The best quake-safe products: earthquake restraints compared

The widespread use of rubble stone masonry, particularly with cement mortar and wooden diaphragms, in seismic regions globally necessitates a comprehensive review of existing design specifications and construction requirements outlined in national seismic and masonry codes. This analysis covers nearly 325 codes from countries where this building technique is, or has been, common. The review focuses on identifying the allowances, restrictions, and specific details related to newly constructed houses and schools using "nominally reinforced rubble stone masonry (NRM) with cement mortar and wooden diaphragms in seismic areas." This particular type of construction is specifically detailed and permitted in the codes of only seven countries: Nepal, India, China, Tajikistan, Georgia, Iran, and Croatia. Significant inconsistencies are observed among these national codes regarding design specifications. Parameters such as maximum building dimensions (length, width, and height), minimum and maximum wall and opening dimensions, and specifications for horizontal and vertical reinforcements vary considerably. For instance, maximum building lengths between seismic gaps range from 25m in Iran to 80m in Georgia, and the number of allowed stories ranges from one to five, even for similar design accelerations. Reinforcement requirements also differ widely, with some codes mandating multiple horizontal and vertical reinforcements, while others require only a few horizontal tie-beams. The discrepancy extends to maximum allowed design accelerations, which range from 0.08g in Indian zone III to 0.52g in Georgia. Such wide variations raise concerns about the completeness, correctness, and reliability of the current knowledge base in this field. Another critical observation is the lack of clear descriptions regarding the types of stone masonry and stone properties addressed in many codes. Often, codes fail to distinguish between random rubble and cut, dimensioned stones, leading to ambiguity and potential misinterpretation. This is particularly prevalent in former Soviet countries whose codes are based on outdated clauses for dimensioned tuff stones, despite rubble stone being the prevalent local material. Furthermore, many codes use vague language, such as "should preferably be avoided," which weakens mandatory compliance. To address these issues, the introduction of "Nominally Reinforced Masonry" (NRM) as a distinct, fourth category of masonry, alongside Unreinforced Masonry (URM), Confined Masonry (CM), and Reinforced Masonry (RM), is proposed to provide clearer terminology and avoid confusion. It is also recommended that codes explicitly state whether rubble stone masonry is permitted, specifying the types of buildings and structures to which it applies. Moreover, the study highlights that many countries where stone masonry is still a widely practiced technique, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bhutan, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Yemen, and Albania, either prohibit it in their codes or lack relevant regulations entirely. This disparity between traditional construction practices and formal building codes creates a significant challenge for local builders and communities. The paper advocates for the development of a stand-alone code specifically for NRM rubble stone buildings with cement mortar, consolidating all necessary design and execution information into a single, accessible document. Such a code would prevent the interchanging of incompatible specifications meant for other masonry types. This comprehensive review forms the basis for future research within the "SMARTnet" initiative (Seismic Methodologies for Applied Research and Testing of Non-Engineered Techniques). This initiative aims to assess, validate, optimize, and complement existing knowledge through modern calculation, testing, and modeling methods. The goal is to develop a structured research approach, termed "Non-Engineered 2.0," focused on vernacular and traditional construction techniques to improve the seismic resilience of rubble stone masonry buildings globally. This effort is crucial for providing clear, reliable, and up-to-date information to millions of people who reside in stone houses worldwide, ultimately strengthening confidence in this traditional building method and potentially reintroducing it where it is currently prohibited. #RubbleStoneMasonry #SeismicCodes #MasonryDesign #EarthquakeEngineering #BuildingCodesWorldwide #NominallyReinforcedMasonry #TraditionalConstruction #SustainableDesign #BuildingResilience

Purlin roof structure houses are common in rural China, valued for their accessible materials and simple construction. However, these structures are highly vulnerable to seismic damage, often experiencing purlin detachment and wall cracking during earthquakes. To address these deficiencies, a new damping-limit device has been developed and investigated. This device is installed at the connection point between the gable and the wooden purlin, aiming to improve the structure's seismic performance. Traditional rural houses in southern China, particularly in provinces like Jiangxi, Anhui, Hunan, and Hubei, frequently feature brick-wood structures with purlin roofs. These buildings, many predating the 1980s, often lack adequate seismic measures, making them susceptible to damage. Earthquakes can cause excessive displacement of purlins, leading to their dislodgement and stress concentration at the gable peak, which can result in wall collapse. Existing strengthening methods, such as adding cement mortar surfaces with steel mesh or ring beams, primarily target load-bearing walls and have not adequately addressed the vulnerabilities of gable peaks and roof truss systems. Furthermore, these traditional methods can be costly, time-consuming, and prone to poor construction quality due to reliance on unskilled labor. This study utilized numerical simulations with ADINA finite element analysis software to evaluate the seismic performance of an unreinforced original structure, a structure reinforced with traditional methods, and a structure enhanced with the novel damping-limit device. An example of a two-story brick-wood house in Jiangxi Province, built in the 1980s, served as the case study. The house features 240mm thick walls made of mixed clay bricks and adobe masonry, lacking ground beams, ring beams, or constructional columns, which compromises its structural integrity. The roof system consists of wooden purlins (200mm diameter, over 4m long) supported by gable walls, overlaid with slats and tiles. The proposed damping-limit device consists of a rubber partition layer sandwiched between two identical steel gaskets, installed at the purlin-gable overlap joint. The wooden purlin is bolted through these layers, ensuring that the purlin, rubber, and steel plate act as a single unit. The rubber layer is designed to dissipate seismic wave energy, thereby reducing acceleration in the purlins and the overlying structure. This mechanism alleviates compression and impact on the wall, significantly mitigating stress concentration and cracking at the joint. The material properties for masonry, wooden purlins, and rubber were defined for the numerical model, with rubber modeled using the Ogden constitutive model to account for its hyperelastic behavior. Seismic waves (EL-Centro, Taft, and Tianjin) with a peak amplitude of 2.2 m/s² (corresponding to a rare 7-degree earthquake) were applied in time history analyses. Modal analysis revealed that the original structure was prone to X-direction vibration due to fewer longitudinal walls and weak gable constraints. The traditional strengthening method improved X and Y-direction constraints, shifting vibration towards the Z-direction. The novel device improved X-direction stiffness. Displacement response analysis showed that the damping-limit device significantly reduced gable peak displacement and overall structural displacement compared to the original structure, though traditional reinforcement showed slightly better overall displacement control. The inter-story drift angle of the reinforced structures indicated good condition, while the original structure was near a moderately damaged state. Principal tensile stress analysis demonstrated that the original structure experienced significant stress concentration at wall junctions and the purlin-wall overlap, leading to potential failure. Both strengthening methods reduced principal tensile stress at the gable peak, with the traditional method achieving a 60% reduction and the novel device a 40% reduction. Shear stress analysis showed that the original structure had severe shear stress concentrations, particularly at the bottom of walls and gable peaks. Traditional reinforcement significantly reduced shear stress (around 70% at the wall bottom), while the novel device had a limited effect on the lower wall's shear stress. Acceleration response analysis indicated that the novel device remarkably reduced X-direction acceleration by approximately 50% compared to the amplitude-modulated seismic wave, demonstrating its effective shock absorption capacity. In contrast, traditional reinforcement did not significantly reduce acceleration response in the X-direction. In conclusion, the novel damping-limit device effectively addresses the seismic vulnerabilities of purlin roof structures by limiting purlin displacement, alleviating stress concentration at purlin-wall connections, and significantly reducing seismic response and acceleration. While traditional methods offer broader improvements in structural stiffness and stress reduction across the entire structure, the damping-limit device provides a simpler, easier-to-install, and quality-controlled solution, making it suitable for rural housing reinforcement. Combining this device with local wall strengthening could further enhance overall seismic performance. Future considerations include exploring alternative materials like nylon plates to reduce costs and enhance applicability. #PurlinRoofStructure #SeismicPerformance #DampingLimitDevice #StructuralStrengthening #NumericalSimulation #RuralHousing #EarthquakeResistance #BrickWoodStructure #MaterialScience

This paper presents a detailed cost analysis of earthquake-resistant school buildings in the Kaski District of Nepal, specifically those constructed by the Smart Shelter Foundation (SSF) between 2007 and 2017. The study compares three primary designs: rubble stone masonry with a wooden roof, and concrete block masonry with either a wooden or a steel trussed roof. The analysis is based on a unique dataset of local building prices collected from 19 different villages, alongside general District Rates, spanning a decade. The cost breakdown is meticulously segmented into five main construction phases—foundation, walls, roof, floor, and finishing—and further categorized into materials, labor, and transportation costs. The research addresses several key questions, including the impact of materials and construction phases on overall costs, the economic viability of rubble stone versus concrete block masonry, cost implications of alternative foundation, wall, and roofing solutions, the effect of the 2015 Gorkha Earthquakes on construction costs, and the cost difference between traditional unreinforced school buildings and fully reinforced seismic designs. Master designs with consistent dimensions were prepared for fair comparisons, and master estimates were developed considering local contextual factors such as material prices and labor wages. These local rates were then contrasted with the official District Rates to identify discrepancies and general cost distribution patterns. The study reveals significant fluctuations in market prices, particularly for locally sourced materials, which complicate the detection of consistent patterns for future predictions. No clear similarities were found between local village rates and general District Rates, indicating that official rates often fail to capture micro-level variations like material availability, site accessibility, and local preferences. To aid future estimations, the paper introduces a tool for rapid cost estimation of different school designs. The cost distribution across main construction phases varied significantly over the 10-year period, with the proportion for labor increasing and transportation costs decreasing, possibly due to improved road networks. In 2017, steel roofs emerged as the most economical option across all three construction groups, contrasting with earlier periods where wooden roofs were often cheaper in certain areas. A specific analysis of seismic features indicates that while improving masonry with cement mortar has the most substantial cost impact, incorporating essential seismic elements such as horizontal bands, buttresses, and steel bars is not prohibitively expensive. The cost of adding two continuous horizontal beams, for instance, is a minimal increase, suggesting that financial constraints are not a major barrier to implementing these safety measures in new constructions. The paper also simulates the transformation of a traditional unreinforced building into a fully reinforced school, demonstrating that seismic improvements contribute significantly to the total cost, but non-structural elements like flooring and finishing can be even more costly, primarily due to labor intensity. The findings suggest that despite some expectations of dramatic price surges after the 2015 Gorkha Earthquakes, the actual increases in Kaski and Gorkha Districts were more moderate, particularly when compared to previous claims of doubling or tripling prices. The paper concludes by providing Bills of Quantity (BoQ) for various school types, offering a practical framework for villagers to compare construction costs based on local prices. It emphasizes that while cost is a major factor, local customs, material availability, and accessibility also play crucial roles in construction choices. The authors advocate for further interdisciplinary research and collaboration to validate and optimize traditional building techniques for seismic resilience, an initiative launched under the name SMARTnet. #EarthquakeEngineering #CostAnalysis #RubbleStoneMasonry #ConcreteBlockMasonry #SeismicResilience #NepalConstruction #BuildingMaterials #ConstructionManagement #SustainableDesign

In regions characterized by low to moderate seismic activity, such as Switzerland, structures that combine reinforced concrete (RC) and unreinforced masonry (URM) walls are prevalent. Despite their commonality, a comprehensive understanding of their seismic performance remains elusive. The structural integrity of these mixed RC-URM buildings is significantly influenced by both types of walls, given that their stiffness and strength are often comparable. This research project aims to deepen the understanding of the seismic behavior of buildings incorporating both RC and URM walls. A key objective is to formulate performance-based seismic design guidelines specifically tailored for these structures. This includes establishing clear definitions for various performance limit states that these buildings should meet under seismic loading. Additionally, the project focuses on the out-of-plane response of URM walls within these composite structures, investigating how boundary conditions provided by slabs and adjacent walls affect their behavior. The research methodology involves two extensive large-scale testing programs. The first program entails quasi-static cyclic tests conducted on systems comprising one RC wall and one URM wall. These tests are designed to simulate the cyclic loading experienced during an earthquake and to observe the structural response. The second program, known as the CoMa-WallS Project, involves shake table tests on a four-story building constructed at half-scale, integrating both RC and URM walls. This larger-scale test allows for a more realistic assessment of the overall structural performance under dynamic seismic excitation. The project has already yielded significant insights, including the publication of an article on quasi-static cyclic tests of two mixed reinforced concrete–unreinforced masonry wall structures. A dataset associated with this research is also publicly available. The project has received funding from several sources, including the Federal Office for the Environment, the FP7 program for access to the TREES laboratory of EUCENTRE under a specific grant agreement, and in-kind contributions from Morandi Frères SA. Ultimately, the findings from this research are intended to improve the seismic resilience of mixed RC-URM structures. By providing a better understanding of their behavior and developing robust design guidelines, the project contributes to enhancing the safety and performance of these common building types in earthquake-prone areas, ensuring they can withstand seismic events effectively and minimize damage and risk to occupants. #SeismicBehavior #ReinforcedConcrete #UnreinforcedMasonry #StructuralEngineering #EarthquakeResilience #PerformanceBasedDesign #ShakeTableTests #BuildingStructures

The Himalayan region of Nepal, characterized by ongoing neo-tectonic activities, is highly vulnerable to seismic events. Stone masonry, often constructed with or without mud mortar, has been the primary building material for centuries. A significant structural survey of approximately 223 buildings in three remote rural villages revealed prevalent structural irregularities, such as variations in wall thickness between floors leading to mass irregularities, asymmetrical vertical openings causing in-plane discontinuity, and out-of-plane offset irregularities due to cross walls on the ground floor. These constructions were typically built without seismic considerations, making them highly susceptible to earthquake damage, as evidenced by the 2015 Gorkha earthquake. This study examines a typical building, incorporating construction information gathered post-2015 Gorkha earthquake, to enhance seismic design based on local construction practices. The use of mud/cement mortar was minimal in these traditional structures. Timber bands at various wall heights and appropriate roof-to-wall connections were also largely absent. Following the 2015 earthquake, communities implemented several improvements, including replacing gable walls with metal sheets, reducing individual stone masonry homes to a single story, and using lighter construction for the upper stories of hotel buildings. The study emphasizes the potential for seismically resilient building forms by meticulously detailing the construction of these structures using mud/cement mortar and other regional materials. Non-linear finite models were simulated for both typical and enhanced buildings, based on regional building techniques. The inherent irregularities of stone units, construction variability, and constrained linear behavior present challenges for detailed numerical analysis of stone masonry with and without mud mortar. Traditional Sherpa homes, characterized by their elongated shape and strategic placement parallel to hill slopes, often feature thick outer protective walls of locally available stone, reaching up to 1 meter in thickness. These are usually unshaped rubble plastered with yak dung and mud mixture. An internal timber frame supports a wooden ceiling. Older, simpler rubble-built houses often lack horizontal timber beams integrated into the outer stone walls, a feature that would enhance earthquake resistance. Foundations and floors are typically stone, with houses being single or two stories. Two-story homes historically used the ground floor for livestock and storage, with living areas upstairs. The 2015 Gorkha earthquake severely damaged 93% of traditional houses and tourist structures in the Thame Valley, with 66% completely damaged. Observed damage patterns included 'X cracking' of external walls, stones toppling from wall tops and roof triangles, and subvertical cracks. Out-of-plane failure of long, thick stone masonry walls was common due to the absence of cross walls and seismic bands, indicating a lack of lateral load resistance and proper roof-to-wall connections. The construction of dry stone stacks with external pointing and plastering contributed to individual masonry unit failure rather than cohesive wall strength. Post-earthquake reconstruction, often carried out by the community with some government support, did not always incorporate seismic-resistant designs due to the urgency. A rapid visual screening (RVS) in August 2022 confirmed that 92% of buildings were stone masonry, with 43% being uncoursed random rubble. Only 2% of buildings used cement mortar, primarily schools and monasteries, while less than 1% used mud mortar. About 88% of buildings now have CGI metal sheet roofing, replacing heavier slate roofs. While corner tie stones are still common (68%), less than 5% and 2% of buildings had timber and reinforced concrete bands, respectively. A significant change was the replacement of stone masonry gable walls with lightweight metal CGI sheets in 43% of buildings. The majority (72%) of reconstructed individual homes are now single-story, with separate structures for animals and storage, reflecting community-learned adjustments. The study concludes that while the introduction of timber bands and wall buttresses (Enhanced-Irregular Stone Masonry Building, E-ISMB) significantly improved building performance under lateral loading, a more comprehensive approach to incorporating additional enhancement techniques is required. Numerical analysis showed that E-ISMB had a fundamental time period reduced by 28.2% and lateral strength increased by 73.5% compared to Current-Irregular Stone Masonry Building (C-ISMB), indicating enhanced rigidity and capacity. Cross walls, buttress walls, and timber bands, in conjunction with mud mortar, can effectively reduce out-of-plane deformation and distribute stresses more uniformly, thus delaying collapse and improving overall seismic performance. Further numerical and experimental studies are needed to fully understand the local failure modes and optimize additional recommended enhancement techniques. #HimalayanBuildings #SeismicDesign #StoneMasonry #EarthquakeResistance #NepalArchitecture #StructuralIrregularities #PostEarthquakeReconstruction #ResilientDesign

This literature review examines the state of the art concerning non-engineered rubble stone masonry construction, specifically for school buildings, in seismic areas. The research focuses on structures built with loadbearing walls of rubble stone masonry in cement mortar, reinforced with horizontal elements. A total of 47 relevant field manuals published between 1972 and 2017 were analyzed, alongside 109 national building codes. The objective was to identify similarities, contradictions, gaps, and discrepancies among these publications. Given that most practical manuals target the Himalayan context, Indian and Nepali seismic and building codes were particularly relevant for comparison. A significant finding is that only nine manuals provide design and construction processes for schools, despite these often conflicting with codes that explicitly prohibit stone masonry for buildings with an importance factor of 1.5 or higher (which includes schools). It was observed that seven of these nine manuals were either written or co-written by the same author, Martijn Schildkamp, and that much of the available knowledge, largely empirical, stems from a limited number of primary sources. However, consistency and consensus were lacking across almost all critical topics, such as main dimensions, opening parameters, and reinforcing elements. Furthermore, the persistent copying of identical illustrations and tables, including those with apparent conflicts, suggests that knowledge in this domain has not significantly advanced since the 1980s, an observation reinforced by the fact that Indian and Nepali seismic codes have not been substantially updated since 1994. The review highlights that existing information contains numerous contradictions and has become ambiguous, raising concerns about its correctness, reliability, and practical value. For instance, while Indian codes prohibit low-strength masonry for important buildings (like schools) in high seismic zones, the Nepali government has approved school designs in rubble stone masonry, directly contradicting its own regulations. The authors propose that the current body of knowledge requires comprehensive assessment, validation, optimization, and supplementation through modern computational, testing, and modeling techniques. To address this, the authors have launched the SMARTnet initiative (Seismic Methodologies for Applied Research and Testing of non-engineered Techniques), which aims to update and disseminate knowledge about traditional building techniques, starting with rubble stone schools in Nepal as a case study. This initiative calls for global collaboration from experts and academics. The paper details the specific design parameters of schools built by the Smart Shelter Foundation in Nepal, which largely withstood the 2015 Gorkha earthquakes. These designs feature maximum classroom dimensions of 4.8 x 4.8 meters, 350mm thick random rubble stone masonry walls with cement-sand mortar, buttresses at wall ends, and horizontal reinforced concrete bands at five levels. The decision not to include vertical reinforcements in critical wall connections, based on expert advice regarding potential weakening, remains a debated topic. The type of stone masonry and mortar is also discussed, categorizing stone types (rubble vs. ashlar) and mortar compositions (mud, cement, lime-sand) in relation to seismic safety. Rubble stone masonry with cement mortar is classified as the second safety level according to Arya (2003). Additionally, the paper distinguishes between reinforced, confined, and unreinforced masonry systems, noting the ambiguity in classifying structures with minimal reinforcement. It discusses the concept of "non-engineered" construction and the historical development of guidelines for such buildings, highlighting the need for separate code specifications for engineered and non-engineered structures. The article also examines how building categories are determined, referencing seismic zonation, ground conditions, and building importance, and critically assesses the "one-size-fits-all" approach in some publications. The eligibility of national seismic codes is narrowed down to the Himalayan region due to global restrictions on rubble stone masonry in high seismic zones and linguistic challenges. For practical manuals, a completeness analysis revealed that only one manual fully aligned with the specific search criteria, emphasizing the scarcity of precise and comprehensive guidance for this construction type. #RubbleStoneMasonry #SeismicCodes #NonEngineeredConstruction #SchoolBuildings #EarthquakeEngineering #BuildingManuals #HimalayanRegion #ConstructionSafety #StructuralIntegrity

This article presents an interview with Kyle Tourjé, Executive Vice President of Alpha Structural Inc., focusing on the critical aspects of concrete foundation repair and seismic retrofitting, particularly in earthquake-prone regions like Southern California. Alpha Structural Inc., a second-generation company, offers comprehensive civil and structural engineering services, alongside licensed general engineering and concrete specialty contracting. Their expertise spans structural concrete, geohazard repair, and various seismic retrofits, including coastal and hillside repairs, structural steel and concrete repairs, foundation replacement, landslide remediation, slope stabilization, deep foundation systems, and retaining walls. The company integrates both engineering and construction disciplines to ensure a seamless project execution from design to completion. Tourjé highlights geology-related issues as the most common causes of concrete foundation problems, where substandard bearing materials often lead to settlement and instability. Corrosion-related damage is another significant factor, causing deterioration in concrete structures, along with poor drainage which accelerates the overall degradation of foundations over time. He emphasizes the importance of collaboration between structural engineers and concrete contractors, advocating for contractor input during the engineering design phase to enhance constructibility and prevent project delays, performance issues, or disagreements. This integrated approach ensures that practical construction considerations are factored into the theoretical design. In Southern California, specific construction practices are implemented to resist seismic forces, which are often not mandated in other states. These practices include the precise placement of reinforcing steel, the use of high-strength concrete mixes, and meticulous rebar installation to prevent corrosion and ensure long-term foundation resilience. Key details such as maintaining adequate clearance between reinforcing steel and the concrete surface are critical, underscoring that cutting corners on these installation steps can compromise structural integrity. Contractors in other regions can learn from these practices, particularly focusing on preventing corrosion by ensuring correct concrete slump and proper rebar placement. Recent updates in ACI documents and committees relevant to concrete foundation placement in seismic areas include clarifications to seismic design criteria, new maximum stirrup spacing for closed stirrups under seismic demand, and updated seismic design requirements for deep foundations across all categories. These changes are crucial for adhering to the latest safety and durability standards in earthquake-prone zones. Emerging technologies and trends in concrete construction include pressure-injected concrete, advanced mix designs for improved corrosion resistance and strength, and the application of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) as an alternative to traditional steel rebar. These innovations contribute to building stronger and more durable foundations. Tourjé advises concrete contractors to remain committed to quality, especially during challenging project phases, and to strive for perfection in every pour to deliver work that meets the highest standards. #ConcreteConstruction #SeismicRetrofitting #FoundationRepair #StructuralEngineering #ConstructionTechnology #EarthquakeResilience #CorrosionPrevention #ConstructionBestPractices #SouthernCalifornia

The article discusses the importance of building resilient homes to withstand severe weather events, drawing on the author's extensive experience with hurricane damage and the advancements in construction standards. The author, Patrick McCombe, recounts his early career experiences observing the devastation left by hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, highlighting the prolonged and incomplete recovery efforts in their wake. These experiences underscore the critical need for more robust building practices. The focus of the article is the Fortified Home standard, developed by the Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS), a nonprofit research organization funded by the insurance industry. The IBHS conducts rigorous testing at its South Carolina research facility, simulating hurricane-force winds, rain, hail, and flying projectiles, to create standards designed to make homes more resilient. The Fortified standard offers three designation levels—Fortified Roof, Fortified Silver, and Fortified Gold—each building on the previous level with additional improvements for increased resilience against natural disasters. These standards apply to both new constructions and retrofits. The Fortified Roof standard, for instance, includes specific measures such as sealed roof sheathing, strengthened edge protection, and additional nails in the sheathing, underlayment, and drip edge. Shingles are installed according to the manufacturer’s high-wind instructions. These measures aim to prevent water intrusion even if shingles are dislodged during a storm. For Fortified Silver and Gold homes, additional enhancements include strengthened gables, sheathed walls with specific nailing patterns for enhanced impact, racking, and blow-off resistance, and a continuous load path (CLP) connecting the roof, walls, floor systems, and foundation. Fortified Gold homes in hurricane zones often require professional engineer designs for the CLP. The article features an interview with Ben Murphy, a roofing contractor and home builder in Foley, Alabama, who has been a Fortified roofer for over a decade. Murphy shares his experiences, noting that his Fortified Roofs sustained zero damage from Hurricane Sally in 2020, a Category 2 storm with 110 mph winds and significant rainfall, except for three instances where trees fell directly onto the roofs. This contrasts sharply with the widespread devastation observed in other homes in the area. Similar testimonials are provided on the fortifiedhome.org website, including a house in Mexico Beach, Florida, that survived the Category 5 Hurricane Michael in 2018. The financial implications of Fortified construction are also addressed. Building a Fortified Home entails higher costs due to additional materials like connectors, impact-rated windows, fully sheathed walls, and more stringent fastening schedules for sheathing and roofing. The work also requires more time than conventional construction, as speed is often prioritized in traditional methods. Third-party inspections by Fortified-trained inspectors, along with extensive photo documentation of nailing patterns and roof-deck sealing, are part of the certification process. Ben Murphy estimates that a Fortified Roof costs 15% to 25% more than a conventional roof, and a Fortified Gold home can cost 10% to 15% more than a standard structure, with substantial investment in components like stainless-steel fasteners and impact-rated windows. Despite the higher initial costs, there are significant long-term benefits and motivations beyond financial considerations. Insurance discounts are often provided for Fortified-certified homes, and in high-risk areas, meeting these standards may be a prerequisite for obtaining insurance at all. More importantly, building stronger homes can prevent deaths and injuries during severe weather, allow residents to shelter in place, and facilitate quicker community recovery. The availability of housing helps retain local workers, contributing to regional economic stability. The construction industry also benefits from reduced volatility and scarcity of building products that often follow major storms. The article argues that while some question building in disaster-prone areas, the appeal of locations like the coast means construction will continue, making resilient building the sensible solution. It also highlights that high winds and hail are widespread issues, affecting much of the country, not just coastal regions, and often cause more damage than hurricanes and tornadoes combined in an average year. The insurance industry's influence on building standards is presented as a historical precedent, drawing parallels to the development of early building codes after major fires in the 19th century. The article suggests that current efforts by the insurance industry to promote resilient construction are a continuation of this tradition, aiming to mitigate future losses and protect communities. Government-funded grant programs for homeowners implementing resiliency measures are seen as crucial for the widespread adoption of Fortified standards. #FortifiedHome #HurricaneResilience #SevereWeatherProtection #BuildingStandards #ConstructionMethods #Roofing #NaturalDisasters #InsuranceIndustry #HomeSafety

This study addresses the lack of comprehensive analyses and calculated examples for base shear seismic demand in heavy stone masonry buildings by examining nominally reinforced rubble stone masonry house and school designs commonly found in Nepal. The research applies seismic codes from countries where this construction technique is permitted (Nepal, India, China, Tajikistan, Iran, Croatia) or could be reintroduced (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey). The initial phase of the study compares base shear formulas, inertia force distributions, material densities, seismic weights, seismic zoning, natural periods of vibration, response spectra, importance factors, and seismic load combinations across these codes, revealing significant discrepancies in approaches and coefficients. The research then calculates base shear and story shears for a design peak ground acceleration of 0.20g, along with the effects of critical load combinations on lateral-resisting elements, adhering to Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) principles for Ultimate Limit State (ULS) verifications (10%PE50y). Pakistan's code is identified as the most lenient, Nepal's as an average, and India's and China's as the most conservative for the case study buildings. A key observation is that heavy-masonry-light-floor systems with negligible diaphragm action behave distinctly under seismic motion compared to other building typologies. The applicability of conventional ELF, S-ELF, and S-Modal methods for such heavy masonry buildings is questioned, as current codes do not offer modified approaches for these differences. Further assessment and validation are required for implications such as the exclusion of plinth masonry and large portions of seismic weight, necessitating potentially more sophisticated concepts like the equivalent frame method or distributed mass system. Considering Nepal's allowance of stone masonry in higher seismic hazard areas (>0.40g), in contrast to India (<0.12g) and China (<0.15g), Nepal's code serves as the reference for subsequent research aimed at verifying seismic demand through capacity checks of masonry piers and spandrels. The article highlights that these buildings, with heavy stiff walls and light flexible diaphragms, derive almost all their lateral-force-generating mass from the walls (approximately 97.5% versus 2.5% for diaphragms, including live loads). The choice of stone type significantly influences inertia forces, and current codes may underestimate base shear by excluding lower wall sections and lumping seismic weights at floor levels. Empirical formulas for the fundamental period (T1) can also lead to overestimation of maximum base shear in short-period buildings. The structural behavior factor, typically 2.0 for nominally reinforced stone masonry with cement mortar, is crucial, with values like Pakistan's R=4.5 potentially leading to underestimation. While many countries accept simplified analytical methods for regular structures, India's requirement for dynamic analysis at lower seismic levels seems inconsistent with non-engineered seismic design principles. Significant variations in seismic hazard levels and PGA values exist across the selected countries, with India and Tajikistan showing relatively low design accelerations not based on probabilistic approaches. Despite variations in coefficients, the resulting base shear for houses is similar across Nepal, India, Afghanistan (ELF), Iran, Turkey, and Croatia, with Nepal representing the average. Pakistan is the most tolerant, and China the most conservative in terms of base shear. When load combinations are applied, India's seismic demands become comparable to China's due to a high load combination factor. The study emphasizes the need for modified design approaches and rigorous validation of parameters specific to nominally reinforced stone masonry, advocating for global collaboration through initiatives like SMARTnet to improve seismic resilience in such structures globally. #RubbleStoneMasonry #SeismicDemand #SeismicCodes #BaseShear #LoadCombinations #EarthquakeEngineering #StructuralBehavior #BuildingDesign #HimalayanRegion

The article discusses the evolving landscape of structural flooring solutions in New Zealand following the Canterbury earthquakes, which prompted a re-evaluation of design standards for both new and existing buildings. Previously, concrete held over 90% of the market share for structural flooring due to its cost-effectiveness. However, the earthquakes led to a noticeable shift towards timber-based solutions, partly fueled by the perception of concrete's failure and further accentuated by the Labour Party's 'pro-wood' policy, which proposes mandating timber design options for new low-rise government-funded buildings. The Cement and Concrete Association New Zealand (CCANZ) chief executive, Rob Gaimster, acknowledged concrete's dominant market position but also noted the market pressure created by the earthquake damage. Rob Fulford, executive director of PreCast New Zealand and a member of the Standards Committee for structural concrete design, explained that the committee is incorporating recommendations from the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission and forensic engineers. A key issue identified was the inability of concrete floors to perform effectively as a diaphragm, which is crucial for transferring horizontal forces from wind and earthquakes to the building's resistant elements. This failure was often linked to the breaking of non-ductile reinforcing mesh in the concrete topping, a material not permitted in the 2006 design code. Although the loss of seating of floors did not cause collapses, new design standards will require these effects to be accounted for in future building designs. Conversely, some industry experts, such as Gavin Robertson, director of Potius Building Systems, believe the construction market has been overly reliant on concrete floors. He has observed a significant increase in the adoption of engineered timber flooring solutions post-quake, attributing this to timber's performance and flexibility during seismic events. Robertson highlighted that timber floors impose substantially less weight on a building's structure, enhancing its seismic resilience. While he acknowledges the benefit of the 'pro-wood' policy for his business, he also shares the widespread sentiment that government intervention to control the market is unfair, a view echoed by CCANZ's Rob Gaimster, who warns of potential job losses in the concrete sector. Amidst this industry debate, a novel hybrid flooring system called 3PT has emerged from the University of Canterbury, developed by Dr. Alessandro Palermo and Professor Stefano Pampanin. This innovative system combines engineered timber, concrete anchorage, and high-strength pre-stressed or post-tensioned reinforcement. The pre-stressing feature creates a pre-camber that balances self-weight and a portion of the live load, while the concrete anchorage ensures movement continuity at mid-supports. This system allows for longer floor spans compared to traditional timber methods and offers a reduced weight, making it a promising solution for Christchurch's rebuild, where lightweight flooring systems are highly sought after. The 3PT system is slated for its first installation in a mixed-use timber building in Nelson, potentially offering a sophisticated answer to contemporary structural flooring challenges. #StructuralFlooring #ConcreteConstruction #TimberConstruction #EarthquakeResilience #BuildingStandards #HybridFlooring #NewZealandArchitecture #SeismicDesign #ConstructionMaterials

Furniture anchors are essential safety devices designed to prevent tall or heavy furniture, such as bookshelves and dressers, from tipping over. These anchors are crucial for protecting individuals from injury during natural disasters like earthquakes, as well as safeguarding children who might attempt to climb on furniture. Experts emphasize that furniture anchoring is not just an earthquake preparedness measure but also a vital child safety measure, citing that nearly 75% of over 5,000 annual furniture tip-over injuries involve children. Furthermore, a new government regulation, effective September 1, 2023, mandates safety standards for clothing storage furniture 27 inches or taller, requiring them to pass stability tests and include anchoring kits with warnings about tip-over dangers. There are several types of furniture anchors available, each with specific applications and weight capacities. Furniture cables consist of two brackets connected by a strong, flexible nylon or braided steel connector. One bracket is screwed to the wall and the other to the furniture, with the connector threaded through eyeholes and fastened. These typically include a quick-release mechanism for moving furniture. No-drill anchors, featuring adhesive-backed brackets, are designed for baby-proofing lightweight furniture and do not require drilling, though they offer less holding power compared to screw-on types. Furniture straps are similar to cables but have permanently connected adjustable straps, which are screwed to both the wall and the furniture and then adjusted for length. Steel corner brackets can also be used for securing items flush against a wall, such as bookshelves, though they remain visible. For effective earthquake protection, it is critical to attach screw-on anchors to wall studs rather than just drywall. For heavy wall hangings, threaded anchors driven into a wall stud are recommended, or toggle bolts for items mounted between studs, as these anchor securely against the back of the drywall. The choice of anchor depends on the weight of the furniture. For very heavy items like fully loaded bookshelves, heavy-duty options such as furniture cables, robust straps, or corner brackets are necessary. Manufacturers typically label anchors with their load capacity, and it is advised to select products that can support at least 400 pounds for items that might shift during an earthquake, and up to 1,000 pounds for furniture that could potentially fall over. Incorporating furniture anchoring into home safety routines is presented as a crucial step for fortifying household safety. #FurnitureAnchors #HomeSafety #ChildSafety #EarthquakePreparedness #FurnitureStability #DIYHomeImprovement #HomeSecurity #FurnitureMounting

This study introduces the double impulse input as an approximation for fling-step near-fault ground motions and derives a closed-form solution for the elastic-plastic response of structures using a 'critical double impulse input.' The approach leverages energy principles, focusing on free-vibration behavior under double impulse conditions to simplify the analysis of complex elastic-plastic responses. A key finding is that the maximum inelastic deformation can occur either after the first impulse or after the second, depending on the input level. The accuracy and validity of the proposed theory are assessed by comparing its results with those from response analyses subjected to a corresponding one-cycle sinusoidal input, which represents fling-step near-fault ground motion. The amplitude of the double impulse is adjusted to match the maximum Fourier amplitude of the sinusoidal input. The paper highlights the historical significance of near-fault ground motions, citing earthquakes like Northridge (1994), Hyogoken-Nanbu (Kobe) (1995), and Chi-Chi (Taiwan) (1999), which drew significant attention from earthquake structural engineers. It notes that fling-step and forward-directivity motions are typically characterized by two or three wavelets. Previous research often focused on elastic responses due to the complexity and numerous parameters involved in elastic-plastic analysis. The current work aims to overcome this by introducing the double impulse, which allows for an energy-based solution without direct integration of the differential equation of motion, especially since only free-vibration occurs under such impulse inputs. The research details the evaluation of maximum elastic-plastic deformation for a single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system. It explains three cases based on the yielding stage of the structure: elastic response throughout, plastic response after the second impulse, and plastic response after the first impulse. Energy conservation laws are applied to derive formulas for maximum deformation in each case. A significant advantage of this method is that it directly determines the resonant equivalent frequency without iterative procedures, unlike conventional sinusoidal input methods. The critical timing for the second impulse is identified as the moment of zero restoring force. Comparisons between the double impulse and one-cycle sinusoidal wave responses are presented, including ground displacement, velocity, ductility, and earthquake input energies. While the double impulse generally provides a good approximation for maximum deformation when Fourier amplitudes are matched, some discrepancies are noted in the larger deformation range. The study also proposes a design flowchart for determining stiffness and strength based on specified velocity, near-fault ground motion period, and response ductility. This design concept operates on the principle that if a structure is safe under the worst-case resonant conditions, it is likely safe under non-resonant conditions too. The non-dimensional relations derived in this study facilitate such design. The method focuses on capturing only the critical (upper bound) response, thus automatically determining the critical resonant frequency for increasing input levels. This approach significantly reduces the computational effort compared to traditional methods that analyze a wide range of stiffness and strength parameters. A numerical validation further confirms that the critical timing of the second impulse, at zero restoring force, corresponds to the maximum deformation for various input levels. #EarthquakeResponse #ElasticPlasticStructures #NearFaultGroundMotions #FlingStepInput #DoubleImpulse #StructuralEngineering #SeismicDesign #EnergyApproach

The increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, particularly hurricanes, have made protective measures for homes more critical than ever. American homeowners are spending over $26 billion annually on damages caused by extreme weather, a significant rise from $10 billion in 2010. With NOAA predicting an above-normal 2022 Atlantic hurricane season, the demand for reliable hurricane shutters is booming. This comprehensive guide, updated in August 2022, provides an in-depth look at the best hurricane shutters available, considering both functionality and aesthetic appeal. The Good Housekeeping Institute's Home Improvement Lab rigorously researches and evaluates various hurricane shutter options. While not all products are personally tested, technical data is reviewed to ensure claimed impact resistance, and insights from external professionals and user reviews are incorporated. The guide categorizes shutters by their material, type, ease of operation, and aesthetic considerations, offering detailed pros and cons for each. Rolling shutters are highlighted as the best overall option due to their ease of use, streamlined design, and solid protection. Made from durable metal, they can be controlled remotely and offer additional benefits like privacy and improved energy efficiency. AstroGuard Fabric Storm Panels are presented as the best value, being DIY-friendly, allowing light to filter in, and easily rolled up for storage. However, they require manual removal after storm season and change the home's exterior look. For quick fixes, Palram Clear Polycarbonate Storm Panels are recommended for their lightweight yet durable nature and easy removal, although they require additional hardware for installation. For homeowners prioritizing aesthetics, Larson Shutter Colonial Shutters are lauded for their classic design, customizability, and durability. These traditional shutters are available in various styles, colors, and materials, including low-maintenance aluminum with a powder coat finish resistant to saltwater corrosion. Timberlane Bermuda Shutters, also known as Bahama shutters, are recognized for their versatility. They serve a dual purpose by providing shade when not needed for storm protection and are popular in tropical regions, offering easy operation and customization. Lastly, Shutter-Tech Accordion Shutters are recommended for large openings like sliding doors due to their excellent protection and affordability, despite their bulkier appearance. When selecting hurricane shutters, it is crucial to ensure they are rated to withstand extreme conditions, with certifications from organizations like the Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI) or the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). The material choice dictates impact resistance and protection against water and wind. Fabric shutters are strong but may not match the impact resistance of rigid materials, while metal shutters offer excellent impact resistance and security. Plastic polycarbonate panels are highly impact-resistant but can be less aesthetically pleasing. Wood shutters offer a balance of performance and style but require regular refinishing. The cost of installing hurricane shutters typically ranges from $2,000 to $6,000, averaging around $4,000, with potential savings on insurance premiums. Supply chain issues may lead to longer lead times, advising early shopping for the best price and delivery. #HurricaneShutters #StormProtection #HomeSafety #EmergencyPreparedness #HomeImprovement #WeatherResistance #HomeMaintenance #BuildingMaterials

This study investigates the seismic performance of mid-rise and high-rise reinforced concrete (RC) buildings with unreinforced masonry (URM) infill walls containing various percentages of openings, considering the critical effects of soil–structure interaction (SSI). The research employs a soil–foundation–structure (SFS) modeling approach using the finite element software PLAXIS 3D, analyzing both a six-storey mid-rise and an eleven-storey high-rise RC building. The infill walls are modeled with opening percentages of 0% (fully infilled), 20%, 30%, and 40% to represent realistic door and window configurations, while also including a bare frame model for comparison. These building models are subjected to non-linear time–history analysis under bidirectional loading, simulating severe earthquake conditions from the 1995 Kobe earthquake, spectrally matched to Indian standards for seismic zone V. The analysis considers two distinct soil conditions: stiff (Type-B/medium) and soft (Type C) soils. The performance assessment parameters include maximum roof displacement, inter-storey drift ratio (ISDR), mode shapes, and damage state levels, determined using the HAZUS methodology. A key finding is that the inter-storey drift ratio significantly increases for all models under soft soil conditions, particularly for structures with 40% infill opening. The HAZUS damage assessment reveals that mid-rise buildings generally reach a moderate damage state, while high-rise buildings exhibit moderate-to-extensive damage with a 30% infill opening under both soft and stiff soil conditions. Notably, the study consistently shows that assuming fixed-base conditions significantly underestimates the actual storey damage state levels, highlighting the importance of incorporating SSI in seismic assessments. Mode shape analysis demonstrates that SSI considerably alters the lateral responses, increasing the dynamic time periods of the buildings. Buildings without infills (bare frames) are found to be highly vulnerable to SSI effects, experiencing large deformations. Conversely, fully infilled structures (0% opening) exhibit negligible lateral displacement, indicating that infill stiffness effectively resists deformation even with SSI. Structures on soft soil generally show enhanced deflection compared to those on stiff soil, further emphasizing the impact of soil flexibility. Regarding lateral displacement, both absolute maximum roof displacement and relative displacement are higher in soft soil conditions than in stiff soil. For instance, mid-rise structures on soft soil show relative displacement amplifications of up to 25.6% for certain infill configurations compared to stiff soil. Similarly, high-rise structures on soft soil show substantial amplifications, with the M4H model on stiff soil displaying 31.3% higher lateral displacement than a fixed-base counterpart. The varying infill opening percentages also influence these displacements, with larger openings generally leading to increased structural movements. Analysis of shear force and bending moments indicates that infill walls with openings, particularly those with 40% opening, experience higher concentrations of these forces near edges and openings. These concentrations suggest potential vulnerabilities to diagonal cracks or shear failure. The presence of openings modifies load paths, making structures more susceptible to localized damage, while soft soil conditions further amplify structural movements and twisting, increasing the likelihood of shear and bending failures in infills. Torsional moments are also significantly observed in models with openings, especially along the corners, and are more pronounced in soft soil due to increased flexibility. The study concludes that optimal infill opening percentages are highly dependent on soil type and building height. Under stiff soil conditions, optimal opening percentages are estimated to be 40% for mid-rise buildings and 30% for high-rise buildings. However, these optimal percentages are significantly reduced to 30% and 20%, respectively, under soft soil conditions. The findings underscore the critical need for SFS modeling in seismic assessments, particularly for URM-infilled buildings in seismically active regions, to accurately predict structural behavior and optimize infill opening designs. The performance assessment parameters utilized in this research are deemed satisfactory for achieving this optimization. #SeismicPerformance #ReinforcedConcreteBuildings #UnreinforcedMasonryInfill #InfillOpenings #SoilStructureInteraction #PLAXIS3D #NonLinearTimeHistoryAnalysis #DamageAssessment #InterStoreyDriftRatio