Aditya Rahul Final Report PDF

Structural Analysis of Vernacular Architecture in
Indian Himalayas
A DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the award of the degree
of
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE
By
ADITYA RAHUL
12510001
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ROORKEE
ROORKEE-247667
JUNE 2014
Structural Analysis of Vernacular Architecture in Indian Himalayas
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
As the thesis marks the end of a journey, I would like to mention that it has been an eventful
learning experience. This thesis has been kept on track and been seen through to completion with
the support and encouragement of numerous people including my well-wishers, my friends,
colleagues and various institutions.
I am truly indebted to my guide Prof. Rita Ahuja for providing necessary infrastructure and
resources to accomplish my research work. Her unflinching courage and conviction has and will
always be an inspiration to me. This work would not have been possible without her guidance,
support and encouragement.
I take this opportunity to sincerely acknowledge the Ministry of Human Resource Development
(MHRD), Government of India, New Delhi, for providing financial assistance in the form of
Senior Research Fellowship which buttressed me to perform my work comfortably.
I would like to pay high regards to my parents for their sincere encouragement and inspiration
throughout my research work. Besides this, several people have knowingly and unknowingly
inspired my thought process and helped me in completion of the project.
3
4
ABSTRACT
Himalayan region in India is home to 44 million people (source: census 2011) and a variety of
flora and fauna. Due to its tough terrain and climatological conditions a lot of indigenous
construction practices are prevalent in different parts. At the same time it is under the threat of
various natural calamities like earthquakes, landslides and cloudbursts. The whole Himalayan
region is under zone-5 in earthquake hazard zoning. Despite being susceptible to such calamity no
proper structural analysis of the various construction techniques prevalent has been ever done.
This analysis will contribute in risk assessment of the area, in providing model solutions and will
help in incorporating the design patterns extracted from traditional architecture to contemporary.
The research is purely an applied one and seeks the following Objectives:
 To understand the concept of structural analysis and its various methods through literature
study.
 Identify the various building typologies prevalent in the region.
 Study of the Force-Displacement characteristics of the identified typologies.
 Identification of structural drawbacks with reference to present day scenario.
 Providing model solutions by developing prototype and proposing retrofitting measures for
each region.
5
1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 14
1.1 Significance ..................................................................................................14
1.2 Aim ..............................................................................................................14
1.3 Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................14
1.4 Scope of Research........................................................................................14
1.5 Methodology ................................................................................................15
1.6 Process of Research .....................................................................................15
2 Literature review ................................................................................... 18
2.1 Introduction: ................................................................................................18
2.2 Loads: ..........................................................................................................18
2.3 Structures: ....................................................................................................19
2.3.1 Isostatic Structures:........................................................................................................... 19
2.3.2 Hyperstatic Structures: ..................................................................................................... 20
2.4 Structural Analysis: a brief history ................................................................20
2.4.1 The Preparation Time (1575 – 1825) ......................................................................... 21
2.4.2 The Discipline Creation Period (1825-1900) .............................................................. 23
2.4.3 Consolidation Period (1900-1950) .................................................................................. 25
2.4.4 Integration Period (1950-1975) ....................................................................................... 27
2.4.5 Diffusion Period (1975 until now) ................................................................................... 27
2.5 Finite Element Method ................................................................................28
2.6 Summary: .....................................................................................................29
3 Site Study............................................................................................... 34
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................35
3.2 Identified Building Typologies.....................................................................35
3.2.1 Thathara Style: ................................................................................................................. 35
3.2.2 Mud wall construction: ..................................................................................................... 36
3.2.3 Dry stone construction: .................................................................................................... 37
3.2.4 Kaath Kuni ....................................................................................................................... 38
3.2.5 Taq Dewari: ...................................................................................................................... 39
6
3.2.6 Dhajji Dewari:................................................................................................................... 40
4 Case Study – Thathra architectural style .............................................. 44

4.1 Background..................................................................................................44
4.2 Foundation ...................................................................................................44
4.3 Wall Typology .............................................................................................45
4.3.1 Wall System:..................................................................................................................... 45
4.3.2 Construction Material: ..................................................................................................... 46
4.3.3 Construction methodology of walls: ................................................................................ 46
4.4 Floor System ................................................................................................48
4.4.1 Ground floor: ................................................................................................................... 48
4.4.2 Other floors: ..................................................................................................................... 48
4.5 Roof Typology .............................................................................................49
4.5.1 Roof System:..................................................................................................................... 49
4.6 Structural Details ..........................................................................................51
4.6.1 Gravity Load-Resisting System......................................................................................... 51
4.6.2 Lateral Load-Resisting System ......................................................................................... 51
4.7 Seismic Vulnerability Analysis .....................................................................51
4.7.1 Structural and Architectural Features .............................................................................. 51
4.7.1.1 Seismic Features .............................................................................................................. 53
5 Finite element analysis of thathra architecture..................................... 58

5.1 Background..................................................................................................58
5.2 Walls ............................................................................................................59
5.2.1 Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 60
5.2.2 Shear resistance ................................................................................................................ 66
5.2.3 Out-Of-Plane Stiffness ..................................................................................................... 69
5.2.4 Summary........................................................................................................................... 71
5.3 Floor ............................................................................................................71
5.3.1 Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 74
5.3.2 Summary........................................................................................................................... 80
7
5.4 Intercomponent Connections ......................................................................80

5.5 Full Structure base model ............................................................................83
5.5.1 Loads and Load Combination......................................................................................... 84
5.5.2 Analysis: ............................................................................................................................ 84
5.6 Conclusion ...................................................................................................95
6 Proposal ................................................................................................ 97
6.1 Low in-plane and out-of-plane strength of walls ..........................................97
6.2 Lack of shear strength in floor system ..........................................................97
6.3 Lack of anchorage of roof beam and rafters with walls .............................. 100
6.4 Lack of lateral support to walls...................................................................100
7 Bibliography ........................................................................................ 101
8 Appendix A – Survey Form ............................................................... 103
8
9
Figure 1: Statically determinated beam ...................................................................................................... 19

Figure 2: Statically determinated frame ..................................................................................................... 19
Figure 3: 2D indeterminate frame DOF=3 .................................................................................................. 20
Figure 4: Indeterminate beam DOF=1 ........................................................................................................ 20
Figure 5 Galileos cantilever beam embedded in a masonry wall. .............................................................. 22
Figure 6 Hookes spring ................................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 7: Truss Bridge.................................................................................................................................. 23
Figure 8: Heinz Isler: Shell model of office building roof, Burgdorf, Switzerland, 1965. ............................ 25
Figure 9: India Earthquake zone map ......................................................................................................... 34
Figure 10: Typical Thathara house .............................................................................................................. 35
Figure 11: Typical Mud construction .......................................................................................................... 36
Figure 12: Typical Dry Stone construction .................................................................................................. 37
Figure 13: Typical Kath Kuni house ............................................................................................................. 38
Figure 14: Typical Taq Dewari construction................................................................................................ 39
Figure 15: Typical Dhajji dewari framing .................................................................................................... 40
Figure 16: Thathra house in Chamba .......................................................................................................... 44
Figure 17: Stone foundation rising above ground level, in a typical thathara house - village Rohta, Distt.
Chamba (H.P.) ............................................................................................................................................. 44
Figure 18: Hollow box-like frame for thathara ........................................................................................... 45
Figure 19: Thathara with stone and planks laid together ........................................................................... 45
Figure 20: Mortise and tennon joint in planks of thathara......................................................................... 46
Figure 21: Joint detail of two planks in a thathara using wooden pins ...................................................... 46
Figure 22: Stone with mud mortar as infill ................................................................................................. 46
Figure 23: A mud plastered thathara .......................................................................................................... 47
Figure 24: Wooden planks as infill in the upper storey - village Bharmour, Distt. Chamba (H.P.) ............. 47
Figure 25: Diagonal bracing of wood in infill wall ....................................................................................... 47
Figure 26: Main beam supported over wooden post (thamb) in the middle of the room ......................... 48
Figure 27: Main beam supported over posts (khambe) in the verandah and secondary beams also laid
over main beam .......................................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 28: Planks laid over secondary beams ............................................................................................. 48
Figure 29: Stones filled in the gap between secondary beams .................................................................. 48
Figure 30: Gable end roof where ridge beam is supported over thathara ................................................. 49
Figure 31: A flat roof unit ............................................................................................................................ 50
Figure 32: A-type frames............................................................................................................................. 50
Figure 33: Finite element mesh .................................................................................................................. 60
Figure 34: seismic load XX ........................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 35: seismic load YY ........................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 36: Wind, live and dead loads action on wall .................................................................................. 62
Figure 37: Shear stress in XX ....................................................................................................................... 67
Figure 38: Shear stress in YY ....................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 39: Shear stress in XY ....................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 40: Membrane forces....................................................................................................................... 69
10
Figure 41: Moments .................................................................................................................................... 70

Figure 42: Active deformations................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 43: Floor plan ................................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 44: 3D model .................................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 45: Analytical plan ............................................................................................................................ 72
Figure 46: Section detail ............................................................................................................................. 73
Figure 47: Section ....................................................................................................................................... 73
Figure 48: Finite element mesh .................................................................................................................. 73
Figure 49: Loads acting on structure........................................................................................................... 74
Figure 50: Moment in whole structure ....................................................................................................... 76
Figure 51: Moment in XY............................................................................................................................. 77
Figure 52: Shear forces in XX ...................................................................................................................... 77
Figure 53: Shear stress in XX ....................................................................................................................... 78
Figure 54: Shear stress in YY ....................................................................................................................... 78
Figure 55: Total displacement..................................................................................................................... 79
Figure 56: Deformation ............................................................................................................................... 79
Figure 57: Connection at corner between external walls ........................................................................... 81
Figure 58: Plan of connection at corner between external walls ............................................................... 81
Figure 59: Connection between floor slab and internal walls at village Khyah .......................................... 82
Figure 60: Connection between floor slab and wall at village Rakh ........................................................... 82
Figure 61: Connection between a flat roof and wall .................................................................................. 82
Figure 62: Connection between roof and wall in structure at village Bharmour ....................................... 82
Figure 63: Finite Element mesh of the model............................................................................................. 83
Figure 64: Stress developed in whole structure ......................................................................................... 89
Figure 65: Stress in XX for live load ............................................................................................................. 90
Figure 67: Deformation during Live Load ................................................................................................... 90
Figure 69: Membrane forces during live load ............................................................................................. 91
Figure 68: Shear forces in YY for wind load ................................................................................................ 91
Figure 70: Global extremes of stress analysis ............................................................................................. 92
Figure 72: Shear forces during SLS .............................................................................................................. 93
Figure 71: Membrane forces during ULS .................................................................................................... 93
Figure 73: Shear stress during ULS.............................................................................................................. 94
Figure 74: Tangential forces during ULS ..................................................................................................... 94
11
INTRODUCTION
Significance
Aim
Goals and Objectives
Scope of Research
Methodology
Process of Research
12
13
1 Introduction
1.1 Significance
construction practices are prevalent in different parts. At the same time it is under the threat of
various natural calamities like earthquakes, landslides and cloudbursts. The whole Himalayan
region is under zone-5 in earthquake hazard zoning. Despite being susceptible to such calamity no
proper structural analysis of the various construction techniques prevalent has been ever done.
This analysis will contribute in risk assessment of the area, in providing model solutions and will
help in incorporating the design patterns extracted from traditional architecture to contemporary.
1.2 Aim
To structurally analyze the vernacular architectural practices of Indian Himalayas.
1.3 Goals and Objectives

The research is purely an applied one and seeks the following objectives:
 To understand the concept of structural analysis and its various methods through literature
study.
 Identify the various building typologies prevalent in the region.
 Study of the Force-Displacement characteristics of the identified typologies.
 Identification of structural drawbacks with reference to present day scenario.
 Providing model solutions by developing prototype and proposing retrofitting measures for
each region.
1.4 Scope of Research

 This study will go into detail of only two (Thathra and Taq Dewari) architectural styles
present in the study region.
 Structural analysis of each typology and testing of model solution will be done on virtual
model.
 This study will be analyzed with samples of each typology.
14
 No structural testing on life size scale will be done and the results of analysis of virtual
model will be used.
1.5 Methodology
As this research can be categorized as descriptive applied research I have adopted the structured
approach to inquiry.
1.6 Process of Research

Following is the research process being applied:
Identification of problem
Formulation of Aim &

Objectives
Literature Review
Identify process and

requirements for structural
analysis
Determining sample design Preparing survey form
Primary data collection through

structured observational method
Processing and analyzing the data

by Quantitative data analysis
Conclusion &
Recommendation 15
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Loads
Structures
Structural Analysis: a brief history
Finite Element Method
Summary
16
17
2 Literature review
2.1 Introduction:
This research can be broadly classified into following 3 parts:
 Descriptive identification of the building typology

 Structural analysis of the said typology
 Retrofitting measures for better performance
The main aim of this literature study is to understand, what structural analysis is and how to
perform it.
2.2 Loads:
The loads to consider during structural analysis can be divided into two categories:
 Gravity Load
 Lateral Load
Gravity Load:
The loads that are governed by gravity are called gravity loads. It can be further classified into
following two categories:
 Dead Load:
 Live Load:
Lateral Load:
The loads that act in lateral (Horizontal) direction on a structure come under this category.
 Earthquake Load
 Wind Load
According to IS 875 part 3 the wind load, F, acting in a direction normal to the individual
structural element or cladding unit is:
F = (Cpe – Cpi) X A X pd
18
where
Cpe = external pressure coefficient,
Cpi = internal pressure coefficient
A = surface area of structural element or cladding unit, and
pd = design wind pressure
2.3 Structures:
Structures are classified in two parts with regards to the number of support reactions.
 Isostatic Structures
 Hyperstatic Structures
2.3.1 Isostatic Structures:

A structure with a number of external supports (or internal restrictions) equal to the minimum
necessary to be in equilibrium for any set of acting loads (e.g. 2D structure with 3 supports). The
distribution of forces and moments can be obtained through conditions of static equilibrium only.
Figure 2: Statically determinated frame Figure 1: Statically determinated beam
19
2.3.2 Hyperstatic Structures:

A structure with more than the minimum number of external supports (or internal restrictions)
necessary to be in equilibrium for any set of acting loads. In these structures, beyond the static
conditions, conditions of compatibility of deformations must be used.
Figure 3: 2D indeterminate frame DOF=3

Figure 4: Indeterminate beam DOF=1
2.4 Structural Analysis: a brief history

There are many definitions of structural analysis:
“The structural analysis is a mathematical algorithm process by which the response of a structure to
specified loads and actions is determined. This response is measured by determining the internal
forces or stress resultants and displacements or deformations throughout the structure.” (Dr.
Mohan Kalani)
Structural analysis is the determination of the effects of loads on physical structures and their
components.
Analytical process by which the response of the structures (in terms stresses, internal forces and
deformations) to the acting loads is determined.
20
To summarize, structural analysis is a process which provides a set of rules to accurately model a
structure and to proportion its parts so the loads can be carried out safely.
Various methods for structural analysis were evolved gradually over a period of time. To
understand better structural analysis we have to go in its history.
Starting from the Renaissance, K.E. Kurrer has divided the history of structural analysis into five
periods:
 The Preparation Time from 1575 until 1825,

 The Discipline Creation Period from 1825 until 1900,
 The Consolidation Period from 1900 until 1950,
 The Integration Period from 1950 until 1975 and
 The Diffusion Period from 1975 until now.
2.4.1 The Preparation Time (1575 – 1825)

In his Discorsi (1638) Galileo presented the idea of quality of materials.
Through probes wooden examples he decided without a doubt the quality in strain and thusly
explored the quality of a cantilever shaft inserted in a brick work divider under weight toward
oneself, watching its conduct with an expanding burden connected at its free end. In spite of the
fact that the figured bowing quality was off base (because of the suspicion of a direct stretch
circulation in the area at the fixed end of the shaft) Galileo arrived at the right conclusion that the
quality of a rectangular bar is corresponding to the width and to the square of the stature of its
segment. Through his work Galileo made a significant commitment to the bowing issue.
Numerous specialists researched the inquiry of the quality of the material, beginning from the
theory of Galileo.
While Galileo was chiefly concerned with the quality of the material, Robert Hook ( 1629-1695)
in England created the hypothesis of flexibility.
In the same period Simon Stevin (1548-1620) managed the issue of the disintegration of the
power.
21
In these years the power of geometry and the different advancement of statics, quality of the
material and flexibility hypotheses did not take into consideration a fitting examination of
structural components. In the eighteenth century infinitesimal analytics discovered requisition in
cosmology, hypothetical mechanics, geodesy and civil designing. Mathematicians like Leibniz
(1646- 1716), Daniel and Jacob Bernoulli and Leonard Euler (1707-1783) made further
advancement in the hypothesis of pillars and their versatile line. In 1791 Jacob Bernoulli
uncovered that the bend of a shaft in unadulterated curving is relative to the estimation of the
bowing minute.
Figure 6 Hookes spring Figure 5 Galileos cantilever beam embedded in a

masonry wall.
Daniel Bernoulli, 50 years after the fact,
rearranged extensively the science of his sibling's hypothesis, providing for it a "designing"
methodology. In the first 50% of the eighteenth century the first building schools focused around
the requisition of the microscopic math to specialized items emerged in France. In 1729 Bernard
Forest de Bèlidor distributed the first standard Code of Practice for Civil Engineering. In this
book the discoveries of science are made into standards of outline where math discovered a down
to earth requisition.
Fifty years after the fact, Charles Augustin de Coloumbs (1736-1806) in his work M'emoire broke
down the earth push, the curve and the bar through tiny analytics in a moderately clear manner
which made his work more decipherable and more fruitful than different past productions. In this
book structural dissection shows surprisingly the aspects of a logical subject.
22
2.4.2 The Discipline Creation Period (1825-1900)
In the Discipline Creation Period the isolated discoveries of the Preparation Time were integrated
with the elasticity theories developed in France in the first half of the 19th century.
Henry Navier (1785-1836), educator at the

Ecole des Ponts et Chauss'e, was additionally
concerned with the quality of materials,
examining various wood and steel
developments. His thought was that a
definitive enthusiasm of a specialist is to
guarantee the security of a structure under
particular burdens, not to examine the
conduct of a structure close fall. To this end,
an architect must figure the hassles in a
stacked structure, to guarantee that they are
beneath the flexible furthest reaches of the
materials. While balance comparisons are
sufficient to focus inside and outside powers Figure 7: Truss Bridge
in basic structures, the statically determinate

or isostatic ones, they can't be utilized alone to break down hyperstatic structures. This issue,
which soon turned into a critical issue in the field of the hypothesis of structures, was mulled over
by Navier, who created a hypothesis to handle the second sort of structure. All the experimental
mechanical assembly was accessible for this examination: Jacob Bernoulli had expressed that the
versatile shape of the bar was corresponding to the estimation of the curving minute at each one
point, and Daniel Bernoulli had demonstrated to set up the differential mathematical statement of
flexible twisting to focus the redirected state of a pillar. Navier utilized the versatile mathematical
statement joined together with the harmony comparison to examine a cantilever bar backed by an
inflexible prop at its end, which is a hyperstatic structure and after that, summing up this basic
case, he created the straight flexible hypothesis, treated in his book Resum'e des Lecons (1826).
With this work Navier demonstrated a logical approach to model and numerically dissect a
23
structure utilizing straightforward count apparatuses and material properties. Emulating the
techniques managed in Navier's book, a specialist could, on a fundamental level, enhance its
model and fabricate savvy structures equipped for securely convey the connected burdens.
Navier was also concerned with hyperstatic trusses, which were of energy at the nineteenth century
on account of the advancement of steel augmentations. Notwithstanding the way that his system
for grasping trusses was correct, the resulting figurings were prohibitively befuddled due to the
gigantic number of correlations to be unwound.
In the second 50% of the nineteenth century, strategies were concocted to diminish the extent of
the issue, among them some focused around design. The technique's most critical example was
the Swiss educator Karl Culmann (1821-1881), who created the truss hypothesis and refined
graphical dissection strategies. This hypothesis was fundamental for the development of steel truss
connects in the second a large portion of the nineteenth century.
Culmann's system was valuable for isostatic trusses yet less fitting for hyperstatic ones. In the late
nineteenth century Maxwell, Castigliano, Otto Mohr and Müller-Breslau further created the
straight flexible hypothesis of pillar structures with the point of improving the complex numerical
count required for hyperstatic structures. From Maxwell's work comes the proportional
hypothesis, which evaded a portion of the complex scientific counts in the result of hyperstatic
trusses. Castigliano formed the hypothesis which bears his name. Despite the fact that the
dissection could be improved utilizing Castigliano's system, the amount of comparisons to be
illuminated stayed extensive. The energy system created by Müller-Breslau (1851-1925) focused
around the standard of virtual strengths permitted one to decrease the amount of mathematical
statements to be tackled for hyperstatic structure.
24
2.4.3 Consolidation Period (1900-1950)
Figure 8: Heinz Isler: Shell model of office building roof, Burgdorf, Switzerland, 1965.
This period was portrayed by the spread of strengthened solid. Its innovation in Germany in the
second 50% of the eighteenth century spoke to an insurgency in the field of development and in
the meantime had an effect on structural examination, prompting the advancement of new
hypotheses. Since 1915 the hypothesis of casing structures and by most accounts 10 years after the
fact, the hypothesis of two dimensional structures like plates, shells and collapsed structures were
produced. The misshapening strategy for hyperstatic structures supplanted, in a few cases, the
power technique. In the 1920s with the expanded number of elevated structures, the
misshapening system was upgraded by the cycle strategy for Hardy Cross (1930), more suitable for
high-review statically uncertain structures.
By the 1940s, notwithstanding the utilization of cement and hot-moved steel areas, icy shaped steel
parts started to be broadly utilized within building development, especially in top decks, carpet
decks and divider boards. Steel top decks were effectively utilized as a part of collapsed plate and
hyperbolic-illustrative top development. Contrasted with different materials, for example, solid, icy
framed steel parts had numerous qualities: daintiness, high quality and firmness, simple erection,
transportation and taking care of, the consolidation of which frequently brought about expense
25
sparing. In any case, the slim nature of such structures causes nearby and worldwide clasping
phenomena, which are of real sympathy toward outline. Albeit moved steel parts have been
utilized as a part of development since the second 50% of the nineteenth century, just from 1940
were locking issues researched firstly in the USA and later in different nations.
In the same period a definitive quality of structures, specifically hyperstatic ones, turned into the
destination of investigation and this prompted the improvement of the versatility hypothesis. The
principal papers on pliancy hypothesis go once more to a congress in Berlin in 1936, which was
held in perspective of the developing utilization of steel for modern and substantial business and
household structures. So far they had been outlined on the premise of the flexible hypothesis.
This is focused around the suspicion of an immaculate structure where little slips in assembling
and development, temperature variety, settlements of backings, and so on are frequently enough
to discredit the flexible computation. The conclusion was that the flexible hassles are not generally
pertinent to the expectation of the quality of a structure. Jon Backer, a master part of the Steel
Structures Research Committee set up by the British steel industry in 1929 was the first to have
the "thought" of plastic outline. He worked primarily on nonstop shafts and entrance outlines.
Benefactor's methodology to plastic examination was of a statical nature: the safety minute acting
where plastic pivots have formed is brought into the statics comparisons. Along these lines the
breakdown instrument of decently basic structures could be estimate exactly.
In 1949 Prager and his partners created the basic hypotheses of versatility hypothesis. The
purported lower-bound hypothesis, in any case, had as of now been expressed and demonstrated
in 1936 by the Russian researcher Gvozdev. As per his hypothesis, if a set of strengths inside the
structure are in balance with the outer loads and don't defile the yield conditions, then the relating
estimation of the heap following up on the structure is a lower-bound, i.e. safe evaluation of the
breakdown load. The hypothesis clarifies why the flexible hypothesis brings about a safe, however
frequently uneconomical configuration. All the more vitally, pliancy hypothesis made specialists
consider the genuine conduct of a structure under breakdown loads. The trial work of this century
has indicated that obscure and unusual "defects" – a little settlement in an establishment, a slip in
an association, a differential climb in temperature - can deliver extensive changes in the real
stretch state so that the estimations made to discover this state are potentially inconsistent. It has
been an imperative commitment of pliancy hypothesis to demonstrate that blemishes have, truth
26
be told, no impact on a definitive quality of bendable structures. The hypothesis was created to a
great extent with reference to steel development yet can likewise be connected to cement
structures strengthened with pliable steel.
2.4.4 Integration Period (1950-1975)

Until the mid 20st century, in spite of the utilization of streamlined figuring routines like the
energy system, the uprooting strategy and the Hardy-Cross technique, it took quite a while to
investigate structures even of medium intricacy, basically because of the trouble of comprehending
direct comparison frameworks. In the late 1950s the approach of machines and the improvement
of the Finite Element Method (FEM) totally reformed structural examination. The FEM was
produced in the field of flying designing, where counts of high excess frameworks were the
standard. The makers of FEM characterized it as a "system for investigation for exceedingly excess
structures which is especially suited to the utilization of highspeed computerized processing
machines" [3]. The primary persons concerned with the beginning improvement of the FEM were
Argyris (Stuttgart and London), Clough (Berkeley) and Zienkiewicz (Swansea). The principal
FEM projects SAP, ADINA, ANSYS, NASTRAN, MARC, and so on., were utilized just by
experts within enormous organizations and figuring focuses which could exertion exorbitant
centralized computer machines. They were extensive, abate and with no graphical client interface.
The FEM consolidated with the workstation has prompted present day computational mechanics,
of which structural examination is a part. Through advanced registering, non-paltry computations
concerning progress, breakdown instruments, materials and geometrical nonlinearities and
extreme burdens could likewise be routinely performed.
2.4.5 Diffusion Period (1975 until now)

While the FEM hypothesis has been to a huge degree created in the 60s and early 70s, the right to
gain entrance to suitable equipment stayed troublesome. Be that as it may, with the appearance of
the PC in the 80s and the Internet in the 90s, the work identified with structural examination has
been completely reformed. Today, on account of improvements in machine design, a substantial
mixed bag of easy to use FEM workstation projects are effectively accessible, which in for all
intents and purpose no time can any sort of estimation. A structural designer has now only to
enter a suitable structural model into a FE program and detail the heaps to be conveyed. The
workstation will then promptly give the interior structural powers and the comparing burdens. In
27
the event that the structure does not fulfill the security criteria, the workstation can, in a few cases,
itself roll out improvements to the outline until wellbeing criteria have been satisfied.
The cordiality of today's structural examination projects could prompt the wrong conviction that
no particular faculty is obliged to work them. Actually, encounter demonstrates that the client of a
FEM bundle must have the capacity to legitimately display a structure, to know the major
hypotheses of FEM and have an inclination for structural conduct to appropriately evaluate the
legitimacy of the machine results. Without these key necessities, unsafe slips can undoubtedly
happen.
There are many approaches prevalent for structural analysis nowadays. All of them make some
assumptions and deliver results with varying degree of accuracy, but each of them analysis the
same fundamental relationships:
 Equilibrium
 Compatibility
 Constitutive
2.5 Finite Element Method

This is a numerical method of solving differential equations, which is used in all engineering
mechanical calculations. The total region, which is supposed to be analyzed, is divided into small
elements and each element is then solved with the method. When the differential equations of
each element are solved they are put together in a so called finite element mesh, which shows the
solution over the whole body. This means that even though the method is an approximation, the
result can be very close to the reality. The smaller elements - the better approximation over the
whole body.
The FEM works as follows:
1. The structure to be analyzed is first subdivided into finite elements of simple geo- metric shape,
e.g. straight prismatic bars. The elements are joined to each other or supported at the nodes.
2. At each node displacement parameters are introduced which represent the primary unknowns
to be numerically determined. In the case of plane frames two displacements in the horizontal
28
and vertical directions and the nodal rotation are considered, whereas in the case of plane trusses
only the rotation is left out.
3. In order to determine these unknowns, nodal equilibrium conditions are formulated as linear
equations. Nodal equilibrium is satisfied when the resultants of all the forces in the horizontal
direction, of all forces in the vertical direction and, in the case of plane frames, of all moments
acting on each node vanish.
4. The fundamental idea of the FEM is to determine the numerical coefficients needed to
formulate nodal equilibrium conditions by considering each element separately. These
coefficients are first “locally” determined for each single finite element taking into account its
geometry, material properties and loads.
5. From these local element coefficients a “global” equation system is then assembled whose
equations represent nodal equilibrium conditions for the unknown nodal displacement
parameters.
6. This global system of linear equations is solved numerically so as to determine all nodal
displacements. In two cases eigenvalue problems, which arise from the formulation of the same
kind of nodal equilibrium conditions, are to be solved.
7. Once the nodal displacements are known, secondary quantities, like section forces or support
reactions, are determined.
2.6 Summary:
After analyzing the whole literature following conclusions have been made.
The structural analysis should take into account following effects:
 deformability and stiffness of the structure and supports;

 strength and stiffness of joints;
 stability of the structure (global, members and local);
29
 behavior of cross-sections (classification of sections);

 imperfections (global and member imperfections).
Structural analysis should give answers to following questions:
 What are the elastic deformations of the structure caused by the loads?
 What are the section forces associated with these deformations?
 What are the stresses caused by these section forces?
 Can the bars of the structure with their assigned sections withstand these section forces?
 What are the influences of 2nd order effects on structural behaviour and how great can
compressive normal forces become before buckling occurs?
 In which cases can time-dependent loads lead to dangerous dynamic effects?
 How far can external loads be increased without the structure‟s collapsing and how would
the structure collapse if the loads reach this limit?
To answer to these questions mechanical models, which approximate physical reality, are needed.
The FEM is ideally suited both to build such models and to analyze them numerically.
30
31
SITE STUDY
Introduction
Identified Building Typologies
32
33
3 Site Study
Figure 9: India Earthquake zone map
34
3.1 Introduction
construction practices are prevalent in different parts. These indigenous architecture is evolved by
the people of the region over a period of time through their own knowledge and experiences
without any professional help or training.
3.2 Identified Building Typologies

Following are some of the construction styles found in the region:
3.2.1 Thathara Style:

This building style has
been identified in
Himachal Pradesh, a
northern state in India.
Nowadays, this type of
construction practice
can be seen for houses
and temples, however,
earlier photographs
suggest that the same
style was adopted to
build palaces, bridges as Figure 10: Typical Thathara house
well as various other

structures. The construction style is named “Thathara” as this term is locally used for wooden
planks that make the vertical load-carrying members (columns) locally known as thola(s). Tholas (a
peculiar combination of timber and stone) and wood are primarily used for the vertical and
horizontal frame elements, respectively. The region where this building typology is found is
characterized by cold climate and witnesses heavy rainfall during the rainy season (from June to
35
July) as well as snowfalls in winter (from October to March). These effects have been considered
well in the construction style, like e.g. small openings, a verandah to take sun but prevent from rain
and snow, wooden and mud interiors which are good insulators and keep the interiors warm,
sloping roofs with adequate projections as well as other features. Being located in the Himalayan
region, the area has experienced numerous strong earthquakes and this construction technique has
evolved eventually to withstand seismic action.
The wall system is framed structure in which the columns (tholas) are in „thathara‟ style. Beams are
of deodar or kail wood, sometimes of the tree trunk itself. The partition walls are a variety of
construction types either of stone, wood or both. In some cases it was observed that the walls of the
lower storey are entirely made of stone and hence are load bearing, while the upper storey(s) have
tholas with partitions of wooden planks. In some constructions tholas can be seen in the upper
storey directly above the posts of the verandah which is considered to be a poor construction
practice. Thathara houses usually have gable roofs with a slope of about 17 degrees. Over the
verandah, the roof slope becomes a bit gradual in order to have adequate headroom.
3.2.2 Mud wall construction:

The style too has been
identified in Himachal
Pradesh. It is concentrated in
the upper reaches of the state
in the Lahaul and Spiti districts,
which are located in a cold-
desert area with very hot days
and chilling nights.
Precipitation usually only
occurs in the form of snowfall
with almost no to very little
rainfall. This dryness of the Figure 11: Typical Mud construction
local climate is reflected in the
36
architecture of this construction typology which consists of thick mud walls with small openings in
order insulate the interior form the harsh outside climate. This style of construction which is
predominantly used for residential houses and temples is still being practiced today.
The houses in Spitian architecture have load bearing wall system. The 300 or 500mm thick mud
walls take up the entire load. Walls up to 600 to 900 mm height are made of local available field
stones. Above this base, the walls are entirely constructed of rammed earth. As the area has very
little or no rainfall, the roofs are flat and constructed by laying horizontal wooden beams which are
covered by plaster of mud over reed leaves. To make the parapets, a 300 mm thick and 300 mm
high course of mud is laid at the periphery of the terrace. On top of it, dried bushes are packed
densely. These bushes are projecting to the outside and hence also act as a sunshade.
The construction of these buildings is the only efficient option in the valley as the main building
material mud is easily available and also suits to the harsh weather conditions.
3.2.3 Dry stone construction:
The building type has been

identified in Himachal
Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
Nowadays, this type of
construction practice can be
seen prevalent in the areas
where people have been
forced to leave their
traditional construction
practices due to scarcity of Figure 12: Typical Dry Stone construction
wood. Thus, this

construction style is nothing but the traditional housing style while omitting the wooden elements.
Be it Kath Kunni style or Thathara style, the reason why people did not opt mud which is another
37
easily available material, is this region‟s heavy precipitation both in terms of rainfall (June to July) as
well as snowfall (October to March).
The stone walls are load bearing with a thickness of 500 mm and a height of 2.5 m. Both external
and internal walls are of the same thickness. These are made of locally available undressed stones
of varying sizes, packed together without any mortar. Sometimes the size of a single stone is large
enough to cover the entire opening as a lintel beam. Kail or deodar wood is used for frames and
panels of doors and windows. As the area receives rain in monsoon and heavy snow in winters, the
houses have sloping roofs, i.e. gable or hipped roofs. These are covered with slate stones which are
locally available while deodar or kail wood is used for beams, rafters and purlins.
Response of this construction technique during earthquake is excellent and construction

economics also favours it thus making it a viable option in present day scenario.
3.2.4 Kaath Kuni

Houses made of wood and stone in a
peculiar way are a common sight in
upper Shimla and Kinnaur region of
Himachal Pradesh but this
architecture style is also found in
Uttarakhand and Kashmir. Houses of
this type are still being built today and
are being constructed for past
hundreds of years. During field visit,
houses around 300- 400 years old are
Figure 13: Typical Kath Kuni house
also found. The site chosen
for house construction is with gentle slope so that it can be leveled easily while laying plinth stones
and hence no cut/ fill is required. In rare cases, to make more room on ground, site is cut but
again there is no filling. Locally available stone is used for foundation. Trench is dug about 900mm
in depth and 900mm in width. This trench is then filled with large slabs (dry stones) with
approximate width of 900mm. In some cases where the ground is hard enough, no trenches are
dug for foundation. There is no plinth in these houses. The walls have framed-type construction
and are of thickness 600mm.These are made up of stones and wood of deodar ,rai and perman
38
trees without any mortar. Plaster is a mixture of mud, cow-dung and kail wood powder or wheat
husk.
For construction of these walls frame-work of wooden beams (150x200mm) is made which is then
packed with stones.To make the frame, two wooden beams (150x200mm) are laid side-by-side
with a gap in between, defining the wall width i.e. 600mm. This is done for two opposite walls. The
same is done for the upper course but for other two walls. The arrangement is repeated until it
reaches the wall height.
3.2.5 Taq Dewari:

Taq timber development a blending
of wood and unreinforced
workmanship laid on frail mortar
gives the building the obliged
adaptability and utilization
conventional construction modeling
and material. Taq development is a
heading divider stone work
development with level timber
binding implanted in the
workmanship; it is generally arranged Figure 14: Typical Taq Dewari construction
with a secluded design of brick work

wharfs and window bayous entwined with stepping stool like development of even timber installed
in the workmanship at each one story level.
These even "step groups" are found at the base of the structure to the particular design of the docks
and window bayous, i.e. a five-taq house is five inlets wide. The brick work over the establishment
(das or dassa), and at each one story level and at the window lintel level Taq alludes wharfs (tshun)
are practically constantly 1½-2 feet (45-60 cm) square, and the narrows are roughly 3-4 feet (90-
120cm) in width. Since this measured wharf and straight outline and the timber-bound burden
bearing stone work dock and divider framework go together, the name now distinguish the
structural framework.
39
Taqsystem does not comprise of complete edges rather has bigger timber runners resting along the
heap bearing workmanship dividers with floor bars and runners from the weight dividers lapping
over them.
The development practices utilized for these structures, which remained rather than today's codes
and acknowledged practices, incorporate (1) the utilization of mortar of unimportant quality, (2)
the absence of any holding between the infill dividers and the docks, (3) the shortcoming of the
security between the normally acknowledged wythes of the brick work in the dividers, and (4) the
regular utilization of substantial turfs.
3.2.6 Dhajji Dewari:

Dhajji dewari construction is
profoundly found in Jammu and
Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and
Uttarakhand. This construction
technique is basically a patchwork of
wood and stone. Walls are made of
timber frame which are filled with criss
crossed wooden panels. These are
further filled with stones. These
structures are earthquake resistant as
each small panel is an identity on its Figure 15: Typical Dhajji dewari framing
own thus dividing the earthquake load

evenly over the whole structure. The friction between all the small elements breaks the energy.
40
41
CASE STUDY – THATHRA ARCHITECTURAL

STYLE
Background
Foundation
Wall Typology
Floor System
Roof Typology
Structural Details
Seismic Vulnerability Analysis
42
43
4 Case Study – Thathra architectural style
4.1 Background
The Thathara Houses are the traditional houses
dating back to 400 years found in upper reaches of
Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh. The
construction style is named “Thathara” as this term
is locally used for wooden planks that make the
vertical load-carrying members (columns) locally
known as thola(s). Tholas (a peculiar combination
of timber and stone) and wood are primarily used for Figure 16: Thathra house in Chamba
the vertical and horizontal frame elements, respectively. The region where this building typology is
found is characterized by cold climate and witnesses heavy rainfall during the rainy season (from
June to July) as well as snowfalls in winter (from October to March. Plan of this architecture style is
usually rectangular in shape with the sides being 3 to 10 meters and 5 to 8 meters. The structure is
usually 2 to 3 storey(s) with each storey being 2.5 meters.
4.2 Foundation
Foundation is entirely made up of stones.
Trench of 1to1.5m depth, depending upon the
type of soil, and 500mm in width is dug and
courses of stones are laid without any mortar,
which rises up to 500mm above ground level.
Figure 17: Stone foundation rising above ground level, in a

typical thathara house - village Rohta, Distt. Chamba (H.P.)
44
4.3 Wall Typology
4.3.1 WALL SYSTEM:

The wall system is framed structure in which the columns are in “thathara” style and beams are of
deodar or kail wood, sometimes the tree trunk itself. Infill walls are either of stone, wood or both.
In some cases it is seen that walls of lower storey are entirely of stone and hence load bearing but
upper storeys have thatharas.
Thathara
A thathara is the vertical load carrying member in the Gaddi houses. It is made up of stone and
wood and can be constructed in any of the following two ways:
Method I:
Unfinished wooden planks generally of size

500x350x100mm are placed on edge on two
sides at a distance of 400mm. In the
alternate course, planks are placed across.
Same arrangement is repeated till about
2.5m (height of storey) thus forming a
hollow box-like structure. This hollow
structure is then hand-packed with stones
without any mortar. The thatharas thus Figure 18: Hollow box-like frame for thathara
formed have unfinished appearance.
Method II:
Another way of constructing thathara is laying wooden planks and

stones at the same time over a single course. There is no mortar but
stones in courses are tightened at their place with stone chips. The
Figure 19: Thathara with stone

and planks laid together
45
wooden planks are also hewn in such a case. Hence the overall thathara has very neat finish.
Connection between planks in a thathara:
The wooden planks used for thathara have small holes which have wooden pins inserted into
them so that planks do not move and retain their position. Another way is, having mortise and
tennon joint between two planks placed in alternate course.
Figure 21: Joint detail of two planks in a thathara using Figure 20: Mortise and tennon joint in planks of
wooden pins thathara
4.3.2 Construction Material:

The main materials used in the construction of walls are deodar or kail wood, locally available
stone and mud.
4.3.3 Construction methodology of walls:

Step I: Above the raised plinth of stones “Thatharas” (columns) are constructed at the corners. In
case of larger spans intermediate “Thatharas” are also provided where distance between each is
about 3.5m centre to centre.
Step II: Infill walls of following types are then

erected between these Thatharas.
(1) Stone: Undressed stone laid in courses with

mud mortar is used for infill walls in certain
Figure 22: Stone with mud mortar as infill
46
structures. These stone infill walls are of 500mm thickness which is also the width of the
thathara.
(2) Wood: Wooden planks of 20 mm
thickness are also used as infill walls.
Usually these wooden planks infill is used
in top most storey of the structure so as to
make the upper storey lighter and hence
reducing the load on storeys below.
(3) Stone and Wood: In some houses infill
wall between two thatharas is made from Figure 24: Wooden planks as infill in the upper storey -
village Bharmour, Distt. Chamba (H.P.)
both wood and stone. Sometimes there is
Figure 25: Diagonal bracing of wood in infill wall
diagonal bracing of wood and where small stones Figure 23: A mud plastered thathara
with mud mortar are packed in the remaining

space (Dhajji Diwari). Usual practice is having unhewn wooden battens placed every
second or third stone course or more.
Step III: The interiors and exteriors are plastered with mixture of mud and cow-dung. Afterwards,
the walls are treated with mud and cow-dung slurry to give the final finish. Wooden walls are also
finished with the above slurry in the inside as well as outside. In few cases, houses with exposed
exteriors are also seen.
47
Walls over verandah:
Verandah at ground floor has only wooden posts and no walls in between. Walls over the
verandah i.e. balcony above, are always made of wooden planks so as to minimize the load on
verandah posts.
4.4 Floor System
4.4.1 Ground floor:

Wooden planks of thickness 20mm are laid over rammed earth. These planks are then plastered
with mud and finally finished with mud and cow-dung slurry. The floor s coated with mud and
Figure 27: Main beam supported over posts (khambe) in the Figure 26: Main beam supported over wooden post (thamb) in the
verandah and secondary beams also laid over main beam middle of the room
cow-dung slurry every third day.
4.4.2 Other floors:

Main beam of cross-section 270x230mm rests over the extreme thatharas spanning over whole
length of room i.e. 6m without any joint in between. Distance between two main beams is
48
Figure 29: Stones filled in the gap between secondary beams Figure 28: Planks laid over secondary beams
approximately 3m centre to centre. In the verandah, main beams are supported by wooden posts
(khambe) of size 150x150mm at a distance of 1.5m.
In the middle of the room, main beam is supported over main wooden post (thamb) of size
270x270mm. Secondary beams of length 3m and cross-section 100x160mm are just laid over these
main beams at a distance of 400mm centre to centre. Gap between two thatharas is filled with
stones. Wooden planks of size 20x 300mm and length 2.5m are placed across over these
secondary beams without any gap in between. These planks are covered with 25mm mud plaster
and finished with slurry of mud and cow-dung mixture. These floors are coated with mud and cow-
dung slurry every third day or so, to keep these clean and repair any small crack and patch that has
developed.
4.5 Roof Typology
4.5.1 ROOF SYSTEM:

Thathara houses have usually gable roofs, with slope of about 17°. The roof changes angle over
verandah and becomes a bit gradual so as to have adequate head room. Some houses have hipped
roof too.
Construction methodology of roofs:
(1) Gable-end roofs: The most common practice is raising the two opposite thatharas which
are at the middle, up to ridge level. Ridge beam (nhas) is directly placed (without any
connection) over these thatharas with an intermediate support of wooden post (thamb).
Ridge beam is always a single member without any joint in between. Sometimes this ridge
Figure 30: Gable end roof where ridge beam is supported over thathara
49
beam is a wooden log itself. Rafters at distance of around 1m centre to centre are laid
above, which are connected at one end to the ridge beam and the wall plate (jail-dal) on
the other. Rafters are secured at their place with iron nail connections. These wall plates
(wooden) are directly placed over the wall without any connection. Rafters have purlins
(batte) above nailed to them, to support the roof covering material - slate. Slates are also
connected to the purlins with iron nails.
(2) Hipped roofs: A-type frame
is constructed and rested
over wall plates at a distance
of about 1.5m. Over these
purlins are nailed at a
distance depending upon size
of slates. Slates are nailed to
these purlins. The slates are
generally of the following
sizes: 6"x12", 7"x14", 8"x16",
9"x18", 10"x20".
Figure 32: A-type frames
(3) Flat roofs: In a few cases where there is an

additional single storey unit attached to the house,
mainly for cattle or storage, then these units have flat
roof made up of mud and wood. Main wooden beams
are supported over thatharas at the corner. Secondary
beams are placed over these nearly touching each other.
20mm thick wooden planks are laid across over these
beams. This is covered with 150mm thick layer of mud.
Figure 31: A flat roof unit
50
4.6 Structural Details
4.6.1 Gravity Load-Resisting System

The main load-bearing system of this building typology consists of 'Tholas' and wooden beams.
Tholas are provided at corners and/or ridges of the building and support the horizontal beams
which in turn support the inclined rafters and purlins. A positive connection between Tholas and
beams has generally not been observed and the beams are simply kept over the Tholas.
4.6.2 Lateral Load-Resisting System

The resistance to lateral loads is provided by wooden framing or in-plane action of walls. Although
these walls are generally made of poor quality material, such as adobe or random rubble, the large
cross-sectional area with minimal openings provides adequate lateral resistance if built and
maintained well. The lateral load-resisting feature of these buildings are horizontal members (ties)
provided at several intermediate levels between the floors to support the walls in out-of-plane
action. This type of construction known as Kath-Kunni has been traditionally used in the northern
states Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand and has been presented in the WHE report #150
(Rautela et al. 2009). In some cases, Dhajji-Diwari construction (Figure 16, see WHE report #146;
Hiçyılmaz et al. 2012) is also used for partition, in which diagonal braces are used in wooden
frame. In the uppermost storey, generally wooden frames and planks are used as partition material
to reduce the seismic weight of the building. The original construction practice involving use of
wooden planks for roof covering was also motivated from the concept of reducing mass at the top.
In verandahs, where larger openings are required, wooden frames are used in place of masonry
walls. These wooden frames result in reduced seismic mass and better lateral load resistance.
4.7 Seismic Vulnerability Analysis
4.7.1 Structural and Architectural Features
Structural/ Most appropriate type
Architectural Statement
True False N/A
Feature
Lateral load path The structure contains a complete load path for ☑ ☐ ☐
seismic force effects from any horizontal direction that
51
serves to transfer inertial forces from the building to

the foundation.
The building is regular with regards to both the plan

Building Configuration ☑ ☐ ☐
and the elevation.
The roof diaphragm is considered to be rigid and it is

expected that the roof structure will maintain its
Roof construction ☐ ☑ ☐
integrity, i.e. shape and form, during an earthquake of
intensity expected in this area.
The floor diaphragm(s) are considered to be rigid and

it is expected that the floor structure(s) will maintain its
Floor construction ☐ ☑ ☐
integrity during an earthquake of intensity expected in
this area.
There is no evidence of excessive foundation

movement (e.g. settlement) that would affect the
Foundation performance ☐ ☑ ☐
integrity or performance of the structure in an
earthquake.
Wall and frame structures - The number of lines of walls or frames in each
☑ ☐ ☐
redundancy principal direction is greater than or equal to 2.
Height-to-thickness ratio of the shear walls at each

floor level is:
Wall proportions Less than 25 (concrete walls); Less than 30 (reinforced ☑ ☐ ☐
masonry walls); Less than 13 (unreinforced masonry

walls);
Vertical load-bearing elements (columns, walls) are

Foundation-wall connection attached to the foundations; concrete columns and ☐ ☑ ☐
walls are doweled into the foundation.
Wall-roof connections Exterior walls are anchored for out-of-plane seismic ☐ ☑ ☐
52
effects at each diaphragm level with metal anchors or

straps
The total width of door and window openings in a wall

is:
For brick masonry construction in cement mortar :

less than ½ of the distance between the adjacent cross
Wall openings walls; For adobe masonry, stone masonry and brick ☑ ☐ ☐
masonry in mud mortar: less than 1/3 of the distance

between the adjacent cross walls; For precast concrete
wall structures: less than 3/4 of the length of a
perimeter wall.
Quality of building materials is considered to be

Quality of building
adequate per the requirements of national codes and ☐ ☑ ☐
materials
standards (an estimate).
Quality of workmanship (based on visual inspection of

Quality of workmanship few typical buildings) is considered to be good (per ☐ ☑ ☐
local construction standards).
Buildings of this type are generally well maintained

Maintenance and there are no visible signs of deterioration of ☐ ☑ ☐
building elements (concrete, steel, timber)
4.7.1.1 Seismic Features

Structural
Seismic Deficiency Earthquake Resilient Features
Element
Wall Generally of poor quality Horizontal wooden members (similar to ties, known as
material, without any 'Kath-Kunni' in local language) to protect the walls in out-
reinforcement. of-plane action and small window openings. In some cases
wooden bracings (known as 'Dhajji-Diwari' in local
53
language) is also used.
Frame No positive moment Enlarged cross-section of wooden columns (Tholas)

(columns, connection between results in enhanced lateral resistance.
beams) columns (tholas) and
beams.
Roof and No cross bracings provided Light-weight wooden plank covering and A-shaped bracing
floors in floors/roofs, no ties in in old constructions.
sloping roof, no anchorage
of roof/floor with walls,
even in newer
constructions.
Columns Packed with dry stones Interconnected Thatharas (wooden planks constituting
(Tholas) without mortar. Tholas) provide enhanced lateral resistance.
54
55
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF THATHRA

ARCHITECTURE
Background
Walls
Floor
Summary
Intercomponent Connections
Full Structure base model
Conclusion
56
57
5 Finite element analysis of thathra architecture
5.1 Background
Before analysis of individual substructures, a general discussion about the 3D finite-element model
of the full structure is necessary. As the literature review suggests, analytical model of the whole
structure had to be simplified for sake of calculation as computational solution of the detailed
model may not be feasible. To retain each and every detail in the model is impossible because of
the large number of motion associated with each node. So the building was assumed to be an
assembly of substructures for computational purposes.
The following major substructures and components are analyzed:
 Walls
 Floor
 Intercomponent connections
Substructures are joined in the structural framework by means of intercomponent associations.

The general reaction of the framework to a connected load is nonlinear, however a percentage of
the substructures hold a linear reaction while others react nonlinearly. Intercomponent
associations need separate investigations and examinations to know their reactions to loads.
The analysed 3D model was outlined as a composition of walls, frame, floor and roof joined by
intercomponent associations. The roof, wall and floor were broke down as superelements. The
floor is connected with a model of orthotropic plate as an optional way to analyze.
The idea of superelements and substructuring is utilized. The superelement, a piece of the
structural model, acts linearly and is joined with the model through its nodes. Through
condensation process the degrees of freedom of the superelement are removed and don't effect
the result of the whole structure.
The idea of substructures on a fundamental level is, the substantial consistent area is partitioned
into the subdomains and just the degrees of freedom on limits are used. The computational
subdomain is additionally called a superelement.
The full structure analysis requires simplifications based on the literature review and computational
resources. The following assumptions are made:
58
 The behavior of roof is linear in bending

 The behavior of diaphragm of the roof is linear.
 The behavior of floor is linear in bending and also acts as an orthotropic plate.
 Intercomponent connections are nonlinear.
 Self-weight of the whole model is analyzed as dead load.
5.2 Walls
Walls are vertical substructures designed to transfer forces to the foundation. For this analysis the
wall model was considered to be 3 meters in height, 7 meters in length and 450 mm thick.
Construction material used was fieldstone with following properties which matches most to the
stones used for construction of thatra style.
Material E (MPa) G (MPa) NI LX RO Re (MPa)

(1/°C) (kN/m3)
Fieldstone 77000.00 30000.00 0.25 0.00 25.50 27.58
The following forces were identified and were considered during structural analysis of the model:
 Horizontal shear force due to wind and earthquake.

 Bending and torsional moments resulting from the wind loadand forces acting on the wall
boundary connected to other substructures.
 Axial forces due to the weight of the carried substructures (roof, floor, including dead
loads, live loads and other loads resulting from the function of the structure).
 Body forces due to the self-weight.
These forces can act all the while and the proper load combinations are analyzed. The model
comprises of a detailed 3D finite element model.
59
5.2.1 Analysis
Figure 33: Finite element mesh
The analyzed portion of the wall of 7 X 3 X .5 m is further divided into 576 nodes and 525
planar elements during creation of finite element mesh of the model. This analysis in various
small parts of the whole structure gives better accuracy in delivering results.
Following loads were applied on the structure during analysis:
S.No Loads Direction Value (KN/m2)

1 Dead Load -Z Self-Weight
2 Live Load -Z 2
3 Wind Load XY As per IS 875(part 3)
4 Seismic Load -- I XX As per IS 1893:2001
5 Seismic Load -- II YY As per IS 1893:2001
60
Figure 34: seismic load XX
Figure 35: seismic load YY
61
Figure 36: Wind, live and dead loads action on wall
Results
Characteristics of analysis example:
Structure type: Shell
Structure geometrical center coordinates:
X= 3.500 (m)
Y= -0.000 (m)
Z= 1.500 (m)
Structure gravity center coordinates:
X= 3.500 (m)
Y= 0.000 (m)
62
Z= 1.500 (m)
Central moments of inertia of a structure:
Ix = 18427.500 (kg*m2)
Iy = 118755.000 (kg*m2)
Iz = 100327.500 (kg*m2)
Mass = 24570.000 (kg)
Structure description
Number of nodes: 576
Planar finite elements: 525
Cases: 7
Calculation summary
Solution method - SPARSE
No of static degr. of freedom: 3456
Table of load cases / analysis types
Case 1 : DL1
Analysis type: Static - Linear
Potential energy : 8.53365e+010 (kN*m)
Precision : 4.08906e+001
Case 2 : ASCE 7-10 / IBC 2012 Direction_X
Analysis type: Static - Seismic
Excitation direction:
X= 1.000
Y= 0.000
Z= 0.000
63
Data:
Soil : A
S1 : 0.100
SS : 0.250
Spectrum parameters:
Fa = 0.800 Fv = 0.800
SMS = 0.200 SM1 = 0.080
SDS = 0.133 SD1 = 0.053
To = 0.080 TS = 0.400
TL = 2.000
I = 1.000 R = 1.000
Fundamental period:
Approximated method T= 0.111 (s)
Other structures Ct = 0.02 (0.0488) x = 0.75
Structure range:
Effective height Hn = 3.00(m)
Base shear
Cs = 0.133
Cs max = 0.479
Cs min = 0.010
Effective seismic weight W = 24570.00(kG)
Shear force V = 32.13(kN)
Vertical distribution of seismic forces
Story Height (m) Weight (kG) F(kN) M(kN*m)
64
Level 1 3.00 24570.00 32.13 0.00
Case 3 : ASCE 7-10 / IBC 2012 Direction_Y
X= 0.000
Y= 1.000
Z= 0.000
Data:
Soil : A
S1 : 0.100
SS : 0.250
Fa = 0.800 Fv = 0.800
SMS = 0.200 SM1 = 0.080
SDS = 0.133 SD1 = 0.053
To = 0.080 TS = 0.400
TL = 2.000
I = 1.000 R = 1.000
Fundamental period:
Structure range:
65
Base shear
Cs = 0.133
Cs max = 0.479
Cs min = 0.010
Level 1 3.00 24570.00 32.13 0.00
5.2.2 Shear resistance

The shear firmness was demonstrated by a nonlinear behavior of the nodes and planes. The
utilization of shaft components made it conceivable to incorporate extra nodes at the limit and
these nodes were utilized to join the divider to whatever remains of the structure. Additionally,
imperative mathematical statements were characterized to guarantee an unbending body turns of
the studs in the plane of the wall. Stipulation comparisons express the level of flexibility at one
essential node as a direct blend of degrees of freedom at some other nodes. The mathematical
statement comparing to the essential level of flexibility is expelled from the framework. The upper
bar experiences an inflexible body movement in the load direction.
The edge shafts have insignificant out-of-plane twisting stiffness and very large resistance in
direction of plane. Utilizing this arrangement, the main commitment to the worldwide firmness
grid is the interpretation in the z-course and extra bowing firmness in the out-of-plane bearing as
managed by flat bars. The load direction curve from the shear examination of the model is the
66
spring firmness for the equal model, or it could be the result from test or whatever viable suitable
model.
The below image shows the shear stress developed during the simple load combination of all
forces. It reflects that the mid-section of the wall is developing large stress which can lead to its
failure whereas the stress level remains under limit in rest of the substructure.
Figure 37: Shear stress in XX
The diagram below represents the shear stress developed in YY direction when under the loads. It
increases towards the top of the wall but that may be attributed to lack of anchorage in the wall
allowing it for out of plane motion.
67
Figure 38: Shear stress in YY
Figure 39: Shear stress in XY
68
From the scientific examination of the coupling in the middle of bending and shear loads, it takes
after that shear firmness may be lessened when the wall is stacked by weight. To record for the
impact of the wall twisting on the shear firmness, the heap distortion bend of the wall in shear
could be gotten by analysing the 3D model for a consolidation of wind weight and shear rather
than for the straightforward shear. This might be effortlessly performed since wind weight (suction)
on the outside walls is known from the IS 875 (part 3). The weight and shear must be augmented
at the same time to represent the concurrent impact of the wind load. Since the walls in the
building for the most part stacked in shear are not at the same time subjected to high wind weight
(shear walls are spotted in the heading parallel to the wind course normally bringing about suction
impressively lower than wind weight on a windward side of the building), the dissection for
concurrent impact won't prompt considerable change in the divider shear solidness.
5.2.3 Out-Of-Plane Stiffness

Wind weight and reaction forces from perpendicular walls and diaphragms leads to bending and
torsional moments. These strengths are opposed by the wall which tends to behave as a bending
member.
Figure 40: Membrane forces
69
The bending stiffness is displayed by superimposing a two dimensional plate component with the
layer firmness uprooted. The plate is orthotropic to record for diverse stiffnesses of the divider in
the tallness and width of the divider. An iterative answer for the orthotropic plate under distinctive
limit and stacking conditions is utilized to make the plate firmness.
Figure 41: Moments
70
Figure 42: Active deformations
5.2.4 Summary
After analyzing the various maps and calculation results it has been found that behaves well in
shear but fails in bending.
5.3 Floor
Floors are integral substructures which transfers the live loads to the frame. Floor slab for analysis
in the said architecture style is opted to be dimension of 7X7 meter. Main beam of size 270X230
mm rests on the thathra on either side. As the span is larger another main beam run through the
71
centre which is supported in the middle by a single timber member of dime
Figure 43: Floor plan
nsion 270X270 mm. Secondary beams of size 3000 X 160 X 100 mm are nailed to the main
beams at a distance of 400mm centre to centre. A total of 3 main beams run in X axis and2 main
beams and 17 secondary beams run in y direction. Thus this slab will be considered as one way
slab as the secondary reinforcing beams run in
Figure 45: Analytical plan

Figure 44: 3D model
72
single axis. This slab will behave as flexible diaphragm.
Figure 46: Section detail

Figure 47: Section
H=45mm, ha=200mm, a=400mm, a1=100mm
The definite finite element model utilized two-dimensional orthotropic shell components for joists
and sheathing. Joists furthermore sheathing had free node numbering and were joined by means of
nonlinear burden redirection components. For effortlessness, gaps were excluded from the model
and discontinuities in the sheathing were joined by diverse node numbers for every plywood
board.
Figure 48: Finite element mesh
73
The following assumptions were made for carrying out the analysis:
 Loads will only be in transverse direction and will be uniformly distributed.

 Clasps have consistent spacing all through the length of the board.
 All joists have the same spacing.
 Floor is simply supported.
5.3.1 Analysis
Figure 49: Loads acting on structure
Results
74
X= 3.500 (m)
Y= 2.750 (m)
Z= 3.000 (m)
X= 3.526 (m)
Y= 2.672 (m)
Z= 3.000 (m)
Ix = 44093.760 (kg*m2)
Iy = 30958.870 (kg*m2)
Iz = 75040.353 (kg*m2)
Mass = 6479.038 (kg)
Number of bars: 38
Bar finite elements: 952
Calculation summary
75
Solution method - SPARSE M
Case 1 : DL1
Potential energy: 7.36895e+011 (kN*m)
Precision: 2.83574e+001
Case 2 : LL1
Potential energy: 2.48287e+012 (kN*m)
Precision: 3.07059e+001
Figure 50: Moment in whole structure
76
Figure 51: Moment in XY
Figure 52: Shear forces in XX
The above maps of moment in the floor plate reflect the torsional force the nodes in the plane are
going through. As it is reflected through the diagrams the moment acts most in the Y direction
towards geometrical center of the floor. Thus the chances of deformation in the separate zones
crop up.
77
Figure 53: Shear stress in XX
The following diagram represents the shear stress developed in different directions of the
substructure. The shear gradient prevalent is pretty uniform thus eradicating the chances of shear
failure in the floor plate. Whereas a much more uniform distribution of shear load will be
appreciated through the load transferring beams.
Figure 54: Shear stress in YY
78
Figure 55: Total displacement
These maps represent the total displacement and deformation of the nodes. It shows that lack of
proper connection at ends results in excessive moment at the corner leading to deformation in the
zone.
Figure 56: Deformation
79
5.3.2 Summary
After analyzing all maps it has been found that the floor behaving as an orthotropic plate fails in
shear at the corners where it transfers the load to wall through its nodes. The floor plates also show
deformation when transverse loads acts on it.
5.4 Intercomponent Connections

There are various diverse intercomponent associations thathra architecture style building.
Associations range from basic nailing of two continous parts to extraordinarily composed metal-
plate connectors, for example, hooks or T-straps. The associations are an indispensable piece of
the building, and their capacity is to hold the single person substructures together and to exchange
forces between substructures.
The reaction of the intercomponent association with the load is by and large nonlinear and is a
function of numerous parameters, for example, wood type, wood thickness, and dampness
substance of the wood. It is likewise extraordinarily affected by variability of the materials. Hence,
test results will be diverse actually for the same association sort and same wood species.
To incorporate every individual association in the whole model will bring about a tremendous
number of degrees of freedom because of the need of refining the finite element network at the
region of association points.
Additionally, this would oblige that the majority of the substructures in the model exist in their
three-dimensional structure, which will prompt a very large issue.
A vast gathering of the intercomponent associations in this style is made out of the nail
associations. Nails are utilized as associating components and properties of the individual nail
association focus the conduct of the entire subassembly. Likewise, the associations rehash at
certain endorsed frequencies. In this manner, the intercomponent association might be segregated
from the structure also investigated as a different substructure. This substructure might be
subjected to load and limit conditions reproducing the real physical test, which would be utilized to
focus the association solidness in interpretation and pivot. In the end load-deformation curves for
the subassembly are built and utilized as the trademark properties of an one-dimensional nonlinear
burden avoidance component consequently used to associate the limits of semi superelements and
superelements in the full-structure model.
80
This procedure is like the semi superelement examination. For instance, the corner association
between two outer walls is investigated as an average portion of unit width. Load-deformation
aspects in shear and torsion are acquired as force-deflection or moment-rotation connections and
these serve as an immediate information for the model.
The following intercomponent connections were analyzed:
 Connections at corner between external walls.

 Floor and external wall connections.
 External walls and roof connections.
For each intercomponent connection degree of freedom was identified by analyzing the
displacement during application of loads.
Connections at corner between external walls:
Figure 57: Connection at corner between external walls
Figure 58: Plan of connection at corner between

external walls
In almost all the structures surveyed a thathra existed at
the corner. The walls didn‟t had any connection with the thatharas and behaved as free standing
walls. Thus the movements will be 1 in translational and 2 in rotational giving us the total degree of
freedom of 3.
Floor and external wall connections:
81
Figure 60: Connection between floor slab and wall at village Rakh
Figure 59: Connection between floor slab and

internal walls at village Khyah
As we can identify from the images above the floor beams are nailed to the wall allowing for
translational movement in only single direction. Thus this connection can be considered as a
pinned support giving the master degree of freedom as 1.
External walls and roof connections:
Figure 62: Connection between roof and wall in structure at village Figure 61: Connection between a flat roof and wall
Bharmour
Wooden logs rest on the wall with gravity but its movement is restricted in translational direction
so this connection is considered as roller support giving the master degree of freedom as 2.
82
5.5 Full Structure base model

The scientific model is obliged to yield reaction forces and distortions for every shear walls when
the structure is stacked by horizontal forces, for example, wind force. Only static loading is
considered in this study.
The model of the full building is a composition of superelements speaking of both, the roof and
floor, and semi superelements speaking of the walls and intercomponent associations. The semi
superelements for the walls and intercomponent associations carry on nonlinearly, although
superelements are direct. Besides, the conduct of the semi superelements might be
nonconservative, which makes the structural reaction to the cyclic stacking potential study region.
Figure 63: Finite Element mesh of the model
For analysis of the model following boundary conditions were applied:
 Thatras and wooden columns were connected to ground through fixed support.
 Thatra was connected to the beam through pinned support.
 Floors were connected to beam through roller support.
83
 Floors were connected to external walls through pinned line support.

 Each node in A type truss was connected to each other through pinned support.
 Trusses were connected to beam through pinned support.
 Edges of external walls were connected through pinned line support.
 Beams were connected through pinned support.
5.5.1 Loads and Load Combination

Following loads were applied on the model during analytical analysis:
 Dead Load of the self-weight was applied in –ve Z direction.

 Dead Load of another 1kn/m2 in –Z direction was applied considering of furnitures.
 Live Load of 2kN/m2 was applied in –ve Z direction.
 Wind Load of 1.2kN/m2 was applied according to the regulation: IS:875 (Part5).
 Seismic Load was applied according to IS 1893(part 1) : 2002
5.5.2 Analysis:
X= 3.500 (m)
Y= 2.750 (m)
Z= 3.650 (m)
X= 3.387 (m)
Y= 3.918 (m)
Z= 1.818 (m)
Ix = 1058307.947 (kg*m2)
Iy = 1238310.051 (kg*m2)
Iz = 1838016.767 (kg*m2)
Mass = 132094.059 (kg)
84
Number of bars: 87
Bar finite elements: 1324
Supports: 468
Cases: 5
Calculation summary
Solution method - SPARSE M
Stiffness matrix diagonal elements
Min/Max after decomposition: 2.910383e-011 1.332455e+011
Precision: -6
Case 1 : DL1
Potential energy : 3.98593e+011 (kN*m)
Precision : 1.32995e-001
Case 2 : LL1
Potential energy : 1.18755e-002 (kN*m)
Precision : 9.52601e-001
Case 3 : WIND1
85
Potential energy : 7.56150e-004 (kN*m)
Precision : 2.34790e+000
Case 4 : ASCE 7-10 / IBC 2012 Direction_X
X= 1.000
Y= 0.000
Z= 0.000
Data:
Soil : A
S1 : 0.100
SS : 0.250
Fa = 0.800 Fv = 0.800
SMS = 0.200 SM1 = 0.080
SDS = 0.133 SD1 = 0.053
To = 0.080 TS = 0.400
TL = 2.000
I = 1.000 R = 1.000
Fundamental period:
86
Structure range:
Top story Level 6
Bottom story Level 1
Base shear
Cs = 0.133
Cs max = 0.218
Cs min = 0.010
Level 1 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Level 2 3.00 119436.73 0.00 0.00
Roof 2.50 10262.45 0.00 0.00
Case 5 : ASCE 7-10 / IBC 2012 Direction_Y
X= 0.000
Y= 1.000
Z= 0.000
Data:
Soil : A
87
S1 : 0.100
SS : 0.250
Fa = 0.800 Fv = 0.800
SMS = 0.200 SM1 = 0.080
SDS = 0.133 SD1 = 0.053
To = 0.080 TS = 0.400
TL = 2.000
I = 1.000 R = 1.000
Fundamental period:
Structure range:
Top story Level 6
Bottom story Level 1
Base shear
Cs = 0.133
Cs max = 0.218
Cs min = 0.010
88
Level 1 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Level 2 3.00 119436.73 0.00 0.00
Roof 2.50 10262.45 0.00 0.00
The following map represents the stress developed in whole structure when under dead load. This
diagram shows that at the nodal joints of the external walls the stress developed is way beyond
limit. It also reflects the failure of wall in shear at midpoints.
Figure 64: Stress developed in whole structure
89
Figure 65: Stress in XX for live load
Figure 66: Deformation during Live Load
90
Failure in torsion and shear as deformation is denoted through this map. It shows that the floor
which is considered as an orthogonal plate fails due to the moment created by the live load. This
tendency of failure reflects the unidirectional reinforcement by the beams provided.
Figure 68: Membrane forces during live load
Figure 67: Shear forces in YY for wind load

91
Figure 69: Global extremes of stress analysis
After the stress analysis of the whole structure global extremes are generated for each loading
combination. This table gives us the maximum and minimum forces and moments exerted on the
structure under different load combination scenario. Through this table it can be said that the
structure behavior don‟t change much over the whole course and it behaves correctly during
different load combinations.
92
Figure 71: Shear forces during SLS
Figure 70: Membrane forces during ULS
93
Figure 72: Shear stress during ULS
Figure 73: Tangential forces during ULS
94
The shear force diagram during SLS represents the lateral component of the forces on the
structure. Overall the model behaves quite nicely in countering the shear force. The thick 450
millimeter plays its part to perfection in this case. The trusses show their vulnerability as the lower
chord attracts the maximum force.
The membrane and tangential force diagram denotes another set of forces acting on the planar
nodes. The modal analysis shows the just behavior of the model with only the panel with opening
showing tendency of failure.
5.6 Conclusion
After analyzing the results of the structural analysis of 3D nonlinear finite element model of thathra
style of architecture following conclusions can be made:
 The connection between beams and columns allows for both translational and rotational
motion.
 Due to lack of anchorage out of plane movement of wall is not restricted.
 The stress diagram reflects the excessive torsional bending moment is present at the
corners.
 Flexibility of roof and floor is evident through the shear force diagram in SLS load
combination.
 Shear stress beyond permissible limit is prevalent in the load transfer system as evident
through shear stress map during ULS loading combination.
 Deformation on the first floor level is exaggerated when loading under the prescribed live
load thus pointing to lack of shear strength of the beam system supporting the floor.
 After analyzing the map of shear force due to wind load it can be predicted fairly that the
walls will fail in shear if the wind pressure increases to 1.5kN/m3.
 The truss system shows signs of failure under various load combinations. This reflects that
the pin joints in the truss need to be reinforced and its rotational motion needs to be
restricted.
 Each truss behaves differently under the loads as these are not connected properly. Thus
generating separate stress in each member which can further lead to failure.
 Openings in the wall attract moments due to closeness to the non-connected corners.
95
PROPOSAL
Low in-plane and out-of-plane strength of walls

Lack of shear strength in floor system
Lack of anchorage of roof beam and rafters with
walls
Lack of lateral support to walls
96
6 Proposal
After analyzing the results failure of the superelements in the substructure were identified. These
failures can be negated by provision of strengthening measures. Following are some structural
deficiency and their counter retrofitting measures.
6.1 Low in-plane and out-of-plane strength of walls
Figure 74: Wall section with retrofitting measures
The walls can be strengthened using ferro-cement (a layer of welded wire mesh grid sandwiched
between two layers of cement-sand mortar or micro-concrete), applied on both faces of the dry
stone walls, properly interconnected with the wall.
The composite action of the stone wall and ferro-cement is expected to provide adequate in-plane
as well as out-of-plane strength. The steel connectors provided at regular intervals to interconnect
the two layers of reinforcement on opposite faces of the wall will prevent the splitting of the dry
stone walls.
6.2 Lack of shear strength in floor system

The floor system has shown tendency of failure in shear during loading. This can be avoided by
providing a different beam system to support the floor. In this system the beams are arranged in
97
criss cross manner thus providing reinforcement in both XX and YY direction.
Figure 76: Plan of floor system with beams
Figure 75: Analytical model of the floor
98
Figure 77: Moment in whole structure proposal
Figure 78: Total displacement in proposal
99
Figure 79: Total active deformation in proposal
After analyzing all the results it can be said that the new beam system has helped in reducing the
chances of failure of the floor system.
6.3 Lack of anchorage of roof beam and rafters with walls
For existing construction, the ridge beam and rafters are simply placed on the walls without any
positive anchorage. This will cause relative movement of these elements with respect to the walls,
leading to the collapse of the roof. Therefore, these elements should be properly anchored to the
walls. In the proposed strengthening scheme this can be achieved by using metallic connectors
nailed with the wooden members and anchored into the ferro-cement layer or the roof/floor band.
6.4 Lack of lateral support to walls
External band (ties) can be provided at roof level (and also at floor level in case of flexible floor
diaphragms) to provide out of-plane support to the walls. The bands may be provided in timber,
steel or RC and have to be continuous on all internal and external walls.
100
7 Bibliography
 Holgate, Alan (1986). The Art in Structural Design. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
 Rice, Peter (1994). An Engineer Imagines. London
 Macdonald, Angus J. (2001). Structure and Architecture. The Cromwell Press, Wiltshire.
 Ottosen, N.S. and Petersson,H. (1992). Introduction to the Finite Element Method.
Prentice Hall, New York.
 Boughton, G.N. 1988. Full scale structural testing of houses under cyclonic wind loads.
 Cook, R.D. 1981. Concepts and applications of finite element analysis. John Willey &
Sons. New York.
 Groom, K.M. 1992. Nonlinear finite-element modeling of intercomponent connections in
light-frame wood structures.M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
 Gupta, A.K., and P.H.Kuo. 1984. Behavior of wood framed shear walls. Department of
Civil Engineering. North Carolina State University.
 Hayashi, K. 1999. Studies on methods to estimate the racking resistance of houses with
wooden wall panels.
 Kasal, B., M. Wang, and R. J. Leichti. 2001. A Nonlinear finite-element model for wood-
frame stud walls.
 Kikuchi, N. 1986. Finite element methods in mechanics. Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge. England.
 Lafave, K. D. 1990. Experimental and Analytical Study of Load Sharing in Wood Truss
Roof Systems. M.S. thesis. Washington State University.
 Dhajji Dewari. Hicyilmaz, K., Bothara, J., and Stephenson, M. (2012). Report no. 146,
World Housing Encyclopedia, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, United States.
 Indian Standard, Improving Earthquake Resistance of Earthen Buildings - Guidelines. IS
13827: 1993. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi, October 1993 (reaffirmed
1998), 20 pp.
 Indian Standard, Improving Earthquake Resistance of Low strength masonry buildings -
Guidelines.IS 13828: 1993.Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi, October 1993
(reaffirmed 1998), 13 pp.
101
 Indian Standard, Repair and Strengthening of Masonry Building-Guidelines. IS 13935 :

2009. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi.
 Timber-reinforced Stone Masonry (Koti Banal Architecture) of Uttarakhand and
Himachal Pradesh, Northern India. Rautela, P., Girish, J., Singh, Y., and Lang, D.H.
(2009). Report no. 150, World Housing Encyclopedia, Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute, United States.
 Saabye Ottosen, N. and Petersson, H. (1992) Introduction to the finite element method.
New York, Prentice Hall.
 Macdonald, Angus J. (2001). Structure and Architecture. The Cromwell Press, Wiltshire.
 Charleson, A. (2005), Structure as Architecture: A Source Book for Architects and
Structural Engineers, Elsevier/Architectural Press, Oxford.
 Holgate, A. (1986), The Art in Structural Design, Oxford University Press, London.
 Salvadori, M. (1980), Why Buildings Stand Up: the Strength of Architecture, Norton &
Company,New York, NY.
 Wengenroth, R.H. (1971), “A bridge engineer looks at aesthetics of structures”, Journal of
the Structural Division, Vol. 97 No. 4, pp. 1227-37.
 Larsen, O.P. and Tyas, A. (2004), Conceptual Structural Design: Bridging the Gap
between Architects and Engineers, Thomas Telford Ltd, London.
 Timber-reinforced Stone Masonry (Koti Banal Architecture) of Uttarakhand and
Himachal Pradesh, Northern India. Rautela, P., Girish, J., Singh, Y., and Lang, D.H.
(2011) Report no. 150, World Housing Encyclopedia, Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute, United States.
102
8 Appendix A – Survey Form
103
PLAN SKETCH
1. SURVEY DETAILS (Form Identifier)
(a) Form no.:
(b)Date:
2. BUILDING DETAILS
(a) Building Name:
(b)Address:______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Village/Town/City_____________________District_____________
_________State________________________PIN_____________________
(c) Year of Construction:
(d)Width of adjoining main road (m):______
(e) Predominant Use:

Elevation:
Assembly Office School Emergency
Residential Commercial Industrial
If Residential, no. of housing units: ________
Is the Building used for Lifeline function?
No
Give Details………………………
(f) Minimum distance from adjoining building (m): ______
(g) Visual Condition:
Excellent Good Damage
(h) Building on stilts/Open ground floor:

Yes No
<25% 25% - 50% >50%
(i) Construction drawings available:
Yes No
3. GENERAL INFORMATION
(a) Site Morphology
Site Morphology (Select All Applicable)
Flat Crest Embankment Downward Slope Trough Adjacent to Hill Slopes
(b) Soil
Soil Type Soil Nature
Hard Medium Soft Not Known Expansive Not Expansive Not Known
Liquefaction Potential
Liquefiable Not Liquefiable Not Known

(c) Foundation
Foundation Type
o No Foundation o Trench filled with dry stone o Dry stone packing
o Random rubble masonry strip o Regular masonry strip in mud o Regular masonry strip in
mortar lime/cement mortar
o Pile/well foundation o Beam on columns o Other (specify)
(d) Typology
Material Type of Load-Bearing Structure Type of Roof/floor system
Mud Rammed Earth Wall Heavy sloping roofs
Thatch/light weight sloping roof
Others (specify)-
Sundried brick/block walls Heavy sloping roofs
Flat roof on wooden girders/planks
Others (specify)-
Stabilised Earth walls Heavy sloping roof
Others (specify)-
Mud walls with timber framing Heavy sloping roof
Others (specify)-
Timber Timber frame with timber plank Light weight sloping roof
partitions
Heavy/stone sloping roof
Others (specify)
Wooden frame with Light weight sloping roof
‘ekra’/bamboo/light partitions
Heavy /stone sloping roof
Others (specify)
Dhajji-Diwari Light weight sloping roof
Others (specify)
Thatra with timber plank partitions Light weight sloping roof
Others (specify)
Thatra with Dhajji-Diwari partitions Light weight sloping roof
Heavy/ stone sloping roof
Others (specify)
Thatra with other partitions (specify) Light weight sloping roof
Others (specify)
Kath-Kunni walls with stone packing Light weight sloping roof
Others (specify)
Bamboo Bamboo frames with Bamboo/Ekra/ Thatch
straw partitions
‘Bunga’
Stone Dry stone walls Light weight sloping roof
Flat heavy mud roof on wooden/steel
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Others (specify)
Random Rubble in Mud mortar Light weight sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Others (specify)
Random Rubble in cement mortar Light weight sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Others (specify)
Dressed (Regular shaped) stone Light weight sloping roof
masonry in mud mortar
Heavy stone sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
masonry in lime mortar
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
masonry in cement mortar
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
Massive (thick) stone masonry Domes
walls/Historical buildings
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
Brick Brick masonry in mud mortar Light weight sloping roof
Heavy stone/tiled sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
Brick masonry in Lime mortar Light weight sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Jack-Arch Roof
Others (specify)
Brick masonry in Cement mortar Light weight sloping roof
girders
Flat RC/RB roof
Others (specify)
(e) Workmanship and maintenance

Workmanship Maintenance
Good Poor Not Known Good Poor o Abandoned
(f) Other
On hill slopes Entrance on higher slope

Building Built
on Split level Yes
Partial basement Entrance on lower slope
No
Row Middle Corner

Housing Type
Isolated
Depth of soil retaining Structural system supporting Soil
Down-hill side RC Shear Wall
Building in Up-hill side Masonry Shear Wall
contact with Yes
soil Sides Other:
No
4. STRUCTURAL FEATURES
Thickness of Walls (no. of withes) Presence of through-stones in random rubble masonry
o Single-leaf (wythe) o Double-leaf (wythe) o Yes o No o N/A

Presence of arches/vaults without ties or buttresses Presence of ties/braces in sloping roofs
o Yes o No o Yes o No o N/A

Stones/tiles anchored to purlins Diagonal planks/braces in wooden floor diaphragms
o Yes o No o N/A o Yes o No o N/A
5. Connections
Good connections between Lintel band/horizontal Roof band/ties present Good connections between
walls at corners wooden members present roof/floor slab and walls
Yes No Not known Yes No Not known Yes No Not known Yes No Not known
6. ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES
Different storey Large open central Large door/window Door/window openings Re-entrant corners
heights present? courtyard present openings present close to corners present present
Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No
Walls distributed Walls symmetrically Irregular Floating walls about Floating walls about both
symmetrically distributed about orientation of one axis present axes present
about one axis both axes rooms
Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No
Long walls without Location of Location of staircase Staircase Overhead water tank present
cross walls present staircase eccentric eccentric about both headroom present
about one axis axes
Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Location:________________
7. BUILDING DESCRIPTION (Overall metrics, age, use and intensity of use)
No. of stories * Average inter- Average Average floor * Utilisation of floor Maximum *
storey height inter-storey area (m2) area(%) Number of
(m) height (m) occupants
Ground Floor Other Stories
Stories below Stories above <2.5 <2.5 < 25
Road Level Road Level Season
2.5-3.0 2.5-3.0 25-50
1 1 Day:
3.0-3.5 3.0-3.5 50-75 Night:
2 2
3.5-5.0 3.5-5.0 > 75
3 3
> 5.0 > 5.0 Abandoned Unseason
Day:
Unfinished
Night:
Period of Occupancy (y/m m/d d/h)
Year of last structural repair (if any)
8. GEOMETRICAL CHARACTERISTICS
a) Projections
o Communication
o Chimneys o Parapet o Cladding o Balconie o Sunshade o Other
Towers
If others, give details______________________

Largest horizontal projection= _____mLargest vertical projection = _____m
b) Plan irregularity c) Vertical irregularity
Parameter Parameter
Lateral load-resisting elements not parallel to Open storey (Relative)
orthogonal axis
Re-entrant corners (>15% of plan dimension) Mass irregularities
Diaphragm discontinuity (cut/open area > 50% of gross Geometrical irregularity (horizontal dimension of lateral
area, and/or floor to floor variation in diaphragm stiffness) load-resisting system in a storey is >150% of adjacent storey )
Out-of-plane offsets of lateral load-resisting Discontinuity in vertical members over height

elements
Lateral load-resisting elements not symmetric Vertical stiffness irregularities
about orthogonal axis
Staggered floors (offset floor diaphragm)
9. HISTORY OF EARLIER DAMAGE

Yes No Not Known
If Yes,
Any storey/building noticeably leaning

Cracks at beam-column junction
Beam Distress - Vertical/Diagonal cracks near supports/mid span
Are the slabs exclusively deflected?
Cantilever slabs are damaged?
Cracks in Staircase
Out of plane failure of infill walls
If others, give details__________________________________
10. STRUCTURAL STRENGTHENING/REHABILITATION
Yes No Not Known
11. IMPORTANT OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS
12. Photograph Nos.
STRUCTURAL METRICS
Floor 1 Floor 2 Floor 3 Floor 4
No. floors adjoining
Arches supported
No. internal walls
with lateral walls

Good connection
No. of openings
No. floors with
Thickness (m)
Thickness (m)
Thickness (m)
Thickness (m)
identical wall
where L1<L2
Buttresses/
Length (m)
Wall index
connected
Lpier/Lwall
Lpier/Lwall
Lpier/Lwall
Lpier/Lwall
Direction
wall
Lwall
Structural Plan Density:
Total area of bearing walls in x direction

X direction: × 100
Plinth area
Total area of bearing walls in y direction

Y direction: × 100
Plinth area

Aditya Rahul Final Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aditya Rahul Final Report PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aditya Rahul Final Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Analysis of Vernacular Architecture in

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

3.2.6 Dhajji Dewari:................................................................................................................... 40

4 Case Study – Thathra architectural style .............................................. 44

5 Finite element analysis of thathra architecture..................................... 58

5.4 Intercomponent Connections ......................................................................80

Figure 1: Statically determinated beam ...................................................................................................... 19

Figure 41: Moments .................................................................................................................................... 70

1.3 Goals and Objectives

1.4 Scope of Research

1.6 Process of Research

Formulation of Aim &

Identify process and

Determining sample design Preparing survey form

Primary data collection through

Processing and analyzing the data

 Descriptive identification of the building typology

Cpe = external pressure coefficient,

Cpi = internal pressure coefficient

A = surface area of structural element or cladding unit, and

pd = design wind pressure

2.3.1 Isostatic Structures:

Figure 2: Statically determinated frame Figure 1: Statically determinated beam

2.3.2 Hyperstatic Structures:

Figure 3: 2D indeterminate frame DOF=3

2.4 Structural Analysis: a brief history

 The Preparation Time from 1575 until 1825,

2.4.1 The Preparation Time (1575 – 1825)

Figure 6 Hookes spring Figure 5 Galileos cantilever beam embedded in a

2.4.2 The Discipline Creation Period (1825-1900)

Henry Navier (1785-1836), educator at the

sufficient to focus inside and outside powers Figure 7: Truss Bridge

in basic structures, the statically determinate

2.4.3 Consolidation Period (1900-1950)

2.4.4 Integration Period (1950-1975)

2.4.5 Diffusion Period (1975 until now)

2.5 Finite Element Method

The FEM works as follows:

The structural analysis should take into account following effects:

 deformability and stiffness of the structure and supports;

 behavior of cross-sections (classification of sections);

Structural analysis should give answers to following questions:

Figure 9: India Earthquake zone map

3.2 Identified Building Typologies

3.2.1 Thathara Style:

build palaces, bridges as Figure 10: Typical Thathara house

well as various other

3.2.2 Mud wall construction:

rainfall. This dryness of the Figure 11: Typical Mud construction

local climate is reflected in the

3.2.3 Dry stone construction:

The building type has been

practices due to scarcity of Figure 12: Typical Dry Stone construction

wood. Thus, this

Response of this construction technique during earthquake is excellent and construction

3.2.4 Kaath Kuni

3.2.5 Taq Dewari:

workmanship; it is generally arranged Figure 14: Typical Taq Dewari construction

with a secluded design of brick work