Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures

RETROFITTING OF HERITAGE BUILDING “UJJAYANTA PALACE”

IN AGARTALA – A CASE STUDY
Supratim Bhowmik(1), Somnath Shil(1) Dipankar Bhowmik(2) and S. Seetharaman(1)
(1)
Civil Engineering, Sathyabama University.
(2)
Assistant Engineer, P.W.D., Agartala, Tripura.

Abstract
Ujjayanta Palace, standing in the heart of Agartala city, in Tripura, a famous royal house,
covering an area of 1 sq. km. and styled in Greek sculpture, was built by Maharaja
Radhakishore Manikaya in 1901. The two-storeyed palace has a mixed architecture with three
high domes (the center one being 26 m high). Ujjayanta Palace, a declared heritage building,
has been in existence for the past 110 years and the environmental effects have taken their
toll. A detailed survey of the existing structure and the surrounding soil strata was made. The
properties of the building materials were assessed using modern techniques. The soil was
found to be prone to liquefaction in the event of an earthquake. It was decided to carry out
extensive retrofitting of the palace without in any way altering its architectural features. The
criteria adopted for undertaking the retrofitting was to permit the structure to undergo
deformation without brittle failure or loss of life during design basis earthquake and to limit
the damage to minor repairable cracks when the structure was subjected to maximum
considered earthquake. In this paper, details of the assessment of the palace structure and the
environment are presented. Further, a comprehensive description of the retrofitting techniques
adopted and their efficacy are explained.

1. INTRODUCTION
India is a country, having large number of historical monuments that depict its rich
heritage, vibrant culture, thriving economy and spirituality. Conservation of these
monumental structures, which are in a state of deep disrepair, is on the prime agenda of our
Government. One such heritage structure is the Ujjayanta Palace situated in Agartala, the
capital city of the Tripura State. The palace, built in 1901 in Greek architectural style, was
designed and built by Sir Alexander Martin of M/s. Martin & Co. of Calcutta, for the then
King Maharaja Radha Kishore Manikya. The Government of Tripura is now taking measures
to retrofit this national heritage structure and make it a heritage icon and a national museum.
Ujjayanta Palace is a famous royal house, covering an area of one sq. km. and styled in
Greek sculpture. The palace is set with the huge lughole style gardens, adorned by pools and
fountains, superbly tiled floors, curved wooden ceiling and exquisitely crafted doors. The
three-storeyed palace has a mixed architecture with three high domes (the centre one being

203
International Conference, Chennai, India, 13th – 16th February 2013

26 m high). The earlier version of Ujjayanta Palace, which was situated 10 km away from the
city, was destroyed in an earthquake in the year 1897, and the present version was rebuilt at
the heart of the city. The palace now serves as the Assembly House of Tripura.
Ujjayanta Palace, a declared heritage building, has been in existence for the past 110 years
and the environmental effects have taken their due toll. The region, situated in Zone V, is
frequently visited by earthquakes, the recent one being 6.4 on the Richter scale in December
2011. A detailed survey of the existing structure and the surrounding soil strata was made.
The palace is of load bearing type with foundation system and walls made of brick masonry in
lime mortar, and roof in lime surkhi concrete. The properties of the building materials were
assessed using modern techniques. The soil was found to be prone to liquefaction in the event
of an earthquake. It was decided to carry out extensive retrofitting of the palace without in any
way altering its architectural features.
The principal difference between a heritage structure and a regular structure is that
retrofitting techniques cannot be applied indiscriminately with the sole aim of improving
structural response to earthquakes. The aim of the retrofit is to preserve the historical structure
for generations to come. Strengthening of historical buildings is a difficult compromise
between requirements of structural theory and conservation principles. Intervention must be as
much as necessary, but as little as possible.
The criteria adopted for undertaking the retrofitting was to permit the structure to undergo
deformation without brittle failure or loss of life during design basis earthquake and to limit
the damage to minor repairable cracks when the structure was subjected to maximum
considered earthquake. The retrofitting was carried out by fixing aluminium and stainless steel
flats and angles along the walls, under the floors and roofs, and corners of columns. The
retrofitting activity, which was started in 2007, is expected to be completed in 2013.
In this paper, details of the assessment of the palace structure and the environment are
presented. Further, a comprehensive description of the retrofitting techniques adopted and
their efficacy are explained.

2. SALIENT DETAILS OF THE UJJAYANTA PALACE

The Ujjayanta palace Building is a conventional load bearing brick masonry wall structure,
in turn supported on brick masonry foundation. The age of the main block is 110 years and
that of the Annexe Block about 70 years. The building is a two-storied structure comprising of
ground and first floors. The main block of the building was extended in the year 1940. The
roofing system is made up of a combination of reinforced cement concrete and lime surkhi
concrete with steel rafters and reapers.
The foundation of the structure is made up of brick masonry in lime mortar. The walls are
also of brick masonry in lime mortar with lime plaster. The wall thickness is 800 mm in the
ground floor and 600 mm in the first floor. The roofing of the palace is a combination of lime
surkhi concrete with steel rafters and reapers. A part of the roofing system was replaced with
reinforced concrete in a later measure.

3. DETAILS OF DETERIORATION OBSERVED IN THE PALACE BUILDING

The Ujjayanta Palace has been declared as a national heritage structure. Therefore, the
Government decided to investigate the structure in detail and to assess the seismic capacity of

204
 Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures

the building to resist likely earthquake loading in the high seismic zone (Zone V), in which
the city of Agartala is situated. Further, several distress features were observed in the structure
like deterioration of masonry walls, corrosion in steel members, cracks, dampness in walls
and leakage through the roof.
After conducting detailed physical investigation of the structure, many important
observations of the existing building were made. The following general observations were
made after a study of the external features of the palace. There were no visible signs of
settlement of foundation in any part of the building. It was observed that in most locations
there was no all-round plinth protection. There was growth of vegetation close to the
foundation at most of the locations. The plastering on the external wall had been peeled off at
many locations. Vegetation was also present over the masonry walls (Figure 1). Damp
patches, fungus growth and cracks were noticed at many portions (Figure 3). The deterioration
was more severe on the rear side of the palace. The sewage lines and chambers were found to
be open and there were pools of stagnating waste water in the rear portion of the palace.
Several indications of deterioration were observed on the terrace floor. In the pilasters of
terrace dome, there was spalling of plaster and bricks were exposed (Figure 2). Plastering had
come off in masonry walls pilasters of terrace structures. Stagnation of water was noticed over
the roof slab near the location of water tank and growth of vegetation was noticed on the
central dome as well as over the roof slab. Cracks were noted in plaster of masonry walls and
pilasters of central dome. Debris had accumulated over the roof slab, especially in the rear
portion of central dome.
In the interior of the palace, there were damp patches, spalling of plaster, etc., observed,
especially near the toilet area. Corrosion had set in the bearing plates of beams at the ceiling
level. Horizontal cracks were noticed in masonry walls at ceiling level (Figure 4).
Based on the visual physically deteriorated condition of the palace, it was proposed to
conduct several detailed technical studies and in-situ tests on the structure. These studies were
carried out mainly to evaluate the as-existing soundness of the structure.

Figure 1: Vegetation around the palace

205
International Conference, Chennai, India, 13th – 16th February 2013

Figure 2: Cracking on pilasters

Figure 3: Dampness Figure 4: Corrosion

4. TECHNICAL STUDIES AND IN-SITU TESTS

In order to determine the structural soundness of the components as well as of the building,
several technical studies and in-situ tests were conducted. In this effort, the foundation was
investigated in detail. The quality and strength of brick and mortar samples were tested, both
in-situ as well as in the laboratory. In-situ mortar shear test was conducted on brick masonry
walls to evaluate the bonding strength of the mortar to the brick masonry. A cover meter was
used to determine the exact cover available in reinforced concrete (R.C.) members.
In order to assess the quality and strength of R.C. members, rebound hammer tests, and to
evaluate the quality and strength of certain R.C. members and masonry walls, ultrasonic pulse
velocity tests were performed. The half-cell potential measurement was performed on R.C.

206
 Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures

members to assess their degree of proneness to corrosion. Carbonation tests were also
performed on concrete samples.
From the several tests carried out of the structure and foundation, the outcome and
inferences are summarised as follows. The existing dimension of foundation is capable of
bearing the loads satisfactorily. The studies on brick samples conducted in the laboratory
revealed that the compressive strength is about 9 N/mm2 and the water absorption is in the
range of 10%. The ultrasonic pulse velocity tests on reinforced concrete members indicated
that it is dense, uniform and free from voids or cracks. The quality of the concrete can be
characterised as medium concrete. The compressive strength falls between 16 and 18 N/mm2.
The rebound hammer test results on R.C. slab revealed that the compressive strength of
concrete falls between 16 and 20 N/mm2. In lime surkhi concrete, the value is less and is in
the range of 13 to 15 N/mm2. The half-cell potential measurement test on R.C members
indicated that the members do not appear to be affected by corrosion. The carbonation test
conducted on an R.C. member revealed that carbonation has reached up to reinforcement level
indicating the loss of alkalinity.

5. RETROFITTING OBJECTIVES AND MEASURES

After carrying out the detailed technical studies and in-situ tests, it was decided to adopt
retrofitting measures to strengthen the building. Additional improvement works, classified
under non-seismic retrofitting measures were also proposed for the overall performance of the
building. The objective of the recommended measures was to enable the structure to undergo
deformation in a ductile manner. The structure has to resist ground accelerations
corresponding to a value greater than 0.29g, which value is higher than the seismic value of
the specific site. Further, in the likelihood of occurrence of maximum considered earthquake
(M.C.E) the structure should not collapse.
The retrofitting measures included a number of items of work. Initially, all the existing
water proofing, plaster on external and internal walls, columns, parapets and ceilings were
removed and cleaned. Similarly, all the old sanitary and sewage and drainage fittings were
demolished and all the accumulated waste material was completely removed. All the
vegetation growth at several locations of the building was removed completely. The existing
steel beams, trusses and exposed steel reinforcing rods were thoroughly cleaned and painted
with anticorrosive zinc paint. The joints in the masonry in the foundation were thoroughly
raked and repointed using cement lime modified mortar.
As for the ceiling slab, which was cleared of all existing plaster and the exposed steel
members coated with zinc paint, was provided with 12 mm thick plaster using ready to use
cement lime modified mortar mixed with polypropylene fibres to specification and cured for a
minimum period of 14 days. For the water proofing treatment of the roof slab, attaic
polypropylene (APP) bituminous water proofing membrane to specification is provided for
the entire surface of roof slab top and the membrane top surface provided with a coat of
aluminium paint.

6. SEISMIC RETROFITTING MEASURES OF THE STRUCTURE

Several measures have been adopted to improve the performance of the building in the
event of an earthquake. While choosing the various alternatives for the strengthening
measures, due care has been taken to preserve the original architectural features of the

207
International Conference, Chennai, India, 13th – 16th February 2013

heritage palace. The structural integrity of the entire building was improved by providing
horizontal seismic bands made up of high strength GFRP sheets of 50 mm width at the lintel
level both on the inner and outer sides of the walls throughout the building. This is achieved
by applying a thin coat of epoxy resin on the exposed surface of the wall at the lintel level and
gluing the GFRP sheets. Plastering has been done over the bands. In order to improve the out-
of-plane flexural ductility, vertical containment reinforcement has been provided. GFRP
bands for individual masonry piers between window openings at three levels, namely, below
the springing of the arches, mid height of the pier and just below sill level. These bands along
with the vertical reinforcement would prevent the crushing of masonry due to any rocking
action. Further, they also provide a confining effect and prevent vertical crack from
progressing.
For strengthening of wall junctions and wall corners, externally bonded GFRP sheets are
used at both inner and outer corners with the aim of protecting the corners from local failures.
The improvement of connection between floor/roof and walls has been carried out by
providing mild steel angle bracket of length 250 mm at 2 m intervals. These are provided
underneath the ceiling where it can either be tack welded to steel section, if available, or
anchored using special bolts (Figure 5).
The vertical projections above the first floor, such as front tower, the central tower, the rear
tower, the projections above the durbar hall and the ball room are initially checked for
horizontal shear. The pillars and projections are strengthened by providing jackets at the
corners using angle sections of 200 mm width and 8 mm thickness. These angles are anchored
along the height of the wall by 12 mm diameter anchor bolts at interval of 0.45 m (Fig. 7).
The angle sections are also anchored to the terrace floor. The jambs are protected by vertical
containment reinforcement mainly to retain the window profile. Aluminium flat strips have
been used all along the height as well as the soffit of the arch opening. The parapets were
protected by providing buttresses and connecting them at the top to the existing parapet by
GFRP bands at the coping level.
Anchors are provided for the aluminium flats for a length of one-fourth the height of the
building from top and bottom at a spacing of 0.25 m. The aluminium flats are screwed to the
masonry in pre-drilled holes for a depth of 60 mm. All the flats on the inside of the building
are bent and anchored to the floor and roof. The length of the bent flat is 0.25 m and two
anchors are provided. The diameter of the anchor screw is 3 mm and of length 60 mm. The
flats on the outside of the building are taken 0.25 m to 0.4 m below the ground level with two
anchors on this length and at the other end they are taken up to the top of the roof. A
minimum lap length of 0.6 m with two anchors is provided at the top. (Figures 5 and 6).
The masonry pillars in the durbar hall are architecturally intricate and, hence, the
strengthening was carried out using GFRP bands. The bands are 100 mm wide on either side
of a corner of the pillar. Therefore, a width of 200 mm wide is wrapped about the corner to
conform to the profile of the pillar at the edges. Further, a horizontal band of 100 mm wide is
wrapped around the pillar at four locations, namely, the base, the top, and approximately 1/3rd
and 2/3rd heights (Figure 6).
In order to mitigate the liquefaction effects, vertical drains are installed at six places around
the palace. These vertical drains accelerate the drainage reducing the required surcharge time
in partially or fully saturated soils. Vertical drains consist of holes drilled to a depth of 25 m
and filled with 20 mm single sized aggregates. In the event of soil being not stable enough
during the drilling process, PVC pipes have been used as casing (Figure 8).

208
 Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures

Figure 5: MS-Flat & Aluminium work Figure 6: Aluminium & GFRP work

Figure 7: SS-Angle work Figure 8: PVC pipe (liquefaction effect)

7. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The extensive structural investigations carried out on the Ujjayanta palace, built in the
beginning of 20th century, indicated the necessity for seismic retrofitting measures as well as
some strengthening measures not connected with seismic effects. After the implementation of
comprehensive retrofitting measures, the structure is expected to resist ground acceleration

209
International Conference, Chennai, India, 13th – 16th February 2013

corresponding to a value greater than 0.29 g which is more than the acceleration provided in
the site specific seismicity. In the event of occurrence of maximum considered earthquake, the
structure is designed to perform without suffering major damages. After the structure is
retrofitted comprehensively, it is mandatory to carry out periodic maintenance of the building
as per standard practice.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The first two authors have undergone training in the Retrofitting Project of Ujjayanta
Palace under Er. Dipankar Bhowmik, PWD, Agartala, Tripura. PWD’s great support and
encouragement are wholeheartedly acknowledged.

REFERENCES
1. IS 4326:1993, Indian Standard for ‘’Earthquake resistant design and construction of
buildings – Code of Practice (Second Revision)’’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
2. IS 13828:1993, Indian Standard for ‘’Improving Earthquake resistance of Low Strength Masonry
Buildings – Guidelines’’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
3. IS 13935:1993, Indian Standard for ‘’Repair and Seismic Strengthening of Buildings –
Guidelines’’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
4. Handbook on Seismic Retrofit of Buildings, Central Public Works Department, Indian Buildings
Congress and Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Narosa Publishing House, Chennai 2008.

210