Structural Audit of Three Residential Buildings

located at DN Nagar

(Job No.: DRD/CE/SB-12/17-18)

Report

by

Dr. Sauvik Banerjee

&
Dr. Arghadeep Laskar

Department of Civil Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
Powai, Mumbai - 400 076

For

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited

April 2018
 CONTENTS

Section Subject Page No

1. Introductory Remarks 2

2. Site Inspection and Testing 4

3. ONGC Building at DN Nagar (A,B and C-wing) 8

 Important Observations
o Exterior Portion
o Interior portion
o NDT result
 Distress Analysis and current structural status

4. Concluding Remarks and Recommendations 109

5. References 111

1
 Structural Audit of ONGC Residential Buildings
located at DN Nagar
(Job No.: DRD/CE/SB-12/17-18)

1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Mumbai approached Indian Institute of

Technology Bombay (IITB), Mumbai for investigation of structural condition of the

Residential buildings located at DN Nagar through their original letter No.

MR/RO/Structural Audit/2017/1 dated 04/07/2017. The project could only be started

during April 2018 as per Dean R&D approval letter …… dated 20/10/2017 and after

clarification of TDS issues between ONGC and IITB. The buildings were reinforced

cement concrete (RCC) framed structure constructed in the year 1994 and about

23 years old. Each building has built up area of 4598.25m2. The building had shown

sign of severe distress; therefore, it was decided by ONGC to carry out detailed

structural audit of the buildings to have an expert technical opinion on its current

structural conditions.

In view of the above, consultancy service to examine the current structural

condition and stability of the residential building was under-taken by IITB. The

specific objectives of the study are summarized as:

1. Carry out the visual inspection of the buildings to see the extent of distress in

the RCC structural members.

2. Perform Non-destructive testing (NDT) through Rebound Hammer (RH),

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests (UPVT), Carbonation Tests (CT) and Half Cell

2
 Potentiometer Tests (HCPT) of the building to assess the current quality and

likely compressive strength of RCC structural members of the buildings, and

corrosion of steel reinforcement.

3. Investigate the possible reasons for deterioration of the structural health of all

the buildings based on the above NDT tests and visual inspections.

4. Submission of detailed report on the structural condition of the buildings and

recommend the appropriate remedial measures.

3
2. SITE INSPECTION AND TESTING
The site was visited by a team of four members from IIT Bombay during April 2018.

The team consisted of two faculty member, two laboratory engineer, and one

technician and one research scholar. The team was supported by the ONGC engineers

and casual labours for testing work of the buildings. The building was first inspected

to identify accessible locations for NDT measurements. The plastering work at the

identified RCC elements was removed and surface preparations were carried out at

early dates with the help of laboratory engineer.

The markings were carried out based on the locations since no building plan

was available appropriate. The details of various tests conducted and their guiding

principle are summarized below.

2.1 Rebound Hammer Test

Rebound hammer test is done to find out the likely compressive strength of concrete

by using rebound hammer as per IS 13311 (Part 2): 1992. The underlying principle of

the rebound hammer test is “the rebound of an elastic mass depends on the hardness of

the surface against which its mass strikes”. When the plunger of the rebound hammer

is pressed against the surface of the concrete, the spring-controlled mass rebounds and

the extent of such a rebound depends upon the surface hardness of the concrete. The

surface hardness and therefore, the rebound are taken to be related to the compressive

strength of the concrete. The rebound value is read from a graduated scale and is

designated as the rebound number or rebound index. The compressive strength can be

read directly from the graph provided on the body of the hammer.

4
2.2 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test (UPVT)

This test helps in assessing the quality of concrete. The time of travel for an ultrasonic

pulse through a given path length of concrete is measured. For this purpose two

probes (transducers) are used one transmitting and the other receiving. Thus,

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) = Path Length / travel time (1)

It is best to have the two probes on opposite faces of concrete members. Thus,

the signal passes through the entire thickness of the member. This is the direct (D)

method of test and the same was used for the investigations of the RCC elements.

On the other hand, when only one face of the structural element is available the

two probes are kept on the same inspected face. This is the indirect (ID) method and

the same was used when both sides of the RCC member was not accessible. Indirect

method is not as efficient as direct method due to reduced signal amplitude and the

test results are greatly influenced by the surface layers of concrete which may have

different properties from that of concrete inside the structural member.As per the IS

13311 (Part 1): 1992, the measured indirect velocity is invariably lower than the direct

velocity on the same concrete element. This difference may vary from 5 to 20 percent

depending largely on the quality of the concrete under test. Thus, the measured

indirect velocity obtained from equation (1) is increased at least by 20 percent in the

results reported. The UPV depends on the quality of concrete and is affected by all its

ingredients. The IS 13311 (part 1):1992 uses only qualitative interpretation as given in

the Table 2.1.

5
 Table 2.1 Concrete Quality Grading Based on Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity
Measurements as per IS 13311 (part 1):1992

Sr. No. Pulse velocity Concrete Quality

Grading

1 Above 4.5 km/s Excellent

2 3.5 km/s to 4.5 km/s Good

3 3 km/s to 3.5 km/s Medium

4 Below 3 km/s Doubtful

2.3 Carbonation Test (CT)

The measurement of carbonation depth in the cover zone of concrete is standard

procedure in assessing reinforced concrete deterioration, particularly in respect of

reinforcement corrosion problems. The carbonation test is carried out to determine the

depth of concrete affected due to combined attack of atmospheric carbon dioxide and

moisture causing a reduction in level of alkalinity of concrete. A spray of 0.2%

solution of phenolphthalein is used as pH indicator of concrete. The change of colour

of concrete to pink indicates that the concrete is in the good health, and where no

changes in colour take place, it is suggestive of carbonation-affected concrete. The test

is conducted by drilling a hole on the concrete surface to different depths upto cover

concrete thickness, removing dust by air blowing, spraying phenolphthalein with

physician’s injection syringe and needle on such freshly drilled broken concrete and

6
observing change in colour. The depth of carbonation is estimated based on the

change in colour profile.

2.4 Half-Cell Potentiometer Test

The instrument measures the potential and the electrical resistance between the

reinforcement and the surface to evaluate the corrosion activity as well as the actual

condition of the cover layer during testing. The electrical activity of the steel

reinforcement and the concrete leads them to be considered as one half of weak

battery cell with the steel acting as one electrode and the concrete as the electrolyte.

The name half-cell surveying derives from the fact that the one half of the battery cell

is considered to be the steel reinforcing bar and the surrounding concrete. The

electrical potential of a point on the surface of steel reinforcing bar can be measured

comparing its potential with that of copper – copper sulphate reference electrode on

the surface. Practically, this is achieved by connecting a wire from one terminal of a

voltmeter to the reinforcement and another wire to the copper sulphate reference

electrode. This method may be used to indicate the corrosion activity associated with

steel embedded in concrete and can be applied to members regardless of their size or

the depth of concrete cover. It should be clearly noted that the test does not actual

corrosion rate or whether corrosion activity has already started, but it indicates the

probability of the corrosion activity depending upon the actual surrounding conditions

The risk of corrosion is evaluated by means of the potential gradient obtained,

the higher the gradient, and the higher risk of corrosion. The test results can be

interpreted based on based on Table 2.2.

7
 Table 2.2 Corrosion Chance Based on Half Cell Porential

Half – cell potential ( mv) relative to

% chance of corrosion activity
Cu-Cu sulphate Ref. electrode

Less than – 200 10%

Between – 200 to – 350 50% (uncertain)

Above – 350 90%

3. ONGC Building at DN Nagar (A,B and C-Wing):

The ONGC Building is located near at DN Nagar is a G+4 storied RCC frame

structure with flat roof as shown in the Figure 3.1,3.12 and 3.25. It is about 23 years

old. The building has one main entrance for each wing. The structures was first

inspected to identify accessible locations for NDT measurements. Points for NDT

measurements.

3.1 IMPORTANT OBSERVATIONS:

The detailed visual inspection of the C-10 building leads to the following important

observations:

3.1.1: External Portion:

1. From inspection of external portion building, heavy distress in Walls, some

Columns members was observed (Refer Figure 32, 3.13, 3.26).

8
 2. Some External Column reinforcements were corroded (Refer Figure 32, 3.13,

3.26).

3.1.2: Internal Portion:

1. Common areas:

a. Heavily distressed and cracked stair case landings, slabs and beams can be
observed in the interior portions (Refer Figure 3.3, 3.14, 3.28).

b. Slightly distressed slabs, cracks on parapet walls, slight fungal growth on the
stair case room on terrace, parapet wall and water tank, slightly damaged terrace
floor. (Refer Figure 3.4,3.15,3.27).

Floor Figure
Location Observation
Level Reference
4th Floor Room No - Minor cracks 3.5 and 3.6
(A-wing) 19&20,17&18 Seepage of Water through Wall
4th Floor Room No - Minor cracks on walls 3.16 and
(B-wing) 39&40,37&38 Seepage of Water through Wall 3.17
Minor cracks on walls
4th Floor Room No -
Seepage of Water through Wall 3.29
(C-wing) 59&60
and roof slab
Minor cracks on walls and slabs
3rd Floor Room No -
Seepage of Water through Wall 3.6 and 3.7
(A-wing) 15&16,13&14
and roof slab
Heavy seepage, wide cracks on
3rd Floor Room No -
walls, Spalling of plaster from 3.18
(B-wing) 35&36,33&34
walls and slabs 3.19
2nd Floor Room No -
Seepage of water through walls
(A-wing) 11&12 3.9

9
 Seepage of water through walls, 3.20
2nd Floor Room No -
Minor cracks on walls, Spalling of 3.21
(B-wing) 31&32,29&30
plaster concrete from walls

2nd Floor Room No –

Seepage of water through walls 3.30
(C-wing) 49&50

1st Floor Room No- Seepage of water through walls,

(A-wing) 5&6 Minor cracks on walls 3.10
1st Floor Room NO- Seepage of water through walls,
(B-wing) 27&28 Minor cracks on walls 3.22
Seepage of water through walls,
1st Floor Room No –
Minor cracks on walls, Spalling of 3.31
(C-wing) 45&46
plaster concrete from roof slab
Room No – Seepage of water through walls,
3&4
GF Floor Minor cracks on walls, Spalling of 3.11
(A-wing) plaster concrete from roof slab
and Walls
Room No – Seepage of water through walls
GF Floor 23&24
Major Cracks in columns and 3.29
(B-wing)
Walls
Room No – Seepage of water through walls, Minor
GF Floor 45&46
cracks on walls, Spalling of plaster 3.33
(C-wing)
concrete from roof slab and Walls
Compound -
Major cracks
Wall 3.34

3.1.3: NDT test results:

1. The Rebound Hammer Test results of the columns, beams and slabs of the

Building are tabulated in the Tables 3.1, Table 3.2 and Table 3.3 respectively.

Corresponding photographic views of the testing work of Building are shown

10
 in the Figure 3.35, 3.37 to 3.39, 3.43 to 3.45, 3.49 to 3.51. Based on rebound

hammer readings, the estimated average strength of concrete of tested columns,

beams and slabs is observed as 27.1 MPa, 28.0 MPa and 32.2 MPa

respectively. The rebound hammer strength above 20MPa for the RCC

members may be taken as just adequate.

2. The UPVT results of the columns, beams and slabs of the building are shown

in the Tables 3.4 to 3.6 (refer Figures 3.36, 3.40 to 3.42,3.46 to 3.48,3.52 to

3.54 for the photographs of the UPVT of the structural members). The average

recorded velocity in column, beam and slab are 2.1km/s, 2.2km/s and 2.3 km/s

respectively. These test results are indicative that the concrete of columns,

beam and slab can be given doubtful quality grading. The same doubtful

concrete quality was also observed from the visual inspection.

3. The Carbonation Test results of the concrete of various structural elements of

the Building are given in the Table 3.7. These test results indicate that of

moderate carbonation of the concrete had taken place in the external members

of the building (refer Figure 3.55 to 3.57 for the spots of carbonation test).

4. The Half Cell Potential for all structural member is in between 200 to 350

which indicates 50% chance of corrosion activity in the reinforcing bars. Table

3.8 shows the half-cell potential values of the columns, and slab. The

corresponding photographic views of the testing work are shown in Figure 3.58

to 3.59.

11
3.2 DISTRESS ANALYSIS AND CURRENT STRUCTURAL STATUS:

The visual inspection and NDT of various structural members of the ONGC Building

located at DN Nagar Mumbai has suggested that the building is in a partially distressed

condition.

Externally the RCC members., e.g extended beam and slabs, pardis/projections are

showing severe cracks/spalled concrete along the main reinforcement directions due to

corrosion. Inside the building, mainly RCC slab has been distressed and have rebar

exposed to atmosphere. The internal rooms are also seen to have been affected

primarily affected by seepage and leakage problems. Spalling of concrete due to

volumetric expansion of reinforcement resulted from corrosion can be observed in

some places. In particular, major distress was observed on the 7th floor. The primary

source for the seepage and leakages are found to be deteriorated plumbing lines

around the toilet lines, additionally erected toilet adjacent to office rooms,

distressed/failed roof water proofing and projected areas from the windows with

inadequate slope/water proofing. It is further observed the RCC elements are cut to

take the AC lines , which should have been taken through brickwork. It is desirable

that the heavy book racks be moved to the ground floor. It is also desirable that

internal central AC be placed on appropriate framing system.

The residual strength of concrete in columns, beams and slabs is just adequate but

have doubtful grading exhibiting some degree of looseness. The doubtful grading in

some structural members is indicative of aging and corrosion related events. The beam

and slabs were found to be comparatively weaker than columns. Moderate

carbonation has taken place with about 50% chances corrosion activity. The repeated

12
drying and wetting cycles caused by excessive seepage and leakages, inadequate cover

at places during construction and carbonation of concrete surface could be possible

reasons for corrosion of steel reinforcements. Internal plumbing leakage add more

detrimental effects.

It is observed that major repairing work has not been taken up at all. This, in turn,

leading to recurrence of distress and seriously compromising the overall structural

safety and stability of the building. Therefore, the rehabilitation of the building to

restore its strength will require major structural and as well as non-structural repairs,

and strengthening on extremely urgent basis.

13
 Table 3.1: Rebound Hammer Test Results of Columns of Building

REBOUND HAMMER TEST

RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE
COMP.
AVERAGE
R1 R2 R3 R4 STRENGTH
READING
(MPa)

Gr.Flr.Column-01 (T) 31 26 24 32 28 20
Gr.Flr.Column-01 (B) 31 28 30 29 30 23
Gr.Flr.Column-02 (T) 39 34 36 32 35 32
Gr.Flr.Column-02 (B) 32 38 34 33 34 30
Gr.Flr.Column-03 (T) 31 32 30 29 31 25
Gr.Flr.Column-03 (B) 32 34 36 32 34 30
Gr.Flr.Column-04 (T) 24 22 27 26 25 16
Gr.Flr.Column-04 (B) 24 28 26 30 27 19
Gr.Flr.Column-05 (T) 34 39 38 38 37 35
Gr.Flr.Column-05 (B) 32 34 36 30 33 28
Gr.Flr.Column-06 (T) 27 32 31 31 30 23
Gr.Flr.Column-06 (B) 30 32 34 28 31 25
Gr.Flr.Column-07 (T) 34 29 30 34 32 26
Gr.Flr.Column-07 (B) 28 32 30 30 30 23
Gr.Flr.Column-08 (T) 36 44 39 38 39 39
Gr.Flr.Column-08 (B) 41 38 40 37 39 39
Gr.Flr.Column-09 (T) 33 33 36 29 33 28
Gr.Flr.Column-09 (B) 32 30 34 37 33 28
Gr.Flr.Column-10 (T) 28 29 26 24 27 19
Gr.Flr.Column-10 (B) 30 32 28 26 29 22
Gr.Flr.Column-11 (T) 26 22 26 25 25 16
Gr.Flr.Column-11 (B) 28 30 28 24 28 20

A-Wing
st n
1 Flr.Column (Bet Flat N0.7&8)
38 34 38 36 37 35
(T)
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.7&8)
32 38 34 40 36 33
(B)
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
38 36 34 32 35 32
N0.11&12) (T)
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
40 34 32 38 36 33
N0.11&12) (B)
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
40 42 36 34 38 37
N0.15&16) (T)
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
38 36 38 40 38 37
N0.15&16) (B)

14
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat
23 24 22 23 23 13
N0.19&20) (T)
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat
23 28 26 30 27 19
N0.19&20) (B)
B-Wing
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat
26 24 28 30 27 19
N0.21,Hall) (T)
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat
27 19
N0.21,Hall) (B) 30 24 26 28
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat
30 30 26 26 28 20
N0.24,Centre) (T)
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat
23 26 28 30 27 19
N0.24,Centre) (B)
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat
32 26
N0.27&28) (T) 32 29 31 34
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat
31 25
N0.27&28) (B) 30 28 32 34
C-Wing
Gr.Flr.Column (Betn Flat
32 34 30 30 32 26
N0.43&44) (T)
Gr.Flr.Column (Betn Flat
36 32 30 36 34 30
N0.43&44) (B)
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat
32 28 36 34 33 28
N0.47&48) (T)
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat
32 30 30 32 31 25
N0.47&48) (B)
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
30 34 36 34 34 30
N0.51&52) (T)
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
36 34 38 40 37 35
N0.51&52) (B)
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
32 30 30 26 30 23
N0.54&55) (T)
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat
28 30 28 28 29 22
N0.54&55) (B)
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat
48 44 42 46 45 50
N0.59&60) (T)
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat
44 42 40 43 42 44
N0.59&60) (B)
Mean 27.1
Standard Deviation 7.8

Table 3.2: Rebound Hammer Test Results of Beams of Building

REBOUND HAMMER TEST

RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE
COMP.
AVERAGE
R1 R2 R3 R4 STRENGTH
READING
(MPa)
A-Wing
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 36 34 32 40 36 33
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 30 34 31 36 33 28

15
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 36 34 32 38 35 32
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 32 34 30 38 34 30
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 34 36 38 40 37 35
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 34 32 34 38 35 32
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 36 34 40 36 37 35
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 40 32 32 38 36 33
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 20 24 20 24 22 12
th
4 Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 26 24 28 30 27 19
B-Wing
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 34 36 32 36 35 32
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 30 32 30 32 31 25
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 38 42 36 40 39 39
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 40 42 40 40 41 42
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 30 26 28 28 28 20
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 28 26 30 34 30 23
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 34 39 36 32 35 32
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 40 36 32 40 37 35
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 38 38 40 36 38 37
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 34 32 32 38 34 30
C-Wmg
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 30 28 26 30 29 22
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 30 26 28 27 28 20
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 28 30 32 30 30 23
st
1 Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 32 30 34 32 32 26
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 28 32 34 32 32 26
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 26 30 34 32 31 25
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 30 24 26 28 27 19
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 24 26 24 30 26 17
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (N) 32 30 32 36 33 28
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) (S) 34 36 34 30 34 30
Mean 28.0
Standard Deviation 7.1

16
 Table 3.3: Rebound Hammer Test Results of Slab of Building

REBOUND HAMMER TEST

RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE
COMP.
AVERAGE
R1 R2 R3 R4 STRENGTH
READING
(MPa)
A-Wing
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (N) 46 42 42 44 44 41
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (S) 44 40 42 46 43 39
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (N) 30 34 38 36 35 24
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (S) 34 40 38 40 38 30
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 38 36 42 40 39 32
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 40 42 42 42 42 37
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 40 44 42 46 43 39
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 40 48 48 43 45 43
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 42 46 48 42 45 43
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 44 40 42 42 42 37
B-Wing
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 38 36 34 38 37 28
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 30 34 32 36 33 21
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 32 36 32 34 34 23
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 30 38 34 32 34 23
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 30 38 34 30 33 21
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 34 36 34 38 36 26
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 34 40 38 36 37 28
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 38 36 34 32 35 24
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 38 32 36 30 34 23
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 30 32 36 38 34 23

C-Wing
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 40 40 40 36 39 32
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 38 38 36 34 37 28
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 42 45 43 50 45 43
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 48 46 42 44 45 43
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 44 36 40 42 41 35
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 44 40 40 40 41 35

17
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (E) 44 40 40 46 43 39
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) (W) 42 48 46 40 44 41
Mean 32.2
Standard Deviation 7.8

Table 3.4: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test Results of Columns of Building C10.

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY TEST

RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE AVERAGE
THICKNESS TIME (µ
VELOCITY
(mm) sec)
(Km/Sec)

Gr.Flr.Column-01 Rough surface

Gr.Flr.Column-02 240 140.0 2.1
Gr.Flr.Column-03 300 254.4 1.4
Gr.Flr.Column-04 Loosed
Gr.Flr.Column-05 Cracked
Gr.Flr.Column-06 290 189.0 1.8
Gr.Flr.Column-07 190 89.7 2.5
Gr.Flr.Column-08 300 213.6 1.7
Gr.Flr.Column-09 300 209.4 1.7
Gr.Flr.Column-10 300 198.8 1.8
Gr.Flr.Column-11 Cracked
A-Wing
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.7&8) 280 94.4 3.6
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.11&12) 300 99.8 3.6
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.15&16) 300 106.1 3.4
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.19&20) 220 556.9 0.5

B-Wing
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat N0.21,Hall) 230 556.0 0.5
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat N0.24,Centre) Cracked
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.27&28) 260 293.0 1.1
C-Wing
Gr.Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.43&44) 300 98.5 3.7
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.47&48) 250 153.8 2.0
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.51&52) 300 136.6 2.6

18
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.54&55) 250 258.4 1.2
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.59&60) 250 99.8 3.0
Mean 2.1
Standard Deviation 1.0
(*Direct Method,Indirect Method)

Table 3.5: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test Results of Beams of Building

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY

TEST
RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE
AVERAGE
THICKNESS TIME
VELOCITY
(mm) (µ sec)
(Km/Sec)
A-Wing
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 79.4 2.9
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 85.5 2.7
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 81.2 2.8
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 73.4 3.1
th
4 Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 221.1 1.0
B-wing
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 92.1 2.5
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 97.1 2.4
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 82.7 2.8
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 91.7 2.5
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 260 312.1 0.8
C-Wing
Gr.Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 135.0 1.70
1st Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 95.8 2.40
2nd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 198.2 1.16
3rd Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 105.1 2.19
4th Flr.Beam (Over staircase) 230 184.0 1.25
Mean 2.2
Standard Deviation 0.8
(Direct Method,*Indirect Method)

19
 Table 3.6:Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test Results of Slab of Building.

ULTRASONIC PULSE VELOCITY

TEST
RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE AVERAGE
THICKNESS TIME
VELOCITY
(mm) (µ sec)
(Km/Sec)
A-Wing
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 280 147.8 2.3
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 230 79.4 3.5
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 230 110.9 2.5
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 280 172.3 2.0
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 250 135.2 2.2
B-Wing
Rough
Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 260 349.8 0.9
Surface
1st Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 290 147.0 2.4
2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 200 64.2 3.7
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 180 67.5 3.2
th
4 Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 280 219.1 1.5

Gr.Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 240 173.3 1.7

2nd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 230 130.4 2.1
3rd Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 240 105.1 2.7
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 230 152.1 1.8
Mean 2.3
Standard Deviation 0.8
(*Direct Method,Indirect Method)

Table 3.7: Carbonation Test Results of Column of Building

CARBONATION EFFECT FROM

RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE
THE SURFACE* (mm)

BUILDING N0.10
Gr.Flr.Column-01 10
Gr.Flr.Column-02 5
Gr.Flr.Column-03 5
Gr.Flr.Column-04 5
Gr.Flr.Column-05 >30

20
Gr.Flr.Column-06 5
Gr.Flr.Column-07 >30
Gr.Flr.Column-08 >30
Gr.Flr.Column-09 5
Gr.Flr.Column-10 >30
Gr.Flr.Column-11 >30
A-Wing
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.7&8) >30
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.11&12) >30
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.15&16) >30
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.19&20) >30
B-Wing
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat N0.21,Hall) >30
Gr.Flr.Column (In Flat N0.24,Centre) >30
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.27&28) >30
C-Wing
n
Gr.Flr.Column (Bet Flat N0.43&44) >30
1st Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.47&48) >30
2nd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.51&52) >30
3rd Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.54&55) >30
4th Flr.Column (Betn Flat N0.59&60) >30
(*excluding surface plaster)
Table 3.8: Corrosion Analysis Test Results of Column and slab of Building

AVERAGE
HALF CELL
RCC MEMBER STRUCTURE HALF CELL POTENTIAL -mV
POTENTIAL
-mV

244 258 279 260

Gr.Flr.Column-07 268 251 240 253
254 286 265 268
242 272 243 252
Gr.Flr.Column-11 242 217 222 227
221 249 267 246
C-Wing
292 291 288 290
4th Flr.Slab (Over staircase) 295 310 318 308
312 309 300 307
Mean 268

21
Standard Deviation 28
(*excluding surface plaster)

EXTERIOR VIEWS (A-Wing)

22
 (b)
(a)
Figure. 3.1. Photographs showing exterior views of A-Wing at DN Nagar

(a) (b)

23
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

24
 (g) (h)

(i)
Figure. 3. 2. Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked Sunshades, walls at exterior
portions of A-Wing

25
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

26
(e) (f)

27
(g) (h)

(i) (j)

28
 (k) (l)

Figure. 3. 3. Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked landings and stair case slabs and
beams of A-Wing

29
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

30
(e) (f)

(g) (h)

31
 (i) (j)
Figure. 3. 4. Photographs showing Slightly distressed slabs, parapet walls, slight fungal growth on
Parapet walls, slightly damaged terrace floor, water tank in A-wing

(a) (b)

32
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

33
 (g) (h)
Figure 3.5. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 19&20, A-Wing

(a) (b)

34
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

35
 (g) (h)

(i) (j)
Figure 3.6. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 17&18, A-Wing

36
(a) (b)

(c ) (d)

37
 (e) (f)
Figure 3.7. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 15&16, A-Wing

(a) (b)

(c ) (d)
Figure 3.8. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 13&14, A-Wing

38
 (a) (b)

(c)
Figure 3.9. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 12&11, A-Wing

39
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

40
 (e) (f)
Figure 3.10. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members of the various rooms of the Room No. 5&6, A-Wing

(a) (b)

41
(c ) (d)

(e) (f)

(g) (h)

42
 (i) (j)
Figure 3.11. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 3&4, A-Wing

43
EXTERIOR VIEWS (B-Wing)

44
Figure. 3.12. Photographs showing exterior views of B-Wing at DN Nagar

(a) (b)

45
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

46
(g) (h)

(i) (j)

47
 (k) (l)
Figure. 3.13 Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked Walls, fungal growth on walls at
exterior portions and Corrosion of reinforcement of columns of B-Wing

(a) (b)

48
 (c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g) (h)
Figure. 3.14 Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked landings and stair case slabs and
beams of B-Wing

49
50
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.15. Photographs showing slight distress in the parapet wall, slight fungal growth on
Parapet walls, slightly damaged terrace floor, water tank in B-wing

51
Internal Common areas

52
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

53
Figure 3.16. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 39&40, B-Wing

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.17. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 37&38, B-Wing

54
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.18. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the RCC
members/Walls ,minor spalling of plaster concrete on roof slabs of the various rooms of the
Room No. 35&36 B-Wing

(a) (b)

55
 (c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.19. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls
Chajja, spalling of plaster concrete of walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 33&34 B-
Wing

56
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.20. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls of
the various rooms of the Room No. 31&32 B-Wing

57
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.21. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls,
spalling of plastering concrete of walls of various rooms of the Room No. 29&30 B-Wing

58
 (e) (f)

(a) (b)
Figure 3.22. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls of
the various rooms of the Room No. 27&28 B-Wing

59
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

60
 (e) (f)
Figure 3.23. Photographs showing leakage problems along with heavy distress in the RCC
members/Walls of the various rooms of the Room No. 23&24 B-Wing

(a) (b)

61
 (c) (d)
Figure 3.24. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls of
the various rooms of the Room No. 21&22 B-Wing

EXTERIOR VIEWS- C WING

62
 (a) (b)
Figure. 3.25. Photographs showing exterior views of C-Wing at DN Nagar

(a) (b)

63
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

64
(g) (h)

(i) (j)

65
 (k) (l)
Figure. 3.26 Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked Walls, Corrosion of reinforcement
of columns of B-Wing

(a) (b)

66
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

67
 (g) (h)

(i) (j)
Figure 3.27. Photographs showing slight distress in the parapet wall, water tank and stair case
room slab, slight fungal growth on Parapet walls, slightly damaged terrace floor, water tank in C-
wing

68
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

69
(e ) (f)

(g) (h)

70
 (i) (j)

(k) (l)
Figure 3.28. Photographs showing heavily distressed and cracked landings and stair case slabs and
beams, spalling of plaster concrete of slab and beams of staircase room of C-Wing

71
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

72
(e) (f)

(g) (h)

73
 (i) (j)
Figure 3.29. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the Walls of
the various rooms of the Room No. 59&60, C Wing

(a) (b)

74
 (c) (d)

(e)

Figure 3.30. Photographs showing leakage problems various rooms of the Room No. 49&50,
C Wing

75
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

76
 (e) (f)

(g) (h)

Figure 3.31. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the walls,
spalling of plaster concrete on roof slab of the various rooms of the Room No. 45&46, C Wing

(a) (b)

77
(c) (d)

(e) (f)

78
 (g) (h)

(i) (j)
Figure 3.32. Photographs showing leakage problems along with some distress in the RCC
members of the various rooms of the Room No. 43&44, C Wing

79
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

80
(e) (f)

(g) (h)

(i) (j)

81
 (k) (l)
Figure 3.33. Photographs showing seepage/leakage problems along with some distress in the
RCC members, spalling of plaster concrete of walls of the various rooms of the Room No.
41&42, C Wing

(a) (b)

82
 (c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.34. Photographs showing heavy distress in the Compound Wall

83
NDT PHOTOS

84
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.35. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of external Columns of the A,B,C-
wings

85
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.36. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of external Columns of
A,B,C- wings

86
 A-Wing

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure 3.37. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Columns of the A-Wing

87
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Figure 3.38. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Beams of A-Wing

88
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.39. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Slabs of A Wing

89
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.40. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Columns of A-
Wing

90
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)

91
Figure 3.41. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of Beams of A-Wing

92
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.42. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of Slabs of A-Wing

B-Wing

93
 (a) (b)

(c)
Figure 3.43. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Columns of B-Wing

(a) (b)

94
 (c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.44. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Beams of B-Wing

(a) (b)

95
 (c) (d)
Figure 3.45. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Slabs of B-Wing

(a) (b)

96
 (c)
Figure 3.46. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Columns of B
Wing

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

97
 (e) (f)
Figure 3.47. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Beams of B-
Wing

98
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.48. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Slabs of B-Wing

C-Wing

99
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.49. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Columns of C-Wing

(a) (b)

100
 (c) (d)
Figure 3.50. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Beams of C-Wing

101
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3.51. Photographs showing Rebound Hammer Tests of internal Slabs of C-Wing

(a) (b)

102
 (c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.52. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Columns of C-
Wing

(a) (b)

103
 (c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.53. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Beams of C-
Wing

(a) (b)

104
 (c) (d)
Figure 3.54. Photographs showing Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests of internal Slabs of C-Wing

105
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 3.55. Photographs showing the external Carbonation Tests (common photos )

106
 (a)
Figure 3.56. Photographs showing the internal Carbonation Tests of the B-Wing

(a) (b)
Figure 3.57. Photographs showing the internal Carbonation Tests of the C-Wing

107
 (a) (b)
Figure 3.58. Photographs showing the external Half Cell Potentiometer Tests

(a)B-wing (b)C-wing
Figure 3.59. Photographs showing the internal Half Cell Potentiometer Tests

108
9. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The ONGC buildings (A,B and C-Wing) located at DN Nagar were assessed

for its current structural condition based on visual observations and necessary NDT

tests. Based on the important observations and analysis, the following is concluded

and recommended:

1. The building is currently in partially distressed condition,

2. Externally the RCC members., e.g extended beam and slabs, pardis/projections are

showing severe cracks/spalled concrete along the main reinforcement directions due to

corrosion.

3. Inside the building, mainly RCC slab has been distressed and have rebar exposed to

atmosphere. The internal rooms are also seen to have been affected primarily affected

by seepage and leakage problems. Spalling of concrete due to volumetric expansion of

reinforcement resulted from corrosion can be observed in some places. Typically, the

thinner RCC sections such as extended projections/pardis/ slabs as shown in the report

are being deteriorated. The original plastering work of the building (especially of the

slabs) appears to be of weak quality. However, no major distress was noticed in the

columns of the building.

4. It shall be clearly noted that the repeated drying and wetting cycles caused by

excessive seepage and leakages, inadequate cover at places during construction and

carbonation of concrete surface are possible reasons for corrosion of steel

reinforcements.

109
5. The primary source for the seepage and leakages are found to be deteriorated

plumbing lines around the toilet/canteen, additionally erected toilet adjacent to office

rooms, distressed/failed roof water proofing and projected areas from the windows

with inadequate slope/water proofing, worn out plasters/paintings, and structural and

non-structural cracks.

6. The NDT test results have indicated that the residual strength of concrete in

columns, beams and slabs is just adequate but have doubtful grading exhibiting some

degree of looseness. The doubtful grading in some structural members is indicative of

aging and corrosion related events. The beam and slabs were found to be

comparatively weaker than columns. Moderate carbonation has taken place with about

50% chances corrosion activity.

7. The building will require major structural and non-structural repairs on extremely

urgent basis for structural safety and stability as per the general methodologies

provided below.

110
10. REFERENCES

1. IS:456-2000, Plain and reinforced concrete - Code of practice, Bureau of Indian

Standards.

2. S.N. Sinha, Reinforced Concrete Design, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company,

New Delhi, 2002.

3. IS: 13311 (Part 1) – 1992, Non-destructive testing of concrete: Part 1 Ultrasonic

pulse velocity.

4. IS: 13311 (Part 2) – 1992, Non-destructive testing of concrete: Part 2 Rebound

Hammer Ultrasonic pulse velocity.

5. IS:1893(Part-1)-2002 Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of

Structures.

111