DRH-Asia: Disaster Reduction Hyperbase
(by Google translation. Translation will be reset by reloading.)

1. Title

Nonstructual Seismic Retrofitting for School Buildings in Japan -Publication of a Reference Book -

ID: DRH 40 Damage Conditions and Retrofitting; Case 9.
Hazard: Earthquake
Category:

Implementation Oriented Technology (IOT)

Proposer: Takayuki Nakamura
Country: JAPAN;
Date posted: 24 September 2008
Date published: 07 November 2008
Copyright © 2008 Takayuki Nakamura (proposer). All rights reserved.

Damage Conditions and Retrofitting; Case 9.

Contact

(1) Koichi SHINPO (NIER)
Director, Educational Facilities Research Center, National Institute for Educational Policy Research (NIER)
shinpo@nier.go.jp, TEL: -81-3-6733-6990

(2) Masao YAMAKAWA (MEXT)
Director, Office for Disaster Preventiont, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
m-yama@mext.go.jo, TEL: -81-3-6734-2290

(3) Takayuki NAKAMURA (Hokkaido University)
Director, Facilities Department, Hokkaido University
s-bucho@facility.hokudai.ac.jp, TEL: -81-11-706-2063

2. Major significance / Summary

Securing the safety of school buildings and facilities against earthquakes is important, because children spend a large part of the day studying and playing at schools, which also act emergency evacuation facilities for the local community. NIER published a reference book for retrofitting nonstructual members of school buildings under the cooperation with MEXT. The book includes many nonstructual seismic retrofitting examples with various pictures, charts and plans. Even though the readers don’t have enough technical knowledge and information about nonstructual seismic retrofitting, they can easily understand what are critical for retrofitting the nonstructual members of existing school buildings.
Readers are encouraged to access the full text of the Reference Book at the website (http://www.nier.go.jp/shisetsu/pdf/e-jirei.pdf)
NIER: National Institute for Educational Policy Research
MEXT: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

3. Keywords

Nonstructural seismic retrofitting, School buildings


II. Categories

4. Focus of this information

Implementation Oriented Technology (IOT)

5. Users

5-1. Anticipated users: Administrative officers , Municipalities , National governments and other intermediate government bodies (state, prefecture, district, etc.)

5-2. Other users: Policy makers

6. Hazards focused

Earthquake

7. Elements at risk

Human lives , Buildings


III. Contact Information

8. Proposer(s) information (Writer of this template)

(1) Koichi SHINPO (NIER)
Director, Educational Facilities Research Center, National Institute for Educational Policy Research (NIER)
shinpo@nier.go.jp, TEL: -81-3-6733-6990

(2) Masao YAMAKAWA (MEXT)
Director, Office for Disaster Preventiont, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
m-yama@mext.go.jo, TEL: -81-3-6734-2290

(3) Takayuki NAKAMURA (Hokkaido University)
Director, Facilities Department, Hokkaido University
s-bucho@facility.hokudai.ac.jp, TEL: -81-11-706-2063

9. Country(ies)/region(s) where the technology/knowledge/practice originated

JAPAN;

10. Names and institutions of technology/knowledge developers

National Institute for Educational Policy Research (NIER)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)

11. Title of relevant projects if any

12. References and publications

13. Note on ownership if any


IV. Background

14. Disaster events and/or societal circumstances, which became the driving force either for developing the technology/knowledge or enhancing its practice

With the introduction of the new seismic codes (1981) in the Building Standard, seismic retrofitting of buildings has made progress.  For school buildings and facilities, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has established the Guideline for Improving the Seismic Resistance of School Facilities (July 2003).    At the investigative research cooperator meeting for establishing the Guideline for Improvement of School Facilities, which was held in March 2005, a proposal was made for the urgent improvement of seismic resistance in school buildings and facilities.   Through these efforts, damages to the school main structure from earthquakes would be reduced.  However, when retrofitting is insufficient, nonstructural members, such as ceiling material, equipment, and various fixtures could fall or topple, and could cause significant harm to children and others.  In recent years, people have been harmed by falling nonstructural members from earthquakes, such as from the Geiyou Earthquake (March 2001), Mid-Niigata Prefecture Earthquake (October 2004) and the Fukuoka Prefecture West Offshore Earthquake (March 2005).  It is still fresh in our memories that many people, who were inside a sports facility, were hurt from falling ceiling material during the earthquake (Magnitude 7.2, maximum seismic intensity 6 lower), that occurred in August 16, 2005, with a hypocenter off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture.   This reference book is based on the "Investigative Survey Report on the Seismic Inspection of Nonstructural Members in School Facilities" (March 2002) (hereafter called the "Academic Report on Nonstructural Members"), which MEXT commissioned the Architectural Institute of Japan to develop. The examples of nonstructural seismic retrofitting in school buildings and facilities show the conditions of damages from previous earthquakes, as well as retrofitting examples, by using photos and illustrations to make them easier to understand.  It is hoped that this case study, together with the "Academic Report on Nonstructural Members", will help increase the awareness among school founders, administrators, teachers and staff, toward the need for seismic retrofitting of non-structural members as well as toward retrofitting methods.


V. Description

15. Feature and attribute

The following 19 case studies of nonstructual members are shown in this reference book. These members are relatively prone to damages by earthquakes. Nonstructural seismic retrofitting of such items is thought to be possible with low costs through daily inspections.      1. Ceiling material  2. Window and windowpane  3. Exterior wall and siding (concrete block and ALC walls)  4. Lighting fixture  5. Outdoor unit (air conditioner and heating unit)  6. Elevated water tank and cooling tower  7. Chimney  8. Refrigerator  9. Bookshelf and locker 10. TV and computer 11. Piano 12. Machine tool 13. Storage shelves in special classes 14. Gymnasium equipment and facility 15. Shoe locker 16. Wall and gate post 17. External staircase and surroundings 18. Retaining wall

 19. Other items

 

 

 

 

 

16. Necessary process to implement

Arousing AwarenessIn Japan, municipal governments are responsible for public school buildings. Though the national government funds approximately two-thirds of the cost for retrofitting school buildings through grants, the one-third of the costs must be budgeted by local municipalities.  Therefore, it is necessary to arouse awareness of the importance of seismic resistance in school buildings in order to promote them.   For this purpose, the results of the yearly survey done by MEXT concerning the seismic resistance capacity evaluation rates and seismic resistance rates of public schools of each municipality is disclosed.  Also, MEXT urges local authorities to disclose the seismic resistance capacity evaluation results and plans for retrofitting of each school. Sufficient and Adequate InformationMEXT cooperating with architectural experts, conducted research and study of earthquake resistance for school buildings to establish seismic resistance capacity evaluation methods for school buildings, present methods for seismic retrofitting, and also compile examples of seismic retrofitted school buildings that municipalities can use as reference. Also, MEXT established a consultation service where municipalities and school building designers can seek technical advice. Budgetary MeasuresBecause retrofitting school buildings is costly, budgetary measures is essential for progress.  Not only securing enough budgets for subsidies, but other measures such as reforming the subsidy system for a more flexible use by the local municipality, have also been taken.

17. Strength and limitations

StrengthThe purpose of this reference book is to enlighten the general public and those who are in charge of school buildings and facilities with understandable manners. There are many pictures, charts and plans in this reference book, so the readers can easily understand what are necessary for retrofitting the nonstructural members of existing school buildings. LimitationsIn order to apply the technologies shown in this reference book to other real cases, more detailed investigations and analyses about the real case are necessary. Especially, when these technologies are applied to the cases in foreign countries, more careful attention to the regional characteristics and social backgrounds ought to be paid.

18. Lessons learned through implementation if any

It is costly to retrofit vulnerable school buildings, and municipalities have to address other public needs; therefore there is a difficult condition to assign higher budgets to school buildings. Under these budget constraints, it is critical to develop cheaper technologies for retrofitting the nonstructural members of existing school buildings.


VI. Resources required

19. Facilities and equipments required

20. Costs, organization, manpower, etc.


VII. Message from the proposer if any

21. Message

Many people tend to pay attention to only the structural seismic retrofitting, however the retrofitting of nonstructural members such as ceiling materials, windowpanes, bookshelves, lockers, etc. is also critical. Even though the structures of school buildings are not seriously damaged by earthquake, children can be killed or injured by the fall of nonstructural members. Therefore, the importance of retrofitting the nonstructural members should be acknowledged among the people who are in charge of school buildings and facilities.


VIII. Self evaluation in relation to applicability

22. How do you evaluate the technology/knowledge that you have proposed?

It is a technology/knowledge that has high application potential verified by implementation in various field sites.

23. Notes on the applicability if any

The technologies introduced in this reference book are thought to be applicable to other regions in the world. However, in that case, more careful attention to the regional characteristics such as building materials, structural components, skills of construction workers, etc. should be paid.


IX. Application examples


X. Other related parallel initiatives if any

Message

19 case studies shown in this reference book can be seen at the following website. (http://www.nier.go.jp/shisetsu/pdf/e-jirei.pdf)


XI. Remarks for version upgrade

Message

Attached files:

Similar technologies

By Hazard

> Earthquake (21)

Institutions contributing to DRH Contents (Click here): posted on request