nepal earthquake 2015 case study a level

• 0 Shopping Cart

Nepal Earthquake 2015

A case study of an earthquake in a low income country (LIC).

Nepal, one of the poorest countries in the world, is a low-income country. Nepal is located between China and India in Asia along the Himalayan Mountains.

A map to show the location of Nepal in Asia

What caused the Nepal Earthquake?

The earthquake occurred on a  collision plate boundary between the Indian and Eurasian plates.

What were the impacts of the Nepal earthquake?

Infrastructure.

• Centuries-old buildings were destroyed at UNESCO World Heritage Sites in the Kathmandu Valley, including some at the Changu Narayan Temple and the Dharahara Tower.
• Thousands of houses were destroyed across many districts of the country.

Social and economic

• Eight thousand six hundred thirty-two dead and 19,009 injured.
• It was the worst earthquake in Nepal in more than 80 years.
• People chose to sleep outside in cold temperatures due to the risk of aftershocks causing damaged buildings to collapse.
• Hundreds of thousands of people were made homeless, with entire villages flattened.
• Harvests were reduced or lost that season.
• Economic losses were estimated to be between nine per cent to 50 per cent of GDP by The United States Geological Survey (USGS).
• Tourism is a significant source of revenue in Nepal, and the earthquake led to a sharp drop in the number of visitors.
• An avalanche killed at least 17 people at the Mount Everest Base Camp.
• Many landslides occurred along steep valleys. For example, 250 people were killed when the village of Ghodatabela was covered in material.

What were the primary effects of the 2015 earthquake in Nepal?

The primary effects of the 2015 earthquake in Nepal include:

• Nine thousand people died, and 19,000 people were injured – over 8 million people were affected.
• Three million people were made homeless.
• Electricity and water supplies, along with communications, were affected.
• 1.4 million people needed support with access to water, food and shelter in the days and weeks after the earthquake
• Seven thousand schools were destroyed.
• Hospitals were overwhelmed.
• As aid arrived, the international airport became congested.
• 50% of shops were destroyed, affecting supplies of food and people’s livelihoods.
• The cost of the earthquake was estimated to be US$5 billion.

What were the secondary effects of the 2015 earthquake in Nepal?

The secondary effects of the 2015 earthquake in Nepal include:

• Avalanches and landslides were triggered by the quake, blocking rocks and hampering the relief effort.
• At least nineteen people lost their lives on Mount Everest due to avalanches.
• Two hundred fifty people were missing in the Langtang region due to an avalanche.
• The Kali Gandaki River was blocked by a landslide leading many people to be evacuated due to the increased risk of flooding.
• Tourism employment and income declined.
• Rice seed ruined, causing food shortage and income loss.

What were the immediate responses to the Nepal earthquake?

• India and China provided over $1 billion of international aid .
• Over 100 search and rescue responders, medics and disaster and rescue experts were provided by The UK, along with three Chinook helicopters for use by the Nepali government.
• The GIS tool “Crisis mapping” was used to coordinate the response.
• Aid workers from charities such as the Red Cross came to help.
• Temporary housing was provided, including a ‘Tent city’ in Kathmandu.
• Search and rescue teams, and water and medical support arrived quickly from China, the UK and India.
• Half a million tents were provided to shelter the homeless.
• Helicopters rescued people caught in avalanches on Mount Everest and delivered aid to villages cut off by landslides.
• Field hospitals were set up to take pressure off hospitals.
• Three hundred thousand people migrated from Kathmandu to seek shelter and support from friends and family.
• Facebook launched a safety feature for users to indicate they were safe.

What were the long-term responses to the Nepal earthquake?

• A $3 million grant was provided by The Asian Development Bank (ADB) for immediate relief efforts and up to $200 million for the first phase of rehabilitation.
• Many countries donated aid. £73 million was donated by the UK (£23 million by the government and £50 million by the public). In addition to this, the UK provided 30 tonnes of humanitarian aid and eight tonnes of equipment.
• Landslides were cleared, and roads were repaired.
• Lakes that formed behind rivers damned by landslides were drained to avoid flooding.
• Stricter building codes were introduced.
• Thousands of homeless people were rehoused, and damaged homes were repaired.
• Over 7000 schools were rebuilt.
• Repairs were made to Everest base camp and trekking routes – by August 2015, new routes were established, and the government reopened the mountain to tourists.
• A blockade at the Indian border was cleared in late 2015, allowing better movement of fuels, medicines and construction materials.

Premium Resources

Please support internet geography.

If you've found the resources on this page useful please consider making a secure donation via PayPal to support the development of the site. The site is self-funded and your support is really appreciated.

Related Topics

Use the images below to explore related GeoTopics.

Previous Topic Page

Topic home, amatrice earthquake case study, share this:.

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

If you've found the resources on this site useful please consider making a secure donation via PayPal to support the development of the site. The site is self-funded and your support is really appreciated.

Search Internet Geography

Top posts and pages.

Latest Blog Entries

Pin It on Pinterest

• Click to share
• Print Friendly

Nepal Case study

The Nepal Earthquake of 25th April, 2015

At the time of the earthquake Nepal was one of the poorest countries in the world, with a HDI of 0.556 (2015) (218th in the world) and a GNI of $2,660 per annum, a lower middle income country.

Nepal is also a Least Developed Country, as recognised by the UN. Much of the population in this region live in houses that are highly vulnerable to earthquake shaking: unreinforced brick masonry and the like. ( Source )

• The earthquake occurred at 11:26 (local time) on Saturday the 25th of April
• Estimated at 7.8 to 7.9 on the Richter scale.
• Aftershocks followed, one at 6.7 on Sunday the 26th of April
• On 12 May 2015 at 12:35 another massive aftershock occurred with a moment magnitude of 7.3. The epicenter was near the Chinese border between the capital of Kathmandu and Mt. Everest. More than 200 people were killed and more than 2,500 were injured by this aftershock

The earthquake was approximately 80 km to the northwest of the Nepalese capital of Kathmandu. The Indian plate is converging (colliding) with Eurasia at a rate of 45 mm/yr towards the north-northeast, driving the uplift of the Himalayan mountain range. The India plate is subducting under the overriding Eurasian plate. The earthquake occurred as the result of this movement thrusting through a fault running off the plate margin. Where the plates meet strain energy builds up which, when released, violently shakes the ground with its seismic energy. The earthquake's effects were amplified in Kathmandu as it sits on the Kathmandu Basin, which contains up to 600 m of sedimentary rocks, representing the infilling of a lake.

Primary effects

• 8,632 dead (Official death toll)
• 19,009 injured (Official)
• Worst earthquake in Nepal in more than 80 years
• Centuries-old buildings were destroyed at UNESCO World Heritage sites in the Kathmandu Valley, including some at the Changu Narayan Temple and the Dharahara Tower.
• Thousands of houses were destroyed across many districts of the country
• Hundreds of thousands of people were made homeless with entire villages flattened
• 1.7 million children had been driven out into the open

Secondary effects

• Harvests reduced or lost this season
• U.S. Geological Survey initially estimated economic losses at 9 percent to 50 percent of gross domestic product, with a best guess of 35 percent.
• The steep valleys of the area suffered many landslides, the village of Ghodatabela was covered killing 250 people
• The earthquake triggered avalanche on Mount Everest, killing 17 people. Estimates put the number of trekkers and climbers at base camp at the time of the quake at up to 1000
• Estimates of damage put at $10billion by Nepalese government
• The earthquake massively reduced tourism over the long term, a key industry for this mountain kingdom

• Tent cities sprung up in Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal
• Responses were criticised as slow - the hardest hit Gorkha-Lamjung epicentre area was visited by helicopter the day after the earthquake and hundreds were feared dead in this area
• 90 percent of soldiers from the Nepalese army mobilised to worst hit areas, but efforts were hampered by landslides and damaged infrastructure
• On May 1st international aid agencies like Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) and the Red Cross were able to start medically evacuating the critically wounded by helicopter from outlying areas.
• GIS tool “Crisis mapping” was used to coordinate the response
• Surgeons and inflatable hospitals were used ( source )
• The Asian Development Bank (ADB) provided a USD$3 million grant to Nepal for immediate relief efforts; and up to USD$200 million for the first phase of rehabilitation.
• Aid was donated by a huge number of countries. The UK gave £73 million, of which £23 million was donated by the government and £50 million was donated by the public. The UK also provided 30 tonnes of humanitarian aid and 8 tonnes of equipment. Finally, the UK offered expert help by sending around 100 search and rescue responders, medical experts, and disaster and rescue experts deployed by the Department for International Development; engineers from the British Army's Brigade of Ghurkhas (ironically, Nepalese soldiers working in the British Army); three Chinook helicopters (returned unused by the Nepali government). 
• International aid was provided by India and China who in total committed over $1 billion to help support Nepal.
• A new government taskforce was created to help deal with future earthquakes.
• People are now being educated across Nepal to do earthquake drills.
• Two years after the quake, only about 28,000 (3.4%) of those homes and buildings that qualified to receive government assistance for reconstruction – had been rebuilt. A year later, about 113,000 (13.7% of the total) were rebuilt.

NEXT TOPIC - Why live in tectonic areas?

©2015 Cool Geography

• Copyright Policy
• Privacy & Cookies
• Testimonials
• Feedback & support

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

• Why is an earthquake dangerous?
• What are earthquake waves?
• How is earthquake magnitude measured?
• Where do earthquakes occur?

Nepal earthquake of 2015

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Academia - Consequence of Nepal Earthquake 2015 and Effects in Bangladesh
• Nature - Strong ground motion data of the 2015 Gorkha Nepal earthquake sequence in the Kathmandu Valley
• The Geological Society - 2015 Nepal Earthquake
• Stanford University - 2015 Nepal earthquake offers clues about hazards
• United Nations - The humanitarian response to the 2015 Nepal earthquake
• National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - Aftershock analysis of the 2015 Gorkha-Dolakha (Central Nepal) earthquake doublet
• Frontiers - The 2015 Gorkha Nepal earthquake: insights from earthquake damage survey

Nepal earthquake of 2015 , severe earthquake that struck near the city of Kathmandu in central Nepal on April 25, 2015. About 9,000 people were killed, many thousands more were injured, and more than 600,000 structures in Kathmandu and other nearby towns were either damaged or destroyed. The earthquake was felt throughout central and eastern Nepal, much of the Ganges River plain in northern India , and northwestern Bangladesh , as well as in the southern parts of the Plateau of Tibet and western Bhutan .

The initial shock, which registered a moment magnitude of 7.8, struck shortly before noon local time (about 06:11 am Greenwich Mean Time ). Its epicentre was about 21 miles (34 km) east-southeast of Lamjung and 48 miles (77 km) northwest of Kathmandu, and its focus was 9.3 miles (about 15 km) underground. Two large aftershocks , with magnitudes 6.6 and 6.7, shook the region within one day of the main quake, and several dozen smaller aftershocks occurred in the region during the succeeding days. On May 12 a magnitude-7.3 aftershock struck some 76 km (47 miles) east-northeast of Kathmandu, killing more than 100 people and injuring nearly 1,900.

The earthquake and its aftershocks were the result of thrust faulting (i.e., compression-driven fracturing) in the Indus-Yarlung suture zone, a thin east-west region spanning roughly the length of the Himalayan ranges. The earthquake relieved compressional pressure between the Eurasian tectonic plate and the Indian section of the Indo-Australian Plate, which subducts (underthrusts) the Eurasian Plate. Subduction in the Himalayas occurs at an average rate of 1.6–2 inches (4–5 cm) annually. Such tectonic activity adds more than 0.4 inch (1 cm) to the height of the Himalayan mountains every year.

The Himalayan region is one of the most seismically active in the world, but large earthquakes have occurred there infrequently. Before the 2015 temblor, the most recent large earthquake (that is, magnitude 6.0 or above) took place in 1988. That magnitude-6.9 event resulted in the deaths of 1,500 people. A magnitude-8.0 earthquake in 1934, however, killed approximately 10,600 people.

Initial reports of casualties following the early-morning earthquake put the death toll in the hundreds, but, as the day wore on, reports had the total number of fatalities surpassing 1,000 and nearing 1,900 by the end of the day. Within two weeks after the main quake occurred, rescue teams had reached all the remote villages in the earthquake zone, and a more-accurate picture of the earthquake’s human cost emerged. The deaths of approximately 9,000 people (which included fatalities in nearby parts of India, China , and Bangladesh) were confirmed, with nearly 16,800 injured and some 2.8 million people displaced by the earthquake. One United Nations (UN) report mentioned that more than eight million people (more than one-fourth of Nepal’s population) were affected by the event and its aftermath.

The earthquake produced landslides that devastated rural villages and some of the most densely populated parts of the city of Kathmandu. Initial damage estimates ranged from $5 billion to $10 billion. Inside Kathmandu, bricks and other debris from collapsed and partially collapsed buildings, which included parts of the famous Taleju Temple and the entire nine-story Dharahara Tower, filled the streets. The earthquake also triggered an avalanche on Mount Everest that killed at least 19 climbers and stranded hundreds more at Everest Base Camp and at camps higher up the mountain. Those at the high camps were soon airlifted to Base Camp, and all the climbers either hiked off the mountain or were flown out to other locations.

Immediately after the quake, the Nepalese government declared a state of emergency, and soon nearly the entire Nepalese army was assisting in rescue and recovery work. Nepal also called on the international community for aid. The UN quickly established the “Nepal Earthquake 2015 Flash Appeal” fund, whose goal was to raise an estimated $415 million for Nepal’s earthquake relief. By some two weeks after the earthquake, more than $330 million had been either provided directly or pledged.

India, China, and several other countries quickly responded by sending in aid and rescue teams. The delivery of relief services to the people in need during the first few days after the earthquake occurred, however, was complicated by the remoteness of many villages from the existing transportation network, congestion at Kathmandu’s international airport, and a shortage of heavy trucks, helicopters, and other vehicles capable of transporting supplies. In addition, earthquake debris—along with “tent cities” erected in streets and other open areas by Kathmandu residents who feared going back to their homes—contributed to making many of the city’s streets virtually impassable, hampering efforts by rescuers to reach people still trapped in the rubble. The debris was gradually cleared.

Earthquake Case Study: Nepal 2015

The nepal earthquake in 2015.

A shallow focus earthquake of magnitude 7.8 affected Nepal in April 2015.

• Foreign aid was needed to support recovery.
• The effects were more severe because many people lived in poor quality housing.
• The earthquake was caused by the collision of the Indo-Australian and Eurasian plates.

Primary effects

• 9,000 people were killed.
• There was US$5 billion of damage.

Secondary effects

• Flooding and damage to roads from landslides.
• An avalanche on Mount Everest which killed 19 people.

Responses to the earthquake

• Overseas aid from NGOs (non-governmental organisations) such as Oxfam.
• 300,000 people left the capital city (Kathmandu).
• An international conference to appeal for funding.

1 The Challenge of Natural Hazards

1.1 Natural Hazards

1.1.1 Types of Natural Hazards

1.1.2 Hazard Risk

1.1.3 Consequences of Natural Hazards

1.1.4 End of Topic Test - Natural Hazards

1.1.5 Exam-Style Questions - Natural Hazards

1.2 Tectonic Hazards

1.2.1 Tectonic Plates

1.2.2 Tectonic Plates & Convection Currents

1.2.3 Plate Margins

1.2.4 Volcanoes

1.2.5 Effects of Volcanoes

1.2.6 Responses to Volcanic Eruptions

1.2.7 Earthquakes

1.2.8 Earthquakes 2

1.2.9 Responses to Earthquakes

1.2.10 Case Studies: The L'Aquila & Kashmir Earthquakes

1.2.11 Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010

1.2.12 Earthquake Case Study: Nepal 2015

1.2.13 Living with Tectonic Hazards 1

1.2.14 Living with Tectonic Hazards 2

1.2.15 End of Topic Test - Tectonic Hazards

1.2.16 Exam-Style Questions - Tectonic Hazards

1.2.17 Tectonic Hazards - Statistical Skills

1.3 Weather Hazards

1.3.1 Global Atmospheric Circulation

1.3.2 Surface Winds

1.3.3 UK Weather Hazards

1.3.4 Tropical Storms

1.3.5 Features of Tropical Storms

1.3.6 Impact of Tropical Storms 1

1.3.7 Impact of Tropical Storms 2

1.3.8 Tropical Storms Case Study: Katrina

1.3.9 Tropical Storms Case Study: Haiyan

1.3.10 UK Weather Hazards Case Study: Somerset 2014

1.3.11 End of Topic Test - Weather Hazards

1.3.12 Exam-Style Questions - Weather Hazards

1.3.13 Weather Hazards - Statistical Skills

1.4 Climate Change

1.4.1 Evidence for Climate Change

1.4.2 Causes of Climate Change

1.4.3 Effects of Climate Change

1.4.4 Managing Climate Change

1.4.5 End of Topic Test - Climate Change

1.4.6 Exam-Style Questions - Climate Change

1.4.7 Climate Change - Statistical Skills

2 The Living World

2.1 Ecosystems

2.1.1 Ecosystems

2.1.2 Ecosystem Cascades & Global Ecosystems

2.1.3 Ecosystem Case Study: Freshwater Ponds

2.2 Tropical Rainforests

2.2.1 Tropical Rainforests - Intro & Interdependence

2.2.2 Adaptations

2.2.3 Biodiversity of Tropical Rainforests

2.2.4 Deforestation

2.2.5 Case Study: Deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest

2.2.6 Sustainable Management of Rainforests

2.2.7 Case Study: Malaysian Rainforest

2.2.8 End of Topic Test - Tropical Rainforests

2.2.9 Exam-Style Questions - Tropical Rainforests

2.2.10 Deforestation - Statistical Skills

2.3 Hot Deserts

2.3.1 Overview of Hot Deserts

2.3.2 Biodiversity & Adaptation to Hot Deserts

2.3.3 Case Study: Sahara Desert

2.3.4 Desertification

2.3.5 Case Study: Thar Desert

2.3.6 End of Topic Test - Hot Deserts

2.3.7 Exam-Style Questions - Hot Deserts

2.4 Tundra & Polar Environments

2.4.1 Overview of Cold Environments

2.4.2 Adaptations in Cold Environments

2.4.3 Biodiversity in Cold Environments

2.4.4 Case Study: Alaska

2.4.5 Sustainable Management

2.4.6 Case Study: Svalbard

2.4.7 End of Topic Test - Tundra & Polar Environments

2.4.8 Exam-Style Questions - Cold Environments

3 Physical Landscapes in the UK

3.1 The UK Physical Landscape

3.1.1 The UK Physical Landscape

3.2 Coastal Landscapes in the UK

3.2.1 Types of Wave

3.2.2 Weathering & Mass Movement

3.2.3 Processes of Erosion & Wave-Cut Platforms

3.2.4 Headlands, Bays, Caves, Arches & Stacks

3.2.5 Transportation

3.2.6 Deposition

3.2.7 Spits, Bars & Sand Dunes

3.2.8 Case Study: Landforms on the Dorset Coast

3.2.9 Types of Coastal Management 1

3.2.10 Types of Coastal Management 2

3.2.11 Coastal Management Case Study - Holderness

3.2.12 Coastal Management Case Study: Swanage

3.2.13 Coastal Management Case Study - Lyme Regis

3.2.14 End of Topic Test - Coastal Landscapes in the UK

3.2.15 Exam-Style Questions - Coasts

3.3 River Landscapes in the UK

3.3.1 The River Valley

3.3.2 River Valley Case Study - River Tees

3.3.3 Erosion

3.3.4 Transportation & Deposition

3.3.5 Waterfalls, Gorges & Interlocking Spurs

3.3.6 Meanders & Oxbow Lakes

3.3.7 Floodplains & Levees

3.3.8 Estuaries

3.3.9 Case Study: The River Clyde

3.3.10 River Management

3.3.11 Hard & Soft Flood Defences

3.3.12 River Management Case Study - Boscastle

3.3.13 River Management Case Study - Banbury

3.3.14 End of Topic Test - River Landscapes in the UK

3.3.15 Exam-Style Questions - Rivers

3.4 Glacial Landscapes in the UK

3.4.1 Erosion

3.4.2 Landforms Caused by Erosion

3.4.3 Landforms Caused by Transportation & Deposition

3.4.4 Snowdonia

3.4.5 Land Use in Glaciated Areas

3.4.6 Tourism in Glacial Landscapes

3.4.7 Case Study - Lake District

3.4.8 End of Topic Test - Glacial Landscapes in the UK

3.4.9 Exam-Style Questions - Glacial Landscapes

4 Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1 Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.1 Urbanisation

4.1.2 Urbanisation Case Study: Lagos

4.1.3 Urbanisation Case Study: Rio de Janeiro

4.1.4 UK Cities

4.1.5 Case Study: Urban Regen Projects - Manchester

4.1.6 Case Study: Urban Change in Liverpool

4.1.7 Case Study: Urban Change in Bristol

4.1.8 Sustainable Urban Life

4.1.9 End of Topic Test - Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.10 Exam-Style Questions - Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.11 Urban Issues -Statistical Skills

5 The Changing Economic World

5.1 The Changing Economic World

5.1.1 Measuring Development

5.1.2 Classifying Countries Based on Wealth

5.1.3 The Demographic Transition Model

5.1.4 Physical & Historical Causes of Uneven Development

5.1.5 Economic Causes of Uneven Development

5.1.6 How Can We Reduce the Global Development Gap?

5.1.7 Case Study: Tourism in Kenya

5.1.8 Case Study: Tourism in Jamaica

5.1.9 Case Study: Economic Development in India

5.1.10 Case Study: Aid & Development in India

5.1.11 Case Study: Economic Development in Nigeria

5.1.12 Case Study: Aid & Development in Nigeria

5.1.13 Economic Development in the UK

5.1.14 Economic Development UK: Industry & Rural

5.1.15 Economic Development UK: Transport & North-South

5.1.16 Economic Development UK: Regional & Global

5.1.17 End of Topic Test - The Changing Economic World

5.1.18 Exam-Style Questions - The Changing Economic World

5.1.19 Changing Economic World - Statistical Skills

6 The Challenge of Resource Management

6.1 Resource Management

6.1.1 Global Distribution of Resources

6.1.2 Food in the UK

6.1.3 Water in the UK 1

6.1.4 Water in the UK 2

6.1.5 Energy in the UK

6.1.6 Resource Management - Statistical Skills

6.2.1 Areas of Food Surplus & Food Deficit

6.2.2 Food Supply & Food Insecurity

6.2.3 Increasing Food Supply

6.2.4 Case Study: Thanet Earth

6.2.5 Creating a Sustainable Food Supply

6.2.6 Case Study: Agroforestry in Mali

6.2.7 End of Topic Test - Food

6.2.8 Exam-Style Questions - Food

6.2.9 Food - Statistical Skills

6.3.1 The Global Demand for Water

6.3.2 What Affects the Availability of Water?

6.3.3 Increasing Water Supplies

6.3.4 Case Study: Water Transfer in China

6.3.5 Sustainable Water Supply

6.3.6 Case Study: Kenya's Sand Dams

6.3.7 Case Study: Lesotho Highland Water Project

6.3.8 Case Study: Wakel River Basin Project

6.3.9 Exam-Style Questions - Water

6.3.10 Water - Statistical Skills

6.4.1 Global Demand for Energy

6.4.2 Factors Affecting Energy Supply

6.4.3 Increasing Energy Supply: Renewables

6.4.4 Increasing Energy Supply: Non-Renewables

6.4.5 Carbon Footprints & Energy Conservation

6.4.6 Case Study: Rice Husks in Bihar

6.4.7 Exam-Style Questions - Energy

6.4.8 Energy - Statistical Skills

Jump to other topics

Unlock your full potential with GoStudent tutoring

Affordable 1:1 tutoring from the comfort of your home

Tutors are matched to your specific learning needs

30+ school subjects covered

Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010

Living with Tectonic Hazards 1

Nepal Earthquake Case Studies

About the Project

On April 25, 2015, Nepal and its people experienced a 7.8 magnitude earthquake. On May 12, another major earthquake of 7.2 magnitude hit the country. In practice, his means that millions of Nepalis have lived and died under the weight of falling buildings, landslides, floods, hunger, and homelessness brought about by massive seismic shifts across the Himalayan belt. Most will refer to this as an earthquake, singular. But this is no singular disaster. The country has experienced more than 300 seismic events since April 25, 2015, and nearly 9000 people died as a direct result of the two most major earthquakes.

For most of Nepal’s approximately 30 million people, living uncertainty is old hat. Consider the legacies of civil war (1996-2006) followed by a decade of political instability and current struggles to write a viable constitution. But the spring of 2015 has cracked open new forms of vulnerability for most Nepalis. These quakes have caused enormous destruction to the nation’s rich cultural heritage, in the Kathmandu Valley and beyond. The countryside has experienced vast devastation. More than half a million homes have been destroyed or are precariously habitable. This equates to about 2.5 million internally displaced. More than 3,500 schools have been destroyed and nearly as many health posts. There has been widespread damage to highways and road networks; glacial lakes are in danger of bursting; landslides are a constant threat, and have continued to wipe out settlements; many hydroelectric dams have been damaged; water borne illness and other public health challenges loom as monsoon has arrived. Even so, Nepalis are showing incredible resilience, creativity, and deep commitments to helping each other through this suffering.

This project – in the context of ANTH 55: Anthropology of Global Health – explores the human impacts of these disasters by asking students to engage in collective research and writing of case studies focused on specific areas of inquiry related to the earthquake.

The assumption of this project is not that students will become “experts” either on Nepal or on the health effects of earthquakes, but that they will amass sufficient knowledge about their area of inquiry so that they can contribute to an effort to expand knowledge and understanding of this event to others, and expand in the process their own conceptualization of what “global health” is, where and how it occurs, and how it links to many other aspects of human life.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Nepal Government's Emergency Response to the 2015 Earthquake: A Case Study

This paper utilizes the National Disaster Response Framework 2013 guidelines to analyze the large-scale disaster response of the Nepal government's institutional system in the wake of the 2015 earthquake. The methodology includes in-depth interviews with key informants, focus group discussions, field observations, and document analysis. The study found that despite limitations in institutional capacity and scarcity of resources, government institutions such as the Nepal Army, the Nepal Police, the Armed Police Force, the District Administration Offices, the Ministry of Home Affairs, and major public hospitals made a significant contribution to support the victims. Nevertheless, it also revealed the current weaknesses of those institutions in terms of response effectiveness and provides recommendations for enhancing their capacity.

Related Papers

David Sanderson

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Alistair D . B . Cook

Natural Hazards

The Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Response (HADR) research team at the NTS Centre, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) studied the international response to the 2015 Nepal earthquake to understand the dimensions and scope of the international response and to distill field observations from this particular experience. The research revealed that most international responders and parties in Nepal, who were beneficiaries of the response, considered immediate search and rescue, and relief operations a success. There was however a number of lessons which emerged from the experience for both the affected country as well as international responding parties. Through a primary focus on the immediate relief phase following the disaster, this report identifies four themes: (i) Strategic Planning; (ii) Aid Delivery; (iii) Aid Provision; and (iv) Aid Distribution. The following recommendations from the research on Nepal is to ensure greater effectiveness and efficiency for future HADR responses. While this research assessed a relatively small but critical window, and some of the lessons were context specific, it is hoped the recommendations which have emerged will help make future international humanitarian assistance and disaster response more effective.

Bulletin of the Department of Geology

Shrijan Malla

Effect of local level disaster response is always questionable in Nepal. It is because the capacity of local responding bodies' i.e. local administration, elected representatives and security forces is deficit. Overlooking own role and responsibility by public service offices such as health, water supply, road network, rural development, communication, education has overburdened the responsibility of CDO during disaster response and eroded the effectiveness of cluster approach. Similarly, over-reliance on security forces from relief and rescue to rehabilitation and reconstruction have also garnered lethargy amongst civil administration and public service offices wearing away their capacity. For that reason, it is utmost important that the prevailing tendency should be altered and derailed local level response mechanism should be brought into the right track.

Morten Wendelbo , Sebastiano Mori , Federica La China , Leonardo Taccetti , Robert Zielonka , European Institute for Asian Studies

The response to the earthquakes in Nepal was among the strongest in history, seen from an international perspective, and given the severity of the calamities. Dozens of countries came to the aid of Nepal, some of them, such as India and Pakistan, within a few short hours. Nonetheless, an unnecessary amount of people were killed, injured or otherwise had their lives permanently altered. This report details many of the challenges experienced by international and Nepalese actors before, during and after the disaster. Here, the main findings are briefly summarized.

Anastasia Aladysheva

On 25 April 2015 an earthquake measuring 7.8 on the Richter scale struck in Nepal, with its epicentre in the Lamjung district, causing destruction in 14 of the 75 districts in the country. Two weeks later, on 12 May, a second earthquake hit the country, this time 7.2 on the Richter scale, exacerbating the humanitarian situation. According to offi cial statistics, nearly 9000 people were killed, more than 21 000 injured and 188 900 temporarily displaced as a result of the earthquakes. In total, 605 254 houses were destroyed and 288 255 houses damaged, leaving many thousands homeless. According to the United Nations Offi ce for the Coordination of Humanitarian Aff airs (UNOCHA), more than 450 aid organizations are providing humanitarian assistance in the aff ected districts.1 The UNOCHA Country Team estimated that $422 million was needed to meet protection and humanitarian needs after the disaster.2 As of January 2016, two-thirds of the appeal target had been contributed, but 69 per c...

Risk Management

Meen Chhetri

Vina Ismawati

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Nepal case study GEO - A LEVEL AQA

Students also viewed

Comparative study on the seismic performance of a typical low-rise building in Nepal using different seismic codes

• Published: 11 June 2024

Cite this article

• Ashish Sapkota   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2570-8131 1 ,
• Binod Sapkota 1 ,
• Jhabindra Poudel 1 &
• Suyog Giri 1  

The recently enacted Nepal National Building Code of 2020 necessitates an examination and contrast of the seismic performance of the most prevalent architectural typologies based on various building codes. However, previous research has primarily focused on comparing seismic building design codes with hypothetical building and various assumptions regarding seismic parameters. To address this gap, this study aims to investigate the performance of a reinforced concrete frame type building approved by the municipality for construction. The analysis was conducted using ETABS according to the linear equivalent lateral force method. The study building was analysed to compare the base shear, story displacement, and story drift in accordance with Nepal National Building Code , Indian Code, and American Society of Civil Engineers guidelines. The analysis results indicated that NBC 105:2020 showed a higher value of base shear compared to the other codes. Incorporating the impact of cracked sections, NBC 105:2020, IS 1893:2016, and ASCE 7–16 guidelines demonstrated a significant effect on displacement and period. In comparison to NBC 105:1994 and IS 1893:2002, the periods increased by approximately 35% for these codes. The investigation revealed that the revised NBC 105:2020 displayed higher values for all response parameters analysed. Based on the design outcomes, the IS codes exhibited the highest percentage of longitudinal rebar, while NBC 105:1994 depicted the lowest. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the adherence to building code regulations during construction. The findings of this study aim to equip designers with comprehensive knowledge regarding seismic provisions and standards to facilitate informed decision-making in their design endeavours.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Aksoylu, C., Mobark, A., Arslan, M. H., & Erkan, İH. (2020A). A comparative study on ASCE 7-16, TBEC-2018, and TEC-2007 for reinforced concrete buildings. Revista De La Construcción: J Const, 19 (2), 282–305. https://doi.org/10.7764/rdlc.19.2.282-305

Article   Google Scholar  

American Society of Civil Engineers. (2017). Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures . . https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412916

Book   Google Scholar  

K Bhattarai 2020 Evaluation of Nonlinear Seismic Responses of Low- To Mid-Rise RC Frame Buildings with Masonry Infill Walls by Using a Modified Response Spectrum Analysis (MRSA) Method [Master’s Thesis] Asian Institute of Technology (AIT)

Bhusal, B., & Paudel, S. (2021). Comparative study of existing and revised codal provisions adopted in Nepal for analysis and design of Reinforced concrete structure. International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management, 6 (1), 16–24.

Google Scholar  

Brzev, S., Jain, S. K., & Rai, D. C. (2019). Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces – Code of Practice (IS 13920:2016) Proposed Modifications and Commentary . IITGN.

Bureau of Indian Standards, 2000 IS 456:2000 – Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards.

Bureau of Indian Standards 2002 Indian Standard Code (IS 1893). Part I: Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures: General provisions and buildings.

Bureau of Indian Standards 2016 Indian Standard Code (IS 1893). Part I: Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures: General provisions and buildings.

Chaulagain, H., Rodrigues, H., Jara, J., Spacone, E., & Varum, H. (2013). Seismic response of current RC buildings in Nepal: a comparative analysis of different design/construction. Engineering Structures, 49 , 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2012.10.036

Chaulagain, H., Rodrigues, H., Spacone, E., & Varum, H. (2015). Seismic response of current RC buildings in Kathmandu valley. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 53 (4), 791–818. https://doi.org/10.12989/SEM.2015.53.4.791

Chopra, A. K. (2005). Earthquake Dynamics of Structures: a Primer . Berkely: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.

Department of Urban Development and Building Construction, M. of U. D. (DUDBC), G. of N. (GoN). (2019). Nepal National Building Code (NBC 105) commentary: Seismic design of buildings in Nepal.

Government of Nepal, D. R. R. and M. P. (n.d.). Risk profile of Nepal. Retrieved September 2, 2023, from http://drrportal.gov.np/risk-profile-of-nepal

Dixit, A. M., Yatabe, R., Dahal, R. K., & Bhandary, N. P. (2013). Initiatives for earthquake disaster risk management in the Kathmandu Valley. Natural Hazards, 69 (1), 631–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11069-013-0732-9/METRICS

Ellingwood, B., & Ellingwood, B. R. (1980). Development of a probability based load criterion for American National Standard A58: Building code requirements for minimum design loads in buildings and other structures (Vol. 577) . Department of Commerce: National Bureau of Standards.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2009). FEMA P-751: Chapter 7 - Seismic Design Considerations. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1513-20490-4961/fema_p_751_chapter_7.pdf

L Fort 1975 Himalayas: The collided range. Present knowledge of the continental arc Himalayas: The collided range Present knowledge of the continental arc

Department of Urban Development and Building Construction (DUDBC), G. of N. (GoN) 2020 Nepal National Building Code (NBC 105): Seismic design of buildings in Nepal.

Giri, P., Bhatt, A. D., Gautam, D., & Chaulagain, H. (2019). Comparison between the seismic codes of Nepal, India, Japan, and EU. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 20 (2), 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/S42107-018-0102-8/METRICS

Government of Nepal 2021 National Report | National Population and and Housing Census 2021 Results. National Report. https://censusnepal.cbs.gov.np/results/downloads/national

International Code Council. (2015). International Building Code (IBC) . Falls Church, VA: International Code Council.

Jain, S. K., & Murty, C. V. R. (2011). Proposed Draft Provisions and Commentary on Ductile Detailing of RC Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces. In IITK/GSDMA, EQ11-v4 & EQ16-v3 . Kanpur: IIT.

Kayal, J. R. (2008). Microearthquake seismology and seismotectonics of South Asia. Microearthquake Seismology and Seismotectonics of South Asia, 1 , 503. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8180-4/COVER

Kencanawati, N. N., Agustawijaya, D. S., & Taruna, R. M. (2020). An investigation of building seismic design parameters in Mataram city using Lombok Earthquake 2018 Ground Motion. J Eng Tech Sci, 52 (5), 651–664. https://doi.org/10.5614/J.ENG.TECHNOL.SCI.2020.52.5.4

Khose, V. N., Singh, Y., & Lang, D. (2010). Limitations of Indian seismic design codes for RC buildings. Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, 14 , 1416–1423.

Department of Urban Development and Building Construction, M. of P. P. and W. (DUDBC), H. M. G. of N. (HMG). (1994). Nepal National Building Code (NBC 105): Seismic design of buildings in Nepal. Department of Urban Development and Building Construction, Ministry of Physical Planning and Works, His Majesty’s Government of Nepal.

Mishra, O. P. (2020). Seismic microzonation study of South Asian cities and its implications to urban risk resiliency under climate change scenario. International Journal of Geosciences, 11 (4), 197–237. https://doi.org/10.4236/IJG.2020.114012

Mishra, O. P., & Ghatak, M. (2020). SAARC: A Regional Perspective . Geography and You: Scientific Research Publishing.

MoHA 2015 Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) Government of Nepal. https://moha.gov.np/en

Naeim, F. (2005). Earthquake engineering—from engineering seismology to performance-based engineering. Earthquake Spectra, 21 (2), 609–611. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1896960

Paulay, T., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1992). Seismic Design Of Reinforced Concrete And Masonry Builings . John Wiley.

Puri, U. (2021, September 10). Proposed Vision For National Building Code. The Rising Nepal. https://old.risingnepaldaily.com/featured/proposed-vision-for-national-building-code?fbclid=IwAR2pdq3jsF_4oMlDV_mSmcHAdE9BN8TYIt7441Z9RcMzoiR3EHNr59SPdFE

Rupakhety, R., Olafsson, S., & Halldorsson, B. (2017). The 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha Earthquake in Nepal and its aftershocks: analysis of strong ground motion. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 15 (7), 2587–2616. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10518-017-0084-Z/METRICS

SAARC 2009 Workshop on Earthquake, Risk Management in South Asia.

Shah, A. A., Qadri, T., & Khwaja, S. (2018). Living with earthquake hazards in South and South East Asia. ASEAN Journal of Community Engagement, 2 (1), 2. https://doi.org/10.7454/ajce.v2i1.105

Singh, Y., Khose, V. N., & Lang, D. H. (2012). A Comparative Study of Code Provisions for Ductile RC Frame Buildings. 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering., 09 , 12.

Sunaryo. (2017). Study of Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) by means of microzonation data: Case Study on Batubesi Dam of Nuha, East Luwu, South Sulawesi. Indonesia. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1908 (1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5012713/764316

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Surana, M., Singh, Y., & Lang, D. H. (2018). Effect of strong-column weak-beam design provision on the seismic fragility of RC frame buildings. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, 10 (2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40091-018-0187-Z/TABLES/6

Takai, N., Shigefuji, M., Bijukchhen, S., Ichiyanagi, M., & Sasatani, T. (2016). Features of Ground Accelerations in The Kathmandu Valley During The Gorkha Nepal Earthquake 5th IASPEI / IAEE . International Symposium: Effects of Surface Geology on Seismic Motion.

UNDP 2010 Recommendations for construction of Earthquake Safer Buildings - Earthquake Risk Reduction and Recovery Preparedness Programme for Nepal. https://sheltercluster.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/public/docs/recommendations_for_safer_construction_rcc_english_errp.pdf

Varum, H., Furtado, A., & Melo, J. (2022). Insights on the Seismic Design of Current RC Buildings: Field Lessons, Codes and Research Needs. Springer Proceedings in Earth and Environmental Sciences, ECEES 2022 , 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15104-0_19/

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Umesh Puri (an international consultant and the Director of CivilPark International Co. Ltd, a global engineering firm) for his valuable contributions in discussions related to the research project.

This research work received no funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Engineering and Technology, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Pathumthani, Thailand

Ashish Sapkota, Binod Sapkota, Jhabindra Poudel & Suyog Giri

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors worked diligently and have thoroughly reviewed the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashish Sapkota .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors hereby state that they have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Sapkota, A., Sapkota, B., Poudel, J. et al. Comparative study on the seismic performance of a typical low-rise building in Nepal using different seismic codes. Asian J Civ Eng (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-024-01053-5

Download citation

Received : 06 September 2023

Accepted : 11 April 2024

Published : 11 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-024-01053-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Seismic performance
• Low-rise building
• Building codes
• Structural detailing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Structural analysis of the sympathetic restoration and conservation of the gopinath temple, kathmandu, nepal.

1. Introduction

2. methodology, 2.1. historic research, 2.2. visual inspection, 2.3. numerical modeling, 2.4. climate-change considerations, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. temple history and characteristics, 3.2. visual inspection report, 3.3. finite-element model and structural analysis, 3.3.1. modal analysis and calibration of the model, 3.3.2. pushover analysis, 3.3.3. retrofit proposal, 4. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• United Nations. Tracking Progress towards Inclusive, Safe, Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Human Settlements, SDG 11 Synthesis Report. 2018. Available online: https://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/sdg11-synthesis-report-2018-en.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• Europa Nostra. The Venice Manifesto for a European Cultural Citizenship. 2023. Available online: https://www.europanostra.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2023-Venice-Manifesto-English.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• United Nations. Policy Document for the Integration of a Sustainable Development Perspective into the Processes of the World Heritage Convention. 2015. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/document/139747 (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• United Nations. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• Hayles, C.; Huddleston, M.; Chinowsky, P.; Helman, J. Climate Adaptation Planning: Developing a Methodology for Evaluating Future Climate Change Impacts on Museum Environments and Their Collections. Heritage 2023 , 6 , 7446–7465. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saba, M.; Golondrino, G.E.C.; Torres-Gil, L.K. A Critical Assessment of the Current State and Governance of the UNESCO Cultural Heritage Site in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. Heritage 2023 , 6 , 5442–5468. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vardopoulos, I. Adaptive Reuse for Sustainable Development and Land Use: A Multivariate Linear Regression Analysis Estimating Key Determinants of Public Perceptions. Heritage 2023 , 6 , 809–828. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Papatzani, S.; Michail, G.; Tzamalis, G.; Skitsas, G. UNESCO Historic Centre (Chorá) of Patmos Island: Conservation and Reconstruction of a Collapsed Urban House. Heritage 2022 , 5 , 3100–3132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marenić, Z.B.; Pavlović, R.; Tutek, I. Industrial Heritage of Dubrovnik—Unaffirmed Potential of Gruž Bay. Heritage 2022 , 5 , 2332–2369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elnaggar, A. Nine principles of green heritage science: Life cycle assessment as a tool enabling green transformation. Heritage Sci. 2024 , 12 , 7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, L.; Tang, Y. Towards the Contemporary Conservation of Cultural Heritages: An Overview of Their Conservation History. Heritage 2023 , 7 , 175–192. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xie, K.; Zhang, Y.; Han, W. Architectural Heritage Preservation for Rural Revitalization: Typical Case of Traditional Village Retrofitting in China. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 681. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rios, A.J. Learning from the Past: Parametrical analysis of cob walls. Appl. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 9045. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiménez Rios, A.; O’Dwyer, D. Earthen buildings in Ireland. In 6th International Congress on Construction History (6ICCH 2018), Brussels, Belgium, 9–13 July 2018 ; Wouters, I., van de Voorde, S., Bertels, I., Espion, B., de Jonge, K., Zastavni, D., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 787–794. Available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9780429446719-12/earthen-buildings-ireland-jim%C3%A9nez-rios-alejandro-dwyer-dermot (accessed on 30 February 2024).
• Sardella, A.; Palazzi, E.; von Hardenberg, J.; Del Grande, C.; De Nuntiis, P.; Sabbioni, C.; Bonazza, A. Risk mapping for the sustainable protection of cultural heritage in extreme changing environments. Atmosphere 2020 , 11 , 700. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Briz, E.; Garmendia, L.; Marcos, I.; Gandini, A. Improving the Resilience of Historic Areas Coping with Natural and Climate Change Hazards: Interventions Based on Multi-Criteria Methodology. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2023 , 1–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Coïsson, E.; Ferrari, L. Emergency Response to Damaged Architectural Heritage: Time, Safety and Conservation. In Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions ; Endo, Y., Hanazato, T., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 1320–1331. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Roca, P.; Cervera, M.; Gariup, G.; Pela, L. Structural Analysis of Masonry Historical Constructions. Classical and Advanced Approaches. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2010 , 17 , 299–325. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lagomarsino, S.; Cattari, S. PERPETUATE guidelines for seismic performance-based assessment of cultural heritage masonry structures. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2014 , 13 , 13–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bracchi, S.; Rota, M.; Penna, A.; Magenes, G. Consideration of modelling uncertainties in the seismic assessment of masonry buildings by equivalent-frame approach. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2015 , 13 , 3423–3448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tomić, I.; Vanin, F.; Beyer, K. Uncertainties in the Seismic Assessment of Historical Masonry Buildings. Appl. Sci. 2021 , 11 , 2280. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• D’altri, A.M.; Sarhosis, V.; Milani, G.; Rots, J.; Cattari, S.; Lagomarsino, S.; Sacco, E.; Tralli, A.; Castellazzi, G.; de Miranda, S. Modeling Strategies for the Computational Analysis of Unreinforced Masonry Structures: Review and Classification. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2020 , 27 , 1153–1185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Božulić, I.; Vanin, F.; Beyer, K. Numerical Modeling of FRP-Strengthened Masonry Structures Using Equivalent Frame Models. In Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions ; Endo, Y., Hanazato, T., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 400–406. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• de Sousa Medeiros, K.A.; Palhares, R.d.A.; Parsekian, G.A.; Shrive, N.G. Simplified frame models to simulate the in-plane load–displacement response of multi-story, perforated, partially grouted masonry walls. Structures 2023 , 55 , 2086–2104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bertani, G.; Patruno, L.; D’altri, A.; Castellazzi, G.; de Miranda, S. A single-surface multi-failure strength domain for masonry. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2024 , 288 , 112624. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pereira, M.; D’Altri, A.M.; de Miranda, S.; Glisic, B. 3D Non-periodic Masonry Texture Generation of Cultural Heritage Structures. In Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions ; Endo, Y., Hanazato, T., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 366–373. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rios, A.J.; Nela, B.; Pingaro, M.; Reccia, E.; Trovalusci, P. Rotation and sliding collapse mechanisms for in plane masonry pointed arches: Statistical parametric assessment. Eng. Struct. 2022 , 262 , 114338. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rios, A.J.; Pingaro, M.; Reccia, E.; Trovalusci, P. Statistical Assessment of In-Plane Masonry Panels Using Limit Analysis with Sliding Mechanism. J. Eng. Mech. 2022 , 148 , 04021158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rios, A.J.; Nela, B.; Pingaro, M.; Reccia, E.; Trovalusci, P. Parametric analysis of masonry arches following a limit analysis approach: Influence of joint friction, pier texture, and arch shallowness. Math. Mech. Solids 2023 , 10812865231175385. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Prajapati, S.; Shrestha, K.C.; Shakya, M. Seismic fragility evaluation of the Nepalese pagoda temple: A case study of Laxmi Narsingha temple. J. Build. Eng. 2024 , 87 , 108993. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yavartanoo, F.; Kim, T.; Kim, J.; Jang, H.; Kim, C.-S. Out-of-plane behavior of U-shaped unreinforced masonry structures. J. Build. Eng. 2024 , 86 , 108984. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Meoni, A.; D’alessandro, A.; Mattiacci, M.; García-Macías, E.; Saviano, F.; Parisi, F.; Lignola, G.P.; Ubertini, F. Structural performance assessment of full-scale masonry wall systems using operational modal analysis: Laboratory testing and numerical simulations. Eng. Struct. 2024 , 304 , 117663. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Magenes, G.; Penna, A.; Senaldi, I.E.; Rota, M.; Galasco, A. Shaking Table Test of a Strengthened Full-Scale Stone Masonry Building with Flexible Diaphragms. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2013 , 8 , 349–375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guerrini, G.; Senaldi, I.; Graziotti, F.; Magenes, G.; Beyer, K.; Penna, A. Shake-Table Test of a Strengthened Stone Masonry Building Aggregate with Flexible Diaphragms. Int. J. Arch. Herit. 2019 , 13 , 1078–1097. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vintzileou, E.; Mouzakis, C.; Adami, C.-E.; Karapitta, L. Seismic behavior of three-leaf stone masonry buildings before and after interventions: Shaking table tests on a two-storey masonry model. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 2015 , 13 , 3107–3133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mininno, G.; Ghiassi, B.; Oliveira, D.V. Modelling of the In-Plane and Out-of-Plane Performance of TRM-Strengthened Masonry Walls. Key Eng. Mater. 2017 , 747 , 60–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arce, A.; Kapsalis, P.; Papanicolaou, C.G.; Triantafillou, T.C. Diagonal Compression Tests on Unfired and Fired Masonry Wallettes Retrofitted with Textile-Reinforced Alkali-Activated Mortar. J. Compos. Sci. 2023 , 8 , 14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shabani, A.; Feyzabadi, M.; Kioumarsi, M. Model updating of a masonry tower based on operational modal analysis: The role of soil-structure interaction. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2022 , 16 , e00957. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, P.; Milani, G. Specialized 3D Distinct element limit analysis approach for a fast seismic vulnerability evaluation of massive masonry structures: Application on traditional pagodas. Eng. Struct. 2023 , 282 , 115792. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiao, L.; Tapponnier, P.; Mccallum, A.C.-C.; Xu, X. The shape of the Himalayan “Arc”: An ellipse pinned by syntaxial strike-slip fault tips. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2024 , 121 , e2313278121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bollinger, L.; Adhikari, L.B.; Vergne, J.; Hetényi, G.; Subedi, S. The 2015 April 25 Gorkha Earthquake. In Himalaya: Dynamics of a Giant, Current Activity of the Himalayan Range ; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2023; Volume 3, pp. 217–237. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elliott, J.R.; Jolivet, R.; González, P.J.; Avouac, J.-P.; Hollingsworth, J.; Searle, M.P.; Stevens, V.L. Himalayan megathrust geometry and relation to topography revealed by the Gorkha earthquake. Nat. Geosci. 2016 , 9 , 174–180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xiong, N.; Niu, F.; Wang, R. Significance of Nonplanar Rupture of the Mainshock and Optimal Faulting in Forecasting Aftershocks of the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha Earthquake. Seism. Res. Lett. 2020 , 91 , 1606–1616. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Varum, H.; Dumaru, R.; Furtado, A.; Barbosa, A.R.; Gautam, D.; Rodrigues, H. Chapter 3—Seismic Performance of Buildings. In Nepal after the Gorkha Earthquake, in Impacts and Insights of the Gorkha Earthquake ; Gautam, D., Rodrigues, H., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 47–63. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• UNESCO. 45 COM Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. 2023. Available online: https://whc.unesco.org/archive/2023/whc23-45com-7B-en.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2024).
• Saisi, A.; Borlenghi, P.; Gentile, C. Between Safety and Conservation—Procedure for the Assessment of Heritage Buildings Based on Historic Research. Buildings 2023 , 13 , 2236. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Roca, P. The Iscarsah Guidelines on the Analysis, Conservation and Structural Restoration of Architectural Heritage. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Structural Analysis of Historical Constructions (SAHC), Barcelona, Spain, 29 September–1 October 2021; Available online: https://www.scipedia.com/public/Roca_2021a (accessed on 20 February 2024).
• Ranjitkar, R.K.; Joshi, L. Lakshmi Narayan Temple Kathmandu Darbar Initiative Final Report. 2004. Available online: https://danam.cats.uni-heidelberg.de/files/danam-cms/Lakshmi_Narayan_Temple_KDI_Final_Report_DyGUJ9h.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• Mishra, M.; Lourenço, P.B. Artificial intelligence-assisted visual inspection for cultural heritage: State-of-the-art review. J. Cult. Herit. 2024 , 66 , 536–550. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bayraktar, A.; Hökelekli, E. Seismic Performances of Different Spandrel Wall Strengthening Techniques in Masonry Arch Bridges. Int. J. Arch. Heritage 2020 , 15 , 1722–1740. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Parajuli, H.R. Determination of mechanical properties of the Kathmandu Valleey world heritage brick masonry buildings. In Proceedings of the 15 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–28 September 2012; Available online: https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/WCEE2012_3139.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• Parajuli, H.R.; Maskey, P.N.; Kiyono, J. Disaster Risk Management for the Historic City of Patan, Nepal, Final Report of the Kathmandu Research Project. 2012. Available online: https://r-dmuch.jp/wp/assets/en/project/dl_files/report/2012+03+KTM+Final+Report.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2018).
• Gavrilovich, P.; Pichard, P. Methodology for strengthening and repair of earthquake damaged monuments in Pagan—Burma. In Proceedings of the Eight World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA, USA, 21–28 July 1984; Available online: https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/8_vol1_609.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2018).
• Jaishi, B.; Ren, W.X.; Zong, Z.H.; Maskey, P.N. Dynamic and seismic performance of old multi-tiered temples in Nepal. Eng. Struct. 2003 , 25 , 1827–1839. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• William, K.; Warnke, E. Constitutive model for the triaxial behaviour of concrete, in IABSE reports of the working commissions = Rapports des commissions de travail AIPC = IVBH Berichte der Arbeitskommissionen. In Proceedings of the Seminar on Concrete Structures Subjected to Triaxial Stresses, Bergamo, Italy, 17–19 May 1974; pp. 1–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• ANSYS Inc. ANSYS Mechanical APDL Feature Archive ; ANSYS Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2023. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rios, A.J.; O’Dwyer, D. Numerical modelling of cob’s non-linear monotonic structural behaviour. Int. J. Comput. Methods 2020 , 17 , 1940013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Altunişik, A.C.; Genç, A.F.; Günaydin, M.; Okur, F.Y.; Karahasan, O. Dynamic response of a historical armory building using the finite element model validated by the ambient vibration test. J. Vib. Control. 2018 , 24 , 5472–5484. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sinaei, S.; Abadi, E.I.Z.; Hoseini, S.J. Failure Analysis of Skewed Persian Brick Masonry Barrel Vaults: Experimental and Numerical Study. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2023 , 37 , 04023057. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hejazi, M.; Soltani, Y. Parametric study of the effect of hollow spandrel (Konu) on structural behaviour of Persian brick masonry barrel vaults. Eng. Fail. Anal. 2020 , 118 , 104838. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shabani, A.; Kioumarsi, M. Seismic assessment and strengthening of a historical masonry bridge considering soil-structure interaction. Eng. Struct. 2023 , 293 , 116589. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shakya, M. Modal Analysis Using Ambient Vibration Measurement and Damage Identification of Three Tiered Radha Krishna Temple. 2010. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260096970_MODAL_ANALYSIS_USING_AMBIENT_VIBRATION_MEASUREMENT_AND_DAMAGE_IDENTIFICATION_OF_THREE_TIERED_RADHA_KRISHNA_TEMPLE (accessed on 20 February 2018).
• Takai, N.; Shigefuji, M.; Rajaure, S.; Bijukchhen, S.; Ichiyanagi, M.; Dhital, M.R.; Sasatani, T. Strong ground motion in the Kathmandu Valley during the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake. Earth Planets Space 2016 , 68 , 10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• IS:1905-1987 ; Code of Practice for Structural Use of Unreinforced Masonry. Bureau of Indian Standards: New Delhi, India, 1987. Available online: https://archive.org/details/gov.in.is.1905.1987 (accessed on 20 February 2018).
• European Commission. Industry 5.0: Human-Centric, Sustainable and Resilient. 2020. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/aed3280d-70fe-11eb-9ac9-01aa75ed71a1 (accessed on 30 January 2024).

Share and Cite

Arce, A.; Jiménez Rios, A.; Tomic, I.; Biggs, D. Structural Analysis of the Sympathetic Restoration and Conservation of the Gopinath Temple, Kathmandu, Nepal. Heritage 2024 , 7 , 3194-3210. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7060151

Arce A, Jiménez Rios A, Tomic I, Biggs D. Structural Analysis of the Sympathetic Restoration and Conservation of the Gopinath Temple, Kathmandu, Nepal. Heritage . 2024; 7(6):3194-3210. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7060151

Arce, Andrés, Alejandro Jiménez Rios, Igor Tomic, and David Biggs. 2024. "Structural Analysis of the Sympathetic Restoration and Conservation of the Gopinath Temple, Kathmandu, Nepal" Heritage 7, no. 6: 3194-3210. https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage7060151

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals