BUILDING INTEGRITY SUMMARY REPORT

Transcription

1 BUILDING INTEGRITY SUMMARY REPORT SUPPLIER NAME UNITS AUDITED Ananta Denim Technology Ltd. Main production Wash plant SUPPLIER ADDRESS AUDIT DATE May 2015 AUDIT PERFORMED BY AUDIT TEAM Kashpara, Noyabari, Kanchpur, Narayanganj, Dhaka, Bangladesh Department of Civil Engineering, Bureau of Research, Testing and Consultation, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) 2 auditors GRAVITY LOADING EVALUATION: Main production GREEN The is fully safe. Wash plant GREEN The is fully safe. SEISMIC PERFORMANCE RATING* Main production FAIR Wash plant GOOD Performance during a major seismic disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would represent low life hazards. Performance during a major seismic disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would not significantly jeopardize life. *Facility is located in a zone with low seismic activity BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY Visual inspection and ASCE Tier-1 Analysis BUILDING INTEGRITY INSPECTION SUMMARY ANANTA DENIM TECHNOLOGY LTD PAGE 1/5

2 DETAILED CONTENT VISUAL INSPECTION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS... 2 MAIN PRODUCTION BUILDING... 2 WASH PLANT BUILDING... 2 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION... 3 I. BASIC STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES... 3 II. GEOLOGICAL SITE HAZARDS AND FOUNDATIONS CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES BASIC NON-STRUCTURAL COMPONENT CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES... 3 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY... 3 VISUAL INSPECTION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS MAIN PRODUCTION BUILDING The is classified in the GREEN category. The present condition of the does not call for an immediate evacuation or postponement of the function of the provided current loading intensity is maintained. Use of the in present usage pattern may continue. However, the authority should be vigilant about any deterioration of the present distresses or development of new distresses. No construction beyond the present level and no change in loading pattern (which may add load to the structure) should be made unless detail analysis is performed to justify those actions. As per the provision of Article of ASCE 31 a Full Building Tier 2 evaluation for this is not required. However, Deficiency only Tier 2 evaluation is required in connection with the identified deficiency as mentioned in "Liquefaction" Criteria of Geological Site Hazards and Foundation Checklist. WASH PLANT BUILDING Over all condition of this pre-engineered structure is good enough. No objections are found during the site visit. The is classified in the GREEN category. No recommendations are needed to propose for the existing condition of the evaluated. It appears that the present condition of the does not call for an immediate evacuation or postponement of the function of the provided current loading intensity is maintained. Use of the in present usage pattern may continue. However, the authority should be vigilant about any deterioration of the present distresses or development of new distresses. No construction beyond the present level and no change in loading pattern (which may add load to the structure) should be made unless detail analysis is performed to justify those actions. BUILDING INTEGRITY INSPECTION SUMMARY ANANTA DENIM TECHNOLOGY LTD PAGE 2/5

3 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION I. BASIC STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES II. GEOLOGICAL SITE HAZARDS AND FOUNDATIONS CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES Geologic Site Hazards Liquefaction-susceptible, saturated, loose granular soils that could jeopardize the 's seismic performance shall not exist in the foundation soils at depths within 50 Liquefaction feet under the for Life Safety and Immediate Occupancy. Liquefaction susceptible soils exist in the foundation soils at depths within 50 feet of the as described in project geotechnical investigation. III. BASIC NON-STRUCTURAL COMPONENT CHECKLIST NON-COMPLIANCES Main production DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF METHODOLOGY 1. The following criteria are used for the integrity inspection: A. Permit review and verification. B. Visual assessment. C. Detailed assessment following ASCE-31 standards. i. Level of Investigation ii. Level of Performance Evaluation to Life Safety Performance Level (L.S.) iii. Level of Seismicity According to BNBC (1993) and based on geotechnical investigation report 1. Zone coefficient 2. Site Class (as per BNBC 1993) Design short period response acceleration S DS Design spectral response acceleration at 1 sec. SD 1 iv. Building Type v. Screening Phase (Tier 1) BUILDING INTEGRITY INSPECTION SUMMARY ANANTA DENIM TECHNOLOGY LTD PAGE 3/5

4 vi. Basic Structural Checklist vii. Geological Site Hazards and Foundation Checklist viii. Basic Non-structural Component Checklist 2. Gravity Loading Evaluation Definitions GREEN YELLOW AMBER RED Factor of Safety (FS) of Column Strength is greater than the is fully safe Factor of Safety (FS) of Column Strength is between 1.5 and the is marginally safe Factor of Safety (FS) of Column Strength is between 1.25 and the 's safety is not fully ensured Factor of Safety (FS) of Column Strength is less than the is unsafe 3. Seismic Performance Ratings ( ) GOOD FAIR POOR VERY POOR disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would not significantly jeopardize life. Buildings and other structures with a GOOD rating would represent an acceptable level of earthquake safety, such that funds need not be spent to improve their seismic resistance to gain greater life safety. disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would represent low life hazards. Buildings and other structures with a FAIR seismic rating would be given a low priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the could be reclassified GOOD. Buildings and other structures expected to sustain significant structural and nonstructural damage and/or result in falling hazards in a major seismic disturbance, representing appreciable life hazards. Such s or structures either would be given a high priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the could be reclassified GOOD, or would be considered for other abatement programs, such as reduction of occupancy. disturbance is anticipated to result in extensive structural and nonstructural damage, potential structural collapse, and/or falling hazards that would represent high life hazards. Such s or structures either would be given the highest priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the could be reclassified GOOD, or BUILDING INTEGRITY INSPECTION SUMMARY ANANTA DENIM TECHNOLOGY LTD PAGE 4/5

5 would be considered for other abatement programs, such as reduction of occupancy. BUILDING INTEGRITY INSPECTION SUMMARY ANANTA DENIM TECHNOLOGY LTD PAGE 5/5