Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes? Lessons Every Engineer Must Know

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes? Lessons Every Engineer Must Know

Understanding seismic failures, structural mistakes, and the engineering lessons from the 2001 Bhuj Earthquake.

Introduction

It was Republic Day. Families were having a relaxed time in their homes when the ground suddenly began to tear apart beneath them. The ground didn’t just shake, it exploded.

James, A. (n.d.). 2001 Gujarat Earthquake: When India Faced One of its Worst Disasters 25 Years Ago [PHOTOS]. IBTimes India.

In a matter of just 90 seconds, a Mw 7.7 earthquake turned Bhuj into a graveyard, becoming one of India’s deadliest seismic disasters. More than 20,000 dead, 166,000 injured and 600,000 left homeless. Eighty percent of the city’s buildings simply disappeared.

A 20-year-old building and a newly built apartment complex folded like a deck of cards. Across the city, a government school, supposed to be “earthquake resistant”, crumbled into dust. Yet nearby, an old stone temple barely lost a single carved pillar.

Why do some structures survive earthquakes while others collapse completely?

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes

For over 5,000 years, we’ve built structures, yet earthquakes expose the weakest flaws in structural design. Here’s the truth: many collapses occur not solely because of earthquake intensity, but because of poor seismic detailing, irregularities, and construction deficiencies. They collapse because we have left behind the fundamentals of engineering, seismic design, and structural safety.

Let’s walk through the wreckage of Bhuj. Here are five reasons buildings fail and the lessons every engineer must understand to create earthquake-resistant structures.

1. The Pancake Collapse – Soft Storey Failure

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes

Soft storey collapse during Bhuj earthquake (N Sivakumar, et al., 2013)

Across Bhuj, several multi-storey apartments had open ground floors used for parking or shops. The upper floors were enclosed with rigid concrete, while the ground floor relied only on slender columns and glass façades.

When the shaking started, the soft ground floor swayed wildly while the upper floors resisted. The stress concentrated entirely at the base level. Within seconds, columns snapped like dry sticks and the building collapsed vertically floor upon floor.

Lesson: A building cannot have a highly flexible ground floor and rigid upper floors without severe seismic risk.
Solution:
  • Retrofit with steel bracing or shear walls.
  • Design uniform stiffness from foundation to roof.

2. The Building That Fought Itself – Torsional Irregularity

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes

Mansi Complex, Ahmedabad after structural collapse during the Bhuj earthquake.

A well-known example from the Bhuj earthquake was the failure of irregularly shaped structures, such as the Mansi Tower in Ahmedabad, a striking L-shaped building. The owners added a private swimming pool on the roof. This shifted the centre of mass far from the centre of rigidity. During the quake, the heavy side pulled one way, while the lighter wing lagged behind. Thus, the entire building twisted its columns off their foundations.

Lesson: Asymmetry creates torsion. Torsion creates collapse.
Solution:
  • Use seismic separation joints.
  • Break complex forms, like L-shapes and T-shapes, into simple rectangles that move independently.
  • Recalculate structural loads before adding rooftop features.

3. The Short Column Effect – The Overlooked Failure Mechanism

Schools and offices with beautiful windows and squat concrete columns between them faced earthquake failures.

When seismic forces struck, those short, stiff columns couldn’t flex. They attracted huge shear forces and fractured horizontally, resulting in loss of structural support.

Lesson: Short columns are stiffer. Stiffer elements attract more force. More force + no ductility can trigger explosive structural failure.
Solution:
  • Never confine a column with masonry walls that prevent bending.
  • Decouple the wall or design the column for massive shear.

4. The Weak Joint Betrayal – Beam-Column Joints

Post-earthquake, investigators found that in many collapsed buildings, the beam-column joints had no confining stirrups. The steel rebars were smooth mild steel, not the required deformed bars for seismic resistance. The hooks were too short. When the quake hit, the rebars pulled out like nails from soft wood, and the beam-column joints disintegrated under seismic loading.

Lesson: The bond between steel and concrete at the joint is the soul of the building.
Solution:
  • Tight stirrups inside the joint.
  • Never lap splice bars inside a joint.
  • Ensure on-site quality inspection.

5. The Soil Liquefaction Lie- Foundation Failure Beneath the Surface

Why Do Buildings Fail in Earthquakes

Bhattacharya, Subhamoy & Sarkar, Rajib & Huang, Yu. (2012). Seismic Design of Piles in Liquefiable Soils.

Another example was the Port & Customs Office Tower at Kandla. A sturdy building with deep foundations, but it stood on ground with water-saturated sandy soil. The shaking turned that sand into behaving more like liquid than solid ground, losing its strength and stiffness. The building didn’t collapse; it simply tilted sideways as the foundation lost all bearing capacity.

Lesson: A well-designed superstructure cannot survive if the foundation soil fails during seismic loading
Solution:
  • Geotechnical investigation prior to construction/design is non-negotiable.
  • Use Deep piles into competent layers, or ground improvement (vibro-compaction, stone columns).

The 3 Rules Every Engineer Must Never Forget

  • Ductility saves lives, brittle = death, flexible = survival.
  • Symmetry is safety – if the plan is irregular, put in a seismic joint.
  • The ground lies – never assume the soil is “good enough.”

The Ugly Truth – Bhuj Exposed

  • Builders used flat strips of mild steel instead of deformed high-yield bars.
  • Concrete quality was poor due to inadequate cement content and improper mixing
  • Beam-column joints lacked stirrups.
  • Inadequate on-site inspection during construction.
Lesson: A structural drawing is worthless without quality inspection and enforcement. The code is only a suggestion if no one is watching.

Resilience vs. Life Safety – The New Frontier of Earthquake Engineering

Most building codes (IBC, Eurocode 8) are designed for Life Safety; that means the building may suffer structural damage or even partial collapse, but should remain standing long enough for occupants to escape alive.

After Bhuj and the 2023 Turkey-Syria earthquake, engineers saw “code-compliant” buildings experience catastrophic structural failure, including pancake collapse, because the code allowed too much flexibility.

We now need Immediate Occupancy buildings that shake and still work as hospitals the next day. That’s the frontier.

Let’s Argue (Professionally) in the Comments

We’ve given you the failures and the lessons. We want to hear from the trenches.

  1. The Cost Reality: We know how to build a perfect seismic fortress. But with inflation and budget cuts, how do you convince a client to pay for ductile detailing when “nobody has felt a big one in 50 years”?
  2. The Existing Stock: Millions of URM (unreinforced masonry) buildings still stand in seismically active cities. Retrofitting costs as much as rebuilding. Is it ethical to design “perfect” new buildings while leaving behind the deadly old ones?
  3. AI vs. Intuition: AI can optimize structural layouts. But can it feel torsion? Are we losing the intuitive engineer who spots failure just by looking at a floor plan?
Stay safe, Design smart, Build stronger, and respect Earthquake!

Drop your best seismic war story below.

Comments ( 4 )

Devjit Acharjee
28 May 2026
Very good Initiative by Seismic Academy.
Madhukar Shroti
28 May 2026
Excellent breakdown of why “code-compliant” doesn’t always mean “earthquake resilient.” The Bhuj lessons are still painfully relevant today, especially the soft-storey failures and poor site execution. Ductility and detailing save lives.
SEEMA CHEDAPANGU
26 May 2026
The Building Everyone Thought Was Safe A few years ago, during a routine site visit, I walked into a newly constructed apartment building that everyone on site was proud of. The ground floor was completely open for parking, with only thin concrete columns holding up five residential floors above. The upper floors were packed with masonry walls, making them stiff and heavy, while the base looked soft and exposed. The owner smiled and said, “See how spacious it looks? Buyers love this design.” Everyone nodded. The architect liked the clean open appearance. The contractor liked the reduced wall work. The client liked the extra parking spaces. From the outside, it looked modern and efficient. But one senior engineer standing beside me stayed silent for a moment and quietly said, “If an earthquake comes, this ground floor will suffer first.” At that time, I didn’t fully understand what he meant. Years later, after studying the Bhuj earthquake and seeing images from Turkey and Syria, that moment came back to me instantly. I realized we had all seen this story before. Not once, but everywhere. We see buildings where parking is valued more than stiffness. We see irregular floor plans approved because they “look attractive.” We see columns partially trapped by masonry walls. We see beam-column joints rushed during concreting because deadlines matter more than detailing. And the uncomfortable truth is that most engineers notice these problems the moment they see them. That small feeling in the back of the mind — “something about this doesn’t feel right” — is something almost every structural engineer has experienced. Earthquakes don’t create weak buildings. They only reveal the weaknesses we already decided to ignore. That is why the lessons from Bhuj still feel personal today. Because somewhere, in almost every city, there is still a building standing quietly, waiting for the day the ground decides to test it.
SEEMA CHEDAPANGU
26 May 2026
Excellent breakdown of seismic failures and structural lessons from the Bhuj earthquake. The explanation of soft storey collapse, torsional irregularity, and weak beam-column joints was especially clear and practical. I also appreciated the emphasis on construction quality and ductile detailing, which are often ignored despite being critical for seismic safety. Articles like this help bridge the gap between theory and real-world engineering practice. Great work!

Leave a Comment