You are on page 1of 34

CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W.

Wallace

Seismic Code Requirements

John W. Wallace, Ph.D., P.E.


Associate Professor
University of California, Los Angeles

CE243A 1

1971
San Fernando, California
Earthquake

CE243A 2

Fall 04 1
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Olive View Hospital Complex

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 3

Soft-story

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 4

Fall 04 2
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 5

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 6

Fall 04 3
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Confinement

Ties @ 18” o.c. Spiral @ 3” o.c.

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 7

Cal State Northridge

1994 Northridge Earthquake


CE243A 8

Fall 04 4
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Cal State Northridge

1994 Northridge Earthquake


CE243A 9

Northridge Fashion Mall

1994 Northridge Earthquake


CE243A 10

Fall 04 5
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Barrington Building

1994 Northridge Earthquake


CE243A 11

Holiday Inn – Van Nuys


Barrington Building

1994 Northridge Earthquake


CE243A 12

Fall 04 6
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

1994 Northridge Earthquake

z Major failures:
– Steel moment-resisting frames
– Precast concrete parking structures
– Tiltup & masonry buildings with wood
roofs
z Major successes
– retrofitted unreinforced masonry
structures
– retrofitted bridge structures

CE243A 13

1994 Northridge Earthquake

z 1997 UBC & NEHRP – stricter detailing for


changes: non-
non-participating
– removal of pre-
pre- elements
qualified steel – deformation
connection details compatibility
– addition of near-
near- requirements
fault factor to base – chords & collectors
shear equation designed for “real”
– prohibition on forces
highly irregular – redundancy factor
structures in near-
near- added to design
fault regions forces

CE243A 14

Fall 04 7
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Summary
z Observation of the behavior of real buildings in
real earthquakes have been the single largest
influence on the development of our building
codes
z The lull in earthquakes in populated areas
between approximately 1940 and 1970 gave a
false since of security at a time when the
population of California was expanding rapidly
z Performance of newer buildings and bridges has
generally been good in recent earthquakes;
however, older buildings pose a substantial
hazard.

CE243A 15

Seismic Codes and Source Documents

NEHRP SEAOC

ASCE 7

BOCA National
Standard Building Code Uniform
Building Code Building Code

International Building Code

CE243A 16

Fall 04 8
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

IBC 2000, 2003


z International Code
Council (ICC),
established in 1994
z Seismic provisions
– ASCE 7-7-02
z Modeling
z Forces
– Material codes
z ACI, ASCE
z IBC 2003 (ASCE 7-7-02,
ACI 318-
318-02)

CE243A 17

Material Codes
International Building Code

MANUAL
OF STEEL ACI 318-02
CONSTRUCTION ACI 318R-02

LOAD &
RESISTANCE
FACTOR Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02)
DESIGN and Commentary (ACI 318R-02)

An ACI Standard
Volume I
Reported by ACI Committee 318

Structural Members,
Specifications,
& Codes

AISC aci american concrete institute


P.O. BOX 9094
FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48333

Second Edition

CE243A 18

Fall 04 9
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Shake Table Test – Flat Plate

CE243A 19

Earthquake Building Response


F4 = m4a4(t)

F3 = m3a3(t)

F2 = m2a2(t)

F1 = m1a1(t)
Note: Forces generally
Increase with height
V(t) = ∑miai(t) i=1,4
Shaking

Time
CE243A 20

Fall 04 10
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Building Response Analysis


z In general, three types of analyses are
done to design buildings subjected to

Shaking
earthquakes
– Response History Analysis
z Linear or nonlinear approach to
calculate time varying responses Time
(P, M, V, δ)

– Response Spectrum Analysis


Sa
z Linear approach to calculate modal
responses (peak values) and
combine modal responses Sd
F4
– Equivalent Lateral Force
F3
z Nonlinear approach used for
rehabilitation (e.g., FEMA 356) F2
z Linear approach – assume F1
response is dominated by first
mode response (very common)
Vbase
CE243A 21

Building Response Analysis


z Response History Analysis
– Analyze structure by applying
Shaking

acceleration history at base of


structure
– Typically requires use of several
records Time
– Elastic or inelastic response
– Time consuming and results can vary
substantially between records
z Response Spectrum Analysis Sa
– Elastic response
– Determine peak responses for each
mode of response
– Combine modal responses (SRSS, T
CQC)

CE243A 22

Fall 04 11
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Acceleration Response Spectrum

Maximum
Acceleration

Aground

Structural Period, T M
T = 2π M K
K

Shaking
CE243A Time 23

Displacement Response Spectrum

Maximum
Displacement

Structural Period, T M
T = 2π M K
K

Shaking
CE243A Time 24

Fall 04 12
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Modal Analysis

Sd,1

Sd,2

Sd,3

T3 T2 T1

φ nT Mφ n
Tn = 2π
φ nT Kφ n δ max,n = φ n S d ,n
CE243A 25

Dynamic Building Response


MDOF System SDOF Model
δx=4 δx=4

Story Sd,n Sd,n


Forces
δx=2 δx=2
δx=1 δx=1

Base Shear
CE243A 26

Fall 04 13
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

ADRS Spectrum

z Alternative format for Spectral


response spectrum Acceleration
T = constant
z “Capacity Spectrum”
approach – ATC 40

z Spectrum for a given


earthquake versus
smooth spectrum
Spectral Displacement

CE243A 27

Code Analysis Procedures

z UBC-
UBC-97 and IBC-
IBC-2000
– Equivalent static analysis approach
– Response spectrum approach
– Response (Time) history approach
– Other (Peer review)
z FEMA 273/356 & ATC 40
– Linear Static & Dynamic Procedures (LSP, LDP)
– Nonlinear Static Analysis (NSP) “pushover”
– Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP)

CE243A 28

Fall 04 14
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

1997 UBC Design Response Spectrum


2.5CA Control Periods
TS = CV/2.5CA
T0 = 0.2TS
V/W (Acceleration)

CV/T
Long-Period Limits
CA

T0 TS
Period (Seconds)

CE243A 29

UBC-97: Response Spectrum Analysis

Cv I
Vbase = W Eq. (30 - 4)
RT
2.5Ca I
Vbase ≤ W Eq. (30 - 5)
R
Vbase ≥ 0.11Ca IW Eq. (30 - 6)
Ca = Seismic Coefficient (Acceleration)
Cv = Seismic Coefficient (Velocity)

CE243A 30

Fall 04 15
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Modal Analysis
z Eigen Analysis
– Requires mass (M) and stiffness (K) matrices
z M is often assumed to be diagonal

z K (e.g., from direct stiffness assembly)

– Frequencies (ω T=2π/ω) and mode shapes (Φ


(ω, T=2π (Φ)
z Mode shapes φ are columns of Φ matrix
(orthogonal property)
z Modal Analysis – solve uncoupled equations
[ M ]{v} + [C ]{v} + [ K ]{v} = { p}(t ); {v} = [Φ ]{ y}
M n = [Φ ] [ M ][Φ ] = {φm } [ M ]{φn }
T T
m=n
M n yn + Cn y n + K n yn = φ p (t )
T
n solve for yn
Combine modal responses (e.g., SRSS, CQC)
CE243A 31

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


MDOF System Model Equivalent SDOF
δx=4 δx=4

Story Sd,n Sd,n


Forces
δx=2 δx=2
δx=1 δx=1

Base Shear
CE243A 32

Fall 04 16
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


Peak modal responses – 1st Mode
{δ x=1, 4 }1 = {φ11,φ21,φ31 ,φ41} S d ,1 F1 = M 1Sa ,1
T

T1 = 2π M1
δx=4 K1 Vbase,1 = M 1Sa ,1
F1=M1Sa,1 δx=3 T1 = Ct (hn )3 / 4
2
Sd ,1 = ω1 Sa ,1
Sd,1
δx=2

Acceleration,
V/W (Acce leration)
g
K1 δx=1

T0 T1 TSPeriodPeriod
(Seconds)(sec)
Vbase,1
CE243A 33

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


Peak modal responses – 2nd to nth Mode
{δ x =1, 4 }2 = {φ12 ,φ22 ,φ32 ,φ42 } Sd , 2 F2 = M 2 S a , 2
T
T = {T1 , T2 , T3 , T4 }
δx=4 Vbase, 2 = M 2 S a , 2
Mi
Ti = 2π S d , 2 = S a , 2 (T22 / 4π 2 )
Ki
F2=M2Sa,2 δx=3
Sd,2
δx=2
Acceleration,
V/W (Acce leration)
g

K2 δx=1

T2 T0 TSPeriodPeriod
(Seconds)(sec)
Vbase,2
CE243A 34

Fall 04 17
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


Modal Combinations

z Peak modal responses do not occur at the same


time, that is, the peak roof displacement for mode
one occurs at t1 , whereas the peak displacement
for mode two occurs at t2, and so on. Therefore,
peak modal responses must be combined based
on the correlation between modes.
z Modal Combination Approaches
– SRSS: Square-
Square-root-
root-sum-
sum-squares, works well
for systems with well-
well-separated modes (2D
models)
– CQC: Complete-
Complete-Quadratic-
Quadratic-Combination (3D)

CE243A 35

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


Mass Participation

z The (force) participation of each mode can be


gauged by the mass participation factor.

{φn }T [ M ]{r = 1}
PFm,n =
{φn }T [ M ]{φn }
z Typical mass participation factors: PFm
– Frame buildings: 1st Mode – 80 to 85%
– Shear wall buildings: 1st Mode – 60 to 70%
– To achieve 100% mass participation, all modes
must be included in the modal analysis

CE243A 36

Fall 04 18
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


Specific Requirements

z 1631.5.2 - For regular buildings, include sufficient


modes to capture 90% of participating mass. In
general, this is relatively few modes
z 1631.5.3 - Modal combinations – Use appropriate
methods (SRSS, CQC). For 3D models with
closely spaced modes – need CQC.
z 1630.5.4 – R factors and limits on reducing base
shear where response spectrum analysis is used
z 1630.5.5 – Directional effects: consider seismic
forces in any horizontal direction (1630.1)
z 1630.5.6 – Account for torsion

CE243A 37

UBC-97 Approach: Response Spectrum


z Combine response
Dead & Live Loads
spectrum analysis results
with analysis results for
gravity forces
z Load combinations (1612)
– Same as new ACI load
combinations
z Drift limits (1630.10)
– hs = Story height
– ∆s = Displ.
Displ. for code
level forces
∆ m = 0.7 R∆ s
T < 0.7 sec : ∆ m < 0.025hs
T ≥ 0.7 sec : ∆ m < 0.025hs
CE243A 38

Fall 04 19
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

1997 UBC – Equivalent Static


2.5CA Control Periods
TS = CV/2.5CA
T0 = 0.2TS
V/W (Acceleration)

CV/T
Long-Period Limits
CA

T0 T1 TS
Period (Seconds)

CE243A 39

UBC-97 Base Shear Equations


Equivalent Static Analysis
Cv I
Vbase = W Eq. (30 - 4)
RT
2.5Ca I
Vbase ≤ W Eq. (30 - 5)
R
Vbase ≥ 0.11Ca IW Eq. (30 - 6)
Ca = Seismic Coefficient (Acceleration)
Cv = Seismic Coefficient (Velocity)

CE243A 40

Fall 04 20
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Approach: Equivalent Static


Cv = 0.40 N v For Z = 0.4, SB (Table 16 - R)
Ca = 0.40 N a For Z = 0.4, SB (Table 16 - Q)
Z = Seismic Zone Factor (0.075 to 0.4)
S = Soil Profile Type
Nv = Near Source Coefficient (velocity)
Seismic Source A (M > 7.0, SR > 5 mm/yr)
Distance = 5 km Î Nv = 1.6 (Table 16-T)
Na = Near Source Coefficient (acceleration)
Seismic Source A (M > 7.0, SR > 5 mm/yr)
Distance = 5 km Î Na = 1.2 (Table 16-S)
CE243A 41

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Cv I
Vbase = W Eq. (30 - 4)
RT
I = Importance Factor (1.0 to 1.25; Table 16-K)
W= Building Seismic Dead Load
R = Force Reduction Coefficient (Table 16-N)
T = Fundamental Structural Period
T = Ct (hn ) 3 / 4 = 0.02(48 ft )3 / 4 = 0.37 sec
Ct = Coefficient (e.g., 0.02 for rc walls)
hn = Building height (feet)
CE243A 42

Fall 04 21
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Equivalent Static Lateral Forces


Dead & Live Loads

Ft F4
(Vbase − Ft ) wx hx
F3 Fx = n
∑ wi hi
i =1
F2
Ft = 0.07TV T > 0.7 sec
F1 Ft = 0.0 T < 0.7 sec

Vbase
CE243A 43

Lateral Force Resisting System


LFRS “Gravity” System

CE243A 44

Fall 04 22
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Details of a
building in
Emeryville
CE243A 45

“Non-Participating” System
z Also referred to as: “Gravity” System
z Flat plate floor systems (Gravity loads)
– Efficient and economical
– Easy to form, low story heights
– Strong column – weak beam concept

CE243A 46

Fall 04 23
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Perimeter LFRS and Interior “GFRS”

CE243A 47

UBC-97: LFRS Design


Equivalent Static or Response Spectrum

12 ft
LFRS
Model 12 ft

100 ft
12 ft

12 ft

50 ft
Floor Plan Elevation View LFRS
Note: Neglecting torsion
CE243A 48

Fall 04 24
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Cv I 0.4(1.6)(1.0)
Vbase = W= W
RT 3/ 4
R (T = Ct hn )
W4 = (100' x 50' )(100 psf) = 500 kips

W3 = (100' x 50' )(100 psf) = 500 kips

W2 = (100' x 50' )(100 psf) = 500 kips

W1 = (100' x 50' )(100 psf) = 500 kips

W = 500 kips (4 floors) = 2000 kips

CE243A 49

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Cv I 0.4(1.6)(1.0)
Vbase = W= (W = 2000 kips)
RT 3/ 4
R (T = Ct hn )
R = Force Reduction Coefficient (Table 16-N)
Accounts for nonlinear response of building
(Building strength, ductility, damping)
R = 1 is associated with elastic response
Typical Values:
R = 8.5 for a rc special moment frame
R = 5.5 for a rc wall building

CE243A 50

Fall 04 25
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Cv I 0.4(1.6)(1.0)
Vbase = W= W
RT R (0.63)
0.64 1.73 1.73 g
Vbase = W= W= M
R (0.37) R R
2.5Ca I 2.5(0.4)(1.2) 1. 2 g
Vbase ≤ W= W= M
R R R
Vbase = 1.2(2000) / R = 1 = 2400 kips (elastic)
Vbase = 2400 /( R = 5.5) = 435 kips (design)
R > 1.0 requires inelastic response
Structure must be specially detailed to
control inelastic behavior
CE243A 51

1997 UBC Seismic Criteria


(Seismic Zone 4, Soil Type SB, Na =Nv =1)
1.5
Response Spectrum
1.25 Design Spectrum (CN)
Design Force - R/I = 4.5
V/W (Acceleration)

1
Design Force - R/I = 8.5
0.75

0.5

0.25

0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
Period (Seconds)

CE243A 52

Fall 04 26
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Confinement

Ties @ 18” o.c. Spiral @ 3” o.c.

1971 San Fernando Earthquake


CE243A 53

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


F4
(Vbase − Ft ) wx hx
F3
Fx = n
∑ wi hi
i =1
F2
Ft = 0.07TV T > 0.7 sec
F1 Ft = 0.0 T < 0.7 sec

Base Shear Vbase = 435 kips

CE243A 54

Fall 04 27
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


n
F4 ∑ wi hi = (500 kips)(12'+24'+36'+48' )
i =1

= 60,000 kip - ft
F3
(435 − 0)(500 k )(48' )
Fx = 4 = = 0.4V = 174 k
60,000 ft − k
F2 (435 − 0)(500 k )(36' )
Fx =3 = = 0.3V = 131k
60,000 ft − k
F1 (435 − 0)(500 k )(24' )
Fx = 2 = = 0.2V = 87 k
60,000 ft − k
(435 − 0)(500 k )(12' )
Fx =1 = = 0.1V = 43k
60,000 ft − k
4
∑ Fx = 174 + 131 + 87 + 43 = 435 kips
Base Shear x =1

Vbase = 435 kips


CE243A 55

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Dead & Live Loads z Load Combinations
F4 UBC-
UBC-97 - S16.12.2.1
– U = 1.2D + 0.5L + 1.0E
F3 – U = 0.9D +/-
+/- 1.0E
– Where: E = ρEh+ Ev
F2 Ev=0.5CaID = 0.24D
z U = 0.9D +/- 1.0(ρEh+ Ev)
+/- 1.0(ρ
F1
U = (0.9+/- +/- ρEh
(0.9+/-0.24)D +/-
ρ = redundancy factor ≥1.0
z Conduct static analysis
e.g., use SAP2000
Base Shear = ρEh
CE243A 56

Fall 04 28
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Equivalent Static Analysis


Dead & Live Loads z Load Combinations
F4
UBC-
UBC-97 - S16.12.2.1
– U = 1.2D + 0.5L + 1.0E
F3
– U = 0.9D +/-
+/- 1.0E
F2 – Where: E = ρEh+ Ev
Ev=0.5CaID = 0.24D
F1 z U = 0.9D +/- 1.0(ρEh+ Ev)
+/- 1.0(ρ
U = (0.9+/- +/- ρEh
(0.9+/-0.24)D +/-
ρ = redundancy factor ≥1.0
z Conduct static analysis
Vbase e.g., use SAP2000

CE243A 57

UBC-97: Drift & Drift Limits

z 1630.9 – Drift for all analysis Code level


is defined Design forces:
(e.g., R=8.5) Story Displ.: ∆s
– Defines drift for
Maximum Inelastic ∆ s,x=4
Response Displacement
(∆M ) and for Design ∆ s,x=3
Seismic Forces (∆S ): ∆M
= 0.7R∆S ∆ s,x=2
z 1630.10 – Drift limits defined ∆ s,x=1
– Drift < 0.025 times story
height if T < 0.7 sec
– Drift < 0.02 times story
height if T ≥ 0.7 sec Elevation View

CE243A 58

Fall 04 29
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Requirements

z 1633 – Detailed systems design requirements


z 1633.1 General:
– Only the elements of the designated LFRS
shall be used to resist design forces
– Consider both seismic and gravity (D, L, S)
– For some structures (irregular), must consider
orthogonal effects: 100% of seismic forces in
one direction, 30% in the perpendicular
direction

CE243A 59

UBC-97 Requirements

z 16333.2 Structural Framing Systems


z 1633.2.1 General:
– Defined by the types of vertical elements used
z 1633.2.2 For structures with multiple systems,
must use requirements for more restrictive
system
z 1633.2.3 Connections – if resisting seismic
forces, then must be on drawings
z 1633.2.4 Deformation compatibility

CE243A 60

Fall 04 30
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

LFRS and Deformation Compatibility


LFRS “Gravity” System

CE243A 61

LFRS and Deformation Compatibility


Code level ∆s,x=4
Design forces:
(e.g., R=8.5) Story Displ.: ∆s
∆ s,x=4

∆ s,x=3

∆ s,x=2

∆ s,x=1
diaphragm

Elevation View Plan View: Roof


Rigid diaphragm
Flexible diaphragm
CE243A 62

Fall 04 31
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Requirements

z 1633.2.4 – Deformation compatibility


– Requires that non-
non-participating structural
elements be designed to ensure compatibility
of deformations with lateral force resisting
system
– Non-
Non-participating elements must be capable of
maintaining support for gravity loads at
deformations expected due to seismic forces
– Design of LFRS:
z Model LFRS and apply design seismic forces
z Neglect lateral stiffness and strength of non-
non-
participating elements

CE243A 63

UBC-97 Requirements
Code level
z 1633.2.4 – Deformation Design forces:
compatibility (e.g., R=8.5) Story Displ.: ∆s
– For LFRS ∆ s,x=4
z ∆M = 0.7R∆S for
lateral frame at each ∆ s,x=3
story
z That is, compute ∆ s,x=2
story displacements
for design seismic ∆ s,x=1
forces applied to the
LFRS, then multiple
by them by 0.7R

Elevation View

CE243A 64

Fall 04 32
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

UBC-97 Requirements
z 1633.2.4 – Deformation compatibility
– Non-participating frame
z Model the system (linear - element stiffness)

– Shear and flexural stiffness limited to ½ gross


section values
– Must consider flexibility of diaphragm and
foundation
z Impose story displacements on the model of non-
participating frame
– The imposed displacements produce element
forces, consider these to be ultimate
– check stability (support for gravity loads)
– Detailing requirements: 21.11 in ACI 318-02

CE243A 65

UBC-97 Requirements

z Other items of interest


– Collectors (1633.2.6)
z Must provide collectors to transfer seismic
forces originating in other portions of the
structure to the element providing the
resistance to these forces
– Diaphragms (1633.2.9)
z Deflection of diaphragm limited by the
permissible deflection of the attached elements
z Design forces specified in (33-1)

CE243A 66

Fall 04 33
CE 243A Behavior & design of RC Elements Prof. J. W. Wallace

Reinforced Concrete: ACI 318-02


Chapter 21 – Seismic Provisions
z Provide transverse steel
- Confinement, buckling
- Maintain gravity loads
z Strong-
Strong-column, weak-weak-beam
- Beam flexural yielding
z Capacity design
- Beam & column shear
- Joint regions
z Prescriptive requirements
- Little flexibility
- Quick, easy, and usually
conservative

CE243A 67

Fall 04 34