CE470 (2012) Chapter9 (Filled in Notes)

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 1
Chapter 9

Seismic Design of Steel Structures
_________________________________________________________________________________

9.1 S16-09: Clauses

Clause 27: Seismic Design
(ductility of frames)
27.1 General Rd Ro
27.2 Type D (ductile) moment-resisting frames 5.0 1.5
27.3 Type MD (moderately ductile) moment-resisting frames MRFs 3.5 1.5
27.4 Type LD (limited-ductility) moment-resisting frames 2.0 1.3
27.5 Type MD (moderately ductile) concentrically-braced frames 3.0 1.3
27.6 Type LD (limited-ductility) concentrically-braced frames Braced 2.0 1.3
27.7 Type D (ductile) eccentrically-braced frames Frames 4.0 1.5
27.8 Type D (ductile) buckling-restrained braced frames 4.0 1.2
27.9 Type D (ductile) plate walls 5.0 1.6
27.10 Type LD (limited-ductility) plate walls 2.0 1.5
27.11 Conventional construction 1.5 1.3
27.12 Special seismic construction. -tbd -tbd

Annexes: Annex J: Ductile moment-resisting connections
Annex L: Design to prevent brittle fracture

NBCC-2010: Division B: Section 4.1.8. Earthquake Load and Effects
CE-321 Class Notes Chapter 3 (2012)

Reference publications:
FEMA (2000) Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment frame
buildings, FEMA 350, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
Hamburger, Ronald O., Krawinkler, Helmut, Malley, James O., and Adan, Scott M.
(2009). "Seismic design of steel special moment frames: a guide for practicing
engineers," NEHRP Seismic Design Technical Brief No. 2 available from:
http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nistgcr9-917-3.pdf
THESE NOTES ARE SUBJ ECT
TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE.
REPORT ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
to: metro.hrabok@usask.ca
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 2

9.2 Review of concepts in Earthquake Engineering

9.2.1 Basic definitions

Earthquake Engineering deals with applying civil engineering design principles to
reduce life and economic losses due to earthquakes, (i.e. to mitigate seismic risk).
Seismic risk can be defined as the probability of losses occurring due to earthquakes
within the lifetime of a structure. The two main components of seismic risk are:

a) Seismic hazard : This component of risk is determined by nature and cannot be
reduced. There are several damaging effects due to earthquakes including: ground
shaking, landslides, surface ruptures and liquefaction. The level of seismic hazard
can vary from having frequent low intensity earthquakes to having rare severe
earthquakes.

b) Structural vulnerability : This component depends on the structural
configuration and properties and thus can be reduced by proper seismic design of
structures. Steel structures have several inherent characteristics that are
advantageous for seismic design. At the top of the list is the high ductility of steel
compared to other construction materials. Ductility is the ability of the structure to
deform past yielding without significant strength deterioration. However, to make
use of the advantages of steel as a construction material for seismic design, the
design engineer has to be familiar with the code design and construction
provisions. In essence, code provisions are set to avoid different sources of
structural vulnerability which include:
inappropriate detailing
inappropriate design
poor connections
irregularities in structural configuration (in plan and/or in elevation)
soft storey (laterally)
pounding against nearby structures
failure to conform to the intent of the design.

9.2.2 Nature of Earthquakes

There are several causes for earthquakes: Some are caused by volcanoes which may be a
triggering factor for earthquakes, or there can be induced seismicity resulting from
underground explosions. However, a cause which is believed to be the main reason for
most earthquakes is referred to as plate tectonics. Compared to the radius of the earth,
the thickness of the earths crust is relatively thin. The earths crust is composed of
several tectonic plates which move relative to each other about 50 mm per year.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 3

The roughness of the surfaces and edges of tectonic plates, and the huge pressures
involved, cause potential sliding and slipping movements to generate friction forces large
enough to lock-up surfaces in contact. Instead of sliding past each other, rock in a plate
boundary area absorbs greater and greater compression and shear strains until it suddenly
ruptures. At rupture, the accumulated energy (strain energy) within the strained rock mass
releases in a sudden manner with a violent jarring motion. This is an earthquake.

Most earthquakes are caused by movement between tectonic plates: 70% around the
perimeter of the pacific plate; 20% along the southern edge of the Eurasian plate and 10%
cannot be explained by plate tectonics some of which are intra-plate (within the plate).

The surface along which the crust of the
earth fractures is an earthquake fault.
The point in the fault surface area
considered the centre of energy release is
termed the focus, its projection up to the
earths surface defines the epicenter.
The distance between the focus and the
epicenter is known as the focal depth.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 4

When the fault ruptures, seismic waves emanate in all directions from the focus. The two
types of underground waves which are generated by the fault rupture are:
P waves (Primary waves) also known as compression waves, they push and pull the
soil through which they pass.
S waves (Shear waves) they move soil particles side-to-side either horizontally or
vertically. This shear effect is of most concern and damaging to buildings.
There is also a surface-rippling wave known as a Rayleigh wave.
The response of the soil affects the features of the earthquake waves felt by the buildings.
For example: deep layers of soft soil, as may be found in river valleys, significantly
amplify shaking and also modify the frequency content of seismic waves by filtering out
higher frequency excitations.

9.2.3 Earthquake Magnitude (Richter) and Intensity (Mercalli)

Earthquake magnitude defines the amount of energy released by the earthquake. Thus,
earthquake magnitude is a quantitative measure of earthquake severity commonly
measured by the Richter scale(1935). Each earthquake is assigned only one magnitude
value. This is determined by seismologists from seismograph records. The Richter scale
is a magnitude scale for earthquakes which relates logarithmically to the amount of
energy released. This means that an increase of 1 in the number on the Richter scale
represents a ten-fold (10
1
) increase in amplitude and a 30-fold increase in
discharged energy.

( 10
3
)
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 5

On the other hand, earthquake intensity is a qualitative description of the earthquake
severity. Accordingly, earthquake intensity varies according to the location where
shaking is felt. Factors affecting earthquake intensity at a certain location includes:
earthquake magnitude, epicentral distance and soil conditions. The most recognized
intensity scale for earthquakes is the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale summarized in
the following Table.

Intensity Description
I to III Not felt, unless under special circumstances.
IV Generally felt, but not causing damage.
V Felt by nearly everyone. Some cracked plaster. Some crockery broken or
items overturned.
VI Felt by all. Some fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Some heavy
furniture moved.
VII Negligible damage in well designed and constructed buildings through to
considerable damage in construction of poor quality. Some chimneys
broken.
VIII Depending on the quality of design and construction, damages ranges
from slight through to partial collapse. Chimneys, monuments and walls
fall.
IX Well designed structures damaged and permanently racked. Partial
collapses and buildings shifted off their foundations.
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed along with most masonry
and frame structures.
XI Few, if any masonry structures remain standing.
XII Most construction is severely damaged or destroyed.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 6

Performance levels
Fully operational Collapse
H
a
z
a
r
d
l
e
v
e
l
Very rare
Frequent
Performance objective(s)
Risk Vulnerability PBEE Quantif ication Response Spectrum EQ. Eng. Hazard
Minor
Severe
Performance Based Earthquake
Engineering
9.2.4 Philosophy of Seismic-Resistant Design

Given the uncertainties in determining the degree of severity of earthquakes and for
obvious economical reasons, it is unrealistic to design a structure to respond elastically
during a major earthquake. Thus, the philosophy of seismic design for major earthquakes
is collapse prevention rather than damage prevention.
For less severe earthquakes, lower
levels of damage are accepted. As
the importance of the structure
increases, the criteria of accepted
performance are more stringent as
shown in the next figures taken from
SEAOC.

Operational Immediate
occupancy
Life safety Structural
stabi lity
Fully
operational
Operational Life safety Near
Col lapse
Frequent
(Low Intensi ty)
Occasional
Rare
Very rare
(Severe
intensit y)
Performance levels
S
e
i
s
m
i
c
h
a
z
a
r
d
l
e
v
e
l
s
Vision 2000 (SEAOC 1995)
Risk Vulnerability PBEE Quantif ication Response Spectrum EQ. Eng. Hazard
Performance Objectives

H
a
z
a
r
d

L
e
v
e
l
S
e
i
s
m
i
c

H
a
z
a
r
d

L
e
v
e
l
s
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 7

9.3 Seismic Forces on Buildings
9.3.1 Nature of Seismic-Induced Forces
The ground motion caused by earthquakes is experienced by the building as acceleration
at the base. The masses of the building resist the ground motion acceleration and inertia
forces are generated. The inertia force can be quantified using Newtons second law of
motion
a M F =

where
M
is the mass of the building, and a is the acceleration of
the mass caused by ground motion acceleration. Inertia forces are generated throughout
the building on every element and component. However, most of the mass of the building
is concentrated in its floors and roof. For this reason and for simplicity of design,
engineers assume inertia forces act at the center of mass of the roof and floors as
lumped masses.
Noteworthy of comparison at this point are the similarities and differences
of seismic to wind-induced forces:
Seismic-induced forces Wind-induced forces
mainly lateral
- some earthquakes have
significant vertical
components ( of
horizontal motion).
mainly lateral
- near-vertical wind-induced
suction forces acting on roofs
normally have little impact on
the building behavior
dynamic
- peak seismic-induced forces
act for fractions of a second
dynamic
- strong wind gusts can last for
several seconds
- act within the building mass - act external to the building

Inertia
Forces

Loading
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 8

9.3.2 Factors affecting Seismic-Induced Forces

(a) Building weight:
When an object is subjected to a dynamic action, the inertia force is proportional to its
mass according to Newtons second law of motion. Thus, as the weight of an object
increases, the inertia force increases for a given level of acceleration. Buildings with
heavier-weight structural materials are subjected to higher levels of seismic-induced
forces than lighter ones. It is therefore advisable to use lighter weight construction in
seismic prone areas (less mass gets excited).
(b) Natural periods of vibration:
A natural period of vibration is the time for one complete vibration cycle that a structure
would undertake when subjected to an initial dynamic stimulus and then left to oscillate
freely. The lowest frequency has the largest natural time period of vibration and is called
the 1
st
mode or fundamental mode of the structure. Depending on the structural and
geometrical configuration of the structure, there may be other periods corresponding to
higher-order (2
nd
, 3
rd
, ...) modes. It is noteworthy that the contribution of the first
(fundamental) mode of vibration is the most prominent and important for low and
medium-rise buildings.

(c) Damping:
Damping is a resistance to free vibration and defines the energy-dissipation mechanism
which steadily diminishes the amplitude of vibration. Damping in structures is mainly
caused by internal friction within building elements. The type of construction material
affects the degree of damping. There are many forms of damping. Viscous damping is
velocity dependent. Currently, the most popular form is proportional damping (mass
and stiffness dependent); it is also known as: Rayleigh, classical, orthogonal or
modal damping. For additional information on damping refer to Tedesco et al.(1999).
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 9

9.3.3 *** Response Spectrum concept ***

Response spectrum is a powerful response vs. time graphical analytical tool used to
quantify effects of natural periods of vibration on responses (acceleration, velocity or
displacement) of buildings to an earthquake. Design codes use this response spectrum to
develop design spectra.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 10

9.4 Lateral Load Resisting Systems

9.4.1 Lateral Load Resistance

The two main types of gravity load resisting systems are:
o skeleton type structures: consisting of beams and columns.
o wall bearing Structures
The vertical members of both systems are mainly subjected to compression forces with
the requirement to have sufficient cross section to resist buckling. The instability under
lateral forces is a main issue for both systems.

A main principle of seismic-resistant design is to ensure collapse prevention; therefore it
is essential to design lateral-load resisting systems with lateral stability. NBCC-2010 and
S16-09 seismic design provisions for lateral load resistance are based on the capacity
design procedure. In this design procedure, certain structural components are designed
to act as structural fuses (sacrificial elements). Specifically designed and detailed, these
components are to fail and exhibit inelastic response dissipating energy during a design
level earthquake. The locations of these components are engineered such that the gravity
load-carrying capacity of the whole system is not impaired due to the damage in these
components. The rest of the systems structural components are then proportioned to
behave elastically.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 11

Building codes largely adopt the R-factor design procedure . In this procedure, elastic
seismic forces are reduced by factors Rd and Ro to obtain design forces. This procedure
has matured into the capacity design procedure. The R-factor procedure can be
illustrated by using a typical lateral load-deformation model. If we have a structure
designed to behave elastically when subjected to an earthquake, the lateral load-
deformation relation would be linear and the structure would have a strength value
corresponding to the elastic base shear ratio Ce caused by the earthquake, where Ce is a
ratio of base shear force (V) caused by the earthquake to the weight of structure (W).

W
V
C
e
=
if it were elastic.

However, due to the uncertainties in determining the degree of severity of earthquakes
and for obvious economical reasons, it is unrealistic to design a structure to respond
elastically during a major earthquake. Thus, the code permits the reduction of the design
base shear value to a lower value than the elastic base shear. The design base shear ratio
defined by the code can be expressed as:

o d
e
d
R R
C
C =

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 12

Two levels of reduction are inferred from this equation through the
reduction factors
d
R
and
o
R
:

d
R
is a ductility-related force reduction factor that reflects the capability of a
structure to dissipate energy through inelastic behavior.
o
R
is an overstrength-related force reduction factor that reflects the dependable
portion of reserve strength in the structure.
Both of these factors form the essence of Canadian seismic design philosophy and
have numerically assigned values in [Table 4.1.8.9] of NBCC-2010.

9.4.2 Seismic Lateral Force Resisting Systems

The three most common systems used for seismic lateral force resistance are:

Structural Shear Walls Braced Frames Moment-Resisting Frames

- no penetrations - triangular penetrations - rectangular penetrations
resist lateral force as
vertical cantilevers with
rigid connection to the
foundation
resist lateral forces as a
cantilevered vertical trusses
(braced bays).
resist lateral forces
through rigid connectivity
between beams and
columns (rigid frames).

One of the three lateral systems should be present in each orthogonal direction of the
structure.

o d
e
d
R R
C
C =
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 13

9.5 Seismic Forces estimation based on NBCC-2010

9.5.1 Hazard and Design Spectra

The procedure for estimating seismic-induced forces on buildings presented by the
NBCC-2010 is based on seismic hazard analysis for different locations in Canada. As
illustrated on the 2010 Seismic Hazard Map of Canada, each Canadian location has a
certain degree of relative hazard. This is reflected in the quantification of seismic forces.
When designing a structure to resist earthquakes, the design engineer should check the
location of the structure and the corresponding degree of hazard.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 14

Hazard maps are further expressed in terms of spectral response accelerations Sa(t):

The above spectral accelerations are for periods of < 0.2, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 seconds>,
respectively at a probability of 2% in 50 years, and for firm ground conditions (NBCC
soil class C). Spectral acceleration contours are in gs (gravitational acceleration).

Note that there are two spectral response accelerations in NBCC-2010:

S
a
(T) 5% damped spectral response acceleration (shown above),
( and as defined in NBCC-2010, Article 4.1.8.4, sentence 1)

S(T) design spectral response acceleration,
( as defined in NBCC-2010, Article 4.1.8.4, sentence 7, and determined from
Sa(T) shown above).
It is a common error for un-experienced engineers to fail to recognize this distinction.
Therefore, in this class, a subscripted S
da
(T) will be used in lieu of S(T).

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 15

Using the Sa(T) information from seismic hazard maps which are expressed in terms of
damped spectral response acceleration, the engineer can develop the design response
spectrum for any locality in Canada. The design spectral acceleration (expressed as a
fraction of gravitational acceleration), for a period T, is defined as S
da
(T) and is given as:

S
da
(T) = F
a
S
a
(0.2) for T 0.2 seconds,

=
F
v
S
a
(0.5) or F
a
S
a
(0.2), whichever is smaller for T=0.5 sec,

=
F
v
S
a
(1.0) for T=1.0 sec,

=
F
v
S
a
(2.0) for T=2.0 sec,

=
F
v
S
a
(2.0) for T 4.0 sec.
where: T period (seconds) linear interpolation may be used for intermediate values,
S
a
(T) the damped spectral response acceleration from seismic hazard maps,
F
a
and F
v
acceleration- and velocity-based site coefficients, respectively.
F
a
and F
v
values are given in the NBCC-2010 and depend on the type of site condition
(rock, or dense soil, or soft soil,.. etc). Sample design spectra for different localities are
illustrated in the following figure.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 16

9.5.2 Base Shear Force Estimation

For structures with geometrical and structural regularity, NBCC-2010 Article 4.1.8.11
permits using an Equivalent Static Force procedure for estimating the design base shear
force.
More rigorous dynamic analysis is required for structures with geometrical and/or
structural irregularities, which are beyond the scope of the present chapter.

For regular structures, Article 4.1.8.11 defines the minimum base shear force as:

W
R R
I M T S
V
o d
E v a
) (
=

W
R R
I M T S
V
o d
E v a da
) (
=

where,
V is the base shear force;
T
a
is the fundamental period of vibration of the structure;
S(T
a
) S
da
(T
a
) is the design spectral acceleration corresponding to the fundamental
period T
a
;
M
v
is a factor which accounts for higher mode effects;
I
E
is a factor which accounts for the degree of importance of the structure;
d
R
and
o
R

are the ductility-, and overstrength- related force reduction factors,
respectively; and
W is the weight of the structure.

The previous formula can be viewed as:
W
Factors duction Re Force
t Coefficien Shear Base Elastic
V =

similar to Section 9.4.1.

This approach can only be used for structures satisfying the conditions of Article 4.1.8.7.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 17

9.5.3 Distribution of Forces (along the height of the building).

NBCC-2010 establishes the vertical distribution of the total base shear force at different
floor levels based on the relationship:

=
=
n
1 i
i i
x x
t x
h W
h W
) F V ( F

where:
V T 07 . 0 F
a t
=
but does not to exceed
V 25 . 0

and,
F
x
= the force at floor number x
i

V = the total base shear as defined in Section 9.5.2
F
t
= force portion concentrated at the top of the building in addition to the above
distribution,
W
x
= the weight of floor x
i

h
x
= the height of floor x
i
from the foundation level,
and,
=
n
1 i
i i
h W

=
summation of (floor weight) x (height) for all the floors in the building, and
n
=
number of floors.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 18

9.6 Design of Ductile Moment-Resisting Frames based on S16-09

Clause 27 of S16-09 present both proportioning and detailing requirements which provide
acceptable inelastic response of steel structures under seismic actions. The main
objectives of Clause 27 code provisions are:

a) avoid unstable sidesway mechanisms for structures exhibiting inelastic behavior.
b) ensure ductile flexural behavior in yielding regions of the steel frame.

In other words, S16-09 code provisions for seismic design provide the guidelines to
correctly defining the locations of yielding regions (fuses, plastic hinges) as well as the
criteria for detailing the steel frames to ensure a safe failure of these regions under the
effect of a major earthquake level. This section highlights some of the principles
presented by S16-09 for the design and detailing of Ductile Moment-Resisting Frames.

9.6.1 Strong-Column/Weak-Beam principle

Clause 27.2.1.1 promotes a multi-storey side-sway mechanism dominated by hinging of
beams rather than columns. The requirement of the formation of hinges (fuse locations) at
beam ends and at column bases only is termed strong-column/weak-beam design. This is
intended to avoid the formation of weak-storey (single-storey) mechanisms in which
hinging occurs at the top and bottom ends of a single storey leading to overall instability.

weak-column / strong-beam strong-column / weak-beam concept

To achieve strong-column/weak-beam design, S16-09 requires that the sum of columns
flexural strengths at each joint exceed the sum of beam flexural strengths as specified by
Clause 27.2.3.2.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 19

9.6.2 Beam-to-Column Connections

S16-09 provisions require that a beam-to-column connection is capable of transferring the
moment and shear forces developed in the beam to the column. Clause 27.2.5.1 requires
that the connections should be capable of deforming in order that the frames can achieve
specified drift levels. This is further discussed in Annex J where reference is made to
pre-qualified connection configurations that have been tested for the ability to provide
satisfactory performance. Some of these configurations are illustrated below:

Reduced beam section connection

Bolted flange plate connection Bolted bracket connections

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 20

9.6.3 Detailing for Ductile Behavior

The higher the level of ductility of the lateral load resisting system, the more it is
expected to undergo significant inelastic behavior. Thus, S16-09 sets detailing provisions
to ensure ductile behavior which include:

Protected Zones:
Clause 27.2.8 requires the designation of regions subject to inelastic deformations.
Clause 27.1.9 sets the requirements for protected zones where structural and other
attachments that can alter the desired behavior of these zones should be prohibited.
Protected zones should be indicated on structural design documents and shop details.

Compact Sections (Class 2):
To ensure reliable inelastic deformation, S16-09 requires width-to-thickness b/t ratios of
compression elements to be limited such as to avoid local buckling (Class 1 or 2).

Column splices:
Since column splices are critical to the overall performance of moment-resisting frames,
it is essential to ensure the reliability of the splice. In most cases a complete joint
penetration grove weld is required for column splices.

New and innovative concepts:
The University of Toronto has
developed a yielding brace
system (YBS) shown in
the attached photograph by
Michael Gray. Details of
this scorpion YBS system
are given in CISCs No 41,
Fall 2011 publication of
ADVANTAGE STEEL.

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 21

=
=
n
i
i i
x x
t x
h W
h W
F V F
1
) (
9.7 Seismic Example: EQUIVALENT STATIC FORCE PROCEDURE .

required: - vertical distribution of lateral seismic-induced forces due to ground
shaking only according to ESFP EQUIVALENT STATIC FORCE PROCEDURE)
using the equivalent lateral seismic force
base shear equation:
Article 4.1.8.11, sentence 6)

given: 9-storey office building has an SFRS (SEISMIC FORCE RESISTING SYSTEM)
consisting of a steel ductile moment-resisting seismic frame as illustrated above,
- located in Victoria, BC
- rock soil condition equivalent to site soil class B
solution steps:
Note: all the information required to solve this problem is provided by NBCC2010 in
Subsection 4.1.8 and its Articles 4.1.8.__ and its sentences 4.1.8.__ )
also, as stated in Articles 4.1.8.4 the 5% damped SRA data provided for the problem is
based on Class C reference ground conditions for the locale in question.
designer input required to solve the problem: go to . in NBCC-2010
T
a
fundamental period of lateral vibration
of building in the direction of analysis.


Spectral Response Accelerations SRA:
S
a
(T) 5% damped SRA

S
da
(T) design SRA
S
da
(T
a
) design SRA at T=T
a

Article 4.1.8.4, sentence 1) ,or,
seismic hazard maps, or
COMMENTARY J (Table J-2)
__________

6
5
4
3
2
1
9
8
7
9
x
3
6
0
0
=
3
2
4
0
0
8000
Storey Weight (kN)
1800
1900
1870
1870
1870
2080
1500
1800
1800
Level
8000
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 22

step 1: estimate of fundamental period T
a
:
The response spectrum adopted by the Code is based on estimating a value of the
fundamental period of vibration of the structure. NBCC-2010 provides a number of
empirical formulas for different structural systems to estimate the fundamental period:
Article 4.1.8.11 (sentence 3):

3) The fundamental lateral period, T
a
in the direction under consideration, shall be
determined as:
a) for moment-resisting frames that resist 100% of the required lateral forces and where
the frame is not enclosed by or adjoined by more rigid elements that would tend to
prevent the frame from resisting lateral forces, and where h
n
is in metres:
i) 0.085 (h
n
)
3/4
for steel moment frames
ii) 0.075 (h
n
)
3/4
for concrete moment frames, or
iii) 0.1 N for other moment frames,
b) 0.025 h
n
for braced frames where h
n
is in metres,
c) 0.05 (h
n
)
3/4
for shear wall and other structures where h
n
is in metres, or
d) other established methods of mechanics using a structural model that complies with
the requirements of sentence 4.1.8.3.(8), except that:
i) for moment-resisting frames, T
a
shall not be taken greater than 1.5 times that
determined in Clause (a),
ii) for braced frames, T
a
shall not be taken greater than 2.0 times that determined in
Clause (b),
iii) for shear wall structures, T
a
shall not be taken greater than 2.0 times that
determined in Clause (c),
iv) for other structures, T
a
shall not be taken greater than that determined in Clause (c),
and
v) for the purpose of calculating the deflections, the period without the upper limit
specified in Subclauses (d)(i) to (d)(iv) may be used, except that for walls, coupled
walls and wall-frame systems, T
a
shall not exceed 4.0 sec, and for moment-
resisting frames, braced frames and other systems, T
a
shall not exceed 2.0 sec.

- the upper limits (above) are imposed on the periods of structures (T
a
) because of
concern that structural modeling does not include non-structural stiffening elements,
thereby resulting in values of T
a
which are too high results in calculated seismic
design forces which will be too low.

calculations:
H
n
= 9 x 3.6 metres=32.4 metres
from Article 4.1.8.11 (above), T
a
= 0.085(32.4)
3/4
=1.15 seconds

the structure meets the criteria of Article 4.1.8.7, sentence 1), case (b) and, therefore
qualifies for analysis by ESFP method (equivalent static force procedure).

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 23

step 2: Spectral Response Accelerations (SRA):
This is the crucial step in seismic analysis and is based on the hazard classification given
by NBCC. The value of S
a
(T)
5% damped spectral response acceleration will depend on

the period of the structure and the location of the building. It can be obtained using the
maps included earlier in this chapter or, in this case, from NBCC-2010 COMMENTARY J
(Table J-2). The reference soil is always class C. Some of the data from this table is:

City
S
a
(T): 5% damped SRA seismic data
S
a
(0.2) S
a
(0.5) S
a
(1.0) S
a
(2.0) PGA

Victoria 1.2 0.82 0.38 0.18 0.61
Vancouver 0.94 0.64 0.38 0.17 0.46
Calgary 0.15 0.084 0.041 0.023 0.088
Edmonton
Saskatoon
Regina 0.10 0.057 0.026 0.008 0.040
Winnipeg 0.095 0.057 0.026 0.008 0.036

Since the period of our structure is t=1.15 second, we interpolate between the values of
S
a
(1.0) and S
a
(2.0) for Victoria, BC and could
get spectral response acceleration at t=1.15 sec, as
Sa(1.15sec)= 0.35 (units are fractions of g), but
there is a better way using the complete spectrum.
- also, S
a
(0.2)= 1.2 > 0.12, according to
Article 4.1.8.1, sentence 1) need to design for
Subsection 4.1.8 Earthquake Load and
Effects
____________________________________

step 3: S
da
(T) design Spectral Response Acceleration:
- need values for Fa and Fv: and the Table below Article 4.1.8.4, sentence 7).
S
da
(T) =
F
a

S
a
(0.2) for T 0.2 sec.

=
F
v

S
a
(0.5) or F
a

S
a
(0.2), whichever is smaller for T=0.5 sec.

=
F
v

S
a
(1.0) for T=1.0 sec.

=
F
v

S
a
(2.0) for T=2.0 sec.

=
F
v

S
a
(2.0)/2 for T 4.0 sec.

Fa acceleration-based site soil coefficient; it is based on the short-period
amplification factor of S
a
(0.2) and it is required for non-Class C soils.
NEHRP
Fv velocity-based site soil coefficient; it is based on the long-period
amplification factor of S
a
(1.0) and it is needed for non-Class C soils.

Sa(1.0) Sa(2.0)
0.38
0.19
0.35
Sa(1.15)
0.18
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 24

- the site soil conditions are given as class B , the reference soil is class C,
need to use Tables 4.1.8.4 A, B & C to get the site coefficients Fa and Fv
(for educational purposes, copies of these tables are reproduced below):

reference
soil C

example
site soil

example
site soil

example: Sa(1.0)=0.38 Fv= 0.78
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 25

To obtain seismic design parameters for site soil class B, use the above values of
Fa and Fv from NBCC Tables B and C.
Table B has Fa at Sa(0.2) (short period vibrations), while
Table C has Fv at Sa(1.0) (long period vibrations),
At class C sites, all values of Fa and Fv are unity (=1.0) because this is the reference
soil class on which the seismic hazard maps are based but our example is class B.
Calculations need to be done on the Sa( ) values provided by NBCC-2010 (Appendix C)
to get S( ) S
da
( ) for Victoria B soils as indicated below:

city:
Victoria, B.C.
Response Spectra (accelerations)

T= 0.2 sec T= 0.5 sec T= 1.0 sec T= 2.0 sec
NBCC-2010
Appendix C
S
a
(T): 5% damped
SRA (response
spectrum) data
from Seismic
Hazard Maps
(class C soils)

S
a
(0.2)=1.2

S
a
(0.5)=0.82

S
a
(1.0)=0.38

S
a
(2.0)=0.18

PGA=0.61
- design response
spectrum
calculations for
class B
Victoria soils
S(T) S
da
(T)

F
a

S
a
(0.2)
=(1.0)(1.2)
= 1.2
lesser of:
F
v

S
a
(0.5)
and
F
a
S
a
(0.2),
= (0.78)(0.82)
or, (1.0)(1.2)
= 0.640

F
v

S
a
(1.0)
=(0.78)(0.38)
= 0.296

F
v

S
a
(2.0)
=(0.78)(0.18)
= 0.140

To get the overall picture, the above S
a
(T) and S(T) S
da
(T) should be presented on
graphs as shown below. This is the design response spectrum for the project and is used
repeatedly for static as well as dynamic analyses of structures on the project.

1.2
0.640
0.296
0.140
0.070 0.070
0
0.23
0.3
0.73
1
1.23
0 1 2 3 4 3
D
e
s
|
g
n

S
p
e
c
t
r
a
|

k
e
s
p
o
n
s
e

A
c
c
e
|
e
r
a
t
|
o
n

S
(
1
)

S
d
a
(
1
)

1|me er|od (seconds)
T= 1.15 sec Sda(1.15 sec)= 0.273
Class B soil
Victoria, B.C.
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 26

SRA summary for Victoria example:

site soil class B

Ta=1.15 sec, and Sa(1.15)=0.35 (interpolated, but not required if using graphs above),

Fa=1.0 at Sa(0.2),

Fv=0.78 at Sa(1.0),

S
da
(Ta) Fv Sa(Ta) =0.273 as interpolated from graphs, or 0.78 x 0.35= 0.273

1.2
0.640
0.296
0.140
0.070 0.070
1.2
0.82
0.38
0.18
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
0 0.3 1 1.3 2 2.3 3 3.3 4 4.3 3
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
|

k
e
s
p
o
n
s
e

A
c
c
e
|
e
r
a
t
|
o
n
s

(
g
'
s
)

1|me er|od (seconds)
vlcLorla: Class C solls
n8CC-2010 Appendlx C
Sa(1)
vlcLorla: Class 8 solls
S(1) S
da
(1)
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 27

step 4: Base Shear Design Force: (remember, in these notes: S(Ta) S
da
(Ta) )
W
R R
I M T S
V
o d
E v a da
) (
=

- need more Tables to get IE and Mv but these are simple-to-read values as follows:
from Table 4.1.8.5, normal importance IE =1.0
from Table 4.1.8.11, higher-modes for ductile MRFs (moment-resisting frames)
with Sa(0.2)/Sa(2.0)=1.2/0.18= 6.7 Mv =1.0

R
d
& R
o
:
from Table 4.1.8.9, for ductile MRFs (moment-resisting frames)
with IE Fa Sa(0.2)=(1.0)(1.0)(1.2)= 1.2 , read Rd =5.0, Ro =1.5
Note: a high ductility rating like Rd =5.0 will require ductile detailing and design.

Total Weight of Structure: = Wi=16490 kN

Base Shear: V=0.273 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 16490 kN / (5.0 x 1.5)
= 600 kN 3.6% W
_________________________________________

step 5: check Minimum and Maximum Limits of Base Shear:
to safeguard against long period repetitive sway vibrations where ductility
demand might not be uniform along the height of the frame:
Vmin: Article 4.1.8.11, sentence 2) case (b)
W
R R
I M S
V
o d
E v
) 0 . 2 (
min
=

Vmin(Class C)=(0.18)(1.0)(1.0)W/ (1.5x5.0) = 0.024W= 0.024 x 16490 kN= 396 kN
Class B soil will be less yet (0.140) and Vmin does not govern.

for short period vibrations the ESFP method overestimates the magnitude of base
shear and, for SFRS systems with Rd 1.5, an experience-based factor of is used
to place an upper bound on the value of V , see COMMENTARY J (page J-49).

Vmax: Article 4.1.8.11, sentence 2) case (c)
W
R R
I S
V
o d
E
) 2 . 0 (
3
2
max
=
for SFRS systems with Rd 1.5 and not on class F soils.
class C soil Vmax =()(1.2)(1.0)W/7.5=0.1067W=0.1067x16490 kN= 1759 kN
class B soil Vmax same as class C
Vcalculated governs, use V= 600 kN.
__________________________________________________
CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 28

step 6: Vertical distribution of horizontal forces:

=
=
n
1 i
i i
x x
t x
h W
h W
) F V ( F

where:
F
t
= 0.07 T
a
V but not to exceed 0.25V

F
t
= 0.07(1.15)V= 0.081V= 48.3 kN
(V F
t
)= 600.0 48.3=551.7 kN

Level h
x
[metres] W
x
[kN] W
x
h
x
[kN.m] W
x
h
x
/W
i
h
i
F
x
[kN]

9 32.4 1500 48600 0.1693639 141.74

8 28.8 1800 51840 0.1806549 99.67

7 25.2 1800 45360 0.158073 87.21

6 21.6 1800 38880 0.1354912 74.75

5 18 1900 34200 0.119182 65.75

4 14.4 1870 26928 0.0938402 51.77

3 10.8 1870 20196 0.0703801 38.83

2 7.2 1870 13464 0.0469201 25.89

1 3.6 2080 7488 0.0260946 14.40
=
16490 [kN] 286956 [kN.m] 1.000000 600.0 [kN]

[end of ESFP example problem.]

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 29

9.8 Seismic Analyses summary

Structural seismic analyses is a world of its own. The structural design analysts may
encounter any of the following procedures indicated below. National and international
codes are trending away from ESFPs (equivalent static frame procedures).

SEISMIC ANALYSIS / DESIGN TOOLS
Linear Static:
o Building code formulae for calculating base shears similar to ESFP.
(NBCC-2010 Article 4.1.8.11 , see example problem 9.7 class notes).
Linear Dynamic by Modal Response Spectrum Analysis (Article 4.1.8.12):
o response spectrum analysis requires a response-spectrum curve
consisting of digitized points of pseudo-spectral accelerations vs. time
periods in a given direction for the structure (Commentary J, Note 32)
o response spectrum seeks maximum response rather than a full time
history analysis. It is based on modal superposition and eigenvectors or
Ritz vectors.
Non-Linear Static: Pushover Analysis
o performance-based analysis,
o the structure is pushed to failure with an increasing load up to expected
level of performance,
o progression of plastic hinges are monitored until complete collapse
mechanism is formed.
Time History Analyses (THAs) (NBCC-2010 Article 4.1.8.12):
- used at fault locations and whenever historic data is available,
o can be linear, or non-linear (geometric and/or material).
o can be modal superposition (MTHA) or direct-integration .
o can be transient or periodic.

Although more sophisticated seismic analyses are a daunting task, they are becoming the
requirement of codes. Software such as SAP2000 and related tutorials, webinars and
training sessions are available to assist structural seismic engineers.
__________________________________________
[end of Chapter IX Seismic Loads]
prepared (2010) by: M.M. Safar, Ph.D. (McMaster), P.Eng.
edited (2012) by: A. Mir, M.Eng. (UBC), P.Eng.
reviewed by: M.M. Hrabok, Ph.D. (Alberta), P.Eng.


CE470 (2012) Chapter9 (Filled in Notes)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CE470 (2012) Chapter9 (Filled in Notes)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CE470 (2012 S16-09) IX - 1

5% damped spectral response acceleration will depend on

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen