You are on page 1of 29

Previous | Next | Contents


Lecture 17.5: Requirements and Verification

of Seismic Resistant Structures
To present the general design principles and requirements for building structures in seismic
The general principles (symmetry, regularity, redundancy, torsional resistance, diaphragms, ...)
of an earthquake resistant design are first discussed.
Complete details on structural design for steel buildings, based on the general principles and
including rules and checks of Eurocode 8 [1] are given. They include data on regularity,
elements and connections, typology of structures and the q factors, strength and ductility checks
required for elements and connections.


Overview of the requirements
Designing a safe structure in earthquake regions is a multi-planar problem. The following table
summarizes the main requirements and criteria.
Ultimate limit states

- checks on resistance, stability and ductility of

No collapse under

structural elements

strong earthquake

- overall stability of structure

- foundations

Serviceability limit states

- checks on deformation conditions

Limitation of damage under

moderate earthquake
Other specific aseismic measures

- planning and design

- height and other limitations
- foundations
- quality plan
- ground investigations

Ultimate Limit State


For all structural elements, the design resistance Rd/Rd design action effects Sd.
The resistance Rd is calculated according to rules specific to the material. Explanations are given
in Sections 3 and 4.


Second order effects, are either taken into account explicitly, or they are checked as being
negligible using the following criterion (Figure 1).
M2nd order << M1st order
Ptot . dr << Vtot . h

Ptot is the total gravity load at and above the storey considered

dr is the design interstorey drift (dr = q . de !)

Vtot is the total seismic design shear at the storey considered
h is the storey height.


Checks on ductility are material related and are described in Sections 3 and 4.


The resistance of soil must satisfy "capacity design" requirements; this means that the
foundations must resist the maximum forces that the structural elements can transmit to them,
regardless of the actual values due to the seismic design actions.
Serviceability Limit State
Checks on deformation conditions

Interstorey drift

For structures including non-structural elements sensitive to deformation, the interstory drift d r is
limited, e.g. 0,002h.


Joints between structures must be designed to avoid pounding between two adjacent structures.


Some general principles for the design of structures to be erected in earthquake areas are given
here. It should be pointed out that earthquake resistant structures can be designed without
consideration to these principles.
Compliance with these principles will however substantially reduce the possibility of the
occurrence of dynamic effects which cannot be predicted by linear analysis. For this reason,
Eurocode 8 [1] prescribes lower values of seismic actions (higher q factors) for systems
complying with the general rules. The overcost of an earthquake resistant structure is reduced by
use of these lower values in comparison with a usual structure. It also seems that the combination
"good design - simple analysis" gives safer structures than the combination "bad design - refined
Principle 1 - Simplicity
The dynamic behaviour of a simple structure is easy to understand and to compute. The risk of
forgetting any special aspect of performance such as an interaction of parts with different rigidity
is low. Overall simplicity leads to simple detailing.
Principle 2 - Continuity and uniform distribution of strength
Any discontinuity in the design brings a stress concentration and, potentially, a local failure
mechanism. Energy dissipation in the structure should be as high as possible. There should
therefore be many dissipative zones in the structure. As a result a global failure mechanism
should be aimed at. The non-homogeneous behaviour of a structure with major discontinuity
leads to tedious calculations and difficult design of the connection areas.
Practical continuity has many aspects.

There should be no weakening in sections.

Secondary effects generated by offsets, as well as sudden changes in sections should be

Connections should be away from dissipative zones.
Site control should be effective to obtain a proper correspondence between design and
execution. Particular attention should be given to, for example, bolts, prestressing
(minimum and maximum yield strength, ductility of the material), no locking of the
displacement of the structure by unplanned infilled walls.
There should always be positive links. Friction cannot be relied on to resist horizontal
forces or relative displacements of, for example, supports, diaphragms, girders of a
bridge. Similarly, gravity force is not enough to restrain non-structural elements.
Disconnection of hanging ceilings or claddings can be dramatic.

Overall design:
Redundancy is a minimum condition for developing real continuity in a structure. It is essential,
but not sufficient.
Continuity and uniform distribution of strength in the horizontal direction of a building generally
means symmetry, if possible almost axisymmetry. Plan layout of vertical resisting elements
should also recognise the need of a high global torsional stiffness. Major damage has been
observed in the connection zones of structures with 'wings'. The differences in flexural mode
shapes of these 'wings' induce this result, Figure 2.

Continuity in the vertical direction means a lack of setbacks and a relatively uniform distribution
of the shear and flexural resistance of the structure. The so-called "soft storey" should be
avoided. Unintended changes in rigidity caused by "non-structural" elements like infills, partition
walls ... should also be avoided, Figure 2. Eurocode 8 allows simplified methods of analysis of
buildings when certain conditions are met, see Table 1.
Table 1: Structural regularity in Eurocode 8
For the application of simplified methods of analysis, a building can be classified as regular
when the following conditions are satisfied simultaneously.
Geometrical and structural layout in plan
The plan configuration does not present divided shapes nor large recesses. When re-entrant
corners or recesses exist their dimension does not exceed 25% of the building external dimension
in the corresponding direction.
The structure of the building is distributed along an orthogonal mesh defining two main
directions with similar stiffnesses.
The building has an approximately symmetrical plan configuration with respect to those two
main orthogonal directions.
At any storey the distances (measured in the two main directions) between the centre of masses
and the centre of stiffness do not exceed 15% of the "resilience radius" defined as the square root
of the ratio of the storey torsional and translational stiffnesses.
The in-plan stiffness of the floors is high enough, in comparison with that of the vertical
structural elements, such that a rigid behaviour may be assumed. Furthermore, the floors should
not present large holes hindering such assumption especially if they are located in the vicinity of
the main vertical structural elements.
Vertical configuration
The stiffness and mass properties are approximately uniform throughout the building height.
Where there is a gradual setback throughout the height, the setback at any floor is not greater
than 20% of the previous plan dimension in the direction of the setback and symmetry about the
vertical axis is preserved.
If a setback greater than 20%, but not greater than 50% and preserving symmetry, occurs within
the lower 15% of the total height of the building above the surrounding ground level (or above
the level of application of the seismic excitation), it may still be classified as regular. In such
cases the structure of the base zone beneath a vertical projection of the upper storeys must be
able to support at least 75% of the shear forces that would develop in that zone in a similar

building without the base enlargement.

Where setbacks occur only in one facade, the overall setback (sum of setbacks at all storeys) is
not greater than 30% of the plan dimension in the first storey and at any floor the individual
setback is not greater than 10% of the previous plan dimension.
When circumstances, e.g. the available site, aesthetics or use of the building, are such that
structural continuity is not possible for the whole volume of the structure, the latter can be
subdivided into smaller blocks. Structural continuity can then exist in each block, the blocks
being linked by flexible footpaths. A proper distance computed as the sum of their maximum
displacements must be left between two contiguous blocks to avoid pounding of the blocks when
they are excited by earthquake motion.
Principle 3 - Dissipative structures
Building structures able to dissipate energy are introduced and discussed in Lecture 17.4.
Dissipative zones must be safe and numerous. This situation can be achieved in different ways,
by adopting the design approaches based on the principles described below.
Principle 4 - Low slenderness
In general, the more slender a structure, the worse the overturning effect of an earthquake.
High slenderness may however be useful in some cases (see Principle 7).
Principle 5 - Torsional resistance
Earthquake action generates special torsional effects in structures, mainly because the resultant
of inertia forces generated by the earthquake is applied at the mass centre M of each floor of the
structure and the latter generally does not coincide with the torsion centre S of the earthquake
resistant structure, Figure 3. The resultant force times the distance to that centre gives a torsional
moment Mt. In multi-storey frames, the torsional moment from one particular floor is increased
by the resulting moment of the floors above. In most structures, the approach to evaluate this
torsional moment is partly rational (the distance between S and M) and partly statistical, because
the load distribution in a structure is not well known at the design stage and changes through the
life of the structure. Codes indicate how to evaluate this second term. A few structures are free of
torsional effects (axisymmetrical), e.g. water towers.

There may also be a second cause for torsional action. The earthquake itself results mainly in the
vertical propagation of a shear wave so that two points of the structure may be moving
differently at one time. This origin of torsion is normally important for structures which are very
large in plan, e.g. bridges.

To resist the torsional action, the structure must be given adequate torsional rigidity. The best
solution is obtained by putting the earthquake resistant part of structure close to the perimeter of
the structure as a whole and all around it, complying with the symmetry principle. It must be
pointed out that the classical "one vertical core" structure of earthquake free areas is not
effective, because it lacks torsional rigidity. It should simply be avoided in unsymmetrical
Principle 6 - Diaphragms
Diaphragms in a building are the structures which transfer horizontal inertia forces, resulting
from the motion applied to the masses of floors and their loading, towards the structures able to
contain them.
Diaphragms must be structures of low deformability and capable of efficiently distributing the
horizontal action between the various vertical resistant structures. Diaphragms may be provided
in many ways: concrete slabs, composite slabs, trusses, frames. Diaphragms must be properly
linked to the vertical rigidity elements. The links must be able to transmit the horizontal inertia
Principle 7 - Rational distribution of loads in the structure
Important loads should not be put at places where they generate inertia forces under earthquake
loading. For example, a library should for preference be at ground level. An X-Ray installation
should be close to the centre of rotation. Masses should be reduced whenever possible. For
instance, using light floor systems rather than traditional slabs can bring drastic reductions in
inertia forces and result in substantial economy in the framework. Similar choices should be
made for partition walls, infills, claddings, etc.
Principle 8 - Stiffness adapted to the site
The shape of the design response spectrum (Lecture 17.4) indicates that earthquake forces are
lower for structures characterized by a predominant high period (T) of vibration. This
characteristic can sometimes be used at the start of a design, especially when more refined data
are available for a particular site. For instance, in a site with thick alluvium layers, which is
characterized by a response spectrum with relatively high amplitudes in the high period range
and low amplitudes in the low period range, a very rigid structure would better fit than a flexible
one. The opposite choice would apply to rock areas.
Principle 9 - A strict correspondence between the real structure and the model used in its
Designing a structure which is safe under earthquake loading is feasible. However to achieve a
safe structure, the model used in the analysis must correspond to the real structure. Otherwise,
for instance, yielding will take place in other places than foreseen or will not take place and be
replaced by a brittle failure. In earthquake engineering more material or a stronger material does
not mean more safety, because safety is not only derived from strength, but also from ductility.

There are many causes for discrepancies between reality and model, for example:

non-structural elements like infills must not give unexpected rigidity to a structure. Such
rigidity can completely change the behaviour of the structure, introduced high local shear
and cause failure. Non-structural elements must be linked in a way such that they do not
in fact play any structural role.
distribution of yield strength throughout the structure should not differ much from that
assumed, otherwise yielding will take place elsewhere than foreseen or not take place.
site control should ensure the real structure corresponds to that planned.


Materials such as structural sections, bolts and welds which are used for steel structures in
earthquake prone regions are not different from those used for steel structures elsewhere. They
are usually submitted to the same quality checks.
However, compliance to Principle 9 of Section 2 requires the definition by the designer of a
maximum value of yield strength of the steel to be used in the structure. This requirement is
specific to earthquake resistant design. The reason is that normally steel material is delivered on
the basis of a guaranteed minimum yield strength, but in practice it may have a far higher value
of yield strength than that ordered. This fact leads in general to conservative design which is not
detrimental for normal steel structures, but which can be harmful in the case of earthquake
resistant steel structures. Overstrength effects in dissipative parts of the structure can lead to a
concentration of seismic energy dissipation at points where it is not expected nor wanted, as for
instance at the connections.
Therefore, for the dissipative parts of the structure both lower and upper values of yield strength
are specified in design and in ordering of the material. Moreover, sufficient control to avoid
overstrength must be undertaken through specific application rules.
General structural steels according to EN 10025 are used in earthquake resistant steel structures.
Bolts should preferably be high strength grades 8.8 and 10.9.
Steel sections in dissipative zones of the structure must be able to withstand yielding without
significant loss of bearing resistance. This requirement can be a problem in compressed parts of
sections where early local buckling can occur. To avoid local buckling, restrictions are placed on
the width-to-thickness ration b/t of the compressed flat parts of sections. These restrictions
depend on the maximum intended overall ductility of the structure. For this reason, steel sections
are classified into three classes in accordance with three levels of behaviour factor q, as indicated
in the following table.

Behaviour factor q

Section class




The limiting values b/t for the above three classes of section are given in Eurocode 3 [2].
An increase of ratio b/t results in a lower local ductility because of the appearance of local
buckling. This reduction therefore results in a reduction of the capacity of the structure to
dissipate energy, which is finally expressed by a smaller value of the behaviour factor q.
Connections should not be the location for failure, for the following reasons:

their failure mechanism is generally not well known.

they have low global ductility, because stress concentrations locally exhaust the available
ductility of the material.
high strength bolts are not very ductile. In tension connections they may be subjected
additionally to prying forces which are also not well known.
the heat affected zone close to welds is less ductile than the original material.

Therefore, a criterion is imposed according to which connections near dissipative zones of the
structure must have sufficient overstrength so that yielding occurs in the ductile members
(overstrength criterion).
Welded connections made with full penetration butt welds are considered to satisfy the above
Welded connections made with fillet welds and bolted connections, in order to satisfy the above
overstrength criterion, must meet the following requirements:
Rd 1,20 Rfy
Rd is the design resistance of the connection
Rfy is the yielding resistance of the connected member.
The above condition can often be attained by an increase of the member section in the
connection zone. Figure 4 shows two bracing connections, where the fulfilment of the

overstrength condition requires a reinforcement of the connection zone either by a welded plate
or by an additional bolted cleat.

In bolted connections, the failure of bolts in bearing must control the behaviour and not failure in

From the above discussion it is evident that the overstrength condition can lead to expensive
connections. There are two possible ways to overcome this overstrength penalty:

to use full penetration butt weld connections in dissipative zones.

to reduce the member section and consequently the yielding resistance of the dissipative
zone so that the overstrength condition gives a less penalizing value of Rd.

Earthquake resistant structures - General considerations

The term "earthquake resistant structures" (ERS) refers to those structural systems of a building
which are designed to resist the horizontal seismic actions.
In dissipative steel ERS, i.e. structures which through inelastic hysteretic behaviour can be
submitted to considerable deformations without failure by dissipating large amounts of seismic
energy, there are essentially three structural systems used to resist horizontal seismic actions
(Figure 5):
a. Moment resistant frames (MRF) or simple frames.
b. Concentrically braced frames (CBF) or concentric truss bracings.
c. Eccentrically braced frames (EBF) or eccentric truss bracings.

In general, frames are more flexible than braced truss structures. Therefore they may experience
greater horizontal displacements under equal seismic actions. Such displacements can be a
problem with respect to the "P- effect" under a strong earthquake or to "damage" under a
moderate earthquake. Compliance with the overstrength criterion may also be very expensive for
members in bending.
Truss braced structure contrary to frames, are always stiff depending of course on their
configuration. Their capacity to dissipate seismic energy differs greatly from one type to the
other. The ability of both frames and truss structures to dissipate energy whilst resisting seismic
action is quantified by the value of the behaviour factor "q", which has been described in Lecture
Figure 6 presents the values of q-factor for the various systems provided that regularity criteria
are met. If the building is not regular in elevation the listed q values shall be reduced by 20%.
These values should be considered as maximum allowable ones, even if in some cases direct
dynamic non-linear analysis indicates higher q values in the region of 10 or 12.

Earthquake resistant structures

Specific considerations - criteria according to Eurocode 8
Frames are structures that resist horizontal seismic actions mainly through bending of their
members. They have a large number of energy dissipative zones located near to the beam-tocolumn connections. The energy is dissipated through cyclic bending behaviour.
During seismic design, it is assumed that the frame as a whole satisfies the basic criterion of
avoiding the creation of a soft storey.
Under this criterion, the aim is to form plastic hinges in the beams and not in the columns in a
global failure mechanism, except at the bases of the columns. This mechanism is the so-called
"strong columns-weak beams" concept (Figure 7). When the design is such that plastic hinges
form in the beams rather than in the columns, these hinges have the role of spreading yield
through the structure. Moreover, the P- effect is reduced and interaction between axial force
and biaxial bending moments in the columns is avoided.

The concept of "strong columns-weak beams" is not applied to single storey frames, to the top
floor of multi-storey frames and at the base of columns where they are connected to foundations.
Beams are verified as having sufficient safety against lateral or lateral and torsional buckling
To obtain safe plastic hinges in the beams, a check is made that the full plastic moment
resistance and rotation capacity are not decreased by compression and shear forces. To this end
the following inequalities are verified at the location where the formation of hinges is expected.

M and N are the seismic action effects taking account of the behaviour factor q
Mpd, Npd and Vpd are the ultimate resistances of the section at the plastic hinge
Vo is the shear force of the beam, considered as simply supported, due to vertical loads
VM = (MRA + MRB)/1 is the shear force due to the resisting moments MRA and MRB of the beam
at its extremities A and B, calculated with the upper value of yield strength.
Beam-to-column connections must satisfy the requirements for connections, considering the
bending resistance Mpd of the plastic hinge section, and shear force equal to (Vo + VM), as
specified above.
Columns are verified in axial force and bending, the design values of bending moments MCD,c
being resistance design values, i.e. values derived from maximum design moments of column
due to seismic actions, multiplied by a suitable capacity amplification factor.
The most unfavourable shear force of the column due to seismic combination actions must
respect the following condition:
V/Vpd = < 0,5
The transmission of forces between beam flanges at a beam-column node is achieved by
extending beam flanges to stiffeners across the column.
Concentric truss bracings
In concentric truss bracings horizontal seismic forces are mainly resisted by members in axial
loading (tension or compression). In such systems ductile members are mainly the tension

braces, because energy dissipation in compression braces deteriorates quickly due to buckling.
The usual types of concentric truss bracings are the following:
Diagonal type
The alternating horizontal forces are resisted in this type by the corresponding tension braces
only, while the contribution of compression braces is neglected. The diagonal braces of
alternating loading can be in the same bay (X bracing) or in different bays of the same storey. In
the latter case the quantity "Acos " (where A is the area of the brace section and is the slope to
the horizontal) must not vary by more than 10% between two opposite braces in the same storey.
Type V or
In this type both tension and compression braces are needed to resist the horizontal seismic
forces (for equilibrium reasons). The diagonal braces may have a V shape or a shape, in which
case they meet at the middle of the upper beam without interrupting its continuity.
Type K
Bracings of this type, where the meeting point of diagonals intersects the column at an
intermediate point, do not offer any possibility of ductile behaviour because they demand the
participation of the column in the yielding mechanism. Therefore q = 1 for this type of bracing,
and its use is not recommended.
Diagonals must be verified for the condition: N/Npd 1,0
N is the maximum tensile force due to seismic combination actions
Npd is the design resistance in tension
Satisfactory dissipative behaviour of diagonals depends on their slenderness. For this reason the
following condition must be satisfied:


is the effective slenderness of the diagonal
A is the cross section area

fy is the yield strength

Ncr is the ideal critical Euler load of the diagonal (= 2EI/12).
Note: The above condition 1,5 is equivalent to slenderness ratio 140 for steel Fe E 235,
and 114 for steel FE E 355.
Columns and beams
Columns and beams are capacity designed, i.e. they are verified for buckling under an axial load
acd N, where N is the maximum axial load due to seismic combination actions and a cd is a
suitable amplification factor.
In bracings of type V or the horizontal beams are designed to resist their vertical loads,
neglecting the intermediate support provided by the diagonals.
Eccentric truss bracings
Eccentric truss bracings are a lateral load-resisting system for steel buildings which can be
considered a hybrid between conventional frames and concentric truss bracings. They combine
most of individual advantages of frames and concentric bracings, whilst they minimize their
respective disadvantages. Figure 8 illustrates some common arrangements.

The main characteristic of eccentric truss bracings is that at least one end of every brace is
connected in such a way that the brace force is transmitted either to another brace or to a column
through shear and bending in a beam segment called a "link", denoted by the symbol 1 s. Because
shear and bending in the link due to horizontal forces are of considerable magnitude, it is
convenient to concentrate the ductility requirements to that segment.
The most attractive feature of eccentric truss bracings for seismic-resistant design is their high
stiffness combined with excellent ductility and energy dissipation capacity.
The yielding mechanism of links depends on the ratio of 1s to the length 1o=2Mp/Vp where Mp
and Vp are the plastic strengths in bending and shear of the link. Theoretically if 1 s/1o 1,0 the
links yield in shear (shear plastic hinge). However, experiments have shown that the effect of
strain hardening is very important and cannot be neglected. As a result, in order to assure the
more desirable behaviour of links that yield in shear, it is recommended that 1s/1o 0,8. When
1s/1o 1,3 the link yields in bending (moment plastic hinges). Yielding of the link is mixed
between the above two limits. In all cases there is a possibility for adequate ductility.
Links are designed to provide enough ductility. The other members (bracings, columns and rest
length of beams) are capacity designed, so that yielding is confined to the links.
Key elements in developing the full strength and rotation capacity of shear links are proper
stiffening and lateral bracing. Two-sided, full-depth stiffeners must be provided at the link end.
Intermediate stiffeners may be single sided for beam depths less than 600 mm, but are required
on both sides of the web for deeper beams.
The maximum distance between successive stiffeners is taken equal to 56tw-d/5 for 1s/1o 1,15
or equal to 38tw - d/5 for 1s/1o 0,80. For intermediate values of 1s/1o a linear interpolation is
Lateral bracing must be provided at the link ends at the locations shown in Figure 9. Strong and
stiff lateral bracing at these locations is critical to the stability of both the link and the brace. A
composite deck by itself cannot be counted upon to provide adequate lateral support for the link
ends. Transverse beams are the preferred lateral-bracing system.

After the selection of the link section, all other truss members are designed to remain essentially
elastic under the forces generated by the fully yielded and strain-hardened link. This design
requires an estimate of the ultimate shear force that can be achieved by the link. The ultimate
shear force should be taken at least as:
Vult = 1,5 Vp
Columns and braces
Columns must be designed to remain essentially elastic under the ultimate link forces, as well as
the appropriate vertical load contributions.
Braces must not buckle. They are therefore designed for the axial forces generated by the
ultimate link shear given above. Experimental results show that ultimate link shear forces may
sometimes exceed the value of 1,5 Vp due to overstrength of the web or due to the presence of a
thick composite concrete deck. A conservative design of the bracings is therefore appropriate.
The horizontal diaphragms and bracings must be able to transmit with sufficient overstrength the
earthquake forces to the various earthquake-resistant elements connected by them.
This condition is assumed to be fulfilled by using a magnification factor of 1,5 for the
verification forces obtained from the analysis. Eurocode 8 [1] also gives minimum detailing rules
for diaphragms in reinforced concrete.

Specific control measures

The details of connections, sizes and qualities of bolts and welds as well as the steel grade of the
members and the allowable maximum yield strength f y in the dissipative zones are indicated on
the fabrication and erection drawings.
At the different phases of fabrication and construction continuous checks are necessary in order:

to guarantee that the specified maximum yield strength of steel is not exceeded by more
than 10%.
to guarantee that the distribution of yield strength throughout the structure does not
substantially differ from the distribution assumed in the design. This check aims at the
achievement of sufficient regularity in terms of yielding behaviour to prevent the energy
dissipation from being concentrated to one storey only (Figure 10).
to guarantee that the stiffness and strength assumed in the design are not exceeded by
more than 10%.

Whenever one of the above criteria is not fulfilled, either new computations of the structure and
of its details are made to demonstrate its efficiency, or changes are made to confer equivalent
efficiency. For instance, such a change could be the reduction of the member section so that its
plastic resistance is equal to the intended one (Figure 10). A change of this kind allows more
reasonable dimensions of the connection (end plates, bolts) since in the overstrength condition of
connections Rfy is reduced because it refers to the reduced section which becomes the dissipative
Cross-section and boundary

Stress distribution

Class A

Class B

Class C

(compression positive)
Rectangular hollow section





Tubular section


50 2

70 2

85 2

Webs of I-profiles





Webs of flanges of welded


distribution distribution










Combined bending and



distribution distribution
Outstanding flanges of welded
box sections or flanges of IProfiles

Combined bending and
Combined bending and

Flanges of









Table 2 Limit b/t ratio of compressed parts of cross-sections for different cross-sectional classes


The main requirements for the design of a structure in earthquake regions are that it shall
not collapse under a strong earthquake and that damage is limited under a moderate
To meet these requirements design is based on general principles usually involving:

continuity and uniform distribution of strength
ability to dissipate energy
avoidance of high slenderness
torsional resistance
stiffness adapted to the site
correspondence between the real structure and the model used in its analysis.
Rules and checks are given in Eurocode 8 [1] based on these general principles covering
materials, sections, connections and the structural systems which provide earthquake resistance.
Particularly considerations relate to frames, beams, columns and truss bracings.

[1] Eurocode 8: "Structures in Seismic Regions - Design", CEN (in preparation).
[2] Eurocode 3: "Design of Steel Structures": ENV 1993-1-1: Part 1.1: General rules and rules
building, CEN, 1992.

1. ECCS-CECM-EKS: "European Recommendations for Steel Structures in Seismic
Zones", Technical Working Group 1.3: Seismic Design, N.54, 1988.
2. SEAOC: "Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary", 1990.
3. Popov, E. P. and Engelhardt, M. D., Seismic Eccentrically Braced Frames, USA.

Previous | Next | Contents