Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

Seismic ground motion values for locations outside the United States

February 2010 » Columns » CODE SIMPLE

By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E.

» CODE SIMPLE By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E. e Mail Print We are

e Mail

SIMPLE By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E. e Mail Print We are frequently asked

Print

By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E. e Mail Print We are frequently asked what
By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E. e Mail Print We are frequently asked what
By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E. e Mail Print We are frequently asked what

We are frequently asked what spectral response accelerations should be used for areas outside the United States where there are no mapped values in the International Code Council’s (ICC) International Building Code (IBC) or the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Minimum Design Loads For Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7).

Prior to the IBC, it was customary for code users to use the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Appendix Chapter 16 Seismic Zone table for areas outside the United States. This table, introduced in 1976, was completely revised and expanded in the 1997 edition of the UBC. With the 1997 UBC Appendix Chapter 16, a paragraph was added indicating that the compilation was only a partial listing of seismic zones outside the United States and may not, in all cases, reflect local ordinances or current scientific information. The seismic zones tabulated in UBC Appendix Chapter 16 were based on the Tri Services Manual, Seismic Design for Buildings, Departments of the Army [TM 5 809 10], Navy [P 355], and Air Force [AFM 88 3], Chapter 13.

In answer to the question what spectral accelerations should be used for areas outside the United States where there are no mapped values in the IBC or ASCE 7, it is possible to use the C a and C v values of the 1997 UBC corresponding to the Seismic Zone listed in Appendix Chapter 16 to determine S DS and S D1 , using the following equivalency relationships (this is referred to hereinafter as Method 1): S DS = 2.5C a and S D1 = C v .

An example of entries in the 1997 UBC Seismic Zone table with corresponding C a and C v and converted S DS and S D1 values is given in Table 1.

S D S and S D 1 values is given in Table 1 . However, the

However, the values obtained using Method 1 are considered crude. In the absence of maps developed for the local foreign region, a source of S S and S 1 values for locations outside of the United States may be the U.S. military document, UFC (Unified Facilities Criteria) 3 310 01, Structural Load Data, dated May 25, 2005, including Change 2, dated Dec. 5, 2007. Tables D 2 and E 1 of this document should be used. These values (hereinafter referred to as Method 2 values) are used by the United States Department of Defense. Of course, the same statement made in the 1997 UBC Appendix Chapter 16 applies here as follows: The values may not, in all cases, reflect local ordinances or current scientific information. Entries in Table E 1 of UFC 3 310 01 for the same locations as in the above table are given in Table 2.

The 10/50 entry represents the design earthquake ground motion prior to the 2000 IBC, reflecting 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years (approximately a 475 year return period). The data in Table 3 compares the S DS and S D1 values using the two methods presented.

S.K. Ghosh Associates, Inc., (SKGA) was recently contracted by ICC to develop maps of S S and S 1 for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) because the Emirate of Abu Dhabi is scheduled to adopt the 2009 IBC this year. E. V. Leyendecker, Ph.D., principal seismological consultant with SKGA and scientist emeritus at the U.S. Geological Survey, conducted the study. Time was not available to conduct a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, which would have been the preferred way to proceed. The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) data were used to replace the Tri Services (TI 809 04) Seismic Zone tables in UFC 3 310 01. The GSHAP data did not form the basis of the maps developed by SKGA because of a number of limitations including the fact that the values of GSHAP ground motion were several times higher than unpublished proprietary data for a number of sites in the region. Abdalla and Al Homoud of the Civil Engineering Department, American Univerity of Sharjah, have published maps of the UAE region in the Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Imperial College Press, 2004. These maps are more in line with the unpublished data mentioned previously and form the basis of the maps developed by SKGA. This one instance serves to underscore the fact that the GSHAP data and UFC 3 310 01 may not reflect current scientific information for local regions.

Although not originally scheduled for this issue, we wanted to share this recent development; therefore, our next Code Simple column will address the anchorage requirements for structural walls as it relates to seismic design and will include a thorough discussion of ASCE 7 05 Section 12.11 for structural walls in structures assigned to SDC B through F.

S.K. Ghosh Associates Inc., is a structural seismic, and code consulting firm located in Palatine, Ill., and Aliso Viejo, Calif. President S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and Susan Dowty, S.E., are active in the development and interpretation of national structural code provisions. They can be contacted at skghosh@aol.com and susandowty@gmail.com, respectively, or at www.skghoshassociates.com

Table 1: An example of entries in the 1997 UBC Seismic Zone table with corresponding C a and C v and converted S DS and S D1 values (Method 1).

Location Mexico: Mazatlan Mexico: Mexico City Appendix Ch. 16 Seismic Zone 2A Assumed Site Class

Location

Mexico: Mazatlan

Mexico: Mexico City

Appendix Ch. 16 Seismic Zone

2A

Assumed Site Class

C

C

a

v

S DS = 2.5C

a

S D1 = C

v

D

0.22

0.32 0.55

0.32

0.84

3

E

0.36

0.84 0.90

Table 2: Values derived from Table E-1 of UFC 3-310- 01 (Method 2) for the same locations as in Table 1, above.

Country

Base/City

Seismic Loading (Site Class B)

S s (%g)

S 1 (%g)

10/50S s (%g)

10/50S 1 (%g)

Mexico Mazatlan Mexico

Mexico

Mazatlan

Mexico

Mexico Mazatlan Mexico
Mexico Mazatlan Mexico 97.4 39 48.7 19.5 56.9 22.8 28.5 11.4

97.4

39

48.7

19.5

56.9

22.8

28.5

11.4

97.4 39 48.7 19.5 56.9 22.8 28.5 11.4

Mexico City

Table 3: Comparison of Methods 1 and 2

City

Method 1

S DS

S D1

Method 2

S DS

S D1

Method 1 S DS S D1 Method 2 S DS S D1 Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55

Mazatlan

Mexico City

Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47
0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47

0.55

0.90

0.32

0.84

0.72

0.59

0.42

0.47

Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47
Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47
Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47
Mazatlan Mexico City 0.55 0.90 0.32 0.84 0.72 0.59 0.42 0.47

Structural Engineer

Page 1 of 3

 
   
 
    LATEST NEWS MAGAZINE ONLINE POLL CONTINUING EDUCATION ADVERTISE RESOURCES ABOUT US + WAYNE
LATEST NEWS MAGAZINE ONLINE POLL CONTINUING EDUCATION ADVERTISE RESOURCES ABOUT US +

LATEST NEWS

MAGAZINE
MAGAZINE

ONLINE POLL

CONTINUING EDUCATION ADVERTISE

RESOURCES

ABOUT US +

WAYNE MUIR: MODELING EXPERT Hard work and determination helped this Vietnam veteran become a leader

WAYNE MUIR: MODELING EXPERT Hard work and determination helped this Vietnam veteran become a leader in 3D design.

WAYNE MUIR: MODELING EXPERT Hard work and determination helped this Vietnam veteran become a leader in

»

READ FULL ARTICLE

ESCALATING SEISMIC DESIGN Award winning Seattle high rise innovative reinforcement allows for wide open spaces.

»

READ FULL ARTICLE

EVALUATING TIMBER PILES Engineering innovation and ingenuity critical to project viability

 

SEARCH

 

GO

 
    Related Engineering Channels  
 

Related Engineering Channels

 
    Related Engineering Channels  
 
 

Seismic ground motion values for locations outside the United States

February 2010 » Columns » CODE SIMPLE

 

By S. K. Ghosh, Ph.D., Susan Dowty, S.E.

 
e Mail Print  

e Mail

e Mail Print  

Print

Print
 

We are frequently asked what spectral response accelerations should be used for areas outside the United States where there are no mapped values in the International Code Council’s (ICC) International Building Code (IBC) or the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Minimum Design Loads For Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7).

 

Prior to the IBC, it was customary for code users to use the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Appendix Chapter 16 Seismic Zone table for areas outside the United States. This table, introduced in 1976, was completely revised and expanded in the 1997 edition of the UBC. With the 1997 UBC Appendix Chapter 16, a paragraph was added indicating that the compilation was only a partial listing of seismic zones outside the United States and may not, in all cases, reflect local ordinances or current scientific information. The seismic zones tabulated in UBC Appendix Chapter 16 were based on the Tri Services Manual, Seismic Design for Buildings, Departments of the Army [TM 5 809 10], Navy [P 355], and Air Force [AFM 88 3], Chapter 13.

 

In answer to the question what spectral accelerations should be used for areas outside the United

States where there are no mapped values in the IBC or ASCE 7, it is possible to use the C a and C v values of the 1997 UBC corresponding to the Seismic Zone listed in Appendix Chapter 16 to determine S DS and S D1 , using the following equivalency relationships (this is referred to hereinafter as Method 1): S DS = 2.5C a and S D1 = C v .

 

Headlines From Around The Web

 
as Method 1): S D S = 2.5 C a and S D 1 = C

Forestry urged to seize chance to rebuild Christchurch

 

(stuff.co.nz)

3 D printing technology for buildings (Forbes)

 
 

Study finds federal funding needed for bridge repairs (Reuters)

 
   

White House pressures buildings to go green (Fox Business)

 
 

An example of entries in the 1997 UBC Seismic Zone table with corresponding C a and C v and converted S DS and S D1 values is given in Table 1.

However, the values obtained using Method 1 are considered crude. In the absence of maps developed for the local foreign region, a source of S S and S 1 values for locations outside of the United States may be the U.S. military document, UFC (Unified Facilities Criteria) 3 310 01, Structural Load Data, dated May 25, 2005, including Change 2, dated Dec. 5, 2007. Tables D 2 and E 1 of this document should be used. These values (hereinafter referred to as Method 2 values) are used by the United States Department of Defense. Of course, the same statement made in the 1997 UBC Appendix Chapter 16 applies here as follows: The values may not, in all cases, reflect local ordinances or current scientific information. Entries in Table E 1 of UFC 3 310 01 for the same locations as in the above table are given in Table 2.

Chicago’s Willis Tower to become a vertical solar farm (inhabitat.com)

Current Issue

 
Current Issue  

The 10/50 entry represents the design earthquake ground motion prior to the 2000 IBC, reflecting 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years (approximately a 475 year return period). The data in Table 3 compares the S DS and S D1 values using the two methods presented.

February 2013

data in Table 3 compares the S D S and S D 1 values using the
 

» COVER STORY

S.K. Ghosh Associates, Inc., (SKGA) was recently contracted by ICC to develop maps of S S and S 1 for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) because the Emirate of Abu Dhabi is scheduled to adopt the 2009 IBC this year. E. V. Leyendecker, Ph.D., principal seismological consultant with SKGA and scientist emeritus at the U.S. Geological Survey, conducted the study. Time was not available to conduct a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, which would have been the preferred way to proceed. The Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program (GSHAP) data were used to replace the Tri Services (TI 809 04) Seismic Zone tables in UFC 3 310 01. The GSHAP data did not form the basis of the maps developed by SKGA because of a number of limitations including the fact that the values of GSHAP ground motion were several times higher than unpublished proprietary data for a number of sites in the region. Abdalla and Al Homoud of the Civil Engineering Department, American Univerity of Sharjah, have published maps of the UAE region in the Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Imperial College Press, 2004. These maps are more in line with the unpublished data mentioned previously and form the basis of the maps developed by SKGA. This one instance serves to underscore the fact that the GSHAP data and UFC 3 310 01 may not reflect current scientific information for local regions.

Wayne Muir: Modeling expert

» FEATURES

 

International Roofing Expo

Evaluating timber piles

 

Tips for using diaphragms with analysis software

 

Peter Rice: license to imagine

All articles

eZine

Subscribe

Cover Story

Although not originally scheduled for this issue, we wanted to share this recent development; therefore, our next Code Simple column will address the anchorage requirements for structural walls

as it relates to seismic design and will include a thorough discussion of ASCE 7 05 Section 12.11 for structural walls in structures assigned to SDC B through F.

S.K. Ghosh Associates Inc., is a structural seismic, and code consulting firm located in Palatine, Ill., and Aliso Viejo, Calif. President S.K. Ghosh, Ph.D., and Susan Dowty, S.E., are active in the development and interpretation of national structural code provisions. They can be contacted at skghosh@aol.com and susandowty@gmail.com, respectively, or at www.skghoshassociates.com

Richard Weingardt: The pioneer spirit

It isn't an easy feat for one person to visit all seven continents. Nor is it an easy feat to establish a company at 27. But that is exactly how a lifetime of professional and personal adventuring began for Richard Weingardt.

   
 

News

  News