5 Seismic Design of Buildings - English PDF

ETS CAMINS, CANALS I PORTS DE BARCELONA
Performance-Based Seismic Design and Assessment (PBSDA)
SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS
Luca Pelà
Technical University of Catalonia (UPC-BarcelonaTech)
luca.pela@upc.edu
PBSDA – Seismic Design of Buildings
SUMMARY
Introduction
Resistant mechanisms
Floor diaphragm
Earthquake resistant structures

Desirable structures
Center of mass and stiffness, torsion effects
Plan and elevation regularity
Joints
Effects of non-structural elements
Structural systems
Load bearing walls
Shear frames
Braced frames
Shear walls
Coupled shear walls
Frame-shear wall systems
Shear walls with stiffenning beams
Cores
Tubes
Practical session
Rigid planes method
Analysis of a building with shear walls
Design of a building with shear frames
PBSDA – Seismic Design of Buildings 3
INTRODUCTION ON SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS
 Determination of the design action

(seismic demand, seismological aspects, statistical studies)
 Damage acceptance criterion

(it is generally accepted that the structure is deformed as a consequence of
the earthquake and suffers “programmed damages”)
 Selection of an adequate structuration

(structural simplicity, uniformity, symmetry, regularity in plan and elevation)
 Structural response analysis

(equivalent dynamic or static calculation methods)
 Detailed dimensioning of the structure with adequate constructive details
 Correct execution of the construction

RESISTANT MECHANISMS OF THE BUILDING
Mechanism of transmission
of the gravitational actions of the
structural system subjected to
vertical forces
Mechanism of lateral
force transmission
(wind, seism) of the
structural system when
subjected to horizontal
forces.
Different behaviour between flexible and rigid floor slab buildings.

Rigid and monolithic floor slabs

Floors
The excessive deformation of the floor slabs can cause an unequal
distribution of the seismic force on the different vertical elements.
Floor slabs with appropriate stiffness in its plane must be designed and built.
STRUCTURAL REGULARITY
Influence of the configuration of the building in elevation and plan
The structural regularity plays a major role in the definition of the

seismic response.
Structural regularity contributes to the formation of ductile global

mechanisms and, therefore, contributes to improve the building’s
seismic capacity.
A good structural regularity can be achieved with a good architectural

design of the building.
PLAN REGULARITY
Reduces the eccentricity between the mass centre (point of seismic

action application) and the stiffness centre (point of structure reaction
application).
An excessive
eccentricity produces
dynamic torsional
effects which can locate
the damage on the
pillars situated in the
building perimeter.
PLANS
MAKE AVOID COMMENTS
Necessary
symmetry and Ideal for behaviour and analysis
uniformity of the Good symmetry.

Analysis less easy.
structure in plan
in both directions of Be careful with the differential
behaviour on the opposed
the building extremes of long solids.
Even though they are

symmetrical, the long wings imply
problems on the behaviour
Compact shape prediction.
Access towers which are

projected.
Problems with analysis and detail.
Avoid long/slender
shapes
Asymmetry of the resistant
members.
Problems of analysis and torsion.
Reduce the size of
set-backs (re-entrant
corners or edges
recesses)
Recommendable Not convenient
Rigid
body
walls
core core
Linking
beam in
each
floor
Not convenient Recommendable

Necessary symmetry and uniformity of the structure in plan.

Situations which must be avoided:
Examples of buildings with “false symmetry” in plan.

REGULARITY IN ELEVATION
Reduces the discontinuities (of mass and stiffness) along the structure.
The discontinuities
localize the
damage and
induce
flexible floor
mechanisms
Incorrect Correct
Situations which must be avoided:
1.- Free ground floor

2.- Flexible floor on
intermediate levels
3.- Short column
Inadequate geometries in elevation:
Rigid wall
a) Flexible ground b) Abrupt reduction of c) Excessive

floor stiffness slenderness
Situations which must be avoided by lack of uniformity:
Examples of stepped buildings.

Flexible floor
Flexible floor
Olive View Hospital, California 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.

Flexible floor
Olive View Hospital, California 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.

Flexible floor
(L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Short pillar effect
Shear failure Bending failure

Problems derived from a lack of uniformity in elevation
Mexico, 19 September 1985, m=8.1

STRUCTURAL REGULARITY: comparison
Central Bank and Bank of America in Managua, Nicaragua

Earthquake Managua (1972)

Earthquake Managua (1972)

Anchorage failure among elements. Bar anchorage failure in concrete structures

(L’Aquila, 6th April 2009, m=5.9).
Joints
Complex and irregular shapes

can be regularized
if the building is divided into
several independent buildings.
The joints must have an

adequate shape in order to
avoid pounding (hammering)
between adjacent buildings.
Incompatibility between parts which vibrate with different period or phase

Destruction due to the interaction (pounding) between buildings.

Loma Prieta Earthquake, 17 October 1989, m=7
Incompatibility between adjacent buildings



Foundations
Foundations have two purposes:

receiving the seismic waves and
transmit them to the structure, as
well as receiving the inertial forces
from the structure’s movement and
transmit them again to the ground.
The vertical elements must be

linked together along both directions
by means of a grillage of tie-beams
or foundation beams.
The foundations must be designed

in order to avoid plastic deformation
(high repair costs).
Non-structural elements
The main objective is the

substantial reduction of
victims, usually caused by
the damage of non-structural
elements (partition walls,
divisions, false ceilings,
façades, spandrels, parapets,
chimneys, etc.).
They must be correctly

restrained in order to
guarantee their stability.
(L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Damage and fall of façade walls (L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Coalinga Earthquake (California, 1983).

Non-structural elements prone to affect the structure behaviour:
Partition walls
Façades and roof members
Ramps
Stairs
Elevators and stairs boxes
Parapets
L’Aquila 2009. Out-of-plane mechanism of façade’s elements.

L’Aquila 2009. Out-of-plane mechanism of façade’s elements.

L’Aquila 2009. In-plane mechanism of façade’s elements.

L’Aquila 2009. In-plane mechanism of façade’s elements.

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS
Coupled tubes
≈ 300
110
Structural solutions for horizontal
stiffening
Tube in
according to the building height.
tube
High-rise
buildings
60 ≈ 200
Exterior tube
(bracing, frames of robust
elements in façade)
These are indicative values
Stiffening since they depend on building’s
deep beams
Mega-frames
slenderness and the magnitude
30 ≈ 100 of the horizontal actions.
- Coupled walls (We might have to consider
- Interior cores
lower limits).
High
buildings - Frames connected
to shear walls
15 ≈ 50
8 Simple frames
5 Low-medium height ≈ 25
Load bearing walls
Plan Height (m)
LOAD BEARING WALLS
Relevance of floor rigidity and its connection to the walls.

Is it a box-type behaviour?
This topic will be covered

in the lecture about
rigid floor
flexible floor Masonry structures
Connected and non-connected walls

FRAMES
Nodes with bending rigidity and rigid slabs.

FRAMES
The previous case (strong beam, weak column) is not desirable.
Nc 12 Ec I cj
In the previous case, the stiffness of each floor is: ki = ∑
j =1 hi3
IMPORTANT: we prefer weak beam-strong column in seismic design.
In the most general case, the rigidity of each floor is:

Nc
 Ec I cj 
∑  
12 Nc  Ec I cj  j =1  hi i
(1 +ψ i ) ∑
ki =  3  ψi =
j =1  Lc i 1 Nb  Eb I bj   Eb I bj  
∑ 
  + 
2 j =1  L j   L j
 
 i i −1 
Being Ψi the ratio between the column and beam stiffnesses at i-th floor
FRAMES
Rigid nodes in concrete and steel frames

BRACED FRAMES
Concentric
bracing
Eccentric
bracing
SHEAR WALLS
frame-shear wall coupled shear

systems walls
SHEAR WALLS
SHEAR WALLS
P=
w Pa + PR Isostatic
PR= Pc + Pb structure
Hyperstatic
structure
(statically
indetermined)
COUPLED SHEAR WALLS
Flexible beams Rigid beams

COUPLED SHEAR WALLS
With flexible beams:

COUPLED SHEAR WALLS
With rigid beams: without (left) and with (right) diagonal reinforcement at the
connection beams (Paulay, 1972).
reinforcement layout damage distribution

COUPLED SHEAR WALLS
Detail of diagonal reinforcement in the connection beams.

FRAME-SHEAR WALL SYSTEMS
Shear wall works in bending, frame works in shear

Shear in frame
The frame restricts

load
the shear wall

deformation
Shear in
shear wall
restricts the frame

The shear wall
deformation
Shear in
slabs
shear frame
wall
SHEAR WALLS WITH STIFFENING BEAMS
Without stiffening beams With stiffening beams

SHEAR WALLS WITH STIFFENING BEAMS
Stiffening beams in concrete structures
Stiffening beams in steel or composite structures

CORES
Types (lateral view)
Cross-section
CORES
CORES
Resistant mechanism of the core to torsion:

restrained twisting.
CORES
Central core with lateral walls Separated cores
Corner cores Central core

CORES
TUBES
Axial force
distribution
in piers
Framed tube
Trussed tube
utilizing exoskeletal members
(John Hancock Center, Chicago)
TUBES
Tube in tube
Façade: grid formed by closely spaced
piers and high stiffness beams
EXAMPLES OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS
Suitable in-plan configurations to resist seismic action:

a) frames of rigid nodes, b) shear walls and c) frame-shear walls/cores systems
EXAMPLES OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS
Example of seismic retrofit of an existing building

CENTER OF MASS AND SHEAR CENTER
If the slab can be considered as a rigid body, the inertial forces are applied to
the center of mass (or mass barycenter). Due to horizontal forces effects, there
is a rigid roto-translation of the roof and then resistant forces proportional to the
rigidity of the vertical elements. The shear center (or elastic barycenter) can be
defined as the application point of the resulting horizontal resistant forces.
PLAN REGULARITY
Not convenient Recommendable
ACCIDENTAL ECCENTRICITY
Even when the centre of mass coincides with the centre of shear, an accidental
eccentricity of the mass distribution will be considered at each floor.
It will not be lower than 1/20 of the greater dimension of the floor in the
perpendicular direction of the seism force, in order to cover constructive
irregularities and accidental load asymmetries (NCSE-02, EC8).
CM
ey
CT
ACCIDENTAL ECCENTRICITY
Even when the centre of mass coincides with the centre of shear, an accidental
eccentricity of the mass distribution will be considered at each floor.
It will not be lower than 1/20 of the greater dimension of the floor in the
perpendicular direction of the seism force, in order to cover constructive
irregularities and accidental load asymmetries (NCSE-02, EC8).
ex
CM
CT
REGULARITY IN ELEVATION
Not convenient Recommendable Not convenient Recommendable

RIGID PLANES METHOD
The building is conceived as a system

formed by three families of planes:
- two families of perpendicular vertical
elements
- an additional family of horizontal planes
(floors).
Floors are considered infinitely rigid,

whereas vertical planes only present
stiffness in their own plane.
RIGID PLANES METHOD
How to redistribute seismic forces among the building frames (or shear walls, or
load bearing walls)
Hypotheses
 All the horizontal stiffness is concentrated in a series of frames, shear walls or

walls organized according to two perpendicular directions.
 Each frame, shear wall or load-bearing wall has only in-plane stiffness, since
out-of-plane stiffness is negligible.
 The in-plane elastic stiffness of the elements is considered.
 Floors are monolithic and infinitely rigid (they do not experience in-plane
deformation).
METHOD FOR SYSTEMS COMPOSED OF SHEAR

WALLS CONTINUOUS IN ELEVATION
Basic hypothesis
The only elements that provide horizontal stability

consist of a system of shear walls (with no holes),
CONTINUOUS IN ELEVATION and disposed
according to only two orthogonal directions X or Y.
Horizontal forces remain proportional throughout

all the storeys.
Force distribution among shear walls
Forces resisted by the

shear walls, when the
Fkx
applied forces
Fxk, Fyk
and a bending moment
Mk
are acting separetely.
Fky
Mk
y
Notation FXi
Positive
Shear wall i
actions:
yi
M Fyj
It is possible to find a G x
shear centre, of yc
coordinates xc, yc so Fx C Shear
that the external forces wall j
going through it do not xc
generate torsion.
xj

x c =
∑x k j yj Fy
 ∑k yj

 ∑y k
 yc =
i xi
 ∑k xi
Being kxi, kyj the stiffness of the shear walls along the axis x or y , respectively.
If we take the shear center as the

origin of a new coordinate system
x’y’, it is possible to calculate y'
directly the forces experimented Fxi x’G
by each of the shear walls.
y’i
Fyj
G
y’G
C
Fx C x'
Mc j
Mc =M − Fx yG′ + Fy x 'G
x’j
It is necessary to take into
account the sign of x’G and y’G Fy
(for instance, according to the
figure above, x’G<0, y’G>0)
y'
Fxi x’G
y’i
Fyj
G
y’G
C
Fx C x'
Mc j
x’j
The force received by each shear
wall can be computed as:
Fy
k xi y'i k xi
F k
Fext,k
− M ext,k
∑k
ix x c Where Ip is a polar inertia that can be
xi Ip
calculated as:
Fk
k yj
Fext,k
+
x'i k yi
M ext,k =Ip ( ∑ y' k + ∑ x' k )
2
i xi
2
i yi
∑k
jy y c
yj Ip
Computation of the stiffness of a shear wall
In case of not having very high shear walls, bending and elastic shear
deformation of the cantilever shear wall must be taken into account. Therefore,
the stiffness is obtained by adding up the bending and shear flexibilities, i.e. the
inverse of the sum of the inverses of the bending (Kflex) and shear (Ktall)
stiffnesses.
1 1
K = 3
1 1 L 1.2 L
+ + L
K flex K tall 3EI GA
In case of high shear walls, considering bending stiffness is enough (we can
take Kj=(EI)j directly) due to the fact that the constant member of all the shear
walls (3/L3) will be cancelled out.
PRACTICAL SESSION 1:
ANALYSIS OF A BUILDING WITH SHEAR WALLS
We want to build a 25-storey luxury

hotel, the structural plan view of
which is represented in the figure.
The building is laterally stiffened by 4

RC shear walls continuous in
elevation.
All shear walls have the same cross-

section, 0.3 x 4 m2.
The geometrical barycenter is the

point of intersection of axes 1 and 2.
[m]
Qualitative analysis
- Two perpendicular systems of shear

walls, each wall resists the
corresponding component of the force
acting in its direction
- The shear walls’ directions do not

intersect at a unique point (they are not
convergent), and this fact guarantees
the necessary resistance capacity to [m]
global torsion moments.
- The shear walls layout is no efficient, as the maximum distance among them
(and therefore their mechanical arm) is just 8 m, as a consequence we do not take
advantage of the maximum dimensions of the building, which would be almost the
double against possible torsion.
- Plan and direction of shear walls are symmetric with respect to axis 1, this
implies that the shear center and the mass barycenter (G) must be on axis 1.
On the contrary, this symmetry does not exist along axis 2, thus the shear center
will not be on this axis.
F2
Preliminary calculations 4
y
1st system (Y): shear walls 1 and 2
3
2nd system (X): shear walls 3 and 4
1 x
G
Stiffness of shear walls 4 x 0.3m2
1 3
K ji = E ⋅ I ji = E ⋅ ⋅ 4 ⋅ 0,30 = 1,6 E 2
12
F1 [m]
Stiffness of each shear wall system:
in y direction (shear walls 1 and 2): ∑K

3 ,4
xi = 3,2 E
in x direction (shear walls 3 and 4): ∑K

1,2
yi = 3,2 E
Position of the shear centre with respect to the given origin (G)
∑x ⋅K ( −10 − 2 ) ⋅1.6 E = −12 =

∑ y ⋅ K= (10 + 2 ) ⋅1.6 =
i xi E 12
= 6m
x CEC = = = −6 m yCEC
i yi
∑K yi 3.2 E 2 ∑K xi3.2 E 2
F2
Preliminary calculations 4
Polar inertia with respect to the shear CEC

3
center:
1
G
2
F1 [m]
Ip= ∑y
3,4
2
1 ⋅ K xi + ∑ x12 ⋅ K yi
1,2
I p =( −4 ) ⋅1.6 E + ( 4 ) ⋅1.6 E  + ( −4 ) ⋅1.6 E + ( 4 ) ⋅1.6 E  =4 ⋅ ( 25.6 E ) =102.4E

2 2 2 2
   
Direction 1
4
4
3
3 F1x
1 1
2 2
F1
F1y
The force F1 goes through the

2 2
F1x =
− ⋅ F1 F1y =
+ ⋅ F1 shear centre, therefore it does
2 2 not produce any torsion effect.
K 1.6 E 2
F3 =
F4 = xi ⋅ F1x = ⋅ F1x =
0.5 ⋅ F1x =
−0.5 ⋅ ⋅ F1 =
−0.354 ⋅ F1
∑ K xi3,4
3.2 E 2
K yi 1.6 E 2
F1 = F2 = ⋅ F1y = ⋅ F1y = 0.5 ⋅ F1y = 0.5 ⋅ ⋅ F1 = 0.354 ⋅ F1
∑K
1,2
yi 3.2 E 2
The force F2 does

Direction 2 not pass through the
F2y shear center, this
produces a torsion
F2 in the plan, that will
involve all the shear
walls.
1
Therefore, we will
find a force
component due to
2 the global torsion in
each wall.
F2x
4 4
2
M F2x =
− ⋅ F2
3 1 2
3
2
F2y =
− ⋅ F2
2
2
M =F2 ⋅ d =− 6 2 F2
Direction 2
Shear walls of the 1st system of shear walls (y direction):

K yi x ci ⋅ K yj
Fiy = ⋅ F2y + ⋅M
∑K
1,2
yi IP
1.6 E -4 ⋅1.6 E
F1 = ⋅ F2y + ⋅ M = 0.5 ⋅ F2y − 0.0625 ⋅ M =
3.2 E 102.4 E
=−0.5 ⋅
2
2
⋅ F2 − 0.0625 ⋅ - 6 2 F2 = ( )−0.354 ⋅ F2 + 0.530 ⋅ F2 =0.176 ⋅ F2
1.6 E 4 ⋅1.6 E
F2 = ⋅ F2y + ⋅ M = 0.5 ⋅ F2y + 0.0625 ⋅ M =
3.2 E 102.4 E
= −0.5 ⋅
2
2
⋅ F2 + 0.0625 ⋅ - 6 2 F2 = ( )−0.354 ⋅ F2 − 0.530 ⋅ F2 =− 0.884 ⋅ F2
Direction 2
Shear walls of the 2nd system of shear walls (x direction):
K xi y ci ⋅ K xj
Fix = ⋅ F2x − ⋅M
∑ K xi
3,4
IP
1.6 E -4 ⋅1.6 E
F3 = ⋅ F2x − ⋅ M = 0.5 ⋅ F2x + 0.0625 ⋅ M =
3.2 E 102.4 E
=−0.5 ⋅
2
2
(
⋅ F2 + 0.0625 ⋅ - 6 2 F2 = ) −0.354 ⋅ F2 − 0.530 ⋅ F2 =−0.884 ⋅ F2
1.6 E 4 ⋅1.6 E
F4 = ⋅ F2x − ⋅ M = 0.5 ⋅ F2x + 0.0625 ⋅ M =
3.2 E 102.4 E
=−0.5 ⋅
2
2
(
⋅ F2 − 0.0625 ⋅ - 6 2 F2 = ) −0.354 ⋅ F2 + 0.530 ⋅ F2 =0.176 ⋅ F2
Wall
Pantalla Force
Força endue to F11
direcció
1 0,354 F1
2 0,354 F1
3 -0,354F1F1
0,354
4 -0,354F1F1
0,354
Wall
Pantalla Force
Força endue to F22
direcció
1 0,176 F2
2 -0,884 F2
3 -0,884 F2
4 0,176 F2
F2
Alternative solution 4
CEC
FORCE 1: 3
Does not produce torsion due to symmetry, then: 1
F
F1 = F2 = 1 2 = 0.354 F1
4
F1 2
F3 = F4 = − 2= −0.354 F1 F1
4
FORCE 2:
Note that, in terms of stiffness distribution, the plan is comparable to that of a
square of 8 m side with its centre of symmetry at the shear centre.
Shear walls have to resist the direct shear force given by F2 plus a torsion moment
that is F2·6·sqrt(2)=8.4853 F2 with respect to the shear centre. The increment of
shear force at each shear wall due to torsion is M/2/z=M/2/8=0.5303 F2
F1 = F4 = − 0.354+0.530=0.176 F2
F2 = F3 =
−0.354 − 0.530 =
−0.884 F2
Note that the stiffness distribution is rather inadequate and creates a considerable
torsion for the case of forces going through the mass barycentre.
How to improve the seismic behaviour
Shear walls 2 and 3 are more loaded (5 times) than the others.
This scenario implies the use of more steel reinforcement in shear walls 2 and 3.
The shear centre should be closer to the barycentre (where F2 is acting), in order
to reduce the magnitude of the torsion.
Options:
F2
a) increase stiffness of shear walls 2 and 3 4
CEC
b) locate the four shear walls along the 3
longer sides of the plan to get the 1
maximum distance among them.
2
F1
DESIGN OF A BUILDING WITH SHEAR FRAMES
Define loading-transfer direction of slabs, positions of columns, beams and

foundation.
The structure must bear vertical loads and horizontal actions.
Design the most regular layout for the structural system.
If irregular, consider the possibility to divide the building into blocks separated by
joints.
Decide carefully the position of the elevators or stairs boxes since they introduce
rigid elements and consequently:
- stress concentration and consequent reduction of global ductility;
- possible introduction of asymmetry in the stiffness distribution.
Distribute the columns uniformly on the plan to guarantee a uniform distribution of

stiffness along both directions.
Uniform distribution of piers in plan but stiffness to horizontal actions only in

one direction.
stairs
Rectangular
piers biga de cantell
Uniform distribution of columns in plan with stiffness to horizontal actions in

both directions.
stairs
biga de
cantell
rectangular piers
biga de cantell jàssera plana

5 Seismic Design of Buildings - English PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

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

5 Seismic Design of Buildings - English PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ETS CAMINS, CANALS I PORTS DE BARCELONA

Performance-Based Seismic Design and Assessment (PBSDA)

SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS

Earthquake resistant structures

INTRODUCTION ON SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDINGS

 Determination of the design action

 Damage acceptance criterion

 Selection of an adequate structuration

 Structural response analysis

 Detailed dimensioning of the structure with adequate constructive details

 Correct execution of the construction

RESISTANT MECHANISMS OF THE BUILDING

Different behaviour between flexible and rigid floor slab buildings.

Rigid and monolithic floor slabs

Influence of the configuration of the building in elevation and plan

The structural regularity plays a major role in the definition of the

Structural regularity contributes to the formation of ductile global

A good structural regularity can be achieved with a good architectural

Reduces the eccentricity between the mass centre (point of seismic

uniformity of the Good symmetry.

Even though they are

Access towers which are

Recommendable Not convenient

Not convenient Recommendable

Necessary symmetry and uniformity of the structure in plan.

Examples of buildings with “false symmetry” in plan.

Situations which must be avoided:

1.- Free ground floor

Inadequate geometries in elevation:

a) Flexible ground b) Abrupt reduction of c) Excessive

Situations which must be avoided by lack of uniformity:

Examples of stepped buildings.

Olive View Hospital, California 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.

Olive View Hospital, California 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.

(L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Short pillar effect

Shear failure Bending failure

Problems derived from a lack of uniformity in elevation

Mexico, 19 September 1985, m=8.1

STRUCTURAL REGULARITY: comparison

Central Bank and Bank of America in Managua, Nicaragua

Earthquake Managua (1972)

Earthquake Managua (1972)

Anchorage failure among elements. Bar anchorage failure in concrete structures

Complex and irregular shapes

The joints must have an

Incompatibility between parts which vibrate with different period or phase

Destruction due to the interaction (pounding) between buildings.

Incompatibility between adjacent buildings

Mexico, 19 September 1985, m=8.1

Mexico, 19 September 1985, m=8.1

Foundations have two purposes:

The vertical elements must be

The foundations must be designed

The main objective is the

They must be correctly

(L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Damage and fall of façade walls (L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

L’Aquila, 6 April 2009, m=5.9)

Coalinga Earthquake (California, 1983).

Non-structural elements prone to affect the structure behaviour:

Façades and roof members

Elevators and stairs boxes