Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14

Coming Attractions

(Code Changes)
W. Mark McGinley Ph.D., PE FASTM

Jan. 26, 2018


Period 5 Session 4
Frankfort
Earthquake Engineering
Short Course
Kentucky Geotechnical Engineering Group
1

Outline
• Discuss Changes in Seismic 
Procedures in ASCE 16
• Briefly discuss why and 
what is changed

1
ASCE 7 – Seismic Loading 
From presentation to NCSEA by C. Kircher

Research Projects Contributing to 2014 
USGS NSHM Updates (Luco, USGS)

+ Dozens of other updates summarized in the Commentary to 
Chapter 22 of ASCE 7‐16 and explained in the December 2015 
Special Issue of Earthquake Spectra journal 4

2
Moved Seismic loading to 
load Chapter 2 in ASCE 7  
5

Chapter 12 ‐ New Site Amplification Factors
First update since 1994 UBC
Much more data!
F a and F v range between 80%‐120% of 
previous values
Site Class D is no longer default for F a
Fa ≥ 1.2 (Site Class C “controls” in high shaking 
areas)

3
New Values of the Site Coefficient, Fa (Table 11.4‐1 of ASCE7‐16) 
(shown as proposed changes to ASCE 7‐10) Table 11.4‐1 Site Coefficient, Fa 

Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of SS. At the Site Class B-C boundary, Fa = 1.0 for all Ss levels. If
site classes A or B is established without the use of on-site geophysical measurements of shear wave velocity, use Fa = 1.0.

Note – Site Class B is no longer the “reference” site class of MCER ground motion parameters
Ss and S1 (i.e., new coefficients reflect Site Class BC boundary of 2,500 f/s) and Site Class D is
no longer the “default” site class (when Site Class C amplification is greater, i.e., SS ≥ 1.0)
See Section 11.4.8
Note – Site-Specific analysis required for Site Class E sites where SS ≥ 1.0 w/exception 7

New Values of the Site Coefficient, FV (Table 11.4‐2 of ASCE7‐16) 
(shown as proposed changes to ASCE 7‐10) 
Table 11.4‐2 Site Coefficient, Fv

Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of SS. At the Site Class B-C boundary, Fv = 1.0 for all Ss levels. If
site classes A or B is established without the use of on-site geophysical measurements of shear wave velocity, use Fv = 1.0.

Note – Site Class B is no longer the “reference” site class of MCER ground motion parameters
Ss and S1 (i.e., new coefficients reflect Site Class BC boundary of 2,500 f/s) and Site Class D is
no longer the “default” site class (when Site Class C amplification is greater, i.e., SS ≥ 1.0)
Note - Site-Specific analysis required for Site Class D sites where S1 ≥ 0.2 w/exceptions
Site-Specific analysis required for Site Class E sites where S1 ≥ 0.2 w/o exception 8

4
The “Problem” with ELF (MRSA) Methods
•Use of only two response periods (0.2s and 1.0s) to define ELF (and 
MRSA) design forces is not sufficient, in general, to accurately 
represent response spectral acceleration for all design periods of 
interest
–Reasonably Accurate (or Conservative) –When peak MCER response 
spectral acceleration occurs at or near 0.2s and peak MCER response 
spectral velocity occurs at or near 1.0s for the site of interest
–Potentially Non‐conservative –When peak MCER response spectral 
velocity occurs at periods greater than 1.0s for the site of interest(e.g., 
Site Class D and E sites whose seismic hazard is dominated by large 
magnitude events)
•Softer soil sites whose seismic hazard is dominated by large 
magnitude events
9

Example ELF “Design Spectrum” based on ASCE 
7‐16 (Revised) Site Factors M8.0 earthquake 
ground motions at R X = 8.5 km, Site Class D/E
2.0

ELF “Design Spectrum” MCEr - BC (Vs,30 = 2,500 fps)


1.8 Cs x (R/Ie) = min[SDS, SD1/T] MCEr - DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
Design DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)
1.6
ELF DE (Vs,30 = 600 fps)

1.4 ASCE 7-16 (Revised)


Fa = 0.9 = (1.0 + 0.8)/2
Spectral Acceleration (g)

1.2 Fv = 1.85 = (1.7 + 2.0)/2


Ts = 0.85s
1.0

0.8
Conservative

0.6
Non-Conservative
0.4
Ground Motion Values
0.2 SDS = 2/3FaSs = 2/3 x 0.9 x 1.56g = 0.94g
SD1 = 2/3FvS1 = 2/3 x 1.85 x 0.70g = 0.86g
0.0
0.1 1.0 10.0
Period (seconds)
10

5
New Site‐Specific Ground Motion 
Requirements
Required for the following site 
conditions:
Structures on Site Class E sites with 
Ss ≥ 1.0
Structures on Site Class D & E sites 
with S1 ≥ 0.2
However, exceptions to requiring 
site‐specific spectra provided if 
higher values of F a or C s are used
11

New Site‐Specific Ground Motion 
Requirements
Exceptions:
Structures on Site Class E sites with S s ≥ 1.0, 
provided F a  taken as from Site Class C
Structures on Site Class D & E sites with S 1  ≥ 
0.2, provided C s is  determined by Eq. 12.8‐2 
for T ≤ 1.5Ts  and taken as 1.5 times value 
computed by Eq. 12.8‐3 for T L ≥ T > 1.5Ts or Eq. 
12.8‐4 for T > T L
Note Ts = S D1 /S DS
Structures on Site Class E with S 1 ≥  0.2, 
provided  T ≤ Ts and ELF is used

12

6
US Areas Where S1  0.2 g

13

14

7
15

16

8
New Vertical Ground Motions 
Section 11.9 provides OPTIONAL vertical 
ground motions in lieu of Section 12.4.2.2 (E v ) 
for SDC C through F
Initially developed for the 2009 NEHRP 
Provisions
Keyed to S MS (MCE R ‐level ground motions)
Design spectrum taken as 2/3 MCE R spectrum

17

New Vertical Ground Motions 

18

9
Updated Requirements for 
Determination of C s and E v for short, 
regular structures
Section 12.8.1.3 allows S DS = 1.0 but not 
less than 70% of S DS  defined in Section 
11.4.4
No irregularities
Does not exceed five stories
T < 0.5sec
Meets the requirements for ρ = 1.0
Risk Category I and II
19

New Diaphragm Requirements
Section 12.10.3 required for precast 
concrete diaphragms; alternative for 
others
Complete new formulation
Includes potential reduction for 
diaphragm ductility
Based on analytical and physical 
research

20

10
New Diaphragm Requirements
Change also requires the use of Ω 0 for 
transfer diaphragms (Horizontal Irregularity 
Type 4—Out‐of‐Plane Offset )

Increased by
Ω0

21

New Structural Requirements for Sites 
Susceptible to Liquefaction
Current Section 11.8.2 requires 
geotechnical investigation, including 
liquefaction and lateral spreading
New Section 12.13.9 provides design 
requirements
12.13.9.2 Shallow Foundation Design
12.13.9.3 Deep Foundation Design

22

11
Section 12.13.9.2 Shallow Foundations
Buildings permitted to be supported on 
shallow foundations provided:

23

Section 12.13.9.2 Shallow Foundations
Shallow foundations meeting differential 
settlement criteria need only need to follow 
deem‐to‐comply detailing:
Individual footing ties: Ftie = 0.5μPu 
Footings integral with minimum 5” slab‐on‐
ground with ρ > 0.0025
Mat foundations need to be designed to 
accommodate expected vertical differential 
settlements

24

12
Section 12.13.9.3 Deep Foundations
Design requirements account for:
Down drag demands
Reduced lateral resistance
Concrete pile detailing (ACI reference)
Lateral spreading affect on piles 
deformations 
and demands
Foundation ties
25

Modifications to Modal Response 
Spectrum Analysis Method
Modified to require 100% of the mass
Introduces rigid body mode concept for 
T<0.05s
Exception allows 90% of mass as currently 
done
15% scaling reduction relative to ELF 
results is eliminated; must scale to 100% 
of ELF results
26

13
New Seismic Design Maps:
Based on USGS’s 2014 National 
Seismic Hazard Maps
New/updated fault characterizations
New Ground Motion Prediction 
Equations
And Changes also resulting from 
fragility curve β modification

27

THANK YOU !

QUESTIONS?

28

14