Comentarios-103 - Parte I - English

8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 1
Page 2
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_f 1/89
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 3
COMMENTS TO
ARGENTINE REGULATIONS
FOR CONSTRUCTIONS
SISMORRESISTENT
PART I
BUILDINGS
IN GENERAL
8/22/2019 Untitled
JULY 2018 EDITION
Page 4
INPRES INTI CIRSOC

Rogert Balet Nº 47 North Av. Cabildo 65 - Ala Savio Subsoil
(5400) San Juan (C1426AAA) Buenos Aires
Tel .: (54 264) 4239016 - 4239010 - PBX Fax: (54 11) 4779-5271 / 4779-5273
FAX: (54 264) 4234463 e-mail: cirsoc@inti.gob.ar
e-mail: giuliano@inpres.gov.ar cirsoc@fm.gob.ar
Internet: www.inpres.gov.ar Internet: www.inti.gob.ar/cirsoc
NATIONAL DIRECTOR: TECHNICAL DIRECTOR:

ING. ALEJANDRO P. GIULIANO ING. MARTA S. PARMIGIANI
NATIONAL SUB-DIRECTOR:
ING. MARIO BUFALIZA
8/22/2019 Untitled
© 2018
Edited by INTI
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
Av. Leandro N. Alem 1067 - 7th floor - Buenos Aires. Tel. 4515-5000 / 5001
The deposit established by law 11.723 is made. All rights reserved.

Partial or total reproduction prohibited without written authorization from the publisher. Printed
in Argentina.
Printed in Argentina.
Page 5
INTI CIRSOC
PROMOTING BODIES
Secretariat of Territorial Planning and Coordination of Public Works of the Nation
Ministry of Housing of the Nation
National Institute of Industrial Technology
National Seismic Prevention Institute
Ministry of Finance, Finance and Public Works of the Province of Neuquén
Interprovincial Council of Ministers of Public Works
Government of the City of Buenos Aires
National Road Directorate
Road Directorate of the Province of Buenos Aires
Federal Road Council
Argentine Chamber of Construction
Professional Civil Engineering Council
Portland Cement Manufacturers Association
Argentine Institute for Standardization and Certification
Techint
Acindar
ADHERENT MEMBERS
8/22/2019 Untitled
Argentine Association of Concrete Technology

Argentine Association of Structural Concrete
Argentine Association of Processed Concrete
Argentine Association of the Concrete Block
Association of Structural Engineers
Red Ceramic Industrial Chamber
Argentine Center of Engineers
Argentine Steel Institute
South Gas Conveyor
Quasdam Engineering
Argentine Society of Geotechnical Engineering
College of Engineers of the Province of Buenos Aires
Argentine Chamber of Aluminum and Related Metals
Argentine Chamber of Companies of Civil Engineering Foundations
Page 7
6
This Part I, “Constructions in General”, of the Argentine Regulations for

INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Earthquake Resistant Constructions, arises from an effort
joint between the following institutions and their respective representatives:
National Seismic Prevention Institute
Ing. Alejandro Giuliano
National University of Cuyo - Faculty of Engineering
Dr. Ing. Francisco Javier Crisafulli
Ing. José Giunta
Ms. Sc. Ing. Carlos Ricardo Llopiz
Ing. Agustín Benito Reboredo
National Technological University - Mendoza Regional Faculty
Ing. Eduardo Balasch
Ing. Carlos Daniel Frau
Ing. Daniel García Gei
Dr. Ing. Noemí Graciela Maldonado

8/22/2019 Untitled
Ing. Luis Matons
Ing. Eduardo Daniel Quiroga
Professional Council of Engineers and Geologists of Mendoza
Ing. Raúl Héctor Delle Donne
Ing. Roberto R. Nesossi
Mendoza Engineers Center
Ing. Juan Camps
Ing. Norberto González
Ing. Elías Japaz
Ing. Raúl Giménez Mathus
Page 8
The drafting commission was composed of the following professionals:
Ing. Eduardo Balasch
Ing. Juan Camps
Dr. Ing. Francisco Javier Crisafulli
Ing. Carlos Daniel Frau
Ing. Daniel García Gei
Ing. Alejandro Giuliano
Ing. José Giunta
Ms. Sc. Ing. Carlos Ricardo Llopiz
Dr. Ing. Noemí Graciela Maldonado
Ing. Eduardo Daniel Quiroga
Ing. Agustín Benito Reboredo
Special thanks:
The valuable collaboration of Ing. Daniel Alejandro Yañez belonging to
8/22/2019 Untitled
INTI / CIRSOC for the revision and edition of this document.
Page 9
FOREWORD
This Part I "General Construction" complements Part II

“Reinforced Concrete Construction”, to Part III “Construction of
Masonry ”and Part IV“ Steel Constructions ”of the Argentine Regulations
for earthquake resistant constructions, INPRES-CIRSOC 103.
While the country's seismic zoning is maintained, new ones are included
design spectra that contemplate six site profiles. Design spectra
of pseudo accelerations include not only the area controlled by acceleration and by
speed, but also the area controlled by displacement. In this way
it is possible to obtain spectra of congruent displacements for use
alternative of a displacement design.
Traditional structural analysis methods are included. The treatment of
8/22/2019 Untitled
torsional effects aims to more fully reflect the behavior of the

Inelastic field construction. The irregularities in plan and elevation are
they deal in more detail than in the previous Regulation, with the purpose of emphasizing the
importance of building configuration in seismic performance.
Finally, the problem of existing constructions is addressed.
We are convinced that the improvements introduced in this new Part I

of the Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions, INPRES-CIRSOC
103, tend to the safety of buildings, and are presented in a way
clear, so they are expected to be well received by professionals
seismic design managers.
Inga Marta S. PARMIGIANI Ing. Alejandro P. GIULIANO

Technical director National Director
INTI-CIRSOC INPRES
Page 10
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 11
INDEX
COMMENTS TO CHAPTER 1
OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS
C 1.1. OBJECTIVES one
C 1.2. REACHES two
C 1.3. ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS two
C 1.3.1. National and local Regulation Council two
C 1.3.3. Responsible for the application of the Regulation two
C 1.3.3.1. Professional Responsibility two
8/22/2019 Untitled
C 1.3.3.2. Responsibility of the owner or user of the work 3
C 1.3.3.3. Control of the application of the Regulation 3
C 1.4. INSTRUMENTAL AND MEASUREMENTS 3
SEISMIC ACTION: ZONING AND EVALUATION METHODS
C 2.2. Seismic zoning 5
C 2.3. CLASSIFICATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE 5
C 2.3.1. Soil influence, C 2.3.3. Classification of sites with stratified soils 5
C 2.4. CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTIONS ACCORDING TO THEIR DESTINATION AND

FUNCTIONS 6
C 2.5. APPLICATION OF SISMORRESISTENT REQUIREMENTS 7
C 2.6. STRUCTURAL REGULARITY 7
C 2.6.1. Regularity in plant 8
C 2.6.2. Regularity in height 10
C 2.7. METHODS FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION 12
C 2.7.1. Simplified verification 12
C 2.7.2. Static method, C 2.7.3. Dynamic methods 12

COMMENTS TO ANNEX B - Art. 2.3.2. RISK ASSESSMENT OF
SOIL LICUATION
C B.3. SOILS OUTSIDE THE CONDITIONS ESTABLISHED IN B.1 AND B.2 14
SPECTROS, ACTIONS AND DESIGN COMBINATIONS
C 3.1. INTRODUCTION fifteen
C 3.4. REFERENCE LEVEL fifteen

INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I I
Page 12
C 3.4.2. Reference level in subsoil constructions fifteen
C 3.5. DESIGN SPECTERS fifteen
C 3.5.1. Design spectra for horizontal actions for Ultimate Limit State
(THE U) 16
C 3.5.1.2. Damping Influence 16
C 3.5.2. Vertical seismic actions for Ultimate Limit State (ELU) 16

C 3.6. GRAVITATORY ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED TO EVALUATE THE ACTION
HORIZONTAL SEISMIC 17
8/22/2019 Untitled
C 3.6.1. Common buildings 17
C 3.7. COMBINATION OF SHARES 17
C 3.7.1. Last Limit States 17
SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATION OF THE SEISMIC SECURITY
C 4.1. APPLICATION LIMITS 19
C 4.1.1. Geometric conditions 19
C 4.1.2. Type of construction and structures 19

C 4.2. SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATION 19
C 4.2.1. Seismic design coefficient 19
CONSTRUCTION BEHAVIOR FACTORS
INFLUENCE OF THE LAST CONSTRUCTION BEHAVIOR twenty-one
C 5.1. REDUCTION FACTOR 26
C 5.1.1. Reduction factor R for structures composed of different elements 26
C 5.1.2. Constructions whose destiny requires elastic behavior 26
C 5.2. DEFORMATION AMPLIFICATION FACTOR 27
C 5.3. OVERHER RESISTANCE FACTOR 27
STATIC METHOD
C 6.1. Seismic actions 29
C 6.2. HORIZONTAL ACTIONS 30
C 6.2.1. Cutting effort at the base 30
C 6.2.2. Seismic design coefficient 30
Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions II
Page 13
C 6.2.3. Fundamental period of structure vibration 30
C 6.2.4. Distribution of seismic actions 31
C 6.2.4.1. Height distribution 32
C 6.2.4.2. Accidental twisting 32
C 6.4. DEFORMATIONS 33
8/22/2019 Untitled
C 6.6. INFLUENCE OF MASS ROTATIONS AROUND AXES
HORIZONTALS 3. 4
C 6.6.1. Cases of mandatory consideration 3. 4
C 6.6.2. Static evaluation of rotational influence 3. 4
DYNAMIC METHODS
C 7.1. GENERALITIES 35
C 7.1.1. Seismic excitation application 35
C 7.1.2. Vibratory Analysis Model 35
C 7.2. SPECTRAL MODAL PROCEDURE 35
C 7.2.1. Determination of natural modes of vibration 36
C 7.2.2. Response Determination 36
C 7.2.3. Ways to consider 36
C 7.2.4. Modal overlay 37
C 7.2.5. Minimum Requests 37
C 7.2.6. Accidental Twist 37
C 7.3. LINEAR RESPONSE PROCEDURE IN TIME 37
C 7.3.1. Accelelerograms to use 38
C 7.3.2. Requests 38
C 7.3.3. Accidental Twist 38
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
C 8.1. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS METHODS 39
C 8.1.1. Linear elastic analysis 39
C 8.1.2. Other methods 39
C 8.2. STRUCTURAL MODELING 40
C 8.2.1. Deformability of the diaphragms 40
C 8.2.1.2. Fully flexible diaphragm 42
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I III
Page 14
C 8.2.2. Soil deformability 42
C 8.3. STRUCTURAL PARTICULARITIES 42
C 8.3.1. Influence of structural irregularities 42

8/22/2019 Untitled
C 8.3.1.1. Extreme irregularities in plan or height 43
C 8.3.1.2. Discontinuity of components in vertical seismic resistant elements 43
C 8.3.1.3. Discontinuity outside the plane of seismic resistant elements 43
C 8.3.1.4. Weak floor 44
C 8.3.2. Structural systems or components not considered part of the

earthquake resistant structure 44
C 8.3.3. Components or systems considered non-structural 44
C 8.3.4. Influence of fillings in porches 44
C 8.3.5. Mezzanines without beams 46
C 8.4.1. Structural regularity control 46
C 8.4.2. Control of horizontal floor distortion in building constructions 46
C 8.4.3. Checking the conditions of regularity in height 47
C 8.4.4. P-Delta effect (2nd order effect) 47
C 8.4.5. Hammering effects, separations and seismic joints 47
C 8.4.5.1. Separation between new and existing buildings 47
C 8.4.5.2. Separation of a block construction 48
C 8.4.5.3. Dimensioning separations and seismic joints 48
PARTICULARITIES OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
C 9.1. DIAPHRAGMS 49
C 9.1.2. Verification of connections and manifolds 49
C 9.2. FOUNDATIONS 49
C 9.2.3. Surface foundations in potentially liquefiable soils 49
C 9.2.4. Foundation Bracing 49
C 9.2.4.1. Bracing dimensioning 49
C 9.3. SEPARATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION JOINTS fifty
ANNEX TO THE COMMENTS OF CHAPTER 9
FOUNDATIONS
To 9.0. SYMBOLS 52
A 9.1. DETERMINATION OF THE FOUNDATION LOAD CAPACITY 52
Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions IV
Page 15
8/22/2019 Untitled
A 9.2. CONSTRUCTION MINIMUM FOR CONCRETE PILOTS OR CYLINDERS
ARMED 54
A 9.3. TYPES OF ARRIOSTRAMIENTOS 54
CONSTRUCTION PARTS AND NON-STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
C 10.1. SCOPE 57
C 10.2. EVALUATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION ON PARTS OF THE

BUILDING 57
C 10.2.1. Importance factor 58
C 10.2.2. Dynamic amplification factor 58
C 10.2.3. Response Modification Factor 58
C 10.2.4. Magnification factor in height 58
C 10.3. SUPPORTS, LINKS AND FIXATIONS 58
EXISTING CONSTRUCTIONS
C 11.1. REACHES 61
C 11.3. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 61
C 11.4. CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTIONS 62
C 11.4.1. Importance of the current work 62
C 11.4.2. Seismic-resistant quality of primitive work 62
C 11.4.3. Seismic-resistant ability of primitive work 63
C 11.5. EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED 63
C 11.5.2. Constructive requirements 63
C 11.5.2.3. Metal constructions 64
C 11.6. REQUIREMENTS AND CHECKS 64
C 11.7. CONSTRUCTION PARTS 66
REFERENCES 69
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I V
Page 16
8/22/2019 Untitled
TABLE INDEX
Table C 2.1. Applicability of structural analysis methods 13
Table C 9.1. Dimensions and minimum bracing reinforcement 55
Table C 11.1. Parameters for the evaluation of earthquake resistant quality 62
Table C 11.2. Requirements for construction interventions:

C1 quality 64
C2 quality 65
C3 quality 66
C4 quality 67
INDEX OF FIGURES
Figure C 2.1. Regularity in plant 9
Figure C 2.2. Regularity in height eleven
Figure C 5.1. Force curves - deformation of two simple structures 22
Figure C 5.2. Force curves - deformation of two typical structures 2. 3
Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions SAW
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 17
OBJECTIVES, SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS
C 1.1. OBJECTIVES
The intensity of the seismic action exceeds the human capacity to predict it. For other
economic considerations force to accept damages in the constructions for the
case of occurrence of destructive earthquakes. Finally the claim to endure
destructive earthquake actions without damage leads to extremely large accelerations
in constructions that can hardly be supported by their occupants or by their
content. Therefore, the possibility of
damage to the design earthquake, which is defined by the spectra established in the
Chapter 3.
In this way, structural and non-structural damage can be expected for the earthquake of
design, because the regulation admits inelastic behavior of structures and accepts
deformations that can also cause damage to non-structural components.
For earthquakes more intense than that of design, the probability of collapse of
the constructions are low although they can be seriously damaged.
On the other hand, it is considered necessary that certain constructions withstand intense earthquakes
with less damage than others; are those that by their occupation, function or because they are
Essential facilities for the community. That's why constructions are classified
by their destination and they are assigned a design earthquake of varying intensity according to the destination.
It should be emphasized that even for relatively frequent earthquakes in many constructions
It is impossible to avoid damages or guarantee their absence. However the
Compliance with these Regulations is intended to give a high degree of protection to life,
although with structural or non-structural damage. The objective of the regulation is to establish
the minimum requirements to provide reasonable and prudent security of life.
If you want to reduce the damage, the design must not only provide resistance but also
Enough rigidity to limit deformations. The damage of the components does not
Structural can be reduced if deformations are adequately limited and taken care of
the details carefully. Non-structural components can be separated from the
structure so that they are not affected by the deformations of the latter, it must be
provide sufficient play for glass, cladding, partitions and wall panels;
fixing devices must also be provided that prevent falling or detachment. Yes
the components are rigidly attached to the structure must be protected from
deformations that can damage them, otherwise the damages are of greater magnitude. He
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I Com. chap. eleven
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 18
you must recognize that in a severe earthquake the deformations may be greater than the
Horizontal floor distortion limits specified in the Regulation.
The resilient system must provide a continuous path of actions for the
balance, however experience shows that this principle is ignored
frequently and that is why significant damage and even collapse appear. The basis for
This design requirement are two:
1) Ensure that the designer has clearly identified the earthquake resistant system and the
appropriate level of analysis.
2) Ensure that the basic hypotheses and the seismic-resistant system are clearly
expressed in the project documents for consideration in future modifications
of the structure (see 1.3.4.2.b).
C 1.2. REACHES
The works that due to their exceptional importance, their destiny or their particularities
Constructive require special studies are excluded from the Regulation in its details.
However, the provisions of this Regulation should be considered guidelines
guidelines to define the project criteria, analysis, dimensioning, detailed and
building.
The projects and methods of review and control of these constructions should be
submitted to a review by an independent special committee to be appointed by the
Application Authority Eventually the opinion of the National Council should be required.
of the INPRES-CIRSOC Regulation 103 .
C 1.3. ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS
C 1.3.1. National and local Regulation Council
The purpose of this Council is to clarify the doubts of interpretation that may arise from the
Application of this Regulation. Each jurisdiction must establish a system to channel
inquiries or requirements to the Commission. It is considered inevitable that during the
application of this Regulation appear doubts and divergences of interpretation between the
different responsible and a stable body is needed to clarify them.
C 1.3.3. Responsible for the application of the Regulation
C 1.3.3.1. Professional Responsibility
Recent earthquakes show that damage to non-structural components, equipment and
8/22/2019 Untitled
Facilities are increasingly significant in terms of risk. In addition, every time
They represent a higher percentage of the cost of the work.
Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions Com. chap. 1 - 2
Page 19
The professionals in charge of the structure have no responsibility for this type of
components, while in most cases those components are installed
when the structure has been completed. That is why it is necessary to define whose is the
responsibility for the seismic safety of these components while
prevent the remaining members of the professional community.
C 1.3.3.2. Responsibility of the owner or user of the work
The professionals finish their effective link with the work at the conclusion of it,
With the definitive reception. The person in charge is therefore the owner or
user. However, the work suffers deterioration and modifications in the course of life
Useful. This paragraph of the regulation warns of the need to maintain fitness
Seismic resistant intended and defines the relevant responsibility.
C 1.3.3.3. Control of the application of the Regulation
Attention is drawn to the need to control the works from the point of view of the
Regulation application. It is necessary to establish an efficient system to control the
Application of the Regulation in all instances of the work. That system is designated
generically "Application Authority".
The Regulation will only be effective if its application is controlled, as the

Experience of many earthquakes worldwide. The limits of liability
established by the current legal framework (Civil Code), are not sufficient in the case of
seismic actions In effect, the construction is tested at the time of putting it in
service for own and use charges. The test for seismic action can occur
long afterwards, even when those who designed and built it no longer exist.
C 1.4. INSTRUMENTAL AND MEASUREMENTS
The instrumentation of the constructions is necessary among others, for two reasons. The
first is to improve knowledge about the movement of the soil as a result of seismicity
local. The second is to know the behavior of constructions subjected to earthquakes
intense This article reproduces and improves the provisions contained in Regulations
precedents and extends them to infrastructure works.
8/22/2019 Untitled
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I Com. chap. 1 - 3
Page 20
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 21
SEISMIC ACTION: ZONING AND EVALUATION METHODS
C 2.2. Seismic zoning
The seismic hazard in the national territory is defined based on studies conducted up to
1983. It is based on the estimation of the energy released considering the seismic history and the
records obtained since the beginning of the instrumentation in the Republic.
It is basically the same zoning included in the 1983 version of INPRES Regulation-
CIRSOC 103 .
With the advancement of microzonation and failure studies, as well as the rate of
deformation of faults may change that zoning in the future. They can also
change factors become effective due to proximity to failures, expressed in
specific maps, as happens, for example, in the United States.
C 2.3. CLASSIFICATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE

ION
All Regulations consider the influence of soil on the seismic effect on the
building. In previous versions, this influence was related to the admissible tension
of the ground to design the foundations. However subsequent investigations have
demonstrated that the influence is related to a more important mass of soil and not
a geotechnical parameter of a given stratum. It has been proven that for
common constructions should be considered the influence of the upper thirty meters
of soil. This is why the expression “ Classification of the soil ” of the
earlier versions and instead the expression " Site classification " is adopted to
characterize the design spectra.
8/22/2019 Untitled
C 2.3.1. Soil influence, C 2.3.3. Classification of sites with stratified soils
The most significant property for site classification is the average speed of
shear wave propagation for small amplitudes, V sm . However not always
this data is available, so the correlation with the test results is accepted
Standard penetration ( SPT ), for all floors and with that of cut resistance not
drained, S um , for clays.
When the soil is stratified, average values resulting from an average are used.
weighted.
Page 22
The sites are classified into six categories from A to F . The latter ( F ), requires
special studies for dynamic instability phenomena, such as liquefaction or instability
of slopes.
The method presented in the Regulation appears as of direct application. But nevertheless
there are aspects that require interpretation and additional engineering judgment.
The site classification should reflect the soil conditions that will modify the
induced movement in the structure or a significant part of it. For structures that
they receive movement through surface foundations, such as shoes, plates, piles,
or structures in which the movement of the soil is transmitted by the subsoil walls,
It is reasonable to classify the site at the base of 30m of soil below the ground surface.
Sites with very heterogeneous and erratic soils can lead to exaggerated estimates
or insufficient. In them it becomes necessary to densify the explorations and interpret the
results with engineering criteria rather than mechanically apply the included expressions
in 2.3.3.
On the other hand the constructions on sloping soils or basal rock in slope with
horizontal natural surface may require careful studies because the excitation of the
Soil may vary throughout construction. In those cases they may be necessary
site-specific studies that include three-dimensional modeling of the spread of
waves. The same happens when the topography is very variable. Those studies can
require the intervention of specialists.
C 2.4. CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTIONS ACCORDING TO THEIR DESTINATION AND

FUNCTIONS
8/22/2019 Untitled
The classification of the constructions according to their destiny exists from the first versions
Modern seismic design regulations. Its purpose is to ensure that
constructions are projected based on a uniform seismic risk, that is to say that the
more important or more dangerous constructions can withstand more intense earthquakes with
the same performance as those belonging to minor categories. He
understand that the seismic risk is a function of the danger of the area and of the
consequences of potential collapse. Classification is maintained in four groups of
risk as in previous versions.
The classification is based on:
a) The degree of occupation.
b) The need for immediate occupation or operation after an earthquake.
c) The risk or value of the content.
Page 23
The examples that accompany the description of each group should be understood within the
conceptual framework exposed and considering the influence that construction under study
may have on neighboring buildings or on their means of access. The classification is
expressed in a risk factor, r γ , which will then be used to modify the seismic demand
About the structure
C 2.5. APPLICATION OF SISMORRESISTENT REQUIREMENTS
It is considered that in seismic zone 0 - zone of very low seismic danger - the
probability of destructive earthquakes is low enough to allow
accept that structures capable of supporting wind action may have a
Acceptable performance for seismic events. However, a lower limit is established
for the resistant capacity of the construction. That way the verification can be
expeditious The designer can simply amplify the effects of the wind up to
Reach the required baseline cut.
C 2.6. STRUCTURAL REGULARITY
It is recognized that “ structural regularity ” - concept of difficult quantitative expression -
it is a condition that guarantees the reliability of the prediction of the response of the
construction against seismic excitations. Therefore it is a desirable design objective. A) Yes
This is demonstrated by the experience of many earthquakes, particularly the most recent.
In a regular structure the inelastic demands produced by seismic movements
8/22/2019 Untitled
strong tend to distribute well throughout the structure, resulting in a dispersion of the
dissipation of energy and damage. In irregular structures inelastic behavior
it can concentrate on the areas of irregularity resulting in a rapid failure of the
corresponding structural elements. Additionally some irregularities
introduce unforeseen requests into the structure, often not considered by
the designers when they detail the resistant system. Finally the analysis methods
elastic typically employed for structural analysis often cannot predict
well the distribution of seismic demands in irregular structures, leading to
Improper design in areas of irregularity. For these reasons the requirements
They are oriented to ensure that constructions have regular configurations and
prohibit large irregularities in buildings near active faults, where
they expect very strong seismic movements and extreme inelastic demands.
Regularity has an influence on the choice of the method of analysis but also has
influence on the reliability of its results. For that reason and although in the Regulation
links regularity with the choice of the method of analysis, it is necessary to consider the
design to reduce irregularities.
Page 24
The classification is based on the study of the deformations of the resistant system,
considered as spatial structure, and in geometric conditions. All of them are from
Simple evaluation but must be interpreted conceptually. It is obvious that
deformations are the first results of the analysis to evaluate and that if the results
they are not satisfactory the designer should redesign the structure to improve it.
The conditions of torsional regularity in plant and of regularity of stiffness in height are
particularly important and it has been considered necessary to limit irregularity in
seismic zones 3 and 4 for the most important constructions from the point of view
seismic, that is, those of height greater than three levels. This means that, if the results
of the analysis show that the irregularity is excessive, the designer must redesign the
structure to reduce it.
Attention is drawn to the need to conceptually interpret the conditions of

regularly, without trying limit or forced interpretations to fit the construction into
certain category Rather, the designer should, in doubt, apply the most
restrictive.
C 2.6.1. Regularity in plant
Table 2.3 indicates under what circumstances a construction should be designed as

irregular plan for the purpose of this Regulation. A building can have a shape
geometric symmetric without recesses or wings but still be classified as irregular in plan
8/22/2019 Untitled
by the vertical distribution of masses or resistant elements. An important cause of

irregularity is the lack of coincidence between the centers of mass and stiffness, which causes
torsional movements in construction. Consequently, several aspects are addressed
to define the regularity in plant:
• Torsional regularity (Lines 1 a , 1 b and 1 c of Table 2.3):
Importance of torsional movements when forces are applied to the mass center of
each level In complex structures it is difficult to define the center of stiffness at each level. By
that has been preferred to compare the relative floor displacements of the edges of the
construction with the average displacement. It is obvious that this comparison can only
be done quantitatively after a first structural analysis; although the designer
You can, according to your experience, estimate more or less favorable configurations.
• Continuity of the resistant elements (Lines 2 a and 2 b of Table 2.3):
It refers to the coplanarity in height of all the components of each element

resistant. In many cases the needs of a functional or aesthetic project lead to
move the components to a parallel plane with respect to the location in the levels
adjacent. This configuration creates actions perpendicular to the plane of the element that does not
Page 25
they are easily quantifiable and, most seriously, create discontinuities that tend to
concentrate the demands of ductility.
• Orthogonality or symmetry of the resistant elements (Lines 3 a and 3 b of the
Table 2.3):
When the elements are not orthogonal or are not doubly symmetrical it is difficult to predict
the main plans of the construction, on which the action would ideally be applied
Seismic in the static method. More importantly, there is a strong link between
the movements in two orthogonal directions, so the static method is
inapplicable. Finally, it is difficult to ensure a reasonably uniform distribution of the
inelastic demand in those cases.
Figure C 2.1. exemplify the conditions indicated.
∆ mk = (∆ bk max + ∆ bk min ) / 2
Regularity ∆ bk / ∆ mk ≤ 1.2
∆ bk max
Medium Irregularity 1.2 < ∆ bk / ∆ mk ≤ 1.4
∆ bk min ∆ bk / ∆ mk ≥ 1.4
Extreme Irregularity
8/22/2019 Untitled
K level
K-1 level
K-2 level
a) EVALUATION OF TORSIONAL REGULARITY
E1 E2
d1 d2
d 1 is parallel displacement
to the plane of element E 1 .
d 2 is the setback in the plane

of element E 2 .
b) ORTOGONALITY AND SIMETRY c) DEFINITION OF DISPLACEMENT

AND RETRANK
Figure C 2.1. Regularity in plant
Page 26
C 2.6.2. Regularity in height
Table 2.4 indicates under what circumstances a structure should be considered irregular in
height. The irregularities in height affect the response at different levels and induce
forces at those levels that are significantly different from the distribution assumed by
the static method established in Chapter 6. The irregularities in the configuration
Vertical construction can be summarized in the following aspects:
• Stiffness regularity (Lines 1 a , 1 b and 1 c of Table 2.4):
It may happen that the height of a level or the dimensions of the system components
are very different from those of adjacent levels. Although in the
Literature is often related to this concept with the " floor stiffness " in these Regulations
it has been preferred to link it with the regularity of the system deformation, represented by
the relative displacements of successive levels. This is so for two reasons. The
first is that what matters is the behavior of the system, rather than that of the
individual elements The second is that it is difficult to assess the stiffness of floor structures
8/22/2019 Untitled
with strong coupling between floors, as is the case with structures with partitions, as is
Frequent practice in our country.
• Mass regularity (Line 2 of Table 2.4):
This condition is easy to understand and its evaluation is very simple.
• Regularity of horizontal dimensions (Line 3 of Table 2.4):
This condition refers to the dimensions of the resistant system, not the dimensions
construction physics. That is to say that the distances between the
extreme elements Differences in distances between resistant elements
they cause irregularities of the torsional rigidity of the construction. The differences in
physical dimensions are more related to mass differences, considered in the
previous point
• Vertical configuration of the resistant elements (Lines 4 a and 4 b of the Table
2.4):
The table presents two aspects to consider. One is the continuity of dimensions of the
components of the elements: if the components are uniform in height or their
increasing dimensions from top to bottom (that is, following the law of distribution of
full construction efforts) construction is considered regular.
The other aspect is the continuity of configuration of the vertical elements. Sometimes
it is necessary to produce setbacks in the plane of the elements, for example by moving
a partition at a level with respect to adjacent levels in the direction of the plane of the
Page 27
element. The construction can be considered regular if the setback is less than the
item length
Both conditions must be met simultaneously for the construction to be

consider regular.
• Regularity of lateral resistance (Lines 5 a and 5 b of Table 2.4):
Lateral resistance is understood as the resistance for the overall shear stress to be supported.
for the construction The condition tends to avoid the appearance of weak levels or floors in the
that the inelastic demands would be concentrated.
The lateral resistance at each level is the sum of the shear resistance of the elements
resistant. However, attention should be paid to the internal link conditions that
8/22/2019 Untitled
They can limit the cutting capacity of vertical components. It is the case of columns,
for example, that to develop all their capacity to cut depend on the capacity to
bending of the beams.
This condition is critical for constructions of a certain height because the weak floor is usually
cause of very serious damage, in many cases the collapse.
Lk+1
Lk>Lk+1
K + 1 level K + 1 level K + 1 level
K level K level K level
HE=H
K-1 level K-1 level
∆ mk + 1 K-1 level
∆ mk
∆ mk
LR
LE
Regular ∆ mk ≤1.4∆ mk + 1 Average Irregularity:

1.4∆ mk + 1 ≤∆ mk ≤1.7∆ mk + 1
e.1) REGULARITY
a) RIGIDITY REGULARITY Extreme Irregularity:
∆ mk > 1,7∆ mk + 1 OF ELEMENTS
Lk+1
a) EVALUATION OF TORSIONAL REGULARITY L k <L k + 1
K + 1 level
W k+1 K + 1 level K + 1 level
H
Lk+1 V uk + 1
K level Wk K level K level
HE
Lk V uk
K-1 level
W k-1 K-1 level K-1 level
L2 LR
L 1 <L 2 LE
0.7 ≤ W k / W k + 1 ≤ 1.3 0.7 ≤ L k / L k + 1 ≤ 1.3 V uk / V uk + 1 ≥ 0.80 e.2) IRREGULARITY

OF ELEMENTS
b) REGULARITY c) REGULARITY d) REGULARITY
OF MASSES GEOMETRIC OF RESISTANCE
Figure C 2.2 Height regularity
Page 28
C 2.7. METHODS FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION
C 2.7.1. Simplified Verification
Simplified verification is an expedited procedure applicable to little constructions

Slender and with a regular structuring of walls. The application criteria must be
interpreted in a restrictive sense. The only verification is the shear resistance of the
walls.
C 2.7.2. Static Method, C 2.7.3. Dynamic methods
Table C 2.7.1. shows the applicable methods in each case according to the conditions of
8/22/2019 Untitled
regularly established in 2.6.
The static method represents the seismic action by a set of horizontal forces
parallel to the direction under study and applied to each of the masses that make up the
building. The analysis is performed in two directions independently and assumes that
both displacements and torsional movements in each direction are
decoupled, that is, they do not influence each other. Therefore it is not applicable to
irregular structures in plan, or with periods of vibration very close for each
of directions if the centers of mass and stiffness are almost coincidental.
The modal spectral analysis assumes that the response to seismic excitation can be
represent by overlapping individual responses to each of the modes of
vibration, whose excitation would be given by the spectral acceleration corresponding to its
period. It was originally limited to the analysis of symmetric structures so that the analysis
could be limited to a degree of freedom by mass, in which the answer for each of
The addresses could be considered independent. Today, with the diffusion of computers
powerful personal and spatial analysis programs it is possible to become independent of that
limitation. Consequently, a three-dimensional model will generally be used, with three
degrees of freedom, two translations and one rotation, by mass.
Both methods are based on the simplification of considering the plasticization of the structure
by means of a modification factor of the response R applied to the design spectrum
elastic. This means that the structure can plasticize more or less uniformly in
All its extension. Therefore they are irrelevant when the structure presents
irregularities that may cause ductility demands concentrated in a few
places or levels Torsional actions are considered in the same way by both
methods The fundamental difference between both methods consists in the distribution of
forces in height. While the static method is based on the influence of the first mode
of vibration, with some correction to take into account the second mode in structures
of long period, the spectral modal analysis allows to evaluate the influence of all
vibration modes of the structure.
Page 29
The nonlinear behavior of complex structures can only be evaluated

adequately through static or dynamic nonlinear analysis methods. In this
The latter case is about the direct integration of the movement equations. These
methods are mainly used in research papers and their use requires
the exhaustive justification of the hypotheses and the model used, as well as the validity of
the results. The main utility of its application to specific cases, also possible today
With the computers available among professionals, it is sequence tracking
8/22/2019 Untitled
of plasticizing to be able to correct the excessive ductility demands.
The comments in chapters 6 and 7 extend considerations on the application of

Each of the methods.
Table C 2.1. Applicability of structural analysis methods

Areas Areas
Kind of Condition of Seismic Seismic

Line Line Case 3 and 4 0, 1 and 2
regularity regularity
To o TO BA or TO B
1a Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND

Irregularity
one Torsional 1b D AND AND AND AND AND
Half
Irregularity
1c R R R R D D
Extreme
Regularity Continuity of 2a Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND
two
in plant Elements Irregular AND AND AND AND AND AND
2b
Table 2.3
3 Orthogonality
3b Irregular AND AND AND AND AND AND
Corners 4a Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND

4
starters 4b Irregular D D AND AND AND AND

Irregularity
one Rigidity 1b D AND AND D AND AND
Half
Irregularity
1c R R R R D AND
Extreme
Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND
two Masses
Regularity Irregular D D D D D AND
in height Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND
Dimensions
Table 2.4 3
Horizontal Irregular D D D D D AND
Retranqueos 4a Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND

4
in your plane 4b Irregular AND AND AND AND AND AND
Resistance 5a Regular AND AND AND AND AND AND

5
Horizontal 5b Irregular R R R R D AND
E : Static Method; D : Dynamic Methods; R : Redesign the Structure

Page 30
COMMENTS TO ANNEX B - Art. 2.3.2. EVALUATION OF

RISK OF SOIL LICUATION.
The methods for assessing the risk of soil liquefaction are included as an annex
8/22/2019 Untitled
Because they are very specialized and because they are constantly evolving. Those who know
Present respond to the current state of the art.
Sites can fall into three categories: those in which the liquefaction is
improbable, those in which it is probable and those of doubtful behavior.
C B.3. SOILS OUTSIDE THE CONDITIONS ESTABLISHED IN B.1. And B.2.
The assessment of the risk of liquefaction of soils included in the latter category
It is a delicate task that requires the intervention of specialized laboratories and
Professional experts in the field.
When deep foundations are adopted within the framework of the EXCEPTION of this
Article, it is important to consider the effect of liquefaction of the intermediate layer. Is
it is probable that the mass of this layer oscillates in contraphase with the construction and its
foundations This may cause deformations and additional requests on the
Foundation structure that should be considered.
Page 31
8/22/2019 Untitled
SPECTROS, ACTIONS AND DESIGN COMBINATIONS
C 3.1. INTRODUCTION
Seismic excitation is defined by means of elastic pseudo spectra.

absolute accelerations. They express total accelerations as fractions of the
acceleration of gravity, depending on the period of vibration of the construction. The shape
and magnitude of said spectra depend on the seismic zone, on the characteristics of the site
and of the damping factor.
This way of expressing the seismic excitation, accepted internationally, then allows
work directly with the weights of the vibrating masses to determine the actions of
corresponding inertia.
Acelerograms whose temporary dynamics are used in Chapter 7

characteristics are defined in the same chapter but are related to the
spectra defined in this chapter.
C 3.4. REFERENCE LEVEL
C 3.4.2. Reference level in subsoil constructions
The development of the thrusts between the floor and the wall must be guaranteed. This condition is
considered satisfied if the walls are concreted directly against the ground. If the
construction requires a filling between the wall and the floor, the compaction of the filling must
guarantee a compactness at least equal to that of the surrounding soil. Subsoil
they can have contact with the ground in only one direction or even one way to
A certain address. For each case we will have to consider the most
unfavorable
C 3.5. DESIGN SPECTERS
The elastic design spectra presented in this Regulation differ from those
corresponding to Regulation INPRES-CIRSOC 103 of the year 1991. The latter were
heavily influenced by Seed's investigations, after the San earthquake
Fernando, 1971. Basically, the influence of the site was taken into account by a single
amplification factor applicable to the speed-controlled area of the spectrum. The
Mexico earthquake of 1985 and, subsequently, that of Loma Prieta of 1989 showed that the
site influence impacted not only on the speed-controlled zone, but also on
Page 32
8/22/2019 Untitled
the area controlled by acceleration, suggesting the incorporation of two factors of

amplification, one for each zone of the spectrum.
In this way, the coefficients C a and C v incorporate these amplification factors. These
coefficients are not only a function of the site, but also of the level of seismic danger of
the area (Table 3.1). In all cases, the spectrum ceiling amplifies the acceleration of the
land by 2.5 ; instead of 3.0 of Regulation INPRES-CIRSOC 103 of the year 1991, of
According to the current trend.
Another important change is the incorporation of the T 3 period that divides the spectrum area
controlled by the speed of the controlled by the displacement. The first varies with the
inverse of T and the second with the inverse of T 2 . This makes the demands of
displacement grow linearly with T in the speed-controlled zone, and it
keep constant from T 3 , according to the trends of the real spectra.
Actually, travel demands for very long periods should be

equal to the displacement of the land, but these long periods are outside the
periods of interest for the usual structures.
During the discussion process within the Editorial Committee of this Regulation,
The concern was raised to incorporate the effects of directivity for sites near
active failures. Taking into account that in the country, in general, they are not even
identified or cataloged active faults, it was decided, for seismic zones 4 and 3 ,
incorporate the factors N a and N v , according to the criteria of UBC-97 , with values
constant and valid for the whole area. This gives the possibility that each province or
municipality, if you carry out active failure studies, you can incorporate the results,
defining appropriate values for N a and N v depending on the distance in the fault.
C 3.5.1. Design spectra for horizontal actions for Ultimate Limit State
(THE U)
C 3.5.1.2. Damping Influence
It is admitted that the damping may be greater than 5% when considering the
influence of the soil or the installation of devices that increase the damping. In
both cases must justify the final value adopted to the satisfaction of the Authority of
Application.
The procedures indicated in ATC3-78 (Chapter 6), FEMA 273 or ATC40 for the
Determination of the equivalent damping attributable to the soil-structure interaction.
C 3.5.2. Vertical seismic actions for the Ultimate Limit State (ELU)
Unlike the INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation of 1991, this edition 2013
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 33
consider not only the horizontal seismic action E H but also the seismic action
vertical E V according to the expression [3.10].
C 3.6. GRAVITATORY ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED TO EVALUATE THE

HORIZONTAL SEISMIC ACTION
In general, we will work directly with the weights, since the spectral values are
defined as a fraction of the acceleration of gravity. However in the methods
dynamic or when determining the period by application of procedures derived from the
Structural dynamics should use the mass, for which we must divide the weight by
acceleration of gravity.
The use of the International System can bring some complications to

professionals accustomed to the MKS (technical) system. The same can happen with the
use of programs of foreign origin that use the North American system of
units. Care must be taken to express the masses in consistent units
to avoid gross mistakes in period estimates.
C 3.6.1. Common buildings
Common buildings are those constructions formed by one or more levels

horizontal or approximately horizontal without direct connection with the foundation
except the first and when the resistant systems are connected at those levels by
rigid diaphragms The rigid diaphragm condition is considered satisfied if they are met
the requirements of Chapter 9.
C 3.7. COMBINATION OF SHARES
C 3.7.1. Last Limit States
In this Regulation the combinations that include the action have been simplified
seismic, reducing them to those established in the expressions [3.16] and [3.17]. The
influence of mobile overload ( L ) and snow action ( S ) as coexisting actions
With seismic action.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 34
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 35
SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATION OF THE SEISMIC SECURITY
C 4.1. APPLICATION LIMITS
It is admitted to dispense with a more rigorous analysis in constructions whose behavior

can be reasonably predicted with a single indicator, in this case the overall capacity
to cut. Those constructions must have a complete resistant system capable of taking
horizontal actions in any direction, regular form, reduced slenderness so that the
global tipping moment is negligible and reduced torsional effects.
C 4.1.1. Geometric conditions
The walls and partitions can be of any of the materials accepted by this
Regulations for bearing walls and described in Parts II and III . Among them:
reinforced or chained masonry, reinforced concrete, simple chained concrete.
The walls may have openings within the limits indicated in Parts II and III for
each of the materials but the accumulation of lengths cannot be considered
partial independent walls to meet the limits established in 4.1.1.c) and
4.1.1.d).
C 4.1.2. Type of construction and structures
Simplified procedures can only be accepted if the deformations of the

Diaphragms are negligible. To determine the condition of rigid diaphragm, the
established in Chapter 9.
C 4.2. SIMPLIFIED VERIFICATION
C 4.2.1. Seismic design coefficient
It is determined based on the risk factor without explicitly considering the characteristics
building dynamics or the influence of the type of foundation floor.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 36
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 37
CONSTRUCTION BEHAVIOR FACTORS
INFLUENCE OF THE LAST CONSTRUCTION BEHAVIOR
The Regulation establishes that when applying the usual engineering procedures
structural to evaluate the response of the constructions spectra of
response representative of soil movement, although reduced compared to
expected values in reality. This is based on the resistance of the constructions
and in the ductility of the structures. The preconditions for the behavior of
the constructions that are acceptable are: a) the choice of resistant elements for the
vertical loads and horizontal loads appropriate for the intensity of the actions
planned seismic; b) organization of said elements in such a way that the solicitations
they are transmitted with continuity, regularity and redundancy; in order to ensure that the system
complete reacts integrally against seismic actions and c) sizing and
detailed components and their joints so that adequate strength is obtained
and rigidity to limit damage in a design earthquake to acceptable levels. If these
assumptions are met then the reduction factors established in
Chapter 5
The use of reduced spectra with respect to the really expected movements of the
Soil implies that solicitations and deformations in many structures will exceed
substantially the point at which said components begin to flow and will behave
inelastically This procedure is acceptable because the historical precedents and the
Observation of the behavior of structures subjected to earthquakes shows that if
Structural systems are detailed to ensure appropriate levels of ductility,
regularity and continuity it is possible to analyze them elastically and dimension them for levels
reduced forces and still achieve acceptable behavior. Therefore in this
Regulation adopts the procedure to analyze and size the structures to
requests reduced by the R factor with respect to those that would occur if the
8/22/2019 Untitled
Elastic behavior for the design earthquake.
The deformations calculated for these reduced solicitations must be amplified

by a factor C d to estimate the probable deformations corresponding to the movement
of the floor provided for the design.
The reduction factor R essentially represents the ratio between the baseline cut that is
would develop under the specified seismic movement if the structure had a
elastic behavior ( V E ) and baseline design ( V S ). The structure must be
Page 38
designed in such a way that the significant plasticization cut exceeds the basal cut of
design. The relation R , expressed by the expression:
V AND
R= [C 5.1]
VS
it is always greater than 1 ; therefore all structures are designed for forces
smaller than those that the seismic design movement would produce in a structure with
completely elastic response. This reduction is possible for a number of reasons.
First, plasticization leads to a lengthening of the period, which implies a

lower elastic demand in most structures. Second the raid
plastic implies energy dissipation, which is usually designated as damping by
hysteresis, which is added to elastic damping. Both effects are included in the
called structural ductility, which explains why well-designed structures with a
ultimate resistance ( V Y , completely plasticized) that is significantly less than the
Elastic demand ( V E ) can perform satisfactorily during the earthquake of
design.
The ductility reduction factor is defined:
V AND
R d= [C 5.2]
VY
The energy dissipation resulting from hysteretic behavior can be measured as the
area enclosed by the force - deformation curve of the structure when it undergoes several cycles
of excitement Some structures have much more energy dissipation capacity
what others. The available energy dissipation capacity depends mainly on the
degradation of stiffness and resistance that the structure experiences when it supports cycles
repeated inelastic deformation. Figure C 5.1. shows representative curves of two
simple structures, for example a subset of beam and column in a porch.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Figure C 5.1. Force curves - deformation of two simple structures.

Page 39
Figure C 5.1. (A) represents the behavior of a detailed substructure for

ductile behavior The substructure maintains virtually all of its resistance and
rigidity during a significant number of cycles with great inelastic deformation. Ties
Force – deformation are very wide and open. Figure C 5.1. (B) represents the
behavior of a low ductile substructure. She quickly loses low stiffness
Repeated inelastic deformation and the resulting ties are narrow and "pinched." The
Energy dissipation capacity of that structure is much lower than that of the previous one.
Systems with high energy dissipation capacity have higher R d values and by
consequently they are assigned higher R values , resulting in lower design forces
than in systems with limited power dissipation capacity.
The second cause that allows to reduce the design actions regarding the response
Elastic is the resistance. Figure C 5.2. shows the force - deformation curves
for two typical structures. Significant creep is the level for which plasticization
occurs in the most requested component of the structure, which is shown as the first
kneecap in the diagram.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Figure C 5.2. Force - deformation curves of two typical structures.
When the load increases, new ball joints are formed and the capacity increases (curve
full) until the maximum is reached. The difference between the plasticizing load
significant and the maximum load that the system can withstand is the resistance due to
system redundancy, obtained by this continuous inelastic action.
It should be noted that this resistance comes from the sequential development of kneecaps.
plastics in a properly designed redundant structure, that is, that all
kneecaps become formed before the first reach their maximum capacity of
deformation.
Page 40
There are other sources of resistance. First, the resistance of the

materials (that is, the actual resistance is greater than the nominal resistance specified in the
draft). For example for concrete, a characteristic resistance is specified, which
it has a probability of exceeding 90% , while the most likely resistance is
The average resistance. For concretes with moderately careful processing resistance
average is 50% higher, approximately, than the characteristic. The same happens with the
reinforced concrete steel, for which the actual resistance can be between 25% and 40%
higher than specified. Studies done in the US show that the strength of steel
Current structural (A36, equivalent to the F24 of our country) is 30% to 40% higher than the
specified by the Standards.
Secondly the capacity of the components is calculated with a reduction factor of

resistance ø , typically 0.9 for bending, which takes into account the probability of
Resistances lower than required.
Thirdly, the sections chosen are usually larger than those required, because the
manufacturing requirements for bars and profiles or simply requirements for
standardization of the structure so require. On the other hand the regulation imposes on
Many minimal constructive cases.
Finally, the highest structures are usually controlled by deformation and not by
resistance, so the sections are sized to control deformations
lateral rather than the required resistance. Consequently the resistance of
8/22/2019 Untitled
component is larger than required.
For all these reasons the strength of the structure ( V Y ) is much greater than that required
by elastic structural analysis for design actions ( V S ). Based on experience
North American first creep may occur at baseline cutoff levels 30% higher than
The design ones. If the structure is redundant, regular and properly detailed to achieve
ductile behavior, complete plasticization can occur at baseline cut levels 2 to 4
times higher than design.
The structural resistance is characterized by the factor R s . That factor indicates the relationship
between the probable strength of the structure ( V Y ) and the specified design resistance
( V S ), that is:
VY
R s= [C 5.3]
VS
Figure C 5.2. indicates the meaning of the mentioned design parameters: the factor of
response modification or reduction R , the strain amplification factor
C d , the reduction factor due to ductility R d and the reduction factor due to over-resistance R s .
Page 41
Ω or Table 5.1 should not be confused . with R s since the first one is an upper bound of the
structure resistance to be used with special combinations of
load indicated in 3.7.1.
The values are those that correspond to the experience of typical structures
North American, for lack of specific local studies. However and considering that
The sizing requirements implicit in this Regulation are derived from the
from the US, similar values can be expected, although somewhat lower because in the US
prioritize the workforce over the consumption of materials and consequently the designs
They tend to be heavier.
It should be taken into account that when the design is optimized, adjusting tighter
the capacities to the requirements and concentrating the resistance in less elements the
successive plasticization shown in Figure C 5.2. does not form and consequently the
values of the behavioral factors specified in Table 5.1. They may be
inadequate to provide the expected performance.
It is clear that the total reduction factor R is the product of the reduction factor by
ductility R d and the reduction factor due to over-resistance R s :
=
R RR d s
[C 5.4]
8/22/2019 Untitled
Some current regulations (Canada, EUROCODES) have tried to quantify

directly the contributions of over-resistance ( R s ) and inelastic behavior
( R d ) to total reduction ( R ). The proposal is, in essence, what is indicated in the expression [C 5.4].
However, at the time of writing this Regulation it has been considered that there is not enough
research and that would introduce greater complexity to the application, so it has
maintained a single reduction factor R linked to a qualitative description of the
resistant systems However, the inclusion of Ω o and C d in table 5.1 allows you to enter
conceptually the topic for more detailed inclusion in future revisions of the
regulation.
For all of the above, the values of R must be chosen and used wisely and
engineering judgment. For example, if the structural systems are less redundant, in the
that plasticization tends to occur simultaneously and for a near level of forces
the design, it must be assigned lower values of R . This requires the designer
Qualitatively study the mechanism of plasticization. A good index to evaluate the
system redundancy and inherent resistance reserve is the degree of
resistance concentration, that is, the resistance concentration in a few
elements. The more concentrated the resistance, the lower the redundancy of the
system and the value of R to be adopted should approach the lower limits given by the
Table 5.1
Page 42
Within these concepts the use of the risk factor r γ , defined in 2.4, should be understood
as a means to rate the performance of different types of constructions,

reducing structural damage due to plasticization in those whose destiny so
require. It is recognized that resistance is not the only parameter that defines the
construction performance but it is one of the most important, since it is linked
directly with the expected ductility demand of the design earthquake.
It is clear from Figure C 5.2. that the relationship between the expected maximum deformation and the
Elastic deformation for design actions is not equal to R , as defined in
previous regulations. In effect, over-resistance retards the plasticization of the
structure and final deformation is increased to a lesser extent than the total effect on
the strength of the structure. The effect on the final deformation is quantified with the
coefficient C d .
C 5.1. REDUCTION FACTOR
Table 5.1 provides the design factors for the different structural types. Are
8/22/2019 Untitled
directly applicable to structures formed by elements of the same type. The
description of the different types should be interpreted in the light of the concepts indicated in the
beginning of this chapter of comments and requires the interpretation of the designer
conceptual of the expected plasticization mechanism for each type.
C 5.1.1. Reduction factor R for structures composed of different elements
The reason for using the resistance of the elements as a weighting factor for
to obtain the value of R is that the demand for ductility is controlled by resistance.
Obviously the operation is more complex and recent research (Paulay)
show that stiffness and resistance influence simultaneously. However, if
considers that the stiffness of reinforced concrete elements is proportional to the
resistance can be taken that single weighting factor.
C 5.1.2. Constructions whose destiny requires elastic behavior
From the above about the resistance it follows that the structures are maintained
elastic for actions larger than those used for analysis and sizing. The
expression [5.1] reflects this fact and considers that the reduction factor represents
only a conservative value of resistance.
Page 43
C 5.2. DEFORMATION AMPLIFICATION FACTOR
The strain amplification factor C d for a system composed of several types

Structural can be evaluated by the same procedures as the reduction factor R ,
In all cases, the factor C d chosen must be consistent with the factor R adopted.
C 5.3. OVERHER RESISTANCE FACTOR
The resistance factor is used element by element, so it is not necessary

Evaluate it for the complete system.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 44
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 45
STATIC METHOD
C 6.1. Seismic actions
The static method is suitable for many regular structures, within the
Definitions of Chapter 2. However, the designer can apply methods of analysis
8/22/2019 Untitled
more refined in those cases. It is inappropriate for:
1) Structures with irregular distributions of masses or rigidities, when the distribution

of forces given by the expressions [6.11] or [6.12] and [6.13] can give results
wrong.
2) Regular or irregular structures in which lateral movements in each

Direction and torsional movement are strongly coupled. This can
be warned when for actions applied in one direction occur
comparable displacements in both directions, either in the center of mass or in
the edges
3) Structures with irregular distributions of resistance, which can lead to

excessive concentrations of ductility demands.
In these cases the structure must be corrected or a more rigorous method of analysis applied.
Many irregular building structures can still be analyzed with the method
static if it is verified that the height cut distribution is reasonably approximate to
that provided by the expressions [6.11] or [6.12] and [6.13]. The procedure is the next:
Step 1: Calculate the distribution of forces at height according to 6.2.4.1.
Step 2: With these forces the structure is pre-sized and the

displacements of each level, d i .
Step 3: Replace h i , h k or h n in the expressions [6.11] or [6.12] and [6.13] with d i , d k or d n ,

as appropriate and obtain the new distribution of forces.
Step 4: If at any level the cut resulting from step 3 differs more than 30% from that
computed in step 1 the building should be analyzed by the methods of
Chapter 7. If the difference is smaller, the building can be analyzed with the values
obtained from step 3.
In any case, the procedure to follow should be:
a) Predict the chosen structural system and establish a collapse mechanism,
b) Apply the actions defined in 6.2. and 6.3. and analyze the structure (Chapter 8),
Page 46
c) Check the elastic deformations of the structure (according to 6.4.),
d) Verify dimensions of the different components, with the redistribution allowed,
e) Control eccentricity. If the conditions are not met, correct the dimensions
of the components or the overall design of the structure.
8/22/2019 Untitled
It is obvious that the pre-dimensioning must take into account the future verification of the
structural regularity (tables 2.3. and 2.4.), it is also obvious that the process is iterative.
In high building structures the static method tends to exaggerated values of the
tipping moments and consequently of the vertical reactions due to the action
seismic In those buildings the methods of Chapter 7 can provide more values
realistic and demand less from foundations without compromising security.
C 6.2. HORIZONTAL ACTIONS
The designer must consider that the equivalent force system is intended to provide
to the construction of the minimum resistance required to limit damage to levels
acceptable. However, only the study of the collapse mechanism ensures that
Damages meet the forecasts. The required study is qualitative before
quantitative. It's about comparing demands with resistance supplies, with the object
to establish the points at which the structure will plasticize and avoid the appearance of
fragile components or breakage modes. The application of design principles by
ability guarantees that goal and allows more “automatic” work but does not put in
Evidence of design errors that the study mentioned allows us to notice.
C 6.2.1. Cutting effort at the base
The seismic coefficient C of the expression 6.1 is expressed in units of g , that is, it is
a dimensionless factor that represents a fraction of the acceleration of gravity for
apply to the weight W of the construction and obtain the total horizontal force, this is the cut in the
base. The weight W is the weight of the construction that is probably present during the
design earthquake and is determined according to Chap. 3.
C 6.2.2. Seismic design coefficient
The seismic coefficient C is a function of the destination, period, seismicity or seismic zone
and of the ultimate behavior of the construction.
C 6.2.3. Fundamental period of structure vibration
The fundamental period is the starting data to determine the seismic coefficient. In
In general, constructions with more than three levels have periods that exceed the T 1 value ,
Therefore, as the period increases, the seismic coefficient decreases. Consequently the
Argentine Regulations for Earthquake Resistant Constructions Com. chap. 6-30
Page 47
evaluation of the period must be conservative, that is, a lower limit should be used
for its value The approximate fundamental period T a provided by [6.8] or [6.9] and the
8/22/2019 Untitled
limit set by the expression [6.7] is intended to avoid gross analysis errors
on the one hand and structures too flexible on the other. The expressions [6.8] and [6.9]
they come from the analysis of the response of many buildings for intense earthquakes,
mainly from the USA.
In general for the determination of the period it is desirable to use the procedures of the
structural dynamics, particularly when current programs allow
quickly. However, attention is drawn to the interference of components “no
structural ”with the deformation of the structure, which can increase its rigidity and
Decrease the theoretical period. Therefore the structural model should take into account those
circumstances.
The use of the approximate formulas of Structural Dynamics is admissible:
to). For structures in general:
In the case of structures on a fixed basis, and in which the masses can be assumed
concentrated in levels, the fundamental period of vibration T can be obtained by
following expression:
∑
n two
1i=
uW
i i
2T = π [C 6.1]
g ∑
n
1i=
u iF i
h Wi
Fi =
i
[C 6.2]
∑
n
=
1i
hW
i i
Where u i is the displacement of level i for the set of horizontal forces F i .
b). Regular buildings of n levels:
It is considered sufficient approximation:
h Wn
2T = π n
[C 6.3]
Fgn
Where F n is given by the expression [C 6.2] for the last level.
C 6.2.4. Distribution of seismic actions
It is common practice to talk about the horizontal distribution, understanding as such the distribution of
the forces applied in the centers of gravity of the different masses that make up the
construction between the planes or resistant elements. This concept comes
mainly from times when the only methods were manual and the analysis should
be performed for each vertical plane individually. Current methods, which allow the
Page 48
8/22/2019 Untitled
spatial analysis of the structure directly, do not require other consideration than
apply the forces in the centers of gravity of the masses.
However, in structures for buildings of up to three levels it is possible to apply the

distribution of the cut "by levels" assuming that the rigidities are reasonably estimated.
For that purpose it should be considered that the stiffness of element e at level i is given
by:
one
R [C 6.4]
ei = d hey
Being d ei deformation element at the level i for a unit force.
C 6.2.4.1. Height distribution
The expression [6.11] implies that the first mode of vibration is dominant in the response
of the structure, since in deformed structures the deformed deviates little from the law
linear. The expressions [6.12] and [6.13] take into account the influence of the second mode of
vibration in relatively flexible structures. The structures that are supposed to
satisfy the regularity conditions established for the application of Chap. 6 allow
Apply these distributions with sufficient confidence. However the designer should
take into account irregularities in the vertical deformation that could indicate a
different behavior
C 6.2.4.2. Accidental twisting
Torsional effects are manifested in structures whose diaphragms are stiff

enough to distribute shares in your plane. In constructions with very diaphragms
flexible or without them there are no torsional effects, but then the horizontal forces must
be assigned “by areas of influence” to each resistant element. The detail of the application of
These procedures are in Chapter 8.
Torsional effects on constructions are due to several causes: eccentricity

between the center of mass and the "center of stiffness" (inherent eccentricity), the movements
torsional soils, the inevitable variations of rigidities and masses due to differences between
the theoretical and actual dimensions, the distribution of mobile charges different from the
supposed. In addition the dynamic torsional effect is greater than the purely static effect,
It follows that the inherent eccentricity is not sufficient to quantify the effect
torsional still in "theoretically perfect" structures; there is a call "amplification
dynamics of eccentricity ”.
Consequently in previous regulations the torsional effect on each mass was represented
or level by the resulting torque of the product between the seismic force applied at the level by the
Eccentricity of calculation. This eccentricity of calculation was given by the eccentricity
Page 49
8/22/2019 Untitled
inherent multiplied by an amplification factor plus accidental eccentricity. East

I raise it is simple for its application with manual or semi manual methods. But nevertheless
It has several objections.
On the one hand the concept of "center of stiffness" is only unique in structures with only one
mass or level, since in structures of many levels, except in the case of porches with beams
very rigid compared to the columns, the deformations of the different levels
are coupled and therefore can not speak of "floor stiffness", much less a
"Rigidity center" of each floor. On the other hand when the plastic structure is more interested in
position of the resulting resistors than that of the stiffnesses and the amplification effect
dynamics cannot be explained with a factor applied to inherent elastic eccentricity.
Finally, the procedure so far used requires the determination of a “center of

rigidity ”, which in some regulations preferred to be called“ center of rotation ”, considering such
the non-scrollable point of each level when applying unit cups of equal sense in all
they. This determination is hidden in many structural analysis programs and therefore
both implies an additional nuisance for the designer, without thereby improving security
of the construction. Several authors, in particular Paulay, have objected to the application of this
procedure, which only increases resistance without achieving the fundamental objective of limiting
deformations and damages.
Consequently, in this version of the regulation it has been preferred to insist on the need for
design well-configured structures: with the least possible inherent eccentricity and with
Good rigidity and torsional strength. It is also recognized that by requiring that the force be
apply in the center of mass and have the structure analyzed as a spatial structure already
the eccentricity inherent in the analysis is implied. As for eccentricity
accidental it was considered convenient to classify the structures by their torsional regularity and
reward those that have less inherent torsion, as well as in seismic zones 3 and 4 it
requires the redesign of structures with excessive torsion.
In the analysis the force should be considered applied at a point distant from the center of
mass the value of accidental eccentricity in each direction and for each direction of
analysis, which is equivalent to applying a pair of intensity equal to the force multiplied by the
accidental eccentricity.
C 6.4. DEFORMATIONS
Due to the characteristics of each of the methods of evaluation of the seismic action
the procedure for verifying deformations in each of the
methods
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 50
C 6.6. INFLUENCE OF MASS ROTATIONS AROUND AXES

HORIZONTALS
In these structures the translation is accompanied by an important turn of the end of the
support and if the mass has an important rotational inertia, as is often the case
mentioned in 6.6., the action on construction increases significantly.
C 6.6.1. Cases of mandatory consideration
The expression [6.19] sets a limit based on comparing the energy associated with the
rotations with the energy associated with translations when applied to the masses
equivalent static forces (not including the additional effect of the cups on the masses).
C 6.6.2. Static evaluation of rotational influence
The expression [6.20] provides a simplified method to take influence into account
of rotation If the system has more than two masses there is no way to simplify the analysis and
Dynamic analysis is inevitable.
The simplified method proposed is iterative, that is to say that only the
translations and rotations from the forces and then calculate the moments. Known
These would repeat the cycle. However, given the simplifications of the method, it is sufficient
calculate the moments in the first cycle and apply them to the security check
structural.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 51
DYNAMIC METHODS
C 7.1. GENERALITIES
The use of dynamic methods has been favored by the dissemination of

analysis that include them as routine. However, the aspects should be considered
more sensitive of these methods remain the validity of the model and the interpretation of
the results. They should focus the attention of the designer. This requirement is both
The more complex the method.
In all cases the comparison of the results with those corresponding to

the application of the static method (Chapter 6), as a way to avoid gross errors.
C 7.1.1. Seismic excitation application
The criterion is consistent with the consecrated practice in the world. In most of the
Case studies will be sufficient to consider a common movement to all supports. Without
However, certain very large structures may require the application of movements
independent in the different supports.
C 7.1.2. Vibratory Analysis Model
Attention is drawn to aspects to be considered by the designer to ensure validity

From the results. The model must be representative of the deformations of the structure.
In many cases, only the use of several models allows to evaluate an envelope of
situations.
C 7.2. SPECTRAL MODAL PROCEDURE
The modal analysis is applicable to calculate the elastic linear response of structures with
Multiple degrees of freedom. It is based on the fact that the answer is the superposition of
the responses of the individual modes. Each mode has its own warped, the shape
modal, its period and its own damping. Consequently the response of the
structure can be modeled by the response of a number of single vibrators
degree of freedom, each representative of each mode and the excitement that the earthquake induces
In each one. For certain types of damping this representation is
mathematically accurate For real structures, experience has shown that the use
8/22/2019 Untitled
of modal analysis, with vibrators of a single degree of freedom and viscous damping
provides a sufficient approximation for the actual elastic response.
Page 52
The purpose of modal analysis is to obtain the maximum response for each of the modes
important, which then overlap appropriately. This overlay should take
Note that the maximums of each mode are not simultaneous.
It should be borne in mind that overlay methods provide results in

absolute value and the resulting maximum values for different efforts are not
simultaneous. Therefore, simultaneity and
influence of the sense of efforts in the results.
C 7.2.1. Determination of natural modes of vibration
The established conditions correspond to the excitation of earthquakes that will demand
major deformations, although it is about assessing the elastic behavior of the
structure. That is why the periods can be significantly longer than those
they obtain from measurements in real buildings for environmental or artificial excitations of
small amplitude This is largely due to the presence of fragile enclosures that
during an important earthquake they will be damaged.
C 7.2.2. Response Determination
The analysis of the model has two stages: the modal analysis, which is the determination of the
forms, participation factors and periods corresponding to each mode; and the
modal overlay, which is the result of the joint action of the excited modes
according to the design spectrum.
One of the most common causes of error is the introduction of weights instead of
masses, when the program requires such information separately, the periods are
increased by an approximate factor of 3. Another source of frequent error is the system of
units, particularly with programs of North American origin. Consequently it is called
the attention to the designer about the need to become familiar with the program he uses and
Carefully investigate the units you use, the source of which the program
It determines the masses and the relevance of the data you enter.
The expression [7.1] is consistent with the idea that ductility develops
evenly in the structure, since it applies the same reduction to the excitation of all
the modes. Therefore it is necessary to consider this issue when analyzing the
results. It is assumed that the final result provides the information corresponding to the
elastic limit of the structure.
8/22/2019 Untitled
C 7.2.3. Ways to consider
Strictly speaking the structures have a number of degrees of freedom much greater than what is
possible to represent in the model. In turn the number of modes that provides a certain
model is large enough to be convenient, or even
Page 53
necessary, limit the number of those considered in determining the response. The
established criteria, consider a number of ways that mobilize at least 90% of the
Total mass is consistent with international practice and, in addition, it is logical if you consider
the precision with which seismic action can be evaluated.
C 7.2.4. Modal overlay
The modal overlay must take into account the probability of simultaneity of
the maximum response of the different modes. In previous regulations the
sum of absolute values of the response of all modes and quadratic overlap
simple (square root of the sum of squares of the individual responses). Clearly
the first is extremely pessimistic and it has been considered convenient to eliminate it,
following the trends of the latest regulations.
When there are modes whose periods differ from each other by less than 10%, the
quadratic overlay application ( SSRS ). The CQC method can be applied in all
the cases. Most of the programs available today have both methods included.
C 7.2.5. Minimum Requests
This provision is consistent with accepted practice and is intended to avoid errors
thick in the dynamic analysis model, as well as detecting anomalous behaviors
of the structure.
C 7.2.6. Accidental twisting
The same simplified procedure as the static method (6.2.4.2.) Is applied to

evaluate the influence of accidental torsion.
C 7.3. LINEAR RESPONSE PROCEDURE IN TIME
The response of the structure is obtained by numerical integration of the equations of

movement for an accelelerogram that represents the movement of the ground. The accelelerogram
It is presented digitized in a series of sufficiently short steps compared to the
period of the structure, usually on the order of 1/100 s . Starting with the step
8/22/2019 Untitled
initial displacements of the degrees of freedom of the structure are resolved step by
step incrementally. This requires considerable computational effort, today
possible with the available PCs and programs. However the interpretation of
results, which includes a large volume of information, is the most laborious part and
important process.
The main advantage of this procedure, in relation to the spectral modal overlay
is that real response values can be obtained for a given earthquake.
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I Com. chap. 7-37
Page 54
This includes displacements, deformations, solicitations and even characteristics.

dependent on displacement, such as damping. However this
response is highly dependent on the particular characteristics of the earthquake
considered and small differences between two apparently equal accelerograms
They can produce big differences in response. That is why it is essential to analyze the
structure for a significant number of accelerograms that adequately cover the
design spectrum Obviously this further increases computational work and
interpretation of results. As far as possible the accelerograms should come from records
of real earthquakes, although artificially generated acelerograms can be used.
An important number of such records are available today.
The greater the complexity of the analysis method, the more experience and dedication
It requires the interpretation of its results. A case in which this method is convenient
is the evaluation of the behavior of structures with base insulation, for which the
Modal analysis may provide enveloping results of solicitations but does not predict
properly the displacements.
C 7.3.1. Accelelerograms to use
A way is provided to control the representativeness of the accelelerograms in

relationship with the design earthquake, expressed by the design spectrum of this
Regulation.
C 7.3.2. Requests
The required capacity will verify the capacity of the structure in the limit state
Last that corresponds. The limit set for the baseline cut is intended to control
errors in the model or in its processing.
C 7.3.3. Accidental twisting
The same simplified procedure as the static method (6.2.4.2.) Is applied to
8/22/2019 Untitled
evaluate the influence of accidental torsion.
Page 55
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
C 8.1. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS METHODS
The requirement to evaluate the spatial behavior of the structure is reiterated, in order to
highlight the links between translations and torsions. Is also
provision is indispensable to alert professionals about the effects
Spatial seismic action.
C 8.1.1. Linear elastic analysis
In general, the elastic analysis will be the starting point for making final decisions of
design such as finish defining the collapse mechanism. It will also serve as
comparison to establish the magnitude of redistributions, deformations
plastics caused by redistributions and final deformations.
The directive on the consideration of the stiffness of concrete components or

Masonry is consistent with behavioral assessment for actions that
they reach the elastic limit of the constructions.
C 8.1.2. Other methods
Other methods that directly consider the non-linear behavior of structures

They are subject to the approval of the Application Authority.
The following methods are currently available: Nonlinear static analysis
8/22/2019 Untitled
incremental; Nonlinear time response procedure and Design based on
displacement. Below is a brief summary of each one.
a) Incremental nonlinear static analysis
It consists of applying the equivalent static forces in finite increments that are defined
from the changes in the elastic conditions of the structure, that is, when
produces each of the plasticizing stages of each of the plastic ball joints
provided. The method requires defining the location and mode of plasticization of each of
the kneecaps so that the structure becomes a mechanism of collapse. The definition of
The kneecaps requires ensuring that the rest of the structure remains elastic, by
example, applying design principles by capacity.
The method is included in many structural analysis programs but the documentation
Accompanying them is not always enough guidance for the correct application. Other difficulty
resides in that the method provides a force-displacement law that includes part of the
Page 56
over-resistance, which must be taken into account when interpreting the results. Finally the
definition of the system of static forces, which is linked to the first mode of vibration in
plasticizing conditions, it is a sensitive issue.
Many experts believe that this method is appropriate for verification and reinforcement.
of existing structures. Even the NERHP 450 standard includes it for those cases.
b) Nonlinear time response procedure
It consists of applying displacements defined by an acelerogram at the base of the

construction incrementally. After each increase the properties are redefined
elastic structure depending on the deformations in each of the kneecaps. The
method requires defining the location and mode of plasticization of each of the kneecaps
necessary for the structure to become a collapse mechanism. The definition of
The kneecaps requires ensuring that the rest of the structure remains elastic, by
example, applying design principles by capacity. The accelerograms should
meet the conditions required by the linear response procedure over time
(7.3.).
The method is currently reserved for research or very special structures,

although it is already included in some standards. The main difficulty is the interpretation of the
huge amount of information.
c) Displacement based design
The method recognizes that damage or collapse is more linked to deformation than
8/22/2019 Untitled
to the strength of the structure. It consists in establishing a priori the limit deformation of the
structure and, based on the displacement design spectrum, define the period and
equivalent rigidity of the structure. Known displacement and equivalent stiffness are
it obtains the demand of cut and therefore the required resistance. In the systems of a
degree of freedom the method is direct and easy to apply. In multi-grade systems of
Freedom complicates the definition of boundary deformation and force distribution.
Another difficulty of the method is the inclusion of the influence of the plasticization of the structure.
There are many variants proposed for the application of the method, among the best known
from Chopra and Priestley's.
C 8.2. STRUCTURAL MODELING
C 8.2.1. Deformability of the diaphragms
Most reinforced concrete buildings have slabs or mezzanines whose rigidity

horizontal allows to suppose rigid diaphragms. This is not the case with many
Page 57
industrial or low-rise buildings with metal or wooden roofs. The

designer should consider the influence of diaphragm flexibility in the model of
analysis. It is obvious that this consideration must be consistent with the evaluation method
of the seismic action applied.
When the diaphragms are flexible in low constructions (up to three levels) they can be
Consider two extreme cases as envelopes of the real situation: a distribution of
actions in the rigid diaphragm hypothesis and one in the diaphragm lack hypothesis.
When the diaphragms are very flexible or non-existent, it is impossible to transfer
torsional actions to the structure as a whole, so they should be omitted from the analysis.
In those cases the distribution of forces between the vertical elements must be done by
tax areas, that is, considering the mezzanines as beams on rigid supports.
The condition established in 8.2.1.2. allows the simplification of considering the diaphragms
as infinitely flexible.
Compliance with condition 8.2.1.1. also implies compliance with the specified
in parts II , III and IV of this Regulation so that the diaphragm can be considered
rigid. Given the frequency of the case of reinforced concrete diaphragms, some
Recommendations indicate:
a) Solid reinforced concrete slabs
8/22/2019 Untitled
Slabs supported on more than two edges d ≥ L o / 50
Slabs supported otherwise d ≥ L o / 30
Being d the thickness of the slab and L or lower clearance of the slab.
b) Rib plates or mixed steel concrete plates
Separation between nerves 1 / s x + 1 / s and ≤ 1 / (12d o )
Being s x and s and the separation between nerves according to the x and y directions respectively
and d or the thickness of the plate between nerves.
In constructions in general d or ≥ 5cm . In constructions of groups B or C up to 7m

or two stories of height d or ≥ 3 cm . The total height of the nerves d must meet a).
If the plate between nerves is formed by pre-molded elements that are joined by
casting in situ, the joints must allow the effective splicing of the reinforcements of the
Plate elements with 25% additional capacity.
c) Diaphragms consisting of precast elements
A perimeter chain and a chain will be placed in correspondence with each

vertical resistant system. The chains will be made of reinforced concrete cast on site and
they must contain the total thickness of the slab or plate (including nerves).
Page 58
C 8.2.1.2. Fully flexible diaphragm
The indicated check requires modeling the diaphragms as horizontal beams

supported by vertical elements. Seismic forces are applied to this beam
distributed according to the corresponding mass distribution. The indicated method supports by
extension consideration of the continuity of the diaphragm component elements
(continuous beam on elastic supports) for the distribution of forces.
C 8.2.2. Soil deformability
The soil conditions the behavior of the structure. The deformation of the soil under the
foundations increases the fundamental period of construction, modifies the distribution of
solicitations between the vertical elements, influences the damping and increases the
displacements with respect to those that would have in the fixed base hypothesis.
The increase in the period is significant in tall buildings. In the constructions of

medium or low heights, which generally have independent surface foundations,
The influence on the distribution of solicitations is significant. Instead this aspect
it is insignificant when the foundation is continuous as in the case of rigid stalls or
8/22/2019 Untitled
Foundation drawers formed by the subsoils and their walls. The influence on him
damping is significant in large heavy constructions, which
they generally correspond to groups A or A or , which often fall into the
requirement of special risk studies and what is established in 1.2., second paragraph.
The ANNEX TO THE COMMENTS OF CHAPTER 8 provides simplified methods,

accepted by international practice, for modeling soil behavior. The
established limit for the reduction of actions that could result from the representation of
soil deformability is consistent with other similar requirements in others
Chapters of the Regulation and aims to avoid modeling errors or behaviors
anomalous structure.
C 8.3. STRUCTURAL PARTICULARITIES
C 8.3.1. Influence of structural irregularities
Structural irregularities increase uncertainties about the behavior of

the structure for seismic actions. Therefore they must be considered carefully and
It should be the first step in the verification of the structure. In other words, the
evaluation of displacements in plant and height, which are the indicators of
irregularities, should be completed before any other verification.
Page 59
The structural irregularities, mentioned in Tables 2.3. and 2.4., except those
specifically they refer to the element, they should not refer to a single element or to some
few, but the whole system in the direction under study.
C 8.3.1.1. Extreme irregularities in plan or height
Extreme irregularities are a source of uncertainty and cause of evidence of damage

For all the earthquakes. Consequently the structure must be redesigned to reduce the
irregularity. It is not a matter of analysis but of design, most of the time
of conceptual design. Therefore and without the need for a very elaborate analysis model,
before advancing in the dimensioning the structural regularity must be evaluated according
with Tables 2.3. and 2.4. and, if necessary, redesign the structure.
C 8.3.1.2. Discontinuity of components in vertical seismic resistant elements
When an earthquake resistant element is interrupted, it is because the efforts are

transfer to a parallel element, either because they are transferred within the plane of the element,
8/22/2019 Untitled
the need is created to support vertical actions of seismic origin due to the
interruption. These vertical actions can be supported in various ways, with
columns or beams, for example. The elastic analysis is insufficient for the evaluation of
vertical actions of seismic origin on the components affected by the
interruption. The plasticization of the interrupted element will cause greater efforts than
derived from elastic analysis. Therefore it is necessary to evaluate the efforts in the
components that support the interrupted element on the condition that the latter has
plasticized, regardless of the efforts from the analysis
elastic.
In the case of reinforced concrete structures, it is sufficient to apply the design principles
by capacity required by part II of this Regulation. In the case of structures of
steel shall apply the resistance factors in accordance with part IV of this
Regulation.
C 8.3.1.3. Discontinuity outside the plane of seismic resistant elements
The discontinuity of a vertical element in its plane implies transfer of efforts to

elements in parallel planes or in the same plane. In that transfer they are involved
other structural components and, eventually, the diaphragm. They all must
be verified for the most unfavorable combination of own solicitations and of the
derived from the transfer of efforts. Attention should be paid to the connection of
vertical elements with the diaphragm and, considering that plasticization should
develop preferably in the vertical elements, the solicitations in the
Diaphragms must be mayrated.
Page 60
The discontinuity in the plane of the element can cause a local decrease in the
demand-capacity ratio, which would increase the demand for local ductility. That's why it is
It is necessary to limit the possible reduction of the aforementioned relationship.
C 8.3.1.4. Weak floor
The weak floor produces a concentration of ductility demand at the level

correspondent. To avoid it, it is necessary to design the level in an elastic condition, except for the
very low construction case.
C 8.3.2. Structural systems or components not considered part of the structure

earthquake resistant
Although the strength and rigidity of these components is negligible, it should be considered
8/22/2019 Untitled
the influence of his presence with a double purpose. First the component must
remain stable for the ultimate deformation conditions that the
Seismic-resistant structure when developing the expected ductility. Second is
must take into account possible changes in structure behavior
Main for his presence.
C 8.3.3. Components or systems considered non-structural
In many earthquakes the interaction of non-structural elements has produced modifications

of the structural behavior that resulted in significant structural damage. Is the case
of the earthquakes of Caracas (1964), Lima (1972), San Juan (1977), Mendoza (1977) and (1985),
among others. In them the filling partition of hollow ceramic blocks (Mendoza) and still
wooden furniture (Lima) modified the supposed behavior of the
structure that significant damage occurred. In the case of Lima, the building of the
Library of the University of La Molina collapsed.
For the speed of deformation that causes an earthquake many materials have a
totally different behavior than they have in conditions of application loads
slow; both its rigidity and its resistance are considerably higher. As
consequently they become part of the seismic-resistant structure, although the
designer, for regulatory reasons or by own decision has excluded them from the model
analytical.
C 8.3.4. Influence of fillings in porches
The presence of masonry fillings or other materials, commonly considered

“Non-structural” totally modifies the structural performance compared to that of a
free porch. Failure modes other than the usual expected flex mode originate
For the porches. Therefore these fillers should be carefully considered by the
designer to prevent the structure from having an undesirable behavior. Is
Page 61
prevention reaches a multitude of materials although the most common filling is the
masonry.
Structural separation of landfills normally requires that spaces be provided

to allow relative movement of the components, which generally must be
sealed by the functional requirements of the construction. The designer, considering the
deformation speed imposed by seismic action, must ensure that seals
allow relative movement without causing significant efforts. Space filling
with compressible materials of the expanded polystyrene type and the like is unacceptable
8/22/2019 Untitled
from this point of view.
When the filling is in solidarity with the structure, the possible ways of
following fault:
a) Failure due to cutting of the parts of the porch in the areas near the nodes, due to
the concentration of stress caused by the compressed area of the wall (connecting rod of
compression).
b) Failure to cut the pieces due to the short column effect when the fillings are
partial (sills or lintels).
c) Failure due to the cutting of the columns due to the decrease in the free height caused
for failures due to cutting in intermediate joints of the masonry panel.
d) Column compression failure due to the global moment (“moment of

tipping ”) increased as a result of the stiffening of the stiff gantry.
It is evident that the most critical elements are the columns and on them the designer
You must focus your attention.
The provisions of the Regulation tend to control these unfavorable failures but
It should be noted that the solution is to design the main structure so that it is
relatively insensitive to the presence of masonry. This can be achieved if the
plane that will receive the fillings has components (especially columns) of sufficient
rigidity and resistance or if there are other rigid and resistant systems in parallel direction
that can prevent the formation of unfavorable plasticizing mechanisms.
Finally, attention is drawn to the need to respect the coherence between the
structural analysis and construction model that is analyzed. The lack of coherence between
both is the root of many catastrophic failures of structures analyzed according to the
Letter of the Regulations.
Page 62
C 8.3.5. Mezzanines without beams
Although many design methods for mezzanines without beams consider the “porch
equivalent ”( CIRSOC 201 , ACI 318 ), this consideration should be limited to the analysis for
vertical actions The lateral deformability of mezzanine systems without beams is

too large for its stability to be guaranteed by the effect of
supply between the columns and the plate. It is also impossible to bear the
8/22/2019 Untitled
ductility concentration in the slab area next to the column, as evidenced

numerous cases of collapses. The 1985 Mexico earthquake is one of them.
Therefore they are only acceptable within the seismic-resistant structure as

diaphragms For horizontal actions the construction must have a resistant system
additional, for example columns embedded in the foundation, porches, partitions,
triangulations, etc., properly located.
C 8.4. DEFORMATIONS
The deformation control must be done for the combination of actions more
unfavorable in each of the analysis directions.
The deformations obtained from the elastic analysis methods (static, modal or linear in
time) are obtained at the elastic limit for reduced spectra and must be
amplified to obtain the ultimate deformations.
C 8.4.1. Structural regularity control
This is torsional regularity to verify compliance with the conditions

set out in Table 2.3., which may include the need to redesign the structure.
Accidental eccentricity is defined according to the conditions of torsional regularity
required in Table 6.3.
C 8.4.2. Control of horizontal floor distortion in building constructions
The control of horizontal floor distortion is fundamental in the seismic design of buildings
if one takes into account that in the inelastic field the earthquake basically imposes
deformations of the structure and not forces that are practically blocked after
the creep of the structure. In addition, horizontal floor distortion is associated with the
Survival of fragile elements such as partitions, windows, stained glass, furniture,
equipment or similar. The limits established are those accepted internationally and
They come from the experience of numerous earthquakes. The conditions established in
6.4.2. They mainly refer to civil architecture buildings. Eventually the
designer may consider the limits applicable to other types of facilities or
buildings.
Page 63
C 8.4.3. Checking the conditions of regularity in height
This is the regularity of rigidity to verify compliance with the conditions

established in Table 2.4., which may include the need to redesign the structure.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Horizontal middle floor distortion has been taken as an indicator of regularity

vertical structure, as it is the only indicator applicable equally to all types
structural and is also easily verifiable.
C 8.4.4. P-Delta effect (2nd order effect)
This effect is significant when the horizontal displacements of the construction are
important in relation to the dimensions of the earthquake resistant components
vertical In particular, these are structures provided with small components
rigidity. The case of mezzanines without beams must be taken special care, even if it is only
fulfill diaphragm functions for horizontal actions.
The simplified procedure indicated (8.4.4.1. And 8.4.4.2.) Comes from very regulations
recognized.
C 8.4.5. Hammering effects, separations and seismic joints
The purpose of the separation between adjacent constructions or between bodies of a

same construction is to achieve better seismic resistant behavior and an evaluation
more reliable construction response for seismic action. Additionally
it may be a consequence of the need to divide the construction to control others
effects, such as those caused by temperature or forge retraction.
Irregular constructions should be understood as those that:
a) They have plants in L, T, E, H or similar, when the entrees exceed 25% of the
Narrowest diaphragm width of the plant.
b) They have sectors with different heights, when the highest body mass
exceeds 25% lower body mass. The case of parts of the
construction (Chapter 10).
c) They have very different foundation conditions in different parts of the

building.
C 8.4.5.1. Separation between new and existing buildings
When there is an existing construction the effort to evaluate its behavior can
Be difficult or even impossible. Therefore to avoid undesirable effects, as has been
proven in many earthquakes, it is convenient to make the new construction independent. The
Page 64
8/22/2019 Untitled
exception attends to counterbalance this simplifying criterion with the disadvantages of a
separation that creates structural problems, hygiene and waste of
space.
C 8.4.5.2. Separation of a block construction
The main reason to propose separation is to achieve a more predictable operation

of the construction. It is also about avoiding possible damage to the diaphragms in the areas
of connection. Finally, it is about avoiding the consequences of excessive deformability
of the diaphragms. The same considerations as in C 8.4.5.1.
On the other hand, the possible advantage of disengagement should be considered in the light of some
important functional and constructive aspects. The first is the risk of what elements
or parts of the construction, necessary for the evacuation of a building, are separated
of all or part of the occupied areas. The second is that the necessary elements
to transit over the separations can be of very important dimensions, due to
the required separation, with the corresponding disadvantages in terms of
materialization, tightness, etc.
C 8.4.5.3. Dimensioning separations and seismic joints
The definition of the “joint axis” is clear when it comes to blocks of the same
building. In the case of new constructions with existing constructions,

must define a “joint axis” from the probable displacements of the construction
existing. That task can be too cumbersome, so the condition e) is accepted

as a variant
It is noted that at different levels the "joint axis" is not necessarily coplanar.
Page 65
8/22/2019 Untitled
PARTICULARITIES OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
C 9.1. DIAPHRAGMS
C 9.1.2. Verification of connections and manifolds
It distinguishes between connections, which are the unions between the different components and the
collectors, which are transfer components. A collector must be used when the
direct union between diaphragm components or between the diaphragm and an element of
stiffening lacks sufficient capacity.
C 9.2. FOUNDATIONS
The application of design principles by capacity can lead to solicitations

greater than the solicitations that would correspond to the construction in behavior
elastic. It is logical to limit the design value to the latter because they are the limit
corresponding to the design earthquake.
C 9.2.3. Surface foundations in potentially liquefiable soils
Group A constructions or can only have deep foundations unless the

soil is stabilized to avoid liquefaction risks.
To avoid the risks of liquefaction, the following measures can be taken:
1) Replace or improve by compacting or draining the potentially liquefiable soil.
2) Use a deep foundation system designed to withstand the effect of

liquefaction In this case the cylinders or piles will project without lateral restriction in the
Liquidable zone and considering the eventual dynamic thrust of the liquefied soil. Must be
comply 9.2.3.
3) Use a single foundation drawer to provide a compensated foundation,

designed to support the weight of the construction by flotation. The rigidity of the drawer
It must ensure the absence of deforming deformations for the superstructure.
The proportions of the drawer and the construction must guarantee the overall stability.
C 9.2.4. Foundation Bracing
C 9.2.4.1. Bracing dimensioning
A rational analysis of bracing efforts is exempted if they are

dimension to balance a horizontal reaction in the corresponding base given by the
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 66
indicated expressions. The force H u must be considered in any direction and for that purpose
they will properly arrange the braces, eventually collaborating with slabs or
underlays
If on one base two or more braces come together capable of supporting the action H u in a certain
direction, the efforts in each of them will be determined by the conditions of
balance and compatibility.
C 9.3. SEPARATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION JOINTS
Separation zones and seismic joints require careful construction to

that the free movement of adjacent building bodies be guaranteed. The
minimum dimension set out in Chapter 8 ( 2.5cm ) takes tolerance into account
Geometric usual in construction. If greater tolerance is necessary, it should be
Consider when sizing the board.
The spaces of separations and joints must be completely free of obstacles,

debris, etc., to allow relative displacements in any direction. Is
condition must be maintained for the life of the construction.
The filling of the spaces in the separations is allowed if materials are used
special compressibles that guarantee the possibility of any relative displacement
no transmission of significant forces or interactions between adjacent parts. The
eventual use of fillers should consider the influence of the strain rate on the
filling stiffness
When joint covers are used, they should be designed and constructed in a way that allows
relative movements without altering the specific function of the separation or joint. He
they can use joint covers of fragile “sacrificial” materials provided that the
fall of dangerous elements on sectors accessible to people or damage to

facilities or other constructions.
It is generally unnecessary to produce seismic movement joints below the level of the
surrounding terrain.
In most cases the contact between adjacent constructions below the level of
Terrain is beneficial because it limits relative displacements. It is recognized from this
mode the situation of buildings between medians and the practical difficulty to materialize
effectively separation. However, the designer must verify the possibility of
clashes between buildings and especially the possibility of relative displacements
by difference between the conditions of the opposite limits (in one there is a construction
adjacent and not in the other).
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 67
The structural analysis, including consideration of the seismic effect, must include the
subsoil to the reference level, regardless of the influence of the construction
adjacent.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 68
ANNEX TO THE COMMENTS OF CHAPTER 9
FOUNDATIONS
To 9.0. SYMBOLS
To g gross area of the cross section.
B shoe width / width of the effective area of the foundation.
Df depth of foundation with respect to the free surface within the fault zone.
F cs , F qs , F γ s form factors.
F cd , F qd , F γ d depth factors
F ci , F qi , F γ i load inclination factors.
L length of the footing / length of the effective area of the foundation.
N c , N q , Nγ dimensionless load capacity factors that are a function of

ground friction angle.
c soil cohesion
fy specified creep stress of the longitudinal reinforcement in MPa.
k pγ passive thrust coefficient.
that effective effort at the foundation's level of displacement ( γ D f ).
ϕ internal friction angle of the ground.
γ specific weight of the soil.
β inclination of the load with respect to the vertical.
A 9.1. DETERMINATION OF THE FOUNDATION LOAD CAPACITY
The ultimate capacity of the foundations may be evaluated based on the parameters
soil geotechnics. The expressions of the ultimate load capacity correspond to
Different origin theories. The following are recommended depending on the type of foundation and
solicitation:
8/22/2019 Untitled
a) for surface foundations: Terzaghi load capacity formula, Hypothesis of
Meyerhof for effective width of eccentric load.
b) for deep foundations: Bishop's analysis for clay piles,

Broms for ultimate horizontal loads.
Page 69
Terzaghi formula:
Ncor q= ∙ c
+ Nq∙ that
+ NB21
γ∙ ∙ γ (run shoe) [C 9.1]
N c = cotg ϕ ∙ (N that- )1 [C 9.2]
inthat=
∙( π
4/32 - ϕ two/)∙so ϕ
[two∙ cos (Four.+Five
ϕ )] 2
two or
[C 9.3]
γ =N
K21 [( pγ cos
two
ϕ )- one∙ so
ϕ ] [C 9.4]
General load capacity equation (Meyerhof):
= ∙q
FFFNc
or c
∙ cs
∙ CD
∙ ci
+ FFNq
∙ that∙ qs
∙ qd
∙ Fqi + FFFNB21
γ∙ ∙ γ ∙ γs ∙ γd ∙ γi [C 9.5]
N c = cotg ϕ ∙ (N that- )1 [C 9.6]
N that = so
two
(Four.+Five
ϕ e2)∙
or π ∙so ϕ
[C 9.7]
= q ∙(
N2γ N )∙ so
+ one ϕ [C 9.8]
Form factors (for L > B ):
= +F ()
NNLB1
cs ( ∙ that
) c [C 9.9]
LB1
qs
=F + () ∙ so ϕ [C 9.10]
= F
LB4.01
γs
- ∙ () [C 9.11]
Depth factors (for D f / B ≤ 1 ):
= F
BD4.01
CD
+ ∙( F
) [C 9.12]
∙ so ϕ ∙ (one
- sen ϕ ) (∙ BD )
two
21qd F= + F
[C 9.13]
8/22/2019 Untitled
1 γF [C 9.14]
d =
Tilt Factors:
1 ciFF= - qi = ( β or 90 ) 2nd [C 9.15]
1 γF
i
= ( - β ϕ) 2 [C 9.16]
Page 70
When a request is submitted by M at one address, the values should be used
of B and L corresponding to the effective area ( B - 2e ) or ( L - 2e ) being and eccentricity

generated by the solicitations, the smaller of the two dimensions is the effective width. For
Form factors replace B and L with the value of the effective area. Do not affect the factors of
depth through effective areas.
For the capacity of other foundation structures, the informed opinion of the
geotechnical specialist
A 9.2. MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION FOR PILOTS OR CYLINDERS

REINFORCED CONCRETE
a) The minimum amount of longitudinal reinforcement shall be:
(a.1) Not less than 2.40 / f and for piles with a gross area of section A g equal to or
less than 0.50 x 10 6 mm 2 .
(a.2) Not less than 1.20 / f and for piles with a gross area of section A g equal to or
greater than 2.00x10 6 mm 2 .
(a.3) Not less than: 2400 / f and · ( 2Ag ) 1/2 for piles with a gross section area
A g between 0.50x10 6 mm 2 and 2.00x10 6 mm 2 .
b) The transverse reinforcement must comply with the following:
(b.1) In areas of potential plastic ball joint formation, as specified

for columns in 2.3.9.1. of part II of this Regulation.
(b.2) In areas adjacent to the zone of potential plastic ball joint formation in
a distance equal to the greatest between 3 times the diameter of the pile ( d ), 3 times
the total height of the section or the length of the potential formation zone of
plastic patella, as specified for columns in 2.3.9.2. of part II of
8/22/2019 Untitled
this regulation.
(b.3) In the rest of the pile the spacing between stirrup shafts should not be greater
than the diameter of the pile ( d ).
A 9.3. TYPES OF ARRIOSTRAMIENTOS
Masonry constructions govern the provisions of Part III of this

Regulation.
Page 71
a) Minimum dimensions and reinforcement braces given by Table AC 9.1. for that matter
of reinforced concrete.
The reinforcements given in Table AC 9.1. correspond to steels with f and ≥ 420MPa . For
steels of other types will be placed mechanically equivalent section with diameters
minimum indicated.
b) Slabs of minimum thickness 10cm and with the same local capacity that is required at
braces.
c) In constructions of up to 2 floors of groups A , B or C a subfloor of

10cm of simple concrete built in the same plane as the braces to supply
stiffness transverse to the direction of the braces.
d) Other types of bracing are allowed, which must be sized for the
efforts indicated in 9.2.4.1. and in accordance with the requirements of parts II , III and IV of
this regulation.
Table C 9.1. Dimensions and minimum bracing reinforcement.
Zone Kind of Armor

Dimensions Stirrups
seismic ground Longitudinal
1 and 2 20cm x 20cm 4ϕ8 ϕ 4.2 c / 20cm

1 and 2
3 and 4 20cm x 20cm 4 ϕ 10 ϕ 6 c / 20cm
1 and 2 20cm x 20cm 4 ϕ 12 ϕ 6 c / 15cm

3 and 4
3 and 4 20cm x 20cm 4 ϕ 12 ϕ 6 c / 15cm
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 72
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 73
CONSTRUCTION PARTS AND

NON-STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
C 10.1. SCOPE
The importance of the risk of construction components or parts should not be

underestimated In major earthquakes in areas with forecasts
earthquakes are frequent that there are numerous accidents or falls of elements
ornamental, “non-structural” enclosure, stained glass, tiles, etc. It is also frequent
that the buildings remain standing and without significant damage but totally inoperative
for failures in its facilities and services. Finally many of the facilities in
buildings with complex equipment (such as hospitals, many industries and plants
of energy) are highly dangerous if not properly designed to withstand
seismic actions As a component or part of the construction, elements are understood
of prolonged permanence in the construction and that are subject directly or indirectly
to the main structure.
From the point of view of mass we can consider part or component those that
They do not significantly modify the vibration of the construction as a whole. If the weight of
8/22/2019 Untitled
component is important an analysis model (static or dynamic) should be considered
that allows to adequately represent the response of the set and apply in it
methods of the previous Chapters.
C 10.2. EVALUATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION ON PARTS OF THE

BUILDING
The Regulation presents for the evaluation of the seismic action on components a
simplified procedure consisting of an extension of the static method applicable to the
construction in general. This does not exclude the application of analysis procedures.
Direct dynamic to get the shares on the parties. In certain cases of
installations (pipes) it may be necessary to perform a specific analysis of the installation.
The analysis consists in the determination of a seismic coefficient that results

a seismic action in the final state as a result of an elastic action reduced by a factor of
own reduction of each type of component or part. The elastic acceleration results from
increase the anchor value of the spectrum by a dynamic amplification factor, a factor
of magnification in height and a factor of specific importance of the part.
Page 74
C 10.2.1. Importance factor
The factor of importance differentiates those components that constitute a high risk
for the life of the occupants of the construction or that the construction be of character
essential after a severe earthquake. For unforeseen cases, the designer may
propose them by analogy to the Application Authority.
C 10.2.2. Dynamic amplification factor
The dynamic amplification factor represents the amplification of the acceleration that acts
at the base of the component (ground spectrum anchor acceleration).
C 10.2.3. Response Modification Factor
The response modification factor of the component or part can be considered as the
equivalent to the reduction factor that is applied to the main structure. Cases no
referred to in Tables 10.1. and 10.2. They must be selected with engineering judgment. The
values given in Tables 10.1. and 10.2. are minimum values and the designer in his opinion
You can adopt higher values.
C 10.2.4. Magnification factor in height
8/22/2019 Untitled
This factor takes into account the amplification of the accelerations in height with respect to the
ground. A linear height distribution of soil acceleration C is adopted to what is
congruent with the static method.
C 10.3. SUPPORTS, LINKS AND FIXATIONS
The frictional forces due to gravitational actions (component weight) are

extremely variable during an intense earthquake, they can be canceled due to
vertical components of the movement, particularly in the epicentral areas. In
consequence every link has to provide an independent reaction from the
friction collaboration due to weight.
C 10.4. DEFORMATIONS
The parties can strike with the main structure or with each other. In addition the accessories
like connections, pipes, etc. they can suffer damages that disable the system and, in the case
of dangerous fluids or contents, cause serious accidents. The same can happen
with fragile elements such as windows, roofs or glass walls. Therefore it should
pay attention to the influence of deformations to leave the separations or take
The necessary precautions.
Page 75
When studying the deformations of the component the influence must be taken into account
of the local deformation of the main structure. Eventually you can model
partially the main system together with the part to evaluate deformations and
solicitations
The proposed deformation assessment takes into account the influence of ductility.
with the accepted criterion that the maximum displacement is equal to the displacement
maximum of the supposed elastic structure, and in this case increased by 20% . Because
that the control of the absolute displacement of a component does not allow to appreciate the level
of expected damage the distortion control is imposed.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 76
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 77
EXISTING CONSTRUCTIONS
C 11.1. SCOPE
Most of the infrastructure exists prior to the entry into force of a

new regulation. In many cases the constructions lack forecasts
specific earthquakes or were projected with criteria that can be considered
obsolete Experience proves that it is these constructions that cause the greatest
8/22/2019 Untitled
Part of the damages and victims. From that point of view it would seem that what should be done
is to demand full compliance with the Regulation.
However, the cost in both economic and purely social terms can be
very high and that's why other solutions are required. Although most of the regulations
ignore existing constructions some ( FEMA 273 , ATC 3-78 ) include
considerations on this subject that are oriented similarly to the one adopted
for this wording, which tries to reflect local circumstances.
One aspect that should be emphasized is that reinforcement, recovery or rehabilitation and more
the repair of damaged buildings requires much more criteria and engineering judgment to
professional than the project of a new work. It's not about coldly applying the letter of
a regulation but to achieve a proper design. In this the conceptual study of
collapse mechanism and its monitoring throughout the process is the most reliable auxiliary that
it is had to ensure the satisfactory behavior of the construction.
It is obvious on the other hand that the designer and the owner can choose to adapt the work
new complete to the requirements of the Regulation, without using the franchises that this
Chapter allows. In those cases it is unnecessary to determine the indices that are
detailed in 11.4. and all the rest of the process.
The constructions of historical value require a particular care, so in the

project and construction of modifications must participate interdisciplinary teams. In
Particular interventions should not alter the essence of primitive construction.
C 11.3. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
The economic necessity of providing the

investment dedicated to the repair or reinforcement of the total investment that the work requires.
Many of the works that must be repaired or modified are constructions
relatively small, for which a complete adaptation to the demands of the
Page 78
Regulation could be prohibitive. In other cases, the modifications are small

aggregates or extensions that in themselves require a modest investment.
A balanced judgment is imposed between safety, the remaining useful life of the construction and the
magnitude of the work to be done.
C 11.4. CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTIONS

8/22/2019 Untitled
To achieve the objectives considering the fundamental principles, it is necessary to define the
requirements for the current construction, according to criteria that consider the multiple
variables that occur in this type of works.
Three parameters have been chosen to classify the primitive construction:
1) The importance of the current work responds to technical-economic aspects.
2) The seismic-resistant quality of the primitive work considers the background of

project, construction and structural behavior of the building in what
It has a shelf life.
3) The earthquake resistant capacity of the primitive work results in a comparison index
between the nominal resistance of the elements and the resistance required by application
of this Regulation.
C 11.4.1. Importance of the current work
Two parameters have been chosen to assess the importance of the current work, which are
excluding: the gravitational burden and the value of the work, the one that is highest must be recognized.
C 11.4.2. Seismic-resistant quality of primitive work
The earthquake resistant quality assessment includes two forecasts and two types of
behavior, shown in Table C 11.1.
Table C 11.1. Parameters for the evaluation of earthquake resistant quality.
Regulation Current Past / Nonexistent
C1 - Good Quality C2 - Medium Quality

Behavior
C3 - Low Quality C4 - Abnormal
The classification requires the survey of the current state of the structure of the building that is
intervenes. In particular, the construction behavior reflected in the
existence of damage or abnormal displacements and the seismic intensity that have
Page 79
supported This may require a particular and confronted study of the site where the
construction with collection of both documentary and
behavior of other surrounding buildings.
It should be understood that "anomalous structural behavior" includes inspection of the

8/22/2019 Untitled
behavior of systems and structural elements and the interaction that could
have with non-structural elements. Therefore, anomalies should also be considered
presence of short column, weak floor, irregularity in plan or elevation, lack of system
full earthquake resistant, etc.
Note that the seismic-resistant quality of the primitive work is valued by the behavior
of construction and not because of the predominant material in it.
The Regulation also respects the intuition and ingenuity of the builders who, even without
regulations, built considering the seismic effect with some forecast, such as
case of heritage works.
C 11.4.3. Seismic-resistant ability of primitive work
The evaluation of the earthquake-resistant capacity implies defining and evaluating the mechanisms of
collapse that construction can form. When those mechanisms allow development
of deformations of allastic can include the corresponding reduction of demand
under the conditions set forth in Chapter 5.
The coefficient r of the structure to consider is the lowest of all the components,
Therefore, in many constructions the reinforcement of a few elements can improve
substantially the coefficient r . In these cases the most important objective is to reinforce the
weak elements that produce premature or fragile failures.
However, the danger of indiscriminately reinforcing the

construction neglecting the evaluation of the collapse mechanism, which can translate
failures to inappropriate or dangerous areas and result in a more dangerous construction
than the original The nominal capacity is established in consideration of the particularities
earthquake resistant materials that make up the work.
For constructions made with materials without national regulation it will be necessary
resort to foreign norms and regulations with preeminence of those applied in
seismic zones of equivalent risk.
C 11.5. EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED
C 11.5.2. Constructive requirements
Page 80
C 11.5.2.3. Metal constructions
8/22/2019 Untitled
It is assumed that the primitive work is already consolidated, that the structural components and
their riveted or crushed joints of the crush type have been deformed and are
acting, it is supposedly safe, for permanent actions. Reinforcement can
be made with more rigid connections whether welded or critical slip, you can
assign to these unions the transfer of variable and seismic actions. The
criterion established in J.1.9 of CIRSOC Regulation 301 .
The increased capacity of the connections can be resolved, if necessary, by modifying

the structural type used; for example a primitive system of beams and columns changes to
portico with tornapuntas, or a structure of porch comes to be in a plane with diagonals
centered or eccentric.
C 11.6. REQUIREMENTS AND CHECKS
The following Tables show, for each defined quality of construction, the
Regulation requirements to take into account in construction interventions
existing.
Table C 11.2. Requirements for construction interventions: Quality C1.
C1 quality
All exceptions indicated in 11.5 are accepted.

Security
S1 S2 S3 S4
Importance
Security Restitution
of this Regulation or Security Restitution Security Restitution
Full verification
I1 Damage repair of this Regulation and of this Regulation and
of the construction.
and extensions Damage Repair Damage Repair
independent.
of this Regulation or Security Restitution Security Restitution
Full verification
I2 Damage repair of this Regulation and of this Regulation and
and extensions Damage Repair Damage Repair
independent.
Inspection for
Security Restitution of this Regulation and
check status of Security Restitution
of this Regulation or Damage repair
I3 building. of this Regulation and
extensions or Repair of
Full verification Damage Repair
independent. damages and extensions
independent.
Page 81
8/22/2019 Untitled
C2 quality
All exceptions indicated in 11.5 are accepted.
Security
S1 S2 S3 S4
Importance
The NEW work must The NEW work must The NEW work must The NEW work must
Have the capacity Have the capacity Have the capacity Have the capacity
required by this required by this required by this required by this
I1 Regulation, Regulation, Regulation, Regulation,
considering the considering the considering the considering the
contribution of the contribution of the contribution of the contribution of the
subsisting work. subsisting work. subsisting work. subsisting work.
The NEW work must

Have the capacity
required by this
Regulation,
The NEW work must The NEW work must considering the
Have the capacity Have the capacity Damage repair contribution of the
required by this required by this and Restitution subsisting work or
Regulation, Regulation, security of Extensions
I2 considering the considering the original project with independent and
contribution of the contribution of the a capacity ≥ 80% Reinforcement of the work
subsisting work or subsisting work or of this subsistent with a
Extensions Extensions Regulation. investment ≥ 25% of
independent. independent. amount of the work and
that reaches one
capacity ≥ 60% of the

required by this
Regulation.
If you increase the If you increase the
Eccentricity: The Eccentricity: The

NEW work must NEW work must
Extensions
Have the capacity Have the capacity Damage repair
independent and
required by this required by this and Restitution
Reinforcement of the work
Regulation, Regulation, security of
subsistent with a
considering the considering the original project with
investment ≥ 25% of
I3 contribution of the contribution of the a capacity ≥ 80%
amount of the work and
subsisting work or subsisting work or of this
that reaches one
Extensions Extensions Regulation or
independent. independent. Extensions
required by this
If not, the work If not, the work independent.
Regulation.
CURRENT MUST HAVE CURRENT MUST HAVE
the required capacity the required capacity
by this Regulation. by this Regulation.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 82
C3 quality
All exceptions indicated in 11.5.2 are allowed, except 11.5.2.2.d). Not less than
25% of the investment will be used to reinforce the remaining work.
Security
S1 S2 S3 S4
Importance
Damage repair
Damage repair Damage repair Damage repair
and restitution of the
and restitution of the and restitution of the and restitution of the
I1 capacity of
capacity required by capacity required by capacity required by
draft.
this regulation. this regulation. this regulation.
Damage repair
and reinforcement that
Damage repair
reach one
Damage repair Damage repair capacity ≥ 60% of the
capacity of
and restitution of the and restitution of the required by this
I2 project or
capacity required by capacity required by Regulation or
Damage repair
this regulation. this regulation. Damage repair
and extensions
independent.
capacity required by
this regulation.
Damage repair
and reinforcement that

reach one
Damage repair Damage repair Damage repair
required by this
I3 and extensions and extensions and extensions
Regulation or
independent. independent. independent.
Damage repair

capacity required by
this regulation.
C 11.7. CONSTRUCTION PARTS
It is necessary to minimize the risk in those places where they can circulate or congregate
people immediately occurred a seismic event. There are many antecedents of
loss of life due to the collapse of parts of the work on circulations and sites of
evacuation.
In constructions of groups A or and A requirement extends to all parts of the building

whatever their location, since in them any sector can be occupied by
several people or contain valuable items or primary facilities.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 83
C4 quality
All exceptions indicated in 11.5.2 are allowed, except 11.5.2.2.d). Not less than
40% of the investment will be used to reinforce the remaining work.
Security
S1 S2 S3 S4
Importance
Damage repair Damage repair,

and reinforcement up reinforcement up
reach capacity reach 80% of the
Damage repair required by this capacity required by
Damage repair
and complete adjustment to Regulation, this Regulation,
and complete adjustment to
this Regulation, considering only the considering the
this Regulation or
considering only the contribution of contribution of
I1 Extensions
contribution of items not items not
independent and
items not damaged from the work damaged from the work
program of
damaged from the work subsistent and subsistent and
substitution.
subsistent program of program of
replacement or adjustment replacement or adjustment
complete to this complete to this
Regulation. Regulation.
Damage repair Damage repair,

and reinforcement up reinforcement up
Extensions
reach 80% of the reach 80% of the
independent and
Damage repair capacity required by capacity required by
damage repair
and complete adjustment to this Regulation, this Regulation,
or Repair of
this Regulation, considering only the considering the
damage and adjustment
considering only the contribution of contribution of
I2 complete to this
contribution of items not items not
Regulation or
items not damaged from the work damaged from the work
Extensions
damaged from the work subsistent and subsistent and
independent and
subsistent program of program of
program of
replacement or adjustment replacement or adjustment
substitution.
complete to this complete to this
Regulation. Regulation.
Extensions ONLY
Extensions Damage repair
independent,
independent and and extensions
Damage repair
damage repair independent or Damage repair,
and reinforcement until
or Repair of Damage repair program of
reach one
damage and adjustment and complete adjustment to replacement and
I3 complete to this this Regulation, extensions
required by this
Regulation or considering only the independent or
Regulation and
Extensions contribution of Full adjustment to
program of
independent and items not this regulation.
replacement or adjustment
program of damaged from the work
complete to this
substitution. subsistent
Regulation.
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 84
8/22/2019 Untitled
Page 85
REFERENCES:
1) NEHRP RECOMMENDED PROVISIONS FOR SEISMIC REGULATIONS FOR NEW

BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES (FEMA 450), Part 1: Provisions, 2003 Edition.
2) NEHRP RECOMMENDED PROVISIONS FOR SEISMIC REGULATIONS FOR NEW

BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES (FEMA 450), Part 2: Commentary, 2003
Edition
3) MINIMUM DESIGN LOADS FOR BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES ASCE / SEI
7-10.
8/22/2019 Untitled
INPRES-CIRSOC 103 Regulation, Comments to Part I References - 69
Page 86

Comentarios-103 - Parte I - English

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

Comentarios-103 - Parte I - English

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

8/22/2019 Untitled

JULY 2018 EDITION

INPRES INTI CIRSOC

Internet: www.inpres.gov.ar Internet: www.inti.gob.ar/cirsoc

NATIONAL DIRECTOR: TECHNICAL DIRECTOR:

The deposit established by law 11.723 is made. All rights reserved.

Argentine Association of Concrete Technology

This Part I, “Constructions in General”, of the Argentine Regulations for

National Seismic Prevention Institute

Ing. Alejandro Giuliano

National University of Cuyo - Faculty of Engineering

Dr. Ing. Francisco Javier Crisafulli

Ing. José Giunta

Ms. Sc. Ing. Carlos Ricardo Llopiz

Ing. Agustín Benito Reboredo

National Technological University - Mendoza Regional Faculty

Ing. Eduardo Balasch

Ing. Carlos Daniel Frau

Ing. Daniel García Gei

Dr. Ing. Noemí Graciela Maldonado

Ing. Luis Matons

Ing. Eduardo Daniel Quiroga

Professional Council of Engineers and Geologists of Mendoza

Ing. Raúl Héctor Delle Donne

Ing. Roberto R. Nesossi

Mendoza Engineers Center

Ing. Juan Camps

Ing. Norberto González

Ing. Elías Japaz

Ing. Raúl Giménez Mathus

The drafting commission was composed of the following professionals:

Ing. Eduardo Balasch

Ing. Juan Camps

Dr. Ing. Francisco Javier Crisafulli

Ing. Carlos Daniel Frau

Ing. Daniel García Gei

Ing. Alejandro Giuliano

Ing. José Giunta

Ms. Sc. Ing. Carlos Ricardo Llopiz

Dr. Ing. Noemí Graciela Maldonado

Ing. Eduardo Daniel Quiroga

Ing. Agustín Benito Reboredo

INTI / CIRSOC for the revision and edition of this document.

This Part I "General Construction" complements Part II

Traditional structural analysis methods are included. The treatment of

torsional effects aims to more fully reflect the behavior of the

Finally, the problem of existing constructions is addressed.

We are convinced that the improvements introduced in this new Part I

Inga Marta S. PARMIGIANI Ing. Alejandro P. GIULIANO

C 1.2. REACHES two

C 1.3. ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS two

C 1.3.1. National and local Regulation Council two

C 1.3.3. Responsible for the application of the Regulation two

C 1.3.3.1. Professional Responsibility two

C 1.4. INSTRUMENTAL AND MEASUREMENTS 3

C 2.3. CLASSIFICATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE 5

C 2.3.1. Soil influence, C 2.3.3. Classification of sites with stratified soils 5

C 2.4. CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTIONS ACCORDING TO THEIR DESTINATION AND

C 2.6. STRUCTURAL REGULARITY 7

C 2.6.1. Regularity in plant 8

C 2.6.2. Regularity in height 10

C 2.7. METHODS FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION 12

C 2.7.1. Simplified verification 12