6.9K views

Uploaded by Bart Lucena Jr.

code

- NSCP2001-UBC97 Static Earthquake.pdf
- NSCP Earthquake, Soil, Rain Code
- NSCP 2015 Seismic Analysis Static Force Procedure Vertical Distribution of Forcces
- Nscp - Wind Load
- National Structural Code of the Philippines(NSCP), Volume 1, Fourth Edition
- Nscp Design Loads
- ASEP NSCP SECTION 207 WIND LOADS part 1.pdf
- NSCP Seismic Provisions SMRSF Horizontal Forces
- National Structural Code of the NSCP Volume II Bridges 2nd Edition
- NSCP 2010 6th Edition
- Simplified Reinforced Concrete Design 2010 NSCP
- NSCP 2010(2)
- Structural Analysis and Design Criteria
- Rc Design Ppt
- An Example Problem on Wind Load Calculation According to NSCP 2010
- Basic Structural Concepts (NSCP Based ASD to LRFD Design of Steel Structures)
- Nscp Seismic
- NSCP_2010
- NSCP 6th Edition 2010(1)
- Wind Loads NSCP 2001 Provisions

You are on page 1of 67

Seismic Provisions

High probability

of Failure Failure redefined to permit behavior (yielding) that would be considered failure under other loads. High Uncertainty Importance of Details

In dealing with earthquakes we must contend with appreciable probabilities that failure will occur in the near future. Otherwise, all the wealth of the world would prove insufficient We must also face uncertainty on a large scale In a way, earthquake engineering is a cartoon Earthquakes systematically bring out the mistakes made in design and construction, even the minutest mistakes. Newmark & Rosenblueth

Incipient Collapse Life Safety Immediate Occasional

Rare

Very Rare

Max Considered

A specific performance level given a specific

Stated basis of current codes:

FEMA 302 Section 1.1 The design earthquake ground motion levels specified herein could result in both structural and nonstructural damage. For most structures designed and constructed according to these Provisions, structural damage from the design earthquake ground motion would be repairable although perhaps not economically so. For essential facilities, it is expected that the damage from the design earthquake ground motion would not be so severe as to preclude continued occupancy and function of the facility. For ground motions larger than the design levels, the intent of these Provisions is that there be a low likelihood of structural collapse

4.3

Building Properties: Moment Resisting Frames density = 8 pcf Period T = 1.0 sec Damping = 5%

Wind:

100 mph Fastest mile Exposure C 62.5 90 120

Velocity pressure qs = 25.6 psf Gust/Exposure factor Ce = 1.25 Pressure coefficient Cq = 1.3 Load Factor for Wind = 1.3

Total wind force on 120 face: VW120= 62.5*120*25.6*1.25*1.3*1.3/1000 = 406 kips Total wind force on 90 face: VW90 = 62.5*90*25.6*1.25*1.3*1.3/1000 = 304 kips

4.4

Earthquake:

Building Weight W= 120*90*62.5*8/1000 = 5400 kips 62.5 90 120

VEQ = CSW

CS = 12 AV S 1.2 0.4 10 . . = = 0.480 2/3 2/3 T 10 .

Total ELASTIC earthquake force (in each direction): VEQ = 0.480*5400 = 2592 kips

4.5

This example uses old version of NEHRP. It is used for illustrative purposes only.

VEQ VW120 2952 = = 7.3 406 VEQ VW 90 2952 = = 9.7 304

ELASTIC Earthquake forces 7 to 10 times wind! Virtually impossible to obtain economical design

4.6

Isolate structure from ground (Base Isolation) Increase Damping (Passive Energy Dissipation) Allow Inelastic Response

Historically, Building Codes use Inelastic Response Procedure. Inelastic response occurs though structural damage (yielding). We must control the damage for the method to be successful.

4.7

The frame, designed for a wind force which is 15% of the ELASTIC earthquake force, can survive the earthquake if: It has the capability to undergo numerous cycles of INELASIC deformation It has the capability to deform at least 5 to 6 times the yield deformation It suffers no appreciable loss of strength

4.12

As a result of the large displacements associated with the inelastic deformations, the structure will suffer considerable structural and nonstructural damage.

This damage must be controlled by adequate detailing and by limiting structural deformations (drift)

4.13

The red line shows the force and displacement that would be reached if the structure responded elastically. The green line shows the actual force vs. displacement response of the structure The pink line indicates the minimum strength required to hold everything together during inelastic behavior The blue line is the force level that we design for. We rely on the ductility of the system to prevent collapse.

1755 - Lisbon: ground shaking waves 1906 - San Francisco: Fire, lateral force from wind 1911 - Messina, Italy: Static inertial force (10%), First

recognition of F=ma 1923 - Tokyo: Prediction by seismic gap 1925 - Santa Barbara: USCGS instructed to develop strong motion seismographs. 1927 - U.B.C.: Inertial forces and soil effects in the U.S. (7.5% or 10% of D+L) 1933 - Long Beach: First instrumental records (flawed): reinforcement required for masonry; quality assurance; design review & construction inspection.

1940 - El Centro: Earthquake ground motion record. Makes possible

the computation of structural response. Became the most used record. 1943 - City of Los Angles Building Code: Dynamic property of building used in addition to mass (Number of stories relates to period and to distribution of force) 1952 - San Francisco Joint Committee:

Modal analysis used as a basis for static forces and distribution. Difference between design force and computed forces not resolved. Distinction for soils types dropped Overturning reductions Torsion

1956 - World Conference on Earthquake Engineering 1957 - Mexico City: Success with design using dynamic analysis.

1960 - SEAOC blue book

Design accel. Similar to 1943 LA and 1952 SF Factor for performance of structural systems (K) Effect of higher modes on vertical distribution 1961 - Design of Multi-Story Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motions, Blume, Newmark, and Corning Inelastic response Ductility in concrete 1964 Alaska Earthquake: Lack of instrumental data. Observations influenced thinking on torsional response, anchorage of cladding, and overall load path concepts. 1964 - Niigata, Japan: Liquefaction 1967 - Caracas Earthquake: Non structural infill and overturning.

1974 Applied Technology Council Report ATC 2

Probabilistic ground accelerations Realistic response accelerations and explicit factors for inelastic action Strength design Ground motion attenuation Nationwide applicability Existing buildings

and direction 1979 Building Seismic Safety Council: response to ATC 3 - extensive review and trial designs 1985 - BSSC/NEHRP Recommended provisions: Son of ATC 3

1985 - Mexico City Earthquake: Extreme site effects 1988 - New SEAOC (1987) and UBC requirements:

Allowable stress design and a single map. 1988 Armenia Earthquake: Structural details and site effects 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake: A performance test for buildings & bridges. 1991 NEHRP Provisions into Model Codes

http://www.bssconline.org/

Members are

organizations (ASCE, ACI, AISC, AIA, ICBO, BOCA, EERI, SEAOC, etc) Consensus Process

See ASCE 7-05 11.4

Ss = Mapped 5% damped, spectral response acceleration parameter at short periods S1 = Mapped 5% damped spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 sec. Can be found online at

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/

SS

See ASCE 7-05 22 Use Map to find the

maximum considered ground motion for short periods. The contours are irregularly spaced Values are in % of g

S1

See ASCE 7-05 22 Use Map to find the

maximum considered ground motion for short periods. The contours are irregularly spaced Values are in % of g

Site Classes

See ASCE 7-05 11.4.2, 20 Site Classes are also labeled A-F

A is for hard rock, F for very soft soils See definitions in ASCE 7-05 20 Choice of site class is based on soil stiffness which is measured in different ways for different types of soil. See ASCE 7-05 20 for procedure If insufficient data is available, assume Site Class D unless there is a probability of a Site Class F.

See ASCE 7-05 11.4.3

SMS = FaSS

SM1= FvS1

See ASCE 7-05 11.4.4

SDS = 2*SMS/3

SD1 = 2*SM1/3

response acceleration for short periods. SD1 is the design, 5% damped, spectral response acceleration at a period of 1 sec. SDS and SD1 are used in selecting the Seismic Design Category and in the analysis methods.

See ASCE 7-05 11.4.5

response acceleration

Importance Factor, I

See ASCE 7-05 11.5

occupancy category IV structures where access is needed to get to the category IV structure.

See ASCE 7-05 11.6

requirements, height limitations, and other limits on usage. Seismic Design Categories labeled A-F

The most restrictive

SDC F:

See ASCE 7-05 11.7

Very limited seismic exposure and risk Lateral forces taken to equal 1% of structure

See ASCE 7-05 11.8

(SDC E or F) SDC C F:

SDC D-F:

See ASCE 7-05 12.6

Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) Static approximation. May not be used on structures of Seismic Design Categories E or F with particular irregularities. (ASCE 7-05 Table 12.6-1) Modal Analysis

Analysis Procedures

Category A: regular and irregular structures designed

for a minimum lateral force Category B & C: regular and irregular structures using any of the three methods Category D, E, & F: Table 12.6-1 with some limits on SDS and SD1

ELF for regular and some irregular Modal for some irregular Site specific required in Site Classes E or F

Plan Configuration

Vertical Configuration

1a - Torsional Irregularity 1b - Extreme Torsional Irregularity 2 - Re-entrant Corners 3 - Diaphragm Discontinuity 4 - Out-of-plane Offsets 5 - Nonparallel Systems

1a - Torsional Irregularity

larger story drift more than 1.2 times average story drift 1b - Extreme Torsional Irregularity larger story drift more than 1.4 times average story drift Not permitted in Design Categories E & F Design forces for lateral force connections to be increased 25% in Design Categories D, E, & F.

Both projections

beyond the corner are more than 15% of the plan dimension of the structure in the same direction

Diaphragms with abrupt discontinuities or variations

in stiffness, including those having cutout or open areas greater than 50% of the gross enclosed diaphragm area, or changes in effective diaphragm stiffness of more than 50% from one story to the next. Design forces for lateral force connections to be increased 25% in Design Categories D, E, & F.

Discontinuities in a lateral

force resistance path, such as out-of-plane offsets of the vertical elements. Design forces for lateral force connections to be increased 25% in Design Categories D, E, & F.

The vertical lateral force-

resisting elements are not parallel to or symmetric about the major orthogonal axes of the lateral force resisting system. Analyze for forces applied in the direction that causes the most critical load effect for Design Categories C - F.

Vertical Irregularities

1a - Stiffness Irregularity -Soft Story 1b - Stiffness Irregularity - Extreme Soft Story 2 - Weight (Mass) Irregularity 3 - Vertical Geometry Irregularity 4 - In-plane Discontinuity in Vertical Lateral Force

1a - Soft Story

the lateral stiffness is less than 70% of that in the story above or less than 80% of the average stiffness of the three stories above. 1b - Extreme Soft Story the lateral stiffness is less than 60% of that in the story above or less than 70% of the average stiffness of the three stories above. Not permitted in Design Categories E & F

Mass irregularity shall

be considered to exist where the effective mass of any story is more than 150% of the effective mass of an adjacent story. A roof that is lighter than the floor below need not be considered.

Vertical geometry

irregularity shall be considered to exist where the horizontal dimension of the lateral force-resisting system in any story is more than 130% of that in an adjacent story.

An in-plane offset of the lateral force-resisting elements greater

than the length of those elements or a reduction in stiffness in the resisting element in the story below. Design forces for lateral force connections to be increased 25% in Design Categories D, E, & F.

A weak story is one in which the

story lateral strength is less than 80% of that in the story above. The story strength is the total strength of all seismic-resisting elements sharing the story shear for the direction under consideration. Do not confuse STIFFNESS with STRENGTH. Not permitted in Design Categories E & F.

(ASCE 7-05 12.8)

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.1

Base Shear, V = CsW Where: Cs = seismic response coefficient W = the effective seismic weight, including applicable portions of other storage and snow loads (See ASCE 7-05 12.7.2)

Seismic Weight, W

See ASCE 7-05 12.7.2

W is to include: all dead load (all permanent components of the building, including permanent equipment) 25% of any design storage floor live loads except for floor live load in public garages and open parking structures. If partition loads are considered in floor design, at least 10 psf is to be included. A portion of the snow load (20% pf minimum) in regions where the flat roof snow load exceeds 30 psf.

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.1.1

Cs = SDS /(R/I) Cs need not exceed SD1/(T(R/I)) for T < TL SD1TL/(T2(R/I)) for T > TL Cs shall not be taken less than 0.01 for S1 < 0.6g 0.5S1/(R/I) for S1 > 0.6g

See ASCE 7-05 12.2

The response modification factor, R, accounts for the dynamic

characteristics, lateral force resistance, and energy dissipation capacity of the structural system. Can be different for different directions.

Fundamental Period, T

May be computed by analytical means May be computed by approximate means, Ta Where analysis is used to compute T:

T < Cu Ta

May also use Ta in place of actual T

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.2 An approximate means may be used.

Ta = CThnx Where: CT = Building period coefficient. hn = height above the base to the highest level of the building for moment frames not exceeding 12 stories and having a minimum story height of 10 ft, Ta may be taken as 0.1N, where N = number of stories. For masonry or concrete shear wall buildings use eq 12.8-9 Ta may be different in each direction.

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.2

V = CsW

From Design Spectrum W = Building Seismic Weight

0.01 or 0.5S1/(R/I) < SDS/(R/I) < SD1/(T(R/I)) or TLSD1/(T2(R/I)) From map R from Table 12.2-1 based on the Basic Seismic-ForceResisting system I from Table 11.5-1 based on Occupancy Category Numerical Analysis or Ta = CThnx or Ta = 0.1N CT = 0.028, 0.016, 0.030, or 0.020 hn = building height N = number of storys

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.3 For short period buildings the vertical

distribution follows generally follows the first mode of vibration in which the force increases linearly with height for evenly distributed mass. For long period buildings the force is shifted upwards to account for the whipping action associated with increased flexibility

Story Force, Fx

Fx = CvxV

Where Cvx = Vertical Distribution Factor

Cvx W x hx n W i hi i= 1

k k

Wx = Weight at level x hx = elevation of level x above the base k = exponent related to structure period When T < 0.5 s, k =1, When T > 2.5 s, k =2, Linearly interpolate when 0.5 < T < 2.5 s

Story Shear, Vx

Story shear, Vx, is the shear force at a given story

Horizontal Distribution

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.4

distributed in accordance with the distribution of the mass at each level. The Story Shear, Vx, is distributed to the vertical lateral force resisting elements based on the relative lateral stiffnesses of the vertical resisting elements and the diaphragm.

Torsion

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.4.1-3 The analysis must take into account any torsional effects

resulting from the location of the masses relative to the centers of resistance. In addition to the predicted torsion, accidental torsion must be applied for structures with rigid diaphragms by assuming the center of mass at each level is moved from its actual location a distance equal to 5% the building dimension perpendicular to the direction of motion. Buildings of Seismic Design Categories C, D, E, and F with torsional irregularities are to have torsional moments magnified.

The effects on the structure and its components due to gravity loads and seismic forces shall be combined in accordance with the factored load combinations as presented in ASCE 7 except that the effect of seismic loads, E, shall be as defined herein.

Overturning

See ASCE 7-05 12.8.5

The effects of overturning must be considered. The overturning moment at any level is the sum of the

moments at that level created by the Story Forces at each level above it.

See ASCE 7-05 2.3 & 2.4

LRFD 5: 1.2D + 1.0E + L + 0.2S 7: 0.9D + 1.0E ASD 5: D + (W or 0.7E) 6: D + 0.75(W or 0.7E) + 0.75L + 0.75(Lr or S or R) 8: 0.6D + 0.7E

Definition of E

See ASCE 7-05 12.4

When Seismic effects and Dead Load effects

counteract: E = Eh - Ev = QE - 0.2SDSD

QE = Effect of horizontal seismic forces

See ASCE 7-05 12.3.4 The reliability factor is intended to account for redundancy in the

structure. The factor, , may be taken as 1.0 for eight cases listed in ASCE 7-05 12.3.4.1, including Seismic Design Categories A-C. For structures of Seismic Design Categories D-F: = 1.3 With listed exceptions (ASCE 7-05 12.3.4.2)

- NSCP2001-UBC97 Static Earthquake.pdfUploaded byMichael Dixon
- NSCP Earthquake, Soil, Rain CodeUploaded byRache Cordero
- NSCP 2015 Seismic Analysis Static Force Procedure Vertical Distribution of ForccesUploaded byKevin Saluague
- Nscp - Wind LoadUploaded byjuncos0729
- National Structural Code of the Philippines(NSCP), Volume 1, Fourth EditionUploaded bysermenap
- Nscp Design LoadsUploaded byShem Barro
- ASEP NSCP SECTION 207 WIND LOADS part 1.pdfUploaded byRoda Cadiz
- NSCP Seismic Provisions SMRSF Horizontal ForcesUploaded byAlvinSanDiego
- National Structural Code of the NSCP Volume II Bridges 2nd EditionUploaded byHillmayor
- NSCP 2010 6th EditionUploaded bymaverick1009
- Simplified Reinforced Concrete Design 2010 NSCPUploaded byArjay Corral
- NSCP 2010(2)Uploaded byRalph Rodrigo
- Structural Analysis and Design CriteriaUploaded byJoseph Cloyd L. Lamberte
- Rc Design PptUploaded byRamilArtates
- An Example Problem on Wind Load Calculation According to NSCP 2010Uploaded byMelvin Esguerra
- Basic Structural Concepts (NSCP Based ASD to LRFD Design of Steel Structures)Uploaded byJohn Abao
- Nscp SeismicUploaded byjuncos0729
- NSCP_2010Uploaded byReychelle Sujetado
- NSCP 6th Edition 2010(1)Uploaded byEngr Badz de Dios
- Wind Loads NSCP 2001 ProvisionsUploaded byMonde Nuylan
- Design of RC Rectangular Section-NSCP(ACI-318)Uploaded byBong-Bong Rodriguez Bianzon
- 1.Design of SlabUploaded byKurt Nicolas Villegas Paquibo
- National Structural Code of the PhilippinesUploaded byMarc Alvin Lim
- PP03_ ASEP_ NSCP 2015 UPDATE ON CH2 MINIMUM DESIGN LOADS.pdfUploaded byCarlo Joseph
- Wind Load Design NSCP 2015Uploaded byPaul Marion Demapelis
- Computation for ApartmentUploaded byAllan Soriano
- Two - Way Slab Design - 2Uploaded byArnel Dodong
- Structural Computation AnalysisUploaded byjeromefamadico

- DPWH Blue BookUploaded byrekcah eht
- Asean EngineeringUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- DOUploaded bykhraieric16
- Application for 2storey ProjectUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- High Rise Structures:Plumbing Design Guidelines.Uploaded byshrikant
- Principles of Pavement Design Yoder, 2nd EdUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- structures-design-manual.pdfUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Design_guide_for_Roadways-.pdfUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Astronomy Lab ManualUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Waste Pipeline ManualUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Concrete Technology, NEVILLE 2nd Edition Book.pdfUploaded byramya_an2411
- Carpentry and JoineryUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Respiratory SystemUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- DAO 2010-12Uploaded bysorbisorbi
- azimuthsUploaded byTaj Deen
- Measuring Inaccesible Points in Land SurveyingUploaded byCristi Istrate
- ProjectionsUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- DAO 2008-14Uploaded bysorbisorbi
- Respiratory SystemUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Column+Footing.xlsUploaded bynuwan01
- Dao-2008!26!114 Revised Nipas Irr (1)Uploaded byZeyk Onas
- Water Surveys and DesignsUploaded byElias Arap Rotich
- Prestressed Concrete KrishnarajuUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Star Plumber Study GuideUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- StudyGuide PlumberUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Water Sewerage Planning GuidelinesUploaded byBart Lucena Jr.
- Water Distribution SystemUploaded byzshehadeh
- DENR Memo Circ-2010-13 Manual of Land Survey ProceduresUploaded bysorbisorbi
- Cadastral Survey from DENRUploaded byaisha20101954
- Dpwh Blue Book Volume 1Uploaded byMach Kayanan Bartolome

- MacBook Pro For Seniors by Matthew Hollinder - 2015.pdfUploaded byRomani Noel S. Chavez Jr.
- 03-DataTransmissionUploaded byNeo Ict
- Chapter 5-Centrifugal Pumps01Uploaded bySalvador Vargas-Diaz
- Another futile attempt to steal the assets in the Global Debt FacilityUploaded byKaren Hudes
- Lipoma Removal Worth It? Reviews, Cost, Pictures - RealSelfUploaded byXICMEN
- 2015-09-21 FINAL - Report Aidenvironment on IndoAgriUploaded byAppie Koekange
- UTOPIA_Thomas_MoreUploaded byIris Pijnenburg
- 1)Interpretacion Hemograma JmaUploaded byLohana Vidaurre
- The Autobiography of Methuselah by Bangs, John Kendrick, 1862-1922Uploaded byGutenberg.org
- 1 Kuzma Et Al. Food Taboos Pregnant WomenUploaded bySri Rahayu
- Processing of Grease WithUploaded byHussain Shaik
- Paint Industry ProjectUploaded byManmeet Singh Sachdeva
- The Six Trigonometric RatiosUploaded byeustoque2668
- CT-SC01-03Uploaded byYap Teik Hing
- AbstractUploaded byletsflyweb
- Mathematical Reasoning SpmUploaded byVisnuVaratan
- AD5160Uploaded byakshay37
- Weider System 3 15922 ManualUploaded byoopsilon
- FM 4-40 - Quartermaster OperationsUploaded by"Rufus"
- Mesquite RecipesUploaded byElizabeth Day
- Final DissertationUploaded byWade Rodriguez
- DS EK220 Product Configuration EnUploaded bydaniellimadasilva
- Form 1 Chapter 3 - Three States of MatterUploaded byMohd Safwan Mohd Isa
- World Wide Fund for NatureUploaded byShivangi Jain
- History of Korea V2_HulbertUploaded byozzaib
- Emulsion Forming Drug Delivery System for Lipophilic DrugsUploaded bywadhwajyoti29
- TopTaq PCR HandbookUploaded byjuanmjunco83
- Crystal Habit Modifications of IbuprofenUploaded byPaul
- Sheet04 h LsgUploaded byAusten Meusel
- Processing Csf SampleUploaded bySyazmin Khairuddin