Seismic FORCE

ESTIMATION
IS 1893-
1893-2002
1893-2002

The material contained in this lecture handout is a property of

Durgesh C. Rai
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Kanpur
1 2
Professors Sudhir K. Jain, C.V.R.Murty and Durgesh C. Rai of IIT Kanpur,
and is for the sole and exclusive use of the participants enrolled in the short
course on Seismic Design of RC Structures conducted at Ahmedabad during
Nov 26-30, 2012. It is not to be sold, reproduced or generally distributed.

Structure of Revised IS:1893

• Since 1984:
– More information
– More experience Detailed Provisions
– Practical difficulties
• IS 1893: From 2002 onwards…
Part 1 :: General Provisions and Buildings
Part 2 :: Liquid Retaining Tanks
EQ Behaviour Part 3
– Elevated/Ground Supported
:: Bridges and Retaining Walls

is different!! Part 4
Part 5
:: Industrial and Stack-like Structures
:: Dams and Embankments
4

IS:1893-2002 What does IS:1893 Cover?

IS:1893 first published in 1962.

Revised in 1966, 1970, 1975, 1984, and now in
2002.

Beginning 2002, this code is being split into
several parts

So that revisions can take place more frequently!

Only Part 1 and 4 of the code has been
published.

Specifies Seismic Design Force

Other seismic requirements for design, detailing
and construction are covered in other codes

e.g., IS:4326, IS:13920, ...

For an earthquake-resistant structure, one has
to follow IS:1893 together with seismic design
and detailing codes.

5 6

1
 Coverage of Part 1

General Provisions

Applicable to all structures

Provisions on Buildings

To address the situation that other parts of the
code are not yet released, Note on page 2 of
the code says in the interim period, provisions of
Part 1 will be read along with the relevant
clauses of IS:1893-1984 for structures other
than buildings

This can be problematic.

For instance, what value of R to use for overhead
water tanks?
7 8
Zone Map

1962 and 1966 maps had seven zones (0 to VI)

In 1967, Koyna earthquake (M6.5, about 200
killed) occurred in zone I of 1966 map

In 1970 zone map revised:

Zones O and VI dropped; only five zones

No change in map in 1975 and 1984 editions
9 10
Zone Map (contd…)

Notice the location of Allahabad and Varanasi in
the new zone map.

There is an error and the locations of these two
cities have been interchanged in the map.

Varanasi should be in zone III and Allahabad in
zone II.

The Annex E of the code gives correct zones for
these two cities
11
Major Changes

Since the code has been revised after a very
long time (~18 years), there are many
significant changes.

Some of the philosophical changes are discussed
in Foreword of the code.
Zone Map (contd…)

Latur (1993) earthquake (mag. 6.2, about 8000
deaths) in zone I!

Revision of zone map in 2002 edition

Zone I has been merged upwards into zone II.

Now only four zones: II, III, IV and V.

In the peninsular India, some parts of zone I
and zone II are now in zone III.
Zone Map (contd…)

Also notice another error in the new zone map

Location of Calcutta has been shown incorrectly
in zone IV

Calcutta is in fact in zone III

Annex E of the code correctly lists Kolkata is in
zone III.
12
2
 Preface

It is clear that the code is meant for normal
structures, and

For special structures, site-specific seismic
design criteria should be evolved by the
specialists.
Other Effects

Read second para, page 3

Earthquakes can cause damage in a number of
ways. For instance:

Vibration of the structure: this induces inertia
force on the structure

By inertia force, we mean mass times acceleration

Landslide triggered by earthquake

Liquefaction of the founding strata

Fire caused due to earthquake

Flood caused by earthquake

13 14

Other Effects (contd…) Intensity versus Magnitude

The code generally addresses only the first
aspect: the inertia force on the structure.

The engineer may need to also address other
effects in certain cases.
15

It is important that you understand the
difference between Intensity and Magnitude

Magnitude tells

How big was the earthquake

How much energy was released by earthquake

Intensity tells

How strong was the vibration at a location

Depends on magnitude, distance, and local soil
and geology

Read more about magnitude and intensity at:

http://www.nicee.org/EQTips/EQTip03.pdf
16

Seismic Hazard Shaking Intensity

Last para on page 3
Shaking intensity is commonly measured in

The criterion for seismic zones remains same as terms of Modified Mercalli scale or MSK scale.
before
See Annex. D of the code for MSK Intensity Scale

Zone Area liable to shaking intensity

There is a subtle change: Modified Mercalli
intensity is replaced by MSK intensity!
II VI (and lower)

In practical terms, both scales are same. Hence,
III VII it does not really matter.
IV VIII
V IX

17 18

3
 Zone Criterion

Our zone map is based on likely intensity.

It does not address the question: how often such
a shaking may take place. For example, say

Area A experiences max intensity VIII every 50 years,

Area B experiences max intensity VIII every 300 years

Both will be placed in zone IV, even though area A has
higher seismicity

Current trend world wide is to

Specify the zones in terms of ground
acceleration that has a certain probability of
being exceeded in a given number of years.
Peak Ground Acceleration

Maximum acceleration response of a rigid
system (Zero Period Acceleration) is same as
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA).

Hence, for very low values of period,
acceleration spectrum tends to be equal to PGA.

We should be able to read the value of PGA
from an acceleration spectrum.

19 20

Peak Ground Acceleration (contd…) Typical shape of acceleration spectrum

1.80

Average shape of acceleration response 1.60

spectrum for 5% damping (Fig. on next slide) 1.40

Ordinate at 0.1 to 0.3 sec ~ 2.5 times the PGA Spectral Acceleration (g)
1.20

There can be a stray peak in the ground motion;

1.00


0.80
i.e., unusually large peak.
0.60

Such a peak does not affect most of the
0.40
response spectrum and needs to be ignored.
PGA = 0.6g 0.20

Effective Peak Ground Acceleration 0.00

(EPGA) defined as 0.40 times the spectral 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Per iod (sec)
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

acceleration in 0.1 to 0.3 sec range (cl. 3.11) •Typical shape of acceleration response spectrum

There are also other definitions of EPGA, but we •Spectral acceleration at zero period (T=0) gives PGA
will not concern ourselves with those. •Value at 0.1-0.3 sec is ~ 2.5 times PGA value

21 22

Earthquake Level Earthquake Level (contd…)

Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE):
Other terms used in literature which are

Largest reasonably conceivable earthquake somewhat similar to max credible EQ:
that appears possible along a recognized fault
Max Possible Earthquake
(or within a tectonic province).
Max Expectable Earthquake

It is generally an upper bound of expected
Max Probable Earthquake
magnitude.

Max Considered Earthquake

Irrespective of return period of the earthquake
which may range from say 100 years to 10,000
years.

Usually evaluated based on geological
evidence

23 24

4
 Max Considered EQ (MCE)

Term also used in the International Building
Code 2000 (USA)

Corresponds to 2% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years (2,500 year return period)

Uniform Building Code 1997 (USA)

10% probability of being exceeded in 100 years
(1,000 year return period)

For the same tectonic province, MCE based on
2,500 year return period will be larger than the
MCE based on 1,000 year return period
25
Design Basis EQ (DBE)

This is the earthquake motion for which
structure is to be designed considering inherent
conservatism in the design process

UBC1997 and IBC2000:

Corresponds to 10% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years (475 year return period)
27
MCE versus DBE

IBC2000 provides for DBE as two-thirds of MCE

IS1893 provides for DBE as one-half of MCE

The factor 2 in denominator of eqn for Ah on p.14
accounts for this

See definition of Z on p.14 of the code
29
Max Considered EQ (MCE) (contd...)

IS:1893

MCE motion as per Indian code does not
correspond to any specific probability of
occurrence or return period.
26
Design Basis EQ (DBE) (contd...)

Cl. 3.6 of the code (p. 8)

Earthquake that can reasonably be expected to
occur once during the design life of the structure

What is reasonable…not made clear in our code.

Also, design life of different structures may be different.
28
Modal Mass

It is that mass of the structure which is effective
in one particular natural mode of vibration

Can be obtained from the equation in Cl. 7.8.4.5
for simple lumped mass systems

It requires one to know the mode shapes

One must perform dynamic analysis to obtain
mode shapes

Next slides to appreciate the physical
significance of Modal Mass
30
5
 Example on Modal Mass

Three degrees of freedom system

Total mass of structure: 100,000kg

5% damping assumed in all modes

To be analyzed for the ground motion for which acceleration
response spectrum is given here.
Maximum Acceleration, g
31
Example on Modal Mass (contd...)

Second mode of vibration:

Period (T2)=0.2sec

Modal Mass=8,000kg

Spectral acceleration (for T1=0.2sec) = 0.80g

Max Base shear contributed by second mode =
= (8,000kg)x(0.80x9.81m/sec2)
33
Seismic Weight (Cl.3.29)

It is the total weight of the building plus that
part of the service load which may reasonably
be expected to be attached to the building at
the time of earthquake shaking.

It includes permanent and movable partitions,
permanent equipment, etc.

It includes a part of the live load

Buildings designed for storage purposes are
likely to have larger percent of service load
present at the time of shaking.

Notice the values in Table 8
35
Example on Modal Mass (contd…)

First mode of vibration:

Period (T1)=0.6sec,

Modal Mass= 90,000kg

Obtained using first mode shape

Spectral acceleration = 0.87g

Read from Response Spectrum for T=0.6sec

Max Base shear contributed by first mode =
= (90,000kg)x(0.87x9.81m/sec2) = 768,000 N = 768 kN
Undamped Natural Period T (sec)
32
Modal Participation Factor (Cl.3.21)

A term used in dynamic analysis.

More later

Read the definition in Cl. 3.21

There seems to be a typographical error.

“amplitudes of 95% mode shapes” should be read as
= 62,800 N = 62.8 kN “amplitude of mode shapes”
34
Seismic Mass (Cl.3.28)

It is seismic weight divided by acceleration due
to gravity

That is, it is in units of mass (kg) rather than in
the units of weight (N, or kN)

In working on dynamics related problems, one
should be careful between mass and weight.

Mass times gravity is weight

1 kg mass is equal to 9.81N (=1x9.81) weight
36
6

Section 4
Terminology on Buildings
37
Centre of Rigidity

In cl. 4.21, while defining static eccentricity,
Centre of Rigidity is used.

Both Centre of Stiffness (CS) and Centre of
Rigidity (CR) are the same terms for our
purposes!

Experts will tell you that there are subtle
differences between these two terms. But that is
not important from our view point.

It would have been better if the code had used
either stiffness or rigidity throughout
39
Eccentricity (contd…)

An accidental eccentricity is also considered
because:

The computation of eccentricity is only
approximate.

During the service life of the building, there could
be changes in its use which may change centre
of mass.

Design eccentricity (cl.4.6) is obtained from
static eccentricity by accounting for (cl.7.9.2)

Dynamic amplification, and

Accidental eccentricity
41
Centre of Stiffness

Cl. 4.5 defines Centre of Stiffness as The point
through which the resultant of the restoring
forces of a system acts.

It should be defined as:

If the building undergoes pure translation in the
horizontal direction (that is, no rotation or twist or
torsion about vertical axis), the point through
which the resultant of the restoring forces acts is
the Centre of Stiffness
38
Eccentricity

Cl. 4.21 defines Static Eccentricity.

This is the calculated distance between the
Centre of Mass and the Centre of Stiffness.

Under dynamic condition, the effect of
eccentricity is higher than that under static
eccentricity.

Hence, a dynamic amplification is to be applied
to the static eccentricity before it can be used in
design.
40
Dual System

Consider buildings with shear walls and moment
resisting frames.

In 1984 version of the code, Table 5 (p. 24)
implied that the frame should be designed to
take at least 25% of the total design seismic
loads.
42
7
 Dual System (contd…)

In the new code several choices are available to
the designer:

When conditions of Cl. 4.9 are met: dual system.

Example 1: Analysis indicates that frames are taking 30% of
total seismic load while 70% loads go to shear walls. Frames
and walls will be designed for these forces and the system
will be termed as dual system.

Example 2: Analysis indicates that frames are taking 10%
and walls take 90% of the total seismic load. To qualify for
dual system, design the walls for 90% of total load, but
design the frames to resist 25% of total seismic load
43
Dual System (contd…)

Clearly, the dual systems are better and are
designed for lower value of design force.

See Table 7 (p. 23) of the code. There is different
value of response reduction factor (R) for the
dual systems.
45
Number of Storeys (Cl.4.16)

When basement walls are connected with the
floor deck or fitted between the building
columns, the basement storeys are not included
in number of storeys.

This is because in that event, the seismic loads
from upper parts of the building get transferred
to the basement walls and then to the
foundation. That is,

Columns in the basement storey will have insignificant
seismic loads, and

Basement walls act as part of the foundation.
47
Dual System (contd…)

Conditions of Cl. 4.9 are not met. Here, two
possibilities exist (see Footnote 4 in Table 7, p. 23):

Frames are not designed to resist seismic loads. The entire
load is assumed to be carried by the shear walls. In Example
2 above, the shear walls will be designed for 100% of total
seismic loads, and the frames will be treated as gravity
frames (i.e., it is assumed that frames carry no seismic
loads)

Frames and walls are designed for the forces obtained from
analysis, and the frames happen to carry less than 25% of
total load. In Example 2 above, the frames will be designed
for 10% while walls will be designed for 90% of total seismic
loads.
44
Moment Resisting Frame

Cl. 4.15 defines Ordinary and Special Moment
Resisting Frames.

Ductile structures perform much better during
earthquakes.

Hence, ductile structures are designed for lower
seismic forces than non-ductile structures. For
example, compare the R values in Table 7

IS:13920-1993 provides provisions on ductile
detailing of RC structures.

IS: 800-2007 does have seismic design
provisions for some framing systems.
46
Number of Storeys (contd…)

Definition of number of storeys

Was relevant in 1984 version of the code wherein
natural period (T) was calculated as 0.1n.

In the current code, it is not relevant

In new code, Cl. 7.6 requires height of building.

See the definition of h (building height) in Cl. 7.6

Compare it with definition in Cl. 4.11.

Clearly, the definition of Cl. 7.6 is more
appropriate.

The definition of Cl. 4.11 needs revision
48
8
 Soft Story

Cl. 4.20 defines Soft Storey

Sl. No. 1 in Table 5 (p. 18) defines Soft Storey
and Extreme Soft Storey

In Bhuj earthquake of January 2001, numerous
soft storey buildings collapsed.

Hence, the term Extreme Soft Storey and cl. 7.10
(Buildings with Soft Storey) were added hurriedly
after the earthquake.
49
Weak Storey

Note that the stiffness and strength are two
different things.

Stiffness: Force needed to cause a unit
displacement. It is given by slope of the force-
displacement relationship.

Strength: Maximum force that the system can
take
51
Storey Drift

Storey Drift defined in cl. 4.23 of the Code.

Storey drift not to exceed 0.004 times the storey
height.
53
Soft Storey (contd…)

There is not much of a difference between soft
storey and extreme soft storey buildings as
defined in the code, and the latter definition is
not warranted.

Most Indian buildings will be soft storey as per this definition
simply because the ground storey height is usually different
from that in the upper storeys.

Hence, the definition of soft storey needs a review.

We should allow more variation between stiffness of adjacent
storeys before terming a building as a “soft storey building”

The code does not have enough specifications on
computation of lateral stiffness and this undermines the
definition of soft storey and extreme soft storey.
50
Weak Storey (contd…)

Soft storey refers to stiffness

Weak storey refers to strength

Usually, a soft storey may also be a weak
storey
52
Definition of Vroof

On p. 11, it is defined as peak storey shear
force at the roof due to all modes considered.

It is better to define it as peak storey shear in the
top storey due to all modes considered.
54
9
 General Principles and Design Criteria (Section 6)

Four main sub-sections

Cl. 6.1: General Principles

Cl. 6.2: Assumptions

Cl. 6.3: Load Combination and Increase in
Permissible Stresses

Cl. 6.4: Design Spectrum

Section 6.1: General Principles

IS:1893-2002(Part I)

55 56

Ground Motion (cl. 6.1.1) Ground Motion Contd…

Usually, the vertical motion is weaker than the
horizontal motion

On average, peak vertical acceleration is one-
half to two-thirds of the peak horizontal
acceleration.

Cl. 6.4.5 of 2002 code specifies it as two-thirds

All structures experience a constant vertical
acceleration (downward) equal to gravity (g) at
all times.

Hence, the vertical acceleration during ground
shaking can be just added or subtracted to the
gravity (depending on the direction at that
instant).

57 58

Ground Motion Contd… Ground Motion Contd…

Example: A roof accelerating up and down by
0.20g.

Implies that it is experiencing acceleration in the
range 1.20g to 0.80g (in place of 1.0g that it
would experience without earthquake.)

Factor of safety for gravity loads (e.g., dead and
live loads) is usually sufficient to cover the
earthquake induced vertical acceleration

Main concern is safety for horizontal
acceleration.

Para 2 in cl. 6.1.1 (p. 12) lists certain cases
where vertical motion can be important, e.g.,

Large span structures

Cantilever members

Prestressed horizontal members

Structures where stability is an issue

59 60

10
 Design Lateral Force
Effects other than shaking
• Philosophy of Earthquake-Resistant Design

Ground shaking can affect the safety of – First calculate maximum elastic seismic forces
structure in a number of ways: – Then reduce to account for ductility and overstrength

Shaking induces inertia force Lateral Force

Soil may liquefy
H, ∆

Sliding failure of founding strata may take place Maximum

Fire or flood may be caused as secondary effect Elastic Force

of the earthquake. Elastic

Elastic Force

Cl. 6.1.2 cautions against situations where reduced by R
founding soil may liquefy or settle: such cases Actual

are not covered by the code and engineer has

to deal with these separately. Design Force
Lateral
61 62 0 Deflection

Earthquake Design Principle Clause 6.1.3

The criteria is:

Minor (and frequent) earthquakes should not
cause damage

Moderate earthquakes should not cause
significant structural damage (but could have
some non-structural damage)

Major (and infrequent) earthquakes should not
cause collapse

Para 1 of this clause implies that Design Basis
Earthquake (DBE) relates to the “moderate
shaking” and Maximum Considered Earthquake
(MCE) relates to the “strong shaking”.

Indian code is quite empirical on the issue of
DBE and MCE levels.

Hence, this clause is to be taken only as an
indicator of the concept.

63 64

Seismic Design Principle Overstrength

A well designed structure can withstand a
The structure yields at load higher than the
horizontal force several times the design force design load due to:
due to:
Partial Safety Factors

Partial safety factor on seismic loads

Overstrength
Partial safety factor on gravity loads

Redundancy
Partial safety factor on materials

Ductility
Material Properties

Member size or reinforcement larger than required

Strain hardening in materials

Confinement of concrete improves its strength

Higher material strength under cyclic loads

Strength contribution of non-structural elements

Special ductile detailing adds to strength also

65 66

11
 Redundancy Ductility

Yielding at one location in the structure does not
As the structure yields, two things happen:
imply yielding of the structure as a whole.
There is more energy dissipation in the structure

Load distribution in redundant structures due to hysteresis
provides additional safety margin.
The structure becomes softer and its natural
period increases: implies lower seismic force to

Sometimes, the additional margin due to be resisted by the structure
redundancy is considered within the
Higher ductility implies that the structure can
“overstrength” term. withstand stronger shaking without collapse

67 68

Response Reduction Factor ∆

Total

Overstrength, redundancy, and ductility Maximum force

if structure remains elastic Fel
Horizontal
Load

together lead to the fact that an earthquake Linear Elastic

Due to
Total Horizontal Load

Ductility
Response
Non linear
resistant structure can be designed for much Maximum
Load Capacity Fy
Response
Due to
lower force than is implied by a strong shaking. Load at
First
Significant
Yield
Redundancy
First Yield Fs

The combined effect of overstrength, Due to
Overstrength
Design force Fdes Figure: Courtesy
redundancy and ductility is expressed in terms Dr. C V R Murty

of Response Reduction Factor (R)

0 ∆w ∆y ∆max
Roof Displacement (∆)

Maximum Elastic Force (Fel )

Response Reduction Factor =
Design Force (F des)

69 70

Para 2 and 3 of Cl. 6.1.3. Para 2 and 3 of Cl. 6.1.3 Contd…

Imply that the earthquake resistant structures
should generally be ductile.

IS:13920-1993 gives ductile detailing
requirements for RC structures.

Ductile detailing provisions for some steel
framing systems are available in IS:800-2007.

However, it is advisable to refer to international
codes/literature for ductile detailing of steel
structures.

As of now, ductile detailing provisions for
precast structures and for prestressed concrete
structures are not available in Indian codes.

In the past earthquakes, precast structures have
shown very poor performance during
earthquakes.

The connections between different parts have
been problem areas.

Connections in precast structures in high seismic
regions require special attention.

71 72

12
 Past Performance

The performance of flat plate structures also has
been very poor in the past earthquakes.

For example, in the Northridge (California)
earthquake of 1994.

Additional punching shear stress due to lateral
loads are serious concern.
73
Soil Structure Interaction (Cl. 6.1.4)

If there is no structure, motion of the ground
surface is termed as Free Field Ground Motion

Normal practice is to apply the free field motion
to the structure base assuming that the base is
fixed.

This is valid for structures located on rock sites.

For soft soil sites, this may not always be a good
assumption.
75
SSI Contd…

Consideration of SSI generally

Decreases lateral seismic forces on the structure

Increases lateral displacements

Increases secondary forces associated with P-
delta effect.

For ordinary buildings, one usually ignores SSI.

NEHRP Provisions provide a simple procedure to
account for soil-structure interaction in buildings
77
Para 4 of Cl. 6.1.3

This is an important clause for moderate seismic
regions.

The design seismic force provided in the code is
a reduced force considering the overstrength,
redundancy, and ductility.

Hence, even when design wind force exceeds
design seismic force, one needs to comply with
the seismic requirements on design, detailing
and construction.
74
Soil Structure Interaction (Cl. 6.1.4) Contd…

Presence of structure modifies the free field
motion since the soil and the structure interact.

Hence, foundation of the structure experiences
a motion different from the free field ground
motion.

The difference between the two motions is
accounted for by Soil Structure Interaction (SSI)

SSI is not the same as Site Effects

Site Effect refers to the fact that free field motion
at a site due to a given earthquake depends on
the properties and geological features of the
subsurface soils also.
76
Direction of Ground Motion (Cl. 6.1.5)

During earthquake shaking, ground shakes in all
possible directions.

Direction of resultant shaking changes from
instant to instant.

Basic requirement is that the structure should
be able to withstand maximum ground motion
occurring in any direction.

For most structures, main concern is for horizontal
vibrations rather than vertical vibrations.
78
13
 Direction of Ground Motion (Cl. 6.1.5) (contd…)

One does not expect the peak ground

acceleration to occur at the same instant in two
perpendicular horizontal directions.

Hence for design, maximum seismic force is not
applied in the two horizontal directions
simultaneously.

If the walls or frames are oriented in two
orthogonal (perpendicular) directions:
Building Plans with Orthogonal Systems

It is sufficient to consider ground motion in the
two directions one at a time.

Else, Cl. 6.3.2: will come back to this later.

79 80

Floor Response Spectrum (Cl. 6.1.6)

Equipment located on a floor needs to be
designed for the motion experienced by the
floor.

Hence, the procedure for equipment will be:

Analyze the building for the ground motion.

Obtain response of the floor.
walls
Express the floor response in terms of spectrum
(termed as Floor Response Spectrum)

Design the equipment and its connections with
the floor as per Floor Response Spectrum.

Building Plans with Non-Orthogonal Systems

81 82

General Principles and Design Criteria (Section 6)

Four main sub-sections

Cl. 6.1: General Principles

Cl. 6.2: Assumptions

Cl. 6.3: Load Combination and Increase in
Permissible Stresses

Cl. 6.4: Design Spectrum
Sections 6.2 and 6.3
This lecture covers sub-sections: Cl. 6.2 and Cl.
IS:1893-2002(Part I) 6.3

83 84

14
 Cl.6.2 Assumptions Mexico Earthquake of 1985

Same as in the 1984 edition, except the Note
Earthquake occurred 400 km from Mexico City
after Assumption a)
Great variation in damages in Mexico City

There have been instances such as the Mexico
Some parts had very strong shaking
earthquake of 1985 which have necessitated
In some parts of city, motion was hardly felt
this note.
Ground motion records from two sites:

UNAM site: Foothill Zone with 3-5m of basaltic
rock underlain by softer strata

SCT site: soft soils of the Lake Zone

85 86

Mexico Earthquake of 1985 (contd…) Mexico Earthquake of 1985 (contd…)

PGA at SCT site about 5 times higher than that at UNAM
Extremely soft soils in Lake Zone amplified weak
site long-period waves

Epicentral distance is same at both locations
Natural period of soft clay layers happened to
be close to the dominant period of incident
seismic waves

This lead to resonance-like conditions

Buildings between 7 and 18 storeys suffered
extensive damage

Natural period of such buildings close to the
period of seismic waves.
Time (sec)

Figure from Kramer, 1996

87 88

Assumption b) Assumption c) on Modulus of Elasticity

A strong earthquake takes place infrequently.
Modulus of elasticity of materials such as

A strong wind also takes place infrequently. concrete, masonry and soil is difficult to specify

Hence, the possibility of strong wind and strong
Its value depends on
ground shaking taking place simultaneously is
Stress level
very very low.
Loading condition (static versus dynamic)

It is common to assume that strong earthquake
Material strength
shaking and strong wind will not occur
Age of material, etc
simultaneously.

Same with strong earthquake shaking and
maximum flood.

89 90

15
 Loads and Stresses Cl.6.3 Load Combinations and Increase in
Permissible Stresses
• Loads
– EQ forces not to occur simultaneously with
Cl.6.3.1.1 gives load combinations for Plastic
maximum flood, wind or wave loads Design of Steel Structures

Same as in IS:800-1978
– Direction of forces

More load combinations in IS:800-2007
• One horizontal + Vertical

Cl.6.3.1.2 gives load combinations for Limit
• Two horizontal + Vertical
State Design for RC and Prestressed Concrete
Structures

Same as in IS:456-2000 (RC structures) and
IS:1343-1980 (Prestressed structures) with one
difference

91 92

Load Combinations in Cl.6.3.1.2 Load Combination 0.9DL ±1.5EL

Compare combinations of this clause with those
in Table 18 (p.68) of IS:456-2000

Combination 0.9DL ± 1.5EL

The way this combination is written in IS:456, the
footnote creates an impression that it is not
always needed.

It has been noticed that many designers do not routinely
consider this combination because of the way it is written.
93

Horizontal loads are reversible in direction.

In many situations, design is governed by effect
of horizontal load minus effect of gravity loads.

In such situations, a load factor higher than 1.0
on gravity loads will be unconservative.

Hence, a load factor of 0.9 specified on gravity
loads in the combination 4)

Many designs of footings, columns, and positive
steel in beams at the ends in frame structures
are governed by this load combination

Hence, this combination has been made very
94
specific in IS:1893-2002.

Direction of Earthquake Loading Direction of Earthquake Loading (contd…)

During earthquake, ground moves in all
directions; the resultant direction changes every
instant.

Ground motion can resolved in two horizontal
and one vertical direction.

Structure should be able to withstand ground
motion in any direction

Two horizontal components of ground motion
tend to be comparable

Say, the epicentre is to the north of a site.

Ground motion at site in the north-south and
east-west directions will still be comparable.
95

Vertical component is usually smaller than the
horizontal motion

Except in the epicentral region where vertical
motion can be comparable (or even stronger) to
the horizontal motion

As discussed earlier, generally, most ordinary
structures do not require analysis for vertical
ground motion.
96

16
 Direction of Horizontal Ground Motion in Design
(Cl.6.3.2.1) Cl.6.3.2.1 (contd…)

Consider a building in which horizontal (also
termed as lateral) load is resisted by frames or
walls oriented in two perpendicular directions,
say X and Y.

One must consider design ground motion to act
in X-direction, and in Y-direction, separately

That is, one does not assume that the design
motion in X is acting simultaneously with the
design motion in the Y-direction

If at a given instant, motion is in any direction
other than X or Y, one can resolve it into X- and
Y-components, and the building will still be safe
if it is designed for X- and Y- motions,
separately.

Minor typo in this clause: “direction at time”
should be replaced by “direction at a time”

97 98

Load Combinations for Orthogonal System Non-Orthogonal Systems (Cl.6.3.2.2)

Load EL implies Earthquake Load in +X, -X, +Y, and –Y,
When the lateral load resisting elements are
directions.
NOT oriented along two perpendicular directions

Thus, an RC building with orthogonal system therefore
needs to be designed for the following 13 load cases:
In such a case, design for X- and Y-direction

1.5 (DL+LL)
1.2 (DL+LL+ELx) ELx = Design EQ load in X-direction
loads acting separately will be unconservative

1.2 (DL+LL-ELx) for elements not oriented along X- and Y-
1.2 (DL+LL+ELy) ELy = Design EQ load in Y-direction

1.2 (DL+LL-ELy)
directions.

1.5 (DL+ELx)

1.5 (DL-ELx)

1.5 (DL+ELy)

1.5 (DL-ELy)

0.9DL +1.5ELx

0.9DL-1.5ELx

0.9DL+1.5ELy

0.9DL-1.5ELy

99 100

Load Combinations…
Combinations… Load Combinations…
Combinations…

• Lateral force resisting system – Problem

non-parallel in two plan directions 1
– Consider design based on one direction at a time ELx
0.8
y V 0.6 ELy

Force effective along 0.4

ELx direction of inclined 0.2
x element
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
y θ
Orientation of inclined element with respect to x-axis

x
Elements at 450 orientation designed only for 70%
of lateral force
ELy
101 102

17
 Load Combinations…
Combinations…
Non-Orthogonal Systems (Cl.6.3.2.2) (contd…)
– Solution :: Try (100%+30%) together

A lateral load resisting element (frame or wall) is
most critical when loading is in direction of the ELx
element. x

It may be too tedious to apply lateral loads in
each of the directions in which the elements are 0.3ELy
oriented. y

For such cases, the building may be designed 0.3ELx
for:

100% design load in X-direction and 30% design x
load in Y-direction, acting simultaneously

100% design load in Y-direction and 30% design ELy
load in X-direction, acting simultaneously
Note that directions of earthquake forces are reversible. Hence, all
combinations of directions are to be considered.
103 104

Load Combinations…
Combinations…
Non-Orthogonal Systems (Cl.6.3.2.2) (contd…)
– Justification :: Say ELx = ELy = V

Thus, EL now implies eight possibilities: y
+(Elx + 0.3ELy) Vcosθ
+(Elx - 0.3ELy) θ
-(Elx + 0.3ELy) V x
-(Elx - 0.3ELy) V*=Vcosθ + 0.3Vsinθ
+(0.3ELx + Ely)
+(0.3ELx - ELy) 0.3Vsinθ 0.3V
-(0.3ELx + ELy)
-(0.3ELx - ELy) 1.5
ELx+0.3ELy
V* 1 0.3ELx+ELy

0.5

0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 θ
105 106

Non-Orthogonal Systems (Cl.6.3.2.2) (contd…) Non-Orthogonal Systems (Cl.6.3.2.2) (contd…)

Therefore, one must consider 25 load cases:

Note that the design lateral load for a building in
1.5 (DL+LL) 1.5[DL+(ELx+0.3ELy)]
1.5[DL+(ELx-0.3ELy)] the X-direction may be different from that in the
1.2[DL+LL+(ELx+0.3ELy)] 1.5[DL-(ELx+0.3ELy)]
1.5[DL-(ELx-0.3ELy)]
Y-direction
1.2[DL+LL+(ELx-0.3ELy)]
1.2[DL+LL-(ELx+0.3ELy)] 1.5[DL+(0.3ELx+ELy)]
Some codes use 40% in place of 30%.
1.2[DL+LL-(ELx-0.3ELy)] 1.5[DL+(0.3ELx-ELy)]
1.2[DL+LL+(0.3ELx+ELy)] 1.5[DL-(0.3ELx+ELy)]
1.2[DL+LL+(0.3ELx-ELy)] 1.5[DL-(0.3ELx-ELy)]
1.2[DL+LL-(0.3ELx+ELy)]
1.2[DL+LL-(0.3ELx-ELy)] 0.9DL+1.5(ELx+0.3ELy)]
0.9DL+1.5(ELx-0.3ELy)]
0.9DL-1.5(ELx+0.3ELy)]
0.9DL-1.5(ELx-0.3ELy)]
0.9DL+1.5(0.3ELx+ELy)]
0.9DL+1.5(0.3ELx-ELy)]
0.9DL-1.5(0.3ELx+ELy)]
0.9DL-1.5(0.3ELx-ELy)]

107 108

18
 Cl.6.3.4.1

In complex structures such as a nuclear reactor
building, one may have very complex structural
systems.

Need for considering earthquake motion in all
three directions as per 100%+30% rule.

Now, EQ load means the following 24
combinations:

± Elx ± 0.3ELy ± 0.3ELz

± Ely ± 0.3ELx ± 0.3ELz

± Elz ± 0.3ELx ± 0.3ELy

Hence, EL now means 24 combinations

A total of 73 load cases for RC structures!
109
Increase in Permissible Stresses: Cl.6.3.5.1

Applicable for Working Stress Design

Permits the designer to increase allowable
stresses in materials by 33% for seismic load
cases.

Some constraints on 33% increase for steel and
for tensile stress in prestressed concrete beams.
111
Second Para of Cl.6.3.5.2
 It points out that in case of loose or medium
dense saturated soils, liquefaction may take
place.

Sites vulnerable to liquefaction require

Liquefaction potential analysis.

Remedial measures to prevent liquefaction.

Else, deep piles are designed assuming that soil
layers liable to liquefy will not provide lateral
support to the pile during ground shaking.
113
Cl.6.3.4.2

In place of 100%+30% rule, one may take for
design force resultants as per square root of
sum of squares in the two (or, three) directions
of ground motion
EL = (ELx)2 + ( ELy)2 + (ELz)2
110
Typographical Errors in Table 1

The Table within Table 1, giving values of
desirable minimum values of N.

This Table pertains to Note 3 and hence should
be placed between Notes 3 and 4 (and not
between Notes 4 and 5 as printed currently)

Caption of first column in this sub-table should
read “Seismic Zone” and not “Seismic Zone level
(in metres)”

Caption of second column in this sub-table
should read “Depth Below Ground Level (in
metres)” and not “Depth Below Ground”

Note 1 is also repeated within Note 4.

Hence, Note 1 should be dropped.
112
Liquefaction Potential

Information given in cl.6.3.5.2 and Table 1 on
Liquefaction Potential is very primitive:

Note to Cl.6.3.5.2 encourages the engineer to
refer to specialist literature for determining
liquefaction potential analysis.

It is common these days to use SPT or CPT
results for detailed calculations on liquefaction
potential analysis.
114
19
 General Principles and Design Criteria (Section 6)

Four main sub-sections

Cl. 6.1: General Principles
Cl. 6.2: Assumptions
Lecture 2

Cl. 6.3: Load Combination and Increase in

Permissible Stresses

Cl. 6.4: Design Spectrum

This lecture covers sub-section 6.4.
Sections 6.4
IS:1893-2002(Part I)

115 116

Response Spectrum versus Design Spectrum Response Spectrum versus Design Spectrum (contd…)

Consider the Acceleration Response Spectrum

Notice the region of red circle marked: a slight
change in natural period can lead to large
variation in maximum acceleration
Spectral Acceleration, g

Natural period of a civil engineering structure
cannot be calculated precisely

Design specification should not very sensitive to
a small change in natural period.

Hence, design spectrum is a smooth or average

shape without local peaks and valleys you see in

the response spectrum

Undamped Natural Period T (sec)

117 118

Design Spectrum Design Spectrum (contd…)

Since some damage is expected and accepted in

the structure during strong shaking, design
spectrum is developed considering the
Spectral Acceleration, g

overstrength, redundancy, and ductility in the

structure.

The site may be prone to shaking from large but
distant earthquakes as well as from medium but
nearby earthquakes: design spectrum may
account for these as well.
Natural vibration period Tn, sec

See Fig. next slide.
Fig. from Dynamics of Structures by Chopra, 2001

119 120

20
 Design Spectrum (contd…) Design Spectrum (contd…)

Design Spectrum must be accompanied by:

Design Spectrum is a design specification

Load factors or permissible stresses that must be

It must take into account any issues that have used
bearing on seismic safety.
Different choice of load factors will give different seismic
safety to the structure

Damping to be used in design

Variation in the value of damping used will affect the design
force.

Method of calculation of natural period

Depending on modeling assumptions, one can get different
values of natural period.

Type of detailing for ductility

Design force can be lowered if structure has higher ductility.

121 122

Design SPECTRUM…
SPECTRUM… Design Lateral Force…
Force…

• Two methods of estimation of • Design Horizontal Acceleration Spectrum

design seismic lateral force Maximum
– Seismic Coefficient Method Elastic
Acceleration
– Response Spectrum Method
S 
Z  a (T ) I
Ah (T ) =  
– In both methods g
• Seismic Design Force Fd = Fe /R = A W
 A = Design acceleration value 2R
Reduction to account
 W = Seismic weight of structure for ductility and
overstrength

123 124

Seismic zone factor Design SPECTRUM…

SPECTRUM…

• Seismic Zone Factor – Relative Values Consistent 1.5

Seismic
II III IV V
Zone Seismic Zone II III IV V
Z 0.10 0.16 0.24 0.36
Z 0.10 0.16 0.24 0.36
– Reflects Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA)
of the region during 1.6 1.5
Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE)
– Factor of 2 in Ah for reducing
Acceleration Spectral Acceleration PGA for MCE
PGA to
PGA for Design Basis Earthquake (DBE)
Time
PGA
(ZPA:: (Earthquake which can be reasonably expected to occur
Natural
125
Zero Period Acceleration)0
Period 126
at least once during the lifetime of structures)

21
 Importance factor
Soil Effect
• Importance factor I
– Degree of conservatism
Recorded earthquake motions show that
– Willing to pay more for assuring essential services response spectrum shape differs for different
– Domino effect of disaster type of soil profile at the site
– Important & community buildings
S.No. Building I
1 Important, Community & Lifeline Buildings 1.5
2 All Others 1.0
• Can use higher value of I Fig. from
Geotechnical
• Buildings not mentioned can be designed for higher value of I Earthquake
depending on economy and strategic considerations Engineering, by
Kramer, 1996
• Temporary (short term) structures exempted from I
Period (sec)
127 128

Soil Effect (contd…) Soil Effect (contd…)

This variation in ground motion characteristic for
Design Spectrum depends on Type I, II, and III
different sites is now accounted for through different soils
shapes of response spectrum for three types of sites.

Type I, II, III soils are indirectly defined in
Table 1 of the code.
Spectral Acceleration Coefficient (Sa /g)

See Note 4 of Table 1: The value of N is to be

taken at the founding level.

What is the founding level of a pile or a well
Fig. from foundation?
IS:1893-2002

This is left open in the code.

Period(s)
129 130

Soil Effect (contd…) Shape of Design Spectrum

The International Building Code (IBC2000)
The three curves in Fig. 2 have been drawn
classifies the soil type based on weighted based on general trends of average response
average (in top 30m) of: spectra shapes.

Soil Shear Wave Velocity, or
In recent years, the US codes (UBC, NEHRP and

Standard Penetration Resistance, or IBC) have provided more sophistication wherein

Soil Undrained Shear Strength the shape of design spectrum varies from area

I feel our criteria should also use the average to area depending on the ground motion
properties in the top 30m rather than just at the characteristics expected.
founding level.

131 132

22
 Response Reduction Factor

As discussed earlier, the structure is allowed to be
damaged in case of severe shaking.

Hence, structure is designed for seismic force much less
than what is expected under strong shaking if the
structure were to remain linear elastic

Earlier code just provided the required design force

It gave no direct indication that the real force may be
much larger

Now, the code provides for realistic force for elastic
structure and then divides that force by (2R)

This gives the designer a more realistic picture of the
design philosophy.
133
Response Reduction Factor (R) (contd…)

Study Table 7 very carefully including all the footnotes.
We have already discussed terms: Dual systems, OMRF,
and SMRF

Notes 4 and 8 were covered earlier when we discussed
Dual systems.

The values of R were decided based on engineering
judgment.

The effort was that design force on SMRF as per new
provisions should be about the same as that in the old
code.

For other building systems, lower values of R were
specified.

It is hoped that with time, these values will be refined
based on detailed research.
135
Response Reduction Factor (R) (contd…)

Moreover, there are a number of other systems
that are prohibited in high zones and those are
not listed in this table. For instance,

OMRF’s are also not allowed in zones III, IV and V
as per IS:13920.

Load bearing masonry buildings are required to
have seismic strengthening (lintel bands, vertical
bars) in high zones as per IS:4326.

It would be better for this table to drop Note 6.

In its place, there could be a general note that
some of the above systems are not allowed in
high seismic zones as per IS:4326 or IS:13920.
137
Response Reduction Factor (contd…)

For buildings, Table 7 gives values of R

For other structures, value of R is to be given in
the respective parts of code
134
Response Reduction Factor (R) (contd…)

Note 6 prohibits ordinary RC shear walls in
zones IV and V.

Such a note is not there for OMRF.

This confuses people and they take it to mean
that the code allows Ordinary Moment Resisting
Frames in zones IV and V.

As per IS:13920, all structures in zones III, IV
and V should comply with ductile detailing (as
per IS:13920). Hence, Ord. RC shear walls
prohibited in zones III also.

This needs to be corrected in the code.
136
Response Reduction Factor (contd…)

Note the definition of R on page 14 contains the
statement:
However, the ratio (I/R) shall not be greater than
1.0 (Table 7)

This statement should not be there.

For buildings, I never exceeds 1.5 and the lowest
value of R is 1.5 in Table 7

Thus, this statement does not kick in for buildings

For other structures, there are situations where
(I/R) will need to exceed 1.0

For instance, for bearings of important bridges.
138
23
 Response Reduction Factor …
– R values can be taken as for Dual Systems,
only if both conditions below are satisfied
• Shear walls and MRFs are designed to resist VB in
proportion to their stiffness considering their
interaction at all floor levels
• MRFs are designed to independently resist at least
25% of VB
Shear Wall MRF
139
Design Spectrum for Stiff Structures (contd…)

Statement in Cl.6.4.2
Provided that for any structure with T ≤ 0.1s, the
value of Ah will not be taken less than Z/2
whatever be the value of I/R

This statement attempts to ensure a minimal
design force for stiff structures.

Note that this statement is valid only when the
first (fundamental) mode period T ≤ 0.1sec even
though the code does not specify so.

For higher modes, this restrictions should not be imposed.
141
Underground Structures (contd…)

The clause is also applicable for calculation of
seismic inertia force on foundation under the
ground, say a well foundation for a bridge.

Hence, the wording Underground structures and
foundations

Note that in case of a bridge (or any above-
ground structure) with foundation going deeper
than 30m:

This clause (Cl. 6.4.4) can be used to calculate
seismic inertia force due to mass of foundation
under the ground, and not for calculation of
inertia force of the superstructure.
143
Design Spectrum for Stiff Structures

For very stiff structures (T < 0.1sec), ductility is not
helpful in reducing the design force.

Codes tend to disallow the reduction in force in
the period range of T < 0.1sec
Design spectrum assumes peak
extends to T=0
Actual shape of response spectrum
(may be used for higher modes only)
Spectral acceleration
T(seconds)
Concept sometimes used by the codes for
response spectrum in low period range.
140
Underground Structures Cl.6.4.4

When seismic waves hit the ground surface,
these are reflected back into ground

The reflection mechanics is such that the
amplitude of vibration at the free surface is
much higher (almost double) than that under
the ground

Cl.6.4.4 allows the design spectrum to be one-
half if the structure is at depth of 30m or below.

Linear interpolation for structures and
foundations if depth is less than 30m.
142
Equations for Design Spectrum

Second para of Cl.6.4.5 and the equations

This should not be a part of C.6.4.5 and should
have had an independent clause number

Note the word “proposed” in this para is
misleading and should not be there.
144
24
 Equations for Design Spectrum

Response spectrum shapes in Fig. 2 are for 5%
damping.

These shapes are also given in the form of
equations

Table 3 gives multiplying factors to obtain
design spectrum for other values of damping

Note that the multiplication is not to be done for
zero period acceleration (ZPA)
145
Sections 7.1 to 7.7 on Buildings
IS:1893-2002(Part I)
147
Regular and Irregular Configuration (Cl. 7.1)

The statement of Cl. 7.1 is an attempt to
emphasize the importance of structural
configuration for ensuring good seismic
performance.

Good structural configuration has implications
for both safety and economy of the building.
149
Site Specific Design Criteria Cl.6.4.6

Seismic design codes meant for ordinary projects

For important projects, such as nuclear power plants,
dams and major bridges site-specific seismic design
criteria are developed

These take into account geology, seismicity, geotechnical
conditions and nature of project

Site specific criteria are developed by experts and
usually reviewed by independent peers

A good reference to read on this:

Housner and Jennings, “Seismic Design Criteria”,
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, USA, 1982.
146
Buildings (Section 7)

Sub-sections

Cl. 7.1: Regular and Irregular Configurations

Cl. 7.2: Importance Factor I and Response Reduction
Factor R

Cl. 7.3: Design Imposed Loads for Earthquake Force
Calculation

Cl. 7.4: Seismic Weight

Cl. 7.5: Design Lateral Force

Cl. 7.6: Fundamental Natural Period

Cl. 7.7: Distribution of Design Force

Cl. 7.8: Dynamic Analysis

Cl. 7.9: Torsion

Cl. 7.10: Buildings with Soft Storey

Cl. 7.11 Deformations

Cl. 7.12 Miscellaneous
148
Importance of Configuration

To quote Late Henry Degenkolb, the well-
known earthquake engineer in California:
If we have a poor configuration to start with,
all the engineer can do is to provide band-aid
– improve a basically poor solution as best as
he can. Conversely, if we start off with a good
configuration and a reasonable framing
system, even a poor engineer can’t harm its
ultimate performance too much.
150
25
 Importance of Configuration (contd…) Regular versus Irregular Configuration

Quote from NEHRP Commentary:
Tables 4 and 5 list out the irregularities in the
The major factors influencing the cost of complying with the building configuration
provisions are:
1. The complexity of the shape and structural framing system for
Table 4 and Fig. 3 for Irregularities in Plan
the building. (It is much easier to provide seismic resistance in a
Table 5 and Fig. 4 for Irregularities in Elevation
building with a simple shape and framing plan.)
2. The cost of the structural system (plus other items subject to
special seismic design requirements) in relation to the total cost
of the building. (In many buildings, the cost of providing the
structural system may be only 25 percent of the total cost of the
project.)
3. The stage in design at which the provision of seismic resistance
is first considered. (The cost can be inflated greatly if no
attention is given to seismic resistance until after the
configuration of the building, the structural framing plan, and the
materials of construction have already been chosen).

151 152

A Remark on IS:13920 Design Imposed Load…(Cl. 7.3)

Recently, BIS has issued some amendments to
There could be differences of opinion about Cl.
IS:13920-1993 (see next slide). 7.3.3.

In the context of Table 7, note that provisions of
Say the imposed load is 3 kN/sq.m
IS:13920 are now mandatory for all RC
This clause implies that we take only 25% of
structures in zones III, IV and V. imposed load for calculation of seismic weight,
and also for load combinations. This amounts to:

1.2 DL + 0.3LL + 1.2LL

The Cl. 7.3.3 should be dropped.

153 154

Design Lateral Force (Cl. 7.5)

Note that the code no longer talks of two Mass that causes
Earthquake Force
methods: seismic coefficient method and EQx
in X-Direction
response spectrum method.

There have been instances of designer
calculating seismic design force for each 2-D Mass being considered for
calculation of inertia force
due to earthquake
frame separately based on tributary mass
shared by that frame.

This is erroneous since only a fraction of the EQx
Calculation of design seismic
building mass is considered in the seismic load force on the basis of
calculations. tributary mass on 2-D frames
leads to significant under-
design.
Plan of building
155 156

26
 Design Lateral Force (Cl. 7.5) …
Design Lateral Force (Cl. 7.5) (contd…)
• Seismic Weight of Building W
– Dead load
Now, Cl. 7.5.2 makes it clear that one has to
– Part of imposed loads evaluate seismic design force for the entire
building first and then distribute it to different
frames/ walls.
Imposed Uniformly % of Imposed Load

Cl. 7.5.2 does not mean that one has to
Distributed Floor Loads to be considered
necessarily carry out a 3-D analysis.
(kN/m2)

One could still work with 2-D frame systems.
Up to and including 3.0 25

Above 3.0 50

157 158

Fundamental Natural Period (Cl. 7.6) Fundamental Natural Period (Cl. 7.6) (contd…)

For frame buildings without brick infills

Needless to say, brick infill in Cl. 7.6 really
Ta = 0.075h0.75 implies masonry infills

These need not just be bricks: could be stone

For all other buildings, including frame buildings masonry or concrete block masonry.
with brick infill panels:
0.09h
Ta =
d
d
where h is in meters
d

159 160

Rationale for new equations for T Observations on Steel Frame Buildings During San Fernando EQ

Experimental observations on Indian RC buildings with

masonry infills clearly showed that T = 0.1n significantly
over-estimates the period. For instance, see

Jain S K, Saraf V K, and Mehrotra B, “Period of RC Frame
Buildings with Brick Infills,” J. of Struct. Engg, Madras, Vol. 23,
No 4, pp 189-196.

Arlekar, J N, and Murty, C V R, “Ambient Vibration Survey of RC
MRF Buildings with URM Infill Walls,” The Indian Concrete
Journal, Vol.74, No.10, Oct. 2000, pp 581-586.

For frame buildings with masonry infills, T = 0.09h/(√d)
was found to give a much better estimate.

Fig. from NEHRP Commentary

161 162

27
 Observations on RC Frame Buildings During San Fernando EQ Observations on RC Shear Wall Buildings During San Fernando EQ

Fig. from NEHRP Commentary Fig. from NEHRP Commentary

163 164

Vertical Distribution of Seismic Load (Cl. 7.7.1) Vertical Distribution of Seismic Load (Cl. 7.7.1) (contd…)

Lateral load distribution with building height
depends on
Hence, NEHRP provides the following expression for

Natural periods and mode shapes of the building vertical distribution of seismic load
Shape of design spectrum Wi hik


Qi = V B n

In low and medium rise buildings,

Fundamental period dominates the response,
∑W h
j =1
j
k
j

and
Where k = 1 for T ≤ 0.5sec, and k = 2 for T ≥ 2.5 sec.

Fundamental mode shape is close to a straight
line (with regular distribution of mass and
stiffness)

For tall buildings, contribution of higher modes
can be significant even though the first mode
may still contribute the maximum response.
Value of k varies linearly for T in the range 0.5 sec
to 2.5 sec.

In IS:1893 over the years, k = 2 has been taken
regardless of natural period

This is conservative value and has been retained
in the code.

165 166

Horizontal Distribution... (Cl. 7.7.2)

Floor diaphragm plays an important role in
seismic load distribution in a building.

Consider a RC slab

For horizontal loads, it acts as a deep beam with
depth equal to building width, and the beam
width equal to slab thickness.
Concept of Floor

Being a very deep beam, it does not deform in Diaphragm Action
its own plane, and it forces the frames/walls to
fulfil the deformation compatibility of no in-plane
deformation of floor.

This is rigid floor diaphragm action.
Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed Draft for IS:1893…Part II:
Commentary and Examples,” J. of Struct Engg, Vol. 22,
No. 2, July 1995, pp 73-90

167 168

28
 Horizontal Distribution... (Cl. 7.7.2) (contd…)

Implications of rigid floor diaphragm action:

In case of symmetrical building and loading, the
seismic forces are shared by different frames or
walls in proportion to their own lateral stiffness. Lateral Load Distribution
Due to Rigid Floor
Diaphragm: Symmetric
Case – No Torsion

Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed Draft for IS:1893…Part II:

Commentary and Examples,” J. of Struct Engg, Vol. 22,
No. 2, July 1995, pp 73-90

169 170

When building is not symmetrical, the floor

undergoes rigid body translation and rotation.

Analysis of Forces Induced

by Twisting Moment (Rigid
Floor Diaphragm)

Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed Draft for IS:1893…Part II:

Commentary and Examples,” J. of Struct Engg, Vol. 22,
No. 2, July 1995, pp 73-90

171 172

Rigid Diaphragm Action Buildings without Diaphragm Action

In-plane rigidity of floors is sometimes misunderstood to
When the floor diaphragm does not exist, or
mean that when the diaphragm is extremely flexible as

The beams are infinitely rigid, and
compared to the vertical elements

The columns are not free to rotate at their ends.

The load can be distributed to the vertical

Rotation of columns is governed by out-of-plane
elements in proportion to the tributary mass
behavior of slab and beams.

(a) In-plane floor

deformation, (b) Out-
of-plane floor
deformation.
Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed
Draft for IS:1893…Part II:
Commentary and Examples,” J. of
Struct Engg, Vol. 22, No. 2, July
1995, pp 73-90

173 174

29
 Flexible Floor Diaphragms Analysis for Flexible Floor Diaphragm Buildings

There are instances where floor is not rigid.

“Not rigid” does not mean it is completely flexible!
One can actually model the floor slab in the

Hence, buildings with flexible floors should be carefully computer analysis.
analyzed considering in-plane floor flexibility.

Note 1 of Cl. 7.7.2.2 gives the criterion on when the

Fig. on next slide shows the vertical analogy
floor diaphragm is not to be treated as rigid. method to consider diaphragm flexibility in
lateral load distribution
Definition of Flexible Floor
Diaphragm (Cl. 7.7.2.2)

Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed (Plan View of Floor)

Draft for IS:1893…Part II:
Commentary and Examples,” J. of In-plane flexibility of diaphragm to be considered when
Struct Engg, Vol. 22, No. 2, July ∆2>1.5{0.5(∆1+ ∆2)}
1995, pp 73-90

175 176

Analysis for Flexible Floor Diaphragm Buildings (contd…)

Alternatively, one can take the design force as

envelop of (that is, the higher of) the two
extreme assumptions, i.e.,

Rigid diaphragm action
Lateral Load Distribution
No diaphragm action (load distribution in
Considering Floor Diaphragm proportion to tributary mass)
Deformation: Vertical
Analogy Method

Fig. from Jain S K, “A Proposed

Draft for IS:1893…Part II:
Commentary and Examples,” J. of
Struct Engg, Vol. 22, No. 2, July
1995, pp 73-90

177 178

Buildings (Section 7)

Sub-sections

Cl. 7.1: Regular and Irregular Configurations

Cl. 7.2: Importance Factor I and Response Reduction Factor R

Cl. 7.3: Design Imposed Loads for Earthquake Force Calculation

Cl. 7.4: Seismic Weight

Cl. 7.5: Design Lateral Force

Cl. 7.6: Fundamental Natural Period

Cl. 7.7: Distribution of Design Force
Section 7.8: Dynamic Analysis
Cl. 7.8: Dynamic Analysis

Cl. 7.9: Torsion
IS:1893-2002(Part I)
Cl. 7.10: Buildings with Soft Storey

Cl. 7.11 Deformations

Cl. 7.12 M iscellaneous

This lecture covers sub-section 7.8

179 180

30
 About This Lecture

The intent is not to teach Structural Dynamics or
to teach how to carry out dynamic analysis of a
building.

Interested persons may learn Structural Dynamics
from numerous excellent text books available on
this subject.
181 182
Why Dynamic Analysis?

Expressions for design load calculation (cl.
7.5.3) and load distribution with height based
on assumptions

Fundamental mode dominates the response

Mass and stiffness distribution are evenly
distributed with building height

Thus, giving regular mode shape
183 184
Lower Bound on Seismic Force (Cl. 7.8.2)

This clause requires that in case dynamic
analysis gives lower design forces, these be
scaled up to the level of forces obtained based
on empirical T.

Implies that empirical T is more reliable than T
computed by dynamic analysis
185 186
Requirement of Dynamic Anal. Cl. 7.8.1
Seismic Regular Irregular
Zone Building Buildings
II and III Ht > 90 m Ht > 40 m
IV and V Ht > 40 m Ht > 12 m

Notice wordings of section b) in Cl. 7.8.1

All framed buildings higher than 12m….
Why Dynamic Analysis? (contd…)

In tall buildings, higher modes can be quite
significant.

In irregular buildings, mode shapes may be
quite irregular

Hence, for tall and irregular buildings, dynamic
analysis is recommended.

Note that industrial buildings may have large
spans, large heights, and considerable
irregularities:

These too will require dynamic analysis.
Lower Bound on Seismic Force (Cl. 7.8.2) (contd…)

There are considerable uncertainties in modeling
a building for dynamic analysis, e.g.,

Stiffness contribution of non-structural elements

Stiffness contribution of masonry infills

Modulus of elasticity of concrete, masonry and
soil

Moment of inertia of RC members

Depending on how one models a building, there
can be a large variation in natural period.

Ignoring the stiffness contribution of infill walls
itself can result in a natural period several times
higher
31
 Lower Bound on Seismic Force (Cl. 7.8.2) (contd…)

Empirical expressions for period

Based on observations of actual as-built
buildings, and hence

Are far more reliable than period from dynamic
analysis based on questionable assumptions

Even when the results of dynamic analysis are
scaled up to design force based on empirical T:

The load distribution with building height and to
different elements is based on dynamics.
187
Value of Damping Cl. 7.8.2.1 (contd…)

Damping value depends on the material and the
level of vibrations

Higher damping for stronger shaking

Means that during the same earthquake,
damping will increase as the level of shaking
increases.

We are performing a simple linear analysis, while
the real behaviour is non-linear.

Hence, one fixed value of damping is used in our
analysis.
189
A Note on Static Procedure

The procedure of Cl.7.5 to 7.7 does not require
dynamic analysis.

Hence, this procedure is often termed as static
procedure or equivalent static procedure or
seismic coefficient method.

However, notice that this procedure does
account for dynamics of the building in an
approximate manner

Even though its applicability is limited to simple
buildings
191
Value of Damping Cl. 7.8.2.1

Damping to be used

Steel buildings: 2% of critical

RC buildings: 5% of critical

For masonry buildings? Not specified.

Recommended value is 5%

Implies that a steel building will be designed for
about 40% higher seismic force than a similar
RC building.

The code should specify 5% damping for both
steel and RC buildings.
188
Value of Damping Cl. 7.8.2.1 (contd…)

Choice of damping has implications on seismic
safety.

Hence, damping value and design spectrum
level go together.

Most codes tend to specify 5% damping for
buildings.

What value of damping to be used in “static
procedure” of Cl. 7.5?

Not specified. I recommend 5% be mentioned in
the code.
190
Number of Modes Cl. 7.8.4.2

The code requires sufficient number of modes
so that at least 90% of the total seismic mass is
excited in each of the principal directions.

There is a problem in wordings of this clause.
First sentence reads as:

The number of modes to be used in the analysis
should be such that the sum total of modal
masses in all modes considered is at least 90
percent of the total seismic mass and missing
mass correction beyond 33 percent.

The portion highlighted in red should be deleted.
192
32
 Number of Modes Cl. 7.8.4.2 (contd…) Modal Combination Cl. 7.8.4.4

Last sentence reads as:
This clause gives CQC method first and then

The effect of higher modes shall be included by simpler method as an alternate.
considering missing mass correction using well
CQC is a fairly sophisticated method for modal
established procedures
combination. It is applicable both when the

It should read as: modes are well-separated and when the modes

The effect of modes with natural frequency are closely-spaced.
beyond 33 Hz shall be included by….

Many computer programs have CQC method
built in for modal combination.

193 194

Modal Combination Cl. 7.8.4.4 (contd…) Alternate Method to CQC

Response Quantity could be any response
Use SRSS (Square Root of Sum of Squares) if
quantity of interest: the natural modes are not closely-spaced.
Base shear, base moment, …
λ = λ12 + λ22 + λ23 + λ24 + ....

Force resultant in a member, e.g.,

Moment in a beam at a given location, Axial force in column,
etc.

Use Absolute Sum for closely-spaced modes

Deflection at a given location
λ = λ1 + λ 2 + λ 3 + λ 4 + ...

To appreciate the alternative method, consider

two examples.

195 196

Example 1 on Modal Combination: Example 1 on Modal Combination (contd…)

For first five modes of vibration, natural period/
All natural frequencies differ from each other by
natural frequency and maximum response are more than 10%.
given. Estimate the maximum response for the
As per Cl. 3.2, none of the modes are closely-
structure. spaced modes.

As per section a) in Cl. 7.8.4.4, we can use
Mode 1 2 3 4 5 Square Root of Sum of Squares (SRSS) method
Natural 0.95 0.35 0.20 0.14 0.11 to obtain resultant response as
Period
Natural 1.05 2.86 5.00 7.14 9.09 = (1100) 2 + (350) 2 + ( 230) 2 + (150) 2 + (120) 2 = 1193
Frequency
Response 1100 350 230 150 120
Quantity

197 198

33
 Example 2 on Modal Combination Example 2 on Modal Combination (contd…)

For first six modes of vibration, natural period/
As per Cl. 3.2, modes 2 and 3 are closed spaced since
natural frequency and maximum response are their natural frequencies are within 10% of the lower
frequency.
given. Estimate the maximum response for the

Similarly, modes 5 and 6 are closely spaced.
structure.

Combined response of modes 2 and 3 as per section b)
Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 in Cl.7.8.4.4 = 230+190=420
Natural period 0.94 0.78 0.74 0.34 0.26 0.25

Combined response of modes 5 and 6 = 90 + 80 = 170
(sec)
Combined response of all the modes as per section a)
Natural frequency 1.06 1.28 1.35 2.94 3.85 4.00
(Hz) = (850) 2 + (420) 2 + (200) 2 + (170) 2 = 984
Response Quantity 850 230 190 200 90 80

199 200

Dynamic Analysis as per Cl. 7.8.4.5 Lumped Mass Model for Cl. 7.8.4.5

The analysis procedure is valid when a building can
be modeled as a lumped mass model with one
degree of freedom per floor (see fig. next slide)
X3(t)

If the building has significant plan irregularity, it
requires three degrees of freedom per floor and the X2(t)
procedure of Cl. 7.8.4.5 is not valid.
X1(t)

201 202

Summary

Dynamic analysis requires considerable skills.

Just because the computer program can
perform dynamic analysis: it is not sufficient.

One needs to develop in-depth understanding of Lecture 3
dynamic analysis.

There are approximate methods (such as
Rayleigh’s method, Dunkerley’s method) that
one should use to evaluate if the computer This lecture covers
results are right.
Sections 7.9 to 7.11

It is not uncommon to confuse between the
units of mass and weight when performing IS:1893-2002(Part I)
dynamic analysis.

Leads to huge errors.
203 204

34
 Torsion
Buildings (Section 7)
• Uncertainties

Sub-sections

Cl. 7.1: Regular and Irregular Configurations
– Location of imposed load

Cl. 7.2: Importance Factor I and Response Reduction Factor R – Contributions to structural stiffness

Cl. 7.3: Design Imposed Loads for Earthquake Force Calculation

Cl. 7.4: Seismic Weight • Accidental Eccentricity
Cl. 7.5: Design Lateral Force


– Torsion to be considered in Symmetric Buildings

Cl. 7.6: Fundamental Natural Period

Cl. 7.7: Distribution of Design Force • Design Eccentricity
Cl. 7.8: Dynamic Analysis
1.5 esi + 0.05 bi

Cl. 7.9: Torsion

e di = Worst of 

Cl. 7.10: Buildings with Soft Storey

 esi − 0.05bi

Cl. 7.11 Deformations

Cl. 7.12 M iscellaneous

This lecture covers sub-sections 7.9 to 7.11
bi
205 206

Design eccentricity First Equation for Design Eccentricity

Now the equation for design eccentricity is:

The intention is to add the effect of accidental
1.5esi+0.05bi eccentricity to 1.5 times calculated eccentricity.
edi =
esi-0.05bi
Hence, the first equation should be taken to
mean having + and - sign for the second term,

Notice:

First equation has 1.5 times the computed whichever is critical:
eccentricity, plus additional term due to edi = 1.5esi ± 0.05bi
accidental eccentricity

Accidental eccentricity is specified as 5% of plan dimension.

Second equation does not have factor of 1.5,
and sign of accidental eccentricity is different.

In lecture 2, we discussed dynamic amplification
of 1.5 and the accidental eccentricity.

207 208

Torsion…
Torsion… First Equation for Design Eccentricity (contd…)
– Two cases of Design Eccentricity bi

esi
CM Calculated locations of
CM* CS CM CM* CS CR CM
CM and CR
ith floor

0.05bi 0.05bi *
esi CR CM CM
0.5esi Location CM* to be used
esi
in analysis for first eqn. of
1.5esi+0.05 bi
cl. 7.9.2
1.5esi + 0.05bi esi − 0.05bi
Considering EQ in Y-Direction
209 210

35
 Second Equation for Design Eccentricity Second Equation for Design Eccentricity (contd…)
bi

In second equation, it is expected that there is
accidental eccentricity in the opposite sense, esi
i.e., it tends to oppose the computed Calculated locations of
CR CM
eccentricity. CM and CR
ith floor

Hence, factor 1.5 is not applied to the computed
eccentricity.

Again, this equation also should be understood
to mean having + and - sign for second term, *
CM CR CM
whichever is critical: Location CM* to be used
esi in analysis for first eqn. of
0.05 bi
edi = esi ± 0.05bi cl. 7.9.2

Considering EQ in Y-Direction
211 212

Torsion…
Torsion… Torsion…
Torsion…

• Incorporating the provision in practice • Incorporating the provision in practice…

1.5 esi + 0.05bi – Effect of shear and torsion (esi)
edi =  • Analysis A
 esi − 0.05bi

CS CM CS CM

213 214

Torsion…
Torsion… Torsion…
Torsion…

• Incorporating the provision in practice… • Incorporating the provision in practice…

– Effect of shear only – Effect of shear, torsion esi and 0.05bi
• Analysis B • Analysis C

CS CM CS CM
CM*

0.05bi
215 216

36
 Torsion…
Torsion…
Definition of Centre of Rigidity
• Incorporating the provision in practice…
– Solution
Earlier we defined Centre of Rigidity as:

If the building undergoes pure translation in the
• Effect of esi only
horizontal direction (that is, no rotation or twist or
 A-B torsion about vertical axis), the point through
which the resultant of the restoring forces acts is
• Effect of 0.05bi only the Centre of Rigidity.
 C-A
This definition was for single-storey building.

How do we extend it to multi-storey buildings?
• Effect of 1.5esi+0.05bi along with shear
Recall that I mentioned in Lecture 2 that we will
 B+1.5(A-B)+(C-A) not distinguish between the terms Centre of
= 0.5(A-B)+C
Rigidity and Centre of Stiffness.

217 218

CR for Multi-Storey Buildings All Floor CR Definition

It can be defined in two ways:
Centre of rigidities are the set of points

All Floor Centre of Rigidity, and located one on each floor, through which

Single Floor Centre of Rigidity application of lateral load profile would cause
no rotation in any floor.

As per this definition, location of CR is
dependent on building stiffness properties as
well as on the applied lateral load profile.

219 220

All Floor Definition of CR Single Floor CR Definition

CR
Centre of rigidity of a floor is defined as the
Fny point on the floor such that application of lateral
F(j+1)y
CR load passing through that point does not cause
any rotation of that particular floor, while the
CR
Fjy other floors may rotate.
CR
This definition is independent of applied lateral load.
F(j-1)y No rotation in any
CR floor
F2y
CR
F1y
Fig. Dhiman Basu

221 Figure 1: ‘All floor’ definition of center of rigidity 222

37
 Single Floor Definition of CR Choice of Definition

Question is: which definition of CR to choose for
multi-storey buildings?

In fact, some people also use the concept of
Shear Center in place of CR. But, we need not
CR
jth floor does not concern ourselves about it.
rotate
(other floors may
Results could be somewhat different depending
rotate) on which definition is used. But, the difference is
not substantial for most buildings.

Use any definition that you find convenient to use.

Fig. Dhiman Basu

For computer-aided analysis, the all-floor
definition is more convenient.

223 224

To Calculate Eccentricity To Locate CR

Need to locate

Centre of Mass, and
The way we defined it, one needs to apply

Centre of Rigidity
lateral loads at the CR.

But, we do not know CR in the first place.

Centre of Mass is easy to locate.

Unless there is a significant variation in mass

Notice the condition that the floor should not
distribution, we take it at geometric centre of the rotate.
floor.
Hence, we could apply the load at CM, and

Locating CR is not so simple for a multi-storey restrain the floor from rotation by providing rollers
building.
The resultant of the applied load and reactions
at the rollers will pass through CR

225 226

To Locate All-Floor CR To Locate Single-Floor CR

Central nodes of both ends of
the diaphragm are constrained
to ensure equal horizontal
displacement

Column Column
shear
shear
Lateral load Lateral load
proportional to proportional to
the mass the mass
distribution distribution
distributed Resultant of column distributed Resultant of column
Central nodes of both ends of
Central nodes of both ends of along the floor shears passes through along the floor shears passes through
the diaphragm are constrained
the diaphragm are constrained length the center of rigidity of length the center of rigidity of
to ensure equal horizontal to ensure equal horizontal
displacement the floor displacement the floor

(a) Lateral loads are applied at all floors of the (b) Free body diagram of a (a) Lateral load is applied at the (b) Free body diagram of a
constrained model particular floor constrained floor particular floor
Fig. Dhiman Basu Fig. Dhiman Basu

227 228

38
 Alternative to Locating CR

It is tedious to locate CR’s first and then
calculate eccentricity.

One could follow an alternate route using
computer analysis, provided one is using All-
Floor Definition.

This method is based on superposition
concept and was first published by Goel and
Chopra (ASCE, Vol 119, No. 10).
229
Superposition Method

Apply lateral load profile at the CM’s and analyse
the building; say the solution is F1

This incorporates the effect of computed
eccentricity (without dynamic amplification or
accidental ecc.)

Apply lateral load profile at CM’s but restrain the
floors from rotating; say this solution is F2

This amounts to solving the problem as if the
lateral loads were applied at the CRs since the
floors did not rotate.

The difference of F1 and F2 gives the solution
due to torsion caused by computed eccentricity.
230

Superposition Method (contd…) Superposition Method (contd…)

Hence, solution for loads applied at 1.5 times

Loads applied at CMs
Floors can translate and rotate
computed eccentricity
= solution F1 + 0.5(solution F1 – solution F2)

To this, add solution due to accidental torsion:

Apply on every floor a moment profile equal to
load profile times accidental eccentricity; say
Loads applied at CMs solution F3
Floors can only translate

Solution F1 Solution F2
Fig. CVR Murty

231 232

Superposition Method (contd…) Suggestions on Cl.7.9

Following solution for ed = 1.5es + 0.5b i

F1 + 0.5 (F1 – F2) ± F3

Following solution for ed = e s − 0.5b i

F1 ± F3

In Cl.7.9.1, the following statement should be
deleted:
However, negative torsional shear shall be
neglected
This statement is needed only when second
equation of design eccentricity is not specified.

Notice that Cl.7.8.4.5 says if highly irregular
buildings are analyzed as per 7.8.4.5, while
7.8.4.5 says that it is applicable only for regular
or nominally irregular buildings!

Indeed, 7.8.4.5 is not applicable to buildings
highly irregular in plan.

233 234

39
 Bldgs with Soft Storeys Cl. 7.10 Buildings with Soft Storeys…
Storeys…

• Need to increase Stiffness and Strength of

Most of the time, soft storey building is also the Open or Soft Storeys
weak storey building.

In the code, distinction between soft storey and
weak storey has not been made.

Soft/weak storey buildings are well-known for
poor performance during earthquakes.

In Bhuj earthquake of 2001, most multistorey
buildings that collapsed had soft ground storey.

• Inverted
pendulum !!
235 236

Buildings with Soft Storeys…

Storeys…
Bldgs with Soft Storeys Cl. 7.10 (contd…)
• Dynamic Analysis
– Include strength and stiffness of infills
– Inelastic deformations in members

OR

Fig from Static Design

Murty et al,
2002 – Design columns and beams in soft storey for
Open ground story Bare frame 2.5 times the Storey Shears and Moments calculated
under seismic loads
Notice that the soft-storey is subject to severe deformation
demands during seismic shaking. – Design shear walls for 1.5 times the Storey Shears
calculated under seismic loads
237 238

Buildings with Soft Storeys Cl. 7.10 (contd…) Buildings with Soft Storeys Cl. 7.10 (contd…)

This clause gives two approaches for treatment
of soft storey buildings.

First approach is as per 7.10.2

It is a very sophisticated approach.

Based on non-linear analysis.

Code has no specifications for applying this
approach.

Cannot be applied in routine design applications
with current state of the practice in India.

Second approach as per 7.10.3 is an empirical
provision.

There are reservations on the way entire Cl.
7.10 has been included in the code.

First approach is too open ended and does not
enable the designer to implement it.

Second approach is too empirical and may be
impractical in some buildings.

Also note that Table 5 defines Soft Storey and
Extreme Soft Storey

And yet, nowhere the treatment is different for
these two!

239 240

40
 Buildings with Soft Storeys Cl. 7.10 (contd…)

We need considerable amount of research on
Indian buildings with soft storey features in
order to develop robust design methodology.
241
Deformations C.7.11…
C.7.11…
• Inter-storey Drift
– Storey drift under design lateral load with partial
load factor 1.0
δ < 0.004hi
δ

hi
243
Computation of Drift

Note that higher the stiffness, lower the drift but
higher the lateral loads. Hence,

For computation of T for seismic design load
assessment, all sources of stiffness (even if
unreliable) should be included.

For computation of drift, all sources of flexibility
(even if unreliable) should be incorporated.
245
Deformations Cl. 7.11

For a good seismic performance, a building
needs to have adequate lateral stiffness.

Low lateral stiffness leads to:

Large deformations and strains, and hence more
damage in the event of strong shaking

Significant P-∆ effect

Damage to non-structural elements due to large
deformations

Discomfort to the occupants during vibrations.

Large deformations may lead to pounding with
adjacent structures.
242
Deformations Cl. 7.11 (contd…)

Note that real displacement in a strong shaking
will be much larger than the displacement
calculated for design seismic loads

Because design seismic force is a reduced force.
As a rule of thumb, the maximum displacement
during the MCE shaking (e.g., PGA of 0.36g in
zone V) will be about 2R times the computed
displacement due to design forces.
244
Computation of Drift (contd…)

Thus, in computation of drift:

Stiffness contribution of non-structural elements
and non-seismic elements (i.e., elements not
designed to share the seismic loads) should not
be included.

This is because such elements cannot be relied upon to
provide lateral stiffness at large displacements

All possible sources of flexibility should be
incorporated, e.g., effect of joint rotation,
bending and axial deformations of columns and
shear walls, etc.
246
41
 Para 2 of Cl. 7.11.1 Para 3 of Cl. 7.11.1

Cl. 7.8.2 required scaling up of seismic design
This para allows larger than the specified drift
forces from dynamic analysis, in case these for single-storey building provided it is duly
were lower than those from empirical T. accounted for in the analysis and design.

This para allows drift check to be performed as
per the dynamic analysis which may have given
lower seismic forces, i.e., no scaling-up of forces
needed for drift check.

247 248

Compatibility of Non-Seismic Elements (Cl. 7.11.2) Compatibility of Non-Seismic Elements (Cl. 7.11.2) (contd…)

Important when not all structural elements are
During shaking, gravity columns do not carry
expected to participate in lateral load resistance. much lateral loads, but deform laterally with the

Examples include flat-plate buildings or buildings shear walls due to compatibility imposed by
with pre-fabricated elements where seismic load floor diaphragm
is resisted by shear walls, and columns carry only
Moments and shears induced in gravity columns
gravity loads. due to the lateral deformations may cause

During 1994 Northridge (Calif.) earthquake, collapse if adequate provision not made.
many collapses due to failure of gravity
ACI Code for RC design has a separate section
columns. on detailing of gravity columns to safeguard
against this kind of collapse.

249 250

Compatibility of Non-Seismic Elements (Cl. 7.11.2) (contd…) Compatibility of Non-Seismic Elements (Cl. 7.11.2) (contd…)

P1
Pi ∆ i
F1
Since deflections are calculated using design
Gravity columns Shear Wall P2 seismic force (which is a reduced force), the
h1
F2 deflection is to be multiplied by R.
P3
Floor slab
h2
Multiplier R could be debated since it will only
F3
∆ ∆ ensure safety against Design Basis Earthquake.
P4
h3
For safety against Maximum Considered
F4
Earthquake, multiplier should be (2R).
h4
Imposed
displ. at
Shear Wall
all floors
Floor slab

Gravity
 n 
column Pi ∆ i + ∑ Fi  ∑ h j 
 j= 1 
251 252

42
 Separation Between Adjacent …Cl. 7.11.3 Separation Between Adjacent …Cl. 7.11.3 (contd…)

During seismic shaking, two adjacent units of
the same building, or two adjacent buildings
may hit each other due to lateral displacements
(pounding or hammering).

This clause is meant to safeguard against
pounding.

Multiplication with R is as explained earlier:
since deflection is calculated using design
seismic force which are reduced forces.

Pounding effect is much more serious if floors of
one building hit at the mid height of columns in
the other building.

Hence, when two units have same floor
elevations, the multiplier is reduced from R to
R/2.

253 254

Separation Between Adjacent …Cl. 7.11.3

Separation Between Adjacent …Cl. 7.11.3 (contd…)
 Two adjacent buildings
Potential pounding
location
Potential pounding  Two adjacent units of same building
location
 Amount of separation
• Floors levels are at same elevation

Building 1 Building 2 Building 1 Building 2

∆>
R
2
(
⋅ δ 1 design + δ 2 design )
• Floors levels are at different elevations
a b
(
∆ > R ⋅ δ 1 design + δ 2 design ) R1 ⋅ δ 1 R2 ⋅ δ 2
Pounding in situation (b) is far more damaging.

255 256

Separation Between Adjacent …Cl. 7.11.3 (contd…)

To handle pounding by roof of one unit to the

middle of columns of the other unit:

Soft Timber
Structural
Grade Steel

Section 7.12: Miscellaneous, and

Section 7.1: Regular and Irregular Configuration
Fig. From Arnold and
Reitherman IS:1893-2002(Part I)

257 258

43
 Foundations Cl. 7.12.1 Foundations Cl. 7.12.1 (contd…)

This clause is to prevent use of foundation types
vulnerable to differential settlement.

In zones IV and V, ties to be provided for
isolated spread footings and for pile caps

Except when footings directly supported on rock

Recall newly-introduced Note 7 inside Table 1 of
the code which states:
Isolated R.C.C. footing without tie beams, or
unreinforced strip foundation shall not be
permitted in soft soils with N<10.

This note is applicable for all seismic zones.

It would be better to bring this note inside Cl.
7.12.1.

259 260

Cantilevers and Projections

Foundations Cl. 7.12.1 (contd…)
• Towers, Parapets, Stacks, Balconies

Ties to be designed for an axial load (in tension (Small)
and in compression) equal to Ah/4 times the – Design of these attachments
larger of the column or pile cap load. – Design of their connections to main structure

This is fairly empirical, and the specification
appears on the low side. • Design force

Many structural engineers design the ties for 5% – 5× vertical seismic coefficient 5Ah
of the larger of the column or pile cap load. for horizontal projections

Any other alternative design approaches? – 5× horizontal seismic coefficient
for vertical projections

5Av
261 262

Compound Walls Cl. 7.12.3

To be designed for design horizontal coefficient
Ah and importance factor = 1
Cl. 7.1
Regular and Irregular
Configuration

263 264

44
 Building Configuration Building Configuration…
Configuration…

• Configuration emphasised • Plan Irregularities

– Comprehensive section on identifying irregularities – Torsion Irregularity
Heavy Mass
– Qualitative definitions of irregular buildings

• Two types
Irregular Orientation of Lateral
– Plan Irregularities Force Resisting System
– Vertical Irregularities

 ∆ + ∆2 
∆ 2 > 1.2 1 
∆1 Floor ∆2  2 

265 266

Torsional Irregularity Torsional Irregularity (contd…)

Look at the top two figures of page. 19 (Fig. 3)
These figures were taken from NEHRP

Can you make out anything what this figure is Commentary where it appears as follows:
trying to show?

Heavy
Mass

Vertical Components of Seismic Resisting System

The figures have not been traced correctly for

There is a problem with these two figures! IS:1893!

267 268

Building Configuration…
Configuration… Building Configuration…
Configuration…
– Re-entrant Corners – Diaphragm Discontinuity
Flexible
A

L Opening
A A
A

A A Opening
> 0.15 − 0.20
L L

269 270

45
 Out-
Out-of-
of-Plane Offsets Building Configuration…
Configuration…

• This is a very serious irregularity wherein there is – Out of Plane Offsets

an out-of-plane offset of the vertical element that
carries the lateral loads.
• Such an offset imposes vertical and lateral load
effects on horizontal elements, which are difficult
Shear Wall Shear Wall
to design for adequately.
• Again, there is a problem in figure for this in the
code
Shear Wall
– Shear walls are not obvious.

271 272

Building Configuration…
Configuration… Building Configuration…
Configuration…
– Non-Parallel System • Vertical Irregularities
– Stiffness Irregularity (Soft Storey)

ki < 0.7ki +1
ki+1 k +k +k 
ki ki < 0.8 i +1 i + 2 i + 3 
ki-1
 3 
273 274

Building Configuration…
Configuration… Mass and Stiffness Irregularity
– Mass Irregularity • It is really the ratio of mass to stiffness of a storey
• induced by the presence of a heavy mass on a that is important.
floor, say a swimming pool.
• Our code should provide a waiver from mass and
stiffness irregularities if the ratio of mass to
stiffness of two adjacent storeys is similar.

Wi > 2 Wi −1
Wi+1
Wi
Wi-1
Wi > 2 Wi +1

275 276

46
 Building Configuration…
Configuration… Building Configuration…
Configuration…
– Vertical Geometric Irregularities L1
A
A
> 0.15 − 0.20 L2 > 1.5L1
A A L

L1
L2
L

L
A A

L
L2
277 278

Building Configuration…
Configuration… Building Configuration…
Configuration…

– In-plane Discontinuity in Lateral Load Resisting Elements – Strength Irregularity (Weak Storey)

Upper Floor S i < 0.8Si +1

Plan
Si+1
Si
Si-1

Lower Floor
Plan

279 280

Building Configuration…

Geometrically building may appear to be regular

and symmetrical, but may have irregularity due
to distribution of mass and stiffness.
(a) (b)

It is better to distribute the lateral load resisting Arrangement of shear walls and braced frames-not recommended.
Fig. From
Note that the heavy lines indicate shear walls and/or braced frames
elements near the perimeter of the building NEHRP
Commentary
rather than concentrate these near centre of the
building.

(a) (b)
Arrangement of shear walls and braced frames- recommended.
Note that the heavy lines indicate shear walls and/or braced frames

281 282

47
 Diaphragm Discontinuity Diaphragm Discontinuity (contd…)

Diaphragm discontinuity changes the lateral load

Notice the words
distribution to different elements as compared “mass resistance
eccentricity” do not
to what it would be with rigid floor diaphragm. make sense.

Also, it could induce torsional effects which may

Fig in Code
not be there if the floor diaphragm is rigid.

Observe the top two figures of page 20.

Again, these are from NEHRP Commentary and not RIGID FLEXIBLE

traced correctly in our code. DIAPHRAGM

DIAPHRAGM
O P E N

Fig in NEHRP
Vertical Components of Seismic Resisting System

Discontinuity in Diaphragm Stiffness

283 284

Problems with Irregularities Problems with Irregularities (contd…)

In buildings with vertical irregularity, load
In irregular building, there may be concentration
distribution with building height is different from of ductility demand in a few locations.
that in Cl. 7.7.1.
Special care needed in detailing.

Dynamic analysis is required.
Just dynamic analysis may not solve the

In buildings with plan irregularity, load problem.
distribution to different vertical elements is
complex.

Floor diaphragm plays an important role and
needs to be modelled carefully.

A good 3-D analysis is needed.

285 286

Code on Irregularity

Our code has simplistic method of treating the
irregularities.

For irregular buildings, it just encourages dynamic
analysis.

Compare Tables of NEHRP shown earlier in this
lecture.

For each type of irregularity and for each seismic
performance category, different requirements
are imposed.
Seismic Force

Dynamic analysis is not always sufficient for
irregular buildings, and
Estimation

Dynamic analysis is not always needed for
irregularities.
287 288

48
 Design Seismic Lateral Force
• Two ways of calculating
– Equivalent Static Method
• Seismic Coefficient Method
 Single mode dynamics
 Simple and regular structures
– Dynamic Analysis Method
• Response Spectrum Method
 Multi-mode dynamics
Origin of
Equivalent Static
 Irregular structures
• Time History Method
 Special structures

Method
289 290

Dynamics of 2 DOF System Dynamics of 2 DOF System…

System…

• Dynamic Characteristics • Lateral Force

m2 m2
k2 k2
m1 m1
k1 k1

Property
Property Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22 Property
Property Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22
M1 M2 PSA (g) PSA (g)

Equivalent SDOFs K1 K2 PSA2

PSA PSA1

K1 K2
Natural Frequency ω1 = ω2 = T1 T T2 T
M1 M2
PSA1 PSA2
Natural Period T1 = 2π / ω1 T2 = 2π / ω2 SD
SD1 = SD2 =
291 292 ω12 ω22

Dynamics of 2 DOF System…

System… Dynamics of 2 DOF System…
System…

• Lateral Force… • Lateral Force…

m2 m2 F12 F22
k2 k2
m1 m1 F11 F21
k1 k1

Property
Property Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22 Property
Property Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22

{ϕ}T1 [m ]{1} {ϕ}T2 [m ]{1}

Mode Participation Γ1 = Γ2 =
Factor M1 M2 F11  F21 
Lateral Force {F}1 = [k ]{u}1 =   {F}2 = [k ]{u}2 =  
F12  F22 
Lateral Displacement {u}1 = SD1{ϕ}1 Γ1 {u}2 = SD2 {ϕ}2 Γ2
u11  u21  2 2
=  =  Base Shear
u22  VB1 = ∑ F1i VB 2 = ∑ F2i
u12 
i =1 i =1
293 294

49
 Dynamics of 2 DOF System…
System… Dynamics of 2 DOF System…
System…

• Lateral Force • Equivalent Static Force

m2 F12 F22 – Since mode 1 is dominant
k2
m1 F11 F21 F12 F12
k1

Property
Property Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22
F11 F11

Resultant Base Shear VB = (VB1 )2 + (VB2 )2

Usually, for regular buildings
Building VB Mode
Mode11
VB1
 VB1   VB2  Building
  >  
295
 VB   VB 
296
VB ≈ VB1

MDOF System MDOF System…

System…

• Vibration modes • Lateral Force

m3 Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22 Mode
Mode33 m3 Mode
Mode11 Mode
Mode22 Mode
Mode33
k3 k3
m2 m2
k2 k2
m1 m1
k1 k1
Property
Property (
Eigen Value Problem : [k ] − ω2 [m ] {ϕ} = {0})
m1 0 0  Property
ω1 , {ϕ}1 ω2 ,{ϕ}2 ω3 ,{ϕ}3 Property
[m] =  0 m2 0  M1 , K 1 M 2 , K2 M 3 , K3 Base Shears
 0 0 m3  VB1 VB2 VB3
 k11 k12 0 
[k ] = k21 k 22 k 23  Response
Responseofofthe
thewhole
wholebuilding
buildingisisusually
usually
that
thatofofits
itsdominant firstmode.
dominantfirst
297  0 k 32 k 33  298
mode.

First Mode Analysis First Mode Analysis…

Analysis…

• Typical first mode shapes • Base Shear VB using T1

VB = M ⋅ PSA1
Linear Parabolic
 ⋮ 
 ⋮   ⋮  • Distribution of force
   
 
{ϕ}1 = ϕ01i ⋅  i 
h  ⋮
2 along height
{ϕ}1 = ϕ01i ⋅  i  
  h

 ⋮
H 
  H  Fi
   ⋮ 
W h2
⋮
 ⋮ 
 
Fi = VB ⋅ N i i
Low-to-Medium
Low-to-MediumPeriod
PeriodBuildings
Buildings Long
LongPeriod
PeriodBuildings
Buildings ∑ Wk hk2
(T<1s)
(T<1s) (T>2s)
(T>2s) k =1
299 300

50
Equivalent lateral Force Method
• IS:1893 (Part1) - 2002

Perform the usual static elastic

Fi structural analysis with these forces.

No dynamic analysis is done.

(But, it is hidden in concept of
Response Spectrum used in assumed
vertical distribution of Base Shear VB.)

VB Example
301 302

Three Storey Frame Building Step 1

• Seismic Zone V • Decide a structural system
– OMF and SMF

3m
5m

3.0m
3m

3.0m
5m
4m
4.0m 3.5m

3m 5.0m
3.5m 3.0m 3.5m 3.5m 3.0m 3.5m
3.5m 5.0m
Plan Elevation
303 304

STEP 2 Step 2…
2…

• Estimate Seismic Weight W • Estimate Seismic Weight W…

– Clause 7.4 of IS:1893(1)-2002 – Imposed load as per Clause 7.3
• W = Full DL + Part LL • % of Imposed Load to be considered from Table 8
– Unit weights of dead loads from IS:875(1) • No imposed load on roof
• Steel sections : 78.5 kN/m3
• Reinforced concrete : 25 kN/m3 Imposed Load (kN/m2) % of Load to be considered

• Masonry infill : 19.0 kN/m3 ≤ 3.0 25

• Mortar plaster : 20.0 kN/m3 > 3.0 50

• Floor finish on floors : 1 kN/m2

• Weathering course on roof : 2.25 kN/m2
– Imposed loads from IS 875(2)
• On floors : 3.0 kN/m2
305 • On roof : 0.75 kN/m2 306

51
 Step 2…
2… Step 3
• Estimate Seismic Weight W… • Estimate Design Horizontal Acceleration
– Total Seismic Weight W Spectrum Value Ah
W = 4900 kN – Clause 6.4 of IS:1893(1)-2002
Maximum
Elastic
DL=1340 kN; LL=0 Acceleration
3m
S 
DL=1620 kN; LL=75 kN
Z  a (T ) I
Ah (T ) =  
3m g
DL=1800 kN; LL=75 kN

4m
2R
Reduction to account
for ductility and
overstrength
3.5m 3.0m 3.5m
307 308

Step 3…
3… Step 3…
3…

• Estimate Ah… • Estimate Ah…

– Seismic Zone Factor Z – Response Reduction Factor R from Draft IS:800
Seismic Zone II III IV V 4 OMF
Z 0.10 0.16 0.24 0.36
R=
5 SMF

– Importance factor I
S.No. Building I
1 Important, Community & Lifeline Buildings 1.5
2 All Others 1.0

309 310

Step 3…
3… Step 3…
3…

• Estimate Ah… • Estimate Ah…

– Empirical Natural Period Ta – Structure Flexibility Factor Sa/g
0.085 h 0.75 = 0.085 × 10 0.75 = 0.48 sec Bare Frame • Structure on Type I (Rock or Hard Soil)
 • 5% damping
Ta = 
 0.09 h = 0.09 × 10 = 0.28 sec Infilled Frame
 d
Sa /g
10
2.5
2.08

Rock/ Hard Soil

1.0
Note
The first expression is independent of
the base dimension of the building!! 0 0.28 0.48 Natural Period Ta
311 312

52
 Step 3…
3… Step 4
• Estimate Ah… • Calculate Design Base Shear Vb
– OMF – Clause 7.5.3 of IS:1893(1)-2002
 0.36 × 1.0 × 2.5
 2× 3
= 0.15 Infilled Frame VB = Ah (Ta )× W
Ah = 
0.36 × 1.0 × 2.08
 = 0.125 Bare Frame
 2× 3
0.09× 4900= 441kN SMF
VB = 
– SMF 0.15× 4900= 735kN OMF
 0.36 × 1.0 × 2.5
 = 0.090 Infilled Frame
Ah =  2× 5
0.36 × 1.0 × 2.08
 = 0.075 Bare Frame
 2× 5

313 314

Step 5 Step 5
• Distribute Design Base Shear Vb • Locate point of application of Qi at each floor
along height – At each floor level at design eccentricity
– Clause 7.7.1 of IS:1893(1)-2002 • Clause 7.9.1 of IS:1893(1)-2002
Wi hi2
Qi = VB  1.5esi + 0.05bi , or
N edi = 
∑ W j h 2j
EQ
 esi − 0.05bi EQ

j =1 b
238.4 kN 397.4 kN

148.9 kN 248.1 kN

53.7 kN 89.5 kN
EQ
EQ
SMF OMF
SMF OMF esi b
315 316

Step 5…
5… Step 5…
5…

• Locate point of Qi … • Locate point of Qi …

– Two cases of Design Eccentricity – Incorporating the provision in practice
1.5 esi + 0.05bi
edi = 
CM
 esi − 0.05bi
CM* CS CM CM* CS

CS CM
0.05bi 0.05bi
esi
0.5esi esi

1.5esi + 0.05bi esi − 0.05bi

317 318

53
 Step 5…
5… Step 5…
5…

• Locate point of Qi … • Locate point of Qi …

– Incorporating the provision in practice… – Incorporating the provision in practice…
• Effect of shear and torsion: esi • Effect of shear only
 Analysis A  Analysis B

CS CM CS CM

319 320

Step 5…
5… Step 5…
5…

• Locate point of Qi … • Locate point of Qi …

– Incorporating the provision in practice… – Incorporating the provision in practice…
• Effect of shear, torsion esi and 0.05bi • Solution
 Analysis C  Effect of esi only CS CM
AA
 A-B

 Effect of 0.05bi only CS CM

 C-A BB

CS CM
CM*  Effect of 1.5esi+0.05bi along with shear
 B+1.5(A-B)+(C-A) CS CM CM*
= 0.5(A-B)+C CC

0.05bi
0.05bi
321 322

Step 6 Step 6…
6…

• Load Combinations • Load Combinations…

– Lateral force resisting system orthogonal – Lateral force resisting system
in two plan directions non-parallel in two plan directions
• 9 load cases for unsymmetrical buildings • Consider design based on one direction at a time
y
 Can reduce to 5 for beams
1.7 (DL + LL) ELx
x
1.3 (DL + LL ± ELx)
1.3 (DL + LL ± ELy) y
1.7 (DL ± ELx)
1.7 (DL ± ELy) x
x

323 324
ELy

54
 Step 6…
6… Step 6…
6…

• Load Combinations… • Load Combinations…

– Non-parallel system – Two/Three Component Motion
• Consider design based on one direction at a time • Response (EL) due to earthquake force is
maximum of ::
• Replace
 ELx by (ELx ± 0.3ELy) and ELy by (ELy±0.3ELx) ± ELx ± 0.3ELy ± 0.3ELz

in the combinations for orthogonal systems
 Thus, 17 load cases for unsymmetrical buildings
EL = ± ELy ± 0.3ELz ± 0.3ELx
± EL ± 0.3EL ± 0.3EL
1.7 (DL + LL)  z x y
1.3 (DL + LL ± (ELx± 0.3ELy)) • Alternately, SRSS Method may be employed as ::
1.3 (DL + LL ± (ELy±0.3ELx))
1.7 (DL ± (ELx ± 0.3ELy)) EL = (ELx )2 + (ELy )2 + (ELz )2
1.7 (DL ± (ELy±0.3ELx)) • If any one component is not being considered,
the corresponding response quantity is dropped.
325 326

55