RESPONSE SPECTRA d.

2010 – emphasis on structural tests or

analyses
Response Spectra – function giving maximum values of ground
response experienced by a single degree of freedom systems 2. Heuristic Vulnerability
when subjected to a given time history of earthquake ground - Delphi method of expert opinion surveys
motion. - Gap: variation in engineers’ knowledge of hazard

*Duration cannot be scaled because stretching or compressing can 3. Empirical Vulnerability

affect spectral content. Increase by repeating portions of record - Pre / post earthquake visual surveys
and decrease by deleting. - Earthquake damage reports
- Gap: little attention to data gathering
*Accelerograms should represent: magnitude, focal depth, type of
fault, distance of transmission, attenuation characteristics 4. Semi-analytical Vulnerability
- visual and gross measurements
Seismic coefficients – adjust motions from a strong motion - vibration period measurement
instrument to convert into appropriate values. - Gap: Uneven coverage of building types
e.g. ratio of acceleration for a spectral content to acceleration in
the ground 5. Analytical Vulnerability
- Pushover / static analysis
RISK ANALYSIS - Dynamic nonlinear analysis
- Gap: analysis tools and data not widely available
*Three generic risk factors: Hazard, Exposure, Vulnerability
ROLE OF CODES
Risk = H*E*V (may have a factor U – uncertainty)
*Purpose of codes: ensure minimum structural resistance to limit
(H in %, E in corresponding units, V in %, therefore risk is in collapse and consequent loss of life.
corresponding units)
Basic Lateral Force Procedures for Minimum Seismic Design
Hazard – likelihood of a certain effect to exposed elements for a (UBC-97):
certain time and degree of confidence 1. Static Lateral Force (SLFP)
2. Dynamic Lateral Force (DLFP)
Exposure – number of elements at risk (lives, buildings, amount of
pesos, etc.) Risk: 10% probability of being exceeded in any 50-year period
- capacity to resist and upper-level earthquake with a
Vulnerability – fraction or percentage of expected loss return period of 475 years without collapse and
without endangering life.
Risk Management Steps:
1. Recognize risk or risk factors NSCP 208.4.8.2 and 208 4.8.3 – Criteria for Appropriate Lateral
2. Impute an estimate Force Procedure
3. Survey the risk or risk factors
4. Keep the risk or risk factors within tolerance Irregular Features of Structures
A. Horizontal
Roles: 1. Soft Story – Lateral stiffness is less than 70% of story
1. Hazard – Geologists, Seismologists above or below or less than 80% of average stiffness of
2. Exposure – Building Officials, LGUs three stories above.
3. Vulnerability – Engineers 2. Weight/Mass Irregularity – Effective mass of story is
more than 150% of the effective mass of adjacent story.
How to measure exposure? 3. Vertical Geometric Irregularity – Horizontal dimension of
1. Ad hoc inventories lateral force resisting system in any story is more than
2. Remote Sensing / Aerial Photogrammetry 130% of adjacent story.
3. Field Survey 4. In-Plane Discontinuity – in-plane offset of lateral load
4. NSO data resisting elements greater than length of elements.
5. Comprehensive building typology needed
- Building Height: low rise (1-3 floors), mid rise (4-7 B. Vertical
floors), high rise (8+ floors) 1. Torsional Irregularity – maximum story drift is more than
- Material: Wood, masonry, concrete, steel 1.2 times the average story drifts of two ends of
structure.
Vulnerability 2. Re-entrant Corner Irregularity – L1/L > 0.15
1. Nominal Vulnerability 3. Diaphragm Discontinuity Irregularity – A1/A > 0.5
- varies with age or vintage of construction 4. Out-of-Plane Offsets Irregularity – out-of-plane offsets of
- building code: vertical elements
a. 1972 – National Building Code 5. Nonparallel Systems Irregularity
b. 1992 – emphasis on structural ductility
c. 2001 – emphasis on near source seismic Base Shear (SLFP)
hazard Zone 4:

Zone 2:
Simplified Approach – buildings of not more than three stories in
height.
*Study definition of terms for earthquake loads.
Other Notable Terms:
Seismic Dead Load (W) – total dead loads and applicable portions
of other loads (refer to NSCP 208.6.1)
Ω0 – seismic force amplification
Maximum Story Drift:
ΔM ≤ 0.025*(story height), for T < 0.7 seconds
ΔM ≤ 0.020*(story height), for T > 0.7 seconds
Period T using Method B:
TB = 1.3 TA (for Zone 4)
TB = 1.4 TA (for Zone 2)
DYNAMIC ANALYSIS
*NSCP Figure 208-3. Design Response Spectrum
*Damping Ratio = 0.05 (unless a different value is shown to be
consistent with anticipated structural behavior)
Vertical Ground Motion:
- 2/3 of corresponding horizontal ground motion (for
Na ≤ 1.0
- site-specific vertical response spectra for Na > 1.0
Response Spectrum Analysis – utilizing peak dynamic response of
all modes having a significant contribution to total structural
response.
Time History Analysis – analysis of structure’s dynamic response
at each time increment when subjected to specific ground motion
time history.
*The base shear for a given direction, determined using dynamic
analysis must not be less than the value obtained by equivalent
static lateral force method.
Number of Modes – at least 90% of the participating mass of the
structure is included in the calculation of the response. (modal
weight)
sum of effective modal weight of all modes = total design weight of
the building
Reduction of Elastic Response Parameters:
1. Regular Structure – Design Base Shear is not less than
90% of Base Shear computed using SLFP. (Concrete)
2. Regular Structure – Design Base Shear is not less than
80% of Base Shear computed using SLFP. (Steel)
3. Irregular Structures – no reduction.
Number of Time History Analysis
1. Three – maximum response of parameter
2. Seven or more – average value of response parameter
*Design values are obtained by combining corresponding modal
responses  SRSS or CQC
SRSS – square root of sum of squares
CQC – complete quadratic contribution (refined technique)
*Scaling of results: results of dynamic analysis scaled up to match
the values of static analysis as specified in reduction of elastic
response parameters.
Steps in Dynamic Analysis: (NSCP 2010 / UBC 97)
1. Determine stiffness properties and seismic weights
2. Modelling of structure (stiffness and mass matrices)
3. Determine natural periods and modal shapes
4. Determine spectral acceleration
5. Determine effective modal weight (> 90% of seismic
weight)
6. Determine modal base shear (combine using SRSS)
7. Scale modal effective weight and modal base shear
scale ratio = (percent * shear using equivalent lateral
procedure) / modal base shear
8. Determine modal seismic force
9. Determine modal shear force, lateral displacement, story
drift, overturning moments, and torsional moments.
10. Determine P-Δ effect (if ratio of secondary to primary
moment, need not be considered)
FRAGILITY AND VULNERABILITY CURVES
Fragility Curve – relationship between structural performance and
ground motion. Probability that a structure is in a given damage
state due to given ground motion intensity.
Vulnerability – degree of loss to a given element at risk from given
level of hazard. Ratio of expected loss to maximum possible loss.
Damage Probability Matrix – Fragility Curve in a tabular format.
Development of Vulnerability Curve:
*For each intensity, the following procedures are done:
1. Percentage of damaged buildings as y-axis is graphed
with x-axis as damage state (no damage, slight,
moderate, extensive, complete). – Fragility Curve 
Fragility Value
2. For each damage state, a mean damage ratio (MDR) is
assigned.
3. Damage ratio = Σ(MDR x Fragility Value)
*Fragility curves can be expressed as Probability vs PGA or
Probability vs MMI.
Modelling the Fragility Curve
PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
Structural Analysis – determination of the response of a structure
due to external actions (loads).
Types of Structural Analysis Procedure:
1. Linear Static Procedure
- SLFP of NSCP 208.5.2
2. Linear Dynamic Procedure
- DLFP of NSCP 208.6
3. Nonlinear Static Procedure
- Pushover Analysis
4. Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure
- Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Linear – a linear relationship holds between applied forces and
displacements. The stiffness matrix is constant.
Non-Linear – a non-linear relationship between applied forces and
displacements. The stiffness matrix is not constant during the load
application.
Pushover Analysis – incremental static analysis to determine the
force-displacement relationship for a structure or an element.
Applying horizontal loads in prescribed pattern incrementally until
the limit state or collapse condition.
Pushover curve or capacity curve – plot of total lateral force (base
shear) vs displacement of reference point (usually center of mass
of roof level).
*A pushover analysis is an approximation of a nonlinear dynamic
procedure.
*Only applicable for nonlinear structures for which fundamental
mode dominates and is not applicable for certain irregular and
dynamically complex structures.
Types of Pushover Analysis:
1. Force Controlled
- force is incrementally increased
2. Displacement Controlled
- displacement of reference point is incrementally
increased
- preferred type because analysis can be carried out
up to desired level of displacement
Uses of Pushover Analysis:
1. Performance Check of Structures / Assessment and
Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings
- sequence of formation of hinges can be determined
and used for improving the building performance.
(Retrofitting)
2. Performance Based Design
- design buildings according to pre-determined
standards on Immediate Occupancy, Life Safety,
and Collapse Prevention at corresponding levels of
shaking.
Performance point – intersection of demand
spectrum for effective damping and capacity
spectrum.
*Performance point can be obtained using
Coefficient Method by determination of target
displacement.
3. Development of Fragility and Vulnerability Curves
- methods of determining fragility curves:
a. Empirical Method (historical or observed data)
b. Computational Method (analytical)
c. Heuristic Method (experts’ opinion)
*Pushover analysis gives a better understanding of the building
behavior well into the inelastic region.
LIQUEFACTION
Liquefaction – loss of strength of saturated sand subjected to
shear stress where pore water pressure cannot readily escape.
Total Stress = Pore water pressure + effective stress
During earthquake: Pore water pressure increases, effective stress
decreases.
Categories:
1. Flow or Actual Liquefaction
- static equilibrium is destroyed by static or dynamic
loads (earthquake, blasting, pile driving) in a soil
deposit of low residual strength (strength of
liquefied soils)
- failures happen when soil strength is no longer
sufficient to withstand static stresses and often
characterized by large and rapid movements
2. Cyclic Mobility
- triggered by cyclic loading where deformations
developed incrementally due to static and dynamic
stresses
- phenomenon of cumulative deformation without
large strength loss
Sand Boils or Sand Volcanoes – sand, silt, and water erupts
upward under pressure through cracks and flows out onto the
surface.
Factors of Soil Susceptibility:
1. Grain Structure
2. Soil Permeability
3. Soil Density
- loose sands more susceptible
4. Gradation
- uniform and fine sands more susceptible
5. Confining Pressure
6. Geologic History
- old sand deposits less susceptible
Evaluation of Liquefaction:
1. Empirical Analysis
- uses data from sites where liquefaction is known to
have occurred
- assume liquefaction will occur if empirical analysis
do not clearly define occurrence or non-occurrence
2. Analytical Analysis
- specialized soil sampling, testing, and analyses
Factors Affecting Choice of Procedure for Evaluation:
1. Relative costs of analysis
2. Cost of remedial measures vs cost of repairs
3. Possible risks
4. Public perception
Liquefaction Potential Analysis (Simplified Procedure)
- Factor of Safety: FS ≥ 1.00
 - applicable for expected peak horizontal acceleration - potential for large compressive stress in the pile tip
less than 0.5g - avoid friction piles in loose to medium compact
1. Identify potentially liquefiable layers. sands in seismic regions
2. Calculate shear stress required to cause liquefaction - pile head should have a ductile moment connection
(resisting forces). to the cap that is capable of forming a plastic hinge
3. Calculation of design earthquake’s effects on critical - pile reinforcing steel must extend into pile caps
zone (driving forces). - closely spaced spiral ties are necessary
4. Calculate factor of safety against liquefaction ≥ 1.00 - batter pile – pile driven at an angle to resist lateral
(resisting divided by driving) forces
- preferred design of seismically loaded pile
Remedial Measures: foundation: no batter piles and horizontal forces
1. Avoid Liquefaction Susceptible Soils resisted by reaction of substructure elements above
2. Build Liquefaction Resistant Structures piles against the soil
- designing the foundation
3. Improve the Soil Piers and Caissons
- due to great stiffness and brittleness (often
FOUNDATION DESIGN unreinforced), they may fail and crack in bending

Foundation Response: RETAINING STRUCTURES

1. Reaction of building foundation against ground in motion.
2. Ground movements dominate as foundation moves with
ground.
3. Irregularities or discontinuities in foundation shape or
load distribution may result in extraordinary stresses at
any point.
4. Minimize relative movements between foundation
elements.
Seismic Force: V = Cs (seismic coefficient) * W
Spread Foundations on Clay
- ultimate strength under cyclic loading will generally
not exceed ultimate strength under static loading
- Traditional Factor of Safety = 3.0
- Actual FS = 2.25 (increase of allowable bearing
capacity up to 1/3)
- Effective FS = 1.84 (enough to survive an
earthquake, degradation up to 20% of clay strength)
- observable consolidation should not occur during an
earthquake because of cohesion
Spread Foundations on Sand
A. Effect on Load Bearing Capacity (determination of
effective angle of internal friction Φ’)
1. Zeevaert Procedure
a. angle of internal friction directly affected by
earthquake = 25° to 35°
b. bearing capacity of dense sands not affected during
earthquakes
c. conservative
2. Okamoto Procedure
*Forces during earthquake = approximate dynamic analysis by
adding inertial forces to static analysis.
Assumptions:
1. Equivalent static analysis for seismic soil forces =
Coulumb’s Sliding Wedge Theory
2. Dynamic strength soil parameters = cohesion and angle
of internal friction = same with static analysis
3. Void ratio does not change during earthquake
4. Pore water pressure changes as effect of inertial force
only
Active Force, No Groundwater
- position of failure plane obtaining maximum value of
active force determined by trial
- direction of ground motion is selected to obtain
maximum seismic active force
- slope of critical seismic failure is flatter than static
active case
- transformed section – wall and backfill is rotated
forward by an angle
- Coulumb’s procedure is done using transformed
values (*)
- coefficient of active seismic earth pressure (using
Mononobe-Okabe solution)
- location of resultant force: affected by wall
geometry, bracing, anchors, and departures from
simple gravity wall case
- pressure distribution: case of static loading with
similar geometry may be used as a guide

- FS against ultimate bearing capacity is generally 5

to 10.
- unlike clay, increase of allowable bearing capacity
in sand is not permitted
B. Horizontal Loads
- net static resistance = (kp – ka)
- during earthquake: active pressure increases,
passive pressure decreases

Pile Foundations
- during shaking, pile will move with the soil
- splices and pile-cap connections should have
sufficient strength to develop full bending strength
of pile
 *Wall performance is a function of average value of acceleration
rather than peak (for buildings) = approximated at 2/3 of design
earthquake peak acceleration

SEISMIC ISOLATION

Seismic Isolation
- detaching the building from ground to reduce or
prevent earthquake motion from being transmitted
up to the building
- reduce floor acceleration and interstory drifts
- introduce flexibility at base of structure
- introduce damping elements to restrict amplitude of
motion

*Mechanical energy dissipaters and elastomers with high damping

Active Force, With Groundwater
- position of failure plane obtaining maximum value of
seismic active soil force and seismic water force
determined by trial
- seismic water force: static weight of water in the soil
voids + static buoyed weight of the soil (neutral
weight of wedge)
- neutral weight of wedge = volume of trial wedge *
unit weight of water
- Mononobe-Okabe solution limited to:
a. vertical wall (β = 0)
b. wall friction is neglected (δ = 0)
c. vertical acceleration is neglected (av = 0)
properties were developed.
Development Contributions:
1. Development of reliable software for computer analysis
2. Development of shaking tables
3. Development in skills of engineering seismology
community
Basic Elements of Seismic Isolation Systems:
1. Flexible mounting
- lengthen the period of vibration to reduce force
response
2. Damper or energy dissipater
- control relative deflections between building and
ground
3. Means of providing rigidity under low load levels

Devices:
1. Elastomeric Bearings
2. Rollers
3. Sleeved Piles
4. Rocking Foundations
5. Cable Suspension

*Increasing the damping, the displacement and forces at a given

period decreases and reduces sensitivity to variations due to
ground motion.

Hysteretic Energy Dissipation – one of the most effective means of

providing substantial damping.

Hysteric – offset in loading and unloading curves under cyclic

loading.
Passive Forces, No Groundwater
- direction of ground movement selected to minimize Feasibility of Seismic Isolation:
passive resistance to wall movement 1. Subsoil has no predominance of long period ground
- passive force resultant assumed to be horizontal, shaking.
acting on a vertical face with zero wall friction 2. Structure two stories or more.
- transformed section: similar to active case but tilted 3. Site permits horizontal displacements of 8 inches or
towards the backfill by a transforming angle more.
- Mononobe-Okabe solution: for vertical wall and zero 4. Structure is fairly squat.
angle wall of friction only 5. Wind lateral and non-earthquake loads ≤ 10 % of
- location of resultant: similar to active case building weight.

Passive Force, With Groundwater Assessment Guidelines for Seismic Isolation:

- assumes vertical wall with zero wall friction A. New Construction
- analysis is similar to active force with groundwater 1. Fundamental period of 1.0 second or less.
- transformed section not possible - effective for low to medium rise buildings
- Mononobe-Okabe solution similar to active forces 2. Stiff soil (effective isolation)
 3. Adjacent Structures
- should be able to allow displacements of 8 to 20
inches
B. Retrofit of Existing Structures
*The International Building Code (IBC) is a better code for new
seismically isolated buildings.
Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) = 10% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years (475-year return period)
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) = 2% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years (2500-year return period)
Conditions for Sufficiency of Static Analysis:
1. Structure located in site of acceleration < 0.6g
2. Soil classification = A to D
3. Building height above isolation plate = not more than 4
stories or 65 feet
4. Effective period not more than 3.0 seconds
5. Effective period > 3 times fixed base period
6. Structural system above isolation plate regular
Dynamic Analysis – in the form of response spectrum analysis or
time-history analysis.
Design Displacement is a function of:
1. Spectral Coefficients
- function of MCE 5% damped spectral acceleration
and site coefficient
2. Isolated Periods
- weight of building and minimum effective horizontal
stiffness
3. Damping Coefficients
*Total Design Displacements = function of plan dimensions of
isolation plane, actual eccentricity plus 5% eccentricity, and design
displacements.
If design displacements and forces are below minimum design
forces:
- total design displacement = 90% of total design
displacement from static analysis
- total maximum displacement = 80% of total
maximum displacement from static analysis
Drift Limitations
- Static Analysis = should not exceed 0.015 hsx
- Response Spectrum Analysis = should not exceed
0.015 hsx
- Time History Analysis = should not exceed 0.020 hsx
*The bearing location should permit access for inspection and
replacement.
Locations of Seismic Isolation Bearings:
1. Below the sub-basement
2. Bottom of first story columns
3. Top of basement columns
4. Top of first story columns
Connection Details:
1. Upper surface of bearing must be able to move freely
horizontally.
2. Connections have the capacity of transferring maximum
seismic forces between substructure and superstructure.
3. Ease of construction.
*Design should safely support maximum gravity service loads and
provide period shift and hysteric damping.
Steps:
1. Minimum required plan size
2. Total rubber thickness or dimensions of isolator
3. Damping characteristics of isolator system
4. Performance of bearings
Design of Elastomeric Isolators
1. Determine shape factor S. Typical value of S is between
10 and 20.
2. Horizontal Stiffness of rubber = (shear modulus * area) /
rubber thickness
3. Maximum shear strain = maximum horizontal
displacement / rubber thickness
4. Vertical Stiffness of rubber = (compression modulus of
steel-rubber * area of steel plate) / rubber thickness
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION
Free-field – site without the building and its foundation.
*Assumption of fixed base is valid only for building founded on
rock.
Soil Structure Interaction (SSI) – response of soil influences motion
of structure and structure influences the response of soil. (Can be
neglected in light structures in stiff soils)
*Soft soils can elongate seismic wave period and also SSI can
elongate the period of the structure  Resonance may occur.
SSI Mechanism:
1. Seismic waves propagate upward the soil and usually
amplified
2. Base of the structure will be subjected to average
horizontal displacement and rocking  Kinematic
Interaction
3. The base will apply inertial loading to the structure
4. The structure will cause a demand to supporting soils to
resist transverse shear and overturning moments 
Inertial Interaction  Soil Deformation
5. Motion at base of structure modified
SSI Analysis: (Free Field + Interaction)
1. Compute free field response forces at site
2. Study superstructure mounted on spring dashpot system
subjected to (1)
*For stiffness ratio, larger values indicate relatively stiff structure on
relatively soft soil.
*Fixed-base condition = zero stiffness ratio
Methods of Analysis:
1. Direct Method
- entire soil-foundation-structure system is modeled
and analyzed in a single step
- free-field input motions are specified at base and
sides of model (finite element method)
2. Multistep Method
- principle of superposition
- two primary causes of SSI:
 a. inability of foundation to match free-field
deformation
b. effect of dynamic response on structure-
foundation system on the movement of
supporting soil
- in kinematic interaction = massless structure 
foundation input motion
- foundation input motion  in inertial interaction =
mass of structure lumped at center