SEAONC Spring Seminar

Additional Slides

FEMA 356 Example: Concrete Shear Wall

Building

Presenter:

RUSSELL BERKOWITZ, S.E.

 Check Walls Using Nonlinear Static
Procedure (Pushover) (3.3.3)
 Modeling Considerations (3.3.3.2)

• Control node taken as center of mass at the

roof level (3.3.3.2.2)

• Lateral load distribution (3.3.3.2.3)

• At least two vertical distributions for each direction
• For this example, only one distribution is illustrated.
We will use the triangular distribution

Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

 Construct Component Force-Deformation

Relations (6.4.1.2.2)

 Modeling Parameters from Tables:

• Members controlled by flexure (wall line 1)

(Table 6-18)
• Members controlled by shear (wall line 6)
(Table 6-19)

1
 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

Walls On Line 1

6000
C

5000

4000
Moment (kip-ft)

3000

2000
B IO LS CP
1000

0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
Wall Rotation (radians)

Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

Walls On Line 6

1600

1400
B
1200
C
1000
Shear (kips)

800

600

400
IO LS CP
200

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Total Wall Drift Ratio (%)

2
 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis
Bilinear Approx. Pushover for Triangular Distribution

2000 Wall 6 Shear

Wall 6 C.P., Drops to Wall Line 1 Pushover Curve
Yielding
0.4Vy L.S.
1800

1600
(kips)

1400
Wall 6 L.S.

1200
Shear

Wall Line 1 Drops

Capacity
1000 Wall 6 Loses All
Capacity
800
Base

Line 1 Walls Point "B"

Flex Yield
600

400
L.S. Target Displacement

200

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Roof Displacement (in)

Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

 Determine Target Displacement (3.3.3.3.2)

• δt = C0C1C2C3Sa(Te2 / 4π
4π2) g (Eq.
Eq. 3-15)

 C0 = Factor to relate spectral displacements on an

equivalent SDOF system to the roof displacement of the
building MDOF system

• Three methods to calculate C0

• C0 = 1.2 (Table 3-2)

3
 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis
 C1 = Factor to relate expected maximum inelastic
displacements to displacements calculated for linear
response

• Te = 0.35 sec (Eq.

Eq. 3-14)

• R = SaCm / (V
(Vy / W) (Eq.
Eq. 3-16)
• R = Ratio of elastic strength demand to calculated yield
strength coefficient
• R = (1.0 g)(1.0) / (1,410 k / 5,000 k) = 3.55

• C1 = [1.0 + (R-1)TS/Te]/R
• C1 = [1.0 + (3.55-1)(0.61 sec / 0.35 sec)] / 3.55 = 1.57

Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

 C2 = Factor to represent the effect of pinched

hysteretic shape, stiffness and strength
degradation on maximum displacement
response

• Values based on framing systems and Structural

Performance Levels (Table 3-3)

• Can be taken as 1.0 for nonlinear procedures

• C2 = 1.0

4
 Nonlinear Pushover Analysis
 C3 = Factor to represent increased displacements
due to dynamic P-ΔP-Δ effects
• = 1.0 for buildings with positive post-yield
stiffness
|α|(R-1)3/2 / Te
• = 1 + |α (Eq.
Eq. 3-17)
• C3 shall not exceed values set forth in 3.3.1.3
• C3 = 1.0
• C3 = 1.0 Governs

 δt = (1.2)(1.57)(1.0)(1.0)(1.0g)(0.37 sec)2 / 4π
4π2 g
= 2.1”
2.1”

Nonlinear Pushover Analysis (C.P.)

Bilinear Approx. Pushover for Triangular Distribution

2000
Wall 6 Shear
Wall 6 C.P., Drops to Wall Line 1 Pushover Curve
Yielding
0.4Vy L.S.
1800

1600
(kips)

1400
Wall 6 L.S.

1200
Wall Line 1 Drops
Shear

Capacity
1000 Wall 6 Loses All
Capacity
800
Base

Line 1 Walls Point "B"

Flex Yield

600

400
C.P. Target Displacement

200

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Roof Displacement (in)

5
 Summary Of UBC vs. FEMA 356
 The Building was Designed for 1997 UBC

 Shear Walls are Insufficient Per FEMA 356 Linear

Procedures
• Life-Safety Level: D/C = 1.33 (50% Wall Added)
• Collapse Prevention Level: D/C = 2.0
(100% Wall Added)

 Shear Walls are O.K. Using Nonlinear Static

Procedure for L.S., but Fail for C.P.

6
 SEAONC Spring Seminar
Additional Slides

FEMA 356 Example: Special Concentrically

Braced Frame

Presenter:

RAFAEL SABELLI, S.E.

 Safety Objective

Braced-Frame Structural Performance (Table C1-3)

Life Safety
Many braces yield or buckle but do not totally fail. Many connections
may fail.
1.5% Transient Drift; 0.5% Permanent Drift
Collapse Prevention
Extensive yielding and buckling of braces. Many braces and their
connections may fail.
2% Transient or Permanent Drift

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Determining the Response Spectrum

Find Building Latitude and Longitude

Use Mapping Web-site
www.geocode.com
Find Accelerations from Maps
USGS Site
http://eqhazmaps.usgs.gov/
Peak Ground Acceleration
Response at 0.2 and 1.0 second Periods
Modify for Damping
Modify for Soil Type
Construct Response Curve

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

5
 Linear Static Analysis
Calculate Element Demand-to-Capacity Ratios
Start with Darrick Hom’s “Summary of Unreduced Results” Table
Identify the lowest yield force level of the elements
Brace in compression at 36% g
Create “Summary of Reduced Results” Table
Separate “Deformation-Controlled” and “Force-Controlled” elements
Deformation-Controlled Elements
Reduce demand by “m” factor
Force-Controlled Elements
Reduce demand based on yielding elements
Must also consider brace tension capacity: 55% g
Combine tension and compression forces on columns and beams

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Linear Static Analysis

Deformation-Controlled Elements
Braces
(Foundation Uplift)
Force-Controlled Elements
Brace Connections
Braced-Frame Columns
Non-Braced-Frame Columns
Braced-Frame Beams
Chords, Collectors, etc.
Foundations

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

12
 Nonlinear Static Analysis
Modal Distribution Uniform Distribution

0.35

Acceleration (g) 0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Displacement (inches) δt

Pushover Diagrams
DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Nonlinear Static Analysis

Evaluate Performance at Target Displacement
Braces
Some Buckling and Yielding
Exceed Deformation Limits for Life Safety
Braced Frame Columns
No Buckling
Flexural Yielding at Connections
Rotation Exceeds Life-Safety Limit (Exceeds Deformation Limit)
Beams
No Inelasticity
Foundations
Maximum Uplift = 1440 kips < 3500 kips (Assumed Capacity)

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

24
 Nonlinear Static Analysis

Evaluate Performance at Target Displacement (cont’d)

Non-Braced Frame Columns
Flexural Yielding at Connections
Rotation Exceeds Life-Safety Limit
Building Did Not Meet Performance Goal

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

What Now?

Is the analysis sufficiently accurate?

Can the building be rehabilitated?

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

25
Is the analysis sufficiently accurate?

Can better knowledge of material properties save the building?

Not likely in this case: only pertinent material property is column Fy
Can more rigorous modeling save the building?
Additional displacement from better foundation modeling?
A must for spread footings
Not likely to be sufficient for pier foundations
Lower column rotational ductility requirements from nonlinear time-history
analysis?
Brace modeling is fundamental
Column axial-flexure interaction must be modeled
Nonlinear time-history analysis typically shows large drifts after brace fracture
Additional stiffness from gravity frames?

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Nonlinear time-history analysis

Accurate brace modeling is fundamental for predicting drift

Negative post-buckling stiffness
Hysteretic degradation
Fracture criterion
Column axial-flexure interaction
Low rotational ductility at high compression forces must be modeled
Analysis may show lower column axial forces at maximum rotation
Higher mode participation
Brace fracture typically leads to large drifts
If results show excessive drift, consider modeling with braces retrofit for
improved fracture life
Tubes filled with concrete
Different sections substituted

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

26
How can the building be rehabilitated?

Increase ductility of failing elements

Decrease drift

Distribute ductility more uniformly

Achieve required displacement through other means

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

How can the building be

rehabilitated?

Increase ductility of failing elements

Strengthen columns
Reduce axial stress
Increase inelastic rotation capacity
Add steel plates to make box columns
Jacket in concrete
Decrease drift
Stiffen building
Add more braced frames to reduce target displacement
Add damping
Reduce Sa (and target displacement)
Change structural system
Steel or concrete shear walls

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

27
How can the building be rehabilitated?

Distribute ductility more uniformly

Change HSS braces to Buckling
Restrained Braces
Link Braces into “Zipper”
configuration
Add vertical trusses to enforce
uniform story drifts
Achieve required displacement
through other means
Change structural system
Seismic isolation
Detach columns from foundation
Connect with hysteretic damper
Zipper
Vertical Truss

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Rehabilitation Strategies

Code-based rehabilitation
No rehabilitation required
Building complies with code
If building is to be retrofit:
Add strength (more braced frames)
Retrofit to meet ductile detailing requirements
Connection details
Member compactness
Strength proportioning
Does not correspond well with actual limiting element
(True of FEMA 356 linear methods as well)

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

28
 Concluding Remarks

FEMA Analysis of CBF Buildings

Linear static analysis
Brace connection check can determine the evaluation
Does not capture column flexural and rotational demands
Demands on foundations can be unrealistic
Brace inelastic behavior is far from linear
Nonlinear static analysis
Brace connection check can determine the evaluation
Column rotation at connection: deformation-controlled?
Modeling of non-braced frame columns is important
Force distribution can determine yielding sequence

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

Concluding Remarks

Performance of CBF Buildings

Columns
Subject to Large Axial-Force Demands
Flexural Members
Flexural Strength Resists Single-Story Mechanisms
Compactness is Required For Inelastic Rotation Capacity
Single-Story Yield Mechanisms
Result of Unfavorable Proportioning of Braces
Lead to Large Column Rotational Demands
Connection Capacity is Fundamental

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

29
 Concluding Remarks

Performance of CBF Buildings

Can braced frames achieve good performance?
How do they achieve inelastic displacement?
Brace axial ductility
Limited, even for SCBF
Column rotational ductility
Very limited
Necessary consequence of brace buckling for typical multi-story buildings
Foundation uplift and rocking
In some cases (low buildings on spread footings)
Diaphragm inelasticity
In some cases (low buildings)
Elastic response possible in some cases

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

The End

Thank you!

Questions?

DASSE Design, Inc. 2005 SEAONC Spring Seminar

30
 SEAONC Spring Seminar
Revised Slides

FEMA 356 Example: Application to the

Seismic Rehabilitation of a Reinforced
Concrete Masonry Structure with a Metal
Deck Diaphragm

Presenter:

ANDREW MEROVICH, S.E.

Slide 21
Rehabilitation to Eliminate Torsional Strength
Irregularity

24.8’ E
40’ CR
* e New braced frame
+
CM
C
A

By adding a braced frame at this location :

 E = 0.12”  d 2(0.3) = 0.6”

 ave = 0.30”
 C = 0.28”
 d = 0.6” Diaphragm is FLEXIBLE and…
 A = 0.51”
TORSIONAL STRENGTH IRREGULARITY IS
ELIMINATED!!!

• Note also: e = 15.2 = 0.19 < 0.20

80
• Improve Line A brace connections so that DCR < 1.5 [But this is not required to proceed
with Linear Static Procedure]
DCR

Slide 25
CMU PIER A (continued)

Va = 66.2k , Vy = 51.1k QCL = VCL = VmL + VsL (EQN 7-8)

M = 778(12) = 0.90 0.25 < 0 .90 < 1.0

Vdv (66.2)(156)

Interpolation : VCL max = [(6)-(0.65/0.75)(2)]{f’m}1/2An (EQN 7-9, 7-10)

VCL max = 4.3 {f’m}1/2An = 4.3 {900psi}1/2 (7.625) (1556) = 153 k

1000

VmL = [4.0 – 1.75 ( M ) ] An {f’m} + 0.25PL 1/2 (EQN 7-11)

Vdv
VmL = [4.0 – 1.75 (0.90)](7.625)(156){900} 1/2 + 0 = 86.5k
1000
VsL = 0.5 (Av/s) fy dv (EQN 7-12) VsL = 0.5 (.31/32) (40)(156) = 30.2 k

VCL = 86.5 + 30.2 = 116.7 k > Va, Vy Adequate shear resistance as a force
controlled action