10/30/2017

What’s New In ASCE 7-16?

Ronald O. Hamburger SE, SECB

Senior Principal
Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc.

Presented to:
TMS
San Diego, CA
Nov. 4 2017

www.sgh.com

The Big Changes

• Title Change
• Chapter 1 – Performance Goals
– Service & Function
– Reliability Targets
– Updated Hazard Maps
• New Chapter on Tsunami Loads
• New Appendix on Fire Effects
• Complete Revision of Seismic Response History
Analysis Procedures
• New Seismic Site Class Coefficients
• New Cladding Wind Pressure Coefficients

1
 10/30/2017

Title Change (also 2 Volumes)

Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for

Buildings and Other Structures
• Hazard levels
• Intended Performance Goals
• Seismic detailing
• Protection against wind borne
debris

Chapter 1
Performance
Goals

2
 10/30/2017

1.3.3 Functionality
• Risk category IV structures and systems designed to
provide reasonable probability of functionality given any
of the design level hazards (ice, flood, rain, seismic,
snow, tsunami, wind)
• Affects:
– Outdoor generators
– Radio communications towers
– Roof-mounted HVAC (if necessary for function)

Reliability Goals – Load other than Seismic

Table 1.3-1– Target Reliability other than Seismic, Tsunami or Extraordinary Events

3
 10/30/2017

Reliability Goals & Performance

Reliability Goals Seismic

Table 1.3-2– Target Reliability for Structural Instability Caused by Earthquake

Table 1.3-3– Target Reliability for Noncritical Member Failures Caused by

Earthquake

4
 10/30/2017

Updated Hazard
Maps

Impact on ASCE 7-16

• New hazard maps for:

– Atmospheric Icing
• ¼” to ½” increase in susceptible areas
• Moderate increase in geographic coverage
– Seismic
• +/- 10% changes many places
• +/- 20% a few places
– Wind
• 10 – 15 mph reduction across non-hurricane prone regions
– Snow

10

5
 10/30/2017

Wind Maps
• ASCE 7-10 • ASCE 7-16

11

Snow Maps

6
 10/30/2017

Snow Maps

Chapter 6
Tsunami

7
 10/30/2017

Scope

• Risk Category III & IV Structures within the Tsunami

Design Zone
• Other structures designated by building official
• Tsunamic Design Zone
– Based on 2,475 year tsunami run-up hazard
– Digital maps for: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon,
Washington

Tsunami Design Zone

8
 10/30/2017

Tsunami Design Procedure

• Based on Tsunami Amplitude, shoreline distance,

ground elevation and friction, determine:
– Flood elevation
– Flood velocity

Design Evaluations

• Design for:
– Hydrodynamic forces
– Buoyancy
– Waterborne debris impact
• Load Case 1
– Maximum inundation depth + buoyancy
• Load Case 2
– 2/3 Maximum inundation depth
– Maximum velocity
• Load Case 3
– Maximum inundation depth
– 1/3 maximum velocity

9
 10/30/2017

Evaluation Approach

• Linear static or nonlinear static procedure

• ASCE 41 Acceptance Criteria
– Risk Category II or III buildings – Collapse Prevention
– Risk Category IV buildings – Immediate Occupancy

Chapter 12
Seismic

10
 10/30/2017

Classical Design Response Spectrum

Sa(T)
SDS

SD1/T
SD1

SD1TL/(T)2

0.2 1 TL T
2
3
2
3

Where hazard is controlled by large-magnitude earthquakes, and site soils

are soft, the standard spectral shape is not appropriate

Response Spectrum Rules

Sa(T) SD1
SDS Sa(T)
SDS
SD1/T SD1/T
SD1

SD1TL/(T)2
SD1TL/(T)2

0.2 1 TL T 0.2 1 TL T

• Site specific site response analysis required where:

– Site Class E and SS > 1.0
– Site Class D or E S1 > 0.2g

11
 10/30/2017

Response Spectrum Rules

• Exceptions
– Site Class E,
• Site Class “C” Fa is used
– Site Class D,
• ⁄ for values of T< 1.5Ts
• Cs factored by 1.5 for T>1.5TS

• Scaling of Response Spectrum Results

– Forces scaled to 100% of ELF Base Shear

Response History Analysis

• Linear procedure moved to Chapter 12

• Completely rewritten nonlinear procedure (Chapter 16)
– Must perform linear analysis first
– Ground Motions
• Uniform Hazard or Conditional Mean Spectrum
• 11 motions minimum
• Global Evaluation
– Unacceptable Runs
– Transient Drift
– Residual Drift
• Component Evaluations
– Reliability-based with load and resistance factors

24

12
 10/30/2017

Chapters 26-30
Wind

ASCE 7-10 v ASCE 7-16

• Except in hurricane areas, wind speeds have reduced by

about 10%
– More weather stations available now
– Increased forestation & urbanization
– Reliabilities of old maps “not right”
• At high altitude locations wind pressures can be reduced
considering the reduced density altitude

13
 10/30/2017

High Altitude Wind Reduction

Reno, Tahoe, Denver, Santa Fe

27

Flat Roof Pressures

2010 2016

14
 10/30/2017

Appendix E
Fire Effects
Appendix

Fire Effects

• All structures comply with applicable fire protection

requirements of building code, or
• Performance-based approach
– Design fire scenarios
• Structural stability
• Egress

15
 10/30/2017

On-line
Hazard Tool

On-line Hazard Tool

• Replaces USGS and ATC Seismic and Wind Hazard

applets
• Input:
– Lattitude
– Longitude
– Site Class
• Output:
– Seismic: SS SMS, SDS, S1, SM1, SD1 + response spectra
– Ground Snow Load
– Basic Wind Speed
– Atmospheric Icing Thickness

16
 10/30/2017

Summary

• Significant changes in wind and seismic design

• Enhanced recognition of performance-based procedures
• First ever adoption of Tsunami criteria
• Web-based Hazard Lookup
• Is now available for purchase
• Is referenced in IBC 2018

Thank you!

17