Seismic Design of Building Structures

Seismic analysis
and design methods

Ricardo Monteiro
UME Graduate School, IUSS Pavia

Overview
Introduction
There are 2 philosophy for seismic analysis:

Force-based design methods

• Force-based procedures are currently the most used design methods in practice, and
corresponding provisions are widely available in almost all design codes worldwide.
• For this reason in most of this section force-based procedures are discussed in order to
ensure their meaningful application in design practice.
• However, force-based procedures are affected by several drawbacks that should be
known in order to avoid serious mistakes.

Displacement-based design methods

• The intensive development of displacement-based design procedures started about 10 to
15 years ago.
• Such procedures are very promising, however they are still mostly confined to the
academic environment.
• In many cases the use of displacement-based design procedures in practice require the
engineer to deviate from current code provisions and take full responsibility for that.
• However, in the near future they will find more and more space in design codes. Hence it
is important to be aware of some principles of displacement based design method and
they will be given in this lecture

2
 Overview
Introduction
There are 2 philosophy for seismic analysis:

Force-based design methods

• Force-based procedures are currently the most used design methods in practice, and
corresponding provisions are widely available in almost all design codes worldwide.
• For this reason in most of this section force-based procedures are discussed in order to
ensure their meaningful application in design practice.
• However, force-based procedures are affected by several drawbacks that should be
known in order to avoid serious mistakes.

Displacement-based design methods

• The intensive development of displacement-based design procedures started about 10 to
15 years ago.
• Such procedures are very promising, however they are still mostly confined to the
academic environment.
• In many cases the use of displacement-based design procedures in practice require the
engineer to deviate from current code provisions and take full responsibility for that.
• However, in the near future they will find more and more space in design codes. Hence it
is important to be aware of some principles of displacement based design method and
they will be given in this lecture

Force based design – overview

Overview of Force Based Design Method
Equivalent Response Non linear Non lineal time
lateral force spectrum static analysis history
method method analysis
Dynamic Linear SDOF Linear MDOF Non linear SDOF Non linear
Model system system system MDOF system

Material Model Linear Linear Non linear Non linear

Modes of Fundamental All Fundamental ---
vibration mode only mode only
considered
Consideration Q-factor Q-factor Non lineal model Non linear model
of material non
linearities
Seismic action Design spectrum Design spectrum Design spectrum Time history
Typical Design Design Assessment Design/Assessm
application ent

Effort Low Medium Medium High

4
 Structural Dynamics Review
Overview of Structural Dynamic
SDOF
SDOFsystems
System
ua absolute displacement
u relative displacement
ug ground displacement
k stiffness
c damping
m mass

The equilibrium equation is:

&&a + cu& + ku = 0
mu && + cu& + ku = −mu
→ mu &&g

Relative equations Effective earthquake force

This equation is a second order inhomogeneous differential equation and can be solved
analytically for simple excitations (harmonic). For seismic excitation, it is typically solved
numerically either solving the Duhamel integral or integrating with a numerical method the
equation of motion

MDOF systems

MDOF System
M mass matrix
K stiffness matrix
C damping matrix (usually defined as a combination of M and K)
1 unitary vector

The equilibrium equation is:

&&a + Cu& + Ku = 0
Mu && a = u
if u && + 1 u
&&g → Mu
&& + Cu& + Ku = −M 1 u
&&g

6
 MDOF systems
Background on mode of vibration
Free vibration of non dissipative MDOF systems:

&& + Ku = 0
Mu
Let us express the solution as:

ui ( t ) = Φi q(t) i = 1..n

Substituting in the equation of motion:

&q&( t )
M φ &q&( t ) + Kφ q( t ) = 0 → M φ = −Kφ
q( t )
&q&( t )
po sin g = −ω2 → &q&( t ) + ω2q( t ) = 0
q( t )
The solution like for the SDOF system is of the type:

q( t ) = R sin (ωt + ϑ)
Substituting in the equation of motion:
7

MDOF systems
(K - ω2M)φ = 0
if K - ω2M ≠ 0 → φ = 0 that is a solution but not a very interestin g one!

We look for the solution of:

K - ω2M = 0

ωi2 are the eigenvalue of the matrix above and are the pulsation of the MDOF system
Φi are the eigenvector of the matrix above and are the represent the vibration shape of the
MDOF system. They are not defined in term of magnitude (if Φi is a solution, also αΦ
Φi is a
solution)

If we define:

M* = φ tMφ M* and K* are diagonal matrixes because the eigenvector are orthogonal
K * = φ tKφ
The equation of motion becomes:
&& + Ku = −M 1 u
Mu && + φ tKφφ = −φ tM 1 u
&&g → φ tMφq && + K *q = −φ tM 1 u
&&g → M*q &&g

8
 MDOF systems
Important outcome!

• The equation of motion of the original system is transformed in n equation of motion of

SDOF systems, with n the number of degree of freedom of the MDOF system

• If the system is dissipative, but ΦtCΦ

Φ is diagonal (this is certainly the case when C is
expressed as C=αM+βK) what is true for the non dissipative MDOF system is valid also for
the dissipative one

• n can be less than the number of degree of freedom of the system, because if n is big
enough, the modes above n do not contribute to the response of the system
Modal equation of motion:
t
&q&i + 2ν iωiq& i + ωi2qi = − φt i M 1 u
&&g      → &q&i + 2ν iωiq& i + ωi2qi = −Γiu
&&g
φitM 1
φi Mφi Γi = t
φi Mφi
mod al partecipation facor

If we define the” effective modal mass” like: Criterion to

select
n
the n of vibration
* 2 *
m i,eff = Γi m i   → ∑ m*i,eff → m tot = total mass of the system
if n is big enough modes to
i
consider
9
Course “Seismic Design of Building Structures” Page 5-23

• MDOF system with eigenmodes and equivalent SDOF systems

MDOF Eigenmodes and
MDOF System equivalent static forces

systems
m3
f31 f32 f33
hs
m2
f21 f22 f23

h hs h3
m1 h2 f11 f12 f13
hs h1
EI

Vb Vb1 Vb2 Vb3

Mb Mb1 Mb2 Mb3

MDOF Set of equivalent SDOF systems

System and equivalent static forces
m1*=2.180m
m3
m1*Sa1
hs
m2
m2*=0.646m
m3*=0.174m
h1*=2.50hs

h hs
m1 m2*Sa2
h2*=0.72hs

h3*=0.48hs

m3*Sa3
hs
EI EI1* EI2* EI3*
Vb Vb1 Vb2 Vb3
Mb Mb1 Mb2 Mb3
10

5 Seismic design methods (based on course notes by A. Dazio)

 Equivalent lateral
Equivalent force
lateral method
forces
Equivalent lateral forces
•
• The
It is adynamic
simple linear
Equivalent
It is a simple linear static
actionstatic
of theanalysis
earthquake on the
method
lateral
analysis method allowed
structure
allowed
forces
by almost all design codes worldwide.
is replaced
by almost by lateral
all design codesstatic forces
worldwide.
• called “equivalent Equivalent
lateral forces”. lateral forces
The dynamic action of the earthquake on the structure is replaced by lateral static forces
••
••
It
Theis amethods
called simple linear
can be
“equivalent Equivalent
static analysis
applied
lateral to structural
forces”. lateral
methodsystems
allowed by
which forces
almost
can all
bedesign codes by
represented worldwide.
The dynamic action of the earthquake on the structure is replaced by lateral static forces
two 2D
structural
The
It is amethods
simplemodels,
can be
linear and which
applied
static behaviour
to
analysis structural
method is systems
not substantially
allowed which
by influenced
can
almost bedesign
all by
represented higher
codes by modes
two 2Dof
worldwide.
called
vibration.
structural “equivalent
models, lateral forces”.
•• The
It is• adynamic
simple for actionand
linear
which
of the
static
behaviouron
earthquake
analysis method
is the
not structure
substantially
allowed by
influenced
is replaced
almost
by higher
by lateral modes
codesstatic forcesof
• The methods
vibration.Criteria can be applied
regularity to be
shall structural
met systems which can all
bedesign
represented worldwide.
by two 2D
• called
The dynamic“equivalent lateral
action of theforces”.
earthquake
•
structural
The • methods
The models,
fundamental
Criteria for
can
and
be
which
period
regularity behaviour
shall
applied should
to be metbeon
structural
is the
not structure
smaller
systems than is replaced
substantially
2 seconds
which
by lateral
influenced static
by higher
can be represented by two 2D
forcesof
modes
called
vibration. “equivalent lateral forces”.
• The
structural Higher vibration
fundamental
models, modes
period
andapplied
which to are neglected.
should
behaviourbe is
smaller than 2 seconds
not substantially influenced by higher
• The• methods
Criteria can
for be
regularity shall structural
be met systems which can be represented by modes
two 2Dof
• The fundamental period of vibration
• Higher vibration modes are neglected.
vibration. of the building can be estimated by means of simple
structural models, and period
which behaviour is not substantially influenced by higher modes of
• The•• fundamental
equations The fundamental
or for
Criteria by means
periodofofashall
regularity
should
proper
vibration
be
bethe
of
met
smaller
structural than
model.
building can2 seconds
The besecond option
estimated by is recommended.
means of simple
vibration.
• Higher vibration modes are neglected.
• Torsional
equations
•• The effects
or by are
means
fundamental taken
of a
periodinto account
proper
should in
structuralan approximate
model. The
be smaller than 2 seconds way
second (e.i. increasing
option is the forces to
recommended.
•• The Criteria
fundamentalfor regularity
period of shall be met
vibration of the building can be estimated by means of simple
account
Torsional
•• The for
Higher torsion)
effects are taken
vibration modes intoare
account in an approximate way (e.i. increasing the forces to
neglected.
equations fundamental
by meansperiod
ortorsion) of athe should
proper be smaller
structural than The
model. 2 seconds
second option is recommended.
•• The
account inelastic
for
The• fundamental behaviour
period of
of structure
vibration of is
the also taken
building into
can beaccount
estimatedin anbyapproximate way
means of simple
•• Torsional Higher vibration
effects are modes
taken intoare neglected.
account in an approximate way (e.i. increasing the forces
through
The inelastic
equations inelastic
or by design
behaviour
means spectra.
of athe
of structure
proper is alsomodel.
structural taken The
into second
accountoption
in an approximate
is way to
recommended.
• The
account fundamental
for torsion) period of vibration of the building can be estimated by means of simple
• through
Torsionalinelastic
effects design
are spectra.
taken into account in an approximate way (e.i. increasing the forces to
• equations
The inelastic or by means
behaviour of
of athe
proper structural
structure is alsomodel.
taken The
into second
accountoption is recommended.
in an approximate way
• account
Torsional for torsion)
effects are taken into account in an approximate way (e.i. increasing the forces to
through inelastic design spectra.
• The inelastic
account behaviour of the structure is also taken into account in an approximate way
for torsion)
• through
The inelastic inelastic design of
behaviour spectra.
the structure is also taken into account in an approximate way
through inelastic design spectra.

11

Equivalent lateral force method

F = λ mtot Sa (T1,ν, q, γf) → total equivalent lateral force

mtot : total mass of the building

Sa : spectral value taken from the design acceleration spectrum at the fundamental period of
the building T1; the spectrum is computed assuming a damping ratio ν and a behaviour factor
q. Additional parameters, like e.g. the importance factor γf can be taken into account while
computing the spectral ordinate
λ : Correction factor ranging between 0.85 and 1.0. Some codes (e.g. EC8) use to account
for the fact that in buildings with at least three storeys and translational degrees of freedom in
each horizontal direction, the effective modal mass is about 85% of the total mass.
mihi
F shall be distributed along the building height (
Fi = F − Fn' ) i =n

∑m h
j=1
j j

Fi , mi, hi: equivalent lateral force, mass and

height on floor i
F’n: special single force acting at the top of the
building. Some codes use this force to increase
the shear force in the upper storeys and the
bending moment at the base
EC8: Fn’ = 0
12
 Equivalent
Equivalent lateral force lateral
method force method
Distribution of the lateral forces over the height of the
building

d j Gk 2 Qk j
f dj Fd
di Gk 2Qk i
i
Often distribution is based on the assumption of a
linear deformed shape:

z j Gk 2 Qk j
f dj Fd
zi Gk 2Qk i
i
• zi and zj: Height of the storeys i and j
• For a regular structure (constant storey height and
masses) a triangular force distribution results.
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 49
13

Equivalent lateral force method

Modeling issues

1) Substitute beam

The simplest structural model which allows the analysis of the seismic action on a building is
the cantilever substitute beam. The substitute beam runs through the centres of stiffness of all
storeys.
49
The clamping of the substitute beam is set in correspondence of the fix horizon. The fix horizon
corresponds to the location where for the first time a storey floor provides a relatively stiff
horizontal bearing. In cases where the foundation of the building features a stiff basement, the
fix horizon normally corresponds to the level of the ground storey floor. Independently of the
location of the fix horizon, internal forces must be tracked and considered until they are
introduced into the ground.

The total mass of the building is distributed among the storey masses acting at the level of the
storey floors.

14
 Equivalent lateral force method
2) Underground

The flexibility of the underground in many cases is not considered. With soft soils, the clamping
of the substitute beam can be modelled by means of springs. In this case the fix horizon shall
be taken at the foundation level.

For additional information on soil-structure-interaction see e.g.[Cho07] and [Kra96]

Spring stiffness for circular foundation :

4Gr
Vertical → kv =
1- ν
32(1 - ν ) G r
Horizontal → k h =
7 - 8ν
8G r 3
Rotation → k ϕ =
3(1 - ν )
G shear modulus
ν Poisson ratio
r Radius of foundation

15

Equivalent lateral force method

3) Regularity

To use the method of equivalent lateral force, the building is supposed to be regular in plan
and elevation. The design codes give the criteria to consider a building as regular in plan and
elevation.

4) Stiffness

The members used to assemble the structural model should be characterized by a realistic
stiffness up to yielding. For members made of masonry or reinforced concrete the effect of
cracking should be properly taken into account.
Computations carried out using a stiffness based on the properties of the uncracked sections
result normally in a gross overestimation of the sectional forces and in a gross underestimation
of the deformations.

16
 Equivalent lateral force method
Estimating the natural period of buildings
4) Fundamental period
Empirical
Crude formula: equations:
• As a function of the number of storeys (n):
n
Plenty of crude formula 10fundamental period of vibration of structures
exists to estimate the
T1 [ s] f1 [Hz ]
10
T1= 0.1 sec x number of storey n
• As a function of the building height (SIA 261):
Eurocode 8:
T1 CtH0.75 [ s ]
T1=C h0.75
• H= Building height in [m]
With •C=0.085
Factorforaccounting
steel frame buildings, C=0.075 forsystem:
for the structrual RC frame buildings, C=0.05 for all the
other buildings
• Steel moment resisting frames C = 0.085
t
• RC moment resisting frames Ct = 0.075
• All other types of structures Ct = 0.050

• Equations were developed for force-based design To be conservative, they

tend to underestimate the actual period.
• Equations were developed for structures in areas of high seismicity. For areas
of low seismicity, these equations underestimate the actual period by large.
• It is not recommended to use these equations. 17
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 4

Rayleigh Method
Rayleigh formula:

The natural vibration frequency of structures can be estimated by means of the Rayleigh
method. The method is based on the principle of conservation of energy (see [Cho07]). If di is
the horizontal displacement of the floor i:

1 1 ∑ Fd i
i i
= f1 = n
T1 2π 4
∑m d
i
2
i i

Please not that the shape of the distribution of Fi does have an influence on T1, while the
magnitute of the forces does not.

Finite element analysis:

Perform a modal analysis to define the first vibration mode.

18
 Rayleigh Method
Estimating the natural period of buildings

Rayleigh method – cont. d3

Choice of force vector F: d2

In practice one chooses typically one of the
following two vectors:
d1

1) Force proportional to storey masses 15.01.2013

x0 = e (for 3 DDL: e=[1 1 1]T)

d3
F1=3f

2) Triangular distribution
F1=2f d2

F1=f d1

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 7

19

Equivalent
Equivalent lateral
lateral force force
method method – EC8
Excitation in several directions
• In reality, an earthquake corresponds to a ground movement in the 3 directions
x, y, z. The effect of the rotational components ( x, y, z) is neglected.
• EC 8:
• If the vertical PGA is larger than avg>0.25g it should be considered for: 7
• Structural elements cantilevering out by more than 5m
• Beams supporting columns
• Large span structures (L>20m)
• In base isolated structures (not to be designed with ELF)

• The two horizontal and – if necessary – the vertical component are

combined using the following rule:

1 .0 E Edx " " 0 .3 E Edy " " 0 .3 E Edz • «+» signifies «combined
with»
0 . 3 E Edx " " 1 . 0 E Edy " " 0 .3 E Edz • EEdx action effets due to
excitation in x-direction
0 . 3 E Edx " " 0 .3 E Edy " " 1 .0 E Edz

20
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 52
7 Load effects and considerations

7.1 The design of structures shall consider seismic zoning, site characteristics, building importance,
Equivalent lateral force method –
structural system and height.

7.2 SANS10160-4
For the definition of seismic design situations, see SANS 10160-1.

7.3 The seismic loads to be used in the load combinations set out in SANS 10160-1 shall be
determined using the following equation:

Ed = ρ × γ 1 ( Ex " + " 0,3Ey ) + Ev (5)

where

γ1 is the building importance factor as given in table 3;

Ed is the design seismic load on an element of the structure to be used in the seismic load
combination covered in SANS 10160-1 (where, Ad =Ed);
SANS 10160-4:2010
Ev 1is the vertical component of seismic action (see 8.7);
Edition
Ex,Ey is the seismic load in two orthogonal directions, x and y, resulting from the application of
the seismic forces in clause 8 to the structure;
⎛ 3 ⎞
⎜ vx × L ⎟
r = max ⎜ wx ⎟
(8)
20 i ⎜ V i ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
21
where

ri is the maximum shear ratio for storey i;

vx
Equivalent lateral force method –
is the shear force in wall, x, on level, i, expressed in kilonewtons (Kn);

Lwx is the length of wall, x,SANS10160-4

on level, i, expressed in metres (m);

Vi is the total storey shear force at level, i, expressed in kilonewtons (kN).

Table 3 — Importance classes for buildings

1 2 3
Importance
Importance
Buildings factor
class
γi
I Buildings of minor importance for public safety, for example agricultural buildings 0,8
II Ordinary buildings, not belonging to the other categories. 1,0
Buildings for which seismic resistance is of importance in view of the
III consequences associated with a collapse, for example, schools, assembly halls 1,2
and cultural institutions
Buildings for which integrity during earthquakes is of vital importance for
IV 1,4
protection, for example, hospitals, fire stations and power plants
NOTE The numbering of importance classes differ from those in the Eurocode from where these definitions
were taken.

8 Structural analysis 22

8.1 Modelling
 Equivalent lateral force method
Equivalent lateral force method
TORSION

S M
y

x
15.01.2013
Hypothesis in codes concerning torsion:

• Linear elastic system.

• Slabs infinitely rigid in plane.
• Out-of-plane stiffness of slabs and murs is negligible.
• Shear deformations and torsional rigidity of walls are neglible.

23

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 59

Equivalent lateral force method

Equivalent lateral force method
TORSION

Definition of the points M and S

M = Centre of mass
Point where the resultant of the inertia forces acts

S = Stiffness centre
Point where a horizontal force causes only a translaution (and no
rotation) of the slab.
If a torsional moment is applied, the slabs rotates around a
vertical axis through S. 59

n n
I ix x i I iy y i
xs i 1
n ys i 1
n
I ix I iy
i 1 i 1

24
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 60
 Equivalent lateral force method
Efforts tranchants
TORSION – dir. X

Two systems that are statically equivalent:

Ts
edy S Vx Vx S edy
M M
y y

x
15.01.2013
e dy yS yM Sign convention:

Moment Ts for an
excitation in x-dir.:
Ts V x e dy

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 61

25

Equivalent lateral force method

Equivalent
TORSION lateral force method
– dir. X

Shear force due to the Shear force due to the rotation:

translation:

61
x
Vxedy S S Ts
M M
y y

I ix y i
I iy V ix Ts n
2 2
Vix Vx n I ix x i I iy y i
I iy i 1
i 1 I ix x i
V iy Ts n
2 2
Vix = Shear force in wall i I ix x i I iy y i
Vx = Storey shear force i 1
Ts V x e dy
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 62 26
 Equivalent lateral force method
Equivalent lateral force method
TORSION – dir. Y

Two systems that are statically equivalent:

S Ts
S M M

y edx Vy y edx
Vy
x x
15.01.2013
Convention
e dx xS xM
du signe:

Moment Ts for an
excitation in y-dir.: Ts V y e dx

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 63

27

Equivalent lateral force method

Equivalent
TORSION – dir.lateral
Y force method

Shear forces due to the Shear forces due to the rotation:

translation:

y
Ts
S x 63
S
Vy
M M
y y

x x
I ix y i
Vix Ts n
2 2
I ix I ix x i I iy y i
Viy Vy n
i 1

I ix I ix x i
i 1
Viy Ts n
2 2

Viy = Shear force in wall i

I ix x i I iy y i
i 1
Vy = Storey shear force
Ts V y e dx
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 64
28
 Equivalent lateral force method
Equivalent lateral force method
TORSION

Shear force in wall i:

I iy I iy y i
V ix Vx n - Ts n
2 2
I iy I ix x i I iy y i
i 1 i 1
15.01.2013

I ix I ix x i
V iy Vy n Ts n
2 2
I ix I ix x i I iy y i
i 1 i 1

x y : Coordinates of the wall with respect to S

29

Equivalent lateral force method

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 65

Equivalent lateral force method

TORSION

Codes differentiate typically between two types of eccentricity:

- Effective eccentricity of the centre of mass with respect to the

centre of stiffness
- Accidental eccentricity of the centre of mass
This eccentricity accounts for the uncertainty of the
distance between the centre of mass and the centre of
stiffness

S ex M
y

x
30
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 66
 Equivalent lateral force method
Equivalent lateral force method

Effective and accidental eccentricities for the ELF method:

e d ,sup 1 .5 e 0 .05 d (Both EC8 and SANS10160-4)

e d ,inf 0 .5 e 0 .05 d 15.01.2013

e = eccentricity of the resultant inertia force of all storeys above the
considered storey

d = Dimension of the building orthogonal to the considered direction

of excitation

31

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 67

Equivalent lateral
Equivalent lateral force method – summary
force method

Steps of the ELF method:

For each direction of excitation:
1. Modelling of the structure
2. Determine the fundamental period (accounting for cracked stiffness properties)
3. Choose a behaviour factor q
4. Compute the spectral acceleration
5. Compute the total base shear
6. Distribute it over the height
7. Compute the shear force profiles Vx (Vy) for the entire building
8. Distribute Vx (Vy) between the walls of one storey
6
a) Compute the shear forces of the walls for a storey shear force Vx=1kN
(Vy=1kN)
b) Multiply these by the actual value of the storey shear force
9. Compute the bending moment diagram for each wall

32
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 68
Equivalent lateral force method
Response Spectrum Method
Response spectrum method (RSM) Equivalent lateral force method
(ELF)
• Consider all modes • Only the first mode is considered
• or consider the first N* modes with
N*
mi*,eff 90% mtot
i 1

15.01.2013

Base shear due to first mode:

Vd ,1 m1*,eff S d (T1 , q )
Total base shear:
Base shear due to all modes:
N 2 Vd S d (T1 , q ) m j
Vd ,i mn*,eff S d (Tn , q) j
n 1

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 46

33

Response Spectrum Method

Modal analysis
MDOF subjected to base M x Cx K x M e x xg
excitation:

Displacement in modal
coordinates:
x Az
2
Equation for mode i: zi 2 i z
i i z
i i x
i g

46

34
Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 13
 Response
ResponceSpectrum Method
spectrum analysis
Responce spectrum analysis
If the maximum response only and not the response to the entire time history is of interest, the
Responce spectrum analysis
response spectrum method can be applied.
Responce spectrum analysis
If the maximum response only and not the response to the entire time history is of interest, the
The method is based on the combination of the contribution of each vibration mode to the
response spectrum method can be applied.
If the maximum
seismic response
performance only
of the and not the response to the entire time history is of interest, the
building.
The
If themethod
maximum is based
responseon the
onlycombination theofforthe contribution of each vibration
history mode to the the
The response
response spectrum
spectrum methodcan beand
can be not
computed
applied. response to the entire
the considered time
seismic is and
excitation of interest,
the
seismic
response performance
spectrum of the building.
method
maximum
The methodvalue of the
is based on thecan
modal be applied.
coordinate
combination can
of thebe contribution
determined as follows:
of each vibration mode to the
The
The response
method is spectrum
based of can
onthe be computedofforthe
thebuilding.
combination thecontribution
consideredofseismic excitation
each vibration and to
mode thethe
seismic performance
maximum
seismic value of
performance the modal
of the coordinate can be determined as follows:
The response spectrum canbuilding.
be computed for the considered seismic excitation and the
1
q
The = Γ
response
maximum
n,max n S ( ω , ν
d spectrum
value of
n the ) = Γn be
can
n modal Sa (ωn , ν ncan
2 computed
coordinate ) for
be the   →
considered
determined
contributi
un,max excitation
seismic
on of n-mode as follows:= φnqn,maxand the
ω
maximum value of the modal1ncoordinate can be determined as follows:
to total displaceme nt
qn,max = ΓnS d (ωn , ν n ) = Γn 2
Sa (ωn , ν n )     → un,max = φnqn,max
contributi on of n-mode
Where: ω1n to total displaceme nt
q
Γqn : modal
n ,max = Γn S ( ω , ν
participation
d n n ) = Γ
factor
n 1 ofS ( ω ,
2 the n-th mode
a n ν n )      → un,max = φnqn,max
contributi on of n-mode
Where: = Γ S ( ω , ν ) = Γ ω S ( ω , ν )  
to  nt→ un,max = φnqn,max
displaceme
total 
Sdn:,max n d
Spectral n n
displacement n
ω
n2
for a
the n
circularn contributi on of n-mode
eigenfrequency
to total displaceme nt and the modal damping rate
n :: Spectral
modal participation factor
Γ n of the n-th mode
S
Where:
a acceleration for the circular eigenfrequency and the modal damping rate
S d : Spectral displacement for the circular eigenfrequency and the modal damping rate
Where:
Γn : modal participation factor of the n-th mode
The
S maxima
: Spectral of differentfactor
acceleration modes
for of do
the not
circularoccur at the same instant.
eigenfrequency An exact
and the modalcomputation
damping rateof the
Snad :: modal
Γ participation
Spectral displacement for the
the n-th
circular modeeigenfrequency and the modal damping rate
total
S maximum
: Spectral response
displacement on the
forthebasis of
thecircular
circularthe maximum
eigenfrequency modal responses
andthe is
theexact
modalhence impossible.
dampingrate
rate
S
Thea : Spectral
d maxima acceleration
of different for
modes do not occur eigenfrequency
at the same and
instant. An modal damping
computation of the
Different
S : methods
Spectral have been
acceleration for developed
the circular to estimate
eigenfrequency the total maximum
and the response
modal fromrate
damping the
total
a
maximum maximum
modal response
responses. on the basis of the maximum modal responses is hence impossible.
The maxima of different modes do not occur at the same instant. An exact computation of the
Different
The methods have been developed to estimate the total maximum response from the
total maxima
maximum of response
different modes
on the do basisnotof occur at the same
the maximum instant.
modal An exact
responses is computation of the
hence impossible.
maximum
total modal
maximum responses.
response on the basis of the maximum modal responses is hence impossible.
Different methods have been developed to estimate the total maximum response from the
Different methods
maximum have been developed to estimate the total maximum response from the
modal responses.
maximum modal responses.
35

Response Spectrum Method

Combination rules:

“Absolute Sum (ABSSUM)” Combination Rule

n
ui,max ≤ ∑ φijq j,max
1
The assumption that all maxima occur at the same instant and in the same direction yields an
upper bound value for the response quantity. This assumption is commonly too conservative.

“Square-Root-of Sum-of-Squares (SRSS)” Combination Rule

∑ (φ q )
2
ui,max = ij j,max
1

This rule is often used as the standard combination method and yields very good estimates of
the total maximum response if the modes of the system are well separated. If the system has
several modes with similar frequencies the SRSS rule might yield estimates which are
significantly lower than the actual total maximum response.

36
 Response Spectrum Method 15.01.2013

• “Complete Quadratic Combination (CQC)” Combination Rule

n n
ui,max = ∑∑ u
j=1 k =1
( j)
i,max u(i,kmax
)
ρ jk

where :
ui(,max
j)
and ui(,kmax
)
are the max modal responce of mode j and mode k
ρ jk is the modal correlation coefficien t between mode j and mode k
8 ν iν k (ν i + rν k )r 3 / 2
ρ jk =
(1 − r )
2 2
( ) (
+ 4ν iν k r 1 − r 2 + 4 ν i2 + ν k2 r 2 )
This method based on random vibration theory gives exact results if the excitation is
represented by a white noise. If the frequencies of the modes are well spaced apart, the result
converge to those of the SRSS rule. More detailed information on this and other combination 15.01.2013
Modal analysis
rules can be found in [Cho07]

Internal forces: the combination rules used showed for displacements are valid also for
More forces.
internal general:
It isEffective
wrong to modal
compute mass for modeinternal
the maximum i for excitation in thebydirection
forces directly the
maximum
of vectordisplacement!
e: x

T 2
A Me x 37
m i ,eff i ri T
A MA

The effective modal mass is independent of the normalisation of the

eigenvectors! Response Spectrum Method

How many modes should be considered in modal analysis?

Modal analysis - Example
Typically: Consider N* modes so that the sum of the effective modal masses
of these N* modes is larger than 90% of the total mass.
Eigenvectors and natural periods:

Fundamentals of Seismic Design Course 6, 15.1.2013 17

38
T1=1.15s T2=0.18s T3=0.04s T4=0.03s T5=0.02s
 Response Spectrum Method – summary
Step by step procedure:

The maximum response of a N-storey building can be estimated according to the following
procedure:

1) Determine the properties of the MDOF system

• Choose DOFs
• Determine mass matrix M and stiffness matrix K
• Estimate modal damping ratios νn

2) Carry out modal analysis of the MDOF system

• Determine circular eigenfrequencies ωn and eigenvectors φn
• Compute the modal properties of the MDOF system ( M*, K* )
• Compute the modal participation factor Γn

3) The maximum response of the n-th mode should be determined as described in the
following. This should be done for all modes which require consideration.
• For all periods Τn and for the corresponding damping ratios νn, the spectral response
Sa(Tn, νn) should be determined from the response spectrum for pseudo-accelerations.
(The spectral displacement should be determined in the same manner)

39

Response Spectrum Method – summary

• Compute the maximum displacement:

un,max= φn Γn Sd(Tn, νn)
• Compute the maximum equivalent static force:
Fn,max= Γn M φn Sa(Tn, νn)
• Computation of the maximum internal forces on the basis of the forces Fn,max

4) Estimate the total response in terms of displacements and internal forces by means of
suitable combination rules. Different combination rules might be applied (ABSSUM, SRSS,
CQC).

Comment
In order to consider the non-linear behaviour of the structure the equivalent lateral static forces
can be determined from the spectral ordinate of the design spectrum for pseudo
accelerations:

Fn,max= Γn M φn Sa(Tn, νn,q)

40
 EXAMPLE

41

6-storey RC building

42
 building, expressions bas
EN 1998-1:2004 (E)
Rayleigh method) may be

Fundamental period (3)

H For
is asbuildings
in (3) of wit
this
approximated by the follow
lwi is the length of t
Calculation based on EC8, 4.3.3.2.2, Eq. (4.6):
Factor C t [-] 0.05 T1 = C t applied
⋅ H 3 / 4 forces, in
Fundamental Period T [s] 0.44
(5)
where Alternatively, the
Calculation based on EC8, 4.3.3.2.2, Eq. (4.9):
expression:
Total gravity load [MN] 32.4 Ct is 0,085 for mome
Distributed horizontal load [MN/m] 1.8
Rayleigh ⋅space
d concrete fram
T1 = 2formula:
Top displacement d [m] 0.5183 other structures;
Fundamental Period T [s] 1.44 The natural vibration frequency of stru
where
H Theismethod
method. the height
is basedof
on the
the
basement.
the horizontal displacement of the floo
Calculation based on Rayleigh method d is the lateral ela
n
Triangular shaped force q [kN/m] 2.33 gravity
∑i Fidi loadsfor
apps
Parameter q*H 4
/(120*EI) [m] 4.4793E-05 1(4) 1Alternatively,
= f1 =
Fundamental frequency [Hz] 0.79 Texpression 2π n(4.6)2 may be ta
Fundamental Period T [s] 1.26 4.3.3.2.3 ∑iDistribution
1
midi o
C t =not0,that
075the/ shape
Ac of the distri
(1)
Please
The fundamenta
magnitute of the forces43
does not.
building may be calc
where
approximated
Finite element analysis:
by horizo

Torsion
building.
Perform
[
a modal analysis to define th
Ac = Σ Ai ⋅ (0,2 + (l wi / H )
(2)P The seismic acti
and
models, horizontal force
Ac is the total effectiv
2 s ⋅m
Fi = Fbm⋅ ; i i
S
Ai Σ seffective
is the j ⋅ mj cro
ed,inf,y

M at ed,inf,y
the first storey of th
ey

where
ed,sup,y

Vx M
M at ed,sup,y Fi is the horizontal
Fb is the seismic bas
si, sj are the displacem
mi, mj are the storey ma
y

(3) When the fundam

x increasing linearly along
given by:
Translational component = red - 0.337
Rotational component = blue 0.410
0.747

ed,sup,y = -8.90 m
- 0.170 0.170
M at ed,sup,y
Vx= 1.000

x 0.253
0.590
0.337

Final distribution of forces – Wall 4

Distrbution of Axial Force N of Structural Wall W4 Distrbution of Shear Force V of Structural Wall W4

21 21

18 18

15 15
Height z [m]
Height z [m]

12 12

9 9

6 6

3 3

0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Axial Force N [kN] Shear Force V [kN]

Distrbution of Moment M of Structural Wall W4

21

18

15
Height z [m]

12

0
00 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000

Moment M [kNm]
 Modelling issues

47

Summary
General Considerations for modelling
Modelling of structural walls
Wide-Column Models (equivalent column)
Core modelling (staircases)
Wide-Column Models; Stick Models
Infill’s modelling
Beam-column joint modelling
Bar slippage
Shear deformations
Slab modelling (rigid diaphragm and no slab)
Rigid diaphragm behaviour (Penalty functions / Lagrange
multipliers); Slab deformation (equivalent trusses)
 Modelling Issues

§ Structural properties
§ Flexible/rigid Slab
§ Consideration of infill panels
§ Accidental eccentricity

§ Modelling decisions
§ Elements meshing
§ Distributed/lumped mass

§ Analysis
§ Static (NSPs)
§ Dynamic

Modeling of Structural RC Walls

§ Linear analysis: Modelling with four nodes bidirectional element
(“shell” or “plate” (a). This type of analysis is suitable if the software
provides, in an automatic fashion, the N, V and M results.
§ Nonlinear analysis (damage is expected at the base of the
column) : Modelling with equivalent column with horizontal rigid
links (b) ⇒ Wide-Column Models

“Rigid link”:
link the wall to other
structure elements
Shell
a) b)

Equivalent column
Core modelling
The core can be modelled in the following fashion:

§ Wide-Column Models; If torsion is important

§ Stick Models: one beam-column element
assigned with a fibre section Wide-Column Models

Wide-Column Model of a U-
“U” section for Stick Model
shaped wall

Core modelling
For obvious reasons, it is fundamental to explicitly model the stair
cases:
 Cores + Stairs – Modelling

Equivalent
column

Rigid
Elements

MODELING:
External and internal skeleton with
•
equivalent columns rigidly
connected to the structure at each
floor and basement levels.
• Stairs and landings with membrane
elements which are rigid in-plane
and flexible out-of-plane. Membrane

Cores + Stairs– Results Comparison

stairs + core
Modeling

T1 = 0.32 sec
The first two
models give
similar results è
Core only

consideration of
Modeing
MIDAS Jan 2011 v.1.1

T1 = 0.34 sec the core is

sufficient.
Modeling
with stairs
(no core)

T1 = 0.56 sec
Modeling
no core/
no stairs

T1 = 0.67 sec

54
 Infill modelling
§ Nonlinear analysis: modelling through and equivalent truss
(3 modelling approaches)

a) b) c)
1 truss 2 trusses 3 trusses

Does not allow the modelling Intermediate situation: Most accurate modelling,

of local damage effects Enables us to consider however requires large

è To be ignored the eccentricity computational effort (high

number of nodes)

Equivalent truss modelling:

Approach implemented in SeismoStruct (2 trusses)

Compression/Tension Struts Shear Strut (bilinear model)

(masonry strut model)
 Modelling with and without infills
4 floors RC building
7000
- With infills

Comparison (with /without

6000 -Without infills
5000
Analitical Model

Base Shear (kN)

4000

infills.)
3000

2000

1000

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Top Displacement (m)

If masonry infills are inserted, the stiffness and capacity of the structure
are greatly increased in comparison to the bare frame. After the infills
fail, however, the resistance of the structure reduces drastically and can
drop below that of the bare frame (due to local damage to
columns/beams by the infills.

Beam-column joint modelling

When modelling new buildings, the beam-column joint can be
modelled in the following fashion:
§ Rigid element (link the node with the beam and column end);
§ End offsets (rigid) at element end.

NEW BUILDINGS:
It is expected that the
beam-column joint
response is effectively
rigid, or at least elastic
Beam-column joint modelling
When modelling existing buildings, on the other hand, beam-column
joints should be defined in the following fashion:
1) Rigid element (linear) +spring (nonlinear behaviour) ⇒ difficult
2) Beam-column element (non-linear) ⇒ pragmatic option

In the second case the elements are longer, and thereby more
flexible, thus indirectly considering, in a simplified way, the complex
nonlinear response of the joint.

Rigid element

1) 2)

Spring

Bar slippage
Reinforcement slippage occurs due to a significant drop in the bond
resistance between the concrete and the rebars.

The presence of a transversal pressure on the bar (due to compression

axial load and/or confinement) increases the “bond resistance” (see
figure on the left).
In several existing buildings, where smooth bars might be present, the
bond between the concrete and rebars might be partially achieved
if rebar's are bent.
 Modelling of bar-slippage in RC
Structures

PRACTICAL MODELLING:
• Assume that bar slip is
accounted for in the joint
deformation;
• Reduce the stiffness of
reinforcing steel by 20%-30%.
61

Shear Deformations
Deformation and shear failure are currently difficult to explicitly model
(strong effort of the scientific community in this topic), hence
resistance control is typically performed during the analysis; once the
shear resistance of a given element is achieved, the analysis may not
be reliable anymore
 Slab Modelling
The slab can be considered as a:

üSlab providing a rigid diaphragm effect;

üDeformable slab.

“The rigid diaphragm behavior is enhanced if the joints in the diaphragm are located
only over its supports. An appropriate topping of in-situ reinforced concrete can
drastically improve the rigidity of the diaphragm. The thickness of this topping layer should
be not less than 40 mm if the span between supports is less than 8 m, or not less than 50
mm for longer spans; its mesh reinforcement should be connected to the vertical resisting
elements above and below.”
( 5.11.3.5 in EC8 – part 1)

“Particular care should be taken in cases of non-compact or very elongated in-plan

shapes and in cases of large floor openings, especially if the latter are located in the
vicinity of the main vertical structural elements, thus hindering such effective connection
between the vertical and horizontal structure.
( 4.2.1.5 in EC8 – part 1)

Slab modelling – rigid diaphragm

behaviour
Master-Slave model:
Identify the centre of mass of the floor (Master node) where the
translational and rotational mass is concentrated. All the other nodes
(Slave nodes) are forced to have the same in-plan displacement of
the Master node.

LINEAR-ELASTIC ANALYSIS NONLINEAR ANALYSIS

Easy to model ⇒ More complex modelling ⇒
• Simple geometric • Penalty functions
transformations • Lagrange Multipliers
Slab modelling – rigid diaphragm
behaviour
LIMITATIONS:
§NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS it was observed that, constraining all the
nodes of a given floor through a rigid diaphragm might impose an
“artificial” stiffening of the beams* (forced not to deform axially) ⇒
extreme care required when applying rigid diaphragms ⇒ in
particular for what regards suitable selection of floor nodes to assign.

Example of rigid diaphragm node

selection in case of irregular
building
* The fibre elements with inelastic behaviour, not constrained and subjected to
flexure, deform axially (the neutral axis is not coincident with the baricentre of
the section)

Slab modelling– equivalent truss

Equivalent truss modelling:
The lateral elastic stiffness Ksl of the slab is calculated through:

1
K sl = 3 I = moment of inertia;
(L') +
(L')
12 EC I AS GC AS = shear area of the
section
Ksl is equal to the axial stiffness of the equivalent truss Kb (in the case
of approximately square slabs), connected with hinges at the ends in
order to avoid the moment transfer:

Eb Ab
Kb = ⇒ Ab truss
Lb
earthquake

L'
 Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”
How significant are our modelling decisions?

Results of modelling sensitivity study

4-storey build. 8-storey build.

Slab - modal -X
4000 500 Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”

3000 400
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

300 Grey Black

2000

200

1000
Truss Truss
No Slab 100 No Slab
Rigid Diaphragm

0
Rigid Diaphragm
The presence of in-plane stiff
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 slabs allows the seismic loads
Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)
to be uniformly distributed
7000
! through the vertical elements
6000

5000
Base Shear (kN)

4000
The buildings’ response
3000
becomes significantly
2000
Truss different as the variation in
1000 No Slab
Rigid Diaphragm the column stiffness increases
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Top Displacement (m)

 § Modelling options
No Slab
Rigid Diaphr.
Shear Capacity 4-storey build. 8-storey build.
Slab-NC-LS-Modal (A), Y
Grey Black
Slab-LS-LS-Modal (A), Y

Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”

Slab-DL-LS-Modal (A), Y
-50 0 50 -200 0 200 -50 0 50 -50 0 50
8 4 8 8

7 7 7

6 3 6 6

5 5 5
Storey
Storey

Storey

Storey
4 2 4 4

3 3 3
Stiffer slabs generally
2 1 2 2 lead to higher beam
shear forces and lower
1 1 1

No Slab

chord rotations
0 100 200Diaphr.
300 400 500 600 0 200 400
0 100 600
200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Rigid
Difference
Chord rotation Capacity Difference
Shear Force, B (kN) Difference Difference
Shear, bottom (kN) Shear, bottom (kN) Shear, bottom (kN)
! Slab-DL-LS-Modal (A), Y Slab-LS-LS-Modal (A), Y Sl;ab-NC-LS-Modal (A), Y

-0.002 0.000 0.002 -0.02 0.00 0.02-0.002 0.000 0.002 -0.002 0.000 0.002
8 4 8 8

7 7 7

6 3 6 6

5 5 5
The columns response
Storey
Storey

Storey

Storey

4 2 4 4

3 3 3 may also be affected,

albeit not regularly
2 1 2 2

1 1 1

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.00 0.01 0.020.000

0.015 0.03 0.005
0.04 0.010 0.015 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
Difference Difference Difference Difference
Chord Rotation, bottom (rad) Chord Rotation, Chord
B (rad)Rotation, bottom (rad) Chord Rotation, bottom (rad)
!

§ Modelling options

4-storey build. 5-storey build.

Black Grey
Dist Mass - Lumped Mass
4000
3000 Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”
2500
3000
Base Shear (kN)
Base Shear (kN)

2000

2000 1500

1000 Adaptive
1000
Adaptive Defining the mass as lumped
Uniform Uniform
Modal
500
Modal at the main structural nodes
0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
produces negligible
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m) differences in the global

6000
! 4000 response of the buildings,
5000
independently of the lateral
3000 load distribution assumed
Base Shear (kN)

4000
Base Shear (kN)

3000 2000

2000
Adaptive 1000 Adaptive
Uniform Uniform
1000
Modal Modal

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)

!
 § Modelling options Black

2-storey build. 4-storey build. Grey

ELEMENT-X-NS-1,7

3000 4000

Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”

2500
3000
2000
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

1500 2000

1000
Adaptive 1000
Adaptive
Uniform
500 Uniform
Modal
Modal
0
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 The definition of a
Top Displacement (m)
ELEMENT-Y-NS-2, 8
Top Displacement (m) “simplified” beam does not
1600 6000 seems to change the global
1400
5000 response of the buildings
1200
4000
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

1000

800 3000

600
2000
400 Adaptive Adaptive
Uniform 1000 Uniform
200 Modal Modal

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)

§ Modelling options Acc. Ecc.

2-storey build. 8-storey build.

Black Grey
RB, X, NS, DM, 14, 34 Acc. Eccentr. - No Slab - X
1400 400
Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”
1200
300
1000
Base Shear (kN)
Base Shear (kN)

800
200
600

400 100

200 Modal Modal

Uniform
Considering accidental
Uniform
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
eccentricity, as prescribed
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m) by EC8, does not introduce
RB, Y, NS, DM, 16, 36
! Acc. Eccentr. - No Slab - Y significant changes in the
1600 1800

1400 1600
global behaviour of the
1200
1400 buildings
1200
Base Shear (kN)
Base Shear (kN)

1000
1000
800
800
600
600
400
400
Modal Modal
200 200
Uniform Uniform
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)

!
 § Modelling options

2-storey build. 5-storey build. Black Grey

Infill-X-TR-15, 51
Modal Distribution - Diaph
5000 3000

Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”

No Infill 2500
4000 With Infill When the model accounts
2000
for the infill contribution,
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

3000
1500 the buildings response
2000
1000 presents an initial stiffness
1000 500
No Infills
and a base shear
0
Infills significantly higher
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)

After the infills lose their
!
Infill-Y-TR-16, 52
Modal Distribution - Trusses
5000 4000 capacity, the buildings’
4000
resistance decreases
No Infill 3000
With Infill abruptly to values that
Base Shear (kN)

Base Shear (kN)

3000
2000
might be lower than the ones
2000 estimated without infills,
1000 due to local damage
1000
No Infills
Infills
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Top Displacement (m) Top Displacement (m)

Conclusions
§ Different slab configuration/modelling may yield significant changes in the buildings
behaviour
§ the correct evaluation of actual properties of a slab is determinant Based on “Kazantzidou, Sousa, Pinho, Nascimbene and Monteiro (2015)”

§ The definition of lumped masses (rather than distributed), together with the use of
“simplified” beams (constant reinforcement), lead to a significant reduction in the
modelling and analysis time, without compromising significantly the obtained results

§ The consideration of an accidental eccentricity, as prescribed by EC8, has only a

minor influence in the seismic assessment of buildings

§ The presence of infill panels drastically modifies the seismic response of RC

buildings
§ Given the sensitiveness to cyclic degradation and out-of-plane actions, the
response obtained with static procedures can largely underestimate those
from dynamic analysis