Seminar and Workshop on

Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings

November 3-6, 2017
Novotel Manila, Araneta Center, Cubao, Quezon City

Progression of Structural Design

Approaches
Naveed Anwar, PhD
 Wah 2017
Islamabad 2017

Kathmandu 2016
Dubai 2017

Yangon 2015
Dhaka 2014
Oman 2017
Manila 2017
Manila 2016
Bangkok 2016

Colombo 2015

Singapore 2016
Why this Seminar and Workshop ?
And why is this topic important?
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
A MUST read for structural Engineers

17
The Intent of Structural Design is to
ensure public safety,
minimize damage to built environment,
help preserve continuity of life activities…

18
Demand and
Complexity is
Increasing
Percentage of Urbanized World

20
World’s Population Urban-to-Rural Ratio

(www.un.org) 21
 Visions

Japan, 4000m Dubai City Tower, 2400 m Sky Mile Tower, 1700 m Japan One Dubai Tower,
1008 m

22
The Reality

23
 24
Source: CTBU Report, 2015
Source: CTBU Report, 2015 25
Source: CTBU Report, 2015
26
Source: CTBU Report, 2015 27
The Twisting Turning Towers Trend

Source: CTBU Report, 2015 28

29
Source: CTBU Report, 2015 30
 Top Countries with Buildings > 150 m

Over 40 more are under construction

at this time in Manila !

31
http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/country/philippines
Makati is major Tall Building Center
32
 Buildings and Structures are expected to be
• Safe • Protective
• Secure • Friendly
• Serviceable • Sustainable
• Reliable • Affordable

• The contents of the structures are often much

New Structural
more valuable than structure itself Systems
• The loss of service/operations/business is a often
larger than repair costs

33
Seminar Day 2 (4th October 2017)

34
Needs progresion in Structural Design
Approaches
Is my Structure safe?

(What level of Richter earthquake my structure sustain?

Or what tornado level can it withstand,
or is it safe for explosions or
How long can it withstand the fire?)
How long do we have
before the building will
collapse in this fire?

- Asks the Fire Chief from the structural

engineer

1974

37
The Towering Inferno (1974)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FagbC09BO2o
38
 Evolution of our Understanding of Structures
Risk integrated based design, and
a more and holistic approach
towards consequence based
engineering.
The introduction of
capacity based design
approaches.
The recognition of the
difference between brittle
and ductile failure.
Performance based
design and more explicit
linkage between demand
and performance.
Formulation of ultimate
strength.
Formulation of limit
state design principles.

Explicit consideration of
partial FOS.

Limits on the allowable stresses to

achieve in-direct FOS
39
 Design Approaches

Resilience
Based Design
Consequences
and Risk Based
Performance Design
Based Design
Code Based
Design
Intuitive
Design

40
 Design Approaches

Resilience
Based Design
Consequences
and Risk
Performance Based Design
Based Design
Code
Intuitive Based
Design Design

41
 Development of Formal Buildings Codes

“Rebuilding In 1908 , a
In 1680 AD, In USA, the The Internat
of London In 1904, a formal
“The Laws of London City ional European
Act” after the Handbook of building
the Building Act of of Baltimore f Building Union,
“Great Fire of the Baltimore code was
Indies” Spanis 1844. irst building Code (IBC) the Eurocodes.
London” in City drafted and
h Crown code in 1859. by (ICC).
1666 AD. adopted.

42
The Modern Codes – With “intent” to make buildings safe for public

Extremely Detailed
prescriptions and
equations using
(ACI 318 – 11)
seemingly arbitrary,
rounded limits with
implicit meaning

(IS 456-2000)

43
 The General Code Families

ACI, PCI, CRSI,

ASCE, AISI, British, CP and China, USSR,
UBC, IBC Euro-codes
BS Japan
AASHTO

44
 Are All Buildings Codes Correct ?

• If they differ, can all of them be correct ?

• Did we inform the structures to follow which code when earthquake or

hurricane strikes ?

• Codes change every 3 or years, should we upgrade our structures every

3 or 5 years to conform ?

• Codes intend for “Life Safety”, not damage limits or cost implications

45
 Prescriptive Codes – A Shelter

• Public:
• Is my structure safe ?
• Will it be damaged, how much, how long to
repair

• Structural Engineer:
• Not sure, but I did follow the “Code”

As long as engineers follow the code, they can be

sheltered by its provisions

46
 Shortcomings of Code Based Design for Tall Buildings

• Traditional codes govern design of general, normal buildings

 Over 95% buildings are covered, which are less than about 50 m
• Not specifically developed for tall buildings > 50 m tall
• Prescriptive in nature, no explicit check on outcome
• Permit a limited number of structural systems
• Do not include framing systems appropriate for high-rise
• Based on elastic methods of analysis
• Enforce uniform detailing rules on all members
• Enforce unreasonable demand distribution rules
• Do not take advantage of recent computing tools

47
48 48
 The First Building Code: Code of Hammurabi (1792 BC to 1750 BC)

Clause 229:

If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it

properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner,
then that builder shall be put to death.

49
Design Approaches

Performance
Based Design
Code Based
Design
Intuitive Design

Wind

Earthquake
 Motivation for PBD in EQ

• Lack of explicit performance in design codes is

primary motivation for performance based
design

• Performance based methods require the

designer to assess how a building is likely
perform extreme events and their correct
application will help to identify unsafe designs.

• Enables arbitrary restrictions to be lifted and

provides scope for the development of
innovative, safer and more cost-effective
solutions 51
Seminar Day 1 (3rd October 2017)
10:50 – 11:50 AM

52
Define Performance Levels

Based on FEMA 451 B 53

 Link the Hazard to Performance Levels

sta
Re nt
ura

Resta
urant
Loading Severity

Consequences

Resta
Hazard

urant

Vulnerability Structural Displacement

54
 The Role of Ductility and Capacity Design?
• Capacity Design is a design process in which it is decided which objects within a structural system
will be permitted to yield (ductile components) and which objects will remain elastic (brittle
components).

• Once ductile and brittle systems are decided upon, design proceeds according to the following
guidelines:
• Ductile components are designed with sufficient deformation capacity such that they may satisfy
displacement-based demand-capacity ratio.
• Brittle components are designed to achieve sufficient strength levels such that they may satisfy strength-
based demand-capacity ratio.

55
Seminar Day 3 (5th October 2017)
09:10 – 10:30 AM

56
Is PBD needed for Wind?
57
 Climate Change may effect future wind hazard level
Before Climate After Climate
Change Change

Common Event Common Event

Common Event Common Event

Will there be a Category 6?

Occasional Event Occasional Event

Rare Event Occasional Event

Very Rare Event

Occasional Event
(Might never happen)

58
 Wind Codes – What do they miss
Give Miss

• Wind load factors to convert certain • Most do not give explicit Structure
wind speed to different return period Performance under different level of
wind speed wind speed based on it’s probable
occurrences
• Standard Pressure Coefficient
• Do not explicitly incorporate Wind-
• Cover background and Resonant tunnel test outcome
force thru Gust Factor
• They differ from each other in
• Design for linear, static, elastic concept, factors, outcome
response
• Nonlinearity, dynamics, inelasticity
 Most Codes Differ
– Which one is
right?

Dynamic Wind Effects: A Comparative Study of Provisions in Codes and Standards with Wind Tunnel Data, T. Kijewski1 A. Kareem, https://www3.nd.edu
60
Why Integrated PBD for
Earthquake and Wind?
61
Design Approaches

Resilience Based
Design
Consequences and
Risk Based Design

Performance
Based Design
Code Based
Design
Intuitive Design

Wind

Earthquake
Design Approaches

Resilience Based
Design
Consequences and
Risk Based Design

Performance
Based Design
Code Based
Design
Intuitive Design

Wind

Earthquake
Seismic Demand and Design may Depend on Wind Demand and Design

64
 Linear-Elastic Wind Design Effects Seismic Performance

Larger Sections for Larger Seismic

Larger Mass
Stiffness and Motion Demand

Larger Shear due to

Higher Modes
Elastic Design
Susceptible to brittle
failure

Less Ductility
Moment Controlled
Lower Effective R Larger Seismic
Flexural
Lower Energy Demand
Reinforcement
dissipation
65
 The Effect of Wind on Seismic Performance
 The calculated wind resistant
demand can be higher than the
seismic design demand (RSA) due to
reduction of elastic design load by
force reduction factor (R)
 The actual seismic demands can be
higher than both wind and design
seismic demand
 Demands in the higher modes in
inelastic range are not reduced by
the same “R” factor which is
intended in the RSA procedure

 Wind Moment is 1st Mode type

 Seismic shear is Higher mode based
66
 Extreme
Events
should be Earthquakes, Wind, Blast,
handled
Consistently Progressive Collapse, Impact

67
 Earthquake and Wind PBD are
Compatible!
Site specific Seismic Hazard Site specific Climate
Study Analysis

Various Earthquake levels Various Wind Return

SLE, DBE, MCE etc period and Velocities

Hazard Response Spectrum Wind Force in Frequency

Domain

Earthquake Ground Motion Time Wind Tunnel Pressure in Wind

History Time Domain

68
 Set appropriate
Incorporate wind performance criteria
Consider winds of Determine static and Make the Wind PPD
tunnel dynamic for motion,
higher intensity and dynamic impacts consistent with
measurements into deformation,
longer return through wind tunnel
dynamic analysis of strength, ductility, Earthquake PBD
periods studies
structural models energy decimation
etc.

Possible Way forward

69
 Wind Test Models

Force balance model, Pressure model Surrounding model

(Images based on RWDI facilities)

70
 Apply Wind as Dynamic Effect
Wind load obtained from wind tunnel test can be 67L
either point loads or area pressure loads depending on
which technique being used. 45L

• Point loads
• Area pressure loads
30U
kN

15U

1 hour span of time history point loads at different elevations

71
Wind Pressure Variation and Dynamic effects

72
 Wind
Wind Structural System Overall Wind
Performance
Return Response Damage Performance Design Criteria
Level
Period Objective

Perception No Permanent None Perception Bldg. Acceleration <5

1 year Threshold Interstory
Undamage
of movement milli -g

No Permanent Controlled Bldg. Acceleration

10 years Motion Comfort Undamage
Suggested Interstory Comfort <15 milli -g

Structural 50 years Operational

No Permanent
Interstory
Undamage
Non-Structural
Damage
Story drift is limited
to 0.2%
Performance Limited No Permanent Minor Structural Story drift is limited
100 years
Criteria for Interruption Interstory Damages Damage to 0.3%

Wind Permanent Major

Story drift is limited
475 years Life Safety
Interstory Damages
No Collapse to 0.5%
Residual Drift < h/600

Story drift is limited

Permanent
1000 Collapse Extensive to 1%
Interstory No Collapse
years Prevention Damages Residual Drift < h/500
 What is being done at AIT

Structural Lab Teaching, Research Practical Experience

Wind Tunnel Lab Shake table, Cyclic Tall Buildings, Wind and of over 100 PBD
Actuator, strong floor Earthquake Engineering Projects

Development and application of Integrated PBD

for Wind and Earthquake

CSi Partners
Software Developer Structural Engineers 74
Is this acceptable?
Even though it satisfies CBD and PBD

75
Design Approaches

Resilience Based
Design
Consequences and
Risk Based Design

Performance
Based Design
Code Based
Design
Intuitive Design

Wind

Earthquake
Why do we need to go Beyond PBD
• For public and society, the performance criteria
still does reduce the effects of the events, but it
can reduce the risk level

• The non structural damage is not acceptable in

modern buildings

• The disruption and loss goes much beyond the

building

• Insurance companies want to have greater

reliability of assessment of risk and damages

77
 Beyond PBD

• For public, the performance

criteria still does reduce the
effects of the events

• Insurance companies want

to have greater reliability of
assessment of risk and
damages

78
 Questions still un-answered

• What if the chance that performance level is not

achieved? Code based was implicit, with not
confirmation of response

• What is the risk?

PBD is explicit, can help to
confirm the response and
performance level
• What are the consequences?

• What if the performance levels are not

sufficient?

79
 Design Approaches

Resilience Based
Design
Consequence
and Risk
Performance
Based Design Based Design
Code Based
Design

80
 Consequence Based Engineering

• It is not enough to say “Cracking and non-

The trigger of structural damage is acceptable, as long as
an event is not structure does not collapse”
important,
the • A natural extension of the performance-based
design approach
consequences
of an event are • Structural consequences >
DDD (dollars, deaths and downtime)
(Porter, 2003).

81
 Consequence Based Engineering

• “Structural consequence and non-structural effects”

determined entirely from the analysis of structural
member as well as overall system behavior.

• Proceeds through the analysis of expected system

consequences, irrespective of the event triggering
these consequences.

• Requires the structural members to be designed for

variable reliability levels, depending upon their
contribution in causing adverse system
consequences.

82
 Risk Based Design Process

Safety Studies
Design
(Probability and Risk Safety Critical Structure
Accidental
Consequence Quantification Element Design
Load
Analysis)

83
 Special Purposes Guidelines from USA

National
Federal
Earthquake
Applied Emergency PEER
Hazards Tall Buildings CTBUH
Technology Management Guidelines for
Reduction Initiatives (TBI) Guidelines
Council (ATC) Agency Tall Buildings
Program
(FEMA) and
(NEHRP)

84
What Next: What is still missing

• Adequacy, Performance and Risk reduction of

Structure alone is not enough

• Structure serves a purpose in society,

economy, community > Should be integrated
with other aspects

• A more holistic approach, beyond structural

design needed

85
 Design Approaches

Resilience
Based Design
Consequences
and Risk
Performance Based Design
Based Design
Code Based
Design

86
 Technical Robustness
4 Dimensions of 4 Properties of
Resilience Resilience

Organizational Rapiditty

Social Redundancy

Economic Resourcefulness

RESILIENCE

Lower
More Reliability
Consequences

3 Results of Resilience Faster

Recovery
87
 Resilience Based Earthquake Design

• A holistic approach which seeks to identify

all hazard-induced risks (including those
outside the building envelope) and mitigate Economic Loses
them using integrated multi-disciplinary
design and contingency planning to
achieve swift recovery objectives in the
aftermath of a major earthquake.

Loss of Loss of
• The key principle in resilience-based Quality of Community
design is to limit expected damage to Life and Culture
structural and architectural components
and egress systems (elevators, stairs, and
doors)
Go Beyond Life Safety
88
 Link Performance to other Indicators

Restaurant Restaurant nt
ura
sta
Re

Operational (O) Immediate Occupancy (IO) Life Safety (LS) Collapse Prevention (CP)

0% Damage or Loss 99 %

Lowest Casualties Highest

Lowest Downtime for Rehab Highest
Lowest Rehab Cost to Restore after event Highest

Highest Retrofit Cost to Minimize Consequences Lowest

Lowest Impact on Sustainability of Community Highets

89
Ref: FEMA 451 B
 Green Buildings Resilient Buildings

Main authors : Arup

Supported by USRC and many others 90
ARUP 91
Seminar Day 3 (5th October 2017)
10:50 – 11:50 AM

92
Tools: How to design
efficiently?
 The Growing Computational Requirements

• Dynamic Analysis
• Nonlinear modelling
• Nonlinear Time History Analysis
• Progressive Collapse
• Staged construction analysis

• A new and major concern for structural safety

• Structure should not collapse completely if one or two elements are
“destroyed”
• Backup systems, alternate load paths, additional redundancy

94
The Role of Computers and Software

• Initially, computers were used to

program the procedure we had

• Now, we develop procedures that are

suited for computing

95
95
Design Approaches evolved to match computing revolution

96
 Seismic Analysis Procedures

Linear Static Nonlinear Static Linear Dynamic Nonlinear Dynamic

Procedures Procedures Procedures Procedures

• Equivalent Static • Capacity Spectrum • Response • Nonlinear

Method
Analysis • Displacement
Spectrum Analysis Response History
Coefficient Method Analysis
• Various Other • Linear Response
Pushover Analysis History Analysis
Methods

97
Seminar Day 2 (4th October 2017)

98
 A Swing Towards the AI

• Rich Pictures
• Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

• Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)

• Genetic Algorithms (GA)
• Expert Systems (ES)

• Fuzzy Logic
• Deep Thinking
• Big Data and Data Mining

99
Mobile computing might change how we design

100
Can we make it safe, sustainable and resilient?

101
Thank you