Earthquake Resistant Design of Buildings

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

Chapter 5

Earthquake-Resistant Design of Buildings

5.1 INTRODUCTION
Buildings subjected to earthquake shaking at their base oscillate back and forth in all three
directions. Under low levels of shaking, their amplitudes of shaking and directions of shaking are
dependant on how they are proportioned geometrically and in terms of stiffness throughout the
building in plan and elevation. Under strong earthquake shaking, buildings undergo damage also.
Controlling the damage type and sequence of damage in various structural elements is the main
focus of earthquake-resistant design. It is possible to get a reasonable understanding of the overall
mechanism of failure of the building by suitable nonlinear static analysis. Many deficiencies
discussed in this document can be identified at the design stage itself, and the structural
configurations and design and detailing of members modified to make the building resist the
earthquake effects generated in the building during strong earthquake shaking.

Displacement-controlled loading subjected at the base of the building during earthquake


shaking and inelastic actions accrued in them during strong shaking, together make earthquake-
resistant design of buildings exciting and special. Inter-relationships between analysis, design and
behaviour determine the overall seismic performance of a building. These inter-relationships exist in
design of buildings for other loading actions also (e.g., wind, wave, snow, and temperature). But, it
is the expected inelastic actions in buildings under seismic conditions and the absence of the same
under other load actions, which makes understanding earthquake behaviour of buildings challenging.
Analysis and design both influence the earthquake behaviour of buildings (Figure 5.1). Understanding
seismic behaviour is possible only through suitable analyses of building that captures all behavioural
actions possible in buildings during earthquakes. And, controlling seismic behaviour is possible only
through faithful design that ensures all behavioural actions considered in buildings during analysis.
Between design and analysis also there are relationships. For designing a new building, design
should reflect the analysis performed, and for assessing an existing building, analysis should assess
the design performed.

Behaviour

Design Analysis

Figure 5.1: Inter-relations that affect Earthquake-Resistant Design of Buildings: Focus of earthquake-
resistant design is desired earthquake behaviour
Thus, in earthquake-resistant design of new buildings, design development process involves
(Figure 5.2):
(1) Analysing the building to capture desired seismic behaviour, i.e., performing suitable analyses of
building to ensure the limited expected behavioural actions ALONE are realised in building during
earthquake shaking;
(2) Designing the building to reflect that all assumptions made in analysis are honoured, and thereby
controlling desired seismic behaviour through design of the new building; and
(3) Observing the building (during the next earthquake in the region where the building is built) to
gain confidence in the design process or understand deficiencies in it.
But, in assessment of earthquake resistance of existing buildings, safety assessment process involves
marginally separate steps (Figure 5.3) depending on whether the assessment is done after an
earthquake or before it. For the pre-earthquake assessment, the steps involved are (Figure 5.3a):
(1) Analysing the building to capture possible seismic behaviour, i.e., performing suitable analyses of
building to include all possible behavioural actions that can be CONCEIVED in building during
earthquake shaking. Here, synthetic or recorded earthquake ground motions of known
characteristics are employed to project the demand on the building;
(2) Designing retrofit of each member (and thereby of the whole building) to capture the true
behaviour that is conceived in analysis and desired to be realized, and thereby understanding the
likely seismic behaviour of the existing building; and
(3) Observing the building (during the next earthquake in the region where the building is built) to
gain confidence in the retrofit design process or understand deficiencies in it.

Design

Earthquake Behaviour
Behaviour
Seismic Design Code
Real Earthquake Ground Motion
start

Design Analysis

Analysis

Synthetic/Recorded Earthquake Ground Motion

Figure 5.2: Earthquake Performance Assessment of NEW Buildings

242
And, for the post-earthquake assessment, the steps involved are (Figure 5.3b):
(1) Observing the building (during the earthquake that occurred in the region where the building is
built) to gain confidence in the design process or understand deficiencies in it;
(2) Designing retrofit of each member (and thereby of the whole building) to capture the true
behaviour that is desired to be realized, and thereby understanding the likely seismic behaviour of
the existing building in the next earthquake; and
(3) Analysing the building to capture possible seismic behaviour, i.e., performing suitable analyses of
building to include all possible behavioural actions that can be CONCEIVED in building during
earthquake shaking. Here, synthetic or recorded earthquake ground motions of known
characteristics are employed to project the demand on the building.

243
start
Analysis

Analytical Assessment Earthquake Behaviour

Real Earthquake Ground Motion


Synthetic/Recorded Earthquake Ground Motion

Behaviour Design

Retrofit

Seismic Design Code

(a)

start
Analysis

Earthquake Behaviour Analytical Assessment

Real Earthquake Ground Motion Synthetic/Recorded Earthquake Ground Motion

Behaviour Design

Retrofit

Seismic Design Code

(b)

Figure 5.3: Earthquake Performance Assessment of EXISTING Buildings: (a) BEFORE Earthquake, and
(b) AFTER Earthquake
244
5.2 EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN METHODS
The ideal lateral load-deformation (backbone) curve of a building under monotonic lateral
displacement loading in pushover analysis reflects three clear features, namely linear behaviour, onset
of nonlinear behaviour and plastic behaviour (Figure 5.4). These features may be used to identify three
dominant ranges of structural behaviour in the sequence in which they appear, namely elastic
behaviour, early inelastic behaviour and ductile inelastic behaviour. An important consequence of all
these three characteristics together is inelastic energy dissipation capacity of the building.

Stiffness

Strength
Lateral Force H

Ductility

Inelastic Energy

Lateral Deformation Δ

Figure 5.4: Four Virtues of Earthquake-Resistant Buildings control earthquake performance of


buildings: Stiffness, Strength and Ductility directly affect load-deformation behaviour of
buildings, while Seismic Structural Configuration affects these three virtues indirectly; Energy
Dissipation Capacity is an overall consequence of all the four virtues of buildings

245
In keeping with the key characteristics of buildings (Figure 5.4), structural design of
buildings can be stiffness-based (considering only stiffness), strength-based (considering stiffness and
strength), deformation-based (considering stiffness, strength and ductility) or energy-based (considering
stiffness, strength, ductility and energy dissipation capacity) (Figure 5.5). Strength-based design can be
further classified as Force Design and Capacity Design. In the former, the design is based simply on the
design lateral force on the building; members are designed to resist the stress-resultants obtained
from linear structural analysis of the building subjected to code-specified design lateral forces.
There is no pre-determined hierarchy of strengths across adjoining members and within each
member. Within each member, the shear design of RC members is performed using the shear forces
obtained from above structural analysis, and is independent of the design for axial forces and
bending moments. In the latter, the design is based on BOTH the stress-resultants obtained from
linear structural analysis of the building subjected to code-specified design lateral forces AND
equilibrium-compatible stress-resultants derived from the pre-determined collapse mechanism. A
pre-determined hierarchy of strengths is ensured both across adjoining members and within each
member. Again within each member, the shear design of RC members is performed using larger of
(a) the shear forces obtained from above structural analysis, and (b) plastic hinge based shear forces
that are dependant on axial forces and bending moments.

Seismic Design

Stiffness-Based Strength-Based Deformation-Based Energy-Based


Design Design Design Design

Design for Ki only Design for K i and V Bd Design for K i, VBd and Δmax Design for K i, VBd, Δmax and E
Insufficient for Currently under Currently under
Earthquake-Resistant Design Development Research
Currently in
Practice

Force Design Capacity Design


(1) No hierarchy of (1) Strong-Column Weak-Beam
relative strengths of members Philosophy
(2) Design of members for shear (2) Design of members for shear
independent of P-M interaction dependent of P-M interaction

Levels of EQRD 1 2 3
Mandatory for Normal buildings Normal buildings in Critical and Lifeline buildings
in low seismic zones moderate/high seismic zones
Optional for - Normal buildings in Normal buildings in
low seismic zones moderate/high seismic
zones

CURRENT Earthquake Resistant Design Philosophies

Figure 5.5: Four broad methods available for Earthquake-Resistant Design: Rigour increases in each
higher level method

246
Of the four methods of design, the deformation-based design method is the most advanced, and
is expected to give best earthquake performance. It requires more engineering experience and
judgment, but the results build more confidence in designers to arrive at a building that is more
likely to perform as intended. Therefore, this method is best suited for special buildings, where
earthquake performance of the building should be guaranteed, e.g., critical and lifeline buildings
that are required to remain functional after the earthquake. The capacity design method is best suited
for normal buildings that are required to sustain moderate to severe seismic shaking. The energy-
based design method is still under research. The force design method is known not to result in good
seismic behaviour, and hence should be discouraged even in low seismic regions. But, owing to lack
of adequate manpower and arguments of economy, it may be practiced for some more time.

5.3 EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN PROCEDURE


In keeping with the sequence in which the characteristics of buildings appear in the load-
deformation behaviour of buildings (Figure 5.4), the current process of designing buildings has
three stages, namely Stiffness Design Stage, Strength Design Stage, and Ductility Design Stage.
Details are given below of steps involved in each of the three stages of seismic design of buildings.

5.3.1 Stiffness Design Stage


The main activities in this stage are:

(1) Choosing a seismic structural configuration, that is expected to give desirable earthquake behaviour
(a) Overall geometry of the building of required height should be convex. It should be well
proportioned, in keeping with elevation slenderness ratios and plan aspect ratios that have
been observed in well-designed buildings. For instance, the proportioning of the building
should be such that
(i) the maximum slenderness ratio (H/B) achieved in different well-designed buildings
worldwide is generally found to be around 10, and that of maximum plan aspect ratio
(L/B) to be around 4;
(ii) the absolute dimensions of buildings should not be unduly long to attract differential
ground motion under different parts; for this a seismic wavelength analysis is required
to understand the relative dimension of the building with respect to the predominant
seismic wave;
(iii) the absolute plan area of the building should not be too large to attract large inertia
force; and
(iv) the obvious irregularities as stated in the design codes and literature of standard should
be minimised, if not entirely eliminated.
(b) Structural system chosen should be suitable for good earthquake performance, with vertical
and horizontal members of lateral load resisting system (LLRS) that can carry earthquake
effects safely during strong earthquake shaking. For instance, the structural system should
(i) be symmetrical in both directions in plan,
(ii) be regular in stiffness along elevation with gradually increasing stiffness towards the
lower levels of the building (for instance, open ground storey buildings are unacceptable
with sudden drop in lateral storey stiffness and lateral storey strength in the lower
storey),
(iii) have many direct and short load paths, i.e., the building should have large redundancy,
but there should be no unexpected load paths that are not known at the time of design
e.g., short-column effects owing to lateral restraint offered by infills are unacceptable,
(iv) have no or only limited offsets in plan of the building, and
(v) no cut-outs in horizontal LLRS elements, e.g., slabs should not have any cut-outs along
their edges.

247
Also, just moment resisting frames may be unsuitable for resisting effects due to strong
earthquake shaking in RC buildings; RC walls or braces should be used in buildings meant
to be built in moderate to severe seismic zones.
This proportioning of the building geometry and choosing the most suitable seismic structural
configuration is best achieved by an objective negotiation effort between the architect and
structural engineer involved in the project.

(2) Proportioning of Vertical LLRS members in the structural system of the building
(a) The structural plan density of vertical LLRS elements should be at least 4-8% along each
direction in plan. Often, this cannot be achieved with just moment frames; structural walls
are required, which run full height of the building and oriented along each plan directions.
(b) The building should have at least a minimum amount of lateral stiffness, to ensure that
deformation (and hence damage) is small under low and moderate shaking. In general,
buildings with large lateral stiffness are preferred over those with small lateral stiffness.
(c) The cross-section of each vertical member and its design (be it a structural steel or an RC
column or structural wall) should be designed ideally to have the maximum axial load
demand less than 30% of its uniaxial axial compression capacity.
(d) The cross-section of each vertical column or structural wall should be such that difficulties
do not arise with adjoining horizontal members in detailing of reinforcement bars in RC
members and of connections in structural steel members.
(e) The cross-section strengths of each vertical column or structural wall should be such that the
vertical members are stronger than the adjoining horizontal members framing into them.

(3) Modeling the structural system of the building for structural analysis (on a computer)
Prepare a basic structural analysis model of the building with the dimensions and details
obtained from preliminary design strategies. The analytical model of the building should
(a) be a 3-dimensional one to be able to study dynamic behaviour, with all possible stiffness and
masses of the building included in it; two-dimensional models are unacceptable, because
seismic design codes require all buildings to be analysed with torsional effects with at least a
minimum eccentricity between mass and stiffness at each floor level of the building;
(classical literature requires that cracked moment of inertia properties be used in modeling
moment frame members, e.g., 0.35Igross for beams and 0.7Igross for columns); and
(b) include effect of soil flexibility where the underlying soil layers are either flexible or weak; in
most such cases, the associated constitutive relation of soils is nonlinear. Sometimes, even a
linear idealization of the soil flexibility can reveal significantly different structural actions.

(4) Studying dynamic modes of oscillation of the building


This is a critical step in evaluating suitability of the overall geometry, seismic structural
configuration, and distribution of mass and stiffness of the building. An important feature that
should be ensured is that
(a) The building should have minimum, if not no, asymmetry in plan. In particular, the early
modes of vibration should be the pure LATERAL TRANSLATIONAL modes of vibration, and
NOT either the diagonal translational or the torsional mode(s) of vibration that result in poor
performance of the building; and
(b) The modal mass of early pure translational modes together should account for at least 90%
of the mass of the building along each plan direction of the building, excluding that of the
torsional modes of vibration. If this is not being achieved, the structural configuration,
member proportioning, connectivity and/or material properties need to be changed to seek
the desired pure translational behaviour in the early modes of vibration.

248
(5) Performing Linear Elastic Structural Analysis of the building
(a) Prepare the improved structural analysis model of the building with the dimensions and
details obtained from the preliminary design calculations performed above. Estimate the
approximate fundamental translational natural period Ta of the building, and calculate the
design seismic base shear VB on the building by the Equivalent Lateral Force Design procedure
(sometimes called the Seismic Coefficient Method).
(b) Apply seismic code specified design lateral forces Qi at each floor i of the building on the
analytical model of the building, perform linear elastic structural analysis, and estimate the
stress-resultants from all load combinations given in the seismic code. Estimate the lateral
deformation in the building, under the various load combinations. If the governing lateral
deformation is within the permissible lateral deformation in the building specified in the
seismic design codes, the structural configuration and sizing adopted may be accepted. Else,
the vertical LLRS should be made stiffer to arrive at a revised structural configuration of the
building.
(c) Perform Linear Dynamic Structural Analysis of the building for buildings that are irregular,
tall, long, important and in high seismic zones. This can be done in two ways, using
recorded/synthetic ground motion time histories or design response spectrum. Some codes
categorically require that the seismic base shear from the Response Spectrum Method of analysis
should not fall below that obtained from the Seismic Coefficient Method, even though the
displacements estimated by the former method can exceed those by the latter.

5.3.2 Strength Design Stage


The main activities in this stage are:

(6) Choosing relative member flexural strength ratio to seek desired collapse mechanism
(a) Identify a desired collapse mechanism of the structural system in which the building should
deform in, under the extreme condition of collapse, if ever, when the strong earthquake
shaking exceeds the design earthquake shaking for which buildings are normally designed.
Determine the locations and type of inelastic actions that are desired in the building.
(b) Perform Capacity Design of all members, to ensure strength hierarchy is such that shear failure
is preceded by large flexural plastic actions, and that the plastic actions are localized to only to
the desired locations as identified in step 6(a) above. In doing so, the beam-to-column design
moment strength ratio in moment-resisting frame buildings or frame-structural wall buildings may
take values much higher than those normally recommended in some seismic codes.

(7) Performing seismic design of all structural elements of the building


(a) Design the slabs of the building.
(b) Design each beams for flexure for the governing moment demand obtained from the load
combinations. Then, design these beams for shear, by the capacity design method and in line
with the plastic hinges in the identified desired collapse mechanism.
(c) Design all columns and structural walls for flexure, for the governing axial force and bending
moment combinations specified by the seismic design code, and for the stress-resultants
arising out of an additional special load combination of the building with overstrength
plastic moment hinges as per identified desirable collapse mechanism. Then, design the
columns for shear, for the shear demand from the load combinations specified by the seismic
design code and for that arising out of an additional special load combination based on the
capacity design method for design of shear considering the plastic hinges in beams as per
identified desirable collapse mechanism. RC columns and RC walls should be designed to
have all design points within the tension failure region on the P-M interaction diagram, i.e.,
usually to have axial load demand to be about less than 30% of the uniaxial compression
capacity of the section. Members of RC moment-resisting frame buildings need to have few
more important features, namely:
(i) the column should be much wider than the beam (in both directions) to allow beam bars
to be passed into/through column without cranking;
249
(ii) the longitudinal bars in beams should adopt standard hook detailing at the end, to avoid
constructional difficulties of anchoring beam bars into the adjoining column.
(d) Design the beam-to-column and beam-to-wall joints to have shear stresses within the
permissible values specified in seismic design code.
(e) Design foundation(s) of the building in keeping with the capacity of the soil underneath it.

5.3.3 Ductility Design Stage


The main activities in this stage are:

(8) Detailing all members and their connections to ensure ductility in required members and prevent
undesired actions in other members
(a) Provide confining transverse reinforcement in all ductile RC beams as per the requirements
specified in the seismic detailing code (including close spacing, closed loops with 135°
hooks, and at least the minimum specified lengths at hook ends).
(b) Provide design transverse reinforcement in all RC columns and RC walls as per design
calculations (including close spacing, closed loops with 135° hooks, and at least the
minimum specified lengths at hook ends).

(9) Verifying that the desired mechanism is generated in the building


(a) Prepare the structural analysis model for performing nonlinear quasi-static displacement pushover
analysis (PoA) and nonlinear time history analysis (NL THA).
(b) Perform PoA of the building with lateral force profile as per code-specified distribution of
design lateral forces. Understand the deformability under design lateral force loading and
collapse mechanism generated. And, determine if the design of the building needs to be
revised. If the collapse mechanism obtained in not the desirable one, revise the seismic
structural configuration and repeat the above steps from step 1, till the desired mechanism is
achieved. If the collapse mechanism obtained in the desirable one, go to the next step 9(c).
(c) Choose a suite of ground motions that reflect possible ground motions that are likely to occur at
the location of the building. These could include far field type motions, and near-field type
motions, if applicable. And, they could reflect the type of soil on which the building is
constructed. Ensure that the level of their intensity and frequency spectrum are at least those
specified by the seismic design code. Perform NL THA of the building under all ground
motions identified, to capture the type of mechanism that can be generated under the
building. Study the collapse mechanism generated, if any.
(d) If the desirable mechanism is not achieved, make suitable changes in the building in step 1
(e.g., through design of members, structural system, ductile detailing, and/or choice of
materials), and perform all activities under stiffness design and strength design stages.
(e) If the desired mechanism is achieved, prepare requisite structural drawings as per the
detailing chosen in design and analysis.

5.4 CLOSING COMMENTS


Only a select set of the concepts of earthquake behaviour is discussed in this book. This is
not an exhaustive list of all concepts relevant to earthquake behaviour, analysis and design. Also,
many of these concepts are inter-related; the book does not attempt to discuss these inter-
relationships. It is hoped that the discussions presented in this book will help architects and engineers
undertake seismic design of buildings with greater clarity and confidence, especially when using
the concepts presented.

250

You might also like