EC8 - Modelling and Analysis

EUROCODE 8
Background and Applications

Dissemination of information for training Lisbon 10-11 February 211
Dissemination of information for training Lisbon, 10-11 February 2011
Modelling and Analysis Modelling and Analysis
(Chapter 4 of EC8-1)
Peter Fajfar
University of Ljubljana
M j K li Maja Kreslin
University of Ljubljana
Accelerograms
Dissemination of information for training Lisbon 10-11 February 2011 2
Hysteretic behaviour
STEEL
REINFORCED CONCRETE
MASONRY
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
Philosophy of seismic design
PERFORMANCE STATE
frequent
operational safe near collapse
PERFORMANCE STATE
q
R=95 years
41% in 50 years
A
K
E
design
R=475 years
10%i 50
T
H
Q
U
A
10% in 50 years
E
A
R
T
max.considered
Performance states
Everything should be made as simple
as possible but not simpler as possible, but not simpler
Albert Einstein
Scope
EC8-1, Chapter 4, Overview and comments
4.2 Characteristics of earthquake resistant buildings 4.2 Characteristics of earthquake resistant buildings
4.3 Structural analysis
4.4 Safety verifications y
Test building
Modellingg
Analysis
Code designed versus old buildings g g
Basic principles of conceptual design
Structural simplicity p y
Uniformity, symmetry and redundancy
Bi-directional resistance and stiffness Bi-directional resistance and stiffness
Torsional resistance and stiffness
Diaphragmatic behaviour at storey level Diaphragmatic behaviour at storey level
Adequate foundation
LAquila 2009
LAquila 2009
LAquila 2009
Kobe 1995 Izmit 1999
Kobe 1995
Chile 2010
Kobe 2010
LAquila 2009
Montenegro 1979
Kobe 1995
Montenegro 1979
Montenegro 1979
Primary seismic members
Members considered as part of the structural
system that resists the seismic action, modelled in y ,
the analysis for the seismic design situation and
fully designed and detailed for earthquake
resistance in accordance with the rules of EN
1998
Secondary seismic members
Members which are not considered as part of the
seismic action resisting system and whose g y
strength and stiffness against seismic actions is
neglected
Structural (ir)regularity
Regularity
Regularity in plan
Symmetry
Compact plan configuration
Adequate in-plan stiffness of the floors
Small in plan slenderness Small in-plan slenderness
Adequate torsional stiffness
Regularity in elevation
No interruption of lateral load resisting systems in
ele ation elevation
No abrupt changes of stiffness, mass and overstrength
Limitations of setbacks Limitations of setbacks
Torsional flexibility
T > T and/or T > T T
> T
x
and/or T
> T
y
r
x
> l
s
and/or r
y
> l
s
Torsionally stiff Torsionally flexible
Importance classes
Permanent loads G
self weight of the structure + 2 kN/m
2
self weight of the structure 2 kN/m
Variable live loads Q
I
= 0.8
office building (category B) 2 kN/m
2
I
= 1.0
I
= 1.2
Vertical loads (G, Q) were distributed to the
elements with regard to their effective area
I
= 1 4
I
= 1.4
Importance factor
Importance factor Return period T (years)
0.8 230
1.0 475
1.2 780
1.3 1000
1 4 12 0 1.4 1250
(based on data for Slovenia)
Combination of loads (EC0)
k,j E,d 2,i ,
1 i 1
G "+" P "+" A "+"
k i
j
Q
> >
+

Permanent loads G
Prestressing loads P
Seismic loads A
Variable live loads Q (factor +
2
in EC1) Variable live loads Q (factor +
2
in EC1)
Determination of masses
Q G

" "
ki Ei kj
Q G +

" "

2i Ei
=
Pseudo 3D model
Cracked sections
In concrete buildings, in composite steel-
b ildi d i b ildi h concrete buildings and in masonry buildings the
stiffness of the load bearing elements should take
into account the effect of cracking (Secant into account the effect of cracking (Secant
stiffness to the initiation of yielding of the
reinforcement). )
The elastic flexural and shear stiffness properties p p
of concrete and masonry elements may be taken
to be equal to one-half of the corresponding
stiffness of the ncracked elements stiffness of the uncracked elements.
Cracked sections
S
ae
(g)
S
de
(cm)
2 0
2.5
100
R N
T = 2 T T
cr
= T 2
1.5
2.0
0.5
1.0
50
0.0
0 1 2 3
T(s)
0
T
R
T
N
T T
cr
T (s)
Accidental eccentricity
e
i
= 0 05 L
i
L i th fl di i di l t th
e
ai
= 0.05 L
i
L
i
is the floor-dimension perpendicular to the
direction of the seismic action
Methods of analysis
a
S
DYNAMIC STATIC
a
Modal response
spectrum
Lateral force
method
LINEAR
b
T
analysis
method
T
a
combined with response spectrum
b
bi d ith b h i f t
Nonlinear
response-
history analysis
Nonlinear static
(pushover)
analysis
NONLINEAR
b
combined with behaviour factor
Behaviour factor
Factor used for design purposes to reduce the
forces obtained from a linear analysis, in order to y ,
account for the non-linear response of a structure,
associated with the material, the structural system
and the design procedures
Behaviour factor - background
FF
F
e

e
F D
R = = =
y y
R
F D
F
y
s
d
F
R =
F
F
y

e
s
d
F
R = = R R
F
F
d

u
R R
Eurocode 8
D
d
D
y
D
D
u
s
1
R q , R >
Ductility classes
FF
F
e

F
y2
DCM
F
y1

y
DCH
D
y1
D
y2
D
D
Behaviour factor
Overstrength
900
o
u
F
o
r
c
e
o
1
F
F
0
0.00 0.15
Displacement Displacement
Overstrength factor = o
u
/ o
1
g
u 1
Montenegro 1979
Kobe 1995
Overstrength factor
Wall- or wall-equivalent dual systems
wall systems with only two uncoupled walls per wall systems with only two uncoupled walls per
horizontal direction: o
u
/ o
1
= 1,0
other uncoupled wall systems: o
u
/ o
1
=1,1
wall-equivalent dual, or coupled wall systems:
o
u
/ o
1
= 1,2
Irregular in plan: reduced values
Pushover analysis: increased values
Lateral force method
Regular structures with small influence of higher
modes
T
1
4 T
C
in T
1
2.0 s
F
b
= S
d
(T
1
) m
Approximate formulas for the period T Approximate formulas for the period T
1
Distribution of horizontal forces Distribution of horizontal forces
i i
b i
m z
F F

=
i i
b i
m s
F F

=
or
j j
b i
m z
F F
=
E
j j
b i
m s
F F
=
E
or
Accidental eccentricity Accidental eccentricity
= 1 + 1,2 (x/L
e
)
L
e

x
i

Approximate formulas for T
1
R l i h Rayleigh
=
j j
j
j j
p u
m u
T
2
1
2t
j
j j
Empirical formula
3
4
1 t
T C H =
Modal response spectrum analysis
Displacements:
Ai
i
i i Di i i i
S
T
S
2
2
max
4t
I = I = U
4t
ai i i i
S I = M F
Forces:
i
i
i
M
L
= I
i
M
s M
T
i i
L =
T
M M
i
T
i i
M M =
Number of modes
The response of all modes of vibration
contributing significantly to the global response g g y g p
shall be taken into account
the sum of the effective modal masses amounts to at the sum of the effective modal masses amounts to at
least 90% of the total mass of the structure
ll d ith ff ti d l t th 5% all modes with effective modal masses greater than 5%
of the total mass are taken into account
Effective masses
i
L
m
2
-
i
i
i
M
m =
s M
T
i i
L =
i
T
i i
M M =
i i
M
n m

-
i i i
M m m
i j
j i
= =

= = 1 1
Combination of modal responses
E
E
= E
Ei
2
(SRSS)
if T
j
0.9 T
i
Otherwise more accurate procedure such as Otherwise more accurate procedure, such as
CQC CQC
Accidental eccentricity
Accidental torsional effects
0.05 , 0.05
X i X i Y i Y i Y i X i
M F L M F L = =
, , , , , ,
0.05 , 0.05
X i X i Y i Y i Y i X i
M F L M F L
Pushover analysis
N2 method (basic)
Target displacement: Annex B (informative) Target displacement: Annex B (informative)
Extended N2
Higher mode effects in plan and elevation
Complies with the EC8-3 requirement 4.4.4.5
P d f ti ti f t i l d hi h d Procedure for estimation of torsional and higher mode
effects
Combination of effects of components
E " " 0 30E E
Edx
"+" 0,30E
Edy
0,30E
Edx
"+" E
Edy
SRSS
E
1
E
1x
E
1x
E
2x
F
x
F
x

E
1y
E
1x
E
2x
F
y
F
y

Vertical seismic action
If a
vg
is greater than 0,25 g (2,5 m/s2) the vertical
component of the seismic action should be taken
into account
for horizontal or nearly horizontal structural
b i 20 members spanning 20 m or more
for horizontal or nearly horizontal cantilever
components longer than 5 m components longer than 5 m
for horizontal or nearly horizontal pre-stressed
components components
for beams supporting columns
in base-isolated structures in base-isolated structures
Displacement calculation
d d d
s
= q
d
d
e
d di l t i d d b th d i i i ti d
s
displacement induced by the design seismic action
q
d
behaviour factor for displacements (q
d
= q, unless
otherwise specified) otherwise specified)
d
e
displacement determined by a linear analysis based on
the design response spectrum the design response spectrum
Upper limit: value from the elastic displacement spectrum
Torsional effect are taken into account
Actual displacements
F
FF
e

q = F
e
/F
d
D = q D
d
F
y

FF
d

D
d
D
y
D
D
Non-structural element
Architectural mechanical or electrical element Architectural, mechanical or electrical element,
system and component which, whether due to
lack of strength or to the way it is connected to the lack of strength or to the way it is connected to the
structure, is not considered in the seismic design
as load carrying element y g
Non-structural elements
For non-structural elements of great importance or
of a particularly dangerous nature p y g
Floor-response spectra
For other non-structural elements
Simplified procedure
Non-structural elements
Simplified analysis
( )
a a a a a
/ q W S F =
S
a
= oS[3(1 + z/H) / (1 + (1 T
a
/T
1
)
2
)-0,5]
W
a
weight of the element
a
importance factor for the element
q
a
behaviour factor for the element
Floor acceleration spectrum (simplified)
5
6
a
g
S
a S
3
4
z
= 1. 0
H
z
= 0. 5
H
2
3 H
z
= 0
H
0
1
0
0 1 2 3 4
a
1
T
T
Normalized floor acceleration spectrum
( 1 1 h i ht t th fl H t t l h i ht (q
a
= 1,
a
= 1, z height up to the floor , H total height,
T
a
period of the element, T
1
period of the structure)
Additional measures for masonry infilled frames
Provisions apply to frame or frame equivalent dual concrete
systems of DCH and to steel or steel-concrete composite
moment resisting frames of DCH with interacting non-
engineered masonry infills
Recommendation: adopt also for DCM or DCL concrete steel Recommendation: adopt also for DCM or DCL concrete, steel
or composite structures with masonry infills
I l iti i l ti Irregularities in elevation
Irregularities in plan g p
Damage limitation of infills
Friuli 1976
Montenegro 1979 Izmit 1999
Safety verifications (1) - Ultimate limit state
Resistance condition
E
d
R
d
E d d R it E
d
demand, R
d
capacity
P-A effects need not be taken into account if
10 , 0 =
tot
r tot
s
h V
d P
tot
Safety verifications (2)
Global and local ductility condition
Specific material related requirements shall be satisfied Specific material related requirements shall be satisfied,
including, when indicated, capacity design provisions
Prevention of storey mechanisms Prevention of storey mechanisms

>
Rb Rc
3 , 1 M M
Capacity design
YES !
NO !
Capacity design
Kobe 1995
Kobe 1995
Kobe 1995
Safety verifications (3)
Equilibrium condition
R i t f h i t l di h Resistance of horizontal diaphragms
Resistance of foundations
Seismic joint condition
Damage limitation state
Limitation of interstorey drift y
non-structural elements of brittle materials
d 0 005 h d 0 01h d
r
v 0.005 h , d
r
0.01h
ductile non-structural elements
d
r
v 0.0075 h
non-structural elements do not to interfere with structural
deformations, or without non-structural elements
d
r
v 0.010 h d
r
0.02h
r r
v = 0.4 (importance classes III and IV)
v = 0.5 (importance classes I in II)
Return period versus (importance) factor
Return period T (years) Return period T (years)
50 0.48
100 0.60
200 0.76
475 1.00
1000 1 30 1000 1.30
10000 2.57
Valid for Slovenia
Test example
RC buildingg
6 stories + 2 basements
Description of building
SCHEMATIC
SECTION
TYPICAL PLAN TYPICAL PLAN
BASEMENT BASEMENT
Seismic actions
ELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM
a
g
=
I
a
gR
= 0.25g
importance class II (I = 1 0) importance class II (I = 1.0)
Soil B, Type 1
S = 1.2, S 1.2,
T
B
= 0.15 s,T
C
= 0.5 s, T
D
= 2.0 s
Damping 5%
Vertical actions
Permanent loads G
self weight of the structure + 2 kN/m
2
self weight of the structure 2 kN/m
Variable live loads Q
office building (category B) 2 kN/m
2
Vertical loads (G, Q) were distributed to the
elements
Seismic masses (1)
Masses from permanent loads G factor 1.0
Masses from live loads Q factor +
Ei
Masses from live loads Q factor +
Ei
+ = +
2 Ei i
factor = 1.0 (roof storey), = 0.5 (other)
factor + = 0 3 (category B) factor +
2i
= 0.3 (category B)
15% (30%) mass from Q is taken into account
Seismic masses (2)
Level Storey mass
m (ton)
Moment of inertia
MMI (ton*m2)
ROOF 372 33951
5 396 36128
4 396 36128
3 396 36128
2 396 36128
1 408 37244
E = 2362 ton
+
= =
2 2
2
l b
MMI m l m
* Only masses above level 0 are taken into account
= =
12
s
MMI m l m
Structural model general (1)
3D (spatial) model
All element are modelled as line elements All element are modelled as line elements
peripheral walls are modelled with line elements and a
rigid beam at the top of the each element
Effective widths of beams (EC2)
Rigid offsets are not taken into account g
Infinitely stiff elements are used only in relation to walls
W1 and W2
Rigid diaphragms at each floor
slabs are not modelled
Masses and mass moments of inertia are lumped
at centres of masses
Only masses above the top of the peripheral walls are
taken into account
Cracked elements are considered
0.5*As, 0.5*I, 0.1*It
All elements are fully fixed in foundation
Infills are not considered
Structural model effective width EC2
Structural model peripheral walls
Structural regularity
Criteria for regularity in elevation
Criteria for regularity in plan
1) slenderness < 4
= <
max
4
L
1) slenderness < 4
2) eccentricity < 30%* torsional radius
s
s
0
Direction X: 0.30
Direction Y: 0 30
X X
e r
e r
= <
min
4
L
2) eccentricity 30% torsional radius
3) torsional radius < radius of gyration
s
0
Direction Y: 0.30
Y Y
e r
>
>
Direction X:
Direction Y:
X s
r l
r l
) gy
> Direction Y:
Y s
r l
Structural regularity in plan
Structural eccentricity e
0
and centre of stiffness
3 static load cases in each storey (F
Xi
= 1, F
Yi
= 1, M
i
= 1) 3 static load cases in each storey (F
Xi
1, F
Yi
1, M
i
1)
Loads are applied in centres of mass (CM)
Determine rotation R
Zi
due to F
Xi
, F
Yi
and M
i Zi Xi Yi i
Determine e
0i
and centres of stiffness (XCR
i
, YCR
i
)
( )
( )
=
= = +
=
, ,
0 , 0 ,
,
1
( 1)
1
Z i X i
X i i X i i
Z i i
R F
e XCR e XCM
R M
R F
( )
=
= = +
=
, ,
0 , 0 ,
,
1
( 1)
Z i Y i
Y i i Y i i
Z i i
R F
e YCR e YCM
R M
Structural regularity in plan
T i l di ( ) Torsional radius (r
X
, r
Y
)
3 static load cases in each storey (F
TXi
= 1, F
TYi
= 1, M
Ti
= 1)
L d li d i t f tif (CR) Loads are applied in centres of stifness (CR)
Determine rotations R
Zi
(M
Ti
), displacement U
Xi
(F
Xi
) and U
Yi
(F
Yi
)
Determine torsional (K ) and lateral stiffnesses (K K ) Determine torsional (K
M,i
) and lateral stiffnesses (K
FX,i
, K
FY,i
)
Determine r
Xi
and r
Yi
( ) ( ) ( )
= = =
= = =
, , ,
, , , , , ,
1 1 1
, ,
1 1 1
M i FX i FY i
Z i T i X i TX i Y i TY i
K K K
R M U F U F
= =
, ,
, ,
M i M i
X i Y i
FY i FX i
K K
r and r
K K
, , FY i FX i
K K
Structural regularity - criteria
Criteria for regularity in elevation
Criteria for regularity in plan
1)

max
4
L
1)
2)
s
0
Direction X: 0.30
X X
e r
= <
max
min
4
L
Structure is regular
in plan and
2)
3)
s
0
Direction Y: 0.30
Y Y
e r
>
>
Direction X:
Direction Y:
X s
r l
r l
p
in elevation
)
> Direction Y:
Y s
r l
Irregular in elevation if basement is also considered !?
Structural type of the building
UNCOUPLED WALL SYSTEM
The structural system is defined as a wall system when The structural system is defined as a wall system, when
65% (or more) of the shear resistance is contributed by
walls
Application of shear resistance is difficult
EC8 allows that shear resistance may be substituted by
h f shear forces
Base (above basement) shear force taken by walls
amounts to 72% (direction X) and 92% (direction Y) amounts to 72% (direction X) and 92% (direction Y)
of the total shear force
Dual wall equivalent system?
Behaviour factor q
St t l t l d ll t Structural type: uncoupled wall system
Ductility class: DCM
=
0
3.0 q
Structural (ir)regularity:
regular in elevation - no reduction q
0
g q
0
Factor associated with prevailing failure mode: k
w
= 1
= =
0
3.0
w
q k q
Periods, effective masses and modal shapes (1)
T M M M
Mode
T
(sec)
M
eff,UX
(%)
M
eff,UY
(%)
M
eff,MZ
(%)
1 0.92 80.2 0.0 0.2
2 0 68 0 0 76 3 0 0 2 0.68 0.0 76.3 0.0
3 0.51 0.2 0.0 75.2
4 0.22 15.0 0.0 0.2
5 0.15 0.0 18.5 0.0
6 0.12 0.2 0.0 17.6
E M = 95 7 94 7 93 1 E M
eff
= 95.7 94.7 93.1
ETABS program
1 MODE predominantly translational in X direction 1. MODE predominantly translational in X direction
2 MODE translational in Y direction 2. MODE translational in Y direction
3 MODE predominantly torsional 3. MODE predominantly torsional
Modal response spectrum analysis RSA
Modal response spectrum analysis was performed
independently for the ground excitation in two p y g
horizontal direction
Combination of diferent modes CQC Combination of diferent modes CQC
Combination of results in two directions SRSS
Design spectrum was used Design spectrum was used
Accidental eccentricity was taken into account
S i i d i it ti Seismic design situation
Accidental torsional effects
Results of analysis without accidental torsion (SSRS
of two horizontal directions) + envelope of accidental ) p
torsional effects
SRSS (E
X
, E
Y
) + ENVE(M
X
, M
Y
) (
X Y
) (
X Y
)
Results of analysis without accidental torsion +
id t l t i l ff t f h h i t l accidental torsional effects, for each horizontal
direction. SRSS combination of two horizontal
directions directions
SRSS (E
X
M
X
, E
Y
M
Y
)
RSA Accidental torsional effects
RSA shear forces
12% of the total
15% of the total
%
weight
weight
RSA - displacements
RSA Damage limitations
RSA second order effects
Force distribution
Direction X Direction X
Force distribution
Direction Y Direction Y
Shear forces
Direction X Direction X
Shear forces
Direction Y Direction Y
Code designed versus old buildings
SPEAR BUILDING SPEAR BUILDING
Pushover curves
30 30
Test
EC8 H
24
27
30
24
27
30
= 6.5
EC8 H
18
21
24
[
%
]
18
21
24
[
%
]
12
15
F
b

/

W

[
= 3.2
12
15
F
b

/

W

[
= 3.2
3
6
9
Test
1st yield of beam
3
6
9
Test
EC8 H
1st yield of beam
1st yield of column
NC
0
3
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7
1st yield of column
NC
0
3
0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7
NC
Design force
d
n
/ H [%]
d
n
/ H [%]
X direction
Determination of seismic capacity (NC)
Test Test
EC8 H
Probability of failure
PGA = 0 25 g x 1 15 = 0 29 g (seismic hazard map soil type C) PGA
475
= 0.25 g x 1.15 = 0.29 g (seismic hazard map, soil type C)
PGA
C
= 0.25 g (test building), PGA
C
= 0.77 g (EC8 building)
P
NC
= 0.78 x 10
-2
or 32% in 50 years (test building)
P
NC
= 2.67 x 10
-4
or 1.3% in 50 years (EC8 building)
Discussion of results
PGA
C
= 0.77 g
The code is too conservative!? The code is too conservative!?
P 1 3 % P
NC,50
= 1.3 %
The probability is too high!?
How high is the tolerable probability?
How safe is safe enough?

EC8 - Modelling and Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EC8 - Modelling and Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EUROCODE 8

Background and Applications

You might also like