PP - Weetcloaded - Compute Eq Alternate Proc Per Asce7-10 - WSL PDF

4/24/2018
Alternative Seismic Provisions Based From ASCE 7‐10:
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures
WILFREDO S. LOPEZ, f.asep f.pice
Alternative Seismic Provisions Based From ASCE 7‐10
CONTENTS OF THE PRESENTATION:
I. Introduction (Historical Development of Seismic Codes)
II. Steps in Using Section 12.8 of ASCE 7‐10
III. Sample Computation of Base Shear
IV. Comparison of Base Shear Between NSCP 2015 and
ASCE 7‐10
TECHNICAL CONFERENCE ON WIND AND
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING: LOADED 1
4/24/2018
I. INTRODUCTION
Historical Development of Building Code / Seismic Code
Circa 3000 BC – Code of Hammurabi during the Babylonian Empire
‐ If a builder has built a house for a man and his work is not strong,
and if the house he has built fall and kills the householder, the
builder shall be slain. If the child of the householder be killed,
the child of the builder shall be slain.
‐ though the Code of Hammurabi was harsh by today’s standards,
civilization has tried to bring about some control over building
safety.
Circa 64AD – Burning of the Roman Empire
‐ Emperor Nero implemented his Master Plan for the Roman Empire
with sound construction principals and fire resistance after the
burning of Rome.
Circa 1666AD – The Great London Fire
‐ destroyed over 15,000 buildings.
‐ The “London Building Act” was issued by the Parliament which set‐
up building regulations in the City of London.
‐ Considered the first significant building regulation.
4/24/2018
1755 Lisbon Earthquake

‐ estimated magnitude between M8.5 to M9.0 that lasted between
3.5 to 6.0 minutes.
‐ Fires and tsunami resulted from the earthquake that was felt
throughout Europe and as far as Finland and North Africa
which reported a 20 meter high tsunami.
‐ First earthquake studied scientifically for its effects over a large area
and led to the birth of modern seismology and earthquake
engineering.
1908 Mw7.1 Messina Earthquake, Italy

‐ The Italian Government established the Geologic Committee and
Engineering Committee to study the disaster and recommends
earthquake disaster mitigation.
‐The Engineering Committee recommended the seismic ratio (seismic
acceleration over the gravity acceleration) equal to 1/12 for the
first floor and 1/8 for the floor above.
‐ First known quantitative recommendation of design seismic forces.
4/24/2018
1923 Great Kanto Earthquake, Tokyo, Japan

‐ estimated Mw 7.9 and between 4 to 10 minutes duration
‐ 105,385 confirmed deaths and and 40,000 missing
‐ 38,000 died from fire
‐ 1924 Japanese Urban Building Law
‐ specified 10% of the building weight as horizontal force
1927 Uniform Building Code (UBC)

‐ 1925 Mw 6.8 Sta. Barbara Earthquake which lasted 19 seconds
‐ first UBC published
‐ recommended minimum design lateral forces for earthquake
resistance equal to V=0.075 W for buildings in foundations with
allowable bearing pressure of 4000 psf and V=0.10 W for all
other buildings including those on pile foundations where
W=Dead Load plus Live Load.
4/24/2018
YEAR Seismic Force Seismic Source/Zone NSCP Zone
1927 UBC 1927 Building Dead Loads and Live
V 0.075 W (qall = 4000 psf) Loads
V 0.10W (other buildings)
1935- UBC 1935 – UBC 1958 Seismic coefficient, C, based on
1958 F CW probability of damage assigned
to Zone Map (1,2,3)
1961- UBC 1961 – UBC 1973 Framing factor, K 1972
1973 V ZKCW C depend on the fundamental NSCB
period, T, of the structure
Z factor based on probability of
damage (zone 1,2,3)
Inclusion of Earthquake
Recording Instrumentation (UBC
1973
Year Seismic Force Seismic Source/Zone NSCP Zone
1976- UBC 1976 – UBC 1985 Zone Factor, Z, based on 1981 NSCP Zone 2, 4
1985 V ZIKCSW Seismic Risk Map (Zones 1,2,3,4) 1987 NSCP
Soil site resonance factor
Rayleigh formula for period
Start to recommend Dynamic
Analysis (1976) but no provision
was included
1988- UBC 1988 – UBC 1994 Zones 1, 2A,2B,3,4 with zone 1992 NSCP Zone 2, 4
1994 V ZICW/Rw factor based on seismic ground
motion with 10%probability of
exceedance in 50 years (500
years RP)
Ductility factor, Rw
Provisions for Dynamic Analysis:
Response Spectrum
4/24/2018
Year Seismic Force Seismic Source/Zone NSCP Zone
1997 UBC 1997 (last UBC) Velocity-related coefficient 2001 NSCP Zone 2, 4
V CvIW/RT Distance of seismic source: 2010 NSCP
Near-source factors 2015 NSCP
2000- IBC 2000-IBC 2016/ Spectral Acceleration Maps
present ASCE7- MCE at 2% probability of
V CsW exceedance in 50 years
(2500 years RP)
Seismic zones are replaced
with Seismic Design
Category (SDC)
ASCE7-10 Spectral Acceleration Maps Alternative Phivolcs PEM
Procedure
V CsW
Motivations why we have to discuss this Alternative Provisions.
Already recognized in the NSCP 2015 as an Alternative
Procedure in determining seismic forces
Issuance of the Philippine Earthquake Model
(PEM) of PHIVOLCS
ASEP Project SAM (Spectral Acceleration Maps)
4/24/2018
ASCE7‐10: Design Response Spectra
NSCP 2015: Design Response Spectra
II. STEPS IN USING SEC. 12.8 ASCE 7‐10
I. Occupancy or Risk Category
4/24/2018
II. Obtain ground motion parameters: Ss and S1
ASCE 7‐10 ground motion parameters are taken on a 5%
damped acceleration response spectrum at site class B that is
expected to achieve a 1% probability of structural collapse within
a 50 year period from an earthquake having a 2% probability of
exceedance in 50 years or 2500 year return period.
II. Obtain ground motion parameters: Ss and S1
The ground motion parameters are represented by the Risk‐
Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake spectral response
acceleration parameters at short and long periods (Ss and S1
Ss – mapped MCER spectral response acceleration parameter at
short periods of 0.2 sec.
S1 – mapped MCER spectral response acceleration parameter at
long period at 1 sec
4/24/2018
III. Determine site classification to modify the bedrock response
spectrum for non‐rock local site conditions.
IV. Obtain site coefficients Fa and Fv as adjustment factors to

modify the response spectrum.
NSCP2015 Soil Types
Where the soil properties are not known
in sufficient detail to determine the site
class, Site Class D shall be used unless the
authority having jurisdiction or ASCE7‐20: Site Coefficients
geotechnical data determines Site Class E
or F soils are present at the site.
4/24/2018
V. Calculate adjusted MCER spectral response parameters, SMS and

SM1 .
Eq. 11.4.1 Eq. 11.4.2
VI. Compute the Design Spectral Response Parameters, SDS and
SD1.
2 2
Eq. 11.4.3 Eq. 11.4.4
3 3
VII. Compute structure approximate fundamental period , Ta
Eq. 12.8‐7 structural height
For concrete or steel MRF not exceeding 12 stories above the base:
0.1 Eq. 12.8‐8 number of stories
Values of Ct ; x Ct x
Steel moment-resisting frames = 0.0724 0.8
Concrete moment-resisting frames = 0.0466 0.9
Steel eccentrically braced frames &
Steel buckling-restrained frames = 0.0731 0.75
All other structural system = 0.0488 0.75
4/24/2018
Approximate Fundamental Period, in sec
Eq. 12.8‐7 0.1 Eq. 12.8‐8
Maximum value of the fundamental period,
VIII. Identify the Seismic Design Category, SDC
4/24/2018
IX. Determine Importance Factor, Ie
X. Determine Structural System and System Parameters: R, Cd, o
4/24/2018
X. Determine Structural System and System Parameters: R, Cd, o
XI. Determine Configuration Irregularities if any
4/24/2018
XI. A. Horizontal Configuration Irregularities
4/24/2018
4/24/2018
XI. B. Vertical Configuration Irregularities
4/24/2018
4/24/2018
4/24/2018
XII. Determine Diaphragm Flexibility: Rigid, Semi‐rigid, Flexible
4/24/2018
XIII. Determine Redundancy Factory, 
For structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D, E, or F, ρ shall
equal 1.3 unless one of the following two conditions is met, whereby ρ
is permitted to be taken as 1.0:
a. Each story resisting more than 35 percent of the base shear in the
direction of interest
b. Structures that are regular in plan at all levels provided that the
seismic force‐resisting systems consist of at least two bays of
seismic force‐resisting perimeter framing on each side of the
structure in each orthogonal direction at each story resisting more
than 35 percent of the base shear.
4/24/2018
XIV. Determine Lateral Force Analysis Procedure
XIV. Determine Lateral Force Analysis Procedure
4/24/2018
XV. Compute Base Shear and Distribute Lateral Loads
Section 12.8, ASCE 7‐10: Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure
12.8.1 Seismic Base Shear. The seismic base shear, V, in a given
direction shall be determined in accordance with the following
equation:
Eq. 12.8‐1
where:
Cs = the seismic response coefficient
W = the effective seismic weight
XV. Compute Base Shear and Distribute Lateral Loads
W = the effective seismic weight
Includes: All structural and non structural elements
0.5 kPa minimum partition load allowance
25% of storage live load
Total operating weight of permanent equipment
4/24/2018
Eq. 12.8‐2
The maximum value of : For Eq. 12.8‐3
For > Eq. 12.8‐4
The minimum value of : 0.044 0.01 Eq. 12.8‐5
0.5
Additional Minimum: For 0.6 Eq. 12.8‐6
4/24/2018
Where:
SDS = the design spectral response acceleration parameter in the short
period range
SD1 = Design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period
of 1.0 s
S1 =Mapped MCER spectral response acceleration parameter
T = Fundamental period of the structure(s)
TL= Long‐period transition period(s)
R = the response modification factor
Ie = the importance factor
Vertical Distribution of Seismic Forces
The lateral seismic force Fx induced at any level shall be determined from
the following equations:
Eq. 12.8‐12
Eq. 12.8‐11 ∑
where
Cvx = vertical distribution factor
V = total design lateral force or shear at the base of the structure
wi and wx = the portion of the total effective seismic weight of the structure
(W) located or assigned to Level i or x h i and
hx = the height from the base to Level i or x
4/24/2018
∑
k = an exponent related to the structure
period
k=1 for period of 0.5 s or less
k = 2 for period of 2.5 s or more
for structures having a period
between 0.5 and 2.5 s, k shall be 2
or shall be determined by linear
interpolation between 1 and 2
4/24/2018
Horizontal Distribution of Seismic Forces
Type equation here.Horizontal Distribution of Forces. The seismic design
story shear in any story (Vx) shall be determined from the following
equation:
Eq. 12.8‐13
where
Fi = the portion of the seismic base shear V at Level i. The seismic design story shear (Vx)
shall be distributed to the various vertical elements of the seismic force‐resisting system
in the story under consideration based on the relative lateral stiffness of the vertical
resisting elements and the diaphragm.
Horizontal Distribution of Seismic Forces: Include Torsional Effect
4/24/2018
4/24/2018
4/24/2018
XVI. Combine Results
Basic Load Combinations with Earthquake
5. 1.2 D 1.0E L Eq. 12.4‐1
7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐2
The seismic load, E, shall be determined considering both the
effect of the horizontal and vertical seismic load:
Load Combinations for Strength Design (2.3.2) :
5. 1.2 D 1.0E L Eq. 12.4‐1
7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐2
4/24/2018
Horizontal load effect, Eh and vertical seismic load effect Ev:
Eq. 12.4‐3 0.2
Eq. 12.4‐4
Load Combinations for Strength Design:
5. 1.2 0.2SDS D ρQE L
7. 0.9 – 0.2SDS D ρQE
The load factor on L in combination 5 is permitted to equal 0.5 for all
occupancies equal to 4.80 kPa except for garages or areas occupied as
places of public assembly.
XVIII. Combine Results
Where:
E = seismic load effect
Eh = effect of horizontal seismic forces
Ev = effect of vertical seismic forces
QE = effects of horizontal seismic forces from V or Fp
ρ = redundancy factor
SDS = design spectral response acceleration at short periods
D = effect of dead load
H = lateral earth pressure
4/24/2018
Where specifically required, conditions requiring overstrength
factor applications shall be determined in accordance with the
following:
Seismic Load Effect Including Overstrength Factor
Load Combinations for Strength Design (2.3.2) :
5. 1.2 D 1.0E L Eq. 12.4‐5
7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐6
4/24/2018
Emh o QE Eq. 12.4‐7
where
Em = seismic load effect including overstrength factor
Emh = effect of horizontal seismic forces including overstrength factor
Ev = vertical seismic load effect
QE = effects of horizontal seismic forces from V
Ωo = overstrength factor
Load Combinations for Strength Design with overstrength
factor:
5. 1.2 0.2SDS D ΩoQE L
7. 0.9 – 0.2SDS D ΩoQE
The load factor on L in combination 5 is permitted to equal 0.5 for all
occupancies equal to 4.80 kPa except for garages or areas occupied as
places of public assembly.
4/24/2018
XVII. Include Orthogonal Effects, as applicable
Direction of Loading Criteria.
The directions of application of seismic forces used in the
design shall be those which will produce the most critical load
effects.
XVII. Include Orthogonal Effects, as applicable
4/24/2018
XVIII. Check Story Drift Limitations
The deflection at Level x (δx) used to compute the design story drift, Δ,
shall be determined in accordance with the following equation:
Eq. 12.8‐15
where
Cd = the deflection amplification factor in Table 12.2‐1 (Structural Systems)
δxe = the deflection at the location required by this section determined by
an elastic analysis
Minimum Base Shear for Computing Drift:
The elastic analysis of the seismic‐force resisting system for
computing drift shall be made using the seismic design force, V :
Eq. 12.8‐1
Exception: Eq. 12.8‐5 need not be considered:
Minimum Value: 0.044 0.01 Eq. 12.8‐5
4/24/2018
Minimum Base Shear for Computing Drift:
For compliance with drift limits, it is permitted to compute the elastic
drifts, δxe, using the seismic design forces based on the computed
fundamental period of the structure without the upper limit (CuTa).
Eq. 12.8‐7
Maximum value of the fundamental period,
Need not have to satisfy
1 = strength level design earthquake
= computed elastic displacements
(amplified displacements)
∆ ∆
∆ ∆
= total displacement
4/24/2018
Story Drift Limits. The design story drift, , shall not exceed
the allowable drift, a .
Risk Category I or II III IV

Structures, other than masonry
shear walls: 4 stories and below: 0.025hsx 0.020hsx 0.015hsx
All other structures: 0.020hsx 0.015hsx 0.010hsx
See Table12.12‐1 ASCE 7‐10 for other structure types:
hsx = story height above Level x
XVIII. Check P‐Delta Effects
P‐Delta Effects are not required to be considered when the
stability coefficient, Ѳ. Is equal to or less than 0.10.
∆
Eq. 12.8‐16

Px = the total vertical design load at and above Level x
Δ = the design story drift occurring simultaneously with Vx
Vx = the seismic shear force acting between Levels x and x – 1
h sx = the story height below Level x
Cd = the deflection amplification factor
4/24/2018
XVIII. Check P‐Delta Effects
The stability coefficient, Ѳ , shall not exceed Ѳmax
.
0.25 Eq. 12.8‐17
ß
ß = ratio of shear demand to shear capacity or conservatively taken
as 1.0
IF: Ѳ Ѳ max Structure is unstable
XVIII. Structural Separation
All portions of the structure shall be designed and
constructed to act as an integral unit in resisting seismic
forces unless separated structurally by a distance sufficient
to avoid damaging contact. Separations shall allow for the
maximum inelastic response displacement (δM). δM shall be
determined at critical locations with consideration for
translational and torsional displacements of the structure
including torsional amplifications, where applicable:
4/24/2018
XVIII. Structural Separation
Eq. 12.12‐1 = maximum inelastic displacement
= maximum elastic displacement
Eq. 12.12‐2 = structural separation
= maximum inelastic response displacements of the
adjacent structures at their adjacent edges
SAMPLE PROBLEM
A 7 story Reinforced Concrete Hospital Building‐ With SMRF System
Compute the base shear using ASCE 7‐10 and compare with the NSCP 2015.
ELEVATION PLAN
4/24/2018
SAMPLE PROBLEM
Step 1: Determine Occupancy Category/ Risk Category
From Table 1.5‐1, ASCE 7‐10
Occupancy of the building is Hospital and can be considered as
Essential Facility = Risk Category IV
SAMPLE PROBLEM
Step 2: Obtain ground motion parameters
In the absence of the spectral response acceleration parameters for the
Philippines, obtain the parameters from the USGS as presented in its
website. Also USGS recommends estimated values for spectral
acceleration parameters based on the peak ground acceleration (PGA).
As per NSCP 2015: the PGA for 500 year return period = 0.40g
4/24/2018
Spectral response acceleration parameters can be estimated following
the USGS recommended estimation
@ 500 0.4 @ 2500 2∗ @500 = 0.8g
• spectral response acceleration parameter at short periods of 0.2 sec.
2.5 ∗ 0.8 2.0
• spectral response acceleration parameter at long periods of 1 sec.
1.0 ∗ 0.8 0.8
Spectral response acceleration parameters can also be taken from the
USGS website which published few values in the Philippines. The
Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) gave the following values for Manila area:
o spectral response acceleration parameter at short periods of 0.2 sec.
2.039g Use for this sample problem
o spectral response acceleration parameter at long periods of 1 sec.
0.96 Use for this sample problem
4/24/2018
Step 3: Determine soil classification
When the soil properties are not known in detail to determine the site class,
Site Class D shall be used unless the authority having jurisdiction determines
Site Class E or F soils are present at the site.
• assume Site Class D for this sample problem
Step 4: Determine site coefficients, Fa and Fv , based on Soil Type

Table 11.4‐1: 2.039 > 1.25 1.0
Table 11.4‐2: 0.96 > 0.5 1.5
Step 5: Calculate adjusted MCER spectral response parameters,
SMS and SM1 .

1.0 ∗ 2.039 2.039 1.5 ∗ 0.96 1.44
Step 6: Compute the Design Spectral Response Parameters,
SDS and SD1.
2
2
3
3 2 ∗ 1.44
2 ∗ 2.039 0.96
1.3593 3
3
4/24/2018
Step 7: Compute structure approximate fundamental period , Ta
22 .
Table 12.8‐2: Concrete moment-resisting frames; Ct 0.0466 x 0.9

.
0.0466* 22 0.753 use
Or for structures not exceeding 12 stories: 0.1 0.1 ∗ 7 0.7
Table 12.8‐1: 1.4 0.4

1.4 * 0.753 1.054 sec.
Step 8: Identify the Seismic Design Category, SDC
for 0.96 0.75 SDC F for Risk Category IV
Step 9: Determine Seismic Importance Factor, Ie
Table 1.5‐2: 1.50 For Risk Category IV
Step 10: Determine Structural System and Parameters
Table 12.2‐1: For Special Moment Resisting Frame System (SMRF)
R 8.0 Response Modification Coefficient
 3 Overstrength Factor
5.5 Deflection Amplification Factor
4/24/2018
Step 11: Determine Configuration Irregularities
For the sample problem, no structural irregularities exist
Step 12: Determine Diaphragm Flexibility
For the sample problem, the RC slab system provide fully rigid
diaphragm action
Step 13: Determine Redundancy Factory, 
For SDC F, the value of  may be permitted to equal to 1.0
Step 14: Determine Lateral Force Analysis
Table 12.6‐1: For structures under SDC F with no structural
Irregularities and under 50 m in height, the Equivalent
Lateral Force Procedure is permitted.
Step 15: Compute Base Shear, V
1.3593
0.2549
8
1.5
4/24/2018
The maximum value of : For
0.96
0.239 USE
0.753 8 1.5
The minimum value of : 0.044 0.01
0.044 ∗ 1.3593 ∗ 1.5 0.0897
Additional Minimum: For 0.6
0.5 0.5 ∗ 0.96
0.09
8
1.5
For the sample problem,
total seismic weight, W 26,935 kN
V 0.239*26,935 6,438 kN
4/24/2018
Compare the base shear from NSCP 2015
Give Data: /
Seismic Source Type A
.
Distance from the fault = 5 km 0.0731 ∗ 22 = 0.743 sec
Z 0.4
Na 1.2 Ca 0.528 1.024 ∗ 1.5
∗
Nv 1.6 Cv 1.024 8.5 ∗ 0.743
Ct 0.0731 0.2432
Compare the base shear from NSCP 2015
. . ∗ . ∗ .
W W 0.2329W USE
.
0.11 0.11 ∗ 0.528 ∗ 1.5 0.0792
. . ∗ . ∗ . ∗ .
W W 0.090
.
V 0.2329 ∗ 26,935 6,273 kN
4/24/2018
Summary of Results of Base Shear
ASCE 7‐10 (with spectral Acceleration parameters
V 6,438 kN
in Manila area: Ss=2.096 & S1=0.96)
NSCP2015 (with 5 km distance from seismic source
6,273 kN
Type A)
4/24/2018
Thank you for your attention!
End of Presentation!

PP - Weetcloaded - Compute Eq Alternate Proc Per Asce7-10 - WSL PDF

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

PP - Weetcloaded - Compute Eq Alternate Proc Per Asce7-10 - WSL PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4/24/2018

1755 Lisbon Earthquake

1908 Mw7.1 Messina Earthquake, Italy

1923 Great Kanto Earthquake, Tokyo, Japan

1927 Uniform Building Code (UBC)

IV. Obtain site coefficients Fa and Fv as adjustment factors to

V. Calculate adjusted MCER spectral response parameters, SMS and

The maximum value of : For Eq. 12.8‐3

For > Eq. 12.8‐4

The minimum value of : 0.044 0.01 Eq. 12.8‐5

7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐2

5. 1.2 D 1.0E L Eq. 12.4‐1

7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐2

5. 1.2 D 1.0E L Eq. 12.4‐5

7. 0.9D 1.0E Eq. 12.4‐6

Minimum Value: 0.044 0.01 Eq. 12.8‐5

Risk Category I or II III IV

IF: Ѳ Ѳ max Structure is unstable

Step 4: Determine site coefficients, Fa and Fv , based on Soil Type

Table 12.8‐2: Concrete moment-resisting frames; Ct 0.0466 x 0.9

Or for structures not exceeding 12 stories: 0.1 0.1 ∗ 7 0.7

Table 12.8‐1: 1.4 0.4

0.11 0.11 ∗ 0.528 ∗ 1.5 0.0792

V 0.2329 ∗ 26,935 6,273 kN

You might also like