A Rational Approach for Determining Response Modification Factors for Seismic Design of Buildings Using Current Code Provisions

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Foutch ◽  
James Wilcoski

A short review of response modification factors currently found in code design provisions for seismic design of buildings is given. A proposal for a new, rational procedure for determining R factors is presented. It requires both experimental and analyses for implementation. It is based on a probabilistic foundation developed for the SAC Phase 2 project. The target threshold is to provide a 90% confidence level for satisfying the Collapse Prevention performance objective for an earthquake with a 2,475-year return period. Adoption of this procedure would result in a uniform level of safety against collapse over all materials and building systems. The method is applied to steel moment-resisting frame buildings as an example.

1992 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 688-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. Zhu ◽  
W. K. Tso ◽  
A. C. Heidebrecht

Seismic areas in Canada are classified into three categories for three different combinations of acceleration and velocity seismic zones (Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv), and ground motions in different zonal combination areas are expected to have different frequency characteristics. The National Building Code of Canada specifies different levels of seismic design base shear for short-period buildings located in areas with different zonal combinations. The specification of seismic design base shear for long-period buildings is directly tied to zonal velocity, irrespective of seismic zonal combination. This paper evaluates the seismic performance of both high-rise long-period and low rise short-period reinforced concrete ductile moment-resisting frame buildings located in seismic regions having Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv. Two frame buildings have 10 and 18 storeys were used as structural models for high-rise buildings, while a set of four-storey buildings were used to represent low-rise buildings. All buildings were designed to the current Canadian seismic provisions and concrete material code. Three groups of earthquake records were selected as representative ground motions in the three zonal combination regions. The inelastic responses of the designed buildings to the three groups of ground motions were analyzed statistically. The results indicate that the distribution of inelastic deformations is significantly different for high-rise frame buildings situated in seismic regions with Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv. Inelastic deformation is concentrated in the lower storeys for high-rise buildings located in Za < Zv areas, whereas significant inelastic deformation can develop in the upper storeys for high-rise buildings situated in Za > Zv regions. The use of three different levels of seismic design base shear for short-period structures improves the consistency of ductility demands on low-rise buildings situated in the three different zonal combination regions. Despite the use of appropriate design base shears for different seismic regions, the ductility demands for these low-rise buildings are relatively high. To avoid excessive ductility demands, it is suggested that the seismic strengths for low-rise short-period buildings should not be significantly reduced from their elastic design base shears. Key words: earthquake, ground motion, seismic, design, reinforced concrete, frame buildings, beams, columns, ductility.


2009 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 280-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Md Yousuf ◽  
Ashutosh Bagchi

The seismic design provisions in the current edition of the National building code of Canada significantly differ from those in the earlier version of the code . Although the code has moved from the earlier prescriptive provisions towards a more performance-based design, such design principles have not yet been fully implemented. In the present work, four ductile steel moment-resisting frame buildings with heights of 5, 10, 15, and 20 storeys, were designed for Vancouver using the newer code, and their performances were studied to determine the level of seismic protection implied in the code. Synthesized and scaled real ground motion records were used to evaluate the nonlinear dynamic response of these structures. Although the buildings achieved the collapse prevention performance objective of the code, variations in evaluated performance parameters for the different buildings were observed. Also, building performance was found to be affected by the presence of infill walls, as well as by the nature of selected ground motion records and the methods used to scale them to Vancouver uniform hazard spectra.


1999 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aiman Biddah ◽  
Arthur C Heidebrecht

Steel moment resisting frames have been considered as excellent systems for resisting seismic loads. However, after recent earthquakes (e.g., Northridge, California, in 1994 and Kobe, Japan, in 1995) the confidence in this structural system was reduced as a result of various types of damage that moment resisting steel frames suffered. This paper presents the results of the evaluation of seismic level of protection afforded to steel moment resisting frame buildings designed in accordance with the National Building Code of Canada. Six- and 10-storey office buildings located in a region of intermediate seismic hazard are designed in accordance with the current Canadian code provisions. Three different design philosophies are considered, namely strong column - weak beam (SCWB), weak column - strong beam (WCSB), and strong column - weak panel zone (SCWP). The performance of these frames is evaluated dynamically by subjecting an inelastic model to an ensemble of 12 actual strong ground motion records. The model takes into account both connection flexibility and panel zone shear deformation. The results are presented in terms of response parameters determined from static pushover analyses, as well as statistical measures of the maximum response parameters determined from the inelastic dynamic analyses. The computed performance of the frames is evaluated in order to assess both the overall level of protection of the frames and the preferred design philosophy. It is concluded that a well-designed and well-detailed ductile moment resisting frame designed using either the SCWB or SCWP design philosophy can withstand ground motions of twice the design level with very little likelihood of collapse, whereas a frame designed using the WCSB approach is ill-conditioned and may develop a collapse mechanism at an excitation level well below twice the design level.Key words: seismic, ductile, steel, frame buildings, performance, design, ductility, damage, inelastic, dynamic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document