PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE 2012 BUILDING CODE O. REG. 332/12 AS AMENDED
|
|
- Cecilia Ross
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Ministry of Municipal Affairs PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE 2012 BUILDING CODE O. REG. 332/12 AS AMENDED CHANGE NUMBER: SOURCE: B Ontario-NBC CODE REFERENCE: Division B / Division B / Division B / DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT This proposed change captures changes to Articles , and required as a result of an update to the seismic hazard model. EXISTING 2012 BUILDING CODE PROVISION(S) Notation (See Appendix A.) (1) In this Subsection, A r = response amplification factor to account for type of attachment of mechanical/electrical equipment, as defined in Sentence (1), A x = amplification factor at level x to account for variation of response of mechanical/electrical equipment with elevation within the building, as defined in Sentence (1), B x = ratio at level x used to determine torsional sensitivity, as defined in Sentence (9), B = maximum value of B x, as defined in Sentence (9), C p = seismic coefficient for mechanical/electrical equipment, as defined in Sentence (1), D nx = plan dimension of the building at level x perpendicular to the direction of seismic loading being considered, e x = distance measured perpendicular to the direction of earthquake loading between centre of mass and centre of rigidity at the level being considered, F a = acceleration-based site coefficient, as defined in Sentence (4), F t = portion of V to be concentrated at the top of the structure, as defined in Sentence (6), F v = velocity-based site coefficient, as defined in Sentence (4), F x = lateral force applied to level x, as defined in Sentence (6), h i, h n, h x = the height above the base (i = 0) to level i, n, or x respectively, where the base of the structure is the level at which horizontal earthquake motions are considered to be imparted to the structure, h s = interstorey height (h i - h i-1 ), I E = earthquake importance factor of the structure, as described in Sentence (1), Page 1 Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2016
2 J = numerical reduction coefficient for base overturning moment, as defined in Sentence (5), J X = numerical reduction coefficient for overturning moment at level x, as defined in Sentence (7), Level i = any level in the building, i =1 for first level above the base, Level n = level that is uppermost in the main portion of the structure, Level x = level that is under design consideration, M v = factor to account for higher mode effect on base shear, as defined in Sentence (5), M x = overturning moment at level x, as defined in Sentence (7), N = total number of storeys above exterior grade to level n, N 60 = Average Standard Penetration Resistance for the top 30 m, corrected to a rod energy efficiency of 60% of the theoretical maximum, PGA = Peak Ground Acceleration expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, as defined in Sentence (1), PI = plasticity index for clays, R d = ductility-related force modification factor reflecting the capability of a structure to dissipate energy through reversed cyclic inelastic behaviour, as given in Article , R o = overstrength-related force modification factor accounting for the dependable portion of reserve strength in a structure designed according to these provisions, as defined in Article , S P = horizontal force factor for part or portion of a building and its anchorage, as given in Sentence (1), S(T) = design spectral response acceleration, expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, for a period of T, as defined in Sentence (7), S a (T) = 5% damped spectral response acceleration, expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, for a period of T, as defined in Sentence (1), SFRS = Seismic Force Resisting System(s) is that part of the structural system that has been considered in the design to provide the required resistance to the earthquake forces and effects defined in Subsection , S u = average undrained shear strength in the top 30 m of soil, T = period in seconds, T a = fundamental lateral period of vibration of the building or structure in seconds in the direction under consideration, as defined in Sentence (3), T x = floor torque at level x, as defined in Sentence (10), V = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V d = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V e = lateral earthquake elastic force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V ed = lateral earthquake design elastic force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V P = lateral force on a part of the structure, as determined by Article , V s = average shear wave velocity in the top 30 m of soil or rock, W = dead load, as defined in Article , except that the minimum partition load as defined in Sentence (3) need not exceed 0.5 kpa, plus 25% of the design snow load specified in Subsection , plus 60% of the storage load for areas used for storage, except that storage garages need not be considered storage areas, and the full contents of any tanks, W i, W x = portion of W that is located at or is assigned to level i or x respectively, Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 2
3 W P = weight of a part or portion of a structure, e.g., cladding, partitions and appendages, δ ave = average displacement of the structure at level x, as defined in Sentence (9), and δ max = maximum displacement of the structure at level x, as defined in Sentence (9) Site Properties (1) The peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the 5% damped spectral response acceleration values, S a (T), for the reference ground conditions ( C in Table A.) for periods T of 0.2 s, 0.5 s, 1.0 s, and 2.0 s, shall be determined in accordance with Subsection and are based on a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. (2) Site classifications for ground shall conform to Table A. and shall be determined using Vs except as provided in Sentence (3). (3) If average shear wave velocity, V s, is not known, shall be determined from energy-corrected Average Standard Penetration Resistance, N 60, or from soil average undrained shear strength, s u, as noted in Table A., N60 and s u being calculated based on rational analysis. (See Appendix A.) (4) Acceleration- and velocity-based site coefficients, F a and F v, shall conform to Tables B. and C. using linear interpolation for intermediate values of S a (0.2) and S a (1.0). (5) Site-specific evaluation is required to determine F a and F v for F. (6) For structures with a fundamental period of vibration equal to or less than 0.5 s that are built on liquefiable soils, and the corresponding values of F a and F v may be determined as described in Tables A., B., and C. by assuming that the soils are not liquefiable. Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 3
4 Ground Profile Name Table A. ification for Seismic Site Response Forming Part of Sentences (1) to (3) Average Shear Wave Velocity, V (m/s) s Average Properties in Top 30 m Average Standard Penetration Soil Undrained Shear Strength, Resistance, N 60 su A Hard rock (1)(2) V s > 1500 N/A N/A B Rock (1) 760 < V s 1500 N/A N/A C Very dense soil and soft rock 360 < V s < 760 N 60 > 50 su > 100 kpa D Stiff soil 180 < V s < N kpa < su 100 kpa V s < 180 N 60 < 15 su < 50 kpa Any profile with more than 3 m of soil with the following characteristics: E Soft soil plasticity index: PI > 20 moisture content w 40%, and undrained shear strength: su < 25 kpa F Other soils (3) Site-specific evaluation required Column Notes to Table A.: (1) es A and B, hard rock and rock, are not to be used if there is more than 3 m of softer materials between the rock and the underside of footing or mat foundations. The appropriate for such cases is determined on the basis of the average properties of the total thickness of the softer materials. (See Appendix A.) (2) If V s has been measured in-situ, the Fa and Fv values derived from Tables B. and C. may be multiplied by (1500 / V s ) 1/2. (3) Other soils include: (a) liquefiable soils, quick and highly sensitive clays, collapsible weakly cemented soils, and other soils susceptible to failure or collapse under seismic loading, (b) peat and/or highly organic clays greater than 3 m in thickness, (c) highly plastic clays (PI > 75) more than 8 m thick, and (d) soft to medium stiff clays more than 30 m thick. Table B. Values of Fa as a Function of and Sa(0.2) Forming Part of Sentence (4) Values of Fa Sa(0.2) 0.25 Sa(0.2) = 0.5 Sa(0.2) = 0.75 Sa(0.2) = 1.00 Sa(0.2) 1.25 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Column Notes to Table B.: (1) See Sentence (5). Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 4
5 Table C. Values of Fv as a Function of and Sa(1.0) Forming Part of Sentence (4) Values of Fv Sa(1.0) 0.1 Sa(1.0) = 0.2 Sa(1.0) = 0.3 Sa(1.0) = 0.4 Sa(1.0) 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Column Notes to Table C.: (1) See Sentence (5). (7) The design spectral acceleration values of S(T) shall be determined as follows, using linear interpolation for intermediate values of T: S(T) = F a S a (0.2) for T 0.2 s = F v S a (0.5) or F a S a (0.2), whichever is smaller for T = 0.5 s = F v S a (1.0) for T = 1.0 s = F v S a (2.0) for T = 2.0 s = F v S a (2.0) / 2 for T 4.0 s Elements of Structures, Non-Structural Components and Equipment (See Appendix A.) (1) Except as provided in Sentences (2) and (8), elements and components of buildings described in Table and their connections to the structure shall be designed to accommodate the building deflections calculated in accordance with Article and the element or component deflections calculated in accordance with Sentence (10), and shall be designed for a lateral force, V P, applied through the centre of mass of the element or component that is equal to: where, F a = as defined in Table B., V p = 0.3F a S a (0.2) I E S p W p S a (0.2) = spectral response acceleration value at 0.2 s, as defined in Sentence (1), I E = importance factor for the building, as defined in Article , S p = C p A r A x /R p (the maximum value of S p shall be taken as 4.0 and the minimum value of S p shall be taken as 0.7), where, C p = element or component factor from Table , A r = element or component force amplification factor from Table , A x = height factor (1 + 2 h x / h n ), R p = element or component response modification factor from Table , and W p = weight of the component or element. Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 5
6 PROPOSED CODE CHANGE Revise existing Articles , and as follows: Notation (See Appendix A.) (1) In this Subsection, A r = response amplification factor to account for type of attachment of mechanical/electrical equipment, as defined in Sentence (1), A x = amplification factor at level x to account for variation of response of mechanical/electrical equipment with elevation within the building, as defined in Sentence (1), B x = ratio at level x used to determine torsional sensitivity, as defined in Sentence (9), B = maximum value of B x, as defined in Sentence (9), C p = seismic coefficient for mechanical/electrical equipment, as defined in Sentence (1), D nx = plan dimension of the building at level x perpendicular to the direction of seismic loading being considered, e x = distance measured perpendicular to the direction of earthquake loading between centre of mass and centre of rigidity at the level being considered (See Appendix A), F a = acceleration-based site coefficient for application in Subsection , as defined in Sentence (4)Sentence (7), F(PGA) = site coefficient for PGA, as defined in Sentence (5), F(PGV) = site coefficient for PGV, as defined in Sentence (5), F s = site coefficient as defined in Sentence (2) for application in Article F(T) = site coefficient for spectral acceleration, as defined in Sentence (5), F t = portion of V to be concentrated at the top of the structure, as defined in Sentence (6), F v = velocity-based site coefficient for application in Subsection , as defined in Sentence (4) (7), F x = lateral force applied to level x, as defined in Sentence (6), h i, h n, h x = the height above the base (i = 0) to level i, n, or x respectively, where the base of the structure is the level at which horizontal earthquake motions are considered to be imparted to the structure, h s = interstorey height (h i - h i-1 ), I E = earthquake importance factor of the structure, as described in Sentence (1), J = numerical reduction coefficient for base overturning moment, as defined in Sentence (5), J X = numerical reduction coefficient for overturning moment at level x, as defined in Sentence (7), Level i = any level in the building, i =1 for first level above the base, Level n = level that is uppermost in the main portion of the structure, Level x = level that is under design consideration, M v = factor to account for higher mode effect on base shear, as defined in Sentence (5), M x = overturning moment at level x, as defined in Sentence (7), N = total number of storeys above exterior grade to level n, Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 6
7 N 60 = Average Standard Penetration Resistance for the top 30 m, corrected to a rod energy efficiency of 60% of the theoretical maximum, PGA = Peak Ground Acceleration expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, as defined in Sentence (1), PGA ref = reference PGA for determining F(T), F(PGA) and F(PGV), as defined in Sentence (4), PGV = Peak Ground Velocity, in m/s, as defined in Sentence (1), PI = plasticity index for clays, R d = ductility-related force modification factor reflecting the capability of a structure to dissipate energy through reversed cyclic inelastic behaviour, as given in Article , R o = overstrength-related force modification factor accounting for the dependable portion of reserve strength in a structure designed according to these provisions, as defined in Article , R s = combined overstrength and ductility-related modification factor, as defined in Sentence (7), for application in Article , S P = horizontal force factor for part or portion of a building and its anchorage, as given in Sentence (1), S(T) = design spectral response acceleration, expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, for a period of T, as defined in Sentence (7), S a (T) = 5% damped spectral response acceleration, expressed as a ratio to gravitational acceleration, for a period of T, as defined in Sentence (1), SFRS = Seismic Force Resisting System(s) is that part of the structural system that has been considered in the design to provide the required resistance to the earthquake forces and effects defined in Subsection , S u = average undrained shear strength in the top 30 m of soil, T = period in seconds, T a = fundamental lateral period of vibration of the building or structure in seconds in the direction under consideration, as defined in Sentence (3), T x = floor torque at level x, as defined in Sentence (10), V = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V d = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V e = lateral earthquake elastic force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V ed = lateral earthquake design elastic force at the base of the structure, as determined by Article , V P = lateral force on a part of the structure, as determined by Article , V s = lateral earthquake design force at the base of the structure, as determined by Sentence (7), for application in Article , V s30 = average shear wave velocity in the top 30 m of soil or rock, W = dead load, as defined in Article , except that the minimum partition load as defined in Sentence (3) need not exceed 0.5 kpa, plus 25% of the design snow load specified in Subsection , plus 60% of the storage load for areas used for storage, except that storage garages need not be considered storage areas, and the full contents of any tanks (See Appendix A), W i, W x = portion of W that is located at or is assigned to level i or x respectively, W P = weight of a part or portion of a structure, e.g., cladding, partitions and appendages, Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 7
8 W t = sum of W i over the height of the building, for application in Sentence (7), δ ave = average displacement of the structure at level x, as defined in Sentence (9), and δ max = maximum displacement of the structure at level x, as defined in Sentence (9) Site Properties (1) The peak ground acceleration (PGA), peak ground velocity (PGV), and the 5% damped spectral response acceleration values, S a (T), for the reference ground conditions ( C in Table A.) for periods T of 0.2 s, 0.5 s, 1.0 s, and 2.0 s, 5.0 s and 10.0 s shall be determined in accordance with Subsection and are based on a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. Table A. ification for Seismic Site Response Forming Part of Sentences (1) to (3) Ground Profile Name Average Shear Wave Velocity, V s30 (m/s) Average Properties in Top 30 m Average Standard Penetration Resistance, N 60 Soil Undrained Shear Strength, su A Hard rock (1)(2) V s30 > 1500 N/A N/A B Rock (1) 760 < V s N/A N/A C Very dense soil and soft rock 360 < V s30 < 760 N 60 > 50 su > 100 kpa D Stiff soil 180 < V s30 < N kpa < su 100 kpa V s30 < 180 N 60 < 15 su < 50 kpa E Soft soil Any profile with more than 3 m of soil with the following characteristics: plasticity index: PI > 20 moisture content w 40%, and undrained shear strength: su < 25 kpa F Other soils (3) Site-specific evaluation required Column Notes to Table A.: (1) es A and B, hard rock and rock, are not to be used if there is more than 3 m of softer materials between the rock and the underside of footing or mat foundations. The appropriate for such cases is determined on the basis of the average properties of the total thickness of the softer materials. (See Appendix A.) (2) If Where V s30 has been measured in-situ, the Fa and Fv the F(T) values for A derived from Tables B. to G are permitted to be multiplied and C. may be multiplied by the factor 0.04+(1500 / V s30 ) 1/2. (3) Other soils include: (a) liquefiable soils, quick and highly sensitive clays, collapsible weakly cemented soils, and other soils susceptible to failure or collapse under seismic loading, (b) peat and/or highly organic clays greater than 3 m in thickness, (c) highly plastic clays (PI > 75) more than 8 m thick, and (d) soft to medium stiff clays more than 30 m thick. Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 8
9 (2) Site classifications for ground shall conform to Table A. and shall be determined using V s30 provided in, or where V s30 is not known, using Sentence (3). except as (3) If average shear wave velocity, V s30, is not known, shall be determined from energy-corrected Average Standard Penetration Resistance, N 60, or from soil average undrained shear strength, s u, as noted in Table A., N60 and s u being calculated based on rational analysis. (See Appendix A.) (4) For the purpose of determining the values of F(T) to be used in the calculation of design spectral acceleration, S(T), in Sentence (9), and the values of F(PGA) and F(PGV), the value of PGA ref to be used with Tables B. to I. shall be taken as (a) 0.8 PGA where the ratio S a (0.2)/PGA < 2.0, and (b) 1 PGA otherwise. (45) The values of the site coefficient for design spectral acceleration at period T, F(T), and of similar coefficients F(PGA) and F(PGV), Acceleration- and velocity-based site coefficients, F a and F v, shall conform to Tables B. and C.to I. using linear interpolation for intermediate values of PGA ref S a (0.2) and S a (1.0). Table B. Values of FaF(0.2) as a Function of and Sa(0.2)PGAref Forming Part of Sentence (4) and (5) Sa(0.2) 0.25 PGAref 0.1 Sa(0.2) = 0.5 PGAref = 0.2 Values of Fa(0.2) Sa(0.2) = 0.75 PGAref = 0.3 Sa(0.2) = 1.00 PGAref = 0.4 Sa(0.2) 1.25 PGAref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Column Notes to Table B.: (1) See Sentence (5).Sentence (6) Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 9
10 Table C. Values of Fv(0.5) as a Function of and Sa(1.0)PGAref Forming Part of Sentence (4) and (5) Sa(1.0) 0.1 PGAref 0.1 Sa(1.0) = 0.2 PGAref = 0.2 Values of F(0.5)v Sa(1.0) = 0.3 PGAref = 0.3 Sa(1.0) = 0.4 PGAref = 0.4 Sa(1.0) 0.5 PGAref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Column Notes to Table C.: (1) See Sentence (5).Sentence (6). Table D. Values of F(1.0) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(1.0) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table D.: (1) See Sentence (6). Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 10
11 Table E. Values of F(2.0) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(2.0) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table E.: (1) See Sentence (6). Table F. Values of F(5.0) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(5.0) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table F.: (1) See Sentence (6). Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 11
12 Table G. Values of F(10.0) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(10.0) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table G.: (1) See Sentence (6). Table H. Values of F(PGA) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(PGA) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table H.: (1) See Sentence (6). Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 12
13 Table I. Values of F(PGV) as a Function of and PGA ref Forming part of Sentence (4) and (5) Values of F(PGV) PGA ref 0.1 PGA ref = 0.2 PGA ref = 0.3 PGA ref = 0.4 PGA ref 0.5 A B C D E F (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Note to Table I.: (1) See Sentence (6). (56) Site-specific evaluation is required to determine F a and F(T) v, F(PGA) and F(PGV) for F. (7) For all applications in Subsection , F a = F(0.2) and F v = F(1.0). (68) For structures with a fundamental period of vibration equal to or less than 0.5 s that are built on liquefiable soils, and the corresponding values of F(T) a and F v may be determined as described in Tables A., B., and C. by assuming that the soils are not liquefiable. (79) The design spectral acceleration values of S(T) shall be determined as follows, using linear interpolation for intermediate values of T: S(T) = F(0.2) a S a (0.2) or F(0.5)S a (0.5), whichever is larger for T 0.2 s = F(0.5) v S a (0.5) or F a S a (0.2), whichever is smaller for T = 0.5 s = F(1.0) v S a (1.0) for T = 1.0 s = F(2.0) v S a (2.0) for T = 2.0 s = F(5.0) v S a (5.0)(2.0)/2 for T 4.0= 5.0 s = F(10.0)S a (10.0) for T 10.0 S Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 13
14 Elements of Structures, Non-Structural Components and Equipment (See Appendix A.) (1) Except as provided in Sentences (2) and (8), elements and components of buildings described in Table and their connections to the structure shall be designed to accommodate the building deflections calculated in accordance with Article and the element or component deflections calculated in accordance with Sentence (10), and shall be designed for a lateral force, V P, applied through the centre of mass of the element or component that is equal to: where, V p = 0.3F a S a (0.2) I E S p W p F a = as defined in Sentence (7)Table B., S a (0.2) = spectral response acceleration value at 0.2 s, as defined in Sentence (1), I E = importance factor for the building, as defined in Article , S p = C p A r A x /R p (the maximum value of S p shall be taken as 4.0 and the minimum value of S p shall be taken as 0.7), where, C p = element or component factor from Table , A r = element or component force amplification factor from Table , A x = height factor (1 + 2 h x / h n ), R p = element or component response modification factor from Table , and W p = weight of the component or element. RATIONALE FOR CHANGE Problem/General Background A major update of seismic hazard model in Canada has been undertaken to incorporate current knowledge on the subject and alignment with modern seismic hazard maps used in building codes in the United States and other jurisdictions. The update of seismic model involves incorporation of new GMPE (Ground Motion Prediction Equations) for most locations in Canada, inclusion of Cascadia subduction source probabilistically to seismic hazard for areas of western Canada and the explicit inclusion of fault sources such as those in Haida Gwaii and the Yukon. Some provisions in Article and are not aligned with the new seismic hazard model and need to be revised. Justification/Explanation This proposed change would harmonize requirements with the model National Building Code of Canada. The major changes required as a result of adoption of new hazard values are as follows: Article : Notation for terms F(T), F(PGA),F(PGV), PGA ref, PGV added as these are new terms introduced in the Building Code, Notation for Fa and Fv revised to align with the changes proposed in the Building Code Sentence (1) Spectral acceleration values for 5 and 10 s have been added in subsection on the Building Code, Peak Ground Velocity ( PGV) has also been added. Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 14
15 Sentence (4) The attenuation of ground motion in Eastern Canada is less than in the West. The direct use of PGA would give F(T) values with larger non-linear de-amplification effects in the east than is appropriate for their sustained level of shaking. This would be unconservative and thus have potential safety implications. Consequently an adjustment factor is needed to provide for appropriate foundation factors at eastern sites Sentence (5) A much expanded database of ground motion recordings in earthquakes, since the current Fa and Fv factors were established, allows determination of site amplifications at a wide range of horizontal periods of vibration, which have been incorporated into modern Ground Motion Prediction Equations. Accordingly, period dependant foundation factors and foundation factors for PGA and PGV have been proposed. Sentence (6) Editorial revision to coordinate shift from Fa and Fv to F(T), F(PGA) and F(PGV) Sentence (7) Definition of Fa and Fv in terms of F(T) to coordinate with other provisions in Article as triggers and other formulae in Article are currently using Fa and Fv instead of F(T). Sentence (8) Editorial revision to coordinate with shift from Fa and Fv to F(T) Sentence (9) Formulae for Design Spectral response acceleration are now expressed in terms of F(T) to incorporate use of period based foundation factors. The values for design spectral response at 5 and 10 seconds have been added. For some localities, S(0.5) is larger than S(0.2). Considering that it is not a good practice to design on the basis of a spectrum in which the S value increases with period, the design spectral acceleration expression has been modified. Article : Editorial revision to correct reference for Fa Cost/Benefit Implications In some location the assessed hazard has gone up and in other areas it has gone down. There may be cost increases or decreases wherever the estimated hazard has changed. In many localities in eastern Canada the estimated hazard has decreased, which will result in cost savings.. There may be cost increase or decrease of the order of 1% of the overall cost of the building wherever the estimated hazard has changed. Enforcement Implications None Who is Affected Building officials, Consultants, builders and Building Owners. Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 15
16 Objective Based Analysis Provision Objective/Functional Statement Division B (1) Division B (1) 1 [F20-OS2.1] (1) 1 [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] (2) 2 [F20-OS2.1] (2) 2 [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] (3) 3 (4) [F20-OS2.1] (4) [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] (5) 4 [F20-OS2.1] (5) 4 [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] (6) 5 [F20-OS2.1] (6) 5 [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] (7) (8) 6 (9) 7 [F20-OS2.1] (9) 7 [F20-OP2.1][F22-OP2.4] Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 16
17 Provision Objective/Functional Statement Division B (1) [F20, F22-OP2.3] [F22-OP2.4] (1) [F20, F22-OS2.4] OTHER SUPPORTING MATERIALS Copyright Queen s Printer for Ontario 2015 Page 17
Overview of National Seismic Hazard Maps for the next National Building Code
Overview of National Seismic Hazard Maps for the next National Building Code John Adams Earthquakes Canada Geological Survey of Canada Copyright. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2004 CSCE Workshop
More informationCHAPTER 5. T a = 0.03 (180) 0.75 = 1.47 sec 5.12 Steel moment frame. h n = = 260 ft. T a = (260) 0.80 = 2.39 sec. Question No.
CHAPTER 5 Question Brief Explanation No. 5.1 From Fig. IBC 1613.5(3) and (4) enlarged region 1 (ASCE 7 Fig. -3 and -4) S S = 1.5g, and S 1 = 0.6g. The g term is already factored in the equations, thus
More informationEarthquake Loads According to IBC IBC Safety Concept
Earthquake Loads According to IBC 2003 The process of determining earthquake loads according to IBC 2003 Spectral Design Method can be broken down into the following basic steps: Determination of the maimum
More informationGeotechnical Aspects of the Seismic Update to the ODOT Bridge Design Manual. Stuart Edwards, P.E Geotechnical Consultant Workshop
Geotechnical Aspects of the Seismic Update to the ODOT Bridge Design Manual Stuart Edwards, P.E. 2017 Geotechnical Consultant Workshop Changes Role of Geotechnical Engineer Background Methodology Worked
More informationHarmonized European standards for construction in Egypt
Harmonized European standards for construction in Egypt EN 1998 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance Jean-Armand Calgaro Chairman of CEN/TC250 Organised with the support of the Egyptian Organization
More informationCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering. Background to Some of the Seismic Design Provisions of the 2015 National Building Code of Canada
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering Background to Some of the Seismic Design Provisions of the 2015 National Building Code of Canada Journal: Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering Manuscript ID cjce-2014-0385.r1
More informationChapter 4 Seismic Design Requirements for Building Structures
Chapter 4 Seismic Design Requirements for Building Structures where: F a = 1.0 for rock sites which may be assumed if there is 10 feet of soil between the rock surface and the bottom of spread footings
More informationEvaluating the Seismic Coefficient for Slope Stability Analyses
Evaluating the Seismic Coefficient for Slope Stability Analyses by Edward Kavazanjian, Jr., Ph.D., P.E.,D.GE., NAE Ira A. Fulton Professor of Geotechnical Engineering School of Sustainable Engineering
More informationNew Ground Motion Requirements of ASCE 7-16
New Ground Motion Requirements of ASCE 7-16 Building EERI Seismic Seminar on Safety Next Generation Council Webinar Attenuation Models July 28, 2017 Charlie Kircher Kircher & Associates Palo Alto, California
More informationEarthquake Risk in Canada and the National Building Code
Earthquake Risk in Canada and the National Building Code Tuna Onur, Ph.D. Onur Seemann Consulting, Inc. NICC, Vancouver, BC, 28-30 September 2016 Southwestern Canada: Cascadia Subduction Zone + Crustal
More informationSEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS. Instructional Material Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Seismic Hazard Analysis 5a - 1
SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS Instructional Material Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Seismic Hazard Analysis 5a - 1 Seismic Hazard Analysis Deterministic procedures Probabilistic procedures USGS hazard
More informationMicro Seismic Hazard Analysis
Micro Seismic Hazard Analysis Mark van der Meijde INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR GEO-INFORMATION SCIENCE AND EARTH OBSERVATION Overview Site effects Soft ground effect Topographic effect Liquefaction Methods
More informationLecture 4 Dynamic Analysis of Buildings
1 Lecture 4 Dynamic Analysis of Buildings Course Instructor: Dr. Carlos E. Ventura, P.Eng. Department of Civil Engineering The University of British Columbia ventura@civil.ubc.ca Short Course for CSCE
More informationLecture-08 Gravity Load Analysis of RC Structures
Lecture-08 Gravity Load Analysis of RC Structures By: Prof Dr. Qaisar Ali Civil Engineering Department UET Peshawar www.drqaisarali.com 1 Contents Analysis Approaches Point of Inflection Method Equivalent
More information7 SEISMIC LOADS. 7.1 Estimation of Seismic Loads. 7.2 Calculation of Seismic Loads
1 7 SEISMIC LOADS 7.1 Estimation of Seismic Loads 7.1.1 Seismic load and design earthquake motion (1) For ordinary buildings, seismic load is evaluated using the acceleration response spectrum (see Sec.7.2)
More informationAn Overview of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering
An Overview of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Sudhir K Jain Slide 1 Outline Introduction to Seismic Design Principle Dynamic Soil Properties Site Effects Soil Structure Interaction Issues for Foundation
More informationSeismic Evaluation of Tailing Storage Facility
Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2010 Conference, Perth, Western Australia Seismic Evaluation of Tailing Storage Facility Jonathan Z. Liang 1, David Elias 2 1 Senior Geotechnical Engineer, GHD
More informationChapter 3. Geotechnical Design Considerations
Chapter 3 Geotechnical Design Considerations Marshall Lew, Ph.D., G.E. Corporate Consultant, Law/Crandall, a division of Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (A LAWGIBB Group Member), Los Angeles
More informationEngineering Characteristics of Ground Motion Records of the Val-des-Bois, Quebec, Earthquake of June 23, 2010
CSCE 2011 General Conference - Congrès générale 2011 de la SCGC Ottawa, Ontario June 14-17, 2011 / 14 au 17 juin 2011 Engineering Characteristics of Ground Motion Records of the Val-des-Bois, Quebec, Earthquake
More informationSeismic Vulnerability Assessment of Wood-frame Buildings in Southwestern British Columbia
Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Wood-frame Buildings in Southwestern British Columbia K. Goda University of Bristol, United Kingdom G.M. Atkinson University of Western Ontario, Canada ABSTRACT: The
More informationDate: April 2, 2014 Project No.: Prepared For: Mr. Adam Kates CLASSIC COMMUNITIES 1068 E. Meadow Circle Palo Alto, California 94303
City of Newark - 36120 Ruschin Drive Project Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix C: Geologic Information FirstCarbon Solutions H:\Client (PN-JN)\4554\45540001\ISMND\45540001 36120
More informationSeminar Bridge Design with Eurocodes
Seminar Bridge Design with Eurocodes JRC Ispra, 1-2 October 2012 1 EU-Russia Regulatory Dialogue: Construction Sector Subgroup Seminar Bridge Design with Eurocodes JRC-Ispra, 1-2 October 2012 Organized
More informationAPPENDIX J. Dynamic Response Analysis
APPENDIX J Dynamic Response Analysis August 25, 216 Appendix J Dynamic Response Analysis TABLE OF CONTENTS J1 INTRODUCTION... 1 J2 EARTHQUAKE TIME HISTORIES... 1 J3 MODEL AND INPUT DATA FOR SITE RESPONSE
More informationEffective stress analysis of pile foundations in liquefiable soil
Effective stress analysis of pile foundations in liquefiable soil H. J. Bowen, M. Cubrinovski University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. M. E. Jacka Tonkin and Taylor Ltd., Christchurch, New
More informationSeismic load calculations per the NYS 2002 code
Rochester Institute of Technology RIT Scholar Works Presentations and other scholarship 2004 Seismic load calculations per the NYS 2002 code Abi Aghayere Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/other
More informationComparison of Base Shear Force Method in the Seismic Design Codes of China, America and Europe
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 66-69 (202) pp 2345-2352 Online available since 202/May/4 at www.scientific.net (202) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland doi:0.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.66-69.2345
More informationChapter 6 Seismic Design of Bridges. Kazuhiko Kawashima Tokyo Institute of Technology
Chapter 6 Seismic Design of Bridges Kazuhiko Kawashima okyo Institute of echnology Seismic Design Loading environment (dead, live, wind, earthquake etc) Performance criteria for gravity (deflection, stresses)
More informationCharacteristics of a Force Loads on Structures. Dead Load. Load Types Dead Live Wind Snow Earthquake. Load Combinations ASD LRFD
Architecture 314 Structures I Characteristics of a Force Loads on Structures Load Types Dead Live Wind Snow Earthquake Load Combinations ASD LRFD University of Michigan, TCAUP Structures I Slide 1 of 27
More informationTHE RESPONSE SPECTRUM
(NBCC 25) Gail M. The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Vancouver Section THE RESPONSE SPECTRUM Seismic Hazard Analysis to obtain Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum (NBCC 25) Gail M. Department of
More informationCHAPTER 3 VIBRATION THEORY. Single Degree of Freedom Systems (SDOF) Stiffness, k Member Stiffness (Member Rigidity).
HPTER 3 VIRTION THEORY Single egree of Freedom Systems (SOF).. 3- Stiffness, k. 3- Member Stiffness (Member Rigidity). 3-3 Natural Period.. 3-3 Natural Frequency... 3-5 ngular Natural Frequency 3-5 Structural
More informationCharacterization and modelling of seismic action
COST C26: Urban Habitat Constructions under Catastrophic Events Final Conference, 16-18 September 2010, Naples, Italy Characterization and modelling of seismic action Report of WG2: Earthquake resistance
More informationNON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF SOIL-PILE-STRUCTURE INTERACTION UNDER SEISMIC LOADS
NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF SOIL-PILE-STRUCTURE INTERACTION UNDER SEISMIC LOADS Yingcai Han 1 and Shin-Tower Wang 2 1 Fluor Canada Ltd., Calgary AB, Canada Email: yingcai.han@fluor.com 2 Ensoft, Inc. Austin,
More informationTHE USE OF INPUT ENERGY FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT WITH DIFFERENT DUCTILITY LEVEL
th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August -6, Paper No. 8 THE USE OF INPUT ENERGY FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT WITH DIFFERENT DUCTILITY LEVEL Mao-Sheng GONG And Li-Li
More informationNumerical model comparison on deformation behavior of a TSF embankment subjected to earthquake loading
Numerical model comparison on deformation behavior of a TSF embankment subjected to earthquake loading Jorge Castillo, Yong-Beom Lee Ausenco, USA Aurelian C. Trandafir Fugro GeoConsulting Inc., USA ABSTRACT
More informationDesign of Earthquake-Resistant Structures
NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS LABORATORY OF EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING Design of Earthquake-Resistant Structures Basic principles Ioannis N. Psycharis Basic considerations Design earthquake: small
More information2C09 Design for seismic and climate changes
2C09 Design for seismic and climate changes Lecture 10: Characterisation of seismic motion Aurel Stratan, Politehnica University of Timisoara 07/04/2017 European Erasmus Mundus Master Course Sustainable
More informationNumerical analysis of effect of mitigation measures on seismic performance of a liquefiable tailings dam foundation
Numerical analysis of effect of mitigation measures on seismic performance of a liquefiable tailings dam foundation Yong-Beom Lee, Jorge Castillo Ausenco, USA Aurelian C. Trandafir Fugro GeoConsulting
More informationEMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE FOR SITE- SPECIFIC AMPLIFICATION FACTORS USED IN US BUILDING CODES
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE FOR SITE- SPECIFIC AMPLIFICATION FACTORS USED IN US BUILDING CODES Roger D BORCHERDT And Thomas E FUMAL SUMMARY Site-specific amplification factors, F
More informationSLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS
INFORMATION BULLETIN / PUBLIC - BUILDING CODE REFERENCE NO.: LABC 7006.3, 7014.1 Effective: 01-01-2017 DOCUMENT NO.: P/BC 2017-049 Revised: 12-21-2016 Previously Issued As: P/BC 2014-049 SLOPE STABILITY
More informationRECORD OF REVISIONS. Page 2 of 17 GEO. DCPP.TR.14.06, Rev. 0
Page 2 of 17 RECORD OF REVISIONS Rev. No. Reason for Revision Revision Date 0 Initial Report - this work is being tracked under Notification SAPN 50638425-1 8/6/2014 Page 3 of 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
More informationSeismic design of bridges
NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS LABORATORY FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING Seismic design of bridges Lecture 3 Ioannis N. Psycharis Capacity design Purpose To design structures of ductile behaviour
More informationSOIL-BASEMENT STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALYSIS ON DYNAMIC LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE ON BASEMENT WALL
International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Disaster Mitigation, Jakarta, April 1-15, SOIL-BASEMENT STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALYSIS ON DYNAMIC LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE ON BASEMENT WALL Nurrachmad
More informationDIRECT HAZARD ANALYSIS OF INELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRA
DIRECT HAZARD ANALYSIS OF INELASTIC RESPONSE SPECTRA ABSTRACT Y. Bozorgnia, M. Hachem, and K.W. Campbell Associate Director, PEER, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA Senior Associate,
More informationDRAFT ONONDAGA LAKE CAPPING AND DREDGE AREA AND DEPTH INITIAL DESIGN SUBMITTAL H.4 SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES
DRAFT ONONDAGA LAKE CAPPING AND DREDGE AREA AND DEPTH INITIAL DESIGN SUBMITTAL H.4 SEISMIC SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES Parsons P:\Honeywell -SYR\444576 2008 Capping\09 Reports\9.3 December 2009_Capping and
More informationGravity dam and earthquake
Gravity dam and earthquake Tardieu s Dynamic simplified method Patrick LIGNIER, Tractebel Engineering Coyne et Bellier Château des Comtes de Challes 9 octobre 2014 CONTENTS 2 Vulnerability of gravity dam
More informationComparative study between the push-over analysis and the method proposed by the RPA for the evaluation of seismic reduction coefficient
33, Issue (27) 5-23 Journal of Advanced Research in Materials Science Journal homepage: www.akademiabaru.com/arms.html ISSN: 2289-7992 Comparative study between the push-over analysis and the method proposed
More informationSeismic Design of a Hydraulic Fill Dam by Nonlinear Time History Method
Seismic Design of a Hydraulic Fill Dam by Nonlinear Time History Method E. Yıldız & A.F. Gürdil Temelsu International Engineering Services Inc., Ankara, Turkey SUMMARY: Time history analyses conducted
More informationCodal Provisions IS 1893 (Part 1) 2002
Abstract Codal Provisions IS 1893 (Part 1) 00 Paresh V. Patel Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Nirma Institute of Technology, Ahmedabad 38481 In this article codal provisions of IS 1893
More informationLecture-09 Introduction to Earthquake Resistant Analysis & Design of RC Structures (Part I)
Lecture-09 Introduction to Earthquake Resistant Analysis & Design of RC Structures (Part I) By: Prof Dr. Qaisar Ali Civil Engineering Department UET Peshawar www.drqaisarali.com 1 Topics Introduction Earthquake
More informationCHAPTER 11 OTHER GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING ANALYSES
CHAPTER 11 OTHER GEOTECHNICAL EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING ANALYSES The following notation is used in this chapter: SYMBOL DEFINITION a Acceleration a max Maximum horizontal acceleration at ground surface (also
More informationLiquefaction Assessment using Site-Specific CSR
Liquefaction Assessment using Site-Specific CSR 1. Arup, Sydney 2. Arup Fellow, Adelaide M. M. L.SO 1, T. I. MOTE 1, & J. W. PAPPIN 2 E-Mail: minly.so@arup.com ABSTRACT: Liquefaction evaluation is often
More informationAn Approach for Seismic Design in Malaysia following the Principles of Eurocode 8
An Approach for Seismic Design in Malaysia following the Principles of Eurocode 8 by Dr J. W. Pappin, Ms. P. H. I. Yim and Mr. C. H. R. Koo 1. INTRODUCTION Eurocode 8 is a useful document providing systematic
More informationSEISMIC PERFORMANCE FACTORS FOR STEEL ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES
SEISMIC PERFORMANCE FACTORS FOR STEEL ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES Cem Topkaya Professor of Civil Engineering Middle East Technical University Ankara, Turkey e-mail: ctopkaya@metu.edu.tr Ahmet Kuşyılmaz
More informationA GEOTECHNICAL SEISMIC SITE RESPONSE EVALUATION PROCEDURE
A GEOTECHNICAL SEISMIC SITE RESPONSE EVALUATION PROCEDURE Adrian RODRIGUEZ-MAREK 1, Jonathan D BRAY 2 And Norman A ABRAHAMSON 3 SUMMARY A simplified empirically-based seismic site response evaluation procedure
More informationCase Study - Undisturbed Sampling, Cyclic Testing and Numerical Modelling of a Low Plasticity Silt
6 th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering 1-4 November 2015 Christchurch, New Zealand Case Study - Undisturbed Sampling, Cyclic Testing and Numerical Modelling of a Low Plasticity
More informationGeo-Marine Letters Volume 36, 2016, electronic supplementary material
1 Geo-Marine Letters Volume 36, 016, electronic supplementary material Submarine landslides offshore Vancouver Island along the northern Cascadia margin, British Columbia: why preconditioning is likely
More informationDisplacement ductility demand and strength reduction factors for rocking structures
Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures VI 9 Displacement ductility demand and strength reduction factors for rocking structures M. Trueb, Y. Belmouden & P. Lestuzzi ETHZ-Swiss Federal Institute of
More informationDynamic Loads CE 543. Examples. Harmonic Loads
CE 543 Structural Dynamics Introduction Dynamic Loads Dynamic loads are time-varying loads. (But time-varying loads may not require dynamic analysis.) Dynamics loads can be grouped in one of the following
More information3-D Numerical simulation of shake-table tests on piles subjected to lateral spreading
3-D Numerical simulation of shake-table tests on piles subjected to lateral spreading M. Cubrinovski 1, H. Sugita 2, K. Tokimatsu 3, M. Sato 4, K. Ishihara 5, Y. Tsukamoto 5, T. Kamata 5 1 Department of
More informationRepresentative ground-motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand
Representative ground-motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand K. Tarbali & B.A. Bradley Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
More informationDynamic Analyses of an Earthfill Dam on Over-Consolidated Silt with Cyclic Strain Softening
Keynote Lecture: Dynamic Analyses of an Earthfill Dam on Over-Consolidated Silt with Cyclic Strain Softening W.D. Liam Finn University of British Columbia, BC, Canada Guoxi Wu BC Hydro, Burnaby, BC, Canada
More informationUnique Site Conditions and Response Analysis Challenges in the Central and Eastern U.S.
Unique Site Conditions and Response Analysis Challenges in the Central and Eastern U.S. James R. Martin, C. Guney Olgun, & Morgan Eddy Civil and Environmental Engineering World Institute for Disaster Risk
More informationImprovements to the Development of Acceleration Design Response Spectra. Nicholas E. Harman, M.S., P.E., SCDOT
Improvements to the Development of Acceleration Design Response Spectra Nicholas E. Harman, M.S., P.E., SCDOT Thanks Clemson University Dr. Ron Andrus Co-Principal Investigator Dr. Nadarajah Ravichandran
More informationCAPACITY SPECTRUM FOR STRUCTURES ASYMMETRIC IN PLAN
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 004 Paper No. 653 CAPACITY SPECTRUM FOR STRUCTURES ASYMMETRIC IN PLAN B. K. Raghu Prasad 1, A. Seetha Ramaiah and A.
More informationSHAKE TABLE STUDY OF SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTS ON SEISMIC RESPONSE OF SINGLE AND ADJACENT BUILDINGS
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 1918 SHAKE TABLE STUDY OF SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTS ON SEISMIC RESPONSE OF SINGLE AND ADJACENT
More informationNonlinear static analysis PUSHOVER
Nonlinear static analysis PUSHOVER Adrian DOGARIU European Erasmus Mundus Master Course Sustainable Constructions under Natural Hazards and Catastrophic Events 520121-1-2011-1-CZ-ERA MUNDUS-EMMC Structural
More informationChapter 5 Commentary STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
Chapter 5 Commentary STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 5.1 GENERAL The equivalent lateral force (ELF) procedure specified in Sec. 5.2 is similar in its basic concept to SEAOC recommendations in 1968, 1973,
More informationSHAKE MAPS OF STRENGTH AND DISPLACEMENT DEMANDS FOR ROMANIAN VRANCEA EARTHQUAKES
SHAKE MAPS OF STRENGTH AND DISPLACEMENT DEMANDS FOR ROMANIAN VRANCEA EARTHQUAKES D. Lungu 1 and I.-G. Craifaleanu 2 1 Professor, Dept. of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Technical University of Civil Engineering
More informationSEISMIC RESPONSE OF SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM STRUCTURAL FUSE SYSTEMS
3 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August -6, 4 Paper No. 377 SEISMIC RESPONSE OF SINGLE DEGREE OF FREEDOM STRUCTURAL FUSE SYSTEMS Ramiro VARGAS and Michel BRUNEAU
More informationAmplification of Seismic Motion at Deep Soil Sites
20th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 20) Espoo, Finland, August 9-14, 2009 SMiRT 20-Division 5, Paper 1740 Amplification of Seismic Motion at Deep Soil Sites
More informationProposed Approach to CENA Site Amplification
Proposed Approach to CENA Site Amplification Gail Atkinson with acknowledgement to many co-authors, especially Ghofrani, Hassani, Assatourians, and Braganza. The model is a team effort reflecting their
More informationPrediction of elastic displacement response spectra in Europe and the Middle East
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2007; 36:1275 1301 Published online 27 February 2007 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com)..679 Prediction of elastic
More informationIZMIT BAY BRIDGE SOUTH APPROACH VIADUCT: SEISMIC DESIGN NEXT TO THE NORTH ANATOLIAN FAULT
Istanbul Bridge Conference August 11-13, 2014 Istanbul, Turkey IZMIT BAY BRIDGE SOUTH APPROACH VIADUCT: SEISMIC DESIGN NEXT TO THE NORTH ANATOLIAN FAULT A. Giannakou 1, J. Chacko 2 and W. Chen 3 ABSTRACT
More information5. What is the moment of inertia about the x - x axis of the rectangular beam shown?
1 of 5 Continuing Education Course #274 What Every Engineer Should Know About Structures Part D - Bending Strength Of Materials NOTE: The following question was revised on 15 August 2018 1. The moment
More information1D Analysis - Simplified Methods
1D Equivalent Linear Method Page 1 1D Analysis - Simplified Methods Monday, February 13, 2017 2:32 PM Reading Assignment Lecture Notes Pp. 255-275 Kramer (EQL method) p. 562 Kramer (Trigonometric Notation
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE 2 PRINCIPLES OF SEISMIC ISOLATION OF BRIDGES 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 PRINCIPLES OF SEISMIC ISOLATION OF BRIDGES 3 3 ANALYSIS METHODS OF SEISMICALLY ISOLATED BRIDGES 5 3.1 Introduction 5 3.2 Loadings for the Analysis
More informationBOĞAZİÇİ UNIVERSITY KANDILLI OBSERVATORY AND EARTHQUAKE RESEARCH INSTITUTE CHANGING NEEDS OF ENGINEERS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN
BOĞAZİÇİ UNIVERSITY KANDILLI OBSERVATORY AND EARTHQUAKE RESEARCH INSTITUTE CHANGING NEEDS OF ENGINEERS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN Erdal Şafak Department of Earthquake Engineering Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake
More informationInterpretive Map Series 24
Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Interpretive Map Series 24 Geologic Hazards, Earthquake and Landslide Hazard Maps, and Future Earthquake Damage Estimates for Six Counties in the Mid/Southern
More informationLiquefaction and Foundations
Liquefaction and Foundations Amit Prashant Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar Short Course on Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings 26 30 November, 2012 What is Liquefaction? Liquefaction
More informationDowntown Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment & Land Use Regulations to Mitigate Seismic Risk
Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department and the Geotechnical Advisory Commission Downtown Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment & Land Use Regulations to Mitigate Seismic Risk Prepared
More informationEVALUATION OF SECOND ORDER EFFECTS ON THE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF RC FRAMED STRUCTURES: A FRAGILITY ANALYSIS
13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 428 EVALUATION OF SECOND ORDER EFFECTS ON THE SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF RC FRAMED STRUCTURES: A FRAGILITY
More informationProbabilistic Earthquake Risk Assessment of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Part 1 Seismic Hazard.
Probabilistic Earthquake Risk Assessment of Newcastle and Lake Macquarie Part 1 Seismic Hazard. T. Dhu, D. Robinson, C. Sinadinovski, T. Jones, A. Jones & J. Schneider Geoscience Australia, Canberra, Australia.
More informationENERGY DIAGRAM w/ HYSTERETIC
ENERGY DIAGRAM ENERGY DIAGRAM w/ HYSTERETIC IMPLIED NONLINEAR BEHAVIOR STEEL STRESS STRAIN RELATIONSHIPS INELASTIC WORK DONE HYSTERETIC BEHAVIOR MOMENT ROTATION RELATIONSHIP IDEALIZED MOMENT ROTATION DUCTILITY
More informationCyclic Behavior of Sand and Cyclic Triaxial Tests. Hsin-yu Shan Dept. of Civil Engineering National Chiao Tung University
Cyclic Behavior of Sand and Cyclic Triaxial Tests Hsin-yu Shan Dept. of Civil Engineering National Chiao Tung University Causes of Pore Pressure Buildup due to Cyclic Stress Application Stress are due
More informationSensitivity of Liquefaction Triggering Analysis to Earthquake Magnitude
Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2013 Conference, Nov 15-17, Hobart, Tasmania Sensitivity of Liquefaction Triggering Analysis to Earthquake Magnitude Dr Timothy I Mote 1 and Minly M. L. So 2 1.
More informationJapan Seismic Hazard Information Station
Japan Seismic Hazard Information Station (J-SHIS) Hiroyuki Fujiwara National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED) Background of the Project Headquarters for Earthquake Research
More informationSLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS
INFORMATION BULLETIN / PUBLIC - BUILDING CODE REFERENCE NO.: LAMC 98.0508 Effective: 1-26-84 DOCUMENT NO. P/BC 2002-049 Revised: 11-1-02 Previously Issued As: RGA #1-84 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE
More informationThe Effect of Using Hysteresis Models (Bilinear and Modified Clough) on Seismic Demands of Single Degree of Freedom Systems
American Journal of Applied Sciences Original Research Paper The Effect of Using Hysteresis Models (Bilinear and Modified Clough) on Seismic Demands of Single Degree of Freedom Systems 1 Ahmad N. Tarawneh,
More informationSeismic site response analysis for Australia
Seismic site response analysis for Australia Anita Amirsardari 1, Elisa Lumantarna 2, Helen M. Goldsworthy 3 1. Corresponding Author. PhD Candidate, Department of Infrastructure Engineering, University
More information2017 Soil Mechanics II and Exercises Final Exam. 2017/7/26 (Wed) 10:00-12:00 Kyotsu 4 Lecture room
2017 Soil Mechanics II and Exercises Final Exam 2017/7/26 (Wed) 10:00-12:00 Kyotsu 4 Lecture room Attention: The exam consists of five questions for which you are provided with five answer sheets. Write
More informationON THE PREDICTION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS FROM TWO PILE TESTS UNDER FORCED VIBRATIONS
Transactions, SMiRT-24 ON THE PREDICTION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS FROM TWO PILE TESTS UNDER FORCED VIBRATIONS 1 Principal Engineer, MTR & Associates, USA INTRODUCTION Mansour Tabatabaie 1 Dynamic response
More informationEvaluation of the Seismic Load Level in Korea based on Global Earthquake Records
Proceedings of the Tenth Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering Building an Earthquake-Resilient Pacific 6-8 November 215, Sydney, Australia Evaluation of the Seismic Load Level in Korea based on
More informationΙApostolos Konstantinidis Diaphragmatic behaviour. Volume B
Volume B 3.1.4 Diaphragmatic behaviour In general, when there is eccentric loading at a floor, e.g. imposed by the horizontal seismic action, the in-plane rigidity of the slab forces all the in-plane points
More informationSITE ANALYSIS USING RANDOM VIBRATION THEORY
Transactions, SMiRT-23, Paper ID 050 SITE ANALYSIS USING RANDOM VIBRATION THEORY 1 President APA Consulting, USA Alejandro P. Asfura 1 ABSTRACT This paper compares two methods for the seismic analysis
More informationRESPONSE ANALYSIS STUDY OF A BASE-ISOLATED BUILDING BASED
4th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering Taipei, Taiwan October 12-13, 2006 Paper No. 224 RESPONSE ANALYSIS STUDY OF A BASE-ISOLATED BUILDING BASED ON SEISMIC CODES WORLDWIDE Demin Feng 1,
More informationDynamic Soil Pressures on Embedded Retaining Walls: Predictive Capacity Under Varying Loading Frequencies
6 th International Conference on Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering 1-4 November 2015 Christchurch, New Zealand Dynamic Soil Pressures on Embedded Retaining Walls: Predictive Capacity Under Varying Loading
More informationCOLUMN INTERACTION EFFECT ON PUSH OVER 3D ANALYSIS OF IRREGULAR STRUCTURES
th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August -6, Paper No. 6 COLUMN INTERACTION EFFECT ON PUSH OVER D ANALYSIS OF IRREGULAR STRUCTURES Jaime DE-LA-COLINA, MariCarmen HERNANDEZ
More informationChapter (11) Pile Foundations
Chapter (11) Introduction Piles are structural members that are made of steel, concrete, or timber. They are used to build pile foundations (classified as deep foundations) which cost more than shallow
More informationGround Motions and Liquefaction Potential
Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics 2010 - Fifth International Conference
More informationChapter 2: Rigid Bar Supported by Two Buckled Struts under Axial, Harmonic, Displacement Excitation..14
Table of Contents Chapter 1: Research Objectives and Literature Review..1 1.1 Introduction...1 1.2 Literature Review......3 1.2.1 Describing Vibration......3 1.2.2 Vibration Isolation.....6 1.2.2.1 Overview.
More information