Chapter 15 – SE104

Chapter 15

GUIDELINES FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN and

EVALUATION OF EARTHQUAKE FORCES
S. K. Bhattacharyya
Department of Civil Engineering,
IIT, Kharagpur.

PART : 1 SEISMIC ZONING OF INDIA

1 INTRODUCTION

The destruction of life and property caused by earthquake has continued to remain as menace to
mankind despite an enormous amount of sustained research over decades in this field. One
possible way to reduce the intensity of such calamity, if not to prevent it totally, is to classify
terrains in order of progressively changing intensity of seismicity highlighting the more vulnerable
areas prone to damage by earthquakes. Identification of possible consequences of an earthquake
both in relation to the existing structures as well as in the planning and locating of new facilities is
important for an efficient analysis of hazards & risks.

Seismic risk is the probability that social or economic consequences of earthquakes will equal or
exceed specified values at a site or at several sites or in an area during a specified exposure
time. The seismic risk for a project depends to a great extent on the seismic activity of the region.
As most earthquakes arise from stress build-up due to deformation of the earth’s crust,
understanding of seismicity depends on aspects of geology, which is the science of the earth’s
crust. Geological evidence of the seismic activity of a region is a valuable tool in the evaluation of
seismic risk. It is helpful in estimating the likely magnitude, locations and frequency of seismic
events. Useful information on the seismic activity of a region may be obtained from the study of
crustal tilting, warping and faulting. The particular aspect of geology, which sheds most light on
the source of earthquakes is tectonics, which concerns the structure and deformations of the
crust and the processes that accompany it. The relevant aspect of tectonics is often referred as
seismotectonics. In estimating seismic risk for a given site this largely qualitative information
should be used in conjunction with quantitative estimates of earthquake magnitude and
frequency.

1.1 GLOBAL SEISMOTECTONICS

The seismicity pattern of the world demonstrates that the events follow some clearly defined
belts, which form a map of the boundaries of segments of the earth’s crust known as tectonic
plates. Fig.1 shows a world map of main tectonic plates. As per G. R. Stevens, the earth’s crust
is composed of at least 15 virtually undistorted plates of lithosphere. Boundaries of plates are of
four main types:
(i) Divergent zones: In these zones new plate material is added from the interior of the
earth. Divergent boundaries are found at the oceanic sea-floor ridges, affecting
scattered islands of volcanic origin. As these zones involve lower stress levels, they
generate somewhat smaller earthquakes than the other types of plate boundary.

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 1

Chapter 15 – SE104

(ii) Subduction zones: In these zones plates converge and the under-thrusting one is
consumed. Subduction zones occur in various highly populated region. Fig.2 shows
the cross-section of the likely structure of the subduction zone formed by the pacific
plate thrusting under the Indian-Australian plate. The progressive movement of the
pacific plate caused shear stresses to develop. It is believed that the fault forming the
plate boundary periodically locks together and this leads to an accumulation of shear
and compressional strain until the same is in part relieved by a large thrust type of
earthquake. The sudden release of strain by overcoming the shear resistance signals
the recommencement of movement of the subducting plate in a further cycle of
aseismic slip, then another locking of the fault leads to the next plate interface
earthquake. Apart from the main plates, there are smaller buffer plates or sub-plates,
which in certain areas tend to ease the relative movements of the larger plates. The
tectonic plates are considered as rigid, virtually undistorted plates and the world’s
principal zones of seismicity are associated with the interaction between the plates.
However, occasional damaging intra-plate earthquakes also occur, well within the
interior of the plates that clearly are not associated with plate boundary conditions.
The uncertainties associated with intra-plate seismicity are much greater than that for
inter-plate regions of high seismicity.

(iii) Collision zones: The subduction zones where continents riding on plates are
colliding.

(iv) Transform faults: Two plates are simply gliding past one another with no addition or
destruction of plate material.

During earthquakes the release of crustal stresses is believed generally to involve the fracturing
of the rock along a plane, which passes through the point of origin of the event. The point of origin
is generally known as hypocenter or focus. The strength of an earthquake is defined in two ways
– first the strength of shaking at any given place, called the intensity and secondly the total
strength of the event called magnitude.

The intensity of an earthquake on the Earth’s surface depend on a number of factors. The most
important of these are the hypocentral distance c and the amount of energy released by the
sudden rupture of the material at the focus. The distance c can be determined as the hypotenuse
(OK – Ref. Fig.3) of a right angle:

c = ∆2 + h 2

where ∆ is the epicentral distance defined as the distance from the epicenter (the point on the
Earth’s surface located directly over the hypocenter) to point K on the Earth’s surface where the
earthquake intensity is being determined and h is the depth of the hypocenter. If the points on the
surface, where earthquake intensities are the same and connect them by lines, closed curves
termed as isoseismal lines or simply isoseismals are obtained. Near the epicenter, the shape of
the isoseismals is similar to that of the focus. On moving away from the epicenter, the earthquake
intensity diminishes. The rate at which the intensity diminishes depends on the amount of energy
released during the earthquake and on the properties of the focus and the media in which the
seismic waves propagate.

The reasons for the decrease in intensity are many and diverse. As a rule, it may be due to the
divergence of the seismic wave-front, the formation of reflected and other types of waves or the
development of plastic zones in the ground. Another important factor is the dissipation of the
energy of vibrations. As the epicentral distance increases, the first to die out are short period
vibrations so the relative share of long period vibrations builds up in proportion.

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 2

Chapter 15 – SE104

1.2 INDIAN SEISMIC ZONE

India lies at the northwestern end of the Indo-Australian Plate, which encompasses India,
Australia, a major portion of the Indian Ocean and other smaller countries. This plate is colliding
against the huge Eurasian plate (Figs.1 & 4) and going under the Eurasian plate. This process of
one tectonic plate getting under another is termed as subduction. When continents converge,
large amounts of shortening and thickening takes place like at the Himalayas and the Tibet.
Three chief tectonic sub-regions of India are the Himalayas along the North, the plains of the
ganges and other rivers and the peninsula.

A number of significant earthquakes have occurred in and around India over the past century.
Some of these occurred in populated and urbanized areas and hence caused great damage.
Most earthquakes occur along the Himalayan plate boundary but a number of earthquakes have
also occurred in the peninsular region. Table.1 shows some of the past damaging earthquakes.

Table.1: Past Earthquakes

Year Event Magnitude (Richter value)

1819 Cutch 8.3
1897 Assam 8.7
1900 Coimbatore 6.0
1905 Kangra 8.0
1934 Bihar-Nepal 8.3
1950 Assam 8.6
1956 Anjar 6.1
1967 Koyna 6.5
1970 Bharuch 5.2
1988 Bihar-Nepal 6.6
1991 Uttarkashi 6.4
1993 Killari (Lattur) 6.2
1997 Jabalpur 6.0
1999 Chamoli 6.6
2001 Bhuj 7.7

The varying geology at different locations in the country implies that the likelihood of damaging
earthquakes taking place at different locations is different. Thus a seismic zoning map is essential
so that the structures located in different regions can be designed to withstand different level of
ground shaking. The seismic zoning map is revised time to time based on the experience gained
over the past occurrences of earthquakes. Based on the experiences of earthquakes at Koyna &
Killari, the zoning map of India was modified. It is difficult to have an entirely scientific basis for
zoning in view of the scanty data available. Though the magnitudes of different earthquakes,
which have occurred in the past are known to a reasonable degree of accuracy, the intensities of
the shocks caused by these earthquakes have so far been mostly estimated by damage surveys
and there is little instrumental evidence to corroborate the conclusions arrived at. Maximum
intensity at different places can be fixed on a scale only on the basis of the observations made
and recorded after the earthquake and thus a zoning map which is based on the maximum
intensities arrived at, is likely to lead in some cases to an incorrect conclusion in view of (a)
incorrectness in the assessment of intensities; (b) human error in judgement during the damage
survey and (c) variation in quality and design of structures causing variation in type and extent of
damage to the structure for the same intensity of shock. Indian standard has arrived at the zoning
map based on known magnitudes and the known epicenters (Fig.5). The zoning map has been
prepared by the Indian standard based on the information available upto 1993.

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 3

Chapter 15 – SE104

In the seismic zoning map, zone I and zone II as indicated in IS:1893-1984 (refer Fig.6)have
been merged and assigned the level of zone-II. The Killary area has been included in zone-III and
modifications have been made keeping in view the probabilistic hazard evaluation. The Bellary
isolated zone has been removed. The parts of eastern coast areas have shown similar hazard to
that of the Killari area, the level of zone-II has been enhanced to zone-III and connected with
zone-III of Godavari Graben area. The new zoning map as per IS:1893-2002 is shown in Fig.7.

INDIA Fig.1 : World Map of Main Tectonic Plates

Fig.2 : Cross section of Subduction zone

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 4

Chapter 15 – SE104

Fig.3 : Earthquake Features

Fig.4 : Enlarged View of Subduction zone

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 5

Chapter 15 – SE104

Fig.5: Map of India showing Epicenters of past earthquakes

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 6

Chapter 15 – SE104

Fig.6: Seismic Zone map of India: IS 1893-1984

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 7

Chapter 15 – SE104

Fig.7: Seismic Zone map of India: IS 1893-2000

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 8

Chapter 15 – SE104

PART 2 : GUIDELINES FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN

2 INTRODUCTION

Earthquakes are one of nature’s greatest hazards to both human life and property. The damage
to engineering structures and facilities caused by ground vibration, settling of foundations,
landslides, land subsidence and uplift etc. attributed to earthquakes has been extremely large.

The purpose of an earthquake-resistant design is to provide a structure with features, which will
enable it to respond satisfactorily to seismic effects. These features are related to five major
objectives, which are listed in order of importance:

(a) The likelihood of collapse after a very severe earthquake should be as low as possible.

(b) Damage to non-structural elements caused by moderate earthquakes should be kept

within reasonable limits. Although substantial damage due to severe earthquakes, which
have a low probability of occurrence is acceptable, such damage is unacceptable in the
case of moderate tremors which are more likely to occur.
(c) Buildings in which many people are usually present should have deformability features
which will enable occupants to remain calm even in the event of strong shocks.

(d) Personal injury should be avoided.

(e) Damage to neighboring buildings should be avoided.

Such objectives cannot be met simply by following certain rules or recommendations. This
approach can be used only in situations, which occur frequently and only for their more general
aspects. Each case has unique features, which will require the designer to use knowledge and
experience to adapt the recommendation in such a way as to obtain the most suitable solution.
Since the design of earthquake-resistant buildings involves a large number of variables such as
rigidity, damping, ductility and other structural factors whose influence on the response of the
structure to earthquakes is difficult to assess, it is not possible to make specific recommendations
and only guidelines can be established for the designer. In fact these circumstances make it
advisable to apply the theory of probability and optimization techniques in the design of
structures. Hence a general guideline, which should be taken into account in order to attain above
objectives, is formulated.

2.1 PERFORMANCE LEVELS – PREVENTION OF COLLAPSE:

The need to erect buildings in seismic areas had led to the development of a particular design
philosophy. The basic principle of this philosophy consists of considering that it is not
economically justified that, in a seismic active area, all structures should be designed to survive
the strongest possible ground motion, without any damage. It is more reasonable to take the point
of view that the structures must exceed a moderate earthquake without damage, but in a rare
event of very strong ground motion, damage would be tolerated as long as structural collapse can
be prevented. The following cases are exceptions from this concept:

- constructions whose failure may lead to other disasters affecting people or environment
such as nuclear power plants, dams, petrochemical facilities;

- buildings, which are required in emergency plans e.g. hospitals, communication centers;

- life-line facilities e.g. communication lines, pipelines, bridges;

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 9

Chapter 15 – SE104

- housing containing irreplaceable articles e.g. museums.

For these buildings, specific seismic design criteria are developed, which do not allow damage
under common actions.

In the case of usual buildings in seismic areas the code provisions for earthquake design cannot
guarantee a safe structure or no damage during a very strong earthquake. In the performance
based design philosophy, the acceptable level of damage due to an earthquake is defined for
different types of structures. There is no general agreement on this damage level, but there are
some general accepted criteria for determining these performances:
(i) Life safety is the primary requirement. The loss of life and the injuries in a building
due to an earthquake are usually caused by the collapse of the building components.

(ii) Collapse prevention is directly related to the prevention of loss of lives, injuries and
damage of the contents of buildings. The structure can undergo serious damage
during the major earthquakes, but it must stand after the ground motion.

(iii) A distinction is made between structural damage, which cannot be repaired and
damage, which can be repaired. The damage refers both to structural as well as non-
structural elements.

(iv) Acceptable loss of architectural and historical heritage, in which artistic valuables and
masterpieces are destroyed at the same time with the building collapse.

Making a building safe from collapse appears to be simply a question of resistance. However,
since earthquakes are random events and response of buildings to them is complicated, a
dynamic analysis of the situation must be performed.

A building can be prevented from collapsing under static loads by ensuring that the load bearing
capacity of the structure is adequate. However, under dynamic loads, such as those caused by
an earthquake, the energy, which must be absorbed by the structure in order to make it fail must
be taken into account. In such instances, the energy-absorption capacity of the structure is more
important than its resistance. Therefore, the major factor to be considered in the design of
earthquake resistant buildings is the ductility of the structure.

Apart from ductility, the aspect, which should be taken into account is the structural
indeterminacy. Unless the conditions demand a statically determinate structural form, it is
preferable to use statically indeterminate form of structures. The statically indeterminate forms
have advantages, which make the structures safer under seismic loads. If the structure is forced
into the plastic state, the indeterminacy results in the formation of plastic hinges, which can
absorb substantial amounts of energy without losing the stability of the structure.

The choice of material also plays an important role in the prevention of collapse by producing
ductile indeterminate structure. However, it should not be interpreted that the choice of building
material should be solely dictated by collapse. Ductility can be achieved with all the commonly
used building material (masonry, concrete, steel) using suitable design methodology.

Masonry can be used to build ductile structures if an appropriate design is applied. Bricks of
suitable size and shape should be used. Relatively thin parallelepipedal bricks are particularly
suitable. The confinement of walls by reinforced concrete or steel members, known as confined
masonry provides the assembly with satisfactory ductility. The replacement of this confinement
with vertical and horizontal reinforcements (reinforced masonry) gives satisfactory results.

Ductile structures can be built with using reinforced concrete if care is taken in the design to
provide the joints that can adequately confine the concrete thus allowing it to deform plastically
without breaking. It is also important to ensure that the tension edges of the structure are

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 10

Chapter 15 – SE104

adequately reinforced and that there are sufficient stirrups to ensure that the concrete is properly
confined along the compression edges.

The ductility of metal structures can be ensured by designing their joints in such a way that they
will yield plastically under stresses with values above normal. Thus plastic hinges, which permit
rotation will be formed and a large amount of energy will be absorbed and the structure will not
reach breaking point.

2.2 PROTECTION AGAINST DAMAGE TO NON-STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS:

Buildings, in addition to the basic structural forms, have other very important elements to enable
the structures to function in an appropriate manner. These include partitions, windows, filler walls,
chajjas, cornices etc. Although these do not play a part in building’s resistance totally, should
remain intact during an earthquake. The structural design should be such that these elements are
not damaged under the action of moderate earthquakes. The non-structural elements generally
have no stability of their own. They are usually supported by the structure and must, therefore, be
able to move with the building without being damaged.

Non-structural elements have an important role in the reliability or predictability of seismic

response of any given type of construction. In considering the form of a structure, it is important to
be aware that some items, which are normally non-structural become structurally very responsive
in earthquakes. The filler walls in framed structure may be carrying little vertical load but they can
act as shear walls in an earthquake with the following effects:

(i) Reduce the natural period of vibration of the structure, hence changing the intake of
seismic energy and changing the seismic stresses of the actual structure.

(ii) Redistribute the lateral stiffness of the structure, hence changing the stress
distribution, sometimes creating large asymmetries.

(iii) Cause premature failure of the structure usually in shear.

(iv) Suffer excessive damage themselves due to shear.

(v) Prevent failure of otherwise inadequate moment-resisting frames.

2.3 PROTECTION AGAINST DAMAGE TO NEIGHBOURING BUILDINGS:

The main cause of damage to neighbouring buildings is collision. To ensure that this does not
occur, it is necessary to determine accurately how much space should be provided between
buildings. This separation should be determined on the basis of the deformation which both
structures will undergo and will depend on the type of structure selected

2.4 RESTRICTION OF DEFORMABILITY:

Under seismic action flexible buildings behave in a manner, which has a very unfavourable
psychological effect on the occupants. Rigid buildings, however, do not present this problem. The
choice of whether to use a rigid or a flexible structure depends on a number of factors. A flexible
structure is generally on rocky ground whereas a rigid structure is more appropriate on
deformable ground with a low load bearing capacity.

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 11

Chapter 15 – SE104

2.5 SUBSTRUCTURE AND FAILURE MODE CONTROL:

The form of the substructure or the foundation has a strong influence on the seismic response of
structures. The basic rule regarding the earthquake resistance of substructure is that integral
action in earthquakes should be obtained. This requires adequate consideration of the dynamic
response characteristics of the superstructure and of the subsoil. If a good seismic-resistant form
is chosen for the superstructure then at least the plan form of the substructure is likely to be
sound i.e.
(a) Vertical loading will be symmetrical;
(b) Overturning effects will not be too large;
(c) The structure will not be too long in plan.
The nature of the subsoil determines the minimum depth of foundations. In earthquake areas this
will involve consideration of the following factors:
(a) Transmission of horizontal base shears from the structure to the soil;
(b) Provision for earthquake overturning moments (e.g. tension piles);
(c) Differential settlements;
(d) Liquefaction of the subsoil;
(e) The effects of embedment on seismic response.
The effects of depth of embedment are not easy to evaluate reliably but some allowance for this
effect can be made in soil-structure interaction analyses or when determining at what level to
apply the earthquake loading input for the superstructure analysis.

The horizontal interaction stresses between the soil and the foundation are more problematic
than the vertical stresses. The main problems of foundation design occur in transferring the base
shear of the structure to the ground and in maintaining structural integrity of the foundation during
differential soil deformations.

Three basic types of foundations are generally used:

(a) isolated footings
(b) Continuous rafts
(c) Pile foundation

The horizontal seismic shear force at the base of the structure must be transferred through the
sub-structure to the soil. With shallow foundations it is normal to assume that most of the
resistance to lateral load is provided by friction between the soil and the base of the members
resisting horizontal load. Shallow foundations are often vulnerable to damage from differential
horizontal and vertical ground movements during earthquakes.

The aseismic design of pile foundations includes consideration of the vertical and horizontal
stresses and the structural integrity of the foundation. Vertical seismic loads in individual piles
may vary greatly depending on their position in relation to the rest of the pile group and to the
superstructure (Fig.8). Some piles, particularly those at the edges or corners of pile systems may
have to carry large tensile as well as compression forces during earthquakes.

2.6 STRUCTURAL FORMS:

The main structural forms suitable for earthquake resistance are:

(i) Moment-resisting frames

(ii) Framed tube structures
(iii) Structural walls (shear walls)
(iv) Concentrically braced frames
(v) Eccentrically braced frames
(vi) Hybrid structural systems.

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 12

Chapter 15 – SE104

2.7 CONTROL DEVICES TO PROTECT STRUCTURES FROM EARTHQUAKE FORCES:

Earthquake ground motion imparts kinetic energy into structures and the basic philosophy of
earthquake resistant design is to control the location and extent of damage caused by this
energy. This basic philosophy can be extended beyond the structural forms to any means, which
may further protect the structure by reducing the amount of energy imparted on it. Fig.9 shows
the schematic of the control systems that are adopted to the structures as earthquake protective
systems.

It is imperative that the standard of construction should match the standard of the design by
meeting the requirements of the drawings and specifications for any given project. But,
unfortunately in practice, the same is not adhered to. In many a cases the standards of design
may be adequately controlled but are not achieved in the end product because of lack of control
of standards of construction or fabrication. Thus one of the important criteria to reduce
earthquake risk is the enforcement of standards at all stages of the design and construction.

Fig.8 : Effect of horizontal force in Pile group

Passive Control Active Control Hybrid Control

Systems Systems Systems

Tuned Mass Active mass Active

damping damping isolation

Energy Active Semi-active

dissipation bracing isolation

Adaptive Semi-active
Seismic
Control Mass damping
isolation

Fig.9: Structural Control Systems

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 13

Chapter 15 – SE104

PART 3: EVALUATION OF EARTHQUAKE FORCES

3 INTRODUCTION

Earthquake forces are caused by the inertia of the structure, which tries to resist ground motions.
As the shifting ground carries the building foundations along with it, inertia keeps the rest of the
structure in place for a short while longer. The movement between the two parts of the building
creates a force equal to the ground acceleration times the mass of the structure. The ground
acceleration depends on the magnitude of the seismic event.

In addition to the earthquake magnitude and the mass of the building – the heavier it is, the larger
the force – the value of the seismic force also depends on the type of soil under the building.
Some soils tend to amplify seismic waves and can even turn to a liquid like consistency during an
earthquake.

The design computation of structures subjected to seismic ground motions requires the designer
to make decisions on the definition of the action to be considered in the analysis. This operation
is conditioned by the quantity and quality of seismological data available for a given area and at
the same time by the way in which the seismic response of the structure to be analysed is
expressed. This response can be characterized as a time history through its maximum value in
the complex frequency domain or by means of a stochastic formulation. In the type of definition
used for the response it must be feasible to take into account the possible non-linear structural
behaviour under seismic action. Consequently, it is necessary to use analysis procedures, which
can solve both linear and non-linear structural models.

From the point of view of the definition of seismic action an ‘ideal’ seismic zone is one for which
reliable models of the characteristics of the ground motion at the epicenter can be developed and
for which high quality data on the expected amplitude, frequency and duration of the ground
motion are available. The existing data must also include the mechanical characteristics of the
soil layers at a given site. If strong ground motion accelerograms are also available for such a
zone, these can be used directly in the computation of the seismic response of structures.
Numerical stepwise integration procedures for the equations of motion can be performed to
compute the time history of the structural response in the linear or the non-linear field. The same
acceleration records could be used to calculate seismic response spectra, in which case the
maximum response of structures is computed using a modal analysis.

3.1 EARTHQUAKE EXCITATION – LINEAR SDOF SYSTEM:

For engineering design the time variation of ground acceleration is the most useful way of
defining the shaking of the ground during an earthquake. For a given ground acceleration the
problem to be solved is defined completely for a Single Degree of Freedom (SDOF) system with
known mass, stiffness and damping properties.

3.2 EQUATION OF MOTION:

The governing equation of motion of a linear SDOF system having mass m, damping c and
stiffness k, subjected to ground acceleration Üg(t) may be written as:

&& + cu& + ku= −mu

mu && g (1)

Dividing eqn.(1) by m gives

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 14

Chapter 15 – SE104

&& + 2ςω n u& + ω n2 u = −u

u && g (t ) (2)

It is apparent from eqn.(2) that for a given Üg(t), the deformation response u(t) of the system
depends only on the natural frequency ωn or natural period Tn of the system and its damping ratio
ς. Thus any two systems having the same values of Tn and ς will have the same deformation
response u(t) even though one system may be more massive than the other or one may be stiffer
than the other.

For a given ground motion Üg(t), the deformation response u(t) of a SDOF system depends only
on the natural vibration period of the system and its damping ratio. From the deformation
response corresponding to a ground motion it is observed that the longer the vibration period, the
greater is the peak deformation. However, this may not be valid for entire range of periods.
Once the deformation response history u(t) is evaluated by dynamic analysis of the structure, the
internal forces can be determined by static analysis of the structure at each time instant. The
static force at any instant may be written as fs = k.u(t) = m.ωn2.u(t). The term ωn2u(t) is commonly
referred as pseudo-acceleration. The pseudo-acceleration response of the system may readily be
computed from the deformation response u(t).

The response (displacement, velocity or acceleration) of the system may be plotted with time for
any given ground motion.

3.3 RESPONSE SPECTRUM:

The response spectrum provides a convenient means to summarise the peak response of all
possible linear SDOF systems to a particular component of ground motion. It also provides a
practical approach to apply the knowledge of structural dynamics to the design of structures and
development of lateral force requirements in building codes. A plot of the peak value of a
response quantity (displacement / velocity / acceleration ) as a function of the natural vibration
period Tn of the system or a related parameter such as circular frequency ωn or cyclic frequency fn
is called the response spectrum for that quantity. Fig.10 shows a typical response spectrum for a
given earthquake spectra.

Fig. 10 Typical Response Spectrum

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 15

Chapter 15 – SE104

3.4 STEPS TO CONSTRUCT RESPONSE SPECTRUM:

For a known ground motion Üg(t), the response spectrum can be developed using the following
steps:

1. Üg(t) is defined numerically.

2. The natural vibration period Tn and damping ratio ς of a SDOF system are selected.
3. The deformation response of the SDOF system is computed for the selected ground
motion.
4. The peak values of deformation, velocity and acceleration are evaluated.
5. The above computations are carried out for different values of Tn and ς and plotted.

3.5 DESIGN SPECTRA

The design spectrum is constructed for the design of new structures or for the evaluation of
seismic safety of existing structures to resist future earthquakes. Since it is expected to have
different spectrum for different earthquakes in the same site, a spectrum is plotted, which consists
of a set of smooth curves. The design spectrum is generated based on the statistical analysis of
the response spectra for different ground motions.

3.6 CONSTRUCTION OF DESIGN SPECTRUM

1. Three dashed lines corresponding to the peak values of ground acceleration, velocity and
displacement for the design ground motion are plotted.
2. For the specified damping ratio, the amplification factors are selected.
3. The quantities acceleration, velocity and deflection are multiplied by the respective
amplification factors.
4. The curve is thus generated.

Fig.11 shows the typical design spectra.

Fig. 11 Typical Design Spectrum

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 16

Chapter 15 – SE104

3.7 EVALUATION OF FORCES

For evaluating earthquake forces in building structures deterministically, methods stipulated in the
Indian standards are used. A typical example is solved using Seismic coefficient method and
Response spectrum method.

Problem : A two bay three storied building frame is shown in the Fig 12. Assume the floors are
sufficiently rigid so that the frame can be idealized as a shear building.

Data given are: Grade of concrete : M20

Spacing of frames : 3.0 m
Normal live load on floors : 400 kg/m2
Longitudinal walls : Outer walls- brick : 250 mm thick
: Inner walls-brick : 125 mm thick
Crosswalls – 125 mm thick brickwall.

Roof Floors
Slab thickness 100 mm 140 mm
Floor finish 0.50 kN/m2 1.0 kN/m2
Cross beams 250 x 350 mm 250 x 500 mm
Long beam 250 x 300 mm 250 x 400 mm

Size of column: Bottom storey : 400 x 500 mm

II storey : 400 x 500 mm
Top storey : 400 x 400 mm
Zone—III, Isolated footings, Hard soil.
Evaluate the earthquake forces using (a) Seismic Coefficient Method (b) Response Spectrum
Method.

W1

I1 I1 I1 3m
W2

I2 I2 I2 3m
W3

I3 I3 I3 3m

4m 4m

Fig 12. Plane

Frame

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 17

Chapter 15 – SE104

Calculation of loads at roof / floor levels:

W1 = 3 x 8 x 0.1 x 25 + 3 x 8 x 0.5 + 0.4 x 0.4 x 3 x 1.5 x 25

(slab) (finish) (columns)

+ 0.25 x 0.25 x 8 x 25 + 0.25 x 0.2 x 3 x 3 x 25

(cross beam) (long beam)

+ 0.25 x 3 x 1.5 x 2 x 20 + 0.125 x 3 x 1.5 x 20

( outer long wall) (long-inner wall)

+ 0.125 x 8 x 1.5 x 20 + 0 (L.L) Æ (Ref.cl. 7.3.2) = 200 kN = W

W2 = 3 x 8 x 0.14 x 25 + 3 x 8 x 1 + 0.4 x 0.4 x 1.5 x 3 x 25

(slab) (floor) (col.upper)

+ 0.4 x 0.5 x 1.5 x 3 x 25 + 0.25 x 0.26 x 3 x 3 x 25

(col-lower) (long beam)

+ 0.25x0.36 x8x25 + 0.25x3x3x2x20 + 0.125x3x3x20

(cross beam) (long-outer-wall) (long-inner-wall)

+ 0.25 x 0.36 x 8 x 25 + 0.25 x 3 x 3 x 2 x 20

(L.L) (cross wall)

= 401.625 ≅ 400 KN = 2 W

W3 ≅ 400 KN = 2W

W1 200 × 103
M1 = = M = = 2x104
g 9.81

2W1
M2 = = 2M
8
2W1
M3 = = 2M
8

CL.7.5.3 DESIGN SEISMIC BASE SHEAR

VB = An.W

An = Design horizontal acceleration spectrum value as per Cl.6.4.2

CL.6.4.2
Z I Sa Z
An= . .
2 R g 2

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 18

Chapter 15 – SE104

Z = Zone factor as in Table 2 = 0.16 Æ Table .2

I = Æ Table.6
R = 3.0 I/R 1.0 Æ Table.7

Sa
= 1 + 15 x 0.032 = 1.48
g
0.09 0.09
Tn = = = 0.032
d 8

0.16
An = x 1.0 x 1.48 = 0.1184
2
VB = An W = 0.1184 x ( 200 + 400 + 400 ) = 118.4

Wi hi 2
Qi =VB .
∑Wi hi2

Wi hi Wihi2

1 W1 9.0m 16200
200 kN

2 W2 6.0m 14400
400 kN

3 W3 3.0m 3600
400 kN
∑ 34200

W1
h1

W2
h2

W3
h3

Fig.13 Lumped model

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 19

Chapter 15 – SE104

16200
Q1 = × 118.4 KN = 56.08kN
34200

14400
Q2 = × 118.4 KN = 49.85kN
34200

3600
Q3 = × 118.4 KN = 12.46kN
34200

V1 = Q1 = 56.08 kN

V2 = Q1+Q2 = ( 56.08 + 49.85 ) =105.93 kN

V3 = Q1 + Q2 + Q3 = ( 56.08 + 49.85 + 12.46 ) kN

= 118.39 kN

0.4 × 0.43 4 ⎫
I1 = m = 2.133 × 10 −3 m 4 = I ⎪
12 ⎪
0.4 × 0.53 4 ⎪
I2 = m = 4.17 × 10 −3 m 4 ≅ 2 I ⎬
12 ⎪
0.4 × 0.53 4
I3 = m = 4.17 × 10 ≅ 2 I ⎪
−3

12 ⎪⎭

STIFFNESS

12 EI 36 EI 36 × 2.24 × 10 7 × 2.133 × 10 −3
K 11 = 3 × = 3 = kN / m = 637056 kN / m = K ( say )
L3 L 33
− 36 EI
K 12 = = −K
L3
K 13 =0

36 EI
K 21 = − = −K
L3
36 EI 3 × 12 E ( 2 I )
K 22 = 3 + = K + 2 K = 3K
L L3
K 23 = −2 K

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 20

Chapter 15 – SE104

K 31 = 0
K 32 = −2 K
K 33 = 4 K

The Stiffness Matrix is :

⎡ K −K 0 ⎤
K=
⎢− K 3K − 2K ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ 0 − 2K 4 K ⎥⎦
The Mass Matrix is :

⎡M 0 0 ⎤
M=
⎢0 2M 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ 0 0 2 M ⎥⎦
For Non-trivial Solution :

K − λM −K 0
K − λM = −K 3K − 2λM − 2K = 0

0 − 2K 4 K − 2λM

λM
Assuming =µ
K
1− µ −1 0
−1 3 − 2µ −2 =0
0 −2 4 − 2µ
On evaluation of the cubical equation :
K
λ 1 = 0.2553
M
K
λ 2 = 1.3555
M
K
λ 3 = 2.8892
M

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 21

Chapter 15 – SE104

K 63705 .6 × 10 3
= = 56.438
M 2 × 10 4

K 2π
ω1 = λ1 = 0.5053 = 28.52 rad/s T1 = = 0.22 sec
M ω1

K 2π
ω 2 = λ2 = 1.1643 = 65.71 rad/s T2 = = 0.096 sec
M ω2

K
ω 3 = λ3 = 1.7 2π
M = 95.94 rad/s T3 = = 0.065 sec
ω3

NATURAL FREQUENCY & MODE SHAPE

Sl. No. Frequency Time Period Mode Shape Wi

1. 28.52 rad/sec 0.22 sec 1.0 0.7447 0.4268 200
2. 65.71 rad/sec 0.096 sec 1.0 -0.3555 -0.5514 400
3. 95.94 rad/sec 0.065 sec 0.4707 -0.8893 1.0 400

⎧φ11 ⎫ ⎧ 1.0 ⎫ ⎧φ12 ⎫ ⎧ 1.0 ⎫ ⎧φ13 ⎫ ⎧ 0.4707 ⎫

⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎨φ 21 ⎬ = ⎨0.7447 ⎬ ; ⎨φ 22 ⎬ = ⎨− 0.3555⎬ ; ⎨φ 23 ⎬ = ⎨− 0.8893⎬
⎪φ ⎪ ⎪0.4268⎪ ⎪φ ⎪ ⎪− 0.5514⎪ ⎪φ ⎪ ⎪ 1.0 ⎪
⎩ 31 ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ 32 ⎭ ⎩ ⎭ ⎩ 33 ⎭ ⎩ ⎭

MODAL PARTICIPATION FACTOR :

n
∑Wiφik
i =1
Pk=
n
∑W (φik ) 2
i =1
(W1φ11 + W2.φ 21 + W3.φ31 )
P1=
(W1φ11
2
+ W2φ 21
2
+ W3φ31
2
)

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 22

Chapter 15 – SE104

=
200 ×1.0 + 400 × 0.7447 + 400 × 0.4268
200 ×12 + 400(0.7447 2 + 0.42612 )
668.6
= =1.351
494.7
(W1φ12 + W2.φ 21 + W3.φ31 ) − 162.76
P2 = = = -0.437
(W1φ12
2
+ W2φ 22
2
+ W3φ32
2
) 372.17

(W1φ13 + W2.φ 23 + W3.φ33 ) 138.42

P3 = = = 0.18
(W1φ13 2 + W2φ 23
2
+ W3φ33
2
) 767.8

DESIGN LATERAL FORCE AT EACH FLOOR IN EACH MODE.

Qik = Ak.Qik.Pk.Wi

k
Z I ⎛ S ⎞⎛ S ⎞
1

For k=A1, = T=.0.22.⎜seca. ⎟ ⎜⎜ a ⎟⎟ = 2.50

2 R ⎜⎝ g ⎟⎠ ⎝ g ⎠
k

0.16
A1 = × 1 × 2.50 = 0.20
2
2
⎛S ⎞
For k=2, T = 0.096, ⎜⎜ a ⎟⎟ = 1 + 15 × 0.096 = 2.44
⎝ g ⎠
0.16
A2 = × 1 × 2.44 = 0.1952
2
3
⎛ Sa ⎞
For k=3, T = 0.065 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = 1 + 15 × 0.065 = 1.975
⎝ g ⎠
0.16
A3 = × 1 × 1.975 = 0.158
2

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 23

 Chapter 15 – SE104

Q1(1) = A1 × φ11 .P1 .W1 = 0.20 × 1.0 × 1.351 × 200 = 54.04kN

1st Q2(1) = A1 × φ 21 .P1 .W2 = 0.20 × 0.7447 × 1.351 × 400 = 80.5kN
mode
Q 3(1) = A1 × φ 31 .P1 .W 3 = 0 .20 × 0 .4268 × 1 .351 × 400 = 46 .13 kN

Q1( 2 ) = A2 × φ12 .P2 .W1 = 0.1952 × 1.0 × (−0.437) × 200 = −17.06kN

2nd Q2( 2 ) = A2 × φ 22 .P2 .W2 = 0.1952 × (−0.3555)(−0.437) × 400 = 12.13kN
mode Q3( 2 ) = A2 × φ32 .P2 .W3 = 0.1952 × (−0.5514)(−0.437) × 400 = 18.81kN

rd
Q1( 3) = A3 × φ13 .P3 .W1 = 0.158 × 0.4707 × 0.18 × 200 = 2.68kN
3
mode Q2(3) = A3 × φ 23 .P3 .W2 = 0.158 × (−0.8893) × 0.18 × 400 = 10.12kN
Q3( 3) = A3 × φ33 .P3 .W3 = 0.158 × 1.0 × 0.18 × 400 = 11.4kN

SHEAR FORCES AT DIFFERENT LEVELS

V1(1) = Q1(1) = 54.04kN

V2(1) = Q1(1) + Q2(1) = (54.04 + 80.5) KN = 134.54kN
V3(1) = Q1(1) + Q2(1) + Q3(1) = (54.04 + 80.5 + 46.13)kN =180.67kN

V1( 2 ) = Q1( 2 ) = −17.06kN

V2( 2 ) = Q1( 2 ) + Q2( 2 ) = −17.06 + 12.13 = −4.93kN
V3( 2 ) = Q1( 2 ) + Q2( 2 ) + Q3( 2 ) = −17.06 + 12.13 + 18.81 = 13.88kN

V1( 3) = Q1( 3) = 2.68kN

V2(3) = Q1( 3) + Q2( 3) = 2.68 + 10.12 = 12.8kN
V3(3) = Q1( 3) + Q2( 3) + Q3( 3) = 2.68 + 10.12 + 11.4 = 24.2kN

V1= 54.04 + 17.06 + 2.68 = 56.73kN

2 2 2

V2= 134.54 + 4.93 + 12.8 = 135.23kN

2 2 2

V3= 180.67 + 13.88 + 24.2 = 182.8kN

2 2 2

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 24

Chapter 15 – SE104

COMPARISON:

Seismic Response 35.23 %

Coeff. Spectrum 1.52
21.7 %
%

V1 56.08 kN 56.73 kN

V2 105.93 kN 135.23
kN

V3 118.39 kN 182.8 kN

REFERENCES:

1. IS:1893-2002 – Criteria for Earthquake resistant design of structures – Part I – General

Provisions and buildings – BIS, New Delhi
2. D. J. Dowrick – Earthquake risk reduction – John Wiley & Sons, 2003
3. N.M. Newmark & E. Rosenbleuth – Fundamentals of Earthquake Engineering – Prentice
Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1971
4. IITK & BMTPC – Earthquake Tips – Part I, 2003.
5. Dynamics of Structures – A. K. Chopra
6. Structural Dynamics – Meirovitch
7. IS:1893 – 2000 – Indian Standard for Earthquake resistant design of structures – BIS,
India

NPCBEERM, MHA (DM) 25