Building Safety Promotion Project 1

Short Training Course on Seismic Analysis and Design of RC Buildings

Basic of Seismic Design

(pushover, collapse mechanism, and dynamic analysis)

27 February

Akira INOUE
WT-2 member of JICA Expert Team
 Basic of Seismic Design (pushover, collapse mechanism, and dynamic analysis)

Contents
1. About design acceleration spectrum
2. Relation of design base shear, strength and ductility
3. Design, analysis and evaluation (assessment)
4. Recommended performance objectives for buildings
5. Collapse mechanism and Pushover analysis
6. Factors reduce strength and ductility
7. Introduction of dynamic (response) analysis
8. Conclusion: Importance of structural design conforming to the latest code
1. About design acceleration spectrum
Seismic zoning map and Design acceleration spectrum of the coming BNBC 2020
3
Zone 4: Z= 0.36 (Sylhet)
Zone 3: Z= 0.28 (Chittagong)
Zone 2: Z= 0.20 (Dhaka)
Zone 1: Z= 0.12
3.375

2.875

0.60 0.80

Figure * Seismic Zoning Map of BNBC 2020

Figure * Design Acceleration Spectrum, BNBC 2020
Elastic response shear force coefficient, Cs
(Building period and soil type)
Design base shear coefficient
Response Spectrum Representation
4
An example of observed earthquake wave, El Centro, California, 1940
341.7cm/s2

Acceleration

Integration

Velocity

Integration

Displacement

Ref. Design of Earthquake-resistant buildings, by prof. Minoru Wakabayashi

 Acceleration response spectrum, Sa
Ex. Response SA (Period, ξ ) of a Single-degree-of-freedom system 5

ξ = C/Ccr
Ccr = 2ω m = 2 (mk) ½
ξ : the ratio of the coefficient of viscous
damping to its value at critical damping or
the damping ratio

Period, T= 2π√ (m/k) Response is not even

Elastic response against

natural period with constant
Elastic response of an
damping ratio.
earthquake
Equation of motion, ξ =0.05 is typical.
341.7cm/s 2
m; Mass (mv ; inertia force)
① ② ③ ① C; Damping coefficient (= 2 ξω)
① Inertia force (kN・s/cm)
② damping force K; Spring constant (cm/kN)
③ restoring force V; Displacement (cm) Figure * Acceleration response spectra derived from N-S
component of the El Centro earthquake, California, 1940
Figure * Single degree of freedom system
Ref. Design of Earthquake-resistant buildings, by prof. Minoru Wakabayashi
Smoothed Average Acceleration response spectrum, Sa Seismic design
Smoothed Average Velocity response spectrum, Sv
Smoothed Average Displacement response spectrum, Sd 6

Ref. Design of Earthquake-resistant

buildings, by prof. Minoru Wakabayashi

General shapes of response spectra

2. Relation of design base shear, strength and ductility
Idea of constant energy principle 7
Smoothed average
and constant displacement principle. acceleration response spectrum, Sa
Assuming elastic-plastic behavior
Ductility ratio μ=δu/δy Ductility ratio μ=δu/δy
A Ve/Vy=√(2μ-1) ...Newmark A Ve/Vy=μ
Ve Ve Ve: Elastic response
shear force

Story Shear force

Story Shear force

Rd=Ve/Vy Rd=Ve/Vy Vy: Yield shear force

(Yield strength)
B C R=Ve/Vd B C R=Ve/Vd Vd: Design shear
Vy Vy force
D Ω=Vy/Vd D Ω=Vy/Vd
Vd Ve

δd δy δe δu δd δy δu=δe
Story deflection (drift) Story deflection (drift)
Constant energy principle Constant displacement principle
(System with short natural vibration period, (System with long natural period,
Sa= const) Sv= const)
 A
3. Design, analysis and Ve

Story Shear force

evaluation (assessment) Rd=Ve/Vy Short vibration period, 8
B C R=Ve/Vd Ductility ratio, μ=δu/δy
Ve: Elastic max. shear force Vy
D Ω=Vy/Vd Ve/Vy=√(2μ-1)
Vy: Yield shear strength Vd
(= Yield and max. strength)
Vd: Design base shear 0 δd δy δe δu
Story deflection (drift)
Seismic performance or Ductility or Shear force or strength
max. elastic response deformability
Structural design A : Ve is given from C : δu is supposed. D : Vd is design base shear
design response (Not shown clearly.) through selection of R
spectrum
Pushover A : (B and C supposed) C : δu is supposed. B : Vy is estimated/judged.
Response analysis A : As ground C : Story drift (output) B : Vy is inputted as
(Dynamic analysis) acceleration (input) is judged. restoring force
characteristics
Seismic evaluation A : Ve (or equivalent Ve) C : μ (or Ve/Vy) is B : Vy is estimated.
(Assessment) is estimated and estimated.
judged.
4. Recommended performance objectives for buildings
Proposed by Vision 2000, SEAOC, USA
9
5. Collapse mechanism and Pushover analysis
Collapse mechanism and horizontal strength
Members with flexural yield are required and is the condition. 10
Equilibrium of flexural moment
Shear failure has no ductility.
at beam column joint
Beam collapse mode has more ductility than column collapse mode.

Beam

ΣMnb
Column

ΣMnc

Figure: Prepared by Mr. Nakajima

ΣMnc :Sum of nominal flexural strengths of the columns framing into

the joint, evaluated at the faces of the joint. (kN-m)
ΣMnb : Sum of nominal flexural strengths of the beams framing into
Figure: Assumed various collapse mechanism the joint, evaluated at the faces of the joint. (kN-m)
Design of Earthquake resistant design- Easy to learn structural design-
Kanto branch, AIJ
Plastic hinge formation and over strength factor (1)
Ex. beam collapse mechanism 11

Source: BSPP Seismic design manual

Source: BSPP Seismic design manual

Plastic hinge formation and over strength factor (2)
R：Response modification coefficient, 12
Ω: System overstrength coefficient,
Cd : Deflection amplification factor,
(ASCE-7)

Source: Seismic design manual

 Pushover analysis (1)
Example:
6 storied RC building
Residential Building in Zone 2
(Dhaka)
BNBC 93, R=8,
Pw= 0.31~0.35%, N/bDFc< 0.4
13
V/W= 0.0459, W=30,283kN
V= 0.0459xW= 1,390kN
Ω= 4,000/ 1,390= 2.88 (over strength ratio)
Strength coefficient= Strength/W=0.132
(a) Load deflection Curve of X-direction (b) Plastic hinges formation in a frame
Fig. An Example of Result of Pushover Analysis
Pushover analysis (2) Dual system with ordinary RC frame (OMF)
and ordinary RC shear wall, R= 4.5
Example: W= 50,026kN, 14
6 storied RC building V/W= 0.0667, Cs=2.25, V= 3,335kN
Ω= 7,700/ 3,335= 2.31 (over strength ratio)
Strength coefficient= Strength/W=0.154

Fig. Relation of story shear force and story deflection angle (story drift ratio)

Fig. Framing plan and elevation

Fig. Failure pattern (Plastic hinge formation and Collapse mechanism)
Pushover analysis (3)
Supposed curve if there is no drop
15
Example:
V=4,152kN (GFL) of beam strength by shear failure.

6 storied RC building without

multi-story shear wall

a) Story shear force and story deflection angle

b) Formation of plastic hinges (grid 1, X direction) (Story drift ratio, X direction

Fig. ** - Behavior of frames in case there are no RC walls

Damage grade and Load-deflection curve of RC columns,
by Japanese code
Horizontal deflection 16

Horizontal
load
(Shear force)

Damage grade Ⅲ Damage grade Ⅳ Damage grade V

Damage grade Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ Ⅴ Damage grade Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ Ⅴ

Residual horizontal No deterioration Deterioration No strength Residual horizontal No deterioration Deterioration No strength
strength strength
No deterioration Deterioration No deterioration Deterioration No strength
Residual vertical Residual vertical
strength strength
Flaking of covering
concrete, enlargement of
shear cracks
Compressive failure of
covering concrete
Horizontal Horizontal
load Yield of main re-bar load
Buckling of main re-bar, Rupture of shear
compressive failure of core reinforcement, buckling of
Crack occurrence Crack occurrence main re-bar

Horizontal deflection (flexural members) Horizontal deflection (shear members)

[Source: “Standard of Judgment of Damage Grade and Guidelines of Recovery Engineering for Damaged Buildings, 2001”,
The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association (written in Japanese)]
6. Factors reduce strength and ductility
Axial force ratio 17
An Example of Shear force- Deflection of RC columns
based on experiment

No= bDFc, N/No = Axial force ratio

Beam Column

Ref. Design of Earthquake-resistant

buildings, by prof. Minoru Wakabayashi
Axial force of column and deformability
High axial force; Region B shows that tension re-bar will not yield, Re-bar
and low ductility of the section (member) is supposed. 18
Stress
Medium axial force; Region C shows that tension re-bar will yield,
Concrete
and reasonable ductility of the section (member) is supposed.
Strain
Compressive
re-bar
Compression
side

Neutral axis
Axial force, N
Section
Flexural Equivalent stress
moment, M block of concrete Strain distribution of section
at ultimate stage
Tensile re-bar
Tension
side
Shear
Note: Strong column force High axial force (B)
of column
and weak system
Mid. axial force (C)
(B)
Low axial force
0.4*B*D*Fc

Yield oftensile
Yield of re- re-bar
bar
Story deflection angle

Axial force and deformability

Source; ACI and text book for “Seismic design of RC”, AIJ,
N (axial force) and M (flexural moment) interactive relation Kanto branch, Japan 2012. (in Japanese)
 Beam Beam
Beam column joint
Assumption: 19
Column
Beam column joint is stronger than beam and column
Column
member for the formation of collapse mechanism. Plan Elevation
Shear Bond stress Torsion and bond !!
Careful consideration is required.

Torsional moment

Eccentricity

Beam Beam
Beam

Column Column Column

Figure. Shear failure at beam
Figure. Bond failure at beam column joint
column joint (crack pattern)
Ref. Design of Earthquake-resistant
buildings, by prof. Minoru Wakabayashi
Figure Torsion caused by eccentricity at
beam column joint
Source: Design of earthquake resistant structure, AIJ, Kanto branch
Strength and ductility
Factors affecting the ductility of column and type (Ex. Japanese code)
20
A B C
1. Main re-bar ratio (Pt < 0.8%, 1.0%, --- )
2. Axial force ratio (N/No < 0.35, 0.45, 0.55 )
3. Shear span ratio (M/Q・d> 1.25, 1.0, --- )
4. Shear stress level (τu /Fc < 0.1, 0.125, 0.15, Pw> 0.2%)
at flexural yield,
135 degree hook will be required for
Detail of shear reinforcement (Transversal re-bar) shear reinforcement
135 degree hook 95 degree hook where - transversal re-bar-
floor slab exists

Example of beam detail for Special

moment frame
– Philippine code
Fig. R7.13.2—Example of a two-piece stirrup that complies with Fig. R7.10.5—Sketch to clarify measurements between
the requirements of 7.13.2.3. ACI 318 laterally supported column bars. ACI 318
7. Introduction of dynamic (response) analysis
N- degrees-of-freedom system 21
Building and Vibration Model N masses and only one direction movement

Building Vibration Model

m; Mass
K; Spring constant
(linear model)
C; Damping ratio

Ground motion, acceleration

Building and Vibration Model Source: Prof. Kusakabe:
Lecture note on Building Vibration
Example of response analysis
Supposed restoring Force Characteristic Output: Response shear force coefficient and story deflection 22
of a simple shear vibration model angle (storey drift), soil type SC

Qe/W,
Elastic Response of
Soil SC/ SD,
BNBC2015
0.00375* K
Qy/W

Shear Force 0.375* K

coefficient

0.4*Qy/W

H/750(0.4cm) δy= h/150 (2.0cm)

Story deflection, δ

Fig. * Supposed restoring force characteristics Fig. *- Response shear force coefficient and story deflection
angle (storey drift), soil type SC
Source: BSPP Seismic retrofit design manual
 Relation of Yield shear force coefficient “Cy”/ Elastic response shear
coefficient “Ce” and Response ductility ratio “μ” , applying Degrading Tri-linear RC
frame model. Modified formula of constant energy principle by Newmark 23
Max. ground Damping
Response of acceleration constant
yield
displacement
constant
Responsetype
of strength constant
type
Elastic response
Yield period
Elastic

Yield shear force coefficient,(Cy/Ce, Ce=neally

Yield shear force coefficient,(Cy/Ce,
period
Ce =Ve/ W
Envelope to
cover the Response of degrading
response
Envelope to
Tri-linear 1 mass system
cover the
In case, R= 8, Ωo=3 responses Cy=Vy/W

Then,
Ce=neally 1.0)

Rd = Ve/Vy = 2.67
δy δe δu
1/Rd= 0.375
μ=δu/δy=Rmu/Ry

Assumption of Restoring force

characteristics for the analysis
(Stiffness and Cy are supposed as
input data)
1.0)

Source; Japan Building Disaster

Prevention Association,
"Seismic evaluation of existing RC Ductility factor, μ
buildings 2001”(Japanese version)
Response ductility ratio, μ
Example of response analysis- Simple shear vibration model

24

Output: Story displacement,

Story shear force, etc.
⇒Time

Input : Mass (weight)

Input : Restoring force characteristics
Blue line : Ground acceleration (input) expressed by stiffness, strength, etc.
Red line : Ground displacement (Elastic, bi-linear, tri-linear model)
Input : Damping constant

Ground
Ground acceleration A (time)
An Example of output – existing 5 story RC frame building
Natural vibration period, T1 = 0.48 sec., T2 = 0.16 sec., T3 = 0.10 sec.
25
Max. displacement Max. story deflection
angle (story drift angle)

No. of No. of
story story

Max. displacement Max. story deflection

(cm) angle

Story shear coefficient Max. response

Story
No. of shear
story (kN)

Story shear Max. displacement

coefficient (cm)
8. Conclusion
Importance of structural design conforming to the latest code 26
Example: 1995 Kobe (Hyogoken Nanbu) earthquake, damage ratio of buildings per constructed year in Japan.

(a) Damages of RC Buildings by HyogokenNanbu EQ. (Kobe) 1995

Figures from “Damage Investigation Report “ by Architectural Institute of Japan and other Institutions
Importance of structural design conforming to the latest code RC column

Damage ratio of buildings per constructed year in Japan Slight damage

- 1995 Kobe (Hyogoken Nanbu) earthquake.

Non-structural RC
wall 27
Minor (structural)
damage
⇒Heavy damage and collapse ratio has reduced clearly after construction of 1981.
Damage survey of all RC buildings by AIJ at the highest intensity area. Moderate (structural)
damage

Table: (Heavy + Collapse) damage ratio of RC due to

1995 Hyogoken Nanbu (Kobe) E. AIJ
Heavy (structural)
Construction period ~1971 1971~1981 1981~ damage

RC without soft storey 9% 4% 1%

3,517 buildings Collapse

RC with soft storey 25% 23% 4%

377 buildings c) Classification of damage grade

a) RC general buildings (total 3,517= 635+ 1,209+ 1,673) b) RC with a soft storey (total 377= 47+ 144+ 186)
Figure: Damage ratio of each damage grade and constructed year
 28

Basic of Seismic Design

(pushover, collapse mechanism, and dynamic analysis)

30 January 2021

Thank you very much

Akira Inoue
Pushover

応答修正係数Rは弾性応答から設計用応力を求めるためのものである。Rは、8.0, 5.0, 3.0と決まって

おり、構造種別を選択して、これに見合う構造詳細を採用して骨組みの強度と靭性を確保する方法、
設計手法である。R=8は構造規定が厳しくなっている。
部位によっては脆性破壊を防ぐために、せん断設計など部材の保証設計を行う。この時の設計応力は
弾性解析で求められる存在応力にΩoを乗じなければならない。非戦役解析では設計応力より存在応
力がおおきくなる。部材低減係数の採用、材料強度の上昇等による。Ωoをかけて保証設計をしてい
るといえる。

耐震設計は設計荷重に対して、骨組みの応力計算をし、柱や梁、床、基礎等の部材をの寸法
や配筋を設計する。
これにより、部材や骨組みに剛性や強度が与えられる。
それでは、設計された骨組みは、地震荷重に対してどのような挙動を示すのか？
静的非線形増分解、Horizontal load carrying capacityの強度、Pushover解析

福山
増分解析は添え以下する過程を見ながら設計できる利点。一方、脆性破壊を防ぎ、塑性変形能力をどう
やって確保（保証）するか、
大きく変形させていくとどうなるか、という知見・経験が必要。
終局耐力や変形能力の過大評価の可能性に注意。
応答計算

Cd : deflection amplification factor、大地震時の弾塑性応答時の最大変形が用途ごとに定められた

限界値以下になる検討が必要。高度な解析を避けるため、設計用地震力の時の水平変形（RCでは部
材剛性を低減して算出）に変形増大係数Cdを乗じて弾塑性応答時の最大応答（変形）を算出する簡
便法を採用している。
Cdの値はRより小さい、これは履歴エネルギー吸収能力が確保できること等を考慮して調整されて
いる。特別モーメントフレームでは、R=8に対して、Cd=5.5となっている。

それでは実際の変形はどの程度なのか？？

Life safety, collapse prevention, operationの説明図の追加、関さんの要望

E. Input/Output of time-history response
analysis
Time-history Response Analysis Review of lecture of 1st year
An example of typical shear model

Input data: weight of each story (N), story height(m)

story shear – story deflection relation
(stiffness, shear at crack, shear and deflection at yield,
stiffness
degrading after yield)
Linear, bi-linear, tri-linear model are used.
(result of pushover analysis is used generally)
Damping constant
Input wave (El Centro NS, Taft EW and others, and size
of ground
acceleration)
Analysis: Numerical analysis of “Equation of Motion”

Response: (response maximum shear force, deflection, story

deflection angle,
plastic ratio, acceleration at each story, natural period,
F. Judgment of the response,
such as story deflection (angle) or ductility ratio

1.Restoring force characteristics such as “Tri-linear” will be reasonable

representation (assumption) of the actual behavior of RC frames.
2. Possible ductility of RC frames should be designed or be
evaluated separately.
3. In case the response exceed the allowable limit of story deflection, or
ductility factor, then change the structural design, through increasing
horizontal strength.
4. Again, execute response analysis to verify that the response satisfy
the allowable limit.