Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Seismic Performance and Design Requirements For High Rise Concrete Buildongs
Seismic Performance and Design Requirements For High Rise Concrete Buildongs
I
n recent years there has been a resurgence structural system for buildings over 240 feet tall; sidered a distinct type of seismic-force-resisting
of high-rise construction in the major however, under building code provisions that per- system. This distinction currently exists in building
cities along the West Coast of the U.S. mit alternative systems, building authorities have codes outside the US, and has been discussed as a
Unlike previous high-rise booms, most granted approval to core-wall buildings greater potential change to upcoming US building codes
of the new and proposed tall buildings are for than 240 feet tall using the process of Seismic Peer by the American Concrete Institute and National
residential or mixed use rather than for offices. Review. (See sidebar.) The Engineer of Record is Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
Concrete construction is often favored, and required to identify any exceptions being taken to
many of the new high-rises use concrete core- prescriptive requirements, and to demonstrate to Capacity Design
wall construction without supplemental moment an expert reviewer that the building provides at The capacity-design approach to seismic design
frames in the seismic-force-resisting system. least equivalent seismic performance to that im- requires that the structural engineer:
Concrete core-wall construction can offer advan- plied or resulting from the prescriptive require- 1) Select a desirable mechanism of non-
tages of lower costs, faster construction, and more ments of the building code. linear lateral deformation for the
open and flexible architecture. Cost and schedule The task of the Engineer of Record is to show structure, which identifies those
savings are realized because core-wall buildings that a building satisfies the equivalent performance structural elements and actions that are
withstand seismic forces and deformations with- criteria defined in IBC Section 104.11: intended to undergo nonlinear
out the moment frames that are used in traditional 104.11 Alternate materials, design and methods of response. The mechanism should not
high-rise construction. By eliminating the need for construction and equipment. The provisions of this lead to concentrated nonlinear defor-
moment frames, smaller framing members or flat code are not intended to prevent the installation of mations such as occurs, for example,
slabs can be used for the building floors, and the any material or to prohibit any design or method with a story mechanism.
framing depth of floors can be reduced. of construction not specifically prescribed by this 2) Ensure that the detailing of the desig-
In a core wall building, resistance to seismic code, provided that any such alternative has been nated nonlinear elements provides
forces is provided by a reinforced concrete core that approved. An alternative material, design or method adequate ductility capacity, i.e., allows
surrounds the elevator banks. Stairs, restrooms, of construction shall be approved where the building the elements to deform well beyond
and mechanical/service uses may also be located official finds that the proposed design is satisfactory yield without significant
within the core. For buildings 300 feet or taller, the and complies with the intent of the provisions of this strength degradation.
concrete core usually has a minimum dimension of code, and that the material, method or work offered 3) Design all other elements and actions
30 feet in each plan direction, with walls that are is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of the structure for elastic, or nearly
18 to 30 inches thick (Figure 1). Regular openings of that prescribed in this code in quality, strength, elastic, response.
are used in the core walls, and the coupling beams effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety. For a concrete core-wall building under
above the openings are reinforced and detailed to For non-prescriptive seismic designs, the earthquake lateral displacement, the desired
dissipate earthquake energy. performance is evaluated with respect to strength, mechanism consists of flexural plastic hinging
effectiveness, and safety. Alternative or non- near the base of the core wall and flexural yielding
Code Acceptance of Non- prescriptive seismic designs are also accepted in of coupling beams, as shown in Figure 2. Some
the building code by ASCE 7-05, Section 12.1.1,
Prescriptive Designs paragraph 3:
core-wall buildings have coupling beams only in
one plan direction, with walls in the other plan
In high seismic zones, prescriptive provisions of Seismic force-resisting systems that are not contained direction acting as cantilever walls, as shown
U.S. building codes do not permit the core-wall in Table 12.2-1 shall be permitted if analytical in Figure 2. The cantilever wall is designed to
and test data are submitted that establish the develop a single plastic hinge at its base. In each
dynamic characteristics and demonstrate the lateral plan direction, the wall flanges, typically including
force resistance and energy dissipation capacity the entire core-wall section, contribute to global
to be equivalent to the structural systems listed in moment capacity.
Table 12.2-1 for equivalent response modification The nonlinear elements of the structure –
coefficient, R, system overstrength coefficient, Ωo, and coupling beams and the base plastic hinge – are
deflection amplification factor, Cd, values. detailed for ductile response. Other elements and
Although Table 12.2-1 of ASCE 7-05 lists a actions of the structure – such as wall shear, wall
number of types of concrete wall seismic-force-re- moment outside the hinge zone, floor and roof
sisting systems, none of the design rules for such diaphragms, and foundations – are given sufficient
systems are as stringent as the capacity-design re- strength that their behavior will be essentially
Figure 1: Concrete core-wall building under quirements typically applied to the design of core- elastic. Table 1 lists structural elements and actions
construction, the Washington Mutual/Seattle wall high-rise buildings. Thus, based on expected for a core-wall building that are typically designed
Art Museum, Magnusson Klemencic Associates, seismic performance, capacity-designed and flex- for nonlinear behavior and those that are designed
Structural Engineers. ure-governed concrete wall buildings can be con- for elastic, “capacity-protected” behavior.
Plastic Hinge
Locations at
Two-Stage Design Process
Coupling Beams
Floor Diaphragms
and Base of Wall
Core-wall high-rise buildings can be designed
at and Below
Grade Transfer
Flexural Plastic according to a two-stage process that follows the
Hinge Location,
Forces from Core
Detailed for capacity-design approach and assesses seismic
Wall to Perimeter
Ductility performance under severe earthquake ground
Retaining Walls
motions.
The first stage of the process is to design the
Foundation building to comply with all code provisions (except
Below-Grade for identified exceptions such as the height limit).
Perimeter
Retaining Walls
This means that the designated yielding elements
of the building, namely the flexural design of the
Figure 2: The typical nonlinear action for a cantilever wall (left) is a flexural plastic hinge at the base of the core-wall hinge zone and the coupling beams, are
wall. For a coupled wall (right) nonlinear actions are flexure-yielding coupling beams and a flexural plastic designed for code-level demands including the
hinge at the base of the wall. code R factor. For tall buildings with long periods,
Flexure-Governed Design this code-level demand is typically governed by
minimum base shear requirements (Figure 4).
A critical consideration in the design of the The second stage is to analyze the structure us-
concrete wall system is to protect against shear ing an NLRH analysis at the Maximum Consid-
failure in the wall. A wall governed by flexural ered Earthquake (MCE) level of ground motion.
yielding will maintain its lateral-force resistance The MCE level is currently defined in building
through large displacements and will deform in a codes to correspond to a 975-year return period
way that distributes deformation over the height in California and about a 2500-year return period
of the building. A wall shear failure, by contrast, elsewhere. The purpose of this analysis is to:
leads to a degradation of strength and can cause 1) Verify that the expected seismic
a concentration of deformation and damage over behavior of the structure is governed
a limited height (Figure 3). Flexure-governed by the intended mechanism, with
response provides a greater assurance against nonlinear behavior occurring only in
collapse in a severe earthquake. the designated structural elements.
The seismic design process for concrete core-wall 2) Verify that all other potential mecha-
buildings is based on methods that were established nisms and actions remain essentially
in the New Zealand and Canadian building codes elastic. When evaluating actions
beginning in the 1970s. A large number of core- designed to remain elastic, the design
wall high-rises were built in Vancouver before Figure 3: Concrete wall failing in shear in the 1995
Kobe earthquake. Capacity design aims to protect should consider the dispersion of the
the methodology was applied, with Seismic Peer NLRH results, rather than just the
against such a failure mode.
Review, to high-rise buildings in the Seattle area average response.
and elsewhere in the U.S.
Table 1: Typical nonlinear and capacity-protected elements for a core-wall building with
concrete flat slabs.
Capacity Design
using Nonlinear Structural elements and actions designed for
Notes
nonlinear behavior:
Response-History Analyses
• Coupling beams (diagonally reinforced if Strength is determined from Code-Level
The capacity design approach was principally
deformation demands are high) evaluation. Elements are detailed for
developed and promoted by researchers and prac-
• Base of wall plastic-hinge zone ductile response.
ticing engineers in New Zealand, at a time when
computer analysis capabilities were limited. Non- Although considered part of the “gravity”
linear response-history (NLRH) analyses were • Floor and roof slabs in out-of-plane flexure system, slabs may yield from induced
only feasible on large university computers using lateral displacement.
two-dimensional models of simplified structures. Structural elements and actions designed for
Researchers used such analyses to derive detailed Notes
elastic (capacity-protected) behavior:
requirements for capacity design that could be ap-
• Wall shear and sliding shear
plied to simpler static and linear analysis and de-
• Wall moment outside designated
sign practices. Strength is determined from the MCE level
hinge zone
These detailed capacity-design requirements, nonlinear response-history (NLRH) analysis.
• Floor and roof diaphragms and collectors
such as dynamic shear amplification factors, are Elements are designed to remain
• Foundation perimeter walls
still useful, particularly for regular structures less essentially elastic.
• Foundations
than 20 stories and for the preliminary design
• Columns
of taller structures. Today, thanks to recent ad-
• Floor and roof slab punching shear
vances and availability in structural analysis soft-
Table 2: Differences between Seismic Peer Review and Structural Plan Check
Seismic Peer Review Structural Plan Check
Done by an engineering firm or a panel of engineers, independent of Done by a jurisdiction’s building authority or by a third-party
the Engineer of Record, with expertise in seismic design consultant to the jurisdiction.
Ideally starts at schematic design Reviews completed structural documents.
Review of seismic criteria, seismic evaluation and design concepts Review is for compliance with prescriptive structural
and methods, preliminary design, and final design requirements of the building code.
Typically covers only seismic design. Covers gravity, wind, seismic, and any other loads.
Peer reviewer gives professional opinion (e.g., to building authority) Jurisdiction has the authority to grant or deny building permit.
Is recommended for projects where the seismic criteria, design In most jurisdictions is carried out at some level of detail on all
methods, or performance are not pre-determined or may be types of building projects.
complex. Required for certain types of seismic systems or seismic
analysis methods.
Paid for by owner. Paid for by permit fees.
NEW!
ADVERTISEMENT - For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org