.

ACI COMPt3lr ff 0662949 0525387 22q

SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

Compilation 31

American Concrete Institute

 Seismic Design and Construction
ACI Compilation 31

Contents

3 Rehabilitation of the Jordan River Concrete 32
Buttress Dam for Seismic Loads, by Tibor J.
Pataky and Bradley G . Kemp (Concrete
International, V. 15, No. 5, May 1993, pp. 55-
60)
9 Bay Area Rapid Transit: Concrete in the 1960s
by Bernard L. Meyers and Stephen H. Tso
(Concrete International, V. 15, No. 2, February
1993, pp. 4549)
14 Precast Concrete Connection Details for All
Seismic Zones by C. E, Warnes (Concrete
International, V . 14, No. 11, November 1992,
PP. 36-44)
23 Precast Concrete in Seismic-Resisting Building
Frames in New Zealand by R. Park (Concrete
International, V. 12, No. 11, November 1990,
pp. 43-5 1)
Current Bridge Seismic Retrofit Practice in the
United States by Mehdi "Saiid" Saiidi (Concrete
International, V . 14, No. 12, December 1992,
PP. 64-67)
36 Shearwalls-An Answer for Seismic Resistance?
by Mark Fintel (Concrete Intem'onal, V. 13,
NO.7, July 1991, pp. 48-53)
42 Seismic Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete
Frame-Wall Buildings by Sashi K. Kunnath,
Andrei M. Reinhorn, and Young J. Park
(Concrete International, V. 11, No. 8, August
1989, pp. 57-61)
 - -_ L- . - _- .- . . _-
A C I COMP*31 Y Y Obb27q7 0525187 OT7

Preface

This ACI Compilation combines material previously published in CONCRETE

INTERNATIONAL Magazine to provide compact and ready information on a
specific topic. The material in such a compilation does not necessarily represent
the opinion of any ACI technical committee -only the opinions of the authors of
the compiled articles. However, the material presented here is considered to
contain useful information for readers interested in the subject.

M. "Saiid" Saiidi
Chairman, ACI Committee 341
Earthquake-Resistant Concrete Bridges

John W. Wallace
Chairman, ACI Committee 368
Earthquake Resisting Concrete Structural Elements and Systems

Todd Perbix
Chairman, ACI Committee 369
Seismic Repair and Rehabilitation

On the cover: A relatively new addition to the skyline of Minneapolis-St. Paul is the City CentedMulti-
Foods Tower. This 52-story building required 400,000 sq ft of sand-blasted precast panels. Architect:
Skidmore Owings & Merrill; general contractor: PCL; and precast contractor: Gage Brothers.

American Concrete Institute, Box 19150, Redford Station, Detroit, Michigan 48219
 -.
A C I COMP*33
the Jordan River
T e Jordan River Dam (Fig. 1) is
part of the Jordan River
Power Development on Van-
couver Island, approximately
50 km west of Victoria, B.C., Canada.
Three types of dam were considered
during the planning stage in 1912 con-
crete gravity, masonry gravity, and re-
inforced concrete buttress. Because of
the shortage of naturally available and
readily usable construction materials a
decision was made to build an Am-
bursen type concrete buttress dam.The
dam was constructed between August
1912 and October 1913.12
Under B.C; Hydro’s current dam
safety program, comprehensiveinspec-
tions and reviews (CIRs) are carried out
once every six years for high hazard
dams. Such a CIR was carried out for
the Jordan River Dam in 1985 and the
results reported in Reference 3. The
major recommendationsof the CIR re-
port were to:
Complete the foundation investiga-
tions started in 1985
0 Assess condition and strength of the
BUTTRESS No. TYP
I 7WALKWAY
Fig. 1 -Jordan River Dam prior to rehabilitation.
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
~
_ . _.
** E Obb2949 0525370 817
concrete in the buttresses and the up-
stream slab
Complete the dynamic analyses
started in 1985
Evaluation of existing
structure
Field nondestructivetesting
u~trasonicpulse velocity vir)testing
of Buttresses 38 and 40 was carried out
in July 1986. UPV readings were taken
at a grid of about 1.2 m.A total of 192
readings were taken for Buttress 38 and
136 for Buttress 40. A histogram of
UPV readings is shown on Fig. 2. A
rather subjective interpretation of
quality would be that a good portion of
the concreteis of acceptablequality, but
20 to 25 percent of the UPV readings
imply poor quality concrete.
The UPV readings were correlated
with compressive strength by con-
ducting tests on samples prepared from
15 cores. The relationship between UPV
on dry specimens and compressive
strengthis shown on Fig. 3. The general
tendency for the UPV to be in direct
- - _.__
-. . - .-
proportion to compressive strength is
quiteapparent,but the scatteris wide, as
indicated by a correlationcoefficientof
0.32. The degree of saturation had a
negligible effect on the readings.
Laboratory tests on concrete
Laboratory tests were conducted to ob-
tain information on the physical prop-
erties of concrete such as compressive,
shear, and tensile strengths. modulus of
elasticity, Poisson’s ratio, thermal coef-
ficient of expansion, water absorption,
and air void content.
Compressive strength tests were car-
ried out in accordancewith ASTM C42-
84a. Thirty-one 146mm diameter hori-
zontal cores were drilled; of these, 28
were taken perpendicularto and 3 in the
plane of the buttress. Strengths varied
from a low of 6.25 MPa to a high of 38.7
MPa, with a mean of 18.1 MPa.
To determine the shear strength of the
concrete at horizontal construction
joints, which appeared to be a potential
sourceof weakness, twenty 203 mm di-
ameter cores were taken with their axis
TOP OF PARAPET
3
 WHITEHURST SCALE
VERY POOR POOR OOUBT- GOOD EXCELLENT

I 4
t
0
I
w 3.
U
t; 2.
a
a
W
5 1.

9
0
0
2: 0 3.- 0 s;0 NORMAL STRESS (MPal
UPV (krn/sl
Fig. 4 - Peak shear strengths for various joint
Fig. 2 - Histogram of ultrasonic pulse velocity readings. classifications.

5.5. LUST'SOUARES FIT: horizontal but perpendicular to the
UPV=Zl.SICS) + 4115
planes of the buttresses. From these
cores 36 samples were prepared for di-
rect shear testing. For joint classifica-
tion and the recorded peak strengths see
3.5-
$fit CORRELATION COEFF. Fig. 4. It was observed that rn over-
abundanceof cement paste along a joint
0 10 20 30 40
produced two major effects!
COUPRESSIYE STRENGTH ICS) IWa) Overall strength was reduced
-
Fig. 3 Relationship between
Cohesion component of strength was
ultrasonic pulse velocity and eliminated
comoressive strenath. Concrete samples without joints
showed a remarkably high shear
strength of 3.0 to 4.2 MPa. Those with
joints (and cement paste) did not, and
all of their shear strength seems to have
been derived from friction.
30- The tensile strength of ten samples,
based on the ASTM C496-85 tests, av-
eraged 1.75 MPa which is about 10per-
cent of the mean cornpressive strength
COEFF. REO. 9 1 mentioned above.
0 10 ' to 30 40
The modulus of elasticity tests were
C W R E S S I V E STRENGTH ( M P d
carried out in accordance with ASTM
C469-83 on 30 samples. Both dial and
Fig. 5 - Relationship between strain gauges were used in the mea-
modulus of elasticity and
comDressive strenath. surement of strain. Good linear rela-
tionship was found between compres-
sive strength and modulus, with a cor-.
relation coefficient of 0.91 (Fig. 5).
Other relevant buttress concreteprop-
erties were:
Average poissons ratio = 0.19
0 Average thermal coefficient of ex-
pansion = 9.15 x 1OVdegree C
0 Dry bulk specific gravity = 2.37
2 -i io zb i io sb
FREOWNCY IHartzI 0 Average air void content = 0.9 percent
Tests on the concretefor the upstream
Fig. 6 - Response spectrum. slab of the buttress dam indicated much
better quality than in the buttresses.
Compressive strengths were between
18.8 and 32.6 MPa, with an average of
25.5 MPa.
Dynamic analyses of the
existing buttress dam
The vulnerability of buttress dams to
cross-canyon earthquake-generated
loads was recognized during the Cali-
fornia Dam Safety program in the late
1960s: "Nearly all of these dams were
constructed with inadequatebracing."s
Others have recognized this inherent
weakness in buttress dams.67
Initialanalyses were carried out using
simple pseudo-static analyses with in-
creasing prototype reality built into the
structuralmodels as exemplifiedin Ref-
erence 8. Pseudo-static analyses were
soon required to be replaced by dynamic
analyses regardless of the results.9 A
good example of dynamic analysis can
be found in Reference 11.
The existing structure was analyzed
both for upstream-downstream and
cross-canyon earthquake-induced
ground motion. Peak ground accelera-
tion values were 0.18 g and 0.35 g for
the design basis earthquake (DBE)and
maximum credible earthquake (MCE)
respectively. Concurrent peak vertical
ground motion values were assumed to
be two-thirds of the horizontal peaks.
The Newmark-Hall Response Spec-
trum,'*scaled to 0.35 g with 3 percent
and 5 percent damping ratios, was used
to define structural response.
Cross-canyon analyses with the as-
sumption that the existing struts were
capable of developing both tensile and

4 ACI COMPllATION
compressive dynamic loads indicated
the struts would fail. The tallest unsup-
ported buttresseswould deflect laterally
320 mm and would have bending
stresses of about 14 MPa. Not even
modem concrete could withstand such
tensile stresses without cracking and
since the buttresses are virtually unre-
inforced, collapse of the dam would be
inevitable.
Upstream-downstream analyses,
which included hydrodynamic effects,
indicated moderate tensile stresses
along the upstream and downstream
edges of the buttress. It was postulated
that although these stresses could result
in cracking collapse of the dam would
not likely occur. The results of these
analyses are reported in Reference 10.
Rehabilitation alternatives
Failure of the dam, with the reservoir at
the normal maximum elevation, would
result in breaching of a power intake
dam, flooding of Jordan River Gener-
ating Station, and rapid and extensive
flooding of a log sorting area and the
community of Jordan River. Loss of a
number of lives could be expected under
these conditions.
To reduce the potential hazard of the
existing dam, a number of alternative
remedial measures have been consid-
ered, including:
Strengthening the existing buttresses
and struts ($8.5 x 106)
0 Infilling the spaces not occupied by
the buttresses with concrete to El. 378.0
($10.3 x 106)
0 Infilling work rock fill to El. 378.0
($9.6 x 106)
0 Infilling with concrete and extending
its top to El. 390.1 ($12.0 x 106)
0 Building a new concrete gravity dam
($14.8 x 106)
There were non-structural solutions
considered as well, such as abandoning
the dam or relocating downstreamresi-
dents, however these were considered
neither socially nor economically ac-
ceptable.
In September 1988 a decision was
made to streflgthen the existing but-
tresses with a seriesof ductile reinforced
concrete frames consisting of pilasters
and continuous struts. The struts would
be capable of resisting and delivering to
the foundation all earthquake-induced
cyclic tensile and compressive forces.
Design of rehabilitation
Initial layout of new strengthening
frames was based on pseudo-static cal-
culations. Final response spectrum
analysisand frame optimization utilized
the ANSYS-PCLINEAR4.3 finite el-
ement software package on an IBM-
compatible PC. Several sensitivity
studies were completed to test analysis
assumptions.
Design loads
Mass densities for concrete and water
were assumed to be 2,400 kg/m3 and
1,OOO kg/m3 respectively. Reservoir hy-
drostatic pressures were based on El.
386.2, the crest of the freeoverflow sec-
tion. Thermal effects were based on a
mean annual temperature variation of
15 C.
Dynamic analyses used 0.35 g and
0.24 g peak ground accelerations for
horizontal and vertical motions respec-
tively? Amplifications of ground mo-
tion was based on the Newmark-Hall re-
sponse spectrum12 for 5 percent
damping (Fig. 6).
Hydrodynamic effects in the up-
stream-downstream direction were al-
lowed for by attaching to the upstream
edge of the finite element model lumped
masses derived from Zanger's hydro-
dynamicpressure13 on a sloped surface.
Hydrodynamiceffects were not consid-
ered in the cross-canyon direction.
Computer models
Single buttress model
A single buttress model was used for
both the cross-valley and upstream-
downstream seismic motions. Refine-
ment of the strut/pilaster layout and de-
sign of the new upstream-downstream
strengthening members were also car-
ried out with the single buttress model.
The model of the tallest buttress con-
sisted of 1076 eight-noded isopara-
metric solid elements with 3 degrees of
freedom at each node. A total of 500
master degrees of freedom were used.
Two-dimenslonal frame model
Two dimensional frame models were
used for cross-valley dynamic analysis
and thermal loading. All new cross-
valley strengtheningmembers were de-
signed using the output from these
models.
The upstream slab of the dam and the
buttress haunch were modelled using 1
dimensional mass elements. A total of
2584 plate elements were used in the
model with 500 master degrees of
freedom.
Sensitivity studies
Spring stiffness
The input value of spring stiffnesses to
represent the elastic support provided
by the strutson the singlebuttress model
was found to have a significant impact
on vibration frequencies and stresses.
Several unit bad methods were studied
for obtaining spring stiffnesses, in-
cluding placement of unit loads at:
One stqthuttress intersection
0 Coincident at all strut/buttress inter-
sections along a given strut line
0 Coincident at all strut(buttressinter-
sections
The latter method was eventually con-
sidered as best to represent strut stiff-
ness during dynamic loading.
Mesh density
Knowledgeof seismic-generatedtensile
stresses in the unsupportedbuttress con-
crete between frames was used to opti-
mize the frame layout. A study was
completed using models with variable
mesh densities in the buttress concrete
between pilasters. A relationship be-
tween maximum tensile stress between
pilasters and mesh coarseness was then
developed, as it was found that as the
mesh was made finer, a limiting value of
the maximum tensile stress between pi-
lasters was attained. Model-generated
stresses were then factored to account
for mesh density.
Element type
To conserve on computing time, plate
elements were investigated for use in
the single buttress model. For a com-
parative study, two models were con-
structed, one of plate elements and one
of isopamnetricelements. Supportcon-
ditions were kept similar for both
models. The results of cross-valley
analyses showed the plate element
model produced modal vibration fre-
quencies which were on the average 1.5
Hz lower. Since plate elements were
also found to not effectively model
thickened areas of the structure, such as
the buttress haunch and the new pi-
lasters, use of them was not considered
further.
Damping ratio
Initial analyses were completed with a
3 percent damping ratio for the critical
cross-valley excitation. It was later de-
cided to use a 5 percent damping ratio
to better reflect the inherent energy dis-
sipating ability of concrete undergoing
cracking.This resulted in a 15to 20 per-
cent reduction in dynamic stresses and
reactions.

Fig. 7 -Two-dimensional frame model, deflected shape
for first significant mode. above: Cross-valley exitation;
below: Vertical exitation.
NORMAL RESERVOIR
LEVEL EL 386.
PILASTER LINE, TY
Fig. 8 - General arrangement of new strengthening ele-
ments on tallest buttress.
Base support
It is difficult to realistically represent the
dam concrete./bedrockinterface in a fi-
nite element model. When using a base
that is assumed to be fixed or pinned to
the foundation at the node points, large
tensile stressesappear at the toe and heel
during upstream-downstream loading.
To represent more realistically the lack
of tensile strength in the foundation, a
singlebuttressfinite element model was
constructed with gap elements pro-
viding zero tensile capacity at the base.
Resistance to upstream-downstream
loading was provided by sliding friction
only.
Results showed that the high tensile
stresses at the heel and toe did disap-
pear, however the magnitude of the
stresses higher up in the buttress did not
change significantly.
B
1- 15M
I
cn
cu
I
7
1-15M
PILASTER
Fia. 9 -TvDical Dilaster reinforcement.
Fig. 10 - Unfactored horizontal stress contours (seismic
and dead loading), portion of frame along pilaster line P5.
Mode combinations
The modal analysis makes available a
great number of modes of little practical
significance.The squareroot of the sum
of the squares (SRSS) method was used
for obtainingthe total effective stresses.
For cross-valleyloading of the single
buttress model, it was found that the first
five significantmodes contributed to the
majority of the total effective stresses.
The results of studies with the two di-
mensional frame models also showed
that for cross-valleyexcitationonly five
or six modes had to be added to obtain
a reasonable estimate of the total
seismic response. A factor of 1.1 was
applied to the set of stressedEactions
obtained to account for the effect of the
unused modes.
For vertical seismic loading with the
two dimensional model, it was found
- 0.76% REINFORCEMENT
that at least six modes had to be added
to obtain a reasonably complete seismic
response. A factor of 1.3 was applied to
the set of stressedreactionsobtained to
account for the effect of the unused
modes. Fig. 7 shows the deflectedshape
for the first significant mode for each
load direction of the tallest two dimen-
sional frame model.
Haunch support
The advantages of a connection be-
tween the tops of pilasters and the up-
stream slab was studied. A single but-
tress model with the haunch only later-
ally supported at the buttress nose was
compared with a similar model having
this support in addition to lateral re-
straint at the top of each pilaster. A sig-
nificant decrease in stresses was noted.
“Strut” slabs were hence used to pro-

ACI COMP*3L
vide a connection between the upstream
slab and the top ends of the pilastem
Optimization of
pilasterlstrut layout
Pseudo-static hand calculationpvided
a total of nine evenly spaced pilaster/
smt frames.
Optimization was achievedwith iter-
ative finite element analyses, the aim of
which was to maintain generated but-
tress concrete tensile stresses at fairly
even and acceptable levels. Seven pi-
lastedstmt frames multed, which wem
unevenly spaced (Fig. 8) along the up-
stream-downstream dimension of the
buttresses. The uneven spacing of these
frames was found to promote develop-
ment of tensile stresses of similar mag-
nitude in the unsupported zones be-
tween adjacent frames. For a cross-
canyon MCE-generatedground motion,
the principal tensile stresses in the orig-
inal buttress concrete were limited to
about 1400 kPa.
Optimization provided struts 0.7 m
square and pilasters 0.7 x 0.6 m.
Structural design of
remedial works
The design of all new reinforced con-
crete members, with the exception of
strut anchors, was carried out using the
limit state method. Because the MCE
was considered, the seismic load factor
was taken as 1.1. Design actions were
attained after appropriate combination
of gravity, hydrostatic, earthquake-in-
duced, and thermal loads.
Pilasters
Pilasters provide stiffening and con-
tainment for the basically unreinforced
buttress concrete. The pilasters are
made to act composite with the buttress
concrete and, because of their vertical
orientation, are perpendicular to postu-
lated planes of weakness at horizontal
constructionjoints where crackingis ex-
pected to initiiite.
To improve composite action with the
buttresses, u-shaped “shear ties” are
provided which pass through the but-
tresses, acting as both stirrups for the pi-
laster longitudinalreinforcementand as
shear reinforcement at the interface. For
increased ductility, hoop ties are pro-
vided around the longitudinal rein-
forcement in the pilasters.
The reinforcement ratio, as a per-
centage of the pilaster cross-sectional
area, varies between 0.6 and 1.6 with an
average of about 0.8. Pilaster longitu-
dinal reinforcement was sized to with-
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
__ -.- ..
** 0bb2949 0525194 4b4
stand the entire elastic tensile force on 3
the pilaster cross-section. m i c a 1 pi- a
laster reinforcementis shown in Fig. 9. a
20M- c(
.I-
v)
struts
Struts are the most critical of the load-
resisting elements of the seismic reha-
bilitation system. In addition to cyclic -2OM
tensiodcompression axial forces, they
must also resist bending moments at the
stmt/pilasterjoints. Struts are designed
as beamcolms, supportingthe com- STRUT
posite pilasterhuttress members. 2.82% REINFORCEMENT
Struts are made continuous from one
si& of the valley to the other by passing Fia. 11- Tmical strut reinforcement.
through holes cut in the buttresses. Due
to the limited installation clearance,
strut reinforcement has one conven-
tional splice per span. The reinforce-
ment ratio, as a percentage of the strut
cross-sectiond area, varies between 1.9
and 3.3 with an average of 2.4. The most
heavily reinforced struts are at the sup-
ports. Stress contours, unfactored for
mesh density, of typical struts adjacent
to supports can be seen in Fig. 10. Q p -
ical strut reinforcement details are
shown in Fig. 11.
Fig.12 -Typical plan of slab
Slabs reinforcement.
Slabs provide the uppeqost support for
the new structural frame system. Cross-
valley load is transferred through the
slab, in diaphragmaction, to dowels em-
bedded in the underside of the existing
upstream slab. The dowels are epoxy
coated for corrosion resistance. One end
on each slab has a sliding support to REAM
minimize thermal stresses while the
other end is fixed. Typical slab rein-
forcing details are shown on Fig. 12.
Buttress reinforclng strips
Seismic loading in the upstream-down-
stream direction was found to produce
high tensile stresses in the upstream and 4
downstreamedges of the buttresses.The Fig. 13 -Typical buttress reinforcing
pilaster on the downstream edge is de- striD reinforcement.
signed to have sufficienttensile capacity
to resist both the upstream-downstream
and cross-canyon stresses. Along the strength of the dowels at the level of the
upstream edge of ten of the highest but- seat for the upstream slab. Ties are also
tresses reinforcing strips were provided provided for confinement of the longi-
to assist in the carryingof the upstream- tudinal reinforcement. Typical buttress
downstream seismic stresses. reinforcing strip details are shown on
The buttress reinforcing strips are lo- Fig. 13.
cated where the calculated tensile
stresses exceed loo0 kPa. Longitudinal Anchors
reinforcement is designed to supple- The two dimensional frame models
ment existing reinforcementin the but- were used to obtain all vertical and
tress haunches. Reinforcement dowels transverse reactionsat pilaster bases and
with hooks are provided to promote strut ends for all appropriateload com-
composite action with the buttress. binations. Global right and left bank
These dowels extend into the buttress bedrock slopes of 40 and 30 degrees re-
haunch to such depth as to develop the spectively .were used for the abutment
7
 _. .
A C I COPlPt3lr t t
PILASTER T\
1/11
APPROX
EXISTING BEDROCK I).tc,
Fia. 14 -TvDical Dost-tensionedanchor details.
surfaces. The horizontal and vertical re-
actions were resolved on these surfaces
into normal and tangential components.
Concrete/rock interface shear strength
parameters,based on geological assess-
ment of rock quality indices, were esti-
mated to be a friction angle of 50 de-
~
grees and a cohesion of 100 kPa. Where
the net driving force along the inclined
surface exceeded the available resisting
force, anchors were provided. It was
found that all strut ends required an-
chors. Of all pilasterhuttresscomposite
bases only two required anchors, at all
other pilaster bases the verticalreaction,
composed mostly of buttress dead
weight, provided sufficientresistanceto
the driving force.
Geotechnical exploration showed the
bedrock on the right side of the valley
to be fractured, particularly in the upper
6 m. Bedrock on the left bank was typ-
ically sound and competent. For this
reason, fully grouted, passive anchors,
were chosen for the left bank and post-
tensioned anchors for the right bank.
Although groundwater conditions
were not found to be aggressive, an-
chors were provided with corrosion pro-
tection. Passive anchors are epoxy-
coated and splice couplings are wrapped
in grease-impregnated tape followed
with a heat shrink plastic sleeve. Post-
tensioned anchors are also epoxy-
coated. Bonded lengths are premanu-
factured and grouted into a corrugated
plastic sheath. Unbonded lengths are
wrapped in grease-impregnated tape
followed by a smooth plastic sleeve.
Splice couplings are similar to the pas-
sive anchor design. The anchors are
8 ACI COMPllATlON
__ __
m Obb2949 0525395 3T0 m
SECTION THROUGH SECTION THROUGH
BONOEO LENGTH UNBONDED LENGTH
OF POST-TENSIONEO
ANCHOR
OF POST-TENSIONED
ANCHOR
single-stage grouted starting from the sistance of Buttress Dams, Russian Translation
bottom. Typical post-tensioned anchor Series B,A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 1987.
9. Committee on Safe& Critena for Dams of
details are shown on Fig. 14. National Research Council, safty of Dams,Flood
and Earthquake Criteria, National Academy
Conclusions Ress. Washington. 1985.
Dynamic analyses of the Jordan River 10. B.C.Hydro.“Jordan River Diversion Dam.
buttress dam had conclusively shown Structural Analysis” BCH Report No. H1950.
1987.
that the existing buttresses would col- 1 1. Nordstrom, P.A.; Steby, B.; and Tarandi,
lapse under moderate cross-canyon T.. “Aseismic Design of Mtera Dam,” Intern-
earthquake-induced loads. Cost esti- rionnl Committee on Large Dams,New Delhi,Q.
mates of the various rehabilitation al- 51, R. 7,1979.
12. Hall, W.J.. and Newmark. N.M.,Earth-
ternatives had indicated that strength- quake Spectra and Design, Earthquake Engi-
ening of the buttresses with a system of neering Research Institute,Berkky. B82.
cast-in-place reinforced concrete pi- 13. Zanger. C.N.. “Hydrodynamic Pressures
lasters and struts is cost-effective. Rig- on Dams Due to Horizontal Earthquake Effects,”
Eagineering Momgmph No. 11, Bureau of Recla-
orous, iterative finite element analyses mation, Denver, May 1952.
had allowed for optimization of the final
design which was proven to be signifi- Selected for reader interest by the editors.
cantly below initial cost estimates.
ACI member nbor
References J. Pataky is Man-
1. Lee,C.A.. Jordan River Power Devebpment, ager of the Struc-
Vancouver Island, Canadian Society of Civil En- tural Department of
g i m , Montreal, 1915. the Hydroelectric
2. Water Powersof Canada,“Jordan River De- Engineering Divi-
velopment of the Vancouver Island Power Com- sion of British Co-
pany Ltd.,” WaterResourcesPuperNo. 16,1916. lumbia Hydro. He is
3. B.C. Hydro. “Jordan River Diversion Dam,
Comprehensive Inspection and Review, 1985,” a member of ACI
BCHReponNo. H1851, March 1986. Committee 210, Erosion of Concrete in
4. B.C. Hydro. “Jordan River Development, Hydraulic Structures, and is actively in-
DiversionDam, Concrete Testing and Evaluation, volved in support of concrete research
1986 Rogram.” BCH Repor? No. H1944, July related to dam safety assessment.
1987.
5. Cortright, C.J., “Reevaluation and Recon- Bradley G. Kemp
struction of CaliforniaDams,” American Society is a structural engi-
of civil Engineers Journal of the Power Division, neer in the Struc-
V. 96,No. POI, Jan. 1970. tural Department of
6.Riscu. R.; Popovici, A.; Stematiu. D.; and the Hydroelectric
Steve. C.. Earthquake Engineering for Large Engineering Divi-
Dams, John Wiley and Sons, New York 1985. sion of British Co-
7. Jansen. R.B.. “Behavior and Deterioration
of Dams in California,” Transactions, Intcrna- lumbia Hydro. His
tional Committee on Large Dams Congress, Is- interestslie in struc-
tanbul, V. 3, Q.34, R. 35, 1967. tural dynamics and thermal effects on
8. Motsanelidze.N.S.. Stability andSeismic Re- concrete structures.
T he $1.45-billion San Fran-
cisco Bay Area Rapid Transit
(BART) system was the first
new transit system built in the
U.S. in 50 years. With preliminary
planning starting in 1959, the BART
system opened for service in 1972 and
was completed in 1976. A joint ven-
ture of Parsons Brinkerhoff-Tudor-
Bechtel (PBTB), with Bechtel as the
sponsor, served as general consultants
for design and construction.
The project has shown that concrete
is an excellent building material for
both aerial and underground structures.
It has high load-carrying capabilities
and an excellent ability to absorb
sound and vibrations, qualities critical
in a system concerned not only with
the strength of the system but also with
the comfort of its passengers.
Many advances have been made in
the art of concrete engineering since
the beginning of BART, and there has
been much research on the behavior of
concrete structures under dynamic
loadings. Personal computers can now
run all but the most demanding ana-
lytical programs. The ultimate strength
design principle has replaced the
working stress principle used during
the design of BART. These develop-
ments, together with the advent of
higher strength concretes, have en-
abled the engineer to design stronger
and safer structures with less material
than was previously possible.
Concrete also is rapidly becoming a
feasible option in many situations that
formerly dictated the use of steel. As
an example, a precast concrete lining
is so much cheaper than steel that the
technical advantages of a steel lining
are no longer enough to ensure its se-
lection over the concrete alternative.
A major consideration in the design
of any structure in California is its
ability to withstand a major earth-
quake. Innovations in seismic design
from the BART system are still in use
today. Some of those innovations in-
clude ultimate strength design and the
design of underground structures to
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
absorb ground deformations rather
than to resist an applied lateral load.
The system is 75 miles (120 km)
long and connects 14 cities in San
Francisco, Alameda, and Contra Costa
counties. One-third of the system is
underground, consisting of 17 miles
(27 km) of subways, the 3.6-mile (5.8
km)Trans-Bay Tube, and 4 miles (6.4
km) of rock tunnels. Another third
consists of 25 miles (40 km)of aerial
structures, with the remaining third be-
ing 25 miles (40 km) of at-grade con-
struction, There are 34 stations and 3
maintenance and storage yards servic-
ing the 10-car trains in the BART sys-
tem.
Aerial structures
Standard structures
Aerial structures make up about 25
miles (40 km) of the BART system,
with standard design stnlctures consti-
tuting more than 90 percent of this to-
tal. Standard designs were *preparedfor
girders, pier beams, columns, founda-
tions, and abutments.
Girder design -Designs were pre-
pared for three types of conshction:
structural steel, conventionally rein-
forced concrete, and prestressed con-
crete. This allowed contractors to
choose the most economical option for
each particular site. Spans reached up
to 40 ft (1 2 m) for reinforced concrete
girders and 96 ft (29 m) for both steel
girders and precast post-tensioned
girders. The p w a s t post-tensioned
concrete option using 6000 psi con-
crete was selected by every contractor.
Standard concrete girders were 4 ft
(1.2 m) deep trapezoidal boxes with 11
ft-8 in. (3.6 m) wide decks. To enhance
appearance, the deck edges were canti-
levered from the sides of the boxes,
which were set at a 3-to-1 slope. Each
standard girder carried one track.
Girder ends were notched to allow the
pier beam to be partly contained
within the girder depth. This scheme
provided a higher vertical clearance
and a sleeker profile compared to a
girder without notches. Variable depths
were used on the right and left sides of
the box to provide the required su-
perelevation. A girder cross section is
shown on Fig. 1.
An innovative feature was the use of
continuous welded rails with direct
fixation fasteners. The rails were
bolted directly to the girder decks and
second stage concrete was used to ac-
curately install the rails. This scheme
eliminated the need for cross ties and
ballast, and saved millions of dollars.
The continuous welded rails also pro-
vided additional seismic resistance in
the longitudinal direction.
Standard design pier beam, foun-
dations, and columns - Elastomeric
bearing pads supported the girders
onto the pier beams. A 2 ft (0.6 m)
wide closure placement joined the
girders after they were erected. At the
fixed end of each girder, rebar ex-
tended from the preeast piece into this
placement. At the expansion end, a 5
in. (127 mm) square steel tube ex-
tended from the precast piece into a
teflon-lined steel sleeve within the clo-
sure placement. 'I310 5 in. (127 mm)
round steel pins extended from the top
of the pier beam into the closure place-
ment. The girder end connection detail
is shown in Fig. 2.
Fig. 3 shows a typical column and
pier beam, Pier beams and columns
were either 5 or 6 ft (1.5 to 1.8 m)
wide. The pier beam was 22 ft (6.7 m)
long to accommodate a track spacing
of 14 ft (4.3 m). The maximum depth
was 5 ft (1.5 m) and tapered up at a 4-
to-1 slope from the column. Standard
columns were hexagonal and either 5
or 6 ft (1.5 or 1.8 m) wide across the
flats. Longitudinal reinforcing steel
consisted of #18 bars confined within
a 5/8 in. (16 mm) diameter spiral at a 3
in. (76 mm)pitch. The spiral extended
from about 3 ft (0.9 m) inside the
beam down to about 2% ft (0.8 m) in-
side the footing to provide the neces-
sary confinement for structures in a
high seismic zone. The maximum col-
9
 ._ - - ._
A C I COMP*3L
Fig. 1 -Typical aerial girder section; rebar not shown.
CAST-IN-PUCE
VXRTICAL PIER KEY AHD PIER
Fig. 2 -typical girder end details; rebar not shown.
umn height was 45 ft(13n7 m, be-
tween the top Of the and the
tom Of the footing, Or about 34 ft (lon4
m) clear height between the girder sof-
fit and the top of the footing. The rein-
forcing steel strength was 40 ksi (275
MPa) yield and the concrete compres-
sive stkngth was 4 ksi (28 MPa) at 28
days.
Standard footing designs used either
spread footings or 30, 45, or 60 ton
(27, 41, or 54 Mg) capacity piles.
Spread footing designs used allowable
soil bearing pressures of 2, 3, 4, or 5
tons per square foot (190,290,380, or
480 H a ) and ranged in size from 18 to
28 ft (5.5 to 8.5 m) square. The foot-
ings on piles ranged from 14 to 24 ft
(4.3 to 7.3 m) square. The concrete
strength used in footings was 3000 psi
(21 MPa).
'Qpical pile types used were steel
HP, concrete-filled steel shell, precast
pretensioned concrete, and timber. The
pile type was chosen to suit specific
site conditions. To resist lateral loads,
exterior piles were battered at a 4 1
slope and interior piles were battered
at 8:l. Generally, pile foundations
were used instead of spxtad footings
even in areas of good soils. This was
because the criterion limiting differen-
tial settlement between piers to an
10
-
** Obb29q9 0525397 373
- -.
PIE-
Typical aerial structure.
amount equal to
the lenfl tribu-
'0 *e piet
divided by 2400
was more easily
met with a pile
foundation.
aerial
structures -
Special designs
were used where the standard sbruc-
tures were not suitable, These special
designs included structural steel gird-
ers, cast-in-place post-tensioned con-
Crete girders, C-bents, and double
bents.
Seismic design requirements
Seismic design criteria permitted a
one-third increase in the basic allow-
able stresses for minor earthquakes
with ground acceleration of 0.IOg. In
addition, an ultimate strength design
criteria was adopted to resist loads
from a major earthquake. The criteria
assumed a certain amount of repair-
able damage, but no loss of function or
collapse. Aerial structures were re-
quired to withstand a specified hori-
zontal deformation without straining
the column reinforcing steel past twice
its yield strain.
During the 1989 Loma Prieta Earth-
quake, sensors recorded a free field
peak ground acceleration of 0.15g
horizontally and 0.08g vertically.
Maximum accelerations on the girder
deck reached 0.60g in the transvene
direction and 0.26g longitudinally. The
resulting forces were not high enough
to cause any damage.
Aerial stations
Both center and side platform sta-
tions were used although center plat-
forms were preferred because one set
of stairs and escalators could serve
both inbound and outbound passen-
gers. The structural system consists of
double column bents acting as moment
frames in the lateral direction and as
cantilevering columns in the longitudi-
nal direction. Bents were spaced at 70
ft (21 m) to match BART car lengths.
Standard girders spanned between
bents and separate framing supported
the Passenger COm~~rse and Plat-
The total Platformlength was
700 ft (210 m) to match a 10-car train.
Cut-andlcover structures
There are eight cut-and-cover lines
and ten cut-and-cover stations in the
BART system. The typical soil profile
consisted of varying layers of dense
sands, clayey sands, and sandy clay,
often underlaid by stiff, silty clays.
The water table was high but the soil
was usually dewatered during con-
struction. Earth cover over structures
averaged from 8 to 9 ft (2.4 to 2.7 m)
at stations and 20 ft (6.1 m) at line sec-
tions.
Seismic design considerations
Most of the BART subway struc-
tures were constructed in dense or silty
sand, which is stiff compared to the
structure. In such an environment the
structure will simply conform to soil
distortions; thus, the criterion for de-
sign was to absorb the imposed defor-
mation rather than to resist applied
forces.
ACI COMPILATION
__
A C I COMP*:3L
--l
Fig. 3 -Typical column and pier beam; rebar not shown.
Structural systems
The structural system for most cut-
and-cover lines and stations was the
multicelled reinforced concrete box,
with walls and slabs acting one way in
the transverse direction to form a con-
tinuous rigid frame to resist both the
vertical and lateral loads (see Fig. 4).
The box-type construction offered high
resistance to shear and to uplift forces
from a high groundwater table.
In stations, the reinforced concrete
box with concrete or structural steel
girders and columns was designed and
built with full or partial continuity in
the transverse direction. Longitudinal
girders and interior columns were used
to open up the station interior. Where
concrete girders and columns were
used, advantage was taken of the slab-
band type of design, i.e., using wide
bands at the columns instead of deep
girders to keep construction depth
shallow. Alternatively, using structural
steel columns and longitudinal girders
instead of concrete columns and wide
girders had the advantage of reducing
the column sizes and making the plat-
form and mezzanine areas more open.
Construction methods
Construction methods along the
BART subway alignment depended on
many factors including site and envi-
ronmental conditions and line and sta-
tion configurations. Soldier piles and
lagging were used for subway s h c -
tures with favorable soil conditions
and with underpinning of foundations
when the excavation line was close to
existing buildings. Sheet piling was
used where dewatering resulted in det-
rimental settlements or where the or-
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
__
** m Ob62949 0525198 O O T
I
m
r(
Fig. 4 -Typical two-cell structure; rebar not shown.
ganic clay extended appreciably below
the bottom of the excavation. Where
organic clay deposits were present and
the settlement of adjacent structures
needed to be minimized, the rigid
bulkhead method was used.
Tunnels
In general, single-track tunnels were
bored between stations where the lines
went between busy downtown streets.
With the exception of the Berkeley
Hills and Fairmont tunnels, which pass
through rock formations, all tunnelling
was done in alluvial ground, with
much of it below the water table.
Rock tunnel
Seismic design consideration - well the tunnel face is supported, and
The Berkeley Hills and the Fairmont
Hill tunnels are the only rock tunnels
in the BART system. The Fairmont
Hill Tunnel is approximately 4000 ft
(1220 m) long, while the Berkeley
Hills Tunnel consists of two single-
track bores 16,000 ft (4877 m) long,
100 ft (30 m) apart with up to 600 feet
(183 m) of rock cover.
The Berkeley Hills Tunnel is the
only structure in the system that
crosses an active earthquake fault -
-
the Hayward Fault and the primary
concern in its seismic design was
movement and distortion of the fault.
To accommodate tectonic deformation
and to permit rapid repair and adjust-
ment of track after a major earthquake,
the Berkeley Hills Tunnel was over-
sized from BART's typical subway
tunnel diameter of 16.5 to 17.5 ft (5.0
to 5.3 m). During excavation, the tun-
nel was lined throughout with a pri-
mary lining of steel ribs and a
- -
secondary lining of cast-in-place con-
crete. A post-Loma %eta Earthquake
inspection revealed no damage to the
BART tunnels and that no realignment
was necessary.
Soft ground tunnel (tunnel
linlngs)
Design criteria -One of the major
engineering accomplishments of the
BART Project was the development of
design criteria and construction tech-
niques that made shallow tunnels in
soft ground both feasible and eco-
nomical. Soft ground tunneling is af-
fected by the amount of ground
deformation, which depends on the
physical properties of the ground, how
how soon and completely the annular
space behind the shield tail is filled
with grout.
Experience with existing soft
ground tunnels of similar size in simi-
lar soil conditions indicated that the
deformation of the lining after it has
been grouted into contact with the sur-
rounding soil generally can be kept to
1 in (25 mm). The design criteria of
the BART tunnel lining was based on a
capacity to accept this deformation, in
combination with a uniform radial
pressure equal to the overburden
weight plus the hydrostatic pressure,
without exceeding normal working
stresses.
Design alternatives - l k o possi-
ble lining systems were examined for
both performance and economy:
System I - A segmented lining of
cast iron, fabricated steel, or precast
concrete
11
 ._ .-
ACI CO MPt 33 t t
-
Fig. 5 Typical section of Trans-Bay Tube; rebar not
shown.
0 System II - Cast-in-place lining
(with or without initial temporary
lining)
Evaluation of the two systems for
performance and cost gave the follow-
ing results:
0 The ground settlements due to the
installation of the tunnels would be
one-third less for System I than for
System 11.
System I required less field control
to achieve a sound structure. The
bolted prefabricated steel segment
construction produced a more water-
tight tunnel than the precast concrete
construction.
System I could be built faster than
System 11.
0 System I1 generally has better im-
pact and fire resistance qualities
than System I.
0 System I (with either cast iron or
fabricated steel segments) was 7 to
20 percent cheaper than System II at
1970 prices. (Since then, the price
advantage has shifted toward the
precast concrete segmented lining.)
Metallic linings were chosen as su-
perior to precast concrete segmented
lining because of less ground settle-
ment during construction, better dura-
bility, and faster construction. Further
evaluation of the relative in-place costs
led to the adoption of fabricated struc-
tural steel segmented liners for all
BART subway tunnels.
Trans-Bay Tube
The 3.6 mile (5.8 km) Trans-Bay
Tube is the longest and deepest under-
water crossing of its type in the world.
The twin-track tube connecting San
Francisco with the East Bay region
was the most challenging design prob-
lem in the entire project. Responsibil-
ity for developing and designing the
1.)
_.- .-_-
Obb29Ll9 0525399 Tlrb
Tunnel construction.
tube was given to Parsons Brinkerhoff,
Quade & Douglas.
The tube is binocular in cross sec-
tion (see Fig. 5 ) containing two track
compartments and a central area for
utilities and an inspection gallery. The
tube is founded on a course of gravel
in a dredged trench on the bay bottom
and changes alignment both horizon-
tally and vertically in the 3.6-mile
length between ventilation structures,
dipping to about 135 ft (41 m) below
sea level. Generally,the top of the tube
lies at least 5 ft (1.5 m) below the bay
bottom. Grades are limited to 3 per-
cent, with the minimum grade for
drainage being 0.3 percent.
Design concept and earthquake
consideration
Though the tube crosses no major
active faults, it is possible that the tube
could be subjected to ground deforma-
tion caused by earthquakes originating
along the San Andreas and Hayward
Faults. Consequently, a primary design
consideration was to locate the tube in
a bed of soft alluvial material that
would absorb much of the seismic
force instead of transmitting it to the
structure.
The other major concern was the
possibility of shear failure of the deep
stratum of relatively soft silty clays,
known as “bay mud,” as a result of
ground shaking. To investigate this
matter, soil samples from the bay bot-
tom were subjected to dynamic labora-
tory tests specially devised to simulate
earthquake effects. The results showed
that the shear strength of the bay mud
increased rapidly with depth, reaching
up to 800 to loo0 psf (38 to 48 kPa) at
50 ft (15 m) below bay bottom. At the
surface, the shear strength of the bay
mud was about 200 psf (9.6 Wa). It
was concluded that any shear failure
would occur in loose material not deep
enough to damage the tube.
Liquefaction phenomena also were
investigated and found to be possible
only under vibrations far in excess of
those associated with earthquakes.
As a final check, a model simulating
a 300 ft (91 m) long tube section in
layered soil similar to the bay bottom
was tested at the large shake table at
the University of Mexico. The tests
confirmed the validity of the analytical
procedures used in predicting tube
movements during an earthquake. Af-
ter the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, a
post-earthquake inspection of the
Trans-Bay Tube revealed no structural
damage. Despite an observed 3/4 in.
(19 rnm) movement in the longitudinal
direction, no trackwork realignments
were necessary.
Design features
The Trans-Bay Tube is a composite
structure. consisting of a 7’ in. (10
mm) thick exterior steel shell and a 2
ft (0.6 m) thick reinforced concrete
lining inside the tube. The shell and
lining creates a ductile waterproof
structure capable of withstanding dis-
placements due to earthquakes. The
structural steel shell is stiffened trans-
versely by 8 in. (203 mm) structural
steel tees spaced at 6 A (1.8 m) cen-
ters. Elastic joints of neoprene rubber
are used to absorb differential defor-
mation. These joints permit about 6 in.
(152 mm) of longitudinal movement,
plus associated rotational and trans-
verse movement.
Construction
Trans-Bay Contractors (a joint ven-
ture of Kiewit, Raymond, Tidewater &
Healy-Tibbits) was the contractor for
 - - _.

A C I COMPM3L ** E Obb29q9 0525200 598

the tube construction. Tube sections

were floated to the site and sunk into
position with 500 tons (455 Mg) of
ballast placed in pockets on top of the
sections. The tube was placed in a
dredged trench beneath the bay bottom
and covered with protective layers of
gravel, sand, and a 2 to 3 ft (0.6 to 0.9
m) thick armor blanket of stone. A 2 ft
(0.6 m) bed of 3'/ to 3 in. (10 to 76
mm) rock was placed as a foundation
course in the bottom of the trench.

Epilogue
From its beginning twenty years
ago, BART has delivered on its prom-
ise of safe, reliable, and economical
transportation within the Bay Area.
BART remained in operation during
the Loma Prieta Earthquake, thereby
maintaining a vital link throughout the
local economy. On October 1991,
BART embarked on an ambitious pro-
gram to add about 32 miles (51 km)of
trackway and 10 to 12 new stations to
the existing system. Due to its many
advantages, concrete will once again
be the material of choice, this time
aided by the new advances in concrete
engineering and by the analytical capa-
bilities of the personal computer.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the many col-
leagues who contributed to this article, espe-
cially Car1 Goepfert, Peter Frobenius. Dave
Juday, C.C. Wang, Richard Tso, and Richard
Leong.

Selected for reader interest by the editors.

Bernard L. Mey-
ers is a senior
vice president of
Bechtel Corpora-
tion and manager
of the Bechtel Nu-
clear Business
Line. He received
his PhD from Cornell University.

Stephen H. Tso,
ACI member, is
chief civil struc-
tural engineer in
Bechtel Corpora-
tion's San Fran-
cisco Regional
Office and has
been responsible for the structural
design and management of many
projects worldwide, including the
Bay Area Rapid Transit System.
 ACI COMP*3L
Precast Concrete
T he analysis of reinforced con-
crete structures is generally
based on the assumption that
all of the separate elementsbe-
have as a unit. Of course, the actual
structure must be built piece by piece
due to construction limitations. Never-
theless, one of the principal elements of
the art of design is to produce mono-
lithic behavior in the finishedstructure.1
Properly located constructionjoints,
whether in precast or cast-in-place
structures, will ensure transmission of
compressive forces in concrete and re-
inforcing steel. All tensile forces re-
quired to cross the construction joint
must be carried by the reinforcement.
Just as it is impossibleto cast all con-
crete in one monolithic, continuous op
eration, it is also impossible to provide
full length continuous reinforcement
throughout my large structure. Splices
LAPPED SpLlcES N LARGE CONDUT
GROUT
11- kj- r-I
PRECAST CAST-IN-PLACE GROUT
CONCRETE CONCRETE
SECTION AT ANT
Fig. 1 - Lapped bar splices in grout
filled conduit which are extended full
height through the structural element.
4.
..
** m Ob62949 0525203 424
of reinforcementare unavoidable. Rop-
erly designed splices are a key element
in any well executed design. Building
codes limit the methods of joining rein-
forcing bars to lapping (except #14 and
#18 bars), welding, and the use of me-
chanical connections. Many splice situ-
ations are unique and require custom-
made solutions.
The location of construction joints
and splices of reinforcement in precast
concrete are controlled by the practical-
ities of manufacturing, transporting, and
erecting precast elements. As in cast-in-
place concrete, the precast structure
must be built piece by piece. The dif-
ference between the two forms of rein-
forced concrete occurs primarily in the
methods used to join the elements.
The conventional approach used in
North America in the past for con-
nectlng precast structural members has
relied principally upon the use of
“jointed” elements. Thejoints between
precast concrete structural units gener-
ally consist of weldmentsof steel plates,
bars, tubes, angles, studs, reinforcing
bars, and bolts in various combinations.
The continuity of reinforcing bars
WALL P A N L 7 GROUT
riC” ICAL
-
Fig. 2a Special bars with rolled
threads are joined with a threaded fe-
male mechanical connection and the
system is grouted.
m
through ajoint is usually interruptedby
a fabricated assembly of some type.
In Japan and New Zealand especially
and, to an increasing degree in North
America, precast concretestructuresare
being constructedthat attemptto behave
like cast-in-place monolithic struc-
tures.u This “cast-in-placeequivalent”
or “emulation” approach designs pre-
cast concrete structures in such a
manner that their stress response char-
acteristics closely duplicate those of
cast-in-place structures.4
Building code
requirements for cast-in-
place concrete
The three U. S. model e codes all
utilize the ACI Building Code for the
concrete sectionsof their requirements.
The Standard Building Code (southern
Building Code Congress International,
Inc.) and the BOCA National Building
Code (Building Officials and Code Ad-
ministrators International, Inc.) both
adopt the ACI 318 Code by reference.
HEXAGWW
COUPLER
P L N T Ic
PIPE
LOCK H I T
W l l Y GROUT
STEEL PLATE fQI
OROOVE
E r n CMCTION
UsHGwfEfwW
Fig. 2b - Detail of “threadbar”
system.

Fig. 3a -Special mechanical con-
nectors are embedded into the pre-
cast element and grouted with a high-
strenath non-shrink arout.
The International Conference of
Building Officials’s (ICBO) Uniform
Building Code (UBC) reprhts portions
of the ACI 318 Code and distinguishes
where the Uniform Building Code dif-
fers substantively from the ACI Code.
“Concrete,” Chapter 26 of the 1991
UBC, is copyrighted by ACI and is r e details shown below, test data on joint
produced with its consent. The contents
of this chapter are patterned after and in
general conformity with the provisions
of ACI Standad 318-89 for reinforced
concrete design. Section 2625 of UBC
Chapter 26 is derived for the most part
from Chapter 21, “Special Provisions
for Seismic Design,” of ACI 318-89.
Paragraph F of Section2625 is identical
in wording to provision 2 1.2.1.5 of ACI
3 18-89. It states that: “A reinforced
concretestructuralsystem not satisfying
the requirements of this section may be
used if it is demonstrated by experi-
mental evidence and analysis that the
proposed system will have strength and
toughness equal to or exceeding those
provided by a comparable monolithic
reinforced concrete structure satisfying
this section.”
The key words are “experimentalev-
idence and analysis.” This is thefunda-
mental pmvision of the code that per-
mits construction of precast concrete
structures in seismic zones.
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
REBAR
RUWR
GROUT PLUG
SLEEVE
ss YOR’AR
STEEL
SLEEVE
GRWf REBAR
INET
PRfcAsT
WASmR
NLBER
FREWT
YLBER GROUT
INTERFACE
-
Fig. 3b Detail of grout-filled me-
chanical connection.
m a s t concrete structural members
designed in accordat!= with the appro-
priate sections of the codes and pro-
vided with connections that will emu-
late the structural performance of ‘cast-
in-place concrete connections are al-
lowed under Paragraph E In most of the
performancehas confirmedthat the con-
nections are equivalent to cast-in-place
connections. In some cases, test data
was not needed inasmuch as the con-
nection was made with cast-in-place
concrete and with conventional rein-
forcing bar details already permitted
under the code.
Emulation design
approach
The recommended procedure for de-
signing by cast-in-placeequivalentcon-
nection methods in precast concrete
structures is to follow the provisions of
the appropriatebuilding codes and pro-
cedures for conventional cast-in-place
reinforced concrete.5
There is a large body of technical in-
formation available for the design of
cast-in-situ reinforced concrete struc-
tures. Further, there is an extensive on-
going research and development pro-
gram for all types of cast-in-place rein-
forced concrete technology. Numerous
textbookshave been written about con-
ventionally reinforced concrete. Educa-
tors are well versed in teaching the de-
sign techniques for cast-in-place con-
crete smctures. The various ACI Jour-
nals and technical publications
continuouslyhighlight and update tech-
nical progress.
Precast concrete structures, even in
the most severe seismic areas, can be
built using emulation procedures if the
design and detailing meet the require-
ments of the codes.6
Rather than developing new connec-
tion technology when using emulative
methods for connectingprecast concrete
elements, it is much simpler to follow
this procedure:
1.Design the structureas if it is to be
constructedby monolithic cast-in-place
reinford concretemethods, keeping in
mind that the structure will be sub-di-
vided into structural elements of a size
and shape that:
0 are suitable for plant fabrication,
0 are capable of being transported,and
0 can be erected by cranes available to
the contractor.
2. Disassemble the structure “on
paper” into appropriatesizes and shapes
to meet the foregoing criteria. This
process can be significantly enhanced
with the assistance of a knowledgeable
precast concrete engineering specialist
working with the structural engineer.
3. Manufacturethe precast structural
elements, installing conduits, mechan-
ical connections, or other methods of
joining the structuralreinforcing bars so
as to maintain the continuity of the re-
inforcement throughout the structure.
4. Transport the prefabricated ele-
ments to the erection site.
16
 - - __ - -
ACI COtIPt3L f t W 06627119 0525203 2T7
JOIN7 w t m
Yow(IcIL C o n C l I
SEC #TAILS FIG. 0
UST-IICRICL aosm
Fig. 4 -Typical types of precast concrete "cruciform" ele-
ments.
5. Erect and temporarily secure each
precast element.
6. Connect the reinforcing bars be-
tween the precast concrete elements by
completing the mechanical splices,
welding the bars, or by grouting the con-
duit or sleeves with high-strength, non-
shrink grout.
7. Connect the precast concrete ele-
ments using a high-strength,non-shrink
grout in the interfacesor by placing con-
ventional concrete in the spaces be-
tween the precast elements.
Emulative details
The following discussion will describe
only those emulative connections that
will satisfy code requirements in any
seismic zone. There may be other vari-
ations of usable connections whose
structural performance has not yet been
verified by experimental evidence and
analysis. Such connections are not de-
scribed here.
Contemporary methods generally
employed for designing precast con-
crete structuresthat can emulate cast-in-
place structures depend upon the prin-
cipal of splicing reinforcing bars and
providing a monolithic cementitiousin-
terface between the prefabricated con-
crete elements. Reinforcing steel
splicing is accomplished in the same
16
._
W
mm
v a MHEcrms a PlECAsl ulls n t T M S
Fig. 5 -Various types of wet connections for connecting
different confiaurationsof orecast columns and beams.
manner as in cast-in-place concrete, ei-
ther by lapping, welding, or by joining
with mechanical splices. ACI 318 spec-
ifies that both welded and mechanical
splicesmust achievestrengthsof at least
125 percent of the specified yield
strength$, of the bar. Requirements for
lapped splices are included in Section
2612 of the UBC and Chapter 12of ACI
Building Code 3 18.
Welded splicesshould be made in ac-
cordance with the recommendationsof
the American Welding Society standard
D1.4. The use of ASTM 706reinforcing
bars is strongly recommended in struc-
tural applications where inelastic per-
formance of the structural members is
intended.
When mechanical connections are
used, and the designer selects the ap-
propriate reinforcingbar size for a struc-
turalmember according to accepted de-
sign practice for conventional rein-
forced concrete, the bar size determines
the size of the connection device. Addi-
tional design calculations are not nec-
essary. Mechanical connection splices
may be made for longitudinal bars in
both horizontal and vertical elements.
Recommendations include:
Use the largest diameter bars possible
consistent with the ability of the fabri-
cator to procure and handle such bars.
. . - _.. - -
Y
m
0 Use the same size bars throughout ver-
tical structures instead of mixing bar
sizes, Using larger bars opens up the
forms for easier placement of concrete
and allows for wider spacing between
sleeves. Using the same size bars rather
than mixing bar sizes in vertical ele-
ments reduces the chances for plant and
field errors. Bars are discontinuedas the
reduction of forces permits.
Emulative connections
Various conventional approaches to
making emulative connectionsbetween
pnxast concrete elementsare described:
Cast-in-place closure
Bars from two precast elements are ex-
tended into a closure space. Bars are
spliced by one of the following methods
and the space between the connecting
p m t concrete elements is filled with
concrete in the field
0 Lap extended reinforcing bars ac-
cording to ACI Code requirements.
0 Lap extended reinforcing bars with
confinement by spirals.7
0 Splice extended bars with mechanical
connections.
0 Weld extended bars with an approved
process that will ensure that the bars re-
main ductile.
ACI COMPILATION
-..
ACI COMP*3L
HIGHY J
DUCTlLE BAR
(b) DOUBlE t€C)yyJcpL [WWECTORS
(NOT TESTED)
BOLTEO PL*Tf S
(C) USblG WED,
BOLTED STEEL PLATES
Fia. 6 - Variations of horizontal connections between beam or girder ends.
0 Use combinations of spliced bars in
conjunctionwith bolted or welded struc-
tural steel shapes.
This is one of the most practical
methods of achieving monolithicaction
in a horizontal connection between pre-
cast concreteelements. For vertical con-
nections,closureplacement connections
are costly and difficult to accomplish in
the field.
Blind connections
"Blind" COMW~~OIUare so named be-
cause they may be hidden completely
within the precast elements at the man-
ufacturing yard and do not require
patching or cast-in-place closure place-
ments in the field. Hidden connections
can be made by one of the following
methods:
Bars In conduits: Conduits or corm-
gated tubes are installed in the precast
- - __
** = Ob62949 0525204 133
AwLDED
O-(XMNATIO"OFBOLTED PLhTES
w UELDED Esws
elements. Reinforcing bars are intro-
duced into the conduit and overlapped
by the code-specified length. After the
bars are placed, the conduits are filled
with grout (Fig. 1) The maximum bar
size permitted by code to be lap spliced
is #11.
A similar method, also employing a
conduit, uses a special form of propri-
etary reinforcing bars called "thread-
bars" on which the bar deformationsare
rolled in the form of a coarse thread
(Fig. 2a and 2b). The threadbars are
joined with compatible mechanical
threaded couplings. After the bars are
coupled, the conduit is pressure grouted
through special fittings. The manufac-
turer makes both a Grade 60 bar for reg-
ular reinforced concrete service and a
high-strength Grade 150/160bar in se-
lected sizes for prestressing applica-
tions.
This method may be used effectively
for connecting vertical structural con-
Fig. 7 -Connection of girders to a
column with a cast-in-Dlace closure.
Fig. 8 - Beam/column connection of
through girder.
mte elements and to a limited extent in
horizontal connections. It requires the
use of conduits for the full length of the
precast concrete member and the use of
a pumpable or flowable grout with ver-
ifiable strength characteristics.
In designs for which ductility is a
consideration, the use of high-strength
rods, deformed bars, or strands grouted
in conduits is a special connection
system not considered emulative of or-
dinary reinforced concrete fabricated
with mild steel reinforcingbars. There-
fore it is not representative of conven-
tional reinforcedconcretedesign theory
and concepts.
Integral mechanicalconnections:
A special mechanical connection is cast
integrally into the columns and shear
walls and is subsequently filled with
grout after &headjoining concrete mem-
bers have been placed (Fig. 3a and 3b)
This method is particularly appro-
17
 - __
A C I COMP*3L
(C) (d)
Fig. 9 - Using mechanical connec-
tions to make “blind” connections of
precast columns and column/beam el-
ements.
LC.1.P.
CLOSURE
Fig. 10 - Precast shear tower using
mechanical connections for blind ver-
tical connections and for horizontal
connections between elements with a
cast-in-place closure.
UlLD STEEL
CONCRLTC
t from the precast column below extends
LPRECf6T CONCRETE %a
I. SOLID SLAB. MILD OR PRESTRESSED
RE I WORCESNT.
2. PRESTRESSED HOLLOW-CORE UN1 T.
5. % A W E OF PRESTRESSED TEE BEAN.
Fig. 11 - Longitudinal joint between
precast concrete partial thickness
slabs with a cast-in-placetopping.
.-
** W 0bb2949 0525205 07T W
priate for joining vertical precast con-
crete structural elements (columns and
shear walls).
Examples of emulative
connections
The following details are considered to
be emulative connections that will meet
UBC 2625(c)1.F criteria. The list is not
complete and other variations are pos-
sible.8 However, most of the connection
details shown here have been used in
seismic regions and are practical for use
in North America.
Beam-column connections
A structural concept that uses conven-
tional reinforced concretebeam-column
connection design in a precast concrete
joint is shown in Fig. 4. This has been
referred to as a “beam-column tree” or
a “cruciform” element.s.6 The precast
concrete beadcolumn element may in-
clude one or more cruciforms in a row
horizontally andor vertically depending
upon the capacity of the erection equip-
ment. The beam-column joints are
monolithic. There are a number of pos-
sible variationsof the tree (Fig. 5). After
the crucifonn elements have been set
into position, the beam ends may be
connected using one of the methods
shown in Fig. 6.
Vertical connections, which can be
designed to occur at locations of rela-
tively low moments, can be made with
appropriatemechanical connectionsand
manufactured grout.
Another type of beam-column con-
nection (Fig. 7) utilizes precast concrete
beams or girders meeting at the top of a
precast concrete column.11 Mild-steel
reinforcementis extended from the pre-
cast girders or beams into the open
space over the top of the column. Posi-
tive steel may require hooks. Negative
reinforcing steel through the column is
installed in the stirrups after the beams
have been erected. The space between
the beam ends is then filled with cast-in-
place concrete. Vertical column steel
upward through the beadcolumn junc-
ture to engage mechanical connections
in the bottom of the column above.
A variation of this connection can be
used for connecting prestressed beams
and girders by embedding mild steel
bars into the ends of the prestressed el-
ements. The bars are embedded into the
beam a sufficientdistanceto achieve the
required developmentlength, and out of
the ends of the beams into the closure
space. The bars in the enclosure space
may be lapped (if there is sufficient
space), hooked, welded (if accessible),
or joined with mechanical connectors.
The beamlgirder ends over the
columns are then formed and fresh con-
crete with strength and quality equiva-
lent to that of the precast concrete is
placed in the enclosed space.
After the closure concrete has gained
sufficientstrength, subsequentcolumns,
with mechanical connections installed
in the bases to engage bars protruding
up from the joint, are then erected. A
high-strength,non-shrink manufactured
grout is either pre-installed or is inserted
later under the column base.
Fig. 8 shows a direct connection at
the beam/column interfacebetween pre-
cast single-story columns and a pre-
castlprestressed girder. The girder is
continuous through the joint. The main
longitudinal steel from the top of the
lower column is extended a sufficient
length to pass up through plant-installed
conduits high enough above the girder
to connect to the base of the column
above. The procedure is outlined below:
A temporary foam plastic dam is in-
stalled around the top of the lower
column.
0 A shim is installed.
0 Manufacturedbedding grout is placed
on the top of the lower column and is
confined by the foam plastic dam.
The girder is lowered into position
over the dowels and seated on the shim.
0 The conduit and bedding space on top
of the beam is filled with a manufac-
tured grout.
0 The upper column is installed on a
shim and pre-installed grout bed, and
the reinforcement is connected by
means of a mechanical connection
meeting code requirements.
Column-column
connections
Fabricated, welded, and bolted assem-
blies are not addressed in the codes, nor
is there experimentalevidencethat such
connections can be made to be equiva-
lent to cast-in-place concrete connec-

Fig. 12 - Methods of developing monolithic longitudinal
joints between untopped precast concrete floor slabs.
tions. Using methods that will emulate
cast-in-place concrete, columns may be
successfully spliced at the beam/Column
joint or at other locations as discussed
elsewhere under Beam-columnconnec-
tions.
Cast-in-place closure
placements
Monolithic column-to-column connec-
tions have been made by welding ex-
posed bars, enclosing the splicing area
with forms, and placing conventional
concrete between the concrete column
ends. This methd may be cumbersome
and time-consuming and often inter-
feres with efficienterection procedures.
There is also some question as to
whether adequate cross-sectional con-
crete bearing is achieved after the newly
placed concrete shrinks.
Only those methods for welding bars
should be selected that will permit de-
veloping the longitudinalreinforcement
to the ACI Code minimum required
i strength of 125 percent of the specified
yield strength.
Blind connections
Fully cast-in-place equivalent connec-
tions between columns can be made
with mechanical connections that have
been specifically developed for con-
necting precast concreteelements. Such
connections have been describedearlier.
Fig. 9 shows different details for lo-
cating the integral mechanical connec-
tions used in blind connections.
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
Obb2949 052520b TOb
Rt I HORIXLENT
1. LAPPEO BARSIW“ SPACING
PERUITS), OR
2. LAP-%LOS (ASTY A706 WEN
DUCTILITY RtOUIREDl* OR
3. LECHANICU COWECTIONS.
Fig. 13 -Full-depth longitudinal joint.
Beam to beam connections
In order for connections between beam
or girder ends to perform monolithi-
cally, it is generally necessary to couple
the reinforcing bars by one of the
methods described previously and to
make a closwe placement with cast-in-
place concrete. Several methods are
available for making structural splices
of horizontal reinforcing bars.
0 Bars may be lapped according to
code-prescribedlap lengths.With l q e r
sized bars, space considerations pre-
clude lapping because the protruding
bars may be quite long, creating han-
dling, transportationand erection prob
lems for precast concrete elements. The
codes do not permit lapping of #14 or
#18 bars.
0 A modification of the above approach
is to confine the lapped bars with steel
spirals. Tests7 have shown that the code-
required lap lengths may be reduced by
as much as 50 percent when spirals are
used to confine the lapped bars. How-
ever, the designer should verify this by
testing under his own conditions.
0 Some types of mechanical connec-
tions may be used to join reinforcing
bars provided that their installationdoes
not cause linear volumetricchanges, ei-
ther by heat or deformation,which may
cause severe stresses on the concrete
member (Fig. 6 and 10).
0Reinforcing bars may be joined by
welding. Bars may be butt or lap
C. I .P. CLOSURE POUR
PRECAST m
TE
1. SOLID SLAB, MILD OR
PRESTRESSED
REIWORCEYENT. OR
2. FLANCE OT PRCSTRESSED
TEE BEAN.
welded. Connections of bars where
welded splices are used are usually the
most critical connections for seismic
loads and should m i v e special atten-
tion. Recommended procedures estaG
lishedby the American Welding Society
should be cadidly observed, especially
in joining bars designedfor inelasticser-
vice. A bulletin titled “From Experi-
ence” distributed by the StructuralEn-
gineers Association of Southern Cali-
fomia12comments on field welding very
succinctly.
Slab to slab connections
Topped floors
For some types of precast concrete floor
elements, slab reinforcement is placed
above the elements and topping con-
crete is placed (Fig. 11). Precast con-
crete slabs that may be topped in this
manner include partial thickness slabs,
hollowcore units, or double tees rein-
forced with mild steel or prestressed.
The use of topping concrete is also a
convenient method for confining
boundary elements and for tying floor
slabs to beams and girders.
Untoppedfloors
The requirements for making mono-
lithic connections between full-thick-
ness slabs are essentiallythe same as for
beam connections. Bars may be lapped,
welded, or joined with mechanical con-
nections, followed by a cast-in-place
19
 ..
ACI C O M P X 3 L
MILD STEEL
RE IH O R C M N T
/f:::.
EAR SPLICE:
I. LAPPED BARSIWHEN SPACING 1.
PEfWlTS), OR
2. LAP-WELDS (ASTM A 7 0 6 WEN
DUCTILITY REOUIRED). OR 2.
3. UECH4NICU CONKCTIDNS.
I Fig. 14 - Partial depth longitudinal joint.
I
concrete closure placement. Fig. 12
shows alternative methods of joining the
slabs transversely.
In some cases it may be desirable to
provide keys between the floor slabs to
provide for additional diaphragm re-
quirements. Pockets for the keys are
formed by installing removable block-
outs in the slab edges at intervals spec-
ified by the engineer. After the bars are
joined, the keys are filled with concrete
or manufactured grout. This method
may be used to join the flanges of
topped double tee beams.
Fig. 13 shows a full-depth closure
placement with mechanical connections
in which it was necessary to use con-
crete forms. The approach shown in Fig.
14 eliminates the need for forms. Elec-
trical conduits and plumbing are often
installed in closure placement spaces.
Slab-to-beam connections
Fig. 15 shows several different methods
of connecting precast concreteslab ends
to beams and girders.
Slab-to-wall connections
Fig. 1.2 & 3 show various methods of
connecting slabs across walls and ex-
tending the walls vertically with me-
chanical connections. Fig. 16 shows a
method using cast-in-place concrete
20
- . _
XX m Obb2949 0525207 9 4 2
C L O S W POUR
SOLID SLAB. MILD OR
PRESTRESSED
REINfORCEUENT, OR
FLANGE OF PRESTRESSED
TEE BEN.
Fig. 15 - Typical end connections of precast concrete
floor elements at a beam or girder.
KCHANC
I AL
Fig. 16 - Especially reliable seismic
detail where diagonal dowels cross
the wall into the omosite floor.
topping and diagonal bars across the
wall that assures continuity in the floor
slab through the wall, even when the
slabs do not directly bear on the walls.13
Another method for connecting pre-
cast concrete floor elements to precast
walls is shown in Fig. 17. The floor
slabs bear on the ledger beams. Me-
chanical connections known as dowel
bar replacements (DBR), also called
dowel bar substitutes (DBS), are in-
stalled in the wall. (Fig. 18) In this con-
nection method, specially designed and
patented threaded inserts with integral
reinforcing bars are fastened to the in-
side of the forms during fabrication.
MILD
m
A IIC
S THREADED UECWICAL COMCTOR
CHANICU OR E L O E D C ~ C T I O N
OR PRESTRESSED)
2. SOLID SLAB WITH TOPPING
(UILD STEEL OR PRcsTRcssroi
3. PRcsmrssro HOLLOW-C~ACSLM
WITH TOPPING.
4. iw u s o BE USED WITH ivro
OR WTOPPEO TEE erus)
Fig. 17 - Monolithic connection be-
tween precast concrete floor element
and a precast concrete wall.
Later, threaded reinforcing bars are
screwed into the inserts. Also, as shown
inFig. 37 for floor-to-wallconnections,
DBRs may also be used with other me-
chanical connections in the closure
space if there is not sufficient space to
make a lapped splice.
The primary advantage of using
DBRs is that bars do not protrude
through the forms during manufacture
and are not subject to damage while the
precast elements are in transit or being
positioned. Their use also eliminatesthe
ACI COMPllATlON
 - -
A C I COMPt3L
LAP WELO OR
f MECHANICAL SPL I C€
RE I NFORC I NG BAR INTO
THREADED
Fig. 18 - Detail of mechanical connection used for wall-to-
slab connection shown in Fig. 17.
need to "rebend" bars. This method
also works well when connecting pre-
cast elements to cast-in-placeelements.
Wall-to-wall connections
Horizontal wall joints
Emulative shear wall vertical connec-
tions require the use of mechanical con-
nections or lapped splices grouted in a
conduit to connect the vertical reinforc-
ing bars as shown earlier.
For horizontaljoints between precast
concrete shear walls, a grout bedding is
usually used. Some authorities believe
that smooth panel interfaces bedded in
a non-shrink grout are sufficient to de-
velop the necessary shear. Others main-
tain that some type of roughened sur-
face or keyway be provided. Tests have
shown that smooth form-faced finishes
are adequate for shear transfer when in-
UECHAN I CAL
A CONNECTION
Fig 20 - Use of mechanical connec-
tions and keying of precast wall ele-
ments to create a monolithic shear
tower, without welding or cast-n-place
closures
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
** Bll 0662749 0525208 889 D
f L f M E NT
~
END
Fig.19 - Use of small bar mechanical connections to
create a monolithic connection behnleen precast concrete
termediate smaller bars are used across
the joint at regular intervals of 12 to 18
in. (300 to 460 mm). This does not pre-
clude the use of larger bars at the ends
of the panels to provide for tiedown
forces.14
tratidns' that &ne o f h e splices
shown in the chnnecdon' details of
longitudiqal reinforcihg bars have
been staggereb,
In Japan, neither welded nor me-
chanical splices are staggered be-
cause full-scale tests of different
types of connecfiondetails with such
splices have shown that staggeringis
. Even more interesting is the dis-
not necessary. The author has in-
quired extensively and is unable to
discover any research in North
America or elsewhere that indicates
that either welded or mechanical
connections need to be staggered.
In 1988, a formal proposal was
made to ACI Sub-Committee318-H,
Seismic Provisions, to eliminate the
requirement for staggering rnechan-
ical connections in the ACI 318
Building Code Requirements. This
proposal was passed to ACI Com-
mittee439, Steel Reinforcement, and
ACI committee368, EarthquakeRe
sisting ConcreteStructuralElements
and System, as well as 318-Hand
has been under considerationfor the
past three years. This has lead to a
Committee 439, Steel Reinforce-
ment, sponsorship of a research
Vertlcal joints between walls
For verticaljoints between precast con-
crete wall elements, emulative connec-
tions usually require a cast-in-placeclo-
sure after the reinforcing bars arejoined
(Fig. 19). In locations where larger bars
.,-
19$~atthe.,Odversity of ~amsasto
' explore,thspoat-yid shrain charac-
teristics of mechanicalConnections.
~ y ,is very littIe p s t -
~ ~ r i o i sthere
yield strain data available about me-
chanical connectiom or even rein-
forcing bars'in the United States.
covery that there Seems to have been
no criteria establishedfor evaluating
ppst-yield strain. In Japan, a very
sp&ific test procedure is used'that
takes ipto aqcount the cyclic nature
of earthquake iinposed stresses and
strains. The procedure is being con-
sidered as'a model br such tests in
the~riitqd'states. , '
b the meantim'e,a proposal made
to the International Conference of
Building officials to eli@ate stag-
gering of meohanc i dconpections in
Section 2612(p)4 has beea approved
by ICBO andis reported on page 32
of the 1992 Supplempt to the Uni-
form Building C0de:Tbis change is
based on a Section 12.14.3.7 provi-
sion of the "Code Requirements for
Nuclear Safety Related Concrete,"
published by ACI Committee 349.
21

A C I COMP*31 t t .
I0bb2949 0525207 715 E
are needed, such as headers over door-
ways, it is often not practical to use a
normal lap splice because of space lim-
itations. In this case, a spiral wrapped
lapped splice or a mechanical connec-
tion may be used.
For walls where only shear or tem-
perature reinforcement is to be joined in
verticaljoints between precast elements,
-there are several options:
0 Lapped bars (if there is sufficient
space).
0 Mechanical connections especially
suited for smaller bars.
0 Controlled welded splices.
0 Dowel Bar Substitutes
Fig. 20 shows a concrete towerjoined
totally by mechanical connections and
grout interfaces, eliminating the need
for welded connections and closure
pours.
Conclusion
All of the connection details illustrated
here, with the exception of Fig. 6b. have
been designed and used in one form or
another in the construction of emulative
precast concrete structures. For those
details where experimental evidence of
performance has been required by
building officials as a condition for ap-
proval, most have been tested for struc-
tural performance, especially in Japan.
Concrete structures using these con-
nections may be designed according to
contemporary standard reinforced con-
crete practice and current applicable
building codes.
With emulation design, it is not nec-
essary for the structural engineer who is
familiar with conventional reinforced
concrete design methods to learn a new
discipline or procedure. It is simply a
matter of being familiar with how pre-
cast concrete elements are manufac-
tured and assembled. To assist the engi-
neer who is not familiar with precast
concrete manufacturing and erection
techniques, there are a number of spe-
cialized consultants available who can
guide the designer through the practi-
calities of detailing prefabricated struc-
tures. In addition, most precast concrete
fabricators are staffed or associated with
specialized engineers who can instruct
structural designers about optimal
shapes and sizes that can be eeciently
fabricated and erected.
References
1. Reinforcement Anchorages. Lup Splices and
Connections,ConcreteReinforcingSteel Institute.
Third Edition, 1990.
22
.-
2. Hawkins, Neil M., “Overview of Seminar,”
-
1986 American Concrete Institute Japan Con-
crete Institute Seminar on Precast Concrete Con-
struction in Seismic Zones, P CI Journal, Pre-
cast/Restresd Concrete Institute. March-April
1987.
3. Kanoh, Yoshikazu, “Review of Japanese
PrecastConcreteFrame SystemsUsed as Building
Structures,” 1986 American Concrete Institute -
Japan Concrete Institute Seminaron Precast Con-
crete Construction in Seismic Zones, Tokyo.
4. Suenaga, Yasuyoshi. “Design Guideline for
Precastconcrete Structuresin Japan.” Committee
Report of the Architectural Institute of Japan.
1986.
5. Wames. C. E., “Emulation of Cast-in-Place
Monolithic Design,” Repon to rhe Seismic Com-
mittee, PrecastlRestressed Concrete Institute,
1989.
6. Wames, C. E., “Precast Concrete Moment
Frames,’’ Seminar Presentations to Consulting
Engineers, Western Canadian Prestressed Con-
crete Institute, 1990 and 1991.
7. Yee, Alfred A., “Tests of Spiraled Lapped
ReinforcingBars.”
8. Repon: “Existing PrecastFrame Systems in
Japan,” First Meeting of the U. S. - Japan Joint
Technical Coordinating Committee on Precast
Seismic Structural Systems, Precast Committee,
Building Contractors Society of Japan. Nov. 29-
Dec.1, 1990, San Diego.
9. Yee, Alfred A., “New Precast Prestressed
System Saves Money in Hawaii Hotel,” PCI
Journal, Precasflrestressed Institute, May-June
1973, V. 18, No. 3. 1973. (LOCALLY)
10. Wames. C. E.. “Design and Construction
Features of a 37-Story Precast Concrete Rein- You already know the benefits of
forced Concrete Moment Frame Building in ACI national membership. But
Tokyo,” StructuralEngineers Associationof Cal-
ifornia Annual Convention (1990). PreCasUPre- have you considered the benefits
stressed Concrete Institute Annual Convention of belonging to your local ACI
(1990). American Concrete Institute Spring Con- chapter? The local chapters func-
vention (1991), Sixth Canadian Conference on tion as distribution centers for the
Earthquake Engineering (1991).
11. Repon: “FRPC System, Industrialization latest information and ideas. And
of Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Fujita Cor- you’ll find a group of colleagues
poration. with ready answers for local con-
12. Bauer, Warren H., “Welding Reinforcing crete problems-problems you
Bars,” From Experience, Structural Engineers
Association of Southern California, April 1988.
encounter every day.
13. Yee, Alfred A., “Design Considerationsfor Clip and send the coupon below;
Precast Prestressed Concrete Building Structures
in Seismic Areas,” PCI Journal, PrecasVPre-
we’ll rush you complete information
stressedConcreteInstitute,May/June 1991. V. 36, on ACI local Chapter affiliation.
NO. 3, 1991, pp. 40-55.
14. Suenaga Y., Three successive reports on
“Box-Frame-Type Precast Reinforced Concrete
Construction” of five, six and seven-story apart-
Send me all the facts on ACI chapter
ment houses, Yokohama National University,
membership.
1974.
NAME
Received and teviewed under lnstitute publica-
tion policies. COMPANY
ACI member Cloyd E. Warnes is man- 4DDRESS
aging partner of CPM Associates, a
:IN STATE ZIP
consulting firm that specializes in con-
ceptual design and construction of
precast concrete structures. He is a
member of ACI Committees 368,
Earthquake resisting elements and
systems; 442, Response to Lateral
Forces; and 439, Steel Reinforcement,
and is a member of Joint ACVASCE
Committees 550, Precast Concrete
Structures.
AMERICAN CONCRETE lNSTlTUTE
Box 19150, Detroit, MI 48219
 _ _ - _.
A C I COMPt31
Precast Concrete
in Seismic-Resisting
Building Frames in New Zealand
E xperience of earthquakes and
extensive laboratory testing
have shown that well de-
signed cast-in-place continu-
ously-reinforced concrete frames
perform very well during severe
earthquakes. Moment-resisting
frames incorporating precast con-
crete members, designed to be duc-
tile and provide the primary earth-
quake resistance, have not had the
same extensive laboratory testing.
However, moment-resisting frames
incorporating precast concrete
members have become widely used
in New Zealand, because composite
systems of concrete buildings com-
bining precast and cast-in-place re-
inforced concrete have a number of
advantages in construction. The in-
corporation of precast concrete ele-
ments has the advantages of high
quality control, a reduction in site
formwork and site labor, and in-
creased speed of construction; the
cast-in-place reinforced concrete
provides the structural continuity
and the ductility necessary for ade-
quate seismic performance. The de-
sign aim for earthquake resistance
of such composite frames in New
Zealand has been to achieve ductile
behaviour as for a cast-in-place
concrete structure.
The basic problem in the design
of building structures incorporating
precast concrete elements for earth-
quake resistance is in finding an ec-
onomical and practical method for
connecting the precast elements to-
gether. Because of its poor seismic
record in earthquakes overseas,
precast concrete in moment-resist-
ing frames was shunned in New
Zealand for many years. However,
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
** m 0bb2949 0525210 437
with numerous innovative ideas
from both practitioners and re-
searchers and the development of
the New Zealand capacity design
procedure, the approach to this
form of design has been revolution-
ized to such an extent that it is be-
ing used extensively for low and
high-rise construction. However,
there are some difficult areas in de-
sign and construction.
In New Zealand general design
provisions for reinforced and pre-
stressed concrete building structures
are contained in a code for general
structural design and design
loadings' and a code for the design
of concrete structures? These codes
contain comprehensive provisions
for the seismic design of cast-in-
place concrete structures but do not
have provisions covering all aspects
of precast concrete structures. Nev-
ertheless, significant developments
involving the use of precast con-
crete have been made in New Zea-
land and most reinforced concrete
building structures currently under
construction, or recently con-
structed, are moment-resisting
frames combining precast and cast-
in-place reinforced concrete de-
signed to perform as monolithic
struct~res.~*~J
Several aspects of the seismic de-
sign of reinforced concrete mo-
ment-resisting frames incorporating
precast concrete elements could now
be formally c~dified.~
Seismic design concepts
Ductility
In common with other countries,
the seismic design forces recom-
-
mended for ductile structures in the
current New Zealand loadings code
for general structural design and
design loadings are significantlyless
than the inertia forces induced if the
structure responded in the elastic
range to a major earthquake.
When analysis is based on equiv-
alent static forces representing the
effect of the actual inertia forces in-
duced by earthquake shaking, the
total horizontal seismic force in
each direction under consideration
is given by:'
V = CRSMW,
where
C = basic seismic coefficient,
varying between 0.15 and
0.05, depending on the seis-
mic zone and the fundamen-
tal period of vibration for
the structure
R = risk factor, varying between
1.0 and 2.0, being 1.0 for
buildings with normal occu-
pancy orausage, 1.3 for
buildings which are intended
to be functioning in the res-
toration period after a ma-
jor earthquake or whose
contents have high value to
the community, 1.6 for
buildings which are intended
to remain functional during
and after a major earth-
quake, or whose failure
could cause high loss of life
S = structural type factor, vary-
ing between 0.8 for ductile
frames to 4 to 6 for elastic-
ity responding structures
A4 = structural material factor,
being 0.8 for reinforced
concrete and 1.0 for pre-
stressed concrete
23
 _ _-
ACI COHP*3L t f
W,= gravity load of structure
considered t o be present
during an earthquake
The total horizontal seismic force
Vis distributed up the height of the
building. The distribution of seis-
mic forces generally follows the
shape of an inverted triangle or
some variation of that shape de-
pending on building geometry and
mass distribution.
The above seismic design forces
recommended by the New Zealand
loadings code for ductile structures
were obtained assuming that in the
event of a major earthquake the
structure is capable of deforming in
the postelastic range to a lateral dis-
placement of at least 4 t o 6 times
the displacement at first yield dur-
ing several cycles of seismic loading
without significant loss in strength.
The displacement at first yield is
defined as that displacement ob-
tained assuming elastic behaviour of
the cracked structure up to the seis-
mic design force.
The required strength U to resist
the effects of dead load 0,live load
LR,and earthquake load E should
not be less than whichever of the
following factored load equations
gives the greatest effect:’
U = 1.40 + 1.7LR
U = 0.9D + E
U = 1.OD + 1 . 3 L R +E
The exact characteristics of the
earthquake ground motions that
may occur at a given site cannot be
predicted with certainty and it is
difficult to evaluate all aspects of
the complete behaviour of a com-
plex structure when subjected to a
major earthquake. Nevertheless it is
possible to design the structure so
that it has features that will ensure
the most desirable behavior. The
rational approach for achieving this
aim in earthquake resistant design is
to choose the most suitable mecha-
nism of inelastic deformation for
the structure and to ensure by ap-
propriate design procedures that
yielding will occur only in the cho-
sen manner during a major earth-
quake and that the available ductil-
24
- _.
Obb2949 0525211 373 D
Frame Column sides way
mechanism
Fig. 1 - Possible mechanisms of inelastic deformation of moment-resisting
frames of buildings during severe seismic loading0
ity is adequate.’J Adequate ductility
may be considered t o have been
provided if all the primary elements
of the structure resisting seismic
forces are detailed for ductility in
accordance with the seismic provi-
sions of the concrete design code.’
Capacity design
To ensure that the most suitable
mechanism of inelastic deformation
OCCUTS in a structure during a major
earthquake, New Zealand codes re-
quire that ductile structures be the
subject of “capacity design.” In the
capacity design of structures, ele-
ments of the primary lateral earth-
quake load resisting systems are
chosen and suitably designed and
detailed for adequate strength and
ductility for a major earthquake.
All other structural elements and
other possible failure modes are
then provided with sufficient
strength so that the chosen means
for achieving ductility can be main-
tained throughout the deformations
that may occur.
For moment-resisting frames of
buildings the best means of achiev-
ing ductile inelastic deformations is
by flexural yielding at selected plas-
tic hinge positions, since with
proper design the plastic hinges can
be made adequately ductile. To en-
sure that failure in flexure cannot
occur in parts of the structure not
designed for ductility, or that fail-
ure in shear cannot occur anywhere
in the structure, the maximum ac-
tions likely to be imposed on the
structure should be calculated from
the probable maximum flexural
strengths at the plastic hinges tak-
ing into account all the possible
factors that may cause an increase
in the flexural strength of the plas-
tic hinge regions. These factors in-
._
Beam sides way
mechanism
clude an actual yield strength of the
longitudinal reinforcing steel which
is higher than the specified yield
strength, additional longitudinal
steel strength due to strain harden-
ing at large ductility factors, and
additional reinforcement that may
be present.
The shear reinforcement in the
plastic hinge regions, and all rein-
forcement in parts of the structure
away from plastic hinge regions,
will need to be designed for actions
which are at least 1.25 times the ac-
tions associated with the design
bending moments of the plastic
hinge regions in order to ensure that
non-ductile failures do not occur
elsewhere. If plastic hinges in col-
umns are to be avoided, the design
column bending moments may need
to be amplified by much more than
1.25 in order to take into account
higher mode effects and concurrent
earthquake loading as well as beam
overstrength.2
Preferred modes of inelastic
deformatlon
Fig. 1 shows mechanisms of inelas-
tic deformation that could form in
moment-resisting frames due to the
formation of plastic hinges.
If yielding begins in the columns
of a moment-resisting frame before
it begins in the beams, a column si-
desway mechanism can form. In the
worst case the plastic hinges may
form in the columns of only one
storey, since the columns of the
other storeys are stronger. Such a
mechanism can make very large
curvature ductility demands on the
plastic hinges of the critical storey,’
particularly for tall buildings.
On the other hand, if yielding be-
gins in the beams before it begins in
the columns, a beam sidesway
ACI COMPllAflON
 -.
A C I COMP*3L $3:
Mechanism and Rwnhrcement
for Conventiona/ Pias tic
,
Hinae
--.-
hsitians
--
Fig. 2 - Conventional and relocated plastic hinge design for seismic dominated moment resisting frames:
mechanism will develop, which
makes more moderate demands on
the curvature ductility required at
the plastic hinges in the beams and
at the column bases. Therefore a
beam sidesway mechanism is the
preferred mode of inelastic defor-
mation, particularly since ductility
can be more easily provided by re-
inforcing details in beams than in
columns.
As a result of the above consid-
erations, the New Zealand code for
general structural design and design
loadings requires that columns of
multistorey ductile moment-resist-
ing frames should have adequate
flexural strength to avoid the for-
mation of column sidesway mecha-
nisms. Thus a strong columdweak
beam approach is advocated. How-
ever for ductile frames of one or
two storey buildings, or in the top
storey of a multistorey building, the
code permits column sidesway
mechanisms (that is, a strong beam/
weak column approach) since the
curvature ductility demand at the
plastic hinges in the columns in such
cases of low frames is not hi& and
can be provided by proper reinforc-
ing detailing.
Detailing for ductility
The design of ductile structures
should be such as to ensure that
flexural yielding at the chosen plas-
tic hinge position controls the
strength and inelastic deformation
capacity of the structure. Failure
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
- -
0662949 0525232 20T
Plastic
hinge
Mechanisms and Two
Reinforcement Arrangements
for Relocated P(astic H i n g E
modes to be prevented are those due
to diagonal tension or diagonal
compression caused by shear, ex-
cessive plastic hinge rotation of
heavily loaded columns, sliding
shear along costruction joints or
other jointing faces or in plastic
hinge regions, buckling of com-
pressed longitudinal reinforcement,
and bond failure along lapped
splices or at anchorages. All of
these undesirable failure modes lead
to premature strength degradation
and reduced ductility and can be
avoided by use of the capacity de-
sign procedures.
The most important design con-
sideration for ductility in the plastic
hinge regions of reinforced concrete
members is the provision of ade-
quate longitudinal compression re-
inforcement as well as tension rein-
forcement, and the provision of ad-
equate transverse reinforcement in
the form of rectangular stirrups or
hoops and cross ties or spirals, in
order to act as shear reinforcement,
to confine and hence to enhance the
ductility of the compressed con-
crete, and to prevent premature
buckling of the compressed longi-
tudinal reinforcement. A centre-to-
centre spacing of transverse bars not
exceeding six longitudinal bar di-
ameters in plastic hinge regions is
considered to be necessary to con-
trol bar buckling.2
Joint core regions of beam-col-
umn connections need special atten-
tion because of the critical shear
- _. _..
and bond stresses that can develop
there during seismic loading.'V6
In the design of multistorey mo-
ment-resisting frames it is often ad-
vantageous to intentionally shift the
plastic hinges in the beams away
from the column faces. This per-
mits easier detailing of the beam-
column joint cores for shear and
bond, since the diagonal compres-
sion strut carrying shear across the
joint core is then more effective and
yield penetration into the joint core
from the longitudinal reinforcing
steel in the plastic hinge regions will
not occur. According to the New
Zealand concrete design code the
joint core requires less shear rein-
forcement, and larger diameter lon-
gitudinal bars are permitted to pass
through the joint core, when the
plastic hinging does not occur at the
face of the joint core.
Fig. 2 shows mechanisms and
possible reinforcement details for
conventional and relocated plastic
hinge positions in beams which have
been used in New Zealand. For the
design of the relocated plastic
hinges shown in Fig. 2, the flexural
strength of the beam sections
should be such that the bending
moment in the beam at the column
face at A can only reach the nomi-
nal flexural strength of the section
at A if the bending moment at the
plastic hinge section at B reaches a
flexural overstrength value of at
least 1.25 times the nominal flex-
ural strength at B. The 1.25 factor
25
is to take into account a likely yield
strength higher than specified, and f 2!t!2ep2Ftop
strain hardening of the longitudinal sfeel in beom :
reinforcement, at the plastic hinge
section.
Precast elements can be con-
nected by protruding reinforcing
w
Precost 1 LPrecast beam !
w
bars which are lap spliced or an- unit
chored in cast in place concrete. Al- beam wit
in place Midwan I
ternatively the reinforcing bars can concrete and
be welded or mechanically con- steel in column 1
nected. If the connections between ( a ) SYSTEM 1 - Precast Beam &its Between Columns
the precast elements are placed In
critical regions the design approach
in New Zealand is to ensure that the
behavior of the connection region
approaches that of a monolithic ce
cast-in-place structure. Possible
brittle connections between mem-
bers should be made overstrong and
placed away from the critical
regions. Reinforcing details and
structural configurations can be ar-
ranged to ensure that the plastic
hinging occurs away from the joint-
ing faces of precast members if nec- I

essary. (6)SYSTEM 2 - Precast Beam Units d o u g h Columns_

Precast concrete in floors
As is common in many countries,
floors in New Zealand buildings in
early years were mainly of cast-in-
place reinforced concrete construc-
tion. Some use of post-tensioning
was made in cast-in-place floors.
However in the 1960s precast con-
crete elements became widely used
in floors in New Zealand. Cur-
rently, the majority of floors in
New Zealand buildings are con-
structed of precast concrete, span-
ning one-way between beams or
walls. The precast elements are ei-
ther of pretensioned or reinforced
concrete, and generally act compos-
itely with a reinforced concrete t o p
ping slab.
This trend to mainly precast
floors in New Zealand has come
about because of the reduction of
site costs resulting from reduced site
labor and fast erection, and also
because most precast floors are
lighter than cast-in-place floors
leading to smaller seismic forces.
The current New Zealand practice
of using mainly precast concrete
floors contrasts greatly with the
practice of most overseas countries
of using mainly cast-in-place con-
crete floors.
The commonly used precast con-
crete elements in floors in New Zea-
land are either solid slabs, voided
Precast
T- unit I
! Castin place
@ f o r t a r joint I f ioint
-
Icl SYSTEM 3 Precast T- Units
Notes : Reinforcement in precast concrete is not shown
fllAor & -
F Precast concrete units
Fig. 3 - Arrangements of precast concrete members and cast-in-place
concrete commonly used for the construction of moment resisting reinforced
concrete frames in New Zealand.s
slabs, rib slabs, single tees or dou- primary seismic load resisting com-
ble tees, which are seated side by ponents such as frames and walls.
side making up the whole bottom When floors are constructed of pre-
surface of the floor. Alternatively, cast elements it is essential that con-
precast concrete ribs spaced apart tinuity of seismic shear transfer over
with permanent formwork of tim- the whole floor is achieved. It is
ber or thin precast concrete slabs considered in New Zealand that a
spanning between are used. cast-in-place reinforced concrete
The floor system also has to act topping slab at least 50 mm (2 in.)
as a diaphragm during earthquakes, thick containing at least the mini-
in order to transfer the in-plane di- mum reinforcement required for
aphragm forces caused by its own slabs is an excellent means for
mass and the live load on it to the transferring the in-plane diaphragm

26 ACI COYPllATlON
 A C I COflP*33
Fig. 4 - Reinforced concrete building frame incorporating precast concrete
elements in the beams between columns.
forces. Some use of precast con-
crete elements in floors without a
cast-in-place topping slab, but with
adequate shear connection between
the elements, has also been made.
Ductile composite
reinforced concrete moment
resisting frames
Multistorey reinforced concrete
frames with strong column/
weak beam design
The general trend in New Zea-
land for framed buildings is to de-
sign the perimeter frames with suf-
ficient stiffness and strength to re-
sist most of the seismic loading. The
interior columns of the building
then carry mainly gravity loading
and can be placed with greater
spacing between columns. For the
perimeter frames the depth of the
beams may be large without effect-
ing the clear height between floors
inside the building and the columns
can be at close centers. The use of
one-way perimeter frames avoids
the complexity of the design of
beam-column joints of two-way
moment-resisting frames. Refer-
ences 8-12 give the details of several
recently designed buildings in New
Zealand that encorporate signifi-
cant quantities of precast concrete
in their frames and floors.
A number of possible arrange-
ments of precast concrete members
and cast-in-place concrete forming
ductile moment resisting multisto-
rey reinforced concrete frames have
been used in New Zealand.’ Ar-
rangements commonly used in New
Zealand for strong column/weak
beam designs, are shown in Fig. 3.
The aim in design of the systems is
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
** W Obb2949 0525234 082
to achieve behaviour as for a mon-
olithic structure.
Systeml: An arrangement involv-
ing the use of precast members to
form the lower part of the beams is
shown in Fig. 3a. The precast beam
elements are placed between col-
umns and seated on the cover con-
crete on the previously cast-in-place
reinforced concrete column below
and propped under the precast ele-
ments. In some cases there m a y be
two precast beam elements per span
with a cast-in-place joint at mid-
span where the longitudinal beam
bars are spliced. A precast concrete
floor system is placed seated on the
top of the precast beam elements
and spanning between them. The
reinforcement is then placed in the
top of the beam, the topping slab
over the floor system, the beam-
column joint core and the next sto-
rey height of column, and the cast-
in-place concrete is placed. The
frame can be designed using the
provisions for totally cast-in-place
concrete structures.
This system leads to a large re-
duction in the quantity of site
formwork necessary. A difficulty
with the connection detail is that the
bottom longitudinal bars of the
beams, protruding from the precast
beam elements, need to be an-
chored in the joint cores. Hence the
column dimensions need to be rea-
sonably large to accommodate the
required development length and to
reduce the congestion of the hooked
anchorages. Also, it is difficult to
detail strong end regions in the
beams if it is desired to force the
plastic hinges in the beams to form
away from the column faces. Fig. 4
shows a building under construc-
tion using this system.
System2 :An arrangement making
more extensive use of precast con-
crete and avoiding the placing of
cast-in-place concrete in the con-
gested beam-column joint core
regions is shown in Fig. 3b. The re-
inforced concrete columns can be
either precast or cast-in-place to oc-
cupy the clear height between
beams. The precast portions of the
beams extend from near midspan to
midspan, and hence include within
the precast element over the col-
umns the complex arrangement of
joint core hoop reinforcement
which is fabricated in the factory.
The precast portions of the beams
are placed seated on the concrete
column below with a sand-cement
mortar joint or other suitable mate-
rial between, and propped for con-
struction stability.
The protruding longitudinal col-
umn bars from the reinforced con-
crete column below pass through
preformed vertical holes in the pre-
cast beam element and protrude
above the top surface of the ele-
ment. The holes in the precast beam
elements are preformed using cor-
rugated steel ducting and are
grouted after the column bars have
passed through. The protruding
bars of the precast beam elements
are lapped in a joint to be cast in
place at midspan. Alternatively,
they can be connected by welding at
midspan.
A precast floor system is placed
seated on the precast beam ele-
ments and spanning between them.
The reinforcement is then placed in
the top of the beam and the top-
ping slab, and the cast in place con-
crete is placed. Alternatively, the
total depth of the beam can be pre-
cast, including top and bottom steel
in the precast beam, and the precast
floor system would then be sup-
ported on ledges on the sides of the
precast beams. The columns of the
next storey are next positioned
above the beams using grouted steel
sleeves (NMB)to connect the verti-
cal bars if the columns are precast
or using normal reinforced concrete
details if the columns are cast in
place.
An advantage of this system is
that the plastic hinge regions in the
beams occur within the precast ele-
ments away from the jointing faces
27
' -. -
ACI COflP*31
Fig. 5a - 22-storey building frame incorporating precast
concrete beam elements passing through the columns.
between the precast elements. Also,
it is possible to incorporate in the
precast concrete beam element rein-
forcing details as shown in Fig. 2
and hence the plastic hinge regions
can be relocated away from the col-
umn faces if necessary. This system
uses extensive precast concrete and
eliminates fabrication of complex
reinforcing details on the building
site. A possible difficulty is the tight
tolerances necessary when assem-
bling the precast elements.
Fig. 5 shows a 22 storey building
under construction using this sys-
tem. Fig. 5a shows the structure of
the building nearing completion.
The structure consisted of moment
resisting perimeter frames with in-
terior frames carrying mainly only
gravity loading. Fig. Sb shows a
precast concrete beam corner unit
being lowered into position. Plastic
tubes (removed later) are used to
lead the column bars through the
beam unit. Fig. 5c shows the beam
unit after grouting the column bars,
and Fig. 5d shows a spliced mid-
span connection in the beam being
prepared.
System 3: A further possible ar-
rangement incorporating T-shaped
precast concrete elements is shown
28
**
._ ._
Obb2949 0525235 T19
Fig. 5b - Precast concrete beam corner unit being
lowered into place.
in Fig. 3c. This allows plastic hinge
regions to be designed to occur in
the beams at or away from the col-
umn faces. The vertical column bars
in the precast T units are connected
using grouted steel sleeves (NMB).
At the midspan of the beams the
bottom bars can be spliced in a cast-
in-place concrete joint or connected
by welding to steel plates which are
bolted together. An alternative to
the T-shaped units is to use cruci-
form-shaped precast concrete units
with the joints between columns oc-
curring at the midheight of the sto-
reys. Precast floor systems can be
used as with the other systems.
An advantage of System 3 is the
extensive use of precast concrete
possible, and the elimination of the
fabrication of complex reinforcing
details on the building site. A pos-
sible constraint is that the precast
elements are heavy and crane ca-
pacity may be an important consid-
eration.
Fig. 6 shows the details of the
precast concrete T-shaped units
making up a perimeter frame of a
building in which plastic hinging
was designed to occur in the diago-
nally reinforced beam regions away
from the column faces. Grouted
steel sleeves (NMB)were used to
connect the column bars at the in-
terface between units above the
joint core, and high strength fric-
tion grip bolts were used to connect
the beam bars which were welded to
steel channels at midspan.
Fig. 7 shows a perimeter frame of
a building constructed using precast
concrete cruciform-shaped units,
two storeys in height, with grouted
steel sleeves (NMB) connecting the
column bars at midstorey height
and hooked splices connecting the
beam bars in cast in place concrete
joints at midspan.
Low frames with strong beam/
weak column design
For one or two storey frames a
strong beadweak column design
concept is permitted by the New
Zealand code for general structural
design and design loadings. Hence
for such low frames the postelastic
deformations in a major earth-
quake can be designed to occur by
plastic hinges forming at the col-
umn ends, as in the column side-
sway mechanism of Fig. 1.
For a strong beadweak column
design, System 1 of Fig. 3a would
be suitable. Also suitable would be
ACI COMPllATlON
 _. _.

ACI COMP*31 ** W 0bb2949 052521b 955 W

System 3 but with cruciform-shaped

units as in Fig. 7 with connections
between precast elements at the
midheight of columns and at the
midspan of beams rather than T-
shaped units. A further possible ar-
rangement of precast elements for
such a design is shown in Fig. 8.
For the buildins of Fig. 8 the two
storey columns are precast in one
length for the full height of the
frame and the beams are precast to
occupy about the middle 60 percent
of the spans. The top and bottom
beam bars protruding from the pre-
cast beam elements are spliced in
the end regions of the beams in cast
in place concrete. These bars are
spliced with lengths of beam bar Fig. 5c -
Column bars after being grouted in the joint core of a precast
which are cast passing through the concrete beam unit.
precast column.
Composite reinforced concrete
moment resisting frames of
limlted ductility
Cast-in-place ductile reinforced
concrete structural walls in a build-
ing can be designed to resist almost
all of the seismic loading acting on
the building. Then the frames in the
building are present mainly to carry
the gravity loading. Such moment
resisting frames can be designed for
limited ductility, using less trans-
verse reinforcement than for ductile
frames, providing it can be shown
that when the walls have deformed
inelastically to the required dis-
placement ductility factor during Fig. 5d - Preparing cast-in-place concrete midspan joint of a perimeter frame.
severe seismic loading the ductility
demand on the frames is not large.
This is possible because the frames
are much more flexible than the
walls.
Mixed precast prestressed
concrete and cast=ln=place
reinforced concrete
moment-resistingframes
A further building system which has
become popular in New Zealand in-
volves the use of precast concrete
beam shells as permanent form-
work for beams. The precast beam
shells are typically pretensioned
prestressed concrete U-beams and
are left permanently in position af-
ter the cast-in-place reinforced con-
crete core has been cast. The pre-
cast U-beams support the self
weight and construction loads and
act compositely with the reinforced
concrete core when subjected to Fig. 6 - Details of precast concrete T-shaped units of the perimeter frame of a
other loading in the completed reinforcedconcrete building.

29
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
 - -
ACI COMPx3B
structure. The precast U-beams are
not connected by steel to the cast-in-
place concrete of the beam or col-
umn. The typical structural organi-
sation of a building floor and mo-
ment resisting frame system incor-
porating precast pretensioned U-
beam units is shown in Fig. 9.
Initially in New Zealand precast
concrete U-beams were used princi-
pally in the construction of low-rise
buildings in which the lateral seis-
mic loads are resisted primarily by
other elements such as totally cast-
in-place reinforced concrete struc-
tural walls or frames. Recent trends
have seen this form of composite
beam construction used in multi-
storey moment-resisting frame
structures. In this application, the
composite beams will be required to
develop ductile plastic hinges dur-
ing major earthquakes.
Doubts have been expressed by
some designers and checking au-
thorities concerning the ability of
this form of composite construction
to be able to fulfill that demand. It
had been felt that the cracking may
concentrate in the beam at the col-
umn face at the discontinuity
caused by the termination of the
prestressed strand reinforcement at
the end of the precast U-beam.
However recent testsShave demon-
strated that during severe seismic
loading there is a tendency for the
plastic hinging to spread along the
cast-in-place reinforced concrete
core within the precast U-beam.
Hence the plastic hinge rotation
Fig. 8 - Two-storey frame with columns precast in one length for the full height
and cast-ikplace spliced joints at the ends of precast concrete beams.
30
** Obb2949 0525217 891 W
Fig. 7 - Perimeter frame of a reinforced concrete building constructed using
two storey high precast concrete cruciform units.
does not concentrate in the beam at
the column face and no undesirable
concentration of curvature results.
Seismic design recommendations
for such construction are given
elsewher@.It is considered that this
type of construction is suitable for
ductile moment-resisting frames.
Research needs
The New Zealand concrete design
code,* as with the ACI building
code,' has provisions for the seis-
mic design of moment-resisting
frames which were written mainly
for use for totally cast-in-place
structures. Several areas of the
codes need amplification and modi-
__ -_
fiation for effective application to
the design of moment-resisting
frames incorporating precast con-
crete elements.
For example, the connection de-
tails between precast members at
beam-column joints and at the mid-
span of beams need to be given
more consideration. More specific
code provisions for hooked anchor-
ages and splices, resulting in com-
pact and practical cast in place
joints, are needed.
Also, the length of beam ends
which need to be detailed as poten-
tial plastic hinge regions needs fur-
ther consideration. In short span
beams of perimeter frames the
splice in beam bars of the cast-in-
place midspan joint may need to
commence closer to the column face
than two beam depths. Since the
bending moment diagram for such
a beam is dominated by seismic
loading, it would appear to be sat-
isfactory to permit the splice to
commence at one beam depth from
the column face.
Other areas requiring research are
the requirements for grouting of re-
inforcing bars in ducts, types of
mechanical splices between rein-
forcing bars, effective methods for
seating precast floor units on pre-
cast beam members, and require-
ments for diaphragms formed of
precast concrete floor units.
A research project investigating
some of these aspects has recently
commenced at the University of
Canterbury.'l
ACI COMPILATION

Pr efensioned, precast
concrete U-beam
Fig. 9 - Construction details of a structural system involving precast concrete
beam shells and cast-in-place reinforced concrete (not all reinforcement shown).
Conclusions
The general philosophy for the seis-
mic design of precast concrete mo-
ment resisting frame structures in
New Zealand is similar to that for
cast-in-place reinforced concrete
structures. That is, structures de-
signed to withstand the seismic de-
sign loads of the code should be ca-
pable of inelastic deformations by
the formation of ductile plastic
hinges. In New Zealand a capacity
design procedure is used to ensure
that in the event of a major earth-
quake the plastic hinges form only
in regions detailed for ductility and
that the other regions are strong
enough not to yield and that shear
failure does not occur. In the ca-
pacity design procedure the design
actions for the other regions and for
shear take into account the possible
overstrength of the plastic hinge
regions due to an actual longitudi-
nal reinforcing steel yield strength
greater than the specified yield
strength, strain hardening of steel,
and greater steel areas provided
than needed.
The use of precast concrete in
building structures has the advan-
tage of better quality control, re-
duction in site fonnwork, and speed
of construction. Critical regions of
the structures can often be precast,
thus avoiding the fabrication of
complex reinforcing details on the
building site.
Several alternative arrangements
for precast concrete members in
multistorey reinforced concrete mo-
ACI COMPa31
concrete
column
ment resisting frames are currently
in common use in New Zealand.
The frames are designed to perform
as monolithic structures. The ar-
rangements include precast concrete
beam elements placed spanning be-
tween columns, precast concrete
beam elements placed passing
through columns and T-shaped and
cruciform-shaped precast concrete
elements. Structural continuity be-
tween precast elements is generally
achieved using cast-in-place rein-
forced concrete. A structural sys-
tem utilizing precast prestressed
concrete U-beams with a cast-in-
place reinforced concrete core is
also in use.
Acknowledgements
The author gratefully acknowledges
the helpful discussions with many
structural engineers in New Zea-
land. Particular thanks are due to
the consulting engineers of the
Holmes Consulting Group and
Morrison Cooper Ltd, who de-
signed the buildings illustrated by
photographs in the paper, and to
the building contractors.
References
1. “Code of Practice for General Struc-
tural Design and Design Loadhgs for Build-
ings.” (NZS 4203:1984), Standards Associa-
tion of New Zealand, Wellington, 1984, 100
PP.
2. “Code of Practice for the Design of
Concrete Structures,” (NZS 3101:1982),
Standards Association of New Zealand,
Wellington, 1982, 127 pp.
3. Park, R., “Seismic Design Considera-
tions for Precast Concrete in New Zealand,”
t* = Obb2949 0525218 7 2 8 I I
Seminar on Preccst Concrete Constructionin
Seismic Zones, Japan Society for the Pro-
motion of Science/U.S. National Science
Foundation, Tokyo. 1986,V. 1, p. 1-38.
4. Park, R.. “New Zealand Research Into
the Seismic Desiin of Building Frames In-
corporating Precast Prestressed Concrete.”
Seminar on Preaxt Concrete Constructionin
Seismfc Zones, Japan Society for the Pro-
motion of Science/U.S. National Science
Foundation, Tokyo, 1986,V. 1, pp. 3960.
5. Park, Robert, and Bull, D. K., “Seis-
mic Resistance of Frames IncorporatingPre-
cast Prestressed Concrete Beam Shells,”
Journui, Prestressed Concrete Institute. V.
31, NO. 4,July-AUg. 1986,pp. 54-93.
6. Park, Robert, and Paulay. Thomas,
Reworced Concrete Structum, John Wiey
& Sons, New York, 1975,769 pp.
7. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI
318-89),” American Concrete Institute, b
troit, 1989,353 pp.
8. O’Lmry, A. J.; Monastra, D. P.; and
Mason, J. E., “A Precast Concrete Moment
Resisting Framing System,” Proceedings,
Pacific Concrete Conference, Auckland,
NOV.1988. V. 1, pp. 281-298.
9. Billings, I. J., and Thorn, 0. W., “NZI
Centre-Design of Multi-Storey Towers,”
Proceedings, Pacific Concrete Conference,
Auckland, Nov. 1988. V. 1, pp. 3W318.
10. Poole, R. A., and Clendon, J. E.,
“Mid City Towers-An Efficient Precast
Concrete Framed Building,” Proceedings,
Pacific Concrete Conference, Auckland,
Nov. 1988,V. 1, pp. 319-332.
11. Sivester, D. B.. and Dickson, A. R.,
“Fanshawe Street Building-A Precast Con-
crete Study,” Proceedings, Pacific Concrete
Conference, Auckland, Nov. 1988,V. 1, pp.
333-344.
12. O’Orady, C. R., “Precast Cruciform
Columns, H. Frames and Precast Concrete
Shear Walls in Building Construction.” Pro-
ceedings, Pacific Concrete Conference,
Auckland, Nov. 1988,V. 1, pp. 345-354.
13. Restrepo, J.; Park, R.;and Buchanan,
A. H.,“ S e i i c Load Testa on Connections
Between Precast Concrete Elements,” Pro-
ceedings, Silver Jubilee Conference of the
New Zealand Concrete Society, Wairakei,
Oct. 1989,pp. S110.
Received and reviewed under Institute
publication policies.
ACI Fellow Robert
Park is Professor
and Head of the
Department of Civil
Engineering at the
University of Can-
terbury, Chrlst-
church, New Zea-
land. He h a s
teaching and research interests in re-
inforced and prestressed concrete
structures, particularly in earthquake-
resistant design. He is a member of
joint ACIASCE Committees 352, Joints
and Connections In Monolithic Con-
crete Structures; and 441, Reinforced
Concrete Columns. He was the recipi-
ent of ACl’s Raymond C. Reese Re-
search Awards In 1984 and 1989.
31
 . .
ACI COMP*33
Retrofit Practice in the
e considerable damage done
T”. several highway bridges by
the October 1989 Loma Prieta
Earthquakehas stimulated are-
evaluation of the seismic resistance of
highway bridges in many states. Be-
cause highway bridges constructed prior
to the development of modern seismic
codes are generally unable to resist
forces from moderate to strong earth-
quakes, a substantial number of these
bridges need to be retrofitted. The State
of California started its seismic retrofit
program soon after the 1971 San Fer-
nando earthquake,during which several
freeway superstructures collapsed.lJ
This program has been substantially ex-
panded since the Loma Prieta earth-
quake.3
State transportationdepartmentsgen-
erally use different approaches for
bridge rehabilitation. The variation is
due to different climates, seismicity,
available construction materials, past
experience, etc. To avoid duplication
and to learn from the collective experi-
ence of individual states, a study was
undertakenon behalf of ACI Committee
34 1, Earthquake-Resistant Concrete
Bridges, in April 1991 to obtain infor-
mation on how different states are ap-
proaching the seismic retrofit problem.
Survey process
A letter was sent to the bridge division
in the transportation (highway) depart-
ments of all 50 states, the District of Co-
lumbia, and the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico in April 1991. Each state
was asked to provide information on the
methods they currently use to strengthen
seismically vulnerableconcretebridges,
a list of reference materials used, and a
copy of any in-house seismic retrofit
guidelines. The informationwas sought
for the retrofitting of all bridge compo-
nents including piers, foundations,abut-
ments, bearing, and hinges.
Information was received from 25
32
._.
** Ob62949 0525239 bb4
states (Fig. l), representing all geo-
graphic regions of the country. These
states include nearly 52 percent of the
bridges in the United States (Table 1).
For the survey results to be valuable,
they needed to include data for states
with moderate to high seismicity. The
American Associationof State Highway
and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) specifications recognize
three levels of bedrock acceleration to
determine the level of expected seismic
performance.4 These levels are at 10.20,
and 30 percent of gravity acceleration.
Table 1 shows that respondent states
cover all these levels. Table 2 summa-
rizes the number and percentage of
bridges with different bedrock acceler-
ation levels. It is important to note that
some states (for example, Illinois, Ken-
tucky, and Oregon) include only a very
small region in which the acceleration
coefficient is relatively large.
Column 1 in Table 2 shows the
number of bridges in the states that in-
clude a region with different accelera-
tion levels. Column 2 presents similar
data for the respondents. The data in
Column 3 show that 52 percent of the
states encompass some region for the
which the bedrock acceleration is ten
percent or higher. Nineteen percent of
the states have an acceleration level of
0.3g.Column 4 indicatesthat at least 5 1
percent of bridges are representedin the
survey data. Columns 5 through 8 list
data that are similar to those in Columns
1 through 4, except that the number of
states instead of number of bridges is
shown. The data in Column 8 show that
at least 48 percent of states with each
acceleration level are included in the
survey-results.It can, therefore, be con-
cluded that the data is from a represen-
tative sample.
Responses
To facilitate the analysis of the replies,
they were reviewed with respect to the
seismic retrofitting program at each
state and the retrofit details that each
state is using.
Retrofit programs
The responses varied in terms of the
type and extent of detail. The results are
summarized in Table 3. A typical re-
sponse from states with accelerationco-
efficients of 9 percent or less was that
seismic loads are of no concern
(Column 2). However, some of these
states plan to evaluate the seismic vul-
nerability of bridges that are scheduled
for rehabilitation (Column 4). Several
states are reviewing specificbridges that
appear to be critical, either because of
geometric similarity to some of the
bridges that were damaged during the
Loma Prieta earthquake or because of
the disastrous consequence of failure
(Column 3). These bridges are not nec-
essarily selected on the basis of a sys-
tematic screening process. A common
approach by some states (Column 4) is
to focus on bridges that are to be reha-
bilitated for other reasons and to up-
grade the seismic resistance of these
bridges as part of the general rehabili-
tation project. There is variation in the
level of rehabilitation that triggers
seismic retrofitting. Some states con-
sider “major widening” as the justifi-
cation to retrofit the bridge for earth-
quake effects.
Many states are developing pro-
grams to screen their bridges for seismic
vulnerability and to retrofit the poten-
tially unsafe bridges (Column 5). Others
are already using a retrofit program
while refining their methodology
(Column 6).
The replies indicate that many states
are aware of the potential for significant
damage to some of their bridges, and
that they are taking steps to remedy the
problem. The approach,however, varies
widely from state to state. To evaluate
the seismic vulnerability of bridges,
ACI COMPll ATlnN
 A C I COMP83L t t EI 0662747 0525220 386 W

Table 1 - Number of bridges and

acceleration data for respondent states

Fig. 1 - States from which information was obtained. (Re-

spondent states darkened.)

Table 2 - Number and percentage of

bridges in respondent states
(1)
X *.x X I

6). (3) ' (4)'

No.of bridg?
~ ,
Texas . '44,314 Maximum. in thousaods Col. I/ Col. Y (6) 0 (8)
Virginia X bebock . Total Col. 1 (5) No. of COL5/ Col. 61
X X X accelep T O A ~ a p o n - N0.0f resp~n- (52) cOl.5
West Virginia 6,513 tion U.S. dents (%) (96) states dents (45) (%)

Wyoming ' , 2826 X X 2cllOg 300 174 52 58 33 16 63 48

20.u)g 1 9 88 26 58 17 9 33 ' 53
Total ' ' 298,855 TotalU.S.Bridnes $77,710 I I
20.30~ - 111 I 56 I 19 I
51 I 13 I 7 I
25 54 J

many states are relying on publications
that are prepared through different re-
search projects funded by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA). One
or more of References 4 to 11 are cited
by at least one state. These publications
are generally viewed as basic guides for
forming an in-house retrofit program.
The State of California, having been in-
volved in seismicrehabilitation for over
15 years, has an established approach to
upgrading the seismic resistance of
highway bridges, but this approach is
expected to be refined. The State of
Washington has been installing hinge
restrainers as a retrofit measure since
1978, and is expected to expand this
program.
Retrofit details
The retrofitting of bridges may be car-
ried out at two levels: the system level
and the component level. The approach
at the system level is to change the struc-
tural system so that the seismic forces
imparted to the bridge are reduced. One
such retrofit measure is to install dy-
namic isolators at the superstructure-to-
substructure connections. The isolators
can increase the effective period of vi-
bration, thus leading to a reduction in
the substructureforces and ductility de-
mands. CALTRANS has installed iso-
lators on several bridges,' and is con-
sidering one other bridge for the use of
isolators. The States of Illinois, Nevada,
and New Jersey are also considering
isolators as an alternative means of
retrofitting.
The bridge components that poten-
tially need to be retrofitted are piers,
hinges, foundations,abutments, and su-
perstructures. Except for retrofitting
hinges, which was initiated by CAL-
TRANS in the 1970s, the retrofit of
other components is relatively new.
Retrofit concepts are still being devel-
oped and, in many cases, have not been
studied even in a preliminary way.
Piers: The elements of piers include
columns, walls, pier caps, column-cap
joints, and wall-capjoints. Of these, the
survey data address only columns. Since
1987,C A L W S has been sponsoring
research at the University of California,
San Diego on the strengthening of rein-
forced concrete bridge columns.'2 Dif-
ferent means of jacketing columns to
improve their flexural ductility and
shear resistance have been developed,
some of which have been adopted by
California. Fig. 2 shows the steel jacket
details that CALTRANS presents in its
retrofit manual. Both circular and rec-
tangular columns are upgraded in terms
of shear strength and confinement. In
Tennessee, the square columns of a
bridge are being retrofitted over the full
height using a circular steel jacket (Fig.
3). Similar to what is done for rectan-
gular columns retrofitted by an oval
jacket, the space between the column
and the steel shell is filled with grout.
Hinges: One of the first major attempts
to improve the seismic performance of
highway bridges has been to retrofit
hinges. Three general steps have been
to add hinge restrainers, to widen the
bearing areas,and to provide shear keys.
Of the respondent states, California,
Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Jersey,
Oregon, Tennessee, and Washington
have indicated the use of hinge re-
strainers that consist of cables (Fig. 4)
or high-strength steel rods. In initial
retrofit projects, the detail in Fig. 4 was
used with seven cables. However, tests
on C-type restrainer systems reported in
Reference 13 concluded that the number
of cables needs to be reduced to five.
Examples of restrainers used in Ten-
nessee and Washington are shown in
Fig. 5 and 6.

SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 33

 ACI C O M P t 3 1
-
Table 3 Summary of the general
responses from different states
The majority of the states involved in
seismic retrofitting indicated that rocker
bearings are being replaced by elas-
tomeric bearings to improve the stability
of the superstructure during earth-
quakes.
Foundations: The foundation system
in many bridges is unable to adequately
resist seismic forces and deformation
demands. One logical method practiced
in California involves encasing the
footing in a new reinforced concrete
jacket (Fig. 7). This detail has yet to be
tested.
Abutments: Abutments may be mod-
ified to change and improve the seismic
response of some of the shorter bridges.
The movement of abutments in some of
the recent earthquakes has pointed out
the need to better anchor abutment walls
to the soil. Fig. 8 shows a detail used by
CALTRANS for this purpose. The data
provided by other states in the survey
did not point out any plans about up-
grading abutment systems. The author
expects that strengthening the weak
components of a bridge will increase the
force and deformation demand on the
34
tf Ob62747 0525223 212
.. SECTlpJ A-A
U ru*
-
0. b x l U I I )
d d
hl
~ m . p
3 p ah
wcu n- e
-)..
-
Fig. 2 - Steel jacketing of reinforced concrete columns
recommended bv CALTRANS.
Fig. 3 - Retrofit detail for a square Column in Tennessee.
abutments and superstructure, thus
making it necessary to re-examine these
elements for adequacy against seismic
forces.
Conclusions
0 The majority of states are only begin-
ning to develop programs to systemati- PLAN
cally evaluate and seismically retrofit
their bridges.
0 Even among states that are entirely in
areas with low seismicity,there is a con-
siderabledifference in attitudes towards
seismic retrofitting. While some states
are unconcerned, others appear to be
committed to reviewing their bridges ELEVATION
and upgrading them if necessary.
Fig. 4 - C-type hinge restrainer detail
0 As expected, the State of California used in California.
has a considerably more extensive pro-
gram in place. The State of Washington
has installed hinge restrainers in 50 form seismic retrofit program available
bridges since 1978. Some states tend to in the near future.
follow the CALTRANS with modifica-
0 The use of isolator-damper devices as
tions.
an alternative seismic retrofit measure
The approaches taken by different for the overall bridge system is being
states vary from state to state, and it is practiced to some extent by four of the
doubtful if there will be a detailed uni- respondent states.
ACI COMPILATION
 ~~

ACI COMP*31 ** = 0662949 0525222 159 W

n
‘-“- -s
..-.-.-

;.: . . - I+.:.-.,
. . I
;. .- .I -
... .
: *
........ .. . . ’.
: I
-
.
:
..
.. ..
iaaEkuk m n U D I N A L RESTRNNER
Fig. 5 - Example hinge restrainer detail used in Ten- Fig. 6 - Example hinge restrainer detail used in Wash-
nessee. ington.

Acknowledgements ABUTMENT ANCHOR BLOCKS

This project was funded by &Department of En-
ergy through the Center for Infrastructure-Studies
at the University of Nevada, Reno. Professor
Seible of the University of California, San Diego,
and Mr. Mark Yashinsky of CALTRANS are
thanked for providing information about retrofit
research and practice. Professors David Sanders
of the University of Nevada, Reno. and Marc
Eberhard of the University of Washington are
thanked for their helpful comments.
References
1. Gates, J.. “Seismic Damage and Retrofit of
Bridges in California,’’ Seismic Design and Con-
struction of Complex Civil Engineering Systems,
American Society of Civil Engineus, New York,
1988. pp. 79-92.
2. Yashinsky. M., “Performance of Retrofit
Measures on Existing Older Bridges.” Proceed-
ings, Sixth US-Japan Workshop on Bridge Engi-
neering, Lake Tahoe. Nevada, May 1990.
3. Roberts, J., Report No. SSRP-91fl3, Depan-
ment of Applied Mechanicsand EngineeringSci-
ences, University of California, San Diego, July
1991.
4. AASHTO, “Standard Specifications for
Seismic Design of Highway Bridges.” American
Association of State Highway andTransportation
Officials, Interim, 1991.
5. “Seismic Retrofitting Guidelines for
Highway Bridges,” Report No. FHWAIRD-
83/007. U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration, 1983.
6. “Seismic Retrofit Measures for Highway
Bridges.” Report No. FHWA/TS-79L216, U.S.
Dept. of Transportation. Federal Highway Ad-
ministration, V. 1, April 1979.
7. “Seismic Design and Retrofit Manual for
Highway Bridges,’’ Report No. FHWMP-87/4,
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway
HIGH-STRENGTH
STEEL RODS
Fig. 8 - Detail to anchor abutment
walls.
Mechanicsand Enginee- Sciences. University
of California, San Diego, 1991.
Fig. 7 -CALTRANS detail to 13. Selna, L.; Malvar, L. J.; and Zelinski. R.,
strengthen existing footings. “Box Girder Bar and Bracket Seismic Retrofit
Devices,” ACI StructuralJournal, V. 86, No.5,
Sep.-Oct. 1989. pp. 532-540.
Administration, May 1987. Selected for reader intemt by the editors.
8. “Seismic Retrofit Measures for Highway
Bridges,” Report No. FHWA/Ts-791217, US.
Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Ad-
ministration, V. 2, April 1979. “Saiid” Saiidi is a
9. “Guide Specificationsfor SeismicDesign of professor and the
Highway Bridges, American Association of State chairman of the
Highway and Transportation officials, A A S W . Civil Engineering
1983. Department at the
10. “Structures Seismic Design References,” University of
State of California, Department of Transportation. Nevado, Reno. He
Division of Structures, June 1990. is the chairman of
1 1. “Seismic Design of Highway Bridge Foun- ACI Committee 341, Earthquake-Resis-
dations,” Report No. FHWA/RD-84/10, U.S.
Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Ad- tant Concrete Bridges, and a member of
ministration, V. 1,2. and 3,1986. joint ACI-ASCE Committees 343, Con-
12. Riestley. M. J. N.. and Seible. F.. @%tors) crete Bridge Design, and 352, Joints
“Seismic Assessment and Retrofit of Bridges,” and Connections in Monolithic Concrete
Report No. SSRP-91Al3, Department of Applied Structures.

SEISMIC DEStGN AND CONSTRUCTION 35

 A C I COMP*3L
Point of View:
30 Years of Observations on the Performance
of Buildings with Shearwalls in Earthquakes
T he evolution of the modem
approach to earthquake en-
gineering of buildings
started in the 1950s, at a
time of intense construction activity
following the conclusion of the sec-
ond world war. Early attempts to
provide earthquake resistance in
buildings were based on rather
crude assumptions about structural
behavior and were handicapped by
a lack of proper analytical tools as
well as earthquake records.
Observations of the behavior of
structures subjected to actual earth-
quakes, analytical studies, labora-
tory testing of structural elements
and subassemblies, and accumula-
tion of earthquake records over the
last four decades all have contrib-
uted to putting the subject of earth-
quake-resistant structural design on
a rational basis.
Initially, the ductile moment-re-
sistant frame evolved in the 1950s
out of the moment-resistant frame
which, at that time, was the only
system for multistory buildings of
both steel and concrete. Adding
POINT OF VIEW This article was
selected for reader interest by the
editors; however, the opinions
expressed by the author are not
necessarily those of the American
Concrete Institute. The edltors
invite comments from our readers
about the personal views given in
this article.
** W 0662749 0525223 095 W
ductility to the then available sys-
tem created a convenient solution to
the problem of earthquake resis-
tance. This concept of the ductile
moment-resistant frame remained
frozen until the late 1970s.
But in the meantime, better and
more efficient structural systems for
multistory structures, of both steel
and concrete, were developed for
wind resistance, incorporating
shearwalls or trusses for concrete or
steel structures, respectively. Pure
frames for high-rise buildings have
almost disappeared, since they are
technically less efficient and not ec-
onomically viable.
During the 1960s, 1970s, and
1980s, a large amount of very sig-
nificant analytical and experimental
research was carried out through-
out the world, resulting in a wealth
of sophisticated information on the
earthquake response of structural
systems, including those containing
shearwalls. Also, beginning in the
mid-195&, a substantial body of in-
formation was accumulated on per-
formance of buildings in actual
earthquakes.
Most of the analytical research in
the 1950s and 1960s on the response
of structures to earthquakes has
emphasized the importance of a
ductile moment-resistant frame to
reduce the seismic forces. Presup-
posing higher seismic forces in more
rigid structures, and assuming brit-
tle response of shearwalls to in-
plane lateral forces, it has been
concluded that severe damage could
be expected in shearwall buildings.
Based on this thinking, shear-
walls were considered undesirable
for earthquake resistance and
buildings were built primarily with
moment-resistant frames. While in
some countries a degree of ductility
was built into those frames, as re-
quired by codes, in the majority of
countries, and particularly in those
less advanced economically, the
frames were brittle and&c.pable of
withstanding severe earthquake
shaking without severe damage.
Consequently, many people in seis-
mic regions of the world live in
death traps, as has been seen in
many of the earthquakes of the last
four decades.
The author has observed the be-
havior of buildings containing
shearwalls in the earthquakes of the
last thirty years. What follows are
some highlights of those observa-
tions.
Chile - May 1960
Among the first reported observa-
tions concerning shearwalls were
those from the Chilean earthquake
of 1960, as contained in Advanced
Engineering Bulletin No. 6, issued
by the Portland Cement Associa-
tion. The report states: ". . . the
Chilean experience confirms the ef-
ficiency of concrete shearwalls in
controlling structural and nonstruc-
tural damage in severe earthquakes.
There were instances of cracking of
ACI COMPllATlON
. ..
Fig. 1 - Caracas, Venezuela. Plaza One building behind
the remains of a collapsed 1@story building.
shearwalls, but this did not affect
the overall performance of the
buildings. In all cases observed, the
reinforcement held the walls to-
gether in good alignment, even
though the amounts of steel ex-
posed after spalling were, as a rule,
less than specified by code. In es-
sence, the walls continued to func-
tion after damage had occurred
. . ..YY
Skopje, Yugoslavia
1963
- July
In the earthquake of Skopje, Yugo-
slavia of July 1963, a number of
buildings containing unreinforced
concrete walls across the building or
in the core exhibited no damage due
to inhibited interstory distortions,
except for some separation at the
underside of the spandrel beams.
This was despite the documented
severe shaking undergone by these
buildings. Some frame buildings
collapsed and many were severely
damaged in this quake.
Caracas, Venezuela - July
1967
A noteworthy case of exemplary
shearwall building behavior was
provided by the 17-story Plaza One
Building in Caracas (Fig. 1). It was
the only shearwall-type structure in
Caracas that had a load-carrying
system consisting of walls in both
directions (Fig. 2). Of the sur-
rounding buildings, several col-
lapsed and all others suffered se-
Fia. 2 - Structural lavout of Plaza One buildina.
vere, sometimes irreparable, dam-
age. The Plaza One Building went
through the earthquake without any
damage whatsoever.
The typical multistory building in
Caracas, as well as in most of South
and Central America, contained a
relatively flexible reinforced con-
crete frame (Fig. 3), with brittle clay
tile infd walls. A number of these
multistory buildings collapsed in
Caracas, and the hollow clay tile in-
fill walls suffered very severe dam-
age in most of the other multistory
frame buildings.
San Fernando, California -
February 1971
The 6-story Indian Hill Medical
Center, with a shearwall-frame in- Fig. 3 - Typical flexible concrete
frame.
teractive system, survived the earth-
quake, needing only moderate re-
pairs (Fig. 4), while the neighboring
!?-story Holy Cross Hospital (Fig. that contained shearwalls and those
5), with a frame structure, was se- that did not.
verely damaged and subsequently The National Theatre of Mana-
demolished. gua (Fig. 6 and 7) suffered no dam-
There was extensive damage t o
many buildings and bridges, the 01-
age, thanks to the concrete wall en-
closing the auditorium.
ive View hospital being the most The 18-story Banco de America
widely described in the engineering and the 16-story Banco Central
literature. stood across the corner from each
other (Fig. 8). While the Banco
Managua, Nicaragua
December 1972
- Central, a reinforced concrete frame
structure (Fig. 9 ) , was severely
damaged and had to be demol-
The severe earthquake of Managua ished, the Banco de America, a
provided a particularly telling ex- shearwall-frame interactive system
ample of the difference in earth- with substantial core walls (Fig. IO),
quake resistance between buildings suffered little damage.
 - -
A C I COMP*31 t* D Obb2949 0525225 9b8
Fig. 4 - San Fernando. Calif. Indian Hill Medical Center.
Another pair for comparison
from Managua, although separated
by a distance (Fii. ll), was the 5-
story concrete frame Insurance
Building, which suffered severe
damage, and the 5-story Enaluf
Building, containing a relatively
large core in addition to the frame.
The Enaluf went through the earth-
quake exceptionally well.
Bucharest, Romania
March 1977
- buildings to control drift. It should
In Bucarest, where 35 multistory
buildings collapsed, hundreds of
high-rise apartment buildings con-
taining concrete walls, some along
the corridors, others across the
buildings, remained intact and
mostly without damage.
Mexico City -October 1985
The extreme extent of destruction in
Mexico City provided further evi-
dence of the consequences of not
including shearwalls to stiffen con-
crete frames of multistory build-
ings. About 280 multistory frame
buildings (6to 15 stones) collapsed
in this earthquake (Fig. 12); none of
those contained shearwalls. As in
most South and Central American
countries, reinforced concrete
frames without stiffening walls were
the predominant structural system
for multistory buildings.
Chile - 1985
The 1985 Chilean earthquake re-
ceived relatively little attention in
the profession, despite the fact that
its magnitude was similar to that of
--
Fig. 5 - San Fernando, Calif. Holy Cross Hospital.
the Mexican earthquake of the same
year. The earthquake went almost
unnoticed by the profession be-
cause there were no dramatic col-
lapses, notwithstanding the severity
of the event.
The primary reason for the mini-
mal damage was the widely used
engineering practice in Chile of in-
corporating concrete walls into their
be noted that the detailing practice
for shearwalls in Chile generally
does not follow the ductile detailing
requirements of seismic regions in
the U.S.,but rather follows con-
ventional detailing as required in
previous ACI Building Codes.
The exceptionally good perform-
ance of Chilean buildings during the
earthquakes of 1960 and particu-
larly of 1985 bears testimony that
drift control provided by shearwalls
can protect relatively nonductile
framing elements.
Armenia - December 1988
Further evidence of the benefit of
incorporating concrete walls into
multistory structures, or, con-
versely, the negative consequence of
omitting shearwalls, was reaffirmed
in the 1988 Armenian earthquake.
In that earthquake, a total of 72
frame-type buildings collapsed, and
149 were severely damaged in the
four affected cities of Leninakan,
Spitak, Kirovakan, and Stepana-
van. At the same time, all of the 21
large panel-type buildings in those
cities went through the earthquake
damage-free (Fig. 13).
__
In the city of Spitak, which was
almost totally destroyed, the only
structure remaining standing and
undamaged was a 5-story building
constructed as a large-panel struc-
ture, with concrete wall panels in
both directions (Fig. 14).
Discussion
In previous decades, significant at-
tention was devoted to ductility de-
tails of structural systems, some of
which proved inappropriate for
seismic resistance ofwmwete struc-
tures, Ductility details incorporated
into the wrong structural system are
wasted, while creating a false sense
of security.
During the early days of earth-
quake engineering, many profes-
sionals confused ductility with flex-
ibility. As a result, a large number
of flexible buildings were built in
many seismic areas of the world.
Although some of these may have a
reasonable degree of built-in ductil-
ity, their responses in future earth-
quakes.have the potential to cause
large economic losses due to large
interstorj. distortions.
When building today, the cost of
the structure itself may be as low as
20 percent of the total, while the re-
maining 80 percent is for the archi-
tectural, mechanical, and electrical
components. Thus, it is of primary
importance to select a structural
system that will provide the best
protection for both life and prop-
erty in future earthquakes. For con-
crete structures, shearwalls have
demonstrated the ability to fulfil1
 ACI COflP*:31 ** W Ob62949 052522b B T Y W

L a
b a
a
b 4

* a
b a

b a
D 0

L - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - J
Fia. 6 - Manaaua. Nicaraaua. National Theater. Fig. 7 - Plan of National Theater.

;. Fc--------#s‘-----------.J
Fia. 8 - Manaaua. Nicaragua. Two bank buildings. Fig. 9 - Typical floor in Banco Central.

Fig. 10 - Typical floor in Banco de America. Fig. 11 - Managua, Nicaragua. Two fivestory buildings.

SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 39

 ._-
A C I COMP*3L
Fig. 12 - Mexico City. Collapsed 14-story frame building.
these requirements at the least cost.
Considering the suitability of
structural systems as related to the
functional requirements of build-
ings, we can divide the universe of
multistory buildings into residential
and commercial occupancies. There
is no question that for residential
buildings shearwalls can be used as
the primary, or even the only, ver-
tical load-carrying elements, thus
serving the double function of car-
rying the loads and dividing the
space. In commercial buildings,
where large unobstructed space is a
functional requirement, a central
core provides a shearwall-frame in-
teractive system with both rigidity
and space flexibility.
Ductility details for shearwalls,
which were developed as a result of
recent laboratory tests and analyti-
Fig. 13 - Leninakan, Armenia, USSR. Surviving lhtory
largepanel structures amid collapsed nelghbors.
All
- ___ --
** Obb2949 OS25227 730 M
cal investigations and incorporated
into some codes, have not yet been
tested in actual earthquakes. In-
cluding ductility details in shear-
walls will unquestionably improve
the ductile properties of the walls.
However, to the extent to which
shearwall ductility is actually util-
ized during earthquakes, and how
such ductility affects the perform-
ance of the connected frames, re-
mains to be determined, either us-
ing sophisticated dynamic response
studies or in actual earthquakes.
To design a shearwall to behave
in a ductile manner requires that its
strength be governed by flexure
rather than by shear. Its shear ca-
pacity must be known and be larger
than the shear corresponding to its
moment capacity. We need to know
not only the ultimate shear capac-
Fig. 14 - Spitak, Armenia, USSR. Undamaged 5-story
largepanel structure In the totally devastated city.
ity, but also what happens between
the onset of shear cracking and
shear failure.
Whether and to what extent the
grinding within shear cracks, caused
by reversible cycles of lateral move-
ment, can serve as an energy dissi-
pation mechanism needs to be de-
termined and has not yet been suf-
.
ficiently investigated
If we look at the task ahead of
us, I believe that the research com-
munity can provide a great service
by further developing experimental
and analytical information on
shearwalls so that their design and
proportioning can be brought to the
same level of confidence as pres-
ently available for seismic beams
and columns.
The following is needed:
1. Experimentally developed
force-deformation characteristics of
various configurations of shear-
walls throughout their elastic and
inelastic ranges of seismic response.
Knowledge of moment and shear
capacities will enable us to propor-
tion and reinforce the sections to
assure ductility.
2. Analytically derived inelastic
dynamic responses providing both
strength and ductility demands on
shearwalls contained in shearwall
structures as well as in shearwall-
frame interactive systems.
These two types of9nfwnation
will give us a realistic picture of
both sides of the demand-capacity
inequality: the demands for strength
and deformability, and the availa-
ble capacities. Only then are we go-
ing to be able to create better con-
crete structures by using ductility
details judiciously instead of wast-
ing them on structural elements that
ACI COMPILATION
 .- - .__
A C I COflP*31 ff W Obb2949 0525228 b77 W

do not enter the inelastic range dur-
ing earthquake response.
Concluding remarks
During the earthquakes of the last
three decades, buildings containing
shearwalls exhibited extremely good
earthquake performance. In most
cases, the shearwalls were rein-
forced in the traditional manner for
gravity and overturning, without
consideration to special details for
ductility, as required in recent U.S.
codes.
The author, who has investigated
and reported on the behavior of
modem structures in a dozen earth-
quakes throughout the world since
1963, is not aware of a single con-
crete building containing shearwalls
that has collapsed. While there were
cases of cracking of various degrees
of severity, no lives were lost in
these buildings. Of the hundreds of
concrete structures that did col-
lapse, most suffered excessive in-
terstory distortions that, in turn,
caused shear failures of columns.
Even where collapse of frame struc-
tures did not occur and no lives
were lost, the large interstory dis-
tortions of frames caused signifi-
cant property losses.
This should not be taken to im-
ply that frame structures built by
present advanced codes would also
collapse in severe earthquakes;
however. it has been demonstrated
that buildings containing shear-
walls, even if only conventionally
reinforced, do withstand severe
earthquakes, mostly without dam-
age.
After observing the devastations
and the resulting staggering loss of
life in many earthquakes, particu-
larly those in Managua in 1972,
Mexico City, in 1985 and Armenia
in 1988, the author believes it to be
the responsibility of the engineering
profession to make sure that resi-
dential buildings in particular be
constructed with shearwalls.
Whether such walls are made of
plain concrete, traditionally rein-
forced, or reinforced for ductility
will depend upon the economic ca-
pacity of a given society and on en-
gineering judgment; however, they
all protect life and in most cases
also provide good protection of
property.
We cannot afford to build con-
Crete buildings meant to resist se-
vere earthquakes without shear-
walls.
Selected for reader interest by the editors.
ACI member Mark
Fintel is a consult-
ing engineer i n
Boca Raton, Flor-
ida. Until recently,
he was Director of
Advanced Engi-
neering Services of
the Portland Ce-
ment Association, serving as a recog-
nized authority on tall concrete struc-
tures and seismic design. He has
chaired a number of ACI and ASCE
technical committees having to do
with high-rise building design for wind
and earthquake resistance and vol-
ume changes. As head of PCA's
Earthquake Investigation Team, he in-
vestigated and reported on the behav-
ior of contemporary structures in the
earthquakes of the last 25 years, in-
cluding the recent ones in Mexico City
and Armenia. He also has participated
in the U.S. delegations of intergovern-
mental technical cooperation with Ja-
pan, the U.S.S.R., and Bulgaria.

Y
//Durability of Concrete =
Third International
Conference Proceedings
In 1994, The Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology
(CANMET) in association with the American Concrete 'Institute,
sponsored a third international confemce on the Durability of
Concrete. This specid ACI publication presents the 65 conference
papers accepted for publication.
For your convenience, Lbabrlity of Concrete has been Clivided into twoparts.
Part 1, which contains 34 papers, covers the mas of: Part 2, containing 31 papers, covers the areas of:
1. Deicer Salt Scaling of Concrete 1. Alkali-Aggregate Reactivity
2. Freeing and Thawing Phenomenon 2. Coatings for Concrete
3. Performance of Concrete in Marine Environments 3. Carbonation
4. Corrosion of Steel to Fluoride-Ion Attach 4. High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete
5. And other topics 15. Durability of Concrete
Keep abreast of the latest durability issues. Obtain your copy of Durability of Concrete today!
Order through:
American Concrete Institute
Member/Customer Services Department
P.O.Box 19150 Detroit, MI 48219-0150
Tel. (313) 532-2600 Fax 313-533-4747

SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 41


ACI COMP*3L
of Reinforced Concrete
A computationaltool for seismic
evaluation of reinforced concrete
buildings is presented. Using modern
concepts in concrete modeling, the
newly developed computer program
performs a static collapse mode
analysis to estimate the building base
shear coefficient, and an inelastic
dynamic response analysis under
horizontal and vertical base excitations.
The results of the dynamic analysis are
represented using a calibrated damage
model to enable a physical
interpretationof the response. the
program can be used for seismic
evaluation of existing buiidinga and in
damage-limitingdesign of new
buildings.
T here is a growing need for
techniques that allow an en-
gineering understanding of
complex component behav-
ior and a qualitative interpretation
of the overall inelastic response of
structures to severe seismic excita-
tions. This need has brought forth
the concept of damage modeling,
which attempts to capture the phys-
ical state of a structure following
earthquake action.
A new computer program,
IDARC, performs an inelastic dam-
age analysis of reinforced concrete
frame-wall structures. The program
is designed to provide users with the
tools required for assessing behav-
ior and capacity of critical sections,
studying static collapse modes and
evaluating dynamic failure pat-
terns.
Following the input of structural
data, IDARC is organized into four
sequential operations (Fig. 1):
System Identification consists of the
procedure to set up the force-defor-
42
- . ..
** Obb29Ll9 0525229 503
mation envelopes that are used later
in the inelastic dynamic analysis.
Program input is achieved at the
basic section level, with cross-sec-
tion data such as area of reinforce-
ment, confinement, and concrete
grade. This is unlike conventional
programs, which require only
equivalent properties such as mo-
ment of inertia and Young’s modu-
lus. These basic properties are then
used to set up moment-curvature
envelopes, either through the use of
mechanical models (fiber-model) or
through empirical relations.
Collapse Mode refers to the failure
mechanism of the structure when
subjected to a monotonically in-
creasing lateral load. This proce-
dure evaluates the building base
shear coefficient. A collapse mode
analysis is a simple and efficient
technique to evaluate the seismic re-
sponse of a building in an approxi-
mate sense before performing a
fully inelastic dynamic analysis.
Dynamic Response Analysis of the
structure is carried out using the
Newmark’s beta algorithm in con-
junction with a versatile hysteretic
model to monitor inelastic behavior
of critical sections. The hysteretic
model accounts for stiffness degra-
dation, strength deterioration and
bond-slip or pinching.
Damage Analysis of the system re-
sponse is performed, in which the
results of the dynamic analysis are
expressed as quantified damage us-
ing the Park-Ang damage model’.
This model is calibrated using a
simple scale suggesting limits of ser-
_ .
viceability, repairability, or even-
tual collapse of the component or
structure.
Pertinent details of the program
and its features are described in
subsequent sections, beginning with
the structural model used to discre-
tize a building.
Structure modeling
A reinforced concrete building is
discretized as a series of plane
frames linked together by rigid
floors and transverse elements that
allow for flexural-torsiaPaL-cou-
pling between frames. This enables
capture of the space interaction of
parallel frame systems. Each frame
must lie in the same vertical plane.
Since floors are assumed to be infi-
nitely rigid in their plane, identical
frames can be lumped together. Fig.
2 shows a section of a discretized
building with the following element
types:
beams
columns
shear walls
edge columns
transverse elements
Beams and columns are modeled
as continuous equivalent shear-flex-
ure springs. Shear walls are mod-
eled using a pair of shear and flex-
ure springs connected in series.
Edge columns of shear walls are
modeled as inelastic axial springs.
Keywords: balldings; collapse; compulcr
program; damage; dynDmlc strpelorpl W y s h ;
enrlhqaakc resistant stmctons; frames; models;
reinforced coancte.
ACI COMPilATlON
 ACI COMP*3'L $1: = Obb29r19 0525230 225

7 INPUT DATA Structural configuration

Material roperttes
Element kformatlan
bads

Nonsymmetric trillnea[
envelops usin empincol
.
relations or fl%er model
analysts of sectlone
Hysteretic pammetera

Establish collapse mods

of structure showing
MECHANISM formotion of yield hinges
due to monotonlcally
increasing lateral load

Time hlstory analysts

DYNAMIC RESPONSE Newmark's beta algorithm column
3-pammeter hydemtic model
ANALYSIS element

Evaluation of structural damage

DAMAGE Erpression of response terms
using Park-Ang damage
model for component, atory
level and overall damage
Fig. 2-Section of discretized building showing all element
Fig. 1-Organization of the program IDARC. types.

Transverse elements that contrib- member. A linear distribution of Damage indexing

ute to the stiffness of the building
are assumed to have an effect on
both the vertical and rotational de-
formation of the walls or main
beams to which they are connected,
and are modeled as elastic linear
and rotational springs. The struc-
tural model is therefore capable of
integrating ductile moment-resisting
frames with shear wall models and
out-of-plane elements to permit a
realistic model of overall structural
behavior.
Distributed flexiblllty model
All structural components of paral-
lel frames are assumed to behave
inelastically with plastic deforma-
tions concentrated at the joints.
However, to account for the spread
of plasticity, the model assumes a
distributed flexibility rule that is
governed by the behavior of critical
sections of members.
The distributed flexibility model
is used to construct the element
stiffness matrix for all components,
which accounts for the spread of
plastic deformations along the
flexibility is assumed along the
member between the critical sec-
tions and the point of contraflex-
we. This allows for modeling of the
contraflexure point within or out-
side the element. Details of the flex-
ibility formulation and the stiffness
matrix development for compo-
nents with rigid end zones can be
found in an earlier report?
Hysteretlc modeling
The hysteretic model that was de-
veloped for the analysis of critical
sections uses three parameters in
conjunction with a non-symmetric
trilinear curve to establish the rules
under which inelastic loading re-
versals take place. A variety of hys-
teretic properties can be achieved
through the combination of the tri-
linear envelope and the three pa-
rameters. The values of these pa-
rameters determine the properties of
stiffness degradation, strength dete-
rioration and pinching, respec-
tively. Additional information on
the three-parameter model can be
found in Park et al.'
The damage model proposed by
Park et al.' has been implemented
in IDARC, since it is the only cali-
brated model based on actual ob-
served damage of reinforced con-
crete buildings. Until more experi-
mental and post-damage veri-
fication is made, the authors be-
lieve that this model serves as a use-
ful indicator in interpreting the
overall damage sustained by the
structure and its components.
Structural damage is expressed as
a linear combination of the damage
caused by peak deformation and
that contributed by hysteretic en-
ergy dissipation due to repeated
cyclic loading:
where:
6, = max deformation experi-
enced under earthquake load
6, = ultimate deformation capac-
ity under monotonic load

SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION A3


L9" slab
PLAN
ELEVATION
Fig. 3-Plan and elevation of sample six-story building.
fl = strength deterioration pa-
rameter
Py = yield strength of component
dE = incremental absorbed energy
6, and dE are response quantities
that are evaluated during the dy-
namic analysis. 6, and Pyare deter-
mined by IDARC as part of the sys-
tem identification routine. fl has
been empirically calibrated from
observed test data, the details of
which may be found in Park et
It will be seen that the damage in-
dex defined will yield normalized
values between 0 and unity. A dam-
age index of approximately 1.0 sig-
nifies partial or complete collapse of
the component.
A story-level damage index is
useful when analyzing weak-col-
umn strong-beam type buildings
where sudden shear drifts due to the
formation of shear-panel mecha-
nisms may trigger progressive col-
lapse of the total structure. For the
purpose of establishing the story-
level damage index, a weighting
factor was introduced based on the
energy-absorbing capacity of ele-
ments:
17'
in
F1
0
M
. 7'
Fig. 4 - 1 0 ~ generated
~~
shear with top deformation.
where:
A, = enery weighting factor
E, = total energy absorbd by com-
ponent i
In the case of strong-column,
weak-beam type buildings, it is nec-
essary to extend the above concept
to the entire structure. In the deter-
mination of the story-level index,
the summation is carried out for the
components in each story, but the
overall damage index is obtained by
performing a final weighted sum-
mation over all the stories of the
building.
The damage index used has been
calibrated by Park et al,' with ob-
served damage data of nine rein-
forced concrete buildings that were
moderately or severely damaged
during the 1971 San Fernando
earthquake and the 1978 Miyagi-
ken-Oki earthquake in Japan. Ta-
ble l corresponds to the calibrated
index, which is meant only to serve
as a qualitative indicator of the
.
plot showing variation of base
damage index used in this study. As
stated earlier, local damage of a
more severe degree may be detected
at the component or story level. The
assessment of critical damage is
then a matter of interpretation.
Applications
A few sample applications are de-
scribed using the developed pro-
gram IDARC. These applications are
only a representative sample of the
capability of the program.
The examples presented are all
based on analyses carried out on a
six-story reinforced concrete frame
structure designed primarily for
gravity loads according to ACI 318-
83.9 Such buildings are typical in the
eastern United States or other re-
gions of low seismicity.
A uniform live load of 100 psf
(4.8 kPa) corresponding to require-
ments for general office space was
used. The concrete specified has a
28-day compressive strength of 3000
psi (20.7 MPa) and the reinforce-
ment is grade 40 deformed bars
with an ultimate strength of 70 ksi
(483 MPa). The basic structural
configuration of the building is
 ACI COMP*!3L
Table 1 - Interpretation of damage
Degree
of damage
Cdapp
severe
*
8
a
, .*
Moderate
Miior
Slight
shown in Fig. 3. Additional details
of the test structure may be found
in Reinhorn et al.4 For the dynamic
analysis, the NS component of the
1940-ElCentro accelerogram with
scaled peak of 0.3 g was used.
Base shear estimation
The base shear estimate of the
building was obtained from an in-
elastic monotonic analysis under
lateral loading. The lateral load was
applied as a function of building
weight in an inverted triangular
form. Loading proceeded until the
structure yielded and reached a
maximum deformation of approxi-
mately 2 percent of the overall
building height.
A typical plot from IDARC is
shown in Fig. 4, presenting the
variation of base shear with top de-
formation. For the sample building
being analyzed, the figure shows
that the structure can resist a maxi-
mum base shear of about 15 per-
cent of the total building weight.
Collapse mode
In most cases, a static collapse
SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
** IIB 0662949 0525232 O T 8
-
Table 2 IDARC summa of damage
distribution across story evels.
I Damage index for total structure = 0,106
analysis under increasing lateral
load will provide vital information
regarding the overall structural be-
havior under seismic action. Failure
patterns can be established since the
formation of plastic hinges is re-
corded.
Fig. 5 shows a typical output
from I D A R C in which the failure
mechanism of one of the frames of
the building is highlighted. Based on
this output, it is possible to rede-
sign critical sections to achieve a
desired collapse mode and to avoid
certain scenarios (for example,
those which lead to failure through
weak-column strong-beam panel
mechanisms). For the test structure
under consideration, the analysis
revealed a dangerous panel mecha-
nism in the 4th and 5th stories.
Damage evaluation
Another unique feature of IDARC is
its representation of dynamic re-
sponse statistics using a damage
model. As described earlier, both
ductility and energy dissipation have
been included in the damage quan-
tification.
m
7
I
A sample response evaluation as
produced by IDARC is shown in Fig.
6, which examines the damage to
the 1st frame. The figure shows
both a component index and a
weighting factor based on dissi-
pated energy (see Eq. 2). The re-
sults of the damage evaluation were
assessed based on the calibration
given in Table 1. As predicted by
the collapse mode analysis, damage
was more severe in the columns of
the 4th and 5th story.
Table 2 is a damage index sum-
mary produced by IDARC showing
the variation of damage across the
different story levels. In evaluating
the seismic vulnerability of the
building, all aspects of the pre-
dicted damage indices must be
taken into account. The overall
damage index must be considered in
parallel with the story level indices
to arrive at a meaningful under-
standing of the building behavior.
Conclusions
This new computer model for seis-
mic evaluation of reinforced con-
crete frame-wall buildings incorpo-
45
 -- . ___- - - - __
ACI COMPx31 ** 0662949 0525233 T 3 4

FAILURE MODE OF FRAIlE NO. 1

! I 1 1 I !

DAHRCE INDEX ST~TISTICS OF FIUME no. 1

I 0.00 I 0.00 I 0.00 ! 0.00 ! 0.00 I

I (0.14) ! (0.07) I (0.08) 1 (0.09) I (0.13) I
!O.OS 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.04
1(.051 I(.lO) 1(.09) 11.10) Ii.10) !(.OS)
I I I I I !

! 0.02 I 0.01 I 0.00 I 0.01 I 0.01 I

I (0.20) I (0.05) I (0.05) I (0.05) I (0.17) 1
IO.12 10.17 10.18 !0.18 10.18 10.11
l(.04l l(.lO) ;(.lO) !(.10) 11.10) !(.06)
I I I I I
I 0.05 I 0.01 I 0.01 I 0.01 I 0.03 !
I (0.16) ! (0.03) I (0.02) I (0.01) I (0.13) !
10.16 10.18 10.17 10.11 10.18 10.11
Il.05) I(.11) 1(.10) I(.O9) I(.10) 1l.05)
I I I I I

I I 1 I I I
E E E E E E
I 0.07 I 0.01 I 0.07 I 0.06 ! 0.06 I
! (0.10) I (0.10) ! (0.11) ! (0.11) I (0.10) I
10.04 10.09 10.04 10.05 10.04 10.06
I(.08) 11.08) 1(.09) 1(.09) !(.08) 1t.09)
I I I I
I 0.06 I 0.06I 0.06 I 0.06 ! 0.06 I
I 10.10) I (0.08) I (0.10) I (0.11) ! (0.10) I
10.06 IO.08 10.08 10.08 10.08 10.06
NOTATION: Il.05) 1(.10) 1(.10) l(.lO) 1(.10) 1(.04)
I I I I I !

- -- BEAM E -- ELASTIC
I
W
1
-- COLUMN
SBEARWALL
EDGE C O L W
C
Y - CRACK
YIELD
VALUES IN

Fig. &IDARC
e-msIs INDICATE DNERCY UAAFIOS

output showing damage distribution in

Fig. 5-Failure mechanism of frame as produced by IDARC. frame.

rates beam-column elements with
shear wall models and out-of-plane
elements to represent realistic 3di-
mensional behavior within a 2-d
model. The spread of plasticity into
the member is accounted for by us-
ing a distributed flexibility model.
The static collapse mechanism of
the structure is determined under
lateral monotonic loading, and dy-
namic response results are ex-
pressed as damage indices to pro-
vide a physical interpretation of the
results.
The program can be used in seis-
mic evaluation studies of existing
buildings and for damage-limiting
design of new structures. The pro-
gram IDARC is available through
NISEE at the University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley, or 3 r d from ~ the
National Center )r Earthquake
A
Engineering Research (NCEER),
Buffalo.
References
1. Park, Young-Ji. and Ang, Alfred0 H.-
S., “Mechanistic Seismic Damage Model for
Reinforced Concrete,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, V. 111, No. 4, Apr.,
1985, pp. 722-739.
2. Park, Y. J.; Reinhorn, A. M.;and active computer graphics with the
Kumath, S. K., “IDARC: Inelastic Damage National Center for Earthquake Engi-
Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame neering Research (NCEER) at Buffalo.
Shear-Wall Structures.” Technicul Reporr
No. NCEER-87-0008, National Center- for
Earthquake Engineering Research, State ACI member An.
University of New York, Buffalo, 1987. 190 drei M. Reinhorn
PP. is an Associate
3. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Professor at the
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI State University of
318-83),” Amencan Concrete Institute, De- New York at Buf-
troit, 1983, 111 pp. falo. Dr. Reinhorn
4. Reinhorn, A. M.; Seidel, M.; Kunnath,
S. K.; and Park, Y. J., “Damage Assess- Is active in experi-
ment of Reinforced Concrete Structures in mental and analyti-
Eastern United States.” Technical Renort cal research on seismic damage as-
No. NCEER-88-0016,‘National Cente; for Sf3SSment of reinforced concrete
Earthquake Engineering Research, State structures and on modern Seismic
University of New York, Buffalo, 1988. protective systems. He is member of
ACI Committees 549, Ferrocement,
and 118, Use of Computers.
Selected for reader interest by the editors.
Young J. Park is a
Structural Engi-
Sashi K. Kunnath neer at the Brook-
is a Research As- haven National
sistant Professor at Laboratory, Long
the State Univer- Island, New York.
sity of New York at H e has a Ph.D
Buffalo where he from the University
also obtained his of Tokyo and the
Ph.D in civil engi- University of lilinolIs, Urbana. He is
neerina. He is cur- currently involved inI experimental and
rentlyhvolved in research on rein- analytical research on‘seismic resis-
forced concrete modeling and inter- tance of nuclear plants.
 ACI COMPt3L ** Obb2949 0525234 970 =
Seismic Design and Construction

The AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

was founded in 1905 as a nonprofit membership organization dedicated to

public service and to representing user interests in the field of concrete. It
gathers and distributes information on the improvement of design, construc-
tion, and maintenance of concrete products and structures. The work of the
Institute is done by individual members and by volunteer committees.
The committees, as well as the Institute as a whole, operate under a
consensus format, which assures all members the right to have their views
considered. Committee activities include the development of building codes
and specification standards; analysis of research and development results;
presentation of construction and repair techniques; and education.
Anyone interested in the activities of the Institute is encouraged to seek
membership. There are no educational or employment requirements. En-
gineers, architects, scientists, constructors, and representatives from a va-
riety of companies and organizations form the Institute membership.
All members are eligible and encouraged to participate in committee ac-
tivities that relate to their specific areas of interest. Membership information,
a publications catalog, and listings of educational activities are available.

american concrete institute

BOX 19150. REDFORD STATION
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48219