Introduction

Ground accelerations caused by earthquakes generate inertial forces in a structure which can have
significant detrimental effects. Therefore, a proper analysis and a thorough understanding of the seismic
effects are fundamental.

Seismic Ground Motion Parameters

Risk category
Risk categories are assigned to buildings to account for consequences and risks to human life (building
occupants) in the event of a building failure. The intent is to assign higher risk categories, and hence higher
design criteria, to buildings or structures that, if they experience a failure, would exhibit the availability of
essential community services necessary to cope with an emergency situation therefore, have grave
consequences to either the building occupants or the population around the building.

Therefore, the classification was assigned as Risk Category I.

Figure 1- Risk category

Importance factor
This factor directly adds an additional margin of safety for higher risk category facilities. Table 1.5-2 in
ASCE 7-16 defines the importance factors of buildings for snow, ice, and earthquake loads as function of
the risk categories.

For risk category I, the seismic importance factor is Ie =1.0.

Figure 2- Importance factor

Site Classification
The type and properties of the soils present in a given landsite have direct effects on the transmission of
seismic waves, which in turn affects the response behavior of the considered structure.

ASCE 7-16 standard defines 6 different soil classes, ranging from hard rock to soft soil profiles (Site Class
A to F).

For the location of the facility, Site Class D is considered.

Figure 3- Site classification

Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters

• SS and S1

Depending on the geographical location, Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters at Short Period (T =
0.2 s) SS and at Long Period (T = 1 s) S1 are determined in general with the help of maps and tables, with
their values being based on 5% damping, and a 2% probability of being exceeded once in 50 years.

According to Libnor, SS and S1 in Lebanon are taken 1.2g and 0.4g respectively.
 • Fa and Fv

Fa and Fv are site coefficients with the purpose of taking into account the site’s soil characteristics by being
directly dependent on the Site Class. They are determined in Tables 11.4-1 and 11.4-2 in ASCE 7-16.

Figure 5- Site coefficient Fa Figure 4- Site coefficient Fv

Referring to the figures above, we get Fa = 1.02(by interpolation) and Fv = 1.9.

• SMS and SM1

SMS and SM1 are adjusted spectral response acceleration parameters for short periods and 1-second
periods, respectively, obtained from equations 11.4-1 and 11.4-2 as:

SMS = Fa × SS = 1.02 × 1.2 = 1.224 (Eq 11.4 − 1 ASCE 7 − 16)

SM1 = FV × S1 = 1.9 × 0.4 = 0.76 (Eq 11.4 − 2 ASCE 7 − 16)

• SDS and SD1

SDS represents the maximum expected acceleration response of a structure at short periods (typically
between 0.1 and 0.5 seconds) due to seismic ground motion. SD1 represents the maximum expected
acceleration response of a structure at a period of 1 second due to seismic ground motion. They represent
the design-level acceleration parameters and are obtained from equations

𝑆𝐷𝑆 = 2/3 × 𝑆𝑀𝑆 = 2/3 × 1.224 = 0.816 (𝐸𝑞 11.4 − 3 𝐴𝑆𝐶𝐸 7 − 16)
𝑆𝐷1 = 2/3 × 𝑆𝑀1 = 2/3 × 0.76 = 0.507 (𝐸𝑞 11.4 − 4 𝐴𝑆𝐶𝐸 7 − 16)

Seismic Design Category

Seismic Design Categories (SDC) are defined in section 11.6 in the standard. One of the six categories (A
to F) is to be assigned to the considered structure. Determining the SDC is directly affected by the Risk
Category (previously defined), as well as the design-level spectral response accelerations (SDS and SD1).
SDC to be determined from tables 11.6-1 and 11.6-2 of the standard:

Figure 6- SDC based on SDS Figure 7- SDC based on SD1

𝐵𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 SDS : 0.50 ≤ SDS = 0.816 −> 𝑆𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝐷

{
𝐵𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 SD1 : 0.20 ≤ SD1 = 0.507 −> 𝑆𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝐷

Then the SDC for our considered facility is D.

Analysis Procedure selection

The structural analysis required by Chapter 12- seismic design requirements for building structures shall
consist of one of the types permitted in Table 12.6-1, based on the structure’s Seismic Design Category,
structural system, dynamic properties, and regularity, or with the approval of the authority having
jurisdiction, an alternative generally accepted procedure is permitted to be used. The analysis procedure
selected shall be completed in accordance with the requirements of the corresponding section referenced
in Table 12.6-1.

Figure 8- Permitted Analytical Procedures

Since our Seismic Design Category is D, the permitted analytical procedure is the Modal Response
Spectrum Analysis.

However, the Equivalent Lateral Forces Procedure is calculated in order to find the Static Base Shear.
Structural resisting system
The choice of the structural system is a central factor in determining the seismic response behavior of a
given structure. For this reason, the ASCE 7-16 standard section 12.2.1 divides the structural systems into
large categories with a number of specific subcategories within each. For each system, 3 parameters are
specified in table 12.2-1, which are the response modification coefficient R, system over strength factor
Ω0, and deflection amplification factor Cd.

For the concrete building, the chosen system is “Building frame system – Ordinary Reinforced Concrete
Shear Walls”.

Concrete building

Response modification
5
factor R:
System overstrength
2.5
factor Ω0:
Deflection amplification
4.5
factor Cd:

Figure 9- Design Coefficients and Factors for Seismic Force-Resisting Systems

Stiffness modification factor

Seismic building design has typically been based on results from conventional linear analysis techniques.
This type of analysis is a challenge for the design of reinforced concrete because the material is composite
and displays nonlinear behavior that is dictated by the complex interaction between its components – the
reinforcing steel and the concrete matrix. Simplifying the behavior of reinforced concrete components, so
they can be modeled using a linear-elastic analysis approach, is vital to our ability to effectively design
reinforced concrete structures. Modeling of concrete structural elements using linear analysis to extract
a reasonable structural response typically involves modifying the stiffness of concrete structural elements.

However, this method presents its challenges, including the following:

Effective stiffness is a function of the applied loading and detailing of the component. Reinforced concrete
components behave differently under different loading conditions (e.g. tension, compression, flexure), as
well as different rates of loading (impact, short term, long term).

Applying stiffness modifiers can be an iterative process since the assumed stiffness of reinforced concrete
elements in a structural analysis model influences the dynamic characteristics of the structure, which, in
turn, changes the results of the analysis and the effective stiffness.
 Figure 10- Stiffness modifiers

Figure 11- Cracking stiffness modifiers for members

Equivalent lateral force procedure

The equivalent lateral force procedure (ELF) is a method that provides a way to transform the effects of
the complex inelastic dynamic response of a given structure due to earthquake motions, into a simple
linear static analysis.

Fundamental period
The fundamental period of a structure is a function of its geometry as well as its members’ stiffness for a
given oscillatory motion. Section 12.8.1 of the ASCE standard permits the use of an approximate period
value 𝑇𝑎, calculated as:

Ta = Ct × hxn
Where ℎ𝑛 is the structural height in meters. 𝐶𝑡 and 𝑥 are defined in table 12.8-2 of the standard and they
depend on the structural system and materials. The fundamental period of a structure can also be
obtained from adequate structural analysis, or other reasonably approximate methods.

The design value of the fundamental period has an upper limit of Cu ×Ta where Cu is a coefficient that
depends on 𝑆𝐷1 and defined in table 12.8-1 of the standard.
 Figure 12- Value of Ct and x

Figure 13- Values of Cu

In our case, Ct and x are taken 0.0488 and 0.75, respectively. Cu is taken 1.4.

Ta = Ct × hxn = 0.0488 × 630.75 = 1.091 𝑠

Cu × Ta =1.4 × 1.091=1.527 s
After running a modal analysis using ETABS, the fundamental periods in the X and Y direction are Tx =
1.889 s and TY = 1.8 s, respectively, with both exceeding the upper limit Cu × Ta = 1.527 s.

So, the chosen T for our calculation is T = Cu × Ta = 1.527 s.

Seismic Static Base Shear

The static base shear 𝑉 represents the total seismic force on a structure while considering it as a single-
degree of freedom system with 100% mass participation. Based on section 12.8 of the standard, 𝑉 is
expressed as the product of the seismic response coefficient 𝐶𝑠 and the effective seismic weight 𝑊 which
consists of dead loads and other loads defined in section 12.7.2 of the ASCE standard:

V = Cs × W
Cs is to be determined as follows:
SDS 0.816
Cs = Ie = 1.0 = 0.1632
R 5
With a lower limit of:
 0.044×SDS ×Ie = 0.044 × 0.72 × 1.0 = 0.036
Cs,min : the greater of: {
0.01
And an upper limit of:
SD1
Cs = for T ≤ TL
R
T( I )
E
Cs,max :
SD1 × TL
Cs = for T > TL
T 2( R )
{ IE
0.507
We get an upper limit: Cs,max = 1.527×5 × 1.0 = 0.0664

However, according to Section 11.4.8 Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures in ASCE 7-16, Structures
on Site Class D sites with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2, provided the value of the seismic response
coefficient Cs is determined by Eq. (12.8-2) for values of T ≤ 1.5Ts and taken as equal to 1.5 times the
value computed in accordance with either Eq. (12.8-3) for TL ≥ T > 1.5Ts or Eq. (12.8-4) for T > TL.

-> Cs = Cs,max = 1.5 × 0.0664 = 0.996

The static base shear V:

V = Cs × W = 0.996 × 11 089 T = 1104 T

Linear Dynamic Analysis

Modal response spectrum analysis (MRSA) is the basis of this method. It consists of dividing the structure
into multiple single-degree of freedom systems, then determining for each its Eigen period and mode
shape. This analysis was conducted through ETABS.

Scaling of Dynamic Base Shear

Section 12.9.1.4 of ASCE 7-16 states that the design value of the dynamic base shear needs to be at least
equal to the static base shear obtained from the equivalent lateral force procedure.

In case where the static base shear V is greater than the dynamic base shear Vt , the latter shall be
multiplied by a scale factor of 𝑉⁄ V to adjust its value to equal V.
t

𝑔 x IE⁄
The initial scale factor for the response spectrum load cases is 𝑅 where g is the gravitational
2
constant expressed in mm/s . The use of this initial scale factor is due to the fact that the response
spectrum function is without units in ETABS, while all ground acceleration values used to develop the
seismic loads are multiples of g.

The use of this initial scale factor is due to the fact that the response spectrum function is without units
in ETABS, while all ground acceleration values used to develop the seismic loads are multiples of g. The
I
term E⁄𝑅 is to be used for modal response parameters, as stated in section 12.9.1.2 in the ASCE 7-16
standard.
After running the analysis with the initial scale factor for response spectrum load cases, the obtained base
reactions (base shear) were compared: where the static base shear exceeded the dynamic, the scale factor
was adjusted to be expressed as the following:
9810 × 1
After running the analysis on ETABS with only the initial scale factor 5
= 1962 for the response
spectrum loads cases, the following base reactions were obtained:

Output Case Base reaction F𝑥 (T) Base reaction F𝑦 (T)

Static Ex 1126 0
Static E𝑦 0 1126
RS XY 284 302

Table 1- Base reactions before scaling

The load case RS XY should have its initial scale factor multiplied by:
1126
• 284
= 3.964 in the X direction
1126
• 302
= 3.73 in the Y direction

The analysis was repeated and the following base reactions were obtained:

Output Case Base reaction F𝑥 (T) Base reaction F𝑦 (T)

Static Ex 1126 0
Static E𝑦 0 1126
RS XY 1126 1126
Table 2- Base reactions after scaling

The base reaction in the X direction for the response spectrum load case has become equal to the static
load case Ex. The same can be noticed in the Y direction.

Modal Mass Participation

Section 12.9.1.1 of the ASCE 7-16 standard states that the number of modes included in the modal analysis
shall be sufficient to obtain a minimum modal mass participation ratio of 90% in each of the orthogonal
horizontal directions of analysis.

TABLE: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Case Mode Period (sec) UX UY SumUX SumUY
Modal Analysis 1 1.889 0.2309 0.1048 0.2309 0.1048
Modal Analysis 2 1.836 0.0917 0.4231 0.3226 0.5279
Modal Analysis 3 1.367 0.2205 0.0103 0.5431 0.5382
Modal Analysis 4 0.57 0.0345 0.0118 0.5776 0.55
Modal Analysis 5 0.445 0.0197 0.1119 0.5973 0.6619
Modal Analysis 6 0.35 0.0715 0.0076 0.6688 0.6695
Modal Analysis 7 0.304 0.0108 0.0039 0.6795 0.6734
Modal Analysis 8 0.202 0.0078 0.0526 0.6874 0.726
Modal Analysis 9 0.195 0.0095 0.0005 0.6969 0.7265
Modal Analysis 10 0.167 0.0308 0.0085 0.7276 0.735
Modal Analysis 11 0.136 0.0039 0.0036 0.7315 0.7386
Modal Analysis 12 0.123 0.0122 0.0449 0.7437 0.7836
 Modal Analysis 13 0.107 0.0344 0.0213 0.7781 0.8049
Modal Analysis 14 0.101 4.26E-06 0.0001 0.7781 0.8049
Modal Analysis 15 0.089 0.0153 0.0615 0.7934 0.8665
Modal Analysis 16 0.082 0.0453 0.0133 0.8387 0.8798
Modal Analysis 17 0.076 0.0124 0.0163 0.8511 0.8961
Modal Analysis 18 0.07 0.0393 0.0277 0.8904 0.9238
Modal Analysis 19 0.067 0.028 0.004 0.9184 0.9278
Table 3- Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Combinations and Load Effects

The seismic load effect 𝐸 is to be used as the sum of horizontal seismic effects as well as the vertical ones.

The horizontal effects are defined in section 12.4.2.1, and combined in accordance with section 12.5.3.1
of the ASCE 7-16 standard:

𝐸ℎ = 𝜌 × 𝑄𝐸
Where

− 𝜌: Redundancy factor, defined in section 12.3.4 of the standard, taken equal to 1.0 for SDC D
− 𝑄𝐸 : Effects of combined horizontal seismic forces

The Square Root of the Sum of the Squares (SRSS) combination rule, is used to estimate the effect of both
horizontal components of earthquakes.

The vertical effects were taken, as per section 12.4.2.2 of the standard, as an increase or decrease of the
dead load by an amount of:

Ev = 0.2 × SDS × DL = 0.2 × 0.507 × DL = 0.1014

Where 𝐷 is the dead load effect.

Story Drift
Story drift is the difference of displacements between two consecutive stories divided by the height of
that story. The story displacement is the absolute value of displacement of the story under action of the
lateral forces.
 Figure 14- Drift

The gravity load and seismic load combination used in drift analysis is stated in load combination below:

DL + E + 0.5L

The elastic displacement is the absolute lateral displacement of any point in the structure relative to its
base under strength-level design earthquake forces. The story drift is calculated as the relative elastic
displacement of a story to the story below, as shown in Figure 12.

The story drift is computed based on the center of mass displacements.

However, the inelastic displacement is the actual displacement, obtained by elastic analysis multiplied
by a deflection amplification factor, Cd, chosen from Table 12.2-1 based on the type of seismic force
resisting system. The inelastic displacement is obtained from the following equation:
Cd × δxe
δx =
Ie
Where

− δx : Inelastic Displacement
− δxe : Elastic Displacement
− Cd : Deflection Amplification Factor in Table 12.2-1 of ASCE 7-16
− Ie : Importance Factor determined in accordance with Section 11.5.1 of ASCE 7-16
The allowable story drift according to ASCE7-10 are presented in table below:
 Figure 15- Allowable Story Drift

The allowable drift in our case, for a risk category I:

𝑀𝑎𝑥 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑡 = 0.020 × ℎ𝑥𝑥 = 0.020 × 3000 = 60 𝑚𝑚

The values of the stories displacement was taken from ETABS, then the inelastic drift δxe was calculated
by multiplying deflection Amplification Factor Cd by the elastic drift δx , as seen in tables below.

TABLE: Story Response

Story X-Dir (mm) Y-Dir(mm) Cd δx (mm) δ𝒚 (mm) Verification
Roof 102.255 130.224 4.5 15.894 18.5805 Drift checked
16th floor 98.723 126.095 4.5 17.469 20.781 Drift checked
15th floor 94.841 121.477 4.5 19.341 23.409 Drift checked
14th floor 90.543 116.275 4.5 21.294 26.0955 Drift checked
13th floor 85.811 110.476 4.5 23.202 28.71 Drift checked
12th floor 80.655 104.096 4.5 25.029 31.221 Drift checked
11th floor 75.093 97.158 4.5 26.7615 33.642 Drift checked
10th floor 69.146 89.682 4.5 28.386 35.9865 Drift checked
9th floor 62.838 81.685 4.5 29.8935 38.223 Drift checked
8th floor 56.195 73.191 4.5 31.2795 40.3335 Drift checked
7th floor 49.244 64.228 4.5 32.5125 42.2235 Drift checked
6th floor 42.019 54.845 4.5 33.5295 43.785 Drift checked
5h floor 34.568 45.115 4.5 34.1865 44.802 Drift checked
4th floor 26.971 35.159 4.5 34.2135 44.8965 Drift checked
3rd floor 19.368 25.182 4.5 33.0255 43.2585 Drift checked
2nd floor 12.029 15.569 4.5 29.493 38.3175 Drift checked
1st floor 5.475 7.054 4.5 18.8685 23.634 Drift checked
GF 1.282 1.802 4.5 2.115 2.862 Drift checked
Basement 1 floor 0.812 1.166 4.5 1.3545 1.9485 Drift checked
Basement 2 floor 0.511 0.733 4.5 1.233 1.809 Drift checked
Basement 3 floor 0.237 0.331 4.5 1.0665 1.4895 Drift checked
Figure 16- Positive drift check
 TABLE: Story Response
Story X-Dir (mm) Y-Dir(mm) Cd δx (mm) δ𝒚 (mm) Verification
Roof -81.06 -119.076 4.5 21.456 31.752 Drift checked
16th floor -76.292 -112.02 4.5 21.9375 32.4 Drift checked
15th floor -71.417 -104.82 4.5 22.3785 33.0075 Drift checked
14th floor -66.444 -97.485 4.5 22.7385 33.588 Drift checked
13th floor -61.391 -90.021 4.5 22.9815 33.9885 Drift checked
12th floor -56.284 -82.468 4.5 23.0985 34.2855 Drift checked
11th floor -51.151 -74.849 4.5 23.1075 34.6545 Drift checked
10th floor -46.016 -67.148 4.5 23.031 34.6005 Drift checked
9th floor -40.898 -59.459 4.5 22.8825 34.389 Drift checked
8th floor -35.813 -51.817 4.5 22.6575 33.984 Drift checked
7th floor -30.778 -44.265 4.5 22.3695 33.3585 Drift checked
6th floor -25.807 -36.852 4.5 21.9555 32.4135 Drift checked
5h floor -20.928 -29.649 4.5 21.357 31.05 Drift checked
4th floor -16.182 -22.749 4.5 20.4435 29.0925 Drift checked
3rd floor -11.639 -16.284 4.5 19.0125 26.289 Drift checked
2nd floor -7.414 -10.442 4.5 16.6905 22.2435 Drift checked
1st floor -3.705 -5.499 4.5 12.42 15.5835 Drift checked
GF -0.945 -2.036 4.5 1.3005 3.573 Drift checked
Basement 1 floor -0.656 -1.242 4.5 0.9855 2.538 Drift checked
Basement 2 floor -0.437 -0.678 4.5 1.1025 1.899 Drift checked
Basement 3 floor -0.192 -0.256 4.5 0.864 1.152 Drift checked
Figure 17- Negative drift check

P-Delta Effect
Section 12.8.7 of the ASCE 7-16 states that it is permissible to neglect P-Delta effects on a given structure,
if the value of the stability coefficient 𝜃 does not exceed 0.1 with a maximum value of:
0.5
𝜃𝑀𝑎𝑥 = ≤ 0.25
𝛽𝐶𝑑
Where

− 𝛽: is the ratio of shear demand over capacity, conservatively taken equal to 1.0.
− 𝐶𝑑 : is the deflection Amplification Factor in Table 12.2-1 of ASCE 7-16 taken equal to 4.5 in our
case

Which gives:
0.5
θMax = = 0.11 ≤ 0.25
1 × 4.5
The stability coefficient is obtained from the following expression:
Px ΔIe
θ=
Vx hsx Cd
Where

− Px : Total vertical design load at and above level x; where computing Px , no individual load factor
need exceed 1.0
− Δ: Design story drift occurring with Vx
− Vx: Seismic shear force acting between levels x and x-1
− hsx: Story height
− IE : Seismic importance factor
− Cd : Deflection amplification factor

TABLE: Story Forces

delta x delta y h
Story P (KN) VX (KN) VY (KN)
(mm) (mm) (mm)
θ𝑥 θ𝑦
Roof 6736.65 1822.85 1959.12 15.89 18.58 3000 0.0044 0.0051
16th floor 13473.30 2836.73 3129.16 17.47 20.78 3000 0.0061 0.0073
15th floor 20209.95 3274.45 3619.81 19.34 23.41 3000 0.0088 0.0107
14th floor 26946.61 3626.84 3952.93 21.29 26.10 3000 0.0117 0.0144
13th floor 33683.26 3936.34 4274.75 23.20 28.71 3000 0.0147 0.0182
12th floor 40419.91 4102.51 4435.97 25.03 31.22 3000 0.0183 0.0228
11th floor 47156.56 4142.65 4485.23 26.76 33.64 3000 0.0226 0.0284
10th floor 53893.21 4205.44 4601.89 28.39 35.99 3000 0.0269 0.0342
9th floor 60629.86 4334.86 4778.44 29.89 38.22 3000 0.0310 0.0396
8th floor 67366.51 4475.72 4974.76 31.28 40.33 3000 0.0349 0.0450
7th floor 74103.17 4689.71 5237.51 32.51 42.22 3000 0.0381 0.0494
6th floor 80839.82 5040.22 5568.83 33.53 43.79 3000 0.0398 0.0520
5h floor 87576.47 5456.28 5954.45 34.19 44.80 3000 0.0406 0.0533
4th floor 94313.12 5930.59 6422.14 34.21 44.90 3000 0.0403 0.0529
3rd floor 101049.77 6464.36 6956.10 33.03 43.26 3000 0.0382 0.0501
2nd floor 107786.42 6951.93 7474.60 29.49 38.32 3000 0.0339 0.0440
1st floor 114313.56 7415.54 7936.16 18.87 23.63 3000 0.0215 0.0270
GF 125588.13 8194.72 8685.13 2.12 2.86 3000 0.0024 0.0032
Basement 1 floor 136862.70 9386.68 9772.38 1.35 1.95 3000 0.0015 0.0021
Basement 2 floor 148137.28 10421.26 10686.01 1.23 1.81 3000 0.0013 0.0019
Basement 3 floor 159411.85 10974.29 11148.08 1.07 1.49 3000 0.0011 0.0016
Table 4- P-delta check
Overturning