0 tayangan

Diunggah oleh abhi arote

ACI 350 P M Interaction

- Plate Element Sign Convention
- Column Design
- Long Column Design in Kn Unit
- Lintel Beam- Typical
- Gantry Girder ( b Less Than 0.586l)
- Wind Load Calculations
- Sintex Water Tank Sheet[1]
- Helical Staircase
- Slab Design by Wood Armer Method
- Slab Design by Wood Armer Method
- LINTEL BEAM- TYPICAL.pdf
- circularsection.pdf
- circularsection.pdf
- Analysis of Slabs Spanning
- raft design
- Rev Staircase
- Bolt Capacity
- Beam Column Base Plate Design
- Properties of Steel Sections
- Water Tank

Anda di halaman 1dari 19

No.22-7
A proposed draft for IS: 1893 provisions on seismic design of
buildings — Part I*: Commentary and examples
‘Sudhir K. Jain
‘The provisions for seismic design of buildings contained fy 1S:1893-1984 need to be revised im view of many
efciencies that are currently being fl. Pat I of this paper dlacused a proposed draft on provisions for seismic
esi of buildings for inclusion In the nest edition of the code. This paper provides a detailed commentary to
‘explain the proposed eadal provisions.
ased on the detailed review! of 15:1993.1989 provi:
Jonson seismic design of buildings, a revised drat forthe
same as en presented ia act Tf this pape In order
"plain these provisions and wo give the itet Bend some
ofthe clases, ths paper provides detailed commentary.
Inne following sections, clase number ea in Pat 1
of the paper. For instance, clause C341 of his pape ew
tains discussion about clase 34.0 of Pat Only those
‘lmses of Part T which rege discussion ar into in
the commentary. Figures and tbles of Pat Hare given
numbers staring with C. Thus, for example “Tale #
refers tothe Table 4 of Part To hs paper, while "Table
C8" erst Table Cl of Par Tf the pape.
COMMENTARY
Symbols (22) The 1984 edton ofthe cn considers aie
ton im seismic sk in dierent pts ofthe cour tr
"tsi rz eof” () ine seismic eon
meta and though “sesmic zone fator” CF) nthe fe
sponse specu method. Tht i ely mo eed fr dfn
‘0 diferent parameters forthe same purpose in ft is
Simply five times. Hence, in the new provisions, a in-
septate zoe factor (2) haben dein.
* Ato fon, Deparment of Cel Eons fa ste of Tohnaloy, Kanpur 208 046, India.
Symbol “A's been assigned to represent the de
sipn horizons acclertion spectrum ative a afer con
sidering all the relevant factors such as the imprtance
factor (zone aco 2) response reduction fact, nt
sel profi fctor (3). Tiss the spectrum 0 be finaly wed
for design of u pacar type of buldng at hit sit,
inspect of the atalyss procedure used (sai oF
dynam)
Ground Motion (C31.1.
‘The Nonridge earthquake of Sanwary 17.194 in southern
California has early shor the valeablityof prestressed
horizontal memters to verte! component of ground ino
ton. To check the structure for vertical component of mo
tion, it may be sulcent to consider the structure, execpt
forthe lage span seuctares, 8 igi for vera ibeations
and to sijec ito zeo-petad vical aseeratons, with
oreo factor (ie, the eine ene 80521).
Assumptions (C32):
(€22(0 The elastic modulus for materials such as conerte
and maomy is ificl 1 speci. Ts value varies with
sess level, loading conditions (sac vers dynamic),
‘UAL O# STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING VOL.22 NO 29ULY 1985 »material strength, age of the material, etc. Hence, there
tends to be a very large vasiation in the value of elastic
‘modulus specified by different codes even for a specific
rade of concrete under static condition.
For instance, ACE318% recommends # as 4700 YF
(MPs), while IS : 456-1978° suggests $700 Vig (MPa)
or about 6370". Yiy = characteristic cube strength,
c= characteristic eylinder strength = 0.8 fa) ie E given
by the IS code is about 14 times the value given by the ACI
fede for the same grade of concrete. Further, actual
concrete strength in a structure is usually more than the
specified 28-day strength and it also increases with time,
Thete are further difficulties with choosing the value of
modulus of elasticity for concrete of seismic analysis. The
value given in the codes, such as ACI-318° and 1S:456° is
‘often the secant modulus: its value is prescribed with a view
to obtain a conservative estimate of deflections, ic. lower
stifess. On the ober hand, the dynamic modulus of
‘concrete refers to almost pure clastic effects and is equal to
the intial tangent modulus and is appreciably higher than
the secant modulus. When a strcture fs new and subjected
to low amplitude of ground motion, the dysamic modulus
‘of clastcity may be applicable, However, long time expo
sure ofthe stricture t9 wind pressures may overcome the
initial stiffness properties, and the modulus of elasticity of
cconerete may tend to be close to the secant modulus, The
value of modulus of elasticity to be used in analysis has
‘vo opposite implications on scismic design, For calculi
tion ofthe design seismic fore itis uneonservative to have
low value of modulus of elasticity; this leads to high time
period and lower design seismic coefficient. However, for
the drift riteria (deflection condition) itis unconservative
to make a higher estimate ofthe stiffness,
Hence, there are no easy answers t0 the question of
hat value of modulus of elasticity should be use for sei
mic analysis. Considering the enormous ‘variations, this
clause allows the designer to use elastic modulus as for
static condition. However, a safeguard has been intruced
(44.3 and 4.62) against using a very high value of natural
period forcalculation,
Load Combinations and Increase in Permissible
‘Stresses (C33):
€33.1: The design ground motion can occur slong any
direction of building. Moreover, the mation has diferent
directions at different time instants, The eartiquake ground
‘motion can be thought of in terms of components in the 180.
horizontal and one vertical directions. For buildings with
lateral force resisting elements oriented along two principal
icetions, itis usually sufieient to design the bulking for
the earthquake force acting in «- and )- directions sepa
rately; i, not for fores acting in both the dicections simul
taneously (Fig. C1(a)). During earthquake shaking, when
the resultant ground motion isin a direction her than x
andy, the motion can be resolved into the wand y-
oa
ae =
“ on,
toon, te,
©
TFIGCI\@) EARTHOUAKE LOAD CONDITION FoR DUSIGN
‘OF HUILDINGS WHT LATERAL LOAD
RESISTING SYSTEMS ORIENTED ALONG
TWO PRINCIPAL DIRECTIONS,
(0) TO. ENSURE No ELEMENT 1s UNDER DE
SIGNED, EARTHOUAKE FORCE SHOULD BE
‘CONSIDERED IV ALL POSSIBLE DIRECTIONS
I WHICH THE ELEMENTS ARE ORIENTED:
(ALTERNATIVE TO CONDITION (by THE
BUILDING MAY BE DESIGNED CONSIDERING
FULL DESIGN LOAD IN ONE DIRECTION AND
4% DESIGN LOAD INTHE OTHER DIRECHON,
[ACTING SIMULTANEOUSLY AND VICEVERSA
components, as elements in the two principal directions
‘which are normally ble to withstand, except forthe earner
columns for which this may be unconservative,
However, when the lateral force resisting elements
re not oriented along the x- and y= divection, design based
‘on earthquake force in x- and y-direction, separately, leads
{o underdesign of the elements. In such » ease, one should
design the structure for earthquake force ating along all
possible directions in which the seismic load reiting ele
‘ments are oriented (Fig. C1(b). One way to get around the
Aiticuty of having to consider too many possible earthquake
ietions iso design the seucture for (Fig. C1(6)
1. Full design force in the xdieetion (EL) acting
Simultaneously with 40% of the design foree in the
pdirection (EL,); ie, FL, +04 EL,), and
" JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING VOI.22 NO 2 IDLY 1995Full design force in the y-direction (EL,) acting
simultaneously with 40% of the design force inthe
seditetion (EL); ie. (04 EL, + EL)
‘This combination ensures that elements oriented in
any direction will have sufficient lateral stength. Iti also a
‘200d practice to design the comer columns of otherwise
‘orthogonal sytem as per these combinations.
Design Spectrum (C3.
C342: The present code” provides diferent design spectra
i sein the seismic coefficient and the response spectrum
‘methods. The drat provisions provide fora common design
spectrum which is applicable irrespective of whether the
Assign force is calculated bythe static or dyamic procedure
Several important changes have been introduced in the new
design spectrum
44 The performance factor (K) in the earlier version, has
been replaced by a response reduction factor (R). The
soil-foundation factor (B) has been replaced by a soi-
profile factor (5), and the basic horizontal coefficient
(4) and seismic zone factor (F,) have been replaced
by the zone factor Z). The terms representing the
importance of structure (0) and the strate flexibility
effect (C) are the same.
b. In the earlier version, the code directly specified the
design seismic fore; this was often misunderstood as
the maximum expected force onthe structure. In Tine
with the world-wide trend in this regard, the code
‘now tris to distinguish the two. The terms (21 CS)
represent the spectrum corresponding to the maxi
‘mum expected earthquake force, if the structure isto
respond elastically, andthe design force is arived at
by dividing this force by R. The term R gives a cleat
indication of the level of overstrength and ductility
that a structure i expected to have
The term Z now represents the realistic values, as
fraction of ccoleration due to gravity, ofthe expected
peak ground acceleration in diferent seismic zones.
For instance, the code specifies zone IV for areas
Which are likely to sustain shaking of intensity
VIII on the Modified Mezcal sale. The value of Z
(© 0.30) for zone IV gives the value of peak ground
acceleration as 030g which may be reasonably
expected in shaking intensity VIL
4. Adoption of realistic values of peak ground accelera-
tion asthe seismic zone factor has als rationalized
the relative values of design force for different sis:
mic zones. As the intensity of shaking goes up one
level on the MM scale (say from VI to VII), the peak
ground acceleration almost doubles. Tn eatlier code
this was not duly reflected since the seismic force in
ferent zones varied in the ratio 1:24:58
‘notes change inrouced i that he soi foundtion
factor (has eon replaced hy the si profi factor
Factor B, depending on the type of soil and the type of |
Toundation, was intended to inereae the design force
for systems tht are more wlneabe to ier
setlomonts. However, in rn eahquake stato,
‘uildings dono ser hich earn induced in
eri force on account of sera t erat
setlement Alo the problem offre stle-
Imnt cannot be adresse by inreasing the desian
senmic force onthe bung: instead thas 10 be
askressed hy a proper choice of the foundation, On
the other and, revo obsned inthe past eth
avakesclearyshow that the average sceeeaon
{pecan tends to be ificat for sien wh fie
So profiles (Fig C2), The sc profile factor ()con-
Sie ths variation,
8 Su ae aa
3
G.€2 EFFECT OF SOI. PROFILE ON SHAPE OF
[RESPONSE SPECTRUM,
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING VOL.22 NO 2JULY 1995
‘The product of terms (C) and (S), shown in Fig2 of
the draft code, represents the shape of design spec-
trum with peak ground acceleration scaled to the
value of 1.0 This shape is same as the average shape
of acceleration response spectrum, except inthe pe-
riod range O- 0.1 sec (Fig.C3). In this ange, the plot
of Fig.2 is ata constant valve as against the response
spectrum which varies from I.0 at ero period to the
‘maximum value (equal 1 2.0) at period of around
0.1 sec. The shape of design spectrum is mosified in
this range in view ofthe fact that ductility does not
help in reducing the maximum force on stiff stu
‘ures ith fundamental period in the range 0 10 O11
sec?" However, itis acceptable if one were to use
the shape of response spectrum in this range, for
‘modes other than the fundamental mode (Fg.C’)
‘The basic philosophy of earthquake-esistnt design is
that a stricture should not collapse during a severe
earthquake, although it may undergo some structural
as well us nonstructural damage. Hence, a building i
‘usually designed for a much less force than what
would be required it the building were to remain eas-
tic during a severe earthquake shaking, Fig. C4 shows
s

- Plate Element Sign ConventionDiunggah olehGuessss..........!!!!!
- Column DesignDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Long Column Design in Kn UnitDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Lintel Beam- TypicalDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Gantry Girder ( b Less Than 0.586l)Diunggah olehabhi arote
- Wind Load CalculationsDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Sintex Water Tank Sheet[1]Diunggah olehabhi arote
- Helical StaircaseDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Slab Design by Wood Armer MethodDiunggah olehUmesh Patil
- Slab Design by Wood Armer MethodDiunggah olehUmesh Patil
- LINTEL BEAM- TYPICAL.pdfDiunggah olehabhi arote
- circularsection.pdfDiunggah olehkarthikeyan M
- circularsection.pdfDiunggah olehkarthikeyan M
- Analysis of Slabs SpanningDiunggah olehabhi arote
- raft designDiunggah olehAnirban Dey
- Rev StaircaseDiunggah olehPavan Ps
- Bolt CapacityDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Beam Column Base Plate DesignDiunggah olehSPUD1
- Properties of Steel SectionsDiunggah olehvenkatesh19701
- Water TankDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Appendix ADiunggah olehabhi arote
- WATER TANK QUERY- BY MS. SHARMILA..xlsxDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Simpler Shear ConnectionsDiunggah olehAKVISHWA
- r.c.c. Design ConstantasDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Beam FormulaDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Beam Design Calculations-AbhijeetDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Dog Legged Staircase 463Diunggah oleherrinchenw
- QHelp Pipe Weight CalculatorDiunggah olehyaqub1979
- WATER TANK QUERY- BY MS. SHARMILA..xlsxDiunggah olehabhi arote
- Deflection ChecksDiunggah olehabhi arote