CONFIGURATION WITH RESPECT TO SEISMIC DESIGN

configuration can be defined as: building size and shape, the size and
location of structural elements, and the nature, size and location of
nonstructural elements that may affect structural performance. (Figure 1)
The latter includes such elements as heavy nonstructural walls, staircases,
exterior wall panels and heavy equipment items.

If the configuration is good the seismic design will be simple and

economical and good performance is more likely to be assured. If the
configuration is bad the seismic design will be expensive and good
performance will be less than certain.

Figure 1
Seismic codes distinguish between regular and irregular configurations,
and it is the latter that may have a detrimental influence on the
effectiveness and cost of seismic engineering and on building seismic
performance itself.

Regular (Uniform) configuration.

Optimal attributes for seismic

1
 ATTRIBUTES EFFECTS

1. Low height-to base ratio Minimizes tendency to overturn.

2. Equal floor height Equalizes column/wall stiffness.

3. Symmetrical plan shape Reduces torsion.

4. Identical resistance on both axes Balanced resistance in all directions.

5. Uniform sections and elevations. Eliminates stress concentrations.

6.Maximum torsional resistance Seismic resisting elements at perimeter.

7. Short spans. Low unit stress in members.

8. Redundancy. Tolerance of failure of some members.

9. Direct load paths, no cantilevers. No stress concentrations.

REGULAR CONFIGURATIONS

The size and geometrical proportions of a building also affect its seismic
response. Buildings that are very large in plan (such as some industrial or
warehouse type buildings) may have difficulty in responding as one unit to
seismic vibration.

Building size will affect seismic response. Buildings that are large) in plan may have
difficulty responding as one unit to seismic forces (Figure 2)

This may cause additional longitudinal compressive-tensile stresses and

horizontal displacements. Different locations in the building may respond
out of phase with one another, instead of as a single unit.

Very large forces may build up in the diaphragms that must be resisted by
shear walls or frames. The solution is to add shear walls or frames (to

2
reduce the span of the diaphragm), recognizing that this may present
internal planning problems.

Alternatively, the building may be broken up into smaller units, separated

by seismic joints. This is an ideal solution seismically, but introduces
difficult architectural detailing problems at the joints between building
units.

Similarly, buildings that are extremely long in elevation (though not large in
plan) may develop large forces in shear walls or frames, and in the
diaphragm. The solution is the same add cross walls or frames, or
subdivide the building.

Proportion problems in very slender buildings primarily relate to the

possibility of overturning. While this may apply to the form of the entire
building it more commonly relates to the proportions of resisting elements
such as shear walls.

Problem of proportion apply to such as shear wall

IRREGULAR CONFIGURATIONS

Irregular configurations occur when the building deviates from a simple

regular, symmetrical form in plan and section. This deviation tends to
create two basic kinds of problems:

• Torsion
• Stress concentration

Torsional problems are most typically associated with plan irregularity or

geometries, where the size and location of vertical elements produce
eccentricity between the centers of mass and resistance. Torsional forces
create great uncertainty in analyzing the building's resistance.

3
Stress concentrations occur when an undue proportion of the overall
seismic force is concentrated at one or a few locations in the building,
such as a particular set of beams or columns.
Many building failures occur because of the lack of balanced resistance,
which results in undue stress being placed on a member or members, with
consequent overstress or failure.

Torsional forces and stress concentrations induced by configuration

irregularities, such as abrupt changes of strength or stiffness, are the
prime cause of such imbalances.

Configuration irregularities often arise for sound planning or urban design

reasons and are not necessarily the result of the designer's whim (or
ignorance). For example, the re-entrant corner forms are very useful in
achieving high density housing solutions on small lots. (Figure 3.8) High
first stories may be necessary for buildings such as hotels or offices in
which large first floor spaces require much higher ceilings than smaller
rooms on upper floors. Understanding the seismic effect of configuration
irregularity will enable necessary irregularity to be accommodated without
significant detriment to seismic performance.

"Structures having irregular shapes or framing systems:

the distribution of the lateral forces in structures which have highly
irregular shapes, large differences in lateral resistance or stiffness between
adjacent stories or other unusual features shall be determined considering
the dynamic characteristics of the structure" (italics added).
So, the designer must use his judgment and knowledge in assessing the
magnitude and distribution of the code forces.

4
Re-entrant corner shapes

5
Graphic interpretation of “irregular structures or framing systems” from
the commentary to the SEAOC recommended lateral force requirements
and commentary.

6
FOUR COMMON CONFIGURATION PROBLEMS:

1. SOFT FIRST STORIES.

Three types of soft storey.

Soft story failure Fig.A

The most prominent of the set of problems caused by discontinuous

strength and stiffness is the soft story. This term has commonly been
applied to buildings whose ground level story, while adequate in strength,
is less stiff than those above. The building code distinguishes between soft
stories, discontinuities in stiffness and weak stories (discontinuities in
vertical load capacity or strength).

Structures with weak stories are limited by code to two stories or 30 feet in
height. (UBC)

Three typical conditions create the soft first story. (Figure above).

7
Tremendous distortion in the floor, and stress concentration at the second
floor connections, can cause failure at this line, resulting in the collapse or
partial collapse of the upper floors. (Figure A)

SOLUTION:
The best solution to the problem of the "soft" story is
1. to avoid the discontinuity through architectural design
2. is to investigate ways of reducing the discontinuity by other means,
such as increasing the number of columns or adding bracing as shown
in Fig B below.

Reducing discontinuity at a soft story. Fig B

2. DISCONTINUOUS SHEAR WALLS.

When shear walls form the main lateral resisting elements of the building,
they may be required to resist very high lateral forces. If these walls do not
line up in plan from one floor to the next, the forces cannot flow directly
down through the walls from roof to foundation, and the consequent
indirect load path can result in serious overstressing at the points of
discontinuity. Often this discontinuous shear wall condition represents a
special, but common, case of the "soft" first story problem.

SOLUTION:

The solution to the problem of discontinuous shear walls is unequivocally

to eliminate the condition. To do this may create architectural problems of
planning, circulation or image. If this is so, then this clearly indicates that
the decision to use shear walls as resistant elements was wrong from the
inception of the design. Conversely, if the decision is made to use shear
walls, then their presence must be recognized from the beginning of

8
schematic design, and their size and location must be the subject of careful
architectural and engineering coordination.

The soft first story at Olive view Hospital in USA.

3. VARIATIONS IN PERIMETER STRENGTH AND STIFFNESS.

This problem may occur in buildings whose configuration is geometrically

regular and symmetrical, but nonetheless irregular for seismic design
purposes.

A building's seismic behavior is strongly influenced by the nature of the

perimeter design. If there is wide variation in strength and stiffness around
the perimeter, the center of mass will not coincide with the center of
resistance, and torsional forces will tend to cause the building to rotate
around the center of resistance. This effect is illustrated in Figure C .

Variations in perimeter strength and stiffness. Fig C.

9
Open front design is common in buildings such as stores, fire stations and
motor maintenance shops, where it is necessary to provide large doors for
the passage of vehicles. The problem can be particularly acute when the
open front is asymmetrical, as in a corner, or wedge shape building. The
large imbalance in perimeter strength and stiffness around the building can
result in large torsional forces.

The purpose of any solution to this problem is to reduce the possibility of

torsion. Four possible alternative strategies are shown in Figure D

Structural solutions to resist torsion. Fig D

1. The first strategy is to design a frame structure of approximately equal

strength and stiffness for the entire perimeter. The opaque portion of the
perimeter can be constructed of nonstructural cladding, designed so that it
does not affect the seismic performance of the frame. This can be done
either by using lightweight cladding, or by ensuring that heavy materials,
such as concrete or masonry, are solated from the frame.

2. A second approach is to increase the stiffness of the open facades by

adding shear walls at or near the open face.

3. A third solution is to use a very strong moment-resistant or braced frame

at the open front, which approaches the solid wall in stiffness. The ability
to do this will be dependent on the size of the facades: a long steel frame
can never compare to a long concrete wall in stiffness. This is, however, a
good solution for wood frame structures, such as apartment houses with
ground floor garage areas, because even a comparatively long steel frame
can be made as stiff as plywood shear walls.

10
4. Finally, the possibility of torsion may be accepted and the structure
designed to accept it, with careful analysis of the diaphragm design and its
ability to transfer forces back to an inadequate resisting structural system.
This solution will apply only to relatively small structures with stiff
diaphragms, which can be designed to act as a unit.

4. Re-entrant Corners.

The re-entrant corner is the common characteristic of building forms that,

in plan, assume the shape of an L,T,H, etc., or a combination of these
shapes.
This is a most useful and traditional set of building shapes, which enable
large plan areas to be accommodated in relatively compact form, yet still
provide a high percentage of perimeter rooms with access to air and light.

These configurations, pictured in Figure E, are so common and familiar

that the fact that they represent one of the most difficult problem areas in
seismic design may seem surprising. Examples of damage to re-entrant
corner type buildings are common, and this problem was one of the first to
be identified by observers Figure F.

Re-entrant corner configuration Fig E

The second problem of this form is torsion. This is caused because the
center of mass and the center of rigidity in this form cannot geometrically
coincide for all possible earthquake directions. The result is rotation, that
will tend to distort the building in ways that will vary in nature and
magnitude depending on the characteristics of the ground motion. The
resulting forces are very difficult to analyze and predict.

11
Problems with the L-shaped building. Fig F

The magnitude of the forces and the seriousness of the problem will
depend on:
• the mass of the building,
• the structural system,
• the length of the wings and their aspect ratios, and
• the height of the wings and their height/depth ratios.

SOLUTION:

There are two basic alternative approaches to the problem of the re-entrant
corner forms: structurally to separate the building into simpler shapes, or
to tie the building together more strongly. (Figure G )

Structurally separated entities of a building must be fully capable of

resisting vertical and lateral forces on their own, and their individual
configurations must be balanced horizontally and vertically.

To design a separation joint, the maximum drift of the two units must be
calculated by the structural consultant. The worst case is when the two
individual structures would lean toward each other simultaneously, and
hence the sum of the dimension of the separation space must allow for the
sum of the building drifts.

Several considerations arise if it is decided to dispense with the separation

joint and tie the building together. Collectors at the intersection can
transfer forces across the intersection area, but only if the design allows
for these beam-like members to extend straight across without
interruption. Even better than collectors, are full-height continuous walls in
this same location.

12
 Fig G.

Since the portion of the wing which typically distorts the most is the free
end, it is desirable to place stiffening elements at that location to reduce its
response. Fig H

Fig H Stiffened the free

ends of the building Fig I . Use of splayed rather than right
angle reentrant corners

The use of splayed rather than right angle re-entrant corners lessens the
stress concentration at the notch. (Figure I) This is analogous to the way a
rounded hole in a steel plate creates less stress concentration than a
rectangular hole, or the way a tapered beam is structurally more desirable
than an abruptly notched one.

13
NOTE:
In addition to the above technical details readers are requested to go
through the IS 1893-2002(Part I)- Table 4 and Table 5 along with the
sketches 3 and 4 to study with respect to Indian code.

T.RangaRajan.

14