Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing

Concrete Buildings using ACI 369.1M-17

HAKI 2019 Seminar
27 August, 2019, Jakarta
Andrew W. Taylor, PhD, SE, FACI
ACI Ambassador Speaker
KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, USA

August 27, 2019 1

Part 2: Design Examples and
Methods for Concrete Retrofit

August 27, 2019 2

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 3
• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 4
Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Office and Apartment Building

• Three levels; total 1578 m2
• Constructed in 1908 using regulations that did not
consider seismic loading
• RC moment frames with unreinforced masonry infill
• Lightly reinforced concrete floor slabs
• Foundation consists of concrete caissons

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 5

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
RC moment frame with unreinforced masonry infill

6.1 m

6.1 m

32.9 m

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 6

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
RC moment frame with unreinforced masonry infill

4.4 m

4.4 m

4.4 m

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 7

Performance Tier Objective

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 8

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Level of Seismicity
SDS = 0.46g ; SD1 = 0.17g

Moderate Level of Seismicity

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 9

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Building Type [Table 3-1 ASCE 41-17]

Type C3: Concrete Frames with Infill Masonry Shear Walls (with
rigid diaphragms)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 10

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Is building type C3 found in ASCE 41 Table 3-2?

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 11

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Is building type C3 found in ASCE 41 Table 3-2?

The building type is found in Table 3-2, but it does not qualify as a
“Benchmark Building” because it was constructed in 1908 using a code
that did not consider seismic design.

Therefore, it is necessary to make a seismic evaluation of both structural

and nonstructural elements.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 12

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Check the requirements of Table 4-6

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 13

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Required checks include (Tier 1 checklists)

• Wall shear
• Connections between walls and frames
• Distribution of mass over the height
• Torsion in plan
• etc.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 14

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Distribution of mass over the height

The difference between the value of mass from

one floor to another is 31% < 50%
Compliant (C)
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 15

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Torsion in plan
The maximum distance between the center of
mass and the center of rigidity is 42% of the
length of the building in the East-West direction,
which is > 20% (max.)

Not Compliant (NC)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 16

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Shear Force
Pseudo-seismic force:
V = CSaW
C = Modification factor that relates expected
maximum inelastic displacements to displacements
calculated for linear elastic response (Table 4-7)
Sa = Spectral acceleration at the building period
W = Effective seismic weight

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 17

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Shear force
– walls,
Table 4-7

August 27, 2019 18

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Shear force
distribution over the
building height:

August 27, 2019 19

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Compute average shear stress in walls

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 20

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Shear force - walls

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 21

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example
Shear force - walls

Shear stress > 30 psi (0.2 MPa) Not Compliant

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 22

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Results of the evaluation – Deficiencies (NC)

Torsion in plan
Redundancy
Shear forces in walls exceed the permitted value
Connections between the walls and frames are inadequate
Partitions are not braced at a maximum spacing of 10 feet (3 m)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 23

Evaluation – Tier 1 Example

Alternatives
1. Summarize the deficiencies and stop the evaluation
2. Continue and make a Tier 2 evaluation based only on
the deficiencies identified in the Tier 1 evaluation
3. Continue and make a detailed analytical evaluation in
Tier 3

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 24

Tier 2 evaluation based on deficiencies

• A Tier 2 evaluation must be done for each of the

deficiencies (NC or U) identified in Tier 1
• Use the same performance levels and seismic hazards as
were used in Tier 1.
• This requires additional structural analysis
• It may not be possible to completely evaluate all of the
deficiencies using methods from Tier 2.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 25

Tier 2 evaluation based on deficiencies

Methods of Analysis:

Linear Static Procedure - LSP

Equivalent lateral force procedure

Linear Dynamic Procedure - LDP

Modal response spectrum analysis

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 26

Tier 2 evaluation based on deficiencies

Classification of the elements:

Primary Elements:
• Considered to be necessary for resistance of forces
and deformations during the earthquake (i.e.,
structural elements)
Secondary Elements
• They can attract seismic forces, but they are not
required to resist seismic forces (They can be non-
structural or structural elements)
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 27

Tier 2 evaluation based on deficiencies

Primary elements must comply with more restrictive

requirements (forces and deformations) than
secondary elements.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 28

Tier 2 evaluation based on deficiencies

However, if this condition occurs:

𝐾𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑦 > 0.25 𝐾𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦

then some of the secondary elements may need to be

re-classified as primary elements to comply with:

𝐾𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑦 < 0.25 𝐾𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 29

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 30

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 31

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 32
Tier 2: Example

Toledo Building –
Viña del Mar, Chile.
(350 km from epicenter)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 33

10 Floors
14 Years Old

Considerable
structural and
non-structural
damage during
the 2010 Maule
earthquake.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 34

Tier 2: Example

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 35

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 36

Tier 2: Example

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 37

Tier 2: Example

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 38

Tier 2: Example

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 39

Tier 2: Example
Problems With Geometry of Walls

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 40

Tier 2: Example
Problems With Torsion

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 41

Tier 2: Example

Principal Results
• Average shear forces exceed the limits allowed in the
vast majority of levels.
• Discontinuities and other irregularities in plan exceed
the permitted limits, so that a modal response spectrum
analysis is required.
• Eccentricities in plan indicate that torsion effects can
generate significant additional forces.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 42

Tier 2: Example

Principal Results (continued)

• The horizontal reinforcement in the walls is below
what is allowed.

Tier 2 Evaluation

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 43

Tier 2: Example
Tier 2
• At a minimum, assess in more detail the deficiencies
identified in the Level 1 assessment (see Fig. 5-1)
• The Toledo Building has irregularities in plan (torsion)
and discontinuities over the height of the building.

It is necessary to further analyse the building (Fig. 5-1)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 44

Tier 2: Example

Types of analysis permitted (ASCE 41, Section 7.3)

Linear Static (Regular Structures)

Linear Dynamic

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 45

Tier 2: Example
Tier 2
• At a minimum, assess in more detail the deficiencies
identified in the Level 1 assessment (see Fig. 5-1)
• The Toledo Building has irregularities in plan (torsion)
and discontinuities over the height of the building.

3D Modal Response Spectrum Analysis

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 46

Tier 2: Example
Modeling - Stiffness
Use the “effective” stiffness of elements,
defined as the secant stiffness at the yield point
(ASCE 41, Section 10.3.1.2.1)
Alternatively, use the default values given in
Table 10-5

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 47

Tier 2: Example

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 48

Tier 2: Example

For Comparison: T (Tier 1 calculation) = 0.57 sec.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 49

Tier 2: Example

The building is classified as irregular in torsion

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 50

Tier 2: Example

In the 3D analysis, apply

100% of the seismic force in Direction 1 and
30% of the seismic force in Direction 2 (ASCE 41 7.2.5.1)
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 51

Tier 2: Example

Clasificación
de Esfuerzos – Muros

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 52

Tier 2: Example

Deformation-controlled action:
Flexure (M) in Walls

m MCE ≥ MUD

MCE = “expected” (or probable) strength of the element

MUD = maximum moment calculated due to gravitational and
seismic loads
m = resistance factor based on the ductility of the element

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 53

Tier 2: Example

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 54

Tier 2: Example

Deformation-Controlled Actions (M)

Walls (Table 10-21)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 55

Tier 2: Example

Typical Details in Walls

(Boundary elements do not have confining reinforcement)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 56

Tier 2: Example

Force-Controlled Actions for Axial Compression in Walls

QCL ≥ QUF

QCL = Minimum strength of the element

QUF = Maximum force calculated using both gravitational
and seismic forces (ASCE 41, Section 7.5.2.2.2)
 = “reliability” factor for element resistance
= 0.75 (min. – seeTable 6-1)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 57

Tier 2 Example
Non-Compliant Walls in the North-South direction

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 58

Principal Conclusions

• Most of the walls do not have sufficient capacity and

would fail in flexure combined with axial tension in the
transverse direction.
• Similarly, the walls would not have sufficient resistance
in shear at the lower four floors.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 59

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 60
Methods for Rehabilitation

ASCE 41: Basic Strategies

Modify existing elements
Eliminate or reduce irregularities
Stiffen the structure
Strengthen the structure
Reduce the mass of the structure
Seismic Isolation (Base Isolation)
Add energy dissipation devices (dampers)
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 61

Methods for Rehabilitation

Shock absorbers/energy dissipators (dampers)

Seismic Isolation (Base Isolation)
Structural walls (Foundations $$)
Infill walls
Bracing
Encasement with steel, concrete, or FRP

APPROXIMATE COST

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 62

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 63
Encasement

• Increases the resistance (M, V, P) of the element

• Increases the deformation capacity of the element
and the ductility of the element
• Avoids buckling or crushing failure and protects the
integrity of the element (for example, to maintain
the axial load capacity)
All of the above

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 64

Encasement

Advantages:
• Increases M, V, P, ductility
and deformation capacity
of the element.
• Low cost (depending on
the cost of labor))

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 65

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 66

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete

Type 1 Type 2

Encasement for a beam-column joint (Alcocer, 1991)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 67

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete

Type 3

Encasement for a beam-column joint (Alcocer, 1991)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 68

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete

Type 3

Encasement for a beam-column joint (Alcocer, 1991)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 69

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete
ORIGINAL Type 1

Type 3

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 70

Encasement – Reinforced Concrete
Disadvantages:
• Very labor intensive
• Difficult to provide both
longitudinal and
transverse reinforcement,
and to cast concrete.
• Invasive.
• It can be expensive
depending on the number
of elements to be
reinforced.
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 71

Encasement – Steel

Advantages:
• Increases M, V, P, ductility and
deformation capacity of the
element.
• Low cost (depending on the
cost of labor))
• Remote fabrication –
installation is relatively fast
• Less invasive than encasement
with reinforced concrete

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 72

Encasement – Steel

Partial encasement to improve the lap splice and flexural strength –

Type 1 (Aboutaha, 1994)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 73

Encasement – Steel

Partial encasement to improve the lap splice and flexural strength –

Type 2 (Aboutaha, 1994)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 74

Encasement – Steel

Welded bars and mortar (Aboutaha, 1994)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 75

Encasement – Steel
Original (without retrofit) Type 1

Type 2 Welded bars and mortar

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 76

Encasement – Steel

Encasement to increase shear resistance (Aboutaha, 1994)

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 77

Encasement – Steel

Disadvantages:
Careful and neat application of mortar or other
filler material between the casing and the existing
element is essential for proper behavior.
More effective and preferred for circular or oval
cross sections.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 78

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Advantages:
• For columns, has a large capacity
for confining concrete
• Increases ductility and deformation
capacity of the element, and
therefore can increase the axial
load capacity, bending capacity, and
shear capacity

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 79

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Advantages:
 In beams and slabs – can be used to increase
flexure and shear capacity

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 80

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Advantages:

 For concrete walls or

unreinforced masonry
walls – can be used to
increase shear capacity,
and flexural strength for
both in-plane and out-
of-plane bending

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 81

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)

Other advantages:
• High strength
• Light weight – adds very little mass to the
building
• Relatively easy and fast to install
• Less invasive than other methods
• Not susceptible to corrosion

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 82

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)

Disadvantages:
• Carbon fiber material (preferable and
recommended) – high cost.
• Requires specialized, skilled labor – generally
products are patented.

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 83

Encasement – Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)

Disadvantages:
• Various products (resins and/or fibers) deteriorate
under UV radiation, which can affect the durability
of the product. May require an outer layer to
protect against UV exposure.
• Various resins are susceptible to creep
• Be very careful when choosing the product

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 84

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 85
Infill Walls

Advantages:
• Offers a large increase in
stiffness and strength.
• Can change the mode of
failure of existing
elements.
• Can improve the ductility
and deformation capacity
of the structures.
• Cost is average to low
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 86

Infill Walls
Disadvantages:
• Labor intensive
• Invasive
• Often requires
reinforcement of the
foundation ($$$$)
• Difficult to attach to
existing elements,
especially between the top
of the wall and the beam
Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 87

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 88
Structural Walls

Advantages:
• Can offer large increases in strength and
stiffness.
• Can change the failure mode of existing
elements.
• Can increase the ductility and deformation
capacity of the structure.
• Cost is average to high

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 89

Structural Walls

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 90

Wing Walls

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 91

Structural Walls

Disadvantages:
• Labor intensive
• Invasive
• Often requires reinforcement of the
foundations ($$$$)
• Difficult to attach to existing elements

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 92

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 93
Bracing
Advantages:
• Offers increases to
strength and stiffness
• Can change the mode of
failure of existing
elements
• Can improve the ductility
and deformation capacity
of the structure
• Cost is average

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 94

Bracing
Advantages:
 The configuration is flexible - Concentric X or V
bracing

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 95

Bracing
Advantages:
 The configuration is
flexible – Eccentrically
braced frames

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 96

Bracing
Advantages:
 The configuration is flexible – Eccentrically braced
frames

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 97

Bracing
• Concentric and eccentric braces – require “collectors”

Collectors

Slide courtesy Jose Pincheira

August 27, 2019 98

• Example of Tier 1 evaluation, three-
story building
• Example of Tier 1 and Tier 2
evaluation, ten-story building
• Methods for rehabilitation:
• Encasement (concrete, steel, FRP)
• Infill walls
• Structural walls
• Bracing
August 27, 2019 99
• About ACI Technical Activities

August 27, 2019 100

August 27, 2019 101
August 27, 2019 102
August 27, 2019 103
Andrew W. Taylor
ACI Fellow
ACI 318 Building Code (Chair)
ACI 318-H Seismic Provisions (Past Chair)
ACI 374 Performance Based Design
ACI Technical Activities Committee
August 27, 2019 105