An Introduction to Earthquake-

Resistant Design
Stephen Mahin
Nishkian Professor of Structural Engineering
University of California at Berkeley
777 Davis Hall
642-4021; [email protected]

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-1

The Earthquake Challenge

Earthquakes provide one of the most challenging
problems facing the structural engineering profession

Important social and economic problem

Field is rapidly changing
 Changing demands by society
 New tools for design and analysis
 New technologies

Basic concepts and tools relevant to design to resist
other forms of natural and human-induced hazards

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-2

1
Today

Course Organization

Sources of Earthquake Damage

Trends in Earthquake Engineering

Evolution of building codes

Genesis of performance-based approaches to
earthquake engineering

Scope of Course

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-3

Course Organization
Contact Information

Instructor:
Stephen Mahin
777 Davis Hall, 642-4021, [email protected]
Office Hours: Tentatively TuTh 1-2
or by appointment

Teaching Assistant:
Janise Rodgers
504 Davis Hall
[email protected]
Office Hours: TBD
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-4

2
Course Organization
Lectures
TuTh 11-12:30
534 Davis Hall

Review and Discussion Session ?

Weekly session with Graduate Student Instructor or
Professor.

Clarify important points in class or carry out examples.

Help with homework assignments.

Time slot to make up missed classes.

Time to be determined
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-5

Course Organization
Prerequisites

Advanced course in structural analysis (CEE 220/121)

Course in structural dynamics through modal analysis
and use of linear response spectrum techniques for
multiple degree of freedom systems (CEE 225/125).

Some design background.

Some familiarity with plastic analysis.
Questions on student background:

Capacity design concepts (CE 244) and simple plastic
analysis (CEE 248)?

Computer tools? SAP? ETABS? OpenSees? CEE 221?
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-6

3
On-Line Course Notes
Annotated interactive course
outline available at:
http://peer.berkeley.edu/course_mod
ules/eqrd/
Still under construction

Includes class notes,

handouts, homework
problems, most solutions,
review questions, as well
as:

Various analytical tools

Links

Other useful information
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-7

FEMA References
FEMA publications available for free by downloading from the web
or calling 1-800-480-2520

The 2000 NEHRP Recommended Provisions For New Buildings And
Other Structures (FEMA 368) FEMA, Washington DC, 2000,
http://www.bssconline.org/NEHRP2000/comments/provisions/

Seismic Evaluation and Upgrade Criteria for Existing Welded Steel
Moment-Frame Buildings(FEMA 351), Specifications and Quality
Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment-Frame Construction for
Seismic Applications (FEMA 353), Seismic Design Criteria for New
Steel Moment-Frame Buildings (FEMA 350), FEMA, Washington DC,
July 2000. http://www.fema.gov/library/
prepandprev.shtm#earthquakes

NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA
356), FEMA/ASCE, Washington DC, 1997.
http://www.degenkolb.com/0_0_ Misc/0_1_FEMADocuments/
fema356/ps-fema356.html.
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-8

4
Useful References
Various Technical Papers

On Reserve in Engineering Library

From course website or other provided URLs.
Frequent reference to:

“Structural Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering,” A. Chopra, Prentice Hall, 2000.
Reference Texts:
“Earthquake Engineering Handbook,” W-F. Chen; C.
Scawthorn, CRC Press, 2002.
“Seismic Design Handbook,” F. Naiem, 2nd ed., Kluwer
Press, 2001.
“Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering,” S.Kramer,
Prentice Hall, 1995.
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-9

Important Sources of Information

National Information
Service for Earthquake
Engineering
http://nisee.berkeley.edu

Library, located at Pacific
Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, Richmond

Computer applications-
Provides non-proprietary
computer software and
ground motions library

Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute,
Oakland, CA -
http://www.eeri.org

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-10

5
Nonlinear Analysis of Structural Systems
Download: http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~hachem/bispec/index.html

Bispec

Single-DOF systems
subjected to one or two
components of one or
more earthquake
records

Response spectra

Animation

Online and
downloadable help
manuals
Other programs
(NONLIN, CAPP, ETABS,
SAP) will be made
available later
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-11

Course Organization
Assignments Grading

Reading
Homework, 25%

Homework Assignments

Sequence of problems related
Quizzes, 40%
to design and evaluation of a
single building

Project, 35%

Quantitative as well as
discussion type questions

Midterm Quizzes

Equivalent of two 80 minute
midterm exams ( 4-40 minute
or 5-35 minute quizzes)

Term Project

Design or research type
project of your choice One of many possible projects

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-12

6
Course Organization

Questions?
nisee

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-13

Review Sources of Damage

Damage caused by:

Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-14

7
Review Sources of Damage
Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking

Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-15

Review Sources of Damage

Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing

Liquefaction and soil
movement nisee
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-16

8
Review Sources of Damage
Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement nisee

Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-17

Review Sources of Damage

Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides

Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-18

9
Review Sources of Damage
Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche

Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures (pounding)
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-19

Review Sources of Damage

Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire

Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-20

10
Review Sources of Damage
Damage caused by:
 Ground shaking
 Fault rupturing
 Liquefaction and soil
movement
 Slope instability and
landslides
 Tsunami and seiche
 Fire
 Flooding
 Interaction with adjacent
structures
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-21

Trends in Earthquake Engineering

Rapid evolution of model building codes and ad
hoc guidelines for design of special structures
and evaluation and rehabilitation of existing
structures

Fundamental approaches being developed for
performance-based engineering design and
evaluation

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-22

11
Rapid evolution of building codes

Focus is on prevention of major catastrophes associated
with structural collapse

Changes in code provisions usually
tied to observed damage in major
earthquakes

Damage to buildings on soft soil

soil factors

Damage to tops of tall structures

concentrated forces applied
at top of structures

Damage in R/C columns

ductile details
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-23

Basic Design Guidelines from Past Earthquakes

1. Avoid unnecessary mass. 5. Structure should be compact
Achieve a uniform distribution and regular in both plan and
of mass. elevation. Avoid structures with
2. Preserve symmetry. Avoid elongated or irregular plans;
significant torsional motions. having substantial setbacks in
3. Us as simple a structural elevation; or that are unusually
system as possible. Make slender.
sure there is a complete load 6. Use a uniform and continuous
path. distribution of stiffness and
4. Use a redundant structural strength. Avoid nonstructural
system. Use a backup components that unintentionally
structural system where ever effect this distribution. Avoid
possible. sudden changes in member
sizes or details.

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-24

12
 Basic Guidelines (Continued)
7. Permit inelastic action 10. Tie all structural components
(damage) only in inherently together. Anchor
non-critical ductile elements nonstructural components to
(i.e., in beams rather than
columns). structure to avoid falling
8. Detail the members to avoid hazards.
premature, brittle failure 11. Avoid systems with low
modes. Utilize capacity design amounts of viscous damping.
principles to avoid undesired Absence of nonstructural
shear, axial or joint failures components tied to structure
and to foster ductile flexural may be indication of low
failure modes. damping in steel structures.
9. Avoid hammering (pounding)
of adjacent structures.

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-25

Building codes are useful design tools

Define “standard of care” ... important legal
and professional concept.
But ... focus is on minimum standards
needed for the protection of life safety
“ provide minimum standards to safeguard life or
limb, health, property and public welfare by regulating
and controlling the design, construction, quality of
g
Buildin materials, use and occupancy, location and maintenance
of buildings.”
Code

A detailed, prescriptive “deemed-to-comply”
format used.

Contains a mix of empiricism, simplified
theory and expert judgment.

Current codes provide little guidance on how
various stipulations relate to performance.

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-26

13
 Codes improving, but not perfect ...
Uneven performance of model code-compliant buildings noted
in recent earthquakes. Some perform very well, while others
are inadequate.

Nearly 70% of new steel buildings
shaken by the Northridge earthquake
suffered brittle fractures in their welded
beam to column connections. More than
10% of new steel welded moment frame
buildings in Kobe collapsed.

Several new reinforced concrete
structures collapsed or were severely
damaged during the Northridge and
Loma Prieta earthquakes.

Important buildings designed by well
respected engineers, under stringent
quality control conditions are frequently
damaged.

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-27

Problems becoming more complex

Expected ground motions more severe and
complex than previously assumed.

Concern for near-source, soft soil,
long duration motions ... the big one.
Public’s tolerance for damage has
diminished due to apparent increase in
the frequency of damaging earthquakes

Recent earthquakes
 Near Los Angeles and San Francisco
 Turkey, Taiwan and Japan

Highly publicized probabilistic predictions
No longer considered a rare “act of god.”
Insurance companies and building owners
concerned with maximum probable economic losses
Minimizing disruption of services important
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-28

14
 Situation is in flux!

Addition of new technologies for seismic
resistance (isolation, supplemental damping,
buckling restrained bracing, composite
members, etc.)

Quantitative, not qualitative, answers wanted

Addition of new analysis and design tools
(nonlinear static and dynamic analysis,
probabalistic hazard maps, etc.)

Economic and social impacts more important

Developments do not all have same objectives

Life safety. How safe?

Stated performance goals may differ

What is meant by performance state (e.g.,
continued occupancy)

Targeted confidence levels vary
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-29

Some considerations
Traditional Analysis problem Need tool box
Given structure and
analysis of demands on
loading, check that structure
Demands < Capacity
analysis of capacity of
structure
Need to manage risk and
Design problem uncertainty
Identify attributes of a
Rational load and resistance
structure that for given factors
earthquake environment
Utilize system characteristics
will economically and inherently insensitive to
reliably satisfy stated uncertainties in seismic hazard
performance
Focus more on displacement
expectations. and stability than force

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-30

15
Towards Performance-based Engineering
No need to wait for next earthquake to improve seismic
design and evaluation methods

Probabilistic framework

Probabalistic seismic hazard
assessment

Integrate research on system
and element behavior

Computational tools for predicting seismic demands on
systems and elements

Computational tools to predict capacity of systems and
elements to resist expected demands

Relate engineering parameters to parameters owners and
decision makers can understand (cost, disruption, etc.)

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-31

From research to practice

 No longer need to wait

until the next
earthquake
 Testing has had a big
impact on structural
engineering know-
QuickTime™ and a YUV420 codec decompressor are needed to see this picture.

ledge and practice

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-32

16
From research to practice

 No longer need to wait

until the next
earthquake
 Testing has had a big
impact on structural
engineering know-
ledge and practice
QuickTime™ and a YUV420 codec decompressor are needed to see this picture.

 Greatly improved
details

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-33

From research to practice

 No longer need to wait

until the next
earthquake
 Testing has had a big
impact on structural
engineering know-
ledge and practice
 Greatly improved
details
 Validated computer
models

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-34

17
 Structural Engineering Practice

More and better education

Regularly use computer QuickTime™ and a YUV420 codec decompressor are needed to see this picture. QuickTime™ and a YUV420 codec decompressor are needed to see this picture.

simulation models in design

Rigorous inspection of
construction

Codes include advanced
analysis methods

Introduction of new technologies
and devices
Seismic isolation, supplemental
energy dissipation devices

Performance-based engineering
frameworks
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-35

Severity of Damage

Joe’s Joe’s Joe’s

Beer! Beer! Beer!
Food! Food! Food!

Operational Immediate Life Collapse

Occupancy Safety Prevention

0% Damage 99%

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-36

18
Damage related to demand parameters

Joe’s Joe’s
Beer! Beer!
Food! Food!
Lateral REsistance

Joe’s
Beer!
Food!

Structural Displacement ∆

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-37

Relate Probabilities of Exceedence to

Damage States
Occasional
Very Rare
Joe’s Joe’s
Beer! Beer!
Food! Food!

Frequent Rare
(25 years)
10
Pea k Ground Acceleration - g

1
Joe’s 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001

Beer!
0.1
Food!

0.01
Annual Probability of Exceedance

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-38

19
 Quantification of Earthquake Hazard

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-39

Structural Engineering

Tools Improve Improved proportioning strategies

Capacity
Design
Greater demands for quantitative
design and evaluation methods
Improved earthquake characterization

that realistically and explicitly Probability

account for performance Hazard

Improving analysis tools

Model
Sd

Analysis

Improving control of uncertainties

Engine Demand Probability

Capacity Reliability

Improving characterization of Model Fails
δ
performance

Improved assessment of losses
Damage
Models Loss
Models
$
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-40

20
Performance-Based Design Approaches
Capacity
Design

Damage
Models
Analysis Loss
Engine Demand Probability Models $
Capacity Reliability
Model Fails?
δ
Probability
Hazard
Model
Sd

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-41

Much activity to improve codes

Improved national codes New approaches

National Earthquake
Improved performance and
Hazard Reduction reliability
Program (NEHRP)
Tentative Provisions for

Performance -based design
(EERC/FEMA)
Seismic Design of
Vision 2000 (SEAOC)
Buildings (Building
Seismic Safety Council)

SAC Steel Project (FEMA 350 -
FEMA 353)

Next generation codes (NSF,

International Building FEMA)
Code (merging of three
main model codes used

Existing Buildings
in the US and
Guidelines for the Rehabilitation
of Existing Buildings (FEMA 356)
incorporating NEHRP
provisions.

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-42

21
Earthquake-Resistant Design

What’s covered

Course outline

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-43

Rational framework needed

Need balanced perspective to
integrate information from:

structural analysis

structural behavior

seismology

geotechnical engineering

economics and public policy

risk and reliability analysis
Focus on objectives, not
procedures or prescriptions
Rely on first principles

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-44

22
Some basic issues treated in course
 Identify key response parameters
 How to get a structure that behaves as expected?
 How do different ground motion characteristics effect
structures?
 How do different structural materials & systems behave?
 How do you change system to improve performance?
 Effect of designer decisions about proportions on
response.
 How to characterize reliability of a system?
 What simplified tools should be used in design?
 What analysis tools can be used to assess performance?
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-45

Course Overview

Introduction

Engineering Characterization of Ground Motions

Sensitivity of Seismic Response of Simple Systems to
Ground Motion and Structural Characteristics

Development of Design Earthquakes (Linear &
Nonlinear)

Analytical Tools for Preliminary/Conceptual Design

Design Issues and Approaches

Code-related Issues - Interpretation and future trends

Performance-based Design

Capacity Design / Damage Tolerant Design

Applications

Moment Resisting and Braced Frames (mainly steel)

New construction and retrofit

Special topics
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-46

23
Scope of Course

Questions?

nisee

CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering

U.C. Berkeley Spring 2003 ©UC Regents 1-47

24