1

Modul 10

Fundamental Principles of
Earthquake Resistant
Design
Patria Kusumaningrum, ST, PhD
SI 3213 Dinamika Struktur
Fakultas Teknik Sipil dan Lingkungan & Rekayasa Gempa
2

Materi Term 2
Mg. Topik Sub Topik
General Dynamic Loading Response of SDOF system excited by impulsive loading. Numerical
9
and the Numerical Evaluation solution including Duhamel’s & step by step integration method
Earthquake Resistant General concept of earthquake resistant buildings and the
10 importance of ductility factor
Building
11 Response Spectrum Analysis Concept and application of Response Spectrum (RS) analysis
Assembling of mass and stiffnes matrix, eigen vectors, eigen
12 MDOF values
MDOF: Modal Superposition
General concept of using modal superposition analysis to
13 Analysis and Normalization determine the responses of MDOF system
Mode of Vibration
General concept of using CQC and SRSS method, to determine the
14 MDOF: Maximum Response responses of MDOF system
General concept and application of Spectrum Response analysis
15 MDOF: RSA and ELF and Equivalent Lateral Force (ELF) procedure.
16 UAS
3

What is risk?
4 Risk?

Disaster

An event causing widespread human or material

losses which exceeds the ability of the affected
community to cope using its own resources
5

Seismic Risk
 Seismic risk directly depends
Risk
upon Seismic Hazard, Seismic
Vulnerability, and Exposure of
elements at risk.

 For the purpose of simplicity, we

will discuss only first two
parameters
6

Seismic Risk

 Seismic hazard depends on the Seismic Risk can be minimized

by reducing seismic vulnerability
geology of site and, therefore, of structures
cannot be controlled.

 Seismic vulnerability belongs to

structures and can, therefore, be
reduced by appropriate design
and construction
7

The seismic risk keeps increasing

 The current building stock is constantly enlarged by the addition of new
buildings, many with significant, or even excessive, earthquake
vulnerability.
 This is above all due to the fact that for new buildings, especially for low
rise structures (<5 – 8 storeys) or housing, the basic principles of
earthquake resistant design and also the earthquake specifications of
the building codes, are often not followed.
 The reason is either unawareness, convenience or intentional ignorance
 As a result, the earthquake risk continues to increase unnecessarily.
8

Urgent Actions Needed

 The preceding remarks clearly illustrate that there is a large deficit in
the structural measures for seismic protection in many parts of the
world.
 New buildings must be designed to be reasonably earthquake resistant
to prevent the constant addition of new vulnerable structures to a
building stock that is already seriously threatened.
 This course on “Introduction to Structural dynamics and earthquake
Engineering” aims at conveying the fundamental knowledge to the Civil
Engineers regarding seismic resistant design and construction of
structures
9

Some of basic considerations

for seismic design
10

Effect of relative stiffness on lateral forces distribution

 The lateral force is distributed (at a particular story level) in proportion

to the relative stiffness of the resisting members.

 The applied forces are “attracted to” and concentrated at the stiffer
elements of the building.
 Thus, the engineer must calculate the stiffness of the resisting elements
to ascertain the forces that they must accommodate.
 If two elements (two frames, walls, braces, or any combination) are
forced to deflect the same amount, and if one is stiffer, that one will take
more of the load.
11

Effect of relative stiffness on forces distribution

 The evaluation of relative rigidities is a necessary part of most seismic

analysis problems in order to determine the relative distribution of the
total horizontal force to the various resisting elements.

 An important aspect of this concept in relation to column lateral

stiffness is illustrated in figure on next slide.
12

Effect of relative stiffness on forces distribution

 In the figure the columns have the same cross-section, but the short
column is half the length of the long one.
 Mathematically, the stiffness of a column
varies approximately as the cube of its
length. Therefore, the short column will be
eight times stiffer (23) instead of twice as 450 lb
stiff and will be subject to eight times the
horizontal load of the long column. Stress
is concentrated in the short column, while
the long column is subject to nominal
forces.
13
Assignment
10 k 10 k

8 ft
10 ft 15 ft 10 ft 15 ft

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Draw S.F.D and B.M.D of given frames. Assume:

1. EI= Constant in all cases
2. Beams are infinitely stiff in flexure. i.e. beam-column joints act as fixed
supports
14
Assignment
100 ft.k
10 k

10 ft 8 ft

15 ft
Fig. 3

Calculate Bending Moment at all the supports of given frame. Assume

(EI) column= (EI)beam/ 2 where EI for both beams are same
15

Torsional Forces

 The center of mass, or center of gravity, of an object is the point at which it could
be exactly balanced without any rotation resulting.
 If the mass (or weight) of a building is uniformly distributed (in plan), the result is
that the plan's geometric center (centroid) will coincide with the center of mass.
 In a building, the main lateral force is contributed by the weight of the floors,
walls, and roof, and this force is exerted through the center of mass, usually the
geometric center of the floor (in plan).
 If the mass within a floor is uniformly distributed, then the resultant force of the
horizontal acceleration of all its particles is exerted through the floor's geometric
center
16

Torsional Forces
Centre of mass and rigidity

Centre of rigidity

Torsional forces.
17

Torsional Forces

 Torsional forces are created in a building by a lack of balance between the

location of the resisting elements and the arrangement of the building mass.

 Engineers refer to this as eccentricity between the center of mass and the
center of rigidity, C.R. (or centre of stiffness), which makes a building
subjected to ground motion rotate around its center of rigidity, creating torsion
- a twisting action in plan, which results in undesirable and possibly
dangerous concentrations of stress
18

Torsional Forces

 In a building in which the mass is approximately evenly distributed in plan

(typical of a symmetrical building with uniform floor, wall and column masses)

the ideal arrangement is that the earthquake resistant elements should be

symmetrically placed, in all directions

 In practice, some degree of torsion is always present, and the building code

makes provision for this.

19
Effect of shear walls arrangement
on the torsional resistance of buildings

Effect of shear walls arrangement on torsional resistance (the same total

length of longitudinal wall is distributed in a different way for each layout.
20
Effect of shear walls arrangement
on the torsional resistance of buildings

 Greatest torsional resistance is obtained by concentrating the longitudinal

walls at the comers of the building, as in Fig. a. The center of rigidity is at the
center of the plan (from symmetry) and the longitudinal walls, being placed as
distant as possible from this c e n t e r , p r o d u c e t h e g r e a t e s t t o r s i o n
al resistance.
 Although the position of the centre of rigidity of the symmetrical arrangement
in Fig. b remains at the center of the plan, the longitudinal walls are not
entirely placed at the extremities thus r e s u l t i n g i n a r e d u c e d t o r
sional resistance
21
Effect of shear walls arrangement
on the torsional resistance of buildings
• Because of lack of symmetry about one axis in Fig. c, the center of rigidity will
move slightly off centroidal axis and lateral forces will have an increased
torsional effect due to this offset of the center of rigidity. Also the distances from
the center of rigidity of the flanged sections created with longitudinal walls have
been reduced, thus reducing the torsional resistance.

• Although the arrangement of walls in Fig. d is symmetrical, the longitudinal

walls have been moved close to the center of rigidity and the sections produced
have a greatly reduced influence on the torsional resistance of the total
arrangement.
22
Effect of shear walls arrangement
on the torsional resistance of buildings

 A very poor arrangement of longitudinal walls is shown in Fig. e. Here they

are clustered toward one comer, displacing the center of rigidity a large
distance from the center of the plan and greatly increasing the torsional
effects of the lateral loads. In addition, the longitudinal walls are at a short
distance from the center of rigidity and therefore contribute less to the
overall torsional resistance.
23

Non structural components

 For many decades, seismic building codes focused exclusively on the
structure of the building—that is, the system of columns, beams, walls, and
diaphragms that provides resistance against earthquake forces.

 Although this focus remains dominant for obvious reasons, experience in

more recent earthquakes has shown that damage to nonstructural
components is also of great concern.

 In most modern buildings, the nonstructural components account for 60 to 80

percent of the value of the building (figure on next slide). Most nonstructural
components are fragile (compared to the building structure), easily damaged,
and costly to repair or replace
24

Non structural components

Structure (left), nonstructural components and systems (right).

25

Non structural components

 The nonstructural elements (such as parapet walls, furniture if not properly
anchored can impose serious threat to human lives.
 Collapse of boundary walls and parapet walls were the cause of a significant
number of fatalities during 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
 The nonstructural components or systems may modify the structural response
in ways detrimental to the safety of the building.
 Examples are the placing of heavy nonstructural partitions in locations that
result in severe torsion and stress concentration, or the placement of
nonstructural partitions between columns in such a way as to produce a short
column condition. This can lead to column failure, distortion, and further
nonstructural damage.
 Failure of the fire protection system, because of damage to the sprinkler
system, may leave the building vulnerable to post-earthquake fires caused
by electrical or gas system damage.
26

Some common mistakes

resulting in reduced seismic
resistance of structures
Five serious
configurations conditions
27

Four serious configurations conditions

Five configuration conditions (three vertical and two in plane) that originate in
the architectural design and that have the potential to seriously impact seismic
performance are:

 Soft stories  Variations in perimeter strength and

stiffness
 Weak stories

 Re-entrant corners
 Discontinuous shear walls
28

Soft Stories/
Flexible Stories
29

Soft Stories as Vertical Irregularity

SNI 1726-2019

Tabel 14

Ketidakberaturan Tipe 1
 30

Soft-storey effect
The soft first story is the most common
feature of soft story irregularity. It usually
is present in modern frame buildings when
a large number of nonstructural rigid
components, such as masonry walls, are
attached to the columns of the upper
floors of a reinforced concrete frame
structure while the first story is left empty
of walls or with a reduced number of walls
in comparison to the upper floors. The
rigid nonstructural components limit the
ability to deform of the columns,
modifying the structural performance of
the building to horizontal forces. In a
regular building, the earthquake shear
forces increase towards the first story.
© Guevara-Perez, 2012
31

Soft-storey effect
In a regular building (Fig. a), the total disp
(∆ T) induced by an earthquake tend to
distribute homogeneously in each floor
throughout the height of the building.
Deformation in each floor (∆ n) would be
similar. When a more flexible portion of the
lower part of the building (Fig. b) supports
a rigid and more massive portion, the bulk
of the energy will be absorbed by the
lower-significantly more flexible-story
while the small remainder of energy will be
distributed amongst the upper more rigid
stories, producing on the most flexible
floor, larger relative displacement between
the lower and the upper slab of the soft
story (interstorey drift) and therefore, the
columns of this floor will be subjected to
large deformations.
© Guevara-Perez, 2012
32

Soft-storey effect: fundamental concept

(a) Undeflected (b) Deflected

See the difference in moment at the base ?
33

Soft-storey effect
The most prominent of the problems caused by severe stress concentration is
that of the “soft” story.

The soft first story failure mechanism.

34

Avoid soft-storey @Ground floors!

35

Avoid soft-storey @Ground floors!

36

Avoid soft-storey @Upper floors!

Hotel Ambacang, Padang (a) Before (b) After

2009 Sumatra earthquakes
37

Avoid soft-storey @Upper floors!

Intermediate story columns are
completely collapsed

Kobe, Japan 1995. Bagh, 2005

Kashmir earthquake
 38

Solutions

Teddy et. al (2018)

Hotel Ambacang, Padang

After 2009 Sumatra earthquakes
39

Solutions

Add columns Add bracing Add external buttresses

40

Solutions

Fig A Fig B

This apartment house appears to have a soft first story (Figure A), but the
lateral force-resisting system is a strong internal shear wall box (Figure B).
41

Weak Story
42

Weak Stories as Vertical Irregularity

SNI 1726-2019

Tabel 14

Ketidakberaturan Tipe 5
43

Weak-storey effect
Weak story configuration is often generated in
hotel and hospital buildings, in which not only
the first floor is designed less walls than the
other floors, but generally, due to its
importance, it also has a greater height than
the rest of the floors. Weak story can be
generated by:
(1) elimination or weakening of seismic
resistant components at the first floor;
(2) mixed systems: frames and structural
walls, with wall interruption at the second
floor or at intermediate floors
44

Avoid weak-storey

Kirac, et al. (2011)

45

Solutions

N. Kirac et al./Engineering Failure Analysis 18 (2011) 572–581573

46

Solutions

Qu Z, Sakata H, Midorikawa S, Wada A. Earthquake Spectra (2015)

47

Discontinuous Shear Walls

48

Avoid Discontinuous Shear Walls

 When shear walls form the main lateral resistant elements of a structure, and
there is not a continuous load path through the walls from roof to foundation,
the result can be serious overstressing at the points of discontinuity. This
discontinuous shear wall condition represents a special, but common, case of
the “soft” first-story problem.

 The discontinuous shear wall is a fundamental design contradiction: the

purpose of a shear wall is to collect diaphragm loads at each floor and
transmit them as directly and efficiently as possible to the foundation. To
interrupt this load path is undesirable.
49

Avoid Discontinuous Shear Walls

Long section, Olive View Hospital. Note that the shear walls stop at the third floor.

Cross section, Olive View hospital, showing the second-floor plaza

and the discontinuous shear wall.
50

Avoid Discontinuous Shear Walls

Olive View hospital, San Fernando earthquake, 1971, showing the

extreme deformation of the columns above the plaza level.
51

Solutions

 The solution to the problem of the discontinuous shear wall is to

eliminate the shear walls.

 If the decision is made to use shear walls, then their presence must be
recognized from the beginning of schematic design, and their size and
location made the subject of careful architectural and engineering
coordination early.
52

Variations in Perimeter
Strength & Stiffness
53

Variations in Perimeter Strength & 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.
54

Variations in Perimeter Strength & Stiffness

 If there is wide variation in strength and stiffness around the perimeter, the
center of mass will not coincide with the center of rigidity, and torsional forces
will tend to cause the building to rotate around the center of rigidity.
55

Variations in Perimeter Strength & Stiffness

Left, the building after the
earthquake. Right, typical floor
plan showing the Center of Mass
(CM), Center of Rigidity (CR), and
Eccentricity (e) along the two
axes.

The figure shows an apartment house in Viña del Mar, Chile, following the
earthquake of 1985. The apartment, designed with open frontage, had only
three apartments per floor, with the service areas and elevator concentrated
to the rear and surrounded by reinforced concrete walls that provided the
seismic resistance. The lack of balance in resistance was such that the
building rotated around its center of rigidity, tilted sharply, and nearly
collapsed. The building was subsequently demolished.
56

Variations in Perimeter Strength & Stiffness

A common instance of an
unbalanced perimeter is that
of open-front design in
buildings, such as fire
stations and motor
maintenance shops in which Centre of rigidity
it is necessary to provide
large doors for the passage
of vehicles.
CE-412: MODULE
Unbalanced perimeter2 resistance:
( Fall 2015) storefronts and “wedges.”
57

Variations in Perimeter Strength and Stiffness

 Stores, individually or as a group in a Penney’s store,

Anchorage,
shopping mall, are often designed as boxes Alaska,
earthquake, 1964.
with three solid sides and an open glazed Upper: Damage to
the store:
front .

 The large imbalance in perimeter strength

and stiffness results in large torsional
forces. Large buildings, such as department Lower: Second-
floor plan, showing
stores, that have unbalanced resistance on unbalanced
perimeter
a number of floors to provide large window resistance

areas for display are also common.

CE-412: MODULE 2 ( Fall 2015)
58

Solutions
 The solution to this problem is to reduce the possibility of torsion by
endeavoring to balance the resistance around the perimeter.

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

strength and stiffness for the entire perimeter
59

Solutions
 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 isolated from the
frame (Figure A)
60

Solutions

 A second approach is to increase the stiffness of the open facades by adding

sufficient shear walls, at or near the open face, designed to approach the
resistance provided by the other walls (Figure B).
 A third solution is to use a strong moment resisting or braced frame (Figure
C) at the open front, which approaches the solid wall in stiffness.
61

Solutions

 The ability to do this will depend on the size of the

facades; a long steel frame can never approach a
long concrete wall in stiffness.

 This is, however, a good solution for wood frame

structures, such as small apartment buildings, or
motels with ground floor garage areas, or small
store fronts, because even a comparatively long steel
frame can be made as stiff as plywood shear walls
(Figure C).
62

Re-Entrant Corners
63

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

Re-entrant corner plan forms.

64

Re-entrant Corners
 There are two problems created by these shapes.

 The first is that they tend to produce differential motions between different
wings of the building that, because of stiff elements that tend to be located in
this region, result in local stress concentrations at the re-entrant corner.

 The second problem of this form is torsion. Which 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. The
resulting forces are very difficult to analyze and predict.
65

Re-entrant Corners

Re-entrant corner

Centre of rigidity
66

Re-entrant Corners

Differential deformation at the junction of two wings

67

Re-entrant Corners
68

Re-entrant Corners
There are two basic alternative approaches to the problem of re-entrant corner
forms: structurally to separate the building into simpler shapes, or to tie the
building together more strongly with elements positioned to provide a more
balanced resistance (see figure ). The latter solution applies only to smaller
buildings

Separation/Dilatation Stiff resistant elements

In case of separation/dilatation building must be sufficiently away to ensure they
do not pound together and damage each other in an earthquake
69

Solutions

The use of splayed rather than

right angle re-entrant corners
lessens the stress concentration
Splayed re-entrant corners

This is analogous to the way a tapered

beam is structurally more desirable Recommended ?
than an abruptly notched one.

Shall be avoided ?
70

Additional features (to be taken care of)

to minimize structural damages during
an earthquake
71

1. Short Column
72

Avoid short columns!

 The space between columns is sometimes filled in by a rigid wall, leaving a

short space for a clerestory window (a high windows above eye level to bring
outside light, fresh air, or both into the inner space).

 Such a simple act of remodeling may not seem to require engineering

analysis, and a contractor may be hired to do the work: often such work is
not subject to building department reviews and inspection. Serious damage
has occurred to buildings in earthquakes because of this oversight.
73

Avoid short columns!

Partial floor- height panel infill Failure pattern

Inserting parapet walls into a frame

led to a short column phenomenon.
Owing to the good confinement of
the transverse reinforcement, no
actual shear failure occurred, but
an equally dangerous sway
mechanism developed.
(Friaul, Italy 1976).
74

Avoid short columns

L. Teresa Guevara et al., 2012

The diagonal cracks and shear failures in the short

columns of a multi-storey car park almost caused
collapse (Northridge, California 1994).
75

2. Provide Structural Redudancy

76

Structural Redundancy
 A redundant or indeterminate structure has more structure than is absolutely
necessary. So, if some part of the structure is damaged or removed, the
structure will not necessarily fail or collapse, as another part can bear the
load of the damaged or missing piece. A non redundant structure is dependent
on every piece of the structure.
 Redundancy in the structural system permits redistribution of internal forces
in the event of failure of key elements.
 After experience in many earthquakes and much study and discussion, the
engineering profession has generally concluded that more than a single
system is the ideal solution for successful seismic resistance.
77

Provide Redundancy

The Hanshin Expressway after the 1995, Kobe Earthquake , Japan. Columnsin the
partially collapsed portion failed due to inadequate shear reinforcement. Existing
soil conditions and lack of redundancy aggravated the situation
78

Provide Redundancy

Ideal but may not be always

possible due to a number of
‘ground realities’
79

Provide Redundancy

Bracing , in addition to increase in stiffness, also increase redundancy

80

3. Avoid Strong Beam Weak Column

81

Avoid strong beam- weak column

Strong beam-weak column joint
simulates fixed support, resulting in
larger moments at joint

Ground floor of an under

construction commercial plaza
(Muzzafarabad, 2005)
82

4. Provide Adequate Anchorage

83

Provide Adequate Anchorage

Inadequate lap of longitudinal bars in a collapsed column.

(Abbotabad,2005)
84

4. Provide Adequate Dilatation Gap

85

Provide Adequate Dilatation Gap

Building must have sufficient separation to ensure they do not pound together
and damage each other in an earthquake. Generally if framed buildings are
separated by at least 0.01 H, pounding will not be a problem. (e.g. two 6-metre
tall buildings should be separated by 60mm.)
86

Provide Adequate Dilatation Gap

87

5. Provide Adequate Confinement

Reinforcement
88
Use closely spaced transverse reinforcement with 135° hooks
in structural walls and columns!

Mander’s Stress strain relationship for concrete

Effect of confinement (by decreasing ties spacing) spacing on the
compressive strength of plain concrete specimens
89
Use closely spaced transverse reinforcement with 135° hooks
in structural walls and columns!

90o hooks open up at relatively smaller force as compared to 135o hooks

90
Use closely spaced transverse reinforcement with 135° hooks
in structural walls and columns!

Largely spaced rings resulted in failure of column (due to spalling of concrete

from rings) in a building at Abbotabad during 2005 Kashmirearthquake
91
Use closely spaced transverse reinforcement with 135° hooks
in structural walls and columns!

Closely spaced rings avoided collapse of column.

Left (Muzaffarabad secretariat,2005). Right (Taiwan, 1999)
92

6. Provide Sufficient Anchorage of the

Non-Structural Element
93
Provide Sufficient Anchorage of
the Non-Structural Element

Improper
anchorage of
architectural
Components
@Mataram
University,
Lombok
Earthquake
2018

Improper anchorage of architectural Components

@RSUD Mamuju, Sulawesi Earthquake 2021
94
Provide Sufficient Anchorage of
the Non-Structural Element

Out-of-plane overturning offreely standing masonry infills in

reinforced concrete frames in Muzaffarabad
during 2005 Kashmir earthquake
95
Provide Sufficient Anchorage of
the Non-Structural Element

Out-of-plane overturning of unconnected masonry infills in

reinforced concrete frames in Mataram University
during 2018 Lombok Earthquake
96
Provide Sufficient Anchorage of
the Non-Structural Element

Typical failure of boundary walls (left, Abbotabad) and overturning of a

slender parapet prevented by proper bracing across the length (right,
Garhi Habibullah). 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
97
Provide Sufficient Anchorage of
the Non-Structural Element

Water tanks fallen from supporting masonry piers due to their

tensile failure (Abbotabad & Mansehra) during 2005 Kashmir earthquake.
If the tanks are properly anchored to R.C. Columns through steel
reinforcement, this situation could have been avoided
98

Various mechanisms to dissipate

energy imparted to a structure
by an earthquake
99

Base Isolation
Response of a building with no base isolation is shown in Figure a. Response of the
building with base isolation can be simulated by Figure b, where the rollers move
during ground shaking but the building above does not move, and no force is
transferred to the building due to shaking.

(a) (b)
100

Base Isolation

Base isolation is carried out, mostly, by using

 Laminated rubber bearing (LRB)

 Spherical Sliding Isolation Systems

101

Lead Rubber Bearing

Lead-rubber bearings (LRB) are among the frequently-used types of base

isolation bearings. (See figure on next slide)

An LRB is made from layers of rubber sandwiched together with layers of steel.

In the middle of the bearing is a solid lead "plug." On top and bottom, the bearing

is fitted with steel plates which are used to attach the bearing to the building and

foundation. The bearing is very stiff and strong in the vertical direction, but

flexible in the horizontal direction.

102

Lead Rubber Bearing

The bearing is very stiff and strong

in the vertical direction, but flexible
in the horizontal direction.

Lead-Rubber Bearing

Lead plug in the middle of bearing experiences the same deformation as

the rubber. However, it also generates heat as it does so. In other words, the
lead plug reduces, or dissipates, the energy of motion-- i.e., kinetic energy--
by converting that energy into heat
103

Lead Rubber Bearing

The bearing is very stiff and strong

in the vertical direction, but flexible
in the horizontal direction.

Lead-Rubber Bearing

Lead plug in the middle of bearing experiences the same deformation as

the rubber. However, it also generates heat as it does so. In other words, the
lead plug reduces, or dissipates, the energy of motion-- i.e., kinetic energy--
by converting that energy into heat
104

Lead Rubber Bearing

Experiments andobservations of base-isolated buildings in earthquakes have
been shown to reduce building accelerations to as little as 1/4 of the acceleration
of comparable fixed-base buildings, Increase or decrease in acceleration
proportionally increases or decreases inertial force as inertial forces are directly
related to acceleration (FI = ma).

Building base
isolated with LRB
(lower
Building resting displacement and
directly on acc. in building)
ground (large
displacements
and acc. in
building)
105

Spherical Sliding Isolation Systems

Lead-rubber bearings are just one of a number of different types of base isolation
bearings which have now been developed. Spherical Sliding Isolation Systems are
another type of base isolation. The building is supported by bearing pads that have
a curved surface and low friction.
106

Spherical Sliding Isolation Systems

 The force needed to move the building upwards limits the horizontal or lateral
forces (Transformation of K.E into P.E & vice versa) which would otherwise
cause building deformations.

 It should be noted that base isolation is not suitable for tall high rise
buildings or buildings located on soft soil.

 Base isolation is most effective for short to medium rise buildings located on
hard soil.
107

Tuned Mass Damper (TMD)

 Under a simple harmonic load, one can show that the main mass can be kept
completely stationary when the natural time period (of the attached absorber is
chosen to be (or tuned to) the time period of excitation .
 During an earthquake or wind , TMD will move against the direction of main
structural vibration and an inertia force will be acted on the structure to
reduce the response of the structure .
 TMD are effective in controlling wind induced excessive vibration in high rise
buildings due to one specific value of time period of tuned mass. However,
multiple tuned mass dampers have also been devised to control vibration
during earthquake corresponding to important modes
108

Tuned Mass Damper (TMD)

109

Tuned Mass Damper (TMD)

110

Assignment
1. Can we reduce the seismic risk of an existing building? Support your answer
with argument(s)
2. What will be your strategy as a design engineer to avoid soft story effect at a
floor (other than ground floor) without providing any wall?
3. How you will cope, as a design engineer, where you cannot avoid short
columns?
4. How will you handle a situation as a design engineer where you cannot
change the x-sectional dimensions of a very stiff beam connected to a
flexible column?
5. Suggest at least two methods of bracing the boundary walls.
111