Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E.

Ventura University of British Columbia

Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Vancouver Section

THE
Application of
RESPONSE Response Spectrum in
SPECTRUM Structural Engineering
Dr. Carlos E. Ventura, P.Eng.
Department of Civil Engineering
The University of British Columbia
A Technical Seminar on the Development
and Application of the Response Spectrum
Method for Seismic Design of Structures

Filename, 1 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Topics to be covered: 2

Background
Response Spectra Method of analysis
Mathematical background
Physical meaning of components
Examples
Damping
3D analysis
Summary

Filename, 2 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-1

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Purpose of Analysis 3

z Predict, for a design earthquake, the force and

deformation demands on the various components
that compose the structure
z Permit evaluation of the acceptability of structural
behavior (performance) through a series of
CAPACITY vs DEMAND checks

Filename, 3 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

NBCC 2005 Requirements: 4

4.1.8.7. Methods of Analysis

1) Analysis for design earthquake actions shall be carried out in

accordance with the Dynamic Analysis Procedure as per Article
4.1.8.12. (see Appendix A), except that the Equivalent Static Force
Procedure as per Article 4.1.8.11. may be used for structures that
meet any of the following criteria:
a) for cases where IEFaSa(0.2) is less than 0.35,
b) regular structures that are less than 60 m in height and have a
fundamental lateral period, Ta, less than 2 seconds in each of
two orthogonal directions as defined in Article 4.1.8.8., or
c) structures with structural irregularity, Types 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 8 as
defined in Table 4.1.8.6. that are less than 20 m in height and
have a fundamental lateral period, Ta, less than 0.5 seconds in
each of two orthogonal directions as defined in Article 4.1.8.8.

Filename, 4 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-2

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

4.1.8.12. Dynamic Analysis Procedures 5

1) The Dynamic Analysis Procedure shall be in accordance with one of the

following methods:
a) Linear Dynamic Analysis by either the Modal Response Spectrum
Method or the Numerical Integration Linear Time History Method
using a structural model that complies with the requirements of
Sentence 4.1.8.3.(8) (see Appendix A); or
b) Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis Method, in which case a special study
shall be performed (see Appendix A).
2) The spectral acceleration values used in the Modal Response Spectrum
Method shall be the design spectral acceleration values S(T) defined in
Sentence 4.1.8.4.(6)
3) The ground motion histories used in the Numerical Integration Linear Time
History Method shall be compatible with a response spectrum constructed
from the design spectral acceleration values S(T) defined in Sentence
4.1.8.4.(6) (see Appendix A).
4) The effects of accidental torsional moments ……

Filename, 5 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

What is the Response Spectrum Method (RSM)? 6

The Response Spectrum is an estimation of maximum

responses (i.e., acceleration, velocity and displacement) of a
family of SDOF systems subjected to a prescribed ground
motion.

The RSM utilizes the response spectrum to give the structural

designer a set of possible forces and deformations a real
structure would experience under earthquake loads.

For SDF systems, RSM gives quick and accurate peak

response without the need for a time-history analysis.

For MDF systems, a true structural system, RSM gives a

reasonably accurate peak response, again without the need for
a full time-history analysis.

Filename, 6 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-3

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

The Modal Response Spectrum Method

What are the “ingredients”?

Filename, 7 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

SEISMIC HAZARD 8

soil
Site conditions can have
significant effect on response.

Filename, 8 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-4

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

5% Damped Spectra for Four California Earthquakes 9

Pseuso Velocity, in/sec 100.0

10.0 El Centro
Loma Prieta
North Ridge
San Fernando
1.0 Average

0.1 Scaled to 0.40 g

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00
Period, seconds

Filename, 9 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

UHRS for Vancouver 10

Uniform Hazard Spectra

1.2

1.1
Mean for 2475-year Return Period
1
Mean for 975-year Return Period
0.9
Mean for 475-year Return Period
0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Spectral Period (s)
Filename, 10 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-5

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Design Spectra 11

z Acceleration response
spectrum is shown to the Sa
right.

z Displacement response
spectrum can be calculated Period, T
acceleration response spectrum
assuming simple harmonic
motion using expression T0
below: Sd

T2
Sd = Sa g
4π 2
Period, T
displacement response spectrum

TheFilename, 11
Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section 1-21-2 June
June 2007
2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

Elastic Design Spectrum 12

Filename, 12 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-6

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Linear Response of Structures 13

z Single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) oscillators

K
T

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

W g time, sec
Vibration Period T = 2π
K

Filename, 13 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Ground shaking has different effects on buildings

Filename, 14 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-7

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Multi-Story Structures 15

z Multi-story buildings can be idealized and analyzed

as multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) systems.
z Linear response can be viewed in terms of individual
modal responses.

Actual Building Idealized First- Second- Third-

Model Mode Mode Mode
Shape Shape Shape

Filename, 15 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

4.1.8.3.8 Structural Modelling 16

Structural modelling shall be representative of the magnitude and spatial

distribution of the mass of the building and stiffness of all elements of
the SFRS, which includes stiff elements that are not separated in
accordance with Sentence 4.1.8.3.(6), and shall account for:
a) the effect of the finite size of members and joints.

b) sway effects arising from the interaction of gravity loads with the
displaced configuration of the structure, and

c) the effect of cracked sections in reinforced concrete and

reinforced masonry elements.

d) other effects which influence the buildings lateral stiffness.

Filename, 16 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-8

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Dynamic Equilibrium Equations – discrete systems 17

a = Node accelerations
v = Node velocities
u = Node displacements
M = Mass matrix
C = Damping matrix
K = Stiffness matrix
F(t) = Time-dependent forces

Filename, 17 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

A way to solve the equations of motion. 18

• This will be done by a transformation of coordinates

from Normal Coordinates (displacements at the
nodes) to Modal Coordinates (amplitudes of the
natural Mode shapes).

• Because of the Orthogonality Property of the natural

mode shapes, the equations of motion become
uncoupled, allowing them to be solved as SDOF
equations.

• After solving, we can transform back to the normal

coordinates.

Filename, 18 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-9

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Uncoupled Equations of Motion 19

Filename, 19 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

20
Concept of Linear Combination of Mode Shapes
(Transformation of Coordinates)

Filename, 20 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-10

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

21
Concept of Linear Combination of Mode Shapes

N
{u(t)} = ∑ {φ n }Yn ( t )
n =1

Mode shape Response of SDOF

Filename, 21 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Modal Responses using Response Spectrum 22

Ln
Maximum modal displacement X n.Max := S (T , ξ ) ⋅φ n
Mn d n n
Ln
Modal forces
F i.n.Max :=
Mn
( )
S a T n , ξ n ⋅φ n

2
Ln
Modal base shears V b.n.Max :=
Mn
( )
S a T n ,ξ n φ n

Ln, Mn, and φn are system parameters determined from the Modal Analysis Method.

T T
L n := φ n m ⋅ 1 M n := φ n m⋅ φ n

(
S a T n ,ξ n ) System response from spectrum graph.

Filename, 22 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-11

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Modal Participation Factor, Γn 23

Γn = Ln/Mn
= {Φn}T[m]{1} ⁄ {Φn}T [m]{Φn}

It is a measure of the contribution of each mode to the total

Response of the system to the given type of excitation

It depends on how the mode shapes are scaled

Filename, 23 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Concept of Effective Modal Mass, m*n 24

m*n = Ln2 ⁄ Mn
= Γn2 {Φn}T [m]{Φn}
• The sum of the effective modal mass for all modes is equal to the
total structural mass.

• The value of effective modal mass is independent of mode shape

scaling.

Practical value of Effective Modal Mass:

Use enough modes in the analysis to provide a total effective
mass not less than 90% of the total structural mass (valid for base
shear calculation only)

Filename, 24 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-12

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Effective modal masses and modal heights 25

Modal mass

Modal height

We use this
information to
compute modal
base shears
and modal base
overturning
moments

Filename, 25 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Effective modal masses and modal heights 26

Modal mass
Slow

Fast

Modal height

We can use this information to compute modal base shears

and modal base overturning moments

Filename, 26 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-13

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Response Spectrum Method steps 27

Solution steps:

- Determine mass matrix, m

- Determine stiffness matrix, k

- Find the natural periods, Tn (or frequencies ωn=2π/Tn) and

mode shapes φn of the system

- Compute peak response for the nth mode, and repeat for
all modes.

- Combine individual modal responses for quantities of

interest (displacements, shears, moments, stresses, etc).

Filename, 27 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Physical meaning of mode shapes 28

Base-Isolated
Regular building Building with Podium building

Examine the behaviour of a simple 5 story building

that represents these cases

Filename, 28 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-14

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

5 DOF with uniform mass and stiffness 29

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5

5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1

1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1

Modal Periods (in sec):

T = 2.001 T = 0.685 T = 0.435 T = 0.338 T = 0.297

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Frequencies (in Hz):

f = 0.500 f = 1.459 f = 2.300 f = 2.955 f = 3.370

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Masses (as a function of "m"):

MM = 4.398 MM = 0.436 MM = 0.121 MM = 0.038 MM = 0.008

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Heights (as a function of "H"):

MH = 3.513 MH = −1.204 MH = 0.764 MH = −0.594 MH = 0.521

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Participation Factors:

Γ 1 = 1.252 Γ 2 = −0.394 Γ 3 = −0.208 Γ 4 = −0.116 Γ 5 = 0.053

Total mass:

∑MM⋅m = 1295.337
Filename, 29 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Modal Expansion (5 DOF with uniform mass and stiffness) 30

Deformation Vector Mode 1

Modal Contributions
Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5
5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3
= + + + +
2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

Vector Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5

5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3
= + + + +
2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

Vector Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5

5 5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3 3
= + + + +
2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

Filename, 30 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-15

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Relative movement mode shapes 31

5 DOF with uniform mass and stiffness

Filename, 31 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

5 DOF – Base Isolated 32

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5

5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1

1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1

Modal Periods (in sec):

T = 5.866 T = 0.900 T = 0.482 T = 0.351 T = 0.299

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Frequencies (in Hz):

f = 0.170 f = 1.111 f = 2.074 f = 2.845 f = 3.341

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Masses (as a function of "m"):

MM = 4.994 MM = 0.006 MM = 0.000 MM = 0.000 MM = 0.000

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Heights (as a function of "H"):

MH = 3.048 MH = −38.558 MH = 0.512 MH = −38.503 MH = 0.501

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Participation Factors:

Γ 1 = 1.037 Γ 2 = −0.046 Γ 3 = −0.012 Γ 4 = −0.004 Γ 5 = 0.002

Total mass:

∑MM⋅m = 1295.337
Filename, 32 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-16

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Relative movement mode shapes 33

5 DOF – Base Isolated

Filename, 33 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

5 DOF – with Podium 34

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5

5 5 5 5 5

4 4 4 4 4

3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1

1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1

Modal Periods (in sec):

T = 2.001 T = 0.724 T = 0.523 T = 0.407 T = 0.341

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Frequencies (in Hz):

f = 0.500 f = 1.382 f = 1.913 f = 2.457 f = 2.929

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Masses (as a function of "m"):

MM = 3.316 MM = 0.990 MM = 0.634 MM = 0.056 MM = 0.004

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Heights (as a function of "H"):

MH = 3.555 MH = 0.102 MH = 0.941 MH = 0.114 MH = 1.509

1 2 3 4 5
Modal Participation Factors:

Γ 1 = 1.327 Γ 2 = −0.658 Γ 3 = −0.441 Γ 4 = −0.169 Γ 5 = 0.046

Total mass:

∑MM⋅m = 1295.337
Filename, 34 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-17

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Relative movement mode shapes 35

5 DOF – with Podium

Filename, 35 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

RSM – a sample calculations of a 5-storey shear-beam type building. 36

Typical storey height is h=12 ft. 1 0 0 0 0

0 1 0 0 0

m = 0 0 1 0 0 X 100 kips/g

0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 1

2 -1 0 0 0

-1 2 -1 0 0

k = 0 -1 2 -1 0 X 31.54kip/in.

0 0 -1 2 -1
(Example from Chopra’s book) 0 0 0 -1 1
Filename, 36 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-18

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Natural vibration modes of a 5-storey shear building. 37

Mode shapes φn of the system:

T1 = 2.01s T2 = 0.68s T3 = 0.42s T4 = 0.34s T5 = 0.29s

Assume a damping ratio of 5% for all modes

Filename, 37
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section No.1-2
37June 2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

Obtain values from Response Spectrum: 38

T1 = 2.01s
T2 = 0.68s
T3 = 0.42s
T4 = 0.34s
T5 = 0.29s

Filename, 38
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section No.1-2
38June 2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-19

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

. . . Results: 39

Filename, 39 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Modal Combinations to estimate peak response: 40

• Modal maxima do not occur at the same time, in

general.

• Any combination of modal maxima may lead to

results that may be either conservative or
unconservative.

• Accuracy of results depends on what modal

combination technique is being used and on the
dynamic properties of the system being analysed.

• Three of the most commonly used modal

combination methods are:

Filename, 40 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-20

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Modal Combinations…. 41

a) Sum of the absolute values:

• leads to very conservative results

• assumes that maximum modal values occur at the same time

• response of any given degree of freedom of the system is

estimated as

Filename, 41 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Modal Combinations….. 42

b) Square root of the sum of the squares

(SRSS or RMS):
• Assumes that the individual modal maxima are statistically independent.
• SRSS method generally leads to values that are closer to the “exact”
ones than those obtained using the sum of the absolute values.

• Results can be conservative or unconservative.

• Results from an SRSS analysis can be significantly unconservative if
modal periods are closely spaced.

• The response is estimated as:

Filename, 42 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-21

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Modal Combinations…. 43

c) Complete quadratic combination (CQC):

• The method is based on random vibration theory
• It has been incorporated in several commercial analysis programs
• A double summation is used to estimate maximum responses,

ρ is a cross-modal coefficient (always positive), which for constant

damping, z, is evaluated by

Where r = ρn / ρm and must be equal to or less than 1.0.

Similar equations can be applied for the computation of member forces,
interstorey deformations, base shears and overturning moments.
Filename, 43 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Modal combinations – for 5 DOF example: 44

Correct base shear is 73.278 kips (from time-history analysis)

ABSSUM: Summation of absolute values of individual modal
responses

Vb ≤ Σ |Vbn| = 98.41 kips → grossly over-estimated

SRSS: Square root of sum of squares

Vb = (Σ Vbn2)1/2 = 66.07 kips

→good estimate if frequencies are spread out

CQC: Vb = (ΣΣVbi ρinVbn)1/2 = 66.51 kips

→ good estimate if frequencies are closely spaced

Filename, 44 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-22

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Damping 45

Damping => Capacity of the system to

dissipate energy

For mathematical simplicity we assume that

damping is proportional to the relative velocity
of the system (viscous damping), but….

Filename, 45 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Damping – the big uncertainty! 46

Filename, 46 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-23

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Damping – the big uncertainty! 47

We are oversimplifying a very

complex problem, and the selection
of appropriate viscous damping
values carries a lot of uncertainty!

So, how do we deal with damping?

Filename, 47 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Development of a Modal Damping Matrix

48

That is, the mode shapes can uncouple the damping matrix
Filename, 48 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-24

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Rayleigh Proportional Damping 49

Filename, 49 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Rayleigh Proportional Damping 50

Filename, 50 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-25

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Example of Rayleigh Proportional Damping 51

Filename, 51 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Wilson Damping 52

Filename, 52 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-26

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

53

Illustrative Example

Filename, 53 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Analysis of 6-storey building 54

Study the response of the building

to the N-S component of the
recorded accelerations at El Centro,
California, in May 18, 1940.

• All girders: witdh b = 0.40 m, depth h = 0.50 m.

• All columns have square section with a cross section dimension h = 0.50 m.
• Material of the structure has E = 25 GPa.
• The self weight of structure plus additional dead load is 780 kg/m2 and the
industrial machinery, which is firmly connected to the building slabs,
increases the mass per unit area by 1000 kg/m2, for a total mass per unit
area of 1780 kg/m2.

Filename, 54 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-27

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Dynamic properties: 55

The modal participation factors are:

Filename, 55 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

The total effective mass is computed as: 56

Filename, 56 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-28

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Displacement Response Spectrum for El Centro Earthquake 57

Filename, 57 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Maximum displacement values 58

for the uncoupled degrees of freedom

The maximum displacements for each mode are obtained from:

Filename, 58 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-29

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Maximum lateral displacements for each mode 59

Filename, 59 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Maximum story drift (%h) for each mode 60

Filename, 60 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-30

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Maximum modal forces for each mode 61

Filename, 61 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Maximum story shear for each mode 62

Filename, 62 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-31

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Base shear (kN) 63

Overturning moment (kN · m)

Filename, 63 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

64
Overturning moment for each mode

Maximum modal overturning moment at the base, in kN · m,

Filename, 64 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-32

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Maximum credible lateral displacements (m) 65

We now apply the SRSS procedure to each of the row of previous matrix. For
example for the roof (6th story):

Filename, 65 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

66
SRSS procedure for drift, storey shears

Maximum credible base shear

Maximum credible base overturning moment

Filename, 66 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-33

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Comparison of results 67

Filename, 67 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

CAUTION! 68

‰ Do NOT compute story shears from the

story drifts derived from the SRSS of the
story displacements.

‰ Calculate the story Shears in each mode

(using modal drifts) and then SRSS the
results.

Filename, 68 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-34

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

69
69

TheFilename, 69
Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section 1-21-2 June
June 2007
2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

Dynamic Equilibrium Equations – 3D analysis 70

F(t) = Time-dependent forces

Filename, 70 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-35

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

2-D versus 3-D Models 71

z 2D models adequate for structures with reasonably

balanced mass and stiffness distributions.

• If center of mass and center of rigidity do not match,

torsional response results, so 3D models are needed.
center of center of center of
mass and rigidity mass rigidity

2-D Models OK 3-D Models Required

Filename, 71 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Example of 3D behaviour of building 72

„ Constructed in 1993
„ 32 – storey residential
tower in Vancouver
„ 3 levels of underground
parking
„ Concrete with central
core shear walls

Filename, 72 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-36

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

AV testing of the City Tower building: 73

•Used Kinemetrics FBA-11 accelerometers

•Each record has 64K samples at 200 sps
•On-site data analysis
•All field work for each test conducted in one day

Filename, 73 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Results for CTC 32 – Spectral densities

Filename, 74 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-37

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Mode Shapes for CTC 32

Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

T = 1.83s T = 1.55s T = 0.78s

Filename, 75 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Mode Shapes for CTC 32

Mode 4 Mode 5 Mode 6

T = 0.43s T = 0.34s T = 0.27s

Filename, 76 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-38

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

THREE-DIMENSIONAL COMPUTER MODEL 77

• Real and accidental torsional effects must be considered for all structures.
Therefore, all structures must be treated as three-dimensional systems.
• Structures with irregular plans, vertical setbacks or soft stories will cause no
additional problems if a realistic three-dimensional computer model is created.
• This model should be developed in the very early stages of design because it
can be used for static wind and vertical loads, as well as dynamic seismic loads.
• Only structural elements with significant stiffness and ductility should be
modeled. Non-structural brittle components can be neglected. However,
shearing, axial deformations and non-center line dimensions can be considered
in all members without a significant increase in computational effort by most
modern computer programs.
• The rigid, in-plane approximation of floor systems has been shown to be
acceptable for most buildings. For the purpose of elastic dynamic analysis, gross
concrete sections are normally used, neglecting the stiffness of the steel. A
cracked section mode should be used to check the final design.

Filename, 77 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

THREE-DIMENSIONAL COMPUTER MODEL 78

The P-Delta effects should be included in all structural models. The effect of
including P-Delta displacements in a dynamic analysis results in a small increase
in the period of all modes. In addition to being more accurate, an additional
advantage of automatically including P-Delta effects is that the moment
magnification factor for all members can be taken as unity in all subsequent
stress checks.
The mass of the structure can be estimated with a high degree of accuracy. The
major assumption required is to estimate the amount of live load to be included as
added mass. The lumped mass approximation has proven to be accurate. In
the case of the rigid diaphragm approximation, the rotational mass moment of
inertia must be calculated.
The stiffness of the foundation region of most structures can be modeled using
massless structural elements. It is particularly important to model the stiffness of
piles and the rotational stiffness at the base of shear walls.
The computer model for static loads only should be executed before conducting a
dynamic analysis. Equilibrium can be checked and various modeling
approximations can be verified using simple static load patterns. The results of a
dynamic analysis are generally very complex and the forces obtained from a
response spectra analysis are always positive. Therefore, dynamic equilibrium is
almost impossible to check. However, it is relatively simple to check energy
balances in both linear and nonlinear analysis.
Filename, 78 1-2 June 2007
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-39

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

3D models: 79

The current code defines an “irregular structure” as one that has a

certain geometric shape or in which stiffness and mass discontinuities
exist. A far more rational definition is that a “regular structure” is one in
which there is a minimum coupling between the lateral displacements
and the torsional rotations for the mode shapes associated with the
lower frequencies of the system. Therefore, if the model is modified and
“tuned” by studying the three-dimensional mode shapes during the
preliminary design phase, it may be possible to convert a “geometrically
irregular” structure to a “dynamically regular” structure from an
earthquake-resistant design standpoint.

Filename, 79 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura
No. 79

Examples of 3D analysis 80

Filename, 80
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section No.1-2
80June 2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-40

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

81

Three Dimensional
Base Forces and
Moments

Filename, 81
The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section No.1-2
81June 2007 Dr. C.E. Ventura

82

Three Dimensional
Participating Mass
- (percent)

Filename, 82 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-41

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Simple 3D building 83

Filename, 83 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Base Shears in Each Frame for First Five Modes 84

Filename, 84 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-42

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

Comparison of Modal Combination Methods 85

Filename, 85 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

RSM – Summary 86

Response spectrum method offers a standardized

solution to evaluate structures according to the National
Building Code of Canada. The method is simple,
straightforward, yet powerful that the designer can
assess his design in a timely and efficient manner – ie.
back of envelope calculations.

With the use of powerful computer hardware and

computer modeling software available today, RSM offers
a way for a designer to quickly verify and understand the
sometimes non-intuitive results obtained from those
sophisticated tools.

Filename, 86 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-43

Application of Response Spectrum in Carlos E. Ventura University of British Columbia
Structural Engineering Vancouver, June 1st & 2nd

87

RSM – Summary

Filename, 87 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

References & Notes 88

Anil Chopra, “Dynamics of Structures,”2nd Ed. Prentice Hall, 2001.

Saatcioglu, M. and Humar, J.Donald L. Anderson. “Dynamic analysis of

buildings for earthquake resistant design,” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 30: 338–359
(2003)

Some of the slides included here were kindly provided by Dr. Mete Zosen
and Dr. Luis Garcia of Purdue University

Notice
While the instructors have tried to be as accurate as possible, they cannot be held responsible for the designs of others that
might be based on the material presented in this course and these notes. The material taught at this course is intended for
the use of professional personnel competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its contents and
recommendations, and who will accept the responsibility for its application. The instructors and the sponsoring organizations
disclaim any and all responsibility for the applications of the stated principles and for the accuracy of any of the material
taught at the course and contained in these notes.

Filename, 88 1-2 June 2007

The Response Spectrum - CSCE Vancouver Section Dr. C.E. Ventura

Response Spectrum Seminar Lecture 4 P4-44