2.

DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Simplicity and symmetry. Earthquakes repeatedly demonstrate that the simplest structures
have the greatest chance of survival, due to the fact that overall earthquake behavior of a
structure as well as its structural details is markedly greater for a simple one than for a
complex one.
Symmetry is desirable in both directions on plan. Lack of symmetry produces torsional
effects which are tedious and difficult to assess properly and which can be very destructive.

1
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Overall shape should not be elongated. The longer a building is in plan, the more chance
there is of different earthquake movements being applied simultaneously to the two ends of
it, a situation which may produce disastrous results. If for a given plan area, a square plan
shape is not satisfactory for architectural reasons, then two or more separate buildings may
be the answer. This is sometimes done by slicing a long building into sections with
movement-gaps between. But this could be a partial solution because of the difficulty of
properly detailing the gaps, which have to be 100 mm or more in width to prevent adjacent
sections of the building battering each other.
For simple rules for plan layouts of aseismic buildings, please refer to Figure 2.1.

For the elevation it seems reasonable to suggest a limited slenderness for most buildings:
Height-to-width should not exceed 3 or 4. The more slender a building, the worse the
overturning effects of an earthquake and the greater the earthquake stresses in the outer
columns, particularly the overturning compressive forces which can be very difficult to deal
with.
Refer to Figure 2.2 for simple rules on elevation shapes of aseismic buildings.

2
DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

DO DON’T COMMENTS
Ideal for behavior and analysis

Good symmetry, analysis less easy

Beware of differential behavior at opposite
ends of long buildings
Bad for asymmetrical effects
Although symmetrical long wings give
behavior prediction problems
Projecting access towers. Problems with
analysis and detailing
Asymmetry of members resisting
horizontal shear. Analysis and torsion
problems

Figure 2.1. Simple rules for plan layouts of aseismic buildings. (Only with
dynamic analysis and careful detailing should these rules be broken)
3
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

DO DON’T COMMENTS
b Very slender buildings have
b
excessive horizontal
deflections
h>4b
h<4b

Effects of façade setbacks

cannot be predicted by normal
code equivalent static analyses

Figure 2.2. Simple rules for elevation shapes of aseismic buildings.

(Only with dynamic analysis and careful detailing should these rules
be broken)

4
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Structure Configuration Requirements. If for any other reasons the structure becomes
structurally regular or irregular, each structure shall be clearly defined in accordance with
the provisions of Sections 208.4.5.1 and 208.4.5.2 of the NSCP 5 th Edition as follows:
 Regular structures have no significant physical discontinuities in plan or vertical
configuration or in their lateral-force-resisting systems.
 Irregular structures have significant physical discontinuities in configuration or in
their lateral-force-resisting systems in vertical and plan configurations.

5
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Vertical irregularities as defined in NSCP Table 208-9 can be divided into two categories
as:
 Dynamic force distribution irregularity that includes Types 1, 2 and 3 irregularities.
This category requires that the distribution of lateral forces be determined by
combined dynamic modes of vibration. For regular structures without abrupt
changes in stiffness or mass (I.e., structures without “vertical structural
irregularities”), this shape can be assumed to be linearly-varying or a triangular shape
as represented by the code force distribution pattern. However, for irregular
structures, the pattern can be significantly different and must be determined by the
combined mode shapes from the dynamic analysis procedure and thereby bypass the
checks for vertical irregularity Types 1, 2 and 3.
 Irregularity in load path or force transfer that includes Types 4 and 5. When this
irregularity exists, there is the possibility of having localized concentrations of
excessive inelastic deformations due to irregular load path or weak story. In this case,
the code prescribes additional strengthening to correct the deficiencies.

6
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
The five vertical irregularities are as follows:
 Type 1. Stiffness Irregularity – Soft Story. A soft story is one in which the lateral
stiffness is less than 70% of that in the story above or less than 80% of the average
stiffness of the three stories above.
 Type 2. Weight (mass) Irregularity. Mass irregularity shall be considered to exist
where the effective mass of any story is more than 150% of the effective mass of an
adjacent story. A roof that is lighter than the floor below need not be considered.
 Type 3. Vertical Geometric Irregularity. Vertical geometric irregularity shall be
considered to exist where the horizontal dimension of the lateral-force-resisting
system in any story is more than 130% of that in adjacent story. One-story
penthouses need not be considered.
 Type 4. In-Plane Discontinuity In Vertical Lateral-Force-Resisting System. An in-
plane offset of the lateral-force-resisting elements is greater than the length of those
elements.
 Type 5. Discontinuity in Capacity – Weak Story. A weak story is one in which the
storey strength is less than 80% of that in the story above. The story strength is the
total strength of all seismic-resisting elements sharing the story for the direction
under consideration.

7
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.1. A six-story concrete SMRF is shown below. The specified lateral
forces Fx from NSCP equations 208-14 and 208-15 were used and the corresponding
displacement Dx at the floor center of mass were found as shown.
Determine the type of vertical irregularity that exists in the first story, if any.

A B C Solution and discussion:

8000 8000
Based on the given information, since
Ft+F6 Roof
S6 =
displacement at the floor center of
57.24 mm mass is specified, this can be related to
3000

F5 6th stiffness irregularity; that is, if a soft

S5 =
51.31 mm
story exists in the structure.
3000

F4 5th
S4 =
To determine if this is a true case of
44.45 mm Type 1 vertical irregularity, two tests
3000

F3 4th can be performed.

S3 =
36.83 mm
3000

F2 3rd
S2 =
27.43 mm
3000

F1 2nd
S1 =
18.03 mm
3500

GF

TYPICAL ELEVATION

8
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
 The story stiffness is less than 70% of that of the story above.
 The story stiffness is less than 80% of the average stiffness of the three stories above.
If the stiffness of the story meets at least one of the above tests, the structure is considered to
have a soft story, and a dynamic analysis is generally required per Section 208.4.8.3 item 2,
unless the irregular structure is not more than five stories or 20 meters in height per Section
208.4.8.3 item 3.
From the given displacements. Storey drifts and the story drift ratio values are determined.
Commentary: The story drift ratio is the story drift divided by the story height. These will be
used for the required comparisons since these better represent the changes in the slope of
the mode shape when there are significant differences in interstory height. (Note: storey
displacements can be used if the story heights are nearly equal).
In terms of the calculated story drift ratios, the soft story occurs when one of the following
conditions exists, by expressing the two tests in mathematical form, as follows:

 S   S  S1 
(a) When 0 .70  1    2 
h
 1   h2 
or
 S  1  S  S1   S3  S2   S4  S3  
(b) When 0.80  1    2        
h
 1  3  h2   h3   h4  9
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Calculate the story drift ratios for the adjacent stories of the first story.
 S1  18 .03  0
    0 .00515
h
 1  3500
 S2  S1  27 .43  18 .03
    0 .00313
 h2  3000
 S3  S2  36 .83  27 .43
    0 . 00313
 h3  3000
 S4  S3  44 .45  36 . 83
    0 .00254
 h 4  3000
Take the average of the three stories above the first story.

1  S2  S1   S3  S2   S4  S3  

Check either of the two tests:          
3  h2   h3   h4 

(a) 0 .70 ( 00 .515 )  0 . 00360  0 . 00313

0 .00313  0 .00313  0 .00254
hence, soft story exists  0 . 00293
3
or

(b) 0.80 ( 0.00515)  0.00412  0 .00293

likewise, soft story exists
10
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
As a general practice, the tabulation is created to check all stories unless a dynamic analysis
is performed.

Avg o f
Sto ry Sto ry Sto ry Drift
Sto ry SDR o f So ft Sto ry
Sto ry Disp He ig ht Ra tio 70% SDR 80% SDR
Drift ne xt 3 Sta tus
(mm ) (m m ) [SDR]
sto rie s
6th 57.24 3000 5.93 0.00198 0.00139 0.00158 - -
5th 51.31 3000 6.86 0.00229 0.00160 0.00183 - no
4th 44.45 3000 7.62 0.00254 0.00178 0.00203 - no
3rd 36.83 3000 9.40 0.00313 0.00219 0.00250 0.00227 ye s
2nd 27.43 3000 9.40 0.00313 0.00219 0.00250 0.00265 no
1st 18.03 3500 18.03 0.00515 0.00361 0.00412 0.00293 ye s

11
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.2. A five-story special moment frame office building has a heavy utility
equipment installation at 3rd floor. This results in the floor weight distribution shown below.
Determine the type of vertical irregularity that exists in the structure, if any.

A B C
8000 8000

W 6= Roof
350 kN

3000
W 5= 5th
500 kN

3000
W 4= 4th
500 kN

3000
W 3= 3rd
3000 800 kN

W 2= 2nd
400 kN
3500

GF

Solution and discussion: TYPICAL ELEVATION

Based on the given information, Type 2 vertical weight (mass) irregularity need to be
checked.
12
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Solution and discussion:
Based on the given information, vertical weight (mass) irregularity need to be checked.
Check the effective mass of Level 3 against the effective mass of Levels 2 and 4.

at level 2 A B C

1 .50 W2  1 .50 ( 400 ) 8000 8000

1 .50 W2  600 kN W 6= Roof

350 kN

3000
5th
W3  800 kN  600 kN W 5=
500 kN

3000
hence, weight irregulari ty exists
W 4= 4th
500 kN

3000
at level 4
W 3= 3rd
1 .50 W4  1 .50 ( 500 ) 3000 800 kN

1 .50 W4  750 kN 2nd

W 2=
400 kN
3500

W3  800 kN  750 kN
GF
hence, weight irregulari ty exists
TYPICAL ELEVATION

13
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.3. The lateral force-resisting system of the four-storey special moment
frame building shown below has a 7.50m setback at the 3 rd and 4th stories.
Determine the type of vertical irregularity that exists in the structure, if any.
A B C D E
Solution and discussion:
7500 7500 7500 7500
Based on the given information,
Roof
by inspection, Type 3 vertical

3000
geometric irregularity exists. 4th

In this example, the setback of

3000
Level 4 must be checked. The 3rd

ratio of the two levels (Levels 3

3000
and 4) is calculated as 2nd

3500
GF

TYPICAL ELEVATION

width of level 3 30
  1 . 333
width of level 4 22.5
or, 133 .3 %  130 %
hence, vertical geometric irregulari ty exists

14
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Commentary: The more than 130% change in the width of the lateral force-resisting system
between adjacent stories could result in a primary mode shape that is substantially different
from the triangular shape assumed for NSCP Eq. 208-15. If the change is a decrease in
width of the upper story (which is the usual situation), the mode shape difference can be
mitigated by designing for an increased stiffness in the storey with a reduced width.
Similarly, if the width decrease is in the lower adjacent story (which is unusual), this leads
to Type 1 soft story irregularity and this can be avoided by a proportional increase in the
stiffness of the lower story. However, this situation could cause an overturning moment load
transfer discontinuity and shall be proportioned in accordance with the provision of Section
208.5.8.1.

15
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.4. A concrete building has the building frame system as shown below.
The shear wall between lines A and B has an in-plane offset from the shear wall between
lines C and D.
Determine the type of vertical irregularity that exists in the structure, if any.
A B C D
Solution and discussion: 7500 7500 7500

Based on the given information, by Roof

inspection, Type 4 vertical irregularity SHEAR

3500
WALL
exists, that is, in-plane discontinuity in 4th
the vertical lateral-force-resisting

3500
system. 7500
3rd

In this example, there is an in-plane 15000 SHEAR

3500
offset of the lateral-force resisting 2nd
WALL

elements which is greater than the length

of those elements. The left side of the

3500
upper shear wall (lines A and B) is offset GF

15 m from the left side of the lower TYPICAL ELEVATION

shear wall (lines (C and D). This 15 m
offset is greater than the 7.50 m length
of the offset wall elements.

16
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Commentary: The intent of this irregularity check is to provide correction of force transfer
or load path deficiencies. It should be noted that any in-plane offset, even those less or
equal to the length or bay width of the resisting element, can result in an overturning
moment load transfer discontinuity that requires application of Section 208.5.8.1.(elements
supporting discontinuous system)
When the offset exceeds the length of the resisting element (as in this example), there is also
a shear transfer discontinuity that requires application of Section 208.8.2.5(collector
element) for the strength of collector elements along the offset. In this example, the columns
under wall A-B are subject to the provisions of Sections 208.5.8.1 and 421.5.4.5, and the
collector element between lines B and C at Level 3 is subject to provisions of Section
208.8.2.5.

17
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.5. A concrete bearing wall building has the typical transverse shear wall
configuration shown below. All walls in this direction are identical, and the individual piers
have the shear contribution given in the table below. Vn is the nominal shear strength
calculated in accordance with NSCP Section 421.7.4 and V m is the shear strength
corresponding to the development of the nominal flexure strength calculated in accordance
with NSCP Section 421.7.5.
Determine the type of vertical irregularity that exists in the structure, if any.
Pier Vn (kN) Vm (kN)
1 20 30
Roof 2 30 40
3 15 10
3500

3rd 4 20 15
3500

5 6 7
2nd Pier Vn (kN) Vm (kN)
5 80 120
3500

1 2 3 4
GF 6 15 10
TYPICAL ELEVATION 7 20 15

18
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Solution and discussion:
Based on the given information, by inspection, Type 5 vertical irregularity, discontinuity in
capacity – weak story, need to be checked.
In this example, a weak story is one in which the storey strength is less than 80% of that in
the story above. The story strength is the total strength of all seismic-resisting elements
sharing the story for the direction under consideration.
Using the smaller values Vn and Vm of given for each pier, the story strengths are

1st story strength   smaller of Vn and Vm of ground floor piers

1st story strength  20  30  10  15  75 kN

2nd story strength   smaller of Vn and Vm of second floor piers

2nd story strength  80  10  15  105 kN
Check the 1st story strength if less than 80% of that of 2 nd story strength

1st story strength  0.8 * (2nd story strength) ???

75 kN  0.8(105)  84 kN
hence, weak story condition exists

19
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Commentary: The irregularity check is to detect any concentration of inelastic behavior in

one supporting story that can lead to the loss of vertical load capacity. Elements subject to
this check are the shear wall piers, bracing members and their connections, and frame
columns.
Because a weak story is not allowed for structures greater than two two stories or 9 m in
height, the 1st story piers in this example must either be strengthened by a factor of
84/75=1.12, or designed for W0 times the forces prescribed in Section 208.5.

20
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Plan irregularities as defined in NSCP Table 208-10 can be categorized as being either
special response conditions or cases of irregular load path. The five types of plan
irregularities are:
 Type 1. Torsional Irregularity. This type is considered when diaphragms are not
flexible. Torsional irregularity shall be considered to exist when the maximum storey
drift, computed including accidental torsion, at one end of the structure transverse
to an axis is more than 1.2 times the average of the story drifts of the two ends of
the structure. When the ratio of maximum drift to average drift exceeds the given
limit, there is the potential for an unbalance in the inelastic deformation demands at
the two extreme sides of a story. As a consequence, the equivalent stiffness of the
side having maximum deformation will be reduced, and the eccentricity between
the centers of mass (CM) and rigidity (CR) will be increased along with the
corresponding torsions. An amplification factor Ax is to be applied to the accidental
eccentricity to represent the effects of this unbalanced stiffness, given by the
expression
2
  
A x   max NSCP  eq.
  3 .0
208-16
 1 . 2  avg 
where,
davg =the average of the displacements at the extreme points of the structure at
level x.
dmax = the maximum displacement at level x.

21
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
 Type 2. Re-entrant Corners. Plan configurations of a structure and its lateral-force-
resisting system contain re-entrant corners, where both projections of the structure
beyond a re-entrant corner are greater than 15% of the plan dimension of the
structure in the given direction. The opening and closing deformation response or
flapping action of the projecting legs of the building plan adjacent to re-entrant
corners can result in concentrated forces at the corner point. Elements must be
provided to transfer these forces into the diaphragms.

 Type 3. Diaphragm Discontinuity. Diaphragms with abrupt discontinuities or

variations in stiffness, including those having cut-out or open areas greater than 50%
of the gross enclosed area of the diaphragm, or changes in effective diaphragm
stiffness of more than 50% from one storey to the next. Excessive openings in a
diaphragm can result in a flexible diaphragm response along with force
concentrations and load path deficiencies at the boundaries of the openings. Elements
must be provided to transfer the forces into the diaphragm and the structural system.

22
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
 Type 4. Out-of-Plane Offsets. This type describes discontinuities in a lateral force
path, such out-of-plane offsets of the vertical elements. In this case, shears and
overturning moments must be transferred from the level above the offset to the level
below the offset, and there is a horizontal “offset” in the load path for the shears.

 Type 5. Nonparallel Systems. The vertical lateral-force-resisting elements are not

parallel to or symmetric about the major orthogonal axes of the lateral-force systems.
The response deformations and load patterns on a system with nonparallel lateral-
force-resisting elements can have significant differences from that of a regular
system. Further analysis of deformation and load behavior may be necessary.

23
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.6. A four-story special moment resisting frame building has rigid floor
diaphragms. Under specified seismic forces, including effects of accidental torsion, it has
the following displacements at Levels 2 and 3.

A B
8000

Roof
3000

4th
3000

3rd R,2 = 48.5 mm

L,2 = 33 mm dL,2 = 33 mm dR,2 = 48.5 mm
3000

2nd dL,1 = 25 mm dR,1 = 30.5 mm

R,1 = 30.5 mm
L,1 = 25 mm
3500

GF

TYPICAL ELEVATION

Determine the type of plan irregularity that exists at the third level, if any.
Compute the torsional amplification factor Ax for Level 3.

24
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Solution and discussion:
Based on the given information, by inspection, Type 1 plan irregularity, torsional
irregularity seems to have existed in the system particularly at the second story and need
to be checked.
This irregularity check is defined in terms of storey drift
 x   x   x  1
at ends R (right) and L (left) sides of the structure. Torsional irregularity exists at level x
when   R, x L, x
 max   R, x  1 .2
where 2
 L, 2   L, 2   L,1
 max  1 . 2 (  avg )
 R, 2   R, 2   R,1
 R, x   L, x
 avg 
2
 L, 3   L, 3   L, 2  33  25
determining story drifts at level 3
 L, 3  8 mm
 R, 3   R, 3   R, 2  48 . 5  30 . 5
 R, 3  18 mm
 R, x   L, x 18  8
 avg  
2 2
 avg  13 mm 25
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
checking the criterion for torsional irregularity
 max
 1 .2
 avg
 max  R, 2 18
   1 .385  1 .2
 avg  avg 13
thence, torsional irregularity exists in the third level.
Compute the amplification factor Ax for level 3.
When torsional irregularity exists at a certain level x, the accidental eccentricity (equal to
5% of the building dimension) must be increased by an amplification factor Ax. This must be
done for each level, and each level may have a different Ax value.
2
  max  NSCP eq. 208-16
where A x     3 .0

 1 .2  avg 
 max   R,3  48 . 5 mm
 R, 3   L, 3 48 .5  33
 avg  
2 2
 avg values
substituting  40 .75obtained
mm
2
 48 . 5 
Ax     3 .0
 1 . 2 ( 40 . 75 ) 
A x  0 . 984  1 . 0
use A x  1 . 0
26
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
As a general practice, the tabulation is created to check all stories.

Sto ry d isp l, mm Sto ry drift, mm Avg SD @  ma x/ Irre g ula rity

Le ve l
@ Line 1 @ Line 3 @ Line 1 @ Line 3 le ve l  a vg c he c k
Ro o f
4th
3rd 33 48.5 8 18 13 1.385 ye s
2nd 25 30.5 25 30.5 27.75 1.099 no
GF 0 0

27
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.7. The plan configuration of a ten-story special moment frame building
is as shown below.
Determine the type of plan irregularity that exists, if any.

A B C 37500 D E F
7500 7500 7500 7500 7500

5
6000

4
6000
24000

3
6000

2
6000

TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN

28
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Solution and discussion:
Based on the given information, by inspection, Type 2, re-entrant corner need to be checked.
The plan configuration of this building, and its lateral force resisting system, have identical
re-entrant corner dimensions.
For the sides on lines 1 and 5, the projection beyond the re-entrant corner is

dim line 5  dim line 1  37 . 5  30 . 0  7 . 5 m

7.5
or, this is or 20% of the 37.5 m plan dimension
37.5
For the sides on lines A and F, the projection beyond the re-entrant corner is

dim lineA  dim lineF  24 . 0  18 . 0  6 . 0 m

6.0
or, this is
since both projections exceed or 25% of the 24.0 m plan dimension
24.0 15%, then there is a re-entrant corner irregularity in the
system.
Commentary: Whenever Type 2 re-entrant corner plan irregularity exists, the provisions of
Section 208.8.2.8 items 6 and 7 shall apply.

29
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.8. A five-story concrete building has a bearing wall system located
around the perimeter of the building. Lateral forces are resisted by the bearing walls acting
as shear walls. The floor plan of the second floor of the building is shown below. The
symmetrically placed open area in the diaphragm is for an atrium, and has dimensions of
12 m x 23 m. All diaphragms above the second floor are without significant openings.

A B 38000 C D
7500 23000 7500

6000
3

24000
12000

2
6000

Determine the type of plan irregularity that exists at the second floor level, if any.
1

30
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Solution and discussion:
Based on the given information, by inspection, Type 3, diaphragm discontinuity irregularity
need to be checked.
Analyzing the plan configuration
gross enclosed area of the diaphragm is
A gross ,diaph  24 * 38  912 m 2

area of opening is
A opening  12 * 23  276 m 2

get 50% of the gross area:

0 . 5 A gross ,diaph  0 .5 ( 912 )  456 m 2  276 m 2

based on the computed areas, there is no diaphragm discontinuity irregularity that exists.
Commentary: The stiffness of the second floor diaphragm with its opening must be
compared with the stiffness of the solid diaphragm at the third floor. If the change in
stiffness exceeds 50%, then a diaphragm discontinuity irregularity exists for the structure.

31
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.9. A four-story building has a concrete shear wall lateral force resisting
system configuration. The plan configuration of the shear walls is shown below.
A B C D E
F
30000
7500 7500 7500 7500

3
Solution and discussion:
An out-of-plane offset plan

7500
irregularity exists when there

15000
are discontinuities in a lateral 2

force path, for example, out- 1 2 3

7500
of-plane offsets of vertical

3000
resisting elements such as 1
shear walls. The first story TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN

3000
shear wall on line D has 7.5 m A B C D E
F
3000
out-of-plane offset to the 7500 7500
30000
7500 7500

shear wall on line E at the

3000

second story and above.

7500
Therefore, obviously, this ELEVATION LINE E
constitutes an out-of-plane

15000
2
offset irregularity.

7500
Determine the type of plan irregularity that exists between the first and second stories, if
any. 1
GROUND FLOOR PLAN

32
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Example Problem 2.10. A ten-story building has the floor plan shown below at all levels.
Special moment resisting frames are located on the perimeter of the building on Lines 1, 4,
A and F.

A B C D E
30000 F
7500 7500 7500 7500

4
Solution and discussion:
The vertical lateral force-
resisting frame elements
7500

located on line F are not

3 parallel to the major
orthogonal axes of the
building (I.e., lines 4 and A).
22500
7500

Therefore, a nonparallel
2 system irregularity exists.
7500

TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN

Determine
1 the type of plan irregularity that exists, if any.

33
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
Uniform and continuous distribution of strength. This concept is closely related to that of
simplicity and symmetry. The structure will have a maximum chance of surviving an
earthquake if:
 the load bearing members are uniformly distributed;
 all columns and walls are continuous and without offsets from roof to foundation;
 all beams are free of offsets;
 columns and beams are coaxial;
 reinforced concrete columns and beams are nearly the same width;
 no principal members change section suddenly; and
 the structure is as continuous (redundant) and monolithic as possible.
For simple rule for vertical frames in aseismic buildings, refer to Figure 2.3.

34
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

DO DON’T COMMENTS
Avoid low redundancy of
cantilevers; no fail-safe
mechanism
Avoid changes of stiffness
with height. Problem with
analysis and detailing
Remarks as above; ‘Soft
storey’ demonstrably
vulnerable

Figure 2.3. Simple rules for vertical frames in aseismic buildings.

(Only with dynamic analysis and careful detailing should these
rules be broken)

35
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
2.2 Horizontal and vertical members. In framed building it is a fundamental earthquake
requirement that horizontal members should fail before vertical members. It is a very
important life-saver in that it postpones complete collapse of a structure. Beams and slabs
generally do not fall down even after severe damage at plastic hinge positions, whereas
columns will rapidly collapse under their vertical loading once sufficient spalling has taken
place.
For simple rule on widths of beams and columns of aseismic reinforced concrete buildings,
refer to Figure 2.4.

DO DON’T COMMENTS
Width of beams should
not greatly exceed
supporting columns.
Continuity problems.

Figure 2.4. Simple rule for widths of beams and columns in

aseismic reinforced concrete buildings. (Only with dynamic
analysis and careful detailing should these rules be broken)

36
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

DO DON’T COMMENTS

Beams should fail

COLUM N
before columns to
COLUM N

BEAM
BEAM maximize energy
absorption before
collapse.

Figure 2.5. Simple rule for relationship between column and beam strengths
in aseismic reinforced concrete buildings. (Only with dynamic analysis and
careful detailing should these rules be broken)

37
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
2.3 Stiff structures versus flexible. If the local ground motion is largely in frequencies close to
the natural frequency of the building, then the structure will take the maximum punishment.
If the local sub-soil will filter out much of the frequency ground motion then a stiff structure
should be subjected to lower seismic forces than a flexible structure, and vice versa.

Type Advantages Disadvantages

• Specially suitable for short period • High response on long period
sites, for buildings with long sites
periods • Flexible framed reinforced
• Ductility arguably easier to concrete is difficult to
Flexible achieve reinforce
Structures • More amenable to analysis • Non-structure may invalidate
analysis
• Non-structure difficult to
detail

• Suitable for long period sites • High response on short

Stiff • Easier to reinforce stiff reinforced period sites
Structures concrete (i.e., with shear wall) • Appropriate ductility not
• Non-structure easier to detail easy to achieve
• Less amenable to analysis

38
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
2.4 Choice of Structural Materials
In the determination of the form of superstructure the choice of material is often an
important factor. These structural materials are usually dictated by availability, or political
or economic considerations. In terms of earthquake resistance, the best materials should
have the following properties:
 high ductility;
 high strength/weight ratio;
 homogeneity;
 orthotropy; and
 ease in making full strength connections.
The following table in the next slide illustrates the applicability of the major structural
materials to buildings.

39
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Type of Building
High-rise Medium-rise Low-rise
Best • Steel • Steel • Timber
• In-situ reinforced • In-situ reinforced • In-situ
concrete concrete reinforced
• Good precast concrete
concrete* • Steel
• Prestressed • Prestressed
Structural concrete concrete
materials in • Good reinforced • Good reinforced
approximate
masonry* masonry*
order of
suitability • Precast concrete
• Primitive
Worst reinforced
masonry

*These materials only just qualify for inclusion in the medium-rise bracket. Indeed
many earthquake engineers would not use either materials.
40
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
2.5 Effect of Non-structure
In considering the form of a structure, it is important to be aware that some items which are
normally non-structural become structurally very responsive in earthquakes. This means
anything which will interfere with the free deformations of the structure during an
earthquake. In buildings the principal elements concerned are cladding, perimeter infill
walls, and internal partitions. Where these elements are made of very flexible materials, they
will not affect the structure significantly. However, it is often desirable for non-structural
reasons to construct them of still materials such as precast concrete or blocks or bricks. Such
elements can have a significant effect on the behavior and safety of the structure. Although,
these elements may be carrying little vertical load, they can act as shear walls in an
earthquake with the following important effects:
 reduce the natural period of vibration of the structure, hence, changing the intake of
seismic energy and changing the seismic stresses of the “official” structure;
 redistribute the lateral stiffness of the structure, hence, changing the stress
distribution;
 cause premature failure of the structure in shear or by pounding;
 suffer excessive damage themselves due to shear forces or pounding.
The more flexible the basic structure is, the worse the above effects will be; and they will be
particularly dangerous when the distribution of such ‘non-structural’ elements is asymmetric
or not the same on successive floors.

41
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM
2.6 Form of Substructure
The basic rule regarding the earthquake resistance of substructure is that integral action in
earthquakes should be obtained. This requires adequate consideration of the dynamic
response characteristics of the superstructure and of the subsoil. If a good seismic-resistant
form has been chosen for the superstructure then at least the plan form of the substructure is
like to be sound, i.e.:
 vertical loading will be symmetrical;
 overturning effects will not be too large;
 the structure will not be too long in plan.
As with non-seismic design, the nature of the subsoil will determine the minimum depth of
foundations. In earthquake areas, this will involve consideration of the following factors:
 transmission of horizontal base shears from the structure to the soil;
 provision of earthquake overturning moments (e.g. tension piles);
 differential settlements;
 liquefaction of the subsoil;
 the effects of embedment on seismic response.

42
2. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL FORM

Three basic types of building foundations may be:

 discrete pads;
 continuous rafts;
 piled foundations.

43