Previous | Next | Contents

ESDEP WG 17
SEISMIC DESIGN

Lecture 17.1: An Overall View of the

Seismic Behaviour of Structural
Systems
OBJECTIVE/SCOPE
To give, by means of earthquake damage studies, an overall view of the principal
.forms of seismic damage, together with some explanation of failure mechanisms
PREREQUISITES
.None
RELATED LECTURES
.None
SUMMARY
It is not possible to design seismic resistant structures efficiently without
understanding the ways in which they are damaged by earthquakes in practice. The
design process is not simply a matter of analysis, calculation and following codes. A
.practical knowledge of building behaviour in earthquakes is essential
Based on earthquake damage studies the principal forms of damage are described,
.together with some explanation of the mechanics of failures
PRESENTATION OF SLIDES OF .1
EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE
The slides presented are not limited to structural steelwork buildings for two reasons.
The first is that many of the problems caused by earthquakes are common to all forms
of construction. The second reason is that it is very hard to find pictures of steel
!buildings which have suffered serious damage in an earthquake
DISCUSSION OF EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE .2
Engineers are generally accustomed to static loads acting on elastic structures. One of
the most important lessons learned from damage surveys is the difference in failure
patterns between static loads applied in a single direction and those due to cyclic
loading. Another lesson is the necessity in earthquake design to consider the
.behaviour of the main structural system after yielding

SLIDE 1 The Pino Suarez building in Mexico City was a 21-storey structural steel
framed building constructed in about 1978. It suffered partial collapse and severe
damage. Note the "K" bracings which rely on the compressive strength of members -
.a system without the ductility to absorb damage without collapsing
An important aspect of post-earthquake study is the realisation of the important role
that the quality of construction plays. Earthquakes do not respect theories,
calculations or divisions of responsibility. Many instances of poor quality construction
are invariably exposed in earthquake damaged buildings. Badly placed reinforcement,
poorly compacted concrete, incomplete grouting of masonry and loose or missing
.bolts in structural steelwork are some of the commonest examples of poor quality
Although the prime objective in the design of earthquake resistant buildings is the
safety of the occupants and passers by, every earthquake shows up numerous
examples of lives at risk from minor faults in construction - falling masonry or
cladding, ceiling tiles dislodged, window frames separating from the walls and
toppling inwards or outwards, and escape paths blocked by jammed doors and fallen
masonry. Usually these types of failure could have been avoided with very little
.expense
An important category of building failure in earthquake is the case where the building
is so badly damaged that it has to be demolished, although it has not collapsed. For
the owner and the insurance company the costs are similar whether the building
collapses or is demolished. For the occupants it is the difference between life and
.death
Where two buildings are close together, or where there is a movement joint in a
building, the two sides are very likely to pound against each other during an
earthquake. Major structural damage can result, particularly where the floor levels
differ. The cause lies in the closeness of the two structures and in the flexibility of the
.buildings, factors which are within the control of the designer

SLIDE 2 Adjacent buildings will pound against each other unless a sufficient space is
allowed between them. In this case in Mexico City the failure of a complete storey has
been brought about by the two buildings of differing height and dynamic properties
.pounding against each other
Modern buildings are often assembled from many separate components. Older ones
commonly have timber floors with joists poorly tied to the supporting walls. Any lack
of tying together in a building is quickly exposed by seismic (earthquake) action. The
nature of seismic ground motion inevitably leads to differential movement between
separate components, and in the absence of structural continuity, differential
.movement will occur
Aftershocks, generally of much smaller magnitude than the main seismic shock which
they follow, play no explicit part in the design process. Nevertheless they play a
significant part in the immediate post-earthquake rescue and survival operation. The
further damage caused by aftershocks to already damaged buildings is greater than
their magnitude would otherwise suggest. Following major earthquakes many
structures brought to the brink of collapse by the main shock are destroyed by
.subsequent lesser shocks
Concentrations of force occur where there are abrupt changes in structural stiffness or
mass distribution. For this reason building form should be regular and symmetrical as
.far as the functional requirements permit

SLIDE 3 Although the storey shear is normally greatest for the base storey, variations
in the strength, mass and stiffness can lead to failure initiating at any level - in this
.case a 'top down' failure in Mexico City
SLIDE 4 Finally some steelwork (undamaged) under construction in Los Angeles - an
area of high seismicity. This welded frame has to cope with the functional
requirement of the building owner that there should be fewer columns at the lowest
storey for architectural reasons. This requirement is common in hotels and office
.buildings where more open space is needed at this level
GROUND BEHAVIOUR .3
The effects of violent shaking on the ground are to increase lateral and vertical forces
temporarily, to disturb the intergranular stability of non-cohesive soils, and to impose
strains directly on surface material where the fault plane reaches the surface. A
transient increase in lateral and vertical forces places any soil structures capable of
movement at risk. The resulting types of damage are landslips and avalanches.
Experience of the 1970 earthquake in Peru and the 1964 earthquake in Anchorage,
Alaska, show that this damage may be on a massive scale. One village, Yungay, in
Peru was destroyed almost entirely with the loss of 18,000 lives by a debris flow
.involving tens of millions of tons of rock and ice
The disturbance of the granular structure of soils by shaking leads to consolidation of
both dry and saturated material, due to the closer packing of grains. For saturated
sands, pore pressure may be increased by shaking to the point where it exceeds the
confining soil pressure, resulting in temporary liquefaction. This is an important
effect. It can lead to massive foundation failure in bearing and piled foundations, the
collapse of slopes, embankments and dams. It can cause the phenomenon of "boiling"
where liquefied sand flows upwards in surface pockets. It is also possible for some
.unstable soils to heave

SLIDE 5 Serious ground failure may occur, especially in granular soils which are
saturated. In this case the soil failure caused the collapse of a number of dockside
.cranes at Vina del Mar in Chile

SLIDE 6 This building in Mexico City has suffered an overturning foundation failure,
.most probably initiated by failure of the supporting ground

SLIDE 7 Settlement of foundations due to liquefaction or consolidation of the

supporting soil can occur. In this Mexico City building almost the whole of the
ground floor storey has vanished below street level. It is interesting to note that the
.building has not suffered a total collapse despite this settlement
Shear movements in the ground may be at the surface or entirely below it. Where the
earthquake fault reaches the surface, permanent movements of considerable
magnitude, in metres rather than centimetres, may occur. Surface shear movements
may also take place as a result of other soil displacement - landslips or consolidation
for example. Sub-surface shear movements can occur in weaker strata, leading to
damage of embedded or buried structures. Sub-surface shear movements also reduce
the transmission of ground motion to the surface, effectively putting an upper bound
.on the surface motion
In considering the more spectacular permanent ground displacements that can result
from ground shaking, it should not be forgotten that elastic displacements also occur.
They are critical in the design of piles, underground pipelines and culvert-type
 structures. Failures in underground piping and ductwork are common in earthquakes
.and have important implications for the post-earthquake emergency services
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION .4
The nature of ground shaking is substantially influenced by the subsoil underlying the
site. Soft soils tend to vibrate at a lower frequency than hard ground sites but are
.likely to have a higher peak acceleration
General indications of the effect of soil on the fundamental period of surface motion
can be seen from Figure 1. The importance of the period in practice is the increased
liability of damage where the natural period of the building is close to that of the
ground. For low amplitude shaking, quite large amplifications are possible. In very
soft soil, for example, amplifications of over 20 have been recorded for San Francisco
Bay mud. However this effect is swiftly overcome by yielding of soft soils as
amplitudes increase, so that, for strong shaking, peak accelerations are normally
.reduced in transmission through the upper levels of soil

Considering the subsoil layers as a dynamic system, it is clear that surface responses
will be modified if another structure is added at the upper level. The interaction of the
structure and its supporting soil falls into two categories. Buildings in general are light
in relation to the mass of the supporting soil and relatively flexible. Thus the addition
of the building does not affect the surface ground motion significantly. However local
flexibility of the soil where it is in contact with the foundation can modify the
building response. The effects of this local flexibility are to modify vibration modes,
lower natural frequencies and generate additional damping through energy dissipation
in the surrounding soil. Although an increase in response can occur, the general effect
is to produce a reduction in base shear. Piled foundations, in comparison with bearing
foundations, generally have a lesser effect on the mode shapes and frequencies but
.produce lower damping effects
The second type of soil structure interaction to be considered is where a structure is
massive and rigid. In this case the structure becomes a significant element in the
dynamic system represented by the subsoil and the structure. It causes the surface
.ground motion in its vicinity to be modified
THE BEHAVIOUR OF FOUNDATIONS .5
Failures of building foundations in earthquakes are not uncommon but are nearly
always caused by failure of the supporting soil. Overturning failures due to uplift
occur rarely, far less often than calculations would suggest. This rarity is probably due
to the effective reduction in stiffness that accompanies uplift, which correspondingly
reduces the force exerted by the ground acceleration. There can be no doubt that
substantial tension from overturning forces can develop at foundation level.
Examination of some lower failed columns in Caracas, following the 1967
earthquake, showed that they had failed in tension due to a combination of
.overturning forces and vertical ground acceleration
Instances of failure in piles have been reported. In general, piles tend to conform with
ground displacements and are vulnerable at points where adjacent strata have
markedly different properties. Some configurations incorporating raked piles have
.failed at the underside of the pile cap
 THE RESPONSE OF STEEL FRAMED .6
STRUCTURES
Generally steel framed structures are engineered structures competent to resist gravity
and wind loads. In the familiar processes of design, attention is commonly given to
stresses before considering displacement. The secondary effects of displacement are
often forgotten. Earthquake damage frequently draws attention back both to the direct
effects of large displacements, such as the pounding at joints and damage to non-
structural components and contents, and to the second order effects caused by large
.displacements
Buildings with shear walls or braced frames, as long as they maintain their integrity,
compare favourably in performance with more flexible framed structures as far a
damage to contents and non-structural items is concerned. Particular points commonly
:revealed for framed structures are
i. Corner columns often behave badly in comparison with other exterior and interior
columns. This behaviour suggests that the effects of earthquake forces in orthogonal
.directions are not adequately dealt with in design
ii. Complete failure in members detailed for ductility is rare. Where members with
low ductility have failed it is clear that failure is swift. This behaviour is particularly
.marked in reinforced concrete members
iii. The maximum practicable redundancy is shown to be desirable. The failure
mechanism should involve as many members as possible, providing alternative load
.paths when one member yields or fails
iv. Where yielding occurs in the columns before the beams, failure of the frame
becomes much more likely. This point is illustrated in Figure 2 which shows the
number of ductile hinges needed for failure in the column yielding mode compared
.with the beam yielding mode

:Structural steelwork shows the following types of damage from earthquakes

.i. Brittle failure of bolts in shear or tension
.ii. Brittle failure of welds, particularly fillet welds, in shear or tension
.iii. Member buckling, including torsional buckling
.iv. Local web and flange buckling
.v. Uplift of braced frames
.v. Local failure of connection elements such as cleats and tees
.vii. Bolt slip
.viii. High deflections in unbraced frames
ix. Failure of connections between steel members and other building elements, such as
.floors
x. Anchorages of components into masonry or concrete by cast in or expanding head
bolts are almost invariably brittle in shear and tension. Thus they are unable to
accommodate any movement. Accordingly failures are commonplace, aggravated
.when the masonry or concrete into which the anchorage is placed is also damaged
xi. Many failures occur in horizontal torsion, especially in structures where the centres
of mass and resistance are some distance apart on plan, or where the inherent torsional
resistance of the system is low. A common case of a torsionally vulnerable structure is
.where buildings are located at street corners

SLIDE 8 This Mexico City building experienced failure of ground floor columns due
.to a soft first storey and horizontal torsional effects
THE BEHAVIOUR OF FLOORS .7
Floor slabs function as diaphragms in transferring lateral forces. Figure3 shows two
possible floor plans. In the first case there is very little diaphragm action but, in the
second it is clearly significant. The transfer of shear at each end wall imposed high
stresses in the slab. Some fully or partially prefabricated floor systems have very little
.strength in horizontal shear or bending

SLIDE 9 Horizontal diaphragms are not always rigid elements capable of distributing
forces between frames. In this Anchorage school a reinforced concrete roof slab has
.torn like a piece of cardboard
THE BEHAVIOUR OF SECONDARY .8
STRUCTURES AND APPENDAGES
Appendages to buildings - masonry parapets, penthouses, roof tanks, cladding and
cantilevers - tend to behave badly in earthquakes. The reasons for this are twofold.
Firstly many of them are designed without any ductility, and secondly the effects of
dynamic amplification by the building to which they are attached may greatly increase
.the forces applied to them
Figure 4 illustrates the effect of the dynamic response of the building on the response
spectrum, comparing the ground level spectrum with that at the fifth floor. The peak
.values are both amplified and shifted in frequency

The contents of buildings often suffer major damage even when the building itself is
relatively unharmed. This effect is greater for more flexible buildings. It represents an
additional reason for the designer to exercise close control over displacements. In
many modern buildings the contents are of greater value and importance than the
building itself. The costs of preventing damage are often trivial, for example, use of
.steel angle ties to the tops of racks and floor bolts to shelving
At any level in a multi-storey building the ground motion will be modified by the
motion of the building itself. Generally the effect is to concentrate the frequency of
response around a band close to the natural frequency of the building, and to amplify
the peak acceleration roughly in proportion to the height, reaching an amplification of
.perhaps two or three at roof level
Any contents which are either very stiff or which have a natural frequency of their
own close to that of the building are therefore subjected to greater forces than they
.would experience if mounted at ground level
Experience shows that non-structural items which are suspended such as ceiling
systems and light fittings perform badly. Appendages such as parapets and mechanical
plant also suffer high levels of damage, especially where they function as single
 degree of freedom "inverted pendulums". Damage also increases in multi-storey
.structures towards the roof. Roof tanks and penthouses are also subject to high forces

SLIDE 10 All these cladding panels have fallen during the earthquake in Vino del
Mar, Chile, creating a serious hazard for any occupants running for safety from the
building. Cladding needs to be attached with ductile fixings capable of substantial
.deformation without fracture

SLIDE 11 These batteries formed part of the emergency power system in a California
hospital in 1972. During an earthquake the batteries fell off their racks and did not
function when they were needed. Patients on life support systems died as a result. The
contents of buildings are often of great value or importance and can be protected by
limiting displacements and by simple cheap measures. In this case the batteries could
have been strapped down or clipped to the racks which should have been bolted to the
.floor

SLIDE 12 Surface finishes also present a major hazard when they fall, as in the case
.of this Mexico City building

SLIDE 13 Experience with appendages to buildings such as this Mexico City water
tank are that they perform badly in earthquakes. Dynamic response analysis also
supports this experience. There is in effect a major discontinuity at the junction of the
.building and the tank with a resultant high stress concentration

SLIDE 14 This Mexico City building illustrates the fragility of curtain wall glazing
systems. They were unable to cope with the differential movement of the floors to
.which they were attached
THE BEHAVIOUR OF MASONRY AND .9
CLADDING
Failure of unreinforced masonry is so common that it is almost taken for granted and
forgotten. Many earthquake codes ban the use of unreinforced masonry altogether.
However, economic reasons still ensure that it is very widely used both for low-rise
.structural walls and as infill to framed structures
Failures of both reinforced and unreinforced masonry in-plane are common. Masonry
is very stiff and brittle in-plane so that the forces transmitted by ground shaking are
high and failure is accompanied by a marked reduction in strength and stiffness.
Damage normally comprises either collapse or diagonal cracking in both directions
("X" cracking). Cracks will often be concentrated around openings. Cracking will
.frequently follow the mortar joints

SLIDE 15 Typical `X' cracking of masonry in this Anchorage, Alaska school

illustrates the effect of reversing horizontal shear forces during the earthquake. Shear
.stresses are concentrated opposite the window openings
 SLIDE 16 Where masonry buts up against a structural column it has the effect of
concentrating shear over a short length so that the member can fail in shear (brittle
failure) instead of bending (ductile failure). This behaviour is generally referred to as
.the short column effect
The full implications of frame-infill masonry behaviour are complex. The failure of
.walls out-of-plane is common and causes substantial secondary damage
Figures 5 to 7 illustrate the interaction of infill masonry and frame in the in-plane
direction. Figure 5 shows the interaction of the undamaged masonry panel with the
frame. The masonry acts as a diagonal compression brace in the direction of the
arrow, resulting in a substantial stiffening of the frame and redistribution of bending
moments and shears in the frame. Figure 6 shows the effect of the horizontally
sheared panel and accompanying rearrangement of the frame forces. Once the panel
has sheared the effect of the diagonal compression zone is lost. Figure 7 shows the
situation where the masonry does not occupy the whole of the panel, resulting in high
.shear forces in the unsupported portion of the column

The redistribution in plan of forces, due to the stiffening effect of the infill masonry, is
also of consequence. The frame may be stiffened leading to higher dynamic forces
.and accidental eccentricity leading to high torsional forces may result
Some elements can be damaged by drift, or inter-storey displacement. Windows and
cladding elements are frequently connected rigidly to more than one level and, if there
.is no ductile provision for relative movement in the connections, they may fail
TANKS .10
Steel tank structures are a specialised area dealt with in Lecture 17.6. They suffer
from compression failure in the tank wall (including "elephant's foot" buckling) and
.tearing of the wall-floor joint
CONCLUDING SUMMARY .11
Failure patterns resulting from static loads applied in a single direction•
.differ from those due to seismic loading
Adjacent structures may pound against each other unless a sufficient space•
.is allowed between them
The behaviour of the main structural system after yielding must be•
.considered
Poor design and poor quality construction are invariably exposed in an•
.earthquake
Minor faults in construction can create risk to life - falling masonry,•
.windows, etc
.Soil structure interaction plays on important role•
.Constructions with shear walls or braced frames "perform" favourably•

ADDITIONAL READING .12

 Dowrick, D. J., "Earthquake Resistant Design", John Wiley Second.1
.Edition 1989
Key, D. E., "Earthquake Design Practice for Buildings", Thomas Telford.2
.1988
.Naeim, F., "Seismic Design Handbook", Van Nostrand Rheinhold 1989.3
Earthquake Spectra", Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 6431".4
.Fairmount Avenue, Suite 7, El Cerrito, California CA94530, USA
.Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics", John Wiley".5
Previous | Next | Contents