what are the conditions to check the interstoy drift using CSI

etab, Should we consider a cracked section For V.E.

(modifiers: 0.35 Ig) and we check it (with U.L.S),
bilal zakiTechnical Project Manager at Lebgulf

Flag as Promotion
Flag as Job
Flag as Inappropriate
Unlike Like (4)
Comment (10)
Share
Share this discussion


Unfollow Follow
May 27, 2013
Close viewer
Comments
Christos Doussis, Kiran Kumar K.L and 2 others like this
10 comments

bilal
bilal zaki
Technical Project Manager at Lebgulf
or we should check it using S.L.S. without cracked section (modifiers 0.7*Ig).
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o May 27, 2013

Nikolaos K.
Nikolaos K. Gkogkos
Structural Engineer, MSc
It depends on the code you are implementing. There are codes that set up a higher
requirement for a ULS drift - for instance NZS1170.5 requires 2.5% drift limitation
however I am not so sure if this limit corresponds to the MCE (T=2475, 2% in 50
years)that refers to collapse prevention or the LS (T=975, 5% in 50 years) considering an
IL3 structure - while there are other codes that require a quite strict drift limit for frequent
events of lower magnitude. Other than that, the use of cracked section properties is for
sure.
o Unlike Like (1)
o Flag as inappropriate
o 12 months ago
SIGMUND B. likes this

bilal
bilal zaki
Technical Project Manager at Lebgulf
its better to explain more,

let's check with ubc code, with a static model (no dynamic analysis (spec x and spex y )).

as per UBC code 97 the inelastic story drift .

1630.9.1 Determination of delta S. A static, elastic analysis of the
lateral force-resisting system shall be prepared using the design
seismic forces from Section 1630.2.1. Alternatively, dynamic
analysis may be performed in accordance with Section 1631.
Where Allowable Stress Design is used and where drift is being
computed, the load combinations of Section 1612.2 shall be used.
The mathematical model shall comply with Section 1630.1.2. The
resulting deformations, denoted as S, shall be determined at all
critical locations in the structure. Calculated drift shall include
translational and torsional deflections.

there for, if we want to go with elastic behavior that's mean uncracked section with a
modifiers 0.7*Ig, is applicable.
and we check the interstory drift calculated by etab with the SLS combination as per
UBC code,
when we want to for to design we need to redo the calculation and check if the shear wall
are cracked , that's mean update the stiffness modifiers to 0.35, so the building is less
rigid then before,

Does this assumption is logical ! ! !

awaiting the reply ! !
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 12 months ago

Nikolaos K.
Nikolaos K. Gkogkos
Structural Engineer, MSc
By memory, it is the degradation of stiffness of the walls ONLY you are talking about -
this is where 0.7 or 0.35 refers to. You are allowed to use 0.7 if and only if you can
provide evidence from the analysis process and for the worst case scenario of
combinations of actions, tensile stresses on the wall DO NOT exceed a value related to
the rapture strength of the concrete. Alternatively, you can externally run a M- diagram
for the critical wall section and "read" the level of degradation.
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 12 months ago

SIGMUND
SIGMUND BATUCAN
SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD
It's logical to use .7Ig for for columns & .35Ig for beams as per ACI 318 08 to calculate
interstorey drift.
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago

SIGMUND
SIGMUND BATUCAN
SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD
For walls in flexure, I think .25Ig is recommended also as per ACI 318 08.
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago

Jos Luis
Jos Luis Campos Andrade
Ingeniero Estructural
We use 50%I for beams and 100% Ig for Colums in Costa Rica. we campare drifts
betwen stories with limits dependig on the kind of structure we are analysing.
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago

SIGMUND
SIGMUND BATUCAN
SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD
Here in NZ we use Ig but interstory deflection is limited to 2.5%, in which case, suitable
ductility is used.
o Unlike Like
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago

Muneeb
Muneeb Badar
Senior Project Engineer at AIT Consulting, Asian Institute of Technology
Yes the stiffness factors above mentioned are correct , 0.35 for beam, 0.7 for column,0.7
for shear wall and 0.25 for slab.
But for Seismic drift we use cracked section but for wind drift we use gross section to
check the drift
o Unlike Like (1)
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago
Ahmed A. likes this

Nikolaos K.
Nikolaos K. Gkogkos
Structural Engineer, MSc
The 0.7 degradation (uncracked section properties) for shear walls is valid IF AND
ONLY IF it is verified by the analysis process that the maximum tension stresseses acting
on the shear walls do not exceed the maximum allowed bending tensile stress of concrete.
For structural systems resisting earthquake actions, this is certainly not the case - a M-
diagram can verify easily the level of stiffness degradation expected for a wall section
under a certain combinationj of actions (N,M) . So, the use of the 0.35 value for wall
cracked section properties is more likely to be used.
o Unlike Like (2)
o Flag as inappropriate
o 11 months ago
Kiran Kumar K., Muneeb Badar like this