1997 Ubc Seismic Provisions - Final

1997 UBC SEISMIC
PROVISIONS
Engineering Consultancy Group

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 1
OUTLINE
INTRODUCTION
1997 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN LOADS
1997 UBC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
DISCUSSION POINTS
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 2
INTRODUCTION
EARTHQUAKES
Fault Movements Causes Earthquakes

Faults Are Defined by Dip Angle and Strike Line
1- The Dip angle is the angle the fault surface makes with the
horizontal
2- The strike line is the angle the fault line makes with the north

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 3
INTRODUCTION
EARTHQUAKES
Types of faults
1- Strike Slip Fault
a- Left Lateral Strike Slip (1-a) (2-a)
b- Right Lateral Strike Slip
2- Dip Slip Fault
a- Normal Fault
b- Reverse Fault
(2-b) (3)
3- Any Combination From The Above Types

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 4
INTRODUCTION
EARTHQUAKES
Main Types Of Seismic Waves

P-waves
1- Fastest wave
2- Travel in solid and liquid material
(ocean and sea)
3- Horizontal components only
4- Primary waves
S-waves
1- Slow wave
2- Can not travel in liquid
3- Horizontal & vertical components
4- Secondary waves
Dr. Mohamad Fathy 5
INTRODUCTION
EARTHQUAKES
Earthquake Characteristics and

Measure
1- Peak Ground Motion
(Influences Vibration
Amplitude)
2- Duration of Earthquake
(Influences Structure
Shaking)
3- Frequency Content
(Resonance)
Dr. Mohamad Fathy 6
Equivalent Static Force Method
Time History Analysis
Response Spectrum Analysis

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 7
Equivalent Static Force Method
1997 UBC Limitations [Sec. 1629.8.3]
1- Structures regular or irregular in seismic zone (1) and of occupancy

category 4 and 5 only in seismic zone (2).
3- Regular structures 73m in height.
4- Irregular structures not more than 19.80 m in height.
5- Structures with flexible upper portion on rigid lower portion, where
the stiffness of the lower portion is at least 10 times the upper portion
and the period of the whole structure in not greater then 1.1 times the
period of the upper portion considered as separate structure with fixed
base
Dr. Mohamad Fathy 8
Time History Analysis
Different earthquake records has to be introduced to ensure that

most of the structure modes are excited. 1997 UBC code states
that three recorded events has at least to be used for response
evaluation. [Sec. 1631.6.1]
The structure response is obtained by numerically integrating the

equation of motion in the time domain for every time interval
making the computation effort too high.

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 9

Introduction
The response spectrum is the plot of the peak response of a series

of SDOF oscillators with varying periods of vibration subjected to
specific ground motion.
Same damping for

the whole system
P6 P7
P4 P5
P2 P3
P1

Dr. Mohamad Fathy 10

Introduction
Factors Affecting Response Spectrum Curve

Local Soil Conditions & Seismic Zone
Duration
Proximity to Known Faults
Damping

Local Soil Conditions & Seismic Zone

Structure of 0.5 sec period, Is short period
structure or long period structure??????

The value Ts To for rock soil
and soft soil

Short period structures response and Ts
Rock
Ts
Soft
To
rock soil (short period structures on

rock soil behave like rigid bodies
attached to the ground)
Long period structures response and
soft soil
Effect of soft soil on hard soil

Dr. Mohamad Fathy Moharz 1976 12
Duration
Effect of duration on rock soil

Effect of duration on soft soil
Effect of duration on rock soil 5 % damping
Effect of duration on soft soil 5 % damping

Proximity To Known Faults

Damping
Spectral acceleration decreases

as damping increases

1997 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Seismic Zone
Response Spectrum Curve
Structural Framing System
System Redundancy
Over Strength Factor
Drift

1-Seismic Zone
Table 16-I in the UBC defines the seismic zones.

2-Response Spectrum Curve
Ca & Cv
Soil Cv Values Table 16-R

Soil Ca Values Table 16-Q Type Seismic Zone Factor Z
Type Seismic Zone Factor Z
0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40
0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40
SA 0.06 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.32 Nv
SA 0.06 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.32 Na
SB 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Nv
SB 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Na
SC 0.13 0.25 0.32 0.45 0.56 Nv
SC 0.09 0.18 0.24 0.33 0.40 Na
SD 0.18 0.32 0.40 0.54 0.64 Nv
SD 0.12 0.22 0.28 0.36 0.44 Na
SE 0.26 0.50 0.64 0.84 0.96 Nv
SE 0.19 0.30 0.34 0.36 0.36 Na
SF Site geotechnical investigation and dynamic site
SF Site geotechnical investigation and dynamic site response analysis has to be performed for soil
response analysis has to be performed for soil type type SF
SF Engineering Consultancy Group
Ca Values Table 16-Q Seismic Zone Factor Z Acceleration Amplification of Ground Motion [Ca/Z]
Soil Z=1 Z=2A Z=2B Z=3 Z=4 Soil Type Z=1 Z=2A Z=2B Z=3 Z=4
Type
0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40
SA 0.06 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.32 Na SA 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Na
SB 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Na SB 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Na
SC 0.09 0.18 0.24 0.33 0.40 Na SC 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 Na
SD 0.12 0.22 0.28 0.36 0.44 Na SD 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.1 Na
SE 0.19 0.30 0.34 0.36 0.36 Na SE 2.5 2.0 1.7 2.2 0.9 Na
SF Site geotechnical investigation and dynamic site response SF ************************************
analysis has to be performed for soil type SF
Cv Values Table 16-R Seismic Zone Factor Z Velocity Amplification of Ground Motion [Cv/Z]
Soil Z=1 Z=2A Z=2B Z=3 Z=4

Soil Z=1 Z=2A Z=2B Z=3 Z=4
Type
Type
0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.075 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40
SA 0.06 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.32 Nv SA 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Nv
SB 0.08 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Nv SB 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Nv
SC 0.13 0.25 0.32 0.45 0.56 Nv SC 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 Nv
SD 0.18 0.32 0.40 0.54 0.64 Nv SD 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 Nv
SE 0.26 0.50 0.64 0.84 0.96 Nv SE 3.5 3.3 3.2 2.8 2.4 Nv
SF Site geotechnical investigation and dynamic site response SF ***********************************
analysis has to be performed for soil type SF

The amplification of the acceleration, velocity
Amplifications
and displacement occurs at different periods
The acceleration is amplified at low periods,
velocity is amplified at intermediate to long
Periods and displacement is amplified at very
long periods.
Structures have different periods, short period
structures are acceleration controlled,
intermediate to long period structures are
velocity controlled and long period
Amplifications
structures are displacement controlled


Na & Nv (Z =4)

3-Structural Framing System
1997 UBC CODE uses (R) value to account for the degree of the ductility of
the framing system. [Table 16-N ordinary structures & Table 16-P for non
building structures]
The (R) value varies from 2.2 (Low Degree of Ductility) To 8.5 (High
Degree of Ductility).
The Elastic Response Spectrum has to be divided by (R) to account for the
global ductility of the Structure.

3- Structural Framing System
Philosophy of Reducing the Design Force level by the (R) Value
It is uneconomic to design Building to remain in the elastic range
Structures has considerable reserve of strength beyond the elastic range
High Degree of Ductility Structures
Structures that have the ability to efficiently sustain gravity loads after it deforms
laterally beyond the elastic range.
No need for extra strength.
Using (R) of 8.5 (for example) will reduce the force design level thus allowing
seismic loads strain the structure beyond the elastic range.
Low Degree of Ductility Structures
Structures that can not efficiently sustain gravity loads after it deforms laterally.
Extra strength is needed to limit the lateral deformation.
Using (R) of 2.2 (for example) will increase the force design level thus seismic loads
will not be able to strain the structure beyond the elastic range.

4- System Redundancy
A Redundant structure is defined as its ability to withstand lateral loads
when one component of the lateral load resisting elements fails. [ Its lateral
stiffness is not affected by the failure of any lateral load resisting
component]
Redundancy provides multiple load paths for resistance so the loads can be
distributed to other load resisting elements.
Redundancy is defined as where
is equal to 1.0 in seismic zones 1 and 2 and has to be taken equal to 1.0
when calculating drift. [Clause 1630.1.1]

5- Over Strength Factor
The over strength factor is introduced in the UBC code to account for the
overloading of the non ductile elements in the structure.
The over strength factor shall be used for lateral force resisting members to
account for their over loading due to an undesirable soft story or weak
story mechanism.
The factor mainly depends on the structure system and construction

material type. [Table 16-N and 16-P]

6- DRIFT
is the design level elastic response

displacement determined according to
Sec. 1630.2.1 (E.S.F.) or from
dynamic analysis Sec. 1631 (R.S.)

DISCUSSION POINTS
1- Diaphragm Rigidity and Flexibility
The diaphragm is considered flexible when the maximum lateral

deformation of the diaphragm () is more than two times the average
story drift of the associated story. This may be determined by
comparing the computed midpoint in-plane deflection of the
diaphragm itself under lateral load with the story drift of adjoining
vertical-resisting elements. [1997 UBC Sec. 1630.6]

DISCUSSION POINTS
2- Horizontal Irregularities Table 16-m
Opening 50%
D2>1.15 D1
L2>1.15 L1

DISCUSSION POINTS
3- Vertical Irregularities Table 16-L

K2 < 0.7 K3
K2<0.8 (K3+K4+K5)/3
M2 > 1.5M1 or
1.5M3
S2 < 0.8 S3

DISCUSSION POINTS
4- Different (R) Value For The Same Structure. [Sec. 1630.4.3 ]
In seismic zone 3 and 4 for wall bearing system

The (R) value of the orthogonal direction
shall not exceed 4.5
Combinations Along Different Axes

Structures < 48 m
Bearing wall system
Moment-resisting frame system
Dual system
Structures > 48 m (Zones 3 and 4 only)
Special moment-resisting frames
Dual systems
Combinations Along Same Axes

Use the least value for R

DISCUSSION POINTS
4- P Delta Effects [Sec. 1630.1.3]
If the secondary to primary moment ratio is less than 10% no

need to consider for P delta effect. UBC defines the secondary
moment as the axial force multiplied by the elastic story
drift and the primary moment is defined as the
story shear multiplied by the story height.
In seismic zone 3 and 4 if the ratio of the story

drift to story height does not exceed 0.02/ R,
P delta effect need not to be considered.

DISCUSSION POINTS
5- Effective Weight. [Sec 1630.1.1]
W = total dead load + Percentage of Live Load
Warehouses....25% live
Buildings with partitions0.48 kN/m2
Design snow load > 1.44 kN/m2 25% design snow load
Permanent equipment100% dead

DISCUSSION POINTS
6- Occupancy Category

DISCUSSION POINTS
5- Non Building Structures

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
1- Seismic Input Parameters
UBC uses one seismic input parameter which is the zone factor
(Z) to define seismic zones.
IBC does not uses zone factor it uses Seismic Design Categories
(SDC) instead. SDC is defined by two seismic input parameters the
first is for short period ground motion (SDS) that would typically
excite shorter stiffer structures ,and the second for long period
ground motion (SD1) that would typically excite long period
structures..
SDS and SD1 are not given directly. What is given is values for SS
and S1 [Values are shown Maps]
SS is spectral acceleration response for 0.2 sec period for site class
B and S1 is the spectral acceleration response for 1.0 sec period for
site class B Engineering Consultancy Group
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
Find site class form table 1615.1.1 [ Site classes are A, D, C, D ,E

and F]
Find the site coefficients (mapping from site class B)

Fa from [table 1615.1.2 (1)] for SS
Fv from table [1615.1.2 (2)] for S1
Fa Values Engineering Consultancy Group Fv Values

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
Calculate SMS which is the soil modified spectral acceleration response

for short periods and SM1 which is the soil modified spectral acceleration
response at 1.0 sec period
SMS = Fa Ss and SM1 = Fv S1 SDC
Calculate SDS = 2/3 SMS which

is the design spectral acceleration
Sa =SD1/T
response for short periods
Calculate SD1 = 2/3 SM1 which is Sa =SD1 TL/T2
the design spectral acceleration
response for short period of 1.0 sec 1.0 TL

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
Seismic Design Category

Determine Ss and S1 Determine Soil Classification Building Occupancy
We Get SDS and SD1
Determine SDC
Occupancy Category
Occupancy Category S1
SDS I or II III IV
I or II III IV
S1 < 0.067 g A A A
SDS < 0.167 g A A A
0.067 g < S1 <0.133 g B B C
0.167 g < SDS <0.33 g B B C
0.133 g < S1 <0.20 g C C D
0.33 g < SDS <0.50 g C C D
S1 >0.20 g D D D
SDS >0.50 g D D D
S1 > 0.75 g known fault E E F
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
1997 UBC Seismic Zones 0, 1 2A, 2B 3,4
IBC Seismic Design

A, B C D, E, F
Category
THE ABOVE TABLE IS NOT AN EQUIVELANCY

BETWEEN THE IBC AND THE UBC
The level of detailing in the UBC depends only on the seismity (seismic
zones) while the level of detailing in the IBC depends on the Seismic Design
Category.

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
2- Importance Factor
UBC has 5 occupancy categories, IBC has 4 occupancy categories

with different importance factors
Occupancy Category
Importance Factor
IBC
IBC UBC
(UBC)
I or II (4,5) 1.0 1.0
III (2,3) 1.25 1.0
IV (1) 1.50 1.25

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
3- Response Modification Factor (R)
The number of structural systems in IBC is much higher

compared to the UBC
UBC (R) values range from 2.2 to 8.5, IBC (R) values range from
1.5 to 8.
For the same structural system in both codes the R value might be
different. R value for moment resisting frames in the UBC is 8.5, however
in the IBC it is 8.

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
4- Over Strength Factor
UBC values for the over strength factor are 2.0, 2.2 and 2.8, while
in the IBC it is 2.0 , 2.5 and 3.
5- Natural Period
T = Ct hx, Ct value and power coefficient value are different in IBC

the new values in the IBC will give slightly higher periods and
consequently slightly lower base shear.

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
6- Distribution of Story Forces Along the Height
For IBC if the period is less than 0.5 second the distribution is
linear.
For the IBC if the period is 2.5 seconds or more the distribution
is parabolic and this to account for the higher mode effects in the
response of longer period structures.
The UBC also accounted for the higher mode effects by

introducing an additional force (Ft) at the top floor level for
structures having periods higher than 0.7 second. That is no longer
valid in the IBC as the parabolic distribution takes care of that.
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
6- Distribution of Story Forces Along the Height
1997 UBC IBC 2006
(Wx )( hx )
Fx (V Ft )
(W )( h)
T<0.7 Sec Ft=0
T>0.7 Sec Ft=0.07 VT
T<0.7Sec T<0.5Sec
(Wx )(hk x )
Fx (V )
(W )(h )k
T<0.5 Sec k=1

T>2.5 Sec k=2
T>0.5Sec
T>0.7Sec

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
NOTE;
A linear distribution of the base shear along the building height

assumes the following:
1- The structure is responding to the ground motion in the

fundamental mode entirely which might be the case for shorter
stiffer structures, however, this is not accurate for long period
structures.
2- The fundamental mode is linear rather than curvilinear which

might be the case for short stiffer structures.

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
7- Drift Calculations
The inelastic drift in UBC is calculated as

Cd * XE
x
IBC uses Cd coefficient to amplify the elastic drift I
Cd factor depends on the structural system
IBC reduces the inelastic drift by the importance factor (I). That
is because IBC has different drift limits according to the occupancy
of the structure.
A hospital for example has a drift limit lower than an office building
and the philosophy here is that you should not penalize the hospital
twice first by instituting a lower lift and second by calculating
larger drifts for the hospital because the forces that were used to
calculate this drift were amplified by the importance factor (I)
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
7- Redundancy Factor
Redundancy factor in the UBC varies from a value of 1.0 to 1.5.

In the IBC it has only two values 1.0 or 1.3.
8- Near Source Factor
The UBC has a near source factor to account for the proximity of faults,
however that is not case in the IBC. The proximity effect is already taken
into consideration in the Ss and S1 values.

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
9- Combinations of Framing Systems in Two Orthogonal
Directions
In IBC If we have different framing systems with different (R) in

two orthogonal directions. Each direction can be analyzed
according to its (R) value. In the UBC we design for the lower (R)
value.
10- Combinations of Framing Systems in The Same Direction
For a moment resisting frame system (R=8) supporting a bearing

wall system (R=5). This structure has to be designed for an R=5. [R
value can not increase as you go down]
Cd values and Over Strength Factor can not increase as you go

down Engineering Consultancy Group
IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC
11- Base Shear Scaling
In the IBC the base shear from response spectrum should not be
less than 85% of the base shear form the equivalent static force
method.
In the UBC the base shear from response spectrum should not be
less than 90% of the base shear form the equivalent static force
method. [Sec 1631.5.4]

REFERENCES
1- Dynamic Loading and Design of Structures, edited by A.J. Kappos,
2002, Spon Press, 11 New Fetter Lane, London, EC4P 4EE, ISBN 0-419-
22930-2.
2- Dynamics of Structures Theory and Applications to Earthquake

Engineering, Anil K. Chopra, 1995, Prentice Hall, Englewood, New Jersy,
ISBN 0-13-8552-14-2.
3- Earthquake Engineering Application to Design, 2007, Charles K.

Erdey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-0-470-04843-6.
4- Seismic and Wind Design of Concrete Building, 2003, S.K. Ghosh and
David A. Fanella, International Code Council, Inc, ISBN 1-58001-112-8
5- Seismic design of Building Structures, Michael R. Lindeburg and

Majid Baradar, 2006 Professional Publications Inc, Belmont CA.
6- The Seismic Design Handbook, edited by Farzad Naiem, 1989 Van

Nostrand Reinhold, ISBN 0-442-26922-6.
REFERENCES
7- Wind and Earthquake Resistant Buildings Structural Analysis and
Design, Bungale S. Taranath, 2005, Marcel Dekker, New York, USA ISBN
0-8247-5934-6.
8- Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Building, T.

Paulay and M.J.N. Priestley, 1992, John Wiley and Sons, ISBN 0-471-
54915-0
9- Structural Dynamics Theory and Application, Joseph W. Tedesco,

William G. McDougal and C. Allen Ross, 1999, Addison Wesley Longman
Inc. ISBN 0-673-98052-9


1997 Ubc Seismic Provisions - Final

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

1997 Ubc Seismic Provisions - Final

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

1997 UBC SEISMIC

Engineering Consultancy Group

1997 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN LOADS

1997 UBC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

IBC 2006 vs. 1997 UBC

Engineering Consultancy Group

Fault Movements Causes Earthquakes

Engineering Consultancy Group

Engineering Consultancy Group

Main Types Of Seismic Waves

Earthquake Characteristics and

Equivalent Static Force Method

Time History Analysis

Response Spectrum Analysis

Engineering Consultancy Group

Equivalent Static Force Method

1997 UBC Limitations [Sec. 1629.8.3]

1- Structures regular or irregular in seismic zone (1) and of occupancy

Time History Analysis

Different earthquake records has to be introduced to ensure that

The structure response is obtained by numerically integrating the

Engineering Consultancy Group

Response Spectrum Analysis

The response spectrum is the plot of the peak response of a series

Same damping for

Engineering Consultancy Group

Response Spectrum Analysis

Factors Affecting Response Spectrum Curve

Proximity to Known Faults

Engineering Consultancy Group

Local Soil Conditions & Seismic Zone

structure or long period structure??????

and soft soil

rock soil (short period structures on

Engineering Consultancy Group

Effect of duration on rock soil

Effect of duration on rock soil 5 % damping

Effect of duration on soft soil 5 % damping

Engineering Consultancy Group

Response Spectrum Analysis

Proximity To Known Faults

Engineering Consultancy Group

Response Spectrum Analysis

Spectral acceleration decreases

Engineering Consultancy Group

Response Spectrum Curve

Structural Framing System

Over Strength Factor

Engineering Consultancy Group

Table 16-I in the UBC defines the seismic zones.

Engineering Consultancy Group

Soil Cv Values Table 16-R

Soil Z=1 Z=2A Z=2B Z=3 Z=4

Engineering Consultancy Group

The amplification of the acceleration, velocity

Engineering Consultancy Group

Engineering Consultancy Group

2-Response Spectrum Curve

Engineering Consultancy Group

3-Structural Framing System

Engineering Consultancy Group

Engineering Consultancy Group