Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 41

School of

Civil Engineering

A.Y. 2016-2017

October 5, 2016

Earthquake Resistant Design


Prof. Claudio Chesi - Prof. Luca Martinelli

Starting from an obvious yet important comment:


Frequently, earthquakes are cause of damage to our structures
 the responsability for analyzing the problem
and understanding the effects on structures
belongs to both civil engineers and architects
The recent Italian earthquake: what we read in newspapers
Seismological data
The school in Amatrice

Examples of local
collapse mechanisms
A rigid body
equilibrium condition

Structural
details in
traditional
buildings
Seismic
resistant design:
details and
solutions

It is fruitful to analyze cases


of partial (not global) collapse:
typical damage patterns and
recurring behaviour rules
can be emphasized.

We can learn
the correct approach to design + what should be avoided.
Mainly, we get suggestions on the basic physical laws:
earthquake effects correspond to well defined rules.
 In this society, designers and builders as well are responsible for the
earthquake induced collapse of structures.
(see, for instance, the opposite cases of earthquake effects in Haiti and Chile)
In the following examples: a review of typical damage patters and recurring
behaviour rules in structures
 studying and understanding earthquake effects is really possible
In the case of a total distruction
it may be difficult to recognize
the causes of the structural
collapse and highlighting the real
effect of earthquake.

A general comment:
the earthquake is selective :
it will surely produce some
damage in the structure
weak points
In this case: collapse is serious but the structure is not destroyed
We can clearly see that the earthquake generated horizontal loads on the
building

From California
to Cina (2008):
structures
behave in
similar ways …

… damage is concentrated at
the column ends
LI
S
B
O
N

17
5
5

A clear example of total collapse, with well defined modalities


Columns behave like
truss elements (with
plastic hinges (*) at
both ends)

(*) hinges are activated


as moment reachs a well
defined level

L’Aquila, 2009: the first interstory has totally collapsed


The corner column has been ejected

Damage is typically
localized at the column
ends, where the bending
moment reaches maximum
values.
Collapse is due to:
• a not correct evaluation
of seismic loads on the
structure,
• not correct design of
details in the column
(stirrup spacing)
The earthquake has given evidence to:
• lacking of stirrups,
• insatbility of longitudinal bars under
compression,
• absence of concrete confinement.

Transversal reinforcement was not adequate: a classical example


A real design mistake: the column short portion collapsed in shear

Gloabal collapse: the same collapse modality occurred at all the interstories
Interaction of indipendent
structural units:
the ground motion has
generated hammering of
structures.

Hammering: an
extreme situation
The first store columns
revealed a serious mistake in
the detailing of reinforcing
bars
A typical damage pattern in
masonry buildings:
diagonal cracking, corresponding
to shear collapse
A classical damage situation in masonry buildings:
othogonal walls are poorly connected
Damage is serious, although not structural:
exterior masonry panels were not retained

Masonry churches are often


vulnerable structures
Poor interlocking of walls in the bell tower …

… positive effect
of steel tendons
keeping walls
together
A basic concept in conceptual design:
building regularity both in plan and elevation

Lack of regularity
in elevation: a
classical case …
… consequences are unavoidable

L’Aquila –Duca degli Abruzzi Hotel: a “soft storey” situation


2009 Emilia
earthquake:
collapse of
the clock
tower in
Finale
dell’Emilia
2009 Emilia earthquake: collapse of industrial buildings
(pre-fabricated)
Damage to stored materials

Damage from non structural elements


A clear responsibility for public administration:

Earthquakes are recurring events:


 strengthening is by far more convenient than reparing or
reconstructing

The knowledge of earthquake effects allows freedom


• in design
• from wrong opinions

We should also acknowledge


the possibility of resisting
to eathquakes: we may trust
earthquake engineering

(Mexico City, 1985)


The list of contents for this course

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING – 1 (I Semester)

Seismic action definition


3 basic points: Structural analysis (action effects)
Design rules (r.c. and steel)

Knowledge of the
procedures
and
glossary
understanding

(reading and
understandig building
codes !)

Example of glossary in Eurocode 8


The list of topics for this course:
EARTQUAKE ENGINEERING – 2:
- SPECIAL STRUCTURES
- SPECIAL PROBLEMS

( II semester )

Special
problems – 1: Soil Local Effects
(Regione Lombardia specific design rules)

POSSIBLE
EFFETTI DIINSTABILITY
INSTABILITA ’
EFFETTI
SITE EFFECTS
DI SITO
Ground motion modification near the free surface

SPECIAL PROBLEMS – 2 :

Existing buildings

• when and how the problem started to be considered


• codes: from 1986 on ( Ordinanza, EC8, …)
• which materials: masonry, r.c.
• which computational procedures: limit analysis ( mechanisms), push-
over analysis (capacity curves), special tools (POR, 3_muri, …)
• which kind of structural details: intervention criteria
• deeply connected: vulnerability analysis ( risk scenarios ), usability
analisis
Monumental historical buildings:
different masonry qualities
(shear resistance characteristichs)

A new important
tool for the analysis
of existing masonry
buildings: verify

local collapse
mechanisms
(limit analysis:
check equilibrium in
the limit situation
when a mechanism is
activated)
SPECIAL PROBLEMS – 3 :
Base Isolation
Energy dissipation
The c.a.s.e. project (L’Aquila):
an application of the base
isolation technique
SPECIAL STRUCTURES :

A variety of typologies:
• large roof systems
• pipelines
• bridges
• siloses
• tanks
• underground structures
• chimneys
• towers and steel trusses
Using timber as a structural material in seismic design: why ?

Pipelines
Bridges

Friuli, 1976.
Udine-Tarcento Highway,
just completed.

Tanks
dmax

W, water h
weight

2l o 2R

Fluid mass motion


A few reference text-books:
The “BEEP” system

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi