Review of Documents on Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings
Author: Dr DURGESH C RAI | Size: 0.35 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: IITK-GSDMA-EQ03-V1.0 | pages: 33
Occurrences of recent earthquakes in India and in different parts of the world
and the resulting losses, especially human lives, have highlighted the structural
inadequacy of buildings to carry seismic loads. There is an urgent need for assessment
of existing buildings in terms of seismic resistance. In view of this various
organizations in the earthquake threatened countries have come up with documents,
which serve as guidelines for the assessment of the strength, expected performance
and safety of existing buildings as well as for carrying out the necessary rehabilitation,
if required. The objective of this article is to review various documents on seismic
evaluation of existing buildings from different countries. It is expected that this
comparative assessment of various evaluation schemes will help identify the most
essential components of such a procedure for use in India and other developing
countries, which is not only robust, reliable but also easy to use with available
resources.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
The seismic design code of buildings in Japan was revised in June 2000 to implement a performance-based structural engineering framework. The code provides two performance objectives: life safety and damage limitation of a building at two corresponding levels of earthquake motions. The design earthquake motions are defined in terms of the acceleration response spectra specified at the engineering bedrock in order to take into consideration the soil conditions and soil-structure interaction effects as accurately as possible. The seismic performance shall be verified by comparing the predicted response values with the building’s estimated limit values. The verification procedures of seismic performance in the new code are in essence a blend of the equivalent single-degree-of-freedom modeling of a building and the site-dependent response spectrum concepts, which make possible the prediction of the maximum structural response against earthquake motions without using time history analysis.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Quanti cation of Building Seismic Performance Factors: Component Equivalency Methodology
Author: FEMA P-795 | Size: 12.6 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY Michael Mahoney, Project Officer Robert D. Hanson, Technical Monitor Washington, D.C. ATC MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT Christopher Rojahn (Project Executive) William T. Holmes (Project Technical Monitor) Jon A. Heintz (Project Quality Control Monitor) Ayse Hortacsu (Project Manager) | Year: june 2011 | pages: 292
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has the goal of
reducing the ever-increasing cost that disasters inflict on our country.
Preventing losses before they happen by designing and building to withstand
anticipated forces from these hazards is one of the key components of
mitigation, and is the only truly effective way of reducing the cost of
disasters.
As part of its responsibilities under the National Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Program (NEHRP), and in accordance with the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (PL 94-125) as amended, FEMA
is charged with supporting activities necessary to improve technical quality
in the field of earthquake engineering. The primary method of addressing
this charge has been supporting the investigation of seismic and related
multi-hazard technical issues as they are identified by FEMA, the
development and publication of technical design and construction guidance
products, the dissemination of these products, and support of training and
related outreach efforts. These voluntary resource guidance products present
criteria for the design, construction, upgrade, and function of buildings
subject to earthquake ground motions in order to minimize the hazard to life
in all buildings and increase the expected performance of critical and higher
occupancy structures.
This publication builds upon an earlier FEMA publication, FEMA P-695
Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors (FEMA, 2009b).
FEMA P-695 presents a procedural methodology for reliably quantifying
seismic performance factors, including the response modification
coefficient, R, the system overstrength factor, ΩO, and the deflection
amplification factor, Cd, used to characterize the global seismic response of a
system.
While the methodology contained in FEMA P-695 provides a means to
evaluate complete seismic-force-resisting systems proposed for adoption into
building codes, a component-based methodology was needed to reliably
evaluate structural elements, connections, or subassemblies proposed as
substitutes for equivalent components in established seismic-force-resisting
systems. The Component Equivalency Methodology presented in this
document fills this need by maintaining consistency with the probabilistic,
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Author: Indonesian National Standardization Council (Badan Standarisasi Nasional - BSN) | Size: 2.447 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Year: 2012 | pages: 149
SNI Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non gedung ini memberikan persyaratan minimum perencanaan ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non gedung. Standar ini menggantikan SNI 03-1726-2002.
Translation: SNI planning procedure for the earthquake resistance of buildings and non-building structures of this building provides the planning minimum requirements for earthquake resistance of building structures and non-buildings. This standard replaces the SNI 03-1726-2002
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Author: STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SOCIETY NEW ZEALAND | Size: 0.73 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SOCIETY NEW ZEALAND | Year: MARCH 2013 | pages: 40
This submission has been prepared by the Structural Engineering Society of New Zealand
(SESOC), in response to the Consultation document prepared by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). The submission firstly discusses a number of issues raised in the consultation document and then provides specific responses to the proposals and questions
raised. SESOC has been working collaboratively with IPENZ, the New Zealand Society for Earthquake
Engineering and the New Zealand Geotechnical Society to deliver a comprehensive and considered response. These groups have made separate submissions which may vary in detail, but which are in general agreement of the key points, as articulated in the summary of this submission.
Furthermore, although there was relatively little time to do so, SESOC has consulted with membership. Those who were able to respond were generally supportive of the draft submission, with a number of further suggestions, many of which have been adopted.
A discussion document is attached to this submission, providing further background to some of the issues discussed.
The Consultation document notes that the Building Act covers other structures such as bridges statues and memorials. These are not addressed specifically in this document, noting that
bridges are generally publically owned and considered in lifelines studies, and that other structures generally pose a low risk to life. However, many of the principals expressed in this
submission would be equally applicable across all structural forms.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Article/eBook Full Name: Kinematic Bending Moments in Seismically Stressed Piles
Author(s): A. Nikolaou, G. Mylonakis and G. Gazetas
Edition: NCEER-95-0022
Publish Date: 12/23/1995
Published By: NCEER
Related Links:
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Article/eBook Full Name: Dynamic Interaction Factors for Floating Pile Groups
Author(s): G.Gazetas, K.Fan, A.Kaynia, E.Kausel
Edition: NCEER-90-0021
Publish Date: 9/10/1990
Published By: NCEER
Related Links:
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Author: Dr. S. K. Prasad Professor of Civil Engineering | Size: 0.62 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: S. J. College of Engineering, Mysore | pages: 25
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
A large number of reinforced concrete multistoreyed frame buildings were heavily damaged and many of them collapsed completely in Bhuj earthquake of 2001 in the towns of Kachchh District (viz., Bhuj, Bhachao, Anjar, Gandhidham and Rapar) and other district towns including Surat and Ahmedabad. In Ahmedabad alone situated at more than 250 kilometers away from the Epicentre of the earthquake, 69 buildings collapsed killing about 700 persons. Earlier, in the earthquake at Kobe (Japan 1995) large number of multistoreyed RC frame buildings of pre 1981 code based design were severely damaged due to various deficiencies. Such behaviour is normally unexpected of RC frame buildings in MSK Intensity VIII and VII areas as happened in Kachchh earthquake of January 26, 2001. The aim of this paper is to bring out the main contributing factors which lead to poor performance during the earthquake and to make recommendations which should be taken into account in designing the multistoreyed reinforced concrete buildings so as to achieve their adequate safe behaviour under future earthquakes. The Indian Standard Code IS:1893 was suitably updated in 2002 so as to address the various design issues brought out in the earthquake behaviour of the RC Buildings. The paper highlights the main provisions of this code.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
![[Image: 61866355376290647959.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/61866355376290647959.png)
![[Image: info.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/info.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: download.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/download.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: password.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/password.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 24194496885810586351.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/24194496885810586351.png)
![[Image: 00602762973622134883.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/00602762973622134883.png)
![[Image: 67637620434493859345.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/67637620434493859345.png)