thesis seismic design

Improved seismic design of structures using risk-targeting and cost-minimization considerations

Downloadable content.

• Gkimprixis, Athanasios.
• Strathclyde Thesis Copyright
• University of Strathclyde
• Doctoral (Postgraduate)
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
• Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
• This thesis addresses various topics in the context of seismic design of structures with risk and loss considerations. Three design philosophies are investigated: the one based on uniform-hazard spectra, the risk-targeting technique, and an approach that minimizes the life-cycle costs. While the “uniform-hazard” approach is embedded in most of seismic design regulations, many studies have highlighted the need for a more rigorous and explicit control of the structural performance and of the consequences of seismic damage, not only at the assessment but also at the design stage. Thus, in this context, the risk targeting philosophy has emerged and has been implemented in US regulations. This approach is thoroughly reviewed herein, together with alternative risk-targeting techniques. Various case studies and European-wide investigations are performed to compare the results obtained with the risk-targeting and the uniform hazard approaches, evaluate the strengths and limitations of the techniques, and show possible steps forward. Acknowledging the significant financial implications of earthquakes, more advanced frameworks have been developed to account also for losses from future earthquake events in the design. A life-cycle cost optimization technique that considers the initial construction costs and the expected losses is studied in this work. A benchmark building is designed and analysed for different seismic levels and the results are compared against those obtained with the uniform-hazard and the risk-targeting approaches. Subsequently, an investigation is carried out on how the epistemic uncertainty inherent in seismic hazard models influences the structural design and the attained risk and loss estimates. The topic is investigated through different case studies, while a simplified approach for modelling hazard uncertainty is introduced and applied across Europe.In addition to constructing frameworks that mitigate losses, earthquake engineering can provide guidance to help manage the incurred loss levels. Thus, the last part of this thesis looks at the seismic risk management via the mechanism of transfer of financial risk. A method to define loss-informed insurance premiums is presented and various investigations across Europe are performed to explore efficient insurance strategies.
• Tubaldi, Enrico
• Douglas, John
• Doctoral thesis
• This thesis was previously held under moratorium from 28th August 2020 until 30th August 2021.
• 10.48730/7049-aj18
• 9912910492202996
•  https://doi.org/10.15129/670ff871-9e56-4171-86ce-10ab09e1d402
•  https://doi.org/10.15129/48c4bc27-6b12-4a2f-acc9-e70a2b828387

Performance-Based Seismic Design: A Review

• Conference paper
• First Online: 03 June 2022
• Cite this conference paper

• Shruti Chaudhary 21 &
• Satyabrata Choudhury 21  

Part of the book series: Structural Integrity ((STIN,volume 27))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Advances in Structural Mechanics and Applications

694 Accesses

This study presents an overview of the evolution of Performance-based seismic design. Owing to many limitations of force-based codal design, the Displacement-based design and Performance-based design have evolved. The aim of performance-based seismic design is to design structures for some pre-set design objectives under given hazard level. In this literature survey, the limitations of codal design, evolution of Displacement-based design, evolution of Performance-based design up to the Unified performance-based design have been highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Seismic Design Philosophy: From Force-Based to Displacement-Based Design

Key Points and Pending Issues in the Energy-Based Seismic Design Approach

State-of-the-Art Review of Energy-Based Seismic Design Methods

ACI-318: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete. American Concrete Institute (1999)

Google Scholar  

Anil, B.: Unified performance-based design of steel frame buildings. M.Tech. thesis under the supervision of S. Choudhury, Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Silchar (2021)

Antoniou, S., Pinho, R.: Development of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure. J. Earthquake Eng. 8 (5), 643–664 (2004)

Applied Technology Council: Methodology for Evaluation and Upgrade of Reinforced Concrete Buildings, Report No. ATC-40, California Seismic Safety Commission, Sacramento, California (1996)

Applied Technology Council: NEHRP Guidelines for Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Report No. FEMA-273, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C (1997)

ATC-3-06: Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations of Buildings, Applied Geochronology Council (1978)

ATC-40: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Concrete Buildings, Applied Geochronology Council (1996)

AISC-360: Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction (1993)

Banerjee, S., Choudhury, S.: An introduction to unified performance-based design of bridge piers. In: 17th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 17WCEE Sendai, Japan, September (2020). 9e-0011

Bento, R., Falcao, S., Rodrigues, F.: Nonlinear static procedures in performance based seismic design. In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Canada,  1-6 Agust 2004. Paper No. 2522

Bozorgnia, Y., Bertero, V.V.: Earthquake Engineering From Engineering Seismology to Performance-Based Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C. (2006)

Blume, J.A., Newmark, N.M., Coring, L.H.: Design of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Buildings for Earthquake Motions, Portland Cement Association, Chicago (1961)

Chopra, A.K., Goel, R.K., Chintanapakdee, C.: Statistics of SDF-System Estimate of Roof Displacement for Pushover Analysis of Buildings. PEER Report No. 2001-16 (2001)

Choudhury: Performance-based Seismic Design of Hospitals, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Earthquake Engineering, IIT Roorkee (2008)

Choudhury, S., Singh, S.M.: A unified approach to performance-based design of RC frame buildings. J. Inst. Eng. 94 (2), 73–82 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-013-0037-8

Das, S., Choudhury, S.: Influence of effective stiffness on the performance of RC frame buildings designed using displacement-based method and evaluation of column effective stiffness using ANN. Eng. Struct. 197 , 109354 (2019)

FEMA-273: NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, US Federal Emergency Management Agency, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington DC (1996)

FEMA-356: Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, US Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000)

FEMA-440: Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures, ATC-55 Project, Applied Technology Council and US Federal Emergency Management Agency (2004)

FEMA-450: NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and other Structures, US Federal Emergency Management Agency (2004)

Firescu, D.J., Fajfar, P.: Comparison of Simplified Procedures for Nonlinear Analysis of Structures. Report No. PEER/2002/2,  pp. 63-76 (2002)

Freeman, S.A., Nicoletti, J.P., Tyrell, J.V.: Evaluation of existing buildings for seismic risk: a case study of puget sound naval shipyard, Bremerton, Washington. In: Proceedings of the US National Conference on Earthquake Engineers, EERI, Berkeley, California (1975)

Freeman, S. A.: Prediction of response of concrete buildings to severe earthquake motion. In: McHenry  D., (ed.) International Symposium on Concrete and Concrete Structures. Publication SP-55, American Concrete Institute, Detroit (1978)

Freeman, S. A., Paret, T. F., Searer, G.R., Irfanoglu, A.: Musings on recent developments in performance-based seismic engineering. In: Structures Congress 2004. SEI, American Society of Civil Engineers, Nashville  (2004, Submitted)

Gandomi, A.H., Das, S., Mansouri, I., Choudhury, S., Hu, J.W.: A prediction model for the calculation of effective stiffness ratios of reinforced concrete columns. Materials 14 , 1792 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14071792

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Iwan, W.D.,  Guyader, A.C.: A Study of the Accuracy of the Capacity Spectrum Method in Engineering Analysis. Report No. PEER/2002/2, pp. 135-146 (2002)

Malu, A., Choudhury, S.: Direct displacement-based design of a building incorporating viscous dampers. Proc. Int. Struct. Eng. Constr. 7 (2) (2020). Emerging Technologies and Sustainability Principles. https://doi.org/10.14455/ISEC.2020.7(2).STR-12

Matsumori T., Otani, S., Shiohara, H.: Earthquake Member Deformation Demands in Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures. Report No. PEER/1999/10, pp. 79-94  (1999)

Mayengbam, S.S., Choudhury, S.: Determination of column size for displacement-based design of reinforced concrete frame buildings. J. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 43 (8), 1149–1172 (2014). Article first published online: 21 Nov 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2391

Moradpour, S.,  Dehestani, M.: Optimal DDBD procedure for designing steel structures with nonlinear fluid viscous dampers. In: Structures, vol. 22,  pp. 154-174. Elsevier (2019)

Pettinga, J.D., Priestley, M.J.N.: Dynamic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames designed with direct displacement-based design. J. Earthq. Eng. 9 (2), 309–330 (2005)

Priestley, M.J.N.: Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering. Bull. NZ National Soc. Earthq. Eng. 26 (3), 329–341 (1993)

SEAOC Blue Book: Recommended Lateral Force Requirement and Commentary, Structural Engineers Association of California (1999)

Sullivan, T.J., Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M.: Direct displacement-based design of frame-wall structures. J. Earthq. Eng. 10 (1), 91–124 (2006a)

Sullivan, T.J., Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M.: Seismic Design of Frame-Wall Structures, Research Report No. ROSE-2006/02 (2006b)

Sullivan, T.J., Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M.: Direct displacement-based design of frames-wall structures. J. Earthq. Eng. 10 (1), 91–124 (2006)

Sullivan, T. J., Lago, A.: Towards a simplified direct DBD procedure for the seismic design of moment resisting frames with viscous dampers. Eng. Struct. 35 , 140-148 (2012). Elsevier

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology Silchar, Silchar, India

Shruti Chaudhary & Satyabrata Choudhury

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shruti Chaudhary .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

José António Fonseca de Oliveira Correia

Satyabrata Choudhury

Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology Silchar, Silchar, Assam, India

Subhrajit Dutta

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Chaudhary, S., Choudhury, S. (2022). Performance-Based Seismic Design: A Review. In: Fonseca de Oliveira Correia, J.A., Choudhury, S., Dutta, S. (eds) Advances in Structural Mechanics and Applications. ASMA 2021. Structural Integrity, vol 27. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04793-0_31

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04793-0_31

Published : 03 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-04792-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-04793-0

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Design Objectives
• Building Types
• Space Types
• Design Disciplines
• Guides & Specifications
• Resource Pages
• Project Management
• Building Commissioning
• Operations & Maintenance
• Building Information Modeling (BIM)
• Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS)
• Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC)
• VA Master Specifications (PG-18-1)
• Design Manuals (PG-18-10)
• Department of Energy
• General Services Administration
• Department of Homeland Security
• Department of State
• Course Catalog
• Workforce Development
• Case Studies
• Codes & Standards
• Industry Organizations

Seismic Design Principles  

by Gabor Lorant, FAIA Lorant Group, Inc. / Gabor Lorant Architects, Inc.

• Introduction

Within This Page

Description, application, relevant codes and standards, additional resources.

This resource page provides an introduction to the concepts and principles of seismic design, including strategies for designing earthquake-resistant buildings to ensure the health, safety , and security of building occupants and assets .

The essence of successful seismic design is three-fold. First, the design team must take a multi-hazard approach towards design that accounts for the potential impacts of seismic forces as well as all the major hazards to which an area is vulnerable. Second, performance-based requirements, which may exceed the minimum life safety requirements of current seismic codes, must be established to respond appropriately to the threats and risks posed by natural hazards on the building's mission and occupants. Third, and as important as the others, because earthquake forces are dynamic and each building responds according to its own design complexity, it is essential that the design team work collaboratively and have a common understanding of the terms and methods used in the seismic design process.

In addition, as a general rule, buildings designed to resist earthquakes should also resist blast (terrorism) or wind, suffering less damage. For example, were the Oklahoma Federal Building designed to seismic design standards, the damage caused by the blast would have been much less (refer to MAT Report FEMA 277 ). For more information, see WBDG Designing Buildings to Resist Explosive Threats section on Seismic vs. Blast Protection.

About half of the states and territories in the United States—more than 109 million people and 4.3 million businesses—and most of the other populous regions of the earth are exposed to risks from seismic hazards. In the U.S. alone, the average direct cost of earthquake damage is estimated at $1 billion/year while indirect business losses are estimated to exceed $2 billion/year.

Seismicity of the United States

A. Origin and Measurement of Earthquakes

Plate tectonics, the cause of earthquakes.

Earthquakes are the shaking, rolling, or sudden shock of the earth's surface. Basically, the Earth's crust consists of a series of "plates" floating over the interior, continually moving (at 2 to 130 millimeters per year), spreading from the center, sinking at the edges, and being regenerated. Friction caused by plates colliding, extending, or subducting (one plate slides under the other) builds up stresses that, when released, causes an earthquake to radiate through the crust in a complex wave motion, producing ground failure (in the form of surface faulting [a split in the ground], landslides, liquefaction, or subsidence), or tsunami. This, in turn, can cause anywhere from minor damage to total devastation of the built environment near where the earthquake occurred.

Ground failure-landslide—Alaska, 1964

Liquefaction damage—Niigata, Japan 1964

Saada Hotel (before)—Agadir, Morocco, 1960

Saada Hotel (after) ground shaking damage—Agadir, Morocco, 1960

Measuring Seismic Forces

In order to characterize or measure the effect of an earthquake on the ground (a.k.a. ground motion), the following definitions are commonly used:

• 0.001g or 1 cm/sec 2 is perceptible by people
• 0.02 g or 20 cm/sec 2 causes people to lose their balance
• 0.50g is very high but buildings can survive it if the duration is short and if the mass and configuration has enough damping
• Velocity (or speed) is the rate of change of position, measured in centimeters per second.
• Displacement is the distance from the point of rest, measured in centimeters.
• Duration is the length of time the shock cycles persists.
• Magnitude is the "size" of the earthquake, measured by the Richter scale, which ranges from 1-10. The Richter scale is based on the maximum amplitude of certain seismic waves, and seismologists estimate that each unit of the Richter scale is a 31 times increase of energy. Moment Magnitude Scale is a recent measure that is becoming more frequently used.

If the level of acceleration is combined with duration, the power of destruction is defined. Usually, the longer the duration, the less acceleration the building can endure. A building can withstand very high acceleration for a very short duration in proportion with damping measures incorporated in the structure.

Intensity is the amount of damage the earthquake causes locally, which can be characterized by the 12 level Modified Mercalli Scale (MM) where each level designates a certain amount of destruction correlated to ground acceleration. Earthquake damage will vary depending on distance from origin (or epicenter), local soil conditions, and the type of construction.

B. Effects of Earthquakes on Buildings

Seismic Terminology (For definitions of terms used in this resource page, see Glossary of Seismic Terminology   )

The aforementioned seismic measures are used to calculate forces that earthquakes impose on buildings. Ground shaking (pushing back and forth, sideways, up and down) generates internal forces within buildings called the Inertial Force (F Inertial ), which in turn causes most seismic damage.

F Inertial = Mass (M) X Acceleration (A).

The greater the mass (weight of the building), the greater the internal inertial forces generated. Lightweight construction with less mass is typically an advantage in seismic design. Greater mass generates greater lateral forces, thereby increasing the possibility of columns being displaced, out of plumb, and/or buckling under vertical load (P delta Effect).

Earthquakes generate waves that may be slow and long, or short and abrupt. The length of a full cycle in seconds is the Period of the wave and is the inverse of the Frequency . All objects, including buildings, have a natural or fundamental period at which they vibrate if jolted by a shock. The natural period is a primary consideration for seismic design, although other aspects of the building design may also contribute to a lesser degree to the mitigation measures. If the period of the shock wave and the natural period of the building coincide, then the building will "resonate" and its vibration will increase or "amplify" several times.

Height is the main determinant of fundamental period—each object has its own fundamental period at which it will vibrate. The period is proportionate to the height of the building.

The soil also has a period varying between 0.4 and 1.5 sec., very soft soil being 2.0 sec. Soft soils generally have a tendency to increase shaking as much as 2 to 6 times as compared to rock. Also, the period of the soil coinciding with the natural period of the building can greatly amplify acceleration of the building and is therefore a design consideration.

Tall buildings will undergo several modes of vibration, but for seismic purposes (except for very tall buildings) the fundamental period, or first mode is usually the most significant.

Seismic Design Factors

The following factors affect and are affected by the design of the building. It is important that the design team understands these factors and deal with them prudently in the design phase.

Torsion : Objects and buildings have a center of mass, a point by which the object (building) can be balanced without rotation occurring. If the mass is uniformly distributed then the geometric center of the floor and the center of mass may coincide. Uneven mass distribution will position the center of mass outside of the geometric center causing "torsion" generating stress concentrations. A certain amount of torsion is unavoidable in every building design. Symmetrical arrangement of masses, however, will result in balanced stiffness against either direction and keep torsion within a manageable range.

Damping : Buildings in general are poor resonators to dynamic shock and dissipate vibration by absorbing it. Damping is a rate at which natural vibration is absorbed.

Ductility : Ductility is the characteristic of a material (such as steel) to bend, flex, or move, but fails only after considerable deformation has occurred. Non-ductile materials (such as poorly reinforced concrete) fail abruptly by crumbling. Good ductility can be achieved with carefully detailed joints.

Strength and Stiffness : Strength is a property of a material to resist and bear applied forces within a safe limit. Stiffness of a material is a degree of resistance to deflection or drift (drift being a horizontal story-to-story relative displacement).

Building Configuration : This term defines a building's size and shape, and structural and nonstructural elements. Building configuration determines the way seismic forces are distributed within the structure, their relative magnitude, and problematic design concerns.

• Low Height to Base Ratios
• Equal Floor Heights
• Symmetrical Plans
• Uniform Sections and Elevations
• Maximum Torsional Resistance
• Short Spans and Redundancy
• Direct Load Paths
• Irregular Configuration buildings are those that differ from the "Regular" definition and have problematic stress concentrations and torsion.

View enlarged illustration

Buildings seldom overturn—they fall apart or "pancake"

Soft First Story is a discontinuity of strength and stiffness for lateral load at the ground level.

Discontinuous Shear Walls do not line up consistently one upon the other causing "soft" levels.

Variation in Perimeter Strength and Stiffness such as an open front on the ground level usually causes eccentricity or torsion.

Reentrant Corners in the shapes of H , L , T , U , + , or [] develop stress concentration at the reentrant corner and torsion. Seismic designs should adequately separate reentrant corners or strengthen them.

Knowledge of the building's period, torsion, damping, ductility, strength, stiffness, and configuration can help one determine the most appropriate seismic design devices and mitigation strategies to employ.

C. Seismic Design Strategies and Devices

Diaphragms : Floors and roofs can be used as rigid horizontal planes, or diaphragms, to transfer lateral forces to vertical resisting elements such as walls or frames.

Shear Walls : Strategically located stiffened walls are shear walls and are capable of transferring lateral forces from floors and roofs to the foundation.

Braced Frames : Vertical frames that transfer lateral loads from floors and roofs to foundations. Like shear walls, Braced Frames are designed to take lateral loads but are used where shear walls are impractical.

Moment-Resistant Frames : Column/beam joints in moment-resistant frames are designed to take both shear and bending thereby eliminating the space limitations of solid shear walls or braced frames. The column/beam joints are carefully designed to be stiff yet to allow some deformation for energy dissipation taking advantage of the ductility of steel (reinforced concrete can be designed as a Moment-Resistant Frame as well).

Concentric Braced Frame

Eccentric Braced Frame, with link beams

Energy-Dissipating Devices : Making the building structure more resistive will increase shaking which may damage the contents or the function of the building. Energy-Dissipating Devices are used to minimize shaking. Energy will dissipate if ductile materials deform in a controlled way. An example is Eccentric Bracing whereby the controlled deformation of framing members dissipates energy. However, this will not eliminate or reduce damage to building contents. A more direct solution is the use of energy dissipating devices that function like shock absorbers in a moving car. The period of the building will be lengthened and the building will "ride out" the shaking within a tolerable range.

Base Isolation Bearings are used to modify the transmission of the forces from the ground to the building

Base Isolation : This seismic design strategy involves separating the building from the foundation and acts to absorb shock. As the ground moves, the building moves at a slower pace because the isolators dissipate a large part of the shock. The building must be designed to act as a unit, or "rigid box", of appropriate height (to avoid overturning) and have flexible utility connections to accommodate movement at its base. Base Isolation is easiest to incorporate in the design of new construction. Existing buildings may require alterations to be made more rigid to move as a unit with foundations separated from the superstructure to insert the Base Isolators. Additional space (a "moat") must be provided for horizontal displacement (the whole building will move back and forth a whole foot or more). Base Isolation retrofit is a costly operation that is most commonly appropriate in high asset value facilities and may require partial or the full removal of building occupants during installation.

Passive Energy Dissipation includes the introduction of devices such as dampers to dissipate earthquake energy producing friction or deformation.

The materials used for Elastomeric Isolators are natural rubber, high-damping rubber, or another elastomer in combination with metal parts. Frictive Isolators are also used and are made primarily of metal parts.

Tall buildings cannot be base-isolated or they would overturn. Being very flexible compared to low-rise buildings, their horizontal displacement needs to be controlled. This can be achieved by the use of Dampers , which absorb a good part of the energy making the displacement tolerable. Retrofitting existing buildings is often easier with dampers than with base isolators, especially if the application is external or does not interfere with the occupants.

There are many types of dampers used to mitigate seismic effects, including:

• Hysteric dampers utilize the deformation of metal parts
• Visco-elastic dampers stretch an elastomer in combination with metal parts
• Frictive dampers use metal or other surfaces in friction
• Viscous dampers compress a fluid in a piston-like device
• Hybrid dampers utilize the combination of elastomeric and metal or other parts

D. Nonstructural Damage Control

All items, which are not part of the structural system, are considered as "nonstructural", and include such building elements as:

• Exterior cladding and curtain walls
• Parapet walls
• Canopies and marquees
• Chimneys and stacks
• Partitions, doors, windows
• Suspended ceilings
• Routes of exit and entrance
• Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Communications equipment
• Furniture and equipment

These items must be stabilized with bracing to prevent their damage or total destruction. Building machinery and equipment can be outfitted with seismic isolating devices, which are modified versions of the standard Vibration Isolators.

Loss arising from nonstructural damage can be a multiple of the structural losses. Loss of business and failure of entire businesses was very high in the Loma Prieta, Northridge, and Kobe earthquakes due to both structural and nonstructural seismic damages.

The principles and strategies of seismic design and construction are applied in a systematic approach that matches an appropriate response to specific conditions through the following major steps:

1. Analyze Site Conditions

The location and physical properties of the site are the primary influences the entire design process. The following questions can serve as a checklist to identify seismic design objectives.

• Where is the location of the nearest fault?
• Are there unconsolidated natural or man-made fills present?
• Is there a potential for landslide or liquefaction on or near the site?
• Are there vulnerable transportation, communication, and utilities connections?
• Are there any hazardous materials on the site to be protected?
• Is there potential for battering by adjacent buildings?
• Is there exposure to potential flood from tsunami, seiche, or dam failure?

Consider mission critical or business continuity threats of seismicity on adjacent sites or elsewhere in the vicinity that may render the project site inaccessible or causes the loss of utilities, threat of fire, or the release of toxic materials to the site. Conduct subsurface investigations to discover loose soils or uncontrolled fill that could increase ground motion. Hard dense soils remain more stable, while solid dense rock is the most predictable and seismically safe building base.

2. Establish Seismic Design Objectives

A performance-based approach to establishing seismic design objectives is recommended. This determines a level of predictable building behavior by responding to the maximum considered earthquake. A threat/vulnerability assessment and risk analysis can be used to define the level of performance desired for the building project. Some suggested seismic design performance goals are:

• Conform to local building codes providing "Life Safety," meaning that the building may collapse eventually but not during the earthquake.
• Design for repairable structural damage, required evacuation of the building, and acceptable loss of business for stipulated number of days.
• Design for repairable nonstructural damage, partial or full evacuation, and acceptable loss of business for stipulated number of days due to repair.
• Design for repairable structural damage, no evacuation required, and acceptable loss of business for stipulated number of days due to repair.
• No structural damage, repairable nonstructural damage, no evacuation, and acceptable loss of business for stipulated number of days due to repair.
• No structural or nonstructural damage, and no loss of business caused by either (excluding damage to tenants' own equipment such as file cabinets, bookshelves, furniture, office equipment etc. if not properly anchored).

Regarding the magnitude of the earthquake it may also be stipulated as "Low," "Moderate," or "Large" as another matrix of grading threat and establishing corresponding building performance goals.

3. Select/Design Appropriate Structural Systems

Seismic design objectives can greatly influence the selection of the most appropriate structural system and related building systems for the project. Some construction type options, and corresponding seismic properties, are:

• Wood or timber frame (good energy absorption, light weight, framing connections are critical).
• Reinforced masonry walls (good energy absorption if walls and floors are well integrated; proportion of spandrels and piers are critical to avoid cracking)
• Reinforced concrete walls (good energy absorption if walls and floors well integrated; proportion of spandrels and piers are critical to avoid cracking)
• Steel frame with masonry fill-in walls (good energy absorption if bay sizes are small and building plan is uniform)
• Steel frame, braced (extensive bracing, detailing, and proportions are important)
• Steel frame, moment-resisting (good energy absorption, connections are critical)
• Steel frame, eccentrically braced (excellent energy absorption, connections are critical)
• Pre-cast concrete frame (poor performer without special energy absorbing connections)

Structural and architectural detailing and construction quality control is very important to ensure ductility and natural damping and to keep damages to a limited and repairable range. The prospect of structural and nonstructural damage is not likely to be eliminated without the prudent use of energy-dissipating devices. The cost of adding energy-dissipating devices is in the range of 1–2% of the total structural cost. This is not a large number, particularly when related to the life-cycle cost of the building. Within a 30–50 year life cycle the cost is negligible.

Many building codes and governmental standards exist pertaining to design and construction for seismic hazard mitigation. As previously mentioned, building code requirements are primarily prescriptive and define seismic zones and minimum safety factors to "design to." Codes pertaining to seismic requirements may be local, state, or regional building codes or amendments and should be researched thoroughly by the design professional.

Many governmental agencies at the federal level have seismic standards, criteria, and program specialists who are involved in major building programs and can give further guidance on special requirements.

• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Provides a number of web-based "Disaster Communities," organized around multi-hazard issues, including an Earthquake Disaster Community with major seismic related FEMA publications.
• International Code Council (ICC) ICC was established in 1994 to developing a single set of comprehensive and coordinated national model construction codes. The founders of the ICC are Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA), International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), and Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI).
• National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) FEMA's earthquake program was established in 1977, under the authority of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, enacted as Public Law 101-614 . The purpose of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) is to reduce the risks of life and property from future earthquakes. FEMA serves as lead agency among the four primary NEHRP federal partners, responsible for planning and coordinating the Program.
• Standards of Seismic Safety for Existing Federally Owned and Leased Buildings —a report of the NIST Interagency Committee on Seismic Safety in Construction (ICSSC RP 6) (NISTIR 6762)

For definitions of terms used in this resource page, see Glossary of Seismic Terminology   .

Organizations

• American Council of Engineering Companies
• American Society of Civil Engineers
• Building Seismic Safety Council (NIBS) —The Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC), established by the National Institute of Building Sciences develops and promotes building earthquake risk mitigation, regulatory provisions for the nation.
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mitigation Division —One of the features of FEMA's site is a map library, containing: GIS mapping products and data for the latest disasters, along with current and prior year disasters and custom hazard maps that can be created by entering a zip code and selecting from a variety of hazard types to help determine disaster risks in any community. In addition, the Mitigation Directorate's Flood Hazard Mapping Technical Services Division maintains and updates the National Flood Insurance Program maps.
• Mitigation Clearinghouse —The Clearinghouse serves to provide a dynamic resource library, thereby improving discovery and accessibility of mitigation related literature.
• Natural Hazards Center —The Natural Hazards Center, located at the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA, is a national and international clearinghouse for information on natural hazards and human adjustments to hazards and disasters.
• Seismosoft —providing the earthquake engineering community with access to powerful and state-of-the-art analytical tools since 2002.
• USGS National Earthquake Information Center

Publications

• Design Guideline for Seismic Resistant Water Pipeline Installations by American Lifelines Alliance. 2005.
• UFC 1-200-01 General Building Requirements
• UFC 3-310-04 Seismic Design for Buildings

WBDG Participating Agencies

National Institute of Building Sciences Innovative Solutions for the Built Environment 1090 Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 700 | Washington, DC 20005-4950 | (202) 289-7800 © 2024 National Institute of Building Sciences. All rights reserved. Disclaimer

• DSpace@MIT Home
• MIT Libraries
• Graduate Theses

Motion based seismic design and loss estimation of diagrid structures

Other Contributors

Terms of use, description, date issued, collections.

Seismic design of bridge piers

Type of content, uc permalink, publisher's doi/uri, thesis discipline, degree name, journal title, journal issn, volume title.

This thesis is concerned with the seismic design of bridge piers. Particular attention is given to lifeline bridges with reinforced concrete hollow columns. Development of an analytical model to predict the stress-strain behaviour of reinforcing steel under dynamic cyclic loading is presented. Model predictions agreed well with previous tests on mild and high strength steel specimens. A generalised stress-strain model for plain or confined concrete under dynamic cyclic axial compression loading is presented. To verify the model, axial compression tests were carried out on 15 circular columns with spiral reinforcement, 16 rectangular walls and five square columns with rectilinear hoops. Theoretical predictions compared well with the experimental behaviour of the near full size specimens. A ductile design methodology for lifeline bridges is presented. Inelastic response spectra for "maximum credible" earthquake motions were derived for structures with concrete columns. These design spectra can be used to assess ductility demand of column hinges. Using the steel and concrete stress-strain models, a theoretical model is developed to predict the lateral load-deformation behaviour, and thus ductility capability, of reinforced concrete columns under axial load and cyclic flexure. Design charts are prepared to enable the rotational capacity of columns with confined concrete to be assessed. Finally, an experimental investigation into the seismic performance of ductile hollow reinforced concrete columns is described. Four specimens, 40 percent full size, containing different amountsof confining steel in the plastic hinge zone were subjected to a constant axial load and cyclic lateral displacements. An assessment of the effect of axial load and the amount of confining steel on the rotational capacity of the plastic hinge is made. The specimens performed satisfactorily, obtaining member ductilities between 6 and 8, without any significant strength degradation under cyclic loading. Predictions from the proposed lateral load- deformation model are found to compare well with the experimental results.

Description

Ngā upoko tukutuku/māori subject headings, anzsrc fields of research, collections.

2024 Best Doctoral Dissertation Advances Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Seismic Design

• by Molly Bechtel
• May 21, 2024

Sumeet Kumar Sinha is this year's recipient of the University of California, Davis, College of Engineering Zuhair A. Munir Award for Best Doctoral Dissertation. The award recognizes the methods, findings and significance of Sinha's research, which featured several first-of-its-kind approaches and analyses in the field of geotechnical earthquake engineering and is actively informing seismic design practices.   

The college established the annual award in 1999 in honor of Zuhair A. Munir, the former dean of engineering who led the college from 2000 to 2002 and acted as associate dean for graduate studies for 20 years. The award recognizes a doctoral student, their exemplary research and the mentorship of their major professor.  

A two-time Aggie alum, Sinha received his master's degree in 2017 and Ph.D. in 2022 from the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, where he was mentored by Associate Professor Katerina Ziotopoulou and Professor Emeritus Bruce Kutter . He is now an assistant professor in the Department of Civil Engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and co-founder of BrahmaSens, a startup that specializes in the development of sensing technologies and solutions for application in various sectors including health-monitoring of civil infrastructures.  

"It's really a special honor to get this [award]," said Sinha. "It acknowledges both the depth and significance of the research I conducted during my Ph.D."   

Sinha's dissertation is of notable significance in California, where agencies like the Department of Transportation, or Caltrans, which funded his research, are eager to identify improved design methods in seismically active regions of the state.  

In " Liquefaction-Induced Downdrag on Piles: Centrifuge and Numerical Modeling, and Design Procedures ," Sinha focuses on the effects of earthquakes on deep foundations, like piles, in soils that can liquefy. Liquefaction occurs when wet sand-like soils lose their strength due to increased pore water pressure during earthquake shaking. This causes the soil to behave like a liquid, leading to significant ground deformations.   

After the shaking stops, the soil slowly regains its strength as the water drains out, but this settling and densifying process, called reconsolidation, can drag down piles downward. Additional downdrag loads have not always been properly accounted for in conventional design.   

Through centrifuge model tests at the UC Davis Center for Geotechnical Modeling , Sinha developed numerical models to evaluate scenarios. His findings include procedures for accurately estimating downdrag loads and the corresponding demands on pile foundations, as well as practical methods to design bridges in a more efficient and economical way.  

"Dr. Sinha's methods, approaches, documentation, results and overall findings have been, by any standards, novel and meticulous," said Ziotopoulou in her nomination letter. "His research represents a significant and original contribution to the field of geotechnical earthquake engineering, and his findings have already been implemented into practice by major design firms."  

Sinha's research was recognized with a DesignSafe Dataset Award , an Editor's Choice in his field's top journal and the Michael Condon Scholarship from the Deep Foundations Institute. He has published seven papers in peer-reviewed journals.  

Of perhaps greater meaning to Sinha is making improvements in the design codes to make them more informed, feasible, economical, resilient and sustainable through the complete understanding of the mechanism obtained through his findings from experiments, developed numerical models and design procedures, which are available publicly via platforms such as GitHub and DesignSafe.   

"My philosophy has always been to convert whatever I'm doing into a product, a tool which has a wider impact," explained Sinha. "During my Ph.D., I tried to go beyond the deliverables so that I maximize the impact of [my research]."  

Sinha is grateful for his mentors' and peers' influence and support during the five-year Ph.D. program at UC Davis.  

"I have learned a lot from [Professors Katerina Ziotopoulou and Bruce Kutter] academically as well as professionally," said Sinha. "The Geotechnical Graduate Student Society also had a very important role in my overall experience at UC Davis."  

Primary Category

University of Notre Dame

Department of Art, Art History, and Design

College of Arts and Letters

• Home ›
• News and Events ›
• News ›

Spring 2024 Thesis Exhibition Awards

Published: May 17, 2024

Author: Dept. Staff

Walter Beardsley Award (presented by the Raclin Murphy Museum of Art) Joe Matty

The Eugene M. Riley Prize in Photography Joe Matty

Senior BFA Awards

Emil Jacques Medal for Excellence in Studio Art Mae Harkins

Emil Jacques Medal for Excellence in Design Christina Sayut

Mabel L. Mountain Memorial Prize in Painting Jessica Stehlik

The Greif Prize in Studio Art or Design Katherine Gaylord

Radwan and Allan Riley Prize in Studio Art CJ Rodgers

Radwan and Allan Riley Prize in Art History Kendra Lyimo

Radwan and Allan Riley Prize in Design Payton Oliver

Barbara Roche Award of Excellence in Painting Jessica Stehlik

Judith A. Wrappe Memorial Award Katherine Gaylord Mae Harkins

Bill and Connie Greif Art Award Katherine Gaylord Mae Harkins Jessica Stehlik Christina Sayut Luis Sosa Manubes Julia Cutajar

Senior BA Honors Awards

Father Anthony J. Lauck, C.S.C. Awards Payton Oliver CJ Rodgers Mary Votava