Advertisement

Earthquake-resistant Design of Buildings

  • T. Balendra

Abstract

The current seismic design philosophy emphasizes the safety of lives in the event of a severe earthquake. As the nature and occurrence of earthquakes are indeterminate, it is necessary to consider different levels of earthquake intensity in the design of earthquake-resistant structures. This requirement is expressed in three levels of structural performance as follows:
  1. 1.

    The structure is to resist minor earthquakes without any damage.

     
  2. 2.

    The structure should resist moderate and frequently occurring earthquakes without any structural damage, but limited non-structural damage may be tolerated.

     
  3. 3.

    The structure should not collapse under rare and severe earthquakes.

     
Exceptions to these requirements include essential facilities such as hospitals, where more stringent criteria must be followed.

Keywords

Seismic Design Plastic Hinge Local Buckling Earthquake Load Energy Dissipation Capacity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 6.1.
    Walpole W R and Butcher G W, Beam design, seismic design of steel structures study group, section C, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1985; 18: 337–343.Google Scholar
  2. 6.2.
    Butterworth J W and Spring K C F, Column design, seismic design of steel structures study group, section D, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1985; 18: 345–350.Google Scholar
  3. 6.3.
    Wilteveen J H, Stark J W B, Bijlaard F S K and Zoetemeizer P, Welded and bolted beam to column connections, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE 1982; 108: 433–455.Google Scholar
  4. 6.4.
    Walpole W R, Beam-column joints, seismic design of steel structures study group, section H, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1985; 18: 369–380.Google Scholar
  5. 6.5.
    Walpole W R, Concentrically braced frames, seismic design of steel structures study group, section E, Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1985; 18: 351–354.Google Scholar
  6. 6.6.
    Hjelmstad K D and Popov E P, Seismic Behaviour of Active Beam Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames, Report No. UBC/EERC-83/15, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1983.Google Scholar
  7. 6.7.
    Kasai K and Popov E P, General behaviour of WF steel shear link beams, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE 1986; 112: 362–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 6.8.
    Balendra T, Lam K Y, Liaw C Y and Lee S L, Behaviour of eccentrically braced frame by pseudo-dynamic test, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE 1987; 113: 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 6.9.
    Whittaker A S, Uang C and Bertero V V, Earthquake Simulation Tests and Associated Studies of a.3 Scale Model of a Six-storey Eccentrically Braced Steel Structure, Report No. UBC/EERC-87/02, University of California, Berkeley, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 6.10.
    Nishiyama I, Midorikawa M and Yamanouchi H, Inelastic behaviour of full scale eccentrically K-braced steel building, Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering 1988; 4: 261–266.Google Scholar
  11. 6.11.
    Balendra T, Sam M T and Liaw C Y, Diagonal brace with ductile knee anchor for aseismic steel frame, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1990; 19: 847–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 6.12.
    Balendra T, Sam M T, Liaw C Y and Lee S L, Preliminary studies into the behaviour of knee braced frames subjected to seismic loading, Journal of Engineering Structures 1991; 13: 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 6.13.
    Sam M T, A new Knee-Brace-Frame system for seismic resistant steel buildings, PhD thesis, National University of Singapore, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 6.14.
    Libby J R, Eccentrically braced frame construction — a case history, Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction 1981; 4: 149–153.Google Scholar
  15. 6.15.
    Wang C, Structural system — Getty Plaza tower, Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction 1984; 4: 49–59.Google Scholar
  16. 6.16.
    Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, 1978 edn, Whittier, California, 1978.Google Scholar
  17. 6.17.
    ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318–83), American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1983.Google Scholar
  18. 6.18.
    New Zealand Standard Code of Practice for the Design of Concrete Structures (NZS 3101: 1982), Standard Association of New Zealand, 1982.Google Scholar
  19. 6.19.
    Park R and Paulay T, Reinforced Concrete Structures, Wiley, New York, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 6.20.
    Iyengar H and Iqbal M, Seismic design of composite tubular buildings. In: Beedle L S (editor), Advances in Tall Buildings, Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1986, pp 133–148.Google Scholar
  21. 6.21.
    Fintel M and Ghosh S K, Earthquake resistance of buildings designed for wind. In: Beedle L S (editor), Advances in Tall Buildings, Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1986, pp 461–472.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Balendra
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational University of SingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations