TECHNICAL PAPERS
Jan 1, 1994

Dual‐Level Approach for Seismic Design of Asymmetric‐Plan Buildings

Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 120, Issue 1

Abstract

Buildings should be designed to resist moderate ground motion without structural damage and resist intense ground motion with controlled damage. However, most codes do not consider both these requirements explicitly and specify a single design earthquake that generally corresponds to intense ground motion. Investigated in this study is the response of one‐story, asymmetric‐plan systems designed according to torsional provisions of seismic codes to the two levels of ground motions with the objective of evaluating whether such systems satisfy these requirements. The presented results demonstrate that such systems may not remain elastic during moderate ground motion resulting in structural damage and may experience ductility demand in excess of the design ductility, causing excessive damage during intense ground motion. Therefore, the dual‐design approach, proposed earlier for symmetric‐plan systems, is extended to asymmetric‐plan systems. In this approach, the design earthquakes and the design eccentricities corresponding to the moderate and intense ground motions are considered to be different; for the latter ground motion, the values of design eccentricity are considered to depend on the design ductility of the system. It is shown in this exploratory investigation that systems designed by this extended dual‐design approach would satisfy the design requirements for both levels of ground motion.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

1.
Bertero, V. V. (1986). “Lessons learned from recent earthquakes and research, and implications for earthquake‐resistant design of building structures in the United States.” Earthquake Spectra, 2(4), 825–858.
2.
Chandler, A. M., and Hutchinson, G. L. (1987). “Evaluation of code torsional provisions by a time history approach.” J. Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 15(4), 491–516.
3.
Chopra, A. K., and Goel, R. K. (1991). “Evaluation of torsional provisions in seismic codes.” J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 117(12), 3762–3782.
4.
Earthquake resistant regulations—a world list. (1992). International Association for Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
5.
Esteva, L. (1987). “Earthquake engineering research and practice in Mexico after the 1985 earthquakes.” Bulletin of New Zealand Nat. Society for Earthquake Engrg., 20(3), 159–200.
6.
Goel, R. K., and Chopra, A. K. (1990). “Inelastic seismic response of one‐story, asymmetric‐plan systems.” Report No. UCB/EERC‐90/14, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
7.
Goel, R. K., and Chopra, A. K. (1991). “Effects of plan‐asymmetry in the inelastic seismic response of one‐story systems.” J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 117(5), 1492–1513.
8.
Gomez, R., and Garcia‐Ranz, F. (1988). “The Mexico earthquake of September 19, 1985—complementary technical norms for earthquake resistant design.” Earthquake Spectra, 4(3), 441–460.
9.
Humar, J. L. (1984). “Design for seismic torsional forces.” Can. J. Civ. Engrg., 11(2), 150–163.
10.
Kato, B. (1986). “Seismic design criteria for steel buildings.” Proc. Pacific Structural Steel Conf., Auckland, New Zealand, 1, 133–147.
11.
National building code of Canada. (1990). Associate Committee on National Building Code, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
12.
New Zealand standard NZS 4203. (1992). Code of practice for general structural design loadings for buildings, Standards Association of New Zealand, Willington, New Zealand.
13.
Pekau, O. A., and Rutenberg, A. (1987). “Evaluation of the torsional provisions in the 1985 NBCC.” Proc. 5th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Engrg., Ottawa, Canada, 739–746.
14.
Recommended lateral force requirements and tentative commentary. (1990). Structural Engineers Association of California, San Francisco, Calif.
15.
Seismic design guidelines for essential buildings (tri‐services guidelines). (1986). Department of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, Washington, D.C.
16.
Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. (1978). ATC3‐06, Applied Technological Council, Palo Alto, Calif.
17.
Tso, W. K., and Meng, V. (1982). “Torsional provisions in building codes.” Can. J. Civ. Engrg., 9(1), 38–46.
18.
Tso, W. K., and Ying, H. (1990). “Additional seismic inelastic deformation caused by structural symmetry.” J. Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 19(2), 243–258.
19.
Tso, W. K., and Ying, H. (1992). “Lateral strength distribution specification to limit additional inelastic deformation of torsionally unbalanced structures.” Eng. Struct., 14(4), 263–277.
20.
Tso, W. K., and Zhu, T. J. (1992). “Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions I: ductility demand.” J. Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 21(7), 609–627.
21.
Uniform Building Code. (1991). International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, Calif.
22.
Zhu, T. J., and Tso, W. K. (1992). “Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions II: strength distribution.” J. Earthquake Engrg. and Struct. Dynamics, 21(7), 629–644.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Structural Engineering
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 120Issue 1January 1994
Pages: 161 - 179

History

Received: Mar 10, 1993
Published online: Jan 1, 1994
Published in print: Jan 1994

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Rakesh K. Goel, Associate Member, ASCE
Asst. Res. Engr., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
Anil K. Chopra, Member, ASCE
Johnson Prof. of Civ. Engrg., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share