Seismic Design Codes for Buildings in Japan

Review:

Seismic Design Codes for Buildings in Japan

Hiroshi Kuramoto
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Toyohashi University of Technology 1-1 Hibarigaoka, Tempaku, Toyohashi, Aichi 441-8580, Japan E-mail: kura@tutrp.tut.ac.jp [Received August 18, 2006; accepted September 27, 2006]

Two revised seismic design codes in the Building Standard Law of Japan, which were revised in 1981 and 2000, are simply reviewed with the transition of Japanese seismic design code in this paper. The central feature of the seismic code revised in 1981 was the introduction of a two-phase earthquake design. Allowable stress design was employed for rst-phase earthquake design targeting the safety and serviceability of buildings during medium-level earthquake activity. Second-phase earthquake design, which is ultimate strength design, was added to provide safety against severe earthquake motion. On the other hand, the seismic code revised in 2000 precisely denes performance requirements and verication based on accurate earthquake response and limit states of a building. The capacity spectrum method is used for evaluating the earthquake response. The code is applicable to any type of material and buildings such as seismic isolation systems as long as material properties are well dened and structural behavior is appropriately estimated.

Keywords: the Building Standard Law of Japan, seismic design code, two-phase earthquake design, performance based earthquake design

1. Transition of Seismic Design Code for Buildings in Japan [13]

The Urban Building Law enacted in September 1920 was the rst regulation in Japan related to structural design for buildings linking allowable stress design consisting of design loads, frame stress, and allowable material stress. Seismic building code design started in 1924 when the Urban Building Law was revised as a consequence of the 1923 great Kanto earthquake disaster. This Law used structural provisions including a seismic coefcient of 0.1. In 1950, the Building Standard Law replaced the Urban Building Law with more elaborate provisions for structural design. The standard seismic coefcient was raised to 0.2 but seismic design was essentially unchanged because this increase in seismic loading accompanied a comparable increase in allowable material stress.

Both the Urban Building Law and the Building Standard Law specied loading, allowable stress, and certain minimum requirements for detailing members. Other details of structural design, such as structural analysis and proportioning of members, are specied in Structural Standards issued by the Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ). These standards, prepared separately for each structural material, supplement the law and are revised more frequently to add new knowledge and provide for new materials as they develop. The seismic design building code was radically changed in 1981 in the largest revision since 1924. Up to this revision, large earthquake events in which many buildings suffered severe damage had occurred, particularly the 1968 Tokachi-oki earthquake, which signicantly damaged buildings designed based on building regulations then in force. Action undertaken as a consequence of this event included partial revision of the Building Standard Law, a large-scale revision of AIJ Standards incorporating shear design for reinforced concrete buildings and the establishment of a review procedure for existing buildings for seismic safety. A ve-year-project conducted from 1972 to 1977 aimed at establishing a new and rational seismic design method. This was released in 1977 as a proposal for a new aseismic design method for buildings. The 1978 Miyagiken-oki earthquake, which resulted in damage as severe as the 1968 Tokachi-oki earthquake, demonstrated the complexity of urban disaster in the city of Sendai, whose population exceeded 600,000. This triggered the implementation of the Ministry of Construction proposal. In July 1980, the Enforcement Order of the Building Standard Law was revised. It was also announced that this Order, together with supplementary documents, would be enacted from June 1, 1981. The central feature of the revised seismic design code was the introduction of a two-phase earthquake design. Conventional seismic design was retained, with some modications, as rst-phase earthquake design targeting the safety and serviceability of buildings during mediumlevel earthquake activity. Second-phase earthquake design was added to provide safety against severe earthquake motion. The 1995 Hyogoken-nanbu Earthquake caused much loss of human lives and severe damage or collapse of buildings [4]. Many lessons among scientists and engineers were learnt about earthquake preparedness, disaster

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.1 No.3, 2006

341

Kuramoto, H.

response, seismic design, upgrading of existing buildings and introduction of new technologies, which assure high safety levels of buildings against destructive earthquakes. The recognized need for new-generation seismic design led to the development of performance-based engineering [5], which specically addresses life safety, reparability, and functionality. Seismic provisions in the building code were signicantly revised in 2000 from prescriptive to performancebased to enlarge choices of structural design, particularly the application of newly developed materials, structural elements, structural systems, and construction. It is expected to encourage structural engineers to develop and apply new construction technology. Under the revised code, the precise denitions for structural performance requirements and verication are specied based on clear responses and limits. The code is applicable to any materials and buildings including seismic isolation systems on the condition that material properties are well dened and building behavior properly predicted. In the following two chapters, a simple review of the above-mentioned two revised seismic design codes is attempted.

1. Timber construction Others, as specified by Ministry of Construction

2. h 31m and other than 1

3. 31m < h 60m

4. h > 60m

5. Conventional structural design including first phase design for earthquakes

6. Check for story drift

Second phase design for earthquakes

7. Check for rigidity factor and eccentricity

8. Use of specifications of Ministry of Construction

9. Check ultimate capacity for lateral load

10. Approval by building officials of local government body

11. Special approval required

2. Seismic Design Revised in 1980 [1 2]

2.1. General Flowchart
In the general structural design owchart provided by the revised Enforcement Order of the Building Standard Law in 1980 (Fig. 1), buildings are rst divided into four groups mainly based on height (boxes marked (1)-(4)). The Building Standard Law provisions do not apply directly to buildings taller than 60 m (box (4)), high-rises to be designed by special study, usually incorporating timehistory nonlinear response analyses. The design is then subjected to technical review by designated inspection institutions for structural performance. Upon its recommendation, a special approval of the structural design is issued by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MLIT). For buildings not exceeding 60 m, the basic intent of the general ow is two-phase design involving an additional design phase, i.e., second-phase earthquake design, following conventional structural design, including seismic design, i.e., rst-phase earthquake design. First-phase design involves strong earthquakes occurring several times during a buildings lifetime. Second-phase design targets severe or extraordinary earthquakes occurring once in a buildings lifetime. Application of two-phase design is shown in Fig. 1, for three different groups of buildings up to 60 m in height, in boxes (1)-(3). For these, conventional structural design is conducted rst (box (5)), including rst-phase seismic design involving allowable stress design for permanent and temporary loadings taking maximum strength into account. Major changes in the code related to this design phase are methods in seismic force evaluation. 342

Fig. 1. General seismic design owchart.

Box (1) is for buildings prevalent in Japan, including low-rise reinforced concrete with generous amounts of shear walls, for which there is ample experience in seismic design and evidence of seismic behavior. First-phase design, basically unchanged from the previous building code, should provide sufcient seismic resistance to withstand severe earthquakes, so second-phase design is not applied to these buildings. Boxes (2) and (3) involve second-phase design. The most important step in second-phase design is the evaluation of maximum lateral load capacity (box (9)), but considerations in boxes (6)-(8) are included in second-phase design. The evaluation of story drift (box (6)) is intended to eliminate exible structures experiencing excessively large lateral deection under seismic loading. In ordinary reinforced concrete buildings, this check is not critical, but results of calculations are required later for items in box (7) or (9). Buildings up to 31 m high (box (2)) involve a choice of ow into boxes (7) and (8) or into box (9). Box (7) requires a check of the rigidity factor and eccentricity. The rigidity factor refers to the vertical distribution of lateral stiffness checked to eliminate buildings with one or more exible stories among other stories, such as the soft rst story. Checking for eccentricity provides protection against excessive torsional deformation. These checks are followed by the application of a set of additional minimum requirements specied by MLIT (box (8)) to ensure certain strength and ductility. The option of boxes (7) and Journal of Disaster Research Vol.1 No.3, 2006