com
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Strutturale
Relatore:
Ing. Pietro Crespi
Ing. Francesco Iorio
Allievo
Diego Bruciafreddo
a.a. 2010/2011
Ingegneria Strutturale
01/09/2010 30/09/2010
Progettista Strutturale
Progetto Strutturale di un edificio a sei elevazioni fuori terra pi piano interrato, irregolare in pianta e in
elevazione, di un edificio in c.a. in zona ad alta sismicit (ag/g 0.38) in classe di duttilit B. Il
comportamento sismico stato ottimizzato mediante ladozione di una scala alla Giliberti.
Studio Tecnico Arch. Antonino Leonello
Ingegneria Strutturale
10/03/2007 al 10/06/2007
Tirocinio Formativo
Attivit sperimentale di modellazione e calcolo della risposta sismica locale.
MECMAT Dipartimento di Meccanica e Materiali dellUniversit degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio
Calabria
Ingegneria Strutturale
Istruzione e formazione
Date
Titolo della qualifica rilasciata
Principali tematiche/competenze
professionali acquisite
Tecniche di progettazione per la mitigazione del rischio sismico sia su strutture nuove che esistenti.
Competenze specialistiche nellambito della modellazione del comportamento dinamico delle strutture.
The new observation tower for the Galleria Ferrari Area in Maranello: structural earthquake and
comfort design
Progettazione strutturale della nuova torre panoramica a Maranello per la Galleria Ferrari. Sono state
effettuate analisi dinamiche non lineari incrementali con modellazione a fibre (IDA) per la valutazione
del comportamento sismico e analisi dinamiche lineari per la valutazione del livello di confort a seguito
delle vibrazioni di natura antropica sullo sbalzo di 12 m.
Autovalutazione
Pagina 2/3  Curriculum vitae di
Cognome/i Nome/i
Comprensione
Parlato
Scritto
Ascolto
Inglese
Francese
Lettura
Interazione orale
Produzione orale
B2 Livello intermedio C1 Livello Avanzato B2 Livello intermedio B2 Livello intermedio C1 Livello avanzato
A2
Livello
Elementare
B1 Livello Intermedio A2
Livello
Elementare
A2
Livello
elementare
A2 Livello elementare
Capacit e competenze sociali  Sono particolarmente predisposto a lavorare in team cercando sempre di comprendere e di risolvere i
problemi al meglio al fine di ottenere i risultati previsti.
 Sono dotato di un forte senso di volont e di capacit di problem solving anche nelle situazioni pi
dinamiche.
Sono dotato di un ottimo spirito di adattamento anche nelle situazioni pi complesse e sono pienamente
disponibile a trasferte in tutto il mondo.
Buona capacit di comunicazione e motivazione ottenuta grazie a unampia esperienza di impartizione
di lezioni private a un buon numero di studenti universitari ( ad oggi circa 60 )
Capacit e competenze
organizzative
Capacit e competenze tecniche
Capacit e competenze
informatiche
Firma
ABSTRACT IX
<1>Limit state design for reinforced concrete structures................................................ 1
1.1 THE BORN OF LIMIT STATE DESIGN: THE MODEL CODE .............................................................................. 1
1.2 METHODS OF DESIGN OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES .................................................................................... 3
1.2.1
The Allowable Stress Method (ASM) ..................................................................................... 4
1.2.2
Load Factor Method (LFM) ................................................................................................... 4
1.2.3
Limit state Method (LSM) ..................................................................................................... 4
1.3 THE LIMIT STATE DESIGN APPROACH ...................................................................................................... 5
1.3.1
Characteristic load and characteristic strenghs .................................................................... 5
1.3.2
Partial safety factors for loads and material strengths ........................................................ 7
1.3.2.1
1.3.2.2
1.3.3
1.3.3.1
1.3.3.2
1.3.3.3
1.4.3
1.4.3.1
1.4.3.2
1.4.4
1.4.4.1
1.4.4.2
1.4.4.3
1.4.4.4
Floor response for a single combination of step frequency and persons weight ......................... 15
Design value of the floor response ................................................................................................ 16
Hand Calculation method .............................................................................................................. 16
2.6.2
2.6.2.1
2.7.2
VI
2.8 INCREMENTAL DYNAMIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 37
2.9 NONLINEAR STATIC VERSUS NONLINEAR DYNAMIC ANALYSIS .................................................................... 38
2.10
QUALITY ASSURANCE OF BUILDING ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 38
3.2.3
3.2.3.1
<5>
5.3.2
5.3.2.1
5.3.2.2
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.3.4.1
VII
5.5 LOAD ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 93
5.5.1
Vertical loads ...................................................................................................................... 93
th
5.5.1.1
5.5.1.2
5.5.1.3
5.5.2
5.5.3
Snow load............................................................................................................................ 94
Wind load ............................................................................................................................ 96
5.5.3.1
5.5.3.2
5.5.3.3
5.5.3.4
5.5.4
5.5.4.1
5.5.4.2
5.5.4.3
5.5.4.4
5.5.4.5
5.10.2
5.10.2.1
5.10.2.1
5.10.3
<6>
5.10.3.1
5.10.3.1
5.10.3.2
5.11
5.12
The new tower in Maranello: Performance evalutation under seismic load 147
VIII
6.1 STRUCTURAL MODEL ....................................................................................................................... 147
6.1.1
Base Structural model check ............................................................................................. 149
6.1.1.1
6.1.1.2
6.1.2
6.1.2.1
6.1.2.2
6.1.2.3
6.1.3
Fiber division of section and inelastic hinge...................................................................... 155
6.2 PERFORM IDA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 157
6.2.1
Ground acceleration selection .......................................................................................... 158
6.2.1.1
6.2.1.2
6.2.1.3
6.2.2
6.2.2.1
6.2.2.2
6.2.2.3
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.4.1
6.2.5
Consideration............................................................................................................................... 176
6.2.5.1
6.2.5.2
6.2.5.3
6.2.5.4
6.2.5.5
6.2.5.6
6.2.5.7
6.2.6
Summarization of IDA curve and limit states check .......................................................... 190
6.3 BASE SHEAR VERSUS TOP DISPLACEMENT ............................................................................................. 192
<7>
Conclusions 147
REFERENCES 149
IX
ABSTRACT
The structural project of the new panoramic tower for the redevelopment of the Galleria
Ferrari has been done in this thesis.
The tower design has been made, specifically, versus vibration control due to human activities
and versus the seismic load. Two peculiarities have made this project not standard in order to
accomplish the limit state requirement associated to the vibration control (serviceability condition)
and the seismic load (Ultimate state conditions). The first one peculiarity, related to the vibration
control, is the panoramic terrace cantilevered for rc core of the tower for 12 meters, which also
requires a seismic analysis for the vertical component. The second one is the presence of two
overtures in the sections near of the base of the core which disturb the plastic excursion of this
region under seismic load.
The approach was to follow the integrally structural design path from the architectonic design
and after to perform evaluation under seismic load by using non linear dynamic incremental
analysis.
<1>
Limit State Design of reinforced
concrete structures
PREVIEW
In this opening chapter, the limit state design is presented. Exactly, this chapter speaks
about the LSD in the most important building codes. Particular attention is shown about the
serviceability limit states of vibration control because the advices in the European and Italian
code are not very clear.
1.1
Before the last two decades of last century reinforced concrete designers were
concerned more with the safety against failure of their structures than with durability under
service conditions. Thus, the theoretical calculations for design were based on classical elastic
theory using fictitious modulus of elasticity and geometrical properties for reinforced concrete
element and a permissible working stresses. The date of the creation of the European
Committee for Concrete (Comite European du Beton), called CEB, in 1953, can be said as the
date when the limit state design, otherwise called strength and performance criterion, was
born. The initiative for this came from the reinforced concrete contractors of France. The
Committee has its headquarters at Luxembourg. Its objective are the coordination and
synthesis of research on safety, durability and design calculation procedures, for practical
application to construction. Their first recommendations for reinforced concrete design were
published in 1964.
Later, under the leadership of Yves Guyon (well known for his expertise on prestressed
concrete), the CEB established technical collaboration with the International Federation for
prestressing (Federation International de la Preconstrainte), called FIP. Recommendations for
international adoption for design and construction of concrete structures were published by
them in June 1970 and the CEBFIP Model Code for Concrete Structures was proposed in
1977. These efforts formed the solid bases for the creation of an International Code of
Practice. Trough these publications a unified code for design of both reinforced and
prestressed reinforced concrete structures was developed.
Chapter 1
According to the above model code, structural analyses, for determination of section
design values are to be carried by elastic analysis, but the final design of the concrete
structures is to be done by the principles of limit state theory.
The model code was to be a model from which each country was to write its national
code, based on its stage of development but agreeing on important points, like method of
design for bending, shear, torsion, etc., to the model code.
The basis had to be scientifically rigorous, but compromises could be made because of
inadequacy of data on the subject for any region.
The British were the first to bring out a code based on limit state approach as
recommended by the CEBFIP in 1970. This code was published as Unified Code for
structural concrete, i.e. CP 110 (1972). Other Countries in Europe and United States adopted
similar codes, and today most countries follow codes based on the principles of Limit state
Design.
India followed suit during the third revision of Is code 456 in 1978, and the provisions
of the limit state design (as regards concrete strength, durability and detailing) were
incorporated in the revised code IS 456 (1978) in Sections 14. However, for design
calculations to asses the strength of an R.C. member, the choice of either limit state method or
working stress method has been left to the designer (Section 5 and 6) with the hope that with
time, the working stress method will be completely replaced by the limit state method. Many
of the Provisions of the IS code are very similar to the BS approach.
The fourth revision of the code published in June 2000 as IS 456 (2000) specifies that
R.C. structural elements shall normally be designed by Limit State Method. AllowableStress
Method is to be used only where Limit State Method cannot be used conveniently.
Accordingly, the status of working stress method as an alternative method of design has been
discontinued in the current code.
A uniform approach to design, with reference to the various criteria, is the dream of al
designers with an international outlook, but it is bound to take many more years to come into
effect. In the USA, the code used for general design of reinforced concrete structures in the
Building Code Requirement for Reinforce Concrete ACI 318 (1999). The general principles
of limit states design are named as strength and serviceability method in the above code. In
European countries the code used is the Eurocode (EC), composed by 9 parts whit their
national application document (NAD). Not all parts are related with rc design, for example
EC3 is about the steel structures. Every country can use both Eurocodes and its code but, at
the same time, the national codes are changing to be very similar to the Eurocodes. The aim is
to use only one code for all member countries.
As research in various aspects of concrete design in still being carried out in many
countries and these countries are anxious that the results of these latest research are reflected
in their national codes, it will take a long time for all the codes in the world to be the same. It
is therefore advisable that a designer be aware of at least the general prevision of the codes of
other countries too. For this purpose, in this chapter and in many parts of this thesis the
provisions of most important codes are briefly discussed and compared.
2
As has happened in other scientific fields, new ways of thinking replace the old ways. In
scientific circles, this is generally referred to as a paradigm shift. Limit state design should
therefore be looked upon as a paradigm, a better way of explaining certain aspects of reality
and a new way of thinking about old problems. Thus, it should be learned and taught with its
own philosophy, and not as an extension of the old elastic theory.
1.2
Chapter 1
gives a good idea of the strength aspect, the serviceability limit states are better shown by the
elastic theory only.
Since a rational approach to design of reinforced concrete did not mean simply adopting
the existing elastic and ultimate theories, new concepts with a semiprobabilistic approach to
design were found necessary. The proposed new method had to provide a framework which
would allow designs to be economical and safe. This new philosophy of design was called the
Limit State Method (LSM) of design. It has been already adopted by many of the leading
countries of the world in their codes as he only acceptable method of design of reinforced
concrete structures.
Chapter 1
The characteristic values are related to specified fractiles in the statistical distribution of
load or strength. Exactly, for the load is commonly used the fractile 95%, in other words a
load value so big than only 5 times on 100 the structure have to carry a bigger value. For the
strength, instead, the value is so small then 95 times on 100 the effective value is bigger than
the characteristic.
A lot of physical phenomena follow the normal distribution as well the load and the
strength can be treated by this law. In a normal distributions, obtaining of fractiles, is directly
related to mean value and standard deviations according to the below equation:
= +
=
[1.1]
[1.2]
The value of the constant for the 5 per cent chance, in a normal distribution, is 1.64.
[1.3]
[1.4]
This simply means that the strength to be used for design should be used the reduced value of
the characteristic strength by the factor denoted by the partial safety factor for the material.
Chapter 1
Let us write what kind of performance level is required in one or in other one. Helped
by Italian national code, which is referred to Eurocode, the follow subchapters explain briefly,
for each limit state, the performance that the structure will be show during its expected life.
1.3.3.1 Ultimate Limit States
The Ultimate Limit States are related to safety in its strictly meaning, they are linked to
collapse or other kinds of structural failure which can be dangerous for the safety of persons
or doing big environmental or social problems.
When a ULS is overcome, the structure cannot return to the initial state and this
situation defines the collapse of structure.
1. Ultimate strength condition
The ultimate strength of the structure or member should allow n overload. For this
purpose, the structure should be designed by the accepted ultimate load theory to
carry specific overload. This may be inflexure, compression, shear, torsion or
tension and against it every structure have to be checked.
2. Overall stability
The structure or a part of it, thought as a rigid body, have to offer stability against
accidental loads.
3. Big deflections or deformations
It is important that the maximum deflections or deformations, in one ultimate scene,
is limited.
4. Fatigue collapse
When structure or one part of that fails for the action of cyclic load.
5. Fail of frames or joints for time related phenomena
Phenomena, like viscosity, can change the stress distribution in frame sections
respect to the initial checked value
6. Instability
Checked that the structure or one part of it have just one stability configuration.
7. Fire resistance
The structure is able to resist for a determinate time when it is subjected to the fire
action. This capacity is identified by the acronym REI when:
R Load bearing capacity: to provide strength and stability of the building;
E Integrity: to keep the element intact;
I Insulation: to keep the temperature low on the unexposed side of the element,
expressed in minutes.
An element fulfilling all these basic criteria for 30 minutes will be classified REI 30.
8
Chapter 1
The postearthquake damage state that retains the preearthquake design strength
and stiffness, and is safe to occupy. Some minor structural repairs may be
appropriate but not necessary to make the building safe occupy.
2. Damage Control Range
After earthquake the structure (structural elements, non structural elements,
equipments etc.) suffers some damage but not so great as undermining the safety of
persons or as compromising the stiffness and resistance against lateral and vertical
load. In the postearthquake the structure can be used entirely or in a large part.
1.3.3.3 Robustness
Robustness for a structure is when it is able to dont show damages much bigger than
the cause which has generated them. In other words is important that the local damage will be
confined just in a little part of structure when this part suffers damage, also heavy, due an
exceptional load like fire, gas explosion, vehicle impact.
This property can be achieved when the structure has an alternative load path able to
bridge the failed elements.
The main design rules whit which one can design structure with robustness behavior
are:
Privilege the columns resistance with respect to that of the beams (SCWB Strong
Columns Weak Beams);
Privilege shear resistance with respect to the flexure resistance. In other words
member have to fail for shear and not or flexure:
Check with attention the interaction between structural part and non structural part;
Design the structural detailing to allow load transferring.
10
Figure 1. 3 The focus on disproportionate collapse followed the Ronan Point disaster 0f 1968, which is the
classical example of robustness problem. In the collapse one wall panel sustained damage, due a gas explosion,
causing the whole corner of the building to give way.
It is important to note that all above rules are the same rules applied in seismic design hence,
seismically designed structure, already has an implicit capacity to show robustness.
11
Chapter 1
A recent project funded by the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS), has resulted
in a method for verifying the performance of floors with respect to human induced
vibration. The method, referred to as the one step root mean square method (OSRMS),
has been published in a Dutch guideline and a European guideline. The Dutch guideline
describes the complete method whereas the European guideline is limited to the socalled hand calculation.
1
[1.5]
A standard walking load is defined as a series of consecutive steps whereby each step
load (or footfall) is described by a polynomial [1.6]. The normalized step load is given by:
"
=
= =
!#$
!
0,
0 <
< 0 )*
[1.6]
Where G is the persons mass and is the total time during which one footis in contact with
the ground. The coefficients ! depend on the step frequency, , and are given in Table 1.
The duration of a single step, not to be confused with period is given by the following
formula:
= 2.6606 1.757 + 0.3844 5
[1.7]
The step load describes the different phases of the contact between foot and ground as
shown in Figure 1.4. Figure 1.5 gives examples of the time history of the contact forces
during one footfall for two different step frequencies.
12
One individual walking cannot be the basis for the design of floors for vibration comfort but a
representative loading has to be found which covers a relevant majority of loading scenarios.
Hence, the loading is described in a statistical manner.
13
Chapter 1
Statistical distributions of monitored case studies have shown that the step frequencies
are not correlated with the distribution of body weight, hence two probability distribution
functions are sufficient to describe the statistical variation of the loading. In the calculations
of the response, a total of 700 combinations of step frequency and body weigth (35 step
frequencies and 20 body weights). Each combinations leads to a response with a probability
of occurrence described by a joint probability of occurrence function as shown in Figure 1.6.
The limit states mentioned in the preceding paragraphs have a clearly way to check
them in the Eurocodes as well in the NTC08 but it isnt true for the serviceability limit state of
vibration control. Both codes prescribe that the SLS of vibration control must be checked but
dont give any equations or other indications valid to solve this issue (only the advice to
14
design the floor to have natural frequencies higher than 3 Hz), just they recall to the scientific
literature . This paragraph gives a simplified way to assess the vibration control under human
vibration.
1
89
:1 + ;< =
[1.8]
Where < = 5.6 6> and 89 is the reference velocity which is taken as 1.0 mm/s.
Because of division by a reference velocity, the weighted response and the OSRMS value are
dimensionless.
15
Chapter 1
Figure 1. 7 Vibration response for defined ranges of step frequency and body mass
The function can be obtained by applying the steps described in the previous paragraph
for the mobility function of system with one degree of freedom.
In applying the hand calculation method, the dynamic properties of the floor structure
need to be determined. In general, it is sufficient to the determine the following parameters for
the first mode of vibration:

Natural frequency
Modal mass
Damping value
The first and the second parameters can be easily estimated using formulas in classical
text of structural dynamics. The damping, instead, is considered as a combination of damping
effects arising from:

When the mode frequency and the frequency of steps are identical, resonance can lead
to very large response amplitudes. Resonance can also occur for higher harmonics of the step
frequency, i.e. where a multiple of the step frequency coincides with the natural frequency. In
the transfer function method these possible resonance effects are implicitly taken into account.
For the hnd calculation method, however, higher modes need to be taken explicitly into
consideration.
Where higher floor modes may be relevant for design, modal mass and frequency
should be determined for each mode I of interested and the OSRMS90 value is determined by
a SRSS rule.
A BC< = : A BC<,!
!
[1.9]
The direction of the vibration. The issue of floor vibration is related only to
vertical vibrations.
The posture of people such a standing, laying or sitting;
17
Chapter 1
Thus the perception of vibrations varies between individuals and can be judges in a way
that fulfils the expectations of comfort for the majority of people.
It soul be considered that the vibrations levels, which is object of this paragraph, are
relevant for the comfort of the occupants only. They are not relevant for structural integrity.
Aiming at an universal assessment procedure for human induced vibration it is
recommended to adopt the, above presented, OSRMS as a measure for assessing floor
vibrations. Exactly the OSRMS90, defined as the 90 fractile of all the OSRMS values
obtained for a set of load as written in the preceding paragraph.
1.4.3.2 Floor classes
Depending of OSRMS90 a class for a floor can be selected. Specific studies have
identified which class is compatible with determinate human activities. For example the
following table, from European Guidelines [3] give class division of floor response and
recommendation for the application of classes. Limits on vibration are also given in
International standard ISO 10137[4] which is referred in the Eurocodes. These limits are
reproduced here with the equivalent OSRMS90 limit.
Table 1. 2 Classification of floor class and recommendation for the application of classes
18
It is considered that ISO limits are unnecessarily harsh, and testing on a number of
subjects found the limits of Guidelines to be more appropriate.
Chapter 1
document [3] for example gives for different structural materials, furniture and finishing the
relative damping. The total damping, system damping, is obtained by summing up the
appropriate values for the different damping source.
Table 1. 4 Determination of damping
20
21
Chapter 1
Figure 1. 8 The OSRMS90 graph with acceptance classes for various damping values
22
<2>
Nonlinear Structural Analysis for
Seismic Design
PREVIEW
The analysis of damage level shown by structure after large earthquakes in the past,
makes clear that the seismic response of building cannot be found in elastic behavior range.
The phenomena of earthquake response of the structure can be easily understood by energetic
considerations. Indeed, the earthquake gives a certain quantity of energy to the structure that
must be absorbed and dissipated by the structural elements.
It is surely very hard that just the elastic deformations and the structural damping can be
able to confront the energetic input given by design earthquake as for the new buildings,
because of it needs excessive sections, as well for the existing buildings, which, although
usually designed using elastic analysis, most will experience significant inelastic deformation
under large earthquakes.
It is important to note that out of elastic range does not mean failure of the structure; the
failure conditions, showed in the chapter 1, are related to the ULS achievement. Thus, modern
performancebased design methods require ways to determine the realistic behavior of
structures under such conditions.
Non linear analysis method are treated in this chapter.
2.2 The role and the use of nonlinear analysis in seismic design
Nonlinear analyses involve significantly more effort to perform and should be
approchead with specific objectives in mind. Typical instances where non linear analysis is
applied in structural earthquake engineering practice are to:
1. Assess and design seismic retrofit solutions for existing buildings;
2. Design new buildings that employ structural materials, system, or other features that
do not conform to current building code requirements;
3. Assess the performance of buildings for specific owner/stakeholder requirements
Chapter 2
The stiffness is the quantity which linked external applied loads with displacement
while they are still in the elastic range.
The resistance is the maximum load that the element can be carry and in elasticperfectly plastic diagram is the same value which cause the yelding;
The ductility is the ability of an element, or of the whole structure, to show more
displacements ( or deformations) after the elastic range, without an important lost of
resistance ; numerically it is quantified by the fraction between the displacement value
on the failure with the displacement value on the yielding.
Stiffness and resistance are the main elements while a one studies linear system.
Ductility represent the structure resource after yielding to show more displacement before to
achieve the failure.
According to the DAlembert principle, the dynamic equilibrium gives the formula
below:
() +
() + ((),
()) = ()
[2.1]
It is formally analogue to the equation for the elastic SDOF but it is substantially
different because of the resistance forces that are function of the instantaneous value of
displacement u(t) and its time history. In this case, the solution can be carried out only by
numerical procedures as described later in this chapter.
ED: Equal displacement principle which affirms the equality between maximum
displacement shown by an elastic SDOF and an elasticplastic SDOF, with the same
initial stiffness, subjected to the same earthquake. This is true for a relatively
deformable structure, i.e. for relatively high natural period;
EE: Equal energy which affirms that the energy stored in an elasticplastic system
under an earthquake is the same than an elastic system, with the same stiffness of the
initial of the first one, was stored. This is valid for relatively rigid structure, i.e. for
small natural period;
EA: Equal acceleration which affirms that, for very rigid structure 0, the
maximum acceleration on the SDOF is the ground acceleration.
Consequently, the designer who would like use elasticplastic design must:
25
Chapter 2
For high natural period: design the structure to be able to achieve the elastic
displacement with plastic behavior;
For small period: design the structure to be able to achieve a displacement
opportunely bigger than the elastic;
For very small period: design the structure to resist to the maximum ground
acceleration. In this case the structure is so rigid than the small displacement cannot
premise the activation of plastic behavior.
The strategy design discussed above, for the first two principles, shows that the design
force can be reduced if the designer gives to the structure the possibility to have the
displacement required, or rather the required ductility.
These two principles clarify how the ductility reduces the actions with respect to the
elastic values in the seismic evaluation on building. Referring to the Figure 2.3(a), the
maximum force on the SDOF is:
,
,
=
= ,
=
,
,
Where =
,!"
#
[2.2]
principle, by the equality between A and B area in Figure 2.3(b), the reduction is:
'
%, & = %, &
2
[2.3]
,
,
1* = 2 (
(
*
[2.4]
, ,
=
[2.6]
,
+2 1
[2.7]
It is now clear that the ductility makes the design forces smaller. The quantity on the
denominator, in the both equations, is the ascalled behavior factor, usually indicated by the
letter q .
The behavior factor is the essence of the linear equivalent elastic analysis. This method
consists in the reduction of linear elastic response spectra by q factor to keep in count the
inelastic resources of the structure.
Chapter 2
The definition of q factor is an essential point for the seismic structural design. Its
definition is done for structural typology as interpretation of numerical analysis.
The behavior factor is conditioned by:

Structural typology
Material
Ductility global level of the structure
Hyperstaticity of the structure
Plan regularity
Elevation regularity
Every standard structure has its behavior factor. Special structure, for geometry or
material, needs to be studied to understand which is its natural behavior factor. The
Eurocode 8, the Eurocode on earthquake design, gives, for rc structure, a 1.5 as a minimum
value for behavior factor independent of the structural typology.
28
[2.8]
Where , and are the initial values of the forcings and . and 1 the amplification
coefficients. The forcings are increasing until the system collapses which can be defined when
it is impossible to find equilibrium with external load or when the structure arrives to a
predetermined value.
2.6.1.2 Step 2: Linearization of capacity curve
The capacity curve is a diagram which has in the xaxes the displacement and in the yaxes the shear. Three kinds of curve are possible:

With hardening
Perfect
Whit softening
29
Chapter 2
Once had the curve the next step is its linearization, i.e. to fit with straight line the
curve. The interpolated traits can be bilinear or trilinear and the chose is not unique.
30
Chose of forcing type, displacement or load, and their application on the structure
elevation;
Conversion in a SDOF system to do an interpretation of the results.
Chapter 2
equation of motion in non linear field. In literature there are many methods, a commonly
denominator is to transform a system of differential equations in a system of algebraic
equations by some hypothesis on the ground acceleration.
For an inelastic SDOF system the equation of motion is:
() +
() + ((),
()) = ()
[2.9]
[2.10]
and, inside of this time step, the system response is explicitly found. Exactly, with
displacement, velocity and acceleration knew at step i, according with [2.9]
5 +
5 + 8 5 =
[2.11]
567
[2.12]
Usually, the response inside the time step t cannot be exact because of the implicitly
difficulties in the punctual definition of the forcing () and the resistance forces
((),
()) due an inelastic behavior. To solve the problem, a numerical procedures were
created. A numerical procedure must satisfy three important aspect:
Convergency property for which if the time step is decreased the approximate
solution will fit better the exact solution.
Accuracy property related to the capacity of the algorithm to give solution near
of the exact for every chose of time step.
Robustness property related to the stability of the algorithm respect with the roundoff errors; to specifically little input variations must product little variations of the
output data.
The last parameter is linked to the stability and it is a very important parameter during
the analysis debug. Integration methods are divided, indeed, in conditionally stable and
unconditionally stable; the algorithm stability is related to the selected time step.
One of the most used method for the direct integration is the Newmarks method. In the
next chapters this method is explained with particular attention to the stability condition.
32
[2.13]
567 = 5 + ()
5 + 9(0.5 1)()< 5 + 91()' < 567
[2.14]
The parameter 1 and : define the acceleration variation inside of an integration step and they
7
determine the accuracy and the stability of this method. Typical selection are : = and
7
?
'
1 . These two parameters give the acceleration interpolation law of the acceleration,
A
it can easily show that : = and 1 = is the selection for an average acceleration value into
'
A
7
the step and : = ' and 1 = A is the selection for a linear law of interpolation. Details are
shown in the Figure 2.8 .
With equations [2.13] and [2.14] the response can be find. More details can be found in
the literature. Here the robustness property of the algorithm are discussed.
33
Chapter 2
B2 +: 21
[2.15]
Where is the natural period of the SDOF. It follows that the average acceleration method
7
H
[2.16]
That is whatever selection of integration time step does not affect the algorithm stability.
7
7
Linear acceleration method D: = ' ; 1 = ? F, instead, it is stable if
0.551
[2.17]
However, although the limitation is a finite number, it is not so little to be a limit for the
ordinary system analysis, which already requires a little time step for its accuracy.
[2.18]
Like the SDOF systems the action () is described by a vector of values each spaced
by a regular time step . The problem is to determine KO6P , K
567 , K 567 according to:
J K 567 + L K
567 + M8 (K, K
)567 = J N 3QR .
[2.19]
When the same quantities are known at the time step i. The methods for a SDOF system
can be used to solve MDOF system using classical algebraic methods.
Usually in linear system analysis the equations of motion [2.18] can be decoupled by
modal analysis because of the resistance force are linear function of displacement. When the
system is nonlinear, the decoupling is impossible thus the equation must be solved together.
However, the expansion in modal coordinates helps to understand the most important
problems related to the direct integration. It is important and reasonable setting all parameters
starting by the elastic behavior.
34
K() = S T U ().
W7
[2.20]
With j known the time integration step can be selected as a smaller value then = 72Y is
Defining a correct damping matrix which makes less important the modes from j+1 to
N.
Using a numerical method with numerical damping which can reduced the response
only for certain modes characterized by its period. An example is the Wilsons
method.
To understand better the numerical damping the figure below shows the solution of
equation of motion for a SDOF undamped system in free vibration obtained by four different
methods, where one of these is the exact solution.
35
Chapter 2
Figure 2. 9
Analyzing the figure it is clear how solution by Wilsons method shows a damped
response where the system is undamped. This characteristic can be governed because of the
time integration step is the parameter that discriminates if the numerical damping affects or
not the solution. The properties of Wilsons method, synthetically showed in the Figure 2.30,
suggest a method to keep in count only the j important modes in a numerical solution.
Figure 2. 10 Damping and Amplitude decay versus dimensionless time integration step
Wilsons method gives damping only starting from determinate values of time
integration step so, as the period increase with the modes, the time step can be selected in
relation with the period of j+1 mode. In this way, modes from j+1 to N will be numerically
damped while the modes from 1 to j will be keep in count with only their damping value.
36
37
Chapter 2
lateral load. Further validations using published experimental tests can help build
understanding and confidence in the nonlinear analysis software and alternative modeling
decisions (e.g., effects of element mesh refinement and section discretization).
Beyond having confidence in the software capabilities and the appropriate modeling
techniques, it is essential to check the accuracy of models developed for a specific project.
Checks begin with basic items necessary for any analysis. However, for nonlinear analyses
additional checks are necessary to help ensure that the calculated responses are realistic.
39
Chapter 2
40
<3>
Modeling of structure for non linear
analysis
PREVIEW
Structural modeling is the ensemble of operations that allows to translate the physical
problem in a mathematical problem, whose solution gives informations on the real behavior
of the structure. The result of the modeling is the definition of the structural scheme that is
associated to the real structure. The definition of an appropriate scheme, as simple, to be quite
simply calculable, as complex, to keep in count the most important variables, it is the
principle problem in structural analysis, because of from this definition depends, more than
the numerical analysis accuracy, the reliability of results.
By the FEM method, the 3D structural models can be created without any difficulties.
Respect to the past, where the buildings were modeled, usually, as a series of 2D frames, this
represents a bigger reliability to obtainment of the response because, by them, a global
structural behavior can be studied and understood. Nevertheless, by the inherent difficulty of
the studied phenomenon, many difficulties remain which requiring that the structural engineer
must work at different levels of difficulties. In fact, while very simple schemes neglect a lot of
variables and they are, at lest in the theory, less correct, they allow for a direct interpretation
of structural behavior and a possibility of results control which isnt property of the more
Chapter 3
complex schemes. Furthermore, for the simple schemes, many methods are available while,
for complex schemes, there is only one method, i.e. the FEM. The role and the use of
nonlinear analysis in seismic design
Although using point by point models appears the best way to understanding the
structural behavior there are a lots factors which make difficult their practical utilization, even
only for their computational requests associated to a very intensive mesh. The correct
selection of the calculation model is strictly related to the analyzed structure and to the aims
the analyses.
By global models, the response is calculated in an approximate way but, at the same
time, in a very simple way so, they are very useful as in concept design phase as in the
verification of calculation.
A simplified model which, although with important simplifications, makes
understandable the essence of the structural behavior is always necessary to have successful
analysis. In fact, through it, setting the more complex model is possible by selection of the
principal variables and the details to keep in count; furthermore it is the key to understand and
to validate the analysis results.
42
The next paragraphs speak about the principal problems which occur when a structural
model is created.
43
Chapter 3
[3.1]
which indicates that the relation between forces and displacements is non linear. By the
hypothesis of small displacement, but not so small to be infinitesimal, the relation [3.1] can be
lynearized, id est:
= +
44
[3.2]
Which shows that, also in small displacement, writing equilibrium equation cannot be lawful.
The correctness or otherwise is directly related to the acting axial force, as it shown by the
equation [3.2]. Furthermore by the increasing of the axial force the solution can lose the
uniqueness. If a distributed elasticity element is considered, indeed of a lumped element,
using a local reference system is necessary to evaluate equilibrium section by section. The
Figure 3.4 shows the behavior of a linear elastic beam under large displacements and the
Figure 3.5 shows the numerical comparison between the expected solution in small
displacement and in quite large displacements.
Looking to figure 3.5 indicates how the flexional behavior and axial behavior are not
decoupled. Figure 3.6 makes clear how, also in distributed elasticity, axial force is responsible
of the characteristic of the stress.
The possibility to neglect or otherwise the effects due to the geometrical non linearity
depends, essentially, to two factors. The first one is how much large the displacements are,
because also little displacements makes important the effects due to the nonlinearity: the
second order effects. The second one is the entity of the axial force.
45
Chapter 3
It is clear that a model for a new building, which is designed for lateral load and to
respect displacement limit imposed by the codes, cannot keep in count these effects.
When these effects are important, two different ways are usually used:
Geometrical stiffness
A stiffness matrix related to the axial force, , is added to the stiffness matrix in
= +
[3.3]
P effects
An iterative procedure where each step is loaded adding the forces developed
writing the equilibrium equations on the deformed configuration of the previous
step.
46
The simplest models concentrate the inelastic deformations at the end of the
element, such as through a rigidplastic hinge (Figure 36a) or an inelastic spring
with hysteretic properties (Figure 36b). By concentrating the plasticity in zerolength hinges with momentrotation model parameters, these elements have
relatively condensed numerically efficient formulations.
The finite length hinge model (Figure 36c) is an efficient distributed plasticity
formulation with designated hinge zones at the member ends. Cross sections in the
inelastic hinge zones are characterized through either nonlinear momentcurvature
relationships or explicit fibersection integrations that enforce the assumption that
plane sections remain plane. The inelastic hinge length may be fixed or variable, as
determined from the momentcurvature characteristics of the section together with
the concurrent moment gradient and axial force. Integration of deformations along
the hinge length captures the spread of yielding more realistically than the
concentrated hinges, while the finite hinge length facilitates calculation of hinge
rotations.
Chapter 3
over the cross section to obtain stress resultants (axial force and moments) and
incremental momentcurvature and axial forcestrain relations. The cross section
parameters are then integrated numerically at discrete sections along the member
length, using displacement or force interpolation functions (Kunnath, Spacone ).
Distributed fiber formulations do not generally report plastic hinge rotations, but
instead report strains in the steel and concrete cross section fibers. The calculated
strain demands can be quite sensitive to the moment gradient, element length,
integration method, and strain hardening parameters on the calculated strain
demands. Therefore, the strain demands and acceptance criteria should be
benchmarked against concentrated hinge models, for which rotation acceptance
criteria are more widely reported.
The most complex models (Figure 36e) discretize the continuum along the member
length and through the cross sections into small (micro) finite elements with
nonlinear hysteretic constitutive properties that have numerous input parameters.
This fundamental level of modeling offers the most versatility, but it also presents
the most challenge in terms of model parameter calibration and computational
resources. As with the fiber formulation, the strains calculated from the finite
elements can be difficult to interpret relative to acceptance criteria that are typically
reported in terms of hinge rotations and deformations.
2.
the assumptions;
48
3.
While more sophisticated formulations may seem to offer better capabilities for
modeling certain aspects of behavior, simplified models may capture more effectively
the relevant feature with the same or lower approximation. It is best to gain knowledge
and confidence in specific models and software implementations by analyzing small test
examples, where one can interrogate specific behavioral effects.
Steel rebar
Unconfined concrete
Confined concrete
49
Chapter 3
50
&
(
+ 0.75 , 0.002
/
145 1000
wide of concrete nucleum
/ stirrup step
51
Chapter 3
The exhaust path is on a straight line from the point (1 , 1 ), on the skeleton curve, to
the point (3 , 0) and after go again to the origin axes on the abscissa, because of this model
neglects the contribution to traction of the concrete.
3
1 6
1
= 0.145 4 5 + 0.13 4 5
&
&
&
3
1
= 0.707 4
25 + 0.834
&
&
[3.4]
[3.5]
per 78 9 < 2
:;
The reload path is, when 3 is reached again, on the same straight line of the discharge.
52
where
(1 B)
D F/D
[3.6]
C1 + E
@ @1
@H @1
1
=
H 1
@ =
I = IH JF
K
J6 + K
[3.7]
[3.8]
[3.9]
Wich
@
(1 , @1 )
(H , @H )
B
IH , JF , J6
Normal stress
Axial deformation
Unload point wich is (0,0) in the elastic range
Intersection of the two asymptotes
Stiffness decrease factor
constants that are respectively 20.0 , 18.5 , 0.15
53
Chapter 3
K
54
and H
<4>
The new redevelopment of areas
adjacent to the gallery Ferrari
PREVIEW
Maranello is a one of the most attractive place of EmiliaRomagna (Italy). Almost
200.000 tourists, from all parts of the world, come there to visit the Galleria Ferrari so it is the
most known regional museum. This capacity to attract tourists is due to the fame of the Ferrari
able to bypass different languages and national boundaries. Since the 90s of the last century,
and in the more recent years, have grown, very fastly, the tourists number and the tourist
accommodation, to such an extent that today the tourism represents a very important
economic sector. To increase this sector the
requalification project to valorize the aspects linked to identity and tourist attraction. Inside of
this projet
Chapter 4
able to bypass different languages and national boundaries. Since the 90s of the last century,
and in the more recent years, have grown, very fastly, the number of tourists and the tourist
accommodations, to such an extent that today the tourism represents a very important
economic sector. To increase this sector the administration of Maranello has done a
requalification project to valorize the aspects linked to identity and tourist attraction. Inside of
this project, the redevelopment of the Area in front of the Galleria Ferrari, actually used as
parking and green area, has a very large relative importance. The qualification of this area
aims to offer urban functional services of the museum.
tourist information office and tourist acceptance. The new space will be a public square for
the access in Galleria Ferrari.
Figure 4. 2 The red line indicates the boundaries of the design competition area
Currently, the office for the tourists is inside of the museum and it does not have more
area inside to increase its services. The choice to place it outside of the museum building,
must be done in a way to ensure the recognition of the place and, at the same time, the
autonomy of that structure respect to the Galleria Ferrari.
The structure is a panoramic tower, 30 m tall from the square ground and it will placed
in a way to not have interferences with the public underground parking, which will build
under of the square. The tower will become a privileged point to observe (the center, the
mountains around of Maranello, the Fiorano trak where the Ferrari cars are often tuned) and,
at the same time, it will become a vertical element of identification of the Museum structure.
57
Chapter 4
The aim of the project is to do an architectonic building with a clear and well defined
geometry, which is characterized by the selection of modern materials without any decorative
additions, in a way to dont compete with the architecture of the Galleria Ferrari but to define
together a quality urban space.
58
The structure for the tourist reception and the observation point were grouped in only
one symbol building, which is 30 m tall from the ground of the square. The using of
innovative material like a polycarbonate makes clearer the communicative function of the
building: shell of various measures compose the translucent skin, which is interrupted only by
the windows opened on the landscape, while a special retro illumination transforms the
building in a luminescent body which illuminates the square. The retro illumination suggests a
symbolic use, for example it can be red when a special event related to the Ferrari world
occurs.
59
Chapter 4
The ground level of the tower includes the tourist reception point which is linked on the
square, with the access paths to the Galleria Ferrari and underground parking.
The tower is a vertical element with square plan, where there are the lift systems and the
stairs, while the covered terrace is an horizontal cantilevered element. The terrace would be
like a new access path to the Galleria and it is placed in a way to offer to the visitors, by its
overtures, a suggestive panorama. It is possible to see the core production of Ferrari, the
Fiorano track, the historical center of Maranello and the hills around of the city.
60
The redevelopment of the parking in front of the Galleria Ferrari is done by the creation
of two green ramp which realigns the irregular perimeter of the place and they define a
internal rectangular square. The true square, where quotidian activities and temporary events
will be done, is characterized by a concrete pavement which is signed by the same regular
mesh of the cladding of the panoramic tower. A kind of bar code printed in large scale where
the onlyy exceptions are the suspended benches, made by the concrete, and the green area
which,, in a random way, are inserted in the footprint of the incision.
61
Chapter 4
62
<5>
The structural design of the new tower
in Maranello
PREVIEW
The structural design of the new Maranello tower as been done in this chapter. The
tower has been designed to satisfy the requirements of the Italian National Code.
The approach is to follow the integrally structural design path from the architectonic
design.
Structural FEM Analysis is run by:

D.M. LL. PP. 11.3.1988 Norme tecniche riguardanti le indagini sui terreni e sulle
rocce, la stabilit dei pendii naturali e delle scarpate, i criteri generali e le
prescrizioni per la progettazione, lesecuzione il collaudo delle opere di sostegno
delle terre e delle opere di fondazione.
Circ. Min. LL. PP. 24.9.88 Istruzioni riguardanti le indagini sui terreni e sulle
rocce, la stabilit dei pendii naturali e delle scarpate, i criteri generali e le
Chapter 5
Ord. P.C.M. n 3274 20.03.2003 Primi elementi in materia di criteri generali per
la classificazione sismica del territorio nazionale e di normative tecniche per le
costruzioni in zona sismica.
Circolare 2 febbraio 2009, n. 617 del Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti
approvata dal Consiglio Superiore dei Lavori Pubblici  "Istruzioni per
l'applicazione delle Nuove norme tecniche per le costruzioni di cui al decreto
ministeriale 14 gennaio 2008.
Allegato al voto n.36 del 27.07.2007 Pericolosit sismica e criteri generali per la
classificazione sismica del territorio nazionale.
64
Heinemeyer Ch., Feldmann M., Caetano E., Cunha A., Galanti F.,Goldack A.,
Hechler O., Hicks S., Keil A., Lukic M., Obiala R.,Schlaich M., Smith A.,
Waarts P., 2007, RFCSProject: Human induced Vibration of Steel Structures
HIVOSS: Design Guideline and Background Report.
65
Chapter 5
66
67
Chapter 5
Figure 5. 3 Level 0
68
69
Chapter 5
70
71
Chapter 5
72
73
Chapter 5
74
75
Chapter 5
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
G1k=
2.00
0.50
1.00
3.50
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
Q1k=
4.00
4.00
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
In addiction there is the weight of the lateral claddings equal to 0.50 kN/m2.
76
To design the size of the structural element, a simple analysis has been carried out: the latest
two levels have been considered as only one cantilevered beam with a cross section defined
by the structural elements of the transversal section of each floor. The surface loads have been
converted in line loads by multiplying for the transversal dimension (6.00 m) of the
cantilever. By this way, a preliminary design, looking to the main problems of a cantilever,
i.e. deflections and vibrations control for human comfort, can be done..
5.3.1.2 Design against deflection control
According to 4.2.4.2.1 NTC08 maximum deflection must be limited at 1/125 of the
cantilever span when it is loaded in serviceable limit states by the ascalled Combinazione
frequente (Frequently combination) used for reversible limit state.
+ + +
[5.1]
Where 1 ,
and 2 are already defined, is the action dues to prestress, 1 is 0.7 for
the 11th level and nil for the coverture. Applying [5.1] for the loads acting on the conventional
cantilever (with other 6 kN/m to keep in count the weight of the primary beams that will be
calculated), the simple study model of volume cantilevered from the core of tower is ready
and it is shown in the Figure 5.7.
77
Chapter 5
then:
=
[5.2]
8
8
[5.3]
1
1
125 $
=
=> =
= 2.3115 '((
8 125
8
[5.4]
The panoramic space can be classified as a meeting area to read the classes related to
the OSRMS90 values in the table in the European guidelines .
78
For cantilever dynamic parameters are directly obtainable by analytical calculation and they
are given in the Figure below.
Figure 5. 12 Dynamic parameters for beam variously restrained and with distributed mass
79
Chapter 5
The total damping is calculated as sum of more than one value as shown in the following
Figure which shows that the total damping is 2%.
With damping value known the correct ) + can be selected and it is shown in the Figure
5.10.
By manipulating the selected equations in the Figure 5.8, it is possible to have a direct
relation between frequency and modal mass. This equation is:
)=
1
3
.
2  0.24 + 2 $
0.64
[5.5]
This equation can be plotted on the graph in the Figure 5.10 for different values of bending
stiffness EI. For a selected beam, with defined mass for unit length, from the 2nd equation
selected in Figure 5.8 the modal mass is known and it is the same for every eigenfrequency.
Plotting also this equation in the same graph, it is possible to select a correct stiffness to
achieve the desired class because the intersection, between the constant mass curve and the
curves from [5.5], gives the modal mass and the frequency for gave EI.
80
For the examination case, using again the frequently combination, the total mass for unit
length of the cantilever is 1910 kg/m. Looking the Figure 5.11, considering table 5.3, bending
stiffness design can be selected. From this, using the value obtained in 5.3.1.2 as design
value seems reasonable.
81
Chapter 5
82
corner of the section obtained by coupling 11th with the 12th will be defined in this paragraph
using a simplified reasoning.
Figure 5. 16
Usually, respect to a simple steel section, making a composite section the inertia modulus can
be tripled. By this consideration the Inertia modulus required is:
345 =
67345
8944: 3
[5.6]
However, the means used to obtain the request in [5.6] neglect the shear deformations which
are important because of the intrinsic deformability of the coupling system. From this
observation the requirement in [5.6] is, in lump sum, multiplied by 1.5.
The inertia modulus of the section in figure 5.12, without slab contribution, is:
;<; = 4 => + ? @ B C
2
[5.7]
[5.8]
83
Chapter 5
Using [5.8] and [5.6] multiplied by 2 the minimum area for the corner element has been
carried out.
?=
345
[5.9]
84
The transverse section of the composite SRC floor is known and it is given in
Figure 5.17.
The deflection of the composite floor is checked thanks to the technical data
sheets of the composite floor.
Figure 5. 18 Dynamic parameters for beam variously restrained and with distributed mass
The mass for unit length of SRC floor is known by the load analysis in 5.3.1.1combined
with the transversal dimension of the floor and it is 4280 kg/m. Only the span must be
defined.
Assigning different value of the span l, the selection of the best length span to accomplish
vibration control can be done in the plan ) + .
85
Chapter 5
The next table shown the value for the different span plotted in the figure 5.13.
86
Inertia
moment
Span
L
4
[m ]
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
4.939E05
[m]
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.50
Young
Mass for
Massa
modulus unit length Modale
M*
[kg/m]
[kg]
[Hz]
4987
4987
4987
4987
4987
4987
4987
4987
3740
4364
4987
5610
6234
6857
7481
8727
12.07
8.87
6.79
6.40
6.07
5.79
5.54
5.13
E
2
[N/m ]
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
3E+10
Frequency
The maximum length is 2.84 m that is major than the designed length for vibration control.
The check is satisfied.
87
Chapter 5
Figure 5. 21 Dynamic parameters for beam variously restrained and with distributed mass
1
3
.
2  0.49 + 2 $
0.50
[5.10]
This equation can be plotted on the graph in the Figure 5.22 for different values of the inertia.
The modal mass is known and it is the same for every eigenfrequency. Plotting also this
equation in the same graph, it is possible to select a correct stiffness to achieve the desired
class because the intersection, between the constant mass curve and the curves from [5.5],
gives the modal mass and the frequency for given I.
88
A IPE200 has been selected looking also at the space geometrically available.
89
Chapter 5
Figure 5. 23
In order to estimate the value of the post tensioning force the simply model in Figure
5.14 can be used.
90
It is simple to understand that the value of the post tension, which centers the vertical
load respect to the centroide of the core, is defined by the sum of absolute value of H and HI .
In formulas:
HI =
J K9:4L43
2 894
H = @1 +
J K9:4L43
B
2 894
J K9:4L43
B
894
[5.11]
[5.12]
[5.13]
Substituting the current values in serviceability condition (See Figure 5.7) the post
tensioning value is carried out:
= @1 +
= 84.78
J K9:4L43
B
894
'
12.04 (
612.04 + 0.257( @1 +
B = 3478 '
(
5.40( 0.25 (
[5.14]
[5.15]
91
Chapter 5
Once that the structural FEM model is created this value can be opportunely refined in
relation with the numerical result which can be a little bit different because of the intrinsic
simplifications present in simple model used, not last the correct position of the center of
gravity.
5.4 Materials
The materials are selected to have characteristic compatible with NTC08 11
Rck=
35.00 N/mm2
fck=
28.00 N/mm2
fcm=fck+8=
33.00 N/mm2
fctm=0.3(fck)2/3=
2.77 N/mm2
0.7 fctm=
1.94 N/mm2
1.3 fctm=
3.60N/mm2
fcfm=1.2 fctm=
Ecm=22000 (fcm/10)0.3 =
3.08 N/mm2
31475 N/mm2
Poissons coefficient
< 0.2
=10E5 C1
fyk=
450 N/mm2
ftk=
540 N/mm2
Youngs modulus
E=
210000 N/mm2
92
fyk=
355 N/mm2
ftk=
490 N/mm2
Youngs modulus
E=
210000 N/mm2
the self weight load of the structural element is not write in the table because it is
automatically keep in count by the software.
5.5.1.1 All levels under the 10th
Table 5. 5
Structural dead load G1k
Deck
4.00
G1k= 4.00
Non structural dead load G2k
Slab cover
2.00
Equipments
0.50
Claddings
1.50
G2k= 4.00
Live load Q1k
Category NTC08 C2
4.00
Q1k= 4.00
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
2.25
0.79
3.04
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
2.00
0.50
1.00
3.50
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
93
Chapter 5
4.00
4.00
kN/m2
kN/m2
0.79
0.79
kN/m2
kN/m2
0.20
0.50
0.50
1.20
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
kN/m2
0.50
0.50
kN/m2
kN/m2
5.5.1.3 Coverture
Table 5. 7
Structural dead load G1k
Secondary beams (IPE 240 @2m)
G1k=
Non structural dead load G2k
Sandwich panels
Equipments
Claddings
G2k=
Live load Q1k
Category NTC08 H
Q1k=
[5.16]
Where:
8
Snow load
8
Characteristic value of the snow load [kN/m2] with the annual probability of
P
94
Exposure coefficients
Thermal coefficients
Referring to Figure 5.15, the characteristic snow load is 1.50 kN/m2 for an altitude
minor than 200 m.
Figure 5. 25
The exposure coefficient for a normal topographic class is 1 and also the thermal
coefficient.
As shown in figure 5.16, from NTC08, the roof shape coefficient for a single coverture,
with slope minor than 30, is 0.8.
95
Chapter 5
Figure 5. 26
[5.17]
Figure 5. 27
96
3 TI
= 391 '/(
[5.18]
[5.19]
The parameters depend of the terrain category, which is calculated by roughness class of
terrain as shown in the following tables.
97
Chapter 5
[5.20]
Where the dynamic coefficient is assumed equal to one, and the shape pressure
Figure 5. 28
98
Figure 5. 29
seismic
load
is
calculated
helped
by
the
file
SPETTRINTC.xls
(http://www.cslp.it/cslp/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_details&gid=3280&&Ite
mid=165 ) released by the Consiglio Superiore dei Lavori Pubblici which uses the NTC08
seismic data of the whole Italian territory.
99
Chapter 5
The mean velocity d8$\ in the first 30 meters of profundity using NTC08 formula is 339
100
5.5.4.3 Phase 2
The use category class is III so the coefficient Ue = 1.5. the figure below shows the
input data and also, for each limit state, the reference period for seismic action.
101
Chapter 5
102
475 years was calculated to select the seismic zone category according to Allegato al voto
n.36 del 27.07.2007 and it is 0.237
103
Chapter 5
104
Figure 5. 37 Two sides of the Structural fem model with Global coordinate system
The slab for each floor has been inserted in the model as rigid floor diaphragm in a way
to simulate the stiffness for shear deflection that they give to the global cantilever as can be
thought the tower. A fixed joint at the base has been considered.
105
Chapter 5
[5.21]
Category H  coverture
106
= 0.0
= 0.6
107
Chapter 5
The next tables show the result for the first 30 eigenvectors to select the main
eigenvectors to have a good analysis.
108
109
Chapter 5
110
G1
G2
2
[kN/m ]
4.00
3.04
1.00
128.75
1.87
21 Q1
2
[kN/m ]
4.00
3.5
[kN/m ]
2.40
2.4
L1
L2
[m]
5.15
5.15
22.60
30.00
30.00
[m]
5.15
12.3
1.00
n
10
1
1
1
1
TOT
W
[kN]
2758.34
566.30
22.60
3862.50
56.10
7265.84
The two results are substantially in accord and this is indicative of a good model.
Figure 5. 45 Reaction, forces and moments, acting at the base in the for the seismic weight
A local model of the terrace is used to estimate the post tensioning force according to
111
Chapter 5
The figure below shows the axial force, with the new value of prestress applied, along
the height of the rc core. It is possible to see that the section of the rc core is subjected to a
centered axial force in all parts except to the base where, in any case, all sides are compressed
as it is understandable looking at the legend in the Figure 5.47.
112
7239 '
1
jkl
i
= 24.26
= 24260
i
30.42 (
(
(
[5.22]
The formula for the fundamental period is reported in the figure below:
Figure 5. 48 Modal parameters for a cantilever with distributed mass and elasticity
65.40 4.90 7
m=
( = 22.81 (
12
[5.23]
[5.24]
This value can be compared with the first one cantilever translational mode, i.e. the
second mode in y, which has 2.70 Hz frequency and 62.46% of participation masses. These
values show a good correspondence between simplified model and FEM model and this
means the goodness of the model.
113
Chapter 5
The next table shows the calculation by hand which shows a substantial accord with the
fem model value. The goodness of the model is again confirmed.
114
ce
[m]
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
30.4
[]
0.447052
0.447052
0.650928
0.806129
0.932542
1.03974
1.133118
1.216038
1.290744
1.358815
1.421404
1.479383
1.533426
1.584066
1.631733
1.676779
1.719494
1.760123
1.798872
1.83592
1.871418
1.905499
1.938279
1.969859
2.00033
2.029772
2.058256
2.085846
2.112601
2.138573
2.148753
[N/m2]
[m]
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
[m]
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.4
174.7972
174.7972
254.5127
315.1963
364.6239
406.5382
443.049
475.4707
504.6809
531.2967
555.7691
578.4389
599.5696
619.3698
638.0076
655.6204
672.322
688.2079
703.3591
717.8448
731.7245
745.0502
757.867
770.2148
782.129
793.6407
804.778
815.5659
826.0271
836.182
840.1624
cpwindward
cpleeward
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
[kN]
2160.5
1080.2
1572.9
1947.9
2253.4
2512.4
2738.0
2938.4
3118.9
3283.4
3434.7
3574.8
3705.3
3827.7
3942.9
4051.7
4154.9
4253.1
4346.8
4436.3
4522.1
4604.4
4683.6
4759.9
4833.6
4904.7
4973.5
5040.2
5104.8
2067.0
TOT.
108.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
p! o< 6Hq7 !stu 6q7v "+" @x o< 6Hq7 xstu 6q7B "+" y o< 6Hq7
115
Chapter 5
1)Seismic combination
+ + +
o<
[5.25]
Category H  coverture
2) Frequently combination
= 0.0
= 0.6
+ + +
+
[5.25]
z
Category H  coverture
= 0.0
= 0.7
for building in Ue , lateral displacements under SLO earthquake have to be smaller than
the below given limits.
a)
For claddings rigidly linked to the structure which interfere with the
deformability of the building.
2
{3 < 0.005
3
116
[5.26]
The following tables show the story drift for all 8 SLO combinations with relative
verify. The story drift is calculated by the difference between the displacements of two
consecutive floor.
5.9.1.2.1 Check in x direction
117
Chapter 5
118
119
Chapter 5
The maximum story drift is 0.0015 where the maximum story drift 0.0033, so the verify is
satisfied with maximum ratio 0.45.
120
121
Chapter 5
122
The maximum story drift is 0.0024 where the maximum story drift 0.0033, so the verify is
satisfied with maximum ratio 0.73.
5.9.1.3 Vertical displacement check
For cantilever the maximum relative vertical deflection have to be minor than 1/125 of
its length when subjected to all loads in frequently combinations and the contribution of only
live loads must be minor than 1/150.
Because of the shear deformation of the cantilever the check has been done also on the
partial distance between two shear reinforcement.
5.9.1.3.1 Cantilever subjected to all loads in frequently combination
SLE_frequently comb
0.00
5.00 0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
10.00
15.00
20.00
SLE_frequently comb
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
45.00
123
Chapter 5
Node
290
291
292
293
Load
SLE_frequently comb
SLE_frequently comb
SLE_frequently comb
SLE_frequently comb
X
(mm)
0
5550
7950
12300
X
(mm)
0
5550
2400
4350
DZ
(mm)
0.32
23.47
28.15
40.84
DZ
(mm)
23.14
4.68
12.70
DZ/X
DZ/L
(DZ/L)max
CHECK
0.0042
0.0019
0.0029
0.0033
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
0.0080
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
The maximum ratio is 0.0042 equal to 1/250 which is minor than the 1/125 so the verify
is satisfied with ratio 0.53.
5.9.1.3.1 Cantilever subjected only to live loads in frequently combination
The NTC08 code requires also that when the cantilever is subjected only to the live
loads in frequently combinations the maximum vertical displacement have to be minor than
1/150 L.
Figure 5. 52 Deflection of the cantilever under only live load in frequently combination
124
The maximum ratio is 0.0008 equal to 1/2500 which is very minor than the 1/150 so the
verify is amply satisfied.
Chapter 5
(J
K9:4L43
= 93.473 i
i
2}
[5.23]
A number of eigenvalues as involving the 85% of total cantilever mass has been
considered. The next table show the eigenvalue results, for the modes in z direction, of the
table in Figure 5.33 with the ratio between participant mass and total cantilever mass. To
excite all cantilever mass, 18 modes are necessary. Among these, according with NTC08,
only a number of modes to have at least the 85% of participant mass and all modes with
participant mass major than 5% are considered. Selected mode are signed by a red rectangle
in Figure 5.40.
Mode
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Figure 5. 54 Translational z mass. Note that the ratio has been calculated using only the mass of the cantilever
The next table shows the mode shape for each selected modes. It can be see they
involve all elementary contribution to the cantilever vertical vibration.
126
Mode Number 3
Mode Number 6
Global deflection
Global deflection
Cantilever deflection
Mode number 8
Cantilever composite
floor deflection
As done before, the graph with 2% of damping must be selected. On this graph, the
participant mass and the frequency of the above modes is plotted to read the OSRMS90,i
value for each mode. Finally by the SRSS rule the OSRMS90 is obtained.
127
Chapter 5
Table 5. 13 The points in the fM* graph for the vibration assessment
OSRms
()
1.6
0.6
0.7
1.0
2.1
With the OsRms90 value is possible to read the class in the table.
The floor class obtained is recommended by the European guidelines so the verify is satisfied
with ratio 0.66.
128
p! o 6Hq7 !st 6q7v "+" @x o 6Hq7 xst 6q7B "+" y o 6Hq7
Where RS is response spectrum and ES the eccentricity. The simble + means
combined with the SRSS rule
[5.24]
Category H  coverture
= 0.0
= 0.6
129
Chapter 5
The next table reports the value at the base for the SLV load combinations.
130
[5.25]
Base reaction
Load
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV5
sisma_SLV6
sisma_SLV7
sisma_SLV8
FY
(kN)
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
1545.02
FZ
(kN)
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
1986.66
FX
(kN)
10977.04
10977.04
10977.04
10977.04
9756.32
9756.32
9756.32
9756.32
MY
(kN*m)
48439.12
48439.12
48439.12
48439.12
39732.23
39732.23
39732.23
39732.23
MZ
(kN*m)
33383.29
33383.29
33383.29
33383.29
32855.76
32855.76
32855.76
32855.76
MX
(kN*m)
4742.86
7048.24
4901.12
7155.69
4742.86
7048.24
4901.12
7155.69
The first check is relative to the value of normalized axial force at the base because it has to
be minor than 0.65. It is:
=
109773 '
= 0.154
'
16.46
4323291 ((
((
[5.24]
Name
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Pareti 1
Pareti 1
Pareti 1
Pareti 1
Pareti 2
Pareti 2
Pareti 2
Pareti 2
Load
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
Length
(m)
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
Fx
(kN)
3172.48
3167.29
3172.04
3166.85
1848.72
1839.33
1816.35
1806.88
4316.59
4332.89
4316.94
4333.23
2410.23
2430.13
2437.33
2457.13
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
CHECK
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
OK!
131
Chapter 5
Two diameters have been used: 20@15cm (S = 1.67%7 for the confined zone near of the
corner and 12@30 cm (S = 0.30%7 for the other regions. The global rebar ratio is almost the
1%.
The next figures show the resistant domains and the check, with its ratio, for all seismic
combination
132
5.10.2.1 Stirrups
In order to design the stirrups in the section the shear along each side of the section is carried
out. This shear cannot be the design value because the capacity design must be apply. The
design value have to carried out from equilibrium consideration when in the base section the
bending +3c is acting. The value of the shear design has been obtained by multiplying the
analysis shear as follow:
d4c = d
N3c +3c
+8c
[5.27]
Where

Chapter 5
+`{
+{
can be the inverse value of the minimum ratio in the last verify, so 1.36
In the next table, there are the shear value for each side of the section. The design values
have been obtained by multiplying to
134
Name
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 1
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 2
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 3
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Parete 4
Load
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV5
sisma_SLV6
sisma_SLV7
sisma_SLV8
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV5
sisma_SLV6
sisma_SLV7
sisma_SLV8
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV5
sisma_SLV6
sisma_SLV7
sisma_SLV8
sisma_SLV1
sisma_SLV2
sisma_SLV3
sisma_SLV4
sisma_SLV5
sisma_SLV6
sisma_SLV7
sisma_SLV8
Length
(m)
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
5.15
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
Shear
(kN)
1140.33
1055.22
1071.44
980.3
1117.21
1032.1
1048.32
957.18
1692.28
1456.97
1679.2
1441.76
1691.57
1456.26
1678.49
1441.05
842.18
704.21
791.78
642.77
805.25
667.28
754.85
605.84
594.16
404.71
554.98
345.77
634.57
445.12
595.39
386.18
Shear Ved
(kN)
1756.11
1625.04
1650.02
1509.66
1720.50
1589.43
1614.41
1474.06
2606.11
2243.73
2585.97
2220.31
2605.02
2242.64
2584.87
2219.22
1296.96
1084.48
1219.34
989.87
1240.09
1027.61
1162.47
932.99
915.01
623.25
854.67
532.49
977.24
685.48
916.90
594.72
Shear
Ved/Length
(kN/m)
340.99
315.54
320.39
293.14
334.08
308.63
313.48
286.22
506.04
435.68
502.13
431.13
505.83
435.46
501.92
430.92
421.09
352.11
395.89
321.39
402.63
333.64
377.43
302.92
244.00
166.20
227.91
142.00
260.60
182.80
244.51
158.59
The maximum value on the 5.15 sides is 2606.11 kN, 1295 kN for the sides of 3.08 m and
913.99 kN for the sides of 3.75 m. By the ratio with design shear and side length is possible to
select the critical side on which design the stirrups.
A 8 stirrups with two arrangement and spaced 8 cm have been utilized
135
Chapter 5
MATERIALI
CALCESTRUZZO
Rck
35
N/mm2
1.5
fck
29.1
N/mm2
fcd
16.5
N/mm2
Rd
0.55
0.33
N/mm2
ACCIAIO
fyk
450
N/mm2
1.15
fsd
391.3
N/mm2
GEOMETRIA
TRAVE
bw
25
cm
540
cm
cm
534
cm
480.6
cm
mm
bracci
larghezza d'anima
altezza trave
copriferro lordo (asse barre inf.)
altezza utile trave
braccio di leva
STAFFE
s
w
8
0.50%
wmin
0.15%
21.54%
cm
VERIFICATO
rapporto meccanico d'armatura
min
1.909
1.00
inclinazione bielle
VERIFICATO
max
2.50
VERIFICATO
calcolo
1.909
2606.11
4510.56
kN
kN
VRd2
4510.56
kN
VRd
4510.56
kN
Taglio resistente
136
EN 1992
137
Chapter 5
5.11 Resume
The next table resumes all check made with their verify ratio.
ratio
0.73
0.53
0.66
0.75
ULS Shear
0.58
0.38
139
Chapter 5
140
141
Chapter 5
142
143
Chapter 5
144
145
Chapter 5
146
<6>
The new tower in Maranello:
Performance evalutation under seismic
load
PREVIEW
This chapter deals with the verification of the tower under seismic load. Artificial
registrations have been used as input data and an IDA analysis is performed in order to
investigate the behavior in serviceability and ultimate condition when the structure is
subjected to earthquake. In addition, the IDA analysis results have been used to estimate a
behavior the factor q shown by the structure.
Structural FEM Analysis is run by:

Chapter 5
148
The shear effects are not kept in count but, anyway, they are not expected that they will
be very important because the structure has been designed by the capacity design rules so it is
governed by flexural failure and not for shear failure.
Table 6. 1 Comparison between Model for linear analysis and model for non linear analysis
Level
(m)
Story
Roof
11F
10F
9F
8F
7F
6F
5F
4F
3F
2F
1F
30.42
27.02
24.81
22.09
19.37
16.65
13.93
11.21
8.49
5.77
3.05
0
Total
Translational Mass
Model for linear analysis
Model for nonlinear analysis
(ton)
(ton)
28.58
28.59
120.90
120.90
60.49
60.49
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
63.84
64.19
63.84
63.12
63.84
65.23
70.02
16.49
11.56
738.21
738.46
0.01%
0.00%
0.01%
0.00%
0.00%
0.01%
0.01%
0.01%
0.54%
1.13%
6.83%
42.72%
0.03%
149
Chapter 5
Model for
linear
analysis
0.3985
0.3705
0.3049
0.1746
Delta
Model for
linear analysis
Delta
0.3859
0.3612
0.2971
0.1728
3.27%
2.57%
2.63%
1.04%
28.8279
0.063
39.2515
0.0002
29.917
0.0075
38.9974
0.0002
3.64%
0.65%

0.0053
62.9828
0.0052
8.1824
Model for
linear analysis
Delta
0.82%
74.53%
5.5166
0.0035
4.219
0.0041
5.0297
0.0024
3.9895
0.0035
9.68%
5.75%

Figure 6. 3 The first four modes shapes of the model for non linear analysis
150
Figure 6. 4 The first four modes shapes of the model for non linear analysis
151
Chapter 5
f'c=
sh =
B=
H=
c=
st=
fyh=
h'=
b'=
s=
K=
Z=
c0=
cu=
152
30
80
5150
250
55
8
450
200
5040
1.31%
1.1960
30.13
0.0024
0.0289
Mpa
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Mpa
mm
mm
f'c=
sh =
B=
H=
c=
st=
fyh=
h'=
b'=
s=
K=
Z=
c0=
cu=
30
120
5150
250
55
8
391.3
5040
5040
0.00%
1.0000
335.00
0.0020
0.0044
Mpa
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Mpa
mm
mm
153
Chapter 5
154
fyk=
b=
450
0.07
Mpa
155
Chapter 5
The next figure, as example, shows a fiber division for one side of the section at the
base.
The Figure 6.10 shows the assignment of inelastic hinge along the rc core.
156
157
Chapter 5
158
159
Chapter 5
6.2.1.3 Records
The following pictures shows the records analysed.
160
161
Chapter 5
162
Figure 6. 20
Chapter 5
164
trave
primaria
si
0.9
1.00E+07 N
27020 mm
fc=
fy=
fyw=
y=
37.64 Mpa
450 Mpa
450 Mpa
0.0021
Ac=
H=
5.15E+06 mm
5.15E+03 mm
As=
A's=
Asx=
sh=
29250
9750
100
80
mm^2
mm^2
mm^2
mm
nota:nelle pareti tutta l'armatura longitudinale d'anima da includere nella percentuale in trazione
y= 0.000000436
y=
0.0069510
=
5.16E02
=
6.79E02
'=
2.26E02
sx=
2.43E07
r=
1
sD= 0.023726908 rad
u= 0.031635877 rad
165
Chapter 5
The maximum displacement 27.01 mm. In order to compare this value the displacement
on top in a linear elastic with q factor analysis has been here reported.
166
Figure 6. 26 Maximum displacement on top of the core in a linear elastic with q behavior factor analysis
In order to obtain the SLV displacement, the value of a linear elastic analysis, for structure
with period minor than TC as the analyzed tower, must be multiplied for:
"# = max ()1 + , 1/
0
2 , 5 46 = 1.61
1
[6.1]
so the predicted value from the linear elastic analysis is 23.66 mm which is similar to what
has been obtained.
The rotation chord is 0.001 rad minor than the ultimate rotation.
167
Chapter 5
The maximum value of the base shear is 2030 kN in x direction and 1798 kN in y direction.
168
169
Chapter 5
170
The next figures show the cycle on the base section for the various element.
Figure 6. 34 Side 1
171
Chapter 5
Figure 6. 36 Side 2
172
173
Chapter 5
Figure 6. 38 Side 3
174
Figure 6. 40 Side 4
175
Chapter 5
6.2.4.1 Consideration
The structure under the design earthquake has shown a behavior almost elastic. This
characteristic is due to the overstrength given in the design phase (ratio 0.75 in SLV) and the
absence of the partial safety factors in the material used in time history analisys.
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
176
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
ag/g  d_top_y
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_bx
2000.00
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
177
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_by
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
178
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_y
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
179
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
ag/g  d_top_x
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_by
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
180
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
ag/g  d_top_x
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
ag/g  d_top_y
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
Serie1
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
181
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
Serie1
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_by
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
Serie1
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
182
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
ag/g  d_top_x
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
ag/g  d_top_y
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
Serie1
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
0.500
183
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
Serie1
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
0.500
ag/g  V_by
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
Serie1
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
184
0.450
0.500
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
ag/g  d_top_x
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
ag/g  d_top_y
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
Serie1
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
185
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
Serie1
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_by
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
Serie1
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
186
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_y
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
187
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
2000.00
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_by
2000.00
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
188
ag/g  d_top_x
0.350
0.300
0.250
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  d_top_y
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
189
Chapter 5
ag/g  V_bx
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.250
0.300
0.350
ag/g  V_by
1800.00
1600.00
1400.00
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
190
191
Chapter 5
V_bx  d_top_x
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
The next figure shows the fiber status after the 6 times ag/g earthquake. It can seen that
some fiber has crashed.
192
The graphs above show why the structure has shown little plastic behavior. Looking at
the curve 6.52 the point related to the limit states can de found and they are plotted in the next
figure.
193
Chapter 5
Figure 6. 54 Region where the structure is solicited by the limit states actions
A zoom of that zone shows better that the structure responses by the stiffnes of the
cracked section and it is the only way that the structure has to dissipated energy.
Figure 6. 55 A zoom of the region where the structure works under design seismic actions
194
<7>
Conclusions
PREVIEW
In this thesis the structural earthquake and comfort design of a the new tower for the
Galleria Ferrari in Maranello has been done.
The structural design has involved more than one problem in order to fit the structural
design with the actual national Italian code. In fact the tower because of the overtures on the
base, which compromise the dissipation of the energy in the critical zones, is not simply
classificable as a structural tipology presents in the code. The direct consequence of that is
that the behavior factor cannot be known by the NTC08.
The problem is that the structure can be seen as a inverted pendulum, with only one
dissipative mechanism at the base or as a composite wall system.
In the design phase using a value of 1.5, the minimum value suggested by the Eurocode
for the rc structure, seemed reasonable.
By time history analysis the behavior of structure has been deeply understood and the
analysis has shown that the structure is characterized by an elastic (phase II) behavior. The
reasons of this features can be found in the following observations:
 The time history analyses have been performed using a unitary partial safety factor.
For this reason an overstrength value can be expected;
 The maximum ratio for axial and biaxial bending was 0.75, so the structure has
intrinsically an over resistance equal to 1/0.75.
This two considerations suggest that the structure can be resist by the offering of their
non linear resources for earthquake larger than the design earthquake as the curve Base sheartop displacement has shown.
Chapter 7
The problem was against human vibration control because the important dimension of
the cantilevered panoramic terrace. In this case the NTC08 and the Eurocode does not give a
standard method to assess the vibration on the floor.
Guidelines have been used and a numerical procedure to design has been made.
196
<REFERENCES>
References
ARTICLES
 Feldmann, M., Heinemeyer, Ch., Vlling, B., Design guide for floor vibrations, ArcelorMittal,
Commercial Sections, http://www.arcelormittal.com/sections/, 2007
 European Commission, Generalisation of criteria for floor vibrations for industrial,
office,residential and public building and gymnastic halls  Vibration of floor (VoF), ECSC
7210CR04040, Report EUR 21972 EN, ISBN 92 76 01705 05, 2006
European Commission, Human induced vibration of steel structures (HiVoSS), RFS2CT200700033, to be published 2009
 Bachmann, H., Ammann W.. Vibration of structures induced by Man and Machines,
IABSEAIPC IVBH, Zrich. ISBN 385748052X, 1987
 ISO 10137:200711, Bases for design of structures  Serviceability of buildings and walkways
against vibrations
 A. Rutenberg, "Simplified PDelta Analysis for Asymmetric Structures," ASCE Journal of the
Structural Division, Vol. 108, No. 9, Sept. 1982.
 Bracci, J. M., Kunnath, S. K., and Reinhorn, A. M., 1997. Seismic performance and retrofit
evaluation for reinforced concrete structures, ASCE, J. Struct. Eng. 123 (1), 310.
 Bosco M., Ghersi A., Marino E.M. (2007): Una pi semplice procedura per la valutazione
della risposta sismica delle strutture attraverso analisi statica nonlineare. Materiali ed
Approcci Innovativi per il Progetto in Zona Sismica e la Mitigazione della Vulnerabilit delle
Strutture, Consorzio ReLUIS, 1213 Febbraio 2007
 Calabrese A., Almeida J.P., Pinho R. (2010) "Numerical issues in distributed inelasticity
modelling of RC frame elements for seismic analysis," Journal of Earthquake Engineering,
(Vol. 14, Special Issue1).
 Castellani A., Boffi G., Valente M., 2008: Progetto antisismico degli edifici in c.a.
Biblioteca Tecnica Hoepli
 Chopra, A.K., and Goel, R.K. (2002). A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating
seismic demands for buildings. Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 31:56182.
 Chopra A.K., Goel R.K., 2004: A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic
demands for unsymmetricplan buildings, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,
33, pp. 903927.
 Coleman, J, and Spacone, E. (2001) "Localization Issues in Nonlinear ForceBased Frame
Elements." ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, Volume 127(11), pp. 12571265.
 Cornell C.A., 1968: Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bulletin of Seismological Society of
America, Vol. 58, N5, pp. 15831606.
 Cosenza E., Manfredi G., Verderame G.M., 2001: Un modello a fibre per lanalisi non
lineare di telai in cemento armato , X Congresso Nazionale ANIDIS LIngegneria Sismica
in Italia.
 Cosenza E., Mariniello C., Verderame G.M., Zambrano A., 2007: il ruolo della scala nella
capacit sismica degli edifici esistenti in c.a. Convegno Anidis Pisa, 2007.
 Elnashai, A.S. (2001): Advanced inelastic static (pushover) analysis for earthquake
applications,Structural Engineering and mechanics, vol. 12(1), pp. 5169
 E. L. Wilson and A. Habibullah, "Static and Dynamic Analysis of MultiStory Buildings
Including PDelta Effects," Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Vol. 3, No.3, May 1987.
 E. L. Wilson and A. Habibullah, "Static and Dynamic Analysis of MultiStory Buildings
Including PDelta Effects," Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Vol. 3, No.3, May 1987.
 Eucentre, 2009: Corso Analisi non lineare C.A. 2329 Ottobre 2009 Slide del corso.
 Eurocode 8, 2003 : Design for structures for earthquakes resistance Part 1General Rules,
seismeic actions and rules for buildings, Final draft prEN19981
 Fajfar, P. 1999. Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra. Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics 28, pp. 979993: John Wiley & Son, Ltd.
198
Fajfar, P., and Gaperic, P. (1996). The N2 method for the seismic damage analysis of RC
buildings. EarthquakeEngrg. and Struct. Dyn., 25(12), 3146.
Fajfar P., Marusic D., Perus I. (1996): The N2 method for seismic damage analysis of RC
buildings, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 25(1), pp. 3146
Fardis M.N., Panagiotakos T.B., 1997: Seismic design and response of bare and mansoryinfilled reinforced concrete buildings. Part II: infilled structures. Journal of Structural
Engineering, vol.1 n 3, pp. 475503.
Filippou F.C., Popov E.P., Bertero V.V. (1983). "Modelling of R/C joints under cyclic
excitations." ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering (Vol. 109, No. 11, 26662684).
Freeman, S. A. (1978). Prediction of response of concrete buildings to severe earthquake
motion. Douglas McHenry International Symposium on Concrete and Concrete Structures,
ACI SP55, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 589605.
Fujiji K., Nakano Y., Sanada Y., 2004: Simplified nonlinear analysis procedure for
asymmetric buildings, World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 13th, Vancouver, paper
149.
Ghersi A., Lenza P.: Progetto antisismico degli edifici in cement armato, Dario Flaccovio
Editore 2009.
Gupta, A., Krawinkler, H. (1999). Seismic demands for performance evaluation of steel
moment resisting frame structures (SAC Task
5.4.3). Report No. 132, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University,
CA.
Gupta, A., and Krawinkler, H. (2000). Estimation of seismic drift demands for frame
structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 29:12871305.
Gupta, B., and Kunnath, S. K., 2000. Adaptive spectrabased pushover procedure for seismic
evaluation of structures, Earthquake Spectra, 16 (2), 367391.
Iervolino I., Cornell C.A., 2004: Sulla selezione degli Accelerogrammi nella Analisi Non
Lineare delle Strutture, atti XI Convegno nazionale Lingegneria Sismica in Italia,
Genova.
Iervolino L., Maddaloni G., Cosenza E. (2007): Accelerogrammi naturali compatibili con le
specifiche OPCM 3431 per lanalisi sismica delle strutture, atti XII Convegno Nazionale
Lingegneria sismica in Italia, Pisa
Iervolino I., Cornell C.A., 2005: Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of
structure, Earthquake Spectra, Vol.21, N3, pp.685713.
Iervolino I., Cosenza E., Galasso C., 2009. Spettri, accelerogrammi e le nuove norme
tecniche per le costruzioni. Rivista "Progettazione Sismica num.1" edizioni IUSS Press pp
3350
Iervolino I., Manfredi G., 2008 : A review of ground motion record selection strategies for
dynamic structural analysis, in New Approaches to Analysis and Testing of Mechanical and
Structural System, Springer.
Iervolino I., Galasso C., Cosenza E., 2010: REXEL: computer aided record selection for
codebased seismic structural analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 8:339362
Kent D.C., Park R. ,1971: Flexural members with confined concrete. Journal of the
StructuralDivision, ASCE, Vol. 97, ST7.
Kilar V., Fajfar P., 1996: Simplified pushover analysis of building structures, in
Proceedings, World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 11th, Acapulco, paper 1001.
Kilar V., Fajfar P., 2002: Simplified nonlinear seismic analysis of Asymmetric multistory
buildings, in Proceedings, European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 12th, London,
paper 033.
Krawinkler, H., and Seneviratna, G. D. P. K. (1998). Pros and cons of a pushover analysis for
seismic performance evaluation. Engrg. Struct., 20, 452464.
199
References
200
Kunnath, S. K., and Gupta, B., 2000. Validity of deformation demand estimates using
nonlinear static procedures, Proceedings, U.S. Japan Workshop on PerformanceBased
Engineering for Reinforced Concrete Building
Lawson RS, Vance V, Krawinkler H. (1994). Nonlinear static pushover analysiswhy, when
and how? Proceedings of the 5th U.S. Conference on Earthquake Engineering; 1:283292.
Mainstone R.J., 1974: Supplementary note on the stiffness and strength of infilled frames.
Current Paper CP13/74, Build. Res. Establishment, London, England.
Matsumori, T., Otani, S., Shiohara, H., and Kabeyasawa, T., 1999. Earthquake member
deformation demands in reinforced concrete frame structures, Proceedings, U.S.Japan
Workshop on PerformanceBased Earthquake Engineering, Maui, Hawaii, pp. 7994.
Menegotto M., Pinto P.E. (1973). "Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames
including changes in geometry and nonelastic behaviour of elements under combined normal
force and bending." Symposium on the Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures
Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads, International Association for Bridge and
Structural Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, (1522).
Miranda E. (1991). Seismic evaluation and upgrading of existing buildings. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Moghadam A.S., Tso W.K., 2000 : Pushover analysis for asymmetric and setback multistory
buildings, In Proceedings, World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 12th, Upper Hutt,
paper 1093.
Montaldo V., Meletti C., 2007. Valutazione del valore della ordinata spettrale a 1sec e ad
altri periodi di interesse ingegneristico. Progetto DPCINGV S1, Deliverable D3,
http://esse1.mi.ingv.it/d3.html
Monti, G., Spacone, E., and Filippou, F.C. (1993). "Model for Anchored Bars under Seismic
Excitations." UCB/EERC 93/08, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of
California, Berkeley.
Monti, G., and Spacone, E. (2000). "Reinforced Concrete Fiber Beam Element with BondSlip." ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 126, No. 6, pp. 654661.
Newmark (1960) oscillatori elastoplastici
Penelis G.G., Kappos A.J., 2002: 3D Pushover analysis: The issue of torsion, in
Proceedings, European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 12th, London, paper 015.
Petrini L., Pinho R., Calvi G.M. (2004) Criteri di Progettazione Antisismica, IUSS Press,
Pavia, Italy.
Pinho R., Antoniou S. (2004). Advantages and limitations of adaptive and non adaptive
forcebased pushover procedures. Journal of Eartquake Engineering, Vol.8 No. 4(2004),
Imperial College Press, 497522
Pinho R., Antoniou S. (2004). Development and verification of a displacementbased
adaptive pushover procedure Journal of Eartquake Engineering, Vol.8 No. 4(2004), Imperial
College Press, 643661
R. D. Cook., D. S. Malkus and M. E. Plesha, Concepts and Applications of Finite Element
Analysis, Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, ISBN 0471847887, 1989.
Sasaki, K. K., Freeman, S. A., and Paret, T. F., 1998. Multimode pushover procedure
(MMP)A method to identify the effects of higher modes in a pushover analysis,
Proceedings, 6th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington.
Scott B.D., Park R., Priestley M.J.N. [1982]. Stressstrain behavior of concrete confined by
overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. ACI Journal, Jan.Feb. 1982.
Saiidi, M., and Sozen, M. A. (1981). Simple nonlinear seismic analysis of R/C structures. J.
Struct. Div., ASCE,107, 937952.
Spacone E., Ciampi V. and Filippou F.C. (1992) "A Beam Element for Seismic Damage
Analysis." UCB/EERC 92/07, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of
California, Berkeley.
Spacone, E., Ciampi, V. and Filippou, F.C. (1996) "Mixed Formulation of Nonlinear Beam
Finite Element." Computer and Structures, Vol, 58, No. 1, pp. 7183.
Spacone, E., Filippou, F.C., and Taucer, F.F. (1996) "Fiber BeamColumn Model for
Nonlinear Analysis of R/C Frames. I: Formulation." Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 25, N. 7., pp. 711725.
Spacone, E., Filippou, F.C., and Taucer, F.F. (1996) "Fiber BeamColumn Model for
Nonlinear Analysis of R/C Frames. II: Applications." Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 25, N. 7., pp. 727742.
Spallarossa D., Barani S., 2007. Disaggregazione della pericolosit sismica in termini di MR. Progetto DPCINGV S1, Deliverable D14, http://esse1.mi.ingv.it/d14.html
Stafford Smith B., 1963: Lateral stiffnes of infilled frames subject to racking with design
recommendations. The Structural Engineer. Vol.55, n6, pp. 263268
Structures, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Valles, R., Reinhorn, A., Kunnath, S., Li, C. and Madan, A. (1996). IDARC2D version 4.0: a
computer program for the inelastic analysis of buildings. Tech. Rep. No. NCEER960010,
National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at
Buffalo, NY.
Yu Q., Pugliesi R., Allen M., Bischoff C., 2004: Assessment of modal pushover analysis
procedure and its application to seismic evaluation of editing building, World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, 13th, Vancouver, paper 1004.
Zarate G., Ayala A. G., 2004: Validation of single storey models for the evaluation of the
seismic performance of multistorey asymmetric buildings, World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, 13th, Vancouver, paper 2213.
CODES
 Allegato al voto n. 36 del 27.07.2007: Pericolosita sismica e criteri generali per la
classificazionesismica del territorio nazionale
 Applied Technology Council (ATC), 1996. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete
Buildings, Report No. SSC 9601 ATC40, Redwood City, CA.
 Applied Technology Council (ATC), 1997a. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared for the Building Seismic Safety Council, published by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA273, Washington, D.C.
 Applied Technology Council (ATC), 1997b. Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared for the Building Seismic Safety Council, published by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA274, Washington, D.C.
 Applied Technology Council (ATC), 2000. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared for the Building Seismic Safety Council, published by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA356, Washington, D.C.
 Applied Technology Council (ATC), 2005. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic
Rehabilitation of Buildings, prepared for the Building Seismic Safety Council, published by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA440, Washington, D.C.
 ATC40, "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings.", Applied technology
council (Redwood City, California 94065).
 Circolare n617 Circolare esplicativa n617 C.S.LL.PP. 02022009
 EN 19983:2005. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance Part 3:
Assesment and retrofitting of buildings,CEN (European Committee for Standardization),
Management Centre, Brussels, (2005).
 NTC08,2008 Norme tecniche per le costruzioni 2008 DM infrastrutture 14012008
201
References
Books

Castellani A., Boffi G., Valente M., Progetto antisismico degli edifici in c.a. con
lEurocodice UNIEN 199815 e le Norme tecniche per le costruzioni. Biblioteca Tecnica
Hoepli.
Clementi F., Lenci S., 2009 I compositi nellIngegneria Strutturale ladeguamento statico e
sismico di strutture in c.a. e muratura secondo il CNRDT 200/2004, la NTC e le relative
circolari applicative. Esculapio.
Cosenza E., Manfredi G., Pecce M., 2009. Strutture in cemento armato: basi della
progettazione. Biblioteca Tecnica Hoepli.
Corradi dellAcqua L.,, 1992. Meccanica delle strutture vv.123. Mc.GrawHill.
Chopra A.K., 2007: Dynamics of Structures Theory and Application to Earthquake
Engineering Third edition, Prentice Hall.
Cosenza E., Manfredi G., Monti G., 2008. Valutazione e riduzione della vulnerabilit
sismica di edifici esistenti in cemento armato. Atti del convegno "Valutazione e riduzione
della vulnerabilit sismica di edifici esistenti in cemento armato", svoltosi a Roma nei giorni
29 e 30 maggio 2008 sotto l'egida del ReLUIS (Rete dei Laboratori Universitari di Ingegneria
Sismica) e della Protezione Civile. Polimetrica.
Ghersi A., Lenza P. , 2009, Edifici antisismici in cemento armato progettati secondo le
indicazioni delle nuove normative. Dario Flaccovio.
Lanzi G., Silvestri F., 1999. Risposta sismica locale: Teoria ed Esperienze, Hevelius.
Manfredi G., Masi A., Pinho R., Verderame G., Vona M., 2007) Valutazione di Edifici
Esistenti in Cemento Armato, IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy.
Park R., Paulay T. [1975]. Reinforced Concrete Structures. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York.
Paulay T., Priestley M.J.N. [1992]. Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry
Buildings. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Zienkiewicz and Taylor, 2000, Finite Element Method The Basis Fifth edition, McGrawHill
Zienkiewicz and Taylor, 2000, Finite Element Method  Solid Mechanics Fifth edition,
McGrawHill
II.
REPORT
 Taucer F.F., Spacone E. and Filippou F.C. (1991) "A Fiber BeamColumn Element for Seismic
Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures." UCB/EERC 91/17, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley Report to the National
Science Foundation and the California Department of Transportation.
MANUALI
 Midas/GEN  Analysis Reference Manual
 Midas/GEN . Online Manual
 SIMQE_GR tutorial
SLIDE E DISPENSE
 Corso Analisi non lineare C.A. Eucentre 2324 Ottobre 2009 Slide del corso.
 Appunti del corso di Dinamica delle Strutture tenuto dal Prof. A. Santini presso la Facolt
degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria A.A. 2007/2008.
 Albanesi T., Nuti C. ,2007. Dispense sullanalisi statica non lineare per lUniversit degli
Studi Roma Tre.
 Biasoli F., 2007. Edifici in c.a. e le forze orizzontali.
SITI WEB
 http://www.esse1.mi.ingv.it/
 http://www.pricosspacone.it
 http://www.cspacademy.net/
 http://www.cspfea.net/
 http://www.reluis.it/

http://www.cslp.it
http://dicata.ing.unibs.it/gelfi/
203