UBC seismic

Code
Historical basis of seismic codes in California
A formal study of earthquake-resistant started after
1906 San Francisco earthquake. After this earthquake,
the first lateral force requirement was imposed on
structures that was 30 lbf/ft2 wind loading.
After 1925 Santa Barbara earthquake, California
legislature directed the significant effort for seismology.

Based on damage reports, the 1925 Santa Barbara

earthquake is estimated at 6.3 Richter magnitude,
although Richter style seismometers had not yet been
developed. Fatalities were limited because the
earthquake occurred in early morning before people
were in the business district and children were in school.
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)

There were 13 fatalities and significant building

damage, particularly in brick, masonry and tile
construction. Steel, wood and properly designed
reinforced concrete construction sustained little or no
damage.

There were 115 fatalities in the 1933 long beach

earthquake. After this earthquake, Riley Act set minimum
standards for lateral force resistance in all buildings
(specifically, just 2% of the dead load).
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
The format of the early codes was that the building had
to to be “strong” enough to resist a static lateral force,
the base shear V, of some fraction of the weight W. The
fraction was known as the base shear coefficient, C.
Between 1943 and 1953, the base shear coefficient
was modified several times based on the building period
and/or the height of a building, but the static force
concept remained and is in use to this day.

V=CW
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
Nine lives were lost in the 1940 El Centro earthquake,
a 7.1 magnitude event caused by the Imperial fault. In
only approximately 10 s duration, a relatively high
ground acceleration, 0.33g was observed.

This earthquake was significant, not because of the

wide spread damage, but because it was the first
earthquake to occur in a heavily-instrumented area. The
first accelerometer yielding response data on building
periods was obtained.
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
The ASCE and the structural Engineers Association of
Northern California (SEAONC) formed a committee in
1948 that recommended that the equivalent static force
concept be used in San Francisco. In 1959, structural
Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) code was
expanded to a “uniform” code for all areas of the United
States.

There are cases in which the UBC requires a dynamic

analysis.
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
In 1966 Parkfield earthquake on the San Andreas Fault
had a relatively low magnitude of 5.5 and a very short
duration, but the ground acceleration of 0.5g was the
highest observed to that date. Thus, it became obvious
that magnitude and acceleration are not necessarily
correlated.
A great amount of accelerometer data was obtained
from the 1971 San Fernando earthquake (6.6
magnitude, san Fernando fault zone). This earthquake
was significant for several reasons. First, an
unbelievable ground acceleration of 1.24g was
experienced at the Pacoima Dam site. Second, there
were failures of new buildings designed with the current
seismic codes.
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
In 1979 Imperial valley earthquake (Richter magnitude
6.6) produced the first accelerometer data from building
with extensive damage.

In a building that was partially supported at the ground

level by concrete columns, the period and amplitude of
oscillation decreased significantly each time one of the
columns failed.This is consistent with the concept that
seismic energy is removed from a yielding structure.
 Historical basis of seismic codes in
California(contd…)
In1989 Loma Prieta earthquake (magnitude 7.1, 62
fatalities, San Andreas fault) was significant because of
the important lessons learned about soil and site
conditions.

The most significant damage outside of the epicenter

occurred in areas where soil resonance magnified the
seismic energy.
 Seismic codes

A code is a set of rules adopted by an organization

empowered to enforce the code. The guidelines must be
adopted by a law-making body to become legal
documents.

The Uniform building code (UBC) contains the most

extensive seismic provisions for buildings of any code.
This is published by the International Conference of
building officials in Whittier, California.
 Seismic codes(contd…)
This Uniform building code (UBC) is derived from the
recommended lateral force requirements (commonly
referred to as blue book) published by the seismology
committee of the structural engineers, Association of
California, SEAOC. The blue book Commentary is not
reproduced in the UBC, but this commentary is
invaluable in understanding the significance of the UBC
code provisions.
 Seismic codes(contd…)
The SEAOC blue book provisions have been included
in the UBC since approximately 1960, but other building
codes were slower to include more than seismic
provisions, probably because the true seismic risk of the
regions that have adopted those codes was not
recognized.
However, following the 1971 San Fernando
earthquake, when several buildings supposedly built
according to current seismic provisions experienced
substantial damage, other organizations began writing
seismic provisions.
 Seismic codes(contd…)
The Applied technology Council(ATC) published ATC
3-06 in 1978. This was a massive 500-page document
intended to serve as a reference for other code-writers.
It has now been superceded by the NEHRP provisions.

The building seismic safety council (BSSC), with

federal emergency management agency (FEMA)
funding, published the Natural earthquake hazards
reduction program (NEHRP) provisions in 1985 and
revised them in 1988.
 Seismic codes(contd…)
The American National standards institute (ANSI)
published its A58.1 in 1982. This document deals with
determining seismic loading, but it does not address
detailing.
The American concrete institute (ACI) included
detailing to resist seismic loads as Appendix in the 1983
edition of ACI-318. However, determination of seismic
loading is not covered.
The American institute of steel construction has begun
work on a document providing detailing requirements for
steel buildings. As with the ACI document, determining
the seismic loads is not covered.
 Seismic codes(contd…)
A seismic documents were used as “source
documents” for 1988 (and subsequent) blue book and
1988 (and subsequent) UBC. The 1988 blue book drew
its format for the base shear equation from the ATC
document.
There was no “rational” basis for the individual
parameters in the earlier base shear equation. In the
new code, all of the factors in the numerator logically
represent characteristics that contribute to increased
loading. (The numerator reduces the actual numerical
value to a “consensus value” of design base shear.
 Seismic codes(contd…)

Adoption of the UBC is up to each municipality. Most

large cities have their own specific requirements that can
supersede portions of the UBC or replace it entirely.

Bridges in California are designed according to

CALTRANS/AASHTO seismic provisions. These are
similar in concept to the UBC seismic provisions.
However, the nomenclature is different and the response
spectra provided are more detailed.
 Seismic codes(contd…)

The CALTRANS/AASHTO method evaluates each

bridge two ways (the term “loading” refers to lateral
loads, moments, and shears):

(1) transverse seismic loading plus 30% of the

longitudinal seismic loading.

(2) longitudinal seismic loading plus 30% of the

transverse seismic loading.
 Seismic codes(contd…)

As with the UBC method, the CALTRANS/AASHTO

method includes both static and dynamic analysis.

(Static method) The static method is used for well-

balanced spans with supports that are all approximately
equal in stiffness. Once determined, the maximum
lateral load is applied uniformly along the bridge

With the static method, the earthquake design force, V,

is calculated as
V
ARS W
Z
 Seismic codes(contd…)
ARS is the acceleration response spectrum value
obtained from one of four response spectra curves
provided in the code.
Different curves are provided for different alluvium (i.e.,
soil) depths and peak rock accelerations for the
maximum credible earthquake expected in that area.
The maximum credible earthquake is obtained from
published maps.
Z is the ductility risk reduction factor which depends on
the type of structure and its period. Z varies from slightly
less than 1.0 to slightly more than 8.0.
W is the dead load (i.e., the weight) of the bridge.
 Seismic codes(contd…)

The design bridge period, T, (in seconds) is calculated

from the following formula.

W
T  0.32
P

P is the stiffness of the superstructure (i.e., the total

force that, if applied uniformly, would cause the bridge to
deflect one inch). Consistent units must be used.
 The survivability design criteria

The totally elastic buildings can be designed with little

effort (i.e., experience no damage) during an
earthquake, it is implicit in design codes that
catastrophic collapse must be avoided.
 The survivability design criteria(contd…)
The following three design standards constitute the
implied UBC seismic survivability(or life safety) design
criteria.
(1) There should be no damage to buildings from a small
earthquake.
(2) There may be minor architectural damage, but no
structural damage during a moderate earthquake.
(3) There may be structural damage but no collapse
during a severe earthquake.
Yielding is relied upon to dissipate the damaging
seismic energy. Theoretically, all structural damage will
be repairable when collapse is prevented, although
some buildings may be replaced for reasons of
economics or convenience.
 Effectiveness of seismic provisions

The code provides “reasonable” but not complete

assurance of the protection of life. Furthermore, the
code does nothing to prevent construction on land that is
subject to earth slides or liquefaction.

The UBC provisions are intended as minimum

requirements. The level of protection can be increased
by increasing the design lateral force, energy absorbing
capacity, redundancy and construction quality
assurance.
 Effectiveness of seismic provisions(contd…)
Seismic design is not a science-it is an art that,
unfortunately, must be verified in the field. Thus the
nature of seismic code is to require design features or
methods and then observe the effectiveness of those
features.
The seismic code used is not the only factor affecting
the performance of a structure during an earthquake. In
most cases of structural failure in modern buildings,
earthquake severity, duration, soil conditions,
inadequate design, poor control or material quality and
poor workmanship are found to be the major factors
contributing to collapse.
 Effectiveness of seismic provisions(contd…)
The widespread structural failures that occurred in the
1985 Mexico City earthquake are examples of how even
modern buildings can be brought down by these
contributing factors.

In fact, the failures that occurred seem to validate the

need for the current UBC provisions, as the very
features required by that code were often not included in
the design of buildings that collapsed.
 The nature of UBC seismic code
provisions
There are two major categories of seismic provisions
in the UBC:

(1) Those that relate to proportioning the structure

(2) Those that relate to detailing elements of the

structure.
The proportions are chosen such that the structure’s
ability to absorb energy (i.e., its “strength”) matches the
application of energy, no matter how much yielding has
occurred, and such that overall stability is maintained.
 The nature of UBC seismic code
provisions(contd…)
 This requires that the lateral force resisting elements
be roughly distributed (in plan) throughout the structure.

Thus, arbitrarily increasing the strength of one element

may actually have a negative effect on the overall
seismic performance.
 The nature of UBC seismic code
provisions(contd…)

Design details prevent premature local failure by

ensuring ductile behaviour and preventing local
instability and failure of elements that are cyclically
stressed beyond their yield points.

Unlike the UBC provisions for proportioning the

structure, the design details can usually be determined
without evaluating the stresses, drift or loads.
 The nature of UBC seismic code
provisions(contd…)

Controlled yielding in a major earthquake is implicitly

anticipated by the UBC, and therefore, a code based on
yield or ultimate strengths would be preferred.

The seismic design forces for steel design in the UBC

are based on an “allowable stress design” and not a
yield stress basis. This is primarily due to the fact that
the steel structural systems used in the majority of high-
rise structures are still, for the most part, based on ASD.
 The nature of UBC seismic code
provisions(contd…)
The American institute of steel construction(AISC) has
published it sown design standards (which compete with
the UBC) for steel buildings in seismic zones. However,
these standards apply only to buildings designed by the
load resistance factor design(LRFD) method.

The new standards do not apply to buildings designed

by the allowable stress design(ASD). The standards
cover the design of beams, columns, concentric and
eccentric braced frames, and moment resisting
connections, including panel zones at the intersections
of beams and columns.
 Allowable stress levels

When the ASD(allowable stress design) criterion is

used in the design of steel, timber and masonry
structures, the UBC permits a one-third increase in
allowable stress due to the transitory nature of seismic
and wind loading.
 Combined seismic and wind loading
UBC provisions for ductile seismic detailing must
always be met, even if the wind load is greater than the
seismic load. It is not necessary for the building to be
designed to withstand wind and seismic loads
simultaneously.
The wind pressure on a structure is given by the
following formula P=CeCqqsI
Ce is a factor accounting for height, exposure and
gusts.
Cq is a factor that depends on the type of structure
exposed to the wind.
qs is the wind stagnation pressure at an elevation of
11m (standard value). qs depends on wind speed.
I is the importance factor for wind loading.
 Combined seismic and wind loading(contd…)
The wind pressure can be assumed to act on the
structure in one of the two ways.
The normal force method: This method can be used
for the design of any structure, including gabled frames.
Wind pressure is assumed to simultaneously act normal
to all exterior surfaces.
The projected area method: This method calculates
the horizontal wind force by assuming the pressure acts
upon the projected area of the structure. The projected
area method can be used only if the building is less than
200 ft high and does not contain a gabled rigid frame.
 Combined seismic and wind loading(contd…)
Although codes such as AISC, AITC and ACI provide
for the combination of various loadings (e.g., snow and
wind, earthquake and wind), seismic and wind loads are
distinctly different in origin. Wind loads are applied over
an exterior surface. Seismic loads are inertial in nature.

There is no such thing as a “governing” load when a

building is in a potential earthquake. In some cases, the
maximum expected lateral wind loading will result in a
larger drift than an earthquake will. However, even in
that instance, design must adhere to all provisions of the
seismic code. The reason for this requirement is that the
structure must resist seismic loads in a ductile manner
even when it resists the wind load elastically.
 When the UBC permits a static analysis
The UBC permits two methods to be used in
determining the seismic loading: static and dynamic. The
static method may be used for buildings with the
following characteristics.
Structures in seismic zones 1 and 2 with standard
occupancy category IV whether they are regular or
irregular.
Regular structures under 240 ft in height using one of
the lateral force resisting force resisting systems except
regular structures located on soil profile S4 which have
natural periods greater than 0.70 s.
Irregular structures less than or equal to five storeys or
or 65 ft in height.
 UBC base shear calculation
The base shear ‘V’ is the total lateral inertial force
imposed on the structure at its base by an earthquake.It
is the sum of all the inertial storey by an earthquake.
Rather than calculating the storey shears individually ,
the and then summing them to obtain the base shear,
the UBC calculates the base shear from the total
structure weight and then apportions the base shear to
the storeys. The base shear formula is given by
ZICW
V
Rw
This equation calculates the seismic force on the entire
structure and cannot be used for parts (e.g., walls)of the
structure.