Performance based design of buildings to assess damage and downtime and implement a rating system
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.46.1.40-55Abstract
The Christchurch earthquakes have highlighted the mismatch in expectations between the engineering profession and society regarding the seismic performance of buildings. While most modern buildings performed as expected, many buildings have been, or are to be, demolished. The ownership, occupancy, and societal costs of only targeting life-safety as the accepted performance standard for building design are now apparent in New Zealand.
While the structural system has a significant effect on the seismic performance of the entire building, including the contents, it is only about 20% of the total building cost. Hence, structural engineers should view the seismic performance in a wider context, looking at all the systems of the building rather than just the damage to structural items and life-safety.
The next generation of performance-based seismic design procedures, outlined in the FEMA P-58 document, provide engineers with the tools to express the seismic performance of the entire building in terms of the future life loss, facility repair cost and repair time. This paper will outline the FEMA P-58 procedure and present the results of a comparative study of six different structural systems for a three storey commercial and laboratory building: moment frame; buckling restrained braced frame; viscously damped moment frame; Pres-Lam timber coupled-walls; cast-in-place reinforced concrete shear wall; and base isolated braced frame. Each system was analysed as a fully non-linear structure and the calculated drifts and floor accelerations were input into the FEMA P-58 PACT tool to evaluate the overall building performance. The PACT tool performs loss calculations for the expected casualties, repair cost, and repair time from which a QuakeStar or SEAONC rating for the building can be obtained.
References
ATC, (2011), ATC-71-2. “Proceedings for a Workshop on a Rating System for the Earthquake Performance of Buildings,” May 2011, Applied Technology Council.
ATC, (2012). Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No. P-58, Washington, DC.
BSSC, (2003). NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures (2003 Edition), prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report No FEMA 450, Washington, DC.
CERC, (2012). "Earthquake-prone buildings“Final report, Volume 4, Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission, October 2012.
Fahnestock, L.A., Sause, R. and Ricles, J.M. (2006). “Analyti-cal and large-scale experimental studies of earthquake-resistant buckling restrained braced frame systems.” AT-LSS Rep. No. 06-01, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
Fahnestock, L.A., Sause, R. and Ricles, J.M. (2007), “Seismic Response and Performance of Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames” Journal Of Structural Engineering © ASCE Sep-tember 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:9(1195)
Mayes, R.L., Hopkins, D., Holden, D. (2012). “Developments in New Zealand on a Building Rating System for the Earthquake Performance of Buildings,” Proceedings, 81st Annual Convention, Structural Engineers Association of California.
Mayes, R.L., Wetzel, N, Weaver, B., Goings, C., Tam, K. and Brown, A. (2012). “A Comparative Study of Four Structural Systems and their Quakestar Rating,” Proceedings of NZ SESOC Conference, Auckland November 2012.
Mayes, R.L., Goings, C.B., Naguib, W.I., Harris, S.K., (2004). “Comparative Performance of Buckling-Restrained Braces and Moment Frames”, Proceedings of the World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver 2004.
Mayes, R.L., Goings, C.B., Naguib, W.I., Harris, S.K., (2005 and 2006). “Comparative Seismic Performance of Four Structural Systems,” Proceedings of the SEAOC Annual Meeting, San Diego 2005 and 8th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, San Francisco 2006.
NZSEE, (2012). "Assessment and improvement of the structural performance of buildings in earthquakes, Priorisation, Initial evaluation, Detailed assessment, Improvement measures“, Recommendations from a NZSEE study group on earthquake risk buildings, April 2012.
Reis, E., Von Berg, E., Mayes, R.L., (2012). “The U.S. Resili-ency Council Principles of Formation,” Proceedings, 81st Annual Convention, Structural Engineers Association of California. USRC, 2011. www.usrc.org.
Sabelli, R. (2001). “Research on improving the design and analysis of earthquake-resistant steel braced frames.” The 2000 NEHRP Professional Fellowship Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, Calif.
SAC, (2000). State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subject to Earthquake Ground Shaking, prepared by SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Managment Agency, Report No. FEMA 355c, Washington, DC.
SEAONC Existing Buildings Committee, Building Ratings Subcommittee, (2011). “SEAONC Rating System for the Expected Earthquake Performance of Buildings,” Proceed-ings, 80th Annual Convention, Structural Engineers Asso-ciation of California.
SEAONC Existing Buildings Committee, Building Ratings Subcommittee, (2012). “SEAONC’s Earthquake Perfor-mance Rating System: Translating ASCE 31-03,” Proceed-ings, 81st Annual Convention, Structural Engineers Asso-ciation of California.
UBC, (1997). “Structural Engineering Design Provisions,“ Uniform Building Code, Vol. 2, International Conference of Building Officials.
UC, (2012). “Sesimic Design Guide for Post-tensioned Timber Frames and Walls (Pres-Lam Technology)“, Intern Design Guide, University of Canturbery (Private comunication).
