6/19/13

Structural mitigation for seismically

induced permanent ground
displacement

Craig D. Comartin, SE

Topics
Structural behavior under large seismically
induced ground displacements
Illustrative design considerations and
examples
Development of application guidelines and
building code provisions

6/19/13

Surface fault rupture

reverse

strike-slip

normal.

Vertical and horizontal displacements beneath

structures are possible due to surface fault rupture

Block sliding and graben displacements

6/19/13

Horizontal displacement
Tension will lead to
collapse at large
displacements

Vertical displacement (small)

6/19/13

Vertical displacement (large)

Plastic moment MP , and
tension in beam

Horizontal displacement

Rigid link

Vcap

Vcap
DH

Tension in link, T = Vcap= Capacity of foundation

soils in friction and passive resistence

6/19/13

Surface rupture beneath concrete frame

Plan

Vertical displacement (large)

Plastic moment MP , but
no tension in beam

DH

DV

Rigid
link

Vcap
Vcap
Tension in link, T = Vcap= capacity of foundation
soils in friction and passive resistence

6/19/13

Frame compliance to fault displacement

Design strategy for large displacements

Provide base level structural capacity in
tension and shear exceeding the
horizontal capacity of surrounding soils in
friction and passive pressure.
Provide capability to maintain vertical load
carrying capacity for large vertical
displacements.

6/19/13

Bowles Hall

Hayward Fault location at Bowles

6/19/13

Estimated displacements due to

surface fault rupture
For a 475-year event, the ratio of
displacements of approximately 7:1,
horizontal to vertical.
For this probability, a 14 inch
horizontal displacement is expected
and thus 2 inches vertical.

Areas of potential large displacements

6/19/13

Structural embedment

Retrofit strategy
Remove soil from building above the
foundation level.
Provide a retaining wall with clearance to
face of building.
Underpin library and exercise room to
provide new mat with level contact with
supporting soils.

6/19/13

Anchorage Courthouse

Anchorage Courthouse

10

6/19/13

Site location plan

Earthquakes in Alaska

11

6/19/13

Performance objectives

100 yr.

1000 yr.

500 yr.

5000 yr.

Ground shaking
Sa (g)
0.9
0.8

1000 yr - 7% Damping

0.7
100 yr - 3% Damping
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Period (seconds)

12

6/19/13

Displacement hazard

Ground displacement probability

13

6/19/13

Conventional frame

Stiffened box foundation

14

6/19/13

Cantilevered bay

Cantilever failure

15

6/19/13

Cantilever success

Flexible bay

16

6/19/13

Frame compliance to fault displacement

Foundation analysis

17

6/19/13

Mat foundation

Eccentrically braced steel framing

18

6/19/13

California Memorial Stadium

Strawberry Canyon,looking south, 1915

19

6/19/13

Fault creep
curb offsets

major cracks in culvert

observed in 1948,
1954, 1965, and 1999
curb offsets

20

6/19/13

Offset curbs

Pavement cracks

21

6/19/13

Stadium columns

Trenches and borings

22

6/19/13

Trench at south side Main

trace

Existing stadium structure:

nomenclature
East Bowl:
Concrete Slab on Ground

North Fault
Rupture Zone
South Fault
Rupture Zone

West Berm:
Concrete Slab
on Grade
West Bowl: Elevated
Concrete Frame

23

6/19/13

PHASE 2 PHASE 1

(N) Precast Concrete and

Steel Bowl Structure

New Shotcrete and Cast

in Place Concrete Shear

5 Gap All Around

Fault Rupture Block

Sliding Cover
Plate
Existing Seating
Slab on Beam

Student Athlete
High Performance
Center (S.A.H.P.C.)

Plastic Shee t
Below Mat Footing

Concrete Mat
Slab Footing

(N) Steel Floor

Framing

Stone Columns
to Densify Original Fill:
Unconnected to Footing

FAULT RUPTURE B LOCK

Performance-based design objectives

Performance level

Event/shaking intensity

Continued operation

100yr

Immediate occupancy

250yr

Life safety

500yr

Collapse prevention

1000yr

24

6/19/13

Performance-based design process for large

foundation displacements
Determine performance objectives.
Estimate displacements for hazard level(s).
Determine structural limit states for each
hazard level.
Verify capability to meet desired performance
level(s)

The way forward

Develop guidelines for probabilistic
assessment of large foundation
displacements.
Develop guidelines for structural
application.
Develop peer review requirements for
both.
Begin code incorporation process.

25

6/19/13

Conclusions
Structural behavior can be conceptualized,
quantified, and understood.
Well-reasoned mitigative actions should
be allowed.
Guidelines and standards are needed.
Provisions, constraints, and compliance
should be regulated in the building code.

26