SEISMIC ENGINEERING

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING 3

Professor David Thambiratnam

School of Civil Engineering & Built Environment
Queensland University of Technology

TOPICS TO BE COVERED
Earthquakes
Dynamics of Structures
Earthquake Response of Structures
Design Philosophy and Codes
Methods of Analysis and the Australian
Standard AS1170.4
6. Static Analysis
7. Dynamic Analysis
8. Asymmetry & Torsional Coupling
9. Example of Torsional Amplifications
10. Design Considerations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Distribution of Earthquakes 9 year period

LOCATIONS OF EARTHQUAKES
IN AUSTRALIA 1873 - 1988

MECHANISM OF EARTHQUAKES
Elastic rebound.
As a rock is deformed
it bends, storing
elastic energy. Once
the rock is strained
beyond its breaking
point it ruptures,
releasing the storedup energy in the form
of earthquake waves

What Happens to a Fence on a Fault

Line

SEISMIC WAVES P & S Types

TWO TYPES OF EARTHQUAKES

1.INTER PLATE
Due to Sliding of Tectonic Plates Past Each Other

2.INTRA PLATE (Australia)

Due to Fault on Tectonic Plate
Difficult to Predict

SELECTED MAJOR HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES

SELECTED MAJOR HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES

EARTHQUAKES - details of what

happened
Year

Location

Deaths

Magnitude

Comments

1290

Chihli, China

100,000

1556

Shensi, China

830,000

1737

Calcutta, India

300,000

1755

Lisbon, Portugal

70,000

Tsunami damage extensive

1811

Missouri

Few

Three major earthquakes

1886

Charleston , CA

60

1906

San Francisco, CA

1,500

1908

Messina, Italy

120,000

1920

Kansu, China

180,000

1923

Tokyo, Japan

1960

Possibly the greatest natural disaster

8.1-8.2

Fires caused extensive damage

143,000

7.9

Fire caused extensive damage

Southern, Chile

5,700

8.5-8.6

Possibly the largest-magnitude earthquake

1964

Alaska

131

8.3-8.4

1970

Peru

66,000

7.8

Great rockslide

1971

San Fernando

65

6.5

Damage exceeded one billion dollars

1975

Liaoning Province

Few

7.5

First major earthquake to be predicted

1985

Mexico City

9,500

8.1

Major damage occurred 400km from epicenter

1988

Soviet Armenia

25,000

6.9

Poor construction practices contributed to destruction

1989

San Francisco

62

7.1

Damages exceeded six billion dollars

1990

Northwestern, Iran

50,000

7.3

Landslides + poor construction ->great damage

DAMAGE CAUSED BY EARTHQUAKE

Mexico 1985, multi-storey buildings swayed back and forth as

much as one meter

DAMAGE CAUSED BY EARTHQUAKE

Mexico 1985, Pancake-style collapse of 15-storey reinforcedconcrete structure

Acceleration time history recordsTennant Creek earthquake (Australia,

1988)
(a) North
Component

(b) East
Component

(c) Vertical
Component

EARTHQUAKE LOADING ON A
STRUCTURE

System driven by base translation. (a) System (b)

FBDc

mv cv kv mug Peff (t )

g v
) cv kv 0
m(u

Earthquake Loading is an Inertia

Force

EARTHQUAKE MEASUREMENT
1. MAGNITUDE (M) in RICHTER Scale
-Measure of total energy (E) released
Log E = 11.8 + 1.5M
Unit increase in M corresponds to 32*increase in E
2. INTENSITY
-Measure of local destruction
MODIFIED MERCALLI Scale
MM 1 (not felt) - - - MM 2 (total destruction)

Factors Affecting Earthquake Response of

a Structure
1. Earthquake Intensity or Earthquake Hazard Z
(and probability factor kp)
2. Mass Distribution - [M] of structure*
3. Stiffness Distribution - [K] of structure*
4. Ductility & Structural Performance Factor (/Sp)
5. Site Sub-Soil Class (Ae, Be, Ce, De or Ee)
6. Irregularity (asymmetry) torsional coupling*
* structure property

DYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF BUILDINGS

Characterized by
Distributions

Stiffness [K] and Mass [M]

Dynamic properties relevant to earthquake engineering are

represented by:

1 .Fundamental natural period of vibration (T in

secs)
T = (2 largest period. For a SDOF system: T = 2 M/K)1/2

or
fundamental natural frequency (f in Hz); f = 1/T
and
2. Associated Mode Shapes
- unique deflected shape for each T
(or f)

Free Vibration and Damping

Decay of vibration under the assumption of

EARLY MODE SHAPES OF A BUILDING

DUAL DESIGN CRITERIA

TO COMPROMISE BETWEEN SAFETY & ECONOMY
1. NO STRUCTURAL DAMAGE FOR CREDIBLE
MODERATE EARTHQUAKE
2. SELECTIVE STRUCTURAL DAMAGE PERMITED FOR
MAJOR EARTHQUAKE BUT NO COLLAPSE OR LOSS
OF LIFE
SELECTIVE DAMAGE BY FORMATION OF PLASTIC
HINGES

INELASTIC RESPONSE
PRESENTLY INELASTIC RESPONSE IS NOT WELL
UNDERSTOOD
HENCE
SEISMIC CODES DO NOT SUGGEST DIRECT NON
LINEAR ANALYSIS
INDIRECT INELASTIC RESPONSE BY USE OF
DUCTILITY FACTORS