ATC-40 PUSHOVER 静力弹塑性计算 规范

【实例简介】
Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings,ATC
ATC-4O Seismic evaluetion and retrofit ofc。 ncrete Buildings APPLIED TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 550 Redwood City, California 94065 Funded by SEISMIC SAFETY COMMISION State of call Products 1.2 and 1.3 of the proposition 122 Seismic Retrofit Practices Improvement program PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Craig D. Comartin CO-PRNNCIPAL ENESTIGATOR PROJECT DIRECTOR Richard W. niewiarowski SENIR ADYISOR Christopher Rojahn Repon No. SSC 96-0J November 1996 Preface Proposition 122 passed by Califomia's voters in This document is organized into two volumes 1990, created the earthquake Safety and Public Volume One contains the main body of the Buildings Rehabilitation Fund of 1990, sup- evaluation and retrofit methodology, presented pored by a $300 million general obligation in 13 chapters, with a giossary and a list of ref- bond progran for the seismic retrofit of state erences. This volume contains all of the parts of and local govemment buildings. As a part of the document required for the evaluation and the program, Proposition 122 authorizes the retrofit of buildings. Volume Two consists of California Seismic Safety Commission(Cssc) Appendices containing supporting materials re- to use up to 1 of the proceeds of the bonds, or lated to the methodology four example building approximately $3 million, to carry out a range case study reports, a cost effectiveness study of activities that will capitalize on the seismic related to the four building studies, and a revicw retrofit experience in the private sector to im of tesearch on the cffccts of foundation condi- prove seismic retrofit practices for government tions on the seismic performance of concrete buildings. The purpose of Californias Froposi- buildings lion 122 research and development program is LO develop slate-0f-Lhe-practice recouinenda- This reporl was prepared under the direction of lions so address currcnt nccds for scismic retro ATC SEnior Consultant Craig Comartin, who fIl provisions and seismic risk decision tools, It erved as principal investigator and richard w is focused specifically on vulnerable concrete Niewiarowski, who served as Co-Principal nr structures consistent with the types of concrete vestigator and project Director Fred Turner buildings that make up a significant portion of served as cssc Project Manager. Overview Californias state and local government invento and guidance were provided by the Proposition 122 Oversight Panel consisting of Frederick M Herman (Chair), richard conrad, Ross Cran- In 1994, as part of the Proposition 122 Seismic Retrofit Practices Improvement Program, the McClure, Gary Mc Gavin, Joel McRonald, Jo Commission awarded the applied Technology seph F Nicoleti, Stanley Scott, and Lowell Council (AtC) a contract to develop a recom Shields. The Product 1. 2 methodology and lended methodology and commentary for the commentary were prepared by sigmund A seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing corl Freeman, Ronald o. Hamburger, William t crete buildings(Product 1. 2). In 1995 the Holmes Charles Kircher. Jack P moehle Corrumission awarded a second related contract homas A Sabol, ard Nabih youssef (Product La ATC to expand the Product 1.2 effort to in 1, 2 Senior' Advisory Panel).The Product 1.3 clude effects of foundations on the seismic per Ceotechnical/structural Working Group con- formance of existing concrete buildings iiEd of Suni GupTa, Geoffrey Martin, Mar (Product 1. 2). The results of the two projects shall Lew, and Lelio Mejia. William T Hol avc been combincd and are presented in this mcs. Yoshi moriwaki, maurice power and ATC 40 Report(also known as ssc-96-01 Nabi youssef served on the product 1, 3 senior Advisory Panel. Gregory P Luth and Tom II Two other reports recently published by the Hale, respectively, served as the Quality Assur- California seismic Safety Commission. the ance Consultant and te cust effectiveness Provisional Commentary for Seismic Retrofit Study Consultant. Wendy Rule served as fech (1994and the review of seismic Research re nical Editor, and Gail Hynes Shea served as sulEs on Existing Buildings (1994), are Products Publications consultant 1.1 and3, I of the proposition 122 Program,re spectively. These two previous reports provide Richard McCarthy the primary basis for the development of the CSsC Executive director commended methodology and commentar contained in this document Christopher rojahn ATC Executive Director &ATC-40 Senior Advisor oversight Panel f。r Proposclon 122 selsmic Retrofit Practices Improvement Pro巴ram FredericκM. Herman.Cha Richard conrad Ross cranmer ersnic safer 'copuvissiorl Building StaNdards Commi Building official Locai Governmen: Build :g Structural engineer Q所 ficia Roy Johnston Frank mcclure Dr. Wilfred Iwan StructuraL Engineer Structural engineer Mechanical engineer Joel mcdonald Joseph P. nicoletti Gary McGavin Division of ihe stare archnirccI SYn/ctural Enginee Seismic safery counntission Arcliirecy wwell e. shieli SeisMic Safery Curumissionn Stanlev scuct Metlunicu! Engineer Research political scientis Gest f5etyc。mmss。nstF Richard McCarthy Frcd turner ulive Director P Karen Cogan Chris lindstrom Deborah penny Ed Hensley armen m argue 」 er defriend Rady guod七l PrOduct 1.2 senior Advisory Panel Sigmund a. freeman Ronald o. hamburge William T. holmes 」 EQE rre Rutherford chieken Thomas a. sabol Kirche Earthquake Engineering re- Engelkirk salvi Charles kircher d Associates search Certer Nabih F:.Youssef Nabih yors sef associates Product 1.3 senior Advisory Panel will Maurice power Rutherford Chekene Georrtgfrir Gon laus. in Yoshi moriwaki Nabil f youssef Hoodwyard-Clyde consulianils Nabih Youssef Associates Product 1-3 GeotechnIcal/structural Working Group Sunil gt Geoffrey R. ma tin EQ Tech Consulta/NS University of Sourhern California Marshall lew ejIa Crandal ry codward-Clyue Consultans Quality Assurance consultant Technical Editor P. Luth Wendy rule egoP.L反 Richmond ca cost EfFectiveness study consultant publications consultant Tom h. hale Gail Hynes shea JirniryR Yee Cousulninr& engineers Albany Ca seismic Eva uation ont Retr。Ftfc。 ncrete Buidings Products 1.2 and 1.3 af the proposition 122 Seismic retrofit Practices Improvement program Tae of Contents olume 1 Preface Executive Summary Chapter I1 roduction…… 1. I Putpose.. P· :2 1.3 Organization and Contents 15 Chapter 2 overview Introduction 2.2 Changes in perspective 3 G ng ?斗 sic Evaluation and Retrofit Strategy 2.5 Evaluation and Retrofit Concept 2.6 Final Design and Construction Chapter 3 performance Ot 3 Introductio门, 3.2 Ferformance leve 3.3 Earuguake Ground motion…,,,…,, 3.4 Erformance Objectives 39 3.5 Assignment of Performance Objective 3-12 Chpr4 Seismic Hazare… 4,1 Sco 4- 2 Earthquake ground Shaking Hazard level 3 Ground Fai 4. 4 Primary Ground Shaking Criteria 4.5 Specification of Supplementary Criteria 4-l2 Chapter s Determination: of Deficiencies 1 Introduct Table cf content vit SESMIL EALUATION AND RETROFIT OF CONCRETE UILDINIS 5 ription: Typical Layouts and details 5.3 Seismic performance ·k■■1■,4L4LLm -3 5. 4 DaL collection 5-12 5.5 Review of Seismic hazard 5-17 5.6 Identification of Potential Deficiencies 5-8 5.7 Prelirninary Evaluation of Anticipated Seismic Per formance..5-20 5.8 Preliminary Evaluation Conclusions and Recoinunendations 5-21 Chapter 6 Retrofit Strategies 6.2 Altemative Retrofit Strategie 6. 3 Design Constraints and Considerations 6-24 6.4 Stra egy selectin Chapter 7 QuaLity Assurance Procedures General 7.3 Pla check 7.4 Construction Qualily assurance Chapier& Nonlinear Static Analysis Procedures 8.1 nuroduc 1on 8.2 Mechods Lo Perform Simplified Nonlinear Analysis 8.3 Illustrative Example S4 Other Allalysis Methods 8-54 8.5 B sies of Stuctural Dyuainies Chapier 9 Mcdeling rules 9. General 9.2 Load 9.3 Global Building Considerations 9. 4 Eiement Models 9.5 Component Models 9-l9 分.6 notations, 9-46 Chapter 10 Foundation Effects l0-〕 hoi General 10.2 Foundation System and Global Structural Model 10-2 10.3 Foundation Elements 10.4 Properties of Geotechnical Conaponen 10-12 10.5 Characterization of site soils ↓山 0-20 10.6Re Limits and acceptability Criteria l0-28 10. 7 Modifications to Foundation Systems 029 Chapter 1! Re 1.1 Gemeral L↓斗 2 Descriptive Limits of Expected perfo 11.3 Global ei Acceptability limits 21. 4 Element and component AccepTability limiTs Chapter 12 Nonstructural component vII Table of SERC EALUATIH AAlD RE F CoNcrEe BcLoIlGs 12.1 ntroduction 2-l 12.2 Acceptability Criteria,……… Chapter 13 Conclusions and Future Direction I3-L 13.1 ntroduction 13-L 13.2 Additional data 13-l 13.3 Potential benefits 413-4 13. 4 Major challenges 5 13.5 Recommended action plan ,.L3-6 References 14- vume2一 Appendices Appendix A Escondido village Midrise: Stanford, California A Appendix 1 Barrington Medical Center. LOs Angeles, Califomia Appendix c administrarion Building, Califonia State Universiry at Northridge, Northridge, Calitornia C Appendix D Holiday Inn, van Nuys, California -1 Appendix E Cost Effectiveness Study E-I Appendix f Supplemental Information on Foundation Effects Appendix G Applied Technoiogy Council Projects and Report Information G-1 Table of Centents SEISMIC EVALUATION AND RETROFIT OF CoNCRETE BUILDINGS GosseT AcceptabilIty (response) limits: Refec's to response spectrum (demand spectrum) fic limitin values for the qu id loadi displacement demand on the de formation-coritroiled and force intersection Is ihc pcrformance point, and controlled components respectively, which the displacement coordinate, dp, of the constitute criteria for acceptable. seismic performanc point is the estimated crfsrnancc displacement demand on the strueture for the specified level of scismic nazard Brittle: see nondic t e Components: The local concretc members tha1 Capacity: The expected ultimate strength (in comprise the major structurai clcncnts Of flexure, shear, or axial loading)of a the building such as columns, beams structural component excluding the slabs. wall panels, boundary members duction(o)fag d io Joints. elc design of concrete members The usuallv refers to the strength at the yield Concrete frame building: A building widh a point of the element or structures capacity monolithically cast concrele structur curve, for defo m-controlled framing sy posed of horizontal compenents, capacity beyond the elastic and verTical elemets which support all limit generally includes the effects of vertical gravity loads and also provide Strain hardening resistance to all latera] loads through bending of the frating elements Capacity curve: The plot of the total lateral torce. V, on a st:ucture. against the lateral Concrete frawe-wall Luilding: A building with a deflection、d、 T the roof of the structure stuctural sy stem composed of an This is often referred to as the 'pushover essentially complete concrete frame system curve. to suppor all gravity loads and concrete walls to provide resistance (o lateral load Capacity spectrum: The capacity curve primarily in shea ansformed fom shear force vs, roof displacement (v vs. d coordinates into Deformation-controlled: Refers to components spectral acceleration vs. spectral systems which can displacement (Sa vS. Sa) coordinate and are permitted to, exceed their elastic limit in a ductile manner. Force or stress Capacity spectrum method: A nonlinear static Levels for these components are of lesser analysis procedure that provides a importance than the amount or extent of graphical representation of the expected deformation beyond the yield poin(see seismic perforinauce of the existing or ductility denand etrofineed struc ture by the intersection of the structures capacity spectrun with a clossary 【实例截图】
【核心代码】