International Concrete Abstracts Portal

Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD) of reinforced concrete buildings has rapidly become a widely used alternative to the prescriptive requirements of building code requirements for seismic design. The use of PBSD for new construction is expanding, as evidenced by the design guidelines that are available and the stock of building projects completed using this approach. In support of this, the mission of ACI Committee 374, Performance-Based Seismic Design of Concrete Buildings, is to “Develop and report information on performance-based seismic analysis and design of concrete buildings.” During the ACI Concrete Convention, October 15-19, 2017, in Anaheim, CA, Committee 374 sponsored three technical sessions titled “Performance-Based Seismic Design of Concrete Buildings: State of the Practice.” The sessions presented the state of practice for the PBSD of reinforced concrete buildings. These presentations brought together the implementation of PBSD through state-of-the-art project examples, analysis observations, design guidelines, and research that supports PBSD. This special publication reflects the presentations in Anaheim. Consistent with the presentation order at the special sessions in Anaheim, the papers in this special publication are ordered in four broad categories: state-of-the-art project examples (papers 1-5), lateral system demands (papers 6-8), design guidelines (papers 9-10), and research and observed behavior (papers 11-13). On behalf of Committee 374, we wish to thank each of the authors for sharing their experience and expertise with the session attendees and for their contributions to this special publication.

The distribution of forces through floor diaphragms is critical to the overall behavior and performance of buildings during both wind and seismic events. Simplified methods commonly employed by design engineers establish approximate magnitudes and distributions of inertial and transfer forces within floor diaphragms. Such methods can be appropriate for regular low-rise buildings without significant transfer forces. However, for design of complex structures with large stiffness discontinuities in vertical or horizontal directions, a more detailed investigation and modeling of diaphragm behavior is usually required. Common situations in high-rise projects include a tower stack meeting a podium base with supplemental shear walls and a tower stack meeting a grade-level slab enclosed by basement walls. Large diaphragm transfer forces typically occur at these levels of abrupt stiffness changes. Using examples from recent projects and parametric studies following performance-based seismic design (PBSD) principles, this paper describes the use of strut-and-tie models in commercially available software (PERFORM-3D) to provide a better understanding of complex diaphragm behavior. Results can aid the designer in making decisions regarding floor thickness and reinforcing layout, including at chords and collectors. While the need for enhanced modeling techniques and understanding of diaphragm behavior has been highlighted by the increased use of PBSD, the findings presented in this paper may be applicable to projects based on traditional (code-based) approaches as well.

Performance based seismic design (PBSD) has been widely used for tall buildings as a code alternative design method for concrete shear wall structures. However, most PBSD studies are done for buildings taller than 240’ (73 m). Very few studies have been done for buildings shorter than 240’ (73 m) because PBSD is not required for buildings under 240’ (73 m). It is unclear if and how the shear demand increases observed in typical PBSD analysis should be applied to buildings shorter than 240’ (73 m). This study includes two buildings in the Seattle area that are designed per current codes. The study compares the shear demands predicted by the elastic analysis method with the demands predicated by the nonlinear time history analysis used in PBSD method. The intent of this study is to examine the merits of the new Seattle requirement using a factor to amplify the shear demand for buildings designed at code level and for the building height in the range of 160’ (48.8 m) to 240’ (73 m). It also explores the proper factor to be used in ACI 318 to determine the shear wall capacity.

The use of a Performance-Based Seismic Design (PBSD) approach to design buildings whose heights exceed 240 ft (73 m) has become common in many West Coast cities. This paper studies trends across 14 special reinforced concrete shear wall PBSD towers designed within the last 5 years. The primary purpose of evaluating these trends is to compare demands calculated using a linear elastic design approach (i.e. for Design Earthquake or Service Level shaking) to the demands (average results from 7 or 11 ground motions) determined through nonlinear analysis (i.e. for Maximum Considered Earthquake shaking). The specific demands evaluated include core wall shears and foundation overturning moments. The paper also demonstrates that shear and moment amplification are significant phenomena for concrete buildings, and are believed to be primarily due to nonlinear behavior, material over-strength, higher mode effects, and damping and stiffness assumptions. The results present a useful range of trends to provide an engineer guidance on the expected demands and the level of variability between projects. The paper highlights some of the reasons for the variability in these trends, and provides general proportioning recommendations.

A 160-foot (≈ 49 m) tall 12–story reinforced concrete special moment frame building is designed following ASCE 7-16 and ACI 318-14, and assessed using three Performance-Based Seismic Engineering (PBSE) standards and guidelines including ASCE/SEI 41, the Tall Buildings Initiative (TBI) guidelines for performance-based design of tall buildings, and the Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design Council (LATBSDC) procedures. The assessments are performed at the combination of two performance and hazard levels including Collapse Prevention (CP) at the risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER) hazard level and Immediate Occupancy (IO) at a frequent ground motion level with 50 percent probability of exceedance in 30 years, i.e. serviceability performance level. Based on the recommendations of each of the three PBSE documents, nonlinear finite element models are implemented in OpenSees. Through nonlinear time-history response analyses, the finite element models are subjected to eleven ground motions that are selected following the ground motion selection recommendations in ASCE 7-16. Assessment results indicate that for the serviceability performance level, the code-compliant building meets the design requirements of the three PBSE documents for the inter-story drift ratio and inelastic deformation of the structural components. At the MCER hazard level, although the building essentially satisfies the design requirements for the peak inter-story drift ratios and inelastic deformation, the mean of the residual inter-story drift ratios as well as the envelope of the residual drift ratios do not meet the limits of the TBI and LATBSDC guidelines. The results indicate that the newly designed building meets the ASCE 41 acceptance criteria but does not meet the design requirements set in TBI and LATBSDC guidelines.