Title:
SP-339-02: Revitalizing a Community Space Using Performance-Based Seismic Design
Author(s):
Saeed Fathali, Bret Lizundia, and Francisco Parisi
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
339
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
22-35
Keywords:
performance-based seismic design, acceptance criteria, fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP), hazard level, nonlinear response history analyses (NLRHA), reinforced concrete, seismic design, seismic evaluation
DOI:
10.14359/51724690
Date:
3/1/2020
Abstract:
This paper summarizes the benefits and challenges of implementing performance-based seismic design (PBSD) for two concrete buildings of the Lower Sproul Plaza Redevelopment Project in one of the busiest areas of the UC Berkeley campus. The project included new construction of Eshleman Hall and the additions to Martin Luther King (MLK) Hall, and the seismic retrofit of the existing MLK Student Union as a result of the expansion. The peer-reviewed PBSD implemented three-dimensional nonlinear response history analyses at two levels of seismic hazard. The analytical simulations using pairs of near-fault ground motions, scaled to match the site-specific spectrum, were intended to establish the expected seismic behavior of the buildings under rare and frequent earthquakes. The choice of PBSD over code-prescriptive procedures was prompted by multiple layers of complexity of the project. Several challenges including those related to the horizontal and vertical irregularities, or connecting new and existing concrete buildings with different lateral force-resisting systems would have made a code-prescriptive design a cumbersome analytical endeavor without providing reliable insight about the expected seismic behavior of the buildings. The PBSD, however, proved a powerful framework to design for a reliably predictable seismic behavior with sufficient ductility, and a designated ductile hinge zones with sufficient confinement and shear capacity. The PBSD methodology also enabled the designers to avoid unnecessary conservatism to deal with the complexities, when designing drift- and acceleration-sensitive elements including the cladding system. Finally, the PBSD methodology allowed the design to consider all potential modes of failure of concrete elements retrofitted by FRP material including the debonding failure between FRP material and substrate.
Related References:
ACI 318-08, (2008), “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary (ACI 318R-08),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.
ASCE 41, (2007), “Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE/SEI 41/06 plus Supplement 1),” American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
ASCE 7, (2010), “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-10),” American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
ATC 72, (2010), “ATC-72-1: Interim Guidelines on Modeling and Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Design and Analysis of Tall Buildings,” ATC-72-1, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
CBC 2013, (2013), “California Building Code,” International Code Council, Washington, DC.
FEMA 440, (2005), “Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures”, Applied Technology Council for Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
Orakcal K., Wallace J.W., (2006), “Flexural modeling of reinforced concrete walls – model calibration,” ACI Structural Journal 103(2): 196–206, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.
PEER, (2010), “Tall Building Initiative (TBI) Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings,” report No. 2010/05, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA
Priestly M. J. N., Calvi G M, and Kowalsky M J, (2007), “Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures,” IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy.