Bulletin of Earthquake Science and Engineering

Bulletin of Earthquake Science and Engineering

Seismic Codes: Past, Present and Future Outlook

Document Type : Review Article

Author
Hassan Moghadam
Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
10.48303/bese.2024.2029271.1161
Abstract
Seismic codes began with the simple concept of the earthquake coefficient and, over the course of a century, evolved into their current form. Understanding the complex regulations and applying them correctly depends on a solid grasp of the theoretical foundations of these codes. Unfortunately, there has been little discussion on this matter. This article explores the origin and evolution of seismic codes, the determination of the response modification factor R, the design spectrum, force distribution, and the increasing reliance on dynamic analysis. It also discusses the accuracy of the assumptions in the codes. A key question is how the code regulations can ensure the safety of a structure despite insufficient resistance. The key to this dilemma lies in the response modification factor, which should keep the deformation within the limits of the structure's deformation capacity. The relationship between the R  and seismic deformation, the difficulty in estimating the deformation capacity, how current values of R are estimated, and the responsibility of design codes in providing methods for calculating and maintaining sufficient ductility are the main topics of this article. It is shown that the significant reduction in deformation capacity in steel structures is due to the occurrence of the strain rise phenomenon, and in concrete frames, it results from the loss of column compressive strength, due to the drift. Therefore, in stiff seismic-resistant systems such as shear walls, braces, and infill walls are more reliable than flexible frames as they experience much lower drifts. Drift spectra are suggested to replace the existing seismic design spectra as they can easily appreciate the adequacy and potential of seismic resistant systems in reducing seismic drifts, and, unlike the current practice, provide a uniform level of confidence for all types of structural systems.
The concept of the seismic coefficient was recommended by Italian engineers in 1909. In the absence of accelerographs, it was arbitrarily assumed to be equal to 0.125. This oversimplified concept was soon spread throughout the world and was used for seismic design of all sorts of structures. The advent of accelerographs in the 1930s and thousands of recorded accelerograms demonstrated a vast gap between the assumption and reality. However, the concept survived miraculously and remains almost intact to this day, although it has undergone a disguising process that has made it unrecognizable using scientific-looking frameworks. The introduction of the response modification factors in 1978 was the most important step. They were used as adapters to keep the seismic forces unchanged despite employing seismic spectra hugely greater than the original values of seismic coefficients. It is shown that these values of R do not guarantee parity, and some forms of structures may suffer far more damage than others. The present seismic codes face two unknown facts: i) The actual deformation demand in severe earthquakes, ii) The actual deformation capacity of different types of structures. Without being able to equate these two, the codes would lack the necessary rational basis for judging seismic stability of structures.
The present pattern for the distribution of seismic forces is shown to relate to a rigid bar rotating about its base. It is also shown that the ever-growing emphasis on linear dynamic analysis does not guarantee more accuracy due to excessively nonlinear behavior in strong earthquakes. The adequacy of a distribution model can only be asserted via nonlinear dynamic analyses. Some of these models are presented. Furthermore, the adequacy of acceleration spectra for displacement-based design is also discussed. It is shown that they are not suitable for estimating the nonlinear displacement response and do not lead to a competent design for structures with insufficient lateral stiffness such as bending frames. On the contrary, the suggested drift spectra look promising as they can adequately predict the seismic drift, taking into account the actual strength and stiffness of the structure.
Keywords
History of Seismic Codes
Design Spectra
Origin of Response Modification Factor
Ductility
Deterioration of Compressional Strength
Distribution of Seismic Forces

Subjects

ASCE Joint Committee on Lateral Forces (2000). Earthquake forces for the lateral force code. Structural Design of Tall Building, 9, 49-64.
ASCE7-22. (2022). Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. American Society of Civil Engineers.
ATC. (1978). Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seimic Regulations for Buildings (ATC 3-06). Washington: Applied Technology Council.
Biot, M. (1941). A mechanical analyzer for the prediction of earthquake stresses. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 31.
BJI. (1997). Seismic Provisions for Design of Building Structures. Tokyo, Japan, Building Centere of Japan.
Campbell, K.W., & Bozorgnia, Y. (2014). NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthquake Spectra, 30(33), 1087-1115.
Charleson, A. (2008). Seismic Design for Architects. Elsevier.
Deguchi, Y., Kawashima, T., Yamanari, M., & Ogawa, K. (2008). Seismic design load distribution in steel frame. 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China.
Elwood, K.A., & Moehle, J.P. (2003). Shake Table Tests and Analytical Studies on the Gravity Load Collapse of Reinforced Concrete Frames. University of California, PEER. Berkley: University of California.
Fajfar, P. (2018). Analysis in seismic provisions for building: past, present and future. Bull Earthquake Eng, 16, 2567-2608.
Fajfar, P., Vidic, T., & Fischinger, M. (1989). Seismic demand in medium-and-long-period structures,. Eq. Eng. And Str. Dyn, 18, 1133-1144.
Farajpour, Z., Pezeshk, S., & Zare, M. (2019). A new empirical ground‐motion model for Iran. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 109(2), 732-744.
Fema-P695. (2009). Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Fintel, M. (1995). Performance of Buildings with Shear Walls in Earthquakes of the Last Thirty Years. PCI. Journal, 40(3), 62-80.
Fiorato, A.e. (1976). Reversing load tests of five isolated sturctural walls. Proceedings of Int. Symp. Earthquake Struct. Eng. St. Loudis: University of Missouri-Rolla.
Goel, S. C., Liao, W. C., Bayat, M., & Chao, S. (2010). Performance-based plastic design (PBPD) method for earthquake-resistant structures: an overview. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 19(1), 115-137.
Hajirasouliha, I., & Moghaddam, H. (2009). New lateral force distribution for seismic design of structures. Structural Engineering, ASCE, 135(8), 906-915.
Housner, G. (1959). Behaviour of sturucutres during eathquakes. J. Eng Meh Div, ASCE, 85(EM-4), 109-129.
Kato, B., & Akiyama, H. (1982). Seismic design of steel buildings. Journal of the Structural Division ASCE, 108(8), 1709-1721.
Kent, D. C. (1997). Flexural members with confined concrete. J. Struc. Div., ASCE, ST-7, 1969-1990.
Kircher, C., & Heintz, J. (2008). ATC-63-Recommendded methodology for quantification of building system performance and response parameters. The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, China.
Krawinkler, H., & Rahnama, M. (1992). Effects of soft soil and hysteresis models on seismic design spectra. Proc 10th World Conf on Earthquake Engineering, 10, 5841-5846. Madrid.
Lee, L.H., Han, S.W., & Oh, Y.H. (1999). Determination of ductility factor considering different hysteretic models. Earthquake Eng. And Structural Dynamics, 28, 957-977.
Lopez, O.A., & Cruz, M. (1996). Number of modes for the seismic design of buildings. Earthquake Eng. and Struct. Dyn., 25(8), 837–856.
Mander, B. J., Priestley, J. N., & Park, R. (1988). Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. ASCE J. Struct. Eng, 144(8), 1804-1826.
Mehdizad, S., & Moghaddam, H. (2005). Behaviour of square concrete columns strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) strips. Proc. of the International Conference on Concrete Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting, Cape Town, South Africa, 21-23 Nov, 1273-1278.
Miranda, E. (1993). Site-dependent strength-reduction factors. ASCE, J. Str. Eng., 115(12), 3503-3519.
Miranda, E., & Bertero, V. (1994). Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design. Earthquake Spectra, 10(2), 357-379.
Moghaddam, H. (1994). Seismic Design of Masonry Buildings. Sharif University Publication, Tehran (in Persian).
Moghaddam, H. (2002). Earthquake Engineering, Theory And Application. Farahang Pub, Tehran (in Persian).
Mogahddam, H. & Pirayegar, S. (2008). Strain rise phenomenon in rigid steel connections. 4th National Congress of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran (in Persian).
Moghaddam, H. (2018). More efficient lateral load patterns for seismic design of steel moment-resisting frames,. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Structures and Buildings, 171(6), 487-502.
Moghaddam, H., & Karami, R. (2006). More efficient seismic loading for multidegrees of freedom structures. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, 132(10), 1673-1677.
Moghaddam, H., & Mehdizad, S. (2007). Experimental and analytical investigation of square RC columns retrofitted with pre- stressed FRP strips. Greece.
Moghaddam, H., & Karbalaee, M. (2016). 9th National Congress of Civil Engineering, Mashhad. University of Ferdowsi (in Persian).
Moghaddam, H., & Sadrara, A. (2021). Seismic performance of stainless-steel built-up box columns subjected to constant axial loads and cyclic lateral deformations. Structures, 33, 4080-4095.
 
Moghaddam, H., & Sadrara, A. (2021). The Effect of the Strain Rise Phenomenon on the Deformation Capacity of Concentric Braces. 17 World Conference Earhquake Eng., Japan.
Moghaddam, H., & Samadi, M. (2012). Prediction of the Ultimate deformation capacity of RC columns. 15th World Conf on Eq Eng., Lisbon.
Moghaddam, H. (2024). A new strong ground motion model for predicting Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA), pseudo-acceleration spectra and displacement spectra in Iran. Sharif Journal of Civil Engineering (in Persian). doi: 10.24200/J30.2023.63008.3251
Moghaddam, H., Samadi, M., Pilakoutas, K., & Mohebbi, S. (2010). Axial compressive behavior of concrete actively confined by metal strips; part a: experimental study. Materials and Structures.
Mohraz, B. (1976). A study of earthquake response spectra for different geological conditions. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 66(3), 915-935.
Mohraz, B. (1989). Earthquake Ground Motion and Response Spectra. In F. Naeim, The seismic design handbook. Van Nostrand.
Motamedi, M., & Nateghi, F. (2008). A proposed lateral load pattern using seismic energy distribution along the height of buildings. 14th World Conference   on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China.
Newmark, N.H. (1982). Earthquake Spectra and Design. Berkeley, California: The Earthquake Research Centre.
Newmark, N., & Rosenblueth, E. (1971). Fundamen-tals of Earthquake Engineering. Prentice-Hall.
Palermo, M., Silvestri, S., Gasparini, G., & Trombetti, T. (2014). A statistical study on the peak ground parameters and amplification factors for an updated design displacement spectrum and a criterion for the selection of recorded ground motions. Engineering Structures, 76, 163-176.
Park, K., & Medina, R. (2007). Conceptual seismic design of regular frames based on the concept of uniform damage. Structural Engineering, ASCE, 133(7), 945-955.
Paulay, T., & Priestley, M. (1992). Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete And Masonry Buildings. John Wiley.
 
Proietti, G., Pedone, L., D’Amore, S., & Pampanin, S. (2023). Inelastic response spectra for an integrated displacement and energy-based seismic design (DEBD) of structures, Front. Built Environ. Front. Built Environ., 9, doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2023.1264033
Rezaeian, S., Powers, P.M., Shumway, A.M., Petersen, M.D., Luco, N., Frankel, A.D., & ... & McNamara, D. E. (2021). The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the central and eastern US. 371.
Riddell, R. (1995). Inelastic design spectra accounting for soil conditions. Eq. Eng. And Str. Dyn., 24, 1491-1510.
Riddell, R., Hidalgo, P., & Cruz, E. (1989). Response modification factors for earthquake resistant design of short period buildings. Earthquake Spectra, 5(3), 571-590.
Seed, H. e. (1979). Site dependent for earthquake resistant design. Bull Seis Soc Am, 66, 221,-243.
Sezen, H. (2002). Seismic Response and Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Building Columns. Ph.D. Dissertation. Berkeley, California: University of California.
Soesianawati, M., Park, R., & and Priestley, M. (1986). Limited Ductility Design of Reinforced Concrete Columns. University of Canterbury, Department of Civil Engineering. Hristchurch, New Zealand: University of Canterbury.
Uang, C., & Bruneau, M. (2018). State-of-the-art review on seismic design of steel structures. Structural Engineering, 144(4).
Vidic, T., Fajfar, P., & Fischinger, M. (1994). Consistent inelastic design spectra: strength and displacement. Earthquake Eng. and Structural Dynamics, 23, 507-521.
Wakabayashi, M. (1986). Design of Earthquake Resistant Buildings. McGraw Hill.
Zhang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2000). Seismic behavior of reinforced concrete shear walls subjected to high axial loading. ACI Structural Journal, 97, 739-750.

  • Receive Date 15 May 2024
  • Revise Date 08 December 2024
  • Accept Date 08 October 2024