Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
APPENDIX B
Rev. 15
NCh2369
INN - CHILE
CONTENTS
Preface
References to standards
12
3.1
12
3.2
Symbols
14
17
4.1
17
4.2
19
4.3
20
4.4
21
4.5
Loading combinations
21
4.6
23
4.7
23
NCh2369
5
Seismic analysis
23
5.1
General provisions
24
5.2
Methods of analysis
25
5.3
26
5.4
28
5.5
30
5.6
30
5.7
30
5.8
Special analyses
31
5.9
32
5.10
34
Seismic deformations
47
6.1
Calculation of deformations
47
6.2
48
6.3
48
6.4
49
49
7.1
Scope
49
7.2
49
7.3
52
7.4
52
52
8.1
Applicable standards
52
NCh2369
8.2
Materials
53
8.3
Braced frames
54
8.4
Rigid frames
55
8.5
Connections
56
8.6
Anchorages
57
8.7
58
63
9.1
63
9.2
64
9.3
67
10
69
10.1
69
10.2
Shallow foundations
69
11
Specific structures
70
11.1
Industrial buildings
70
11.2
70
11.3
73
11.4
73
11.5
73
11.6
73
11.7
74
11.8
74
11.9
76
NCh2369
11.10
77
11.11
Electric equipment
77
11.12
77
11.13
Wood structures
77
79
89
B.1
General considerations
89
B.2
89
B.3
93
B.4
94
B.5
95
B.6
96
B.7
97
B.8
98
99
C.1
Scope
99
C.2
References
100
C.3
100
C.4
100
C.5
Seismic analysis
103
C.6
Seismic deformations
112
C.7
112
NCh2369
C.8
113
C.9
115
C.10
Foundations
117
C.11
Specific structures
117
C.B
126
References
128
Figures
Figure 5.1 a)
44
Figure 5.1 b)
45
Figure 5.1 c)
46
Figure 5.2
----
47
Figure 8.1
62
Figure 8.2
-----
63
Figure A.1
Column base
79
Figure A.2
Roof bracing
79
Figure A.3
80
Figure A.4
80
Figure A.5
81
Figure A.6
81
Figure A.7
82
Figure A.8
84
Figure A.9
84
NCh2369
Figure A.10
85
Figure A.11
86
Figure A.12
87
Figure A.13
88
Figure B.1
91
Figure B.2
92
Figure B.3
95
Figure B.4
97
Figure C.1
108
Figure C.2
110
Figures
118
Tables
35
Table 5.2
Table 5.3
39
Table 5.4
40
Table 5.5
Damping ratios
40
Table 5.6
41
Table 5.7
43
Table 7.1
52
Table 8.1
60
Table 5.1
39
NCh2369
NCh2369.Of2003
Preface
The Instituto Nacional de Normalizacin (INN) is the Chilean standards organization in charge of
studying and preparing national technical standards. The INN is a member of the International
Standards Organization (ISO) and the Pan American Technical Standards Commission (COPANT), and represents Chile in both organizations.
The standard NCh2369 was prepared by the INN Standards Division. The following organizations and persons took part in its study:
Elas Arze L.
Ivn Darrigrande E.
Rodrigo Concha P.
Ramn Montecinos C.
Alberto Maccioni Q.
Alejandro Verdugo P.
David Campuzano B.
Miguel Sandor E.
Jorge Lindenberg B.
Pedro Hidalgo O.
Augusto Holmberg F.
Marcial Baeza S.
Magno Mery G.
Rodrigo Concha P.
Vladimir Urza M.
Rodolfo Saragoni H.
Maximiliano Astroza I.
Mara Ofelia Moroni Y.
Rodolfo Saragoni H.
Patricio Bonelli C.
Given the inexistence of international standards on this matter, this standard represents the stateof-the-art of Chilean seismic design, which is consistent with the practice of the countrys leading
engineering enterprises. The efficiency and economy of this practice has been substantiated by
the seismic behavior of locally designed structures, particularly regarding such past events as
those of 1960 and 1985.
NCh2369
NCh2369
NCh2369.Of2003
This standard establishes the requirements for the earthquake-resistant design of heavy
and light industrial structures and facilities. It shall be applicable to structures and to
duct and pipe systems, mechanical and electrical process, equipment and their respective
anchorages. The standard also shall be applied to industrial warehouse structures and to
buildings structured with cantilever columns.
1.2.
This standard is not applicable to such other structures as nuclear stations, electric power
generation plants and transmission lines, dams, tailings dams, bridges, tunnels, gravitational piers, retaining walls, underground ducts, etc.
1.3.
1.4.
This standard is supplemented by Nch433.Of96 Seismic Design of Buildings. All provisions of this latter standard are applicable provided they have not been specifically modified.
2. References to standards
The following standards contain provisions, which referenced to in the text of this standard, constitute requirements of this standard.
At the time of the issuance of this standard, the listed edition was in force.
All standards are subject to revision. It is advisable that all parties that enter agreements based on
this standard research the latest editions of the following standards:
NOTE: The National Standardization Institute keeps a record of all national and international
standards
NCh2369
NCh203
NCh433
NCh1159
NCh1537
NCh2369
ASTM A992/A992M-96
ANSI/AWS A5.1-91
ANSI/AWS A5.5-96
ANSI/AWS A5.17-89
ANSI/AWS A5.18-93
ANSI/AWS A5.20-95
ANSI/AWS A5.23-90
ANSI/AWS A5.29-80
NOTE. Those foreign standards which are deemed required may be quoted.
11
NCh2369
3.
3.1
The following terms and definitions apply to this standard. They supplement the terminology of
NCh433.Of1996:
3.1.1
Permanent load (CP): Action whose variation in the course of time can be ignored in
relation to its mean value or one for which the variation tends to a limit.
3.1.2
Connection: region at which several precasted elements or one precasted element and
cast-in-place element are connected.
3.1.3
Strong connection: connection that remains elastic while the pre-determined plastic
hinge zone develops an inelastic response under severe seismic conditions.
3.1.4
Wet connection: any connection compliant to ACI 318-99 sections 21.2.6, 21.2.7 and
21.3.2.3 for joining precasted elements using cast-in-place concrete or mortar filler to fill
the joint space.
3.1.5
Dry connection: connection between precasted elements that does not qualify as wet
connection.
3.1.6
3.1.7
Braced frame: structural system with diagonal elements; its elements beams, columns
and braces mainly act under axial forces.
3.1.8
Ductile frames with non connected non-structural elements: the non-structural elements are separated from the frame columns by a space that is larger than or equal to the
value dmax defined in section 6.3.
3.1.9
Ductile frames with connected non-structural elements: These are frames in which the
non-structural elements are separated from the frame columns by a space that is smaller
than the value dmax defined in section 6.3. In this case, the non-structural elements shall be
12
NCh2369
incorporated into the structural model preventing the shear failure at the beam-column
joints.
3.1.10 Rigid frame: Structural system in which the beam-column joints are capable of transmitting bending moment. Its lateral stability on its plane depends on the flexural stiffness of
its components.
3.1.11 Fundamental vibration period: Natural period with greater equivalent translational
mass in the direction of analysis.
3.1.12 Professional specialist: Professional of renowned structural engineering expertise legally
authorized to work in Chile and with a record of at least 5-year proven experience in
earthquake-resistant design.
3.1.13 Seismic hazard: Likelihood of a certain seismic event of occurring within a determined
zone and a predetermined time interval.
3.1.14 Service Live loads (SC): Static actions, variable in time, which are determined by the
function and the use of the building and the facilities it contains. They present frequent or
continuous non-ignorable variations of their mean value.
According to this definition, the following items must be included under this concept:
- Uniform loads that correspond to the use of floors and platforms considering the
-
normal transit of persons, vehicles, minor movable equipment and the pileup of materials.
Dust incrustation and accumulation in ducts, equipment and structures.
Crane hoist loads
Non-permanent water or earth pressures
Inner pressure of containers.
Belt loads and similar.
3.1.15 Special operating live loads (SO): Dynamic actions that arise from the normal use of
facilities.
According to the foregoing definition, the loads to be included are:
- Impact and dynamic loads in general, even when they are modeled as equivalent
-
static actions.
Braking.
Actions that arise from moving liquids or gases, as for instance: the water hammer.
3.1.16 Accidental operating loads (SA): Actions due to operational phenomena, which only
occur occasionally in the course of the normal use of the facilities.
13
NCh2369
Symbols
Ak
Cij
Cmax
CV
CP
permanent loads;
modulus of elasticity;
Fa
Fk
Fp
Fv
Fy
=
=
Fyf
Highest level height over the base level; total height of the
building above the base level; height of the supports of a bridge
or walkway;
14
NCh2369
Kp
Pk
Pp
Qo
Qp
Qmin
R1
Rp
Value resulting from spectral modal superposition; minimal support length; separation between structures;
Sa
Sa,v
Se
Si
Bending moment, shear or axial force in the connection associated to the development of probable strength (Spr) at the predetermined critical sections of the structure, based on the inelasticity controlling mechanism;
Maximum value of the i-mode contribution with its sign;
SA
15
NCh2369
SC
SO
Ti
T*
Zk
ap
ak
bf
Flange width
dd
d dmax
di
do
16
NCh2369
g
Gravity acceleration;
n
r
=
=
tw
Damping ratio;
Limit of the width to thickness ratio to enable complete plastification of the section.
4.
4.1.
4.1.1. The design provisions of this standard to be applied jointly with those of each materialspecific provisions are set forth for meeting the following objectives:
a
a.2
17
NCh2369
a.3
a.4
To assure the operability of seismic emergency exits during the seismic emergency.
b.2
b.3
4.1.2. In general terms, it is accepted that seismic analyses are based on the utilization of linear
models of the structures; however, the design of resistant elements shall comply with the
corresponding material-specific method, which may be by allowable stresses or ultimate
loads.
4.1.3. For fulfilling the objectives of 4.1.1, a.1) the structures shall have an ample reserve of
strength and/or be capable of absorbing large quantities of energy, beyond the elastic
range, prior to failure. To this end, the global structural system shall meet the following
requirements:
a) To ensure the ductile behavior of the resistant elements and their connections in order to prevent instability or fragile failure or else to ensure their elastic behavior.
b) Provide more than one earthquake-resistant line for the earthquake actions. Earthquake-resistant systems shall be redundant and hyperstatic. The only exception to
this provision is the explicit approval of the professional specialist defined under
3.1.12.
c) Use simple and clearly identifiable systems for the transmission of the earthquake
forces to the foundations, avoiding structures of high asymmetry and complexity.
To fulfill the objectives regarding the continuity of industrial operations and those of
foregoing paragraphs a.2) and a.3), all structures, equipment, and their anchorage systems shall be designed so that during severe over design earthquakes, they meet the following requirements in addition to those set forth under a), b) and c):
d) To limit the non-linear incursions, if they imply jeopardizing operational continuance
or rescue operations.
18
NCh2369
e) Damages must occur at visible and accessible sites.
f) All emergency and control equipment, whose operation shall be guaranteed during
emergencies, shall be duly certified in conformance with international standards and
the approval of the process engineers and professional specialist.
4.1.4. The achievement of ductility during the cyclic behavior of the earthquake-resistant structure in accordance with 4.1.3.a.) requires the meeting of the provisions set forth under
clauses 8, 9 and those in Appendix B.
4.1.5. The professional specialists and process engineers as defined in 3.1.12 and 3.1.6 shall
determine in each project the seismic design conditions of every structure, equipment and
their anchorages, so as to meet the objectives set forth under 4.1.1. In particular, for each
structure and equipment its seismic classification, methods of analysis, criteria, relevant
parameters and illustrative drawings shall be displayed. This data shall be set on record in
the project specifications. The seismic design of equipment may be made by the equipment manufacturers engineers, however the approval shall be done by the professional
specialist defined under 4.6.2.
4.1.6. Location
The location of an industry shall be determined considering the hazards of earthquakerelated phenomena, such as topographic amplifications, tsunamis, displacements generated by soil faults and soil sliding, liquefaction and densification. To this end, in addition
to complying with the provisions 4.2 of the Chilean standard NCh433.Of96, it is imperative that specialists undertake the corresponding geological, topographic, tsunami, and
geotechnical studies.
4.2.
b)
by way of response spectra of single-degree-of-freedom linear systems for the horizontal and vertical motion of the foundation soil, according to 5.4 and 5.5.
c)
19
NCh2369
d)
by real or synthetic accelerograms, duly formulated for the horizontal and vertical
movements of the foundation soil, as defined in 5.8.2.
The application of the alternatives a) and b) requires the meeting of the provisions on
seismic zonification of the national territory (Figure 5.1 and Table 5.1), stipulated under
4.1 of the Chilean standard NCh433.Of96 and under 4.2 of this latter standard on the effects of the foundation soil (Table 5.3) and the topography on the characteristics of the
seismic motion.
The utilization of alternatives c) and d) shall be consistent with the results of the studies
on seismic hazard, which consider the regional and local seismicity, geological, geotechnical and topographic conditions, as well as the direct and indirect consequences of structure and equipment failures. In any case, the provisions under 5.8.1 and 5.8.2 are mandatory.
Suspected near-field effects require a special analysis that takes them into account.
4.3.
4.3.1. Classification
For appropriate application of this standard, structures and equipment are classified according to their importance as follows:
Category C1. Critical structures and equipment based on any one of the following
reasons:
a)
b)
Dangerous, if their failure implies hazard of fire, explosion or air and water
poisoning.
c)
Category C2. Normal structures and equipment, which may be affected by normal
easily repairable failures, which do not cause protracted standstills or important
production losses or hazard to other category C1 structures.
Category C3. Minor or provisional structures and equipment, whose seismic failure
does not cause protracted standstills nor exposes to hazard other category C1 and
C2 structures.
20
NCh2369
The importance coefficient I for each category has the following values:
C1I = 1.20
C2I = 1.00
C3I = 0.80
4.4.
Loading combinations
The combination of earthquake loads with permanent loads and the various types of live
loads shall be done by using the following rules of superposition:
a)
*)
Loads SO and SA are combined with seism only in case of the verification of one of the two following conditions
for them:
i)
ii)
Action SA is derived from the seismic occurrence. In this case it shall be considered with
its sign.
It is normally expected that the load is acting when a seism starts and goes on without interruption, or does not stop during the seism due to its action
If the seism generates such an effect that necessarily interrupts the actions SO or SA at the
beginning of the basal accelerations, this action shall not be considered.
**)
The vertical earthquake only is considered in the cases detailed under 5.1.1; its magnitude shall be determined
according to 5.5.
21
NCh2369
ii)
i)
ii)
*)
Where
a
Factor that affects live load SC determined without considering any type of reduction. It should be equal to 1.0, except in case the process engineer authorizes a reduction of the previous value. Such reduction shall take into account
the probability of simultaneous occurrence of live load with the level of the
earthquake action determined by this standard. In any case, the value of a
will at least be equal to:
0.50
0.25
1.00
b = 1.1
22
NCh2369
b = 1.4
In the combinations i) detailed under a) and b) above, the + or signs of the vertical
earthquake shall be applied so that to obtain an effect that results in its addition to that of
the loads CP and SC. In the combinations ii) shown under a) and b), the signs + or of
the vertical earthquake shall be applied so that to obtain the inverse effect, namely, the reduction of the effect of the loads CP and SC.
The earthquake action is an eventual load that shall not be combined with other eventual
loads. Special locations in mountainous and high zones, where normally wind and snow
may occur in great magnitudes and duration, require special studies for determining the
values of these likely coincident loads with the design earthquake.
If deemed that several content levels of vessels, pipes or tanks ought to be considered, the
number of these combinations grows for covering the different situations.
4.6.
4.6.1. The original seismic design shall be carried out by professional specialists (see 3.1.12).
The only exception to this rule is equipment designed by foreign manufacturers.
4.6.2. The seismic design of all structures, equipment and anchorage, whichever their origin,
shall be approved by professional specialists different from their designers.
4.6.3. Drawings and calculation records shall at least contain the data set forth under 5.11 of
NCh433.Of96. The drawings and calculation records shall be signed by the original design engineer referred in 4.6.1 and the professional specialist referred in 4.6.2.
The only exception are structures and equipment of category C3, which only require the
presentation of the drawings signed by the original design engineer, including dimensions
and materials of the resistant elements, their weight, center of gravity and anchorage details.
4.6.4. The review and approval of the seismic design does not release original design engineers
from their total responsibility of fulfillment with the standards and specifications.
4.7.
5.
Seismic analysis
23
NCh2369
5.1.
General Provisions
24
NCh2369
Irrespective of the previous provision, service live loads may be reduced by multiplying
them by the following coefficients:
:
:
0.5
The determination of the effects of vertical earthquake components in the cases detailed
under 5.1.1 shall not consider any reduction of the vertical loads, except those detailed in
NCh1537 for live loads.
5.2.
Methods of analysis
5.2.1. General
Normally the seismic analyses shall be carried out using linear methods, for seismic actions as defined under 4.2.a) or 4.2.b) or 4.2.c).
In special cases, the analysis may be based on a non-linear response to a seismic action, as
defined in 4.2.d).
5.2.2. Linear methods
Three procedures may be used:
a) Static analyses or analysis of equivalent static forces, which can only be applied to
structures of up to 20 m height, provided their seismic response might be assimilated
to a single-degree-of-freedom system.
b) Modal spectral analysis, which is applicable to any type of structure.
c) Special methods for structures featuring elastic behavior, as detailed under 5.8.
5.2.3. Non-linear methods
Non-linear methods of analysis correspond to the special methods of analysis detailed under 5.8, which meet the conditions of the time-history analysis as defined in 5.8.2.
In conformance with the provisions 4.1 of this standard, non-linear incursion shall be
moderate so to guarantee the continuity of industrial operations.
The non-linear model must appropriately model the resistant capacity and the behavior of
the structural elements, backed up by specific laboratory test carried out with this purpose
or by normally accepted experimental studies.
25
NCh2369
The ductility demand shall not exceed the established limit in accordance with the allowable damage. In no element section shall surpass 2/3 of the available local ductility.
The calculated maximum non-linear displacements shall not be reduced and shall conform
to the limits established under 6.3.
The non-linear model may incorporate the dynamic soil-structure interaction, however its
influence shall be limited up to 75% of the results obtained from the same non-linear
model but with rigid base.
5.3.
26
NCh2369
CIP
(5-1)
Qo =
base shear;
C=
I =
P=
where
2.75 A0 T '
C=
gR T *
0,05
0.4
(5-2)
where
Ao =
T, n = Parameters relative to the foundation soil, to be determined according to Tables 5.3 and 5.4;
5.3.3.1.
T* =
27
NCh2369
5.3.3.2.
Seismic forces shall be distributed along height according to the following expression:
Fk =
Ak =
Ak Pk
Qo
1n A j Pj
(5-3)
Z
Z k 1
1 k
H
H
(5-4)
where
Fk
5.4.
Pk, Pj =
Ak
Number of levels;
Qo
Base shear;
Zk, Zk-1 =
The modal spectral analysis shall conform to the following design spectrum:
28
NCh2369
2.75 Ao I T '
Sa =
R T
0,05
0.4
(5-5)
where
However, the value of Sa shall not be higher than ICmax g, where Cmax shall be determined according to Table 5.7.
5.4.3. Number of modes
The analysis shall include a sufficient number of vibration modes for the sum of equivalent masses in each analysis direction is equal to or higher than 90% of the total mass.
5.4.4. Mode superposition
Earthquake loads and deformations shall be calculated by superposing the maximum modal values by means of the Complete Quadratic Superposition method according to the
following formulas:
S = i j C ij S i S j
Cij =
8 2 r 1.5
( 1 + r )( 1 r ) 2 + 4 2 r( 1 + r )
r=
(5-6)
(5-7)
Ti
Tj
where
Modal combination;
Si , Sj =
Ti , Tj =
29
NCh2369
Qmin = 0.25 I
Ao
P
g
(5-8)
for design purposes all deformations and internal forces shall be multiplied by the quotient Qmin/ Qo.
5.4.6. Accidental torsion
The effect of accidental torsion shall be considered only in levels with rigid diaphragm.
In such cases, this effect can be included considering the possible variations of selfweight and live load distribution. In absence of background data for doing so, the provision 6.3.4 of the Chilean standard NCh433.Of96 shall be used.
5.5.
5.5.1. The vertical earthquake action may be considered as static in the following way:
a) In the cases detailed under 5.1.1. a) and 5.1.1. b) an even vertical earthquake coefficient equal to Ao/g shall be applied on all elements. Therefore the vertical earthquake
force must be Fv = (Ao/g) IP, where P is the sum of permanent loads and live loads.
b) For the cases considered under 5.1.1. c) and 5.1.1. d) the seismic coefficient shall be
2/3Aog.
c) For the cases considered under 5.1.1.e) the procedure detailed under 5.9 shall be applied.
5.5.2. Alternatively a vertical dynamic analysis may be carried out with the acceleration spectrum of expression (5-5) for R = 3 and = 0.03. In this case, the spectral ordinate does
not require to be higher than IAo. Any damping ratio in excess of 0.03 shall be specifically
justified.
5.6.
This provision refers to equipment whose self fundamental period is smaller or equal to
0.06 s, including the effect of its connecting system to the foundation.
These equipments can be designed by static analysis with a horizontal seismic coefficient
of 0.7 Ao/g and a vertical earthquake coefficient of 0.5 Ao/g.
5.7.
30
NCh2369
For bridges or walkways that connect buildings, towers or other equipments, horizontal
supports shall be provided that enable the actual seismic displacement between structures
or equipment indicated in 6.2.
In no case the support length shall be smaller than S, where:
(5-9)
where
5.8.
H =
Special analyses
Toward this aim, a series of parameters can be determined, such as the maximum values
of acceleration, velocity and displacement of the soil, and with these to configure special spectra for the viscous damping levels of Table 5.5 or for determining others, which
enable similar formulations to that presented in NCh433.Of96.
5.8.1.2. For design purposes, the determination of the maximum acceleration, velocity and displacements values shall take into account historical or deterministic data, which can be
applied or related to the site under study. These can be supplemented with the probabilistic values obtained from seismic risk analyses, which consider a 100-year return period. The attenuation formulas used in risk analyses shall correspond to the anticipated
acceleration, velocity and displacement values, belonging to the characteristics of the
seismogenic sources considered in the study.
5.8.1.3. The base shear obtained from the spectrum defined by means of this special analysis,
shall not be smaller than 75%; nor require to be larger than 125% of those resulting
from the methods described under 5.4.
31
NCh2369
5.8.2. Time-history analysis
5.8.2.1. For the time-history analyses at least three actual records shall be used, which must be
representative of the considered seismogenic zones. This data must be escalated so that
the resulting spectrum from combining the spectra of each record by means of the
square root of the average of the squares of the escalated individual values, is not lower
than the design spectrum (5.8.1) at any point of the frequency range of interest.
5.8.2.2. Alternatively, a synthetic record may be used, whose spectrum yields larger values than
the one defined under 5.8.1, for the whole frequency range of interest.
5.8.2.3. When three different records are used, the design shall adopt the maximum values of the
parameter of interest, obtained from applying each one of them. Under this definition
the meaning of parameter of interest is the action, axial force, shear, bending moment or
the deformation obtained for each single element or for the global structure.
5.8.2.4. In linear time-history analyses, the resulting forces on the elements can be divided by
the R factors detailed in Table 5.6, provided the calculated displacements are compatible with the limits imposed in 6.3.
5.8.2.5. Time-history analyses shall consider at each time the movements in only one of the
main directions of the structure, simultaneously acting with the vertical excitation.
5.8.2.6. In time-history analyses, the damping shall be taken from Table 5.5 and the duration of
the record must be equal to or higher than 120 s, unless a seismic risk study justifies the
use of a different duration.
5.8.3. Minimum base shear
Qmin = 0.25I
Ao
P
g
(5-10)
All deformations and stresses shall be multiplied by the quotient Qmin/ Q0, except when a
non-linear time-history analysis has been made.
5.9.
32
NCh2369
its energy dissipation capacity or by modifying the distribution of forces with the purpose of enhancing its seismic response.
5.9.1.2. The structures lateral force resisting system and the isolation and/or energy dissipation
system shall be designed so to withstand the demand of deformation and strength produced by the seismic movement, as required under 5.9, 5.8.1 and 5.8.2 of this standard.
The mathematical model of the physical structure must represent the distribution of
masses and stiffness of the structure at a suitable level for calculating the significant
characteristics of the dynamic response. A three-dimensional model of the superstructure that considers the vertical displacements in the isolators shall be used. The cases
mentioned under 5.1.1.e) require a model that includes vertical degrees of freedom in
the dynamic analysis. The damping ratios to be used shall be those corresponding to the
isolation or energy dissipation systems.
5.9.1.3.
5.9.1.4. The analysis and verification of the isolation and energy dissipation systems shall be
made by modal spectral analysis or time-history response or frequency response analysis. The modal spectral analysis can only be applied if the device or isolator is susceptible of being modeled as an equivalent validated linear system.
5.9.1.5. Spectral analyses (see 5.4 and 5.8.1) or time-history response analysis (see 5.8.2) shall
consider one by one the horizontal components acting in plant in the most unfavorable
direction, simultaneously with the vertical component if necessary according to 5.1.1 e).
5.9.1.6. The constitutive force-deformation relationships considered in the analysis for the selected devices shall be duly founded and be backed by laboratory test.
5.9.1.7. The base shear limitations defined under 5.3.3.2 and 5.4.5 are not applicable in structures outfitted with isolation and/or energy dissipation systems. Likewise, in structures
with isolators, the maximum deformation restriction defined under 6.3 is applicable
only to the superstructure but not to the isolation interface.
5.9.2. Structures with seismic isolators
Seismic isolation systems shall be analyzed and designed in accordance with the provisions of NCh2745.
5.9.3. Structures with energy dissipators
5.9.3.1. Every structure with energy dissipation systems shall be designed using the spectra described under 5.4 or 5.8 and subsequently be verified by three records compatible with
the implicit demand level of the design spectrum, according to the methodology defined
under 5.8.2.
33
NCh2369
5.9.3.2. The seismic analysis of structures with energy dissipation systems shall be carried out
by using dynamic analysis procedures that appropriately consider the constitutive forcedeformation relation of the devices included in the structure.
5.9.3.3. The dissipation systems to be used in a structure shall have previously been subjected to
experimental studies, which prove a stable cyclic behavior for the device as well as possible variations of its properties with temperature.
5.10.
Qmin = 0.50 I
Ao
P
g
(5-11)
All deformations and internal forces must be multiplied by the quotient Qmin/ Q0 for the
purpose of the design.
This provision shall not be applied to the structures, which are explicitly quoted in Table
5.6.
34
NCh2369
Table 5.1 Seismic zonification by municipalities of the Fourth to the Ninth Region
Region
4th Region
5th Region
Zone 3
Zone 2
Zone 1
Andacollo
Combarbal
Coquimbo
Illapel
La Higuera
La Serena
Los Vilos
Mincha
Monte Patria
Ovalle
Paiguano
Punitaqui
Ro Hurtado
Salamanca
Vicua
Algarrobo
Cabildo
Calera
Cartagena
Casablanca
Catemu
Concn
El Quisco
El Tabo
Hijuelas
La Cruz
La Ligua
Limache
Llayllay
Nogales
Olmu
Panquehue
Papudo
Petorca
Puchuncav
Putaendo
Quillota
Quilpu
Quintero
Rinconada
San Antonio
San Felipe
Santa Mara
Santo Domingo
Valparaso
Villa Alemana
Via del Mar
Zapallar
Calle Larga
Los Andes
San Esteban
(continues)
35
NCh2369
Alhu
Curacav
El Monte
Lampa
Mara Pinto
Melipilla
San Pedro
Tiltil
Metropolitan
Region
Buin
Calera de Tango
Cerrillos
Cerro Navia
Colina
Conchal
El Bosque
Estacin Central
Huechuraba
Independencia
Isla de Maipo
La Cisterna
La Florida
La Granja
La Pintana
La Reina
Las Condes
Lo Barnechea
Lo Espejo
Lo Prado
Macul
Maip
uoa
Paine
Pedro Aguirre Cerda
Peaflor
Pealoln
Pirque
Providencia
Pudahuel
Puente Alto
Quilicura
Quinta Normal
Recoleta
Renca
San Bernardo
San Joaqun
San Jos de Maipo
San Miguel
San Ramn
Santiago
Talagante
Vitacura
(continues)
36
NCh2369
6th Region
7th Region
La Estrella
Las Cabras
Litueche
Lolol
Marchigue
Navidad
Palmilla
Peralillo
Paredones
Peumo
Pichidegua
Pichilemu
Pumanque
Santa Cruz
Cauquenes
Chanco
Constitucin
Curepto
Empedrado
Huala
Licantn
Maule
Pelluhue
Pencahue
San Javier
Talca
Vichuqun
Chpica
Chimbarongo
Codegua
Coinco
Coltauco
Doihue
Graneros
Machal
Malloa
Mostazal
Nancagua
Olivar
Placilla
Quinta de Tilcoco
Rancagua
Rengo
Requnoa
San Fernando
San Vicente de Tagua Tagua
Colbn
Curic
Linares
Longav
Molina
Parral
Pelarco
Rauco
Retiro
Ro Claro
Romeral
Sagrada Familia
San Clemente
Teno
Villa Alegre
Yerbas Buenas
(continues)
37
NCh2369
8th Region
9th Region
Arauco
Bulnes
Cabrero
Caete
Chilln
Cobquecura
Coelemu
Concepcin
Contulmo
Coronel
Curanilahue
Florida
Hualqui
Laja
Lebu
Los Alamos
Lota
Nacimiento
Negrete
Ninhue
Penco
Portezuelo
Quilln
Quirihue
Ranquil
San Carlos
San Nicols
San Rosendo
Santa Juana
Talcahuano
Tira
Tom
Treguaco
Yumbel
Angol
Carahue
Galvarino
Los Sauces
Lumaco
Nueva Imperial
Purn
Renaico
Saavedra
Teodoro Schmidt
Toltn
Traigun
Antuco
Coihueco
El Carmen
Los Angeles
Mulchn
iqun
Pemuco
Pinto
Quilaco
Quilleco
San Fabin
San Ignacio
Santa Brbara
Tucapel
Yungay
Collipulli
Cunco
Curacautn
Ercilla
Freire
Gorbea
Lautaro
Loncoche
Perquenco
Pitrufqun
Temuco
Victoria
Vilcn
Villarrica
Curarrehue
Lonquimay
Melipeuco
Pucn
(continues)
38
NCh2369
Table 5.2 Value of the maximum effective acceleration A0
Seismic Zone
A0
0.20 g
0.30 g
0.40 g
Table 5.3 Definition of the types of foundation soil. (Only to be used with Table 5.4)
Type of
soil
Description
Rock: Natural material, with in-situ shear wave propagation speed Vs equal or higher than
900 m/s, or else with uniaxial compression strength of intact samples (without fissures)
that is equal to or higher than 10Mpa and RQD equal to or higher than 50%.
a)
II
Soil that features Vs equal or higher than 400 m/s in the upper 10 m, increasing
with depth; or else
b) Dense gravel, with dry unit weight d equal to or higher than 20 kN/m3, or density
index ID(RD) (relative density) equal to or higher than 75%, or compacting index
over 95% of the modified Proctor value, or else:
c) Dense sand of ID(RD) over 75%, or standard penetration index N over 40 (normalized for an effective overburden pressure of 0.10 Mpa), or compacting index
over 95% of the Modified Proctor value, or else,
d) Hard cohesive soil, with undrained shear strength Su equal to or greater than 0.10
Pa (simple compression force qu equal to or greater than 0.20 Mpa) in samples
without fissures.
These conditions must be met in every case, without regard to the position of the phreatic
level and the minimum stratum thickness shall be 20 m. In case the thickness over the rock
is under 20m, the soil shall be classified as type I.
III
a) Permanently non-saturated sand of ID(DR) between 55 and 75%, or N over 20 (without normalizing at 010 Mpa effective overburden pressure); or else,
b) Non-saturated gravel or sand of compacting index below 95% of the Modified Proctor
Value; or else,
c) Cohesive soil with Su between 0.025 and 0.10 Mpa (qu between 0.05 and 0.20 Mpa)
without regard to the phreatic level; or else,
d) Saturated sand with N between 20 and 40 (normalized at 0.10 Mpa of effective overburden pressure).
Minimum stratum thickness: 10m. In case the stratum thickness over the rock or over type
II soil is under 10m, the soil shall be classified as type II.
Saturated cohesive soil with Su equal to or under 0.025 Mpa (qu equal or under 0.050
Mpa).
IV
Minimum stratum thickness: 10m. In case the stratum thickness over any of the soil types
I, II or III is lower than 10m, the soil shall be classified as type III.
39
NCh2369
T (s)
0.20
1.00
II
0.35
1.33
III
0.62
1.80
IV
1.35
1.80
Resistant system
Welded steel shell; stacks; silos; hoppers; pressure vessels; process towers; piping, etc.
0.02
Bolted or riveted steel shell;
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.05
Precast reinforced concrete structures with wet connections, connected to the non-structural
elements and incorporated into the structural model
0.05
Precast reinforced concrete structures with wet connections, non-connected to the nonstructural elements
Precast reinforced concrete structures with dry connections, non-connected and connected:
0.03
With bolted connections and connections by means of bars embedded in filling mortar
0.03
0.02
Other structures not included in above list or assimilable to the foregoing ones.
0.02
NOTES
1) When using an analysis that considers soil-structure interaction in which the values of the first
damping mode ratio are higher than those of this table, the increase of this ratio shall not be 50%
higher than the foregoing values. Values for all other modes shall be those listed in this table.
2) In case of uncertainty regarding the classification of a resistant system, apply provision 4.7.
40
NCh2369
Table 5.6 Maximum values of the response modification factor
Resistant system
1.
2.
3.
3.1
Steel structures
Buildings and structures of ductile steel frames with non-connected nonstructural elements
Buildings and structures of ductile steel frames with connected nonstructural elements that are incorporated into the structural model
3.2
3.3
3.4
5
3
5
5
3.6
3.7
4
3
3.8
3.9
3
3
3.5
4.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
Continued
41
5
3
5
5
3
NCh2369
4.6
4.7
3
3
5.
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
Welded connections3)
Precast inverted pendulum structures2) or with cantilever pillars
Earthquake-resistant isostatic structures
4
3
3
6.
6.1
6.2
3
4
6.3
7.
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
(continues)
42
4
3
3
NCh2369
8.
8.1
8.2
8.3
4
3
8.4
9.
5
4
NOTES
1. Except that a study proves that an R value other than 2 can be used. Structures
whose resistant system is explicitly included in this table are not assimilable to
this classification.
2. Over 50% of the mass above the upper level. Only one resistant element.
3. The value R = 4 is an upper limit. If the R value is lower for the equivalent reinforced concrete structural system, said lower value shall be used.
4. In case of uncertainty regarding the classification of a resistant system, provision
4.7 shall be applied.
= 0.02
= 0.03
= 0.05
0.79
0.68
0.55
0.60
0.49
0.42
0.40
0.34
0.28
0.32
0.27
0.22
0.26
0.23
0.18
NOTE These values are valid for seismic Zone 3. For application to zones 2 and 1,
these values shall be multiplied by 0.75 and 0.50, respectively.
43
NCh2369
44
NCh2369
Figure 5.1 b) Seismic zonification of Regions IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X and Metropolitan Region
45
NCh2369
46
NCh2369
Figure 5.2
6.
Seismic deformations
6.1
Calculation of deformations
When the analysis considers R-factor reduced earthquake loads, the deformations shall be
determined as follows:
d = d0 + R1 dd
(6-1)
where
d =
Seismic deformation
d0
R1
47
NCh2369
dd =
If anelastic methods are used, deformation d shall be obtained directly from the analysis.
6.2
6.2.1
With the purpose of preventing impacts between adjoining structures, their separation
shall be bigger than the highest of the following values:
S = ( R1i d di ) 2 + ( R1 j d dj ) 2 + d 0 i + d 0 j
(6-2)
(6-3)
ddi , ddj =
R1i , R1j =
hi , hj
6.2.2
The separation between the structure and rigid or fragile non-structural elements, whose
impact is required to be prevented, must be higher than the relative deformation between
the levels where the element is located and calculated with the corresponding d values,
but not less than 0.005 times of the element height.
6.3
Seismic deformation must be restricted to values that do not damage piping, electric systems or other elements, connected to the structure, which shall be protected.
The deformations calculated by the expression (6-1) shall not exceed the following values:
a) Precast concrete structures composed exclusively of an earthquake-resistant system
based on walls connected by dry connections.
48
NCh2369
dmax = 0.002 h
(6-4)
b) Structures of masonry walls with partitions that are rigidly fastened to the structure.
dmax = 0.003 h
(6-5)
dmax = 0.0075 h
(6-6)
dmax = 0.015 h
(6-7)
d) Other structures
where
The P-Delta effect shall be considered in case the seismic deformations exceed the following value
d = 0.015 h
7.
7.1.
Scope
(6-8)
Secondary elements are interior partitions and other appendages attached to the resistant
structure but that are not part of it. Equipment anchored on several levels of the structure
shall conform to provision 11.3.2.
7.2.
49
NCh2369
7.2.1. According to 5.3.1.5 , in case that the secondary element or equipment is included in the
modeling of the supporting structure, they shall be designed with the following horizontal
earthquake loads acting in any direction:
Fp =
1.2Q p R1
Rp
< Pp
(7-1)
where
Qp
R1
Rp
= Response modification factor of the secondary element or equipment according to Table 7.1;
7.2.2. If it is not necessary that the equipment has to be included in the modeling of the structure, except for its mass, the design of the secondary elements and equipment may be carried out with the following seismic forces:
a) When the acceleration ap is known at the support level of the element or equipment as
derived from the dynamic modal analysis of the building with R-factor reduced earthquake loads:
Fp =
3.0 a p K p
Rp
Pp < Pp
(7-2)
Where the coefficient Kp must be defined alternately by means of one of the two following procedures:
50
NCh2369
i)
Kp = 2.2
ii)
Kp = 0.5 +
(7.3)
0.5
(7.4)
(1 2 ) 2 + (0.3 ) 2
where
=1
where
Tp =
b) When no modal dynamic analysis of the building has been carried out:
Fp =
0.7a k K p
Rp
Pp < Pp
(7-5)
where
ak = acceleration at level k on which the secondary element or equipment is mounted, determined according
to 7.2.4.
7.2.3. When the characteristics of the building are unknown or the level on which the secondary
element or equipment will be mounted is not known, the design can be carried out with
the seismic force of the expression (7-5) using Kp = 2.2. and ak = 4 A0/g.
7.2.4. The acceleration at level k of the structure shall be determined by:
ak =
Z
A0
1 + 3 k
H
g
(7-6)
where
A0 = maximum effective acceleration as defined under
5.3.3 ;
Zk = height of level k above the base level;
H = total height of the building above the base level.
51
NCh2369
7.2.5. The seismic design force determined as per 7.2.1 or 7.2.2 shall not be lower than
0.8A0Pp/g.
7.3.
7.3.1. All secondary elements and equipment shall be duly anchored to the resistant structure by
means of bolts or other devices. The design shall be made with the forces established in
7.2 with the modifications detailed under 7.3.2 and 7.3.3.
7.3.2. When the anchorage to concrete elements includes anchor bolts on the surface (bolts with
a length-diameter ratio under 8), the seismic forces established under 7.2 shall be increased by 50%, or else, they shall be calculated with Rp = 1.5. The same provision shall
be applied to anchor bolts designed without the exposed length specified under 8.6.2.
7.3.3. When the anchoring system is built with non ductile materials, the seismic forces of 7.2
must be amplified by 3, or else be calculated with Rp = 1.0.
7.4.
Ducts, vessels and equipment containing high temperature gases and liquids, explosives
or toxic materials must be equipped with automatic shutoff systems which fulfill the provisions of 8.5.4 of NCh433.Of96.
Table 7.1 - Maximum values of the response modification factor of
secondary elements and equipment
Rp
8.
8.1.
Applicable standards
52
1.5
NCh2369
Until the issuance of the new edition of the Chilean Standard on detailing and construction of steel structures, the provisions of this standard shall be used complemented with
the following standards:
a) Load and Resistance Factor Design Specifications for Steel Buildings, 1999, American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC); or Specifications for Structural Steel
Buildings, Allowable Stress Design; 1989, AISC.
b) Specifications for the Design of Cold Formed Steel Structural Members, 1996, American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), covering the design of cold formed elements not
included in the AISC standards
c) In matters of seismic design, the AISC standards shall be supplemented by the provisions of Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, Part 1: Structural Steel
Buildings, 1999, AISC, or the provisions contained in clause 8 and Appendix B of this
standard.
8.2.
Materials
- Exhibe at tensile testing a pronounced natural ductility plateau with a yield point under
0.85 times of the ultimate strength and minimal fracture elongation of 20% in 50 mm test
specimen.
- ASTM A36; A242; A572 Gr. 42 and Gr. 50; A588 Gr. 50; A913 and A982 for structural
shapes; plate; bars; common bolts and anchor bolts).
- DIN 17 100, qualities St. 44.2; St. 44.3 and St. 52.3 for the same foregoing elements.
- NCh203 A 42-27ES; A 37-24ES; and NCh1159 A 52-34ES for the same foregoing elements.
- ASTM A500 Gr. B and C; A501 and A502 for structural tubes.
53
NCh2369
Braced frames
8.3.1. Braced frame configurations with diagonal elements that only resist tension are not allowed, except in case of light steel bays, which are governed by the provisions detailed
under 11.2.
8.3.2. Every resistant line shall include braces to take tension and braces to resist compression.
As a minimum the strength provided by the diagonal resisting tension in each direction of
the seismic action, shall be equivalent to 30% of the shear load of the resisting line at the
corresponding level.
8.3.3.
8.3.4. The diagonal elements in an X brace shall be connected at the point of intersection. This
point can be considered fixed in perpendicular direction to the plane of the braces for determining the members buckling length when one of the diagonal elements is continuous.
8.3.5. In industrial buildings with V-bracing or inverted V-bracing bracing, beams shall be continuous over the intersection point with the diagonal elements and they shall be designed
to resist the vertical loads assuming that they are not supported by the diagonal elements.
In addition, the diagonal elements shall be capable of supporting the self-weight loads and
the beam-induced live loads plus the seismic loads gotten from analysis, amplified by 1.5.
The upper and lower beam flanges shall be designed to resist a transversal load located at
the point of intersection with the diagonal elements, equal to 2% of the nominal strength
of the flange, that is, Fy bf t ,
where
Fy =
bf =
t =
54
NCh2369
8.3.6. The earthquake stress in the compressed diagonal elements shall be less or equal to 80%
of the resistant capacity defined in the steel design specification.
8.3.7. Seismic K-braces in which the diagonal elements intersect in an intermediate column
point are not allowed, except that at that point exists a strut that is part of the bracing system.
8.3.8. Provisions 8.3.3, 8.3.5, and 8.3.6 shall not be applied to bracings whose majorated earthquake stresses are lower than one third of the stresses of the combination that controls the
design.
8.4.
Rigid frames
8.4.1. Moment connections of earthquake-resistant rigid frames shall be totally rigid (TR). Partially rigid (PR) connections are not allowed. These connections shall be designed so that
to enable the development of the plastic hinge in the beam at a reasonable distance from
the column, which can be achieved by reinforcing the connection or weakening the beam
at the desired position of the plastic hinge.
8.4.2. Abrupt changes of the beam flange width are not allowed at the potential plastic hinge
development areas or near them, unless when dealing with a reduced beam section appropriately designed to induce the plastic hinge at that position.
8.4.3. The transversal sections of the columns and beam beams in rigid earthquake-resistant
frames shall qualify as compact, that is, their width to thickness ratios shall be under p
of Table 8.1.
8.4.4. In multi-story structures in which the total earthquake-resistance depends from rigid
frames designed with R1 greater or equal to 3, the sum of the bending strength capacities
of the columns that concur at a node shall be greater or equal to 1.2 times the sum of the
bending strength capacities of the connected beams.
55
NCh2369
8.4.6. The compression strength in columns with prevailing compression, disregarding the effect of the flexural moment, shall be greater than the axial loads obtained from the loading
combinations of 4.5, in which the earthquake loading condition of these loading combinations has been amplified by 2. Prevailing compression is defined as the situation in which
the axial stress obtained from the loading combinations of 4.5 is greater than 40% of the
design compression strength of the column.
8.4.7. The provision of 8.4.3 is not applicable to rigid frame elements in which the stresses from
majorated seismic loads are lower than one third of the stresses of the load combination
which controls the design.
8.5.
Connections
- The bolts of earthquake-resistant connections shall be exclusively high strength material, quality ASTM A325 or ASTM A490, or equivalent.
- Arc welding electrodes and fluxes shall be compliant to AWS A 5.1, A 5.5, A 5.17, A
5.18, A 5.20, A 5.23, and A 5.29 or equivalent specifications.
56
NCh2369
a) In buildings the distance between the column splice and the upper beam flange shall
be greater or equal than the lower value between 900 mm and half of the clear column
height.
b) The splices shall be sized for the design forces obtained from the load combinations of
4.5, in which the seismic load condition has been amplified by 2.
8.6.
Anchorages
8.6.1. The supports of structures and equipments, which transfer seismic loads to the foundations or other concrete element, shall be anchored by means of anchor bolts, anchor
plates, reinforcing bars or other appropriate means.
8.6.2. Anchor bolts subjected to tension according to the procedures of analysis detailed under
clauses 4, 5 and 7 shall have chair and the bolt shall be visible for allowing their inspection and repair and the thread shall have the sufficient length to enable retightening of the
nuts (see Appendix A, Figure A.1). The exposed length of the bolts shall not be less than
250 mm nor eight times their diameter, nor the thread length under the nut be less than 75
mm.
Exception is made to this requirement for anchor bolts with sufficient capacity to resist
loading combinations, in which the seismic loads are amplified by 0.5 R times, but not
less than 1.5 times, the value specified in clauses 5 and 7.
Important equipments, such as very high process vessels and in the structure of large suspended equipments, such as boilers and similar facilities, shall be outfitted with bolts of
high ductile deformation capacity, which are easily repairable and eventually could be replaced (see Appendix A, Figure A.7).
57
NCh2369
8.6.3. Base plates of columns and equipments in general shall be outfitted with shear keys or
seismic stoppers designed for transferring 100% of the base shear load (see Appendix A,
Figure A.1).
8.7.1. The following provisions are applicable to buildings and industrial facilities with floor or
roof steel bracing system, the function of which consists in transferring the seismic design
loads and/or to provide structural redundance for fulfilling the requirements of this standard for specific structures.
58
NCh2369
8.7.2. Diagonal configurations of floor and roof bracing systems, designed to only take tension
are not allowed, except in light steel bays, which are ruled by the provisions under 11.2.
8.7.3. For floor and roof bracing systems whose function is to transfer and/or share the seismic
loads that control the design, which are tributary of one or more frames (overhead traveling cranes, large suspended equipment, etc.) to other adjoining or remote rigid frames or
bracings, the design provisions detailed under 8.7.3.1 to 8.7.3.4, shall be applied.
8.7.3.1. Earthquake-resistant diagonal elements and struts working in compression shall have
width to thickness ratios under r according to Table 8.1 (see Figure 8.1). The slender-
The horizontal bracing system and its connections shall be designed according to the
provisions of 8.1 a) or b), as appropriate.
8.7.4.2.
The seismic loads to be considered for horizontal bracing systems shall not be lower
than the seismic contribution of an intermediate frame under eventual premature failure (see Figure 8.2).
8.7.5. The section height of the diagonal elements and struts of roof and floor bracing systems
shall be greater than or equal to 1/90 of the horizontal projection of the length of the element.
59
NCh2369
Table 8.1 Limits of the width to thickness ratio (for definitions see 3.2 and Figure 8.1)
Action that affects the structural member
Compression
Bending
Shapes
r
r
Double T, rolled, welded or hybrid, and rolled channels
Unstiffened flanges, rolled I and
b/t
0.56 E / F
0.83 E /( F 70)
y
C sections
***)
h/tw
0.64
Ek c / Fy
*)
1.49 E / Fy
5.7 E / Fy
If
h/tw
E/Fy
0.38
E/Fy
Pu / b Py 0.125
p
0.74 Pu
5.70 E / Fy 1
b Py
2.75Pu
3.76 E / Fy 1
P
b y
Pu / b Py 0.125
0.74 Pu
5.70 E / Fy 1
b Py
b/t
or
h/tw
c/t
b/t
0.56
b/t
1.40 E / Fy
b/t
b/t
1.49 E / Fy
0.64
0.38
3.76 E / Fy
If
h/tw
Ek c / Fy
P
1.12 E / Fy 2.33 u 1.45 E / Fy
b Py
1.49 E / Fy
*)
0.56
1.12 E / Fy
E / Fy
0.38
E/Fy
NA
E / Fy
1.40 E / Fy
NA
1.12 E / Fy
Tee shapes
0.56
0.64
Webs **)
d/tw
0.75
b/t
h/tw
Web
0.83 E /( Fy 70)
E / Fy
Ek c / Fy
*)
0.95
Ekc
( Fyf 115)
*)
0.38
E / Fy
0.38
E / Fy
NA
NA
1.40 E / Fy
1.40 E / Fy
1.12 E / Fy
1.40 E / Fy
5.70 E / Fy
3.76 E / Fy
E / Fy
(continues)
60
NCh2369
Table 8.1 Limits of the width to thickness ratio (conclusion)
Tubular Shapes
Welded rectangular with
flanges thicker than the web:
Flanges
b/t
1.49 E / Fy
1.49 E / Fy
1.12 E / Fy
Web
h/tw
1.49 E / Fy
5.70 E / Fy
3.76 E / Fy
Round shapes
D/t
b/t
0.11 E/Fy
0.31 E/Fy
Struts composed of rolled angle shapes
NA
0.45 E / F
0.071 E/Fy
NA
b/t
0.56
E / Fy
b/t
0.42
E / Fy
0.42
E / Fy
0.30
E / Fy
b/t
1.28
E / Fy
1.28
E / Fy
1.08
E / Fy
b/t
0.37
E / Fy
h/tw
1.28
E / Fy
3.13
E / Fy
2.38
E / Fy
c/t
0.42
E / Fy
0.42
E / Fy
0.3
E / Fy
NA
NA
E / Fy
3.13
NA
If
Pu / b Py < 0.15
If
P
2.38 E / Fy 1 2.33 u
b Py
Pu / b Py 0.15
E / Fy
3.13
NA
1.5
E / Fy
NOTES
NA = not applicable
E,Fy; in MPa
*) kc =
4
h / tw
E = 200,000 MPa
but within the range 0.35 kc 0.763
61
NCh2369
62
NCh2369
Figure 8.2
9.
9.1.
9.1.1. Until the official issuance of the new edition of the Chilean standard NCh430 that replaces standards NCh429.Of57 and NCh430.Of61, the provisions of the ACI Code 31899 shall be used, in those that are not in contradiction with the provisions of this standard.
For the effects of the application of Chapter 21 of said ACI Code (paragraph 21.2.1), it
shall be considered that the complete national territory with its three seismic zones corresponds to high seismic risk.
9.1.2. The structural elements that are part of ductile frames designed to resist earthquake loads
shall be designed and detailed as special moment resistant frames, according to the provisions of ACI 318-99, chapter 21, sections 21.1 to 21.5.
9.1.3. Frames which belong to structures whose earthquake loads have been calculated with an
R1 factor under or equal to 2 can be designed according to the provisions for intermediate
moment resistant frames, as per ACI 318-99, chapter 21, section 21.10. The same provision can be applied to frames with seismic deformations lower or equal to 50% of the limiting value established under 6.3.
9.1.4. In the case of structures with a combination of reinforced concrete walls and frames
where the set of walls resists at each level and in each direction of analysis a percentage
of the total shear load of the level that is greater or equal to 75%, the design of the frames
can be carried out according the requirements of section 21.10 of ACI 318-99, chapter 21,
63
NCh2369
provided the frame is responsible for resisting less than 10% of the total shear loads from
each and every level.
9.1.5. Frames in which the seismic loads do not control the design and whose failure does not
affect the stability of the structure, can be designed according to the provisions of ACI
318-99, chapter 21, section 21.9.
9.1.6. It is not required that the design of walls fulfill the provisions of ACI 318-99, chapter 21,
section 21.6.6.3.
9.1.7. In multi-story structures in which the earthquake resistance depends from rigid frames
designed with R1 values that are higher than or equal to 3, it is not necessary to fulfill the
requirement of strong column weak beam (ACI 318-99, 21.4.2) when one of the following conditions is met:
a) the seismic shear load of the groups of columns for which the foregoing provision is
not accomplished, is lower than 25% of the seismic shear load of the corresponding
story;
b) if the analysis and design of the structure is carried out with seismic forces equal to
two times the values detailed under clause 5 of this standard.
c) If it can be proved by means of a non-linear analysis (see 5.2.3) that the structure is
stable when facing the deformation demand of an earthquake.
9.2.
The earthquake-resistant system in this case comprises reinforced concrete, casted-inplace walls or frames, confined or reinforced masonry walls or braced or non-braced steel
frames. Precast elements are used to resist exclusively the vertical loads.
The precast elements and connections that do not belong to the earthquake-resistant system shall be capable of accepting the seismic deformation, d, of the structure and resist
the vertical (gravitational) loads for that deformation.
The frames belonging to the precast gravitational system can be designed in accordance
with the provisions of the ACI Code 318-99, section 21.9.
64
NCh2369
The joints between the precast gravitational system and the earthquake-resistant system
shall be considered as part of this latter system and shall be designed according to paragraphs b), c) or d).
b) Precast systems with wet connections.
These structures consist of precast elements joined by means of connections that have
been proved by non-linear cyclic analysis and tests to have strength and ductility greater
than or equal to the monolithic connections of structures designed according to the ACI
Code 318-99. These tests shall meet the requirements of the document ACI ITG/T1.1-99
Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames based on Structural Testing; they can be performed by local or foreign laboratories, provided that their results are certified by a laboratory approved by the Chilean Ministry of Housing and Urbanism.
d) Precast systems with dry connections
These structures consist of precast elements joined by means of dry connections that have
been designed as strong connections that assure that an eventual non-linear behavior in
case of earthquakes of higher demands than those considered in this standard produce an
incursion within the non-linear response range in sections far from the strong connection.
These precast systems accept an earthquake-resistant system exclusively composed of
walls connected with dry connections or one exclusively composed of frames connected
by dry connections.
Structures with an earthquake-resistant system exclusively composed of a precast system
with dry connections are allowed to be built only up to 4 levels and a maximum height of
18 m, measured from the base level.
9.2.1.2. Structures that include precast gravitational systems shall be designed considering the
earthquake loads that correspond to the earthquake-resistant system being used.
Precast systems with wet connections and ductile connections shall be designed using
the earthquake loads corresponding to a monolithic reinforced concrete structure.
9.2.1.3. 9.2.1.3 Precast systems with dry connections shall be designed with the values listed in
Table 5.6 for cast-in-place reinforced concrete structures. However, the value of R shall
not be greater than 4 and the damping ratio not greater than 0.03 for bolted connections
65
NCh2369
and connections by means of bars embedded in filling mortar, nor greater than 0.02 for
welded connections.
The compliance with the behavior requirements detailed in 9.2.1.1 c) demands that dry
connections must meet the provisions 9.2.1.4 and 9.2.1.5.
9.2.1.4. In precast systems with dry connections, the quotient between the nominal strength of
the connection and that of the element connected at the point of connection (Se) shall be
greater than or equal to 1.4.
9.2.1.5. Dry connections of precast frame structures shall be capable of developing under bending, shear or axial load or combination of these actions acting on the connection, a
probable strength Spr determined by using a value = 1, not under 125% of the yield
strength of the connection and they shall be able of developing a displacement under Spr
that shall not be less than 4 times the yield displacement. The anchorage of the connection in the precast element at any side of the connection shall be designed to develop a
stress equal to 1.3 times Spr. In addition, the connection shall meet the requirements of
confinement if fc is greater than 0.7 fc.
The above established behavior shall be guaranteed by means of tests that include the
cyclic feature of the action. The tested samples shall be representative of the proposed
system. The tests shall be compliant to the ASTM specifications on instrumentation and
performance of cyclic testing.
9.2.1.6. The steel and electrodes used in welded connections shall meet the provisions established under 8.2.2 and 8.5.1.
9.2.1.7. If the base shear Q0 is lower than the following value
Qmin = 0.40 I
A0
P
g
(9.1)
all deformations and stresses shall be multiplied by the quotient Qmin/Q0 for design purposes.
The foregoing provision shall not be applied to precast concrete structures classified under 9.2.1.1 as gravitational systems or precast systems with wet connections and ductile
connections, which shall meet the provision on minimum base shear detailed under
5.4.5.
9.2.2. Special provisions
9.2.2.1. The design of precast elements and connections shall include the load conditions and
deformation occurring from the initial fabrication until the completion of the structure,
including removal of forms, storage, transport and installation.
66
NCh2369
9.2.2.2. The design of precast elements and their connections shall include the effect of fabrication tolerances.
9.2.2.3. In addition to the requirements on drawings and specifications of this standard, the following data shall be included in shop drawings:
a) Details of reinforcement, inserts and hoisting devices those are required for resisting the
temporary loads of handling, storage, transport and installation.
b) Concrete strength at the ages or established construction stages.
9.2.2.4. Not allowed is the use of connections that are based exclusively on the friction caused
by gravitational loads.
9.2.2.5. A slab composed of precast elements shall be considered to be a rigid diaphragm, provided that an overslab that meets the provisions detailed under the ACI Code 318-99,
sections 21.7.2; 21.7.3; 21.7.4; and 21.7.5 is considered in the design.
9.3.
9.3.1. This paragraph establishes the special requirements of industrial bays, with or without
overhead traveling cranes, built with cast in place or precast concrete columns and structured with built in columns at the base and beams connected to the columns with hinged
connections. The earthquake-resistance and deformation capacity of these systems come
exclusively from the columns.
9.3.2. The bays shall have a continuous roof bracing system connected to the upper level of the
columns.
If the bracings are provided by steel shapes, these shall meet the provisions of 8.7.
If the bracing is provided by a different system, this shall feature a stiffness that is equivalent to that of a steel system with braces composed of shapes designed to only work in
tension and meet 8.1.a) or 8.1.b). Such other system cannot be composed of elements designed to only work in tension.
9.3.3.
The seismic design of structures, which fulfill 9.3.1 and 9.3.2 shall be carried out with R
= 3 and with a damping ratio of 0.02.
67
(9-2)
NCh2369
In those cases where the base load Qo is lower than the foregoing values, the stresses and
deformations shall be multiplied by Qmin / Q0 for the purpose of the design.
9.3.5. The design of the elements shall be made according to the provisions of 9.1 for cast-inplace concrete elements and according to 9.2 for precast concrete elements.
The base of the columns shall be designed with a confinement length that is longer than or
equal to twice the height of the transverse column section according to ACI 318-99, section 21.3.3.
9.3.6. The maximum column slenderness shall meet
l = k L / r 100
(9-3)
The seismic loads to be considered for horizontal bracing systems shall not be smaller
than the seismic contribution of an intermediate frame in eventual premature failure (see
Figure 8.2).
9.3.11.
The calculus of deformations shall satisfy 6.1 and the requirements of 6.2 and 6.3 shall
be fulfilled.
Maximum horizontal deformations shall be calculated by modifying the formula 6-1 as
follows
D = d0 + S0 R1 dd
(9-4)
NCh2369
9.3.13.
The design of the columns and foundations resting on soils type III shall consider the
rotation of the foundations for the calculus of stresses as well as for deformations. To
this end, a geotechnical study shall be carried out to get the maximum and minimum
values of the modulus of subgrade reaction. The stress calculation shall be made with
the maximum modulus of subgrade reaction and deformations with the minimum.
It shall not be accepted to support foundations on soil type IV.
10.
10.1.
10.1.1.
The foundations shall reflect the hypotheses of the corresponding model of analysis as
much in their geometry as in their stiffness and mass characteristics.
Massive foundations can be considered to lack elastic properties. However, isolated
foundation systems connected by foundation beams and foundation slabs, shall be assumed to have inertial as well as elastic properties.
The dimensions of foundations assumed to be infinitely rigid and resting on flexible
soil, shall be consistent with this hypothesis.
10.1.2.
The dimensioning by strength of the foundation shall be carried out for all the load
combinations considered in the design of the rest of the structure.
10.1.3.
Verification of soil induced stresses its deformation and the stability of the foundations
shall be carried out for all the applicable non-factored load combinations.
10.1.4.
The appropriate behavior of the foundations shall be verified regarding the action of
static as well as of seismic loads, verifying that the contact pressure between soil and
foundation is such that the induced deformations are acceptable for the structure.
10.2.
10.2.1.
Shallow foundations
Unless the geotechnical report imposes higher restraints, at least 80% of the area below
each isolated foundation or foundation slab shall be under compression.
This restraint is not applicable in cases where anchorages between foundation and soil
are used.
10.2.2.
The calculation of seismic actions induced at the base of buried foundations under
ground level may disregard the inertial forces developed by the masses of the structure
located under the level of the natural soil as well as the grounds seismic thrusts, pro-
69
NCh2369
vided the foundation has been built against natural soil or the earth fills between the
foundation and the natural soil has been duly compacted and controlled.
10.2.3.
11.
Specific structures
11.1.
Industrial buildings
11.1.1.
These provisions shall be applied to industrial buildings with or without traveling crane
supporting beams.
11.1.2.
Buildings with transverse frames shall be outfitted with a continuous roof bracing system. In the presence of roof trusses the continuous bracing shall be placed on the plane
of the lower chord of the truss. Exception to this provision is made for buildings without
traveling cranes, where permanent loads result only from self-weight (see Appendix A,
Figure A.2).
11.1.3.
The seismic analysis of buildings with overhead traveling cranes shall be made considering the magnitude and height of the most probable suspended loads during the design
earthquake. Therefore the occurrence frequency of the design earthquake and the operating conditions of the cranes shall be considered.
11.1.4.
In case of more than one crane in a bay or in parallel bays, the design shall consider a
seismic load combination with all the cranes unloaded and parked at the most unfavorable position.
11.1.5.
The lateral connection between crane girders and columns shall be flexible in the vertical direction. Also to be considered are the safety devices that prevent the falling of the
bogie in case the wheels run out of the rails (see Appendix A, Figure A.3).
11.1.6.
In buildings with rigid frames, the bracings of the endwalls whose purpose is the lateral
support of the columns designed for wind loads, shall not provide greater lateral stiffness than that provided by the interior frames, unless they are considered in the structural model as specified in 5.3.1.1 (see Appendix A, Figure A.4).
11.1.7.
In case the building is flexible and has non-structural rigid masonry walls or walls of
analogous materials, the design shall include connections capable to support the walls
laterally and allow independent longitudinal displacement between the walls and the
structure (see Appendix A, Figure A.5).
11.2.
70
NCh2369
11.2.1.
The subsequent provisions shall be applied to steel buildings that fulfill the following
conditions:
- They are structured as a succession of parallel frames composed of columns and beams,
of truss type, open shapes of solid web, or closed shapes.
- The inner clearance of the lateral columns shall be smaller than or equal to 15 m. This
requirement can be obviated if in the loading combinations indicated in 4.5, the seismic
forces resulting from the analysis are amplified by 2.
- The transverse distance between adjoining column axes shall be shorter than or equal to
30 m. This requirement can be obviated if in the loading combinations indicated in 4.5,
the seismic forces resulting from the analysis are amplified by 2.
- The equipment supported by the structure shall have a weight per frame under or equal
to 100 kN.
- The horizontal seismic load the garret transmits to each column of the structure shall not
be higher than 15 kN.
- They have no storage racks, which are seismically supported by the structure.
11.2.2.
The determination of the seismic design forces shall consider the damping ratios of Table 5.5 and a response modification factor under or equal to 4.
11.2.3.
The design of light steel bays shall fulfill the provisions of clause 8, excepting 8.3.3,
8.3.5, 8.3.6, 8.4.1, 8.4.2, 8.4.3, 8.4.4, 8.4.5, 8.4.7, 8.5.2, 8.5.4 and 8.5.9, the application
of which is not mandatory.
11.2.4.
The diagonal elements of the bracing system designed only to resist tension, shall be
inspection able and be outfitted with adequate devices for initial tensing and subsequent
adjustment.
71
NCh2369
11.2.5.
The diagonals of the seismic roof bracing designed exclusively to resist tensile forces,
shall have a capacity that at least corresponds to the sum of the initial prestress and the
seismic forces resultant from the analysis, amplified by 1.5.
11.2.6.
The roof brace system designed to transmit horizontal forces to the transversal end
frames, shall be continuous and be composed of diagonal and strut elements that work
under tension as well as compression.
11.2.7.
The vertical bracing system shall correspond to diagonal elements and struts, designed
to work under tension as well as compression and their slenderness shall be smaller than
or equal to 1.5 E / Fy . This requirement is not mandatory in bays with spans between columns of less than or equal to 12 m and shoulder height of less than or equal to
6 m. In such cases it is allowed to use elements that work only in tension, provided they
are compliant to the requirements of 11.2.4 and 11.2.5.
11.2.8.
The seismic design of the connections of the vertical and roof bracing systems shall be
carried out considering the load combinations detailed under 4.5 with the seismic forces
resultant from the analysis amplified by 1.5.
11.2.9.
11.2.10. The separation between structures shall fulfill the provisions of 6.2.1.
11.2.11. In light steel bays that do not consider the system described under 11.2.6 neither include
overhead traveling cranes or equipment mentioned under 11.2.1, the roof panel can be
considered to be a rigid diaphragm capable of transferring the seismic forces to the lateral bracing systems, provided its capacity to transfer this shear load is certified by
means of static tests with cyclic load. The safety factor with regard to the experimental
value shall be that of AISI 1996, clause 2.
The design of the diaphragm shall satisfy the ICBO ES document AC43, Acceptance
Criteria for Steel Decks of July 1996 and the AISI standard as supplement. The load
combinations detailed in 4.5 shall be used with the seismic forces resultant from the
analysis, amplified by 2.
The tests shall be analyzed by competent, independent internationally renowned organizations and be performed on samples, which consider the deck panel action and its fastening system to the support structure (sidings), the same as these will be implemented
on site.
The company which certifies its panels also shall concern with the quality and correct
installation of the fastening system.
72
NCh2369
11.3.
11.3.1.
To the extent to be possible, floors shall be rigid seismic diaphragms, which may be of
concrete or metal with horizontal bracings or solid floor plates. Diaphragms shall include devices for connection with the structure, which shall be capable of transferring
the seismic forces.
11.3.2.
Rigid ducts or equipments vertically extended over more than one story shall be outfitted with bearing and connecting systems that prevent their participation in the strength
or stiffness of the building (see Appendix A, Figure A.6). If this is not possible, the
equipment shall be included in the model of the earthquake-resistant system.
11.4.
11.4.1.
Boilers, metallurgical furnaces, and other large suspended equipments from the structure, shall be attached to it by means of connectors that transmit the seismic forces without restraining the free vertical or horizontal thermal expansion (see Appendix A, Figure A.7).
11.4.2.
For suspended electric equipments that cannot be attached horizontally to the structure,
such as the electrode cages of electrostatic precipitators, special isolators with ample
strength capacity shall be specified as well as devices for the interruption of electric
power supply in case of severe earthquakes. If exists the possibility of an impact of the
electrode cage with the equipment shell or with the collector plates, the system shall be
outfitted with impact plates.
11.5.
11.5.1.
Large piping and duct systems shall be equipped with expansion joints and supports that
warrant seismic stability and simultaneously allow thermal expansion.
11.5.2.
If piping and ducts are light in relation to the buildings or structures they connect, the
seismic analysis can be carried out introducing the deformations dd according 6.1 for the
buildings or structures, at the points of connection. In the opposite case, an analysis of
the structure-duct combination as one unit shall be carried out.
11.6.
11.6.1.
Large mobile equipments such as bulk material loaders and unloaders, stackers, traveling cranes and similar equipments shall be dynamically analysed, considering the magnitude and the most unfavorable positions of the loads. The analysis can be carried out
assuming that the wheels are pivoted on rails or floor, but if significant uplifting is involved, counterbalance devices for safety shall be included. (see Appendix A, Figure
A.8).
73
NCh2369
11.6.2.
The system shall be self-centering to reduce the possibilities of impacts between the rail
flanges and wheels (see Appendix A, Figure A.9).
11.6.3.
Special attention shall be laid on the effects of the seismic eccentricity that occur in
these systems.
11.7.
11.7.1.
11.7.2.
Process vessels shall be designed with special attention to the joint of the supports to the
shell when this does not extend down to the foundation.
11.7.3.
Elevated stacks shall be designed by the dynamic method. When the duct for the gases
is not self-supporting, the interaction between the duct and the external steel or concrete
structure shall be considered. The inner concrete coating, where existent, shall be considered for the purpose of calculating stiffness but not of strength.
11.7.4.
The shell shall be designed to prevent local buckling considering the effect of lateral
and vertical design forces as well as the fabrication tolerances. For this purpose, the
shell compression stress shall not exceed the lowest of the following value:
Fa = 135 Fy e/D Fa 0.8 Fy
(11-1)
where
11.8.
Fa
Fy
yield stress;
thickness;
shell diameter
11.8.1.
The following provisions shall be applied to cylindrical or rectangular tanks, which are
symmetric with respect to a vertical axis and where their bottoms are directly supported
on the ground. The tanks shall be made of steel or reinforced concrete and may contain
any kind of liquid.
11.8.2.
In every matter that do not contradict the provisions of these clauses, and in consonance
with the tank material and content, the use of the following standards or design recommendations for the design of tanks are allowed: API 650 Welded Steel Tanks for Oil
Storage; API 620 Design and Construction of Large Welded Low-Pressure Storage
74
NCh2369
Tanks; Seismic Design of Storage Tanks issued by the New Zealand National Society
for Earthquake Engineering together with the New Zealand Standard 4203; AWWA-D
100 Standard for Welded Steel Tanks for Water Storage, AWWA-D 110 Wire and
Strand Wound Circular, Prestressed Concrete Water Tanks, AWWA-D 115 Circular
Prestressed Concrete Water Tanks with Circumferential Tendons, ACI 350.3 Practice
for the Seismic Design of Liquid Containing Structures, or other internationally
recognized standards, specifically accepted by the professional specialist who approves
the project, in accordance with 4.4.2. In particular, the design base shear shall be calculated according to clause 5, and shall not be less than the value that results from the application of provisions 11.8.6, 11.8.7 and 11.8.8. The design of each tank shall be based
on only one of the previous standards avoiding to mix provisions from different standards. Noteworthy is the fact that New Zealand standards consider load and resistance
factors, while all others of the aforementioned standards consider allowable stresses.
11.8.3.
The model of analysis shall consider both the horizontal impulsive response, in which
one portion of the content vibrates in unison with the structure, and the horizontal convective response associated to wave action on the free surface.
11.8.4.
For the purpose of calculating the participating periods and masses associated to the
convective and impulsive modes of response, it can be assumed that the tank is infinitely rigid.
11.8.5.
The determination of the hydrodynamic masses and periods associated to the impulsive
and convective response modes shall be carried out in accordance to the specifications
in the design standards detailed under 11.8.2, as appropriate.
11.8.6.
For the design of steel tanks a maximum value of R = 4 of the response modification
factor shall be used.
11.8.7.
For the design of reinforced concrete tanks a maximum value R = 3 of the response
modification factor shall be used. This value is applied to the normal construction of
continuous connection between wall and base. If this condition is not fulfilled, lower
values for R shall be used which shall be justified by the project engineer.
11.8.8.
The spectral design acceleration or seismic coefficient of the impulsive mode for the
horizontal seismic action shall be equal to the maximum seismic coefficient from Table
5.7 for = 0.02 in case of steel tanks, and = 0.03 in case of concrete tanks. The spectral design acceleration or seismic coefficient of the convective mode for the horizontal
seismic action shall be determined according to expression (5-2) considering a damping
ratio equal to = 0.005; this value in no case shall be less than 0.10 A0/g.
11.8.9.
In those cases where the design standard used considers the vertical action, the vertical
seismic coefficient shall be equal to 2/3 of the impulsive mode coefficient.
11.8.10. The design shall consider the coefficients of importance according to 4.3.2.
75
NCh2369
11.8.11. If appropriate, modal stresses and deformations shall be superposed according to the
specified in the design standard in use.
11.8.12. In those cases where load and resistance factors design methods are used, the loads shall
be combined according to 4.5.
11.8.13. In anchored metal tanks of flat bottom, the design of the anchor bolts shall be carried
out such that 1/3 of the number of the bolts are capable of taking the total seismic shear
load, unless the anchorage system includes a device that warrants that 100% of the bolts
are active to take the seismic shear load. The design of anchor bolts shall consider the
simultaneous occurrence of tensile and shear stresses.
11.8.14. In non-anchored tanks the bottom shall be designed with a minimum conical slope of
1%.
11.8.15. To reduce the risk of spillages and for preventing failures in the roof and upper part of
the tank wall, the design shall include a freeboard between the free surface of the liquid
and the structure of the roof, higher than or equal to the convective-mode wave height.
Smaller freeboards can be used, provided that the sub pressure caused by the contact between the liquid and the roof were considered. This pressure shall be used for the design
of the roof and its connections with the rest of the structure.
11.8.16. In order to prevent secondary damages caused by the movement of the liquid, the following conditions shall be fulfilled:
a)
in metal tanks, the roof plates shall not be welded to the purlins;
b)
the normal diameter of the air vents on the roof shall be duplicated;
c)
in metal tanks, the vertical displacement of the columns at the bottom shall be allowed.
11.8.17. The piping systems and their connection points to the tank shall be designed with ample
deformation capability in order to prevent the possible damages caused by eventual uplifts of the tank bottom or tank displacements.
11.9.
11.9.1.
The longitudinal earthquake component shall be resisted by rims and thrust rollers installed at both sides of the rim and placed on only one support for allowing longitudinal
expansions (see Appendix A, Figure A.11).
To ease the operation, a free space shall be left between the thrust rollers and the rims.
The design shall consider the possibility of longitudinal impact when this space closes.
76
NCh2369
It will be allowed to design the rollers and their mechanisms as elements substitutable,
which may fail in case of earthquake. If so, the manufacturer shall promptly provide
detailed repair instructions to prevent damages to the kiln in the cooling process.
11.9.2.
The transversal earthquake component shall be resisted by rims and lateral rollers installed on various supports. The width of the rollers shall be greater than the width of
the rims to prevent their falling due to thrust roller failure.
The design of foundry furnaces and similar process equipment, composed of steel or
concrete structures combined with refractory brickwork, which are operated at high
temperatures, shall be carried out trying to find configurations where the structural
earthquake-resistance is provided by the conventional materials and only exceptionally by the brickwork. (An example is presented in Appendix A, Figure A.12, where
the suspended roof shall be preferred).
11.10.2.
11.10.3.
The design shall consider the conditions of cold furnace and start up, as well as its
normal operation.
The provisions of this standard are applicable to the structural aspects of electrical
equipment located in the interior of industrial plants. They are not applicable to
power generating and transmission equipment nor to main substations, all of which
shall be ruled by special specifications.
11.11.2.
11.11.3.
The electric isolators shall be designed against break with minimum safety factor of
3.0 for the loading combinations that include earthquake action.
Every equipment and structure independently of their size and importance shall be capable of resisting the seismic loads specified in this standard and shall be appropriately
anchored (see Appendix A, Figure A.13).
11.13. Wood structures
77
NCh2369
Wood structures shall be designed in compliance to NCh1198. Connections shall feature ductile behavior and failure strength in bending or tension shall be lower than that
of the connected elements. The R value to be used for the design of cooling towers shall
be equal to 4.
78
NCh2369
Appendix A
(Normative)
Typical details
79
NCh2369
80
NCh2369
81
NCh2369
Figure A.7 Typical details of large suspended equipment, seismic connectors and anchor bolts
82
NCh2369
Figure A.7 Typical details of large suspended equipment, seismic connectors and anchor bolts (conclusion)
83
NCh2369
84
NCh2369
85
NCh2369
86
NCh2369
87
NCh2369
88
NCh2369
Appendix B
(Normative)
Design of beam to column connections in rigid steel frames
B.1.
General considerations
The use of the AISC provisions for the design of rigid frames contained in the Seismic
Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings 1999, is subjected to the following restrictions:
a) This standard shall be applied to the design of non-braced rigid frames without the
additional obligatory requirements of the AISC Seismic Provisions. In particular,
not applicable are the AISC Seismic Provisions for special frames (paragraph 9)
and intermediate frames (paragraph 10), and no laboratory testing of the connections between beams and columns is required.
b) The provisions in paragraph 8.3 of this standard shall be applied to frames with
concentric bracing without the additional obligatory requirements of the AISC
Seismic Provisions.
c) Frames with eccentric bracing shall be designed according to AISC Seismic Provisions, paragraph 15.
B.2.
Ru =
a)
M u1 M u 2
+
Vu
d m1 d m 2
(B-1)
where
Mu1 and Mu2 :
Beam bending moments at the connection due to the loading combinations detailed under 4.5 b), where the seismic
loading condition of these combinations has been amplified by 2, but not greater than the respective plastic bending moments.
89
NCh2369
Vu :
b) If Pu < 0.75 Py
3bcf t cf2
Rv = 0.60 Fy dc tp 1 +
d b d c t p
c) If Pu
>
(B-2)
0.75 Py
3bcf t cf2
Rv = 0.60 Fy dc tp 1 +
d b d c t p
1.9 1.2 Pu
Py
(B-3)
where
bcf
tcf
dc
tp
db
Fy
yield stress;
Pu
Py
90
NCh2369
91
NCh2369
92
NCh2369
B.2.3. The panel zone shall always be provided with continuity stiffeners (Figure B.2) designed
to resist the forces transferred by the flanges of the beam to the column.
B.2.4. The web doubler plates shall be connected to the column flange by means of fillet or
complete-penetration groove welds, calculated to resist the design shear forces. When attached to the column web, they shall be welded along their upper and lower edges. When
placed apart, they shall be installed symmetrically and welded to the continuity stiffeners.
B.2.5. The thickness of the column web or of each attached plate shall satisfy the following expression:
t > (d2 + w2 ) / 90
(B-4)
where
=
=
=
t
d2
w2
B.2.6. Field-welded connections between the beam flanges and the column shall be completepenetration groove welds, welded in horizontal position on backing plates with nondestructive inspection, X-ray or ultrasonic testing.
B.2.7. The backing plates and start or end weld coupons shall be removed. After their removal,
the metal shall be cleaned and the root of the weld shall be reinforced with fillet welds.
B.3.
B.3.1. The continuity stiffeners shall be designed for a force Ru Rn, where
Ru
= 0.90;
Rn
6.25 t 2f Fyf ;
Where:
Fyf
tf
93
NCh2369
B.3.2. If the width of the beam flange is less than 0.15 b, where b is the total width of the column flange, it is not required to carry out this verification.
B.3.3. If the concentrated force Ru is applied at a distance shorter than 10 tf from the column
end, the aforementioned Rn strength value shall be reduced to one-half.
B.3.4. The continuity stiffeners shall be welded to the web and to the loaded flange to enable the
1)
transmission of the load portion taken by the stiffeners to the web .
B.4.
Ru
= Compression force perpendicular to the column flange (see Figure B.3) coming from moment Mu defined in B.2.2;
= 1.0 ;
Rn
a)
If the concentrated force Ru is applied at a distance from the column end that is bigger
than its height d :
Rn = (5k + N) Fywtw
b)
(B-5)
If the concentrated force Ru is applied at a distance from the column end that is smaller
than or equal to d :
Rn = (2.5k + N) Fywtw
(B-6)
where
Fyw
N
k
1)
The sentence load portion taken by the stiffeners is the difference between the applied load and the resistance
indicated in this paragraph and the following ones for the web of the columns. Therefore, for instance, if Ru is the
factored transmitted load by the beam flange to the column and Rn,min , is the lowest resistance mentioned in
clauses B.3 to B.6, the column stiffener shall be designed for Rn,st = Ru Rn,min ; and the required minimum stiffener area is Ast = Rn,st / Fy,st , with = 0.9. B.7 contains additional instructions for the design of stiffeners. This
note is also applicable to B.3, B.5 and B.6
94
NCh2369
tw
B.4.2. The continuity stiffeners shall be welded to the loaded flange in order to transmit the part
of the load that corresponds to the stiffener, and its web weld shall be sized for the
transference of the proportion of the load taken by the stiffeners (see B.7).
B.4.3. Alternatively, if web doubler plates are required, provision B.8 rules.
Figure B.3
B.5.
B.5.1. Continuity stiffeners and eventually web doubler plates designed for a strength of Ru
Rn , shall be installed, where
Ru
0.75;
Rn
95
NCh2369
a)
If the concentrated compression is applied at a distance that is bigger than or equal to d/2
from the column end:
N t
Rn = 0.80 t w2 1 + 3
d t f
b)
1.5
EFyw (t f / t w )
(B-7)
If the concentrated compression is applied at a distance that is smaller than d/2 from the
column end:
For N/d < 0.2
N t
Rn = 0.40 t 1 + 3
d t f
2
w
1.5
EFyw (t f / t w )
(B-8)
tw
4
N
Rn = 0.40 t 1 +
0.2 EFyw (t f / t w )
d
t f
2
w
(B-9)
The following definitions are applicable to expressions (B.7), (B.8) and (B.9):
N
tf
tw
B.5.2. The continuity stiffeners shall be welded to the loaded flange and their weld to the web
shall be calculated for the load proportion taken by the stiffeners (see B.7 and B.8).
B.6.
B.6.1. This section deals with a pair of opposite concentrated forces applied to both flanges in
the same section (see Figure B.4). Continuity stiffeners and doubler plates shall be installed across the whole web height, sized for a force of Ru Rn , where:
96
NCh2369
Ru
0.90
Rn =
2.4t w3 EFyw
h
(B-10)
Figure B.4
B.6.2. If the pair of concentrated forces to be resisted is applied at a distance that is smaller than
d/2 from the elements end, Rn shall be reduced by 50%. The transverse stiffeners shall be
welded to the loaded flanges and to the web, so to transmit the load proportion taken by
the stiffeners. The weld of the stiffeners to the web shall be capable of transmitting the
load taken by these (see B.7). Alternatively, when web doubler plates are required, rules
the provision under B.8.
B.7.
B.7.1. Diagonal or transversal stiffeners shall also meet the following requirements:
a) The width of each stiffener plus half the thickness of the column web shall not be less
than one third of the column web width nor than the width of the moment connecting
plate that transfer the concentrated force.
97
NCh2369
b) The thickness of the stiffener shall not be smaller than the thickness of the flange nor than
the thickness of the moment connection plate that transfers the concentrated load; nor than
its width multiplied by Fy / 250 (Fy in Mpa).
B.7.2. The continuity stiffeners, which resist the compression forces applied to the column
flange, shall be verified as axially loaded columns with an effective buckling length of
0.75 h and a section composed of: 2 stiffeners and a web fraction with width of 25 tw for
inner stiffeners and 12 tw for end stiffeners.
B.8.
98
NCh2369
Appendix C
(Informative)
Commentaries
Scope
C.1.1 The special seismic standard for industrial structures that supplements the standard on
buildings was prepared in consideration of the following reasons:
a) Industrial structures seldom have the characteristics of buildings: Discrete repartition and
more or less uniform mass in height, rigid horizontal diaphragms at different levels, relatively low eccentricity and around 5% damping.
b) The basic design philosophy is different by reason of the great importance of industry for
the countries economy. Therefore, it is necessary that the basic objectives of the Building
Standard (NCh433, paragraph 5.1) be supplemented by minimum business interruption
risks and means for expeditious inspections and repair.
c) A very important part of industrial structures are the earthquake-resistant components of
mostly large and complex process facilities, which necessarily are designed abroad by
foreign manufacturers. This introduces a factor that does not exist in the case of buildings.
d) The industrial countries, such as the United States of North America, Russia, New Zealand and Japan, are gradually acknowledging the necessity of special standards for industrial structures. In Chile, even that no standards have been established for these matters, a
quite uniform and efficient seismic design practice has been developed since 1940. This
standard is mainly based on Chilean practice (1, 2)1, on the Chilean building standard (3),
on the standards of the North American Uniform Building Code UBC (4) and the Structural Engineers Association of California SEAOC (5), as well as on the New Zealands
recommendations for petrochemical plants (6).
C.1.2 This standard shall be applied to industrial structures and the equipment in industrial
premises, the objective of which is the production of goods or the compliance with established purposes. In consequence, it is not applicable to elements other than the foregoing
ones, most of them external, which are covered by special standards.
C.1.3 Notwithstanding the differences between this standard and NCh433, the design of building and that of industrial structures share a series of elements regarding the seismological
Note: References are indicated between parentheses and are included at the end of the commentary.
99
NCh2369
aspects, their relation with other standards, methods of analysis and similar ones. There
from arises the necessary complementaritys of these two standards.
C.2
References
The national as well as foreign cited sources are listed under References.
C.3
C.3.1 Terminology
This standard supplements the terminology of NCh433, paragraph 3.1 with the terms used
for industrial structures and equipment. The division of loads into permanent and diverse
live load types is based on Chilean established design practices.
The definition professional specialist in charge of the earthquake-resistant design of industrial equipment and his/her approvals is based on the established legal conditions and
practice of project engineering in Chile for local as well as international projects.
Also included are the definitions of process engineers as used by the standard.
C.3.2 Symbology
The symbols listed in this standard supplements that of NCh433, paragraph 3.2 with other
specific symbols.
C.4
The principles enunciated in this standard with minimal variations are those practiced
in Chile and in New Zealand and articulated in the North American standards (3 to 7),
while supplementing NCh433, paragraph 5.1.1.
C.4.1.2
The Chilean practice as well as New Zealands practice, North American standards
and NCh433, paragraph 5.2, specify the elastic analysis as basic method.
C.4.1.3
Chilean and New Zealands practices and the aforementioned North American standards also share the conditions of ductility and redundancy.
C.4.1.5
It is imperative that process engineers and the professional specialist come to agreements as regards to general criteria and earthquake-resistant design details. These
agreements ought to be left on record on special forms and included in the specifications, like the following example:
100
NCh2369
Structure
Title
Category
Coefficient
I *)
C1
1.2
C2
1.0
C1
1.2
C3
0.8
% Reference
Analysis
Dynamic
Dynamic
Special
Static
AC.502
515
BL.016
017
BL-023
028
Notes
Design according to
ASCE-75 Steel
chimney liners
AC-21001
211
C.4.1.6
The provisions of this standard are based on earthquake-resistant designs that have a 10%
probability of excedence during a 50-year return period. The criterion of the 10% excedence in the course of a minimum 50-year return period has been adopted by the North
American UBC and the SEOAC standards as well as by the Chilean NCh433. The 50-year
return period corresponds to the service life of most buildings and industries. However,
there are certain industries, such as those of the petrochemical and the mining sector,
which apply a shorter service life on account of technological obsolescence or depletion
of raw material sources. New Zealands standards for the petrochemical industry are
based on a 15% excedence and 25 years of service life (6). According to these standards
(6, Table 2.3 and Figure C.2.1.1), the shortening of the 50-year return period to 30 years
with 10% excedence only reduces seismic stresses by 12%. This justifies the maintenance of the 50-year return period in Chilean standards for industry.
a) The maximum effective seismic acceleration Ao was originally defined by the U.S. Applied Technology Council ATC (7) and adopted by SEAOC and the UBS (4 and 5) as
Ao = Sa / 2.5
Where Sa is the mean acceleration of the elastic response spectrum with 5% damping between periods 0.1s and 0.5s.
b) The provisions were taken from the UBC and the SEAOC (4 and 5).
101
NCh2369
c) The totality of the Chilean coast, classified as seismic zone 3 of high intensity, is subject
to the hazards of tsunamis, which historically have reached degree 3 of the Imamura scale
and in some cases a maximum degree 4 (8). The areas that feature the highest risk are Tarapac, Atacama, Concepcin and Valdivia. The tsunami hazard also depends on the seismic aspects of the coastal maritime and topographic conditions.
C.4.3 Classification of structures and equipment according to their importance
C.4.3.1 The classification is based on the Chilean practice, which in the main corresponds to
New Zealands recommendations (6).
C.4.3.2 Importance coefficients are based on the Chilean practice and on UBC and SEAOC
experience as well as and New Zealands recommendations, as follows:
Categories
Critical
C1
Chilean industrial practice 1.2 to 1.3
NCh433 Buildings
1.20
UBC and SEAOC
1.25
New Zealand
1.30
Normal
C2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Secondary
C3
1.00
0.60
1.00
0.83
bridges;
American Society for Mechanical Engineers ASME for boilers and pressure vessels;
American National Standards Institute ANSI/ASME for piping;
American Petroleum Institute API for tanks for oil storage;
American Society for Testing Materials ASTM for materials;
American Welding Society AWS for welding
German DIN, British BS, French NF, Japanese JIS and Euro standards.
The criteria concerning load combinations are those of the American National Standard
Association and of the American Society of Civil Engineers ANSI-ASCE (9), adopted by
102
NCh2369
the American Institute of Steel Construction (10, 11) and the American Concrete Institute
(12).
This paragraph does not include wind loads or snow live loads, for which shall be considered the design specifications that correspond to each case and the abovementioned standards. In the main, wind loads can be considered a substitutive although not coincident
with seismic loads in the respective formulas. Snow can be considered to be a live load
that can be normal or eventual.
The source of factor b = 1.4 for concrete structures or equipment is the load factor established by NCh433.Of1996 and the load and resistance factors of the ACI Code 318-99; in
consequence, factor b = 1.4 shall be considered jointly with the resistance-reduction factors of that ACI 318 edition.
The 2002 ACI 318 edition adopts ASCE load factors, considering a factor 1.0 for the
seismic action amplification, and modifies the resistance reduction factors of previous
ACI 318 editions with the purpose of maintaining equivalent safety levels in the design.
The load and resistance factors used until de 1999 edition are reproduced in the ACI 31802 as alternative procedure.
C.4.6 Project and revision of the seismic design
C.4.6.1 Under Chilean law all construction project designs shall be made by legally certified
professionals to work in the country. In addition, it is mandatory that structural designs
of any kind of buildings be reviewed. These provisions have been supplemented by:
structural engineering;
Allowing equipment designs made by foreign equipment manufacturers based on
practical reasons. However, in case of important equipment, such as large boilers,
high process vessels and similar facilities, it is recommended that the foreign manufacturer be assisted by professional specialists registered in Chile.
C.4.6.2 The approval of the design by other professionals is a prerequisite put in force in most
of the worlds Codes and Regulations (13). The standard recommends the approval of
peers who shall be professional specialists registered in Chile. This recommendation is
particularly important for equipment designed abroad.
C.4.6.3 The submission of drawings and calculation sheets under NCh433, paragraph 5.11, has
been simplified for a great number of minor equipment and structures destined to industries in which the seismic factor is not decisive.
C.5
Seismic analysis
103
NCh2369
C.5.1 General provisions
C.5.1.1 Direction of the earthquake action
The use of horizontal actions in two perpendicular directions has been sanctioned for
practice in all seismic standards.
The criteria for application of the vertical component of the earthquake are based on the
Chilean practice (1), New Zealands recommendations (6), NCh433, paragraph 5.8.2 and
U.S. standards (3, 4). Vertical accelerations of 2/3 parts of the horizontals are accepted by
the aforementioned standards, based on actual earthquake records.
C.5.1.3 Seismic mass or the structural model
The design earthquake is an event that occurs once or twice in the life of the industry and
it lasts at the most a couple of minutes. The prerequisite for the selection of the probable
live load at that moment is a clear understanding of the industrys operating requirements.
It is recommended that the seismic load be jointly determined with the operators or process engineers and the professional specialist and that the result be placed on drawings and
calculation sheets.
C.5.2 Methods of analysis
C.5.2.1 General
Most seismic standards, including NCh433, the North American and New Zealands standards are based on elastic response spectra for accelerations with 5% damping, a representative value for buildings. However, industrial structures feature a 2% damping value,
which is based on Chilean practice. The 2% damping was recommended by J.A. Blume
and other researchers as a result of extended studies at the Huachipato Steel Plant in the
wake of the severe May 1960 earthquakes in southern Chile (14).
C.5.2.2 Linear methods
a) Static analysis: Static analysis is a theoretically approached method that is applicable to
structural mathematical models with uniformly distributed discrete masses in height and
similar stiffness between different levels. The standard NCh433 paragraph 6.2.1, the UBC
and SEAOC include criteria for determining application limits of static analysis of buildings, which are not applicable to industrial structures. New Zealands recommendations
limit static analysis to structures in which mass and stiffness at no matter which level have
lower than 30% differences with respect to its adjacent levels.
This method should not be applied to over 20 m high buildings or structures, industrial
steel buildings of more than 6 levels, over 18 m high concrete buildings, or structures with
irregular configurations in plan area or elevation.
104
NCh2369
b) Spectral or dynamic modal analysis: The dynamic analysis is applied to structures with
valid basic hypotheses of linear response, ductile behavior and viscous damping.
Dynamic analysis can be applied where static analysis is not applicable, particular in such
cases as buildings and structures that support heavy hanging equipment, steel or concrete
chimneys with refractory coating, and process vessels of over 20 m high or that feature a
ratio height to smaller transverse dimension of over 5.
C.5.2.3 Non-linear methods
Non-linear methods are required only for structures with important variations respect to
the basic hypotheses. Typical examples are large rolling equipment subject to up-lift or
impact on supports, industrial masonry work that does not admit tensions, structures with
base isolation and similar situations. The corresponding provisions are based on the UBC
(4) and the IBC (15).
In industrial project specifications, it is advisable that the professional specialists determine the method of analysis of each structure or equipment (see C.4.1.5).
C.5.3 Static elastic analysis
C.5.3.1 Mathematical model of the structure
C.5.3.1.3. In three-dimensional models each node has 6 degrees-of-freedom, 3 translational and
3 rotational degrees. The allocation of discrete masses to nodes is in part automatically appointed by the analysis programs, which provide each node with one half of
the weight that corresponds to the self-weight of the node elements or elements, and in
part is decided by the design engineer, who assigns to some or all model nodes the
masses that are representative of the external loads or structure supported equipment.
In such a way, the degree-of-freedom of each node is associated to the inertial characteristics of its allotted mass. The rotational inertia effects on the structural member
masses are normally ignored at the moment of establishing their inertial characteristics, considering only their spatial 3-D translational inertia. On the contrary, the global
rotation inertia effect of all masses is well represented by the spatial distribution of the
total mass into a great number of nodes. When the assignation of masses to a node
made by the design engineer shall represent the dynamic behavior of a body that features not ignorable rotational inertia, that mass shall be provided with the rotational
inertia of the body it represents. Or else, that body can be represented by the sum of
masses with purely translational characteristics, distributed and linked to each other in
such a way that the joint response of all reflects the inertial characteristics of the represented body. All three-dimensional analysis programs demand that the design engineer specifies the translational inertia as well as rotational properties of the masses
considered in the model.
105
NCh2369
C.5.3.1.4. In structures with rigid diaphragms, the masses that correspond to all nodes linked by
the rigid diaphragm as well as their inertia characteristics can be condensed at the
mass center and be represented by the resulting single mass that features translational
inertia in both directions of the diaphragm plane and rotary inertia on the same plane,
which corresponds to the distribution of the masses within the diaphragm. This condensation greatly simplified the analysis. However, the diaphragm normally has not
much stiffness in perpendicular direction in relation to its plane. Therefore, the vertical earthquake effects are not well represented in the foregoing simplification. In this
case, the vertical earthquake component shall be treated as a case of independent load.
Or else, the normal distribution of masses can be applied to three-dimensional analyses, and use the option of link and interdependency of the degree-of-freedom of the
diaphragm nodes (constraint) for displacements within the diaphragm plane. This option provides reduction in computational terms as well as the possibility of a simultaneous analysis of the horizontal and vertical earthquake.
C.5.3.1.5. When structure supported equipment has stiffness or inertia characteristics that local
or globally can determine the structures response, the model shall include the representative equipment elements, which are linked to the structure the same as the
equipment, having the same stiffness and mass characteristics of the actual equipment.
This is the case, for instance, of large diameter ducts tied to the structure at different
levels; or large vessels that are supported on several frames and/or levels of the structure. Likewise, when the response of a certain structure-supported equipment must be
obtained, although its translational and rotary inertia is low in relation to the level
where it is located, the model shall include elements and masses that are representative of the equipment and be linked to the structure the same as the actual equipment.
C.5.3.2 Horizontal base shear
The formula (5-1) coincides with the formula (6-1) of the NCh433 and has the same UBC
and SEAOC format.
C.5.3.3 Horizontal seismic coefficient
The Chilean seismic design practice of industries is based on the empiric elastic response
spectrum proposed by J.A. Blume in 1963 (14), after analyzing 16 structures of the
Huachipato Steel Plant. Most structures were steel stacks, inverted pendulum tanks and
process vessels. Seven of these structures were not damaged by the May 1960 earthquake, while the other nine only resulted with simple damages, such as elongation of anchor bolts and buckling of shells. Figure C-1 shows the Blume spectrum, which according
to the author is reliable in the period range of 0.8 to 1.1 s and has a damping of approximately 1% to 2%.
Based on Blumes studies and long professional experience, Prof. Rodrigo Flores Alvarez
proposed the following seismic coefficients (16):
106
NCh2369
C=
C=
0.15
forT 1s
T
0.15
T
forT 1s
Cmax = 0.30
Cmin = 0.10.
The standard NCh433 (3) is based on the analysis of an appreciable number of subductive
earthquakes recorded in Japan and in the 3 March 1985 Chilean earthquake (17). The
elastic response spectrum proposed by the NCh433 standard with 5% damping is as follows:
Q = CIP
A T'
C = 2.75 0
gR T
A T'
C = 2.75 0
gR T
0.05
0.4
Figure C.1 shows the foregoing spectra of the Huachipato Plant, zone 3 and soil type II of
NCh433 Table 4.2. It also shows Blumes empiric spectrum as well as those of UBC 93
and SEAOC 92.
Worth mentioning is that the coincidence is satisfactory.
107
NCh2369
Figure C.1 Huachipato response spectra (Zone 3 A0 = 0.4 g Soil type II I = 1.0)
108
NCh2369
Soil parameters
The soil classification and parameters of Table 5.3 and 5.4 are taken from NCh433, Tables 4.2 and 6.3.
Values of damping and R coefficient
The determination of the values of damping and the structural modification factor R of
Tables 5.5 and 5.6 are a result of the study of many actual cases of structures on every soil
type and seismic zone, subject to the severe earthquakes of 1960 and 1985, as well as of
comparative analyses with the UBC and SEAOC standards.
C.5.3.3.1. and C.5.3.3.2 Limit values of the seismic coefficient
The following table shows the maximum and minimum values of the seismic coefficient
of several standards and the Chilean practice for I= 1.
Maximum
0.35 g
0.24 g
0.367 g
0.275 g
0.34 g
Minimum
0.10 g
0.067 g
0.20 g
0.075 g
0.10 g
Reference
3
4, 5
4, 5
The values of the Chilean practice are within the range of the other standards and have
been proved to be effective in 5 severe earthquakes of magnitudes between 7.5 and 9.5, in
the years 1960 to 1985.
C.5.3.5 Height distribution
109
NCh2369
Figure C.2 Huachipato Plant design spectra (Zone 3 A0 = 0.4 g Soil type II I = 1.0)
110
NCh2369
C.5.4
See C.5.3.3.
C.5.4.3 Number of modes
The condition of taking enough modes for achieving 90% of the total mass is part of
NCh433, UBC, SEAOC standards and the New Zealands recommendations (3, 4, 5, 6).
C.5.4.4 Mode superposition
The complete quadratic superposition and proposed formulas are from NCh433, paragraph 6.3.5.2.
C.5.4.5 Minimum base shear
See C.5.3.3.2.
C.5.4.6 Torsion in plan
The necessity of considering the vertical earthquake action is justified under C.5.1.1. The
provisions shall be applied to the structural provisions described in 5.1.1.a), b), c), d) and
e), where the seismic forces have special importance and have caused damage due to
earthquakes.
C.5.6
This mostly very stiff equipment prevails in industry. This provision is based on SEAC
and UBC 1997 recommendations.
C.5.8 Special analyses
Special analyses are applied in cases where the basic hypotheses of the linear analyses described under 5.2.2 are not fulfilled.
The standard differentiates two basic procedures, spectral and time-history analysis.
111
NCh2369
The spectral analysis is based on the preparation of spectra that consider the non-linearity
of the structural response, taking in to account the maximum values of the seismic factors
instead of site and type of soil.
The time-history analysis is based on a step-by-step analysis of the structural response for
at least 3 historical records or one synthetic record. The provisions are based on local
studies that consider the provisions of New Zealand and North American UBC standards
as well as SEAOC standards.
C.5.9 Structures with seismic isolation or energy dissipation devices
The provisions for seismic isolators are based on UBC 97 with minor modifications. For
further details see reference 19.
C.6
Seismic deformations
The formula (6-1) initially proposed in ATC-3 has been adopted by UBC, SEAOC and
the New Zealands recommendations (4, 5, 6, 7), which is an acknowledgement of the
fact that the reduction of stresses from an elastic response spectrum to that of a design
spectrum cannot be applied to deformations.
C.6.2 The separation s = d1 +d2 contained in New Zealands recommendations (6) is conservative, because d1 +d2 almost never occurs at the same moment. The Chilean practice often
uses the expression s = d 12 + d 22 , that is more probable but lacks a safety margin. Chile
has been applying the values 0.004 h and 30 mm.
C.6.3 Chilean practice in general has not limited horizontal seismic deformations in industrial
structures, except where they could damage elements joined to the structure, such as piping and ducts. The UBC and SEAOC standards contain the limitation 0.04 h/R; observed
deformations in the May 1960 earthquake were of h/75 = 0.0133 in industrial buildings
with overhead traveling cranes (6), similar to the proposed formula.
C.6.4 The P-Delta effect very seldom has importance in industrial structures but could be important in rigid frame structures.
C.7
C.7.1 Scope
Clause 8 of NCh433, based on ATC-3 (7) mainly deals with the secondary elements of
buildings. The basic theory has been maintained in this clause, although with some minor
industry-oriented modifications.
112
NCh2369
Formulas (7-1) to (7-6) and Table 7.1 correspond to an improved version of NCh433,
clause 8.
C.7.3 Forces for anchoring design
One of the most frequent causes of seismic failure in minor equipment is the lack or insufficiency of anchorages as a result of the application of normal practice in non-seismic
zones.
Anchor bolts meet the need of most equipment that does not require special devices, such
as shear plates.
C.7.4 Automatic shutoff systems
The special provisions are based on the Chilean practice and on North American recommendations, which were prepared after the Loma Prieta and Northridge seisms and afterwards introduced in their standards.
The Chilean experience has been proved in six severe seisms of Richter Kamamori magnitudes 7.5 to 9.5, between 1960 and 1985.
The North American Standards were summarized in the AISC earthquake-resistance design standards and recommendations (10, 11 and 20). Recommendations from AISI (21)
for slender elements, not included in AISC, were also considered.
C.8.2 Materials
The purpose of steel and welding specifications in North American Standards (4, 5, 15)
has the purpose of preventing fragile fracture failures. They are based on numerous studies prepared after the Loma Prieta and Northridge earthquakes. Some fragile fractures in
high strength, low toughness steels have been observed in bridges under non-seismic conditions.
C.8.3 Braced frames
113
NCh2369
The recommendations on bracing are based on the Chilean experience, with some modifications from AISC. The maximum seismic deformation of our standards has been generally considered to reach approximately half of the value used in the United States, which
reduces the risks of failure due to local or anelastic buckling.
Provision 8.3.2 on the use of braces that take compression and tension, has been taken
from Euro standards; its purpose is to increase redundancy [see 4.1.3.b)].
Provision 8.3.4 on the point of the intersection of the braces, not considered in North
American standards, has been permanently successful in Chile; it was based originally on
Austrian standards.
The Chilean practice derived from the North American guide (22) habitually uses as
minimum height 1/90 of the horizontal projection of the sections of the braces in order to
prevent deformations due to self-weight, which reduces the buckling strength.
C.8.4 Rigid frames
Structures exclusively based on rigid frames as habitually used in the United States, presented many failures in beam-column connections during the Loma Prieta and Northridge
earthquakes, giving rise to ample research and, as a result, the strict design requirements
included in the main seismic standards (5, 15). These were summarized in AISC recommendations (20). In Chile there were no failures in these joints, thanks to the lesser seismic deformation and the avoidance of rolled heavy-duty jumbo sections that feature a
dangerous metallography. This is the reason why the proposed provisions are based on
our experiences and very few AISC recommendations.
Provision 8.4.1 specifies totally rigid TR beam-column moment joints. Partially rigid or
PR joints allowed in the United States are not accepted based on two reasons: Lack of local experience and the requirement of tests and studies, which are not available in Chile.
Paragraph 8.4.3 and Table 8.1 that specify width to thickness ratios were taken from
AISC seismic design recommendations (10, 11 and 20), with some corrections based on
local practice. 8.4.5 and Appendix B include provisions for the design of the column
panel zone in rigid connections to beams, based on AISC non-seismic recommendations
(10) with very few modifications from the earthquake-resistance design recommendations
(20). No panel zone failures have been observed in Chile. 8.4.6 recommends provisions
for column bases, detailed in 8.6.2, with a view to post-seism inspection and repair of anchor bolts.
C.8.5 Connections
All provisions are based on local practice and AISC recommendations. The standard under 8.5.2 and 8.5.3 specifies the design of seismic connections for a resistance that is
114
NCh2369
higher than or equal to that of the connected elements, while 8.5.8 includes the requirements for executing reliable field-welded connections.
Column joints (see 8.5.9) shall be designed with a 5 kN horizontal force sited in the free
upper end during the mounting.
C.8.6 Anchorages
Foundation anchorages usually present failures during earthquakes that are minor in general. They might be called seismic fuses.
The provisions offered in 8.6.2 have the purpose of expediting post-earthquake inspections and repairs. They are based on the local experience that primarily considers the failures observed in 1960, which could be prevented in later seisms.
The use of shear plates or seismic bumpers mentioned under 8.5.3 to 8.6.7, like in the
foregoing case, is based on the failures that were detected in 1960 and the successful behavior of the abovementioned recommendations afterwards.
Paragraph 8.6.5 excludes the friction between base plate and foundation mainly due to the
setting contraction of the leveling mortar. Friction can be taken into account in special
cases, mainly large equipment with many anchorages, where non-shrinkable mortar and
prestressed bolts shall be specified and usually only prestressing is considered for friction.
The recommendation of 8.6.8 to prevent anchorage failures ascribable to the concrete is a
habitual protective measure against the difficulty of obtaining reliable concrete and the
uncertainties of the resistance calculation theories. In general, it is recommended that the
design of the Prestressed Concrete Institute PCI (23) be applied.
C.9
In the main, standards are based on the local seismic experience from 1960 to 1985, the
provisions of NCh433 and the recommendations of the American Concrete Institute ACI318-99, chapter 21 (12), and also the post-Loma Prieta and Northridge research works,
published by the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (24), chiefly regarding precasted elements where local experience is limited.
NCh2369, 9.1.6 specifies that it is not necessary that seismic walls be designed according
to the complex ACI provisions. Our designs in which these are not applied have been
successful since the 1960 earthquakes, fact that is acknowledged at international level.
115
NCh2369
The provisions of 9.1.7 for rigid frames that eliminate ACI requirements are justified because of the lesser seismic deformation of this standard and from several numerical studies.
There is a commented translation of the ACI 318 code done by a Structural Design Commission for reinforced concrete and masonry and by the Chilean Institute of Cement and
Concrete. This has been proposed by its authors as Chilean Code for the Design of Reinforced Concrete Design.
C.9.2 Precasted concrete structures
The provisions consider the limited Chilean experience regarding the seismic behavior of
precasted elements, the requirements of ACI 318-02 and IBC 2000, as well as the proposals contained in NEHRP 2000, centered on the prevention of these systems failures observed in the Loma Prieto, Northridge and Kobe seisms (12 and 24).
C.9.2.1.1 a) and b) accept the design of gravitational systems with wet seismic joints as an
equivalent of traditional concrete, because the precasted structure must be of better quality
than field-prepared concrete and joints are equivalent.
Added special restrictions of structures with dry connections are based on the limited local experience with this type of structure. 9.2.1.1 c) limits the height of structures to 18 m
and the number of building stories to 4, which are the maximum values used by local projects.
Provisions 9.2.1.1 c), 9.2.1.4 and 9.2.1.5 demand that the design prevents the failure of
dry connections before those of the structural element and that tests must prove the behavior in case of non-linearity.
C.9.2.1.6 stipulates that the requirements of steel and welds of dry connections be the
same as those specified under 8.2.2 and 8.5.1 in order to prevent fragile failures.
Finally, 9.2.1.7 specifies design conditions for very low seismic stresses; these are similar
albeit stricter than those specified under 5.4.5 for non-precasted structures.
C.9.3 Industrial bays composed of columns in cantilever
The design of columns and foundations including stresses and deformations, shall allow
for the model-assigned base shear in addition to vertical earthquake action. However,
when the horizontal bracing system imposed by 9.3.2 has been conceived for providing
structural redundance, the base design shear shall not be less than the value that results
from multiplying the weight that the column transfer by the highest value between C and
Cmin.
116
NCh2369
C.10 Foundations
These specifications are based on the extensive Chilean experience regarding foundations of buildings compliant to NCh433 and decades of projects for the large-scale mining sector and a wide range of different industries.
C.10.1
C.10.1.3
This paragraph shall be construed as the requirement that tensions in the soil, its deformation and the stability of the foundation shall be verified in all applicable combinations by means of the method of allowable tensions, that result compatible with the
principles of soil mechanics.
C.11.1.2
Commonly used in industry because of their expansion possibilities are mill buildings
in which lateral forces are resisted by the stiff frames of columns and beams or roof
trusses.
The continuous roof bracing has the seismic advantages of stiff horizontal diaphragms. In addition, it enables the distribution of concentrated lateral loads between
several frames, as is the case of cranes. The Chilean US-based practice considers satisfactorily approximate the assumption that the roof bracing transmits 50% of the lateral load to the frames that adjoin the loaded one.
C.11.1.3
The determination of the magnitude and height of the suspended load that matches the
design seism is a complex probabilistic problem, which ought to be jointly analyzed
by the professional specialists and process engineers. However, considering the short
duration of the seismic forces as compared to the service life of the structure, the following recommendations ought to be considered as being safe:
- In cranes of maintenance, fabrication and similar workshops, which seldom hoist the
maximum load and where operations are discontinuous, the suspended load can be ignored in the seismic analysis.
- The seismic analysis of cranes for heavy and continuous operations with maximum
load, such as those of metallurgical foundry shops, ought to use this load at its highest
level. This recommendation is based on the dynamic analysis of over 600 cases, performed in Chile (25), according to which the load equivalent to bridge level matches
the actual one for pseudo-periods of 1 s or more, and to 0.20 of the actual one for periods of up to 0.5 s, linearly varying between both values.
117
NCh2369
Ts
P1
P2
mP2
K
Ts
Ts
Ts
=
=
=
=
<
=
>
118
NCh2369
C.11.1.4
The non-simultaneity of seism and the operating cranes dynamic effects and the position of several cranes without load is justified by probabilistic reasons and is part of
the North American practice recommended by the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers AISE (22).
C.11.1.5
The May 1960 seisms caused systematic failures in the vertical plate joints between
the crane supporting beam and the columns on account of the superposition of seismic
stresses and fatigue stresses. There also were cases of wheels falling from the rail to
the upper flange of the crane beam. The recommendations have the purpose of preventing such failures (1, 26, 27).
C.11.1.6
This provision is intended to prevent the construction of stiff towers at the end facades, which failed during Chilean earthquakes, on account of taking in seismic forces
for which they had not been designed (27).
C.11.1.7
C.11.2
C.11.2.1
This paragraph defines the characteristics of light steel bays (mills), limited clearances
and height and low-weight cranes and equipment, where wind loads really are higher
than the seismic loads. In the course of the years a great number of such bays has
been built, which do not meet all the requirements of this standard but have resisted
seisms without damages.
C.11.2.2
This paragraph defines the parameters required for the determination of the seismic
design forces. In general, the transverse and longitudinal wind forces at the end panels are higher than the seismic forces, but in intermediate panels the controlling force
can be the longitudinal seismic force.
C.11.2.3 to C.11.2.7 These are bracing design provisions. Where no cranes or equipment of
equivalent weight are involved, exclusively tension braces are allowable.
C.11.3
C.11.3.1
Most multi-story industrial process, energy generating and similar buildings, supports
heavy loads and valuable equipment. The best results achieved by the Chilean practice are dual buildings, with braced shear or concrete walls in combination with rigid
ductile frames as second resistance line (1, 26, 16). These buildings feature much
lower seismic deformations than those with North American ductile frames; they have
119
NCh2369
not been subject to the generalized welded joint failures that occurred in the Northridge seism of 1994 (28, 29, 30, 31).
C.11.3.2
C.11.4
C.11.4.1
These recommendations are based on the Chilean practice proved after the 1960 to
1985 seisms (1, 16, 26, 27, 28).
Large suspended equipment
Figure A.7 of Appendix A illustrates a typical boiler suspended from stay bolts at its
upper end. The control of seismic oscillations and prevention of impacts with the
structure requires connectors that allow horizontal as well as vertical thermal expansion (see Figure). The same Figure shows the hammerhead anchor bolts, made for
ample ductility and being readily repairable and replaceable are recommended for
large equipment.
Such equipment is usually projected by foreign manufacturers who frequently have no
seismic experience. Therefore, early assistance systems must be set up accompanied
by the design approval of specialized professionals licensed in Chile.
The foregoing recommendations have been successfully proved in a series of seisms
since 1960 in Chile (1, 16, 32).
C.11.4.2
C.11.5
Parts of electrostatic precipitators are the very high voltage electrode cages, which are
suspended from isolators and as they cannot be gripped laterally they may impact the
shell in case of seism. Chilean practice has observed that such impacts are not significant but present electric problems and fragile rupture of the porcelain isolators. In
consequence, it is frequently necessary that special isolators are specified and that
power supply deactivating devices be implemented.
Piping and ducts
C.11.5.1
The layout of supports and connections shall be made jointly by pipe laying specialists
and the professional specialists.
C.11.5.2
In general the seismic action shall be considered in case of piping or ducts of over 200
mm. The weight of tubes is mostly insubstantial as compared to the weight of buildings and structures; therefore it is enough that the seismic deformations be considered
in the analysis of the piping system and in the design of the connections.
C.11.6
C.11.6.1
120
NCh2369
therefore critical and requires that throughout the project appropriate coordination and
approval systems be set up between suppliers and seismic engineering specialists.
The design, considering the actual support between wheels and rails, with the likelihood of crashing and rising, has uncertainties, which in practice make it impossible.
Therefore, usually these supports are assumed to be pin connections for analysis purposes, and precautionary measures are taken to prevent impacts by means of counterweights and self-centering wheels.
Above provisions have been successful in Chilean practice. Most equipment protected in such a way has not presented failures, except a few cases of successive bangs
that caused repairable damages to wheels and cars (26, 27). The design of counterweights usually considers a pseudo-static safety factor of approximately 1.0 to 1.2 in
static analyses.
The dynamic analysis shall provide for vertical and horizontal accelerations, while
probable live loads during the occurrence of a seism shall be determined jointly with
the operators.
Total capsizing due to seismic action is not a real possibility, because of the alternating loads and thus shall not be considering in the design (33, 34). During the Chilean
seisms of May 1960 and March 1985 portal cranes turned over in the Puerto Montt
and San Antonio seaports, but these were ascribed to soil settlements and not to horizontal seismic forces (29, 35).
C.11.7
C.11.7.1
C.11.7.2
The dynamic analysis of process vessels shall be made with R = 3. The connection
between columns and shell may be direct if the plate is thick or by means of a circular
support beam. The design of these connections is complex and could be made by the
methods developed by Brownell and Young (37).
C.11.7.3
Chimneys can be self-supporting or not self-supporting with a metal or concrete external structure. These latter ones are used for stacks of thermal power plants. The
Chilean experience has been successful with stacks of up to 53 m, based on the dynamic designs according to paragraph 5.4 of this standard and R = 3. Higher non
self-supporting stacks of up to 500 m have been designed according to the conservative method recommended by the American Society of Civil Engineers (27, 38). The
recommendation of using interior concrete grouting for calculating stiffness but not
for resistance is based on the studies of Blume on the effects of the 1960 seism on the
121
NCh2369
Huachipato Steel Plant (14). Blume recommends that the coating be assigned the
value E of 1/20 steel.
C.11.7.4
Fu = 170 Fy e / D
Industry is the major user of large ground supported storage tanks, most of which are
circular steel tanks, although some few are of reinforced concrete or of rectangular
shape. The most frequently stored fluids are oil, water, and other special ones such as
sulfuric acid, liquefied oxygen, alcohol, etc.
C.11.8.2
Most design engineers apply the North American design and construction standards
issued by the American Petroleum Institute API in case of petroleum products storage structures, and for designing water storage structures those of the American Waterworks Association AWWA and of the American Concrete Institute ACI (39, 40,
41 and 42). Also used are the recommendations of the New Zealand National Society
for Earthquake Engineers NZ, which are applicable to any fluid and material. Originally issued in 1986, these specifications are very exhaustive; having been considered
too conservative, they were modified in 2000 (43, 44).
122
NCh2369
Every standard contains two important sections: Seismic Considerations, where seismic stresses are determined: location, risk and required safety; and Design that enables the dimensioning of tanks and their foundations.
This standard specifies seismic action conforming to Chilean conditions that differ
from those of API, AWWA or NZ. Knowing the seismic forces, the design follows
one of the abovementioned standards. This is the same philosophy applied in the
United States (45).
C.11.8.3 to 11.8.5 Masses and periods
The design shall consider that the fluid mass is broken into two forces: the impulsive
force that vibrates in unison with the structure, and above it, the convective one that
features waves. The three standards referenced under 11.8.2 have practically coincident formulas for determining the masses and periods of each one of these forces.
C.11.8.6 to 11.8.13 Analysis and design
The determination of the seismic stresses and of the structural parameter R as well as
damping is based on a comparative study of eight steel and two concrete tanks of
sufficient dimensions for covering the practice requirements; results were compared
with the values of the standards mentioned under 11.8.2. The relations between the
seismic coefficients of the 10 tanks were the following ones:
NCh2369/API
1.01 to 1.17
NCh/AWWA
0.80 to 0.90
NCh/NZ
0.96 to 1.00
The provisions for anchor bolts have been successfully applied in Chilean projects in
the course of the last decades.
C.11.8.15 to C.11.8.18 The standard specifies methods for preventing that tank without anchor
bolts slip out of their foundations, that the roof be damaged by air compression or by
the impact of the convective fluid or secondary problems in the structure and piping.
The recommendations are based on the Alaska 1964 seism damages, on those caused
by the Chilean seisms of 1960 and 1985, as well as on the recommendations provided
on each of these occurrences (1, 27, 28, 46, 47, 48, 49 and 50).
123
NCh2369
C.11.9
C.11.9.1
Rotary kilns and dryers can be facilities of large diameter and length; they are operated at high temperatures and low rotary velocity. Foundations are massive and natural periods are low, which justifies the use of the static method.
Rotary kilns and dryers feature an appreciable longitudinal and radial thermal expansion. Rotating outages during a period of around 20 minutes can cause thermal expansion and considerable damages. These restraints carry weight in the design, which requires an early and continuous cooperation between the equipment manufacturer and
the professional specialists.
The recommendations of this standard have been successfully proved in a great number of kilns and dryers installed in Chile since the 1940s (26).
Experience shows that the impact with the closure of the free space in the longitudinal
seism may double the seismic force (51) and that this can be several times larger than
during normal operation. Therefore, operators must necessarily accept occasional replacements of rollers and roller mechanisms, provided these are promptly replaced
with a procedure of controlled furnace rotation to prevent important thermal deformations.
This procedure requires a standby motor that moves the kiln during power outages
during an earthquake.
The purpose of the indications of Figure A.11, detail 1, is the compatibility of seismic
resistance with operating conditions.
When calculating the seismic force H on support 3 it is admissible to discount the friction of supports 1, 2 and 4 using a friction coefficient equal to 0.1.
C.11.9.2
Detail 2 of Figure A.11 summarizes the design provisions for the lateral seism. The
calculation of overturning has not the purpose of preventing this occurrence, which is
no real possibility, but to avert rising and alternate impacts on both sides, known as
tapping.
The failure of the longitudinal push rollers may cause important displacements (51).
To prevent falling it is necessary that the width of the wheel rim be increased, as per
Figure A.11, detail 2.
124
NCh2369
Equipment that does not meet the conditions of robustness and stiffness may require
dynamic or empiric analyses. For dynamic analyses, the ENDESA specification prescribes equipment-dependent spectra, damping and R values in most cases; in the
main, they are severer than this standard. Empiric qualification tests consist of oscillation assessments for determining frequencies and damping, tests under static forces,
on vibratory tables or similar elements. These specifications are mandatory for important equipment, such as encapsulated substations.
125
NCh2369
C.11.12 Minor structures and equipment
Industries have many minor elements, such as pumps, engines, compact boilers,
boards, racks and similar elements, most of which have good structural resistance.
However their anchorages, connections and other details may fail and some times
cause protracted standstills. It is essential that all these details be seismically verified
and that the required reinforcements be implemented; most of them are simple and
may be installed in-site. Figure A.13 illustrates such cases.
C.11.13 Wood structures
The provisions are based on NCh1198 supplemented by SEAOC and UBC recommendations (4 and 5) as well as on the New Zealand standards referenced in North
American publications.
Structural failure can be due to the wood, to flexure or tension or in the connections.
The failure in wood is fragile and in connections it can be ductile.
Structures in general are classified into ductile, non-ductile or semi-ductile.
Ductile structures have ductile connections that are less resistant than the wood. Typical ductile structures are those that resist seismic forces with braced walls or diaphragms connected by bolts or nails, structures with wood-to-wood connections of
small diameter bolts or nails, or structures with toothed plate or steel plate connections. Non-ductile structures have connections of greater resistance than the wood that
fails on account of tension or flexure. Most structures have stiff glued connections or
connections with over 20 mm diameter bolts.
Semi-ductile structures are an intermediate structure of the abovementioned.
The recommended R values are: 4 for ductile structures; 1 for non-ductile structures,
and 2.5 for semi-ductile structures.
C.B
C.B.1 General
The AISC Standard (10 and 11) includes provisions for the design of the panel zone,
which is the beam web that faces the moment connections of the beam, zone that is
designed to resist the frequently important generated shear.
AISC prescribes special conditions for the seismic case of stiff frames (20) with the
purpose of preventing failures due to lack of ductility, as were observed at the Loma
Prieta and Northridge earthquakes, and often require testing.
126
NCh2369
No such failures have been observed in Chile, because the maximum seismic deformations of our standards are approximately half of the North American values.
Therefore, this standard omits AISC special provisions, except for a few minor exceptions.
C.B.2 Design of the panel zone of moment connections
This includes the design provisions in detail. When the web thickness is insufficient,
it shall be reinforced in the workshop with attached plates or welded diagonal stiffeners. Changing the column profile by another one with greater web thickness can obviate these reinforcements. This is a matter of economy that ought to be reviewed in
each case. The following table presents cost data published by AISC (54) with calculated equivalents for Chile.
Costs expressed in kg of structural steel
U.S.A.
160
140
450
127
Chile
70
60
200
NCh2369
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
Tentative Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for Building, Applied
Technology Council ATC-3, Washington D.C. 1978.
[8]
Metodologa para la Evaluacin del Riesgo de Tsunami, H. Godoy y J. Monge, Universidad de Chile, Facultad de Ciencias Fsicas y Matemticas, Publicacin SES 1-2-75
(115), 1975.
[9]
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Standard Institute American Society of Civil Engineers ANSI/ASCE, New York 1998.
[10] Manual of Steel Construction Load & Resistance Factor Design, American Institute
of Steel Construction, 1999.
[11] Manual of Steel Construction Allowable Stress Design, American Institute of Steel
Construction, 1989.
[12] Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete ACI-89, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1989.
[13] Inspeccin de la Construccin de Obras de Edificacin, L.F. Alarcn. I.B. Acosta, G.
Azcar, Depto. De Ingeniera de Construccin, Publicacin 112, Pontificia Universidad
Catlica de Chile, Santiago 1988.
128
NCh2369
[14] A Structural Dynamic Analysis of Steel Plant Structures subjected to the May 1960
Chilean Earthquakes, J.A. Blume, Bulletin Seismological Society of America, February, 1963.
[15] International Building Code, International Code Council, 2000.
[16] Diseo Ssmico de Instalaciones Industriales, Estado del Arte en Chile, E. Arze L., 6as
Jornadas Chilenas de Sismologa e Ingeniera Antissmica, Santiago, 1993.
[17] Proposicin de Espectros de Diseo para la Nueva norma chilena de Diseo Ssmico,
Arturo Arias, 5as Jornadas de la Asociacin Chilena de Sismologa e Ingeniera Antissmica, Santiago, Agosto de 1989.
[18] Comparacin de Espectros de Arias y Blume, Ramn Montecinos C. Estudio interno de
Arze Recin y Asociados, Ingenieros Consultores, Santiago 1991.
[19] Proposicin de Cdigo para el Diseo y Anlisis de Edificios con Aislacin Ssmica,
ACHISINA, Santiago, Marzo 2001.
[20] Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, AISC 1999.
[21] Specifications for the Design of Cold Formed Steel Structural Members, American Iron
and Steel Institute, AISC 1996.
[22] Guide for the Design and Construction of Mill Buildings, Association of Iron and Steel
Engineers, Technical Report N 3, Pittsburgh, Pa. 1991.
[23] PCI Design Handbook, Precast Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago 1978.
[24] Major Changes in Concrete Related Provisions, S.K. Ghosh, Earthquake Spectra, February 2000.
[25] Estudio de la Respuesta Ssmica de Edificios Industriales con Puentegras. Luis Loyer
Arze, Universidad catlica 1973.
[26] Ingeniera Ssmica, El Caso del Sismo del 3 de Mayo de 1985, Captulo 17, Estructuras
e Instalaciones Industriales, E. Arze L., editor R. Flores A., Instituto de Ingenieros de
Chile, Hachette, Santiago 1993.
[27] Behaviour of a Steel Plant under Major Earthquakes, R. Vignola and E. Arze, Second
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo 1960.
[28] Experiencia de una Empresa de Ingeniera en el Terremoto del 3 de Mayo de 1985 en
Chile, E. Arze, 5as. Jornadas Chilenas de Sismologa e Ingeniera Antissmica, Santiago
1989.
129
NCh2369
[29] The Chilean Earthquake of May 1960, A Structural Engineering View Point, K.V.
Steinbrugge, R. Flores, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February
1963.
[30] Northridge Earthquake, January 17, 1994, Preliminary Reconnaissance Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California 1994.
[31] Lessons learned from the Performance of Steel Buildings during the 1994 Northridge
Earthquake, V. A. Bertero, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of
California, Berkeley, 1994.
[32] The effects of March 3, 1985 Chile Earthquake on Power and Industrial Facilities, D.
L. McCormick et al, E.Q.E., San Francisco, California 1986.
[33] Some Studies of Earthquakes and their Effects on Structures, R.R. Martel, California Institute of Technology, Los Angeles 1939.
[34] Study of Overturning Vibration of Slender Structures, K. Muto et al 2nd. World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo 1960.
[35] El Sismo del 3de Marzo de 1985, Coordinador J. Monge, Acero Comercial S.A., Universidad de Chile, Santiago 1986.
[36] The Dynamic Behaviour of Water Tanks, G.W. Housner,Buletin of the Seismological
Society of America, February 1963.
[37] Process Equipment Design, L.E. Brownell and Young, John Wiley, New York 1959.
[38] Design and Construction of Steel Chimney Liners, American Society of Civil Engineers,
New York 1975.
[39] Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage, American Petroleum Institute API 650, 1998.
[40] Design and Storage of Large Welded Low Pressure Steel Storage Tanks, API 620, 1994.
[41] Standards for Welded Steel Storage Tanks for Water Storage, American Water Works
Association AWWA D100, D110 y D115, 1996.
[42] Concrete Tanks for water Storage, ACI 350-3, 1999.
[43] Seismic Design of Storage Tanks, New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering, 1996.
[44] General Structural Design and Design Loadings for Buildings, New Zealand Standard
NZS 4203, 1992.
130
NCh2369
[45] Non Building Structures Seismic Design Code Developments, H.O. Sprague and N.A.
Legatos, Earthquakes Spectra, February 2000.
[46] The Prince of Williams Sound Alaska Earthquake of 1964, Oil Storage Tanks, J.E.
Rinne, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 1967.
[47] The Chilean Earthquake of May 3, 1985 Field Report, L.A. Wyllie, Earthquake Spectra,
California, 1986.
[48] The Seismic Design of Industrial Plants, R.D. Evison et al, The Institution Of Professional Engineers, New Zealand 1982.
[49] Loma Prieta Earthquake Reconnaissance Report, Earthquake Spectra, California1990.
[50] Armenia Earthquake Reconnaissance Report, Earthquake Spectra, California 1989.
[51] Evaluacin de que el horno caiga al estar sometido a un sismo longitudinal, Arturo
Arias, Informe para el Proyecto de la Planta de Celulosa Arauco 2, 1989.
[52] Especificaciones Tcnicas Generales, ETG 1015 Diseo Ssmico, ENDESA 1987.
[53] Focus Wood Design, Buchanan, Dean and Deam, USA.
[54] Economy in Street Design, AISC Modern Steel Construction, 2000.
131