EARTHQUAKE LOAD:

Variables in Seismic Design:

• Nature of the Ground Motion - This will be different for each site and each earthquake. The
recorded ground motion of previous earthquakes have been widely used in the dynamic
analysis of structures throughout the U.S. and other countries.

• Response of the Structure to Ground Motion:

• Soil/structure interaction
• Mode shapes and periods
• Modal coupling - How much contribution do higher modes make in the response?
• Damping - energy absorption, hard to figure, but very important
• Multidirectional effects

• Level of Safety Desired - How much damage can be tolerated?

Methods of Seismic Analysis:

• Time History Analysis - The ground motion is defined relative to time and used to excite the
base of a single or multiple degree of freedom structure step-by-step. Takes a lot of
computer time and space. The resulting analysis is good for the forcing function chosen
(usually a previous earthquake record).

• Response Spectra Analysis - Curves are developed for peak responses of single degree of
freedom structures based an a particular ground motion. The peak responses for each mode
of a multiple degree of freedom system are determined from the curves and the results are
combined based on modal participation factors. Typically, the first mode (cantilever)
provides about 85% of the total response. Note that this is a quasi-dynamic method in that it
does consider ground motion but when modes are combined it uses only the peak response
associated with each mode. In this method, the modal properties are usually calculated with
a computer and the final response determined by hand calculations. It is also possible to
build the response spectra into the program and have the program do all the work.

NOTE: The time history and response spectra methods are usually based on elastic behavior
with a certain amount of damping assumed for the particular type of structure being
designed. These analyses can also be performed using non-linear inelastic behavior
which produces loads much lower than an elastic analysis. Non-linear analyses have
been used to develop the Equivalent Lateral Force Method.

• Equivalent Lateral Force Method - The equivalent lateral force method is based on the
results of analyses considering linear and non-linear behavior and tests. The method
recognizes the fact that the first mode is dominant for earthquakes and that most structures
undergo some inelastic deformation during an earthquake. The equivalent static load is
applied laterally as an inverted triangle.

1
 The design loads resulting from this method can be significantly less than those determined
from an elastic analysis using either the time history or response spectra methods. For
unreinforced masonry structures the results of the equivalent static load method will be close
to that determined from an elastic dynamic analysis. For ductile moment resistant frames the
results may be as much as 5 or 6 times less than that obtained from an elastic dynamic
analysis. The equivalent static load method recognizes that certain types of structures are
able to undergo significant inelastic deformations without adverse effects.

IBC 2006 Earthquake Load Provisions for the Example Structure but in Jacksonville
rather than Gainesville (Jacksonville is the worst place for seismic in Florida):

§1613 Earthquake Loads - General

• §1613.1 leads to ASCE 7-2005

ASCE 7-2005 Earthquake Loads (Chapters 11-22):

§11.6 Determination of seismic design category

• Need SDS and SD1 per §11.4.4

§11.4.4 Design spectral response acceleration parameters

• SDS = 2/3 SMS

• SD1 = 2/3 SM1
• SMS and SM1 per §11.4.3

§11.4.3 Site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake (MCE) spectral response
acceleration parameters

• SMS = FaSs
• SM1 = FvS1
ƒ Ss = 0.15g from Figure 22-1 map per §11.4.1
ƒ S1 = 0.06g from Figure 22-2 map in §11.4.1
ƒ Assume a stiff soil (i.e. Site Class D per Table 20.3-1) – check with geotech engineer
ƒ Fa = 1.6 from Table 11.4-1
ƒ Fv = 2.4 from Table 11.4-2
• SMS = FaSs = (1.6)(0.15) = 0.240g
• SM1 = FvS1 = (2.4)(0.06) = 0.144g

Return to §11.4.4

• SDS = 2/3 SMS = 2/3(0.24) = 0.160g

• SD1 = 2/3 SM1 = 2/3(0.144) = 0.096g

2
Return to §11.6

• From Table 11.6-1 with SDS < 0.167g the structure is Seismic Design Category A
• From Table 11.6-2 with SD1 > 0.067g but less than 0.133g the structure is Seismic Design
Category B
• Use Seismic Design Category B
• Note: If Seismic Design Category A (this would exist in Tampa), §11.7 applies and the
design load is simply 0.01 times the weight of the structure

§12.6 Analysis procedure selection

• Per Table 12.6-1 Equivalent Lateral Load, Response Spectra, and Time History are all
permitted for determining what to use for E in the load combinations. The Equivalent Lateral
Force Procedure is typically used for this type of structure.

§12.8 Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure

• V = CsW

S DS
• Cs =
R
I
where: SDS = 0.160g from above
R = 6.5 from Table 12.2-1 for light-framed with wood panels rated for shear
I = 1.0 from Table 11.5-1 for Occupancy Category II from Table 1.1
S DS 0.160
Cs = = = 0.025
R 6.5
I 1.0

• but Cs need not exceed

S
Cs = D1 for T ≤ TL
R
T
I
where: SD1 = 0.096g from above
T = Ct hnx = 0.02 (20)0.75 = 0.19sec (12.8.2.1 and Table 12.8-2)
TL = 8 sec per Figure 22-15
S 0.096
Cs = D1 = = 0.077
R 6.5
T 0.19
I 1.0

• and Cs shall not be taken less than 0.01

• therefore, Cs = 0.025 and
• V = 0.025W

3
Conclusion:

Use base shear of V = 0.025W for the earthquake load

The example building was 50’ wide by 100’ long with 20’ high walls. Assuming a sustained
roof dead load of 20 psf, the seismic load at roof level on the long side of the diaphragm in lb/ft
would be:

VE = 0.025(20)(50) = 25.0 lb/ft

From the wind load example in Gainesville the minimum MWFRS load was 13.5 psf on the 20’
walls. For the diaphragm load this is a lb/ft load of:

VW = 13.5(20/2) = 135 lb/ft

Note: Even if this building just had 8 ft high walls the diaphragm load from wind would be
13.5(8/2) = 54 lb/ft.

Obviously, in Florida wind load will control for low-rise buildings and likely for high-rise
buildings. This explains why the FBC has no requirement for seismic loads.