PIANC Seismic Design

Guidelines for Port Structures

International Guidelines by PIANC
WG members from 11 countries
Seismic performance-based design
Analysis methods
Performance-based design
Acceptable damage level
I Serviceable
II Repairable
III Near Collapse
IV Collapse
Earthquake motion level
Level 1
Level 2
Performance grade
S, A, B, C
Acceptable level of damage
Acceptable level
of damage
Structural Operational
Degree I:
Serviceable
Minor or no
damage
Little or no loss of
serviceability
Degree II:
Repairable
Controlled
damage
Short-term loss of
serviceability
Degree III:
Near collapse
Extensive
damage in near
collapse
Long-term or
complete loss of
serviceability
Degree IV:
Collapse
Complete loss of
structure
Complete loss of
serviceability
Performance grades
S, A, B, and C
Performance
grade
Design earthquake
Level 1 Level 2
Grade S Degree I Degree I
Grade A Degree I Degree II
Grade B Degree I Degree III
Grade C Degree II Degree IV
Extent of Damage
Level 1 Level 2
Level of Earthquake Motion
XB
XC
I
II
XS
III
XA
Importance
Higher
Extent of Damage
: No Damage or Minor Damage
: Service Recoverable with Temporary Disruption
: Extensive Damage without Collapse
Performance-based design
Choose performance grade:
Owners/users
Define damage criteria: Engineers
+Owners/users
Evaluate seismic performance:
Engineers
Performance-based design
Damage criteria
Failure mode
Displacement
Strain
Analysis type
Simplified analysis
Simplified dynamic analysis
Dynamic analysis
Input
Earthquake motions
Geotechnical conditions
Proposed design or existing
structures
Output
Displacement
Strain

Types of Analysis
Simplified analysis:
Appropriate for evaluating approximate
threshold level and/or elastic limit
Simplified dynamic analysis:
Possible to evaluate extent of
displacement/ stress/strain based on
assumed failure modes
Dynamic analysis:
Possible to evaluate both failure modes
and extent of displacement/stress/strain
Choice of analysis types
Earthquake motion level
Geotechnical conditions
Structural conditions
Analysis stage
Performance grade
Types of analysis related to
performance grade
Types of analysis Performance grade
C B A S
Simplified analysis
Simplified dynamic
analysis
Dynamic analysis
Extent of Damage
Level 1 Level 2
Level of Earthquake Motion
XB
XC
I
II
XS
III
XA
Examples of Seismic Performance
Structure a : Satisfy Performance Grade XA
Structure b : Satisfy Performance Grade XB
Structure b Structure a
P
dw
= k
h

w
hH
w
7
8
H
H
w

w
h
1-k
v

k
h
P
ae

sat
H
s
u
b
H
s
u
r

wet

ae
k
h
W
g
(1-k
v
)W
g
Non-Liquefaction
Liquefaction
5 10 15
0
5 10 15
-50
0
50
100
150
-500
-250
0
250
500
cm/s
2
threshold acceleration : a
t
Time (s)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

r
i
g
i
d

b
a
s
e
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

a
n
d

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

t
o

r
i
g
i
d

b
a
s
e
Time (s)
150
relative displacement (cm)
relative velocity (cm/s)
0.01 0.1 1
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d

s
l
i
d
e

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
c
m
)
1
10
100
1000
All CIT records
Seed Idriss M=8.25
San Fernando 1971
Other natural records
Rock site records
Richards and Elms (1979)
Whitman and Liao (1985)
Franklin and Chang
(1977)
0.5
a
t
/ a
max
On Firm Foundation
Loose Saturated Sandy Foundation
F
a
c
e

L
i
n
e
C
r
a
n
e

R
a
i
l
C
r
a
n
e

R
a
i
l
Lateral
Displacement
3.5m
Inclination
4.1
+4.0m
-36.0m
Vertical Displacement 1.5m
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Input Peak Acceleration (g)
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
R
e
s
i
d
u
a
l

H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
a
t

t
h
e

T
o
p

o
f

C
a
i
s
s
o
n

W
a
l
l

(
m
)
Limiting Curve
CASE-4
CASE-3
CASE-1
CASE-2
Yield at Sheet Pile Wall
(above mudline)
Yield at Sheet Pile
(below mudline)
Yield at Tie-rod
Displacement of Anchor
(Extent of Damage Degree)
Yield at Anchor

sat

wet

sat
H
s
u
b
D
e
m
b
H
s
u
r

k
h
P
ae
T

ae

w
h
D
e
m
b
H
H
w
P
pe

P
dw
= k
h

w
hH
w
7
8
1-k
v

pe
Static Active
Earth Pressure
Force, (P
a
)
x
P
bottom
Dynamic Incremental
Active Earth
Pressure Force, (DP
ae
)
x
Tie Rod
Force, T
FES
Dynamic Passive
Earth Pressure
Force, (P
pe
)
x
P
top
x
Ppe
z
x
Pa
x
Dpae
=0.6(H+D
emb
)
P
top
= 1.6
(
DP
ae
H+D
emb
P
bottom
= 0.4
(
DP
ae
H+D
emb
1
2
4 3
5








1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
5 6 7 8 10 12 14161820 30 40 50 60 7080 100 150 200
R
a
t
i
o


M
d
e
s
i
g
n

/

M
m
a
x
Value of in per running foot of wall
(H+D
emb
)
4
EI
=
r
in
2
lb
[
Penetration in medium compact
and compact coarse grained soils
Penetration in very
compact coarse
grained soils


Bending Moments (kNm)
-2000
30s
15s
0s
-10.2m
0.0m
-300 300 0 150 -150
Tie Rod
1000 0 -1000
5s
Bending Stresses (MPa)
Yield Point
35 40 45 50 55 60 65
Dr (%)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
0.66
(N)
Elastic Limit
M
a
x
i
m
u
m

B
e
n
d
i
n
g

M
o
m
e
n
t
(
k
P
a
.
m
)
Firm Layer Firm Layer
Loose Subsoil Loose Subsoil
Firm Foundation Firm Foundation
Concrete Pavement
Rubbles
-4.0
+4.00
0.2
2.00
Apron 20.00
14.00
2.00 5.00 5.00
1/100
+3.80
H.W.L +2.00
L.W.L +0.00
Original Ground -4.50
-10.00
Steel Pile D=700mm
1
:
1
.
5
-11.0
-22.0 -22.0 -22.0
Filling Concrete
Pile 1 Pile 2 Pile 3
F (d)
d
Amax
A'
A
B
Y
F
y
F'
d
m
d' d
y
0
B'
d
Displacement
Elasto-plastic system
Linear system
Force
F
Collapse Limit
pile 3 : in-ground plastic hinge ()
pile 3 : plastic hinge at pile cap ()
pile 3 : yield fibre stress at pile cap ()
pile 2 : plastic hinge at pile cap ()
pile 1 : plastic hinge at pile cap ()
pile 2 : in-ground plastic hinge ()
d
1
d
3
d
2
d
Displacement at pile cap
L
a
t
e
r
a
l

L
o
a
d
F
1
F
F
3
F
2
pile 1 : in-ground
plastic hinge ()

y
F
1
d
1
Bending
Moment
M
y
Stress Distribution
in Cross Section
F
2
d
2
M
p

y
F
3
d
3
M
p
-M
p

y
yield fibre stress
at pile cap

plastic hinge
at pile cap

in-ground plastic
hinge

y
D
p
4
- D
p
'
4
)

32D
p
M
y
=

D
p
: Outer Diameter
D
p
' : Inner Diameter

y : Yield fibre stress

y
D
p
3
- D
p
'
3
)
6
M
p
=
0.004m
1.20m
1.20m
0.10m
+0.0m
-7.5m
-25.0m
Elevation(m)
4
2
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
0
0 -2.5 2.5
S
e
a
w
a
r
d

P
i
l
e
C
e
n
t
e
r

P
i
l
e
L
a
n
d
w
a
r
d

P
i
l
e
Bending Moment (MNm/pile)
0 -2.5 2.5 0 -2.5 2.5
Elastic Limit
PIANC Seismic Design
Guidelines for Port Structures
PublishedSeptember, 2001, Balkema
Sponsor: Coastal Development
Institute of Technology, Japan
PIANC Seminars
Tokyo, December 10, 2001
London, October 30, 2002
Long Beach or Auckland