1. Shakes and Quakes A Structural Engineer's View
Yahya Gino Kurama, Associate Professor
Civil Engineering and Geological Sciences
University of Notre Dame
Good afternoon.
My presentation is on the seismic behavior of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls which I have been studying as a part of my Ph.D. work at Lehigh University. Before I begin talking about my research, I would like to give you a brief description of unbonded post-tensioned precast concrete walls and an introduction to their seismic behavior.
Introduction to Engineering Program
University of Notre Dame
July 16, 2004

2. STRUCTURES
Structure: “any assemblage of materials that is intended to sustain loads”
Nearly every plant and animal, and nearly all works of man have to sustain forces without breaking, so practically everything is a structure of one type or another.

3. Civil Structures are BIG!
Dams
Tunnels
Civil Structures are BIG!
Buildings
Domes
Bridges

4. Man fears Time, yet Time fears the Pyramids
How Old is Structural Engineering?
Man fears Time, yet Time fears the Pyramids
Arab proverb
Great Pyramids
Sphinx

5. Structural Loads SOMETIMES FAILING!
Gravity loads (self weight, people, furniture, etc.)
Earth and water pressure
Dynamic wind load effects
Dynamic occupant effects
Earthquakes
Structures respond to these dynamic loads, moving, swaying, and ….
“Non-emulative”
Traditionally, precast structures in seismic regions have been designed to emulate the behavior of monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures, largely because of the limited knowledge about their seismic behavior.
However, in recent years the precast concrete industry has emphasized structures which do not imitate monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures because of their economy, construction simplicity, and desirable seismic characteristics such as self-centering capability and the ability to undergo “large” nonlinear displacements with little damage.
SOMETIMES FAILING!

6. Wind Excited Structures

7. Human Excited Structures

8. Human Excited Structures

9. Human Excited Structures

10. Earthquake Excited Structures

11. Reinforced concrete frame Steel frame Reinforced concrete wall
BUILDING STRUCTURES
Masonry
Reinforced concrete frame
Steel frame
Reinforced concrete wall
“Non-emulative”
Traditionally, precast structures in seismic regions have been designed to emulate the behavior of monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures, largely because of the limited knowledge about their seismic behavior.
However, in recent years the precast concrete industry has emphasized structures which do not imitate monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures because of their economy, construction simplicity, and desirable seismic characteristics such as self-centering capability and the ability to undergo “large” nonlinear displacements with little damage.

12. Can You Recognize These Masonry Structures?
St. Paul’s Cathedral,
London
Pantheon,
Rome
Hagia Sophia,
Istanbul
San Pietro Citta’ del Vaticano,
Rome
Santa Maria del Fiore,
Florence

13. What are Masonry Structures Made of?
BRICKS, STONES, and MORTAR

14. And ... Under an Earthquake ...
THEY BREAK!!

15. And They Break!

17. Where are These Frame Structures?
Transamerica Building
San Francisco
Sears Tower
Chicago
John Hancock Building
Chicago
Marina City
Chicago
Empire State Building
New York City

18. How Do We Build Them?

20. Resting After a Hard Day's Work

21. AUGUST 17, 1999 IZMIT EARTHQUAKE (M 7.4)

22. SEISMIC ACTIVITY IN THE REGION

23. San Andreas Fault
California

24. RIGHT-LATERAL STRIKE-SLIP FAULT (> 1400 km)
The North Anatolian Fault E W

25. HORIZONTAL SLIP ALONG THE NAF
2 meters
(6.6 feet)

26. HORIZONTAL SLIP ALONG THE NAF

27. HORIZONTAL SLIP ALONG THE NAF

28. VERTICAL SLIP ALONG THE NAF
1.7 meters
(5.6 feet)

29. VERTICAL SLIP ALONG THE NAF

30. REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS

31. REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS

32. WHICH FLOOR WOULD YOU RATHER LIVE IN?

33. SOFT/WEAK STORY COLLAPSE

34. REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS

35. REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS

36. HYGOKEN-NAMBU, JAPAN, 1994

37. CHI-CHI, TAIWAN, 1999

38. NORTHRIDGE, U.S., 1994

39. NORTHRIDGE, U.S., 1994

40. Poor detailing, poor materials, poor workmanship
MAIN PROBLEMS
Poor detailing, poor materials, poor workmanship
Stiff and heavy structures
Limited capacity to deform laterally
“Non-emulative”
Traditionally, precast structures in seismic regions have been designed to emulate the behavior of monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures, largely because of the limited knowledge about their seismic behavior.
However, in recent years the precast concrete industry has emphasized structures which do not imitate monolithic cast-in-place concrete structures because of their economy, construction simplicity, and desirable seismic characteristics such as self-centering capability and the ability to undergo “large” nonlinear displacements with little damage.

41. SEISMIC ISOLATION

42. SEISMIC ISOLATION USING LEAD-RUBBER BEARINGS

43. LEAD-RUBBER BEARING

44. USC UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL - WITH ISOLATION
The Base-Isolated USC Hospital Building
The USC Hospital is an 8-story building with many isolators that act like shock absorbers to damp out strong ground shaking. The building contains 149 isolators that support a steel superstructure on continuous concrete spread footings. Diagonally braced perimeter frames, supported by 68 isolators, were designed to carry the lateral loads and the internal columns that carry the vertical load were supported by 81 isolators. The building, within 15 kilometers of the Newport-Inglewood fault zone, was designed for a maximum relative isolator displacement of 26 centimeters, and to meet the seismic standards of the 1988 and 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC).
The motions recorded at the top of the isolators and at the roof were smaller than those recorded below the isolators and in the free field (a ground site away from and free of the influences of the building). These findings provide clear evidence that the isolators were effective in dissipating the vibrational energy traveling from the free field to the building. In general, the shapes of the spectra of recorded components of motions are well enveloped by the building code spectrum, except for some high frequency (>1 hertz) bands for which the code spectrum is exceeded. Accelerations at various levels of the building, and the amplitude spectra and relative displacements of the isolators confirm excellent performance throughout the building. Drift ratios (displacements within a building story at the top relative to the base) reached only 10% of allowable values explaining why there was little damage to the structure or its contents. However, the ground motions at this site were only moderately strong. USGS studies showed that displacements near the seismogenic fault of the Northridge quake would exceed the designed displacement range for the isolators. Therefore, the performance of the isolators could be a problem at the USC Hospital should shaking be stronger than that of the Northridge earthquake.
Base-isolated buildings are a relatively recent addition to U.S. earthquake-resistant design strategies. In base-isolated structures, the building is insulated from strong ground motion by energy-absorbing systems between the building and its foundation. Such buildings are still uncommon because the design concept had not been tested by severe earthquakes prior to the Northridge event.
Lessons Learned
The structural responses derived from strong-motion recordings in buildings actually shaken by earthquakes can be compared to the theoretical responses that were used in designing the structures. These comparisons may verify the calculations and the stability of the design, or they may point to problems that need to be corrected in future construction. Performance of the USC Hospital building showed that design improvements are needed for the type of base-isolation system used in the building.
Prior to the Northridge earthquake, structural engineers believed that modern buildings constructed with specially designed steel frames could resist very intense ground motions with only limited structural damage. However, during the earthquake, the steel framing of more than 100 such structures experienced fractures. The fractures initiated at the welded connections between the beams and columns of the frames. These fractures were initially attributed to poor quality workmanship in the welding of the connections. However, a review of historical test data and tests performed immediately following the earthquake demonstrated that connections with standard quality workmanship were vulnerable to the fractures. Many of the damaged buildings were at sites that experienced ground motions approximating those adopted by the building code as a basis for design. Consequently, the adequacy of the building code provisions was immediately questioned, and the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) adopted an emergency code change in October The ICBO action prompted the creation of a joint venture among the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), the Applied Technology Council (ATC), and the California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREE). The joint venture, simply named SAC, initiated a program to resolve the issues related to the steel-frame damage, and to publish advisories and guidelines. SAC published several interim documents during 1995 to assist engineers and building officials in design and inspection activities while reliable new building codes were being developed for steel-frame buildings. This effort was funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

45. USC UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL - WITH ISOLATION

46. OLIVE VIEW HOSPITAL - WITHOUT ISOLATION
Failures due to discontinuity of vertical elements of the lateral load resisting system have been among the most notable and spectacular. One common form of this type of discontinuity occurs when shear walls that are present in upper floors are discontinued in the lower floors. The result is frequently formation of a soft first story that concentrates damage. A well-known example (shown below) is the Olive View Hospital, which nearly collapsed due to excessive deformation in the first two stories during the 1972 San Fernando earthquake and subsequently had to be demolished (6,18).
The Olive View Hospital Building
The OVH building was designed in 1976 to withstand increased levels of seismic forces based on the disastrous fate of its predecessor. The structural system for resisting lateral forces is a mixed design of concrete and steel shear walls. The foundation consists of spread footings and concrete slab-on-grade for the ground floor. The ground floor and second floor are typically built of concrete shear walls 25 centimeters thick that extend along several column lines. At the third level, the plan of the building changes to a cross shape, making a 4-story tower with steel shear walls surrounding the perimeter.
USGS engineers examined the building’s performance by using data from both the Northridge and Whittier Narrows earthquakes for comparisons. The building was designed for two levels of performance. The first level, 0.52g, represented accelerations at which the building would not be badly damaged. The second level, 0.69g, represented accelerations at which the building would survive, perhaps with major damage but without catastrophic failure.
Data from sensors in the OVH building show that the building escaped the impact of long-period (>1 second) pulses generated by the Northridge quake. The OVH records indicated that very large peak accelerations at the ground level (0.91g) and the roof level (2.31g) were accommodated by the building without structural damage. Analyses of the data indicate that the structure was in resonance at frequencies between 2.5 and 3.3 hertz. These frequencies are also within the site-response frequencies of 2-3 hertz, calculated from examining the geological materials upon which the structure was built. The effective structural frequencies derived from the Northridge and Whittier earthquakes data are different and exhibit variations attributable to nonlinear effects. One effect is soil-structure interaction which was seen to be more pronounced during the Northridge event. The building possibly experienced rocking at 2.5 hertz in the north-south direction during that event, and there is the possibility that radiation damping (wherein the building dissipates energy into the surrounding soil) contributed to reducing that response. Damping ratios for the building were 10%-15% (north-south) and 5%-10% (east-west) for the Northridge effects, and 1%-4% (north-south) and 5%-8% (east west) for the Whittier effects. These nonlinear effects that tended to reduce the shaking of the building during large ground motions are consistent with the different damping ratios observed during the Northridge and Whittier Narrows events. There was also nonlinear behavior due to minor structural damage during the Northridge earthquake. It is also likely that the cruciform wings responded with a different frequency than that of the overall building.
The Olive View Hospital building was conceived and designed as a very strong and stiff structure, particularly in response to the disastrous performance of the original OVH building during the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. However, the resulting design placed the fundamental frequency of the building within the frequency range of the site (2-3 hertz), thereby producing conditions for resonance. This case study indicates that determining the site frequencies needs to be emphasized in developing design response spectra. Despite the site resonances, the performance of the OVH building was considered to be a great success during the Northridge event. The hospital sustained no structural damage under very strong shaking (greater than 2g) at the roof level.
Lessons
Learned The stiff design of the Olive View Hospital performed very well during the Northridge earthquake, probably saving many lives in a region of very intense shaking. Although the structure did not sustain damage, the hospital had to be evacuated because of broken water pipes and other secondary damage. These elements of the interior design need to be improved in anticipation of future earthquakes.

47. OLIVE VIEW HOSPITAL - WITHOUT ISOLATION

48. OLIVE VIEW HOSPITAL - WITHOUT ISOLATION

49. Civil Engineering has many interesting and challenging problems.
Protecting structures against damaging winds and earthquakes is one of the important jobs of a civil engineer.

50. National Science Foundation
Scientists and Engineers in the Schools Program

51. U.S. Geological Survey http://earthquake.usgs.gov/

52. On PBS