BULETINUL INSTITUTULUI POLITEHNIC DIN IAI

Publicat de
Universitatea Tehnic Gheorghe Asachi din Iai
Tomul LVII (LXI), Fasc. 1, 2011
Secia
CONSTRUCII. RHITECTUR

INFLUENCE OF SOIL CONDITIONS IN COMPUTING THE

SEISMIC FORCE IN MISCELLANEOUS DESIGN CODES
BY

CERASELA-PANSELUA OLARIU* and IOAN-PETRU CIONGRADI

Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iai,
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Building Services

Received: February 16, 2011

Accepted for publication: March 12, 2011

Abstract. In civil engineering the knowledge and control of the seismic

action is very important in order to prevent the effects that may occur during an
earthquake. The effects of the seismic action may be determined from the
linearelastic behavior of the building. One of the most well-known methods for
seismic analysis of structures is the equivalent lateral force procedure associated
with the fundamental mode of vibration. The most important aspect of this
procedure is to determine the precise seismic shear base. For the seismic force
evaluation the influence of the local soil conditions is taken into account through
several coefficients that depend on the seismic zonation of the country, the site
class, the natural period of vibration and the shear-wave velocity.
The paper highlights different procedures to consider the influence of soil
conditions in the seismic analysis of structures in miscellaneous design codes.
Therefore, different types of site classifications depending on the seismic
zonation, periods of vibration and site coefficients are presented. Also, the
relations used to compute the seismic shear force included in the studied design
codes are specified. In order to be able to perform comparisons between design
codes provisions, the following norms are taken into account: the International
Building Code from USA, the Earthquake Resistant Design of Buildings from
Chile, the Building Standard Law of Japan, the Romanian seismic design code
and the European design codes.
Key words: soil conditions; seismic shear force; seismic zonation.
*

Corresponding author: e-mail: olariucerasela@yahoo.com

140

Cerasela-Panselua Olariu and Ioan-Petru Ciongradi

1. Overview on the Seismic Shear Force

Earthquakes are natural and uncontrollable phenomena which occur
since ancient times. This is due to the fact that the planet is a living being and it
behaves as such, continuously changing its shape and structure. Since ancient
times, before the inventing of measuring and investigation instruments, humans
have tried to understand this phenomenon. Once the technology developed,
earthquakes came out from the unknown and therefore some steps have been
made to prevent the terrible seismic effects. One of the most obvious solutions
to prevent situations like collapsing of the buildings and human lives losses is to
perform a correct seismic design of structures. For this purpose at the same time
with the development of investigating methods also new provisions for the
existing design codes are appearing. It is noticed the tendency to combine
various areas of expertise in order for a better consideration of all the factors
that influence the highly efficient seismic design process.
All the design codes agree that the seismic effects and the effects of
other loads included in the seismic design process are determined based on the
linearelastic behavior of the structure. The seismic structural analysis can be
performed using computational methods for design such structures, namely the
equivalent lateral force procedure and the response spectrum procedure. Both
methods are based on the approximation of the yielding effects that can be taken
into account through linear analysis of the structural system for the design
spectrum. The effects of the horizontal component of the ground motion, the
vertical component of the ground motion and the torsional motions of the
structure are all considered in simplified approaches of the two procedures. The
main difference between the two procedures lies in the distribution of the
seismic lateral forces over the height of the building. In the equivalent lateral
force procedure, the distribution is based on simplified formulas that are
appropriate for regular structures as in the modal analysis. The distribution is
based on properties of the natural vibration modes, which are determined from
the mass and stiffness distribution.
Most of the international seismic design codes describe in detail the
equivalent lateral force procedure and all of them provide the necessary
computational relations. In this paper, several seismic design codes from
various countries with high seismicity, located on different continents, are
chosen as to achieve an overview. In order to determine the seismic force, Fb,
the following general relation is usually used, having some variations from a
design code to another:

Fb = CW ,

(1)

where: W is the total weight of the structure and C the seismic response
coefficient, computed differently according to the design code prescriptions.

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVII (LXI), f. 1, 2011

141

Due to the fact that in the relations provided by the Romanian standard
P100/1-2006 and SR EN 1998-1-2004 (in accordance with the Eurocode), the
mass of the structure is used instead its weight, the following relation is
introduced:

W = gm ,

(2)

where: g is the gravity acceleration, [m/s2] and m the total mass of the
structure.
Table 1 comprises some relations used for computing the seismic force
and the seismic response coefficients which are provided in different seismic
design codes.
Table 1
Relations for Computing the Seismic Shear Base in Different Design Codes
(Cod de proiectare, 2006; Eurocod8. Proiectarea structurilor, 2004;
Internat. Building Code, 2009; Building Standard Law, 2004;
Earthquake Resistant Design, 1996)
Seismic response coefficient,
Design code
Shear base
C (dimensionless)
F
=

S
T

mg
C
= l S d (T1 ) g
P100/1-2006
b
l d ( 1)
SR EN 1998-12004

Fb = Sd (T1 ) mg

IBC 2009, USA

V = CsW

Building Standard
Law of Japan
Earthquake
Resistant Design
of Buildings,
Chile

Qi = CiWi
Q0 = CIP

C = Sd (T1 ) g
CS =

SDS
RI

Ci = ZRt Ai C0
C=

2.75 A0
gR

T'
0
T

From Table 1 it can be noticed that the general shape of the seismic
shear-base relation provided by eq. (1) is kept in all codes. The main difference
is observed in the parameters that define the seismic response coefficient, C,
and their variation limits In the next section the specific meanings and the
ranges of the including parameters will be discussed.
The field of interest of this study is restricted to the influence of the
specific site periods and the manner in which the soils are classified based on
their geotechnical and geological characteristics and the velocity of shear
waves.

142

Cerasela-Panselua Olariu and Ioan-Petru Ciongradi

2. Importance of Vibration Period

After several disastrous earthquakes which took place in the last century
and due to the continuous work of researchers, it can be stated that the state of
knowledge has reached a level which can provide an efficient seismic design.
Nevertheless, each year efforts are made to optimize and complete the seismic
design codes, based on the gained experience.
The response of a structure during an earthquake depends on the
characteristics of ground motion, the foundation soil and the type of the
structure. For structures founded on rock or very stiff soils, the foundation
motion is essentially, the same with the one experienced in the soil when the
foundation or excavation is absent. This motion is the free field ground motion.
In the case of soft soils, the foundation motion differs from that in the free field
due to the coupling of the soil and structure during an earthquake (Jonson,
2003).
Most of the design codes consider the assumption that the motion
experienced by the base of a structure during an earthquake is actually the same
as the free-field ground motion. Taking this fact into account it is noticed that
the nature of the foundation soil exerts an influence not only on the design
requirements but also on the seismic response in that site.
The ground motion in a site depends on the dynamic characteristics of
the foundation soils and the seismic stiffness. This effect is reflected through the
site coefficients, S, which are included in the Romanian SR EN 1998-1-2004
norm and its National Annex SR EN 1998-1/NA. These site coefficients
depend on the properties and geology of the soils and rocks.
The norm P100/1-2006 as well as SR EN 1998-1-2004 include in the
seismic force relation the coefficient which is introduced by Sd(T) factor from
the seismic response coefficient. The coefficient depends on the stiffness of
the soil and on the acceleration amplification from bedrock to the surface of the
soil. This coefficient depends on the period of the structure and the period of the
soil.
Although the seismic resonance is a controversial subject, to know the
natural vibration of the structure and of the foundation soil is necessary in order
to avoid the possible resonance ranges.
The seismic design code provides a uniform margin against collapse at
the design ground motion. In view to accomplish this desideratum the ground
motion hazards are defined in terms of maximum considered earthquake ground
motions. The seismic hazard is based on a lower estimate of the margin against
collapse inherent in structures (NEHRP Recommended Provisions, 2003).
SR EN 1998-1-2004 provides several values for the site coefficient as
well as for TB, TC and TD depending on the site classes (A, B, C, D, E).
However, the National Annex of the same design code mentions that in
Romania the site classes are divided into three categories characterized by
corner periods. This zonation is performed based on the recorded earthquakes

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVII (LXI), f. 1, 2011

143

from 1977, 1986 and 1990 (Building Standard Law, 2004). Table 2 presents the
site coefficients prescribed by SR EN 1998-1-2004 and the National Annex.
It can be noticed that in the seismic zonation of Romania the values of
the site coefficients and of the site periods provided by SR EN 1998-1/NA are
unchanged from the ones in P100/1-2006 norm. This fact is due to the small
number of seismic records of the earthquakes in our country which prevents
from having more detailed information.
Table 2
Site Coeffiecinets (Eurocod8. Proiectarea structurilor, 2004;
Eurocod8. Proiectarea structurilor, 2008)
SR EN 1998-1-2004
SR EN 1998-1/NA
Site class
A
B
C
D
E
Z1
Z2
Z3
S
1.0
1.2
1.15 1.35 1.4
1
1
1
TB
0.15 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.15
0.07
0.10
0.16
TC
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.7
1.0
1.6
TD
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.0

In addition to the relation of the seismic response coefficient provided

by the American design code IBC 2009 (Table 1) there are other relations for
the coefficient applied depending on the type of structures, as such (Internat.
Building Code, 2009):

CS

S D1
T (R I )

(3),

CS 0.044S DS I

(4),

CS

0.5S1
R I

(5).

Therefore, the seismic response coefficient, CS, depends on the

parameters used for defining the design spectral response acceleration in the
short period range, SDS, and the design spectral response acceleration at a period
of 1 s, SD1. At the same time these values depend on two site coefficients, Fa
and Fv, which are defined using the mapped maximum considered earthquake
spectral response acceleration at short periods (Ss) and the mapped maximum
considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at period of 1 s (S1). In
Table 3 are presented the values of the site coefficients depending on the design
spectrum parameters.
Table 3.
Site Coefficients Fa and Fv (Building Standard Law, 2004)
Site
class
A
B
C
D
E

SS0.25 SS=0.5
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.12
1.6
1.4
2.5
1.7

Values of Fa
SS=0,75 SS=1.0
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.2
0.9

SS1.25 S10.1
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.7
1.0
2.4
0.9
3.5

Values of Fv
S1=0.2 S1=0.3 SS=0.4 SS0.5
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.5
3.2
2.8
2.4
2.4

144

Cerasela-Panselua Olariu and Ioan-Petru Ciongradi

The Japanese design code, Building Standard Law of Japan (BSL), has
been revised in 2000 with the purpose to create a proper basis for a performance
based design . On the other hand, the Japanese design code from 1924 was the
first in the world which required structural calculation in considering seismic
force (Tomohiro, 2010).
The seismic response coefficient from BSL is computed using the
relation from Table 1, where: Z is the seismic zone factor; Rt is the design
spectral coefficient depending on the cornerperiod, TC , and on the fundamental
natural period of the structure, T; Ai is the lateral shear distribution factor of i-th
story and C0 is standard shear coefficient (Building Standard Law, 2004).
The BSL provides values for the seismic coefficient in accordance with
a map which divides Japan in three main regions: A, B and C, characterized by
the values of the seismic hazard zone coefficient. Thus, for region A the
coefficient Z equals 1.0; for the B region the value of Z is 0.9 and for region C
the value of Z is 0.8. A resemblance is noticed between the approaches of
country zonation adopted by the Japanese design code and by Romanian the SR
EN 1998-1/NA .
The Earthquake Resistant Design of Buildings (ERDB) in Chile was
revised in 2000. The seismic response coefficient used for computing the
seismic force is given in Table 1, where: n, T are parameters relative to the
foundation soil type, A0 the maximum effective acceleration, R the reduction
factor, T0 the period of mode with the highest translational equivalent mass in
the direction of analysis (Earthquake Resistant Design, 1996).
Table 4 presents the values of these coefficients provided by the
Chilean design code.
Table 4
Parameter Values Related to Soil Types
(Earthquake Resistant Design, 1996)
T (s)
Soil type
T0(s)
I
0.15
0.20
II
0.30
0.35
III
0.75
0.85
IV
1.20
1.35

n
1.00
1.35
1.80
1.80

3. The Influence of the Local Soil Conditions

One of the most important but less controlable aspects is to know the
real state of the local soil conditions. Depending on the stiffness characteristics
and on the seismic wave velocities, the foundation soils are ones of the main
elements in performing a correct seismic design. There are numerous examples
in the human history when due to the local soil conditions a lot of damage took
place during an earthquake, e.g. Niigata earthquake or Alaska earthquake, both
from 1964.

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVII (LXI), f. 1, 2011

145

Due to this reason all seismic design codes are taking into account the
importance of the soil conditions through site coefficients. The site classes are
more of less detailed from a country to another based on the local classification
criteria.
The SR EN 1998-1-2004 and IBC 2009 design codes are using the same
parameter in classifying soils, namely the shear waves propagation velocities,
vs,30 . Table 5 presents a comparison between the classifications provided by
these codes.
Table 5
Soil Classification in SR EN 1998-1-2004 and IBC 2009
Site
class
A
B
C
D
E

S1, S2

SR EN 1998-1-2004
Description of the
vs,30
Site class
stratigraphic profile
m/s
Rock or other rock like
>800
A
geological formation
Deposits of very dense 360800
B
sand, gravel or very
stiff clay
Deep deposits of dense 180360
C
or medium dense sand,
gravel or stiff clay
Deposit of loose-to<180
D
medium cohesionless
soil
Soil profile consisting
E
of a surface alluvium
layer with vs values of
type C or D
Soft clays/silts with a
<100
F
high plasticiy index :
liquefiable soils

IBC 2009
Desciption of the
stratigraphic profile
Hard rock
Rock

vs,30
m/s
>1,500
7601,500

Very dense soil and

soft rock

370760

Stiff soil

180370

Soil

<180

Soils requiring site

specific evaluation

Although the site classes are named in the same manner (e.g. A, B,
C,) in both codes, the description of the soils are not the same.
The American design code includes a soil type, named hard rock,
which is defined by a very high shear wave velocity. Also, in terms of rock
class, the American code offers a smaller value of the shear wave velocity than
the one in SR EN 1998-1-2004. For the rest of the site classes there can be
noticed some similarities between the description of the soil stratigraphy and the
values of the shear wave velocities.
The Japanese design code has a simplified method for classifying soils,
namely
a) type I (hard soil) ;
b) type II (medium soil);
c) type III (soft soil).

146

Cerasela-Panselua Olariu and Ioan-Petru Ciongradi

The parameter used for soil classification in BSL is the fundamental

period of vibration of the soils, Tg .The following relation is used (Marino et al.,
2005)
L

Tg = 32

i =1

hi ( H i 1 + H i 2 )
Vi 2

(6)

where: L represents the number of soil layers existing between the base of the
foundation and the rock soil; hi, Hi and Vi represent, respectively, the thickness,
depth and shear wave propagation velocity of the i-th soil layer.
Based on the fundamental period of foundation soil, Tg, the site classes
have the following approximated limits (Marino et al., 2005):
a) the soil type I, Tg = 00.2 s;
b) the soil type II, Tg = 0.20.7 s;
c) the soil type III, Tg = 0.70.9 s.
In the same manner as the SR EN 1998-1-2004 design code, the
Japanese code supplies the values of the corner periods. These corner periods
are used in BSL to determine the design spectral coefficient, Rt, depending on
the soil type. The following values are provided (Building Standard Law,
2004):
1 hard soil, TC = 0.4;
2 medium soil, TC = 0.6;
3 soft soil, TC = 0.8.
The Chilean design code classifies the soil types into four main classes
(Earthquake Resistant Design, 1996):
a) soil type I: rock - natural material with in situ shear wave propagation
velocity, vs 900;
b) soil type II: soils with vs 400 in the upper 10 m;
c) soil type III: permanently unsaturated sand, unsaturated gravel or
sand, cohesive soils, saturated sand;
d) soil type IV: saturated cohesive soil.
From all the above mentioned it is noticed that the studied design codes
classifies soils in various ways. This happens because each country has its own
national classification criteria and also it has different numbers of national
seismic records and large scale experiments data. Apart from this, the shear
wave propagation velocities play a very important role in sites classification.
This remark is realistic because the design codes are applied in countries from
different continents which have different geology and seismic activity.
4. Conclusions
The knowledge of the seismic force in the design process is an essential
step. All the studied design codes provide computational relations for the shear

Bul. Inst. Polit. Iai, t. LVII (LXI), f. 1, 2011

147

base force and for the used coefficients, presented under various names and
notations. Essentially, these coefficients have approximately the same
meanings, the only difference being their values. Also, another key element in
determining the correct seismic shear base is knowing the fundamental periods
of vibration for the foundation soils.
Every design code has a soil classification based on national criteria
and on parameters used for defining the soil classes. There are some
resemblances between the classifications provided by SR EN 1998-1-2004 and
IBC 2009 design codes defining the soil classes based on the values of the shear
wave velocities.
Also, there are some similarities between the Japanese design code BSL
and SR EN 1998-1-2004/NA:2008, based on providing the corner period values
depending on the nature of the foundation soil. The main difference between
these codes lies in the used parameters for site classification, namely Tg and vs.
Actually, the natural period of vibration of the foundation soil in BSL is
computed using the value of the shear wave velocity in that layer. Therefore,
this highlights the importance of knowing these values for the sites.
Even though the classifications are more or less detailed the remarkable
thing is the importance granted to them in order to have a performant seismic
design.
To sum up, there are different ways to take into account the influence of
the foundation soils in computing the seismic shear base forces. The presence of
various coefficients depending on the foundation soil highlights the growing
interest of the researchers and of the government officials to provide precise
information for seismic design as to prevent the terrible effects that may occur.

REFERENCES
*
* *
*
* *

Cod de proiectare seismic. Partea I. P100/1-2006, Bucureti, 2006.

Eurocod 8: Proiectarea structurilor pentru rezistena la cutremur. Partea 1. SR EN
1998-1-2004, 15 decembrie 2004.
*
* * International Building Code. International Code Council, Inc., 2009.
*
* * Building Standard Law (BSL). Ministry of Constructuction, Building Center of
Japan, Tokyo, Japan, 2004.
*
* * Earthquake Resistant Design of Buildings (Diseno sismico de edificios), NCh433.
of 96, Chile, 1996
*
* * NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and
other Structures. Part 1-15, Fema 450, Washington, D.C., 2003.
*
* * Eurocod 8: Proiectarea structurilor pentru rezistena la cutremur, Partea 1: Reguli
generale, aciuni seismice i reguli pentru cldiri. Anexa Naional SR EN
1998-1:2004/NA:2008, 28 noiembrie 2008.
Johnson J.J., Soil Structure Interaction: Statement of the Problem. In Earthquake
Engineering Handbook. CRC Press, 2003, Ch. 10, 10-1/10-29.

148

Cerasela-Panselua Olariu and Ioan-Petru Ciongradi

Marino E.M., Nakashima M., Mosalam K.M., Comparison of European and Japanese
Design of Steel Building Structures. Engng. Struct., 27, 827-840, 2005.
Tomohiro H. Introduction to the Building Standard Law. Japanese Building Codes and
Building Control System, Building Center of Japan, April 2010.
MODALITI DE LUARE N CONSIDERARE N UNELE CODURI A
INFLUENEI CONDIIILOR DE TEREN N CALCULAREA FOREI SEISMICE
TIETOARE LA BAZ
(Rezumat)
Pentru ingineria civil cunoaterea i controlarea aciunii seismice este
esenial pentru a se putea preveni efectele ce pot s se produc n timpul unui cutremur.
Efectele aciunilor seismice se pot determina pe baza comportrii liniar-elastice a
structurii. Una dintre metodele de calcul structural la aciunea seismic, cel mai des
utilizate dar i prezente n diferite coduri de proiectare, este metoda forelor laterale
asociate modului de vibraie fundamental. Esenial pentru aceast metod este
determinarea corect a forei tietoare de baz. n cadrul formulrii acesteia se ia n
considerare influena condiiilor de teren prin diferii coeficieni care sunt n funcie de
zonarea seismic, categoria de pmnt i perioada fundamental de vibraie.
n lucrare se urmrete evidenierea modului n care anumite coduri naionale
i internaionale iau n considerare influenele condiiilor de teren n calculul seismic al
structurilor. Astfel, sunt prezentate diferite tipuri de clasificri ale amplasamentelor n
funcie de zonarea seismic i a perioadelor de col sau al factorului de teren. Se mai
prezint de asemenea diferite modaliti de calcul pentru fora seismic tietore de baz.
Prevederi ale urmtoarelor norme internaionale i naionale au fost luate n considerare
pentru a se putea realiza aceste comparaii i evidenieri: codurile de proiectare ale
Statelor Unite ale Americii, cele din Chile, Japonia i Romnia precum i Eurocod.