Potres Zidovi
Potres Zidovi
Potres Zidovi
1 INTRODUCTION
The structural Eurocodes are implemented in higher grade concrete, effective splicing of the
Bulgaria for seismic design of new buildings. Moreover reinforcement, advanced detailing which ensure stable
they are obligatory standard for design of important and seismic response of the whole structure, etc.;
significant residential and office buildings. This fact will • Higher requirements for architectural and functional
increase margin of safety of those buildings for sure solutions in order to avoid the unstable and unclear
because Eurocodes are newer and more comprehensive seismic response of structural system of the building i.e.
system of structural design standards compared to old penalties for irregularity in plan and in elevation as well
Bulgarian codes. However some problems appear in as for the torsionally flexible systems, etc.
application of those new and advanced standards in There are completely new requirements of Eurocode
Bulgarian design and construction practice. 8 in comparison it with the old Bulgarian seismic
Most of those problems are already discussed in standard. They could be briefly listed as follows:
many references (please see [1]÷[6]). The main goal of • New seismic zonation which is based on the
this report is to show how those problems are solved in current seismic hazard definitions is implemented;
the real application of structural Eurocodes. Special • New limit state is implemented – damage limitation
attention is paid to the problems which are developed in level (DLL);
using Eurocode 8 in seismic design of reinforced • Three ductility classes are presented in Eurocode 8
concrete buildings. – low, medium, and high – DCL, DCM and DCH;
• Stiffness reduction of structural elements of seismic
structure is required;
2 MAJOR STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS IN
APPLICATION OF EUROCODES IN SEISMIC • Some precise checks for regularity in plan and
DESIGN OF RC STRUCTURES elevation as well as for torsionally flexible system are
required;
The major structural problems in application of • The concept with “primary” and “secondary”
Eurocode 8 could be roughly classified as follows: seismic elements is implemented;
• More comprehensive design checks, detailing • The new structural system with “large lightly rein-
rules, etc. which leads to some solutions which are not forced walls” is introduced;
typical for the current design and construction practice; • Capacity correction of action effects from the
• Requirements for application of some new analysis are required;
technologies in execution of building structures such as • Capacity design procedure is applied for seismic
design.
According to the requirements of Eurocode 8 the Structural Calculations of RC Structures (from 2010) in
stiffness of the RC members for linear analysis should order to reduce the stiffness of the structural elements
be reduced. However there are not detailed instructions by plastic hinges. The author's proposal based on the
how exactly to reduce that stiffness. It is proposed in [6] above mentioned standard is given in Table 1 and in
to apply the proposals of the Japanese AIJ Standard for Figs 2 ÷ 3.
Table 1. Proposed stiffness reduction for members with plastic hinges according to AIJ
Bending
Member Axial stiffness Shear stiffness
stiffness
without plastic
1.0 1.0 (or ∞) 1.0 (or ∞)
Beams hinges
with plastic hinges 0.3÷0.5 1.0 or ∞ 0.3÷1.0 (or ∞)
without plastic
1.0 1.0 1.0 (or ∞)
hinges
with one plastic
Колони 0.7 1.0 1.0 (or ∞)
hinge
with two plastic
0.3÷0.5 1.0 1.0 (or ∞)
hinge
without plastic
1.0 1.0 0.5÷1.0
hinges
A lot of attention is paid in Eurocode 8 for recognition is presented in Fig. 4 . The torsionally flexible systems
and possibly avoiding torsionally flexible systems. The are extremely dangerous during earthquakes. A heavily
penalty for torsionally flexible system is behaviour factor damaged building with such system is presented in Fig
reduction by about 50% for such systems compared to 5.
the wall structures and even much more compared to It is highly recommended to avoid torsionally flexible
frame structures. However Eurocode 8 fails to provide systems in practical seismic design of RC structures. A
clear procedure for recognition of torsionally flexible practical example how to avoid torsionally flexible
systems. This problem is left to the National Annexes. system is presented in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7.
The procedure presented below is adopted from [5] and
Fig. 5. Heavy damaged office building with torsionally flexible system during the earthquake in Kobe 1995
The analysis effects are capacity corrected according avoided by calculating design shear forces based on
to Eurocode 8. A bending moment envelope diagram plastic hinge mechanism for the given member, thus
with consideration for the tension shift is adopted taking allowing the element to resist the maximal shear force
into account modelling uncertainties and post-elastic that can be developed before forming the mechanism.
dynamic effects. Moreover, the possible effects of Walls correction is presented in Fig 8 ÷ 9 and for the
increase in shear forces due to post-yield behaviour, case of frame members – in Figs 10 ÷ 11.
compared to those obtained from analysis, must be Capacity correction of the analysis forces is very
considered by implementation of shear force important for seismic shear resistance of beams,
magnification factor. Its value is ε = 1.5 for DCM, while columns and shear walls. Some appalling examples of
for DCH exact calculations have to be done, taking into shear failure in columns from past earthquakes are
account overstrength, flexural capacity and structure presented in Fig. 12.
response. In frame structures the shear failure mode is
Fig. 11. Calculation of shear forces for columns, based on capacity design rules
3.6 Primary and secondary seismic elements should be designed to resist the vertical loading when
they are subjected to the most unfavourable
The concept of primary and secondary elements is displacements by the seismic action. It is disallowed to
implemented in Eurocode 8.The secondary elements are classify some elements as secondary ones if they
not a part of the seismic structure. Their strength and change structural type from torsionally flexible into some
rigidity could be neglected during the seismic analysis. other. However Eurocode 8 provides some unclear
However the whole contribution of the secondary instructions how to calculate the action effects of
elements to the rigidity of the structure for horizontal secondary elements in seismic design situation. A
loading should not exceed 15% of the rigidity of all proposal for calculation of action effects in columns of
primary elements. Typical examples for secondary RC wall type of buildings with flat slabs in seismic design
elements are the columns of RC wall type of buildings situation is given in Fig 16.
with flat slabs. Those elements and their connections
One of the major difficulties for application of DCH for of walls. An example of shear wall reinforcement of the
the wall type of structures is too strict requirements for example building presented in Fig.6 is shown in Fig. 18.
the shear resistance check on compression strut. The However the underestimating of shear design of walls
definition of this check is presented in Fig. 17. The leads to the collapse as that presented in Fig. 19.
Eurocode 8 has very high requirements for shear design
Fig. 19. Heavy damaged shear wall during the earthquake in Turkey 1999
Local ductility of ductile walls is ensured by providing Some proposals for procedures for local ductility
the confined boundary elements in the critical zone of calculations for walls with rectangular and composite
the wall. However the procedure for calculation of the section are given bellow in Figs 20 ÷ 21. An example of
length of confined boundary elements is complicated confining reinforcement for wall structures with
and is partly clear in Eurocode 8 even for the case of composite cross section designed according to
walls with rectangular cross section. In author’s opinion Eurocode 8 is shown on Fig. 22.
the procedure is iterative even for the simple cases.
⎡0.15l w
5. lc ≥ lc ,min = max ⎢
⎣ 1.5bw
Fig. 20. Calculation of the length of boundary elements based on the requirements for local ductility
X u = (νd + ωv )
1. lwbwo ;
bo
2.1 If Xu ≤ hf 2.2 If Xu > hf the following iterative solution is proposed:
the above procedure for a) Confinement reinforcement is detailed and boundary
rectangular section is applied elements length is assumed;
assuming bw = bf b) Equilibrium state at yield curvature is inspected and xy
and y are calculated;
c) Equilibrium state at maximum curvature is inspected
and xy and y are calculated;
d) Curvature ductility ratio µ is determined
⎧ ⎛ M Ed ⎞
⎪2qo ⎜⎜ ⎟ −1 ако Т1 ≥ Т C
φ ⎪ M ⎟
µφ = u ≥ ⎨ ⎝ Rd ⎠max
φy ⎪ ⎛M ⎞
1 + 2(q0 − 1)TC T1 ⎜⎜ Ed ⎟⎟ ако Т1 < Т C
⎪ ⎝ M Rd ⎠ max
⎩
e) Steps from a) to d) are repeated if required
Fig. 21. Fulfilment of local ductility requirements for composite wall sections
The detailing requirements of Eurocode 8 for ductile dumbbell cross-section is presented in Fig. 25. That
walls are given in Figs. 23 ÷ 24. Some special attention shear wall is designed according to Eurocode 8 and it is
should be paid to detailing confined boundary elements from the example building shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7.
in critical zone. An example for detailing shear walls with
The “strong columns – weak beams” concept is design of frame structures. An example of braking that
major issue in seismic design of frame structures rule and its consequences are presented in Fig. 28 – a
according to Eurocode8. That concept is presented in total collapse of building.
Figs. 26 ÷ 27.
The fulfilment of the capacity design rule “strong
columns – weak beams” is very important for seismic
(M y
Rc ,b + M Rc
y
) (
,t ≥ 1.3 M Rb + M Rb
1 2
) (M x
Rc ,b + M Rc
x
) (
,t ≥ 1.3 M Rb + M Rb
3 4
)
Fig. 26. Verification of “weak beams strong columns” requirement in beam column joints
Fig. 28. Total collapse of a building due to “week columns-strong beams” – Turkey 1999
Eurocode 8 is the comprehensive seismic code Eurocode 8 for the ductility checks of primary columns of
which has local ductility checks for columns which is frame structures is presented on Fig. 29.
based on the quantity of confining stirrups as well as on
properties of the confined concrete. The procedure of
The detailing requirements of Eurocode 8 for primary For the case of columns the major problems are
beams and columns are given in Figs. 30 ÷ 33. Some close clear distance between longitudinal bars especially
special attention should be paid to the reinforcement in the lapping length as well as required distance
ratio of top beam reinforcement and diameter limitation between stirrups in the splicing length of longitudinal
on longitudinal bars which are bonded in beam-column bars (see Fig. 35). The problem could be solved by
joints. splicing devices. However some special tests are
It is very important to ensure 135o hook for the required for them. An example of application of such
stirrups in the beams, columns and walls. The devices is presented in Fig. 36. The building in which the
experience of past earthquakes shows that damages are devices were applied was designed and detailed
usually initiated from places where 90o stirrups hooks according to Eurocodes.
are applied (please see Fig. 34).
Fig. 30. Transversal reinforcement detailing requirements for beams in seismic MRF – DCM
Fig. 32. Reinforcement detailing requirements for columns in seismic MRF – DCM
Fig. 34. Initiation of column failure due to 90o hooks of stirrups – Turkey 1999
Fig. 35. Problems with clear space between both longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in lapping length of
longitudinal bars (the structure was designed according to Eurocodes)
6 CONCLUSIONS 7 REFERENCES
On the basis of the study presented herein the [1] Elghazouli, A., (Editor), Seismic Design of
following conclusions could be drawn: Buildings to Eurocode 8, Spoon Press, 2009;
Eurocode 8 is a code which is based on advanced [2] Fardis, M., at al, Designers Guide to EN 1998-1
theoretical background following the latest developments and EN 1998-5. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures
in the research on seismic design of buildings; for Earthquake Resistance, Tomas Telford, 2005;
• It is necessary to ensure that structural engineers [Fardis];
correctly implement new features of Eurocode 8 such as [3] Moehle, J., Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete
capacity design procedure, primary and secondary Buildings, McGrawHill, 2014
elements concept, new types of structural elements as [4] Paulay, T., Priestley, M.J.N., Seismic Design of
large lightly reinforced walls, local ductility requirements Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, John
for the different RC elements, etc.; Wiley & sons, Inc, 1992
• It is expected that Eurocode 8 will ensure more [5] P. Bisch, E. Carvalho, H. Degee, P. Fajfar, M.
stable and reliable seismic behaviour of buildings Fardis, P. Franchin, M. Kreslin, A. Pecker, P. Pinto,
compared to old Bulgarian seismic code; A. Plumier, H. Somja, G. Tsionis, Eurocode 8:
• It is possible that building structures which are Seismic Design of Buildings.Worked examples,
designed by the Eurocodes will be slightly more Lisbon, 2011;
expensive than those designed according to old [6] Milev, J., Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete
Bulgarian seismic code; Structures, KIIP Sofia, 2012 (in Bulgarian)
• It is supposed that the major part of the existing
buildings in Bulgaria fail to meet the strict requirements
of Eurocode 8 and special attention should be made
during their retrofit and reconstruction;
• There are some problems in the Bulgarian National
Annexes and in the Eurocode 8 itself that should be
solved.
The main purpose of the paper is to present practical Primarni cilj ovog rada je prikaz i analiza praktične
application of Eurocodes in the field of RC structures primene Evrokodova u projektovanju armiranobeton-
design. The selected examples represent the main skoih (AB) konstrukcija. Odabrani primeri ilustuju glavne
problems in practical application of Eurocodes for probleme u praktičnoj primeni Evrokodova za seizmičku
seismic analysis and design of RC Structures in analizu i projektovanje AB konstrukcija u građevinskoj
Bulgarian construction practice. The analysis is focused praksi Bugarske. Naglasak analize je usmeren na kon-
on some structural and economic problems as well as on strukcijske i ekonomske probleme, kao i na neke kontra-
some contradictions in Eurocode 8 itself. Special diktornosti koje postoje u Evrokodu 8 (EN 1998).
attention is paid to the practical solution of the following Posebna pažnja posvećena je praktičnim rešenjima
problems: recognition of torsionally flexible systems, sledećih praktičnih problema: prepoznavanje torziono
stiffness reduction of RC elements for linear analysis fleksibilnih sistema; smanjenje krutosti AB elemenata za
dimensions and detailing of confined boundary areas of linarnu analizu, dimenzionisanje i oblikovanje detalja
shear walls, detailing of wall structures, etc. Those utegnutih graničnih oblasti smičućih zidova; oblikovanje
problems appear during the practical design of some detalja nosećih zidova i dr. Ovi problemi se javljaju
buildings in Bulgaria. Several proposals for solving some tokom praktičnog projektovanja nekih zgrada u Bugar-
problems defined in the paper are presented through skoj. Nekoliko predloga za rešavanje problema anali-
some practical examples. Some conclusions are made ziranih u radu su predstavljeni preko praktičnih primera.
for further application of Eurocode 8 in the design and Za dalju primenu Evrokoda 8 pri projektovanju i građenju
construction practice. The importance of some rules and formulisani su odgovarajući zaključci. Značaj pojedinih
procedures in Eurocode 8 is supported by the examples pravila i procedura u Evrokodu 8 su propraćeni
of damaged RC members during the past earthquakes. primerima AB elemenata oštećenih tokom prethodnih
The problems of Eurocode 8 and their solutions are zamljotresa. Problemi vezani za Evrokod 8 i njihovo
illustrated through the experience of Bulgarian rešavanje su ilustrovani primerima i iskustvima iz
construction practice. praktične primene u Bugarskoj.
Key words: seismic design, Eurocode 8, reinforced Ključne reči: aseizmičko projektovanje, Evrokod 8
concrete structures, wall structure, frame structure, local (EN 1998), armiranobetonske konstrukcije, noseći
ductility, detailing rules zidovi, okvirne konstrukcije, lokalna duktilnost, pravila
oblikovanja detalja