FEMA 307 98 1998
$14.30
FEMA 307 – Evaluation of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings: Technical Resources
Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
FEMA | 1998 | 272 |
PDF Catalog
PDF Pages | PDF Title |
---|---|
3 | Preface |
5 | Table of Contents |
9 | List of Figures |
13 | List of Tables |
15 | Prologue What have we learned? |
16 | What does it mean? |
19 | 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose And Scope 1.2 Materials Working Group 1.2.1 Tests and Investigations 1.2.2 Component Behavior and Modeling |
20 | Figure 1 1 Component Force-Deformation Relationships 1.2.3 Repair Techniques |
21 | Figure 1 2 Generalized Undamaged and Damaged Component Curves 1.3 Analysis Working Group |
22 | Figure 1 3 Effect of Damage on Building Response 1.4 References |
23 | Figure 1 4 Global Load-Displacement Relationships |
25 | 2. Reinforced Concrete Components 2.1 Commentary and Discussion 2.1.1 Development of Component Guides and l Factors |
26 | Figure 2 1 Diagram of process used to develop component guides and component modification factors. |
27 | Table 2 1 Ranges of reinforced concrete component displacement ductility, mD, associated with dam… |
28 | 2.2 Typical Force-Displacement Hysteretic Behavior |
46 | 2.3 Tabular Bibliography |
47 | Table 2 2 Key References on Reinforced Concrete Wall Behavior. |
51 | 2.4 Symbols for Reinforced Concrete |
53 | 2.5 References for Reinforced Concrete |
57 | 3. Reinforced Masonry 3.1 Commentary and Discussion 3.1.1 Typical Hysteretic Behavior 3.1.2 Cracking and Damage Severity |
58 | Table 3 1 Damage Patterns and Hysteretic Response for Reinforced Masonry Components |
64 | 3.1.3 Interpretation of Tests 3.2 Tabular Bibliography for Reinforced Masonry |
65 | Table 3 2 Ranges of reinforced masonry component displacement ductility, mD, associated with dama… |
66 | Table 3 3 Annotated Bibliography for Reinforced Masonry |
71 | 3.3 Symbols for Reinforced Masonry |
72 | 3.4 References for Reinforced Masonry |
77 | 4. Unreinforced Masonry 4.1 Commentary and Discussion 4.1.1 Hysteretic Behavior of URM Walls Subjected to In-Plane Demands |
90 | 4.1.2 Comments on FEMA 273 Component Force/Displacement Relationships |
91 | Figure 4 1 Bed-joint sliding force/displacement relationship |
92 | Figure 4 2 Relationship Between Toe Crushing and Bed-Joint Sliding |
93 | 4.1.3 Development of l-factors |
94 | Figure 4 3 Developing the initial portion of the damaged force/displacement relationship |
95 | 4.2 Tabular Bibliography for Unreinforced Masonry |
98 | 4.3 Symbols for Unreinforced Masonry |
99 | 4.4 References for Unreinforced Masonry |
103 | 5. Infilled Frames 5.1 Commentary And Discussion 5.1.1 Development of l-Factors for Component Guides 5.1.2 Development of Stiffness Deterioration—lK |
104 | 5.1.3 The Determination of lQ for Strength Deterioration |
105 | 5.1.4 Development of lD—Reduction in Displacement Capability |
106 | Figure 5 1 Energy-based damage analysis of strength reduction to define lQ |
107 | 5.2 Tabular Bibliography for Infilled Frames Table 5 1 Tabular Bibliography for Infilled Frames |
109 | 5.3 References for Infilled Frames |
113 | 6. Analytical Studies 6.1 Overview 6.2 Summary of Previous Findings 6.2.1 Hysteresis Models |
115 | Figure 6 1 Effect of Hysteretic Properties on Response to 1940 NS El Centro Record (from Nakamura… |
116 | 6.2.2 Effect of Ground Motion Duration 6.2.3 Residual Displacement 6.2.4 Repeated Loading |
117 | 6.3 Dynamic Analysis Framework 6.3.1 Overview 6.3.2 Dynamic Analysis Approach |
118 | 6.3.3 Ground Motions |
119 | Table 6 1 Recorded Ground Motions Used in the Analyses |
120 | Figure 6 2 Characteristics of the WN87MWLN.090 (Mount Wilson) Ground Motion |
121 | Figure 6 3 Characteristics of the BB92CIVC.360 (Big Bear) Ground Motion |
122 | Figure 6 4 Characteristics of the SP88GUKA.360 (Spitak) Ground Motion |
123 | Figure 6 5 Characteristics of the LP89CORR.090 (Corralitos) Ground Motion |
124 | Figure 6 6 Characteristics of the NR94CENT.360 (Century City) Ground Motion |
125 | Figure 6 7 Characteristics of the IV79ARY7.140 (Imperial Valley Array) Ground Motion |
126 | Figure 6 8 Characteristics of the CH85LLEO.010 (Llolleo) Ground Motion |
127 | Figure 6 9 Characteristics of the CH85VALP.070 (Valparaiso University) Ground Motion |
128 | Figure 6 10 Characteristics of the IV40ELCN.180 (El Centro) Ground Motion |
129 | Figure 6 11 Characteristics of the TB78TABS.344 (Tabas) Ground Motion |
130 | Figure 6 12 Characteristics of the LN92JOSH.360 (Joshua Tree) Ground Motion |
131 | Figure 6 13 Characteristics of the MX85SCT1.270 (Mexico City) Ground Motion |
132 | Figure 6 14 Characteristics of the LN92LUCN.250 (Lucerne) Ground Motion |
133 | Figure 6 15 Characteristics of the IV79BRWY.315 (Brawley Airport) Ground Motion |
134 | Figure 6 16 Characteristics of the LP89SARA.360 (Saratoga) Ground Motion |
135 | Figure 6 17 Characteristics of the NR94NWHL.360 (Newhall) Ground Motion |
136 | Figure 6 18 Characteristics of the NR94SYLH.090 (Sylmar Hospital) Ground Motion |
137 | Figure 6 19 Characteristics of the KO95TTRI.360 (Takatori) Ground Motion |
138 | 6.3.4 Force/Displacement Models Figure 6 20 Force-Displacement Hysteretic Models |
139 | Figure 6 21 Degrading Models Used in the Analyses |
140 | Figure 6 22 Bilinear Model Used to Determine Strengths of Degrading Models Figure 6 23 Specification of the Pinching Point for the Takeda Pinching Model 6.3.5 Undamaged Oscillator Parameters |
141 | Figure 6 24 Specification of the Uncracked Stiffness, Cracking Strength, and Unloading Stiffness … 6.3.6 Damaged Oscillator Parameters Figure 6 25 Construction of Initial Force-Displacement Response for Prior Ductility Demand > 0 an… |
142 | Figure 6 26 Construction of Initial Force-Displacement Response for PDD> 0 and RSR< 1 for Takeda5… |
143 | Figure 6 27 Strength Degradation for Takeda Pinching Model 6.3.7 Summary of Dynamic Analysis Parameters |
144 | Figure 6 28 Construction of Initial Force-Displacement Response for PDD> 0 and RSR< 1 for Takeda … 6.3.8 Implementation of Analyses 6.4 Results Of Dynamic Analyses 6.4.1 Overview and Nomenclature |
145 | 6.4.2 Response of Bilinear Models 6.4.3 Response of Takeda Models |
146 | Figure 6 29 Response of Bilinear Oscillators to Short Duration Records (DDD= 8) |
147 | Figure 6 30 Response of Bilinear Oscillators to Long Duration Records (DDD= 8) |
148 | Figure 6 31 Response of Bilinear Oscillators to Forward Directive Records (DDD= 8) |
149 | Figure 6 32 Displacement Response of Takeda Models Compared with Elastic Response and Bilinear Re… |
150 | Figure 6 33 Displacement Response of Takeda Models Compared with Elastic Response and Bilinear Re… |
151 | Figure 6 34 Displacement Response of Takeda Models Compared with Elastic Response and Bilinear Re… |
153 | Figure 6 35 Effect of Cracking Without and With Strength Reduction on Displacement Response of Ta… |
154 | Figure 6 36 Effect of Cracking Without and With Strength Reduction on Displacement Response of Ta… |
155 | Figure 6 37 Effect of Cracking Without and With Strength Reduction on Displacement Response of Ta… |
156 | Figure 6 38 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
157 | Figure 6 39 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
158 | Figure 6 40 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
159 | Figure 6 41 Effect of Damage on Response to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for Takeda5, T=0.2 sec (DDD= 8) |
160 | Figure 6 42 Effect of Damage on Response to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for Takeda5, T=0.5 sec (DDD= 8) |
161 | Figure 6 43 Effect of Damage on Response to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for Takeda5, T=1.0 sec (DDD= 8) |
162 | Figure 6 44 Effect of Damage on Response to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for Takeda5, T=1.5 sec (DDD= 8) |
163 | Figure 6 45 Effect of Damage on Response to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for Takeda5, T=2.0 sec (DDD= 8) |
164 | Figure 6 46 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
165 | Figure 6 47 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
166 | Figure 6 48 Effect of Large Prior Ductility Demand Without and With Strength Reduction on Displac… |
167 | Figure 6 49 Effect of Damage on Response of TakPinch Model to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for T=1.0 … |
168 | Figure 6 50 Effect of Damage on Response of TakPinch Model to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for T=1.0 … |
169 | 6.4.4 Response Statistics Figure 6 51 Effect of Cracking on Displacement Response of Takeda10 Model for Short Duration Reco… |
170 | Figure 6 52 Effect of Cracking on Displacement Response of Takeda10 Model for Long-Duration Recor… Figure 6 53 Effect of Cracking on Displacement Response of Takeda10 Model for Forward Directive R… |
171 | Figure 6 54 Effect of Damage on Response of Takeda10 Model to El Centro (IV40ELCN.180) for T=1.0 … |
173 | 6.5 Nonlinear Static Procedures 6.5.1 Introduction |
174 | 6.5.2 Description of Nonlinear Static Procedures |
175 | Figure 6 58 Construction of Effective Stiffness for use with the Displacement Coefficient Method |
176 | Figure 6 59 Initial Effective Stiffness and Capacity Curves Used in the Secant and Capacity Spect… Figure 6 60 Schematic Depiction of Secant Method Displacement Estimation |
177 | Figure 6 61 Schematic Depiction of Successive Iterations to Estimate Displacement Response Using … 6.5.3 Comments on Procedures Figure 6 62 Schematic Depiction of Successive Iterations to Estimate Displacement Response Using … |
178 | 6.5.4 Application of Procedures to Undamaged and Damaged Oscillators 6.6 Comparison of NSP and Dynamic Analysis Results 6.6.1 Introduction 6.6.2 Displacement Estimation |
179 | 6.6.3 Displacement Ratio Estimation |
180 | Figure 6 63 Values of dd,NSP/dd for the Takeda5 Model |
181 | Figure 6 64 Mean values of dd,NSP /dd for all ground motions for each NSP method, for short and l… Figure 6 65 Coefficient Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacemen… |
182 | Figure 6 66 Coefficient Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacemen… Figure 6 67 Coefficient Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacemen… |
183 | Figure 6 68 Secant Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacement Nor… Figure 6 69 Secant Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacement Nor… |
184 | Figure 6 70 Secant Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displacement Nor… Figure 6 71 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displ… |
185 | Figure 6 72 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displ… Figure 6 73 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Ratio of Damaged and Undamaged Oscillator Displ… |
186 | Figure 6 74 Coefficient Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Osc… |
187 | Figure 6 75 Coefficient Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Osc… |
188 | Figure 6 76 Coefficient Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Osc… |
189 | Figure 6 77 Secant Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Oscillat… |
190 | Figure 6 78 Secant Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Oscillat… |
191 | Figure 6 79 Secant Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Takeda5 Oscillat… |
192 | Figure 6 80 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Taked… |
193 | Figure 6 81 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Taked… |
194 | Figure 6 82 Capacity Spectrum Method Estimates of Displacement Ratio of RSR=0.6 and RSR=1.0 Taked… |
195 | 6.7 Conclusions and Implications |
196 | 6.8 References |
199 | 7. Example Application 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 Objectives 7.1.2 Organization |
200 | Figure 7 1 Flowchart for example |
201 | 7.2 Investigation 7.2.1 Building Description 7.2.2 Post-earthquake Damage Observations |
202 | Figure 7 2 Floor Plans |
203 | Figure 7 3 Building Cross-section Figure 7 4 Example Solid Wall Detail (Condition at Line 7) |
204 | Figure 7 5 Example Coupled Wall Detail (Condition at line B) |
205 | Figure 7 6 Solid Wall Example |
206 | Figure 7 7 Coupled Wall Example |
207 | 7.2.3 Preliminary Classification (by Observation) of Component Types, Behavior Modes, and Damage … |
208 | 7.2.4 Final Classification (by Analysis) of Component Type, Behavior Mode and Damage Severity |
213 | 7.2.6 Summary of Component Classifications |
217 | 7.3 Evaluation by the Direct Method 7.3.1 Structural Restoration Measures |
218 | Table 7 4 Summary of Component Type, Behavior Mode, and Damage Severity for Wall Components (Nort… |
219 | Table 7 5 Summary of Component Type, Behavior Mode, and Damage Severity for Wall Components (East… 7.3.2 Nonstructural Restoration Measures 7.3.3 Restoration Summary and Cost 7.4 Evaluation by Performance Analysis |
220 | Figure 7 8 Detail of Coupling Beam Replacement Table 7 6 Restoration Cost Estimate by the Direct Method 7.4.1 Performance Objectives |
221 | Figure 7 9 Response Spectra for Selected Performance Levels 7.4.2 Nonlinear Static Analysis |
222 | Figure 7 10 Mathematical Model of Coupled Shear Wall |
223 | Figure 7 11 Mathematical Model of Full Building |
224 | 7.4.3 Force-Displacement Capacity (Pushover Analysis) Results |
225 | Figure 7 12 Component Force-Displacement Curves for Coupling Beams |
226 | Figure 7 13 Comparison of Pre-event and Post-event Pushover Curves |
227 | 7.4.4 Estimation of Displacement, de, Caused by Damaging Earthquake Figure 7 14 Response Spectra from Damaging Earthquake |
228 | 7.4.5 Displacement Demand |
230 | 7.4.6 Analysis of Restored Structure Table 7 7 Performance Indices for Pre-event and Post-event Structures |
231 | Figure 7 15 Comparison of Pre-event and Repaired Pushover Curves |
232 | 7.4.7 Performance Restoration Measures 7.5 Discussion of Results 7.5.1 Discussion of Building Performance Table 7 8 Restoration Cost Estimate by the Relative Performance Method |
233 | 7.5.2 Discussion of Methodology and Repair Costs 7.6 References |
235 | Appendix A. Component Damage Records for Building Evaluated in Example Application |
255 | ATC-43 Project Participants |
259 | Applied Technology Council Projects And Report Information |