

Comparison of Seismic Design of Building as per Generalized Approach by ASCE-7, and Seismic Hazard Assessment
Abstract
Earthquakes remain the largely damaging natural disasters, with their occurrences varying significantly across regions. The frequent seismic activity in certain areas highlights the elevated levels of hazard and risk. There is a critical need to integrate recent advancements in seismic analysis to better understand ground motion effects on structures. Seismogenic zones are categorized based on historical seismicity, geology, tectonics, soil types, and ground motion intensity, which may lead to underestimation or overestimation of seismic forces. To accurately represent the behavior of structures under seismic loads, a site-specific approach is essential. This study focuses on evaluating the seismic performance of multi-storeyed buildings following ASCE 7-16 provisions.
These paper shows a comparison for seismic design of building as per generalised approach by ASCE-7, and seismic hazard assessment. A site Utah, USA is selected, for which site classification is done as per the available soil profile of the location and site-specific response spectrum are developed. For the comparison of base shear two multistorey building are taken first building of G+3 and G+6. The analysis and design of building are done using E-tabs. Form the analysis it follows that the G+3 the generalised method predict base shear on higher side compared to site specific approach, and as the height of building increases i.e., for G+6 the Site-specific approach predict base shear on higher.
References
Sarika S. Desai • Deepankar Choudhury, “Spatial variation of prbabilistic seismic hazard for Mumbai and surrounding region”. Natural Hazards 71(3): 1783-1898. Springer (2014).
Mohanty, W.K., Verma, A.K., “Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Kakrapar atomic power station, Gujarat, India. Nat Hazards 69, 919–952 (2013).
Mohanty, A. K., Mohanty, W. K., “An Overview of Seismic Zonation Studies in India” Indian Geotech Conf., 175-178 (2010).
Kolathayar sreevalsa, Sitharam. T. G, “Earthquake hazard assessment India and adjacent regions”, CRC Press/Balkema:Taylor & Francis Group (2018).
Abrahamson.N, et.al, “Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA Ground-Motion Relations”. Earthquake Spectra 24 (1): 67-97 (2008).
Abrahamson.N, et.al, “Summary of the ASK14 Ground Motion Relation for Active Crustal Regions”. Earthquake Spectra 30 (3): 1025-1055 (2014).
Boore. D, et.al., “NGA-West2 Equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped PSA for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes”. Earthquake Spectra 30 (3): 1057-1085 (2014).
Chiou, B., et.al., “An NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra.”, Earthquake Spectra 24: 173-215 (2008).
Chiou, B., et.al., “Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra”, Earthquake Spectra 30 (3): 1117-1153 (2014).
Chris C., “Site-Specific Seismic-Hazard Analysis that is Completely Probabilistic”. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93 (4): 1840-1846 (2003).
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.