Preliminary Evaluation of the Impact of Eurocode 8 Draft Revision on the Seismic Zonation of Romania

This study is focused on the impact of the Eurocode 8 draft revision on the seismic zonation of Romania, one of the countries with the highest hazard levels in Europe. In this study, the design response spectra are evaluated for a number of sites in Romania for which both shear wave velocity profiles and ground motion recordings are available. The impact of the proposed changes on the structural design for structures situated in the southern part of Romania is also discussed. The results show considerable differences between the design response spectra computed according to the Eurocode 8 draft revision and the design response spectra from the current Romanian seismic code P100-1/2013. The differences are larger in the case of the sites situated in the southern part of Romania and those which have large design values for the control period TC. In Bucharest, for instance, it was found that the maximum design spectral accelerations would correspond to those from the 2006 version of the code while the maximum design spectral displacements would be significantly smaller than the levels produced by the 1981 or 1992 versions of the code. The results presented herein show that the differences in the seismic hazard and design ground motions are mainly due to the effects of local soil and site conditions and the associated site amplification proposed in the current Romanian seismic code and EC8 draft revision. Moreover, it has been shown that more analyses are needed to apply the seismic actions proposed in Eurocode 8 revision specifically for the sites in Romania under the influence of Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes so as to ensure an increased level of seismic safety for structures designed and built in the future.

The 2020 national seismic hazard model for the United Kingdom

We present updated seismic hazard maps for the United Kingdom (UK) intended for use with the National Annex for the revised edition of Eurocode 8. The last national maps for the UK were produced by Musson and Sargeant (Eurocode 8 seismic hazard zoning maps for the UK. British Geological Survey Report CR/07/125, United Kingdom, 2007). The updated model uses an up-to-date earthquake catalogue for the British Isles, for which the completeness periods have been reassessed, and a modified source model. The hazard model also incorporates some advances in ground motion modelling since 2007, including host-to-target adjustments for the ground motion models selected in the logic tree. For the first time, the new maps are provided for not only peak ground acceleration (PGA) but also spectral acceleration at 0.2 s (SA0.2s) and 1.0 s for 5% damping on rock (time-averaged shear wave velocity for the top 30 m Vs30 ≥ 800 m/s) and four return periods, including 475 and 2475 years. The hazard in most of the UK is generally low and increases slightly in North Wales, the England–Wales border region, and western Scotland. A similar spatial variation is observed for PGA and SA0.2s but the effects are more pronounced for SA0.2s. Hazard curves, uniform hazard spectra, and disaggregation analysis are calculated for selected sites. The new hazard maps are compared with the previous 2007 national maps and the 2013 European hazard maps (Woessner et al. in Bull Earthq Eng 13:3553–3596, 2015). There is a slight increase in PGA from the 2007 maps to this work; whereas the hazard in the updated maps is lower than indicated by the European maps.

Background to the Monolithicity Factors for the Assessment of Jacketed Reinforced Concrete Columns

The paper presents the background to the expressions adopted in the new Eurocode 8—3 for jacketed reinforced concrete columns. These are based on the commonly adopted concept of monolithicity factors (ratios of resistance of the jacketed section to that of an identical monolithic one). These factors are derived here in two ways: (i) by fitting experimental results for jacketed columns and (ii) by an extended parametric study of substandard reinforced concrete (R/C) members that were retrofitted by adding R/C jackets, analysed using a model developed by the authors that takes into account slip at the interface. Apart from the cross-section geometry and the thickness of the jacket, parameters of the investigation were the material properties of the core cross-section and the jacket, as well as the percentage of longitudinal reinforcement of the jacket and the percentage of dowels placed to connect the existing member to the jacket. It was found that the parameter that had the most visible effect on these factors was the normalised axial load (ν). The finally adopted factors are either simple functions of ν or constant values.

Developing Earthquake-Resistant Structural Design Standard for Malaysia Based on Eurocode 8: Challenges and Recommendations

In late 2017, the Malaysian National Annex (NA) to Eurocode 8 (EC8) was released and enacted following some 13 years of deliberations and preparations. The authors of this paper aim to use this article to share their experiences and reflections during this period of developing the first national standard for the seismic design of buildings for Malaysia. To begin with, there were major challenges in implementing the 20-year-old EC8 framework for a country so far away from Europe. The first challenge was adapting the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) methodology in a low-to-moderate seismicity region where the paucity of representative seismic data presented a great deal of uncertainties. To address this situation, imposing a minimum level of seismic hazard was recommended. The second challenge was about dealing with the outdated EC8 site classification scheme, which poorly represents the potential effects of soil amplification in certain geological settings. To address this situation, an alternative site classification scheme in which the site natural period is an explicit modelling parameter was introduced. The third challenge was concerned with difficulties generated by the EC8 provisions mandating Ductility Class Medium (DCM) detailing in certain localities where the level of seismic hazard is predicted to exceed a certain threshold. To address this situation, the viable option of using strength to trade off for ductility was recommended, or in cases where ductility design is needed, a simplified set of code-compliant DCM designs was presented. The fourth challenge was about handling the requirements of EC8 that the majority of buildings are to involve dynamic analysis in their structural design when the majority of practising professionals did not have the skills of exercising proper use of the requisite software. To address this situation, a generalized force method was introduced to control the use dynamic analysis in commercial software. It is hoped that, through sharing the lessons learnt, code drafters for the future would be able to find ways of circumventing the multitude of challenges with clear thinking and pragmatism.

Seismic design of acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements in New Zealand: State-of-practice and recommended changes

Acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements not only constitute a significant portion of a building’s component inventory, but also comprise components and systems that are indispensable to the operational continuity of essential facilities. In New Zealand, Section 08 of the seismic loadings standard, NZS 1170.5: Earthquake Actions, and a dedicated standard, NZS 4219: Seismic Performance of Engineering Systems in Buildings, address the seismic design of non-structural elements. This paper scrutinizes the design provisions for acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements in NZS 1170.5 and NZS 4219, and provides an international perspective by comparing with the design provisions for non-structural elements specified in ASCE 7-16, the latest ATC approach and Eurocode 8. This is followed by a detailed discussion on the improvements required for component demand estimation, the need for design criteria that are consistent with performance objectives, definition of realistic ductility factors, and recommendations for the future way forward in the form of an improved design procedure and its application through a new seismic rating framework.

An Alternative Approach for the Design of Chevron-Braced Frames

The design of steel chevron-braced frames as per Eurocode 8 is based on the idea that only the braces should buckle and yield during ground motions, while other members should remain elastic. The elastic design of the braced frames is also allowed. However, in both cases, the seismic performance of the frame may be compromised because of premature yielding/buckling of columns. This paper proposes an alternative design procedure that promotes yielding of beams in addition to yielding of braces. This mitigates the vertical unbalanced force transmitted by compressive and tensile braces to the beam and in turn reduces the internal forces of the columns. The result is the overall improvement of the seismic performance owing to the reduction of the number of cases in which failure of the columns occurs before full exploitation of the ductility capacity of the dissipative members. The proposed design procedure is validated by incremental dynamic analyses performed on a set of chevron-braced frames. In particular, the peak ground accelerations of the frames designed by the proposed procedure at the attainment of Significant Damage and Collapse Prevention limit states are determined and compared to those of frames designed according to Eurocode 8. Furthermore, frames designed according to the Eurocodes and to the proposed method are compared in terms of structural cost.

Introducing ISMDq—A Web Portal for Real-Time Quality Monitoring of Italian Strong-Motion Data

We present the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia Strong-Motion Data-quality (ISMDq)—a new automatic system designed to check both continuous data stream and event strong-motion waveforms before online publication. The main purpose of ISMDq is to ensure accurate ground-motion data and derived products to be rapidly shared with monitoring authorities and the scientific community. ISMDq provides data-quality reports within minutes of the occurrence of Italian earthquakes with magnitude ≥3.0 and includes a detailed daily picture describing the performance of the target strong-motion networks. In this article, we describe and discuss the automatic procedures used by ISMDq to perform its data-quality check. Before an earthquake, ISMDq evaluates the selected waveforms through the estimation of quality indexes employed to reject bad data and/or to group approved data into classes of quality that are useful to quantify the level of reliability. The quality indexes are estimated based on comparisons with the background ambient noise level performed both in the time and frequency domains. As a consequence, new high- and low-noise reference levels are derived for the overall Italian strong-motion network, for each station, and for groups of stations in the same soil categories of the Eurocode 8 (Eurocode 8 [EC8], 2003). In absence of earthquakes, 24 hr streaming of ambient noise recordings are analyzed at each station to set an empirical threshold on selected data metrics and data availability, with the goal to build a station quality archive, which is daily updated in a time span of six months. The ISMDq is accessible online (see Data and Resources) from August 2020, providing rapid open access to ∼10,000 high-quality checked automatically processed strong-motion waveforms and metadata, relative to more than 160 Italian earthquakes with magnitude in the 3.0–5.2 range. Comparisons between selected strong-motion data automatically processed and then manually revised corroborate the reliability of the proposed procedures.

Variability of Ground Motion Amplitudes Recorded in Bucharest Area during Vrancea Intermediate-Depth Earthquakes

This study focuses on the assessment of the correlation and variability of ground motion amplitudes recorded in Bucharest area during Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes from a database of 119 pairs of horizontal components. Empirical models for the evaluation of the peak ground velocity and displacement from spectral accelerations are proposed in this study. The distribution of the shear wave velocities from 41 boreholes at specific depths appears to follow a normal probability distribution. The analysis performed in this study has also shown that the variability of peak ground velocities and displacements does not appear to be influenced by the earthquake magnitude. In addition, it was observed that the variability in terms of shear wave velocities at specific depths is smaller than the variability of the spectral amplitudes of the recorded ground motions. The empirical site-amplification factors from the Eurocode 8 draft fail to capture the long-period spectral amplifications observed in Bucharest area during large magnitude Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes.

Seismic microzonation of a region with complex surficial geology based on different site classification approaches

A seismic microzonation study was conducted to refine the seismic hazard model for the city of Saguenay, Canada. The Quaternary geology underlying Saguenay shows complex glacial and post-glacial stratigraphy with a number of buried valleys filled with fluvioglacial and glaciomarine sediments. High impedance contrast between rock formations and surficial sediments is prone to seismic amplification. To evaluate their applicability, advantages and limitations in capturing the geological specificity of the study area, four site classification methods were applied: the current National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) and Eurocode 8, both mainly based on the average shear-wave velocity for the surficial sediments (VS,avg) and for the top 30 m (VS,30); a method based on the fundamental site period (T0); and a hybrid method based on the combination of VS,30, T0 and VS,avg. The study specifically aimed to evaluate the importance of the site classification parameters on the resulting microzonation maps. VS,30 is capable to present the geological and geotechnical site conditions, however, the results may be further improved by considering Vs,avg in shallow and T0 in thick layers of soil sediments as secondary parameters. The T0 method gives also satisfactory results with T0 showing a better correlation to Vs,30 than to Vs,avg. The versatile hybrid method may be challenging to apply in certain cases with its nine different site categories and parameters.