Design Philosophy

Chapter

Abstract

Design is a mixed decision made from an environment of partial truth, partial knowledge, and partial uncertainty. A structure subjected to seismic loads is required to have a certain amount of safety related to strength, ductility, deformation and energy absorption.

Keywords

Ground Motion Failure Probability Seismic Design Resistance Factor First Order Reliability Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    FEMA P-749 (2010) Earthquake-resistant design concepts, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jia J (2014) Essentials of applied dynamic analysis. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahin C (2014) Seismic retrofitting of existing structures. Portland State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paik JK, Thayamballi AK (2003) Ultimate limit state design of steel-plated structures. Wiley, Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO19901-2 (2014) Petroleum and natural gas industries—specific requirements for offshore structures—part 2: seismic design procedures and criteriaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eurocode 8 (2004) Design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildingsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Building Code, International Code Council, 2015Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Faella C, Piluso V, Rizzano G (2000) Structural steel semirigid connections: theory, design and software. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Veritas DN (2011) DNV-OS-C101, design of offshore steel structures, general (LRFD method), April, HøvikGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roeder CW (1990) Comparison of LRFD and allowable stress design methods for steel structures. Fifth Seminario de Ingenieria Estructural, San Jose, Costa RicaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Case J, Chilver L, Ross CTF (1999) Strength of materials and structures. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Segui WT (1994) LRFD steel design, 2nd edn. PWS Publishing Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    EN 1990 (2004) Basis of structural design, CEN, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    EN 1993-1-1 (2008) Design of steel structures, part 1-1: general rules and rules for buildings, CEN, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Björkenstam U (1998) Reliability based design, 1st edn. Chalmers University of Technology, GöteborgGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cornell C (1969) A probability-based structural code. J Am Concr Inst 66(12):974–985Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, LRFD Design and Construction of Shallow Foundations for Highway Bridge Structures, NCHRP Report 651, Washington, DC, 2010Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Phoon K, Kulhawy F, Grigoriu M (1995) Reliability-based design of foundations for transmission line structures, report TR-105000. Electrical Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thoft-Christensen P, Murotsu Y (1986) Application of structural systems reliability theory. Springer, BerlinCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ryden J (2011) Failure probabilities and safety index (lecture notes). Uppsala University, Spring 2011Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hasofer AM, Lind NC (1974) Exact and invariant first order second-moment code format. ASCE J Eng Mech Div 100(EM1):111–121Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tvedt L (1989) Second order reliability by an exact integral. In: Thoft-Christensen P (ed) Reliability and optimization of structural systems, proceedings of the second IFIP WG7.5 conference (1988). Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Björkenstam U (2002) Exercise in ship structures basic course. Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, GöteborgGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ditlevsen O, Madsen HO (2007) Structural reliability methods. Wiley, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Melchers RE (1999) Structural reliability analysis and prediction, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Coleman HW, Steele WG (1999) Experimentation and uncertainty analysis for engineers, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jensen JJ (2001) Load and global response of ships. Elsevier Science Ltd., OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Danusso A (1909) Statics of anti-seismic construction, MilanGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reitherman R (2008) International aspects of the history of earthquake engineering. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    International Association for Earthquake Engineering (2004) Regulations for seismic design—a world list 2004, IAEEGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    NORSOK N-001 (2012) Integrity of offshore structures, 8th edn, Sept 2012Google Scholar
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    Papadrakakis M, Lagaros ND, Fragiadakis M (2006) Seismic design procedures in the framework of evolutionary based structural optimization, computational mechanics—solids, structures and coupled problems. Springer, HeidelbergMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ghisbain P (2015) Damage-based earthquake engineering. WII Press, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee D, Ng M (2010) Application of tuned liquid dampers for the efficient structural design of slender tall buildings. CTBUH J 4:30–36Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ghobarah A (2001) Review article: performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development. Eng Struct 23:878–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Galambos TV (2006) Structural design codes, the bridge between research and practice. International association for bridge and structural engineering, Budapest, Hungary, Sept 2006Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Elnashai AS, Di Sarno L (2008) Fundamentals of earthquake engineering. Wiley, London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Moehle JP (2008) Performance-based seismic design of tall buildings in the US. In: The 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, Oct 2008Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    ASCE/SEI 41-06 (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings, ASCEGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Williams MS, Sexsmith RG (1995) Seismic damage indices for concrete structures: a state-of-the-art review. Earthq Spectra 11(2):319–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sucuoğlu H, Yücemen S, Gezer A, Erberik A (1998) Statistical evaluation of the damage potential of earthquake ground motions. Struct Saf 20(4):357–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    FEMA (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, FEMA 356/Nov 2000Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Priestley MJN (1997) Displacement-based seismic assessment of reinforced concrete buildings. J Earthq Eng 1(1):157–192Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Krawinkler H (1996) A few basic concepts for performance based seismic design. In: Proceedings of eleventh world conference on earthquake engineering, Acapulco, Mexico. Paper no. 1133, Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ghobarah A (2001) Review article: performance-based design in earthquake engineering: state of development. Eng Struct 23:878–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Freeman SA (1998) The capacity spectrum method as a tool for seismic design. In: Proceedings of the 11th European conference on earthquake engineering, 6–11 Sept, ParisGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000) Pre standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings—FEMA 356, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2005) Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures—FEMA-440, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    ATC 40 (1996) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings, vol 1. Applied Technology Council, USAGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3):573–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chopra AK, Goel RK (2001) Direct displacement-based design: use of inelastic vs. elastic design spectra. Earthq Spectra EERI 17(1):47–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sullivan TJ, Priestley MJN, Calvi GM (2004) Displacement shapes of framewall structures for direct displacement based design. In: Proceedings of Japan–Europe fifth workshop on implications of recent earthquakes on seismic risk, BristolGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bachmann H, Dazio A (1997) A deformation-based seismic design procedure for structural wall buildings. In: Fajfar P, Krawinkler H (eds) Seismic design methodologies for the next generation of codes. AA Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 159–170Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aker SolutionsBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations