Earthquake Proof Engineering for Seismic Codes - myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theEarthquake Proof Engineering for Seismic Codes. Answer: Introduction Earthquake has been one of the concerning sector in the field of the engineering as, this natural hazard can be the most destructive way for destroying the construction and bringing down the whole building to the dust within few seconds. Most of the countries are earthquake prone sectors and for this, they are already prepared but earthquake can be raised in any sector of the world and designing a building needs proper consideration on the seismic design of the building. Safety should be given highest property and thus, for saving life and money, it is necessary to consider the impact of the vibration on the buildings. Many researchers have proposed their point of view on this context and attempted to minimize the impact of the earthquake on the buildings. This report focuses on the comments and statements provided by different scholar writers in different journals and attempt has been made to bring out a specific solution for resisting the impact of the earthquake on the buildings. Seismic Codes Background After research, it was identified that even in history, building codes were imposed for the architectures and building development in the countries and in 1666, London became the first to implement building code. Clunni et al. (2015) explained the history of the seismic design and explained in 1755 Lisbon devastating earthquake led to the need of implementing Seismic codes for the safety of the buildings and lives of individuals. In 1927, Lateral Bracing appendix explained The design of buildings for earthquake shocks is a moot question but the following provisions will provide adequate additional strength when applied in the design of buildings or structures (Oliva and Lazzeretti 2017). Moving forward, with the passage of time SEAOC Code came in practice that focuses on the providing a criteria that can be utilizing for constructing the buildings resisting the earthquake. Currently, the earthquake has been change as a concept of ground motion. Stating about the Performance Based Eng ineering evolution; FEMA 273 explained various performance levels in between 1991 1997 that include immediate occupancy, operational, collapse prevention, and life safety (Gan 2018). PBE in the present time concentrates on the estimation of the probabilistic terms such as repair costs, casualties, and loss of buildings use those are politically incorrectly represented as deaths, dollars and downtime(Yashwant et al. 2018). Earthquake-Proof Engineering Saleem and Ashraf (2016) performed the evaluation on vibration control capability of multiple tuned mass dampers, considering the natural frequency distribution over the specified frequency ranging between the certain frequencies for the structures related to the wide band input. Application of calculus variations helped the researchers in optimizing the TMDS (Tunned Mass Dampers) design those have been much robust than the previous solely TMD design. It was delivered considering the total mass in manner to eliminate the impact of vibration on the building. () developed the analytical model capable of resisting the vibration effect on the building. Seismic isolation can be simply described as the straightforward action towards minimizing the impact of the vibration caused by any means on the building (Prasad and Pranoosha 2015). English (2016) defined the criteria related to the construction and design of new buildings, alterations, and additions, to the buildings already existing in manner to present a solution to fight against the vibration and earthquake ground motions. The provisions provided by the researcher were capable of minimizing the risks related to the earthquake and influencing the lives and enhancing the existing capabilities of the structures those have been existing, allowing them to function efficiently after and before design earthquakes. Cheng (2017) emphasizes on the FEMA-369 through providing the background information, general requirements and explanations considering the application of the design and analysis criteria as explained in the provisions of FEMA-368. Stoten (2017) drove other attempt on presenting a simple technique of computer-based push-over analysis for the determination of a performance based framework for designing the building considering the load of the earthquakes. They performed conventional displacement method of elastic analysis in manner to identify the related concerns on the impact of the earthquake on the building. Carignan and Hussain (2016) had applied the standard geometric and elastic stiffness matrices despite of the available technique of plasticity factor considering the facts related to the construction including columns, beams, and others. These subjects were modified progressively, in manner to consider the facts associated with the nonlinear elastic-plastic behavior within the consideration of the lateral loads increment and constant gravity loads (English, King and Smeed 2017). A nonlinear dynamic time history analysis and nonlinear pushover analysis was drive by Corbane et al. (2017) after the establishment of the detailing and designing of the reinforced concrete frame structures. They evaluated the structural seismic response in manner to accept the load distribution being distributed for inelastic behavior. They had concluded that the demands of the seismic consideration are approximately maximum at the target displacement that was assumed for the pushover analysis during the situation of the ground motion and the earthquake. At the first situation, they had identified the shear failure and yielding was experienced for the columns within the rectangular displacement and larger story displacements. It was always bringing out the maximum base shear-weight ratio in comparison with the different load distribution considering the respective story displacement. The RC buildings those have been already existing are not designed for resisting the ground motion or earthquake effect loads and thus would be resulting in failure model during the earthquakes. Such designing might lack in weak designed mechanism for the base and whole development of the building (Uemura et al. 2015 ). Further the attempts and research was expanded by (Pampanin 2015), who assessed the 3D irregular RC structure performance as an extended version of the RC structures. They have presented the studies related to the diaphragm effects issues, incremental dynamics and loading profiles and relative responsive on the structural design of the buildings. They have also compared the Force Based, Displacement Based and results represented the necessity of designing the building through the consideration of ground moving and earthquake effects. Battarra, Balcik and Xu (2018) stated that during the evaluation of the seismic demands in context with the tall buildings, civil engineers are most likely to be adopting the pushover analyses or non-linear static analytical procedure in the place of the complex analysis method that includes complicated non-linear response history analysis. However, the most effective and efficient method would be the pushover analysis that will be helpful in eliminating the traditional analysis errors and bringing out high values to the design (Yashwantet al. 2018). It can be stated that the traditional procedure has many drawbacks in making the prediction of the seismic demands in association with the high-rise building and this procedure consider this aspects and results are driven considering them. Retrofitting and Damage for Earthquakes The level of performance of the building can be determined through calculating the building usage requirements. Retrofitting measures can be drove as per the consideration of the type of damage being caused due to shaking, ground motion, or earthquake. There are many strategies available in theory and practice for the retrofitting damages caused by the earthquake on the building. Caregnan and Hussain (2016) explained the factors in associated with the retrofitting in relation with the responses, design determination, modes, capacity design in detail, and ductile design and their impact on the building designing. The re-centering capability of the Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) based bracing system was able to recover the unreformed shape of the frame, when it was in the near collapse condition (English, King and Smeed 2017). Conclusion The above report presents a literature review on the various practices associated with the earthquake-proof engineering within the buildings design and development. In this new era of high-rise building, it is the most crucial aspect for the consideration of effect of earthquake on the buildings. Since, the environment has been changing globally and this resulting in the earthquake in almost each sector of the world and causing extraordinary money and life loss. The above report presents the different statements provided by the researchers on the concept of the earthquake-proof design of the buildings. Most of the buildings have been delivered without the consideration of the facts associated with this factor that could bring a lot of damage in the real life. In this report, pushover analysis has been presented as the best approach towards delivering the analysis of the requirements and design for the buildings. For the retrofitting of the damage caused by the earthquake, it can be r ecommended towards the retrofitted model could take three times accelerations leading the unprotected model to collapse, with no significant damage to elements. References Battarra, M., Balcik, B. and Xu, H., 2018. Disaster preparedness using risk-assessment methods from earthquake engineering.European Journal of Operational Research. Carignan, A. and Hussain, M., 2016. Designing an Earthquake-Proof Art Museum: An Arts-and Engineering-Integrated Science Lesson.Journal of STEM Arts, Crafts, and Constructions,1(1), p.2. Cheng, F.Y., 2017.Matrix analysis of structural dynamics: applications and earthquake engineering. CRC Press. Cluni, F., Costarelli, D., Minotti, A.M. and Vinti, G., 2015. Enhancement of thermographic images as tool for structural analysis in earthquake engineering.NDT E International,70, pp.60-72. Corbane, C., Hancilar, U., Ehrlich, D. and De Groeve, T., 2017. Pan-European seismic risk assessment: a proof of concept using the Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine (ELER).Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering,15(3), pp.1057-1083. English, L., 2016. Session M: Targeting all of STEM in the primary school: Engineering design as a foundational process. English, L.D., 2016. Targeting all of STEM in the Primary School: Engineering design as a foundational process. English, L.D., King, D. and Smeed, J., 2017. Advancing integrated STEM learning through engineering design: Sixth-grade students design and construction of earthquake resistant buildings.The Journal of Educational Research,110(3), pp.255-271. Gan, W.S., 2018. Seismic Metamaterials. InNew Acoustics Based on Metamaterials(pp. 277-288). Springer, Singapore. Oliva, S. and Lazzeretti, L., 2017. Adaptation, adaptability and resilience: the recovery of Kobe after the Great Hanshin Earthquake of 1995.European Planning Studies,25(1), pp.67-87. Pampanin, S., 2015. Towards the Ultimate Earthquake-Proof Building: Development of an Integrated Low-Damage System. InPerspectives on European Earthquake Engineering and Seismology(pp. 321-358). Springer, Cham. Prasad, T.S.S. and Pranoosha, P., 2015. The Earthquake Proof Tokyo Sky-Tree -Bringing New Possibilities for Modern Architecture.International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications,5(2), pp.53-57. Saleem, M.A. and Ashraf, M., 2016. Low cost earthquake resistant ferrocement small house.Pakistan Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. Stoten, D.P., 2017. Generalised formulation of composite filters and their application to earthquake engineering test systems.Earthquake Engineering Structural Dynamics,46(14), pp.2619-2635. Uemura, K., Sasaki, T., Shimada, S., Suemasa, N. and Nagao, K., 2015, July. A Study on Infusion of Silica Micropaticles into Soil Particles. InThe Twenty-fifth International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers. Yashwant, C.S., Ganesh, P.A., Shivnath, P.L., Gurunath, S.S. and Digambararo, C.A., 2018. Review of Various Aspects of Seismically Safe Tall Buildings.