There has been considerable discussion recently in New Zealand about the relative merits of displacement-based, and displacement-focused force-based seismic design. This paper puts the case for direct displacement-based seismic design. It is shown that the emphasis on secant stiffness to maximum displacement, rather than initial stiffness (as in force-based seismic design) is important for rational force-distribution to different seismic-resisting structural elements, and in most cases obviates the need for iteration in the design process, which is inherent in displacement-focused force-based seismic design. It is shown that the influence of hysteretic characteristics has been underestimated in recent force-based studies. These assertions are supported by results of recent analytical studies, which have included refinement of ductility/equivalent-viscous damping relationships, and an examination of the important (and largely ignored) role of "elastic" damping in inelastic time-history analyses.
[1]
W. J. Hall,et al.
Earthquake spectra and design
,
1982
.
[2]
Anil K. Chopra,et al.
Direct Displacement-Based Design: Use of Inelastic vs. Elastic Design Spectra
,
2001
.
[3]
Mjn Priestley,et al.
Myths and Fallacies in Earthquake Engineering--Conflicts Between Design and Reality
,
1995,
SP-157: Recent Developments In Lateral Force Transfer In Buildings.
[4]
Vitelmo V. Bertero,et al.
Evaluation of Strength Reduction Factors for Earthquake-Resistant Design
,
1994
.
[5]
Mjn Priestley,et al.
VISCOUS DAMPING IN SEISMIC DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
,
2005
.
[6]
Mjn Priestley,et al.
Modelling inelastic response in direct displacement-based design
,
2005
.