Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

# RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS : QUERY

• To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
• Subject: RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS : QUERY
• From: Tejas Ins <tejas_ins(--nospam--at)yahoo.com>
• Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:55:29 -0700 (PDT)

From Tejas Ins <tejas_ins(--nospam--at)yahoo.com>
To seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS : QUERY

Hi All,

I am working on a school design project and learnt that the latest amendments (January 2004) require a site specific response spectrum analysis if the structure has any irregularity (except reentrant corner).  So we got a site specific response spectrum.  The response spectrum analysis gives a base shear (after dividing by R) to be much greater than the static base shear per section 1630.2

I am finding the Code language a bit confusing and would like your opinion on the CBC / UBC, where it discusses the reduction of elastic response parameters for design.

UBC/CBC section 1631.5.4:  "..... with the limitation that in no case shall the elastic response parameters be reduced such that the corresponding design base shear is less than the Elastic Response Base Shear divided by the value of R."

My confusion is:

a. When would the above statement apply and supersede items 1, 2, 3 under section 1631.5.4

b. Why would someone scale forces, moments, displacements and then determine the "corresponding design base shear" ... rather than scale elastic response base shear to the base shear determined in accordance with section 1630.2 and then determine corresponding scaled forces, moments, displacements, etc.

c. If (Elastic Response Base Shear / R > static base shear per section 1630.2) ... what to do?  Use the higher Elastic Response Base Shear / R ? OR scale down further to the Sataic base shear value ?