Part 5:

Seismic design analysis

2 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
BuildSoft nv

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or manual, for any
purpose, without written consent by BuildSoft.

The programs described in this manual are subject to copyright by BuildSoft.
They may only be used by the licensee and may only be copied for the
purpose of creating a security copy. It is prohibited by law to copy them for
any other purpose than the licensees own use.

Although BuildSoft has tested the programs described in this manual and has
reviewed this manual, they are delivered As Is, without any warranty as to
their quality, performance, merchantability or fitness for any particular
purpose. The entire risk as to the results and performance of the programs,
and as to the information contained in the manual lies with the end-user.
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 3
1 Table of Contents
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................... 3
2 DESIGN OF EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT STRUCTURES.......................... 4
2.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 4
2.2 SEISMIC ZONES.................................................................................................. 5
2.3 SUBSOIL CONDITIONS........................................................................................ 6
2.4 BASIC REPRESENTATION OF THE SEISMIC ACTION .......................................... 6
2.4.1 General...................................................................................................... 6
2.4.2 Seismic design spectrum for linear analysis ............................................ 7
2.4.2.1 Use of the design spectrum.......................................................................................................................................7
2.4.2.2 The design spectrum according to Eurocode 8 .........................................................................................................8
2.4.2.3 The design spectrum according to PS92...................................................................................................................9
2.4.3 Alternative representations of the seismic action................................... 10
2.5 ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE VERIFICATIONS ......................................................... 11
2.5.1 Eurocode 8 .............................................................................................. 11
2.5.2 PS92......................................................................................................... 12
2.6 SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE VERIFICATIONS............................................... 13
2.7 DESIGN GRAVITY LOADS................................................................................. 13
2.7.1 Eurocode 8 .............................................................................................. 14
2.7.2 P92........................................................................................................... 14
3 SEISMIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................................... 16
3.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 16
3.2 MODAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................ 17
3.3 MODAL RESPONSE ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 19
3.4 MULTI-MODAL RESPONSE ANALYSIS.............................................................. 20
3.5 SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS......................................................................... 22
4 SEISMIC DESIGN ANALYSIS USING POWERFRAME............................. 23
4.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 23
4.2 SEISMIC FUNCTIONS IN THE LOADS-WINDOW............................................ 24
4.2.1 Load groups for seismic analysis............................................................ 24
4.2.2 Definition of design gravity loads .......................................................... 25
4.2.3 Definition of seismic load group............................................................. 26
4.2.4 Generation of loads combinations.......................................................... 28
4.3 SEISMIC FUNCTIONS DURING ELASTIC ANALYSIS.......................................... 29
4.4 SEISMIC FUNCTIONS IN THE PLOT-WINDOW............................................... 31

4 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
2 Design of earthquake
resistant structures
2.1 Introduction
Structures in seismic regions shall be designed and constructed in such a
way that they will be able to withstand seismic actions without a risk of local
or general collapse with an adequate degree of reliability, thus retaining its
structural integrity and a residual load bearing capacity after the seismic
event. The design seismic action is generally selected on the basis of a
chosen return period and need not coincide with the event of maximum
intensity that may occur at a given site.
The above mentioned design seismic action provides the basis of the
design analysis methods described in this manual (and implemented in
PowerFrame). In order to satisfy the above fundamental requirements, the
following limit states shall be checked:
Ultimate limit states:
The structural system shall be verified as having sufficient resistance
and ductility. The resistance and ductility to be assigned to the
structure are related to the extent to which its non-linear response is to
be exploited. In operational terms, such balance between resistance
and ductility is characterized by the values of the behaviour factor q:
o q=1 for non-dissipative structures. No account is taken of any
hysteretic energy dissipation during the seismic event.
Displacements and internal forces can be obtained through a
linear elastic analysis of the structure subject to the design
seismic action.
o for dissipative structures the behaviour factor q is taken greater
than 1, accounting for the hysteretic energy dissipation that
occurs in specifically designed zones called dissipative zones or
critical regions. This capacity of structural systems to resist
seismic actions in the non-linear range generally permits their
design for forces smaller than those corresponding to a linear
elastic response. To avoid however explicit non-linear structural
analysis in design, the energy dissipation capacity of the structure
is taken into account by performing the following analysis steps:
based on the seismic design spectrum, reaction forces and
internal forces are calculated using linear elastic analysis
methods
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 5
next the displacements, calculated using a linear elastic
analysis method, are multiplied by the behaviour factor q.

Serviceability limit states:
An adequate degree of reliability against unacceptable damage shall
be ensured by satisfying specific deformation limits defined in the
relevant standards. Again, the structural deformations can be
calculated using a linear elastic analysis method, provided the non-
linear structural behaviour is accounted for through the use of the
behaviour factor q.

More detailed information, complementary to this reference manual, can be
found in the Eurocode 8 standard document and in below reference book
concerning the French standard PS92:
Rgles de construction parasismique Rgles applicables aux
btiments PS 92 / Edition Eyrolles, 1996, ISBN 2-212-10015-9.

Principles and application rules as explained in this reference, and as
implemented in PowerFrame, are applicable only to buildings.

2.2 Seismic zones
For the purpose of seismic design analysis, national territories are subdivided
by the National Authorities into seismic zones, depending on the local
hazard. By definition, the hazard within each zone can be assumed to be
constant. The hazard is described in terms of a single parameter, i.e. the
value a
g
of the effective peak ground acceleration in rock or firm soil,
henceforth called design ground acceleration. The design ground
acceleration, chosen by the National Authorities for each seismic zone,
corresponds to a reference return period of 475 years.
In the French standard PS92, the design ground acceleration is referred to as
the nominal acceleration a
N
. Values for a
N
are specified not only as a
function of the seismic zone (0, I
a
, I
b
, II & III), but also as a function of the so-
called hazard class:
Class A: buildings of minor importance for public safety, eg. agricultural
buildings, etc
Class B: ordinary buildings, of which the collapse during earthquakes
establishes a normal risks for the inhabitants
6 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
Class C: buildings whose seismic resistance is of importance in view of
the civil and economic consequences associated with a collapse, eg.
public buildings,
Class D: buildings whose integrity during earthquakes is of vital
importance for civil protection, eg. hospitals, fire stations, power plants,


2.3 Subsoil conditions
The influence of local ground conditions on the seismic action shall generally
be accounted for by considering the appropriate subsoil classification.
Where-as Eurocode 8 specifies 3 classes (A, B and C please refer to the
EC8 standard for a detailed description), the French standard PS92 foresees
in a so-called building site classification (S
0
, S
1
, S
2
& S
3
). Despite the fact
that Eurocode 8 and PS92 use different terminology and different detail
criteria, both standards can be said to apply the same concept to account for
the impact of subsoil conditions on the intensity of a seismic event.

2.4 Basic representation of the
seismic action
2.4.1 General
Within the scope of both afore mentioned seismic standards, the earthquake
motion at a given point of the surface of a structure is generally represented
by the so-called elastic response spectrum. Such a structure is considered
to be subject to a uniform displacement applied to the base support. It is thus
implicitly assumed that all support points are subject to the same uniform
excitation. If this assumption cannot be reasonably made, a so-called spatial
model of the seismic action shall be used. Spatial models for seismic action
are not part of the seismic design analysis implementation within
PowerFrame.
The horizontal seismic action is described by two orthogonal components
considered as independent and represented by the same elastic response
spectrum. Unless specific studies indicate otherwise, the vertical component
of the seismic action should be represented by the response spectrum as
defined for the horizontal seismic action, but with (considerably) reduced
ordinates.
Application of the above described elastic response spectrum assumes a
linear elastic behaviour of the structure subject to the seismic action.
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 7
However, in reality, most structures will rather show a non-linear behaviour in
such circumstances, as a considerable amount of energy will be dissipated
due to the ductile behaviour of the structural elements and connections.
Thanks to this non-linear behaviour, such structures, subject to a seismic
action, can be designed for internal forces smaller than those corresponding
to a linear elastic response.
Does this imply that a seismic design analysis of building structures must
necessarily be built on a non-linear type of analysis? An important question,
as non-linear analyses imply a number of difficulties in terms of analysis cost
and complexity. Fortunately, the seismic design Standards allow for the
possibility to replace a complex non-linear analysis by a linear elastic
analysis, provided that:
the analysis is based on the use of the so-called seismic design
spectrum which is derived from the elastic response spectrum through
the introduction of a behaviour factor q. To a large extent, this comes
down to dividing the elastic response spectrum by a factor q to obtain
the seismic design spectrum.
the internal forces are calculated based on the seismic design
spectrum as a result of the excitation of the structure.
the displacements are also calculated based on the seismic design
spectrum, but are subsequently multiplied by the behaviour factor q.
Thus, the behaviour factor q plays a crucial role in seismic design analyses
based on Eurocode 8 or PS92. This behaviour factor will increase
proportionally with the capacity of the structure to dissipate energy during a
seismic action (through local plastic behaviour, for example). Both Standards
provide explicit values for the behaviour factor q for steel, concrete and
timber building structures. Reference is made to the appropriate standards
documents for more precise information on realistic and acceptable q-values
for seismic design analysis.
2.4.2 Seismic design spectrum for linear
analysis
2.4.2.1 Use of the design spectrum
Without going into further details on the application of seismic design
spectra, it may be quite helpful to, at least, describe its basic principles.
A seismic design spectrum can essentially be considered as a peak response
envelope of a building structure that is subject at its base support to a
seismic action with design ground acceleration a
g
(or a
N
). Whereas the
design ground acceleration is applicable to rock or firm soil, the seismic
design spectrum contains further parameters taking into account:
8 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
the subsoil characteristics, through the subsoil classification (EC8) or
the building site classification (PS92)
the non-linear behaviour of the building structure, through the
behaviour factor q
the linear dynamic behaviour of the building structure, through its
vibration periods. Indeed:
o if, for instance, the first vibration period T
1
of a building structure
is known, then the ordinate of the seismic design spectrum at
abscissa T
1
is a measure for the structural displacements and
internal forces if the corresponding eigenmode is effectively
excited by the seismic action
o in reality, a large range of vibration periods T
i
and corresponding
eigenmodes can be calculated for any building structure. For
each eigenmode that is effectively excited by the seismic action,
the structural response can be obtained through the use of the
seismic design spectrum. In a next step, the response values
corresponding to the individual eigenmodes should be combined
in an appropriate manner to calculate the total structural response
induced by the seismic action.
o this analysis flow is mostly referred to as multi-modal response
analysis and is explained, in more detail, in the sections 3.2
through 3.5 of this reference manual.

2.4.2.2 The design spectrum according to
Eurocode 8
The normalized design spectrum, relative to the acceleration of gravity g, is
given by the formulae below:

0 T T
B

( (( (

( (( (



| || |
. .. .
| || |

\ \\ \
| || |
| || |
. .. .
| || |

\ \\ \
| || |
+ ++ + = == = 1
q
0
B
T
T
1 S ) T (
d
S



T
B
T T
C

q
0
S ) T (
d
S

= == =

T
C
T T
D



20 , 0
1 d
k
T
C
T
q
0
S ) T (
d
S = == =
( (( (

( (( (




PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 9

T
D
T


20 , 0
2 d
k
T
D
T
1 d
k
D
T
C
T
q
0
S ) T (
d
S = == =
( (( (

( (( (



( (( (

( (( (





where:
S
d
(T) seismic design spectrum, normalized relative to the acceleration of
gravity g
T vibration period of the building structure (refer to 2.4.2.1)
normalized design ground acceleration ( = a
g
/ g )

0
spectral acceleration amplification factor, function of subsoil
classification
S soil parameter, function of subsoil classification
q behaviour factor, function of material and type of building structure
T
B
, T
C
vibration period limits of constant spectral acceleration branch
T
D
vibration period value defining the beginning of the constant
displacement range of the spectrum
k
d1
, k
d2
exponents which influence the shape of the spectrum for a
vibration period greater than T
C
, T
D


Reference is made to the appropriate standards documents for more precise
information on the appropriate values for the parameters above.

2.4.2.3 The design spectrum according to
PS92
The normalized design spectrum, relative to the acceleration of gravity g, is
given by the formulae below:

0 T T
C

q
M
R
) T (
d
S = == =

T
C
T T
D

1 d
k
T
C
T
q
M
R
) T (
d
S
( (( (

( (( (



= == =
10 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis

T
D
T
2 d
k
T
D
T
1 d
k
D
T
C
T
q
M
R
) T (
d
S
( (( (

( (( (



( (( (

( (( (



= == =

where:
S
d
(T) seismic design spectrum, normalized relative to the acceleration of
gravity g
T vibration period of the building structure (refer to 2.4.2.1)
normalized design ground acceleration ( = a
N
/ g )
R
M
spectral acceleration amplification factor, function of building site
classification & valid for a viscous damping of 5% critical damping
correction factor, function of viscous damping
topographic amplification factor
q behaviour factor, function of material and type of building structure
T
B
, T
C
vibration period limits of constant spectral acceleration branch
T
D
vibration period value defining the beginning of the constant
displacement range of the spectrum
k
d1
, k
d2
exponents which influence the shape of the spectrum for a
vibration period greater than T
C
, T
D


Reference is made to the appropriate standards documents for more precise
information on the appropriate values for the parameters above. However, it
should be mentioned that the above formal description is slightly different
from the one given in the actual PS92 documents. This is done on purpose,
to pronounce more explicitly the similarity and consistency between the
Eurocode 8 and PS92 approach.

2.4.3 Alternative representations of the
seismic action
Next to the seismic design spectrum used with a linear elastic analysis of the
building structure, alternative methods can be used for seismic design
analysis. Three major approaches can be distinguished:
power spectrum analysis: the seismic motion at a given point on the
ground surface is represented as a random process, defined by a
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 11
power spectral density function. The power spectrum shall be
consistent with the elastic response spectrum used for the basic
definition of the seismic action as described before. This consistency
shall be observed by the design Engineer.
time-history analysis: the seismic motion may also be represented in
terms of ground acceleration time-histories and related quantities
(velocity and displacement). Depending on the nature of the
application and on the information actually available, the description of
the seismic motion can be made by using artificial accelerograms and
recorded or simulated accelerograms.
frequency domain analysis: the seismic action input is the same as
in a time-history analysis, but with each accelerogram cast in the form
of a Fourier series.
However, the seismic design spectrum method remains the (p)reference
method, in combination with a multi-modal response analysis. The above
methods may be used, but it shall always be demonstrated that all
requirements are met for those methods to be applicable.
Therefore, seismic design analysis with PowerFrame is always based on the
(p)reference method, which is generally applicable.

2.5 Ultimate limit state verifications
Based on the seismic combinations described below, a verification of
member resistance and stability shall be made, in addition to the verifications
to be made for the fundamental combinations.
It should also be mentioned that the seismic design standards not only
impose requirements in terms of member resistance and stability in the
ultimate limit states, but also specify a number of additional requirements on
the level of ductility, global equilibrium, horizontal displacements,
Reference is made to the appropriate standards documents for more precise
information on those requirements.
2.5.1 Eurocode 8

Ultimate limit state verifications must be performed for the accidental (or
seismic) type of combination given below, in addition to the fundamental
combination:

j>=1
G
k,j
+
1
A
Ed
+
i>=1

2,i
Q
k,i

12 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
where

k
: characteristic value
G: permanent action
A
Ed
: design value of seismic action, based on seismic design
spectrum

1
: importance factor. This factor varies between 0.8 and 1.4
as a function of the importance category to which the
building structure belongs
Category IV,
1
=0.8 : buildings of minor importance for
public safety, eg. agricultural buildings, etc
Category III,
1
=1.0: ordinary buildings, of which the
collapse during earthquakes establishes a normal risk
for the inhabitants
Category II,
1
=1.2: buildings whose seismic
resistance is of importance in view of the civil and
economic consequences associated with a collapse,
eg. public buildings,
Category I,
1
=1.4: buildings whose integrity during
earthquakes is of vital importance for civil protection
and national defense, eg. hospitals, fire stations,
power plants,
Remarks: in case PS92 is used, the design ground
acceleration already takes into account the importance of
a building structure in terms of public safety. In case
Eurocode 8 is used, this is not the case, but the
importance is accounted for through the introduction of

1
.
Q: variable action

2
: combination coefficient for quasi-permanent value of the
variable action
2.5.2 PS92

Ultimate limit state verifications must be performed for the accidental (or
seismic) type of combination given below, in addition to the fundamental
combination:

j>=1
G
k,j
+ E +
1,1
Q
k,1
+
i>=2

2,i
Q
k,i

PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 13
where

k
: characteristic value
G: permanent action
E: design value of seismic action, based on seismic design
spectrum
Q: variable action
Q
1
: most unfavourable variable action

1
: combination coefficient for frequent value of variable action

2
: combination coefficient for quasi-permanent value of
variable action

2.6 Serviceability limit state
verifications
Serviceability limit state verifications must be performed with respect to the
horizontal deflections induced by the seismic action. Eurocode 8 specifies
limits on the so-called interstorey drift being the average relative
horizontal displacement at each level of the building structure. In addition,
PS92 also imposes limits on total lateral deflection of the complete building
structure.

2.7 Design gravity loads
From the above, ( section 2.4.2.1 ) it is clear that the design analysis of
building structures subject to a seismic event, requires a modal analysis.
Such modal analysis calculates eigenfrequencies and corresponding
eigenmodes. The results of this analysis strongly depend on the amount of
gravity loads that are considered during the calculations. Such gravity loads
are of course not only related to the structures self-weight, but also to the
permanent or dead loads and (to a lesser extent) to the variable or live loads.
Then the question arises how permanent and variable loads are to be
considered to derive the design gravity loads to be used during the modal
analysis and the subsequent seismic design analysis. Both seismic design
standards discussed in this reference manual provide the necessary
specifications.
14 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
2.7.1 Eurocode 8
To derive design gravity loads to be used for modal analysis of the building
structure, gravity loads related to following combination of loads must be
considered:

j>=1
G
k,j
+
i>=1

E,i
Q
k,i

where

k
: characteristic value
G: permanent action
Q: variable action

E
: .
2

: correlation coefficient accounting for the degree to which
different stories are occupied simultaneously. Values for
need to be taken from the seismic standard

2
: combination coefficient for quasi-permanent value of
variable action

2.7.2 P92
To derive design gravity loads to be used for modal analysis of the building
structure, gravity loads related to following combination of loads must be
considered:

j>=1
G
k,j
+
E1,1
Q
k,1
+
i>=2

E2,i
Q
k,i

where

k
: characteristic value
G: permanent action
Q: variable action
Q
1
: most unfavourable variable action

Ex
: .
x
(x = 1, 2)
: correlation coefficient accounting for the degree to which
different stories are occupied simultaneously. Values for
need to be taken from the seismic standard
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 15

1
: combination coefficient for frequent value of variable action

2
: combination coefficient for quasi-permanent value of
variable action
16 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
3 Seismic analysis
3.1 Introduction
Let us consider the example of a column, fixed at its base where it is
subjected to an horizontal acceleration. It is assumed that this horizontal
acceleration varies as a function of time such that vibrations are induced in
the column. It can be shown that these column vibrations can be described
as a linear superposition of the columns eigenmodes, in which the
eigenmodes react completely independent of each other to the imposed base
excitation:
= * + * + * + * +

The combination factors , , , , are a priori unknown, but can be
calculated as a function of the imposed base acceleration and as a function
of the structures damping properties. The eigenmodes, on the other hand,
are independent of the imposed base excitation and are mostly also
independent of the damping properties of the structure. They can be
calculated starting from the structures stiffness and mass properties. This
calculation is usually referred to as modal analysis.
In theory, an infinite number of eigenmodes can be calculated for any building
structure. In practice however, it will be largely sufficient to consider only the
N lowest eigenmodes for further use during a dynamic analysis. This
explains the advantages of such an approach as compared to a direct
dynamic analysis, during which the structures response to the imposed
excitation is obtained through a direct integration of the equations of
movement as a function of time:
using modal analysis techniques, the N lowest eigenfrequencies and
eigenmodes are calculated, independent of the imposed excitation
next, the structural response to the imposed excitation is calculated
using a multi-modal response analysis as a combination (or
superposition) of the N lowest eigenmodes, having the benefit that
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 17
only a limited number ( N ) of equations must be solved. Furthermore,
the previuously calculated eigenmodes can be re-used when other
excitation types are considered.

3.2 Modal analysis
The objective of a modal analysis is to calculate the N lowest
eigenfrequencies f
i
(expressed in Hertz) of a structure, along with the
corresponding eigenmodes
i
.
A number of remarks:
very often, different terminology is used for eigenfrequency:
o eigenperiod T
i
, being the inverse of the eigenfrequency f
i

(expressed in seconds).
o eigenpulsation
i
= 2* f
i

eigenmodes
i
cannot be interpreted in absolute terms: only the
eigenmode shape can be interpreted, not its amplitude at least not
without additional information
the additional information needed for absolute interpretation is the so-
called modal mass m
i
corresponding to an eigenmode
i
. Modal
mass can most easily be explained as the fraction of the total mass of
the structure which effectively participates in the displacements
described by the eigenmode
i
. For example, it can be derived from
the figure below that for the first eigenmode
1
all nodes of the column
always move in-phase and that consequently, the distributed mass of
the structure will globally move in-phase. Only the amplitude of
movement of the distributed mass will be variable (zero at the column
basis, maximum at top of column). With the second eigenmode
2
,
not all nodes will move in-phase any more. As a consequence, part of
the distributed mass will move in one sense while the remaining part of
the distributed mass will move in the opposite sense. As a whole, less
mass is effectively mobilized by this mode shape, resulting in a lower
modal mass for the second eigenmode (assuming the maximum
displacement of both eigenmodes
1
and
2
to be equal). In general,
it can indeed be stated that with increasing eigenfrequency f
i
, the wave
length of the eigenmodes
i
will decrease and modal mass m
i
will also
decrease (again assuming that maximum displacement of all
eigenmodes
i
is equal).

18 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis

1

2

3

4


The above explanations allow to understand that the contribution of the
higher eigenmodes will decrease quickly in the context of a dynamic analysis,
as an increasingly smaller mass will be mobilized by the eigenmodes with
increasing eigenfrequency.
Taking into account all those considerations, the introduction of this section
should be modified as follows:
the objective of a modal analysis is to calculate the N lowest
eigenfrequencies f
i
(expressed in Hertz) of a structure, along with the
corresponding eigenmodes
i
and modal masses m
i

The knowledge of the eigenmodes
i
and corresponding modal masses m
i

allows for an unambiguous and absolute interpretation of the response of a
building structure subjected to a dynamic type of excitation.
In case a modal analysis is performed as the basis for a seismic analysis,
mostly the concept of effective modal mass is being used. The effective
modal mass differs from modal mass in the sense that effective modal
masses take into account the type of excitation that is applied to the
structure. Effective modal masses can thus only be calculated once a
seismic action has been defined, more in particular once the directions in
which a seismic action is to be considered, are known.
The importance of effective modal massa relates to the fact that the sum of
all effective modal masses (in case an infinite number of eigenmodes is
considered) equals the total mass of the structure. Furthermore, both
Eurocode 8 and PS92 specify the criterium below to determine the number of
eigenmodes N that should at least be used for seismic analysis:
the number of eigenmodes N to be used for a seismic analysis can be
limited to n, provided the sum of effective modal masses for the n lowest
eigenmodes equals at least 90% of the total mass of the building
structure, for each direction in which a seismic action is considered
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 19
For additional criteria with respect to the number of eigenmodes N that must
be taken into account for a seismic analysis, reference is made to the
appropriate standards documents.
Structures which have a high degree of symmetry can have 2 (or more)
eigenmodes at the same eigenfrequency. Such modes are referred to as
double modes (or triple modes, ). According to modal analysis theory, the
corresponding mode shapes are mutually orthogonal. In practice (definitely
in view of a correct multi-modal response analysis) it is crucial that
eigenvalue solver of an analysis program is capable to calculate such double
modes while respecting their orthogonality properties. The PowerFrame
analysis core is perfectly capable to deal with this situation and thus
guarantees at any time a correct basis for a multi-modal response analysis.
3.3 Modal response analysis
The objective of a modal response analysis is to calculate the response of a
structure in case 1 specific eigenmode
i
(with corresponding
eigenfrequency f
i
and modal mass m
i
) is excited by the applied dynamic load.
It can be shown that such an eigenmode
i
actually behaves as an
equivalent mass-spring-system with (modal) mass m
i
and (modal) stiffness k
i
.
The eigenfrequency f
i
of such a mass-spring-system is given by
i
i i
i
m
k
2
1
2
f = == = = == =




In case such a mass-spring-system is subjected at its base to a seismic
design spectrum S
d
(T) in a specific direction, it can be shown that this system
will undergo a peak displacement given by the relationship below:
i
2
i
i d
i
i
i
) T ( S g
m
l
v


( (( (

( (( (





( (( (

( (( (



= == =
where
v
i
peak displacement vector
T
i
eigenperiod of the eigenmode
i
( = 1 / f
i
)
l
i
effective modal mass corresponding to the eigenmode
i
, for the
direction in which the seismic design spectrum is applied

20 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
Once the peak displacement is known, the corresponding peak values for the
internal forces (moments, shear forces, compression or tensile forces, )
can easily be derived by making use of the stiffness characteristics of all
structural elements.

3.4 Multi-modal response analysis
The objective of a multi-modal response analysis is to calculate the response
of a structure in case several eigenmodes
i
(with corresponding
eigenfrequencies f
i
and modal masses m
i
) are excited by the applied dynamic
load.
In case a structure is subjected at its base to a seismic design spectrum
S
d
(T) in a specific direction, several eigenmodes
i
will, in principle, be
excited. For each eigenmode, the peak displacement vector v
i
can be
calculated as explained in section 3.3. The total peak displacement vector
can then be obtained through a quadratic combination of the contributions of
all N eigenmodes
i
:

= == =
= == =
N
1 i
2
i
v v

A completely similar combination formula can be applied to calculate the
peak values for the internal forces, based on the contributions of all N
eigenmodes:

= == =
= == =
N
1 i
2
i
E E

Is should be noted that in the above formulae accounts for the fact that,
although the direction in which the seismic design spectrum is applied is fully
determined, this design spectrum always needs to be considered in positive
& negative sense along this direction.
The number of eigenmodes N to be considered is not known a priori. As
has already been mentioned in section 3.2, the required number of
eigenmodes N can be determined on the basis of the effective modal
masses. Indeed, it is known that the sum of all effective modal masses (in
case an infinite number of eigenmodes is considered) equals the total mass
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 21
of the structure. Furthermore, both Eurocode 8 and PS92 specify the
criterium below to determine the number of eigenmodes N that should at
least be used for seismic analysis:
the number of eigenmodes N to be used for a seismic analysis can be
limited to n, provided the sum of effective modal masses for the n lowest
eigenmodes equals at least 90% of the total mass of the building
structure, for each direction in which a seismic action is considered
For additional criteria with respect to the number of eigenmodes N that must
be taken into account for a seismic analysis, reference is made to the
appropriate standards documents.

The question remains however what needs to be done in case the sum of
effective modal masses does not reach the above described threshold of
90% for the N available eigenmodes, for at least one principal direction of the
seismic action. In this case, 2 possibilities remain open:
an entirely new modal analysis is performed, increasing the number N
of eigenmodes to be calculated. Of course, such an analysis requires
computing time which increases stongly as a function of the requested
number eigenmodes. This may make such an approach rather
uneconomical.
alternatively, quasi-static correction techniques can be used with the
available set of eigenmodes. With this approach, it is still assumed that
the eigenfrequencies of the unavailable mode shapes are sufficiently
high with respect to the most relevant frequencies covered by the
seismic design spectrum. In this case, it can readily be assumed that
such eigenmodes respond statically (and not dynamically) to the
seismic excitation. The static response of the unavailable eigenmodes
can be derived relatively easy using the set of calculated eigenmodes
and considering a load distribution that is the static equivalent to the
seismic excitation. This static response is then applied as a correction
term to the results of the previously performed multi-modal response
analysis.
During seismic design analysis, PowerFrame will in all cases apply a quasi-
static correction (no intervention is required from the user), which ensures
maximum accuracy of the analysis results in all cases (even when the sum of
effective modal mass is below 90% of total mass for one or more principal
directions of the seismic action).

22 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
3.5 Seismic response analysis
The objective of a seismic response analysis is to calculate the response of a
structure subjected simultaneously to a design spectrum in a number of
mutually orthogonal directions.
According to the seismic standards EC8 and PS92, each seismic action must
consider design spectra applied in 2 orthogonal horizontal directions (further
referred to as X and Z). For both directions, the same design spectrum is to
be used, but the directions in which the design spectrum is to be applied are
not a priori known. In principle, those directions must be defined such that
the corresponding seismic action has the most unfavourable effect on the
building structure.
As part of a seismic response analysis, two multi-modal response analyses
will be performed: one for each horizontal direction (X, Z). This delivers
following results (based on the principes as described in 3.4):
E
X
- peak values of displacement & internal forces for a seismic design
spectrum applied along X
E
Z
- peak values of displacement & internal forces for a seismic design
spectrum applied along Z
The results of both multi-modal response analyses can then be combined as
follows to
E
X
+ 0.30 E
Y
+ 0.30 E
Z

0.30 E
X
+ E
Y
+ 0.30 E
Z

0.30 E
X
+ 0.30 E
Y
+ E
Z

The + in those expressions must be interpreted as to be combined with,
such that the above expressions effectively represent response envelopes
describing the effects of a seismic action along X and Z.



PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 23
4 Seismic design analysis
using PowerFrame
4.1 Introduction
This section of the manual on seismic design analysis describes in more
detail the practical use of PowerFrames seismic design capabilities. As a
starting point, it can be said that the seismic design analysis is an integral
part of the entire structural design analysis. In other words, seismic design
analysis does not represent an extra step to be taken at the end of the
structural design analysis, but is completely embedded in the full design
analysis process.
Therefore, seismic design analysis is part of the standard elastic analysis
procedure within PowerFrame. From a user point of view, there will be little
difference between elastic analyses with and without seismic actions. The
major differences related to the introduction of seismic actions, are:
in the Loads-window:
o the explicit definition of a loads group in which the design gravity
loads are managed (as a function of the permanent loads and the
variable loads), as they are to be used for any type of dynamic
analysis (in particular for any type of seimic analysis)
o the explicit definition of a seismic loads group
o the generation of seismic loads combinations for the ultimate limit
states, next to the fundamental loads combinations
during the elastic analysis:
o when the elastic analysis is launched, a multi-modal reponse
analysis will automatically be performed. The results of this
analysis will then be combined with the effects of the static loads,
consistent with the definition of all loads combinations
in the Plot-window
o of course, you now have access to all analysis results for seismic
loads combinations. Apart from this, no major differences will be
observed in comparison with a traditional static type of analysis.
Code checks (for steel, concrete or timber) will of course take into
account all available combinations:
ULS FC (fundamental combinations)
ULS SC (seismic combinations)
24 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
SLS QP (quasi-permanent combinations)
SLS RC (rare combinations)

4.2 Seismic functions in the Loads-
window
4.2.1 Load groups for seismic analysis
Through the icon Load factor in the icon toolbar of the
Loads-window, 2 load groups can be
defined that are specific to a modal and/or
seismic analysis:
Gravity loads for vibration analysis: this group includes
all gravity loads which must be taken into account during
any type of dynamic analysis. Those design gravity loads
can quickly be derived from the permanent loads and the
variable loads that have defined in several load groups,
through the use of the icon . At any time, it is also
possible to add discrete masses (or gravity loads)
manually at nodes by simply selecting those nodes and
then use the icon .
Seismic: this group contains the definition of the seismic
action. The definition itself can be done through the icon
. At any time, the load group Seismic will include a
visualization of the design gravity loads to be used for vibration analysis.
This information always remains consistent between both load groups
Gravity loads for vibration analysis and Seismic.

The load groups described above can be configured using the dialogue
window shown below. It should be noted that the icon shown in the column
at the right, will automatically adapt itself to the selected type of load group.
Where-as it is possible to change this icon manually in case of static loads
(to define how the loads that are part of the load group should be applied to
the structure), this is not possible for the gravity loads and the seismic load
group.
Also remember to select the appropriate seismic design standard in the
dialogue window shown below. If Eurocode 8 is selected, then the definition
of the seismic load group requires the specification of one of 4 categories (I
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 25
up to IV, corresponding with the importance category of the building structure
as described in section 2.5.1). Depending on the category that is selected,
the corresponding importance factor is automatically assigned to the safety
coefficients in the table below.
Final remark: in case any of the French design standards is selected (either
CM66 or BAEL91), only the French seismic design standard PS92 can be
used.


4.2.2 Definition of design gravity loads
Through the icon of the icon toolbar, the dialogue window as shown
below is launched. This dialogue window enables the definition of the
correlation coefficients to be used for the calculation of design gravity loads
(refer to 2.7 for more information on correlation coefficients). For each load
group, a value for can be defined manually, based on the specifications
provided by the selected design standard.
Based on the correlation coefficients, PowerFrame will automatically
calculate design gravity loads to be used during any type of dynamic analysis
(modal, seismic, ) based on the static type of loads that are part of the
26 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
selected load groups. Those design gravity loads are visualized in the
Loads-window on the geometry of the analysis model, in case either Gravity
loads for vibration analysis or Seismic is selected as the active load group.

4.2.3 Definition of seismic load group
The icon enables the user to completely define the seismic design action
through the dialogue window shown below. Depending on the seismic
design standard that has been selected, a number of parameters must be
defined to characterize the seismic event.
In case Eurocode 8 has been selected, following data are required:
sub-soil class (A, B or C)
behaviour factor q. Appropriate values for q are given in the EC8
documents, as a function of the material (steel, concrete, timber) and
as a function of the type of construction
ground acceleration a
g
for the seismic zone that is considered

In case PS92 has been selected, following data are required:
building site class (S0, S1, S2 or S3)
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 27
behaviour factor q. Appropriate values for q are given in the PS92
documents, as a function of the material (steel, concrete, timber) and
as a function of the type of construction
relative damping factor , expressed as a % of critical damping. By
default, a value of 5% is considered. The PS92 document provides
useful indications for realistic values for different types of structures.
nominal acceleration a
N
for the seismic zone that is considered
topographic amplification factor , to be determined from the PS92
document

According to the seismic standards EC8 and PS92, each seismic action must
consider design spectra applied in 2 orthogonal horizontal directions (further
referred to as X and Z). For both directions, the same design spectrum is to
be used, but the directions in which the design spectrum is to applied are not
a priori known. In principle, those directions must be defined such that the
corresponding seismic action has the most unfavourable effect on the
building structure. Those directions are chosen by the parameter Main
direction in the above dialogue window.
Once the definition of the seismic action has been completed and confirmed,
the visualization shown below will become available in the Loads-window.
This visualization includes following data:
28 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
the directions in which seismic actions will be applied (represented by
red arrows for the horizontal components, and by a green arrow for the
vertical component).
the design gravity loads to be used for modal analysis (and
subsequent seismic analysis)


4.2.4 Generation of loads combinations
It should not be overlooked that with any design analysis that includes
seismic actions, it is necessary to generate fundamental combinations as
well as seismic combinations for the ultimate limit states (see dialogue
window below).
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 29

4.3 Seismic functions during elastic
analysis
A design analysis in which seismic actions should be accounted for, is
launched in the same way as a design analysis related to static loads only. If
however, the user is only interested in the eigenfrequencies and eigenmodes
of a structure, then he should use the tab-page Modal analysis rather than
Elastic analysis in the dialogue window below.


30 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis
When an elastic analysis is launched after seismic combinations have been
generated, PowerFrame will, by itself, automatically take the necessary extra
steps that are required in this situation. Indeed, as a first step PowerFrame
will perform a multi-modal analysis in order to calculate the response of the
structure corresponding to the seismic load group. Next, this response will be
included in the appropriate way in all ULS SC combinations.
If the user decides to perform a second-order analysis or takes into account
the effects of global structural imperfections, then those options will only be
applicable to the static type of loads and to their contribution in the seismic
load combinations. The seismic response will always be evaluated according
to a linear first-order theory without consideration of structural imperfections,
and will be combined with the afore-mentioned results for static type of loads.
The multi-modal analysis will start with a calculation of the N lowest
eigenfrequencies of the building structure using the subspace iteration
method. As a user, you will specify the number N along with the maximum
number of iterations to be used for the calculation of eigenfrequencies and
corresponding eigenmodes. Note that the number of eigenfrequencies N is
limited to an absolute maximum of 40. Depending on the effective number of
DOFs (degrees of freedom) in the analysis model, a stricter limit may be
applicable:
in case the number of DOFs (#dof) is lower than 16, the maximum
number of eigenfrequencies is limited (#dof)/2.
in case the number of DOFs (#dof) is larger than or equal to 16, the
maximum number of eigenfrequencies is limited (#dof 8), with an
absolute maximum of 40.



Up front however, it is not known how many eigenfrequencies and
eigenmodes are really needed for a high-quality seismic analysis. Therefore,
it is recommended to start the analyses with a relatively small number of
eigenmodes and then evaluate the sum of the effective modal masses
corresponding to the calculated eigenmodes, for both directions defined with
the seismic action. In case this sum exceeds 90% of the total mass of the
structure for both directions (to be derived from the table below which is
PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis 31
presented by PowerFrame upon completion of the modal analysis), the
specified number of eigenmodes N is sufficient for a seismic analysis that
complies with the requirements of the seismic standards.


In case the sum of the effective modal masses does not comply with the
above criterion, the number of eigenfrequencies N to be calculated should be
increased until the target value of 90% is achieved. If for one or more
principal directions of the seismic event this sum remains well below 90% for
a relatively high number of eigenmodes N, then PowerFrame will still ensure
maximum analysis accuracy through the automatic automatische application
of a quasi-static correction.
4.4 Seismic functions in the Plot-
window
The icon toolbar of the Plot-window enables you to visualize all familiar
types of analysis results (displacements, internal forces, stresses, reaction
forces) for all types of load groups and load combinations, including the
seismic ones.
32 PowerFrame Manual Part 5: Seismic Design Analysis


The following items should not be overlooked during the interpretation of the
results:
results for a seismic action are always the result of a linear elastic
analysis in which the non-linear behaviour of the building structure is
accounted for through the introduction of a behaviour factor q.
results for a seismic action are always a combination of independent
design spectra applied to mutually orthogonal (horizontal) directions.
Furthermore, the seismic action is considered in positive and negative
sense for each direction. Results for a seismic action are thus always
presented as envelopes.