×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Probabilistic MCE

Probabilistic MCE

Probabilistic MCE

(OP)
Aawk this new code!  CBC2007/ASCE 7-05  

The IBC/CBC Section 1802.2.7 has an exception that allows a design in SDC D without a soils report if the peak ground acceleration of Sds/2.5 is used and Sds is determined per ASCE 7 Section 21.2.1. This section refers to a probabilistic MCE (2% in 50 yrs).  Looking on the USGS Seismic Hazard Map web site,
( http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/nshmp2008/viewer.htm )one can obtain probabilistic peak, .2sec and 1 sec ground accelerations.
 
For my particular site at 39 degN & 121 degW I get:
    Peak Sa= 17.3%,    Ss=42.7%,    S1= 16.3%    and applying the formula:
    Cs=Sds/(R/I)=0.427/(2.5x6.5/1)=0.026   is obtained.

A base shear of only 2.6%W! This does not make sense to me. Using Sds/2.5 reduces the base shear below that of the standard procedure outlined in ASCE 7 Sec. 11.4.  Also, shouldn't a peak acceleration be in fact a peak and not less than Ss.
Can anyone enlighten me?

RE: Probabilistic MCE

you mean "seismic site class" instead of SDC (seismic design catagory)?

Sms=SsxFa
Sm1=S1xFv
Sds=Sms x 2/3
S1=Sm1 x 2/3

also, PGA is not necessarily the "max value"

there's other threads on the topic under "seismology engineering" probably "geotechnical engineering other topics". do a search...

RE: Probabilistic MCE

check your equation for Cs, again.

RE: Probabilistic MCE

(OP)
Thank you both for taking the time to address this tedious issue.

To msucog:  Thank you for your direction - I guess I should have posted this in the geotech section.
I did mean SDC=D.  Starting with an assumed Site Class D, I end up in SDC=D which per IBC/CBC 1802.2.7 requires a soils investigation except if PGA=Sds/2.5 is used.

To Galambos:  Yes, my formula for Cs contains 2.5 in the denominator.  This is precisely my point (or dilemma).  How is PGA=Sds/2.5 to be applied?  It seems convoluted to me that using the provisions to side step the soils report would result in a lower base shear.

There is nothing in the ACSE 7-05 commentary on this provision.  I've searched Google books for comments and found nothing.  Perhaps I can try another angle and contact someone in my SEAOC chapter who was on the ASCE seismic task committee.  

-Alanna

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources