1965 Earthquake Requirements 2

[LobstaEata]

Hi All

We're looking to dismantle and reassemble (from the US to a South American location), an industrial structure built in 1965. I was wondering if anyone here has run across historical seismic design requirements for the eastern US for around that time frame. I assume a pseudo-static methodology was used back then similar to that still used by the UBC in the mid 80's. Hoping that you guys can help me out.

Steve

 

[hokie66]

In 1965, we just tended to ignore the possibility of earthquakes in the eastern part of the US. I don't remember whether the building code addressed seismic requirements or not, but there was not much attention given to this area of loading.

 

[concretemasonry]

How about having a professional on the ground in S.A. that is familiar with the local codes and needs analyze the structure for compatibility. He can also make sure it is re-constructed properly enough to resist the local loadings. Just because it may have been designed according to local U.S standards does not mean the reconstructed building will meet the new local requirements and needs. - You shipping the underlying soil also?

Depending on the country in S.A., there may be many, many good engineers that could do the technical analysis especially in most of Brazil(actually Brasil there) and Argentina. Along the Andes, you will find seismic and wind conditions that could overwhelm any Eastern U.S. design.

Seismic activity and recognition if it has been ignored or not admitted in many provincial U.S. areas and the saying "We don't care because we never have them (earthquakes). I can remember our area (MN) ignoring seismic requirements and saying "We were in Seismic zone Zero". The same has existed for decades and sometimes in the East, even though the New Madrid, MO shake had enough energy transmitted to shake the church bells in Boston.

Dick

Engineer and international traveler interested in construction techniques, problems and proper design.

 

[paddingtongreen]

The eastern USA was mainly zone 2, and seismic was eliminated as a controlling load after a quick comparison of seismic and wind effects.

Michael.
"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved." ~ Tim Minchin

 

[LobstaEata]

Thank you paddingtongreen. Can you recall whether the UBC code was dominent at the time in the mid Atlantic states?

What we are attempting to do is perform a comparative analysis of the earthquake requirements at that time with modern IBC seismic provisions in order to gain a better perspective on the level of the MFRS strengthening that may be required. We are still at a preliminary stage of development, but wish to make some educated decisions on the level of effort for final design.

Steve

 

[hokie66]

LobstaEata,
Most likely not the UBC, as that was predominately a western code. The BOCA covered a lot of the northeast and mid-Atlantic, and the Standard (Southern) the most of the rest.

Don't know why you would be comparing with the modern IBC provisions. Why not use the applicable South American code for comparison?

 

[LobstaEata]

Excellent! Thanks Hokie. We will download the Standard Building code for that period today and are already translating the Guatemalan building code to make this comparison. I appreciate your help.

Best
Steve