Search

The design wind pressures specified in the 2005 National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) have been derived from the Gumbel distribution fitted to annual maximum wind speed data collected up to early 1990s. The statistical estimates of the annual maxima method are affected by a relatively large sampling variability, since the method considers a fairly small subset of available wind speed records. Advanced statistical methods have emerged in recent years with the purpose of reducing both sampling and model uncertainties associated with extreme quantile estimates. The two most notable methods are the peaks-over-threshold (POT) and annually r largest order statistics (r-LOS), which extend the data set by including additional maxima observed in wind speed time series. The objective of the paper is to explore the use of advanced extreme value theory for updating the design wind speed estimates specified in the Canadian building design code. The paper re-examines the NBCC method for design wind speed estimation and presents the analysis of the latest Canadian wind speed data by POT, r-LOS, and annual maxima methods. The paper concludes that r-LOS method is an effective alternative for the estimation of extreme design wind speed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper evaluates the overstrength, ductility, and response modification factors for low to mid-rise buckling restrained braced frames (BRBFs) designed as per the 2010 National Building Code of Canada. In addition to nonlinear static pushover analyses, dynamic time history analyses are performed to assess the seismic performance of four-, six-, and eight-story BRBFs. Different bracing configurations, including chevron (inverted-V) and split-X braces, are considered for the building frames with varied frame span lengths of 6 m and 8 m. The results confirm that the prescribed design values for overstrength and ductility factors provide reasonable estimations of the lower bound for these factors. The response modification factor obtained in this study ranged from 4.8 to 6 for different frames. The results also indicate that the response modification factor decreases with the increase of story height and span length. Moreover, bracing configurations may slightly affect the response modification factor for BRBFs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The last version of the National Building Code of Canada was issued in 2010. The next version will be issued in 2015. In the code cycle between 2010 and 2015 significant changes have taken place in the seismic design provision. The main factor that drives these changes is an improved understanding of the seismic hazard across the country. Changes have also been introduced in the site effect factors. The structural design provisions have been appropriately adjusted to respond to changes in the estimates of hazard and the new site effect factors. There are also new provisions related to design in regions of low hazard, buildings with flexible diaphragms, buildings with inclined columns, passive energy dissipation systems, base isolation, rocking foundations, glazing systems, racks, and elevators. Some of the changes are briefly discussed. The main focus of the paper is, however, on the revisions to the structural design provisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the effectiveness of seven ground motion scaling methods and two spectral matching methods to achieve compatibility with the Canadian National Building Code (CNBC) 2005 uniform hazard spectrum for Montreal to perform nonlinear seismic analysis. Databases of 30 historical records and 30 Eastern North America simulated records have been selected to compute the reference mean seismic demand and its dispersion. The characteristics and destructive capacity of ground motions have been studied using a large number of indices computed from ( i) the records themselves, ( ii) a series of single degree of freedom structures, as well as ( iii) a four-story steel frame. Record scaling methods to the target spectrum using ( i) spectral intensity, ( ii) reducing the mean square error, ( iii) and minimizing dispersion as well as time domain spectral matching generated coherent seismic demand and dispersion in agreement with the reference values. Spectral matching to a specified elastic design spectrum does not reduce the dispersion of the nonlinear response. Therefore close spectral matching cannot be used to reduce the number of records to minimize the resources allocated in seismic safety assessment. At least seven records, as recommended in current CNBC and FEMA (2012) guidelines to compute an average response, should be used to characterize the nonlinear behaviour of structural systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, the seismic performance of 1970s regular R/C bridge is investigated in terms of ductility demand, considering site-specific time histories and the amplification effect of soil with heterogeneous stratigraphy. The five seismic site classes of the 2005 National Building Code of Canada were used in this study and seismic site analyses were performed on soil columns representing real stratigraphies of typical Quebec City soil profiles. A total of 24 linear modal dynamic analyses and 24 nonlinear time-history analyses were performed using historical earthquakes representative of Eastern Canada. It was found that the bridge model shows yielding at the base of the columns for site classes C, D, and E. For site classes D and E the 2005 NBCC amplification factors were found to underestimate the amplification effect on the bridge's response. These results also show that the energy dissipation is a better indicator of damages than the permanent displacement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an assessment of the seismic performance of a ductile concrete core wall used as a seismic force resisting system for a 12-storey concrete office building in Montréal, designed according to the 2005 National building code of Canada (NBCC) and the 2004 Canadian Standards Association standard A23.3. The core wall consists of a cantilever wall system in one direction and a coupled wall system in the orthogonal direction. The building is analyzed in the nonlinear regime. The main conclusion from this work is that the capacity design shear envelope for the studied wall structure largely underestimates that predicted, primarily in the cantilever wall direction, and this in turn significantly increases the risk of shear failure. This issue is essentially due to (i) an underestimation by the new NBCC spectral response acceleration of the higher mode responses of a reinforced concrete wall structure whose seismic response is dominated by higher modes; and (ii) a deficiency in the capacity design method in estimating the wall shear demand on such walls, even when their behavior is lightly inelastic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a comprehensive review of the new provisions for the design of coupled shear walls in Canadian seismic zones. It follows major revisions that were incorporated in the National Building Code of Canada 2005 (NBCC 2005) and in the Canadian standard Design of concrete structures (CSA A23.3-04), which were due, in particular, to the adoption of a new Canadian map of seismic risk. The present study is intended to address recurring confusions in current practice and the difficulties expressed in the application and interpretation of the new NBCC 2005 and CSA A23.3-04 provisions. A design flowchart is thus proposed as a practical guide, describing, step by step, the required verifications at each stage of coupled shear walls calculation. Finally, to demonstrate the applicability of these new provisions, a numerical example is detailed, following the presented design flowchart. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Design guidelines for laterally loaded light-gauge steel-frame – wood structural panel shear walls are not available in Canadian codes. A design method for the calculation of shear stiffness and strength has been developed for use with the 2005 National Building Code of Canada (NBCC), however. This method was based on the analysis, using an equivalent energy elastic–plastic (EEEP) approach, of over 180 single-storey shear wall tests of various configurations. Ductility-related (Rd) and overstrength-related (Ro) force modification factors also need to be defined to calculate equivalent static seismic forces following the 2005 NBCC. This paper describes the development of these two factors based on the EEEP analysis of the shear wall test results. To verify the "test-based" Rd and Ro values, nonlinear time-history dynamic analyses of two representative buildings were carried out using a suite of 10 earthquake records scaled to the 2% in 50 year uniform hazard spectrum (UHS) for Vancouver, British Columbia. Preliminary values have been determined for the force modification factors, namely Rd = 2.5 and Ro = 1.7. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]