Comparative Study On Seismic Analysis And Design Details Of Concrete Structure In Chinese And American Code

This project compares and analysis the objects as followed: "the Chinese Code for seismic design of buildings" (GB 50011-2002) and American code: IBC2000, UBC97, ASCE7-95. The content covers the basic method of seismic design, seismic computation, and aseismatic construction design of the reinforced-concrete structures. Some content gets reference from "the Chinese Code for design of concrete structures" (GB 50010-2002), "the Technical specification for concrete structures of tall building" (JGJ 3-2002), "the Load code for the design of building structures" (GB 50009-2001), and the American seismic provision of NEHRP 1997, seismic provision of NEHRP 2003, ACI 318-99, etc.For the recent decades, the pseudo static method, the response-spectrum analysis, time-history analysis, performance-based design method, spring out early or later. The aseismatic content of current codes in China and America is mainly based on the response-spectrum theory, especially the elastic-plastic response-spectrum theory, all the code involve the principle to keep the balance of earthquake affection computation and the ductility of the structures. The consistency of the theory basement supplies the foundation of the comparison of the seismic code for the two countries.After the discussion of the development of aseismatic theory: especially for the relationship of the elastic-plastic response-spectrum theory and the current codes in many countries, this article focus on the content as followed:Firstly, this paper compares the target of the seismic design of the two countries. The Chinese code has the clear aseismatic target, which is based on probability of being exceeded hazard analysis. The American code also has the similar regulations. The consistency of the aseismatic target is the foundation of the comparison and analysis of the Chinese seismic code and the America's.Then we will focus on the principle of seismic design and basic design method. Although with the same theory basis, the Chinese code imports the conception of "frequent earthquake", this will make seismic computation more independent from the construction design. This is far different from the American code, which reduce the value of the seismic computation in different level according to the different plastic level in construction design. For the comparison, the Chinese method is convenient to be used, and is not easy to make mistakes; the American method is more consistent to the elastic-plastic response spectrum theory, and has more flexibilities. This part will be the foundation of the other comparison and analysis as followed.Both the Chinese and American codes use the seismic hazard map to show the environment of the earthquake. This paper compares the index and the method of the seismic hazard map. After that, unite the index of the seismic hazard.Another important aspect of the earthquake environment is the regional mapping, that means the influence of field where the building is located. In this part, we talk about the method to classify the field and relationship between different ways of classification, the influence of the field, the determination of the infaust field and the measure to deal with.The two aspects listed before focus on the external earthquake environment, based on the uniform seismic index, we compare the elastic response-spectrum, and use it to show the dynamic characteristic considered by the two country's code in the same earthquake environment.