Guidelines for Seismic Retrofit of Weak-Story Wood-Frame Buildings

Similar documents
Prepared For San Francisco Community College District 33 Gough Street San Francisco, California Prepared By

4B The stiffness of the floor and roof diaphragms. 3. The relative flexural and shear stiffness of the shear walls and of connections.

Expected Performance Rating System

Chapter 6 ROOF-CEILING SYSTEMS

Retrofitting in the Central US: A Federal Perspective

Chapter 3 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION FEATURES IMPORTANT TO SEISMIC PERFORMANCE

Specification for Structures to be Built in Disaster Areas

National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying. Principles and Practice of Engineering Structural Examination

Control of Seismic Drift Demand for Reinforced Concrete Buildings with Weak First Stories

6 RETROFITTING POST & PIER HOUSES

Seismic performance evaluation of an existing school building in Turkey

Miss S. S. Nibhorkar 1 1 M. E (Structure) Scholar,

SECTION 7 Engineered Buildings Field Investigation

Chapter 3 FOUNDATIONS AND FOUNDATION WALLS

Perforated Shearwall Design Method 1

PERFORMANCE BASED SEISMIC EVALUATION AND RETROFITTING OF UNSYMMETRICAL MEDIUM RISE BUILDINGS- A CASE STUDY

Rehabilitation of a 1985 Steel Moment- Frame Building

Seismic Risk Evaluation of a Building Stock and Retrofit Prioritization

DESIGN DRIFT REQUIREMENTS FOR LONG-PERIOD STRUCTURES

What is Seismic Retrofitting?

NIST GCR Applicability of Nonlinear Multiple-Degree-of-Freedom Modeling for Design

Seismic Risk Prioritization of RC Public Buildings

SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF STRUCTURES

TECHNICAL NOTE. Design of Diagonal Strap Bracing Lateral Force Resisting Systems for the 2006 IBC. On Cold-Formed Steel Construction INTRODUCTION

ASSESSMENT AND RETROFITTING OF EXISTING RC BUILDINGS IN VIETNAM IN TERMS OF EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCES

PERFORMANCE BASED SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS IN NEW YORK CITY

1997 Uniform Administrative Code Amendment for Earthen Material and Straw Bale Structures Tucson/Pima County, Arizona

Page & Turnbull imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology

Homebuilders Guide to Earthquake-Resistant Design and Construction

POST AND FRAME STRUCTURES (Pole Barns)

Structural Seismic Retrofits For Hawaii Single Family Residences With Post and Pier Foundations

NONLINEAR BEHAVIOR AND FRAGILITY ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-STORY CONFINED MASONRY WALLS UNDER CYCLIC LOADS

SEISMIC DESIGN OF MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS WITH METALLIC STRUCTURAL FUSES. R. Vargas 1 and M. Bruneau 2 ABSTRACT

California Geological Survey Sacramento CA

Retrofitting By Means Of Post Tensioning. Khaled Nahlawi 1

Elevating Your House. Introduction CHAPTER 5

EVALUATION OF SEISMIC RESPONSE - FACULTY OF LAND RECLAMATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING -BUCHAREST

The Base Shear Formula

EARTHQUAKE DESIGN OF BUILDINGS

Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Structures

Design of Cold-Formed Steel Shear Walls

Discipline: Structural Issued

Evaluation of the Seismic Performance of Brick Walls Retrofitted and Repaired by Expansive Epoxy Injection

ARROWHEAD GENERAL INSURANCE AGENCY RESIDENTIAL EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE PROGRAM UNDERWRITING GUIDELINES & RATE MANUAL

November 20, Heather Sustersic Dear Professor Sustersic,

Design for Nonstructural Components

SEISMIC DESIGN. Various building codes consider the following categories for the analysis and design for earthquake loading:

Nonlinear Structural Analysis For Seismic Design

FOUNDATION DESIGN. Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT REPORT BOLINAS MARINE STATION - BOLINAS, CALIFORNIA

Protecting Your Home From Hurricane Wind Damage

Formwork for Concrete

SEISMIC ANALYSIS AND RETROFITTING OF R.C.C STRUCTURE

SEISMIC CAPACITY OF EXISTING RC SCHOOL BUILDINGS IN OTA CITY, TOKYO, JAPAN

ETABS. Integrated Building Design Software. Concrete Shear Wall Design Manual. Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California, USA

Personal Information. Professional Education

Methods for Seismic Retrofitting of Structures

Diaphragms and Shear Walls DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION GUIDE

EARTHQUAKE HOME RETROFIT HANDBOOK HOW TO COMPLETE THE HOME ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

Policy on Water Heater Installations Policy No. UPC Effective: September 1, 1995 Revised: February 10, 1996

DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS OF TUNED/HYBRID MASS DAMPERS USING MULTI-STAGE RUBBER BEARINGS FOR VIBRATION CONTROL OF STRUCTURES

Structural Retrofitting For Earthquake Resistance

Detailing of Reinforcment in Concrete Structures

Protecting Your Home from Wind Damage

STRUCTURAL CONCEPT FOR LIGHT GAUGE STEEL FRAME SYSTEM

THE RELIABILITY OF CAPACITY-DESIGNED COMPONENTS IN SEISMIC RESISTANT SYSTEMS

COMMONLY USED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CODES

Seismic Retrofit Guide

HOW TO EVALUATE BUILDINGS AND DETERMINE RETROFIT COSTS

Design of Steel Structures Prof. S.R.Satish Kumar and Prof. A.R.Santha Kumar. Fig some of the trusses that are used in steel bridges

Bolting: Attachment Of The Mudsill To The Foundation

780 CMR: MASSACHUSETTS AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE 2009

Advanced Retrofitting Methods and Techniques for RC Building: State of an Art

The ASCE 7 standard Minimum Design Loads for

How to secure your property after a disaster

CH. 2 LOADS ON BUILDINGS

Building Condition Assessment: North Howard Street Baltimore, Maryland

Current Status of Seismic Retrofitting Technology

Introduction to Mechanical Behavior of Biological Materials

Breakaway Walls

REVISION OF GUIDELINE FOR POST- EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE EVALUATION OF RC BUILDINGS IN JAPAN

Guidelines for Earthquake Bracing of Residential Water Heaters

Performance-based Evaluation of the Seismic Response of Bridges with Foundations Designed to Uplift

Mark Cramer Inspection Services, Inc.

The minimum reinforcement for the stem wall is the placement of:

Overhang Bracket Loading. Deck Issues: Design Perspective

SMIP05 Seminar Proceedings VISUALIZATION OF NONLINEAR SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF THE INTERSTATE 5/14 NORTH CONNECTOR BRIDGE. Robert K.

Advanced GIS for Loss Estimation and Rapid Post-Earthquake Assessment of Building Damage

CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE

Structural Dynamics of Linear Elastic Single-Degree-of-Freedom (SDOF) Systems

Seismically retrofitting reinforced concrete moment resisting frames by using expanded metal panels

DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION City & County of San Francisco 1660 Mission Street, San Francisco, California

Seismic Analysis and Design of Steel Liquid Storage Tanks

March 14, Installation of Bay, Bow and Garden Windows

Post and Beam Construction

Earthquakes and Data Centers

Steel joists and joist girders are

SECTION 3 ONM & J STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

DEÜ MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ FEN VE MÜHENDİSLİK DERGİSİ Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2 sh Mayıs 2007

Transcription:

Guidelines for Seismic Retrofit of Weak-Story Wood-Frame Buildings

Learning Obectives 1. Understand the vulnerabilities and failure modes of weak-story buildings under EQ demands. 2. Recognize the influence of non-structural finishes on the capacity of wood buildings. 3. Learn how to determine the capacity at near collapse. 4. Learn how to determine the optimal retrofit. 5. Understand the use of the Weak Story Tool.

Background and Theory Nuts and Bolts Making it Simple

BAKGROUND & THEORY

4400 Dangerous Multi-unit Buildings: 8% of population

reate Seismic Retrofit Program for Weak-Story Wood-framed Apartment Buildings in Western US

The Scope

Inepensive to onstruct (Work Only In Ground Story) Inepensive to Design (Unsophisticated Engineers) Performs Well (Shelter-In-Place)

Typically: Non-Engineered No Plans Archaic Materials Archaic onstruction Practices

The Problem 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake Image by Raymond B. Seed National Information Service for Earthquake Engineering University of alifornia Berkeley.

San Francisco A Loma Prieta Earthquake 11/17/1989 Beach and Divisadero in the Marina District. U.S.G.S. by Nakata J.K.

Northridge A: Northridge earthquake FEMA News Photo FEMA News Photo

Design for a Population of Buildings not an Individual Building

Pattern Recognition

Pattern Recognition Strong but Brittle Upper Structure Weak and Brittle Lower Structure

Pattern Recognition Limited Damage to Upper Structure Damage oncentrated in Lower Structure

RELATIVE STRENGTH METHOD

The Relative Strength Method Optimize benefits of ground story retrofits Retrofit to add both strength and displacement capacity and reduce torsion Strength limit established by the upper structure reate a damage and deformation absorption level The tough ground story protects the upper stories If too strong no damage absorption forces are transmitted to upper structure

The Relative Strength Method 400 350 300 250 Elevation in. 200 150 Overly strong retrofit (E) Structure 100 50 Optimal-cost retrofit Optimal-performance retrofit 0 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% Drift Ratio

an a Building s apacity be Determined from a Few Parameters?

Local Seismicity 3.5 Mean Median Geomean 3.0 Spectral Acceleration g 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 Period sec.

Translational Weakness

Analysis Methodology - Material Forms Sheathing material with D = 1.0 Shear Force Sheathing material with D = 0.0 L = 1.25% L = 4.0% Interstory Drift

Damping and Hysteretic Models 1.5 1 0.5 Hysteresis of idealized high displacement capacity material ductile form Force 0-6 -4-2 0 2 4 6-0.5-1 -1.5 Drift Ratio % 1.5 1 0.5 Force 0-6 -4-2 0 2 4 6 Hysteresis of idealized low displacement capacity material brittle form -0.5-1 -1.5 Drift Ratio %

Torsional Weakness

haracteristic Structural oefficients s V N s 1 1 W Ground-story Strength U min V i N s i W Upper-story Strength i 2 N s W s U Upper to Ground Strength Ratio D F 1 ( 3%) V 1 Strength Degradation T T Torsional Imbalance

reate a ontrolled Eperiment Determine the Influence of Each haracteristic

Analytical Engine: Surrogate Structure oncept Material forms: (2) total Upper-story strength ratios Au: (4) per mat'l form Ductile 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 Brittle 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 Weak-story ratios Aw: 0.6 to 1.1 by 0.1 (6) per upper-story strength Retrofit strengths: Aw to 1.6 (51) per upper-story strength ratio TOTAL NUMBER OF BUILDINGS: 612 Time-history seed records: (22) Bi-directional records = (44) individual Scaled so that median Sa( T = 0.3 sec ) = 1.0g (35) intensities per seed record varying from 0.1 to 3.5 by 0.1 Recover peak interstory drift ratios for each analysis 1.0 Given drift criteria fit log-normal DF 0.5 0 0 1.0 (Sa = 1g) 3.5 Earthquake Intensity

Simplified Building Model W 50 in. H 100 in. L 111.8 q 1.107 rad 63.4 deg. cos(q) 0.447 Astrut 1 in2 Mg 1 kip (total weight of building)

Analytical Engine: Surrogate-Structure oncept 612 surrogate structures 44 EQs 35 intensities 1 million nonlinear response-history analyses

Analysis Results 2.7 Aw=1.1 2.2 Au = 0.6 Spectral apacity S c 1.7 1.2 Aw=0.6 Aw=0.6 Aw=0.8 Aw=0.8 Aw=0.8 Aw=1.1 Aw=1.1 Aw=1.1 Au = 0.4 Au = 0.2 Au = 0.1 Aw=0.6 Aw=0.8 Aw=0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Total Ground Floor Strength/Upper Floor Strength

Analysis Results 20th Percentile Intensity Spectral apacity S c20 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 S 0. 48.34 1. A A c 20 0 47 W U Aw = 1.2 Aw = 1.1 Aw = 1 Aw = 0.9 Aw = 0.8 Aw = 0.7 Aw = 0.6 urve fit for Incremental Dynamic Analysis 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Upper-Story Strength Ratio A U

Structural apacity S S 0. 48 2.24A 1 0. Q A c1 0.66 0.525 W 5 T s U 0. 60 1.59A 1 0. Q A c0 0.60 0.122 W 5 T s U D = 1.0 D = 0.0

NUTS & BOLTS

Limitations on the Guidelines Up to four stories Strong basement and strong sloped base can be accommodated Wood-framed stud walls and eisting steel moment frames No concrete or masonry walls or steel braced frames 8 12 floor heights for upper structure 8 15 floor heights for ground floor Sloped sites can be accommodated Torsionally regular upper structure No vertical irregularities in upper structure

Ground-story Strength Upper-story Strength Upper to Ground Strength Ratio Toughness Torsional Imbalance haracteristic Structural oefficients s s N i N i i U W V 2 min N s s W V 1 1 T T D V F 1 1 ( 3%) U s W Ground-story Strength Upper-story Strength Upper to Ground Strength Ratio Toughness Torsional Imbalance T T D V F 1 1 ( 3%) Ground-story Strength Upper-story Strength Upper to Ground Strength Ratio Toughness Torsional Imbalance T T U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) Ground-story Strength Upper-story Strength Upper to Ground Strength Ratio Toughness Torsional Imbalance T T s s N i N i i U W V 2 min U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) Ground-story Strength Upper-story Strength Upper to Ground Strength Ratio Toughness Torsional Imbalance T T T T D V F 1 1 ( 3%) T T U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) T T s s N i N i i U W V 2 min U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) T T N s s W V 1 1 s s N i N i i U W V 2 min U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) T T N s s W V 1 1 s s N i N i i U W V 2 min U s W D V F 1 1 ( 3%) T T

STORY STRENGTH

Structural Use of Non-conforming Materials 3500 3000 Stucco Horizontal wood sheathing Diagonal wood sheathing Brick veneer 2500 Plaster on wood lath Unit Force plf 2000 1500 1000 500 Plywood panel siding Gypsum wall board Plaster on gypsum lath Wood structural panel 8d@6 Wood structural panel 8d@4 Wood structural panel 8d@3 Wood structural panel 8d@2 Wood structural panel 10d@6 Wood structural panel 10d@4 Wood structural panel 10d@3 Wood structural panel 10d@2 0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Drift Ratio %

Deflection riteria Brittle Backbone urves L01 L03 L04 L05 L06 L08 Ductile Backbone urves L02 L07 L09 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14 L15 L16 1000 3500 900 800 3000 700 2500 Unit Force plf 600 500 400 Unit Force plf 2000 1500 300 1000 200 100 500 0 0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 Drift Ratio % Drift Ratio % High Displacement apacity (Hd) Low Displacement apacity (Ld) Ground Upper Ground Upper Name Story Stories Story Stories Onset of Strength Loss Original ondition Onset of Strength Loss Retrofitted 4.0 4.0 1.25 1.25 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.25

Perforated Shearwalls Openings Q perf 2 3 0.92 0.72 0.80 H Floor to eiling A 1 A 2 1 H 1 A i L i L L L 1 2 3 Full-height wall segments Lw A = A + A i 1 2 L = L + L + L i 1 2 3

Story Height Adustment Factor 1.6 Normalized Mean Spectral apacity 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Linear fit for Story-Height Adustment Factor Q s : Q s = 0.55 + 0.0045 H where H is the mean ground-story height in inches. Perform Model 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Height of Bottom Story in.

Wall Height Adustment Factor D h H wall H H Tallest wall in ground story Wall 1 Wall 2 2 H 1200 1000 Adusted load-deflection curve 1 2 Unit Force plf 800 600 400 200 Shorter walls Taller walls Dh < 1.0 Dh = 1.0 Dh > 1.0) H Tallest wall in ground story Wall 1 Drift ratio = / H 1 Wall 2 Drift ratio = / H 2 2 H 2 Unit load-deflection curve adusted for height of Wall 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assembly unit load-deflection curve Unit load-deflection curve adusted for height of Wall 1 Drift Ratio % 2 1 2 1 Unadusted assembly unit load-deflection curve 1 2 Actual Drift Ratio = / H Normalized Drift Ratio

Pushover urve to Find Peak Strength shear force f1y f 2y 1y drift ratio 1y 1y 1y f 3y f 4y Wall: 1 2 3 4 f ( ) v ( ) L w w w Q perf Q ot Translational strength of the Ground Story V 1y Ground Story translational load-deflection curve in the y-direction F 1y 1y Drift ratio at which translational strength occurs

SIMPLIFIED OVERTURNING ADJUSTMENT

Overturning Reduction Factor 300 250 Story Shear kips 200 150 100 50 Ground story fied 0 Ground story with uplift 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 300 Interstory Drift Ratio 250 Story Shear kips 200 150 100 50 Second story fied Second story with uplift 0 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% Interstory Drift Ratio 300 250 Story Shear kips 200 150 100 50 Third story fied Overturning Reduction Factor Q ot for Upper Structure Perpendicular to Parallel to Level Framing Framing Unknown or mied Third story with uplift 0 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% Interstory Drift Ratio 300 250 Two or more stories above 0.95 0.85 0.85 One story above 0.85 0.8 0.8 Story Shear kips 200 150 100 Top story 0.75 0.8 0.75 Fourth story fied 50 Fourth story with uplift 0 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% Interstory Drift Ratio

STRENGTH DEGRADATION RATIO

Strength Degradation Ratio 1200 1000 Peak Strength V Load-Deflection urve Strength at 3% Drift V 3% 800 Unit Force plf 600 400 Strength Degradation Ratio D = V 3% /V 200 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Drift Ratio %

TORSIONAL IMBALANE

Weak-Story Wood-Frame Buildings

Torsion Demand Wall: 1 2 3 4 Ground Story torsion demand = V 1ye + V 1ey V1y enter of strength at Ground Story OS 1 e V1 y e yv1 e y V1 V1 enter of strength at Story 2 (above) OS 2 V1y e OS2 OS1 e e y OS 2 y OS1 y

Torsion apacity Wall: 1 2 3 4 d 1 d 2 d3 d Ay d 4 Twist Level 2 by the twist angle A f A at d Ay B D Dy Ay d d By d1 enter of strength at Ground Story Torsional moment that causes a twist of for the Ground Story t ( ) 1 E f 1y at d 1 f 2y at d 2 f 3y at d 3 f 4y at d 4 d y d f B at d By d f at d y Ey f D at d Dy f E at d Ey Torsion Backbone urve t( ) T ma N walls w y w y d w y f w ) d w f w y w1 H1 H1 t ( ) d d d 1 d 2 Torsional strength of the Ground Story Torsional moment that causes a twist of for the Ground Story t ( ) 1 T 1 d 3 1 d 4 Ground Story torsional load-deflection curve t 1 Maimum twist angle to consider for the Ground Story

Accounting for Torsion 1.2 apacity Reduction Factor 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Ductile Aw = 0.60AB Ductile Aw = 0.60R Ductile Aw = 0.80AB Ductile Aw = 0.80R Brittle Aw = 0.60AB T T Direction of drift assessment 0.2 Brittle Aw = 0.60R Brittle Aw = 0.80AB Brittle Aw = 0.80R 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 Torsion oefficient T

ALULATE SPETRAL APAITY

Spectral apacity Sc S 0. 48 2.24A 1 0. Q A c1 0.66 0.525 W 5 T s U D = 1.0 S 0. 60 1.59A 1 0. Q A c0 0.60 0.122 W 5 T s U D = 0.0 Modifier for POE = 0.2 3 D S c0 3 S c DSc 1 1 for intermediate values Mean spectral capacity S m S S c MS if true no retrofit required Onset of Strength Loss drift criteria OSL 20% Probability of Eceedance POE

ALULATE OPTIMAL RETROFIT

Range of Retrofit Strength For buildings with strong upper structures (V rma > V re ) upper limit lower limit 0.11AU 1. VU V r ma 22 V re S MS X X 1 2 3 D 1 3 D Y2 1 Y 1 3 D 3 D s 1 X 5 T 0.48 0 AU Q 1 0. 1 1. 48X 0 0.6 0 AU Qs 0. T 1 0. 96Y0 Y 5 X X 2 0. 35X 0 Y Y2 0. 07Y0 For buildings with weak upper structures (V rma < V re ) Estimate of the minimum ground-story strength that gets POE below 0.2 use 90% 110% of upper limit 0.11AU 1. VU V r ma 22 If the upper structure is etremely weak such that the Guidelines are not applicable use alternative methodology 2 S cr S 3 MS this corresponds to a 50% POE at the ME

Range of Retrofit Strength Acceptable Retrofit Range Spectral apacity S c S c = S MS Au = 0.4 Aw = 0.6 Minimum Strength V r min (Adequate Performance) Maimum Strength V r ma (Best Performance) V re S MS X X 1 2 3 D 1 3 D Y2 1 Y 1 3 D 3 D Strength of Retrofitted Ground-Story 0.11AU 1. VU V r ma 22

Range of Retrofit Strength Spectral apacity S c S MS S c Acceptable Retrofit Range 2/3 S MS Au = 0.1 Aw = 0.6 Minimum Strength V r min = 0.9V r ma Estimated Minimum Strength V re Maimum Strength V r ma Strength of Retrofitted Ground-Story 0.11AU 1. VU V r ma 22

Retrofit

Regularizing Diaphragms This frame must support lateral loads from both diaphragms D and D L antilevered Diaphragm hord capacity must be checked if L > 10 feet. D D D y W W y D D Direction of motion considered : y > 2 : 1 Aspect ratios : y < 2 : 1 : y < 2 : 1 antilevers y : < 2 : 1 y : < 2 : 1 W D This wall must support lateral loads from both diaphragms D and D N > 0.25y Openings Depending on the width this portion may be considered a separate sub-diaphragm D W E S North-South Analysis > 0.25 Re-entrant corners

Retrofit Placement to Minimize Torsion L Added retrofit strength - e r e V V 1 Vr V1 Force resultant of strengths of retrofit elements in the y-direction Place to eliminate torsion limited by building dimension e V 1 y e V L OS2 V1 y Eisting enter of strength at Ground Story OS 1 V1y Vry V1y Retrofit element enter of strength at Story 2 (above) OS 2 Retrofit element Range of acceptable eccentricity - enter of strength at Ground Story after retrofit OS r V 1 y e min e e e V Vr y e e 0. 05L ma min OS 2 e

MAKING IT SIMPLE

WST IDA Data Base Graphic Utility