3.6 MB

3.6 MB

UFC 3-330-03A

01 March 2005

UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC)

SEISMIC REVIEW PROCEDURES

FOR EXISTING MILITARY BUILDINGS

CANCELLED

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

UFC 3-330-03A

01 March 2005

UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC)

SEISMIC REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR EXISTING MILITARY BUILDINGS

Any copyrighted material included in this UFC is identified at its point of use.

Use of the copyrighted material apart from this UFC must have the permission of the copyright holder.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

(Preparing Activity)

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

AIR FORCE CIVIL ENGINEER SUPPORT AGENCY

Record of Changes (changes are indicated by \1\ ... /1/)

Change No. Date Location

CANCELLED

This UFC supersedes TI 809-51, dated 30 September 1999. The format of this UFC does not conform to UFC 1-300-01; however, the format will be adjusted to conform at the next revision.

The body of this UFC is the previous TI 809-51, dated 30 September 1999.

1

UFC 3-330-03A

01 March 2005

FOREWORD

\1\

The Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) system is prescribed by MIL-STD 3007 and provides planning, design, construction, sustainment, restoration, and modernization criteria, and applies to the Military Departments, the Defense Agencies, and the DoD Field Activities in accordance with USD(AT&L) Memorandum dated 29 May 2002. UFC will be used for all DoD projects and work for other customers where appropriate. All construction outside of the United States is also governed by Status of forces Agreements (SOFA), Host Nation Funded Construction

Agreements (HNFA), and in some instances, Bilateral Infrastructure Agreements (BIA.)

Therefore, the acquisition team must ensure compliance with the more stringent of the UFC, the

SOFA, the HNFA, and the BIA, as applicable.

UFC are living documents and will be periodically reviewed, updated, and made available to users as part of the Services’ responsibility for providing technical criteria for military construction. Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (HQUSACE), Naval Facilities

Engineering Command (NAVFAC), and Air Force Civil Engineer Support Agency (AFCESA) are responsible for administration of the UFC system. Defense agencies should contact the preparing service for document interpretation and improvements. Technical content of UFC is the responsibility of the cognizant DoD working group. Recommended changes with supporting rationale should be sent to the respective service proponent office by the following electronic form: Criteria Change Request (CCR) . The form is also accessible from the Internet sites listed below.

UFC are effective upon issuance and are distributed only in electronic media from the following source:

• Whole Building Design Guide web site http://dod.wbdg.org/ .

Hard copies of UFC printed from electronic media should be checked against the current electronic version prior to use to ensure that they are current.

AUTHORIZED BY:

______________________________________ ______________________________________

DONALD L. BASHAM, P.E. DR. JAMES W WRIGHT, P.E.

Chief, Engineering and Construction

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

______________________________________

KATHLEEN I. FERGUSON, P.E.

The Deputy Civil Engineer

Chief Engineer

Naval Facilities Engineering Command

CANCELLED

DCS/Installations & Logistics

Department of the Air Force

______________________________________

Dr. GET W. MOY, P.E.

Director, Installations Requirements and

Management

Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense

(Installations and Environment)

2

US Army Corps of Engineers

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS

TI 809-51

30 September 1999

SEISMIC REVIEW PROCEDURES

FOR EXISTING MILITARY BUILDINGS

Headquarters

CANCELLED

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Engineering and Construction Division

Directorate of Military Programs

Washington, DC 20314

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS

SEISMIC REVIEW PROCEDURES

FOR EXISTING MILITARY BUILDINGS

Any copyrighted material included in this document is identified at its point of use.

Use of the copyrighted material apart from this document must have the permission of the copyright holder.

No

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

CANCELLED

Record of Changes: \1\ . . . /1/

Date Page

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

FOREWORD

These technical instructions (TI) provide design and construction criteria and apply to all U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commands having military construction responsibilities. TI will be used for all Army projects and for projects executed for other military services or work for other customers where appropriate.

TI are living documents and will be periodically reviewed, updated, and made available to users as part of the HQUSACE responsibility for technical criteria and policy for new military construction. CEMP-ED is responsible for administration of the TI system; technical content of

TI is the responsibility of the HQUSACE element of the discipline involved. Recommended changes to TI, with rationale for the changes, should be sent to HQUSACE, ATTN: CEMP-ED,

20 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20314-1000.

TI are effective upon issuance. TI are distributed only in electronic media through the

TECHINFO Internet site http://www.hnd.usace.army.mil/techinfo/index.htm and the Construction

Criteria Base (CCB) system maintained by the National Institute of Building Sciences at Internet site http://www.nibs.org/ccb/. Hard copies of these instructions produced by the user from the electronic media should be checked against the current electronic version prior to use to assure that the latest instructions are used.

FOR THE COMMANDER:

DWIGHT A. BERANEK, P.E.

Chief, Engineering and Construction Division

for Military Programs

CANCELLED

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Table of Contents

Page

Chapter 1.

Introduction

Paragraph 1-1. Purpose and Scope ...............................................................................1-1

1-2. Applicability ..........................................................................................1-1

1-3. References ............................................................................................1-1

1-4. Seismic Use Groups .............................................................................1-2

1-5. Historic Military Buildings.......................................................................1-2

1-6. Documentation ......................................................................................1-2

1-7. Qualifications of Investigators ................................................................1-3

Chapter 2.

Seismic Review of Structural Systems

Paragraph 2-1. Introduction ............................................................................................2-1

2-2. Building Groups .....................................................................................2-1

2-3. Seismic Review Procedures .................................................................2-1

2-4. Documentation ......................................................................................2-3

Appendix A.

Buildings Exempted Before Review

Appendix B.

Completion of Building Review Report Forms

Appendix C.

Seismic Review Example Problems

C1 Example Problem 1, Reinforced Concrete Frames & Shearwall Building... C1-1

C2 Example Problem 2, Reinforced Brick Masonry Building ........................... C2-1

C3 Example Problem 3, Infilled Steel Frame Building ..................................... C3-1

C4 Example Problem 4,Steel Frame Building ................................................. C4-1

Appendix D.

Installation Report

Appendix E.

Bibliography

CANCELLED

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Table of Contents (continued)

Figures

Figure Title Page

2-1. Structural Review Flow Chart ........................................................................... 2-2

B-1 Lateral Load System Data Sheet ..................................................................... B-3

B-2. Structural Review Score Sheet – High Seismicity Region ............................... B-8

B-3. Structural Review Score Sheet – Moderate Seismicity Region ........................ B-9

B-4. Structural Review Score Sheet – Low Seismicity Region............................... B-10

C1-1. Example Problem C1 – First Floor Plan ........................................................ C1-4

C1-2. Example Problem C1 – Typical Sections ....................................................... C1-5

C1-3. Example Problem C1 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 1 of 3.... C1-6

C1-4. Example Problem C1 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 1 of 3....... C1-7

C1-5. Example Problem C1 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 2 of 3... C1-8

C1-6. Example Problem C1 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 2 of 3...... C1-9

C1-7. Example Problem C1 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 3 of 3. C1-10

C1-8. Example Problem C1 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 3 of 3.... C1-11

C2-1. Example Problem C2 – First Floor Plans ........................................................ C2-3

C2-2. Example Problem C2 – Elevations ................................................................. C2-4

C2-3. Example Problem C2 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet ............. C2-5

C2-4. Example Problem C2 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet ............... C2-6

C3-1. Example Problem C3 – Floor Plans ................................................................ C3-3

C3-2. Example Problem C3 – Sections .................................................................... C3-4

C3-3. Example Problem C3 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet.............. C3-5

C3-4. Example Problem C3 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet ................ C3-6

C4-1. Example Problem C4 – Plan and Section...................................................... C4-3

C4-2. Example Problem C4 - Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet............. C4-4

C4-3. Example Problem C4 - Completed Structural Review Score Sheet ............... C4-5

CANCELLED

1-1. Seismic Use Groups ....................................................................................... 1-4

B-1. Site Soil Profile Classification ........................................................................ B-5 ii

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1-1. Purpose and Scope.

a. Purpose. The purpose of this document is to provide procedures for the assessment of the relative seismic vulnerability of a large inventory of buildings at a military installation. The structural systems of each building or groups of structurally similar buildings in the inventory are reviewed to obtain a numerical score. The scores obtained for all buildings or groups in the inventory are recorded in numerical order in an Installation Report to provide a numerical ranking of the seismic vulnerability of the buildings. This ranked list will provide a basis by which military installations can determine the order for performing seismic evaluations. Other building-specific aspects to consider in conjunction with this review should include: general condition, known site-specific seismic geologic hazards, occupancy type, number of occupants, year built, plans for future use, and availability of alternative buildings (redundancy of function).

b. Scope

(1) Basis of procedures. The seismic review procedures for structural systems were developed by modifying the screening procedures in FEMA 154.

(2) Application. The procedures in this document are intended only for the purposes indicated above, and are not intended to supersede or replace the provisions of TI 809-05 for the evaluation and rehabilitation of military buildings.

(3) Limitations. Review of site-specific seismic geologic hazards and nonstructural components and systems is beyond the scope of these procedures.

CANCELLED

1-3. References.

FEMA 154, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A

Handbook.

FEMA 310, Handbook for the Seismic Evaluations of Buildings.

TI 809-05, Seismic Evaluation and Rehabilitation for buildings.

1-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

1-4. Seismic Use Groups. The following Seismic Use Groups are established based on the occupancy or function of a building.

a. Group IIIE. Seismic Use Group IIIE buildings are those containing essential facilities required for post-earthquake recovery, and/or those structures housing mission-essential functions. Mission-essential functions are those absolutely critical to mission continuation of the activity (there is no redundant back-up facility on- or offsite) as determined by the Commanding

Officer at the activity and/or the Major Claimant.

b. Group IIIH. Seismic Use Group IIIH buildings are those containing substantial quantities of hazardous substances that could be dangerous to the safety of the public, if released.

c. Group II. Seismic Use Group II buildings are those that constitute a substantial public hazard because of the occupancy or use of the building.

d. Group I. Seismic Use Group I buildings are those that are not assigned to Seismic Use

Groups II or III.

e. Hazardous Critical Facilities. These facilities (e.g., nuclear power plants, dams, and LNG facilities) are not included within the scope of this document, but are covered by other publications or regulatory agencies. For any facilities housing hazardous items not covered by criteria in this document, guidance should be requested from DAEN-ECE-D (Army), NAVFAC

Code 04BA (Navy), or HQ USA/LEEE (Air Force).

Examples of buildings or structures in each of the above groups are provided in table 1-1.

Buildings with

CANCELLED the requirements for that occupancy.

1-5. Historic Military Buildings. Historic military buildings, in general, are required to meet the same minimum life-safety objectives as all other buildings in the federal inventory.

1-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

1-6. Documentation. The forms discussed below document the review procedures prescribed herein. Guidance for preparing these forms is provided in appendix B.

a. Building Review Report

(1) Lateral Load System Data. Form for compilation of pertinent structural data for the seismic review of the building.

(2) Structural Review Score Sheet. Provides a relative numerical rating of a building group based on FEMA 310 Model Building Type, seismicity, and selected structural attributes.

b. Installation Report. A brief report will be prepared to summarize the results of the seismic review of buildings at each installation. Guidance for the completion of the Installation

Report is provided in appendix D. The report will include the following information:

(1) Executive Summary

(2) Seismic Vulnerability Ranking

(3) Building List

(4) Exempted Buildings List

(5) Building Group List

(6) Appendices

1-7. QUALIFICATIONS OF INVESTIGATORS. Engineers experienced in the seismic design of building structural systems must implement these procedures.

CANCELLED

1-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Seismic Use Group

I. Standard Occupancy Structures

II. Special Occupancy Structures

*ASSSEMBLY AREA GUIDELINES

Assembly areas, concentrated (without fixed seats) -Single room 195 m

2

(2,100 ft

2

) or more.

Auditoriums

Dance floors

Churches and chapels

Lobby accessory to assembly occupancy

Lodge rooms

Reviewing stands

Stadiums

Waiting area – 84 m

2

(900 ft

2

) or more

Assembly Areas, less concentrated use –

Single room 418 m

2

(4,500 ft

2

) or more

Conference rooms Lounges

Dining rooms Gymnasiums

Drinking establishments Stages

Exhibition rooms

Table 1-1. Seismic Use Groups

Occupancy or Function of Structure

All structures having occupancies or functions not listed above.

Covered structures whose primary occupancy is public assembly with a capacity greater than 300 persons*.

Daycare centers with a capacity greater than 150 persons.

Educational buildings through the 12 persons or 465 m

2

(5,000 ft

2 th

grade with a capacity greater than 250

) classroom space.

Buildings for colleges or adult education schools with a capacity greater than 500 students or 929 m

2

(10,000 ft

2

) of classroom space.

Medical facilities with 50 or more resident incapacitated patients, but not otherwise designated as Seismic Use Group IIIE facility, or 372 m

2

(4,000 ft

2

) of convalescent rooms.

Jails and detention facilities.

All structures with occupancy capacity greater than 5,000 persons.

Structures and equipment in power-generating stations and other public utility facilities not included in Seismic Use Group IIIE, and that are required for continued operation.

III H. Hazardous Facilities

III E. Essential Facilities

1

Water treatment facilities required for primary treatment and disinfecting of potable water.

Wastewater treatment facilities required for primary treatment.

Facilities having high value equipment, when justification is provided by the using agency.

Structures housing, supporting or containing sufficient quantities of toxic or explosive substances to be dangerous to the safety of the general public if released.

Facilities involved in handling or processing sensitive munitions, nuclear weaponry or materials, gas and petroleum fuels, and chemical or biological contaminants.

Facilities involved in operational missile control, launch, tracking or other critical defense capabilities.

Mission-essential and primary communication or data handling facilities.

Hospitals and other medical facilities having surgery and emergency treatment areas.

Fire, rescue, and police stations.

CANCELLED

Power-generating stations or other utilities required as emergency back-up facilities for Seismic Use Groups IIIE facilities.

Emergency vehicle garages and emergency aircraft hangars.

Designated communications centers.

Aviation control towers and air traffic control towers.

Waste treatment facilities required to maintain water pressure for fire suppression.

1

Essential facilities are those structures that are necessary for emergency operations subsequent to a natural disaster.

1-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

CHAPTER 2

SEISMIC REVIEW OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

2-1. Introduction. This chapter describes the procedures for the seismic review of structural systems in military buildings. The procedures include the compilation of data pertaining to the lateral load system of the building, and the relative scoring of the building as to its seismic vulnerability. Buildings that comply with the exemption criteria defined in appendix A are excluded from the provisions of this document.

2-2. Building Groups. Many military installations contain groups of buildings that are structurally similar (e.g., barracks and other personnel housing units). When this grouping occurs, it is necessary to review only one representative building in the group. The term “group” in this document will therefore denote one or more structurally similar building(s). Parameters considered to determine structural similarity might include comparison of FEMA 310 Model

Building Type, plan square footage, the buildings uses or functions, number of stories and the year(s) constructed. Aerial maps may also be helpful in determining structural similarity by comparing building footprints. It is important that building groups are both field-verified and reviewed by individuals who have knowledge of the specific buildings, to confirm the accuracy of the groupings.

2-3. Seismic Review Procedures. Structural review of military buildings includes the activities described below. Figure 2-1 illustrates the overall process. Guidance for the completion of the structural review and summary forms referenced in this chapter is provided in appendix B.

CANCELLED construction at the site to determine if a geotechnical report for the installation has been prepared, and if any site-specific ground motion studies have been performed. Any pertinent information gained from the interviews should be entered on the Lateral Load System Data sheet. Any relevant notes or correspondence related to the interviews should be appended to the data sheet.

2-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

b. Travel to building site. Seismic review is primarily a field-oriented activity requiring the reviewer to travel to the building site and perform a visual inspection of the building.

Building

Inventory

Inventory

Reduction

Exempted Buildings

(Appendix A)

Grouping

(Paragraph 2-2)

Building Review Reports:

a.

Lateral Load

System Data Sheet

(Paragraph 2-3 e.)

b.

Structural Review Score Sheet

(Paragraph 2-3 f.)

CANCELLED

Installation Report

Figure 2-1. Structural Review Flow Chart

2-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

c. Review of available data. The review process should begin by reviewing available geotechnical reports, structural drawings, building materials data, and specifications to obtain pertinent information needed to complete the Structural Review Score Sheet. These documents are likely to be kept at the base facility engineering (FE) office. All data obtained from these documents will be confirmed in the field whenever possible. The building Seismic Use Group should be designated on the Lateral Load System Data sheet.

d. Building exemption. If it becomes apparent during the review that one of the parameters listed in appendix A applies, the building may be declared exempt, and no further review will be necessary.

e. Building inspection visit. The objectives of the field survey are to confirm the information obtained at the FE office, and to obtain additional information needed to complete the Lateral

Load System Data Sheet and the Structural Review Score Sheet. The general condition of the building should also be noted, including any past damage to structural system elements from fire, earthquakes, wind, lack of maintenance, insect damage to wood, etc. This visit will require access to the facility, but need not be an extensive inspection. Sketches should be made and/or photographs should be taken of significant items related to structural performance.

f. Final structural score. The finalization of the structural review process includes the completion of the Structural Review Score Sheet. In some cases, the quantitative final structural score for the building may be in variance with the qualitative judgment of the reviewer.

When this occurs, the reviewer may determine that the quantitative score should not be used, and a different outcome of the review process should be selected. In this case, the reviewer will

CANCELLED

2-4. Documentation. The results of the seismic review procedures described in the preceding paragraph shall be summarized for each building group in the Installation Report described in appendix D. Copies of Lateral Load System Data Sheets and the Structural Review Score

Sheets will be attached as appendices to the Installation Report, as indicated in paragraph 1-4b.

2-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

APPENDIX A

BUILDINGS EXEMPTED BEFORE REVIEW

If any of the following conditions apply to a building under consideration, the building's structural system will be exempted from the seismic review procedures.

A-1. A building whose occupancy or function is defined in Table 1-1 as Seismic Use Group

I, and:

a. Is intended only for minimal human occupancy, or occupied by persons for a total of less than 2 hours a day.

b. Is a detached one- or two-family dwelling, two stories or less, and is located in a region of moderate seismicity as defined by FEMA 310, Table 2-1.

c. Has a gross area of less than 50 square meters (500 square feet).

d. Is a one-story building of wood, FEMA 310 Model Building Type, (MB1&2) or steel light frame (MB5) construction, and has a gross area of less than 280 square meters (3,000 square feet).

e. Is abandoned or scheduled for demolition or replacement within 5 years.

A-2. Buildings in any Seismic Use Group, except as designated in the subparagraphs below, which were designed in accordance with the provisions of the 1982 or later edition of

TM5-809-10, or the 1986 or later edition of TM5-809-10-1.

a. Steel braced frame systems (MB4) designed to 1988 UBC or later edition of TM 5-809-

10.

EXCEPTION: All steel moment frame systems with welded flange connections shall be reviewed by special criteria not provided in this document.

A-3. All buildings that are either fully or partially leased to the government.

CANCELLED

A-1

CEMP-E

APPENDIX B

COMPLETION OF BUILDING REVIEW REPORT FORMS

TI 809-51

30 September 1999

B-1. Purpose

This appendix provides guidelines for the completion of forms for the seismic review of structural systems. The Lateral Load System Data Sheet (Figure B-1) is to be used to record pertinent structural data concerning each of the buildings selected for the seismic review process. This sheet should be completed during the field visit to the building to confirm the data obtained from the drawings, and to provide documentation for the Structural Review Score Sheet.

B.2 Lateral Load System Data Sheet

a. Identification data. The data to be entered at the top of the sheet pertains to the identification of the building and the person performing the seismic review. The name and location of the station

(e.g., McChord AFB, Washington), the Facility Category Number, and the Building should be consistent with the Department of Defense Real Property Inventory Data. The NEHRP Building

Type refers to the 15 common building types described in FEMA 310, Section 2.6. The selection of the building type number that best describes the building will be made by the person performing the review, based on the review of the structural drawings and the visit to the building. The region of seismicity of the building site, represented by the design short-period and one-second period spectral response acceleration parameters, S

SD and S

DI , shall be determined in accordance with

FEMA 310, Section 2.5.

b. Diaphragm data. This section of the form requires a brief description of the floor and roof

CANCELLED forces to the vertical lateral-load-resisting element (e.g., shear walls or braced frames) at each building level. The description of the diaphragm connection to the vertical elements is to be qualitative rather than quantitative. For example, a metal deck diaphragm may be "welded to structural steel framing," and a reinforced concrete slab diaphragm may be "doweled to masonry shear walls."

B-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

c. Vertical resisting elements data. The information to be entered in this part of the form is also intended to be primarily a brief description of the structural element, but it should also provide some indication as to distribution of the element. (For example, "Reinforced concrete shear walls in longitudinal and transverse directions in the interior of the building," or "Steel braced frames at building perimeter in longitudinal and transverse directions.") Some buildings may have a different system in each of the orthogonal directions (e.g., moment-resisting frames in the transverse direction, and braced frames or shear walls in the longitudinal direction). The notation "braced or trussed columns" refers to the use of knee braces or trusses to resist lateral-load moments by

"fixing" or restraining one or both ends of a column. For infilled frames, it is important to note the type of frame (e.g., structural steel or reinforced concrete) and the type of infill (e.g., unreinforced masonry, reinforced concrete, or hollow clay tile).

d. Site soil profile classification. The applicable soil profile should be noted as one of the six standard site classes described in Table B-2. The identification will be obtained from a site geotechnical report, if available. If a geotechnical report is not available, the reviewer will select a site class based on his review of the soil borings, geologic maps, or other data, and should note the basis of his selection in the space provided on the form.

e. Foundations. The person performing the review should note the basic foundation system features, design, and detailing in the space provided, including the following items:

(1) For wood frame buildings, are the mud plates for the stud walls bolted to the foundation walls or strip footings? Are tension hold-downs provided for slender piers acting as shear walls?

(2) For reinforced concrete frame buildings, are the footings capable of resisting the lateral

CANCELLED the top of the footing as well as the bottom?)

(3) For piles or caissons, is the vertical reinforcement adequately anchored into the cap footing to resist lateral load moments? In soft soils, are the pile or caisson cap footings adequately connected with tie beams to preclude lateral displacements?

B-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Lateral Load System Data Sheet

Station

Seismic Use Group

Reviewer

Diaphragms (Describe briefly)

Type

Roof

Floor(s)

Building No.

NEHRP Building Type

Date

How connected to vertical elements

Vertical Resisting Elements (Describe briefly as applicable)

Shear wall

Vert. bracing

Rigid frames

Braced or trussed cols.

Soil information source:

Infilled frames

S

A

S

B

S

C

S

D

S

E

S

F

Mapped Spectral Acceleration

S s

=

F a

=

S

DS

=

S

1

=

F v

=

S

D1

=

(from 1997 NEHRP MCE Maps 1 to 16)

(from FEMA 310, Tables 3-5 and 3-6)

(S

DS

= 0.67F

a

S s

, S

D1

= 0.67F

v

S

1

)

Foundations (Circle one or more)

Spread footings

Strip footings

Pier footings

Piles

Caissons

Unusual Features (Describe briefly)

CANCELLED

Basement

Sidehill site

Other

Figure B-1. Lateral Load System Data Sheet

B-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

f. Unusual features. This portion of the form is to be used to note any unusual structural features that could adversely affect the seismic response of the building. A brief description of these adverse features, as evidenced by the building drawings, should be recorded on the form for use as a basis for the applicable structural modifiers on the Structural Review Score Sheet.

(1) Plan irregularities, for the purpose of this form, include geometric irregularities

(e.g., is the building plan symmetrical, "T" shaped, "L" shaped, or other asymmetrical configuration?), and obvious irregularities in the apparent rigidity and location of the vertical lateral-load-resisting elements (e.g., are the shear walls or braced frames symmetrically located with regard to size and extent?).

(2) Vertical irregularities to be noted in this form include significant setbacks in the plan configuration of the building from one story to an adjacent story (e.g., a building that has a

"stepped" configuration in elevation), and discontinuities in the vertical lateral-load-resisting system (e.g., are there shear walls or braced frames in upper stories that are discontinued in the lower stories?).

(3) The floor and roof diaphragms should be visually evaluated for obvious discontinuities (e.g., are there large stair or elevator openings that significantly impair the effectiveness of the diaphragm to transmit in-plane story forces to the vertical resisting elements?). Discontinuities can lead to adverse seismic response, particularly for highly stressed diaphragms (e.g., diaphragms required to transfer horizontal shear from a discontinuous vertical element to an offset resisting element).

(4) The presence of a basement should be noted, because an embedded structure

CANCELLED

B-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Table B-1. Site Soil Profile Classification

Class A

Hard rock with measured shear wave velocity,

v s

> 5,000 ft/sec (1,500 m/s)

Rock with 2,500 ft/sec <

v s

5,000 ft/sec (760 m/s <

v s

1,500 m/s)

Class B

Class C

Very dense soil and soft rock with 1,200 ft/sec <

v s

2,500 ft/sec (360 m/s <

v s

760 m/s) or with either

N

> 50 or

s u

> 2,000 psf (100 kPa)

Class D

Stiff soil with 600 ft/sec

v s

1,200 ft/sec (180 m/s

v s

360 m/s) or with either

15

N

50 or 1,000 psf

s u

2,000 psf (50 kPa

s u

100 kPa)

Class E

A soil profile with

v s

< 600 ft/sec (180m/s) or with either

N

<

15

s u

<

1,000 psf or any profile with more than 10 ft (3 m) of soft clay defined as soil with

PI > 20,

w

40 percent, and

s u

< 500 psf (25 kPa)

Class F

Soils requiring site-specific evaluations:

1. Soils vulnerable to potential failure or collapse under seismic loading such as liquefiable soils, quick and highly sensitive clays, and collapsible weakly cemented soils.

2. Peats and/or highly organic clays (H > 10 ft [3 m] of peat and/or highly organic clay where H = thickness of soil).

3. Very high plasticity clays (H > 25 ft [8 m] with PI > 75).

4. Very thick soft/medium stiff clays (H > 120 ft [36 m]).

Exception: When the soil properties are not known in sufficient detail to determine the Site

CANCELLED

B-5

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

(5) The bottom story of a building on a sidehill site will often be a basement with access at grade on one side of the building, and essentially solid walls on the other three sides.

If the basement is used to park motor vehicles, the side at grade may have large openings to admit the vehicles, resulting in significant torsional response to seismic forces.

(6) Other unusual features could include structural additions with structural systems or materials that differ from the original construction, or structural alterations that may adversely affect the intended load path for lateral forces.

B-3. Structural Review Score Sheet

The Structural Review Score Sheet (Figures B-2, B-3, and B-4) employs a deterministic matrix of selected structural parameters to arrive at a final structural score that represents the potential vulnerability of the building to seismic damage. This score may be subsequently used to establish a ranking of buildings, based on their relative vulnerability to seismic life-safety hazards. This may be useful as a prioritization tool in selecting buildings for further evaluation and rehabilitation.

Separate score sheets are provided, with applicable basic structural scores and modifiers, for the low, moderate, and high seismic areas. The regions of seismicity shall be defined by using the algorithm presented in FEMA 310, Section 2.5, and using the Maximum Considered

Earthquake (MCE) parameters obtained from the 1997 NEHRP Seismic Map Package. Most of the data to be entered on this sheet can be extracted from the Lateral Load System Data sheet

(Figure B-1), but all of the information on the score sheet, where feasible, should be confirmed

CANCELLED

Additional data to be provided include:

(1) The year the building was designed. This information should be obtained from the drawings. If the drawings indicate that the building was modified or expanded in subsequent years, this information should be entered at the bottom of the sheet under

B-6

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

"Comments/Conclusions." The drawing notes may indicate the building codes that governed the design, or may provide a base shear formula that can be used to determine which code governed the seismic design.

(2) The building name. Although the building number may be the primary identification for purposes of inventory, the building name (e.g., Brigade Headquarters Building) is probably the most definitive identification for personnel at the station.

(3) Present or known future use and initial use. The use or occupancy of a building may provide valuable insight as to the initial basis of design. For example, buildings that were not designed for seismic force, but were designed for heavy loads because of their occupancy classification, will have inherent capacity for lateral loads that may be adequate for the lower seismic areas. Since the use of a given building at a military installation may change with time, the current use (or if the building's use is scheduled to be changed at some known date in the near future) or the future use needs to be identified as an important parameter in the assignment of priority for evaluation and retrofit.

CANCELLED

B-7

CEMP-E

Station

Facility Cat. No.

TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Structural Review Score Sheet

High Seismicity Region (S

DS

> 0.500g, S

D1

>0.200g)

Building No.

Building Name

Present Use

Initial Use

No. Stories

Reviewer

Year Designed

Total Floor Area

Date

Quarters

Mess

SKETCH (Plan, Elevation and Section)

BUILDING FUNCTION

No. Persons

Building Type 1 2

Administration

Shops

Assembly

Hospital

Utility

Warehouse

Communications

Seismic Use Group:

III E

III H

II

I

0-10

11-100

100+

3

STRUCTURAL SCORES AND MODIFIERS

4 5 6 7 8 9

PHOTO

10 11 12 13 14 15

Basic Score

2 to 4 Stories

5.0

4.5

4.5

3.0

5.5

3.5

2.5

2.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

2.5

2.5

2.0

1.0

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

N/A -0.3

-0.5

-0.3

-0.5

-0.5

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

-0.5

-0.3

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

Poor Condition

Details*

Vert. Irregularity -0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

N/A -0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.8

-0.5

-1.0

-1.0

-0.5

-1.0

-0.5

Soft Story

S

E

, S

F

Final Score

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.8

N/A -0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-1.2

-1.2

-1.0

-1.2

-0.8

Torsion

Plan Irregularity

Diaphragm Discont.

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

-0.8

-0.5

-0.8

-1.0

-0.8

-0.8

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-0.8

-0.8

-0.6

S

S

A

D

, S

B

-0.5

-0.5

-0.6

-1.0

-0.8

-0.8

-1.0

-0.8

-0.8

-1.0

-0.8

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.8

-0.5

-0.8

-1.0

-0.8

-0.8

-1.0

-1.0

-1.0

-0.8

-1.0

-0.5

+0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3 +0.3

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

COMMENTS/CONCLUSIONS:

Record dates and a brief description of additions and/or modifications (if any), poor condition or obvious structural deficiencies (if any), narrative explanation of any discrepancies between the final structural score and the judgement of the reviewer, as well as comments that may be useful in the evaluation process.

Note: *Subjective Evaluation of structural details varies from –1.0 to +1.0. Include explanation for detail modifier.

Figure B-2. Structural Review Score Sheet – High Seismicity Region

B-8

CEMP-E

Station

Facility Cat. No.

TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Structural Review Score Sheet

Moderate Seismicity Region (0.167g < S

DS

< 0.500g, 0.067g < S

D1

< 0.200g)

Building No.

Building Name

Present Use

Initial Use

No. Stories

Reviewer

Year Designed

Total Floor Area

Date

Quarters

BUILDING FUNCTION

No. Persons

Mess

Administration

Shops

Assembly

0-10

Hospital

Utility

11-100

100+ Warehouse

Communications

Seismic Use Group:

III E

III H

II

I

SKETCH (Plan, Elevation and Section)

Building Type 1 2 3

STRUCTURAL SCORES AND MODIFIERS

4 5 6 7 8 9

PHOTO

10 11 12 13 14 15

Basic Score

2 to 4 Stories

Poor Condition

6.0

5.5

5.0

3.5

6.0

4.0

3.0

2.5

3.5

3.0

2.5

3.0

3.0

2.5

2.0

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

N/A -0.2

-0.4

-0.2

-0.4

-0.4

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.4

-0.2

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

Details*

Vert. Irregularity

Soft Story

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

N/A -0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.6

-0.4

-0.8

-0.8

-0.4

-0.8

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.6

N/A -0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-1.0

-1.0

-0.8

-1.0

-0.6

Torsion

Plan Irregularity

S

S

A

D

, S

B

-0.4

-0.4

-0.5

-0.8

-0.6

-0.6

-0.8

-0.6

-0.6

-0.8

-0.6

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.6

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-0.6

-0.6

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.6

-0.8

-0.4

Diaphragm Discont.

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-0.6

-0.6

-0.8

-0.8

-0.8

-0.6

-0.6

-0.5

+0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

S

E

, S

F

Final Score

-0.5

-0.5

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

-0.6

COMMENTS/CONCLUSIONS:

Record dates and a brief description of additions and/or modifications (if any), poor condition or obvious structural deficiencies (if any), narrative explanation of any discrepancies between the final structural score and the judgement of the reviewer, as well as comments that may be useful in the evaluation process.

Note: *Subjective Evaluation of structural details varies from –0.8 to +0.8. Include explanation for detail modifier.

Figure B-3. Structural Review Score Sheet – Moderate Seismicity Region

B-9

CEMP-E

Station

Facility Cat. No.

TI 809-51

30 September 1999

Structural Review Score Sheet

Low Seismicity Region ( S

DS

< 0.167g, S

D1

< 0.067g)

Building No.

Building Name

Present Use

Initial Use

No. Stories

Reviewer

Year Designed

Total Floor Area

Date

SKETCH (Plan, Elevation and Section)

Quarters

BUILDING FUNCTION

No. Persons

Mess

Administration

Shops

Assembly

0-10

Hospital

Utility

11-100

Building Type

Basic Score

2 to 4 Stories

Poor Condition

Details*

Vert. Irregularity

1 2 3

STRUCTURAL SCORES AND MODIFIERS

4 5 6 7 8 9

PHOTO

10 11 12 13 14 15

8.0

6.5

6.0

5.5

6.5

5.0

4.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

4.0

3.5

3.5

3.5

3.0

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

N/A -0.2

-0.3

-0.2

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.3

-0.2

-0.2

-0.3

-0.3

-0.2

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.3

N/A -0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.4

-0.3

-0.5

-0.5

-0.3

-0.5

-0.3

Warehouse

Communications

Seismic Use Group:

III E

III H

II

I

100+

COMMENTS/CONCLUSIONS:

Soft Story

Torsion

Plan Irregularity

Diaphragm Discont.

-0.2

-0.2

-0.3

-0.4

-0.3

-0.4

-0.5

-0.4

-0.4

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.4

-0.4

-0.3

S

A

, S

B

Record dates and a brief description of additions and/or modifications (if any), poor condition or structural deficiencies (if any), narrative explanation of any discrepancies between the final structural score and the judgement of the reviewer, as well as comments that may be useful in the evaluation process.

S

D

S

E

, S

F

Final Score

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.4

N/A -0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.6

-0.6

-0.5

-0.6

-0.4

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.5

-0.4

-0.4

-0.5

-0.4

-0.4

-0.5

-0.4

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.4

-0.3

-0.4

-0.5

-0.4

-0.4

-0.5

-0.5

-0.5

-0.4

-0.5

-0.3

CANCELLED

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.3

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

Note: *Subjective Evaluation of structural details varies from –0.6 to +0.6. Include explanation for detail modifier.

Figure B-4. Structural Review Score Sheet – Low Seismicity Region

B-10

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

b. Sketch and photo.

As visual aids in the review process, the form provides spaces for sketches and a photo. At a minimum, a plan of the building and a typical structural section should be sketched. One or more elevations should also be sketched, unless the photo is adequate to show the pertinent features (e.g., approximate size and spacing of window and door openings). The plan should indicate the approximate overall dimensions of the building, and the location and extent of the vertical lateral-load-resisting elements (e.g., shear walls braced frames or rigid frames). If the building has expansion or structural separation joints, the location and size of the joints should be noted. The typical structural section should indicate story height, and should identify the vertical resisting elements and the type of floor or roof diaphragms at each level.

c. Building function.

The classification of an existing building regarding its use and function is an important parameter in the assignment of priority for retrofit. The function of the building should be noted by circling the appropriate category(s) that best describes its current use. The occupancy, which is the average number of personnel that occupy the building during the normal work period (assumed to be from 0700 to 1700 hours). The ten classification categories include the following uses:

(1) Quarters. This category includes all buildings used as living quarters. Examples include single-family units; quarters for bachelor officers, enlisted personnel, or contractors

(e.g., BOQs, BEQs, BCQs); and barracks for group accommodations.

(2) Mess. Includes all buildings used for the preparation and consumption of food or refreshments. Examples include mess facilities, clubs for officers or enlisted personnel, and cafeterias.

CANCELLED

(4) Shops. This is a broad category characterized by large, open work areas and high overhead space, usually designed for bridge cranes, monorails, or other weight-handling equipment. Examples include aircraft hangars, machine shops, ordnance assembly buildings, and vehicle maintenance facilities.

B-11

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

(5) Assembly. Includes all buildings used for the congregation of groups of personnel.

Examples include assembly halls, auditoriums, theaters, chapels, gymnasiums, and recreation buildings.

(6) Hospital. Includes all buildings used for health care. Examples include hospitals, clinics, and dispensaries.

(7) Essential support. Includes buildings that house essential support services, including fire stations, police facilities, security offices, and prisons.

(8) Utility. Includes buildings that are components of utility system. Examples include electric substations, pumping plants, and sewage treatment plants.

(9) Warehouse. Includes buildings that are used for storage. Examples include warehouses, cold storage facilities, and ordnance magazines.

(10) Communications. Includes buildings that house communications facilities.

Examples include telephone equipment buildings, aircraft traffic control facilities, and satellite communication centers.

d. Seismic Use Groups. Examples of occupancy types or functions in the various Seismic

Use Groups are indicated in Table 1-1. Buildings with multiple occupancies should be categorized according to the most important occupancy, unless the portion of the building that houses the most important occupancy can be shown to satisfy all of the requirements for that occupancy.

CANCELLED the site visit are tempered with the engineering judgment of the engineer to develop a relative score reflecting the seismic vulnerability of the building. For each building type, this portion of the form provides a basic score and 11 structural modifiers. The final score for a specific building will be the total of the basic score plus all applicable modifiers. This scoring system is similar to that described in FEMA 154 (Reference 7), except for revisions to make the descriptions and numerical values more applicable to typical buildings in Department of Defense

B-12

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

installations. Some buildings may have different structural systems in each of the two major orthogonal directions. Separate structural scores should be determined for the structural system in each orthogonal direction.

(1) Basic score. The NEHRP building type for the building being reviewed is identified in Lateral Load System Data Sheet (Figure B-1). As a first step in determining the structural score, the "Basic Score” for the representative building type should be circled and modified by the applicable structural modifiers in that column. The Basic Score for each building type, as developed in FEMA 154, was the negative logarithm of the probability of damage exceeding 60 percent of the building replacement cost. The probabilities of damage were obtained from the

ATC-13 data (a probabilistic earthquake damage evaluation study for structures in California based on expert opinion polls), and the basic scores thus derived were intended to be nonarbitrary relative vulnerability assessments for each building type. For purposes of this form, the

FEMA 154 basic scores have been reviewed in the light of building damage observed in recent

California earthquakes, as well as applicability to typical DOD buildings, and were revised by judgment to represent the relative vulnerability.

(2) Two to four stories. Buildings in this height range are in resonance with the predominant periods (i.e., about 0.2 to 0.4 second) of seismic ground motion in firm soils.

These buildings are therefore expected to be subjected to greater damage.

(3) Poor condition. The structural condition of the building should be carefully noted during the field visit. This includes loss of section due to corrosion in steel buildings; excessive cracking of concrete or evidence of staining and spalling due corrosion of reinforcement; fungus

(e.g., damp rot) or borer damage in timber structures; cracking, spalling, or weak mortar in

CANCELLED and age. Any unusual conditions should be noted at the bottom of the sheet under

"Comments/Conclusions."

(4) Details. This is a subjective assessment of the structural detailing as evidenced in the structural drawings or as noted in the field. The cumulative modifier varies from +1.0 for good details to

B-13

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

-1.0 for poor details in high seismic regions; from +0.8 to -0.8 for moderate seismic regions; and from +0.6 to -0.6 for low seismic regions. A detail modifier of 0.0 denotes average details. The reviewer should determine the details for each building type (e.g., wall openings, connections, or foundations) that will have a significant impact on the capability of the structural system to protect the life safety of the occupants. The reviewer should then assign an approximate judgmental weighting factor to each detail, based on its importance, so that the cumulative modifier falls within the -1.0/-0.8/-0.6 to +1.0/+0.8/+0.6 range (high/moderate/low regions of seismicity). It should also be noted that some detailing features might preempt an otherwise good rating of other details. For example, a shear wall building, with minimal wall openings (i.e., reduced not more than 25 percent by wall openings, and acceptable foundation details) may have minimal connections to floor and roof diaphragms, and in the judgment of the reviewer, should therefore be assigned a cumulative modifier of -0.7/-0.6/-0.4 (high/moderate/low regions of seismicity). The following are examples of qualitatively evaluated details. The values in the parentheses (e.g., +1.0/+0.8/+0.6) are intended to provide a relative range of the modifier for each specific detail in the (high/moderate/low) regions of seismicity.

(a) Concrete or masonry shear walls with the gross cross-sectional area at any story reduced not more than 25 percent by window or door openings (e.g., +1.0/+0.8/+0.6). If reduced by openings more than 75 percent (e.g., -1.0/-0.8/-0.6).

(b) Positive ties at floor and roof diaphragms to resist out-of-plane forces on exterior walls (e.g., +0.5/+0.4/+0.3). If no indication of ties (e.g., -1.0/-0.8/-0.6).

(c) Positive connections to transfer diaphragm shears to vertical resisting elements (e.g., +0.5/+0.4/+0.3). If no indication of connections (e.g., -0.5/-0.4/-0.3).

(d)

CANCELLED

(e) Diagonal trim bars at openings in concrete walls are desirable to restrain corner cracking under in-plane lateral forces. If trim bars are provided when window or door openings constitute 20% or more of the gross horizontal cross-section of the wall (e.g.,

+0.3/+0.2/+0.2). If no indication of trim bars (e.g., -0.3/-0.2/-0.2), no modifier is required (0.0) when openings constitute less than 20% of the gross cross-section.

B-14

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

(f) Foundations in soils that may be subjected to settlement or lateral spreading should be connected with the beams. If reasonably well-distributed tie beams are provided

(e.g., +0.5/+0.4/+0.3), if no indication of tie beams (e.g., -1.0/-0.8/-0.6). Foundations for cast-inplace concrete columns and walls should have dowels, matching the column or wall reinforcement, with adequate development length in the foundation and in the column or wall above. If number of dowels and development lengths appear to be reasonable (e.g.,

+0.5/+0.4/+0.3); if not, (e.g., -0.5/-0.4/-0.3). If no information is available (0.0).

A brief explanation of the reasons for the reviewer's chosen cumulative modifier should be noted at the bottom of the sheet under "Comments/Conclusions."

(5) Vertical irregularity. These irregularities may apply to discontinuities of strength, stiffness, geometry, or mass. A significant reduction in stiffness may result in a "soft story," which is evaluated separately in this form. Examples of other vertical irregularities include discontinuous (i.e., offset) columns, "short" columns (e.g., columns in concrete frames with partial height infills), shear walls, or braced frames; significant changes from one story to an adjacent story in size or location of window and door openings in a shear wall; or significant setbacks in the vertical plane of an exterior wall.

(6) Soft story. Generally, in multi-story buildings, a condition where the lateral stiffness of a story is significantly less than that of the story above. This may be the result of higher story height, more or larger openings in the shear walls, or other adverse features, and often occurs at first stories.

CANCELLED such that there is obvious eccentricity between the center of mass and the center of rigidity?)

(8) Plan irregularities. This modifier reduces the structural score for buildings with long wings that are "L," "E," or "T" shaped, with sharp re-entrant corners where increased damage is likely to occur. If the plan length of a wing projection, beyond the re-entrant corner, is greater

B-15

CEMP-E TI 809-51

30 September 1999

than 25 percent of the transverse dimension of the wing, the structure can be considered to have plan irregularity.

(9) Diaphragm discontinuities. Significant discontinuities in diaphragm strength or stiffness. Examples include large openings that significantly reduce the strength and/or stiffness of the diaphragm, particularly when the openings are adjacent to a vertical resisting element so as to impair the effective transfer of shear to the element.

(10) S

A

, S

B

, S

D

, S

E

, and S

F

. These site characteristics pertain to the standardized soil profiles described in Table B-2. Buildings on firm soil (i.e., S

C

) are assumed in the basic score and a positive modifier is used for buildings on rock (S

A

, S

B

), and negative modifiers are used for buildings founded on less favorable soil profiles (S

D

, S

E

, and S

F

).

f. Final score. The numerical total of the basic score and the applicable structural modifiers is the primary structural parameter in the review process. Other parameters noted on this form, (e.g., use, occupancy, and falling hazards) are also important in the assignment of priority for evaluation and retrofit.

g. Comments/Conclusions. This part of the form should be used to record: 1) dates and a brief description of any modifications and/or additions made to the structure; 2) poor condition of the structure, if any; 3) obvious structural deficiencies, if any; 4) a brief explanation to support chosen detail modifier; 5) a narrative explanation provided by the reviewer regarding any discrepancies between the final structural score and the judgement of the reviewer that may affect the outcome of the review results; and 6) any comments that the reviewer believes would be useful for the evaluation process.

CANCELLED

B-16

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

APPENDIX C

SEISMIC REVIEW EXAMPLE PROBLEMS

C-1. Introduction. This appendix illustrates the implementation of the guidelines promulgated by this report for the seismic review of existing military buildings. The following example problems represent typical buildings designed for specific functional uses that occur at many military installations:

C1 Reinforced Concrete Frames and Shear Wall Building

C2 Reinforced Brick Masonry Building

C3 Infilled Steel Frame Building

C4 Steel Frame Building

CANCELLED

C1-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

EXAMPLE PROBLEM C1

REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAMES AND SHEAR WALL BUILDING

C1-1. Building Description

The H-shaped barracks (Building 1452) is a three-story cast-in-place reinforced-concrete structure located at Fort Lewis, Washington. According to the available drawings obtained before and during the initial site visit, it was designed as a two-company barracks and mess hall in 1956. It is one of ten similar buildings at the installation.

The barracks consist of four separate structures with 2-inch separation between adjacent structures. Dimensions of the two end structures (two legs which form the H) are each approximately 39 feet by 117 feet. Dimensions of the structure located between the two wings are approximately 23 feet by 156 feet. These three structures are each 3 stories. The fourth structure that ties into the center structure is a 2-story mess hall with a partial basement. The dimensions are approximately 59 feet by 78 feet. See Figure C1-1 for First Floor Plan and

Figure C1-2 for typical structural sections.

a. Vertical-Load-Resisting System. The vertical-load-resisting system consists of reinforced concrete flat slab and columns and is essentially the same for all four structures. The columns are nominally spaced at 19 feet in both directions of building axes. The slab thickness is typically 7 inches at the roof, and at the third- and second-floor levels. The first floor slab is 4inch-thick concrete on grade. The footings consist of individual spread footings for the columns and strip footings along the perimeter of the structures.

The interior columns are 14-inch square with relatively light reinforcing and #3 ties at 12 inches.

The perimeter framing is a beam-column framing system. The columns are 12 inches by 24 inches, with the major axis oriented in the longitudinal axis of the structures. The beams are typically 12 inches wide by 18 inches deep, or 10 inches by 15 or 18 inches deep.

b. Lateral-Load-Resisting System. The primary lateral-force-resisting system consists of the concrete floors acting as diaphragms transmitting lateral forces to the perimeter frames.

The lateral-force-resisting frame system consists of rectangular columns and beams. The transverse lateral-force-resisting system of the two end structures consists of 8-inch-thick concrete shear walls at the ends of each structure.

CANCELLED

a. Seismic Review of Structural Systems. The review procedure described in Chapter 2 is performed for all four of the structures that comprise Building 1452. A separate Lateral Load

System Data Sheet and Structural Review Score Sheet was completed for each structure, except that the data for the two identical wings are combined on each of the two capacity forms.

The following forms, along with the recorded data for Building 1452, are included in this section.

b. Lateral Load System Data Sheet (Figures C1-3, C1-5 and C1-7). This form is filled out in accordance with the instructions contained in Appendix B. The information is extracted from the building drawings reviewed in the Base Public Works office, and confirmed by visual

C1-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

inspection of the building. The applicable FEMA 310 Model Building Type is determined from the description of structural systems given in FEMA 310, Table 2-2. It should be noted that the two dormitory wings have different structural systems in each of the two orthogonal directions.

c. Structural Review Score Sheets (Figures C1-4, C1-6 and C1-8). This form should be completed at the building site using the information entered on the Lateral Load System Data

Sheet, and confirmed by visual observation of the building. Note that a +1 has been assigned to the "Details" line for the shear wall system because each shear wall has only a small door opening. A zero has been assigned to the concrete frame systems since the details are typical of nonductile concrete frames. The final scores for the various wings range from -0.2 to 2.9, as shown on the score sheets.

C1-3. Installation Report

The final scores for the structurally separated building wings can then be ranked with other installation building scores to compare the relative seismic vulnerability of all nonexempt buildings at the installation. The procedures for seismic vulnerability ranking of buildings and preparation of the Installation Report that summarizes the seismic review findings are described in appendix D.

CANCELLED

C1-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-1. First Floor Plan

C1-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-2. Typical Sections

C1-5

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-3. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 1 of 3

C1-6

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-4. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 1 of 3

C1-7

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-5. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 2 of 3

C1-8

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-6. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 2 of 3

C1-9

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-7. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet, 3 of 3

C1-10

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C1-8. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet, 3 of 3

C1-11

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

EXAMPLE PROBLEM C2

REINFORCED BRICK MASONRY BUILDING

C2-1. Building Description

The Enlisted Men's Barracks at Brigade Headquarters (Building 3733) (Fort Lewis, Washington) is a three-story reinforced brick masonry unit (BMU) structure. According to the as-built drawings, it was designed in 1976.

The building has overall plan dimensions of 80 feet by 48 feet, and consists of three sections.

One section on the east end of the building has plan dimensions of 54 feet by 44 feet. The west section has plan dimensions of 16 feet by 42 feet, and is offset 6 feet to the south of the east section. The two are connected by a 10-foot by 31-foot section of corridors and stairs. See

Figure C2-1 for floor plans, and Figure C2-2 for elevations.

a. Vertical-Load-Resisting System. The ground floor is a reinforced concrete slab-ongrade. For the second and third floors of the east section, the floor slabs consist of 2½-inch lightweight concrete and 3-inch, 20-gauge composite deck over wide-flange steel beams. For the west and the connecting sections, the floor slabs consist of 8-inch-thick reinforced concrete.

The roof consists of built-up roofing and rigid insulation over 20-gauge by 1½-inch steel decking supported by truss joists and steel girders. Vertical loads are supported by steel columns in the interior, and reinforced BMU along the exterior. The footings consist of individual spread footings for the columns, and strip footings along the perimeter of the structures.

b. Lateral-Load-Resisting System. The primary lateral-force-resisting system consists of the roof and floors acting as diaphragms and transmitting lateral forces to the perimeter BMU shear walls. The roof load is transmitted by the steel decking to the walls through steel angles connected to the walls with 5/8-inch-diameter bolts. The BMU walls are reinforced vertically with #4 bars at 24 inches on center. Horizontal bond beams with four #4 bars are provided at each floor level, with intermediate bond beams with two #4 bars at 3-foot, 4-inch centers, and over door and window openings. The lateral force from the floor diaphragm is transmitted to the ground through these BMU shear walls. There are several CMU (concrete masonry unit) walls on the first floor, which also contribute to resisting the lateral loads.

CANCELLED

b. Lateral Load System Data Sheet. This form (Figure C2-3) is completed in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix B. The information is taken from the building drawings and by visual inspection of the building. The building is categorized as FEMA 310

Model Building Type 13, based on the description of structural systems given in FEMA 310,

Table 2-2.

C2-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

c. Structural Review Score Sheet. This form (Figure C2-4) is completed using the instructions in Appendix B and the information obtained from drawings and other sources, and confirmed by visual inspection of the building.

Although the plan of the building is not purely rectangular, the irregularity does not appear severe enough in the initial review to warrant deduction in the structural score. The basic score of 2.5 for the Model Building Type 13 is modified by -1.0 for having between 2 to 4 stories; +0.5

for better than average detailing; and -0.6 for Soil Type S

D

. This results in a final score of 1.4.

C2-3. Installation Report

The final score for the building can then be ranked with other installation building scores to compare the relative seismic vulnerability of all nonexempt buildings at the installation. The procedures for seismic vulnerability ranking of buildings and preparation of the Installation

Report that summarizes the seismic review findings are described in Appendix D.

CANCELLED

C2-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C2-1. Floor Plans

C2-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C2-2. Elevations

C2-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C2-3. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet

C2-5

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C2-4. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet

C2-6

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

EXAMPLE PROBLEM C3

INFILLED STEEL FRAME BUILDING

C3-1. Building Description

The French Theater (Building 2004) is a one-story infilled steel frame building located at Fort

Lewis, Washington. The steel frames are infilled with unreinforced hollow clay tile walls.

According to the available drawings and information, the building was originally built in 1932. It was apparently enlarged in 1940. The drawings reviewed were prepared for the 1940 modification, and generally represent the existing condition of the original building, but do not provide the detailing and reinforcing information of the original building.

The original building had overall plan dimensions of approximately 48 by 120 feet, with the main theater section measuring 48 by 100 feet. The modified building has overall plan dimensions of approximately 80 by 132 feet, consisting of the 80-foot by 100-foot main theater section, and 30foot by 52-foot entrance and lobby area. See Figure C3-1 for plans, and Figure C3-2 for sections.

a. Vertical-Load-Resisting System. The ground floor is a concrete slab poured on excavated ground to form a sloped surface (reinforcing is unknown). The roof consists of

Spanish tile on 2-inch by 6-inch roofing plank supported by a steel joist and truss system. Steel columns support the truss. The steel columns along the exterior are infilled with the hollow clay tile walls. The footings consist of individual spread footings for the columns and strip footings along the perimeter of the structures.

b. Lateral-Load-Resisting System. The primary lateral-force-resisting system consists of horizontal wood sheathing connected to the top flange of the upper chord of the trusses through 3-inch by 6-inch nailer and steel joists. The unreinforced masonry shear walls along the exterior resist the lateral load. The lateral load is transmitted to the walls through the roof diaphragm, with contribution from intermediate collectors and steel framing and X-bracing consisting of angles and rods.

c. The 1940 Modifications. During the 1940 modifications, the auditorium portion was widened and the entrance area was enlarged. The auditorium portion was widened from 49

CANCELLED

C3-2. Building Review Report

a. Seismic Review of Structural Systems. The review procedure described in Chapter 2 was performed for Building 2004 using the Lateral Load System Data Sheet and Structural

Review Score Sheet. The review was performed only on the auditorium section of the building because it appeared to pose the most severe condition.

C3-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

b. Lateral Load System Data Sheet. The form (Figure C3-3) was completed in accordance with the instructions contained in appendix B. The information was extracted from the available building drawings and by visual inspection of the building. The applicable FEMA

310 Model Building Type was determined from the description of structural systems given in

FEMA 310, Table 2-2.

c. Structural Review Score Sheet. This form (Figure C3-4) was completed at the building site using the information entered on the Lateral Load System Data Sheet, and confirmed by visual observation of the building. The building is classified as steel frames with infilled shear wall.

Although the theater is a one-story building, due to its height of approximately 32 feet, and the long 80foot span of the building, the story modifier of -0.5 was assigned. The building drawings lack information on the original building and some of the key elements are not visible; therefore, a score of

-0.5 was assigned for details. The resulting final score for the building is 0.9.

C3-3. Installation Report

The final score for the building can then be ranked with other installation building scores to compare the relative seismic vulnerability of all nonexempt buildings at the installation. The procedures for seismic vulnerability ranking of buildings and preparation of the Installation

Report that summarizes the seismic review findings are described in appendix D.

CANCELLED

C3-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C3-1. Floor Plans

C3-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C3-2. Sections

C3-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C3-3. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet

C3-5

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C3-4. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet

C3-6

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

EXAMPLE PROBLEM C4

STEEL FRAME BUILDING

C4-1. Building Description

Building 745 consists of three 1-story structures located at McChord Air Force Base (AFB),

Washington. The buildings are used as shops for aircraft engine inspection and repair. One is of timber construction (built in the 1950s), and the other two are steel construction (built in 1961 and 1965), and all are structurally independent of each other. One of the steel structures is used here to demonstrate the structural review procedures.

The example building was constructed in 1965 and consists of a pre-engineered and prefabricated gable-framed structure (Figure C4-1). The plan dimensions of the building are approximately 131 feet by 155 feet. The roof framing consists of insulated metal roofing over purlins that are spaced at 5-foot intervals. Steel-gable frames with tapered steel beam-columns at each end span the transverse direction. The beam-columns are 10½-inch by 12-inch built-up steel sections at the base and 10½ inches by about 30 inches at the top, and are spaced at 20foot intervals. The steel beams are approximately 30 inches deep, and are supported at the midpoint by 12-inch by 12-inch wide-flange steel columns. Two sets of crane rails are suspended from the beams. Each crane has a maximum lift capacity of 8 tons.

The east end wall and both side walls consist of 6-inch-thick by 4-foot-high precast concrete wainscot and insulated metal siding over steel girders spaced at approximately 4-foot intervals above (except for door and window openings). The west wall is an 8-inch-thick CMU firewall, and is connected to the steel columns with metal clips.

a. Vertical-Load-Resisting System. Steel framing and concrete columns carry the vertical loads. The footings of the steel frames consist of 3-foot, 6-inch-square spread footings for each column, with strip footings between the columns. The interior columns are 12-inch-square, with reinforcing of four #6 bars and #3 ties at 12 inches. The footings below the center columns are

2-foot, 6-inch-square spread footings.

b. Lateral-Load-Resisting System. The lateral forces in the transverse direction are transmitted through the gable-frame system to the foundation. The lateral forces in the longitudinal direction are transmitted to the foundation by three sets of ¾-inch rod X-bracing

CANCELLED

a. Seismic Review of Structural Systems. The review procedure described in Chapter 2 is performed using the Lateral Load System Data Sheet and Structural Review Score Sheet. The information is extracted from the building drawings (made available by the Base Master

Planning office), and by visual inspection of the building. For this building, there were no fabrication drawings showing the frame sizes and bracing locations. It was necessary to obtain this information by field measurement where they were accessible, and by estimation where they were not. The completed forms are shown in Figures C4-2 and C4-3.

C4-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

b. Lateral Load System Data Sheet (Figure C4-2). This form is completed in accordance with the instructions contained in Appendix B. The building is categorized as FEMA Building

Type 5, based on the description of structural systems given in FEMA 310, Table 2-2. Based on the information obtained from topographic maps and logs of soil profiles, the site is assigned

Soil Profile Type S

D

.

c. Structural Review Score Sheet (Figure C4-3). This form is completed using the information obtained from drawings and confirmed by visual observation of the building.

The building is rectangular in plan. There is a firewall on the east side of the building that is not expected to contribute to the overall building stiffness because the wall is connected to the framing with clips, which do not transfer lateral forces. Therefore, no reduction is taken for possible torsion.

The basic score for Model Building Type 5 is 5.5. With the -0.6 reduction for Soil Type S

D

, the final score is 4.9.

C4-3. Installation Report

The final score for the building can then be ranked with other installation building scores to compare the relative seismic vulnerability of all nonexempt buildings at the installation. The procedures for seismic vulnerability ranking of buildings and preparation of the Installation

Report that summarizes the seismic review findings are described in appendix D.

CANCELLED

C4-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C4-1. Plan and Section

C4-3

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C4-2. Completed Lateral Load System Data Sheet

C4-4

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

CANCELLED

Figure C4-3. Completed Structural Review Score Sheet

C4-5

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

APPENDIX D

INSTALLATION REPORT

D-1. Purpose. This appendix defines the key components of the Installation Report that summarize the results of the seismic review of buildings at a given military installation.

D-2. Installation Report Components

a. Executive Summary. The following items shall be summarized in the front of the report:

(1)

The total number of buildings designated for review

(2)

The number of buildings exempted by the criteria defined in Appendix A

(3)

The total number of structurally similar building groups reviewed.

b. Seismic Vulnerability Ranking. A listing of the structurally similar building groups reviewed, ranked in ascending numerical order based on their structural scores. This will result in the ranking of the building groups from highest seismic vulnerability (lowest structural scores) to lowest seismic vulnerability (highest structural scores). The listing shall include:

(1)

Building Group number

(2)

The building number of the representative building reviewed in each group

(3)

The structural score for each group

(4)

The FEMA 310 Model Building Type of the building reviewed

(5)

The number of stories of the building reviewed

(7)

The Seismic Use Group (Table 1-1) of the building reviewed.

(6)

The construction date of the building reviewed

CANCELLED

(1)

Building number

(2)

Building title

(3)

Building group number

(4)

The number of stories

(5)

Gross area

D-1

CEMP-E

(6)

The FEMA 310 Model Building Type

(7)

The year of construction

(8)

The Seismic Use Group (Table 1-1).

TI 809-51

15 September 1999

d. Exempted Buildings List. A listing of buildings exempted by the criteria defined in

Appendix A during the Inventory Reduction Phase (Figure 2-1).

(1)

Building number

(2)

Building title

(3)

Paragraph reference from Appendix A as the basis for exemption.

e. Building Group List. A listing of building groups and the buildings within each group.

The representative building reviewed for each group shall be identified, and the assigned FEMA

310 Model Building Type shall be indicated.

(1)

Groups of buildings determined to be structurally similar based on the following parameters:

Year Built

Number of Stories

Seismic Use Group

Gross Area

FEMA 310 Model Building Type

Building Footprint.

(2)

A number for each group based on largest (Group 1) to smallest (last Group) gross building areas.

CANCELLED number in the past. Each Building Review Report shall consist of the Structural Review Score

Sheet and the Lateral Load Systems Data Sheet for each building or group. For building groups of structurally similar buildings, only the Building Review Reports of the representative buildings for each group need be included

.

D-2

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

APPENDIX E

BIBLIOGRAPHY

E-1.

Government Publications

Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force

Draft TI 809-04, 1998, November 1998

Seismic Design for Buildings

Draft TI 809-05, November 1998

Seismic Evaluation and Rehabilitation for Buildings

Federal Emergency Management Agency

FEMA 156, July 1988

Typical Costs for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Volume I - Summary

FEMA 157, September 1988

Typical Costs for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Volume II - Supporting Documentation

FEMA 172, June 1992

NEHRP Handbook for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings

FEMA 302, 1997 Edition

NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures,

Part 1 - Provisions

FEMA 303, 1997 Edition

NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures,

Part 2 - Commentary

Draft Report, April 1993

Selected Seismic Rehabilitation Techniques and Their Costs

General Accounting Office

CANCELLED

E-1

CEMP-E TI 809-51

15 September 1999

National Institute of Standards and Technology

ICSSC RP4, February 1994

Standards of Seismic Safety for Existing Federally Owned or Leased Buildings and Commentary

U.S. Congress

PL 96-515, 1966

National Historic Preservation Act

PL 101-614, November 1990

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Reauthorization Act

Office of the President

Executive Order 12941, December 1, 1994 Seismic Safety of Existing Federally Owned or Leased

Buildings

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

36CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties

E-2. Nongovernment Publications

Applied Technology Council, 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Redwood City, CA 94065

ATC 13, October 1985

Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California

ATC 26-1, September 1991

U.S. Postal Service Manual for Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings (Interim)

International Conference of Building Officials, 5360 Workman Mill Road, Whittier, CA 90601-2298

UCBC 1991

Uniform Code for Building Conservation

CANCELLED

E-2

Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement

Table of contents