Contents
|
2 |
The 8th Module is called "ANALYSIS" and includes the following 3 groups of commands:
|
3 |
• FOREWORD
|
3 |
• 3rd revision of 2022 EIA.
|
4 |
• REQUIREMENTS
|
5 |
OBSERVATION:
|
5 |
• Resilient,
|
5 |
• Resilient, (1)
|
5 |
ATTENTION:
|
5 |
• EXISTING MATERIALS
|
6 |
average price.
|
6 |
3h revision of the EIA CIP
|
6 |
OBSERVATION:
|
7 |
SKYRODEMA
|
8 |
HALYVAS:
|
9 |
3h revision of the EIA CIP
|
9 |
• Secondary data in SCADA Pro
|
10 |
• Secondary Pre-seismic Control
|
12 |
• Characterization of earthquake victims (Official Gazette, No. 455, 25.02.20)
|
12 |
OBSERVATION:
|
14 |
Scenarios
|
15 |
OBSERVATIONS:
|
15 |
CEE §5.5.1.1.1 Structural element deficiency index
|
16 |
CAN.EPE §5.5.1.2 Morphological regularity
|
16 |
(see §Control of the influence of the higher idioms)
|
16 |
IMPORTANT OBSERVATION:
|
17 |
Dynamic Pre-Check,
|
19 |
OBSERVATION:
|
21 |
3h revision of the EIA:
|
21 |
Extent of Damage
|
22 |
Table S 4.2: Values of the cSd coefficient
|
22 |
3h revision of the 2022 EIA.
|
23 |
Elastic Dynamic,
|
27 |
3h revision of the EIA:
|
29 |
• Select:
|
30 |
• Extent of Damage
|
30 |
IMPORTANT OBSERVATION: (1)
|
30 |
• Method of Calculation - Analysis / Performance
|
30 |
3h revision of the 2022 EIA.
|
31 |
Assuming we are in zone III, so 0.36 and importance I
|
35 |
Method m (for performance levels B & C)
|
36 |
Method q (for performance levels A & B & C)
|
37 |
CAN §5.7.2 (b) INFLUENCE OF THE HIGHER IDIOMORITIES
|
40 |
OBSERVATIONS
|
40 |
Based on the above criteria, therefore, inelastic (pushover) or elastic (static or dynamic) is applied.
|
42 |
OBSERVATION:
|
47 |
OBSERVATION: (1)
|
48 |
OBSERVATION: (2)
|
49 |
OBSERVATION: (3)
|
51 |
3h revision of the 2022 EIA.
|
52 |
EXAMPLE
|
56 |
OBSERVATIONS:
|
60 |
1.3.2.1 Elements of Resilient Structural Analysis in load-bearing masonry buildings simulated by the Equivalent Frame Method
|
61 |
• With gradual loss of strength
|
62 |
• Maximum number of curves
|
62 |
• Percentage Vmax for curve
|
62 |
-Remaining strength:
|
62 |
1.3.2.2 Elastic Dynamic Analysis of load-bearing masonry using the Equivalent Frame Method
|
63 |
EXAMPLE:
|
66 |
OBSERVATION:
|
70 |
OBSERVATIONS :
|
73 |
OBSERVATIONS: (1)
|
78 |
Results
|
79 |
2.4.1 Combinations of seismic anelastic analysis scenarios
|
80 |
OBSERVATION:
|
81 |
OBSERVATION: (1)
|
87 |
OBSERVATION: (2)
|
91 |
IMPORTANT OBSERVATION:
|
91 |
- Vr,sls
|
91 |
OBSERVATION: (3)
|
92 |
OBSERVATION: (4)
|
94 |
2.4.1 push
|
102 |
BUILDING CONTROL PRIORITY INDICATOR
|
103 |
SEISMIC CATEGORY
|
103 |
CALIBRATION OF CRITERIA
|
104 |
OVERRIDING CRITERION
|
104 |
A summary of the process:
|
105 |
q for performance level B
|
105 |
OBSERVATION:
|
105 |
ATTENTION!
|
114 |
Show
|
115 |
OBSERVATION:
|
120 |
OBSERVATION: (1)
|
121 |
• Control at operator level
|
122 |
IMPORTANT OBSERVATION:
|
124 |
- Vr,sls
|
124 |
OBSERVATION: (2)
|
128 |
OBSERVATION: (3)
|
128 |
OBSERVATION
|
135 |