VOLUME 13, NUMBER 1 FEBRUARY 1998 EARTHQUAKE SPECTRA The Professional Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute 25°13) - Principal Direction June 25,1995 Earthquake rn Frequency Range: 1.0 - 1.4 Hz %, Taipei Basin 24°56" 121°22" 121939"1 Equivalent Static Eccentricities in the Simplified Methods of Seismic Analysis of Buildings K.Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios ‘The equivalent static eccentricities of seismic forces are usually defined by codes with simple expressions of the static eccentricity. This paper presents certain formulae for the exact calculation of these eccentricities on the basis of the dynamic response of a simplified model. From the parametric analysis of such formulae the determinative role of the torsional and lateral stffhess of the system becomes obvious for the correct evaluation of the equivalent static eccentricities. Finally, a proposal is made for the improvement of the static torsional provisions of the current codes INTRODUCTION Observations made after severe seismic events have shown that a high percentage of damage or even collapse occurs in buildings having an asymmetric plan arrangement of the vertical load resisting elements. This fact is mainly attributed to the torsional-translational ‘vibrations of the floor plans due to which, additional ductility demands occur in the peripheral elements. This problem is dealt (within the scope of the simplified methods of seismic analysis), with the aid of the "equivalent" static eccentricities of earthquake lateral forces on both sides of the centre of mass M of the floors. With the eccentric action of earthquake lateral forces, an increase of the strength of the peripheral elements is sought for so that the ductility demands are limited to the levels of the respective torsionally balanced system under ‘translational vibration. More specifically, according to code provisions, a maximum and a ‘minimum eccentricity are defined with respect to the centre of stiffness K of the floors. Such design eccentricities are given by the following reatior emax=€f 8a, &min=& ~6 (lab) where ef, ey are the equivalent static eccentricities and ¢, the accidental eccentricity. The latter takes into account the differential movements of the ground, and the discrepancies between the mass, stifthess and strength distributions used in analysis as well as their true distributions at the time of an earthquake. The accidental eccentricity will not be examined in this work. (KA), (AA), (TM) Professor, Lecturer, Dr. Civil Engineer, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Dept. of Civil Engineering, $4006 Thessaloniki - Greece. ‘cEarthguake Spc, Volume 1 No February 982 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios. The code values of the equivalent static eccentricities ey and ¢, compared to the static eccentricity ¢, (distance between the centre of mass M and the centre of stifiness K) can be classified in the following three categories: Le, >e, e,=¢, (EC. N°8I89, DIN 4149) 2 e>e,, € e, and & 0 or e, ey. Finally, for an eccentricity e, of the F, the static displacements uy(e,) and u-(¢,) can be either smaller or greater than the respective dynamic displacements max uy and max u,. Consequently, the calculated values of eccentricities ef and e, will generally be cither smaller or greater than the static eccentricity €o» depending on the dynamic properties of the system. However, taking into consideration the conclusions from the post-elastic response ‘mentioned in the Introduction, itis advisable to impose the following restrictions to the values of ey and , which are calculated on the basis of the elastic response: ef 2, % S0S-e, (5a,b) The first restriction aims at reducing the inelastic displacements at the flexible side (1), while the second one aims at reducing the ductility demands atthe rigid side (0). ‘The maximum dynamic displacements max 0,, max u, and max uy are calculated by using the Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis, and expressed as follows (see Appendix By:K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou,T: Makarios 1 max 8, = "Ry Sy (62) max up =D, “Say (6b) max uy = Dy Say (6c) By substituting these expressions in the second terms of the expressions (3) and solving as to ey, ¢ and ey, there result the required formulas for the calculation of the equivalent static eccentricities: (7a) (7b) (ey ‘The eccentricity eis not required in practice, because, as it has been already mentioned, we always have ey Sey. Also the vahues of the non-dimensional coefficients Ry, D, and Dy depend on the specific region of the design spectrum in which the cigenperiods 7; and T; of the model are located (see Appendix B). In practice, however, the assumption of only two cases is enough, ie. for 7, > 7. (flexible system), and for 7, < J; (cigid system). Following the above remarks, Table 1 summarises the complete procedure of calculation of the useful eccentricities ey and ¢, , and explains all the parameters required for the calculation in question. APPLICATIONS, PROPOSED DESIGN ECCENTRICITIES ‘The results from the previous chapter allow the expression of the final design eccentricities as follows (see expression 1): (8a) @)valent Static Eccentrcities in Seismic Analysis of Buildings Table 1. Summary of useful formulae 1. Basic parameters cay & static eccentricity, ¢, = fe, Pk Sor torsional radius of gyration ry =radiusofinertia, p= a Ay =I+65-cota Gy =cota—by, Gy=tanaly, by AE = ap ay" 81, 82, Axa)" Ft terty Te10 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios ‘where, for the accidental eccentricity ¢, itis accepted the usual in many codes value (.05L (L = dimension of the building perpendicular to the direction of the earthquake). Moreover, there must be met the restrictions ofthe expressions (5), ic. 2 p-Aenee on 2 on =e i 2 <05-¢5 (9) which are aimed at the reduction of the inelastic displacements in the flexible side, and of the ductility demands in the rigid side ofthe building ‘The expressions (8), on the one hand, present the disadvantage of the complexity-a fact which nowadays is not especially troublesome due to the universal use of computers-but on the other hand posses the following advantages: ‘© They are valid for any geometrical configuration of the plan. ‘© They take under consideration all the geometric and dynamic characteristics of the structure, as well asthe shape of the design spectrum, © They are especially effective and indispensable for torsionally sensitive structures (structures with low torsional radius p, ) COMPARISON WITH CODES The codes usually define the design eccentricities by using simple expressions of the following form: (10a) (10b) which strictly apply only to the case of a rectangular plan of the system (a, B, constant). Therefore, for the facilitation of the comparison between the expressions (8) and (10), it is indispensable the parametric analysis of the equivalent static eccentricities ey and e, (sce expressions 9) in the case of the rectangular plan. This parametric analysis is possible in fimction with the two basic parameters €o=o/t, M=px/r, and the ratio Ly/Ly (Lx Ly the plan dimensions). The equations (9) are actually writen inthe following form. f egnthns? R205 (11ab)Equivalent Static Eccentricities in Seismic Analysis of Buildings u where the reduced eccentricities er and ¢, will be functions of 5, u and of the parameter ¢, 22/2. this parameter takes the constant values 1.550, 1.225 and 0.775 for the thee representative values 2, 1 and 0.5 of the ratio Ly /Lay Finally, two cases are examined for each form of the plan, the case of the rigid system (with T,, < T,) and the case of the flexible system (with 7, > 7.) by applying in each the ‘equations given in Table I for the calculation of the coefficients Ry and D,. Figures 5, 6 and 7 show the results of the parametric analysis in the useful region ey 2 €0 and e, $0.5:e, forthe three forms of the rectangular plan. The preceding results will be compared with the provisions of the Canadian Code (NBC 90 or 95) which provisions are representative of other codes as well. According to the suid code, the design eccentricities are given from the expressions: =150-€ +010-L (12a) ein =0.50-€5 -0.10-L, (2b) where the accidental eccentricity has been increased from 0.05L to 0.0L for the amplification of the equivalent static eccentricity 1.50-e, in the region of the small eccentricities (see Tso 1983). Therefore, for the comparison with the expressions (8), the above expressions are writen as follows: max =(U.50-€, +005-L)+005: L = er +005: 1, nin =(050-€, ~0.05-L)~0.05-L =e, ~005-L where: ef = 150-€, +0.05-L &, =050-€, -005-L or, in non-dimensional form: ef =f fr =150-6 +010-a (3a) & = 6, [r= 0.50-6, -0.10-a (136) The coefficient a for a rectangular plan having a ratio La/Zy = 2.0, 1.0 and 0.5, receive the values 1.549, 1.225 and 0.775, respectively. In figures 5, 6 and 7 there have been drawn the straight lines represented by the above linear expressions of @¢ and 6. From the comparison with the respective exact values of the er and 6 it results that the values of the ey are generally non-conservative for small eccentricities, and very conservative for large eccentricities; the values of the ¢, are always2 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios. Figure 5, Diagrams of eccentricities for rectangular floor plan with L- = 2Ly,Equivalent Static Focentricties in Seismic Analysis of Buildings Figure 6, Diagrams of eccentricities for rectangular floor plan with Ly = Ly. Figure 7. Diagrams of eccentricities for rectangular floor plan with Ly ~ 2L4 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios. conservative for 1 >/, whereas, on the contrary, for 1r © Small eccentricity eo =148m © Large eccentricity 1 &y = 647m + Flexible system :Ty> Te © Rigid system iTy 160, by. Flexible system (n= 2/3) Ry 1038, ey Dy =1870, ¢7 =340m e) >, =0.50-€, Dy =L168, ey =2.30m a2, Rigid system (a = 1) Ry =0326, er =+434m (293 e) Dp =0679, e=359m>ey > ey =0.50-€5 Dy =1189, ey =2.59m b, Large eccentricity Basic parameters: f= 6.47/9.24=070, = 11.09/924= 120 Auxiliary coefficients: tan 2a=1.505, a=28.2° Aj =0.625, 305 1 +1886 61 =42.675, 82 =-0.274 e120. >) €, = +82Im (127-e,) e, =950m>e, re, =0.50-e, ej=4.61m by. 917m (142-€) &, =900m> eq re, =0.50-e, ey =6.88m“Equivalent Static Eecentrcities in Seismic Analysis of Buildings v ‘The above results are summarised in Table 2, from which the following conclusions are sathered: Table 2. Summary of results Tonia Hebe Teco ei i 2 2 | | Pee ES | | i | hol z |e et 4 eee M, K ‘The eccentricity ey is almost always greater than the static eccentricity ¢,.. The eccentricity e, is negative in the torsionaly flexible system with small eccentricity, while for large eccentricity we have ¢, >e, >0. In the torsionally stiff system the ¢, is always greater than the ¢, (great decrease of the max u, due to torsional vibrations).B K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, 7: Makarios, Finally, as regards the eccentricity e, there applies the same rule as for the ¢,, but the eccentricity e', is not interesting from the practical point of view because itis always smaller than the e7: CONCLUSIONS In this paper there have been presented formulae for the exact calculation of the “equivalent” static eccentricities that are necessary for the application of the simplified methods of seismic analysis of buildings. Such eccentricities are intensely affected by the parameter 11= px /r=0 7 /ory,, ic. by the ratio between the uncoupled torsional, © 7, and lateral, 7, frequencies. This fact does not allow their evaluation by using simple expressions of the static eccentricity. With the exception of the torsionally stiff and lateral stiff systems, the analytical calculation of such eccentricities is always necessary. For this reason it is suggested the analytical calculation of the design eccentricities by using the expressions given on Table 1. With this suggestion the static torsional provisions of the codes are improved because: ‘+ They are valid for any geometrical configuration of the plan. ‘© They take under consideration all the geometric and dynamic characteristics of the structure, as well as the shape of the design spectrum. ‘© They are especially effective and indispensable for torsionally sensitive structures (structures with low torsional radius py ). Finally, it is stressed that the proper limitation of the elastic calculated values—as suggested in ‘the paper—is imperative for the reduction of the additional ductility demands and deformations in the perimeter of the buildings. APPENDIX A MODAL ANALYSIS AND SEISMIC RESPONSE OF THE MODEL ‘Modal analysis For a free vibration, perpendicular to the axis of symmetry, the equation of eigenvalues is written as follows (Figure 9): (K-07 M)g=0 (14) where 9 = [gy 92/7 the eigenvector and M, K are the following matrices of mass and stiffness: m™ 0 [ky eorky (° mh leorky ke (15a)Equivalent Static Eccentricties in Seismic Analysis of Buildings, 9 ky shin, ke =k +65 -ky (16a,b) ‘The characteristic equation /K - 7M |= 0 of the eigenproblem (14) can be written in the following expanded form: of -0 (af +03 )+0f (0-13-03 )=0 i) Figure 9. Diagrams ofthe modal displacements. where! ©} = off = ky /m=ky/m (18a) o2 =k, | mr? = 0}y +62 -ofy (18b) in =kur/mr?, 6 =¢9/r (199,5) ‘The oj is an assumed torsional natural frequency fore =0 because the ky refers to the centre of stiffness K, while the m-r? to the centre of mass M. From equation (17), the two natural frequencies ofthe system are calculated: 14? [1 ay + (20) where (equations 18a,b):8 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios. lay (22a) i (22%) where: p= heh» Pe= kin kn (3a,0) are the torsional radii of gyration of the system with respect to the centre of mass M and to the centre of stiffness K, respectively. From the homogenous system (14) for 0” solutions are obtained: (@=1,2.) the following two b 2 (242,b) 0a = +l, °. -(%). i212 (25) However, both further analysis and better comprehension of the system vibrations are decisively facilitated by introducing the concept of the centres of vibration and by the ‘graphical representation of the natural frequencies by the aid of Mohr’s circle (Papapetrou 1934, Dempsey and Irvine 1979). The quantities ¢; and 9; a8 infinitesimal displacements can always be considered to ensue from a simple rotation of the rigid floor diaphragm, about the point O,(¢)) of the axis of symmetry (Figure 9). Therefore, from the condition of zero displacement uy; at the point O;: Hy =O +6102 =O the abscissa of that point is calculated as: 1/0 = constant ‘because the above quotients remain constant during the vibration. Thus, for gq; =+/ we shall have: iat, 2, (26)Equivalent Static Eocentricities in Seismic Analysis of Buildings 2 and therefore the mode shapes (25) are written in a more simple way as follows: ; ir | en From the foregoing it comes out that the vibration ofthe system consists of two simple rotational vibrations about the two centres of vibration O, and 02, Figure 9 shows the ‘modal shape diagrams of the system displacements. Such diagrams offer an initial picture of the torsional-translational character of the two mode shapes of vibration. Thus, for example, in the mode shape which corresponds to the farthest pole O,, the translational character will be the dominant one while in the mode shape withthe closest -to the centre of mass- pole O> the torsional character will dominate. The form of equation (20) allows the graphical representation of the quotients ‘@7/o3 and 03/0 with the aid of Mobr's circle (Figure 10). The angle 2a of the figure is calculated from the relation: °, 28) Figure 10. Mohr's circle, and is used for the simple expression of all response quantities. From Figure 10, the following relations can be easily obtained: +10} /o} = which lead to the following formulae for the calculation of the natural frequencies and periods ofthe system: Ar, @2=0y Jap (298,b)K Anastassiadis, A, Athanatopoulou, T. Makarios. =3,/far. B=1,/far (30a,b) where: Ay = 1-6, tana Az =1+6, cola Gab) ‘The same relations in combination with equation (26) lead to the simple formulae for the calculation ofthe position ofthe centres of vibration: ey=4r- cota, ey =—r- tana (32a,b) from which the following relations are obtained: een tr? =0 33) 2r ‘Sinda h=(0102 rej-€2= G4) Finally the generalised masses of the system: M; 9! Mgj=m-r? +m-e?, ‘which obviously represent the mass moments of inertia J; with respect to the poles O; can be written by using equations (32a,b) as follows: My=Jp=m-r?|sin? a 35a) Mz = J, =m-1? Joos? a (5b) From the above analysis the following qualitative features of the vibration mode shape in connection with the values of the radius of gyration pyy result (Figure 11): eu er (orsionally Stazibte) | Zequiva Len | ‘equiva bent) Pas | [Corsiona tly star) ele 4 My Kk _ 4 a a Tg 7818 Q~ re Lb y—-— r—4 Figure 11. Qualitative characterization of vibration modes.Equivalent Static Fccentrictis in Seismic Analysis of Buildings 2B aFor_py>r (A>1, a<45°) In tis case we shall have (equation 32): aon baler Therefore, the fundamental mode shape will have a dominant translational character while the other mode shape will have a dominant torsional character. The system is characterised as torsionally stiff b For py=r_(A=1, a=45°) In this case we shall have ey =[|=7 and both the first and second mode shapes will present an equivalent torsional and translational character. The system is characterised as torsionally flexible. ce. For _py45°, In this case we shall have: er and therefore, the fundamental mode shape will have a dominant torsional character, while the other mode shape will have a dominant translational character. The system is characterised as torsionally flexible, According to the above conclusions, fora given pyy and +, by increasing the eccentricity p,. the translational character of the first mode shape and the torsional character of the second one also increase because the py [pf +e3 increases. In contrast, decreasing the eccentricity ¢, the torsional character of the first mode shape end the translational character of the second one increase because the py decreases ‘The next section deals with the quantitative evaluation of the contribution of both ‘translational and torsional components of each mode shape to the stuctural response. Slam response Translational excitation For a seismic excitation perpentiular to the axis of symmetry the response at the centre of mass is represented by the vector of displacements u-=[1y 0,]” (Figure 12). According 104 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou,T: Makarios. and the total modal the spectral method, the modal displacements 4 = [uy 8, accelerations 6, =[J,, d.] are given by te following relations (i = J, 2): 4 Hi Pi Sav =H 01 Sai (36a,b) where Sq; and Sq; are the spectral displacement and acceleration for a period 7; and damping ratio ¢. The vj represents the modal participation factor and is given by the relation: i=12 G7) where 5 = (1 0)7. From this relation, and the equations (32), (34) and (35) the following values of v; are obtained: Figure 12, Modal responses. (38a) (8b)Equivalent Static Eccentricties in Seismic Analysis of Buildings 2 Equation (36a) is written in expanded form as follows (see equation 27): ye] _frerveSar]_[- 4-8 ah eae ea & where 8; =vj-Sq; are the modal angles of rotation about the poles Oj. In the same way, from equation (36b) the modal angular acceleration 7;=vj-Sq; are determined. Thus, the two pairs of modal angles of rotation and modal angular accelerations are written as follows (Figure 12): 1 i yah Sa? (40a,b) 1 = -@ Sate (41a,b) The angles @; and @) allow the direct calculation of the modal values of any quantity of displacement and subsequently, with a quadratic combination, the final extreme value of such quantities is obtained (see Appendix B). Similarly, the angular accelerations) and 7 allow the direct calculation of the modal seismic forces. Thus, at the centre of mass M of the system we shall have (Figure 12): ~ Finstmode shape Fya-m-y pe] =4m-Sqycos? a (42a) My =4m-r? yp =F oer Sqi) sida (426) ~ Second mode shape Fy =-m-7 0) = 4m-Sqp “sin? (43a) Mzz = +m-r? yy =+5(m-r-S2)-sin2a (43b) From the combination of (Fj, Mz;) the position ofthe force F; is calculated. The force F,_ passes through the vibration centre O; of the other mode (i=/, 2. and j=2, 1). The quantitative evaluation of the translational component of mode shape is made as usual with the ai of the modal effective mass (Anastassiadis. 1989) M 2 44) which, according to the equations (35) and (38), is written in the following form: My, Mj =v}-M; =m-cos?a (450) M3 =v3-M)=m-sin?a (45b)K Anastassiadis, A Athanatopoulou, T Makarios Consequently, we shall have M;+M}=m and therefore, the modal effective mass participation factors for the translational component will be: €)=M}/m=cos? (46a) 6) =M}/m=sin? a (46b) ‘As shown in Figure 13, for pyg=r (a= 45°) the two mode shapes are equivalent, for pxg>r (torsionally stiff system) the participation of the first mode shape is dominant, and for pyy r_(torsionally stiff system) the participation of the second mode shape is dominant, and for py¢ correspond to the same branch of the spectrum, we shall then have: nel -for the uniform branch 1/2 -for the hyperbolic branch n=2/3 forthe modified hyperbolic branch 2. Ifthe periods 7, T; correspond to different branches (Ty, < 7 T; > Ty), then, the quotient $,2/}, take the values of the previous case (uniform branch), while for the quotient S,;/mf we shall have (Figure 14b): n=R/Ty (60a) |, n= 1/2 forthe hyperbolic branch k= 2B, 2/3 -for the modified hyperbolic branch 3. Ifthe periods 7, 7, correspond to different branches (T, 2 T-, T < T,), then, the quotient S,j/of, take the values of the first case (hyperbolic branches), while for the quotient Sz2/c} we shall have (Figure 14c): n=b/k (60b) =1 forthe hyperbolic branch 23, n=1 — -forthemodified byperbotic branch ‘The relation (59) and the above values of the parameters are obtained from the combination of the relation Sgi=Sqy-(T,/T;)* with the equations (29) and (30) in each specific case Subsequently, substituting Sqy/a} by Sgy (spectral displacement for period 7, ), the ‘modal values of the quantities are written as follows: + Modal values of 0, 5 sinza 7h y= Sy (61a) 6 sia 73g (1b) o aF8 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T: Makarios # Modal values of 1: (62a) (62b) © Modal values of uy: 4 sinda Opr-ri ig EL 7% (a) sind 6f2-75 apy (@) 4a ‘We substitute the above values to the well known formula of the complete quadratic combination (C.Q.C) and take the below expressions of the maximum dynamic displacements: (64a) (646) (640) whe 12 POD ap age AP AE 2 2k g2 sinda | TT" -8ra Thr 12-82 |e 26, 650 oyna ts 7 a a (656) (<3 Ain tin p= i ayy tl 272 (65¢) a a AR ‘Subsequently, according to the conditions (3) and equation (2), the following formulae for the calculation of the eccentricities are obtained: 2 =P. Ry (662) esEquivalent Static Focentricties in Seismic Analysis of Buildings 31 (660) (660) As it has been already ascertained in previous paragraph, we will always have ¢y > ey and therefore, the eccentricity ey is not required. Thus, depending on the region of the design spectrum in which the periods Ty and Tp lie, the expressions of the two useful coefficients Ry and D, are specified as follows: 1, ST, (gid systems) 2 sinta (11 1 R= a . 678) yet amet w 172 8 1-2 a $249 9 (670) (68a) (680) 2 ey A (69a) ea a 12 13 5 4, ont 52 Pra> (ae a Le (69)2 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopoulou, T: Makarios 4, T, 2% Tp < Te (Figure 14e) 3 yay? oe (70a) eri rey / 1/2 sinda | 62, 18? 8 a by 33 8,2) on Sine | Sep TE 26) A, Pg eg | ‘The modal correlation coefficient ¢,7 is calculated in the usual way from the following relation: 862 (lena)rff? (ie for rig =Ty/Tz=YAz]Ay and constant damping ratio ¢ for both mode shapes. Thus, for example, for £ =5%, the following numerical value given in Table 3 result: en a) Table 3. Numerical values of the coefficient &)2 (¢=5%) Ta ayhalay | HOS] MOT TIS] 120] LIS] TSO] a] 130 | Tao jz | 0807 | 0523] 0357) 0.230] 0.166] 0.125] 0.079) 0.085] Coat Finally, it must be stressed that in practice the use of equations (67) for 7, < T, and (68) for T,>T,_ is sufficient because pursuing greater accuracy within the scope of the simplified ‘methods is rather pointless. REFERENCES CITED Anastassiadis, K., Avramidis, I. E., 1986, Statiche Ersatz lasten fur seismisch beanspruchte uunsymmetrsch Geschossbauten, Bautechnif, 2 Anastassiadis, K., 1985, Caractristiques clastiques spatiales des batiments a etages, Annales de TLTBIP., No 435 Anastassiadis, K., 1986, Axes propres de vibration spatiale des batiments a etages, Annales de MLTBTP., No 442, Anastassiadis, K., 1987, Analyse statique tridimentionelle du contreventement des batiments, Annales de ILTBTP., No 452. Anastassiadis, K., 1991, Calcul statique des contreventement par la methode des trois pivots, Annales de IIT BT-P, No 498, Anastassiadis, K., 1989, Constructions antisismigues, tome I (in Greek), Computers. Technics, ‘ThessalonikiEquivalent Static Eccentricities in Seismic Analysis of Buildings 3 Bozorgnia, Y., Tso, W.K., 1986, Inelastic earthquake response of asymmetric structures, J. of the Struct. Eng., ASCE, Vol. 112, No. Capra, A., Souloumiac, R, 1992, Simplified seismic analysis for regular buildings, in: Recent ‘Advances in Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Ouest Editions (Presses ‘Academiques, Chandler, A. M,, Duan, X. N., 1993, A modified static procedure for the design of torsionally ‘unbalanced multistorey frame buildings, Harth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 22, pp. 447- 462. Chandler, A. M, Duan, X. N., 1991, Evaluation of factors influencing the inelastic seismic performance of torsionally asymmetric buildings, Earth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 20, pp. 87-95, Chandler, A. M., Hutchinson, G. L., 1988, Evaluation of the secondary torsional design provisions of ‘earthquake building codes, Proc. Ins. Civ. Emgrs, Patt 2, 85, pp. 587-607. Chopra, A. K., Goel, R.K., 1991, Evaluation of torsional provisions in scismic codes, J. of Siruc. Eng., ASCE, Vol. 117, No 12. Correnza, J. C., Hutchinson, G. L., Chandler, A. M., 1992, A review of reference models for assessing inelastic seismic torsional effects in buildings, Sot! Dyn. and Earth. Eng., 11, pp. 465-484, De Stefano, M. et al,, 1993, Inelastic response and design criteria of plan-wise asymmetric systems, Earth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 22, pp. 245-259, Dempsey, KM, Irvine, H. M., 1979, Envelopes of maximum seismic response for a partially symmetric single storey building model, Earth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 7, pp. 161-180. Dempsey, K. M., Tso, W. K., 1982, An alternative path to seismic torsional provisions, Soi! Dynamics ‘and Earth. Engineering, Vol. 1,No 1 Duan, X. N., Chandler, A. M., 1993, Inclastic seismic response of code-designed multistorey frame buildings with regular asymmetry, arth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 22, pp. 431-445. Esteva, L., 1987, Earthquake engineering rescarch and practice in Mexico after the 1985 earthquakes, Bulletin of the N.Z.N'S. for Earth, Eng., Vol. 20, No3 Goel, R., Chopra, A. K., Inclastic seismic response of one-storey asymmetrical plan systems, Report ‘No UCB/EERC-90/14, Univ. of California, Berkeley, California. Hejal, R, Chopra, A. K., Earthquake response of torsionally coupled buildings, Report No UCB/EERC-87/20, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Califomia. Kan, C. L., Chopra, A. K., 1977, Effects of torsional coupling on earthquake forces in buildings, J. of the Struct. Div., ASCE, Vol, 103, No ST4. Kan, C. L., Chopra, A. K., 1981, Torsional coupling and earthquake response of simple elastic and inelastic systems, J. of the Struct. Div, ASCE, Vol. 107, No STS, pp. 1569-1588. Maller, F. P., Keintzel, E1984, Erdbebensicherung von Hochbauten, Emst & Sohn, Berlin. Papapetrou, A. C. and A. P., 1934, Dynamic analysis ofthe antiseismic problem, (in Greek), Technical Chamber of Greece, Technika Chrontka, pp. 21-26. Riddell, R., Vasquez, J, 1984, Existence of centers of resistance and torsional un-coupling of earthquake response of buildings, Proc. of 8th W.C.EE., 4 Rutenberg, A., 1992, Nonlinear response of asymmetric building structures and seismic codes: a state of the art review, European Earthquake Engineering, 2 Rutenberg, A., Eisenberger, M., Shobet, G., 1992, Inclastic seismic response of code designed single storey asymmetric structures, Eng. Struct, Vol. 14, No 2.4 K Anastassiadis, A. Athanatopouloy, T. Makarios Rutenberg, A., Pekau, O. A., 1987, Seismic code provisions for asymmetric structures: a re-evaluation, Eng. Struct, Vol. 9, pp. 255-264. Sadek, A. W., Tso, W. K.,, 1989, Strength eccentricity concept for inelastic analysis of asymmetrical structures, Eng. Struct, Vol. 11 Sedarat, H., Bertero, V., Effects of torsion on the linear and nonlinear seismic response of structures, Report No UCB/EERC-90/12, Univ. of California, Berkeley, California, ‘Tso, W. K., 1983, A proposal to improve the static torsional provisions forthe National Building Code ‘of Canada, Canadian J. Civ. Eng., 10, pp. 561-565. ‘Tso, W. K., Bozorgnia, Y., 1986, Effective eccentricity for inelastic seismic response of buildings, Earth, Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 14, pp. 412-427. ‘Tso, W. K., Dempsey, K. M., 1980, Seismic torsional provisions for dynamic eccentric ‘and Struct. Dynamics, Vol.8, pp. 275-289, Tso, WK, Sadek, A.W., 1985, Inelastic seismic response of simple eccentric structres, Earth. Eng. ‘and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 13, pp. 255-268. Tso, W. K., Ying, H., 1990, Additional seismic inelastic deformation caused by structural asymmetry, Earth, Eng. and Struct. Eng., Vol. 19, pp. 243-258 Tso, W. K., Zhu, T. J., 1992, Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions I: Ductility demand, Earth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 21, pp. 609-627. ‘Wong, C. M., Tso, W. K., 1994, Inelastic response of torsionally unbalanced systems designed using clastic dynamic analysis, Earth, Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vo. 23, pp. 777-798. Zhu, T. J., Tso, K., 1992, Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions IL: Strength distribution, Zarth. Eng. and Struct. Dynamics, Vol. 21, pp. 629- 644, Barth. Eng