ACECC TC-8
2nd Workshop on
Harmonization of Design Codesin the Asian Region- Direction of Future Design Code -Venue: Tohoku University, Kawauchi North Campus
Multimedia Education and Research Complex
Date: Wednesday, 11th September, 2008
Time: 9:00-16:00

Organized by Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council
TC-8 “Harmonization of design codes in the Asian region”
Sponsored by Japan Society of Civil Engineers
Kajima Foundation

Contents
1.

Introduction

Introduction of the ACECC Activities and the Workshop ------------------------------------------------- 1
Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi, Secretary, ACECC TC-8

2.

Special Lecture

Outlines of the Revision of “Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures [Design],
JSCE – 2007 Version” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
Prof. Junichiro Niwa, Tokyo Institute of Technology

New Technical Standards for Port and Harbor Facilities ------------------------------------------------------- 15
Dr. Yoshiaki Kikuchi, Port & Airport Research Institute

Development of Design Codes and Standard Specifications in Korea -------------------------------------- 23
Dr. Koo, Jai-Dong, Korea Institute of construction technology

3.

Presentation from TC-8 members

Status of Design Codes in Taiwan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 35
Prof. Shyh-Jiann Hwang, National Taiwan University

The Current Situation of Mongolian Building Code System -------------------------------------------------- 41
Prof. Duinkher Yagaanbuyant, Mongolian University of Science and Technology

4.

Presentation from other representatives

Introduction of Asian Concrete Model Code (ACMC) ----------------------------------------------------- 47
Dr. Yoshitaka Kato, Institute of Industrial Science, the University of Tokyo
Seismic Design Specifications for Highway Bridges in Japan ----------------------------------------- 53
Dr. Zhang Guangfeng, Public Works Research Institute
Necessity of Design Codes for Cambodia --------------------------------------------------------------------- 65
Dr. Vong Seng Institute of Technology of Cambodia
Structural Steel Design Specifications in Thailand-------------------------------------------------------- 71
Dr. Taweep Chaisomphob, Engineering Institute of Thailand, Thammasat University

Appendix
First Draft of “Glossary of Terminologies for Design Code” --------------------------------------------- 77

“2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region - Direction of
Future Design Code –“ is supported by the International Scientific Exchange Fund, JSCE,
and the Kajima Foundation.

第２回アジア域内における設計基準の調和に関するワークショップ『将来の設計コードの方向性』は、公益信託土木学会学術交流基金および鹿島学術振興財団の助成を受け開催されております。

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
September 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Introduction of the ACECC Activities and the Workshop
1. About ACECCThe Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council (ACECC) is an organization which wasestablished in 1999, and now consists of the nine civil engineering societies/institutions:
ASCE
American Society of Civil Engineers,
CICHE
Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering
EA
Engineers Australia
HAKI
Indonesian Society of Civil and Structural Engineers
JSCE
Japan Society of Civil Engineers,
KSCE
Korean Society of Civil Engineers
MACE
Mongolian Association of Civil Engineers
PICE
Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers
VIFCA
Vietnam Federation of Civil Engineering Associations
ACECC is now trying to invite other Asian countries.
ACECC organizes a conference that is called the Civil Engineering Conference in the AsianRegion (CECAR) once in three years, in order to provide all the experts in the civil engineering
profession an opportunity to discover some of the most important innovations in civil engineering
technology and R&D, and advance integrated discussions on the infrastructure development in the
Asian region. The CECAR conferences were held in Manila in 1998, Tokyo in 2001, Seoul in 2004
and Taipei in 2007. Over 1,000 engineers from all over the world participated in the Taipei
Conference (4th CECAR). The next 5th CECAR is going to be held in Sydney from 8 - 12 August
2010.
Information about ACECC：http://www.acecc.net/index.php (now under revision)
Information about 5th CECAR: http://www.cecar5.com/

2. The outline of the 2nd Workshop
As part of activities of the above-mentioned ACECC, the importance of mutual coordination on
creating codes to be used in common in Asia has been discussed, and JSCE has been taking initiative
for working on the possible measures. While codes like ISO and Eurocodes are being formulated
from a global perspective, a lot of codes such as in the fields of concrete, geotechnical and seismic
engineering are being transmitted to the world from Asian countries. Under these circumstances, we
held the “1st Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region” in Taipei in 2006,
and significant discussions were made as the first step toward the code harmonization in the Asian
region. After that, the new ACECC Technical Committee (TC-8) on “Harmonization of Design
Codes in the Asian Region” was approved to be established at the ACECC Executive Committee
Meeting on June 25, 2007. Terms of references of the new TC are as follows;
1) Create and strengthen human network on code development through continuous discussions.
2) Provide the latest information on design code in the Asian region, and make it public on thewebsite.
3) Create the glossary of terminology for basis of design, which will be based on a new concept
such as performance based design.
The objectives of the 2nd workshop are considered as follows;
1) This second workshop shall be continuation of the last special forum at the 4th CECAR which isheld on June, 2007. The TC-8 was officially approved by the ACECC Executive Committee
Meeting.
2) This second workshop shall be the first occasion where the members of ACECC TC-8
(Harmonization of design codes in the Asian Regions) give presentations and take part in thediscussions.
3) A new ACECC member has joined since the last workshop, therefore the latest information on
the code development in these new members shall be reported.
i4) This workshop shall make up the first TC-8 meeting, which corresponds to the sessions in theafternoon. Not only the opinions and discussions by the TC-8 members but also those from theaudience shall be incorporated for the planning of future activities.
5) At this stage, we recognize that harmonization of terminology in the new design concept will be
one of the most important issues. The chair of the committee, Prof. Honjo, shall provide the basic
idea of this.
Now, as we are stepping forward on these issues, we would like to hold the “2nd Workshop on
Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region” for the purpose of mutually sharing theinformation and having discussions on international strategy by the engineers/researchers who are
working on code formulation in different areas in civil engineering assembled in one place. We
position the 2nd workshop as the workshop for “Direction of Future Design Code “, then shall start
discussions toward mutual understanding of the terminology for basis of design, which will be basedon a new concept such as performance based design. Since new members might participate in theworkshop, the 2nd workshop also will provides them a place to share the information on theiractivities and strategies for formulating design code. The outline of the 2nd workshop at the present
stage is as follows;ii

3. Workshop ProgramTime table
09:00-09:10
09:10-09:25

09:25-10:00

10:00-10:10
10:10-10:45

10:45-11:20

11:20-11:30
11:30-11:50
11:50-12:10

12:10-13:00
13:00-13:20

13:20-13:40
13:40-14:00
14:00-14:20
14:20-14:30
14:30-15:50(80 min.)

Moderator：Dr. Horikoshi, K., Secretary, ACECC TC-8
Sessions
Speakers
Prof. Yusuke Honjo, Chair, ACECC TC-8
Opening
Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi,
Introduction
Introduction of the ACECC Activities and the Secretary, ACECC TC-8
WorkshopProf. Junichiro Niwa,
Special Lecture 1
Outlines of the Revision of “Standard
Tokyo Institute of Technology
Specifications for Concrete Structures [Design],
JSCE – 2007 Version”
Coffee BreakDr. Yoshiaki Kikuchi,
Special Lecture 2
New Technical Standards for Port and Harbor Port & Airport Research Institute
Facilities
Dr. Koo, Jai-Dong,
Special Lecture 3
Development of Design Codes and Standard
Korea Institute of construction technology
Specifications in Korea
Coffee Break
Presentation from TC-8 members
Prof. Shyh-Jiann Hwang,
Status of Design Codes in Taiwan
National Taiwan University
The Current Situation of Mongolian Building
Prof. Duinkher Yagaanbuyant,
Code System
Mongolian University of Science andTechnology
Lunch
Presentation from other representatives
Introduction of Asian Concrete Model Code
Dr. Yoshitaka Kato,(ACMC)
Institute of Industrial Science, theUniversity of Tokyo
Seismic Design Specifications for Highway
Dr. Zhang Guangfeng,
Bridges in Japan
Public Works Research Institute
Necessity of Design Codes for Cambodia
Dr. Vong Seng
Institute of Technology of Cambodia
Structural Steel Design Specifications in
Dr. Taweep Chaisomphob
ThailandEngineering Institute of Thailand
Coffee Break
Chair: Prof. Yusuke Honjo
Panel Discussion (1st TC-8 Meeting)With all the participants of workshop.
・ Forming opinions from each country
・ Direction of future design code
・ TC-8 activity plan hereafterFirst Draft of ‘Glossary of Terminologies for
Design Code.’

15:50-16:00

Summary Report
Closing Remarks

Dr. Yukihiko Sumiyoshi,
JSCE Representative for ACECC

iii

4. List of Participants
TC-8 members (including speakers):
Japan
Prof. Yusuke Honjo (Chair of TC-8, Gifu University)
Prof. Eiki Yamaguchi (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi (Secretary of TC-8, Taisei Corporation)
TaiwanProf. Shyh-Jiann Hwang (National Taiwan University)
Mongolia Prof. Duinkher Yagaanbuyant (Mongolian University of Science and Technology)
Others (including speakers):
Japan
Prof. Junichiro Niwa(Tokyo Institute of Technology)
Dr. Yoshiaki Kikuchi (Port & Airport Research Institute)
Dr. Yoshitaka Kato (Institute of Industrial Science, the University of Tokyo)
Dr. Zhang Guangfeng (Public Works Research Institute)
Korea
Dr. Koo, Jai-Dong (Korean Institute of Construction Technology)
Cambodia Dr. Vong Seng (Institute of Technology of Cambodia)
Thailand Dr. Taweep Chaisomphob (Engineering Institute of Thailand, Thammasat University)
Organizing Members:
Mr. Masayuki Torii (Secretary General, Committee on ACECC, JSCE
Nishimatsu Construction Co., Ltd)Mr. Masaaki Nakano (Secretary, Committee on ACECC, JSCE, Nippon Koei Co., Ltd)Mr. Hiroyuki Yanagawa (International Affairs Section, JSCE)iv

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Introduction of the ACECC Activities and the Workshop
Kenichi HORIKOSHI, Ph.D.
Secretary of ACECC TC-8, Chair of Committee on ACECC, JSCE
Senior Research Engineer, Taisei Corporation, Japan

2nd Workshop

September 11, 2008 9:009:00-16:00

Harmonization of Design Codesin the Asian Region
Organized by
ACECC: Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council
Technical Committee TC-8
Sponsored by
Japan society of Civil Engineers
The Kajima Foundation
Chair
Secretary

Prof. Yusuke Honjo (Gifu University, Japan)
Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi (Taisei Corporation)]Objectives of the ACECC
1. To promote and advance the science and practice of civil engineering andrelated professions for sustainable development in the Asian region.
2. To encourage communication between persons in charge of scientific andtechnical responsibility for any field of civil engineering.
3. To improve, extend and enhance activities such as infrastructure
construction and management, preservation of the precious environment
and natural disaster prevention.

Introduction of ACECC:
The Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council
formally established on Sept. 27, 1999 in Tokyo.

Member of ACECC(in alphabetic order)
ASCE
CICHE
EA
HAKI
JSCE
KSCE
MACE
PICE
VIFCEA

American Society of Civil Engineers
Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering
Engineers Australia
Indonesian Society of Civil and Structural Engineers
Japan Society of Civil Engineers
Korean Society of Civil Engineers
Mongolian Association of Civil Engineers
Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers
Vietnam Federation of Civil Engineering Associations

CECAR:Civil Engineering Conference in the Asian Region
1st CECAR
2nd CECAR
3rd CECAR
4th CECAR
5th CECAR

February 19-20, 1998
April 16-20, 2001
August 16-19, 2004
June 25-27, 2007
August 8-12, 2010

Manila, Philippines
Tokyo, Japan
Seoul, Korea
Taipei, Taiwan
Sydney, Australia

4. To foster exchange of ideas among the member societies/institutions.
5. To cooperate with any regional, national and international organizations to
support their work, as the ACECC deems necessary.
6. To provide advice to member societies/institutions to strengthen theirdomestic activities.
7. To achieve the above objectives, international conferences called the Civil
Engineering Conference in the Asian Region (CECAR) will be held on atriennial basis as the main activity of the ACECC.

ACECC Operational task assigned to each member

More than 1000 participants from all over the world!!

Code Development and related issues
Developing Countries

Asian design codes (JSCE)

International projects based on bilateral or multilateral assistance,
Code development cannot catch up with rapid infrastructure development,
Without own code, or Mixture of different overseas codes,
Lack of latest code information source,

Development of civil engineering dictionary (PICE)

Developed Countries

Public recognition of civil engineering profession (ASCE)

Cooperation for code development as global standard
Cooperation for creation of unified idea of design concept andterminologies

Creation of expert resource pool (KSCE)
Establishment of technical resource center (VIFCA)

Asian civil engineers code of ethics (EA)
Cross-licensing of professional civil engineers (CICHE)

Necessities
Discuss future of code development
Exchange information on code development in each country
Enhance personal network among code writers

beyond boundaries of nations and fields of study

ACECC Activities

ACECC Activities

1. “WebWeb-based database on design code”
code”
within ACECC members

2. ACECC Workshop on
Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region(November 4, 2006 in Taipei)
Participants from Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Hong Kong,
Thailand, Singapore, and Ireland with different civil engineeringengineering fields

3. Approval of the new TC on
Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region(June 25, 2007 at Executive Committee Meeting of ACECC)
4. Special Forum on
Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region(June 27, 2007 4th CECAR
http://www.acecc.net/

Level of Harmonization (1)ACECC Technical Committee (TC(TC-8) on
Harmonization of design codes in the Asian region
Chair

Prof. Yusuke Honjo (Gifu University, JSCE)

Secretary

Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi (Taisei Corporation, JSCE)

Step 1

Activities of this level have already been started by ACECC
i.e. code information on ACECC website, and
ACECC workshop on Harmonization of design codes in the Asian
region Nov. 4, 2006

Terms of References of the new TC:
1) Create and strengthen human network on code development
through continuous discussions.
2) Provide the latest information on design code in the Asian region,
region,and make it public on the website.
3) Create the glossary of terminology for basis of design, which will
will
be based on a new concept such as performance based design.

Activity period:

Share of information beyond boundaries of societies
and civil eng. fields(source of code, methodology of code development)

Step 2Harmonization of basic terminologies used fordesigns, Harmonization of design concept, such as
limit state design, performance based design,
Informative to code writers
Avoid misunderstanding among engineers in practice20072007-2010

Level of Harmonization (2)Step 3Harmonized code for basis of design,
Harmonized code for a specific design field, such asconcrete, structural engineering, and geotechnicalengineering.
Codes to be refereed by code writers in each country
Such as Eurocode 0: Basis of Design,
ISO 2394: General principles on reliability for structures,

Summaries of discussions
Step 1

Share of information

Step 2Harmonization of terminologies, design concepts

Step 3Harmonization of basis of designs

Step 4

Extension of harmonization to broader area

Necessities
1) To harmonize beyond different structures even in the same country,
2) To incorporate new concept such as sustainability,

Step 4Harmonization extended to broader area and broader
engineering field.

3) To refer European experience, such as Eurocode,

Asian Concrete Model Code activity toward ISO
Asian Voice to the world5) To cooperate governmental body, or obtain assistance, and

4) To incorporate Uniqueness among Asian countries,6) To recognize importance of continuous activities.

objectives of the 2nd workshop
1) Continuation of the last Special Forum at the 4th CECAR (2007)
2) First occasion where the members of ACECC TCTC-8 givepresentations and take part in the discussions.
3) A new ACECC member has joined since the last workshop, therefore
therefore
the latest information on the code development in these newmembers shall be reported.
4) First TCTC-8 meeting, which corresponds to the panel discussion..Not
only the opinions and discussions by the TCTC-8 members but also
those from the audience shall be incorporated for the planning ofof
future activities.
5) Terminology in the new design concept will be one of the mostimportant issues. The chair of the committee, Prof. Honjo, shallprovide the basic idea of this.

4. Presentation from other representatives
1) Asian Concrete Model Code (ACMC)
By Dr. Yoshitaka Kato
2) Seismic Design Specifications for Highway Bridges in Japan
By Dr. Zhang Guangfeng3) Necessity of Design Codes for Cambodia
By Dr. Vong Seng
4) Structural Steel Design Specifications in Thailand
By Dr. Taweep Chaisomphob
5. Panel Discussion (1st TC-8 Meeting)
Chaired by Prof. Yusuke Honjo
6. Closing Remarks

By Dr. Yukihiko Sumiyoshi

Program
1. Introduction

Dr. Kenichi Horikoshi

2. Special lectures
1) Latest ‘Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures’by Prof. Prof. Junichiro Niwa
2) Latest ‘Technical Standards on Port and Harbor Facilities’
By Dr. Yoshiaki Kikuchi3) Plan & Status of Performance Based Design Code &Construction in Korea’
By Dr. Koo, Jai-Dong
3. Presentation by ACECC TC-8 member
1) Status of Design Codes in Taiwan
By Prof. Shyh-Jiann Hwang
2) Mongolian Code for Building and Construction
By Prof. Duinkher Yagaanbuyant

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Outlines of the Revision of “Standard Specifications for Concrete
Structures [Design], JSCE – 2007 Version”
Junichiro Niwa
Secretary General, Subcommittee on the Revision of Standard Specifications, Design Group,
Concrete Committee of JSCE
Professor, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan

Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures[Design], JSCE (2007 Version) have been
published in March 2008.

Outlines of the Revision of“Standard Specifications forConcrete Structures [Design], JSCE
– 2007 Version”
Version”
Sept. 11, 2008
Concrete Committee of JSCE
Subcommittee on the Revision of Standard
Specifications, Design Group
Junichiro Niwa (Tokyo Institute of Technology)
12

2. Features of the Standard Specifications– 2002 Version

1．Introduction(1) Standard Specifications of Concrete Structures
were originally published in 1931.

(1)Extension(1)Extension to high strength materials (concrete andreinforcement)(2) Introduction of findings of Fracture Mechanics(Size effect, nonlinear analysis, etc.)(3) Revision of the predicting equation for flexural
crack width(4) Introduction of “StrutStrut-andand-Tie Model”
Model” (for D
regions)(2) The specifications showed the ideal figure forplanning, design, construction, and maintenanceof concrete structures.
(3) In 1986, the concept of the limit state design
method was introduced.
(4) In 2002, the concept of the performance basedbaseddesign was introduced.
(5) In 2007, the latest version has been published.
34

3. Outlines of the Revision of Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 Version

3. Outlines of the Revision of Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 Version(1) The Specifications [Design] have been divided into
three parts, such as the main documents, thestandards, and the reference materials.
(2) The main documents maintain the style of text andcomment. They present the general way for the
performance verification.
(3) The standards show the simplified way to meet theperformance verification within the limited
conditions.
(4) The reference materials give the explanation or
examples to understand the main documents.

(5) The Specifications [Design] - 2007 have merged“Structural Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)” and“Seismic Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)” into one,and have taken “Chapter 2: Verification for Durability”
Durability”
and “Chapter 4: Verification for Initial Crack”
Crack” from theStandard Specifications of “Construction
Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)”.

5

6

Structural Performance
Verification (2002)
1: General
2: Basic of Design
3: Design Values of Materials
4: Load5: Structural Analysis
6: Verification of Structural Safety
7: Verification of Serviceability
8: Verification of Fatigue Resistance
9: General Structural Details
10: Prestressed Concrete
11: Composite Structure
12: Design of Members
13: Strut-and-Tie Model
Seismic Performance Verification(2002)
1: General
2: Load
3: Seismic Performance Verification
4: Analytical Model
5: Structural Details
Construction Verification (2002)
2: Verification for Durability
4: Verification for Initial Crack[Design] Standards& Reference Materials[Design] Main Documents –2007
1: General
2: Requirement for Performance
3: Structural Planning
4: Principle of Performance Verification
5: Design Values for Materials
6: Load
7: Calculation of Response Values
8: Verification for Durability
9: Verification for Structural Safety
10: Verification for Serviceability
11: Verification for Seismic Performance
12: Verification for Initial Cracking
13: Structural Details for Reinforcement
14: Other Structural Details
15: Prestressed Concrete
16: Composite Structure[Design] Standards &Reference Materials - 2007

7

[Design: Standards]z 1: Structural Analysis of Membersz 2: Seismic Designz 3: Durability Designz 4: Thermal Stress Analysis
z 5: Details of Reinforcementsz 6: StrutStrut-andand-Tie Model[Design: Reference Materials]
z 1: Examples of Structural Planningz 2: Examples of Structural Analysis
z 3: Nonlinear Structural Analysis
z 4: Examples of Seismic Design8

3. Outlines of the Revision of Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 Version

3. Outlines of the Revision of Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 Version(6) Since the structural planning is the mostimportant work in the design stage, “Chapter 3:
Structural Planning”
Planning” has been newly drawn up.

9

3. Outlines of the Revision of Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 Version(7) “Chapter 12: Design of Members”
Members” of 2002 version
has been moved to the Reference Materials, because
the contents are related to linear structural analysis.
(8) The items related to “Nonlinear analysis”
analysis” areexplained in the Reference Materials.
(9) “Chapter 13: StrutStrut-andand-Tie Model”
Model” of 2002 version
has been moved to the Standards, because it is thesimplified design method within the limited conditions.
(10) “Allowable stress design method”
method” in the appendix
of 2002 version has been deleted, because thecontents are not examined.

10

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007(11) “The Standards”
Standards” such as “Seismic Design”
Design” or“Durability Design”
Design” have been newly drawn up topromote the Specifications to practical engineers.
(12) Since “design drawings”
drawings” can be considered as aninterface between the design and the construction,material details which are thought in the design stage
have to be clearly exhibited in design drawings.
(13) To pay attention to excessively large shrinkage ofconcrete, the predicted value by the conventional
design equation has been increased by 1.5 times.
11

Chapter 1: General
Design is the action to set the required
performance for a concrete structure related to the
durability, safety, serviceability, restorability,
environmental aspect and aesthetic viewpoint, etc.

12

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Chapter 2: Required Structural
Performance

Chapter 3: Structural Planning(1)Durability,(1)Durability, safety, serviceability, restorability,
environmental aspects and aesthetic viewpoint
are treated as the required structural performance.
(2) Since the seismic performance is the combined
performance, it is considered to be different fromothers. However, to take the continuity from 2002
version,version, the seismic performance is treated as therequired performance in Chapter 11.

(1) Newly drawn up in 2007.
2007.
(2) The basic ideas are described in selecting
structural forms. The viewpoints of required
performance, construction, maintenance,
environment and economic viewpoint are considered.

13

Example of Structural Planning ofRailway Bridge

14

Example of Structural Planning ofRailway Bridge

z The bridge length is 240 m. It passes over ariver having the width around 160 m (HWL).
z Plan 1 6-span PC simple girder bridge
40 m×6=240 m.
z Plan 2 6-span continuous PC box girder bridge
40 m×6=240 m.
z Plan 3 4-span continuous extradosed PC girder
bridge 40ｍ
40ｍ+80m+80m+40m=240ｍ+80m+80m+40m=240ｍ.
z Plan 4 4-span continuous PC cablecable-stayed
bridge 40
40ｍ+80m+80m+40m=240ｍ+80m+80m+40m=240ｍ.
z Plan 1: 66-span PC simple girder bridge, isadopted from the economical viewpoint.

(Adopted plan) 66-span PC simple girder bridge
40m×6=240 m.

15

Example of Structural Planning ofHighway Bridge

16

Example of Structural Planning ofHighway Bridge

z The bridge length is 130
130ｍ. It passes over a smallsmallsized river and 2 roads.
z Plan 1 55-span continuous PRC double girder bridge25m+
4@25.5m=127m.
25m+4
25.5m=127m.
z Plan 2 44-span continuous PRC double girder bridge
28.5m
28.5m+2@+2@35m
35m+28.5m+28.5m=127m.
=127m.
z Plan 2, 44-span continuous PRC double girder bridge,
is adopted from the economical viewpoint and theharmonization with environment.
17

PRC Four span continuous girder bridge with doubledouble-tee section L=127 000

Route 425
road
pile

pile
Kita river
pile
pile

pile

（Adopted Plan）
Plan） 4-span continuous PRC double
18
girder bridge

Chapter 4: Principle of Performance
Verification

4.5 Safety Factor
Table C4.5.2 Recommended Safety Factor(1)The(1)The limit state corresponding to the required
performances shall be established.

Safety factor(2) It shall be confirmed that the structure does notreach the limit state.

Required PerforPerformance （Limit state）
state）(3) The current limit state design method is adopted.

Safety(Section failure・
failure・Collapse)*2
Seismic
performance Ⅱ・Ⅲ*2

Safety (Section failure)*1(4) Verification shall be performed by Eq. (4.3.1).
γi･Sd ／Rd ≦ 1.0（4.3.1）
4.3.1）

where，
where， Sd ：Design response value
Rd ：Design limit state value
γi ：Structure factor

Response
value

Material factor γmConcrete
γc

Steel
γs

1.3

1.0 or
1.05

MemberfactorLoadfactorγbStructural
analysisfactorγaStructure
factor

γf

γi

1.1～
1.1～1.3

1.0

1.0～
1.0～1.2

1.0～
1.0～1.2

1.0

1.0

―

1.0～
1.0～1.2

1.0～
1.0～1.2

1.3

1.0 or
1.05

1.0，
1.0，
1.1～
1.1～1.3――

Safety (Fatigue failure)*1

1.3

1.05

1.0～
1.0～1.1

1.0

1.0

1.0～
1.0～1.1

Serviceability *1
Seismic performanceⅠ
performanceⅠ*1

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

Limit state
value

1.0～
1.0～1.2

Note）Note）＊1：Linear analyses ＊2：Nonlinear analyses

1920

4.8 Design Drawings
4.8 Design Drawings（1） The basic points of design calculation and theconditions of construction and maintenance shallbe clarified in the design drawings.

Outlines:(1) Design drawings are the interface
between the design and construction, andthe design and maintenance.

① Design service life, environmental condition② Characteristic value of loads and combinationof design loads③ Safety factor④ Required performance and result of verification⑤ Characteristic value of materials (concrete andsteel), such as shrinkage of concrete(2) Items which should be written in thedesign drawings are prescribed in detail.

21

4.8 Design Drawings

22

4.8 Design Drawings⑥ Types and quality of steel⑦ Cover of steel and construction error in all parts⑧ Types and locations of the joint and the portion
where the joint can be arranged.
⑨ Tension force at the end, the elongation andtensioning sequence of PC steel⑩ Required items in construction and maintenance⑪ Name and location of the structure⑫ Signature of the responsible engineer⑬ The date of design⑭ Scale, dimension and unit
⑮ Name of applied specifications

Following items shall be described as thereference values.
⑯ Types of cement⑰ Maximum size of coarse aggregate⑱ Unit cement content⑲ Slump or slump flow of concrete⑳ WaterWater-cement ratio
21 Air content
Although ⑯～21 are reference values, it shall be
confirmed in the design stage that these values are
fully realistic.
23

24

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Prediction of shrinkage strain of concrete(1) If the data of realreal-size test or JIS test areavailable, the data can be used for the design.

Chapter 5: Design Values for Materials(2) When the test data is not available, the predictedvalue by the conventional design equation has to
be increased by 1.5 times.

Outlines: The shrinkage strain of concrete isincreasing year by year due to the degradation of
the quality of coarse aggregates.
25

Average 729μ
729μ
N=123

Frequency

20
15
10
5

1050

900

950

Drying shrinkage strain (μ
(μ)

1000

800

850

650

750

700

600

550

500

450

0

According to JIS test, theaverage shrinkage strainof concrete is 730μ730μ.
The shrinkage strain issometimes more than1000μ
1000μ.

25(3) The maximum value by the conventional design
equation is around 800μ800μ. The maximum value of
JIS test (7 days ~ 6 months) is around 1000μ
1000μ. If
the sum of the autogeneous shrinkage before 7days and the shrinkage after 6 months isestimated as 200μ
200μ, the maximum total shrinkage
becomes around 1200μ
1200μ. Therefore, the predictedvalue has to be increased by 1.5 times.

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Chapter 6: Load

Chapter 7: Calculation of Response
Values(1) “Seismic loading”
loading” has been taken from the“Specifications of Seismic Performance
Verification – 2002”
2002”.
(2) Earth pressure is determined by considering
the interaction between the ground and thestructure and the change with age.

27

7.4.4 Calculation of Flexural Crack Width
The method of calculation of flexural crack width is
the same as that in 2002.

(1) The calculation of response values by nonlinear
analysis has been taken from the “Seismic
Performance Verification – 2002”
2002”.
(2) Calculation methods for section force, deflection,
stress, strain, crack width, etc. are prescribed in
Chapter 7.
(3) The information on nonlinear structural analysis
has been newly drawn up in the Reference
Materials.

26

28

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007
Chapter 8: Verification for Durability⎡ σ ⎛ σ pe ⎞⎤⎟ + ε csd
′ ⎥w = 1.1k1k 2 k3 {4c + 0.7(c s −φ)}⎢ se ⎜ or⎢⎣ E s ⎜⎝ E p ⎟⎠⎥⎦(1) Chapter 8 has been newly drawn up by merging"Chapter 7 Verification of Serviceability”
Serviceability” (2002)
and “Chapter 2 Verification for Durability”
Durability” (2002).
(2) In the verification for the chloride attack, theconcentration of chloride ions at the concretesurface Co is updated according to the location of
the structure and its distance from the shoreline.

ε’csd : The value to consider the influence ofshrinkage and creep.
It is determined depending on the verification,such as the durability of steel corrosion, or theappearance of surface cracks.

(3) The difference of Co between Japan sea side andPacific ocean side has been taken into account.
29

30

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

8.2 Environmental Action
Fig. C8.2.2
C8.2.2 Concentration of chloride ions at theconcrete surface Co (kg/m3)
splashzone
The area withhigh blown
chloride contents

Hokkaido,Tohoku, Hokuriku,
Okinawa

The area with low
blown chloride
contents

Kanto,Tokai,
Kinki, Chugoku,
Sikoku, Kyusyu

distance from shoreline (km)close toshoreline

0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0

9.0

4.5

3.0

2.0 1.5

4.5

2.5

2.0

1.5 1.0

13.0

The values corresponding to the area withlow blown chloride contents have been
updated.

Chapter 9: Verification
Verification for Structural
Safety(1) The crosscross-sectional failure of a member, fatigue
failure, and the stability of a structure are taken into
account as a main target.
(2) In the shear capacity of RC deep beams, a new
calculation method which can consider the effect ofshear reinforcement has been prescribed.

31

9.2.2.2（
9.2.2.2（5）[Commentary]
Design shear capacity of linear members

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Eq. (C9.2.4)

Chapter 10: Verification
Verification for Serviceability

Vdd = (β d ⋅ β n + β w )β p ⋅ βa ⋅ fdd ⋅ bw ⋅ d / γ bwhere, βｗ()

w ⋅ a / d − 0.75 /= 4.23 100 p(1) The verification of the appearance of structures,waterwater-tightness, and fire resistance has been
newly prescribed.

f ' cdif β w＜0 , β w = 0 ．

(2) The limit of crack width for the appearance ofstructures is determined as 0.3mm based on pastrecords and experience.

(1) The parameter βw has been introduced toconsider the effect of shear reinforcement.

(3) The flexural crack width can be evaluated by thefollowing equation.

(2) The accuracy of the estimation for shear
capacity of RC deep beams is almost sameas that of the existing design equation.
33

10.3.2 Flexural Crack
ε’csd should be determined to assume construction
works for the structure concerned such as concrete
casting and removal of formwork and support. The
test value of ε’csd and the age of concrete when thecrack initiates should be taken into account.
When the shrinkage strain obtained by JIS test
method is not more than 1000μ
1000μ, the following values
are recommended as ε’csd.
Table 10.1 Recommended
Recommended value of ε’csd for calculating
flexure crack on surface
Material age of crack initiation
30 days
100 daysmore than 200 days

ε ’csd450×10-6
350×10-6
300×10-6

32

35⎤⎡ σ ⎛ σ pe ⎞⎟ + ε csd
′ ⎥w = 1.1k1k 2 k3 {4c + 0.7(cs −φ)}⎢ se ⎜ or⎜⎟⎥⎦⎢⎣ E s ⎝ E p ⎠34

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007
Chapter 11: Verification for Seismic
Performance(1) Chapter 11 has been newly drawn up based on
the “Seismic Performance Verification – 2002”
2002”.
(2) To avoid the decrease in shear capacity due tolarge deformation cyclic loading and maintain thesafety against the input of excessive seismic
loading, sufficient shear reinforcement shall be
provided so that the ratio between shear andflexure capacities should exceed 2.0.
36

The Standards

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Chapter 2: Design of Seismic
Coefficient Method

Chapter 11: Verification for Seismic
Performance

2.4.3 Shear Reinforcement in the Plastic Region
Deformation ability shall be maintained by thefollowing relationship, which is the prerequisite to
make the design yield seismic coefficient spectrum.

≥ 2.0

where，
where，Vyd : Design shear capacity
Vmu : Shear force at the end of a member whenthe member reaches flexural capacity, Vmu=Mu /La 37(2) In the Standards,
Standards, the design yield seismic
coefficient spectrum is given as a result of thenumerous calculation for modeled ground andstructures.
38

Chapter 2: Design of Seismic
Coefficient Method

Seismic Design
z Main Documents
Time history response analysis by a onedimensional continuous model or a finite element
model.

Design Yield Seismic Coefficient Spectrum
Design Yield Seismic
Coefficient Khy

Vyd /Vmu(1) In addition to Chapter 11 of the Main Documents,
Documents,
Chapter 2 of the Standards “Seismic Design”
Design” andChapter 4 of the Reference Materials “Examples ofSeismic Design”
Design” have been drawn up.

0.5 ≤ Teq < 0.9 Khy= 0.343Teq−1.222
0.9 ≤ Teq ≤ 2.0 Khy= 0.39

1.0

z Standards
Following simplified static analyses can be used.
(1) Static linear analysis by the design yield seismic
coefficient spectrum.
(2) Static nonlinear analysis by the nonlinear
seismic coefficient spectrum.
39

0.8

0.1

0.5

0.39

0.39

0.9

2.0

Equivalent Natural Period Teq (sec)Natural Period of Ground (～(～0.25 sec)

40

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Chapter 12: Verification for Initial Cracking

Chapter
Chapter 13: Structural Details for Reinforcement(1)Chapter(1)Chapter 12 has been newly drawn up based on the
Chapter 4 Verification for Initial Crack of“Construction Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)”.

Chapter 14: Other Structural Details(2) The simplified method to verify the performance ofthe structure by cracking due to the hydration heatof cement has been newly introduced in Chapter 4:
Thermal Stress Analysis in the Standards.

(1)Structural(1)Structural details are classified into two categories.
One is the structural details with quantitative
provisions, and the other is the structural details with
only qualitative explanation.
(2) In the Standards,
Standards, “Chapter 5: Details ofReinforcements”
Reinforcements” has been newly drawn up toprescribe the cover of reinforcements, thedimension and shape of hooks, the anchorage
length, etc. in the form of Tables.

41

42

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Fig. C15.2.1 Type of Prestressed Concrete
Structures

Chapter 15: Prestressed ConcreteTypeof structure
構造体の分類(1)The(1)The description for the stress calculation and the
problem of shrinkage in PRC structures has been
modified and increased.

Typeof tendons
緊張材の分類Timeof prestressing
緊張時期による分類(2) The calculation method for prestressing forces
and ultimate flexural capacities in internal andexternal PC members has been shown in detail.

Pre-tensioning

Internal
cable (bond)内ケーブル（付着有り）

プレテンション方式
systemUnbondedcable(no bond)
アンボンドPC
鋼材（付着無し）

Post-tensioning
ポストテンション方式

PC
PC
構造

system

PRC
PRC
構造
External
cable (no bond)
外ケーブル（付着無し）
conventional
従来の区分(3) The prestressing tendons have been classified
into three categories, such as internal, unbonded
and external tendons.
4344

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

4. Characteristics of Each Chapter of theStandard Specifications [Design] – 2007

Chapter 15: Prestressed Concrete

Chapter 16: Composite Structure(4) When PRC structures are used in corrosive or
severely corrosive environment, a plastic sheath tohave the shielding effect against corrosive
materials shall be used in principle.

(1)The(1)The technical terms in the Standard
Specifications [Design] – 2007 have been unified
with the guidelines of composite structures, JSCE.

45

5．Conclusions

46

Thank you very much

(1)The(1)The Specifications [Design] - 2007 have merged“Structural Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)” and“Seismic Performance Verification (2002)”(2002)” intoone.

for your attention !

(2) The Specifications [Design] - 2007 have threeparts, such as the Main Documents, Standards,
and Reference Materials.
(3) The Specifications try to make the sophisticatedverification technique possible and also present
the simplified design method as well.
(4) “Structural Planning”
Planning” and “Design Drawings”
Drawings” arethe most important issues in this revision.
47

48

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

New Technical Standards for Port and Harbor Facilities
Yoshiaki Kikuchi
Port & Airport Research Institute, Japan

Technical standard system under performance based
design concept

New Technical Standards for Portand Harbor Facilities

Objectives
Performancerequirements

Performances facilities are required

Performance criteria

Concrete criteria which can be usedfor verification of performancerequirements.

Mandatory

Law orNotification

2008.9.11 ACECC

Objectives of facilities

Performance verification

Yoshiaki Kikuchi
Port & Airport Research InstituteNotmandatory

Approach B

Approach A(Specific design code:
TSPHF)

Performances should be verified
by engineering procedure.

¾ Performance verification: Designers can select the approach for verification.
Approach A: Designers should prove the verification of the performance requirements
under a appropriate reliability. Verification results will be checked by an accreditedorganization or a authorized committee.
Approach B: Designers should prove the verification of the performance requirements inaccordance with technical codes prepared by the authorities>> Guide lines which present the standard procedure of verification are prepared for reference.

Concept of performance based design system
Definition

Mandatory
situation

Example for break water

Objectives

The reason
why thefacility isneeded.

Mandatory(Port andHarbor Law)

Calmness of navigation channels and basin should be
kept in order to navigate and moor ships safely and inorder to handle cargo smoothly and in order to safely
maintain buildings and other facilities located in port
Law Article 14

Performancerequirements

Performanceswhichfacilities are
required

Mandatory(Port andHarbor Law)

Damages by the actions of self weight, wave, Level 1
earthquake should not affect the objectives of the
break water and the continuous usage of it.
Law Article 14 - Serviceability requirement-

Performance
criteria

Concrete
criteria which
represent
performancerequirements

Mandatory(Notification)- Notification Article 35 1st Danger of the possibility of the sliding failure of the groundunder the persistent situation in which main action is self
weight should be lower than limit level.
2nd Danger of the possibility of the sliding and rotation failure of
the gravity structure and of the failure of the ground by inshort of bearing capacity under the variable situation inwhich main actions are wave or Level 1 earthquake should
be lower than limit level.

Performanceverification

Performances
should beverified byengineering
procedure.

Not Mandatory(Guidelines arepresented forreferences)(Guidelines present standard procedure of
performance verification for reference)

Performance matrix considered in TSPHF
Designsituation

Definition

Contents

Provisions in former TSPHF

FunctionProtective facilities for harbors should be maintained its
function under every natural situations such as geography,
meteorology, marine phenomena and others. (Law Article 7)

SafetyProtective facilities should be safe against self weight, waterpressure, wave force, earth pressure, earthquake force and soon. (Law Article 7)

Facilities

Fender system should be mounted in mooring facilities. (Law
Article 10)

Calculationof forces

The wave force acting on a structure shall be determinedusing appropriate hydraulic model experiments or design
methods in the following procedure. (Notification Article 5)

Objectives
andperformancerequirements

Performanceverification(They are also
written in
notification)

SafetyExamination of the safety of the members of the rein forced
verification concrete structures shall be conducted as standard by the limitof members state design method. (Notification Article 34)
Stability
check

Examination of the stability of upright section of gravity typebreakwater shall be based on the design procedures using thesafety factors against failures. (Notification Article 48)

Relation between design situation and performancerequirement in new TSPHF

Performance Requirement

Permanent actions
Persistent (self weight, earth
Situation pressures) aremajor actions
Variable actions
Transient (wave, Level1
Situation earthquake) aremajor actions

Serviceability (Possibility of damage is low or thefunctions of the facility would be recovered withminor repairs.)
・Serviceability is required for all facilities
・Serviceability includes Reparability and Safety.

Accidental actions
Accidental (Tsunami, Level 2
Situation earthquake) aremajor actions

・Levels of the performance requirements will bechanged by the importance of the facilities.
- Serviceability- Reparability: The function of the facility would
be recovered in relatively short period after some
repairs.
- Safety: Significant damage would take place.
However, the damage would not cause any lives
loss or serious economic damages to hinterland.

Annual exceedance
probability

Level

Provisions in former TSPHF

0

Serviceability

Reparability

Damage extent
Safety0.01
1Serviceability

Accidental
situation

PersistentandTransientsituationNote) Accidental and transient situation are separated by the annual
exceedance probability of 0.01 for the descriptive purpose.

Performance considered in former TSPHF
Designsituation
Ordinary
Situation

Extraordinary
SituationLargeearthquake

Definition

Level 1 & 2 earthquake

Performance Requirement

Permanent actions(self weight, earthpressures) are major
actions
Variable actions(wave, Level 1
earthquake) aremajor actions

Safety factors against failure shall be larger
than prescribed value.

Level 2 earthquake is Safety factors against failure shall be larger
major action
than prescribed value.

For the verification of earthquake resistance of public
structures, two types of seismic motions shall be appliedsuch as Level1 earthquake and Level 2 earthquake.
– Level 1 earthquake:
earthquake: is the intensity of seismic motion which
structures will encounter 1 or 2 times during its service period.
period.
This level of earthquake is the almost equivalent seismic motion
motionas that used for the external force against conventional seismic
design.
– Level 2 earthquake:
earthquake: is the intensity of seismic motion of which
event probability is quit low. Large scale plate boundary
earthquakes occurred near land or inland earthquakes will bethis kind of earthquakes.

This design situation is applied only on earthquake proofed structures.

Introduction of the institution for adequatenesssurveillance to TSPHF• Although a large variety of design verification methods can be applied byintroduction of performance based design code, high level of engineeringknowledge is required for adequateness surveillance.
• To adequately maintain the safety of important public facilities, designs of
those facilities shall be surveyed by government of accredited organization.
Accredited organizations shall be nominated by government.
Construction,
improvement,
maintenance

Subject facilities of TSPHF (port facilities)
Design verification surveillance facilities

Objectives
Performance requirement– Performance of facilities are clearly presented to users.
fully performance based design code is introduced.

– Designers can utilize their decision and can exercise theiringenuity.
They can propose new design method or new type of structures.

Construction,
Improvement

Institution for adequateness surveillance
Adequatenesssurveillance to
TSPHF

Advantage of new TSPHF shall be summarized asfollows;– Building cost reduction is anticipated with ingenuity.

(Important public facilities)

TSPHF

Advantage of new TSPHF

Adequateness surveillance to
TSPHF by government or
accredited organization

Performance criteria

In order to employ above advantages appropriately, it isrequired for designers and promoters to understand thethoughts and technical contents of the TSPHF correctly.
And to guarantee to users that new technology has
satisfied the demand of TSPHF, the system for checking
the adequateness of proposed design to TSPHF is
founded.

- Designers can select procedure
for performance verification.

Changed Important technical points¾

Introduction of performance based design method- Reliability based design method is fully introduced¾

Change of calculation procedure for the input earthquake
force for design (L1 & L2)- Observed seismic motions in each port are utilized forthe calculation of input earthquake force for design¾

New seismic coefficient method (L1) with new seismic
coefficient for design- New concept of seismic coefficient compatible withexisting seismic coefficient method> Damage of the mooring facilities after L1 level earthquake is considered
to decide the seismic coefficient.

What is Reliability Based Design method?
A design method which takes into considerationof failure probability of the facility or exceedance
probability of limit state, which is required indesign, of the facility.
That is, failure probability of the structure is
explicitly considered in reliability based design
method.

Levels of Reliability based design method
Reliability index
value
μz MeanStandard
deviation

・Failure probability is directly
evaluated (Pf: Probability of
performance function Z<0)β ⋅σ zFailure probability

Pfμz
Performance
functionZ

Z

RBD method

Code calibration(2) Level 2 PBDDeterministic

・Distance between mean value μz andfailure condition is evaluated withreliability index β.
・Indirectly considering the probability
distribution form. β and σz are
considered for evaluating failure
probability.

•Safety factor•Allowable stress method* Actions and resistances are
deterministically defined

Probabilistic•Partial factors•Limit state of materials•Experience oftraditional method isemphasized.
•Failure probability is
explicitly considered.

* Probabilities of action andresistances are taken into
consideration(3) Level 1 PBDResistance Action= R−S(γ R Rk − γ s S k )Partial factor

Traditional design method(Safety Factor Method)

・Partial factors are used forconsidering the distance between
mean value and failure condition.
・Partial factors are decided fromLevel 2 PBD calculation.

⎛

γ i = ⎜⎜1 − α i βT⎝

Partial factor

Difficultσ i ⎞ μi⎟
μi ⎟⎠ xki

2.32

10-3

3.09

10-4

3.72

10-5

4.27

10-6

4.75

* Performance function Z and R and S
are assumed to be normal probability
variables.

Failure probability

Level 2

βT > βReliability index

Level 1

Rd > Sd（γRRk > γsSk ）Partial factor

Safety factor method and RBD method15

4β (sliding)

10-2

Evaluation parameter

PfT > Pf

Safety factor cannot explain failure probability.

β (sliding failure)

1.29

1.E+00

1.E-01

Failure probability

Reliability Index β

10-1

Performance criteria

Level 3

simpleReliability index and failure probability
Failure probability Pf

RBD Level

1.E-02small
3
Failureprobability

2
large

10.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
滑動安全率

1.E-03β (bearing failure)f z (z)Relationship between traditional design method and reliability
based design method(1) Level 3 PBD

β (foundation)

Probability
densityfunction

1050.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Fs Fs(sliding
failure)(sliding)

支持力安全率Fs (bearing
failure)Fs(foundation)

1.E-04

1.E-05Difference between safety factor and failure probability:

1.E-06
0

1

2

3

4

5

– large safety factor --> X Small failure probability– failure probability has some variance even in the same safety factor is used.

Reliability index

Failure probability cannot be presented in the traditional design method.

Determination procedure of partial factor⎛

γ i = ⎜⎜1 − α i βT⎝

σ i ⎞ μi⎟
μi ⎟⎠ xki

Performance based design in TSPHF(in guideline)
Reliability based design (Partial factor method)x1– Performance levels are categorized mainly by importance of thestructures.

Z<0

αi: Sensitivity of the parameter
direction of
βt: Target reliability index
sensitivity vector
μi: Mean value of the parameter
σi: Standard deviation of the parameter
xki: Characteristic value or nominal valuecos-1(α2)

Z>0cos-1(α1)

x2Not only static analysis such as seismic coefficient method but
also dynamic response analysis is introduced especially in thecase of important structures.
– Performance of quay wall is indicated by displacement or
deformation. To evaluate those, high level of analytical method isneeded.

Importance of model tests or field experiments are emphasized toinclude design.

Design value and characteristic value

xdi = γ i xki
Characteristic value is a value which represents a material property.

Traditional safety factor method are still used for some types of structures. In thosecases, partial factors are formally used.

Design verification of gravity type of breakwater

Difference in statements between former and new TSPHF

Design verification method used in new TSPHF is explained using the verification ofgravity type of breakwater for example.

(Ex: verification of the sliding stability of a gravity type of breakwater)

Former TSPHF

New TSPHF

Examination of stability against sliding is
made using following equation. In thisexamination, an appropriate safety factor
shall be used.

The risk of the instability of breakwater
under transient design situation on wave
action shall be under the limit value.
(Notification)

μ Ｗ０－ＵＰ

It should be standard for the limit of the riskof instability to be system failure
probability of 8.7X10-3. (Commentary)

Three modes of failures considered

Traditional method

Ｆｓ≦

Forces acting on breakwater at sliding mode of failure

Out side

Verification of sliding
mode of failure ispresented.

ΣH

Fs =

In side∑H

Fs: Safety factor
for sliding failure
ΣW: Total verticalforce
ΣH: Total
horizontal force
μ: coefficient offriction

ΣW

Design situation istransient situation
at which wave
force is the major
action.

μ ⋅ ∑WμΣW

Fs: Safety factor against sliding of the
upright section

γ f f k (∑ γ W Wik − PBd − γ P PUk ) ≥ γ P PHk

μ : friction coefficient between the uprightsection and rubble mound foundationi

W0: weight of the upright section in stillwater
U: uplift force acting on the upright section
P: horizontal wave force acting on the
upright section(Notification No.48)
It should be standard for safety against
sliding to be 1.2 or greater for wave actions.
(Commentary)

Evaluation of failure probability of existing structures
Deciding Target system failure probability

μi/xki

μi/σi

1.00

0.10

shallow slope

0.97

0.04

steep slope

1.06

0.08

0.87

0.10

0.91

0.19

0.84

0.12

γwl=1.5

1.00

0.20

γwl=2.0,2.5

1.00

0.40

Coefficient of friction

1.06

0.15

Rein forced concrete

0.98

0.02

Concrete

1.02

0.02

Sand

1.02

0.04

Foundation ground

1.00

0.03

1.00

0.10

Wave force (PH,PU)

Note)
μi/xki : deviation of characteristic
value (mean/characteristic value)

Wave deformation calculation- Reliability index β

Average system reliability
index of existing caissontype breakwater is 2.38.

μz = β ⋅ σ z
f z (z)Z = R−SPf

μz: mean value
σz: Standard
deviationμz

μi/σi :Coefficient of variance
rwl：Ratio of highest water levelever recorded and mean monthlyhighest water level

Calculation of wave force
Caisson type
Caisson type covered with wavedissipating concrete blocks

Unit weight

Strength parameters of the ground (c',tanφ')Z

Partial factors used in TSPHF
Partial factor γ

Deformation after breaker

Tidal range– * FORM method is categorized in level2 of RBD.

i

Sensitivity

Coefficient of variance V⎛σ ⎞μ= ⎜⎜1 − α i βT i ⎟⎟ i
μi ⎠ xki⎝

Difference in former TSPHF and new TSPHF
Sliding failure verification in former TSPHF(Per 1m)

Deviation of the characteristic value
to mean value

Target reliability index

Standard partial factor (Transient situation for wave)
Target system reliability index βT
2.38
Target system failure probability PfT
8.7 X 10-3
Target reliability used for partial factor βT'
2.40
μ/xk
γ
α
γf
Coefficient of friction
0.79 0.689 1.060
1.04
0.740
steep slope
γPH,γPU-0.704shallow slope
1.17
0.825
rwl=1.5
1.03
1.000=2.0,2.5
r
1.06
1.000
γ
-0.059wl
wl
Sliding
H.H.W.L.
1
γWRC Unit weight of RC
0.98 0.030 0.980
γWNC Unit weight of NC
1.02 0.025 1.020
γWSAND Unit weight of sand1.01 0.150 1.020
Partial factors are used for design

Deviation of mean value
Deviation of characteristic
value of design parameter fromthe mean value of it. >>Traditional design values are
considered to be characteristic
μ/σ value and they include safety
0.150 margin. This kind of margin
should be corrected.

0.239
0.251
0.200
0.400
0.020
0.020
0.040

Coefficient of variancevariance of design
parameters+/-, amount of sensitivity: effect to reliability index in design method- Coef. friction (positive): Positive large effect to sliding resistance- Wave PH (negative): Positive large effect to action

H

Statistic parameters of design parameters

Offshore wave height

Reliability indices of existing structures are calculated with first orderreliability method (FORM) for understanding average failure probabilityof existing structures.
About 40 cases were examined for each type of structures and design
method.

Uiγ: partial factor
k (suffix): characteristic value , d (suffix):
design value
f: friction coefficient between the uprightsection and rubble mound foundation
W i: total weight of the upright section
PB: buoyancy acting on the upright section
in still water
PU: uplift force acting on the upright section
PH: horizontal wave force acting on the
upright section(Guideline)

H
500kN

Buoyancy
600kN
Self weight
1800kN

Uplift150kN(1) Calculation of safety factor by former TSPHF (Fs>1.2)(1800-150-600)
×0.6*= 1.26 > 1.2 O.K

Fs＝
500

* 0.6 is coefficient of friction between concrete and rubble moundDifference in former TSPHF and new TSPHF(Sliding failure verification in new TSPHF)

Difference in former TSPHF and new TSPHF(Sliding failure verification in new TSPHF)(continue)(2) Calculation of performance function on sliding failure (performance function Z>0)
1. Calculation of design values
Design value of the weight of a caisson
Characteristic value Partialof weight (kN/m)
factorParts
Caisson

342.0

0.98

335.2

Concrete cap

61.2

1.02

62.4

Sand

1056.61.01

1067.2Concrete crown

340.2

1.02

347.0

Total

1800.0- Design value of buoyancy
600 X 1.03 = 618kN/m(Partial factor)

2. Verification by performance function

Design value of
weight (kN/m)

Z= (1811.8 - 156 - 618) X (0.6 X 0.79) - 520 = -28.1 >>Out(Partial factor for coefficient of friction)
If Z>0, the breakwater designed is verified thatsliding failure possibility of this caisson is less than
8.7X10-3 in TSPHF.

If weight of caisson isincreased, Z will bepositive. Then…

1811.8- Design value of Horizontal
wave force and uplift
Horizontal force 500 X 1.04 = 520kN/m
Uplift
150 X 1.04 = 156kN/m(Partial factor)

Effect of introduction of reliability based design to design results
Variance of system reliability index combination of three mode of failure suchas sliding ,turnover, and loss of bearing
capacity- is minimized in new TSPHF.

⎛⎞

γ f f k ⎜ ∑ γ W Wik − PBd − γ P PUk ⎟ ≥ γ P PHk⎝ i

From the view of failure probability,
reliability based design method isrational.

iU

W0 d = ∑ γ Wi Wik − PBdiFormer TSPHF

Wave force

Safety factor
1.2

New TSPHF

U d = γ PU PUk

HDesign value of the weight of the upright section in still water

Design value of the uplift force acting on the upright section

Pd = γ PH PHk

μd = γ f f k

Count

⎠

From the new equation, design values shall be presented as follows.

Design value of the horizontal wave force acting on the upright section

Design value of the friction coefficient between the upright section
and rubble mound foundation

New equation can be rewritten as follows;

more rational and costeffective structure

μ d (W0 d − U d ) ≥ Pd
Systemfailureprobability

Wave force1≤

μ d (W0 d − U d )

Ｆｓ≦

Pd

μ Ｗ０－ＵＰ

8.7x10-3

It means there aren't any new idea for the physical model for calculating the safety.
Introducing partial factors is to clarify the failure probability and to make clear thesensitivity of each factors.

Safe side
Danger side
System reliability index

Input seismic motion for design

Site effect ----Soft----Soft sediment layer makes amplitude of seismic motion
large and duration time long. - 2000 West of Tottori Earthquake

Seismic motion propagation
Site effect

Factors
affecting toseismic motionSite¾Site effect G( f )f: Frequency

Ground surface

Yumigahama Peninsula¾Source ofearthquake
characteristics S(f)¾Propagation pathcharacteristics P( f )Sakai-Minato-G
MeteorologicalofficeSMN001
SMNH10

Yumigahama
Peninsula

ShinamePeninsula

Propagation path characteristics

Shiname Peninsula
Source ofearthquake
characteristics

Observed seismic motion O( f )=S( f )P( f )G( f )Input seismic motion for design(Notification)
Level 1 seismic motion of probabilistic time history wave shall beappropriately selected from measured seismic motions in view ofsource characteristics of earthquake, propagation path, and site
effect.
effect.
Level 2 seismic motion of deterministic time history wave shall beappropriately selected from measured seismic motions andparameters of envisioned source characteristics of earthquake inview of source characteristics of earthquake, propagation path,and site effect.
effect.

Seismic coefficient caring time history of seismic motion<Former TSPHF><New TSPHF>

Seismic design (simple method:seismic coef. method)

Effect of seismic motion was calculated fromtime history of seismic motion.

seismic coefficient

D allow= (area factor) X (ground type factor)
X (Important factor)

PGA
Ground surface•Frequency
dependency•Duration time

One dimension seismic
reaction analysis

Engineering bedrock¾ Evaluation of seismic motion at construction sites- Time history wave( Frequency characteristics, durationtime)¾ Evaluation of site effect- Strong seismic motion measurement system

Calculation of seismic coefficient for verification(gravity type of quay wall)(partial factor of 1.0 is used)⎛ D ⎞k h = 1 .7 8 ⎜ a ⎟⎝ DR ⎠− 0 .5 5αcg+ 0 .0 4

kh : seismic coefficient for verification
Da : Allowable displacement (cm)
DR : Reference allowable displacement (=10cm)
αc : Modified maximum ground acceleration (Gal)

Structures (gravity type of quay wall) designed with seismic
coefficient method with seismic coefficient for verification
shall displace under the limit of residual displacement(about 30cm) of serviceability under Level 1 seismic motionin each port.

¾ Characteristics of seismic motion (Frequency dependency, duration time) are
different for each site.
¾ A lot of varieties exist in quay wall types, sea depths, and ground conditions¾ Serviceability of quay walls shall be kept even after level 1 earthquake.

Introduction of new seismic coefficient for verification

SUMMARY
Main points of this presentation are summarized in key
words are as follows;– Performance based design (Expanding the alternatives inverification procedure)– Introduction of the institution of design verification surveillance
surveillance(Checking the design by third party institution)– Introduction of reliability based design method (failure probability
probabilityof the structure system is the rule) -- Partial factor design
method is introduced.
– Change of calculation procedure for the input earthquake force
for design (L1 & L2)
Site dependent Seismic force
New seismic coefficient method (L1) with new seismic
coefficient for design– New concept of seismic coefficient compatible with existing
seismic coefficient method– Damage of the mooring facilities after L1 level earthquake isconsidered to decide the seismic coefficient.

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
September 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Development of Design Codes and Standard Specifications in
Korea
Jai-Dong Koo and Tae-Song Kim
Construction Engineering and Management Division, Korea Institute of Construction Technology,
Goyang, Korea
Ha-Won SongSchool of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea

1

INTRODUCTION

According to the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization, eachcountry realized the importance of the globalization of its design codes and development of
performance-based design codes. For the past more than a decade, the Korean government has
made many efforts to improve design codes and standard specifications. As a result of these
efforts, uniformity of the design code and specification formats and the convenience of users havebeen partially obtained. Recently extensive researches on the development of the performancebased design codes and specifications in various sectors of the construction field in Korea are
ongoing. In this paper the status of the recent development of design codes and specifications will
be introduced and the future development direction of performance-based design codes andspecifications will be also explained.

2

DESIGN CODES AND STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA

Major standards in Korea are controlled by Korean government. For example, in the field ofconstruction, design codes and standard specifications had been administered by the Ministry ofLand, Transport and Marine Affairs (previously the Ministry of Construction and Transportation),
Korea. But such administrative operation and control fell short of professionalism and efficiency.
Moreover, design codes and standard specifications were not established in unified manner. In
particular, application of the construction codes and specifications called differently as 'standard
specifications', 'codes', 'guidelines', 'handbooks', 'technical instructions', 'manual', etc. entailed
many confusion. Furthermore, the problem of using different criteria in coding for the sameengineering item or behaviour was experienced. Due to these reasons, the Ministry of Land,
Transport and Marine Affairs delegated the management of construction codes and specifications
to corresponding academic societies and associations from 1995 so that each responsibleorganization can establish and revise construction codes and specifications as shown in Table 1.
For construction codes and specifications, the codes were categorized into ‘Design Codes’,‘Standard Specifications’, ‘Owner's Standard Specifications’ and ‘low-level technological criteria’.
Then, ‘Design Codes’, ‘Standard Specifications’, and ‘Owner's Standard Specifications’ were
stipulated by the law to be subject to the deliberation of the Central Construction Technology
Deliberation Committee. And the ‘low-level technological criteria’ is controlled by the academic
societies, associations and owners (Fig. 1). Since the Design Codes and Standard Specifications
are national codes and specifications, government subsidies are granted to each responsibleorganization for development or revision of Design Codes and Standard Specifications. In
addition, Design Codes and Standard Specifications play a role of high-level criteria of the otherconstruction codes and specifications as well as the ‘low-level technology criteria’. Moreover,there are construction codes for facilities, such as the Road Act and the Building Act, andconstruction criteria Stipulated as the Guidelines, the Public Notifications as low-level regulation.

Table 1. Standard specifications and design codes in Korea
Responsible Organizations
Korean Society of Civil
Engineers

Korea Concrete InstituteArchitectural Institute of
Korea
Korean Geotechnical Society
Korean Institute ofLandscape Architecture
Korea Road &Transportation Association

Korean Tunnelling
Association
Korea Water Resources
Association
The Korean Institute of
Illuminating & Electrical
Installation Engineers
The Society of AirConditioning &Refrigerating Engineers of
Korea
Korean Society for Steel
Construction
Earthquake Engineering
Society of Korea
Construction Temporary
Equipment Association of
Korea
Korea Water & Wastewater
Works Association
Korea Port & Harbour
Association
Technical Safety Policy
Officer
Korea Infrastructure Safety
and Technology Corporation
Korea Rail Network
Authority
Korea Rural Community &Agricultural Corporation

Standard Specifications·General Standard Specification for
Civil Works·Standard Specification for Urban
Railroad (metro) Works··Standard Concrete Construction
Specification·Architectural Standard
Specification·Standard Specification forLandscaping Works·Standard Specification for Road
Works
·Standard Specification forConstruction of Bridges on Road
Projects·Standard Specification for
Tunnelling·Standard Specification forConstruction of River·Standard Specification for Building
Electrical Installations Works·Standard Specification for Building
Mechanical Equipments Works·Standard Specification for
Industrial/Environmental
Equipments Works

Design Codes·Concrete Structure Design Code·Korean Building Codes·Structural Foundation Design
Codes·Landscape architecture Design
Codes·Road Design Codes·Bridge Design Code on Road
Projects·Tunnel Design Codes·River Design Codes·Dam Design Codes·Building Electrical Installations
Design Codes·Building Mechanical Equipments
Design Codes·Steel Structure Design Codes·Earthquake-proof Design Codes·Standard Specification for
Temporary Works·Standard Specification for Water
and Wastewater Works·Standard Specification forConstruction of Ports and Harbours·Standard Specification forConstruction Environment Control·Standard Specification for Slopes·Standard Specification for
Agricultural Civil Works·Water Supply Design Codes·Wastewater Design Codes·Port and Harbour Design Codes·Design Code for Slopes·Railroad Design Code·Express Railroad Design Code·Plan and Design Codes for
Improvement Projects ofAgricultural Production Base

These Guidelines and Public Notifications are compulsory regulations. However, Design Codes,
Standard Specifications and low-level technological criteria are not compulsory regulations.
Therefore, if only the owners should choose these criteria as construction contract documents, thatcriteria may take effect as contract documents.

Laws, Regulations

Directives

PublicNotifications

Guidelines

Public Notices

Standard Specs andOwner’s Standard Specs

Design Codes

Deliberated by the Central
Construction Technology
Deliberation Committee

Low-level
technological criteria

Guidelines

Manuals

Handbooks

Technical
Instructions

Standard
Drawings

Controlled by academic
societies, associations
and owners

Figure 1. Design codes and standard specifications in Korea
As a result of these efforts, the problem of overlapping construction codes and specifications
together with the problem of assigning different criteria for an identical item have been removed.
However, even though these efforts served to obtain uniformity of the design code andspecification system and the convenience of users, securing design engineering capability andadvancement and globalization of design code and specification system remain to be desired.

3

NEEDS AND DIRECTION FOR HARMONIZED CODES AND SPECIFICATIONS IN
KOREAThe Korean design codes and specifications is the prescriptive codes suggesting materials anddesign methods for achieving the objectives and functional requirements. These kinds of codes
have an advantage of being able to be directly utilized by the designer and contractor. However,
the enhancement of design engineering capabilities may be faced with bottlenecks due tolimitation of designer’s discretion. Therefore, it is considered to be necessary to move forward to
the direction of performance-based design code and specification system by which designers andconstructors are free to choose diversified design and construction methods.
According to the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization,technical specifications prescribed by procuring entities of each country shall be in terms of
performance rather than design or descriptive characteristics, and shall be based on international
standards, where such exist. Due to this reason, each country is exerting efforts to globalize its
design codes. Therefore, design codes and standard specifications in Korea are also considered tobe necessary to join in the performance-based globalization trend.
Depending on the types of facilities, not many performance-based design codes andspecifications have been developed in Korea until recently. The status of performance-based designcodes and specifications in various facility sectors in Korea are as follows.
3.1
Road Pavement Sector
Experiments and researches were conducted partially to examine road pavement performance. But
technical development for evaluating road pavement performance was few.
3.2

Concrete Structure Sector

Fundamental research on the development of performance-based design technique is in its initialstages in the Korean academic communities. Both performance-based design code and standard
specification is under development including durability design. But the performance of highperformance concrete was not properly reflected in the design yet.
3.3
Steel Structure (Civil) Sector
Steel structural design is mostly limited to the Allowable Stress Design. Performance-based
design is mainly concentrated on seismic design. Researches on the buildings that employ steel
structures are being carried out. Researches on performance-based design, still, remain to be
desired.
3.4
Architectural Building Sector
Efforts of introducing the performance concept in the architectural building design have long been
implemented but any significant development has not been achieved so far. Since the 1990s,
efforts of complying Korean Standards (KS) with an international standard like ISO has been
made but full-scale performance design has not been realized. Recently, researches on
performance-based design technique have been started mainly in the Korean academic
communities. Relevant systems and regulations include the Building Energy Efficiency Rating
System, the Green Building Certification System, regulation for floor impact sound in apartments,
recommendation regulation for indoor air quality of newly built apartment and the Housing
Performance Grade Indication System, etc..
3.5
Other Sectors
Researches on the area of foundation engineering have been carried out mainly in the deep
foundation design based on reliability analysis. Researches on the evaluation of bearing capacityof piles and researches with a safety factor in prediction methods of bearing capacity of piles,
based on reliability analysis have been performed. And researches on stochastical reliability
analysis to nonlinear structures, development of reliability analysis algorithm of real structures,and reliability analysis of pile structures subject to biaxial loading have been carried out at thesame time.
Among road subsidiaries, the criteria of safety barriers have been changed into performance
criteria. Reflective performances of retro-reflectors are applied to delineation systems, pavement
markings, road signs, re-boundable guideposts and etc.. But performance codes and specificationsof road subsidiaries still remain to be desired.
In case of tunnels, the Tunnel Design Code remains mostly at material-oriented approaches. Up
to now researches and introduction of technologies based on the performance in tunnel area
remains to be lack.
In the area of landscaping, development of performance codes nearly has not been
implemented so far but researches on the assessment of landscapes, thermal environments,
rainwater storage and utilization and biological habitat have been performed.
In case of the building mechanical systems, certain levels of performance for the products andequipments are ensured by certification processes of the Korean Standards and certification
systems of public institutions and academic communities. However, the maintenance of thesystems is not sufficient and the criteria of high efficiency performance and durability have notbeen established.
In the building electrical systems, along with efforts of complying Korean Standards with IEC
since the 1990s, efforts of complying Korean codes with international codes have been maintained
sustainably but visible outcome is few so far. Performance evaluation system under
implementation in Korea includes ultra-high speed telecommunication building certification
system, intelligent building certification system, and etc..
3.6
Performance Warranty Contracting System
Researches to introduce international performance warranty contracting system for inducing
improvement of facilities and the contractor’s technical innovation has not been performed.

Recently, breaking away from the bidding system of giving priority on price, introduction of anawarding system that can assess costs and technologies synthetically is under progress.

4

ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN CODES AND
SPECIFICAIONS

Performance-based
design and construction
guidelines

Performance- Master plans
based codes and writing
and specs
manuals

The project, “Master plans to develop performance-based construction codes and specifications”
was carried out in 2007. This project is one of the Construction and Transportation Technology
Research and Development Projects implemented by the Ministry of Land, Transport and Marine
Affairs. This project is in line with the policy of “International standardization of design
documents and performance-based improvement of design codes”.
Through this project, master plans for developing performance based codes and specifications
for about ten different materials/facilities covering road pavement, concrete structures, steel
structures, and architectural buildings has been established. The manuals for developing
performance based codes and specifications for each facility were prepared. In addition, as asubsequent development project, “Standardization of Construction Specifications and Design
Criteria based on Performance - Focused on Pavements and Concrete Structures” commenced in
September 2006 and will end in May 2011. The research roadmap is shown in Figure 2. The
research goals of this project are as follows:(1) To develop the performance warranty specification consists of the performance based
standard, pay adjustment regulation and the performance warranty contract system inpavement area.
(2) To convert the prescriptive design code to the performance based design code for concrete
structures and develop the performance based design code considered the environment,material, and technique level in Korea in concrete area.
(3) To prepare performance-based and globally standardized design and construction
guidelines for steel structures, buildings, foundation structures, road subsidiary facilities,
tunnels, landscaping facilities, building mechanical and electrical systems.
2006

2007

2008

Establishment ofmaster plan s

W riting Manuals

2009

2010

2011

Pavements and Concrete Structures

Steel Structures
Foundation stru ctures,
road subsidiary facilities
Tu nnels, landscaping facilities, building
mechanical and electrical systems

buildings

Figure 2. Roadmap to develop performance-based design codes and specifications (general)In this project, status and plans for developing performance-based codes and specifications or theguidelines for performance based design of the main facilities are shown in Figures 3-6:

2006~2007

2007~2008

2008~20092009~20102010~2011

Performance
based
standard

Case study ofoverseas performance
specs anddevelopment of thelogicsDraft preparation of
performance specs
and selection of pilot
section for applying
performance specs

Draft preparation of
performance specs

Application plan
preparation of
performance specs

Evaluation of
application effects ofperformance specs

Payadjustment
regulation

Survey of material
property status andestablishment of test
plan

Preparation of pay
adjustment regulation
draft and selection ofpilot section for
applying pay
adjustment regulation

Draft preparation of
pay adjustment
regulation

Development of
Evaluation of pay
serviceability model of adjustment regulation
pay adjustment
and application
regulation
effects

Figure 3 Roadmap of performance based pavement work specifications and contracting system
2006~2007

2007~2008

2008~20092009~20102010~2011

Codesystem

Evaluation of structure
design code status andestablishment of
introduction system

Definition of codes forlimit states

Evaluation of reliability(basic variables)

Reliability analysis(failure
probability/partial
safety factor)

Completion of
performance-based
structure design code

Material
property

Survey of material
property status andestablishment of test
plan

Concrete stressstrain/compressive
strength/autogenous
shrinkage model

Establishment of concretetensile strength model, anddrying shrinkage/
autogenous shrinkage
model test

Establishment of
concrete material
property model withage

Completion of
performance-based
structure design codes– material chapter

Durability

Development of
performance-based
durability design principles
and establishment of
durability test plan

Establishment of
durability design model

Establishment of
durability design andevaluation model

Establishment andverification of durability
evaluation program

Preparation of
performance-based
standard specification– durability chapter

Structuralresistance

Suggestion of basic conceptof performance-based
design and establishment of
test plan

Development ofelement
deformation/strength
model

Development ofmembers
deformation/strength
model

Development ofmembers
deformation/strength
model

Preparation of
performance-based
standard specification– member design
chapter

Figure 4. Roadmap of performance-based design codes for concrete structures

2006~2007
Establishment ofmaster plan
to develop
performance-basedcodes

Collection and analysis ofperformance-based designmaterials
Establishment of Korean
performance-oriented
design process

2007~2008

2008~2009

Analysis of the performance hierarchyof steel structures

Development of a guideline ofperformance-oriented design for steel
structures

Establishment of the high level criteria
for performance-oriented design
Suggestion of performance capacity
assessment methods

Proposal of a research project todevelop performance-based Design
Codes and Standard Specifications forsteel structures

Figure 5 Roadmap of performance-based steel structure design guideline

2008 ~ 2009

Architectural
materials

Steelstructuralbuildings

Survey/analysis of architectural
material performance criteria andperformance test method at Korea andabroad. Review of building
performance classification method

Understanding
bottlenecks incase ofconverting
descriptive
design to
performancebased design

Survey ofperformance levels
and comparative
analysis ofperformance-based
design process ofeach country

2009~20102010~2011

Performance classification for eachmember(use) and development of
performance assessment technologies

Preparation of performance-basedarchitectural material design guideline

DB establishment of high temperature
characteristics of structural materials

Preparation of fire-resistance
performance design guideline ofstructural members

Establishment ofDevelopment
performance goal and of performancelevel as per
evaluation
performancetechnologies
evaluation

Preparation of performance-based
structural design guideline of steel
structural buildings

Figure 6. Roadmap of performance-based building design guideline

According to the project, “Standardization of Construction Specifications and Design
Criteria based on Performance: Focused on Pavements and Concrete Structures”, it is expectedthat the development of performance-based codes and specifications for pavements and concrete
structures will be reflected in the Standard Specifications in near future. And also it is further
expected that in case of other facilities including steel structures and architectural buildings,
research and development projects for performance-based codes and specifications will be
progressed on an urgent basis.

5

CONCLUSION

Since the establishment of the World Trade Organization, there is a possibility that there will be
open international competition in design technologies among countries to comply withinternational standards based on the Agreement on Government Procurement in both domestic
construction fields and foreign construction fields. In view of this trend, importance ofdevelopment of harmonized performance-based improvement of design codes and specifications
were realized recently in Korea. At this juncture, it seems to be encouraging to note that Asian
countries are exerting their cooperative efforts for the harmonized design codes for eachconstruction field. One of good example is that successful development of the Asian Concrete
Model Code (ACMC) developed by the International Committee of Concrete Model Code(ICCMC). In Asian countries, information exchanges and mutual close cooperation for the
harmonization in design codes including developing performance-based design codes in the fieldof civil engineering are very much necessary.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge supports by the Construction & Transportation R&D
Policy and Infrastructure Project on Standardization of Construction Specifications and Design
Criteria based on Performance, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Marine Affairs, Korea.

CONTENTS

Development of Design Codes andStandard Specifications in Korea
2006년 12월 24일

Jai-Dong Koo, Tae-Song Kim
And Ha-Won Song

1. INTRODUCTION
2. DESIGN CODES AND STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA
3. NEEDS AND DIRECTION OF HARMONIZEDCODES AND SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA
4. ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OFPERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN CODESAND SPECIFICAIONS
5. CONCLUSIONDESIGN CODES AND STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREAINTRODUCTION¾ For the past more than a decade, the Korean
government has made many efforts to improve designcodes and standard specifications.
¾ Recently intensive researches on the development of
the performance-based design codes andspecifications in various sectors in Korea are ongoing.
¾ In this paper the status of the recent development ofdesign codes and specifications will be introduced andthe future development direction of performance-based
design codes and specifications will be explained.

z Example of Standard specifications and design codes
Responsible
Organizations

Standard Specifications

Korean Society of
Civil EngineersGeneral Standard
Specification for Civil
Works
Standard Specification for
Urban Railroad (metro)
Works·

Design Codes¾ Had been administered by government.
- Fell short of professionalism and efficiency.
¾ Construction code and specification entailed many
confusion- Standard specifications, codes, guidelines,
handbooks, technical instructions, manual, etc.
¾ Was delegated to corresponding academic societies
and associations from 1995.

DESIGN CODES AND STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA¾ Construction codes and specifications were categorized into
'Design Codes', 'Standard Specifications', 'Owner's Standard
Specifications' and 'low-level technological criteria'.
¾ Design Codes and Standard Specifications- National and high-level criteria.
- Government subsidies are granted for the establishment orrevision.

Korea Concrete
InstituteStandard Concrete
Construction
Specification

Concrete Structure
Design CodeArchitectural
Institute of Korea

Architectural Standard
Specification

Korean Building Codes

Korean GeotechnicalSocietyStructural Foundation
Design Codes

Korean Society for
Steel Construction

Steel Structure Design
Codes- Subject to the deliberation of the Central Construction
Technology Deliberation Committee.
- Not compulsory regulations.
¾ Uniformity of the construction code and specification formats
and the convenience of users were obtained.
¾ Securing design engineering capability and advancement andglobalization of design codes and specification system remain to
be desired.

DESIGN CODES AND STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA
Laws, Regulations

Directives

Guidelines¾ Korean design codes and specifications is the prescriptive
codes.

PublicNotifications- Able to be utilized by the designer and contractor.
- May be faced with bottlenecks due to limitation ofdesigner’s discretion.

Public
NoticesStandard Spec and

Design Codes

Owner’s Standard
Specs

Deliberated by the Central
Construction Technology
Deliberation Committee

Manuals

Handbooks

Technical
Standard
InstructDrawingsions¾ Necessary to move forward to performance-based designcodes and specifications.
¾ Necessary to join in the performance-based globalization
trend.

Low-level
technological criteria

Guidelines

NEEDS AND DIRECTION OF HARMONIZEDCODES AND SPECIFICATIONS IN KOREA

Controlled by academic
societies, associations
and owners

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications¾ Not many have been developed in until recently.

z Concrete Structure Sectorz Road Pavement Sector¾ Experiments and researches were conducted partiallyto examine road pavement performance.
¾ Technical development for evaluating road pavement
performance was few.

¾ Fundamental research on the development of
performance-based design technique is in its initialstages in the Korean academic communities.
¾ Both performance-based design code and standard
specification is under development including
durability design.
¾ The performance of high performance concrete was
not properly reflected in the design yet.

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specificationsz Steel Structure (Civil) Sectorz Architectural Building Sector¾ Design is mostly limited to the Allowable Stress
Design.

¾ Any significant development performance concept indesign has not been achieved.

¾ Performance-based design is mainly concentrated onseismic design.

¾ Full-scale performance design has not been realized.

- Especially on the buildings that employ steel
structures.

¾ Recently, researches on performance-based design
technique have been started mainly in the Korean
academic communities.

¾ Researches on performance-based design, still,remain to be desired.

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

z Foundation structures Sectorz Road subsidiaries Sector¾ Researches have been carried out mainly in the deep
foundation design based on reliability analysis.
¾ Researches on the evaluation of bearing capacity ofpiles and researches with a safety factor in prediction
methods of bearing capacity of piles, based onreliability analysis have been performed.
¾ Researches on stochastical reliability analysis tononlinear structures, development of reliability
analysis algorithm of real structures, and reliability
analysis of pile structures subject to biaxial loading
have been carried out.

¾ The criteria of safety barriers have been changed into
performance criteria.
¾ Reflective performances of retro-reflectors are applied
to delineation systems, pavement markings, roadsigns, re-boundable guideposts and etc., but
performance codes and specifications of roadsubsidiaries still remain to be desired.

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specificationsz Tunnels Sectorz Building mechanical systems Sector¾ The Tunnel Design Code remains mostly at materialoriented approaches.

¾ Performance for the products and equipments are
ensured by certification processes of the KoreanStandards and certification systems of public
institutions and academic communities.

¾ Researches and introduction of technologies basedon the performance in tunnel area remains to be lack.
z Landscaping Sector¾ Development of performance codes nearly has notbeen implemented.
¾ Researches on the assessment of landscapes, thermal
environments, rainwater storage and utilization andbiological habitats have been performed.

- However, the maintenance of the systems are notsufficient.
¾ The criteria of high efficiency performance anddurability have not been established.

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specifications

Development status of performance-based
design codes and specificationsz Building electrical systems Sectorz Performance Warranty Contracting System¾ Along with efforts of complying Korean Standards
with IEC since the 1990s, efforts of complying Korean
codes with international codes have been maintained
sustainably but visible outcome is few.

¾ Researches to introduce international performance
warranty contracting system has not been performed.
¾ Recently, introduction of an awarding system that canassess costs and technologies synthetically is underprogress.

ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE BASEDDESIGN CODES AND SPECIFICAIONSz Roadmap to develop performance-based designcodes and specifications (general)z Roadmap of performance based pavement work
specifications and contracting system

Development oflogicsIndicators of pavement
management

2008 - 20092009 - 20102010 - 2011
Application plan
Draft preparation ofCompletion of performance
specs and and evaluation of
performance specs reflecting
preparation of
application effects
the results of pilot projects performance specs•Survey of bond system•Establishment ofconflict resolution
plans

Preparation ofanalysis plan of pilot
sectionPreparation of
performance specs
for pilot projects

Application plan
preparation of
performance specs

Draft preparation of
performance specs• Pavement investigation
on pilot projects• Preparation of pavement
management criteria

Road
map

preparation ofremedial guidelines

Completion of pavement
investigation guidelines

Completion of
performance
specs•Feedback of pilot
project results•Revision of pavement
evaluation methods•Application to related
regulation

Pilot projects, public hearings
Review of contract and bond system and related regulations
Pavement investigationz Roadmap of performance-based steel structure
design guideline
Proposal of a research project to develop performance-based Design
Codes and Standard Specifications

Development of a guideline ofperformance-oriented design

Development of performanceoriented design guidelines

Establishment of thehigh level criteria for
performanceoriented design

Collection and analysis ofperformance-based designmaterials

Suggestion of
performancecapacity
assessment
methods

Establishment of Korean
performance-oriented design
process

Establishment of master plan to develop
performance-based codes

2011

Performancebased codesand specs

Pavements and Concrete Structures

Steel Structures
Foundation structures,
road subsidiary facilities
Tunnels, landscaping facilities, building
mechanical and electrical systems

buildings

Common codes 1 : principles of design
Common codes 2 : loads and design conditions

Concrete Structure
Design CodeCommon codes
Codes forfacilities Structuralbuildings

Dams

Roads

Bridgeson roadprojects

Steel Structure
Design Codes

Tunnels

Wastewater
facilities

Other design
Codes
Port &
harbour
facilities

Standard Concrete
Construction Spec
Generalconcrete

Ready mixed
concrete

Specialconcrete

MaintenanceDurability

Code system

Material
property

Durability

Structuralresistance

performance-based
structure designcode

performance-based
structure designcode (material
parts)

performance-based
standard
specification(durability part)

performance-based
structure designcode (member
design parts)z Roadmap of performance-based building design
guideline
2008 ~ 2009

2008
2009
Architectural
materials

Analysis of theperformancehierarchy of steel
structures

2010

General requirement of Design codes

Standard
specs

Preparation ofdraft guidelines
for pavement
investigation

Effects evaluationof performance
specs

2009

z Roadmap of performance-based design codes forconcrete structures

Structure
Design codes

Case study ofoverseas performancespecs

2007 - 2008
Draft performance
specs

2008

Establishment
Writingofmaster plans Manuals

Designcodes

2006 - 2007
Purpose Logic development of
performance specs

2007

Performance-based
design and construction
guidelines¾ The project, “Standardization of Construction
Specifications and Design Criteria based on
Performance - Focused on Pavements and Concrete
Structures”(2006 ~ 2011) was commenced.

Master plans
and writing
manuals

2006¾ According to the policy, “International standardizationof design documents and performance-based
improvement of design codes”, the project, “Masterplans to develop performance-based construction
codes and specifications”(2007) had been carried out.

2007
2008

Survey/analysis ofarchitectural material
performance criteria andperformance test method at
Korea and abroad. Review
of building performanceclassification method

Survey ofbottlenecks performancelevels andin case ofcomparative
converting
analysis of
descriptive
performancedesign toperformance based design
process of-basedeach country
design2009~20102010~2011

Performance classificationfor each member (each use)and development of
performance assessment
technologies

Preparation of performancebased architectural material
design guideline

DB establishment of hightemperature characteristics
of structural materials

Preparation of fireresistance performance
design guideline ofstructural members

Establishment
Developmentofof
performancegoal and level performance
evaluation
as perperformance technologies
evaluation

Preparation of performancebased structural design
guideline of steel structuralbuildings

Understanding

2006
2007

Steel
structuralbuildings

CONCLUSIONz Future plan

¾ It is expected that the development of performancebased codes and specifications for pavements andconcrete structures will be reflected in the Standard
Specifications in the future.
¾ It is further expected that in case of other facilities
including steel structures and architectural buildings,
research and development projects for performancebased codes and specifications will be progressed onan urgent basis.

Thank You2006년 12월 24일

¾ It seems to be encouraging to note that Asian
countries are exerting their cooperative efforts for the
harmonized design codes.
¾ One of good example is that successful developmentof the Asian Concrete Model Code (ACMC) developedby the International Committee of Concrete Model
Code (ICCMC).
¾ In Asian countries, information exchanges and mutual
close cooperation system for the harmonization indesign codes including developing performancebased design codes in the civil engineering are verymuch necessary.

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Status of Design Codes in Taiwan
Shyh-Jiann Hwang
Professor, National Taiwan University
Chair, Concrete Technology Committee of CICHE (Chinese Institute of Civil and HydraulicEngineering)2nd ACECC Workshop

September 11, 2008

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Geographic Setting

Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region

TaiwanArea: 36,000 km2
Population: 23 million

Status of Design Codes
in Taiwan

TaipeiTaiwanShyh-Jiann Hwang(National Taiwan University)
Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

P0

P1

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Outline• General• Establishment• Modification• Harmonization• Conclusions

GeneralP2

P3

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Status of Design Codes

BackgroundLaws & Regulations• Building, Building Technics,
Highway, Metro, Hydro-Engineering,
Water Supply

1. The government regulates theestablishment of design codes.

Design Codes• General• Geotechnical Engineering• Concrete Engineering• Steel Structural Engineering• Highway Engineering

2. The building and civil sectors
use common sets of guides andspecifications even thougheach has its own governing
law and code.

Standards & Specifications• Chinese National Standard (CNS)• Test Standards• Material Specifications

P4

P5

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Category
Law

Establishment
Code
Guide
Specification

P6

P7

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Code-related Laws

Codes
Drafted by relevant engineering societies

Drafted by the relevant
government agencies with thehelp of experts

Reviewed, approved and published by thecompetent government authority
Modified by specialists, professors, andrepresentatives of engineering societies
and organizations before approval

Enacted by the legislative bodyMore than 100
code-related laws in Taiwan

20 sets of major codes in Taiwan

P8Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

P9

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

List of Codes - Concrete Engineering

List of General Design Codes

Code Name
Design Code and Commentary for Structural Concrete
混凝土工程設計規範與解說( 土木401-93)

Design Code for Structural Concrete
結構混凝土設計規範

Code Name

Publisher

IssuedCPA

2002-11CPA

2006-01

Specifications for Structural Concrete
結構混凝土施工規範

Building Design Code
建築技術規則Seismic Design Code and Commentary for
Building

Design Procedures & Samples for Structural Concrete
混凝土工程設計規範之應用( 土木404-96)

Design Code for Pre-cast Concrete
預鑄混凝土工程設計規範

建築物耐震規範及解說Wind-Resistance Code and Commentary for
Building

Blast-Furnace Slag Concrete Code for Public Construction
公共工程高爐石混凝土使用手冊

CPA

1997-08

Fly Ash Concrete Code for Public Construction

建築物風力規範條文、 解說及示範例

Seismic Isolation Design Code for Building
建築物隔震設計規範

公共工程飛灰混凝土使用手冊

CPA

Design Criteria for High Performance Concrete (draft)

2002-04

CPA: Construction and Planning Administration( 營建署)P10

IssuedCICHE

2004-12

CPA
CICHE
CPA
CICHE

2002-07
2002-07

CICHE

2007-10CPA

1997-06

PCC

2001-04

PCC

1999-08

高性能混凝土設計準則( 草案)

TANEEB 1995-11

Application Guideline of Self-Compacting Concrete

CICHE

自充填混凝土使用手冊

5/9

Publisher

CICHE:Chinese Institute of Civil & Hydraulic Engineering (中國土木水利工程學會)
CPA:Construction and Planning Administration (營建署)PCC:Public Construction Commission (公共工程委員會)
TANEEB:Taiwan Area National Expressway Engineering Bureau (國道新建工程局)

2006-09

P11

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Draft of Concrete Construction CodeDraft of Concrete Design Code
Design Code
Design Code for
Structural Concrete

Code Draft
Design Code andCommentary for
Structural Concrete(土木 401-86a)

Construction CodePublisher Issued
CPA

Specification for
Structural Concrete

2002

Code Draft

Publisher Issued

CICHE

1997
P12

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Publisher

IssuedCriteria for Site Investigation

CICHE

1993-06

Criteria for Geotechnical Investigation

TANEEB 1999-06

工址地盤調
大地工程調

準則

作業準則

Criteria for Geological Mapping and Commentary

CICHE

1999-02

Design Criteria for Building Structural Foundation

TGS

2001-12Specification and Commentary for Foundation Construction

CICHE

1998-11

Design Criteria, Specifications and Commentary for Earth Anchor CICHE

2001-09

Design Criteria and Commentary for Tunneling

CICHE

1999-01

Construction Specifications for TunnelingTANEEB 1993-12

工程地質測繪準則與解說

建築物基礎構造設計規範
基礎工程施工規範與解說

地錨設計與施工準則 解說隧道工程設計準則與解說
隧道工程施工技術規範

Construction Specifications for Shield Tunneling (Draft)
潛盾隧道施工技術規範(草案)

5/9

CTTA

CPA

2002

Publisher Issued

CICHE

1999
P13

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

List of Codes - Geotechnical Engineering
Code Name

Construction Codeand Commentary for
Structural Concrete(土木 402-88a)

Publisher Issued

Guides/specifications
Drafted by the relevant
engineering societies
Approved by the competent
government authority
Published by theengineering societies

1999-09

CICHE:Chinese Institute of Civil & Hydraulic Engineering (中國土木水利工程學會)
CPA:Construction and Planning Administration (營建署)TGS:Taiwan Geotechnical Society (大地工程學會)
TANEEB:Taiwan Area National Expressway engineering Bureau ( 國道新建工程局)
CTTA:Chinese Taipei Tunneling Association (中華民國隧道協會)

P14

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

20 sets of major
guides/specifications in Taiwan

P15

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Local natural conditions
Considered in establishing safety
requirements in design codes
However, international codessuch as those of the US, Japan,
EC, and even PRC were also
referred to.
P16

Modification

P17

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Lessons from Chi-Chi Earthquake

Modification

1999
Vertical Faulting = 9.0m

Reviewed and updated
about every 3-6 years generally
Or after disasters caused byearthquakes, floods andtyphoons
P18

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Lessons from Chi-Chi Earthquake
Damages of School Buildings

293 elementary and high schools werecompletely or partially damaged.

P19

Lessons from Chi-Chi Earthquake
Bridge Damages

P20

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

P21

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Modification-Example
Several design codes have been
updated/upgraded or are being
modified

Harmonization

To raise the level of earthquake
resistance requirements basedon the Chi-Chi Earthquake(M=7.3), 1999
P22

P23

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Asian CodeAsian Code
If
Superior in concept, level andscope than the existing codes
Approved by APEC or ISO
Then
Respected and accepted by thegovernments concerned
Popularization of the Codes

CICHE fully supports theestablishment of a system ofAsian Codes, which,however, may require
government agreement andsponsorship.
P24

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

P25

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

International Committee ofConcrete Model Code of Asia
(ICCMC)Asian CodeThe popularization of the
Asian Codes may, at first,
be mandated to the APEC
engineers, and through thehelp of ACECCCICHE will use the format of
ACMC Level 3 by ICCMC for
guide and specification related toconcrete engineering

P26

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

The working Level 3 documents are to beprepared by each country that adopts thecode by incorporating its own national
concrete engineering practices.

P27

Chinese Institute of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering

Conclusions
CICHE supports the code
harmonization. However, government
agreement and sponsorship areneeded.
ISO or APEC standards are welcome.
Level 3 document of ICCMC will beelaborated.

P28

P29

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
September 11, 2008, Sendai, JapanTHE CURRENT SITUATION OF MONGOLIAN BUILDINGCODE SYSTEM
Ya.Duinkherjav
Prof and Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering, Head of concrete and steel testing laboratory,
Mongolian University of Science and Technology /MUST/ , Ulaanbaatar Mongolia
E.Ganzorig
President of Mongolian Civil Engineers Association, Assistant prof of Civil Engineering Department.
MUST, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

Abstract
Mongolian did a choice in 1990 to step into a completely new socio-economic system from postcommunism. Before this time, the country used Soviet Building Codes as its own. In the period of
1990-2000 the construction industry experienced dramatic decline due to the lack of an investment.
But from 2005 the situation is reversed and the industry investment is increasing year by year as aneffect of a macro economics positive stimulation. Following an increased investment from abroad
especially from China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and USA, new techniques, materials andideas are coming to the industry. This new situation of the industry pushes us to upgrade existing
Industry Building Codes System.
History of Development of Building Codes in Mongolia
Until 1960 the development of construction industry was weak, most construction work were carried out
by Soviet and Chinese workers and Soviet Building Codes were used directly without any translation. In
1960-1970 education system of national engineers and technical staffs and workers is established andfollowing this the industry development was speeded. National work force needed educational andinstructional materials on native language and relating with this measurements were taken to develop
National Building Code System. To develop national codes works were done in three directions: (1) directtranslation and usage of Soviet Codes; (2) adapt Soviet Codes with changes and revision consideringcountry specifics; and (3) develop new national building code. It can be said here that Mongolian
Building Code System founded on Soviet building code system and keeps this root until today.
The historically the development process of national codes can be divided into the following three stages:
From 1921 to 1960, the period of no national codes and Soviet Codes were used directly;
From 1960 to 1990, adaptation of Soviet Codes with changes and revision;
From 1990 to present, development of national codes,

Current System of Building Codes
Development of enforcement of Mongolian Building Codes is primary responsibility of Ministry ofConstruction and Urban Development and its relevant agencies. Building codes are industry standards
that building owners, designers, contractors must follow in their respective activities. Its enforcement ismonitored and controlled by State Professional Inspection Authorities. National Building Code system isunitary; there are no regional codes as used in other countries.
The framework of Building Code System encloses of the following major fields:•

Urban development;•

Allocation, regionalization, and usage of land and construction sites;•

Durability and strength of structures;•

Health and safety•

Operation and maintenance•

Cost estimation

Annual budget allocated from the State for development of building codes is around 30 to 50 million
tugriks.
Building code system before 2003 consisted from 3 major fields:
I.

Management and economics

II. Design and specifications
III. Construction
Each one of major fields contains codes in several groups as showed below.
I.

Management and economics field subdivided into the following six groups:

1st group. Construction normative documents
2nd group. Design requirements, engineering surveying, management of economics
3d group. Construction administration and management
4th group. Norms to estimate duration of design and construction stages of project
5th group. Construction economics
6th group. Rules of officials

II. Design and specification field subdivided into the following 11 groups:
1st group. Fundamental norm for design
2nd group. Soil and foundation
3d group. Structure
4th group. Engineering equipments of buildings, outside engineering supplies
5th group. Transportation facilities
6th group. Hydrotechnical, power and melioration facilities and systems
7th group. Urban planning and construction
8th group. Residential and public buildings
9th group. Factory buildings and supporting facilities
10th group. Agricultural facilities
11th group. Warehouses and storage buildings
Construction field can be subdivided into 9 groups as follows:
1st group. Norms for construction and acceptance of work
2nd group. Soil and foundation
3d group. Structure
4th group. Isolation and protective isolation, finishing
5th group. Engineering equipments of buildings, outside engineering supplies
6th group. Transportation facilities
7th group. Hydrotechnical, power and melioration facilities and systems
8th group. Mechanization in construction
9th group. Production of construction materials and products
January, 2002 statistics showed that 283 building codes were effective in the industry and from the total
23 of them are norms of Management and Economics, 94 are for Design and Specifications, and 38 arefor construction, and 128 are for cost estimation. It also stated that 260 standards are used and 199 ofthem are Russian GOST, 12 are ISO standards, 5 are DIN standards and 44 are from other countries
national standards. Foreign standards are used with translation into Mongolian. Darkhan metallurgicalfactory is sole domestic producer of construction rebars which was built under Japanese project andJapanese several standards are used for its products.

From 2002 new system of building codes have been using in the industry, and its classification differsfrom the previous system. New system has 8 subgroups.
1st group. Management methodological norms
2nd group. General technical normative documents
3d group. Urban development and building normative documents
4th group. Normative documents for engineering equipments of buildings and outside supply systems
5th group. Normative documents for building structures and elements
6th group. Normative documents for construction materials and products
7th group. Normative documents for temporary facilities, form work
8th group. Construction economics normative documents
By August, 2008, 368 building codes are effective in the industry and from the total 23 of them are normsof Management and Economics, 89 are for Design and Specifications, and 144 are for construction andcost estimation, 30 recommendations and 56 documents are in Russian Fig.1.

Figure 1.Effective building codesFigure 2. 173 normative documents are newly approved and enforced from 1997 to 2007.

Proposal of Change into Mongolian Building Code System
Considering today’s rapid development of Mongolian construction industry and penetration of advanced
materials and techniques, it needs to bring national normative documents making close to the level ofinternational documents. To accomplish this objective the followings are needed:•

To transfer function of development of normative documents into non-governmentalorganizations, especially there are already capable professional associations such as Mongolian
Association of Civil Engineers, Concrete Institute and so on,•

To bring collaboration from Asian professional associations of engineers into development
activities of normative documents, organize study and analyze of documents of Asian countries
and seek possibility to adapt reflecting country specifics,•

To enhance effectiveness of educational and professional development systems of engineers,
special attention goes to MUST and MACE.

References
1. Directives to upgrade Building Code system in new market economy, MUDBY,ZGHABHBNAAG, 2003, UB,
2. Objectives and directions of construction standardization, Journal of Construction Information,
2000/4, ZGHABHBNAAG, UB,
3. Journal of Construction Information, 2008, ZGHABHBNAAG, UB,

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Introduction of Asian Concrete Model Code (ACMC)
Yoshitaka Kato
Institute of Industrial Science, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

World wide cement consumption

University of Tokyo
Hokkaido University
Kagoshima University
Port and Airport Research Institute

Others
Japan
USA
India
China

1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

Yoshitaka KATO
Tamon UEDA
Koji TAKEWAKA
Hiroshi YOKOTA

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

year
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Billion ton 0.94 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.99 1.02
1 1.03 1.07 1.08 1.13 1.17 1.22 1.27 1.4

World wide cement consumption

1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

100%
More than 50% in Asia
90%2006st(1.1 billion ton, 44%)80%1 : China(0.16 billion ton, 6%)70%2nd : India(0.1 billion ton, 4%)
Others
60%3rd : USAJapan
50%4th : Japan(0. 07 billion ton, 3%)
USA
40%
India
30%
3
China
Typical 20%
unit weight of cement in concrete = 300 kg/m
10%ton cement consumption (2006)
1.4 billion
Æ0%
4.7 billion m3 in the world

Average unit price of concrete (m3) in Japan = 10,000 (JPY)Æ 47 trillion JPY in the world (21 trillion JPY in China)´ Europe´ America (North/South America)´ Asia (more than 50%)

How about “Model Codes” ?
´ Europe : Euro codes´ America : ACI codes´ Asia : did not have one

year
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Billion ton 0.94 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.99 1.02
1 1.03 1.07 1.08 1.13 1.17 1.22 1.27 1.4´ International big projects´ International big projects« There are many players« There are many players

Owner

Common language =Owner
Designer
Commonmodel
codes
Cannot Asia use other model codes?

Designer

ProjectmanagerArchitect

Inspector

Contractor

Creates confusing and misunderstanding

Project

Architect
Inappropriatenessin codes in Europe
manager andNorth America (due to difference in material
quality, climate, technological level andeconomicalInspector
level)
Contractor

Creates confusing and misunderstanding´ The Model Code is
9 to help the countries to develop their own codes
9 to reduce confusion/misunderstanding in multi-

national projects´ 1992: JCI Research Committee on Concrete Model Code´ 1994: International Committee on Concrete Model Codefor Asia (ICCMC)´ 1998: First draft of

ACMC´ 1999: Second draft of ACMC

´ The Model Code should be´ 2001: ACMC 2001

9 flexible in its nature to fit the diversity in Asia

´ 2004: Vietnamese version for maintenance part of ACMC
´ 2006: ACMC 2006

´ ICCMC has« over 80 individual members« 6 representative members« 10 corporate members

from 14 countries/economies (Australia, Bangladesh,
China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Korea,
Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand,
and Vietnam)´ ICCMC

has been organizing committee meetings
regularly with local institutional hosts. In total 22
meetings have been held in 12 countries/economies.

The objectives of the Committee shall be to develop andmaintain a concrete model code for Asia and promote cooperation and understanding among countries in the AsiaPacific region through´initiationand support of collaborative research activities relating tovarious aspects of concrete, and through synthesis of findings of suchresearch;´disseminationof research results and experience of development
activities by way of publications, symposia, workshops and/or seminars;´updating and revising the model code, and through development of new

knowledge to meet the needs of changing time;´interaction with the members and keeping them aware of the activities of

the Committee and revisions and updates of the model code.

3 Parts:

Clear description of the required performance of astructure (in such a way that the owners and users of thestructure, who are likely to be non-engineers, canunderstand)

No specification on how to satisfy the required performanceor how to prove that the required performance is satisfied,
which means that you can choose any method if proved tobe appropriate“Structural design”“Materials and construction”“Maintenance”
Scope:All kinds of concrete structures (plain concrete,
reinforced concrete, prestressed concrete, andcomposite structures with concrete)
2 Features:

Performance-based concept
Multi-level code document structure

Best way
to assure easy understanding among people withdifferent backgroundto accommodate the diversity in technological andeconomical level

Common CodeLevel 1Document

Level 1

Part I DesignPart II Materials
and Construction

Part III
Maintenance

Level 2Document

Level 2Document

Level 2Document

Level 3Documents

Level 3Documents

Level 3Documents

Local/Specific Code

1. Introduction
1.1 Scope
1.2 Document Organization
1.3 General principles
1.4 Performance Requirements
1.5 Materials

2. General principles for design
2.1 Scope
2.2 Actions
2.3 Analysis
2.4 Verification and Evaluation

CommonCodeDocument
The
common Level
1 document
specifies the general principles andframework for the performance based design of concrete structures
as well as for their construction and maintenance.
Part II Materials
Part IIIPart I Design
The Level 2 document servers
as an operational andpractical modeland Construction
Maintenancecode with specifications for the required performance. To allow for
Level 2 in design, construction
Level 2
Level 2practices
the differences
and maintenance
Document
amongDocument
different countries, national
standards, codesDocumentof practice ordesign guidelines when fully developed may be simpler or moredetailed than this model code.
Level3 3document includes
Level
3
Level 3
The Level
exampleof design, construction
andDocuments
Documents
Documents
maintenance guidelines confirming to the Level 1 and Level 3
documents.

Local/Specific Code

4. General principles formaintenance
4.1 General
4.2 Basis of maintenance
4.3 Inspection
4.4 Deterioration mechanisms
and prediction
4.5 Evaluation and decision
making
4.6 Remedial action
4.7 Records

3. General principles for construction
3.1 General
3.2 Workmanship3.3 Quality control and assurance

ACMC 2006 - Level 3 document, "Design for Fire Actions - Guidelines forthe Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings against Fire Actions

Introduction
4. General principles for
1. 1.
INTRODUCTION
Scope
1.11.1Scope
maintenance
Document
Organization
This1.2
model
code specifies
the general principles
forGeneral
the verification and evaluation
4.1
1.3 performance
General principlesof theof all types of concrete structures
as the structural
4.2 Basis asof wellmaintenanceand1.4
nonstructuralcomponents
thereof, under4.3
variousmechanical actions andPerformance
Requirements
Inspection
environmental
effects. The code incorporates the concept of performance based
1.5 Materials
4.4 Deterioration mechanisms
design using limit state design methodology. It is applicable to the design,and prediction
2.
Generaldesign structures.
construction andprinciples
maintenance forof concrete
4.5 Evaluation and decision
2.1 Scope・・・
making for the performance of
Actions
This2.2code
provides a set of minimum requirements
4.6 measures
Remedialofaction
construction
materials, standard for workmanship,
quality control and
2.3 Analysis
Records
appropriate
constructionthat must be4.7
compliedwith on site in order to
2.4 Verification
andrecords
Evaluation
meet the design requirements for strengths, safety serviceability and durability ofGeneral principles for construction
the3.structure.
3.1 General

WorkmanshipAlso3.2
provided
are guidelines that could be adopted in countries of Asia and thePacific
in theirattempts
to establish relevant national codes.
3.3 region
Qualitycontrol
and assurance

ISO/TC 71 (Concrete, Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete) is atechnical committee established to deal with all kinds of ISO documents
related to concrete. There are six subcommittees under TC 71.

ACMC 2001 - Level 3 document, "Materials and Construction - Guidelines
for materials and construction based on Japanese Standard Specifications
ACMC 2001 - Level 3 document, "Design for Seismic Action - An example
of seismic performance examination for RC building designed according to
the Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) Guidelines
Ministry of Construction Vietnam approved Vietnam National Standard
TCXDVN 318: 2004- "Concrete and Concrete Reinforced Structures - Guide
to Maintenance" which was prepared based on ACMC 2001
ACMC 2001 - Level 3 document, "Maintenance for Chloride Attach Guidelines for maintenance and rehabilitation of concrete structures
against chloride induced deterioration‘’SC 1 : Test methods for concrete
SC 3 : Concrete production and execution of concrete

TC71
Concrete,
RC and PC

SC 4 : Performance requirements for structural concrete
SC 5 : Simplified design for concrete structures
SC 6 : Non-traditional reinforcing materials for concreteSC 7 : Maintenance and repairs of concrete structures

ISO/TC 71 (Concrete, Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete) is atechnical committee established to deal with all kinds of ISO documents
relatedThere
subcommittees
under
TC 71. on a
In toSCconcrete.
4 thereis areansixAd-Hoc
WorkingGroup

performance-based code, which was initiated by
SC 1 : Test methods for concrete
members from ICCMC, to study how to implement
the performance-baseda regionalcode
SC 3 : Concrete concept
production andand executionof concrete
like ACMC, into the ISO system of codes.
SC 4 : by
Performancerequirements
for structuralconcrete
TC71
SC 7, proposed
the members
from
ICCMC
, is
currently chaired by Prof Ha-wong Song of Korea with
Concrete,
5 : Simplified design for concrete structures
RC theand PC
writer as SC
Secretary.
SC 7 is now drafting an umbrella code for
SC 6 : Non-traditional reinforcing materials for concrete
maintenance based on ACMC.

For Asian Countries with Own Code
9Dissemination of their technology to be international
code in Asia and ISO
9Strengthening their presence in international circle
such as ISO through collaboration among Asian countries
For Asian Countries without Own Code
9Development of national codes
9Enhancement of technological level
9Strengthening their presence in international circle

SC 7 : Maintenance and repairs of concrete structures

Acknowledgments
will be extended to
Volunteer work from limited countries
9Unfamiliarity for code drafting
9Small motivation with no direct benefit such as
research grant to individual
Difficulty in being recognized by government
9Country where codes are well established shows little
interest
9ICCMC is not a governmental body
•Financial support is still necessary for many Asian countries toparticipate international collaboration.
•Country like Japan where civil and architectural structures aredealt by different organization needs unification of codes are
preferable.

Members in
ICCMC chaired by Profs Byun & Ueda
JCI Research Committee on ACMC
chaired by Prof Hatanaka
JCI Domestic Committee on ISO/TC71
chaired by Prof Uomoto

Thank you for your attention
http://www.iccmc.org

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
September 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Seismic Design Specifications for Highway Bridges in Japan
G.F. Zhang1 and S. Unjoh2
1
Researcher, Bridge and Structural Technology Research Group, Public Works Research Institute,
Tsukuba, Japan
2
Chief Researcher, Bridge and Structural Technology Research Group, Public Works ResearchInstitute, Tsukuba, Japan

1

INTRODUCTION

Seismic design methods for highway bridges in Japan has been developed and improved basedon the lessons learned from the various past bitter experiences after the Great Kanto Earthquake(M7.9) in 1923. By introducing the various provisions for preventing serious damage such as thedesign method against soil liquefaction, design detailing including the unseating prevention
devices, a number of highway bridges which suffered complete collapse of superstructures was
only a few in the recent past earthquakes. However, the Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake of January
17, 1995, caused destructive damage to highway bridges. Collapse and nearly collapse of
superstructures occurred at 9 sites, and other destructive damage occurred at 16 sites [2, 3]. The
earthquake revealed that there are a number of critical issues to be revised in the seismic designand seismic strengthening of bridges. Based on the lessons learned from the Hyogo-ken-Nanbu
Earthquake, the design specifications for highway bridges were significantly revised in 1996 [3, 4,
5]. The intensive earthquake motion with a short distance from the inland earthquakes with
Magnitude 7 class as the Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake has been considered in the design.
The current version was revised based on the performance-based design code concept with thepropose to enhance the durability of bridge structures for a long-term use, as well as the inclusionof the improved knowledges on the bridge design and construction methods. The current Design
Specifications of Highway Bridges was issued by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
and Tourism on December 27, 2001. The Japan Road Association (JRA) has released it with thecommentary in March 2002. This paper summarizes the current JRA Design Specifications ofHighway Bridges, Part V: Seismic Design, issued in March 2002.

2

PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN SPECIFICATIONSThe JRA Design Specifications has been revised based on the Performance-based design code
concept for the purpose to respond the international harmonization of design codes and theflexible employment of new structures and new construction methods. The performance-based
design code concept is that the necessary performance requirements and the verification policies
are clearly specified. The JRA specifications are employed the style to specify both therequirements and the acceptable solutions including the detailed performance verification methods
which are based on the existing design specifications including the design methods and the design
details. For example, the analysis method to evaluate the response against the loads is placed as
one of the verification methods or acceptable solutions. Therefore, designer can propose newideas or select other design methods with the necessary verification.
The most important issue of the performance-based design code concept is the clear
specifications of the requirements, which the designers are allowed to select other methods, andthe acceptable solutions, which the designers can select other methods with the necessary
verification. In the JRA specifications, they are clearly specified including the detailed
expressions. In future, the acceptable solutions will be increased and widened with the increase of
the verification of new ideas on the materials, structures and construction methods.

The code structure of the Part V: Seismic Deign is as shown in Fig. 1. The static and dynamic
verification methods of the seismic performance as well as the evaluation methods of the strengthand ductility capacity of the bridge members are placed as the verification methods and theacceptable solutions, which can be modified by the designers with the necessary verifications.

Figure 1. Code Structure of JRA Design Specifications, Part V: Seismic Design

Table 1 Seismic Performance Matrix
Type of Design Ground Motions
Level1 Earthquake:
Ground Motions with High Probability to Occur
Interplate Earthquake
Level 2 Earthquake:(Type-I)
Ground Motions with Low
Inland Earthquake
Probability to Occur(Type-II)

3

Standard Bridges(Type-A)

Important Bridges(Type-B)

SPL 1: Prevent Damage
SPL 3:
Prevent Critical
DamageSPL 2:
Limited Damage
for Function
RecoveryBASIC PRINCIPLES OF SEISMIC DESIGN

Table l shows the performance matrix including the design earthquake ground motion and the
Seismic Performance Level (SPL) provided in the revised JRA Seismic Design Specifications in
2002. There is no revision on this basic principle from the 1996 Version.
The two level ground motion as the moderate ground motions induced in the earthquakes withhigh probability to occur (Level 1 Earthquake) and the intensive ground motions induced in theearthquakes with low probability to occur (Level 2 Earthquake).
The Level 1 Earthquake provides the ground motions induced by the moderate earthquakes andthe ground motion considered in the elastic design method in the past for a long time is employed.
For the Level 2 Earthquake, two types of ground motions are considered. One is the groundmotions which is induced in the interplate-type earthquakes with the magnitude of around 8. The
ground motion at Tokyo in the 1923 Kanto Earthquake is a typical target of this type of groundmotion. The other is the ground motion developed in earthquakes with magnitude of around 7 atvery short distance. The ground motion at Kobe during the Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake is atypical target of this type of ground motion. The former and the latter are named as Type-I and
Type-II ground motions, respectively. The recurrence period of the Type-II ground motion may belonger than that of the Type-I ground motion, although the estimation is very difficult.
In the 2002 revision, the design ground motions are named as Level 1 Earthquake and Level 2
Earthquake. One more important revision on the design earthquake ground motion is that the sitespecific design ground motions shall be considered if the ground motion can be appropriately
estimated based on the informations of the earthquake including past history and the location anddetailed condition of the active faults, ground conditions including the condition from the faults tothe construction sites. To determine the site-specific design ground motion, it is required to havethe necessary and accurate informations of the earthquake ground motions and ground conditions
as well as the verified evaluation methodology of the fault-induced ground motions. However, thearea to get such detailed informations in Japan is very limited so far. Therefore, the continuous
investigation and research on this issue as well as the reflection on the practical design of highway
bridges is expected.
Table 2 Key Issues of Seismic PerformanceSPL
SPL 1:
Prevent Damage
SPL 2:
Limited Damage
for Function Recovery
SPL 3:
Prevent Critical
Damage4

SafetyFunctionability

Safety against
Unseating ofSuperstructure
Safety against
Unseating ofSuperstructure
Safety against
Unseating ofSuperstructure

Same Function
as Before
Earthquake
Early Function
Recovery can be
Made-Repairability
Short TermLong Term
No Need of Repair
Simple Repair
for Function
Recovery
Function Recovery
Relatively Easy
can be Made by
Permanent Repair
Temporary Repair
Work can be Made--

GROUND MOTION AND SESIMIC PERFORMANCE LEVEL

The seismic design of bridges is according to the performance matrix as shown in Table 1. The
bridges are categorized into two groups depending on their importances; standard bridges(Type-A bridges) and important bridges (Type-B bridges). Seismic Performance Level (SPL)
depends on the importance of bridges. For the moderate ground motions induced in theearthquakes with high probability to occur, both A and B bridges shall behave in an elastic
manner without essential structural damage (SPL 1). For the extreme ground motions induced in
the earthquakes with low probability to occur, the Type-A bridges shall prevent critical failure(SPL 3), while the Type-B bridges shall perform with limited damage (SPL 2) .
The SPLs 1 to 3 are based on the viewpoints of "Safety", "Functionability" and "Repairability"
during and after the earthquakes. Table 2 shows the basic concept of these three viewpoints of the
SPL.

5

VERIFICATION OF SEISMIC PERFORMANCE

5.1
Seismic Performance Level and Limit States
As mentioned in the above, the seismic performance is specified clearly. It is necessary to
determine and select the limit states of highway bridges corresponding to these seismic
performance levels to attain the necessary performance in the design procedure of highway
bridges.
In the 2002 revision, the determination principles of the limit state to attain the necessary
seismic performance are clearly specified. For example, the basic principles to determine the limitstate for SPL 2 is: 1) the plastic hinges shall be developed at the expected portions and thecapacity of plastic hinges shall be determined so that the damaged members can be repaired
relatively easily and quickly without replacement of main members, 2) the plastic hinges shall be
developed at the portions with appropriate energy absorption and with high repairability, 3)
considering the structural conditions, the members with plastic hinges shall be combined
appropriately and the limit states of members with plastic hinges shall be determined
appropriately. Based on the basic concept, the combinations of members with plastic hinges andthe limit states of members for ordinary bridge structures are shown in the commentary.
Table 3 Applicable Verification Methods of Seismic Performance Dependingon Earthquake Response Characteristics of Bridge Structures
Dynamic
Characteristics
SPL to be
Verified
SPL 1
SPL 2/SPL 3
Example ofBridges

Bridges
Bridges with Multi Plastic
withHinges and without
SimpleVerification of Applicability
Behaviorof Energy Constant Rule
Static Verification
StaticVerification Dynamic Verification
Other
1) Bridge with Rubber
BridgesBearings to Distribute
Inertia Force ofSuperstructure2) Seismically Isolated
Bridge3) Rigid Frame Bridges
4) Bridges with Steel Columns

Bridges with Limited Application of
Static Analysis
With Multi Mode Bridges with
Response
Complicated Behavior
Dynamic
Dynamic
Verification
Verification
1) Bridge with
1) Cable-stayed
Long Natural
Bridges
Period2) Suspension2) Bridge with
BridgesHigh Piers
3) Arch Bridges
4) Curved Bridges

5.2
Verification Methods
It is the fundamental policy of the verification of seismic performance that the response of thebridge structures against design earthquake ground motions does not exceed the determined limit
states. Table 3 shows the applicable verification methods of seismic performance used. In theseismic design of highway bridges, it is important to increase the strength and the ductility
capacity to appropriately resist the intensive earthquakes. The verification methods are based on
the static analysis and dynamic analysis. In the 1996 design specifications, the lateral force
coefficient methods with elastic design, ductility design methods and dynamic analysis were
specified and these design methods had to be selected based on the structural conditions ofbridges. The basic concept is the same as 1996 one but the verification methods are rearranged to
the verification methods based on static and dynamic analyses.
The static verification methods including the lateral force design method and the ductility
design method are applied for the bridges with simple behavior with predominant single mode
during the earthquakes. The dynamic verification method is applied for the bridges withcomplicated behavior, in such case the applicability of the static verification methods is restricted.
In the 1996 design specifications, for the bridges with complicated behavior both the static anddynamic analyses had to be applied and satisfied. In the 2002 one, the applicability of the
dynamic analysis is widened and the dynamic verification method is expected to be used mainlywith appropriate design consideration.
5.3
Major Revisions of the Verification Methods of Seismic Performance(1) Verification of Abutment-Foundation on Liquefiable Ground against Level 2 Earthquake
In the 1996 design specifications, the performance of the abutment-foundations was not verified
in detail. This is because 1) the serious damages to abutment-foundations were not found in thepast earthquakes when the soil liquefaction was not developed, 2) abutment-foundation is affectedby the backfill soils during earthquakes and the effect of the inertia force of abutment itself isrelatively small comparing with the pier-foundations, 3) since abutments generally resist against
back-fill earth pressure, the abutment-foundations tend to develop displacement to the direction of

the earth pressure that is to the center of bridges, then it is generally low probability to have theunseating of superstructures.
On the other hand, recently, the dynamic earth pressure against Level 2 Earthquake based on
the modified Mononobe-Okabe theory has been proposed and the behavior of the abutmentfoundations can be evaluated during the Level 2 earthquakes. Based on investigations using themodified Mononobe-Okabe theory, it is shown that the abutment-foundations designed according
to the Level 1 Earthquake generally satisfy the performance requirement during the Level 2
Earthquake. Therefore, based on these results, the performance of the abutment-foundations only
on the liquefiable ground shall be verified in order to give the necessary strength to thefoundations and to limit the excessive displacement even if the nonlinear behavior is expected in
the abutment-foundations.
(2) Verification of Strength and Ductility of Steel Column
In the 1996 design specifications, the concrete infilled steel columns was designed according to
the static ductility design methods using the response evaluation based on the energy equal theory.
The force-displacement relation was based on the experimental data of steel columns. On theother hand, steel columns without infilled concrete was designed based on the dynamic analysis
because the applicability of the static response evaluation was not verified.
In the 2002 design specifications, new and more appropriate force-displacement relation models
for steel columns with and without infilled concrete are proposed based on the experimental dataof steel columns which has been made before and after the last 1996 revision. Using these newmodels, the seismic performance is verified based on the dynamic analysis.
(3) Verification of Strength and Ductility of Superstructure
Generally, the seismic design of superstructures is not critical except the portion around thebearing supports which are the connection between superstructure and substructures. However,the seismic design sometimes becomes critical in the design of rigid frame bridges and archbridges in the longitudinal direction, and in the design of bridges with relatively long spans to thebridge width in the transverse direction.
The nonlinear behavior of superstructures against cyclic loading is investigated in the recent
research. Therefore, the verification method of the limited nonlinear performance for thesuperstructures is newly specified with the assumption of energy absorption at the plastic hinges
in the columns.

6

CONCLUDING REMARKSThis paper presented an outline of the current JRA Seismic Design Specifications of Highway
Bridges issued in 2002. Based on the lessons learned from the Hyogo-ken-Nanbu Earthquake in
1995, the "Part V: Seismic Design" of the "JRA Design Specifications of Highway Bridges" wastotally revised in 1996, and the design procedure moved from the traditional Seismic Coefficient
Method to the Ductility Design Method. Major point of the revision was the introduction of
explicit two-level seismic design methods. In the 2002 revision, the target point of the revision is
to be based on the performance-based design code concept and to enhance the durability of bridge
structures for a long-term use, as well as the inclusion of the improved knowledges on the bridge
design and construction methods. It is expected to have the circumstances to employ the newideas on the materials, structures and constructions methods to construct safer, more durable andmore cost-effective bridges in the future.

REFERENCES
1) Japan Road Association: Design Specifications of Highway Bridges, Part I Common Part, Part
II Steel Bridges, Part III Concrete Bridges, Part IV Foundations, and Part V Seismic Design,
20022) Ministry of Construction: Report on the Damage of Highway Bridges by the Hyogo-ken Nanbu
Earthquake, Committee for Investigation on the Damage of Highway Bridges Caused by the
Hyogo-ken Nanbu Earthquake, 1995
3) Japan Road Association: Design Specifications of Highway Bridges, Part I Common Part, Part
II Steel Bridges, Part III Concrete Bridges, Part IV Foundations, and Part V Seismic Design,
19964) Kawashima, K.: Impact of Hanshin/Awaji Earthquake on Seismic Design and Seismic
Strengthening of Highway Bridges, Report No. TIT/EERG 95-2, Tokyo Institute ofTechnology, 1995
5) Kawashima, K. et. al.: 1996 Design Specifications for Highway Bridges, 29th UJNR Joint
Panel Meeting, May 1996

APPENDIX
2002 JRA Design Specifications for Highway Bridges, Part V: Seismic Design
Table of Contents
1. General
1.1 Scope
1.2 Definition of Terms
2. Basic Principle of Seismic design
2.1 Policy of Seismic Design
2.2 Basic Principles of Seismic Design
2.3 Definition of Importance of Highway Bridges
3. Loads to be considered in Seismic Design
3.1 Loads to be considered in Seismic Design and the
Combinations
3.2 Effects of Earthquake
4. Design Earthquake Ground Motion
4.1 General
4.2 Level 1 Earthquake
4.3 Level 2 Earthquake
4.4 Modification Factor of Zone
4.5 Category of Ground Conditions
4.6 Ground Level to be considered in Seismic Design
5. Verification of Seismic Performance
5.1 General
5.2 Limit State for Seismic Performance Level (SPL) 1
5.3 Limit State for Seismic Performance Level (SPL) 2
5.4 Limit State for Seismic Performance Level (SPL) 3
5.5 Basic Principles to verify Seismic Performances
5.6 Countermeasures for Preventing Unseating ofSuperstructure
6. Verification Methods of Seismic Performance basedon Static Analysis
6.1 General
6.2 Evaluation of Loads for Static Analysis
6.3 Verification of Seismic Performance for Level 1
Earthquake
6.4 Verification of Seismic Performance for Level 2
Earthquake
7. Verification Methods of Seismic Performance basedon Dynamic Analysis
7.1 General
7.2 Earthquake Ground Motion for Dynamic Analysis
7.3 Analytical Model and Analysis Methods
7.4 Verification of Seismic Performance
8.
Effect of Unstable Ground Condition during
Earthquake
8.1 General
8.2 Design Soil Coefficient of Soft Soil and Liquefiable
Sandy Soils
8.3
Effect of Lateral Spreading induced by Soil
Liquefaction and the Design Methods
9. Verification of Seismic Performance of SeismicallyIsolated Bridges
9.1 General
9.2 Verification of Seismic Performance
9.3 Design Model of Isolators
9.4 Basic Requirements for Isolators
9.5 Other Structures for reducing Effects of Earthquake
10. Reinforced Concrete Columns
10.1 General
10.2
Evaluation of Damage Mode, Strength andDuctility Capacity
10.3 Evaluation of Strength and Displacement
10.4 Stress-Strain Relation of Concrete
10.5 Shear Strength
10.6 Design Details to increase Ductility Performance

10.7 Termination of Longitudinal Reinforcement at
Mid-Height
10.8 Strength and Ductility Capacity of Reinforced
Concrete Two Column Bents
10.9 Effect of Eccentric Loading of Superstructure
11. Steel Columns
11.1 General
11.2 Verification of Seismic Performance of Steel
Columns by Dynamic Analysis
11.3 Design Details
11.4 Design of Anchor of Columns
12. Pier-Foundation
12.1 General
12.2 Strength, Reaction of Soils and Displacement ofPier-Foundation
12.3 Yield of Pier-Foundation
12.4 Ductility Response of Pier-Foundations whenFoundation behaves in Nonlinear Region
12.5 Ductility and Displacement Capacity of PierFoundation
12.6 Design of Members of Pier-Foundation
13. Abutment-Foundation on Liquefiable Ground13.1 General
13.2 Design Seismic Force for Abutment-Foundation
13.3 Ductility Response of Abutment-Foundation
13.4 Ductility Capacity of Abutment-Foundation
13.5 Design of Members of Abutment-Foundation
14. Superstructure and Deck End Structure
14.1 General
14.2 Steel Superstructure
14.3 Concrete Superstructure
14.4 Deck End Structure
15. Bearing Support
15.1 General
15.2 Design Seismic Force for Bearing Support
15.3 Design of Bearing Supports
15.4 Structural Details of Bearing Support
15.5 Stopper for Excessive Displacement
16. Unseating Prevention Systems
16.1 General
16.2 Seat Length
16.3 Unseating Prevention Structure
16.4 Settlement Prevention Structure
16.5 Unseating Prevention Structure in Transverse
Direction
Appendix : References
1. References on Earthquake and Active Fault
2. References on Design Earthquake Ground Motion
3. References on Ductility Design Method
4. References on Dynamic Earth Pressure and Dynamic
Water Pressure for Level 2 Earthquake
5. References on Dynamic Analysis
6. References on Liquefaction Evaluation
7. References on Lateral Spreading induced by
Liquefaction and the Design Method
8. References on Strength and Ductility Characteristics
of Reinforced Concrete Columns
9. References on Strength and Ductility Characteristicsof Steel Columns
10. References on Strength and Ductility Characteristicsof Prestressed Concrete Superstructures

Current Design Codes for Highway Bridges

SEISMIC DESIGN SPECIFICATIONSFOR HIGHWAY BRIDGESIN JAPAN

Specifications for Highway Bridges-2002 VersionIssued by Japan Road Association (JRA) Part I: Common
 Part II: Steel Bridges
 Part III: Concrete Bridges
 Part IV: Substructures

Guangfeng ZHANG, Dr. Eng.

 Part V: Seismic Design

Public Works Research InstituteSep. 11, 2008
Specifications for highway bridges with a span length of 200 m or less
ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 2

Current Seismic Design Code

Performance-Based Design Code Structure (Pyramid)

2002 Seismic Design Specifications for
Highway Bridges

Objectivesof CodesBasic Principles of Seismic Design
Mandatedrequirements

Importance, Seismic performance levels,
Performance matrix

Major Revisions from the previous version(1996):
 Performance-Based Design Code Concept

Performance Requirements
Loads, Design ground motions,
Limit states for seismic performance levels,
Principles of performance verification

 Enhance Long-Term Durability
Verification Methods and Acceptable Solutions
 Inclusion of Improved Knowledge on Bridge

Design and Construction Methods

Verification methods (Static and dynamic verifications)
Effect of Soil Liquefaction, Seismic Isolation Design,
Evaluation of limit states of members(Columns, Bearings, Foundations and superstructure)
Unseating prevention systems

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 3

Requirements

Methods to satisfy
requirements(Can be modified or
may be selected withnecessary verifications)

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 4

Importance of Bridges
 Importance of Bridges
 Design Earthquake Ground

Motions

Class

Definitions

 Seismic Performance Levels

and Limited States

Mandated Selection of Members for

Requirements

Plastic Hinges
 Seismic Performance Matrix

Class A bridges

Bridges other than Class B bridge

Class B bridges

z Bridges of National expressways, urban
expressways, designated city expressways,
Honsyu-Shikoku highways, and general national
highways Selection of Verification

Methods
Methods to Satisfy Requirements

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 5

z Double-section bridges and overbridges ofprefecture highways and municipal roads, and otherbridges, highway viaducts, etc., especially importantin view of regional disaster prevention plans, traffic
strategy. etc.

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 6

Design Earthquake Ground Motions

Design Earthquake Ground Motions - Spectra
Ground Type I
Ground Type II
Ground Type III

Two-Level Design Concept
Level 1 Earthquake Ground Motion
Earthquake ground motion with high probability of occurrence forthe bridge service life (for Elastic Design)
Level 2 Earthquake Ground Motion
Earthquake ground motion by strong earthquake with low probabilityof occurrence for the bridge service life (for Ductility Design)
Type I : Interplate-type Earthquake (e.g. Kanto Earthquake)
Type II : Inland-type Earthquake(e.g. Kobe Earthquake)
MYG002-NS

0
-500
-1000

JR TAKATORI-NS

1000

500

acc. (gal)acc. (gal)

1000

0

10

20

30
Time(sec)

40

50

60

500
0
-500

-1000

0

Type I: Long Duration

10

20

30
Time(sec)

40

50

60

Level 1
Max: 0.2-0.3

Type II: Short Duration, Strong Pulses

Level 2, Type I
Max: 0.7-1.0

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 7

Level 2, Type II
Max: 1.5-2.0

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 8

Seismic Performance Levels and Limit States

Principles in Selection of Members for Energy Absorption

SPL: Seismic Performance Level

Elastic
Limit

Repairable
Limit

Ductility
Capacity Limit

SPL 3:
Prevent Critical Damage
Performance to prevent criticaldamageSPL 1:
Prevent Damage
Performance to keepsound function of thebridges after
earthquake

SPL 2:
Limited Damage for
Function Recovery
Performance to assure
early-recovery of bridgefunction after earthquakeby limiting damage

Reliable Energy Absorption
No Significant Effect on Bridge Stability
 Repairable Damage and Easy to Repair (Repairability) Possibility to Maintain Traffic Function after Damage (Functionability)


ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 9

Example for Selection of Limit States (SPL 2)

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 10

Seismic Performance Matrix

General Continuous Multi-Span Bridge：Repairable Limit：Limited Nonlinear Behavior：Elastic Limit
Level 1 EQ.

Type-A

Type-B(Standard Bridge)(Important Bridge)

SPL 1:High Probability to Occur

Keeping Sound Functions of Bridges

Type I EQ.
Level 2 EQ.

Interplate EQ.

Low Probability
to OccurType II EQ.

SPL 3:SPL 2:No Critical

Limited Damage forDamageFunction Recovery

Inland EQ.

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 11

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 12

Selection of Verification Methods

Bridges
Bridges with multi plastic Bridges with
with simply hinges and without
multi mode
behavior
applicability of energy
response
constant rule
(1)
(2)
(3)

Verification Methods and Acceptable Solutions

Bridges withcomplicatedbehavior(4)

Mandated

StaticSPL 1
verification

Staticverification

Dynamic
verification

Dynamic
verification

Requirements

SPL 2 Static
SPL 3 verification

Dynamic
verification

Dynamic
verification

Dynamic
verification

Example Othersof
Bridges

Bridges with rubber
 Bridges withbearings
long natural
Seismically isolated
periodbridges Rigid-frame bridges
 Bridges with
 Bridges with steel columns
high piers

Cable-stayed
bridges
Suspension
bridges Arch bridges
 Curved bridges









Methods to Satisfy Requirements

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 13

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 14

Verification Methods and Acceptable Solutions

Evaluation of the Limit State of RC Columns

ContentsEffect of Soil Liquefaction

Seismic Isolation DesignEvaluation of the Limit State of Members
RC Columns
Steel Columns
Pier Foundations
Abutment Foundations
SuperstructureEvaluation of Failure Mode, Lateral Strength and Ductility
CapacityCalculation of Lateral Strength and Displacement, Shear
StrengthStress-Strain Curve of Concrete Considering the Lateral
Confinement and Earthquake TypeStructural Details for Improving Ductility Performance

Verification Methods (Static and Dynamic Verfications)

Unseating Prevention Systems
ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 15

Unseating Prevention System

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 16

Concluding Remarks
Performance-Based Design Code

Items

ExamplesSeating Length
SE

Mandated
Requirements

Unseating Prevention
Structure

Methods to Satisfy
Requirements

Structure for Protecting
Superstructure from
Subsidence

Can be modified or may
be selected withnecessary verifications

 Performance requirements are clearly specified
 Existing design methods are specified as verification methods andexamples of acceptable solutions
Designers have more freedom in selecting design method

Excessive Displacement
Stopper
ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 17

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 18

The End
Collapsed Matsurube Bridge in the Iwate-Miyagi Inland Earthquake 2008

Thank You for Your Kind Attention
ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region 19

ACECC 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
September 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Necessity of Design Codes for Cambodia
VONG Seng
Vice President, Cambodian Association of Civil Engineers, Cambodia
Lecturer, Institute of Technology of Cambodia, Cambodia
MOM Mony
President, Cambodian Association of Civil Engineers, Cambodia
Managing Director, Mony Engineering Consultants Ltd, Cambodia

1

INTRODUCTION

The best opportunity for Cambodia to make her own design codes is to follow the activities of
the harmonization of design codes in the Asian Region and to produce her own national
application documents.
This paper presents the current use of different design codes in Cambodia and the problem anddifficulties of using different design codes. The objective of this paper is to present the necessityof design codes for Cambodia with the consideration of local conditions such as materials, climate,skilled labour, equipments and construction method.

2

CAMBODIAN SITUATION

2.1
General situation
Cambodia is a country situated in the Southeast Asia and surrounded by Laos, Vietnam, Thailand
and gulf of Siam. It has a saucer-shaped with gently rolling alluvial plain drained by the MekongRiver and shut off by mountain ranges which the Dangrek Mountains formed the frontier withThailand in the northwest and the Cardamom Mountains and the Elephant Range are in thesouthwest. About half of the land is tropical forest. There are many rivers to collect the waterfrom high land to the plain. In the rainy season the water from the high land and Mekong Riverflows into a big reservoir of Tonle Sap Lake.
The modernized construction including buildings and road network development was started in
Cambodia before 1960s. However, all most all of these constructions had been damaged by thecivil war that suffered the country about 20 years from 1970 to until end of 1980s. After finishedthe civil war, rehabilitation and redevelopment of buildings and infrastructures have been
aggressively carried out by people and the new government.

Figure1.a heavy truck caused the collapseof a bridge on National Road 7
on May 14, 2004

Figure2.the collapse of a bridge on the roadfrom Siem Reap to Bantey Srey temple
on April 10, 2004

The rehabilitation and maintenance of the road networks is now most critical and urgent
requirement for the country. The large numbers of bridges along the national roads do not copewith the existing traffic loads as they were design to cater lower loads than the prevailing one.
There are many cases of bridge collapse due to overloading and/or due to poor structuraldesign. In addition, there were no enough bridges to provide access to all part of the country
throughout a year. As a result, large parts of the country remain isolated during rainy season.
The demands of buildings are increasing rapidly as the increasing speed of population (10.7
million in 1993 and 14.0 million in 2006) and the economic growth (GDP growth rate: 13.4% in
2005, 10.0% in 2004) in which construction increased 20.1% in 2005 due to political stability andthe development plan of new government. Based on the knowledge of the authors, most buildings
constructions are not in good quality.

Figure 3. Per capita GDP in US$ in current and constant prices 1993-2005
2.2
ClimateCambodia has a tropical monsoon climate, with the wet southwest monsoon occurring between
November and April and the dry northeast monsoon the remainder of the year. Temperatures in
Cambodia are fairly uniform throughout the Tonle Sap Basin area, with only small variations fromthe average annual mean of around 25°C. The maximum mean is about 28°C; the minimum mean,
about 22°C. Maximum temperatures of higher than 32°C, however, are common and, just before
the start of the rainy season, they may rise to more than 38°C. Minimum temperatures rarely fall
below 10°C. The relative humidity is high at night throughout the year; usually it exceeds 90
percent. During the daytime in the dry season, humidity averages about 50 percent or slightly
lower, but it may remain about 60 percent in the rainy period.

3

DESIGN CODES USED IN CAMBODIA

The main reasons that the different design codes are used in Cambodia are explained in thefollowing paragraphs.
The rehabilitation and redevelopment of infrastructures are executing by the government with
the Official Development Assistance so call ODA from the developed countries, such as Japan,
France, Australia, USA and Germany. However, it can be observed the fundamental problem thatthose works are still not be done by local engineers and technicians. Because, all most all of
rehabilitation and reconstruction infrastructure works are carried by the contractors coming fromdonor countries themselves and they apply their own design standards and technologies to theworks. Although Cambodian design standards have already been set up under the Australian ODA
scheme, it is still not suitable for local conditions.
In case, the construction is done by local engineers, the design codes used are different among
engineers themselves because of Cambodian engineers who got the formation abroad such as inJapan, European countries and United States etc., they used the design codes of those countries,
and for Cambodian engineers who got the formation inside the country they used the design codesthat they learned from their own professors who also teach different design codes based on theirown experiences and knowledge.

For the constructions which are done by foreign investments, they used engineers from theirown country to work with local engineers by applying their own design standards.
Based on the knowledge of the authors, the popular design codes used in Cambodia are ACI,AISC /LRFD AASHTO, European Codes (EuroCode), French Codes, Russian Codes, JSCE
standards and Australian Standard.
4

PROBLEM AND DIFFICULTIESOn Cambodian market, the construction materials are imported from various countries except
some raw materials such as sand and crushed stone. In each design code, it requires the materials
with quality defined in code. Therefore it is quite difficult to find the materials to be suitable tothe design code used. It is also difficult to check the quality of materials to satisfy the designcodes used due to the lack of equipment for testing, the test condition, test method and the capableof engineers about those design codes.
The different design codes used in Cambodia are not suitable for local conditions such as
climate, materials, skilled labour, equipment, and construction method. It is high risk to use these
design codes without studying and doing research.
5

NECESSITY OF DESIGN CODES FOR CAMBODIA

For the future development of the country of Cambodia, it is important to set up a kind ofsystem that all the construction works shall be carried out by local engineers and technicians. The
design codes are necessarily required for Cambodia to ensure the quality of construction in termof economical development.
At present time with her own capability, Cambodia will not be able to develop her own designcodes without foreign assistance. However by expecting the Asian Codes will develop with theconsideration of the environment in regional area of Asia, Cambodia would be able to profit fromthese codes to make her own national application documents.

REFERENCES
A dissertation submitted to Kochi University of Technology in partial fulfillment of therequirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 2006, Vong Seng, Design of prestressed
concrete bridge girder using self-compacting concrete for Cambodian rehabilitation, Japan
National Institute of Statistics, Ministry of Planning (2006), Cambodian Statistical Yearbook 2006,
CambodiaProc. ACECC Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region (2006), Taipei,
Ueda T., Towards Harmonization of Design Codes in Asia- Structural Concrete- p101-104.
TaiwanCambodian Associationof Civil Engineers

ACECC 2nd Workshop

Content

on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region

September 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Cambodian Situation
Design Codes Used in Cambodia

THE NECESSITY OF DESIGN CODESFOR CAMBODIA
VONG Seng, MOM Mony

Problem and difficulties
Necessity of Design Codes for
Cambodia

Presented by VONG Seng

Cambodian Situationz Before 1970: Buildings, infrastructures in
Cambodia were developed

Cambodian Situation
Examples on recent bridge damages

z During 1970’s and 1980’s: almost all
constructions, infrastructures including road
networks had been destroyed by the war
z After finished the civil war (1991):
rehabilitation and redevelopment of theinfrastructures have been aggressively carriedout by new government.
z Recent years : a number of bridges werecollapsed due to overloaded vehicles and/or poor
structural design. Most building constructions are
not in good quality

Cambodian Situation
Per capita GDP in US$ in current and constantprices 1993-2005

A heavy truck caused
the collapse of a bridge
on May 14, 2004 on
National Road # 7 in
Kratie province

A bridge on the road from
Siem Reap City to Banteay
Srey temple was destroyed on
April 10, 2004 following thepassage of a convoy of heavy
trucks carrying timber.

Design Codes Used Cambodian
The main reasons of using different design codes in
Cambodia are:
- Official Development Assistance (ODA) from thedeveloped countries such as Japan, France,
Australia, USA and Germany, they use their own
standard- Population 10.7 million in 1993 and 14.0 million in 2006
- Economic growth: GDP growth rate: 13.4% in 2005 and10.0% in 2004 in which construction increased 20.1% in
2005

Although Cambodian road and bridge design
standards have already been set up under theAustralian ODA scheme, it is still not suitable
for local conditions.
- Engineers are got the formation in different designcodes- Foreign invesements on construction industry arefrom different countries

Design Codes Used Cambodian
Construction design codes used in Cambodia- ACI, AISC /LRFD AASHTO- Eurocodes- French codes- Russian codes- JSCE standard- Australian Standard- British Standard- ...

Problem and Difficulties
The different design codes used in Cambodia are notsuitable for local conditions such as
ClimateMaterials
Skilled labour
Equipment
Construction method
It is high risk to use these design codes without
studying and doing research.

Problem and Difficulties
On Cambodian market, the construction materials areimported from various countries except some raw
materials such as sand and crushed stone.
In each design code, it requires the materials withquality defined in code.
Therefore it is difficult to find the materials to besuitable to the design code used.
It is also difficult to check the quality of materials tosatisfy the design codes used due to the lack ofequipment for testing, the test condition, test method
and the capable of engineers about those design codes.

Necessity of Design Codes for Cambodia
For the future development of the country of
Cambodia, it is important to set up a kind of systemthat all the construction works shall be carried out by
local engineers and technicians. The design codes
are necessarily required for Cambodia to ensure thequality of construction in term of economicaldevelopment.
At present time with her own capability, Cambodia
will not be able to develop her own design codes
without foreign assistance. However by expecting
the Asian Codes will develop with the considerationof the environment in regional area of Asia, Cambodia
would be able to profit from these codes to make her
own national application documents.

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the Asian Region
Sep. 11, 2008, Sendai, Japan

Structural Steel Design Specifications in Thailand
Dr. Taweep Chaisomphob
Chairman, Steel Structure Committee Engineering Institute of Thailand
Department of Civil Engineering, Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology,
Thammasat University, Thailand

Topics

Structural Steel Design
Specifications in Thailand• Engineering Institute of Thailand Under H.M. the King’s
PatronageDr. Taweep Chaisomphob• Hot rolled steel building design specifications

Chairman, Steel Structure Committee
Engineering Institute of Thailand• Cold formed steel building design specifications

Department of Civil Engineering
Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology
Thammasat University• Design loads• Material standards• Remarks on Thai design standard

ACECC TC-8 2nd Workshop on Harmonization of Design Codes in the
Asian Region on September 11, 2008, at Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan

Engineering Institute of Thailand Under
H.M. the King’s Patronage

Engineering Institute of Thailand Under
H.M. the King’s Patronage
Objective

The Engineering Institute of Thailand (EIT), founded in
1943, is a sole professional association in engineering•Conduct and promote the continuing education,
research, publication in engineering.
•Promote and support engineering career.

discipline in Thailand. Currently, EIT has over twenty fourthousand members in various disciplines, including Civil,•Set up the code, specification, regulation forengineering practice.

Electrical, Mechanical, Industrial, Mining, Environmental•Provide engineering consultants.

and Chemical Engineering, etc.

•Provide engineering ethics.

Engineering Institute of Thailand Under
H.M. the King’s Patronage
EIT provides academic documents in 6 types

Hot rolled steel building
design specifications• At present, EIT standard 1020-51 for hot rolled steelbuilding follows AISC (American Institute of Steel

1.TextConstruction) design specification, entitled “Load and2. Experienced bookResistance Factor Design Specification for Structural

3. Code of practice

Steel Buildings”, which was issued in 1999.

4. Manual
5. Technical terms
6. Journal & Magazine• This AISC specification provides a limit state design
method including strength and serviceability limit states.

Hot rolled steel building
design specifications

Hot rolled steel building
design specifications

Table of content of E.I.T. Standard 1020-46

Table of content of E.I.T. Standard 1020-46

1.

General Provisions

8.

Members under Combined Forces and Tension

2.

Design Requirements

9.

Composite Members

3.

Frames and Other Structures

10. Connections, Joints, and Fasteners

4.

Tension Members

11. Concentrated Forces, Ponding, and Fatigue

5.

Column and Other Compression Members

12. Serviceability Design Considerations

6.

Beams and Other Flexural Members

13. Fabrication, Erection, and Quality Control

7.

Plate Girders

14. Evaluation of Existing Structures

Cold formed steel building
design specifications

Cold formed steel building
design specifications• EIT standard for cold formed steel building is now underdrafting, and follows AISI (American Iron and SteelInstitute) design specification, entitled “North American
Specification for the Design of Cold-formed Steel
Structural Members”, which was issued in 2007.
• This AISI specification provides an integrated treatmentof Allowable Strength Design (ASD) and Load andResistance Factor Design (LRFD) by including theappropriate resistance factors for use with LRFD, andthe appropriate safety factors for use with ASD.

Cold formed steel building
design specifications

Table of content of Draft E.I.T. Standard
1.

General provisions

2.

Elements and Properties of sections

3.

Tension members

4.

Flexural members

5.

Combined axial load and bending

Material Standard
Hot rolled steel section

Table of content of Draft E.I.T. Standard• In Thailand, steel material standard for hot rolled
6.

Structural assemblies and systems

7.

Connections and joints

8.

Tests for special cases

structural steel sections is
TIS (Thai Industrial Standard) 1227-2539•This standard follows JIS G 3192 and JIS G 3106

Material Standard

Material Standard

Hot rolled steel section in TIS 1227-2539
Steel grade and chemical component

Hot rolled steel section in TIS 1227-2539
Steel grade and material properties

Chemical Component (percent by weight)
Steel
Grade

CarbonMax.

SiliconMax.

Manganese

Phosphorus
Max.

Sulfur
Max.

Steel
Grade

Min. Yield Strength(MPa)

Ultimate
Strength(MPa)

Min. Elongation %Min. Impact
Strength(Joule)Thickness≤ 16 mm.

Thickness>16 mm.

Thickness< 5 mm.

Thickness
5 – 16 mm.

Thickness>16 mm.

SM 400245

235

400-510

23

18

22

27

SM 490325315

490-610

22

17

21

27

SM 4000.20

0.35

0.60– 1.40

0.035

0.035

SM 4900.18

0.55

1.60 max.

0.035

0.035

SM 520365355

520-640

19

15

19

27

SM 5200.20

0.55

1.60 max.

0.035

0.035

SM 570460450570-720

19

19

26

47

SM 5700.18

0.55

1.60 max.

0.035

0.035

SS 400245

235

400-510

21

17

21

-

SS 400

-

-

-

0.050

0.050

SS 490285

275

490-610

19

15

19

-

SS 490

-

-

-

0.050

0.050

SS 540400

390

540 min.

16

13

17

-

SS 5400.30-

1.60 max.

0.040

0.040

Material Standard

Material Standard

Hot rolled steel section in TIS 1227-2539
Sectional shape

Cold formed steel section• In Thailand, steel material standard for cold formed

Type

Sectional shapestructural steel sections is

Equal legAngle steel

TIS (Thai Industrial Standard) 1228-2549

Unequal leg
Channel steel•This standard follows JIS G 3350

H-section steel
I-section steel
T-section steel

Material Standard

Material Standard

Cold formed steel section in TIS 1228-2549
Steel grade and chemical component

Cold formed steel section in TIS 1228-2549
Steel grade and material properties

CarbonMax.

SiliconMax.

Manganese

Phosphorus
Max.

SulfurMax.

SSC 400

0.25

-

-

0.050

0.050

Min. Elongation %Steel gradeMin. Yield Strength(MPa)

Ultimate
Strength(MPa)

Thickness≤ 5 mm.

Thickness> 5 mm.

SSC 400

245

400-54021

17

Chemical Component (percent by weight)
Steel
Grade

Material Standard

Design Load

Cold formed steel section in TIS 1228-2549
Sectional shape• In Thailand, the design load is specified in the Building

Type

Control Act, B.E. 2522, issued by Department of Public
Works and Town & Country Planning, Thai Ministry ofSectional shape

Interior.

Equal leg
Light angle steel•

Unequal leg

This act is necessary for securing the buildings in safety

Light channel steel

and good condition, and provides various type of

Lip channel steel

regulations (procedure, area restriction, fire safety,

Light Z steel

construction safety, equipment, shape of building, etc.).

Lip Z steel
Hat steel

Design Load

Design Load

• From the Ministerial Regulation No. 6, B.E 2527, underthe Building Control Act, B.E 2522, the load factor and(2) Case of wind loads consideredload combination are given :U = 0.75(1.7D + 2.0L+ 2.0W)or(1) Case of no wind loads
U = 0.9D + 1.3W
U = 1.7D + 2.0L
where
where

W = wind load

U = required strength
D = dead load
L = live load

Design Load

Design Load

Minimum uniformly distributed live load for building designin Ministerial Regulation No. 6, B.E 2527
Type and Occupancy or Use
1. Roof

Minimum uniformly distributed live load for building
design in Ministerial Regulation No. 6, B.E 2527

Live Load (kg/m2)

Type and Occupancy or Use

Live Load (kg/m2)

30

7. (a) Market place, department store, meeting hall,theatre, restaurant, reading room in a library, and parking
area or garage.
(b) Hall, stair, hallway of commercial building,university, college or school.

400

8. (a) Warehouse, stadium, museum, factory, storageroom.
(b) Hall, stair, hallway of market place, department
store, meeting hall, theatre, restaurant and library.

500

9. Library space or garage for shelf

600

10. Parking area or garage for truck800

2. Concrete canopy or roof

100

3. Habitation, bathroom, toilet, kindergarten

150

4. Condominium, dormitory, row-houses, hotel

200

5. Office and Bank

250

6. (a) Commercial building, portion of row or row building
to be used commercially, college and school.
(b) Hall, stair and hallway of a suite, dormitory, hotel,
hospital, office, and bank.

300

Design Load
Minimum wind pressure for building design in Ministerial
Regulation No. 6, B.E 2527

Remarks on
Thai Design Standard• EIT (Engineering Institute of Thailand) steel building
design standards are based on American standards :Height (m)Wind PressurekPa (kg/m2)

AISC and AISI specifications for hot rolled steel and cold
formed steel, respectively.

0-10

0.5 (50)• There are no Thai structural steel design standards for

10-20

0.8 (80)

infrastructures such as bridges. At present, the design of

20-40

1.2 (120)>40

1.6 (160)

infrastructures adopts the standards of developed
countries, such as AASHTO specifications for steel
bridges.

Appendix
First Draft of“Glossary of Terminologies for Design Code”

Glossary of Key Terms for Structural Design Codes founded on Perfomance based Design Concept
Completed by JSCE (May 2008)
code PLATFORM

Terminology defined in 'Principles, guidelines and terminologies for structural design code drafting founded on theperformance based design concept ver.1.0 (code PLATFORM ver.1.0)', March 2003, JSCE.

ISO2394

Terminology that is defined in ISO2394 (3rd version. 1998) and should be in accordance with the definitions in andrevisions to ISO2394.

JSCE2001

Terminology defined in 'Guidelines for Performance-based Design of Civil Engineering Steel Structures', JSCE,
October 2001.

Geo-code 21

Terminology defined in 'JGS 4001-2004 Principles for Foundation Design grounded on a Performance-based Design
Concept (Geo-code 21)', completed English transration in March 2006.

MLIT2002

Terminology defined in the comprehensive design codes based on 'Bases of Design for Civil and Building Structures',
Japanese Government, Ministroy of Land, Infrastructure and Transportation, October 2002.

ISO13822

Terminology that is defined in ISO13822 (1st version. 2001) and should be in accordance with the definitions in andrevisions to ISO13822.

ACMC2006

Asian Concrete Model Code#

Category
GeneralGeneralGeneralGeneralGeneralGeneralGeneralGeneralDesign codes and design
methods

Design codes and design
methods

Design codes and design
methods

Design codes and design
methods

Reference
Definition
Organized combination of connected parts designed to provide some measure of rigidity
ISO2394
Physically distinguished part of a structure. EXAMPLES: Column, beam, plate.
ISO2394
Load-bearing elements of building or civil engineering works and the way in which these elements
ISO2394
function together.
The period that begins with the construction of a structure and ends with the discontinuance of its
Life, lifetime, life period
use and its removal for one reason or another. Life is classified into physical, functional or
JSCE2001
economic life.
Total period of time during which the planning, execution and use of a construction works takes
Life cycle
ISO2394
place. The life cycle begins with identification of needs and ends with demolition.
A characteristic of a product that is represented using a quantitative indicator. Experimental values
Qualityof quantitative indicators can be obtained in a predetermined inspection or test. One example is the JSCE2001
Charpy impact value.
Ability of a structure or structural element goes fulfill the specified requirements, including the
Reliability
ISO2394
working life, for which it has been designed.
Insufficient load-bearing capacity or inadequate serviceability of a structure or structural element. ISO2394
FailureComprehensive design codes Comprehensive design codes are that describe the basis of the design civil structures and buildings
within a country or region. It is not a code for designing individual structures, rather, it provides
common items such as a mean to specify the performance of the structures, the unification ofterminologies, the introduction of safety margins for the design specifications, the format ofGeo-code 21
verification, the standardization of the information transfer among concerned bodies, fundamental
check lists for the design, etc. It is a code on the highest level of the design code system hierarchy
that covers both Approach A and Approach B. It can be thought of as “a code for code writers,” butcontains more basic and useful information than just that required by code writers.
Basic specific design codes are codes that specify the structural performance criteria of structures
Basic specific design codes
by regulating agencies such as central government agencies/local government authorities/the
Geo-code 21
owner. It is likely that some recommendations for verification methods and acceptable methods foruse with Approach B may be provided.
Specific design codes are codes that detail the performance criteria of specific structures which
Specific design codes
may be limited to a specific use or to a certain region, etc. The specification shall be based on the
Geo-code 21
basic specific design code that is ranked above this code. Certain acceptable verification
procedures can be attached to this code
A design methodology for designing a structure exclusively to satisfy performance requirements
Performance-based design
regardless of the structural format, structural material, design procedure or construction method.
This design methodology explicitly presents the objectives of the structure and the functions toachieve the objectives, defines the performance required to provide the functions and provides the JSCE2001
functions satisfactorily by securing the performance requirements throughout the working life of
the structure. Similar terms include performance-based design, performance-expressing design andperformance-oriented design.
Term
Structure
Structural element
Structural system

See also#

Category
Design codes and design
methods

Term
Performance-based designcodes

Design codes and design
methods

Specification-based design

Design codes and design
methods

Pre-verified specification

Design codes and design
methods
Design codes and design
Design codes and design
methods

Reliability-based design

Design codes and design
methods
Design codes and design
methods
Design codes and design
methods
Design codes and design
methods
General terms on design
methodology
General terms on design
methodology
General terms on design
methodology

Target reliability level
Limit state design

Partial factors format
Partial factor design format

Material factor approach(MFA)
Resistance factor approach(RFA)
Design work life

Reference
Definition
A performance-based design is a code whose specifications on structures have not been give byprescriptive means, but by outcome performances based on the requirements of society and/or theclient or the owner.NOTE:Reference 6) defines the design method that identifies the relationshipGeo-code 21
between the level of performance required to meet the functional requirements of the structure andthe level of action used for verifying the achievement of the requirements as the performance-basedor -expressing design method.
A design methodology for designing a structure using the specified types and sizes of structural
materials, analysis procedure, etc. Many of the existing design standards are applicable to this type JSCE2001
of design.
The specification that exemplifies a “solution” that is considered to satisfy performancerequirements. It is applied in the case where no performance verification methods can be explicitly
presented. Examples include specifications for structural material and their size for which no
relationship is available to performance requirements, analysis methods that do not directly verify
the performance requirements considered valid based on the past practice and verification methods JSCE2001
using resistance estimation equations. Other terms available are pre-verified criteria and approved
design. The term pre-verified specification is used because it is more appropriate than pre-verified
criteria as the specification covers existing analysis methods or estimation equations specified invarious standards.
A design methodology that involves the stochastic verification of the probability of a structure
JSCE2001
reaching a limit state.
The level of reliability required to satisfy performance requirements
ISO13822
A design methodology that explicitly defines the limit states to be verified. In most cases, thepartial safety factor design method at level I of the reliability theory is adopted as the verification JSCE2001
format. The term partial safety factor design is therefore sometimes used to mean the limit stateCalculation format in which allowance is made for the uncertainties and variabilities assigned toISO2394
the basic variables by means of representative values, partial factors and, if relevant additive
The partial factor design format is a format in which several partial factors are applied to various
sources of uncertainties in the verification formula in order to ensure a sufficient safety margin; it Geo-code 21
is usually classified into the following two approaches.
MFA is a type of partial factor format in which partial factors are applied directly to the
Geo-code 21
characteristic values of basic variables.
RFA is a type of partial factor format in which partial factors are applied to resistances.
Geo-code 21

Assumed period for which a structure or a structural element is to be used for its intended purpose
ISO2394
without major repair being necessary.
Structural integrity (structural Ability of a structure not to be damaged by events like fire, explosions, impact or consequences ofISO2394
human errors, to an extent disproportionate of the original cause.
robustness)
Reliability class of structures Class of structures or structural elements for which a particular specified degree of reliability is
ISO2394
required.

See also#

Category
General terms on design
methodology

General terms on design
methodology
General terms on design
methodology
General terms on design
methodology

Terms on performancedescription
Terms on performancedescription
Terms on performancedescription
Terms on performancedescription
Terms on performancedescription
Terms on performance
Terms on limit state
Terms on limit state

Terms on limit state
Terms on limit state

Terms on limit state
Terms on limit state

Reference
See also
TermDefinition
Required performance matrix A matrix indicating the grade of performance that should be provided to a structure and the gradesof assumed external forces. The design engineer selects performance that should be provided to a
JSCE2001
structure from the matrix according to the significance of the structure. Reference 2) proposes
required performance matrices concerning earthquakes, fatigue and wind.
Total set of activities performed in order to find out if the reliability of a structure is acceptable orAssessment
ISO2394
not.
The verification made in the structural planning and design phases to evaluate whether the required
Pre-evaluation
performance is satisfied or not when fabricating, erecting, using, dismantling or re-using a structure JSCE2001
The verification of required performance after the fabrication and erection of a structure such as the
Post-evaluation
quality inspection during the fabrication and erection of a structure, and the inspection and
JSCE2001
investigation while the structure is in service or at the time of damage to the structure due to an
accidental external force.
The reason for building a structure expressed in general terms. The term owners/users should
Objective
code PLATFORM
preferably be used as the subject of sentences.
The performance that a structure should possess to achieve its objectives, expressed in general
Performance requirement
code PLATFORM
terms.
The performance requirement described specifically to enable performance verification.
Performance criterion
Performance criterion is defined by a combination of the limit state of the structure, action andcode PLATFORM
environmental influences and time.
The performance requirement that is essential to the achievement of the objectives of the structure.
Basic performancecode PLATFORM
It may also be regarded as the “function” of the structure.
requirement
The degree of significance of a structure that should be determined based on the benefit that the
Significance of structures
structure produces, necessity of the structure under emergency conditions and the availability ofcode PLATFORM
alternatives.
Ability of a structure or structural element to perform adequately for normal use under all expected ISO2394
Serviceability
A state beyond which the structure no longer satisfies the design performance requirements.
code PLATFORM
Limit states
A state associated with collapse, or with other forms of structural failure NOTE:This generally
Ultimate limit statecorresponds to the maximum load-carrying resistance of structure or structural element but in some ISO2394
cases to the maximum applicable strain or deformation.
A state which corresponds to conditions beyond which specified service requirements for aServiceability limit state
ISO2394
structure or structural element are no longer met.
A limit state under which a structure can be used continuously through restoration using applicable
Restorability limit statetechnologies at reasonable cost in a reasonable timeframe even in the case of damage expected to code PLATFORM
be incurred due to an assumed action. It may be regarded as one of the serviceability limit states.
A limit state which will remain permanently exceeded when the actions which caused the excess
Irreversible limit state
ISO2394
are removed.
A limit state which will not be exceeded when actions which caused the excess are removed.
Reversible limit state
ISO2394#Category
Terms on verification

Term
Verification

Terms on verification

Verification approach A

Terms on verification

Verification approach B

Design examination,accreditation and others

Design examination

Reference
See also
Definition
The determination of whether the structure satisfies the performance criteria or not. In the case oflimit state design, whether equation S ≤ R or f (S , R ) ≤ 1.0 is satisfied or not is determined where JSCE2001
S is the response value and R is the limit value.
A verification approach that imposes no restrictions on the structural verification method but
requires that the design engineer should prove that the structure satisfies the specified performance code PLATFORM
requirement and ensures an appropriate level of reliability.
A verification approach that makes verification of the structure based on the specific base designcodes or specific design codes specified by an administrative organization, local public body orcode PLATFORM
business that governs the structural performance of the structure, and according to the procedureshown in such codes e.g. a design calculation procedure.
The detailed inspection of a series of design procedures from the definition of an objective toverification made by an accredited third-party organization. Upon the passage of the examination, code PLATFORM
the third-party organization certifies the design work.
The appointment of organizations that are authorized to carry out examinations.

Design examination,
Accreditation
code PLATFORM
accreditation and others
Design examination,
The examination of a series of design procedures from the definition of an objective to verification
Certification
code PLATFORM
accreditation and others
and the issue of a certificate.
Design examination,
The satisfaction of requirements
Compliance
ISO2394accreditation and others
Terms relating to actions, action Actiona)An assembly of concentrated or distributed mechanical forces acting on a structure (direct
effects and environmental
actions).b)The cause of deformation imposed on the structure or constrained in it (indirect
ISO2394influences
action).NOTE :In some categorizations, environmental influences are regarded as an action.
Terms relating to actions, action Representative value of action A value used for the verification of a limit state NOTE:Representative values consist ofeffects and environmental
characteristic values, combination values, frequent values and quasi-permanent values, but may
ISO2394influences
also consist of other values.
Terms relating to actions, action Characteristic value of an
Principal representative value NOTE 1:It is either on a statistical basis, so that it can be consideredeffects and environmental
to have a specified probability of not being exceeded towards unfavorable values during a reference
actioninfluences
period, or on acquired experience, or on physical constraints.NOTE 2:Characteristic value :ISO2394
Representative value of parameter estimated to be most suitable to the model for predicting thelimit state that is examined in design. Characteristic values should be determined based on a theory
or acquired experience fully considering variations and the applicability of a simplified model.
Terms relating to actions, action Design values of an action, F d Value obtained by multiplying the representative value by the partial factor γF.
effects and environmental
ISO2394influences
Terms relating to actions, action Permanent actiona)Action which is likely to act continuously throughout a given reference period and for which
effects and environmental
variations in magnitude with time are small compared with the mean value.b)Action whose
ISO2394influences
variation is only in one sense and can lead to some limiting value.

#

Term
Category
Terms relating to actions, action Variable action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Accidental action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Fixed action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Free action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Static action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Dynamic action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Bounded action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Unbounded action
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Combination value
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Frequent value
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Quasi-permanent value
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Action combination
effects and environmental
influences
Terms relating to actions, action Environmental influenceeffects and environmental
influences

Reference
Definition
Action for which the variation in magnitude with time is neither negligible in relation to the meanvalue nor monotonic.
ISO2394
Action that is unlikely to occur with a significant value on a given structure over a given reference
period.NOTE:Accidental action is in most cases of short duration.
ISO2394
Action which has a fixed distribution on a structure, such as its magnitude and direction aredetermined unambiguously for the whole structure when determined at one point in the structure.

ISO2394

Action which may have an arbitrary spatial distribution over the structure within given limits.
ISO2394
Action which will not cause significant acceleration of the structure or structural elements.
ISO2394
Action which may cause significant acceleration of the structure or structural elements.
ISO2394
Action which has a limiting value which cannot be exceeded and which is exactly or approximately
known.
ISO2394
Action which has no known limiting values.
ISO2394
Value chosen, in so far as it can be fixed on statistical bases, so that the probability that the action
effect values caused by the combination will be exceeded is approximately the same as when aISO2394
single action is considered.
Value determined, in so far as it can be fixed on statistical bases, so that:・• the total time, within achosen period or time, during which is exceeded is only a small given part of the chosen period of ISO2394
time; or・• the frequency of its exceedance is limited to a given value.
Value determined, in so far as it can be fixed on statistical bases, so that the total time, within achosen period of time, during which is exceeded is of the magnitude of half period.
ISO2394
A combination of design values used for verifying the structural reliability in a limit state where
different actions are considered simultaneously. It is also referred to as load combination.
Mechanical, physical, chemical or biological influence which may cause deterioration of thematerials constituting a structure, which in turn may effect its serviceability and safety in an
unfavorable way.

code PLATFORM

ISO2394

See also#

Reference
Term
Definition
Category
Terms relating to actions, action Load
Action acting on the structure that is converted to a combination of mechanical forces loaded
effects and environmental
directly on the structure. It is input for calculating stress resultant, stress, displacement and other
MLIT2002
influences
parameters using an action model for the purpose of design.
Terms relating to actions, action Reference period
A chosen period of time which is used as a basis for assessing values of variable actions, timeeffects and environmental
independent material properties, etc.
ISO2394influences
Terms relating to actions, action Design situation
Set of physical conditions representing a certain time interval for which the design demonstrates
effects and environmental
that relevant limit states are not exceeded.
ISO2394influences
Terms relating to actions, action Persistent situation
Normal condition of use for the structure, generally related to its design working life.NOTE:
effects and environmental“Normal use” includes possible extreme loading conditions due to wind, snow, imposed loads,
ISO2394influences
earthquakes in areas of high seismicity, etc.
Terms relating to actions, action Transient situation
Provisional condition of use or exposure for the structure.EXAMPLE:During its construction oreffects and environmental
repair, which represents a time period much shorter than the design working life.
Geo-code 21
influences
Terms relating to structural
A prior specified fractile of the statistical distribution of the material property in the supply
Characteristic value of a
response, resistance, material
produced within the scope of the relevant material standard.
material property
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
A quantity usually corresponding to dimensions specified by the designer.
Characteristic value of a
response, resistance, material
geometrical quantity
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Design value of a material
Value obtained by dividing the characteristic value by a partial factor γM or, in special
response, resistance, material
property
circumstance, by direct assessment.
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Design value of a geometrical Characteristic value plus or minus a additive geometrical quantity.
response, resistance, material
quantity
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Factor which converts properties obtained from test specimens to properties corresponding to theConversion factor
response, resistance, material
assumptions made in calculation models.
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Function which converts properties obtained from test specimens to properties corresponding to theConversion function
response, resistance, material
assumptions made in calculation models.
ISO2394
properties and geometricalquantities

See also#

Category
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities

Term
Fractile value

Design value

Demand, response value S

Definition
The value of a random variable with a cumulative probability lower thanspecified.NOTE:Expressed like “x% fractile is y.”

The design value is the value obtained by multiplying a partial factor by a characteristic value inthe case of an MFA partial factor format.

Reference
MLIT2002

Geo-code 21

The physical quantity that occurs in the structure due to an external force.
JSCE2001

Capacity, limit value of
performance R

The limit value allowed for the response value. A physical quantity that is determined according to
the type of “limit state.” If the response value exceeds the limit value, the performance requirement
JSCE2001
is not satisfied.

Statistical uncertainty

Uncertainty related to the accuracy of the distribution and estimation of parameters
ISO2394

Basic variable

Primary basic variable

Part of a specified set of variables representing physical quantities which characterize actions andenvironmental influences, material properties including soil properties, and geometrical quantities.

ISO2394

Variables whose value is of primary importance to the design results.
ISO2394

Limit state function

Reliability index, βA function g of the basic variables, which characterizes a limit state when g (X 1, X 2, ...., Xn ) = 0 :g > 0 identifies with the desired state and g < 0 with the undesired state.

A substitute for the failure probability Pf, defined by β = –φ–1(pf), where・–1 is the inverse
standardized normal distribution.

ISO2394

ISO2394

See also#

TermCategory
Terms relating to structural
Reliability element
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Element reliability
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
System reliability
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structuralModelresponse, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms relating to structural
Model uncertainty
response, resistance, material
properties and geometricalquantities
Terms on performance
Assessment
assessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Rehabilitationassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Upgradingassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Damageassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Deteriorationassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Deterioration mode
assessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Inspection
assessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Investigationassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Loading test
assessment of existing structures

Reference
Definition
Numerical quantity used in the partial factors format, by which the specified degree of reliability is
assumed to be reached.
ISO2394
Reliability of a single structural element which has one single failure dominating failure mode.
ISO2394
Reliability of a structural element which has more than one relevant failure mode or the reliabilityof a system of more than one relevant structural element.

ISO2394

Simplified mathematical description or experimental set-up simulating actions, material properties,
the behavior of a structure, etc.NOTE:Models should generally take an account of decisive factors
ISO2394
and neglect the less important ones.
Related to the accuracy of models, physical or statistical.
ISO2394
Total set of activities performed in order to find out if the reliability of structure is acceptable ornot.
The improvement of the resistance of a structure to performance deterioration with time.
Efforts to enhance the mechanical performance of a structure.
Changes in condition of a structure that may have an adverse effect on its performance.
The reduction of performance and reliability of a structure with time.
A model of deterioration with time representing the performance of a structure as a function oftime.
A nondestructive test conducted in the field to determine the present state of a structure.

ISO13822
code PLATFORM
code PLATFORM

ISO13822
ISO13822
ISO13822
ISO13822

The collection of data and evaluation through inspection, data surveys, loading tests and other
ISO13822
testing.
A test conducted applying the load or imposed displacement to evaluate the behavior or properties
ISO13822
of an entire structure or part thereof or to estimate load bearing capacity.

See also#

TermCategory
Terms on performance
Maintenanceassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Monitoringassessment of existing structures
Terms on performance
Remaining working life
assessment of existing structures
Accidental action
ActionAerodynamic shape factor
Aggregate
Alkali-aggregate reaction
Analysis (Assessment)
Autogeneous shrinkage
Basic wind speed

Biological degradation
Bleeding
Carbonation

Characteristic strength
Chemical admixtures

Coarse aggregate
Damage control
Deformability

Definition
Total set of activities performed during the design working life of a structure to enable it to fulfill
the requirements for reliability.
Frequent or continuous observation or measurement of the condition of a structure or the action
applied to the structure. Monitoring generally takes place over a long period of time.
The period during which an existing structure is assumed to be maintained and placed in service.

Reference
ISO13822
ISO13822
ISO13822

Action whose chance of occurrence is very small but the intensity is very high compared to the
ACMC2006
variable actions.
Mechanical force or environmental effect to which the structure (or structural component) is
ACMC2006
subjected.
Factor to account for the effect of geometry of structure on the surface pressure due to wind.
ACMC2006
Normally inert materials such as river gravel, river sand, sea sand, crushed rock, etc. which are
ACMC2006
used as ingredients to produce concrete or mortar.
The reaction between alkali in concrete and the reactive substances in the aggregates.
ACMC2006
Acceptable methods of evaluating the performance indices or verifying the compliance of specific
ACMC2006
criteria.
Volume decrease due to loss of water in the hydration process causing negative pore pressure in
ACMC2006
concrete.
Hourly mean wind speed or 3-second peak gust wind speed with a specified probability ofexceedence, measured at 10 meters above open country terrain with few, well scattered
ACMC2006
obstructions.
The physical or chemical degradation of concrete due to the effect of organic matters
ACMC2006
such as bacteria, lichens, fungi, moss, etc.
Segregation between water and the other ingredients in concrete causing water to
ACMC2006
rise up to the surface of the freshly placed concrete.
Action caused by chemical reaction between calcium hydroxide in concrete and carbon
dioxide in the environment, resulting in a denser surface for the carbonated concrete ACMC2006
and reduction of alkalinity in the carbonated portion.
Unless otherwise stated in this code, the characteristic strength of material refers to
ACMC2006
the value of the strength below which 5% of all test results would be expected to fall.
Admixtures which are usually used in small quantities typically in the form of liquidand can be added to the concrete both at the time of mixing and before placing to
ACMC2006
improve various concrete properties such as workability, air content and durability,
etc.
Aggregate which has almost all its particles retained on a 5mm-size test sieve.
ACMC2006
A means to ensure that the limit state requirement is met for restorability or
ACMC2006
reparability of a structure.
A term expressing the ability of concrete to deform.
ACMC2006

See also#

Category

Term
Degree of deterioration

Design return period
Design life

Design wind pressure
Design wind speed

Deterioration factor
Deterioration index
Deterioration prediction
Drag
Drying shrinkage
Durability design
Durability grade

Durability limit state
Durability prediction
Dynamic approach
Dynamic response factor
Early age state
Environmental actions

Equivalent static approach

Reference
Definition
The extent to which the performance of a structure is degraded or the extent to which
ACMC2006
the deterioration has progressed from the time of construction, as a result of its
exposure to the environment.
Inverse of the annual probability of exceedence.
ACMC2006
Assumed period for which the structure is to be used satisfactorily for its intended
ACMC2006
purpose or function with anticipated maintenance but without substantial repair
being necessary.
Potential pressure available from the kinetic energy of the design wind speed.
ACMC2006
Wind speed for use in design. It is derived from regional basic wind speed taking into
consideration the wind direction, topography, height, importance of structure, design ACMC2006
life, size and shape of the structure.
The factor affecting the deterioration process.
ACMC2006
An index selected for estimating and evaluating the extent of the deterioration
ACMC2006
process.
Prediction of the future rate of deterioration of a structure based on results of
ACMC2006
inspection and relevant records made during the design and construction stages.
Force acting in the direction of the wind stream.
ACMC2006
Volume decrease due to loss of moisture from concrete in the hardened state which is
ACMC2006
usually serious in hot and dry environment.
Design to ensure that the structure can maintain its required functions during its
ACMC2006
service life under environmental actions.
Ｔｈｅ ｅｘｔｅｎｔ ｏｆ ｄｕｒａｂｉｌｉｔｙ ｔｏ ｗｈｉｃｈ ｔｈｅ ｓｔｒｕｃｔｕｒｅ ｓｈａｌｌ ｂｅ ｍａｉｎｔａｉｎｅｄ ｉｎ ｏｒｄ
ｅｒ ｔｏ ｓａｔｉｓｆｙ ｔｈｅ ｒｅｑｕｉｒｅｄ ｐｅｒｆｏｒｍａｎｃｅ ｄｕｒｉｎｇ ｉｔｓ ｄｅｓｉｇｎ ｌｉｆｅ. This affects the ACMC2006
degree and frequency of the remedial actions to be carried out during that life.
The maximum degree of deterioration allowed for the structure during its design life. ACMC2006
Prediction of the future degree of deterioration of the structure based on data used in
ACMC2006
its design.
An approach based on dynamic analysis to assess the overall forces on a structure
ACMC2006
liable to have a resonant response to wind action.
Ｆａｃｔｏｒ ｔｏ ａｃｃｏｕｎｔ ｆｏｒ ｔｈｅ ｅｆｆｅｃｔｓ ｏｆ ｃｏｒｒｅｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｎｄ ｒｅｓｏｎａｎｔ ｒｅｓｐｏｎｓｅ.
ACMC2006
The state of concrete from final setting until the achievement of the required
ACMC2006
characteristic strength.
An assembly of physical, chemical or biological influences which may cause
deterioration to the materials making up the structure, which in turn may adversely ACMC2006
affect its serviceability, restorability and safety.
An equivalent or quasi-static approach in which the kinetic energy of wind isconverted to equivalent static pressure, which is then treated in a manner similar to ACMC2006
that for a distributed gravity load.

See also#

Category

Reference
Definition
The physical degradation of the concrete surface due to abrasive actions like rubbing,
ACMC2006
water stream action, tyre friction, etc.
Exposure factor
Factor used to account for the variability of the wind speed at the site of the structure
due to terrain roughness and shape, height above ground, shielding and topographic ACMC2006
conditions.
Fatigue loads
Repetitive loads causing fatigue in the material which reduces its strength, stiffness
ACMC2006
and deformability. Fatigue loads are considered as variable loads.
Fine aggregate
Aggregate which has almost all its particles passing through a 5mm-size test sieve.
ACMC2006
Finishability
The property of concrete at the fresh state which indicates the ease of finishing to
ACMC2006
obtain a neat surface.
Formwork
Total system of support for freshly placed concrete including the mould or sheathing,
ACMC2006
all supporting members, hardware and the necessary bracings.
Freezing and thawing
The effect of freezing and thawing of the pore water in concrete, causing its
ACMC2006
deterioration if repeated continuously.
Fresh state of concrete
The state of concrete after mixing until the completion of placing.
ACMC2006
Function
The task which a structure is required to perform.
ACMC2006
Grout
A mixture of cementitious material and water with or without admixtures.
ACMC2006
Hardened state of concrete
The state of concrete after achieving the required strength.
ACMC2006
Importance
Rank assigned to a structure according to the likely overall impact caused by its
ACMC2006
failure, due to deterioration, to satisfactorily perform its functions as determined at
the time of design.
Irregular structures
Structures having unusual shapes such as open structures, structures with large
ACMC2006
overhangs or other projections, and any building with a complex shape.
Laitance
Substances brought up to the concrete or mortar surface by bleeding water and
ACMC2006
precipitated at the surface giving a contaminated appearance.
Limit state
A critical state specified using a performance index, beyond which the structure no
ACMC2006
longer satisfies the design performance requirements.
Limits of displacement
Allowable deformation of structure in terms of such parameters as interstorey drift
ACMC2006
and relative horizontal displacement, to control excessive deflection, cracking andvibration.
Long-term performance index Index defining the remaining capacity of a structure in performing its design
ACMC2006
functions during the design life.
MaintenanceA set of activities taken to ensure that the structure continues to perform its
ACMC2006
functions satisfactorily during its design life.
Mechanical forces
An assembly of concentrated or distributed forces acting on a structure, or
ACMC2006
deformations imposed on it.
Mineral admixtures
Admixtures which are normally used in large quantities in power form and are added
ACMC2006
at the time of batching in order to improve certain properties of the concrete.
Term
ErosionSee also#

CategoryTerm
Mix proportions
Model

@

Monitoring
Normal concrete

Overall performance index
Partial performance index
Partial safety factor formaterial
Performance
Performance index
Permanent actions
Plastic shrinkage
Plastic state
Reliability
Remaining service life

Remedial action

RepairRestorability (or reparability)
Robustness (or structuralinsensitivity)
SafetySegregation

Reference
Definition
Proportions or quantities of the ingredient or constituent materials to produce
ACMC2006
concrete or mortar of a desired quality.
Mathematical description or experimental setup simulating the actions, material
ACMC2006
properties and behavior of a structure.
Continuous recording of data pertaining to deterioration and/or performance of
ACMC2006
structure using appropriate equipment.
Concrete which is commonly used in construction; it does not include special
constituent materials other than Portland cement , water, fine aggregate, coarse
ACMC2006
aggregate and common mineral and chemical admixtures; it does not require any
special practice for its manufacturing and handling.
Index indicating the overall performance of the structure.
ACMC2006
Index indicating a partial performance of the structure.
ACMC2006
For analysis purposes, the design strength of a material is determined as the
ACMC2006
characteristic strength divided by a partial safety factor.
Ability (or efficiency) of a structure to perform its design functions.
ACMC2006
Index indicating structural performance quantitatively.
ACMC2006
Self-weights of structures inclusive of permanent attachments, fixtures and fittings. ACMC2006
Shrinkage arising from loss of water from the exposed surface of concrete during the
ACMC2006
plastic state, leading to cracking at the exposed surface.
The state of concrete from just after placing until the final setting of concrete.
ACMC2006
Ability of a structure to fulfill specified requirements during its design life.
ACMC2006
Period from the point of inspection to the time when the structure is no longer
ACMC2006
useable, or does not satisfactorily perform the functions determined at the time ofdesign.
Maintenance action carried out with the objective of arresting or slowing down the
ACMC2006
deterioration process, restoring or improving the performance of a structure, or
reducing the danger of damage or injury to the users or any third party.
Remedial action taken with the objective of arresting or slowing down thedeterioration of a structure, or reducing the possibility of damage to the users or any ACMC2006
third party.
Ability of a structure to be repaired physically and economically when damaged under
ACMC2006
the effects of considered actions.
Ability of a structure to withstand damage by events like fire, explosion, impact,
ACMC2006
instability or consequences of human errors.
Ability of a structure to ensure that no harm would come to the users and to people in
ACMC2006
the vicinity of the structure under any action.
Separation of one or more constituent materials from the rest of the concrete, such as
ACMC2006
bleeding, aggregate blocking, etc.

See also#

Category

TermService life
Serviceability
Settlement
ShoresSpecial concrete

Stiff and flexible structures
Strengthening

Surface finishing
Temperature cracking
Threshold level of
Tributary area
Ultimate limit state
Variable action

Wind tunnel test
Workability

Reference
Definition
The length of time from the completion of a structure until the time when it is no
ACMC2006
longer usable because of its failure to adequately perform its design functions.
Ability of a structure to provide adequate services or functionality in use under the
ACMC2006
effects of considered actions.
Sinking of the concrete surface after placing due to bleeding and/or escaping of the
ACMC2006
entrapped and entrained air in the concrete.
Vertical or inclined support members designed to carry the weight of the formwork,
ACMC2006
concrete and other construction loads.
Concrete other than normal concrete including lightweight concrete, rollercompacted
ACMC2006
concrete, self-compacting concrete, fiber-reinforced concrete, anti-washout
underwater concrete, etc.
Stiff structures refer to those that are not sensitive to dynamic effects of wind, while
ACMC2006
flexible ones are those that are sensitive to such effects.
Remedial action applied to a structure with the objective of restoring or improving its
load bearing capacity to a level which is equal to, or higher than, the original design ACMC2006
level.
Action, such as trowelling, applied to the exposed portion of concrete to obtain a neat
ACMC2006
surface.
Cracking caused by thermal stress which arises from differential temperatures in the
ACMC2006
concrete mass.
Minimum acceptable level of performance of a structure.
ACMC2006
Area of building surface contributing to the force being considered, due to wind
ACMC2006
actions, and projected on a vertical plane normal to the wind direction.
Limit state for safety.
ACMC2006
Action due to a moving object on the structure as well as any load whose intensity is
ACMC2006
variable, including traffic load, wave load, water pressure, earth pressure, and load
induced by temperature variation.
Test modeling the atmospheric boundary layer characteristics, to obtain wind speed
ACMC2006
multipliers and/or pressure coefficients.
The term expressing the ease with which concrete can be placed, compacted and
ACMC2006

See also