| dc.creator | Priestley, M. J. Nigel | |
| dc.date | 1993-09-30 | |
| dc.identifier | https://bulletin.nzsee.org.nz/index.php/bnzsee/article/view/671 | |
| dc.identifier | 10.5459/bnzsee.26.3.329-341 | |
| dc.description | Current practice in seismic analysis and design is examined, with particular reference to reinforced concrete structures. The attitude of the paper is deliberately iconoclastic, tilting at targets it is hoped will not be seen as windmills. It is suggested that our current emphasis on strength-based design and ductility leads us in directions that are not always rational. A pure displacement-based design approach is advanced as a viable alternative. Improvements resulting from increased sophistication of analyses are seen to be largely illusory. Energy absorption is shown to be a mixed blessing. Finally, accepted practices for flexural design, shear design, development of reinforcement, and the philosophic basis of capacity design are questioned. | en-US |
| dc.format | application/pdf | |
| dc.language | eng | |
| dc.publisher | New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering | en-US |
| dc.relation | https://bulletin.nzsee.org.nz/index.php/bnzsee/article/view/671/646 | |
| dc.rights | Copyright (c) 1993 M. J. Nigel Priestley | en-US |
| dc.rights | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | en-US |
| dc.source | Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering; Vol 26 No 3 (1993); 329-341 | en-US |
| dc.source | 2324-1543 | |
| dc.source | 1174-9857 | |
| dc.title | Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering | en-US |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | |
| dc.type | Article | en-US |
