<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3314" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ddffdd>
<DIV>To those interested ones in seismic design in China:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>With regard to the analysis and design that it would have been used in
China, Shiping Hu </DIV>
<DIV>in "Seismic Design of Buildings in China" (Earthquake Spectra, 1993,
pp. 703-737) </DIV>
<DIV>shows the Seismic Zoning Map of China (1990) based in intensities 6 to 9,
but made with </DIV>
<DIV>probabilistic concepts and associated to PGA ranging from 0.05 to 0.4 g,
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>According to S. Hu, none major Chinese city was in 9-intensity area. </DIV>
<DIV>Few (including Beijing) were in 8-intensity area, associated to PGA =
0.2 g. </DIV>
<DIV>Most (including Chengdu) were in 7-intensity area, associated to
PGA = 0.1 g. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The 1990 code was changed in 2001, according to Yuxian Hu in "Development
of Earthquake </DIV>
<DIV>Engineering in China" (13th WCEE, Canada, 2004, paper No. 5008), stating
the new PGA map. </DIV>
<DIV>And this author points out that since 1964 those PGA values were
used.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Obviously, the great damage was not due to this map, independently of
its validity, </DIV>
<DIV>but to the previous tradition. </DIV>
<DIV>Those PGA seem very small and it is also necessary to consider the
construction practices.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards, Julio J.</DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________________<BR>Julio J.
Hernández <BR>Consultant on Structural Engineering and Earthquake Engineering
<BR>Caracas, Venezuela <BR>e-mail: <A
href="mailto:julher@cantv.net">julher@cantv.net</A> <BR>cellphone:
+58-414-1293989</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>