대한토목학회논문집 (KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research)

  • 제26권4A호
  • /
  • Pages.659-675
  • /
  • 2006
  • /
  • 1015-6348(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2799-9629(eISSN)
대한토목학회 (Korean Society of Civil Engeneers)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

철근콘크리트 벽체구조물의 지진응답에 대한 비선형 해석기법의 영향

Effect of Nonlinear Analysis Procedures for Seismic Responses of Reinforced Concrete Wall Structure

  • 투고 : 2005.12.06
  • 심사 : 2006.05.04
  • 발행 : 2006.07.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

근래에 비선형 정적해석법에 기초를 둔 성능-기반 방법이 각광을 받으면서 개선되고 있다. 역량스펙트럼 방법과 변위계수법이 비선형 정적해석법 중에서 대표적이라고 할 수 있다. 새로 건설되거나 기존의 구조물에 대하여 내진설계와 내진성능 평가에 대한 비선형 정적해석법의 적용성을 평가하기 위해서는 우선적으로 역량스펙트럼 방법과 변위계수법의 정확성이 평가되어야 한다. 비선형 정적해석법의 정확성은 근거리 및 원거리 지진하중에 대한 철근 콘크리트 벽체 구조물의 진동대 실험결과와 비교하여 평가하였다. 또한, 단자유도계, 등가단자유도계와 다자유도계에 대한 비선형 동적해석기법에 의해 평가된 지진응답도 진동대 실험결과와 비교하여 평가하였다.

Recently, significant progress has been made in performance-based engineering methods that rely mainly on nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. The Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM) and the Displacement Coefficient Method (DCM) are the representative nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. In order to evaluate the applicability of the procedures to the seismic evaluation and design process of new and existing structures, the accuracy of both CSM and DCM should be evaluated in advance. The accuracy of seismic responses by the nonlinear static procedures is evaluated in comparison with the shaking table test results for the structural wall specimen subjected to the far field and near field earthquakes. Also conducted are comparative studies where the shaking table test results are compared with those from nonlinear dynamic analysis procedures, i.e., Single-Degree-of-Freedom (SDOF), equivalent SDOF and Multi-Degree-of-Freedom (MDOF) systems.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 이동근, 송종걸, 윤정방(1997) 지진에 대한 고층구조물의 시스템 연성요구도 평가방법. 대한토목학회 논문집, 대한토목학회, 제17권 제2호, pp. 245-257
  2. IAEA (2002) IAEA CRP-NFE Camus Benchmark: Experimental results and specifications to the participants. Report DM2S. SEMT/EMSI/RT/02-047/A
  3. Applied Technology Council (1996) Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Building (ATC-40). Redwood City. California, 1996
  4. Applied Technology Council (2004) Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures (FEMA 440), ATC-55 Project, Redwood city, California
  5. ASCE (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings (FEMA 356), Reston, Virginia
  6. Chopra, A.K. (1995) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering, Englewood cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall
  7. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (1999) Capacity-demand-diagram methods for estimating seismic deformation of inelastic structures: SDF systems, Reprort No. PEER-1999/02, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley
  8. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2001) A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for buildings: theory and preliminary evaluation, Report No.PEER 2001.03, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley
  9. Fajfar, P. (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design, Earthquake Spectra, pp. 573-592 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586128
  10. Freeman, S., Sasaki, K., and Paret, T. (1998) Multi-Mode Pushover Procedure(MMP)-A Method to Identity the Effects of Higher Modes in a Pushover Analysis, Proceedings of the 6th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, Seattle, Washington
  11. Gupta, B. and Kunnath, S.K. (1998) Effect of hysteretic model parameters on inelastic seismic demands, Proceedings of the 6th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
  12. Hachem, M.M. (2000) Bispec Help Manual, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center
  13. Lee, D.G,, Song, J.K., and Yun, C.B. (1997) Estimation of system-level ductility demands for multi-story structures, Engineering Structures, Vol. 19, No. 12, pp. 1025-1035 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00010-2
  14. Mander, J.B., M.J.N. Priestley, and R. Park (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete, Journal of the Structural Division. ASCE, Vol. 114, No. 8, August 1988, pp. 1804-1826 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
  15. Song, J.K. and Pincheira, J.A. (2000) Spectral displacement demands of stiffness and strength degrading systems, Earthquake spectra, Vol. 16(4), pp. 817-851 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586141
  16. Valles, R.E., Reinhorn, A.M., Kunnath, S.K, and Madan, A. (1996) IDARC2D Version 4.0: A computer program for the inelastic damage analysis of building, Technical Report NCEER-96-0010, NCEER, State University of New York at Buffalo
  17. UCFyber (2000) Cross section analysis software for structural engineers, $Zevent^{TM}$