Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Scaling of design earthquake ground motions for tall buildings based on drift and input energy demands

  • Takewaki, I. (Department of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Kyoto University) ;
  • Tsujimoto, H. (Nippon Steel Corp.)
  • Received : 2010.08.20
  • Accepted : 2010.11.17
  • Published : 2011.06.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Rational scaling of design earthquake ground motions for tall buildings is essential for safer, risk-based design of tall buildings. This paper provides the structural designers with an insight for more rational scaling based on drift and input energy demands. Since a resonant sinusoidal motion can be an approximate critical excitation to elastic and inelastic structures under the constraint of acceleration or velocity power, a resonant sinusoidal motion with variable period and duration is used as an input wave of the near-field and far-field ground motions. This enables one to understand clearly the relation of the intensity normalization index of ground motion (maximum acceleration, maximum velocity, acceleration power, velocity power) with the response performance (peak interstory drift, total input energy). It is proved that, when the maximum ground velocity is adopted as the normalization index, the maximum interstory drift exhibits a stable property irrespective of the number of stories. It is further shown that, when the velocity power is adopted as the normalization index, the total input energy exhibits a stable property irrespective of the number of stories. It is finally concluded that the former property on peak drift can hold for the practical design response spectrum-compatible ground motions.

Keywords

References

  1. Abrahamson, N., Ashford, S., Elgamal, A., Kramer, S., Seible, F. and Somerville, P. (eds.) (1998), Proc. of the First PEER Workshop on Characterization of Special Source Effects, San Diego.
  2. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2006), Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE/SEI 7-05, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
  3. Arias, A. (1970), "A measure of earthquake intensity", In Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants (Ed. R.J. Hansen), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 438-469.
  4. Drenick, R.F. (1970), "Model-free design of aseismic structures", J. Eng. Mech. Div. - ASCE, 96(EM4), 483-493.
  5. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2004), NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, Report No. 450-1/450-2. FEMA, Washington, D.C.
  6. Housner, G.W. and Jennings, P. (1975), "The capacity of extreme earthquake motions to damage structures", Structural and geotechnical mechanics, A volume honoring N.M. Newmark edited by W.J. Hall, 102-116, Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliff, NJ.
  7. Huang, Y.N., Whittaker, A.S. and Luco, N. (2010), "NEHRP site amplification factors and the NGA relationships", Earthq. Spectra, 26(2), 583-593. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3381176
  8. Moustafa, A., Ueno, K. and Takewaki, I. (2010), "Critical earthquake loads for SDOF inelastic structures considering evolution of seismic waves", Earthq. Struct., 1(2), 147-162. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2010.1.2.147
  9. Newmark, N.M. and Hall, W.J. (1982), Earthquake spectrum and design, EERI., Oakland, CA.
  10. Takewaki, I. (2004), "Bound of earthquake input energy", J. Struct. Eng. - ASCE, 130(9), 1289-1297. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:9(1289)
  11. Takewaki, I. (2006), Critical excitation methods in earthquake engineering, Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam.
  12. Tsujimoto, H., Yoshitomi, S., Tsuji, M. and Takewaki, I. (2008), "Correlation of level of critical resonant sinusoidal input wave with dynamic response of building structures", J. Constr. Steel, 16, 521-528. (in Japanese)
  13. Xu, Z., Agrawal, A.K., He, W.L. and Tan, P. (2007), "Performance of passive energy dissipation systems during near-field ground motion type pulses", Eng. Struct., 29, 224-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.04.020

Cited by

  1. Parameters affecting the seismic response of buildings under bi-directional excitation vol.53, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2015.53.5.957
  2. Beyond Uncertainties in Earthquake Structural Engineering vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00001
  3. A New Transmissibility Analysis Method for Detection and Location of Damage via Nonlinear Features in MDOF Structural Systems vol.20, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2014.2359419
  4. Critical Earthquake Response of Elastic–Plastic Structures Under Near-Fault Ground Motions (Part 2: Forward-Directivity Input) vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00013
  5. Critical Input and Response of Elastic–Plastic Structures Under Long-Duration Earthquake Ground Motions vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00015
  6. Critical Double Impulse Input and Bound of Earthquake Input Energy to Building Structure vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00005
  7. Critical Earthquake Response of Elastic–Plastic Structures Under Near-Fault Ground Motions (Part 1: Fling-Step Input) vol.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00012
  8. Magnetorheological elastomer base isolator for earthquake response mitigation on building structures: modeling and second-order sliding mode control vol.11, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.6.943
  9. An area-based intensity measure for incremental dynamic analysis under two-dimensional ground motion input vol.26, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1374
  10. Closed-Form Critical Earthquake Response of Elastic–Plastic Structures on Compliant Ground under Near-Fault Ground Motions vol.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00001
  11. Towards Narrowing Unexpected Issues in Future Earthquakes: A Review vol.16, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.16.5.931
  12. Proposal of new ground-motion prediction equations for elastic input energy spectra vol.7, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.7.4.485
  13. Building earthquake resilience in sustainable cities in terms of input energy vol.12, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.01.004
  14. Quantifying the seismic resilience of two tall buildings designed using Chinese and US Codes vol.11, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.6.925
  15. Selecting and scaling ground motion time histories according to Eurocode 8 and ASCE 7-05 vol.5, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.5.2.129
  16. Hybrid Control System for Greater Resilience Using Multiple Isolation and Building Connection vol.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00026
  17. Critical Response of 2DOF Elastic–Plastic Building Structures under Double Impulse as Substitute of Near-Fault Ground Motion vol.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00002
  18. Effect of Non-linearity of Connecting Dampers on Vibration Control of Connected Building Structures vol.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2015.00025
  19. Closed-Form Dynamic Stability Criterion for Elastic–Plastic Structures under Near-Fault Ground Motions vol.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00006
  20. Automatic generation of smart earthquake-resistant building system: Hybrid system of base-isolation and building-connection vol.2, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2016.e00069
  21. Toward greater building earthquake resilience using concept of critical excitation: A review vol.9, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2013.02.001
  22. Smart passive control of buildings with higher redundancy and robustness using base-isolation and inter-connection vol.4, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.4.6.649
  23. A simple mathematical model for static analysis of tall buildings with two outrigger-belt truss systems vol.40, pp.1, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2011.40.1.065
  24. Earthquake time-frequency analysis using a new compatible wavelet function family vol.3, pp.6, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.6.839
  25. Telescopic columns as a new base isolation system for vibration control of high-rise buildings vol.3, pp.6, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.6.853
  26. Seismic design of structures using a modified non-stationary critical excitation vol.4, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.4.4.383
  27. Approximate methods to evaluate storey stiffness and interstory drift of RC buildings in seismic area vol.46, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2013.46.2.245
  28. Nonlinear damping based semi-active building isolation system vol.424, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2018.03.023
  29. Critical Earthquake Response of 2DOF Elastic-Perfectly Plastic Model Under Multiple Impulse as Substitute for Long-Duration Earthquake Ground Motions vol.4, pp.None, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00081
  30. A rapid screening method for selection and modification of ground motions for time history analysis vol.16, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.1.029
  31. Computing input energy response of MDOF systems to actual ground motions based on modal contributions vol.18, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.18.2.263
  32. Seismic Risk Assessment of a Novel Self-Centering Precast Concrete Frame under Near-Fault Ground Motions vol.10, pp.18, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10186510
  33. Investigations on a mega-sub isolation system under near-fault ground motions vol.24, pp.15, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1177/13694332211026227