Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of ground motion scaling on nonlinear higher mode building response

  • Wood, R.L. (Department of Structural Engineering, University of California) ;
  • Hutchinson, T.C. (Department of Structural Engineering, University of California)
  • Received : 2011.04.13
  • Accepted : 2012.07.03
  • Published : 2012.12.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ground motion scaling techniques are actively debated in the earthquake engineering community. Considerations such as what amplitude, over what period range and to what target spectrum are amongst the questions of practical importance. In this paper, the effect of various ground motion scaling approaches are explored using three reinforced concrete prototypical building models of 8, 12 and 20 stories designed to respond nonlinearly under a design level earthquake event in the seismically active Southern California region. Twenty-one recorded earthquake motions are selected using a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and subsequently scaled using four different strategies. These motions are subsequently compared to spectrally compatible motions. The nonlinear response of a planar frameidealized building is evaluated in terms of plasticity distribution, floor level acceleration and uncorrelated acceleration amplification ratio distributions; and interstory drift distributions. The most pronounced response variability observed in association with the scaling method is the extent of higher mode participation in the nonlinear demands.

Keywords

References

  1. Abrahamson, N.A. (1992), "Non-stationary spectral matching", Seismol. Res. Lett., 31(1), 30-30.
  2. Al Atik, L. and Abrahamson, N. (2010), "An improved method for nonstationary spectral matching", Earthq. Spectra, 26(3), 601-617. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3459159
  3. American Concrete Institute. (2008), "Building code requirements for structural concrete", ACI 318-08, Farmington Hills, MI.
  4. ASCE 7-05. (2006), Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
  5. Bommer, J.J. and Acevedo, A.B. (2004), "The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis", J. Earthq. Eng., 8(1), 43-91.
  6. Catalan, A., Benavent-Climent, A. and Cahis, X. (2010), "Selection and scaling of earthquake records in assessment of structures in low-to-moderate seismicity zones", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 30(1-2), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.09.003
  7. Coleman, J. and Spacone, E. (2001), "Localization issues in force-based frame elements", J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, 127(11), 1257-1265. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2001)127:11(1257)
  8. Englekirk, R.E. (2003), Seismic design of reinforced and precast concrete buildings, Wiley, NJ.
  9. European Committee for Standardization (CEN) (2003), Eurocode designing of structures for earthquake resistance-Part 1: General rules, seismic actions, prEN 1998-1, Final Draft.
  10. Hancock, J., Bommer, J.J. and Stafford, P.J. (2008), "Numbers of scaled and matched accelerograms required for inelastic dynamic analyses", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 37(14), 1585-1607. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.827
  11. Haselton, C.B. (2009), Evaluation of ground motion selection and modification methods: Predicting median interstory drift response of buildings, PEER Technical Report.
  12. Huang, Y.N., Whittaker, A.S., Luco, N. and Hamburger, R.O. (2009), "Selection and scaling of earthquake ground motions in support of performance-based design", J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, In Press.
  13. ICC. (2006), International building code 2006, International Code Council, Falls Church, Va.
  14. Iervolino, I. and Cornell, C.A. (2005), "Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures", Earthq. Spectra, 21(3), 685-713. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1990199
  15. Katsanos, E.I., Sextos, A.G. and Manolis, G.D. (2010), "Selection of earthquake ground motion records: A stateof- the-art review from a structural engineering perspective", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 30(4), 157-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.10.005
  16. Luco, N. and Bazzurro, P. (2007), "Does amplitude scaling of ground motion records result in biased nonlinear structural drift responses?", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 36(13), 1813-1835. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.695
  17. Luco, N. and Cornell, C.A. (2007), "Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions", Earthq. Spectra, 23(2), 357-392. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2723158
  18. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988), "Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete", J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, 114(8), 1804-1826. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
  19. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H. and Fenves, G.L. (2009), Open system for engineering simulation usercommand- language manual, version 2.0, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley. .
  20. Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N. (1992), Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings, John Wiley, and Sons Inc.
  21. PEER-NGA (2009), Pacific earthquake engineering research center: NGA database, http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga/
  22. Scott, M.H. and Fenves, G.L. (2006), "Plastic hinge integration methods for force-based beam-column elements", J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE, 132(2), 244-252 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:2(244)
  23. Shome, N. and Cornell, C.A. (1998), "Normalization and scaling accelerograms for nonlinear structural analysis", Proceedings of the Sixth U. S. Notional Conference on Earthquake Engineering, CD-ROM, Seattle, WA
  24. Somerville, P., Smith, N., Punyamurthula, S. and Sun, J. (1997), "Development of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel project", Report SAC/BC-97/04, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
  25. United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2008a), Custom mapping and analysis tools, USGS, Reston, Virginia, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/interactive.
  26. United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2008b), 2002 Interactive deaggregations, USGS, Reston, Virginia, http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggint/2002/.
  27. United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2009), 2008 Interactive deaggregations (Beta), USGS, Reston, Virginia, http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/.
  28. Watkins, D., Chui, L., Hutchinson, T.C. and Hoehler, M.S. (2009), Survey and characterization of floor and wall mounted mechanical and electrical equipment in buildings, Structural Systems Research Project Report Series, SSRP 09/11, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
  29. Wood, R.L., Hutchinson, T.C. and Hoehler, M.S. (2009), Cyclic load and crack protocols for anchored nonstructural components and systems, Structural Systems Research Project Report Series, SSRP 09/12, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA.

Cited by

  1. Comparing of the effects of scaled and real earthquake records on structural response vol.6, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.6.4.375
  2. Definition and Quantification of Anchor Ductility and Implications on Seismic Design vol.46, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20160369
  3. 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
  4. Shake Table Tests on Suspended Nonstructural Components Anchored in Cyclically Cracked Concrete vol.140, pp.11, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000979
  5. 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
  6. Seismic response analysis of layered soils considering effect of surcharge mass using HFTD approach. Part Ι: basic formulation and linear HFTD vol.6, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2014.6.6.517
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. Effect of design spectral shape on inelastic response of RC frames subjected to spectrum matched ground motions vol.69, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.69.3.293