International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials

Korea Concrete Institute (한국콘크리트학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of Constitutive Material Models on Seismic Response of Two-Story Reinforced Concrete Frame

  • Alam, Md. Iftekharul (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Kim, Doo-Kie (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Kunsan National University)
  • Received : 2012.03.26
  • Accepted : 2012.05.30
  • Published : 2012.06.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper focuses on the finite element (FE) response sensitivity and reliability analyses considering smooth constitutive material models. A reinforced concrete frame is modeled for FE sensitivity analysis followed by direct differentiation method under both static and dynamic load cases. Later, the reliability analysis is performed to predict the seismic behavior of the frame. Displacement sensitivity discontinuities are observed along the pseudo-time axis using non-smooth concrete and reinforcing steel model under quasi-static loading. However, the smooth materials show continuity in response sensitivity at elastic to plastic transition points. The normalized sensitivity results are also used to measure the relative importance of the material parameters on the structural responses. In FE reliability analysis, the influence of smoothness behavior of reinforcing steel is carefully noticed. More efficient and reasonable reliability estimation can be achieved by using smooth material model compare with bilinear material constitutive model.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)

References

  1. Arora, J. S., & Haug, E. J. (1979). Methods of design sensitivity analysis in structural optimization. AIAA Journal, 17, 970-974. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.61260
  2. ATC-55. (2005). Evaluation and improvement of inelastic seismic analysis procedures. Advanced Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  3. Balan, T. A., Filippou, F. C., & Popov, E. P. (1997). Constitutive model for 3D cyclic analysis of concrete structures. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 123(2), 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1997)123:2(143)
  4. Balan, T. A., Spacone, E., & Kwon, M. (2001). A 3D hypoplastic model for cyclic analysis of concrete structures. Engineering Structures, 23, 333-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00048-1
  5. Barbato, M., & Conte, J. P. (2006). Finite element structural response sensitivity and reliability analyses using smooth versus non-smooth material constitutive models. International Journal of Reliability and Safety, 1(1-2), 3-39. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJRS.2006.010688
  6. BSSC. (2003). The 2003 NEHRP recommended provisions for new buildings and other structures. Part 1: Provisions (FEMA 450). Building Seismic Science Council.
  7. Conte, J. P. (2001). Finite element response sensitivity analysis in earthquake engineering. In B. F. Spenser & Y. X. Hu (Eds.), Earthquake engineering frontiers in the new millennium (pp. 395-401). Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.
  8. Conte, J. P., Barbato, M., & Spacone, E. (2004). Finite element response sensitivity analysis using force-based frame models. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering, 59(13), 1781-1820. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.994
  9. Conte, J. P., Vijalapura, P. K., & Meghella, M. (2003). Consistent finite-element response sensitivity analysis. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 129(12), 1380-1393. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2003)129:12(1380)
  10. Der Kiureghian, A., & Ke, J. B. (1988). The stochastic finite element method in structural reliability. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 3(2), 83-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-8920(88)90019-7
  11. Ditlevsen, O., & Madsen, H. O. (1996). Structural reliability methods. New York: Wiley.
  12. Filippou, F. C., Popov, E. P., & Bertero, V. V. (1983). Effects of bond deterioration on hysteretic behavior of reinforced concrete joints. Report EERC 83-19, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
  13. Gu, Q. (2008). Finite element response sensitivity and reliability analysis of soil-foundation-structure-interaction systems. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
  14. Gu, Q., Barbato, M., & Conte, J. P. (2009b). Handling of constraints in finite-element response sensitivity analysis. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 135(12), 1427-1438. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000053
  15. Gu, Q., Conte, J. P., & Barbato, M. (2010). OpenSees command language manual response sensitivity analysis based on the direct differentiation method (DDM). Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California.
  16. Gu, Q., Conte, J. P., Elgamal, A., & Yang, Z. (2009a). Finite element response sensitivity analysis of multi-yield-surface J2 plasticity model by direct differentiation method. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 198(30-32), 2272-2285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2009.02.030
  17. Hasofer, A. M., & Lind, N. C. (1974). An exact and invariant first order reliability format. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 100(12), 111-121.
  18. Haukaas, T.,&Der Kiureghian, A. (2004). Finite element reliability and sensitivity methods for performance-based engineering. Report PEER 2003/14, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
  19. Hohenbichler, M., & Rackwitz, R. (1986). Sensitivity and importance measures in structural reliability. Civil Engineering Systems, 3(4), 203-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/02630258608970445
  20. Kleiber, M., Antunez, H., Hien, T.D., & Kowalczyk, P. (1997). Parameter sensitivity in nonlinear mechanics: Theory and finite element computations. New York: Wiley.
  21. Mahsuli, M., & Haukaas, T. (2010). Methods, models, and software for seismic risk analysis. In 9th US National & 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, 25-29 July 2010.
  22. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., & Fenves, G. L. (2005). OpenSees command language manual. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center, University of California.
  23. Menegotto, M., & Pinto, P. E. (1973). Method for analysis of cyclically loaded reinforced concrete plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending. In Proceedings, IABSE Symposiumon 'Resistance and UltimateDeformability of Structures Acted on by Well-Defined Repeated Loads', Lisbon.
  24. Monti, G., & Nuti, C. (1992). Non-linear cyclic behavior of reinforcing bars including buckling. Journal of Structural Engineering, 118(12), 3268-3284. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:12(3268)
  25. Schueller, G. I., Pradlwarter, H. J., & Koutsourelakis, P. S. (2004). A critical appraisal of reliability estimation procedures for high dimensions. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 19(4), 463-474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2004.05.004
  26. Scott, M. H. (2012). Evaluation of force-based frame element response sensitivity formulations. Journal of Structural Engineering, 138(1), 72-80. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000447
  27. Scott, M. H., & Filippou, F. C. (2007). Response gradients for nonlinear beam-column elements under large displacements. Journal of Structural Engineering, 133(2), 155-165. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:2(155)
  28. Scott, M. H., Franchin, P., Fenves, G. L.,&Filippou, F. C. (2004). Response sensitivity for nonlinear beam-column elements. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(9), 1281-1288. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:9(1281)
  29. Scott, B. D., Park, R., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1982). Stress-strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. ACI Journal, 79(1), 13-27.
  30. Simo, J. C., & Taylor, R. L. (1985). Consistent tangent operators for rate-independent elastoplasticity. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 48, 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(85)90070-2
  31. Zhang,Y., Conte, J. P., Yang, Z., Elgamal, A., Bielak, J., & Acero, G. (2008). Two-dimensional nonlinear earthquake response analysis of a bridge-foundation-ground system. Earthquake Spectra, 24(2), 343-386. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2923925
  32. Zhang, Y., & Der Kiureghian, A. (1993). Dynamic response sensitivity of inelastic structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 108(1-2), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(93)90151-M
  33. Zona, A., Barbato, M., & Conte, J. P. (2005). Finite element response sensitivity analysis of steel-concrete composite beams with deformable shear connection. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 131(11), 1126-1139. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2005)131:11(1126)

Cited by

  1. Modeling of Heavy Armocement Deformation for the Conical Shape of the Heat Accumulator Body by the Methods of Computer Engineering vol.170, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201817003034
  2. Response sensitivity for geometrically nonlinear displacement-based beam-column elements vol.220, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2019.05.003
  3. Cyclic behaviour of prefabricated connections for steel beam to concrete filled steel tube column vol.176, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2020.106422