Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of ground motion selection methods on seismic directionality effects

  • Cantagallo, Cristina (Engineering and Geology Department, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara) ;
  • Camata, Guido (Engineering and Geology Department, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara) ;
  • Spacone, Enrico (Engineering and Geology Department, University "G. D'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara)
  • Received : 2014.06.19
  • Accepted : 2014.09.26
  • Published : 2015.01.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of the earthquake incident angle on the structural demand and the influence of ground motion selection and scaling methods on seismic directionality effects. The structural demand produced by Non-Linear Time-History Analyses (NLTHA) varies with the seismic input incidence angle. The seismic directionality effects are evaluated by subjecting four three-dimensional reinforced concrete structures to different scaled and un-scaled records oriented along nine incidence angles, whose values range between 0 and 180 degrees, with an increment of 22.5 degrees. The results show that NLTHAs performed applying the ground motion records along the principal axes underestimate the structural demand prediction, especially when plan-irregular structures are analyzed. The ground motion records generate the highest demand when applied along the lowest strength structural direction and a high energy content of the records increases the structural demand corresponding to this direction. The seismic directionality impact on structural demand is particularly important for irregular buildings subjected to un-scaled accelerograms. However, the orientation effects are much lower if spectrum-compatible combinations of scaled records are used. In both cases, irregular structures should be analyzed first with pushover analyses in order to identify the weaker structural directions and then with NLTHAs for different incidence angles.

Keywords

References

  1. Ambraseys, N., Smit, P., Sigbjornsson, R., Suhadolc, P. and Margaris, B. (2002), Internet-Site for European Strong-Motion Data, European Commission, Research-Directorate General, Environment and Climate Programme.
  2. Athanatopoulou, A.M. (2005), "Critical orientation of three correlated seismic components", Eng. Struct., 27(2), 301-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.10.011
  3. Baker, J.W. (2011), "Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground-motion selection", J. Struct. Eng., 137(3), 322-331. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000215
  4. Baker, J.W. and Cornell, A.C. (2005), "A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34(10), 1193-1217. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.474
  5. Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C.A. (1999), "Disaggregation of seismic hazard", Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 89(2), 501-520.
  6. Beyer, K. and Bommer, J.J. (2006), "Relationships between median values and between aleatory variabilities for different definitions of the horizontal component of motion", Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 96(4A), 1512-1522. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050210
  7. Bommer, J.J. and Acevedo, A.B. (2004), "The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis", J. Earthq. Eng., 8(Special Issue 1), 43-91.
  8. Cantagallo, C., Camata, G., Spacone, E. and Corotis, R. (2012), "The variability of deformation demand with ground motion intensity", Probab. Eng. Mech., 28, 59-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2011.08.016
  9. CEN-EN 1998-1 (2004), Design of structures for earthquake resistance-Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, Eurocode 8.
  10. Faggella, M., Barbosa, A.R., Conte, J.P., Spacone, E. and Restrepo, J.I. (2013), "Probabilistic seismic response analysis of a 3-D reinforced concrete building", Struct. Safety, 44, 11-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.04.002
  11. Hosseini, M. and Salemi, A. (2008), "Studying the effect of earthquake excitation on the internal forces of steel building's elements by using nonlinear time history analyses", Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthq. Eng., Bejing, China, October.
  12. Iervolino, I., Maddaloni, G. and Cosenza, E. (2008), "Eurocode 8 compliant record sets for seismic analysis of structures", J. Earthq. Eng., 12, 54-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460701457173
  13. Kalkan, E. and Reyes, J.C. (2013), "Significance of rotating ground motions on behavior of symmetric-and asymmetric-plan structures: Part 2. multi-story structures", Earthq. Spectra, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/072012EQS242M.
  14. Kent, D.C. and Park, R. (1971), "Flexural members with confined concrete", J. Struct. Div. ASCE, 97(7), 1969-1990.
  15. Krinitzsky, E.L. and Chang, F.K. (1977), State-of-the-art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States: Specifying Peak Motions for Design Earthquakes, Miscellaneous Paper S-73-1, Report 7, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
  16. Lagaros, N. (2010), "Multicomponent incremental dynamic analysis considering variable incident angle", Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., 6(2), 77-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732470802663805
  17. Lopez, O.A., Chopra, A.K. and Hernandez, J.J. (2000), "Critical response of structures to multi-component earthquake excitations", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 29(12), 1759-1778. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-9845(200012)29:12<1759::AID-EQE984>3.0.CO;2-K
  18. Lopez, A. and Hernandez, J.J. (2004), "Structural design for multicomponent seismic motion", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, August.
  19. Lopez, O.A., and Torres, R. (1997), "The Critical angle of seismic incidence and the maximum structural response", Earthq. Eng. Struc. Dyn., 26(9), 881-894. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199709)26:9<881::AID-EQE674>3.0.CO;2-R
  20. Luzi, L., Hailemikael, S., Bindi, D., Pacor, F., Mele, F. and Sabetta, F. (2008), ITACA (ITalian ACcelerometric Archive): A Web Portal for the Dissemination of Italian Strong-motion Data, Seismol. Res. Lett., 79(5), 716-722. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.79.5.716
  21. Meletti, C. and Montaldo, V. (2007), Stime di Pericolosita Sismica per Diverse Probabilita di Superamento in 50 Anni: Valori di $a_g$, Progetto DPC-INGV S1, Deliverable D2 2007; http://esse1.mi.ingv.it/d2.html.
  22. Menegotto, M. and Pinto, P.E. (1973), "Method of analysis for cyclically loaded r. c. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending", IABSE Symposium: Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads-IABSE, Lisboa, Portugal.
  23. Menum, C. and Der Kireghian, A. (1998), "A replacement for the 30%, 40%, and SRSS rules for multicomponent seismic analysis", Earthq. Spectra, 14(1), 153-164. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585993
  24. Mollaioli, F., Bruno, S., Decanini, L. and Saragoni, R. (2004), "On the correlation between energy and displacement", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, August.
  25. Mollaioli, F., Bruno, S., Decanini, L. and Saragoni, R. (2011), "Correlations between energy and displacement demands for performance-based seismic engineering", Pure Appl. Geophysics, 168(1-2), January 2011, 237-259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-010-0118-9
  26. Pacor, F., Paolucci, R., Luzi, L., Sabetta, F., Spinelli, A., Gorini, A., Nicoletti, M., Marcucci, S., Filippi, L. and Dolce, M. (2011), "Overview of the Italian strong motion database ITACA 1.0", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 9(6), 1723-1739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9327-6
  27. Penzien, J. and Watabe, M. (1975), "Characteristics of 3-dimensional earthquake ground motion. Earthquake", Eng. Struct. Dyn., 3(4), 365-374.
  28. Reyes, J.C. and Kalkan E. (2012), "Relevance of Fault-Normal/Parallel and maximum direction rotated ground motions on nonlinear behavior of multi-story buildings", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, Portugal.
  29. Rigato, A.B. and Medina R.A. (2007), "Influence of angle of incidence on seismic demands for inelastic single-storey structures subjected to bi-directional ground motions", Eng. Struct., 29(10), 2593-2601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.01.008
  30. Smeby, W. and Der Kiureghian, A. (1985), "Modal combination rules for multicomponent earthquake excitation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290130103
  31. Spacone, E., Filippou, F.C. and Taucer, F. (1996), "Fiber beam-column model for nonlinear analysis of R/C frames: I. formulation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 25(7), 711-725. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199607)25:7<711::AID-EQE576>3.0.CO;2-9
  32. Spallarossa, D. and Barani, S. (2007), Disaggregazione Della Pericolosita Sismica in Termini di M-R-${\varepsilon}$, Progetto DPC-INGV S1, Deliverable D14 2007, http://esse1.mi.ingv.it/d14.html.
  33. Stewart, J.P., Abrahamson, N.A., Atkinson, G.M., Baker, J., Boore, D.M., Bozorgnia, Y., Campbell, K.W., Comartin, C.D., Idriss, I.M., Lew, M., Mehrain, M., Moehle, J.P., Naeim, F. and Sabol, T.A. (2011), "Representation of Bi-directional Ground Motions for Design Spectra in Building Codes", Earthq. Spectra, 27(3), 927-937. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3608001
  34. Tsourekas, A., Athanatopoulou, A. and Avramidis I. (2009), "Effects of seismic incident angle on response of structures under bi-directional recorded and artificial ground motion", ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN), Rhodes, Greece.
  35. Vanmarke, E.H. (1979), Representation of Earthquake Ground Motion: Scaled Accelerograms and Equivalent Response Spectra. State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States, Miscellaneous Paper S-73-1, Report 14, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
  36. Wilson, E., Suharwardy, I. and Habidullah, A. (1995), "A clarification of the orthogonal effects in a three-dimensional seismic analysis", Earthq. Spectra, 11(4), 659-666. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585831

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of combination rules for multi-story buildings with asymmetric set-backs vol.11, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.1.179
  2. On selection and scaling of ground motions for analysis of seismically isolated structures vol.15, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-016-0354-9
  3. Critical orientation of earthquake loading for building performance assessment using lateral force analysis vol.15, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0176-9
  4. Ground-Motion Prediction Equations based on refined data for dynamic time-history analysis vol.11, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.5.779
  5. Prediction of engineering demand parameters for RC wall structures vol.54, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2015.54.4.741
  6. 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
  7. Sensitivity analysis of the influence of ground motion intensity levels on the seismic behavior of steel frames in assessment of the target displacement considering near-fault effects vol.47, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2018-0416
  8. Using maximum direction of a ground motion in a code-compliant analysis of seismically isolated structures vol.28, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.10.030
  9. Maximum mean square response and critical orientation under bi-directional seismic excitation vol.233, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.111881
  10. Effects of spatial variability of ground motions on collapse behaviour of buildings vol.144, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106668