Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Probabilistic evaluation of separation distance between two adjacent structures

  • Naeej, Mojtaba (Department of Civil Engineering, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology) ;
  • Amiri, Javad Vaseghi (Department of Civil Engineering, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology) ;
  • Jalali, Sayyed Ghasem (Department of Civil Engineering, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University)
  • Received : 2018.01.31
  • Accepted : 2018.05.21
  • Published : 2018.09.10
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Structural pounding is commonly observed phenomenon during major ground motion, which can cause both structural and architectural damages. To reduce the amount of damage from pounding, the best and effective way is to increase the separation distance. Generally, existing design procedures for determining the separation distance between adjacent buildings subjected to structural pounding are based on approximations of the buildings' peak relative displacement. These procedures are based on unknown safety levels. The aim of this research is to estimate probabilistic separation distance between adjacent structures by considering the variability in the system and uncertainties in the earthquakes characteristics through comprehensive numerical simulations. A large number of models were generated using a robust Monte-Carlo simulation. In total, 6.54 million time-history analyses were performed over the adopted models using an ensemble of 25 ground motions as seismic input within OpenSees software. The results show that a gap size of 50%, 70% and 100% of the considered design code for the structural periods in the range of 0.1-0.5 s, leads to have the probability of pounding about 41.5%, 18% and 5.8%, respectively. Finally, based on the results, two equations are developed for probabilistic determination of needed structural separation distance.

Keywords

References

  1. Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (1988), "Pounding of buildings in series during earthquakes", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 16(3), 443-456. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290160311
  2. Anagnostopoulos, S.A. and Karamaneas, C.E. (2008), "Use of collision shear walls to minimize seismic separation and to protect adjacent buildings from collapse due to earthquakeinduced pounding", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 37(12), 1371-1388. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.817
  3. Barbato, M. and Tubaldi, E. (2013), "A probabilistic performancebased approach for mitigating theseismic pounding risk between adjacent buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 42(8), 1203-1219. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2267
  4. BCJ (1997), Structural Provisions for Building Structures, Building Center of Japan, Tokyo, Japan.
  5. Chase, J.G., Boyer, F., Rodgers, G.W., Labrosse, G. and MacRae, G.A. (2014), "Probabilistic risk analysis of structural impact in seismic events for linear and nonlinear systems", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 43(10), 1565-1580. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2414
  6. Chiou, B., Darragh, R., Gregor, N. and Silva, W. (2008), "NGA project strong-motion database", Earthq. Spectra, 24(1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2894831
  7. Cole, G.L., Dhakal, R.P. and Turner, F.M. (2012), "Building pounding damage observed in the 2011 Christchurch earthquake", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(5), 893-913. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1164
  8. Efraimiadou, S., Hatzigeorgiou, G.D. and Beskos, D.E. (2013), "Structural pounding between adjacent buildings subjected to strong ground motions. Part I: The effect of different structures arrangement'', Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 2(10), 1509-1528.
  9. Eurocode 8 (2005), Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for Standardization; Brussels, Belgium.
  10. Fishman, G.S. (1995), Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications, Springer Series in Operations Research and Financial Engineering, New York, USA.
  11. Hao, H. and Shen, J. (2001), "Estimation of relative displacement of two adjacent asymmetric structures", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 30(1), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-9845(200101)30:1<81::AID-EQE997>3.0.CO;2-E
  12. IBC (2009), International Code Council Inc., International Building Code, Country Club Hills, Illinois, USA.
  13. Jankowski, R. (2005), "Non-linear viscoelastic modelling of earthquake-induced structural pounding", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34(6), 595-611. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.434
  14. Jankowski, R. (2006), "Pounding force response spectrum under earthquake excitation'', Eng. Struct., 28, 1149-1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.12.005
  15. Jeng, V., Kasai, K. and Maison, B.F. (1992), "A spectral difference method to estimate building separations to avoid pounding", Earthq. Spectra, 8(2), 201-223 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585679
  16. Kasai, K., Jagiasi, A.R. and Jeng, V. (1996), "Inelastic vibration phase theory for seismic pounding mitigation", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 122(10), 1136-1146. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1996)122:10(1136)
  17. Khosravikia, F. (2016), "Seismic risk analysis considering soilstructure interaction", Master's Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Sharif Univ. of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
  18. Khosravikia, F., Mahsuli, M. and Ghannad, M.A. (2017), "Probabilistic Evaluation of 2015 NEHRP Soil-Structure Interaction Provisions", J. Eng. Mech., 143(9), 04017065. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001274
  19. Khosravikia, F., Mahsuli, M. and Ghannad, M.A. (2018) "The effect of soil-structure interaction on the seismic risk to buildings", Bull. Earthq. Eng, 16(9), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0194-7
  20. Lin, J.H. (1997), "Separation distance to avoid seismic pounding of adjacent buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 26(3), 395-403. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199703)26:3<395::AID-EQE655>3.0.CO;2-F
  21. Lopez-Garcia, D. and Soong, T.T. (2009a), "Assessment of the separation necessary to prevent seismic pounding between linear structural systems", Prob. Eng. Mech., 24(2), 210-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2008.06.002
  22. Lopez-Garcia, D. and Soong, T.T. (2009b), "Evaluation of current criteria in predicting the separation necessary to prevent seismic pounding between nonlinear hysteretic structural systems", Eng. Struct., 31(5), 1217-1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.01.016
  23. MATLAB (2015), The Language of Technical Computing, Version R2015b.
  24. McKenna, F., Fenves, G.L. and Scott, M.M. (2000), "Open system for earthquake engineering simulation", University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  25. Mucciarelli, M., Masi, A., Vona, M., Gallipoli, M.R, Harabaglia, P., Caputo, R., Piscitelli, P., Rizzo, E., Picozzi, M., Albarello, D. and Lizza, C. (2003), "Quick survey of the possible causes of damage enhancement observed in San Giuliano after the 2002 Molise, Italy seismic sequence", J. Earthq. Eng., 7(4), 599-614. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460309350466
  26. Muthukumar, S. and DesRoches, R.A. (2006), "Hertz contact model with nonlinear damping for pounding simulation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(7), 811-828. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.557
  27. OpenSees (Computer software), Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center; PEER, Richmond, CA, USA.
  28. Penzien J. (1997), "Evaluation of building separation distance required to prevent pounding during strong earthquakes", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 26(8), 849-858. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199708)26:8<849::AID-EQE680>3.0.CO;2-M
  29. Raheem, S.E.A. (2014), "Mitigation measures for earthquake induced pounding effects on seismic performance of adjacent buildings", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 12(4), 1705-1724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9592-2
  30. Rosenblueth, E. and Meli, R. (1986), "The 1985 earthquake: causes and effects in Mexico City", Concrete Int., ACI, 8(5), 23-24.
  31. Standard No. 2800 (2015), Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings, 4th Edition, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development of Iran, Tehran, Iran.
  32. Takewaki, I., Murakami, S., Fujita, K., Yoshitomi, S. and Tsuji, M. (2011), "The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake and response of high-rise buildings under long period ground motions", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 31(11), 1511-1528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.06.001
  33. TBC (1997), Construction and Planning Administration Ministry of Interior, Seismic Provisions, Taiwan Building Code, Taipei, Taiwan.
  34. Tubaldi, E. and Barbato, M. (2011), "Reliability-based assessment of seismic pounding risk between adjacent buildings", Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Corfu, Greece, May.
  35. Tubaldi, E. and Barbato, M. and Ghazizadeh, S. (2012), "A probabilistic performance-based risk assessment approach for seismic pounding with efficient application to linear systems", Struct. Saf., 36-37, 601-626.
  36. Tubaldi, E., Freddi, F. and Barbato, M. (2016), "Probabilistic seismic demand model for pounding risk assessment", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 45(11), 1743-1758. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2725

Cited by

  1. A reliability-based fragility assessment method for seismic pounding between nonlinear buildings vol.77, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2021.77.1.019
  2. Evaluation of required seismic gap between adjacent buildings in relation to the Egyptian Code vol.78, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2021.78.2.219