Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Predicting the seismic behavior of torsionally-unbalanced RC building using resistance eccentricity

  • Abegaz, Ruth A. (Renewable Energy Research Institute, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Kim, In-Ho (Department of Civil Engineering, Kunsan National University) ;
  • Lee, Han Seon (School of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, Korea University)
  • Received : 2021.12.09
  • Accepted : 2022.04.06
  • Published : 2022.07.10
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The static design approach in the current code implies that the inherent torsional moment represents the state of zero inertial torsional moments at the center of mass (CM). However, both experimental and analytical results prove the existence of a large amount of the inertial torsional moment at the CM. Also, the definition of eccentricity by engineers, which is referred to as the resistance eccentricity, is defined as the distance between the center of mass and the center of resistance, which is conceptually different from the static eccentricity in the current codes, defined as the arm length about the center of rotation. The difference in the definitions of eccentricity should be made clear to avoid confusion about the torsion design. This study proposed prediction equations as a function of resistance eccentricity based on a resistance eccentricity model with advantages of (1) the recognition of the existence of torsional moment at the CM, (2) the avoidance of the confusion by using resistance eccentricity instead of the design eccentricity, and (3) a clear relationship of applied inertial forces at the CM and resisting forces. These predictions are compared with the seismic responses obtained from time-history analyses of a five-story building structure under moderate and severe earthquakes. Then, the trend of the resistance eccentricity corresponding to the maximum edge drift is investigated for elastic and inelastic responses. The comparison given in this study shows that these prediction equations can serve as a useful reference for the prediction in both the elastic and the inelastic ranges.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The research described in this paper was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (No. NRF-2020R1I1A1A01073676) and was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (No. NRF-2021R1A6A1A0304518511).

References

  1. Abegaz, R.A. and Lee, H.S. (2020), "Estimation of elastic seismic demands in TU structures using interactive relations between shear and torsion", Earthq. Struct., 19(1), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.19.1.059.
  2. Anagnostopoulos, S.A., Kyrkos, M.T. and Stathopoulos, K.G. (2015a), "Earthquake induced torsion in buildings: critical review and state of the art", Earthq. Struct., 8(2), 305-377. http://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.2.305.
  3. Anagnostopoulos, S.A., Kyrkos, M.T., Papalymperi, A. and Plevri, E. (2015b), "Should accidental eccentricity be eliminated from Eurocode 8?", Earthq. Struct., 8(2), 463-484. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.2.463.
  4. ASCE/SEI 41-13 (2014), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
  5. ASCE/SEI 7-10 (2010), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
  6. Bosco, M., Ferrara, G.A.F., Ghersi, A., Marino, E.M. and Rossi, P.P. (2015), "Seismic assessment of existing R.C. framed structures with in-plan irregularity by nonlinear static methods", Earthq. Struct., 8(2), 401-422. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.2.401.
  7. Bosco, M., Ghersi, A., Marino, E.M. and Rossi, P.P. (2017), "Generalized corrective eccentricities for nonlinear static analysis of buildings with framed or braced structure", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 15, 4887-4913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0159-x.
  8. CESMD (2012), Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data, Internet Data Report, http://www.strongmotioncenter.org/.
  9. Chandler, A.M., Duan, X.N. and Rutenberg, A. (1996), "Seismic torsional response: Assumptions, controversies and research progress", Eur. Earthq. Eng., 10(1), 37-51.
  10. Chopra, A.K. and De la Llera, J.C. (1996), "Accidental and natural torsion in earthquake response and design of buildings", Proceedings of 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico, June.
  11. De-la-Colina, J., Gonzalez-Perez, C.A. and Valdes-Gonzalez, J. (2016), "Accidental eccentricities, frame shear forces and ductility demands of buildings with uncertainties of stiffness and live load", Earthq. Struct., 124, 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.06.012.
  12. ETABS (2013), Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA.
  13. Eurocode 8 (2004), Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance-Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium.
  14. FEMA 454 (2006), Designing for Earthquakes-a Manual for Architects, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  15. Goel, R.K. and Chopra, A.K. (1990), "Inelastic seismic response of one storey asymmetric plan systems: effect of stiffness and strength distribution", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 19, 949-970. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290200302.
  16. Goel, R.K. and Chopra, A.K. (1993), "Seismic code analysis of buildings without locating centers of rigidity", J. Struct. Eng., 119(10), 3039-3055. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:10(3039).
  17. Goel, R.K. and Chopra, A.K. (1994), "Dual-level approach for seismic design of asymmetric-plan buildings", J. Struct. Eng., 120(1), 161-179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:1(161).
  18. Ha, T., Hong, S.G., Cho, B.H. and Kim, D.J. (2019), "Effective assessment of inelastic torsional deformation of plan-asymmetric shear wall systems", Appl. Sci., 9(14), 2814. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9142814.
  19. Humar, J.L. and Kumar, P. (1999), "Effect of orthogonal inplane structural elements on inelastic torsional response", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28, 1071-1097. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199910)28:10<1071::AID-EQE855>3.0.CO;2-V.
  20. International Code Council (IBC) (2012), International Building Code.
  21. KBC 2016 (2017), Korean Building Code, KBC 2016, Architectural Institute of Korea (AIK), Seoul, Korea. (in Korean)
  22. Ko, D.W. and Lee, H.S. (2006), "Shaking table tests on a high-rise RC building model having torsional eccentricity in soft lower storeys", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35, 1425-1451. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.590.
  23. Lee, H.S. and Hwang, K.R. (2015), "Torsion design implications from shake-table responses of an RC low-rise building model having irregularities at the ground story", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 44, 907-927. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2492.
  24. Patil, S.B. and Katti, G.B. (2015), "Study of behaviour of plan and vertical irregularity by seismic analysis", Int. J. Scientif. Res. Develop., 3(4), 253-254.
  25. Paulay, T. (1998), "Torsional mechanisms in ductile building systems", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 27, 1101-1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096 9845(199810)27:10.
  26. PEER, NGA Database (2012), http://www.peer.berkeley.edu/nga.
  27. Ramadan, O.M.O., Mehanny, S.S.F. and Mostafa, A. (2008), "Revisiting the 5% accidental eccentricity provision in seismic design codes for multi-story buildings", Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Bejing, China, October.
  28. Rutenberg, A. (1992), "Nonlinear response of asymmetric building structures and seismic codes: A State of the Art", Eur. Earthq. Eng., VI(2), 3-19.
  29. Stathopoulos, K.G. and Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (2005), "Inelastic torsion of multi-storey buildings under earthquake excitations", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34(12), 1449-1465. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.486.
  30. Stathopoulos, K.G. and Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (2010), "Accidental design eccentricity: Is it important for the inelastic response of buildings to strong earthquakes?", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 30(9), 782-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.12.018.
  31. Tso, W.K. (1990), "Additional seismic inelastic deformation caused by structural asymmetry", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 19, 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290190208.
  32. Tso, W.K. and Bozorgnia, Y. (1986), "Effective eccentricity for inelastic seismic response of buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 14, 413-427. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290140308.
  33. Zakaria, A., Krishna, M.S.R., Krishna, T.G.N.C.V. and Baig, M.M. (2019), "Effects of the accidental eccentricity on regular and irregular buildings", Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., 8(11), 2157-2163. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijitee.k2030.0981119