• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제13권4호
• /
• pp.369-385
• /
• 2002

Ductility capacity is comprehensively studied for steel moment-resisting frames. Local, story and global ductility are being considered. An appropriate measure of global ductility is suggested. A time domain nonlinear seismic response algorithm is used to evaluate several definitions of ductility. It is observed that for one-story structures, resembling a single degree of freedom (SDOF) system, all definitions of global ductility seem to give reasonable values. However, for complex structures it may give unreasonable values. It indicates that using SDOF systems to estimate the ductility capacity may be a very crude approximation. For multi degree of freedom (MDOF) systems some definitions may not be appropriate, even though they are used in the profession. Results also indicate that the structural global ductility of 4, commonly used for moment-resisting steel frames, cannot be justified based on this study. The ductility of MDOF structural systems and the corresponding equivalent SDOF systems is studied. The global ductility values are very different for the two representations. The ductility reduction factor $F_{\mu}$ is also estimated. For a given frame, the values of the $F_{\mu}$ parameter significantly vary from one earthquake to another, even though the maximum deformation in terms of the interstory displacement is roughly the same for all earthquakes. This is because the $F_{\mu}$ values depend on the amount of dissipated energy, which in turn depends on the plastic mechanism, formed in the frames as well as on the loading, unloading and reloading process at plastic hinges. Based on the results of this study, the Newmark and Hall procedure to relate the ductility reduction factor and the ductility parameter cannot be justified. The reason for this is that SDOF systems were used to model real frames in these studies. Higher mode effects were neglected and energy dissipation was not explicitly considered. In addition, it is not possible to observe the formation of a collapse mechanism in the equivalent SDOF systems. Therefore, the ductility parameter and the force reduction factor should be estimated by using the MDOF representation.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제12권3호
• /
• pp.249-266
• /
• 2001

Current seismic design provisions allow structures to deform into inelastic range during design level earthquakes since the chance to meet such event is quite rare. For this purpose, design base shear is defined in current seismic design provisions as the value of elastic seismic shear force divided by strength reduction factor, R (${\geq}1$). Strength reduction factor generally consists of four different factors, which can account for ductility capacity, overstrength, damping, and redundancy inherent in structures respectively. In this study, R factor is assumed to account for only the ductility rather than overstrength, damping, and redundancy. The R factor considering ductility is called "ductility factor" ($R_{\mu}$). This study proposes ductility factor with correction factor, C, which can account for dynamic P-${\Delta}$ effect. Correction factor, C is established as the functional form since it requires computational efforts and time for calculating this factor. From the statistical study using the results of nonlinear dynamic analysis for 40 earthquake ground motions (EQGM) it is shown that the dependence of C factor on structural period is weak, whereas C factor is strongly dependant on the change of ductility ratio and stability coefficient. To propose the functional form of C factor statistical study is carried out using 79,920 nonlinear dynamic analysis results for different combination of parameters and 40 EQGM.

• 산업기술연구
• /
• 제26권A호
• /
• pp.153-161
• /
• 2006

The main objective of this study was to derive a formula of ductility reduction factor, expressed as $R_{\mu}$. To attain this objective, a study comprised reduction factors computed for stiffness degrading systems undergoing different levels of ductility and to investigate an accuracy of the formula. Based on this study, the main conclusions can be summarized :(1) The ductility reduction factor is primarily affected by the period of the system and the displacement ductility ratio. (2) The proposed formula is simpler and the inelastic deformations of bridge structures are better than those by the others formulas we used before.

• 한국지진공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국지진공학회 2006년도 학술발표회 논문집
• /
• pp.316-323
• /
• 2006

The main objective of this study was to derive a formula of ductility reduction factor, expressed as $R{\mu}$. To attain this objective, a study comprised reduction factors computed for stiffness degrading systems undergoing different levels of ductility and to investigate an accuracy of the formula. Based on this study, the main conclusions can be summarized :(1) The ductility reduction factor is primarily affected by the period of the system and the displacement ductility ratio. (2) The proposed formula is simpler and the inelastic deformations of bridge structures are better than those by the others formulas we used before.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제62권2호
• /
• pp.209-224
• /
• 2017

Elevated water tanks are considered as important structures due to its post-earthquake requirements. Elevated water tank on reinforced concrete frame staging is widely used in India. Different response reduction factors depending on ductility of frame members are used in seismic design of frame staging. The study on appropriateness of response reduction factor for reinforced concrete tank staging is sparse in literature. In the present paper a systematic study on estimation of key components of response reduction factors is presented. By considering the various combinations of tank capacity, height of staging, seismic design level and design response reduction factors, forty-eight analytical models are developed and designed using relevant Indian codes. The minimum specified design cross section of column as per Indian code is found to be sufficient to accommodate the design steel. The strength factor and ductility factor are estimated using results of nonlinear static pushover analysis. It was observed that for seismic design category 'high' the strength factor has lesser contribution than ductility factor, whereas, opposite trend is observed for seismic design category 'low'. Further, the effects of staging height and tank capacity on strength and ductility factors for two different seismic design categories are studied. For both seismic design categories, the response reduction factors obtained from the nonlinear static analysis is higher than the code specified response reduction factors. The minimum dimension restriction of column is observed as key parameter in achieving the desired performance of the elevated water tank on frame staging.

• 콘크리트학회논문집
• /
• 제11권4호
• /
• pp.147-156
• /
• 1999

Current design code states that the strength reduction factor shall be permitted to be increased linearly from that for axial compression to that for flexure as the design axial load strength $\Phi$cPn decrease from 0.1fckAg to zero. Since this empirically adopted axial load level of $\Phi$cPn=0.1fckAg considers only sectional area and concrete strength, the other variables such as steel ratio, steel yielding strength, and steel arrangement can not be considered. This research is performed to investigate the consistency and the rationality of the code requirement for determination of column design strength. A nonlinear axial force-moment-curvature analysis was conducted in order to investigate the ductility of reinforced concrete column sections. As the result of ductility analysis, it was found that the ductility at the axial force of $\Phi$cPn=0.1fckAg represented a lock of consistency for the various variable contained sections. Therefore, a more reasonable application method of strength reduction factor is proposed, that is based on the strain ductility index.

• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• 제16권4호
• /
• pp.469-485
• /
• 2019

A numerical investigation regarding local (${\mu}_L$) and story (${\mu}_S$) ductility demand evaluation of steel buildings with perimeter moment resisting frames (PMRF) and interior gravity frames (IGF), is conducted in this study. The interior connections are modeled, firstly as perfectly pinned (PP), and then as semi-rigid (SR). Three models used in the SAC steel project, representing steel buildings of low-, mid-, and high-rise, are considered. The story ductility reduction factor ($R_{{\mu}S}$) as well as the ratio ($Q_{GL}$) of $R_{{\mu}S}$ to ${\mu}_L$ are calculated. ${\mu}_L$ and ${\mu}_S$, and consequently structural damage, at the PMRF are significant reduced when the usually neglected effect of SR connections is considered; average reductions larger than 40% are observed implying that the behavior of the models with SR connections is superior and that the ductility detailing of the PMRF doesn't need to be so stringent when SR connections are considered. $R_{{\mu}S}$ is approximately constant through height for low-rise buildings, but for the others it tends to increase with the story number contradicting the same proportion reduction assumed in the Equivalent Static Lateral Method (ESLM). It is implicitly assumed in IBC Code that the overall ductility reduction factor for ductile moment resisting frames is about 4; the results of this study show that this value is non-conservative for low-rise buildings but conservative for mid- and high-rise buildings implying that the ESLM fails evaluating the inelastic interstory demands. If local ductility capacity is stated as the basis for design, a value of 0.4 for $Q_{GL}$ seems to be reasonable for low- and medium-rise buildings.

• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• 제12권4호
• /
• pp.397-407
• /
• 2017

To estimate the structural seismic demand, some methods are based on an equivalent linear system such as the Capacity Spectrum Method, the N2 method and the Equivalent Linearization method. Another category, widely investigated, is based on displacement correction such as the Displacement Coefficient Method and the Coefficient Method. Its basic concept consists in converting the elastic linear displacement of an equivalent Single Degree of Freedom system (SDOF) into a corresponding inelastic displacement. It relies on adequate modifying or reduction coefficient such as the inelastic deformation ratio which is usually developed for systems with known ductility factors ($C_{\mu}$) and ($C_R$) for known yield-strength reduction factor. The present paper proposes a rational approach which estimates this inelastic deformation ratio for SDOF bilinear systems by rigorous nonlinear analysis. It proposes a new inelastic deformation ratio which unifies and combines both $C_{\mu}$ and $C_R$ effects. It is defined by the ratio between the inelastic and elastic maximum lateral displacement demands. Three options are investigated in order to express the inelastic response spectra in terms of: ductility demand, yield strength reduction factor, and inelastic deformation ratio which depends on the period, the post-to-preyield stiffness ratio, the yield strength and the peak ground acceleration. This new inelastic deformation ratio ($C_{\eta}$) is describes the response spectra and is related to the capacity curve (pushover curve): normalized yield strength coefficient (${\eta}$), post-to-preyield stiffness ratio (${\alpha}$), natural period (T), peak ductility factor (${\mu}$), and the yield strength reduction factor ($R_y$). For illustrative purposes, instantaneous ductility demand and yield strength reduction factor for a SDOF system subject to various recorded motions (El-Centro 1940 (N/S), Boumerdes: Algeria 2003). The method accuracy is investigated and compared to classical formulations, for various hysteretic models and values of the normalized yield strength coefficient (${\eta}$), post-to-preyield stiffness ratio (${\alpha}$), and natural period (T). Though the ductility demand and yield strength reduction factor differ greatly for some given T and ${\eta}$ ranges, they remain take close when ${\eta}>1$, whereas they are equal to 1 for periods $T{\geq}1s$.

• Structural Engineering and Mechanics
• /
• 제45권5호
• /
• pp.655-676
• /
• 2013

In this study, strength reduction factors and inelastic displacement ratios are investigated for SDOF systems with period range of 0.1-3.0 s considering soil structure interaction for earthquake motions recorded on soft soil. The effect of stiffness degradation on strength reduction factors and inelastic displacement ratios is investigated. The modified-Clough model is used to represent structures that exhibit significant stiffness degradation when subjected to reverse cyclic loading and the elastoplastic model is used to represent non-degrading structures. The effect of negative strain - hardening on the inelastic displacement and strength of structures is also investigated. Soil structure interacting systems are modeled and analyzed with effective period, effective damping and effective ductility values differing from fixed-base case. For inelastic time history analyses, Newmark method for step by step time integration was adapted in an in-house computer program. New equations are proposed for strength reduction factor and inelastic displacement ratio of interacting system as a function of structural period($\tilde{T}$, T) ductility (${\mu}$) and period lengthening ratio ($\tilde{T}$/T).

• 한국콘크리트학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국콘크리트학회 1998년도 봄 학술발표회논문집(II)
• /
• pp.433-438
• /
• 1998

Design lateral strength calculated by current seismic design code is prescribed to be much lower than the force level required for a structure to respond elastically during design level earthquake ground motion. Present procedures for calculating seismic design forces are based on the use of elastic spectra reduced by a strength reduction factor known as "response modification factor, R". This factor accounts for the inherent ductility, overstrength, redundancy, and damping of a structural system. This study considers ductility and overstrength of the wall-type structure for investigating R factor. This means that R factor is determined from the product of "ductility-based R factor($R_$\mu$$) and overstrength factor($R_s$). $R_$\mu$$ factor is calibrated to attain the targer ductility ratio (system ductility capacity) and produced in the from of $R_$\mu$$ spectra considering the influence of target ductility, natural period, and hysteretic model. On the other hand, $R_s$ is more difficult to quantify, since it depends on both material and system-dependent uncertain parameters. In this study Rs factor was determined from the result of push-over analysis.-over analysis.