The Library

Seismic structural and non-structural performance evaluation of highly damped self-centering and conventional systems

Tools

Karavasilis, Theodore L. and Seo, Choung-Yeol. (2011) Seismic structural and non-structural performance evaluation of highly damped self-centering and conventional systems. Engineering Structures, Vol.33 (No.8). pp. 2248-2258. ISSN 0141-0296

Preview

PDF
WRAP_karavasilis_seo.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (621Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.04.001

Abstract

This paper evaluates the seismic structural and non-structural performance of self-centering and conventional structural systems combined with supplemental viscous dampers. For this purpose, a parametric study on the seismic response of highly damped single-degree-of-freedom systems with self-centering flag-shaped or bilinear elastoplastic hysteresis is conducted. Statistical response results are used to evaluate and quantify the effects of supplemental viscous damping, strength ratio and period of vibration on seismic peak displacements, residual displacements and peak total accelerations. Among other findings, it is shown that decreasing the strength of nonlinear systems effectively decreases total accelerations, while added damping increases total accelerations and generally decreases residual displacements. Interestingly, this work shows that in some instances added damping may result in increased residual displacements of bilinear elastoplastic systems. Simple design cases demonstrate how these findings can be considered when designing highly damped structures to reduce structural and non-structural damage.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)
Divisions:	Faculty of Science > Engineering
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Earthquake resistant design, Seismic waves -- Damping, Buildings -- Earthquake effects
Journal or Publication Title:	Engineering Structures
Publisher:	Pergamon
ISSN:	0141-0296
Date:	August 2011
Volume:	Vol.33
Number:	No.8
Number of Pages:	11
Page Range:	pp. 2248-2258
Identification Number:	10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.04.001
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Restricted or Subscription Access
References:	[1] FEMA 445. Next-Generation Performance-based Seismic Design Guidelines. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC. 2006. [2] ATC-69. Reducing the Risks of Non-structural Earthquake Damage. Redwood, CA. [3] Dolce M., and Manfredi G. Research Needs in Earthquake Engineering Highlighted by the 2009 L’Aquila Earthquake. The state of Earthquake Engineering Research in Italy: the ReLUIS-DPC 2005-2008 Project. 2009. [4] CEN Eurocode 8. Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings. European Committee for Standardization. 2004. [5] Ramirez S. M., and Miranda E. Building-specific Loss Estimation Methods & Tools for Simplified Performance-based Earthquake Engineering, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Rep. No. 171, Stanford University, CA. 2009. [6] Chopra A. K. Dynamics of Structures. Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 2nd Edition. Prentice Hall. 2001. [7] McCormick J., Aburano H., Ikenaga M., Nakashima M. Permissible residual deformation levels for building structures considering both safety and human elements. 14th Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China, 12-17 October, 2008. [8] MacRae G.A., Kawashima K. Post-earthquake residual displacements of bilinear oscillators. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1997; 26:701-716. [9] Christopoulos C., Pampanin S., Priestley M.J.N. Performance-based seismic response of frame structures including residual deformations. Part I: Single-degree of freedom systems. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2003; 7(1):97-118. [10] Ruiz-Garcia J., Miranda A. Residual displacement ratios for assessment of existing structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35:315-336. [11] Pampanin S., Christopoulos C., Priestley M.J.N. Performance-based seismic response of frame structures including residual deformations. Part II: Multi-degree of freedom systems. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2003; 7(1):119-147. [12] Pettinga J.D., Priestley M.J.N, Pampanin S., Christopoulos C. The role of inelastic torsion in the determination of residual deformations. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2007; 11:133-157. [13] Symans M. D., Charney F. A., Whittaker A. S., Constantinou M. C., Kircher C. A., Johnson M. W., and McNamara R. J. Energy Dissipation Systems for Seismic Applications: Current Practice and Recent Developments. Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE 2008; 134(1): 3-21. [14] Lin W.-H., and Chopra A. K. Earthquake Response of Elastic Single-Degree-of-Freedom Systems with Nonlinear Viscoelastic Dampers. Journal of Engineering Mechanics-ASCE 2003; 129(6): 597-606. [15] Ramirez O. M., Constantinou M. C., Whittaker A. S., Kircher C.A., and Chrysostomou C. Z. Elastic and Inelastic Seismic Response of Buildings with Damping Systems. Earthquake Spectra 2002; 18(3): 531-547. [16] FEMA 450. NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures: Part 1—Provisions. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 2003. [17] Pavlou E., and Constantinou M. C. Response of Nonstructural Components in Structures with Damping Systems. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2006; 132(7): 1108-1117. [18] Lee K. S., Ricles J., and Sause R. Performance Based Seismic Design of Steel MRFs with Elastomeric Dampers. Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE 2009; 135(5): 489-498. [19] Vargas R., and Bruneau M. Effect of Supplemental Viscous Damping on the Seismic Response of Structural Systems with Metallic Dampers. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2007; 133(10): 1434-1444. [20] Wanitkorkul A., and Filiatrault A. Influence of Passive Supplemental Damping Systems on Structural and Nonstructural Seismic Fragilities of a Steel Building. Engineering Structures 2008; 30(3): 675-682. [21] Occhiuzzi A. Additional Viscous Dampers for Civil Structures: Analysis of Design Methods Based on Effective Evaluation of Modal Damping Rations. Engineering Structures 2009; 31(5): 1093-1101. [22] Karavasilis T.L., Sause R., and Ricles J. M. Seismic Design and Performance of Steel MRFs with Elastomeric Dampers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2011; under review. [23] Karavasilis T. L., Ricles J. M., Sause R., and Chen C. Experimental evaluation of the seismic performance of steel MRFs with compressed elastomer dampers using large-scale real-time hybrid simulation. Engineering Structures 2011; in press. [24] Garlock M., Sause R., and Ricles J. M. Behavior and Design of Post-tensioned Steel Frame Systems. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2007; 133(3) :389-399. [25] Tremblay R., Lacerte M., and Christopoulos C. Seismic Response of Multistory Buildings with Self-centering Energy Dissipative Steel Braces. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2008; 134(1): 108-120. [26] Christopoulos C., Filiatrault A., and Folz B. Seismic Response of Self-centering Hysteretic SDOF Systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31(5): 1131-1150. [27] Seo C.-Y., and Sause R. Ductility Demands on Self-centering Systems under Earthquake Loading. ACI Structural Journal 2005; 102(2):275-285. [28] Kam W.-Y., Pampanin S., Palermo A., Carr A.J. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39(10):1083-1108. [29] Viti S., Cimellaro G. P., and Reinhorn A. M. Retrofit of a Hospital through Strength Reduction and Enhanced Damping. Smart Structures and Systems 2006; 2(4): 339-355. [30] Roh H., Reinhorn A. M. Modeling and Seismic Response of Structures with Concrete Rocking Columns and Viscous Dampers. Engineering Structures 2010; 32(8): 2096-2107. [31] Lavan O., Cimellaro GP, and Reinhorn AM. Noniterative Optimization Procedure for Seismic Weakening and Damping for Inelastic Structures. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 2008; 134(10):1638-1648. [32] Medina RA, Krawinkler H. Seismic demands for nondeteriorating frame structures and their dependence on ground motions. Report No. 144, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, 2003. [33] Ruiz-Garcia J., Miranda E. Evaluation of residual drift demands in regular multi-storey frames for performance-based seismic assessment. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35:1609-1629. [34] IBC 2003. International Code Council, Inc. Birmingham, AL, 2003. [35] FEMA440. Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. ATC-55 project, Redwood City, California, 2008. [36] Eatherton MR, Hajjar JF. Large-scale cyclic and hybrid simulation testing and development of a controlled-rocking steel building system with replaceable fuses. NSEL Report No. NSEL-025, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010. [37] ATC-63. Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. FEMAP695. Redwood City, California, 2008. [38] Rodriguez M.A., Restrepo J.I., Blandon J.J. Shaking table tests of a four-story miniature steel building –model validation. Earthquake Spectra 2006; 22(3):755-780. [39] Wiebe L., Christopoulos C. Characterizing acceleration spikes due to stiffness changes in nonlinear systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39:1653-1670.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/40238