A modal seismic design procedure based on a selected level of ductility demand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.52.2.78-94Abstract
Determination of seismic design forces of structures is performed by the building codes usually using response reduction (or behaviour) factors that incorporate indeterminacy and ductility capacity of lateral bearing systems. In this procedure story drifts are checked as a final design step approximately preventing stories from assuming excessive ductility demands, or seismic damage. If this procedure is reversed, a more logical seismic design approach may be developed by starting with a ductility-controlled procedure. It is the incentive of this research in which by using a large number of earthquakes, first nonlinear acceleration spectra are developed for different levels of ductility demand. Then an energy-based modal procedure is developed in which the system ductility demand is distributed between the important vibration modes based on their contribution. Finally, the developed method is applied to seismic design of several buildings selected from both regular and irregular structural systems. Comparison with a sample code design establishes success of the method in developing a more rational seismic design.
References
Bertero RD and Bertero VV (2000). “Application of a comprehensive approach for the performance based earthquake resistant design buildings”. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, NZ.
Park YJ and Ang AH (1985). “Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete”. Journal of Structural Engineering, 111(4): 722-739. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(722)
Medhekar MS and Kennedy DJ (2000). “Displacement-based seismic design of buildings – theory”. Engineering Structures, 22(3): 201-209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00092-3
Borzi B, Calvi GM, Elnashai AS, Faccioli E and Bommer JJ (2001). “Inelastic spectra for displacement-based seismic design”. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 21(1): 47-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(00)00075-0
Chopra AK and Goel RK (2001). “Direct displacement-based design: use of inelastic vs. elastic design spectra”. Earthquake Spectra, 17(1): 47-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586166
Kim J and Seo Y (2004). “Seismic design of low-rise steel frames with buckling-restrained braces”. Engineering structures, 26(5): 543-551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.11.005
Christopoulos C and Pampanin S (2004). “Towards performance-based design of MDOF structures with explicit consideration of residual deformations”. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology, 41(1): 53-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.63898/UZRJ7911
Choi H and Kim J (2006). “Energy-based seismic design of buckling-restrained braced frames using hysteretic energy spectrum”. Engineering Structures, 28(2): 304-311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.08.008
Priestley MJ, Calvi GM and Kowalsky MJ (2007). “Direct displacement-based seismic design of structures”. New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Annual Conference, Palmerston North, NZ.
Sahoo DR and Chao SH (2010). “Performance-based plastic design method for buckling-restrained braced frames”. Engineering Structures, 32(9): 2950-2958. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.014
Grigorian M and Grigorian C (2011). “Performance control for seismic design of moment frames”. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 67(7): 1106-1114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.02.001
Wongpakdee N, Leelataviwat S, Goel SC and Liao WC (2014). “Performance-based design and collapse evaluation of buckling restrained knee braced truss moment frames”. Engineering Structures, 60: 23-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.12.014
Banihashemi MR, Mirzagoltabar AR and Tavakoli HR (2015). “Development of the performance based plastic design for steel moment resistant frame”. International Journal of Steel Structures, 15(1): 51-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-015-3004-6
Vamvatsikos D and Aschheim M (2014). “Direct performance-based seismic design of structures using yield frequency spectra”. The 10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, AL.
NZS1170.5 (2004). “Structural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake Actions”. Standards New Zealand, Wellington, NZ.
FEMA P-750 (2009). “NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures”. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
PEER (2019). “Peer Ground Motion Database”. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Centre, University of California, Berkeley, CA. URL: http://peer.berkeley.edu.
OpenSees (2019). “Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees), Version 2.3.0”. University of California, Berkeley, CA. Available from: http://opensees.berkeley.edu.
Cosenza E, Manfredi G and Ramasco R (1993). “The use of damage functionals in earthquake engineering: a comparison between different methods”. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 22(10): 855-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290221003
ASCE 41-13 (2013). “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings”. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
