Mid- to high-rise buildings are often braced by slender reinforced concrete (RC) walls, which are coupled by RC floor diaphragms. In design it is typically assumed that the walls act independently and the design base shear demand is computed neglecting any compatibility forces between the walls. Pushover analysis of systems
comprising walls of different lengths have, however, shown that large compatibility forces can develop between walls of different length, which should be considered in design, but also that the magnitude of the computed forces is very sensitive to the modelling assumptions. The paper explores by means of a case study of an eight storey structure with two walls of different lengths the shear forces developing at the base of the wall. It compares and discusses the analysis results from different models including simple hand calculations, a lumped plasticity beam element model and a complex shell element model. It concludes that numerical and analytical approaches which are based on the lumped plasticity model tend to overestimate the shear force demand on the shorter wall.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Comparison of Static and Dynamic Pushover Analysis in Assessment of the Target Displacement
Author: Fayaz R. Rofooei1, Nader K. Attari , Ali Rasekh , Amir H. Shodja | Size: 237 KB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: International Journal of Civil Engineerng. Vol. 4 , No. 3, September 2006 | Year: 2006 | pages: 14
Pushover analysis is a simplified nonlinear analysis technique that can be used to estimate the dynamic demands imposed on a structure under earthquake excitations. One of the first steps taken in this approximate solution is to assess the maximum roof displacement, known as target displacement, using the base shear versus roof displacement diagram. That could be done by the so-called dynamic pushover analysis, i.e. a dynamic time history analysis of an equivalent single degree of freedom model of the original system, as well as other available approximate static
methods. In this paper, a number of load patterns, including a new approach, are considered to construct the related pushover curves. In a so-called dynamic pushover analysis, the bi-linear and tri-linear approximations of these pushover curves were used to assess the target displacements by performing dynamic nonlinear time history analyses. The results obtained for five different special moment resisting steel frames, using five earthquake records were compared with those resulted from the time history analysis of the original system. It is shown that the dynamic pushover analysis approach, specially, with the tri-linear approximation of the pushover curves, proves to have a better accuracy in assessing the target displacements. On the other hand, when nonlinear static procedure seems adequate, no specific preference is observed in using more complicated static procedures (proposed by codes) compared to the simple first mode target displacement assessment.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
The interaction between a surface foundation and the supporting inelastic soil under the action of monotonic, cyclic, and seismic
loading is studied numerically. The foundation supports an elastic tall system, the horizontal loading of which induces primarily an
overturning moment and secondarily a shear force. Starting from linear elastic behavior, the footing eventually uplifts from the soil,
provoking strong inelastic soil response culminating in development of a bearing–capacity failure mechanism and progressive
settlement. The substantial lateral displacement of the pier mass induces an additional aggravating moment due to P–δ effect. The
paper outlines the moment–rotation–settlement relations under monotonic loading at the mass center, under cyclic loading, and under
seismic excitation at the base.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
SEISMIC BEHAVIOR OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: A COMPARISON OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC NONLINEAR APPROACH
Author: Maria Polese , Marco Gaetani d’Aragona , Andrea Prota and Gaetano Manfredi | Size: 1 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: COMPDYN 2013 4th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering M. Papadrakakis, V. Papadopoulos, V. Plevris (eds.) | Year: 2013 | pages: 18
Seismic behavior of damaged buildings may be expressed as a function of their REsidual Capacity (RECag), that is a measure of seismic capacity “reduced” due to damage and represented in terms of peak ground acceleration ag. RECag may be estimated through pushover analyses. In fact, adopting a lumped plasticity model, the plastic hinges may be suitably modified to account for the damage level of the single elements [1]; as shown in [2] nonlinear static analyses of the modified damaged models yield pushover curves that, depending on the number of elements involved in the damaged mechanism and on their damage level, may differ significantly with respect to original ones. The applicability of Pushover Analyses (PA) has been demonstrated for regular structures [3, 4], with their significance being generally supported by the comparison of the results obtained by these “simplified” analyses with Nonlinear dynamic Time-History (NTH) analyses. However, the usability of pushover analysis
for the assessment of the behavior of damaged buildings has not been verified yet, and the study presented in this paper aims at contributing in the evaluation of this issue. The results of PA are confronted with those of NTH for Multi Degree Of Freedom (MDOF) systems representative
of existing R.C. building typologies in the Mediterranean regions. In particular, the response (and damage) of each one of the original “intact” MDOF systems for earthquakes of increasing intensity is studied with either the PA and NTH. Next, applying the methodology described in [2], damage dependent behavior is estimated for varying levels of initial seismic (damaging) intensity. The maximum inter-storey drift and shape along the height, as well as the “modified” RECag are compared to the ones that could be obtained with NTH by subsequent application of suitably scaled pairs of accelerograms. The results of this study suggest that degree of approximation that is obtained by PA applied to damaged structures
with respect to NTH does not vary with respect to the approximation of standard PA compared to NTH.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 43RD JOINT MEETING OF U.S.-JAPAN PANEL ON WIND AND SEISMIC EFFECTS UJNR
Author: Keiichi Tamura, Secretary-General Japan-side Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects | Size: 12.5 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: August 29 - 30, 2011 TSUKUBA, JAPAN | Year: 2011 | pages: 230
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
RESPONSE ANALYSIS STUDY OF A BASE-ISOLATED BUILDING BASED ON SEISMIC CODES WORLDWIDE
Author: Demin Feng , Tian-Chyuan Chan , and Shuguang Wang , Hsi-Yun Chen and Yaw-Nan Chang | Size: 424 KB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: 4th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering Taipei, Taiwan October 12-13, 2006 | Year: 2006 | pages: 09
The procedures to do response analysis of a seismically isolated building are summarized based on the building codes of Japan, China, the USA, Italy and Taiwan. While a dynamic response analysis method is recommended in all five building codes, a simplified design procedure based on equivalent linear analysis is also permitted under limited conditions. Subsequently, a typical 14-story reinforced concrete building, isolated with lead-rubber bearings is analyzed using each of the five building codes. The average response values are taken as design values to compare with the results by the equivalent linear analysis method. The deformation of the isolation level and the base shear force coefficient of the superstructure are compared. Finally, the response reduction factor defined in the Japanese code is applied to the other four building codes to improve the accuracy of equivalent linear analysis results.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Proceedings of the First American Conference on Human Vibration
Author: Ren Dong, Ph.D. Kristine Krajnak, Ph.D. Oliver Wirth, Ph.D. John Wu, Ph.D. | Size: 7.2 MB | Format:PDF | Quality:Unspecified | Publisher: Engineering and Control Technology Branch Health Effects Laboratory Division Morgantown, West Virginia, U.S.A. | Year: 2006 | pages: 177
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
- Introduction to Seismic Design (73 slides)
- AISC Seismic Moment Frame Design (208 slides)
- AISC 358 Prequalified Connection for Seismic Applications (99 slides)
- Changes in the 2010 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (83 slides)
- Performance-Based Seismic Design Today and Tomorrow (83)
- The AISC Seismic Design Provisions Past, Present and Future (71 slides)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
- A First Look at the 14th Edition Manual & 2010 Specification (119)
- What's on the Horizon for AISC Standards in 2010 (125 slides)
- An Introduction to Earthquake Engineering and Seismic Codes (Part 1 Ductility) (88 slides)
- Stability Under Dynamic (Earthquake) Loads (86 slides)
- 50 Tips for Designing Constructable Steel Buildings (68 slides)
- Tips on Connection Design (176 slides)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
- A Standards Approach to Connection Design (135 slides)
- A Guide to The Preliminary Design Process (52 slides)
- Design of Horizontal Diaphragms and Collector Beams for Seismic Lateral Load Resisting Systems (52 slides)
- Mechanism Analysis in the 2010 Seismic Provisions (58 slides)
- Steel Deck Diaphragm Design From Understanding Behavior to Efficient Field Installation (68 slides)
- A Special Report from New Zealand (102 slides)
___________________________________________________________________________________________
- Welding Code Updates What's New in 2010 (237 slides)
- Seismic Filler Metals (45 slides)
- Better Base Plates by Design (83 slides)
- HSS Applications, Use, and Limitations of Chapter K of AISC 360-05 (75 slides)
- Behavior and Design of Composite Column Systems Recent Research and New Provisions (86 slides)
- Behavior and Design of Stability Bracing (105 slides)
- Stability and Design of Plate Girders (101 slides)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
- A Story about the Principles of Constructability The John Hancock Building (52 slides)
- Uniform Force Method (53 slides)
- Unleash the Power of Mathcad (33 slides)
- Simplified Finite Element Method for Predicting Low Frequency Floor Vibration due to Walking (57 slides)
- Implementing BIM in Your Structural Engineering Firm (59 slides)
- Implement a Software Error Reduction Plan (SERP) (54 slides)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
- AISC 2010 Specification Appendix 4 (Part 1) Structural Design for Fire Conditions (79 slides)
- AISC 2010 Specification Appendix 4 (Part 2) Structural Design for Fire Conditions (38 slides)
- Stability and Design of Beams (102 slides)
- Floor Vibrations Beyond Design Guide 11 (93 slides)
- Code Complexity (60 slides)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
- So You Want to be A Structural Engineer (59 slides)
- Exposed Column Base Plates What Three Years of Testing Taught Us (71 slides)
- Quality Control and Assurance Are You Ready for Chapter N (93 slides)
- To Camber or Not to Camber (57 slides)
- MythBusters The Connection Edition (62 slides)
- Cellular and Corrugated Web Beams (90 slides)
- Expansion Joints (79 slides)
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
![[Image: 79342439498166314188.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/79342439498166314188.jpg)
![[Image: info.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/info.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: download.png]](http://postgen.civilea.com/icon/download.png){kind=icon}
![[Image: 74668147267828905729.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/74668147267828905729.jpg)
![[Image: 46035802604682170404.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/46035802604682170404.jpg)
![[Image: 34273194043295516420.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/34273194043295516420.jpg)
![[Image: 90541041668034631179.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/90541041668034631179.jpg)
![[Image: 48169107810005348757.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/48169107810005348757.jpg)
![[Image: 84856237367070094483.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/84856237367070094483.jpg)
![[Image: 77915823576097014108.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/77915823576097014108.jpg)