Functional Model to Estimate the Inelastic Displacement Ratio

Open access

Abstract

In this paper a functional model to estimate the inelastic displacement ratio as a function of the ductility factor is presented. The coefficients of the functional model are approximated using nonlinear regression. The used data is in the form of computed displacement for an inelastic single degree of freedom system with a fixed ductility factor. The inelastic seismic response spectra of constant ductility factors are used for generating data. A method for selecting ground-motions that have similar frequency content to that of the ones picked for the comparison is presented. The variability of the seismic response of nonlinear single degree of freedom systems with different hysteretic behavior is presented.

[1] Ancheta, T. D., Darragh, R. B., Stewart, J. P., Seyhan, E., Silva, W. J., Chiou, B. S. J., Wooddell, K. E., Graves, R. W., Kottke, A. R., Boore, D. M., Kishida, T. & Donahue, J. L. (2013). PEER NGA-West2 Database. Berkeley: PEER. (Report No. 2013/03)

[2] Baker, J. W. (2011). Conditional Mean Spectrum: Tool for ground motion selection. Journal of Structural Engineering 137(3), 322-331. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000215

[3] Bates, D. M. & Watts, D. G. (2007). Nonlinear Regression Analysis and Its Applications. New York: JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC.

[4] Bradley, B. A. (2012). A Ground Motion Selection Algorithm Based on the Generalized Conditional Intensity Measure Approach. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 40,48-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.04.007

[5] Carr, A. J. (2003). The generation of inelastic response spectra for earthquake acceleration records. 7th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 13 February 2003 (076). Christchurch, New Zealand.

[6] Chopra, A. K. (2007). Dynamics of Structures Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Third Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

[7] Douglas, J. & Aochi, H. (2008). A survey of techniques for predicting earthquake ground motions for engineering purposes. Survey in Geophysics 29(1), 187-220. DOI: 10.1007/s10712-008-9046-y.

[8] Iervolino, I., Maddaloni, G. & Cosenza, E. (2008). Eurocode 8 compliant real record sets for seismic analysis of structures. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(1), 54-90. 2008. DOI: 10.1080/13632460701457173.

[9] Liossatou, E. & Fardis, M. N. (2014). Residual displacements of RC structures as SDOF systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 44(1), 713-734. DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2483

[10] McKenna, F., Fenves, G. L., Scott, M. H. & Mazzoni, S. (2006). Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation [computer software]. Berkeley: PEER.

[11]MDRAP (2013). P100-1/2013 Cod de Proiectare Seismică. Partea I: Prevederi de Proiectare pentru Clădiri. România

[12]Ruiz-Garcia, J. & Miranda, E. (2005). Performance-Based Assessment of Existing Structures Accounting for Residual Displacements. Stanford University: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center. (Report No. 153)

[13]Shahi, S. K. & Baker, J. W. (2011). An empirically calibrated framework for including the effects of near-fault directivity in Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 101(2), 742-755. DOI: 10.1785/0120100090.

[14]Shome, N. & Cornell, C. A. (1999). Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Stanford University: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center. (Report No. RMS-35)

[15] Zelaschi, C., Monteiro, R., Marques, M. & Pinho, R. (2014). Comparative analysis of intensity measures for reinforced concrete bridges. Second European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 25-29 august 2014. Istanbul, Turkey.

Mathematical Modelling in Civil Engineering

The Journal of Technical University of Civil Engineering of Bucharest

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 55 55 20
PDF Downloads 24 24 13