Analysis and modelling of the seismic behaviour of high ... - Ingegneria

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2. DUCTILITY AND SEISMIC RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES Figure 2.10. Process for simplified demand estimation Gupta and Krawinkler (2000) However, such satisfactory predictions of seismic demands are mostly restricted to low- and medium-rise structures in which the inelastic action is distributed throughout the height of the structure (Krawinkler and Seneviratna, 1998; Gupta and Krawinkler, 2000). None of the invariant force distributions can take into account the contributions of higher modes to response, or for a redistribution of inertia forces because of structural yielding and the associated changes in the vibration properties of the structure. To overcome these limitations, several researchers have proposed adaptive force distributions that attempt to follow more closely the time-variant distributions of inertia forces [Fajfar and Fischinger, 1988; Gupta and Kunnath, 2000]. While these adaptive force distributions may provide better estimates of seismic demands, they are conceptually complicated and computationally demanding for routine application in structural engineering practice. Attempts have also been made to consider more than the fundamental vibration mode in pushover analysis. 2.4.2 Non-linear dynamic procedure (NDP) Under the non-linear dynamic procedure (NDP), design seismic forces, their distribution over the height of the building, and the corresponding internal forces and system displacements are determined by using an inelastic dynamic analysis (IDA). The concept was mentioned as early as 1977 by Bertero, and has since been cast in several forms in the work of many researchers. Recently, it has also 31
2. DUCTILITY AND SEISMIC RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES been adopted by U.S. guidelines (FEMA Reports) and European Code (EC8, 2002) as the state-of-the art method to determine the global collapse capacity. The IDA study is now a multi-purpose and widely applicable method and its objectives, only some of which are evident in Figure 2.11, include (Vamvatsikos and Cornell, 2001): 32 1. thorough understanding of the range of response or demands versus a range of potential levels of a ground motion record; 2. better understanding of the structural implications of rarer/more severe ground motion levels; 3. better understanding of changes in the nature of the structural response as the intensity of ground motion increases, e.g. changes in peak deformation patterns with height, onset of stiffness and strength degradation and their patterns and magnitudes; 4. producing estimates of the dynamic capacity of the global structural system; 5. finally, given a multi-record IDA study, understanding how stable or variable all these items are from one ground motion record to another. Figure 2.11. An example of information extracted from a single-record IDA study of a T1=4 s, 20-storey steel moment-resisting frame with ductile members and connections, including global geometric nonlinearities (P– ∆) subjected to the El Centro (1940) record after Vamvatsikos and Cornell (2001)
Page 1 and 2: Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanic
Page 3 and 4: UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI TRENTO D
Page 6: Ai miei genitori
Page 10 and 11: INDEX 1 INTRODUCTION...............
Page 12 and 13: INDEX iii 4.10.3 Results of the PsD
Page 14 and 15: 1.1 Introduction 1 1 INTRODUCTION I
Page 16 and 17: 1. INTRODUCTION imposes precise con
Page 18 and 19: 1. INTRODUCTION joints whilst 2D mo
Page 20 and 21: 7 2 DUCTILITY AND SEISMIC RESPONSE
Page 22 and 23: 2. DUCTILITY AND SEISMIC RESPONSE O
Page 54 and 55: 3. SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF BOLTED END
Page 94 and 95:
3. SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF BOLTED END
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
4. SEISMIC RESPONSE OF PARTIAL-STRE
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
5. SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF RC COLUMNS
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262:
show all

Analysis and modelling of the seismic behaviour of high ... - Ingegneria

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?