Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley
Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley
limit states, the suggestions given by Calvi (1999) have been followed (see Crowleyet al., 2004). The non-structural components will again fall within one of four bandsof damage: undamaged, moderate, extensive or complete.2.3 Displacement Capacity as a Function of HeightThe demand in this methodology is represented by a displacement spectrum whichcan be described as providing the expected displacement induced by an earthquake ona single degree of freedom (SDOF) oscillator of given period and damping.Therefore, the displacement capacity equations that are derived must describe thecapacity of a SDOF substitute structure and hence must give the displacementcapacity, both structural and non-structural, at the centre of seismic force of theoriginal structure. In the following sub-sections, structural displacement capacityformulae for moment-resistant reinforced concrete frames exhibiting a beam- orcolumn-sway failure mechanisms are presented.2.3.1 Structural Displacement CapacityBy considering the yield strain of the reinforcing steel and the geometry of the beamand column sections used in a building class, yield section curvatures can be definedusing the relationships suggested by Priestley (2003). These beam and column yieldcurvatures are then multiplied by empirical coefficients to account for shear and jointdeformation to obtain a formula for the yield chord rotation. This chord rotation isequated to base rotation and multiplied by an effective height to produce thedisplacement at the centre of seismic force of the building.The effective height is calculated by multiplying the total height of the structureby an effective height coefficient (ef h ), defined as the ratio of the height to the centreof mass of a SDOF substitute structure (H SDOF ), that has the same displacementcapacity as the original structure at its centre of seismic force (H CSF ), and the totalheight of the original structure (H T ), as explicitly described in the work by Glaisterand Pinho (2003).The yield displacement capacity formulae for beam- and column-sway frames arepresented in Equations (1) and (2) respectively; these are used to define the firststructural limit state.lb∆Sy= 0.5efhHTεyhh∆Sy= 0.43efhHTεyhbsc(1)(2)Post-yield displacement capacity formulae are obtained by adding a post-yielddisplacement component to the yield displacement, calculated by multiplying togetherthe limit state plastic section curvature, the plastic hinge length, and the height/lengthof the yielding member. The post-yield displacement capacity formulae for RC beam-176
and column-sway frames are presented here in Equations (3) and (4), respectively. Inthis formulation, the soft-storey of the column-sway mechanism is assumed to form atthe ground floor. Straightforward adaptation of the equations could easily beintroduced in the cases where the soft-storey is expected to form at storeys other thanthe ground floor, but this is not dealt with herein.lb∆ = 0.5ef H ε + 0.5( ε( )+ ε( )− 1.7 ε ) ef Hh∆SLsi h T y C Lsi S Lsi y h TbSLsi=hs0.43efhHTεy+ 0.5( εC( Lsi )+ εS( Lsi )− 2.14εyhc) hs(3)(4)A detailed account of the derivation of Equations (1) through to (4) can beobtained from the work of Glaister and Pinho (2003). These equations employ thefollowing parameters:∆ Sy∆ SLsief hH Tε yl bh bh sh cε C(Lsi)ε S(Lsi)structural yield (limit state 1) displacement capacitystructural limit state i (2 or 3) displacement capacityeffective height coefficienttotal height of the original structureyield strain of the reinforcementlength of beamdepth of beam sectionheight of storeydepth of column sectionmaximum allowable concrete strain for limit state imaximum allowable steel strain for limit state i2.3.2 Non-Structural Displacement CapacityIn the derivation of the non-structural displacement capacity equations for beam-swayframes, the effective height coefficient cannot be used directly because, rather thanmechanically deriving a base rotation capacity, as in the structural displacementcapacity formulation, it is the roof deformation capacity that is directly obtained (seeCrowley et al., 2004). Hence a relationship between the deformation at the roof andthe deformation at the centre of seismic force is required. The factor relating thesetwo displacements is named a shape factor (S) and it can be found from thedisplacement profiles suggested by Priestley (2003) for beam-sway frames of variousheights. The non-structural displacement capacity of the SDOF substitute structure(∆ NSLsi ) for a given limit state i can thus be found by multiplying the roofdisplacement by the shape factor to give the displacement at the centre of seismicforce of the structure, as presented in Equation (5), where ϑ i stands for the drift ratiocapacity at limit state i (Crowley et al., 2004).177
- Page 142 and 143: THE ATC-58 PROJECT PLAN FOR NONSTRU
- Page 144 and 145: The development of next-generation
- Page 146 and 147: for these flexible nonstructural co
- Page 148 and 149: spectra is several times larger tha
- Page 150 and 151: The variability is associated with
- Page 152 and 153: functions for a wide variety of non
- Page 154 and 155: SIMPLIFIED PBEE TO ESTIMATE ECONOMI
- Page 156 and 157: One can show (Porter et al. 2004) t
- Page 158 and 159: ( )FDM| EDP= xdm = 1 −FRdm , + 1,
- Page 160 and 161: 1. Facility definition. Same as in
- Page 162 and 163: Table 1. Approximation of seismic r
- Page 164 and 165: The EAL values shown in Figure 3 mi
- Page 166 and 167: ASSESSMENT OF SEISMIC PERFORMANCE I
- Page 168 and 169: where e -λτ is the discounted fac
- Page 170 and 171: IDR 3[rad]σPFAIDR34(g)σ PFA4media
- Page 172 and 173: Figure 3a, shows an example of frag
- Page 174 and 175: P(C LVCC i |IM )1.00.80.60.40.20.00
- Page 176 and 177: E [ L T | IM ]$ 10 M$ 8 M$ 6 M$ 4 M
- Page 178 and 179: SEISMIC RESILIENCE OF COMMUNITIES
- Page 180 and 181: 2. RESILIENCE CONCEPTSResilience fo
- Page 182 and 183: quantification tools could be used
- Page 184 and 185: structure remains elastic. This is
- Page 186 and 187: of Figure 7a will be used. It is as
- Page 188 and 189: Nigg, J. M. (1998). Empirical findi
- Page 190 and 191: acceleration with a 475-year return
- Page 194 and 195: ∆NSLsi= SϑH(5)iTFor column-sway
- Page 196 and 197: Pinto et al., 2004). The probabilit
- Page 198 and 199: The main difficulty in assigning a
- Page 200 and 201: Crowley, H., R. Pinho, and J. J. Bo
- Page 202 and 203: analytical models generally have si
- Page 204 and 205: Figure 2. Structure of the response
- Page 206 and 207: can be used as a random variable of
- Page 208 and 209: 4. DERIVATION OF THE VULNERABILITY
- Page 210 and 211: 5. CONCLUSIONSDerivation of vulnera
- Page 212 and 213: REFERENCESAbrams, D. P., A. S. Elna
- Page 214 and 215: In general, these types of bench-mo
- Page 216 and 217: where & x&(t ) = acceleration at th
- Page 218 and 219: science building. The lateral load-
- Page 220 and 221: emain the same, the magnitude of sl
- Page 222 and 223: of sliding thresholds, are desirabl
- Page 224 and 225: Retrofit of Nonstructural Component
- Page 226 and 227: was developed to accommodate these
- Page 228 and 229: tested by Meinheit and Jirsa are us
- Page 230 and 231: where D is the maximum drift and N
- Page 232 and 233: in predicting damage as well as rep
- Page 234 and 235: 4.2.2 Modeling the Data Using Stand
- Page 236 and 237: that the defining demand using a no
- Page 238 and 239: • The influence on the dynamic re
- Page 240 and 241: deviations σ and correlation coeff
and column-sway frames are presented here in Equations (3) and (4), respectively. Inthis formulation, the s<strong>of</strong>t-storey <strong>of</strong> the column-sway mechanism is assumed to form atthe ground floor. Straightforward adaptation <strong>of</strong> the equations could easily beintroduced in the cases where the s<strong>of</strong>t-storey is expected to form at storeys other thanthe ground floor, but this is not dealt with herein.lb∆ = 0.5ef H ε + 0.5( ε( )+ ε( )− 1.7 ε ) ef Hh∆SLsi h T y C Lsi S Lsi y h TbSLsi=hs0.43efhHTεy+ 0.5( εC( Lsi )+ εS( Lsi )− 2.14εyhc) hs(3)(4)A detailed account <strong>of</strong> the derivation <strong>of</strong> Equations (1) through to (4) can beobtained from the work <strong>of</strong> Glaister and Pinho (2003). These equations employ thefollowing parameters:∆ Sy∆ SLsief hH Tε yl bh bh sh cε C(Lsi)ε S(Lsi)structural yield (limit state 1) displacement capacitystructural limit state i (2 or 3) displacement capacityeffective height coefficienttotal height <strong>of</strong> the original structureyield strain <strong>of</strong> the reinforcementlength <strong>of</strong> beamdepth <strong>of</strong> beam sectionheight <strong>of</strong> storeydepth <strong>of</strong> column sectionmaximum allowable concrete strain for limit state imaximum allowable steel strain for limit state i2.3.2 Non-Structural Displacement CapacityIn the derivation <strong>of</strong> the non-structural displacement capacity equations for beam-swayframes, the effective height coefficient cannot be used directly because, rather thanmechanically deriving a base rotation capacity, as in the structural displacementcapacity formulation, it is the ro<strong>of</strong> deformation capacity that is directly obtained (seeCrowley et al., 2004). Hence a relationship between the deformation at the ro<strong>of</strong> andthe deformation at the centre <strong>of</strong> seismic force is required. The factor relating thesetwo displacements is named a shape factor (S) and it can be found from thedisplacement pr<strong>of</strong>iles suggested by Priestley (2003) for beam-sway frames <strong>of</strong> variousheights. The non-structural displacement capacity <strong>of</strong> the SDOF substitute structure(∆ NSLsi ) for a given limit state i can thus be found by multiplying the ro<strong>of</strong>displacement by the shape factor to give the displacement at the centre <strong>of</strong> seismicforce <strong>of</strong> the structure, as presented in Equation (5), where ϑ i stands for the drift ratiocapacity at limit state i (Crowley et al., 2004).177