Global Ductility Demands of RC Frames with Various Post-Yield Stiffness Ratio and Ductility Capacity Ratio Under Near-Field Earthquakes

Ade Faisal, Ph.D

Abstract


The directivity pulse motion in near-field earthquake affects the responses of structures. The response includes the roof drifts and interstory drifts, which is so-called the ductility demand. Although many studies have done in this topic, the effect of various post-yield stiffness ratio and ductility capacity ratio to the global ductility demands of reinforced concrete (RC) frames under near-field ground motion is not specifically investigated yet. The trend of global ductility demands of RC frames under near-field earthquake is the objective of this study. The frames are modeled with various fundamental period, behavior factor, plastic rotation capacity, post-yield stiffness ratio, and ductility capacity ratio. The study reveals that the effect of ductility capacity ratio on the global ductility demands is apparent as as the plastic rotation capacity changes. The global ductility demand is also found influenced by global post-yield stiffness ratio and behaviour factor.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bertero, V.V., Mahin, S.A. and Herrera, R.A., 1978. Aseismic design implications of near-fault San Fernando earthquake records. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics, 6(1), pp.31-42.

Hall, J.F., Heaton, T.H., Halling, M.W. and Wald, D.J., 1995. Near-source ground motion and its effects on flexible buildings. Earthquake spectra, 11(4), pp.569-605.

Malhotra, P.K., 1999. Response of buildings to near-field pulse-like ground motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28(11), pp.1309-1326.

Alavi, B. and Krawinkler, H., 2001. Effects of near-fault ground motions on frame structures.Stanford: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center.

Krawinkler, H., Medina, R. and Alavi, B., 2003. Seismic drift and ductility demands and their dependence on ground motions. Engineering structures, 25(5), pp.637-653.

Krawinkler, H., Alavi, B. and Zareian, F., 2005. Impact of near-fault pulses on engineering design. Direction in Strong Motion Instrumentation, 58(1), pp.83-106.

Akkar, S., Yazgan, U. and Glkan, P., 2005. Drift estimates in frame buildings subjected to near- fault ground motions. Journal of Structural Engineering, 131(7), pp.1014-1024.

Kalkan, E. and Kunnath, S.K., 2006. Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings. Earthquake spectra, 22(2), pp.367-390.

Sehhati, R., Rodriguez-Marek, A., ElGawady, M. and Cofer, W.F., 2011. Effects of near-fault ground motions and equivalent pulses on multi-story structures. Engineering Structures, 33(3), pp.767-779.

Majid, T.A., Wan, H.W., Zaini, S.S., Faisal, A. and Wong, Z.M., 2010. The effect of ground motion on non-linear performance of asymmetrical reinforced concrete frames. Disaster Advances, 3(4), pp.35-39.

Zahid, M.Z.A.M., Majid, T.A. and Faisal, A., 2012. Effect Of Repeated Near Field Earthquake To The High-Rise Rc Building. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(10), pp.129-138.

Faisal, A., Majid, T.A. and Hatzigeorgiou, G.D., 2013. Investigation of story ductility demands of inelastic concrete frames subjected to repeated earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 44, pp.42-53.

Beiraghi, H., Kheyroddin, A. and Kafi, M.A., 2016. Forward directivity near-fault and far-fault ground motion effects on the behavior of reinforced concrete wall tall buildings with one and more plastic hinges. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 25(11), pp.519-539.

ASCE. (2005). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE/SEI 7-05.

Reston, VA.: ASCE.

CEN. (2004). Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (Vol. 1). Brussels.: European Committee for Standardization.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.