Advertisement

Effects of Inherent Structural Characteristics on Seismic Performances of Aseismically Base-Isolated Buildings

  • Peyman NarjabadifamEmail author
  • Patrick L. Y. Tiong
  • Ramin Mousavi-Alanjagh
Technical Note
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Effects of inherent characteristics of both isolation system (IS) and superstructure on seismic performances of aseismically base-isolated buildings subjected to near- and far-field ground motions are investigated through extensive numerical analyses. ISs considered are friction pendulum system (FPS) and high-damping laminated rubber bearing (HRB), as the most practical ISs. Superstructures are 3-, 7-, and 11-story buildings with steel and reinforced concrete moment-resisting and braced frames. Seven isolation strategies are practically designed by the ISs, using three target displacements and two coefficients of friction. Eighty-four structural models are created for the 12 superstructures isolated by the two ISs. 1176 nonlinear time history analyses are carried out on the two-dimensional models of the isolated buildings subjected to seven near-field and seven far-field ground motions. Base shears, story displacements, and story accelerations are studied as the performance criteria. It is shown that the effectiveness of aseismic base isolation depends significantly on inherent mass, stiffness, and damping of the structure. The effect of isolation damping is more than mass and stiffness of the superstructure. The effectiveness of aseismic base isolation with the design strategies controlled by target displacement increases by increase in the inherent mass and stiffness of the superstructure, while facing reduction due to inherent increase in the isolation damping. The effects are similar in near- and far-field ground motions. Seismic performances of FPS are less sensitive to the effects of inherent structural characteristics. With the conditions and parameters set in this study, it is found that FPS performs better than HRB, specifically in near-field excitations.

Keywords

Aseismic base isolation Inherent structural characteristics Ground motion Sensitivity Seismic performances 

References

  1. Abrishambaf A, Ozay G (2010) Effects of isolation damping and stiffness on the seismic behaviour of structures. In: Mladenov V, Psarris K, Mastorakis N, Caballero A, Vachtsevanos G (ed) Advances in control, chemical engineering, civil engineering, and mechanical engineering. WSEAS Press, pp 76–82Google Scholar
  2. ACI 318–11 (2011) Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MIGoogle Scholar
  3. AGOM (2017) AGOM International, Ossona, Italy. agom.it/download/Catalogue/Seismic-Isolation. Accessed 19 October 2017Google Scholar
  4. AISC 341–10 (2010) Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. American Institute for Steel Construction, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  5. ASCE, SEI 41–13 (2013) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, RestonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bek M, Oseli A, Saprunov A, Zhumagulov BT, Mian SM, Gusev BV, Zarnic R, Bernstorff BV, Holecek N, Emri I (2013) High pressure dissipative granular materials for earthquake protection of houses. Anali Pazu 3(2):79–86Google Scholar
  7. Bhandari M, Bharti SD, Shirmali MK (2017) Datta TK (2017) The numerical study of base-isolated buildings under near-field and far-field earthquake. J Earthq Eng Publ Online 15:1–19Google Scholar
  8. Botis M, Harcich C (2012) A brief history upon seismic isolating systems. Bull Transilvania Univ Brasov Ser I Eng Sci 5(54):93–98Google Scholar
  9. Cardone D, Narjabadifam P, Nigro D (2011) Shaking table tests of the smart restorable sliding base IS (SRSBIS). J Earthq Eng 15(8):1157–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chun YS, Hur MW (2015) Effects of isolation period difference and beam-column stiffness ratio on the dynamic response of reinforced concrete building. Int J Concr Struct Mater 9(4):439–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DIS (2017) Dynamic ISs, McCarran, NV, USA. www.dis-inc.com. Accessed 19 October 2017
  12. Dolce M, Cardone D, Croatto F (2005) Frictional behavior of steel-PTFE interfaces for seismic isolation. Bull Earthq Eng 3(1):75–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Du H, Han M (2014) Impact and energy analysis of deformation-limited base-isolated structure in shaking table test. Appl Mech Mater 638–640:1811–1817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ETABS (2016) Integrated building design software. Computers and Structures Inc., BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Falborski T, Jankowski R (2017) Experimental study on effectiveness of a prototype seismic IS made of polymeric bearings. Appl Sci 2017(7–808):1–18Google Scholar
  16. Fan FG, Ahmadi G, Tadjbakhsh IG (1990) Multi-story base-isolated buildings under a harmonic ground motion–Part II: sensitivity analysis. Nucl Eng Des 123(1):17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. FIP (2017) FIP industiale, Selvazzano, Italy. www.fipindustriale.it. Accessed 19 October 2017
  18. Folic R, Stanojev M (2016) Seismic protection of structures – application of base isolation in buildings. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on contemporary achievements in civil engineering, 22 April, Subotica, SerbiaGoogle Scholar
  19. Guideline for design of base-isolated buildings (2016) Guidelines No. S 550 for design of base-isolated buildings–in Persian. Road, Housing, and Urban Development Research Center, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  20. Guidelines for design and practice of base ISs in buildings (2010) Guidelines No. 523 for design and practice of base ISs in buildings–in Persian. Office of Deputy for Strategic Supervision of the Bureau of Technical Execution System of the Vice Presidency for Strategic Planning and Supervision, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  21. Hall JM (1999) Discussion–the role of damping in seismic isolation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(12):1717–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hancock J, Watson-Lamprey J, Abrahamson NA, Bommer JJ, Markatis A, McCoy E, Mendis R (2006) An improved method of matching response spectra of recorded earthquake ground motion using wavelets. J Earthq Eng 10(sup001):67–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hong WK, Kim HC (2004) Performance of a multi-story structure with a resilient-friction base IS. Comput Struct 82(27):2271–2283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. IBC (2012) International building code. International Code Council, Country Club HillsGoogle Scholar
  25. Iranian code of practice for resistant design of buildings (2015) Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings; BHRC–PN S-253 known as Standard No. 2800. Road, Housing, and Urban Development Research Center, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  26. Jain SK, Thakkar SK (2004) Effect of superstructure stiffening in base isolated tall buildings IE (I). J Civil Eng 85:142–148Google Scholar
  27. Jalali A, Narjabadifam P (2006) Optimum modal characteristics for multi-story buildings isolated with LRBs. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on earthquake engineering, 12–13 October, Taipei, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  28. Jangid RS (2002) Parametric study of base-isolated structures. Adv Struct Eng 5(2):113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kelly JM (1999) The role of damping in seismic isolation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 28(1):3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kulkaeni JA, Jangid RS (2003) Effects of superstructure flexibility on the response of base-isolated structures. Shock Vib 10(1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martelli A, Clemente P, De Stefano A, Forni M, Salvatori A (2014) Recent development and application of seismic isolation and energy dissipation and conditions for their correct use. In: Ansal A (ed) Geotechnical, geological, and earthquake engineering–volume 34: book series; perspectives on european earthquake engineering and seismology, volume 1. Springer Open, Chapter 14, pp 449–488Google Scholar
  32. Matsagar VA, Jangid RS (2004) Influence of isolator characteristics on the response of base-isolated structures. Eng Struct 26(12):1735–1749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maurer (2017) Maurer Company. Munich, Germany. www.maurer.eu. Accessed 19 October 2017
  34. McVitty WJ, Constantinou MC (2015) Property modification factors for seismic isolators: design guidance for buildings. Technical report MCEER-15-0005, MCEER (Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research), Buffalo, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Narjabadifam P (2015) Shape memory alloy (SMA)-based superelasticity-assisted slider (SSS). In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on seismology and earthquake engineering, 18–21 May, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  36. OILES (2017) OILES Company, Tokyo, Japan. www.oiles.co.jp/en/menshin/building/menshin/products/fps. Accessed 19 October 2017
  37. Ounis HM, Ounis A (2013) Parameters influencing response of base isolated buildings. Asian J Civil Eng 15(2):259–275Google Scholar
  38. PEER (2017) PEER ground motion database Beta (Software/Apps). The Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA, USA. http://ngawest2.berkeley.edu. Accessed 22 November 2017
  39. Providakis CP (2009) Effect of supplemental damping on LRB and FPS seismic isolators under near-fault ground motions. Eng Struct 29(1):80–90Google Scholar
  40. Rabiei M (2008) Effect of bearing characteristics on the response of friction pendulum base-isolated buildings under three components of earthquake excitation. In: Proceedings of the 2008 NZSEE, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  41. SeismoMatch (2016) A computer program for adjusting earthquake records to match a specific target response spectrum. SeismoSoft, PaviaGoogle Scholar
  42. Sepahbodnia A (2006) Achaemenid engineers constructed Pasargadae to withstand seven Richter scale earthquakes. CAIS–circle of ancient Iranian studies, London, UK. http://www.cais-soas.com/News/2006/August2006/27-08-achaemenid.htm. Accessed 3 July 2009
  43. Sharbatdar MK, Hoseini Vaez SR, Ghodrati Amiri G, Naderpour H (2011) Seismic response of base-isolated structures with LRB and FPS under near fault ground motions. Proced Eng 14:3245–3251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sharma A, Jangid RS (2009) Behaviour of base-isolated structures with high initial isolator stiffness. Int J Civil Environ Struct Constr Archit Eng 3(2):49–54Google Scholar
  45. Tavakoli HR, Naghavi F, Goltabar AR (2014) Dynamic responses of the base-fixed and isolated building frames under far- and near-fault earthquakes. Arab J Sci Eng 39(4):2573–2585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tolani S, Sarma A (2016) Effectiveness of base isolation technique and influence of isolator characteristics on response of a base isolated building. Am J of Eng Res 5(5):198–209Google Scholar
  47. Warn GP, Ryan KL (2012) A review of seismic isolation for buildings: historical development and research needs. Buildings 2:300–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of BonabBonabIran
  2. 2.Department of Research and DevelopmentBase Isolation Technology (Asia)KlangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations