Advertisement

System Identification of a Residential Building in Kathmandu Using Aftershocks of 2015 Gorkha Earthquake and Triggered Noise Data

  • Yoshio SawakiEmail author
  • Rajesh Rupakhety
  • Simon Ólafsson
  • Dipendra Gautam
Conference paper
Part of the Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering book series (GGEE, volume 47)

Abstract

System identification is conducted to estimate the fundamental vibration period and damping ratio of a residential building in Kathmandu. Ground motion and structural response due to aftershocks of the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, as well as noise data triggered by ambient vibration is used to identify the dynamic properties of the structure. In total, motion due to 3 aftershocks and 362 ambient vibration is used. The identification is based on estimating the frequency response function of the structure. When using the aftershock data, this function is estimated from power spectral density functions of motion recorded at the ground floor and roof of the structure. In case of triggered noise, it is assumed that the input motion is a white noise. Fundamental vibration period is estimated from the first dominant peak of the transfer function, and damping ratio is estimated by using the half-power bandwidth. The building being studied is a 4-storey reinforced concrete frame with masonry infill walls. The fundamental period of the building estimated from aftershock data and triggered noise data was found to be similar in the range of 0.24–0.4 s. Empirical relations available on the literature predict a fundamental period of 0.25 s for the building being studied. It can thus be concluded that the fundamental period of the building can be estimated with confidence using both aftershock and ambient vibration data. The damping ratio, however, showed greater variation. This variation is, in part, due to the inherent uncertainty in spectral estimation which requires smoothing operations that directly affect the bandwidth of the dominant peak of frequency response function.

Keywords

System identification 2015 Gorkha Earthquake Ambient vibration Spectral estimation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge financial support from University of Iceland Research Fund and the national power company of Iceland, Landsvirkjun. The first author acknowledges the Government of Japan for providing him the Monbukagakusho Scholarship to support his research internship at the EERC. We thank Mr. Damodar Rupakhety for allowing us to install the accelerometers in his house and to use the collected data for the research presented herein. Mr. Rajan Dhakal prepared the plans of the building presented here, and Dr. Benedikt Halldorsson helped in configuring the accelerometers installed in the building; their contributions are gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Alvin KF, Robertson AN, Reich GW, Park KC (2003) Structural system identification: from reality to models. Comput Struct 81(12):1149–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gallipoli MR, Mucciarelli M, Vona M (2009) Empirical estimate of fundamental frequencies and damping for Italian buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 38:973–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gallipoli MR, Mucciarelli M, Šket-Motnikar B, Zupanćić P, Gosar A, Prevolnik S, Herak M, Stipčević J, Herak D, Milutinović Z, Olumćeva T (2010) Empirical estimates of dynamic parameters on a large set of European buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 8:593–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Guler K, Yuksel E, Kocak A (2009) Estimation of the fundamental vibration period of existing RC buildings in Turkey utilizing ambient vibration records. J Earthq Eng 12(S2):140–150Google Scholar
  5. Jenkins GM, Watt DG (1968) Spectral analysis and its application. Holden-Day, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  6. Kocak A, Kalyoncuoglu A, Zengin B (2013) Effect of infill wall and wall openings on the fundamental period of RC buildings. Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures IX, WIT Transactions on The Built Environment 132:121–131. doi: https://doi.org/10.2495/ERES130101
  7. Koketsu K, Miyake H, Guo Y, Kobayashi H, Masuda T, Davuluri S, Bhattarai M, Adhikari LB, Sapkota SN (2016) Widespread ground distribution caused by rupture directivity during the 2015 Gorkha Nepal earthquake. Sci Rep 6:28536.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28536 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ljung L (1999) System identification. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nakamura Y (2008) On the H/V spectrum. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake Enginering, 12–17 October, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  10. National Seismological Centre (NSC) (2015) http://www.seismonepal.gov.np/. Last accessed 21 June 2015
  11. Nepal Earthquake (2015) Disaster relief and recovery information platform (NDRRIP), Nepal Disaster Risk Reduction Portal. http://drrportal.gov.np/. Last accessed 6 July 2016
  12. Papagiannopoulos GA, Hatzigeorgious GD (2011) On the use of the half-power bandwidth method to estimate damping in building structures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:1075–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rupakhety R, Olafsson S, Halldorsson B (2017). The 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha Earthquake in Nepal and its aftershocks: analysis of strong ground motion. Bull Earthq Eng. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0084-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Söderström T, Stoica P (1989) System identification. Prentice Hall International, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. United States Geological Survey (USGD) (2015) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us20002926#general_summary. Last accessed 21 June 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yoshio Sawaki
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rajesh Rupakhety
    • 1
  • Simon Ólafsson
    • 1
  • Dipendra Gautam
    • 2
  1. 1.Earthquake Engineering Research CentreUniversity of IcelandSelfossIceland
  2. 2.Structural and Geodynamics Laboratory, StreGaUniversity of MoliseCampobassoItaly

Personalised recommendations