Seismic Response and Collapse Risk of Shearwall Buildings Subjected to Long Duration Ground Motion
The damage caused by large subduction earthquakes is due in part to high number of load reversal cycles. Experimental and analytical studies indicate that shaking duration and number of cycles contribute to the damage. Currently, building codes do not include explicit design provisions for shaking duration. This paper investigates how shaking duration affects the response of tall, shearwall buildings in British Columbia, which is located in the Cascadia Subduction Zone. A suite of concrete shearwall archetype building models are analyzed with suites long and short duration ground motions. A case study of a reinforced concrete frame is presented to illustrate that long duration shaking can also affect significantly their seismic response. The results are useful for the elaboration of design provisions to account for shaking duration.
The studies presented in this paper are part of the Ph.D. dissertations of the second and third authors, which were funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) through a research grant awarded to the first author.
- Applied Technology Council. (2011). ATC 78: Identification and mitigation of seismically hazardous older concrete buildings. Interim methodology evaluation, Redwood City.Google Scholar
- Applied Technology Council. (2012). ATC 78-1 Evaluation of the methodology to select and prioritize collapse indicators in older concrete buildins. Redwood City.Google Scholar
- Brown, J., & Kunnath, S. K. (2000). Low cycle fatigue behavior of longitudinal reinforcement in reinforced concrete bridge columns. In NCEER Technical Report 00-0007, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA.Google Scholar
- Chin, D. H. (2017). Effects of long duration ground motions on the probability of drift exceedance for reinforced concrete frames near the Cascadia Subduction Zone. M.Sc. thesis, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
- COSMOS Virtual Data Center. (2008). The Consortium of Organizations for Strong-Motion Observation Systems. The Regents of the University of California, CA. http://strongmotioncenter.org/vdc/scripts/default.plx.
- FEMA. (2009). Quantification of Building seismic performance factors, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Galano, L., & Vignoli, A. (2000). Seismic behavior of short coupling beams with different reinforcement layouts. ACI Structural Journal, 97(6), 876–885.Google Scholar
- Green, M. C., & Karsh, J. E. (2012). Tall Wood—The Case for Tall Wood Buildings. BC, Canada: Vancouver.Google Scholar
- Lowes, L. N., Mitra, N., & Altoontash, A. (2004). A beam-column joint model for simulating the earthquake response of reinforced concrete frames. Technical Report PEER 2003/10, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research, Berkeley, USA.Google Scholar
- McKenna, F., Fenves, G. L., Scott, M. H., & Jeremic, B. (2000). Open System for Earthquake Engineering (OpenSees), Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkely, USA.Google Scholar
- PEER. (2010). Technical report for the PEER ground motion database web application, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
- Pugh, J. (2012). Numerical simulation of walls and seismic design recommendations for walled buildings. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.Google Scholar
- Yassin, M. H. M. (1994). Nonlinear analysis of prestressed concrete structures under monotonic and cyclic loads. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, USA.Google Scholar