Advertisement

Seismic Response and Collapse Risk of Shearwall Buildings Subjected to Long Duration Ground Motion

  • Carlos E. VenturaEmail author
  • Michael Fairhurst
  • Armin Bebamzadeh
  • Ilaria Capraro
Conference paper

Abstract

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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

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.

References

  1. Applied Technology Council. (2011). ATC 78: Identification and mitigation of seismically hazardous older concrete buildings. Interim methodology evaluation, Redwood City.Google Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Bommer, J. J., Udías, A., Cepeda, J. M., Hasbun, J. C., Salazar, W. M., Suárez, A., et al. (1997). A new digital accelerograph network for El Salvador. Seismological Research Letters, 68(3), 426–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. Chandramohan, R., Baker, J. W., & Deierlein, G. G. (2015). Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records. Earthquake Spectra, 32(2), 927–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. 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.
  8. Dhakal, R., & Maekawa, K. (2002). Modelling for postyield buckling of reinforcement. Journal of Structural Engineering, 128(9), 1139–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FEMA. (2009). Quantification of Building seismic performance factors, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  10. Galano, L., & Vignoli, A. (2000). Seismic behavior of short coupling beams with different reinforcement layouts. ACI Structural Journal, 97(6), 876–885.Google Scholar
  11. Green, M. C., & Karsh, J. E. (2012). Tall Wood—The Case for Tall Wood Buildings. BC, Canada: Vancouver.Google Scholar
  12. Hancock, J., & Bommer, J. J. (2006). A state-of-knowledge review of the influence of strong-motion duration on structural damage. Earthquake Spectra, 22(3), 827–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ibarra, L. F., Medina, R. A., & Krawinkler, H. (2005). Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 34(12), 1489–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Iyama, J., & Kuwamura, H. (1999). Application of wavelets to analysis and simulation of earthquake motions. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28(3), 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kinoshita, S. (1998). Kyoshin net (K-net). Seismological Research Letters, 69(4), 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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
  17. Mander, J. B., Priestley, M. J., & Park, R. (1988). Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 114(8), 1804–1826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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
  19. PEER. (2010). Technical report for the PEER ground motion database web application, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Pugh, J. (2012). Numerical simulation of walls and seismic design recommendations for walled buildings. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Raghunandan, M., & Liel, A. B. (2013). Effect of ground motion duration on earthquake-induced structural collapse. Structural Safety, 41, 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tremblay, R. (1998). Development of design spectra for long-duration ground motions from Cascadia subduction earthquakes. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25(6), 1078–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos E. Ventura
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael Fairhurst
    • 1
  • Armin Bebamzadeh
    • 1
  • Ilaria Capraro
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations