Effect of Peak Ground a/v Ratio on Structural Damage
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 114, Issue 5
Abstract
Three sets of real earthquake records are selected to represent seismic ground motions in the low, normal, and high a/v (peak ground acceleration/peak ground velocity) ranges. The inelastic responses of single‐degree‐of‐freedom stiffness degrading systems to the three sets of records are analyzed statistically to investigate the significance of such ground motion characteristics on structural damage. Both damage due to peak inelastic deformation and cumulative fatigue‐type damage due to a large number of reversed inelastic deformations are considered. Three damage parameters, each reflecting information on peak inelastic deformation, stiffness deterioration, and hysteretic energy dissipation, respectively, are used to measure structural damage. The mean values of the three damage indicators are obtained for the three sets of accelerograms, and the corresponding dispersion characteristics are examined. It is found that ground motion a/v range has a significant effect not only on peak inelastic response but also on hysteretic energy dissipation and stiffness deterioration of stiffness degrading systems. The effect on hysteretic energy dissipation is more pronounced than that of peak inelastic response.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Associate Committee on National Building Code. (1980). “National building code of Canada 1980.” NRCC No. 17303, National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada.
2.
Associate Committee on National Building Code. (1985). “National building code of Canada 1985.” NRCC No. 23174, National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada.
3.
Banon, H., Biggs, J. M., and Irvine, H. M. (1981). “Seismic damage in reinforced concrete frames.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 107(9), 1713–1729.
4.
Bertero, V. V., Herrera, R. A., and Mahin, S. A. (1976). “Establishment of design earthquakes—evaluation of present methods.” Proc., Int. Symposium on Earthquake Structural Engineering, Univ. of Missouri‐Rolla, St. Louis, Mo., 551–580.
5.
Bertero, V. V., Mahin, S. A., and Herrera, R. A. (1978). “Aseismic design implications of near‐fault San Fernando earthquake records.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 6(1), 1304–1313.
6.
Bolt, B. A. (1973). “Duration of strong ground motion.” Proc., Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Int. Assoc., for Earthquake Engrg., Rome, Italy, 1304–1313.
7.
Hall, W. J. (1982). “Observations on some current issues pertaining to nuclear power plant seismic design.” Nucl. Eng. Des., 69, 365–378.
8.
Hall, W. I., and McCabe, S. L. (1986). “Observations on spectra and design.” Proc., Third U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Inst., Charleston, S.C., 1117–1127.
9.
Heidebrecht, A. C., et al. (1983). “Engineering applications of new probabilistic seismic ground‐motion maps of Canada.” Can. J. Civ. Engrg., 10(4), 670–680.
10.
Heidebrecht, A. C., and Tso, W. K. (1985). “Seismic loading provision changes in National Building Code of Canada 1985.” Can. J. Civ. Engrg., 12(3), 653–660.
11.
Hcidebrecht, A. C. Tso, W. K., and Cherry, S. (1983). “Future directions of Canadian seismic code provisions.” Presented at Annual Conference of Canadian Society of Civil Engineering, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 381–394.
12.
Hutchison, D. L., et al. (1986). “Draft revision of NZS 4203: 1984: seismic provisions.” Bull. New Zealand Natl. Soc. Earthquake Engrg., 19(3), 158–166.
13.
Mahin, S. A., and Bertero, V. V. (1976). “Problems in establishing and predicting ductility in aseismic design.” Proc., Int. Symposium on Earthquake Structural Engineering, Univ. of Missouri‐Rolla, St. Louis, Mo., 613–628.
14.
Mahin, S. A., and Bertero, V. V. (1981). “An evaluation of inelastic seismic design spectra.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 107(9), 1777–1795.
15.
Mahin, S. A., and Lin, J. (1983). “Construction of inelastic response spectra for single‐degree‐of‐freedom systems.” EERC Report 83‐17, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
16.
McCann, N. W., and Shah, H. C. (1979). “Determining strong‐motion duration of earthquakes.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 69(4), 1253–1265.
17.
Newmark, N. M. (1975). “Seismic design criteria for structures and facilities, trans‐Alaska pipeline systems.” Proc., U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Inst., Ann Arbor, Mich., 94–103.
18.
Newmark, N. M. (1976). “A rationale for development of design spectra for Diablo Canyon reactor facility.” Report for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, N. M. Newmark Consulting Engineering Services, Urbana, Ill.
19.
Newmark, N. M., and Hall, W. J. (1973). “Procedures and criteria for earthquake resistant design.” Building practices for disaster mitigation, Building Science Series No. 46, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., 209–236.
20.
Newmark, N. M., and Hall, W. J. (1982). Earthquake spectra and design. Earthquake Engrg. Res. Inst., Berkeley, Calif.
21.
Popov, E. P. (1980). “Seismic behavior of structural subassemblages.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(7), 1451–1474.
22.
Takeda, T., Sozen, M. A., and Nielson, N. M. (1970). “Reinforced concrete response to simulated earthquakes.” J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 96(12), 2557–2573.
23.
Toussi, S., Yao, J. J. P., and Chen, W. F. (1984). “A damage indicator for reinforced concrete frames.” ACI J., 81(3), 260–267.
24.
Trifunac, M. D., and Brady, A. G. (1975). “A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 65(3), 581–626.
25.
Vanmarcke, E. M., and Lai, S. P. (1980). “Strong‐motion duration and rms amplitude of earthquake records.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 70(4), 1293–1307.
26.
Zahrah, T. F., and Hall, W. J. (1984). “Earthquake energy absorption in SDOF, structures.” J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 110(8), 1757–1772.
27.
Zhu, T. J. (1985). “Effect of peak ground acceleration/peak ground velocity ratio on seismic response of simple nonlinear systems,” thesis presented to McMaster University at Hamilton, Canada, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Engineering.
28.
Zhu, T. J., Heidebrecht, A. C., and Tso, W. K. (1988). “Effect of peak ground acceleration to velocity ratio on ductility demand of inelastic systems.” Earthquake Engrg. Struct. Dyn., 16(1), 63–79.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 114 • Issue 5 • May 1988
Pages: 1019 - 1037
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 ASCE.
History
Published online: May 1, 1988
Published in print: May 1988
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.