Earth Quick

University of Patras
Erasmus Mundus Masters Course
MEEES PROGRAMME
DESIGN OF STOREY-ISOLATION SYSTEM IN MULTI-STOREY BUILDING
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Master Degree in
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING
by LUCA ZANAICA
Supervisor: Prof MICHAEL N. FARDIS May, 2007
The dissertation entitled Design of Storey-Isolation System in Multi-Storey Building, by Luca Zanaica, has been approved in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Master Degree in Earthquake Engineering.
Prof . M.N. Fardis _________________
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Non-structural components are sensitive to large floor accelerations, velocities, and displacements. During an earthquake, the building can amplify its motion, resulting in peak floor accelerations higher than the peak ground acceleration. The survival of some particular non-structural components during an earthquake event can be fundamental. The use of base isolation is, at the moment, the best method to get at the same time interstorey drifts and floor accelerations reductions. New types of storey-isolation systems are here developed for a multi-storey reinforced concrete building. Non-linear time-history analyses are carried out in order to evaluate floor response spectra and real accelerations and displacements evolution during a ground motion. This work of research intends to demonstrate how an isolation system can be efficient even if it is localised onto a specific single storey level, evaluating its effectiveness for the global building in terms of PFAs, PFDs, and interstorey drift ratios reductions, and for the hypothetic isolated floor facilities in terms of peak accelerations cut.
Keywords: storey isolation, base isolation, lead-rubber bearing, non-linear time-history, reinforced concrete building, response spectrum, peak floor acceleration, peak floor displacement, interstorey drift ratio
Abstract
ii
Acknowledgements
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Acknowledgements are not compulsory, but when included should be placed after the Abstract and before the Table of Contents.
iii
Acknowledgements
iv
Index
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................................................iii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................................vii LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................................xix LIST OF SYMBOLS ...........................................................................................................................xxi 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................1 1.1 Foreword ....................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Organisation of the Dissertation ................................................................................................2 2. SEISMIC ISOLATION .....................................................................................................................3 2.1 Seismic Isolation Development .................................................................................................3 2.1.1 Recent Applications .........................................................................................................4 2.2 Seismic Protection Systems .......................................................................................................6 2.2.1 Strengthening ...................................................................................................................6 2.2.2 Passive Control ................................................................................................................6 2.3 Base Isolation.............................................................................................................................9 2.3.1 Comparison between Conventional and Base Isolation Approaches.............................11 2.4 Lead Rubber Bearings..............................................................................................................14 3. STATE OF THE ART.....................................................................................................................17 3.1 Linear Theory of Seismic Isolation..........................................................................................17 3.2 Response Spectrum Concept....................................................................................................20 3.3 Design Criteria for Isolated Buildings .....................................................................................21 3.3.1 Base Isolation in EN 1998-1:2004 [Fardis et al., 2004].................................................22 v
Index
3.4 Modelling State of the Art for LRBs [Grant et al., 2005]........................................................25 3.5 Examples of seismic storey isolation .......................................................................................25 3.5.1 Floor Response of SDF Systems....................................................................................26 3.5.2 Floor Response Spectra Evaluation ...............................................................................26 3.5.3 A Storey-Isolation System .............................................................................................27 4. NUMERICAL TESTING................................................................................................................29 4.1 Process Scheme........................................................................................................................29 4.2 Design of the 4-Storey RC Building ........................................................................................30 4.3 Seismic Isolation System with Lead Rubber Bearings ............................................................37 4.3.1 The Design and Characteristics of LRBs .......................................................................39 4.4 Ground Motion Spectra............................................................................................................41 5. DESING AND ANALYSIS OF STOREY-ISOLATION SYSTEMS ............................................47 5.1 First-Storey-Isolation System ..................................................................................................47 5.2 Second-Storey-Isolation System ..............................................................................................52 5.3 Third-Storey-Isolation System.................................................................................................58 5.4 Fourth-Storey-Isolation System ...............................................................................................63 5.5 Whole-Fourth-Storey-Isolation System ...................................................................................68 6. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................75 6.1 General.....................................................................................................................................75 6.2 Numerical Testing....................................................................................................................76 6.2.1 First-Storey-Isolation System ........................................................................................78 6.2.2 Second-Storey-Isolation System ....................................................................................78 6.2.3 Third-Storey-Isolation System.......................................................................................79 6.2.4 Fourth-Storey-Isolation System .....................................................................................79 6.2.5 Whole-Fourth-Storey-Isolation System .........................................................................79 6.2.6 Final Deductions ............................................................................................................79 6.3 Recommendations for Further Research..................................................................................80 REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................................81 APPENDIX A...................................................................................................................................... A1 APPENDIX B...................................................................................................................................... B1 APPENDIX C...................................................................................................................................... C1 APPENDIX D...................................................................................................................................... D1 APPENDIX E ...................................................................................................................................... E1
vi
Index
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1. Schematic seismic response of two buildings: conventional and seismic isolation systems................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2.2. A rubber isolator bearing working and a structural cylindrical PTFE bearing ........7 Figure 2.3. Idealised force-displacement curves of: (a) elastomeric bearings and (b) sliding isolators [Fardis et al., 2004] ..............................................................................................7 Figure 2.4. A steel hysteretic device and a friction pendulum double concave bearing with disassembled articulated slider ...........................................................................................8 Figure 2.5. Shape memory alloy devices and oil viscous dampers ............................................8 Figure 2.6. Idealised force-displacement curves of supplementary devices based on (a) hysteresis of metals, (b) friction, (c) superelasticity of shape memory alloys, (d) fluid viscosity, (e) viscoelasticity [Fardis et al., 2004] ...............................................................9 Figure 2.7. Effect of increasing the flexibility of a structure: (a) The increased period and damping lower the seismic acceleration response; (b) The increased period increases the total displacement of the isolated system, but this is offset to a large extent by the damping [Skinner et al., 1993] .........................................................................................10 Figure 2.8. Conventional and base isolation approaches..........................................................12 Figure 2.9. Base shear ratio for ground type A [Fardis et al., 2004] ........................................13 Figure 2.10. Base shear ratio for ground type D [Fardis et al., 2004] ......................................13 Figure 2.11. Principle structure of a Maurer Shne LRB .........................................................14 Figure 3.1. Parameters of 2-degree-of-freedom isolated system [Naeim and Kelly, 1999] .....17 Figure 3.2. Relationship between bilinear and linearised viscoelastic models in terms of dynamic restoring force versus displacement [Grant et al., 2005]. ..................................25
vii
Index
Figure 3.3. 2-D diagram of the high-performance seismic technology [Mar and Tipping, 2002] ...........................................................................................................................................27 Figure 3.4. Slider at interior column [Mar and Tipping, 2002] ................................................27 Figure 4.1. 3D model of the 4-storey building modelled in ANSRuop....................................32 Figure 4.2. Beam depth ( hb ), beam top ( ) and bottom ( ' ) reinforcement ratio and column total reinforcement ratio ( c ) in 4-storey frames for EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g.; closed circles: exterior and open circles: interior members [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004] .................................................................................................................................33 Figure 4.3. Minimum-maximum range and mean member damage ratio from 7 time-history analyses of 4-storey frames designed to EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004] ..............................................................................................................33 Figure 4.4. Ratio of sum of column flexural capacities to sum of beam flexural capacities around joints in frames designed to EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g. Closed circles: exterior joints; open circles: interior joints [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004] ..................33 Figure 4.5. External column characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop ................................34 Figure 4.6. Internal column characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop .................................34 Figure 4.7. 1st-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop ....................................35 Figure 4.8. 2nd-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop ...................................35 Figure 4.9. 3rd-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop....................................35 Figure 4.10. 4th-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop ..................................36 Figure 4.11. 1st-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop .................36 Figure 4.12. 2nd-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop ................36 Figure 4.13. 3rd-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop .................37 Figure 4.14. 4th-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop .................37 Figure 4.15. 1st ground motion (Kalamata 1986 Greece) and related acceleration response spectrum............................................................................................................................43 Figure 4.16. 2nd ground motion (Capitola building Loma Prieta 1989 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum.............................................................................43 Figure 4.17. 3rd ground motion (Bonds Corner Imperial Valley 1979 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum.............................................................................43 Figure 4.18. 4th ground motion (Tolmezzo Friuli 1976 Italy) and related acceleration response spectrum.............................................................................................................44
viii
Index
Figure 4.19. 5th ground motion (Ulcinj Montenegro 1979) and related acceleration response spectrum............................................................................................................................44 Figure 4.20. 6th ground motion (Herceg Novi Montenegro 1979) and related acceleration response spectrum.............................................................................................................44 Figure 4.21. 7th ground motion (El Centro Imperial Valley 1940 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum.............................................................................45 Figure 4.22. Mean acceleration response spectrum of all the 7 ground motions......................45 Figure 5.1. 1st-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra .......................................................47 Figure 5.2. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................49 Figure 5.3. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion ..............................................................................50 Figure 5.4. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion .......50 Figure 5.5. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion ...........................................................................................................................................50 Figure 5.6. 1st-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD ............................51 Figure 5.7. 1st-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio ...........51 Figure 5.8. 2nd-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra ......................................................53 Figure 5.9. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................55 Figure 5.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2ndfloor facilities during the 1st ground motion .....................................................................55 Figure 5.11. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion ....55 Figure 5.12. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................56 Figure 5.13. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD .........................56 Figure 5.14. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio ........56 Figure 5.15. 3rd-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra.....................................................58 Figure 5.16. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................60 Figure 5.17. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rdfloor facilities during the 1st ground motion .....................................................................60 Figure 5.18. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion.....61
ix
Index
Figure 5.19. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................61 Figure 5.20. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD..........................61 Figure 5.21. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio.........62 Figure 5.22. 4th-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra .....................................................63 Figure 5.23. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................65 Figure 5.24. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion ..............................................................................65 Figure 5.25. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion.....66 Figure 5.26. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................66 Figure 5.27. 4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD..........................66 Figure 5.28. 4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio.........67 Figure 5.29. Whole-4th-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra .........................................68 Figure 5.30. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion...................................................................................................................71 Figure 5.31. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion................................................................71 Figure 5.32. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion ...............................................................................................................................71 Figure 5.33. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion...................................................................................................................72 Figure 5.34. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD..............72 Figure 5.35. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio ...........................................................................................................................................72 Figure A.1. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A1 Figure A.2. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion ............................................................................A1 Figure A.3. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion ....A1 Figure A.4. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A2
x
Index
Figure A.5. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A2 Figure A.6. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion.............................................................................A2 Figure A.7. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion.....A3 Figure A.8. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A3 Figure A.9. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A3 Figure A.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1stfloor facilities during the 4th ground motion....................................................................A4 Figure A.11. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion...A4 Figure A.12. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A4 Figure A.13. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A5 Figure A.14. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1stfloor facilities during the 5th ground motion....................................................................A5 Figure A.15. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 5th ground motion...A5 Figure A.16. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A6 Figure A.17. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A6 Figure A.18. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1stfloor facilities during the 6th ground motion....................................................................A6 Figure A.19. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 6th ground motion...A7 Figure A.20. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A7 Figure A.21. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A7 Figure A.22. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1stfloor facilities during the 7th ground motion....................................................................A8 Figure A.23. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 7th ground motion...A8
xi
Index
Figure A.24. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................A8 Figure B.1. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B1 Figure B.2. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion ............................................................................B1 Figure B.3. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion....B1 Figure B.4. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B2 Figure B.5. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B2 Figure B.6. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion.............................................................................B2 Figure B.7. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion ....B3 Figure B.8. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B3 Figure B.9. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B3 Figure B.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2ndfloor facilities during the 4th ground motion....................................................................B4 Figure B.11. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion ..B4 Figure B.12. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B4 Figure B.13. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B5 Figure B.14. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2ndfloor facilities during the 5th ground motion....................................................................B5 Figure B.15. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 5th ground motion ..B5 Figure B.16. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B6 Figure B.17. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B6
xii
Index
Figure B.18. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2ndfloor facilities during the 6th ground motion....................................................................B6 Figure B.19. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 6th ground motion ..B7 Figure B.20. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B7 Figure B.21. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B7 Figure B.22. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2ndfloor facilities during the 7th ground motion....................................................................B8 Figure B.23. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 7th ground motion ..B8 Figure B.24. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................B8 Figure C.1. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C1 Figure C.2. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion ............................................................................C1 Figure C.3. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion ....C1 Figure C.4. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C2 Figure C.5. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C2 Figure C.6. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion.............................................................................C2 Figure C.7. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion ....C3 Figure C.8. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C3 Figure C.9. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C3 Figure C.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rdfloor facilities during the 4th ground motion....................................................................C4 Figure C.11. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion...C4 Figure C.12. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C4
xiii
Index
Figure C.13. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C5 Figure C.14. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rdfloor facilities during the 5th ground motion....................................................................C5 Figure C.15. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 5th ground motion...C5 Figure C.16. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C6 Figure C.17. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C6 Figure C.18. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rdfloor facilities during the 6th ground motion....................................................................C6 Figure C.19. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 6th ground motion...C7 Figure C.20. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C7 Figure C.21. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C7 Figure C.22. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rdfloor facilities during the 7th ground motion....................................................................C8 Figure C.23. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 7th ground motion...C8 Figure C.24. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................C8 Figure D.1. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D1 Figure D.2. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion ............................................................................D1 Figure D.3. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion....D1 Figure D.4. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D2 Figure D.5. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D2 Figure D.6. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion.............................................................................D2 Figure D.7. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion ....D3
xiv
Index
Figure D.8. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D3 Figure D.9. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D3 Figure D.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4thfloor facilities during the 4th ground motion....................................................................D4 Figure D.11. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion...D4 Figure D.12. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D4 Figure D.13. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D5 Figure D.14. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4thfloor facilities during the 5th ground motion....................................................................D5 Figure D.15. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 5th ground motion...D5 Figure D.16. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 5th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D6 Figure D.17. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D6 Figure D.18. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4thfloor facilities during the 6th ground motion....................................................................D6 Figure D.19. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 6th ground motion...D7 Figure D.20. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 6th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D7 Figure D.21. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D7 Figure D.22. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4thfloor facilities during the 7th ground motion....................................................................D8 Figure D.23. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 7th ground motion...D8 Figure D.24. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 7th ground motion ..............................................................................................................................D8 Figure E.1. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion.................................................................................................................. E1
xv
Index
Figure E.2. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion.............................................................. E1 Figure E.3. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E1 Figure E.4. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion.................................................................................................................. E2 Figure E.5. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion.................................................................................................................. E2 Figure E.6. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion .............................................................. E2 Figure E.7. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E3 Figure E.8. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion.................................................................................................................. E3 Figure E.9. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E3 Figure E.10. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion .............................................................. E4 Figure E.11. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E4 Figure E.12. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E4 Figure E.13. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 5th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E5 Figure E.14. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 5th ground motion .............................................................. E5 Figure E.15. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 5th ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E5 Figure E.16. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 5th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E6 Figure E.17. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 6th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E6
xvi
Index
Figure E.18. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 6th ground motion .............................................................. E6 Figure E.19. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 6th ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E7 Figure E.20. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 6th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E7 Figure E.21. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 7th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E7 Figure E.22. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole4th-floor facilities during the 7th ground motion .............................................................. E8 Figure E.23. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 7th ground motion .............................................................................................................................. E8 Figure E.24. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 7th ground motion.................................................................................................................. E8
xvii
Index
xviii
Index
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3.1. Summary of the types of analyses and conditions to be met for their application [Fardis et al., 2004]...........................................................................................................22 Table 5.1. 1st-floor LRBs design...............................................................................................48 Table 5.2. 2nd-floor LRBs design..............................................................................................54 Table 5.3. 3rd floor LRBs design...............................................................................................59 Table 5.4. 4th floor LRBs design...............................................................................................65 Table 5.5. Whole-4th-floor 15DLRBs design............................................................................70 Table 5.6. Whole-4th-floor 30DLRBs design............................................................................70 Table 6.1. PFAs for every facilities location ............................................................................76 Table 6.2. PFAs and percentage variation onto the facilities for every isolation case .............76 Table 6.3. PFAs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs....................76 Table 6.4. PFAs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs....................77 Table 6.5. PFDs for every facilities location ............................................................................77 Table 6.6. PFDs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs....................77 Table 6.7. PFDs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs....................77 Table 6.8. Interstorey drift ratios for every facilities location ..................................................78 Table 6.9. Interstorey drift ratios and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs ..........................................................................................................................78 Table 6.10. Interstorey drift ratios and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs ..........................................................................................................................78
xix
Index
xx
Index
LIST OF SYMBOLS
ag bw c cb cs cu dbd d cd d dc dy f cd fn h hc hb kb ks m mb q t tr ts ts ,ext u & u && u ub
= design ground acceleration on type A ground = Width of the web of a beam = Damping coefficient = Bearings damping = Structure damping = Undrained shear strength of soil = Design displacement of isolator corresponding to the design displacement of the isolating system d cd = Design displacement of the isolating system = Design displacement of the effective stiffness centre in the direction considered = Yield displacement = Design value of concrete compressive strength = Natural vibration cyclic frequency = Plastic deformation work = Cross-sectional depth of column in the direction of interest = Cross-sectional depth of beam = Bearings stiffness = Structure stiffness = Mass of the superstructure of a building = Mass of the base floor above the isolation system = Behaviour factor = Single rubber layer thickness of lead-rubber bearing = Total lead-rubber bearing thickness = Single steel plate thickness of lead-rubber bearing = Top and bottom steel plates thickness of lead-rubber bearing = Displacement response of a SDF system = Velocity response of a SDF system = Acceleration response of a SDF system = Absolute displacement of the base floor
xxi
Index
ug &&g u us u0 &0 u &&0 u v vb vs vs ,30 A Ac Ar D Dbearing DPb DC ED Ee Eg Eh Ei Ek Es Ev EDE F Fd Fs Fy F0 G HDRB K ; Ke K eff Kp K Pb Kr KV
= Ground displacement = Ground acceleration = Absolute displacement of the superstructure = Peak values of u
& = Peak values of u && = Peak values of u

= Velocity = Relative displacement between base floor and ground = Relative displacement between superstructure and base floor (drift) = Average value of propagation velocity of S waves in the upper 30 m of the soil profile at shear strain of 105 or less = Pseudo-acceleration = Area of section of concrete member = Cross sectional area of the rubber of lead-rubber bearing = Peak values of u = Diameter of lead-rubber bearing = Diameter of lead core of lead-rubber bearing = Ductility Class = Dissipated energy per cycle at the design displacement of isolating system d cd = Elastic energy = Energy of the ground motion = Energy dissipated by plastic deformation = Energy induced into the structure = Kinetic energy = Structurally stored energy into the structure = Energy dissipated by viscous phenomena = Energy Dissipating Element = Force = Viscous damping force = Elastic spring restoring force = Yield force under monotonic loading = Force at zero displacement under cyclic loading = Shear modulus of elastomeric bearing = High Damping Rubber Bearing = Elastic stiffness of bilinear hysteretic isolator under monotonic loading = Effective stiffness of the isolation system in the principal horizontal direction under consideration, at a displacement equal to the design displacement d dc = Post elastic stiffness of bilinear hysteretic isolator = Stiffness of lead core of lead-rubber bearing = Stiffness of rubber of lead-rubber bearing = Total stiffness of the isolation system in the vertical direction
xxii
Index
L L1 ; L2 LDRB LRB M N N SPT NSC PFA PFD PGA R RULS RDLS RC S S S' Sa Sa, f S a ,i Sd Sv SDF SLS TC Teff Tf Tn TR TV T1 ULS V Wi 15 DLRB 30 DLRB
= Total lateral area of lead-rubber bearing = Participation factors = Low Damping Rubber Bearing = Lead Rubber Bearing = Total mass made of superstructure and base-floor masses = Axial force = Standard Penetration Test blow-count = Non Structural Component = Peak Floor Acceleration = Peak Floor Displacement = Peak Ground Acceleration = Behaviour factor outside of the Eurocode 8 provisions = Seismic forces ratio for ultimate limit state = Seismic forces ratio for damage limit state = Reinforced Concrete = Soil factor = Shape factor of lead-rubber bearing = Second shape factor of lead-rubber bearing = Pseudo-acceleration spectrum = Design spectral acceleration for fixed base structure = Design spectral acceleration for isolated base structure = Pseudo-displacement spectrum = Pseudo-velocity spectrum = Single Degree of Freedom = Service Limit State = Corner period at the upper limit of the constant acceleration region of the elastic spectrum = Effective fundamental period of the superstructure corresponding to horizontal translation, the superstructure assumed as a rigid body = Fundamental period of the superstructure assumed fixed at the base = Natural vibration period = Return period for an earthquake = Fundamental period of the superstructure in the vertical direction, the superstructure assumed as a rigid body = Fundamental period of the building in the horizontal direction of interest = Ultimate Limit State = Pseudo-velocity = Weight on the lead-rubber bearing = 15% Damping ratio Lead Rubber Bearing = 30% Damping ratio Lead Rubber Bearing = Post-yield stiffness ratio = Shear strain of a lead-rubber bearing xxiii
Index
m d b eff s 1 ; 2
= Mass ratio = Nominal frequency ratio = Damping correction factor = Effective mass ratio = Curvature ductility factor = Axial force due in the seismic design situation, normalised to Ac f cd = Viscous damping ratio (in percent) = Base-floor damping = Effective damping = Superstructure damping factor = Damping ratios = Pi = Compression steel ratio in beams = Lead yield stress = Mode shapes = Base-floor nominal frequency = Natural vibration circular frequency = Superstructure nominal frequency = Mechanical volumetric ratio of confining reinforcement = Characteristic frequencies
' Pb 1 ; 2 b n s wd 1 ; 2
xxiv
Chapter 1. Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Foreword Non-structural components are objects in a building that are supported by the structure, but do not form part of the main gravity or lateral load resisting systems. Non-structural components may consist of furniture, equipment, partitions, curtain wall systems, piping, venting systems, electrical equipment, bookcases, and many other items. There are mainly three main categories: architectural components, mechanical and electrical equipment, and building contents.
Non-structural components are sensitive to large floor accelerations, velocities, and displacements. When a building is subjected to an earthquake ground motion, the building can amplify this motion, resulting in Peak Floor Accelerations (PFAs) higher than the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA). As a matter of fact, facilities are subjected to these amplified accelerations, which cause severe damage to non-structural components. The survival of some particular non-structural components during an earthquake event can be important for maintaining the continuity of emergency services, for the safety of the public, for mitigating the financial impact of the resulting damage, or mainly because the facilities constitute some particular elements that cannot absolutely receive any type of damage due to their impossibility in repairing, like museum rooms (with statues or similar), or sensible computer machineries. Many problems can occur at lower deformation and acceleration demands than the supporting structure. In view of the importance of protecting the integrity of some special facilities during seismic events, there is a need to carry out additional research studies to develop reliable performance-based design criteria.
1.2 Objectives This work of research deals with a new type of base isolation application. A 4-storey reinforced concrete building is designed in accordance with Eurocode 8 provisions [EN 19981, 2004]. The building is supposed to have in its interior, at a particular floor level, some special facilities that must be absolutely protected during an earthquake to prevent any irreparable damage. These facilities, ideally located in the middle of the considered floor, must not receive either big accelerations or high relative storey displacements.
Chapter 1. Introduction
Lead-Rubber Bearings (LRBs) are designed in order to isolate these facilities from the floor main frame. Five different facilities locations are studied: on the middle of each floor (from the 1st to the 4th one), and a whole-4th-floor position, as the last experiment set. The objective is to see, firstly, the positive effects on the directly isolated facilities through non-linear time-histories analyses and, secondly, the global effects (positive or negative) onto the whole structure, taking into account PFAs, Peak Floor Displacements (PFDs) and interstorey drifts. By this manner it could be possible to decide the effectiveness of this storey-isolation system, giving advices for future possible applications.
1.3 Organisation of the Dissertation Chapter two treats the base isolation. A brief story of this design approach is followed by the last recent applications for bridges and buildings. The seismic protection systems are generally analyzed, from the isolators to the supplementary devices. The main base isolation benefits are expressed with a complete analysis of this new earthquake resistance design. Finally, a comparison between conventional and base-isolation approaches clarifies the two methodologies.
The third chapter is the state of art. The linear theory for seismic isolation is expressed. The important response spectrum concept is also treated. The base isolation design process, as in EN 1998-1, is fully explained and the state of art of the bilinear model for LRBs is explained. Finally, three examples of seismic storey isolation are synthesized. On the fourth chapter the numerical testing, core part of the experimental part in this work of research, is explained: from the test schedule to the building design, from the LRBs design to the ground motions which are utilised. On the fifth chapter every isolation case is treated through its results, showing its consequences both for directed isolated floor mass and for the global building. The sixth chapter concludes this dissertation by expressing a comment of the results carried out from the numerical tests of this new storey-isolation system.
Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation
2. SEISMIC ISOLATION
2.1 Seismic Isolation Development <<In August 1909 J. A. Calantarients, a medical doctor from the northern English city of Scarborough, wrote a letter to the Director of the Seismological Service of Chile in Santiago calling his attention to a method of building construction that he had developed whereby substantial buildings can be put up in earthquake countries on this principle with perfect safety since the degree of severity of an earthquake loses its significance through the existence of the lubricated free joint. Calantarients had submitted a patent application to the British patent office for his construction method, which proposed that the building be built on his free joint and a layer of fine sand, mica, or talc that would allow the building to slide in an earthquake, thereby reducing the force transmitted to the building itself.>> [Naeim and Kelly, 1999]. That doctor explained, perhaps, the earliest example of a base isolation or seismic isolation approach design. Later on, other real examples started to appear worldwide, like the buildings staying on balls of Sevastopol in Ukraine and of Mexico City in Mexico.
Therefore, the father of Modern Seismology was another English, John Milne, Professor of Mining Engineering in Tokyo in the last decades of 1800s. He developed and improved seismoscopes and seismographs. What can be considered very important are his publishing rules for earthquake-resistant structures that are considered valid still today. Thanks to the building on balls at the University of Tokyo, the incomplete satisfaction of this type of seismic isolation started to appear not negligible. As a matter of fact, under a wind load, that system was creating some behaviour not acceptable in a normal service situation. In earthquake building design, the main purpose is to have a building with minimized interstorey drifts and floor accelerations, because the first ones make damages onto nonstructural components and to equipments that interconnects storeys, the second ones and the accelerations can damage internal equipment. If the structure becomes stiffer, the interstorey drifts reduce, but floor accelerations increase. If the system becomes more flexible, floor accelerations reduce but interstorey drifts cannot decrease. The use of base isolation appears the only method to reduce at the same time interstorey drifts and floor accelerations: there is the necessary flexibility with the displacements that are almost all concentrated at the isolation plane. In 1969 there was the first application of rubber bearings isolated building in the Pestalozzi School of Skopje, Yugoslavia. Those devices were completely unreinforced, so that they
3
bulge a lot sideways. In addition, some glass blocks were introduced as seismic fuses, breaking after a certain threshold seismic load. That type of system had the problem of bouncing and rocking continuously during an earthquake because of the similar horizontal and vertical rigidities. During the last 20 years of the last century, with the development of multilayer elastomeric bearings, which are made by vulcanization bonding of rubber sheets to thin steel reinforcing plates, a big forward step was made into the concept of seismic isolation. These devices are very stiff vertically in order the carry the structure load and they are very flexible horizontally in such a way to allow the building to move laterally while the ground is shaking. The natural evolution of the rubber bearings became the lead-plug rubber bearings, where lead cylinders are put into central holes to add damping to the isolation system.
Figure 2.1. Schematic seismic response of two buildings: conventional and seismic isolation systems
2.1.1 Recent Applications Recently, numerous progresses are going on regarding new devices development and new applications of old types of isolation systems. Seismic isolation dedicated codes have been developing constantly. The presence of these new rules for designing structures convinced designers to take into account this new type of earthquake resistance approach.
In Italy, after the Ordinanza No. 3274 that appeared the 8th of May 2003, base isolation is finally present in a proper way for a country that is one of the world leader in the field of seismic research and is one of the most important isolation devices producers too. Every institution makes different application rules for seismic isolation, so that quite important differences in costs derive. For example, in the Peoples Republic of China base isolation makes cheaper structures so that a great increase of application is establishing: in 1999 there were 160 applications while in 2002 they were 458. Japan has a very advanced code that deals with traction on seismic devices too, as a consequence of that, rubber isolators
4
can be used also in very tall buildings. In USA the overall cost of a seismic isolated building is not negligible and only big or strategic buildings saw this type of applications.
(a) Bridges and viaducts. In these last years, applications onto bridges and viaducts, new or retrofitted, augmented significantly in Europe and all around the world too, particularly in USA, where the code for bridges and viaducts is not as restrictive as for buildings, but a big increase was noted also in Chile, Japan, China, Taiwan and Korea.
In Japan more than 2000 isolated bridges and viaducts were realized in these last 10 years. The big input of this boom design was made by Kobe earthquake in 1995: before that, only hysteretic elastoplastic systems were adopted, but, after that earthquake, HDRBs or LRBs were hugely employed. In Europe, 200 new applications were introduced since 2000, and almost 100 of them in Italy. The most used devices are the high damping rubber bearings and the sliding bearings coupled with lead-rubber bearings or viscoelastic dampers. Recently, new application were introduced with the use of memory alloys or particular silicon oils [Dolce et al.,2004].
(b) Buildings. At the end of 2002, in the world there were more than 2700 base isolated buildings and 1600 of them only in Japan. New applications are present for strategic buildings, like hospitals, because their integrity is a must to keep the functionality even after an earthquake. Several applications were made also into schools and public buildings, mainly for retrofitting or seismic adequacy or improvement. The biggest news is the increasing applications onto residence buildings, overall in Japan and China.
At the end of 2003, in Italy there were 25 isolated buildings. With the new seismic code (Ordinanza No. 3274 and next correlated ones) and with the new seismic zones classification (the seismic territory increased from the 43% to the 70% of the total surface), the base isolation design has been really booming. Applications are made not only for hospitals, fire departments, schools, museums, but also for buildings of common and generic use. An important part is dealing with art elements preservation: monuments, statues, archaeological objects, etc. In Japan, after Kobe earthquake, it is practically impossible to know how many applications were introduced into new buildings. The only sure thing is that high damping rubber devices have been substituted by the coupling between sliding bearings and re-centring dampers, basically elastomeric based ones. Often, the target period becomes 4 or 6 seconds, in order to allow the application for high buildings too. A very interesting new design in Tokyo regards a big slab of 12349m 2 in reinforced concrete which is supported by isolators. On this slab there are 21 residential buildings that are between 6 and 14 storeys. This slab is supported by 242 isolators getting a 6.2 second period and a design displacement of 800mm. The isolators are sliding bearings, rubber bearings and lead-rubber bearings. In China, an important realization is going to be in Pechino. 50 isolated buildings between 7 and 9 storeys are going to be built onto a big 2-storey structure (3km2 of area) which contains in its interior every service, such as trains and undergrounds. This type of choice saved a 25% over the total cost.
5
2.2 Seismic Protection Systems 2.2.1 Strengthening In earthquake engineering, one of the first way studied to allow seismic resistance into structures is the strengthening, as explained in 2.3.1. This design can be achieved in a permanent way with the structural design, better known as capacity design, or it can be made in a temporary approach, with the installation of shock transmission units. These devices dont give any reaction during service load effects, because they start to act when the induced velocity is high, that is the case of a seismic event. They consist in temporary restrains for structures, in order to put hyperstaticity. With this method isostatic restrains are kept during the service period with all their benefits, and while an earthquake occurs all elements tend to work together so that relative displacements are reduced, avoiding any damage into bearing devices, joints and adjacent structures. 2.2.2 Passive Control Basically the two most frequently used passive control strategies for buildings are:
1. energy dissipation; 2. seismic isolation. The energy dissipation strategy consists in the introduction within the structural system of elements specifically designed to dissipate energy in the dynamic deformation of the structure. These elements could be dissipative steel bracings separate from the structure and working in parallel with it, or they could be diagonal elements inserted in the structure between consecutive floors too. The dissipation can be obtained by the use of friction devices, viscous dampers or elastoplastic steel components. The type of analysis appropriate for the energy dissipation strategy, not explicitly present in EN 1998-1, depends on the specific choice of the dissipative elements and on their coupled behaviour with that of the structure. Seismic isolation [Skinner et al., 1993; Naeim and Kelly, 1999] essentially uncouples the structural movement from the ground motion by introducing a strong discontinuity in the lateral stiffness distribution along the height of the structure (usually at their base in buildings and between piers and deck in bridges). The structure is thus subdivided into two parts: the substructure, rigidly connected to the ground, and the superstructure.
(a) Isolators. These devices are the fundamental components of an isolation system: they carry the load transmitting it to the substructure. Basically, they can be represented by bearing devices permitting large relative translations, 20 to 40 cm or more.
The most common types are the elastomeric bearings and the sliding ones; their behaviour is shown in Figure 2.3. Elastomeric bearings have a quasi-elastic behaviour, while they can also have some energy dissipation due to the rubber itself (LDRBs and HDRBs are the names for Low Damping Rubber Bearing and High Damping Rubber Bearings) or to some lead-plug cylinders put into the middle of the devices (LRBs). Another very important aspect is the selfcentring capability with their stability after several shaking cycles.
6
Sliding bearings exploit the low friction characteristics between special materials, such as polished stainless steel and PTFE. Their theoretical behaviour is called rigid-plastic, even though velocity and pressure might produce some variations. Moreover, the friction coefficient is dependent on temperature, humidity, contamination, ageing. Lubricated sliding bearing can decrease the friction coefficient up to the 10%. They need to be re-centred.
Figure 2.2. A rubber isolator bearing working and a structural cylindrical PTFE bearing
a)
b)
Figure 2.3. Idealised force-displacement curves of: (a) elastomeric bearings and (b) sliding isolators [Fardis et al., 2004]
(b) Supplementary devices. These are installed separately from the isolators, in order to complete the isolating system. Energy Dissipating Elements (EDEs) are also sometimes put into the isolators, avoiding the necessity of having two separate devices. The main idealised force-displacement curves are shown in Figure 2.6.
Metallic hysteretic devices have a high energy dissipation capability, thanks to metals like steel and lead when stressed beyond the elastic limit. They are very common used because of their reliability, their invariability in time of their mechanical features. Their main problems are a limited resistance to low-fatigue cycles, the re-centring necessity after an earthquake and the need or replacing after a strong ground motion.
7
Figure 2.4. A steel hysteretic device and a friction pendulum double concave bearing with disassembled articulated slider
Figure 2.5. Shape memory alloy devices and oil viscous dampers
Friction dampers have high potential and low cost. Their main problems deal with friction coefficients and normal force: the friction static and dynamic coefficients must have values as near as possible and they should not depend on velocity, on the environment, on the long time periods when the two touching surfaces do not move; the normal force should not vary in their lifetime. Special alloys, such as shape memory alloys, have very nice characteristics and intelligent behaviour. They can be utilised in both energy dissipation and re-centring, exploiting, in this way, their superelastic properties and low-fatigue resistances. Spring fluid viscous dampers exploit the viscosity of some fluids, such as oil or silicon fluids, in order to get elliptical force-displacement behaviour. Forces of reaction and cycle displacements depend on velocity ( F = cv n with n 0.15 ): they make no reaction when there is a low relative movement. Their main problems are their reliability in the long run and their maintenance. Elastomeric viscoelastic dampers have a viscous cyclic behaviour that allows a certain amount of energy dissipation capacity.
Isolation systems can be made of more than one type of components, each one assigned to one or more specific tasks: i. bearing vertical loads; ii. providing adequate resistance to horizontal non-seismic actions (wind, traffic, etc.); iii. assuring high flexibility under seismic actions; iv. dissipating an adequate amount of energy; v. re-centring the structure, in order to reduce the residual displacement after the earthquake.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Figure 2.6. Idealised force-displacement curves of supplementary devices based on (a) hysteresis of metals, (b) friction, (c) superelasticity of shape memory alloys, (d) fluid viscosity, (e) viscoelasticity [Fardis et al., 2004]
2.3 Base Isolation A building that is perfectly rigid would have a 0-second natural period. When the ground moves the acceleration induced in the structure is equal to ground acceleration and there is zero relative displacement between the structure and ground. A building that is perfectly flexible has an infinite natural period. For this type of structure, when the ground beneath the structure moves there is no acceleration induced in the structure and the relative displacement between the structure and the ground is equal to the ground displacement. Every real structure is neither perfectly rigid nor perfectly flexible and so the response to the ground motion.
Strong ground motions may produce considerable negative effects on constructions, so that seismic isolation is used to protect both bridges and buildings. The devices are interposed between the primary mass of the structure and the source of motion. These flexible bearings isolate a building from its foundations or the superstructure of a bridge from its pier.
Figure 2.7. Effect of increasing the flexibility of a structure: (a) The increased period and damping lower the seismic acceleration response; (b) The increased period increases the total displacement of the isolated system, but this is offset to a large extent by the damping [Skinner et al., 1993]
The main consequences of seismically isolating a structure are: 1. the increase of the fundamental period with the consequent decrease of the design forces for short period structures; on the other side, for long period structures this effect can be inconsistent or it could also generate bigger design forces; 2. the concentration of the inelastic deformation into the bearings; 3. the dissipation of seismic energy into the isolators, by hysteretic damping in its components, allowing the decrease of shear force and maximum displacement demands; Several factors need to be taken into account by an engineer while designing a seismic isolated structure. The first of these is the seismic hazard which depends on local geology, recorded history of earthquakes in the region and any known factors about the probable features of an earthquake such as severity and period. Therefore, the design earthquake is specified on the basis of the seismicity of a region, the site conditions and the accepted hazard level (for example a 400-year return period earthquake). Typically, earthquake accelerations have dominant periods between 0.1 and 1 second, with a maximum severity between 0.2 and 0.6 seconds. Consequently, structures with natural periods in those particular rages tend to resonate; they are particularly vulnerable to seismic inputs: the increased fundamental period, due to an isolation system, is one way to reduce negative seismic effects. It must also be recognised that rare earthquakes give their strongest excitations at long periods, like in El Centro earthquake. With this type of motion, an isolation system with
10
moderate damping may cause an increase of the structural response. Increasing the isolation damping is a good procedure in order to get reduced displacements on the superstructures. The pros coming from the large reduction of the response acceleration can be summarised as: i. a reduction of the inertia forces on the structure, such as to eliminate damage to structural elements, even under strong earthquakes; ii. a drastic reduction of the interstorey drifts, such as to eliminate damage into non structural elements and to permit the continued use of a building even after a strong earthquake; iii. a high protection of the building contents; iv. reduced vibrations felt by the people inside the building, resulting in less panic during an event. All these aspects represent significant economical and social advantages after an earthquake, while the additional construction costs (due to the cost of the devices and of their placement in the structure) are partially or even totally counterbalanced by the savings in the superstructure and foundation costs. The cost percentage of seismic isolation in a building is a function of several parameters, such as: a. the building dimensions and, in particular, the number of stories; b. the building configuration in order to have an easy arrangement of the isolation system; c. the structural layout, in relation to the number of devices necessary to realise the isolation system; d. the frequency content of the design action, in relation to the reduction of the effects obtained by the period elongation; e. the presence of adjacent buildings, in relation to the need of wide separation joints and to the relevant architectural and equipment problems.
2.3.1 Comparison between Conventional and Base Isolation Approaches Numerous concepts of seismic isolation using hysteretic isolators are similar to the conventional capacity design, which is present in EN 1998-1. In the well conventionally seismic designed structures, the yielding is forced to occur within some particular selected locations that are called plastic hinge zones. Even if the yielding is considered as a type of damage, when it is localised in specific regions, it becomes a synonym of structural integrity. Moreover, by withstanding an earthquake, the structure itself must sustain big displacements because of the large deformations.
In seismic isolation, the fundamental purpose is to reduce substantially the ground motion forces and energy transmission. Installing isolating layers with a considerable horizontal
11
flexibility is a good way to achieve that aim: it reduces the earthquake effects transmission but it increases the structure displacement relative to the ground, and that could become a considerable problem. Acceptable displacements coupled with a large degree of isolation may be obtained by introducing some damping.
Figure 2.8. Conventional and base isolation approaches
(a) Design seismic stresses on fixed base and isolated buildings [Fardis et al., 2004]. The economical aspect between fixed base and seismic isolation design is often raised. This problem should take into account the initial cost, the eventual repair cost, the maintenance cost, casualties cost and social cost. In seismic isolation, savings can be made from the reduction of the seismic forces acting on the structure: it is interesting to compare the design stress on a fixed base structure and on a similar isolated one, in order to give also an idea to the designer to choose between the two design methods. The ratio between the design spectral accelerations of a fixed base structure S a , f (T f , q ) multiplied by the effective mass ratio and that of a similar seismic isolated structure S a ,i (Teff ) divided by the stress reduction coefficient 1.5 is calculated, where T f is the period of the fixed base structure and Teff the period of the isolated structure. The effective mass ratio is taken equal to 0.85, as prescribed for the equivalent linear static analysis, if the structure has at least 2 stories and its vibration period is T f < 2Tc . It is taken equal to 1 for the isolated structure.
In a fixed base design, for the ultimate limit states, the design spectral ordinate depends on the behaviour factor q : Fardis et al. [2004] for a first ideal approach chose value of 5.85. Reference is made to a typical rubber bearing system, with a viscous damping coefficient of 10%, resulting in a reduction factor of the spectral ordinate = 0.816 . The seismic force ratio is so given:
RULS =
S a ,i (Teff , eff ) /1.5
Sa , f (T f , q )
S a , f (T f ) 1.5 S a , f (T f ) 1.5625 Sa , f (T f ) = 0.267 q Sa ,i (Teff ) q Sa ,i (Teff ) Sa ,i (Teff ) S a , f (T f ) Sa , f (T f ) 1.0417 Sa ,i (Teff ) Sa ,i (Teff )
(2.1)
RDLS =
Sa ,i (Teff , eff
S a , f (T f )
(2.2)
12
5.0 Tf<0.4s Mass Acceleration Ratio 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Isolation Period (s)
Figure 2.9. Base shear ratio for ground type A [Fardis et al., 2004]
Tf=1.0s Tf=1.5s
5.0 Tf<0.8s Mass Acceleration Ratio 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Isolation Period (s)
Figure 2.10. Base shear ratio for ground type D [Fardis et al., 2004]
Tf=1.0s Tf=1.5s
The advantages of seismic isolation are much stronger for DLS because RDLS / RULS 4 . Figs. 2.9 and 2.10 show the RULS values in a diagram with the isolated structure period at the abscissa: they deal with the two extreme possible cases for soil conditions (A and D), which represent, respectively, the most and the less favourable cases for seismic isolation. This ratio is the more favourable to seismic isolation as the higher its effective period. Focusing the attention on the usual range of application of rubber isolation, 2.0s Teff 3.0s , and considering an isolation ratio of at least 2, it can be seen that the seismic force ratio varies between 0.63 ( T f = 1.0 s , Teff = 2.0 s ) and 3.00 ( T f 0.4s , Teff = 3.0s ) for ground type A, and between 0.54 and 1.50 for ground type D. It should be underlined that further savings are
13
implied by the fact that neither capacity design nor seismic detailing is required for structures protected by seismic isolation. Damage limit state ratio is ranging from 2.52 to 12.00 and from 2.16 to 6.00 for ground type A and D respectively. This is strongly emphasising the great advantages provided by seismic isolation in terms of non structural damage control.
2.4 Lead Rubber Bearings Rubber bearings are able to supply for large seismic displacements, but by combining them with lead-plug inserts there is an hysteretic behaviour adding so that the required damping for an ideal isolation system can be incorporated into the rubber bearings themselves.
The lead-rubber bearings were invented in April 1975 by W.H. Robinson in New Zealand. The steel plates in the elastomeric bearing became the solution for controlling the lead shape after large plastic deformations. A glued elastomeric bearing was drilled out in order to take a lead plug and was tested. Those results forwarded to the New Zealand Ministry of Works and Development. In the next few months MWD redesigned the isolators for the William Clayton Building with lead-rubber bearings. At the same period the Bridge Section of the MWD designed the Toe Toe and Waiotukupuna bridges to take lead-rubber bearings. In a very short period of time lead-rubber bearings were invented, tested and utilised in practice.
Figure 2.11. Principle structure of a Maurer Shne LRB
Lead yields at low stress, around 10MPa, and behaves like an elastic-plastic solid. Lead is also hot-worked when plastically deformed at ambient temperature and the mechanical properties of the lead are being continuously restored by the simultaneous interrelated processes of recovery, recrystallization and grain growth. As a matter of fact, deforming lead at 20C is like deforming steel at temperatures higher than 400C. Lead has good fatigue properties during cycling at plastic strains.
14
The hole for the lead-plug can be machined through the bearing after manufacture, or the hole can be made in the steel plates and rubber sheets before they are joined together. The lead, in any case, must fit tightly in the elastomeric bearing and this is achieved by making the lead plug a little larger (1%) than the hole and forcing it into it. In this way, when the bearing is deformed horizontally, the led insert is forced by the interlocking steel plates to deform in shear throughout its whole volume. For strain rates of 1Hz, the lead-rubber bearing can be treated as a bilinear solid with an initial shear stiffness of K and a post-yield shear stiffness of around K /10 . The yield force of the lead insert can be easily determined from the yield stress of the lead in the bearing. The maximum shear force is the sum of the elastic force with the plastic force required to deform the lead cylinder. The lead-rubber bearings represent an economic solution for the seismic isolation problems because it combines the functions of vertical support, of rigidity at service load levels, and of horizontal flexibility and hysteretic damping at earthquake load levels into a single compact unit.
15
16
Chapter 3. State of the Art
3. STATE OF THE ART

3.1 Linear Theory of Seismic Isolation The linear theory of seismic isolation has been given by Naeim and Kelly [1999]. The basic concepts of base isolation can be shown with a simple 2-degree-of-freedom system with concentrated masses, as shown in Figure 3.1.
us
ks, cs
mb kb, cb
ub ug
Figure 3.12. Parameters of 2-degree-of-freedom isolated system [Naeim and Kelly, 1999]
The mass m is intended to represent the superstructure of the building and mb the mass of the base floor above the isolation system. The structure damping and stiffness are represented by cs , ks and the damping and stiffness of the isolation by cb , kb . Absolute displacement of the two masses are us and ub , but more convenient is to relate all with relative displacements: vb = ub u g vs = us u g
(3.1) (3.2)
where u g is the ground displacement. This choice with relative displacement appears to be efficient because Eq. (3.1) represent the isolation system displacement and Eq. (3.2) is the interstorey drift. The equation of motion can be easily expressed by applying dAlamberts principle:
&&b + mv &&s + cb v &b + kb vb = ( m + mb ) u &&g ( m + mb ) v
(3.3)
17
&&b + mv &&s + cs v &s + k s vb = mu &&g mv
(3.4)
If we introduce the total mass M = m + mb the mass ratio

(3.5)
m m = m + mb M
(3.6)
the nominal frequencies
b 2 =
the frequency ratio
kb M
s 2 =
ks m
(3.7)
b 2 = O (102 ) 2 s
(3.8)
the damping factors
b =
cb 2b M
s =
2s m
cs
(3.9)
the basic equations of motion become, in a matrix notation,

&&b 2bb 1 v + 1 1 v &&s 0 &b b 2 0 vb 0 v 1 &&g + = u 2 &s 0 s vs 2 ss v 1
(3.10)
The characteristic equation of the frequencies is
(1 ) 4 (s 2 + b 2 ) 2 + s 2b 2 = 0
the solution of which, to first order in , are given by
(3.11)
1 = b (1 )
2 2
s 2 2 = (1 + ) 1
2
(3.12)
and the mode shapes are
18
1 1 =
1 2 = 1 1 1 ) (
(3.13)
The modal analysis of this system yields with the expressing the participation factors as L1 = 1 and the damping ratios L2 = (3.14)
1 = b 1 2
2 =
s + b 1 2 1
(3.15)
If S d ( , ) and S a ( , ) are the pseudo-displacement and the pseudo-acceleration spectra, the maximum modal displacement can be calculated and combined using the SRSS rule to get:
2 vb ,max = L12 S d (1 , 1 ) + L2 S d ( 2 , 2 ) 2 2
(3.16)
2
vs ,max =
(1 2 )
Sd (1 , 1 ) + 1 2 (1 ) S d ( 2 , 2 )
2 2
(3.17)
The shear coefficient can be defined as:

2 Cs = S a (1 , 1 ) + S a ( 2 , 2 ) 2 2
(3.18) have
Taking into account that, usually, for isolated systems we S d (2 , 2 ) S d (1 , 1 ) , consequently, 1 b , L1 1 and 1 b :
vb ,max = S d (b , b )
vs ,max = S d (b , b ) Cs = S a (b , b )
and (3.19) (3.20) (3.21)
This result is of great importance for the interpretation of the behaviour of base isolated buildings [Fardis et al., 2004] and for their preliminary design: for small values of and for usual spectral shapes the isolation system can be designed for a maximum displacement equal to S d (b , b ) , and the superstructure for a shear coefficient equal to S a (b , b ) . These values could have been obtained with reference to a simple oscillator, whose mass is equal to the
19
total mass of the superstructure, and the stiffness and damping are equal to the corresponding quantities of the isolation system ( kb and b ). The interstorey drift ( vs ,max ) on which the damage produced by an earthquake depends, is proportional to the frequency ratio and to the maximum base displacement S d (b , b ) . The single-degree-of-freedom approximation gives well approximated values of the design parameters that differ from the exact ones of 1 2% .
3.2 Response Spectrum Concept Nowadays, the response spectrum concept is fundamental in engineering and, particularly, in earthquake engineering. This spectrum gives a convenient means to summarize the peak response of all possible linear SDF systems to a particular type of ground motion. Furthermore, it provides a practical way to apply the knowledge of structural dynamics into the structures design and development of lateral force requirements in building codes.
A plot of the peak values of a response quantity as a function of the natural vibration period Tn of the system, or a related parameter such as circular frequency n or cyclic frequency f n , is called the response spectrum for that quality [Chopra, 2001]. Each such plot is for SDF systems having a fixed damping ratio , and several such plots for different values of are included to cover the damping range encountered in real structures. A variety of response spectra can be defined, depending on the response quantity that is plotted. The deformation response spectrum is a plot of u0 against Tn for fixed : u0 (Tn , ) max u ( t , Tn , )
t
(3.22)
&0 and u &&t0 , that means having relative velocity response spectrum and Similar plots for u acceleration response spectrum: &0 (Tn , ) max u & ( t , Tn , ) u
t
(3.23) (3.24)
&&t0 (Tn , ) max u &&t ( t , Tn , ) u

t
&&g ( t ) can be computed following these The response spectrum for a given ground motion u steps:
1. definition of the ground motion in a numerical way; normally, the ground motions are defined every 0.2 seconds; 2. selection of the natural vibration period Tn and damping ratio of a SDF system; 3. computation of the response u ( t ) of this SDF system due to the ground motion;
20
4. choice of the peak values of the response, u0 , that is the spectral abscissa; 5. calculation of the spectral ordinates: D = u0 , V = ( 2 Tn ) D and A = ( 2 Tn ) D ;
2
6. iteration of the steps from 2 to 5 for a number of Tn and in such a way to cover all possible systems of engineering interest; 7. plotting the results in order to produce the spectra that are required. All this process is done with a ground motion input, but something more can be obtained. If we deal with a multistorey building we can imagine that the main input for that MDF system is, obviously, the ground motion. By analysing the building behaviour, a remarkable aspect becomes the different moving such floor has, because of the different accelerations. By considering, for instance, one storey-level acceleration time-history, it is absolutely allowed to use it as an input, the input of the first point above. Following all the other next points, the results coming up from such type of analysis are the floor response spectra. Floor response spectra give useful information for the type of analysis carried out on this work of research. They can easily show the typical behaviour of a storey in a building in order to design the storey-isolation system.
3.3 Design Criteria for Isolated Buildings The design of the superstructure of base-isolated buildings was a debated point for long, essentially because of the lack of precise objectives and of the correct ways for achieving them. At the moment, ideas are clearer, and differences between existing codes represent different choices on the objectives. At the first stage of seismic-isolation diffusion, a misconception took space: the idea that isolation could and should, to be competitive, be more economical in absolute terms than fixed base construction. In order to achieve this objective, unjustifiably low forces were proposed in early codes for the design of the superstructure [Fardis and Calvi, 2002].
Now, all codes recognize two performance levels to be checked: 1. a level (SLS) of fully elastic response both for the devices and for all structural parts, under the intensity of a seismic event of rather frequent occurrence ( TR = 50 150 years ); 2. a level (ULS) in which the devices attain their ultimate capacity, in terms of strength and deformability, while the structural parts (above and below the devices) may undergo a limited amount of damage, under the intensity of a seismic event with a TR = 500 years or more. Codes differ only in the precise definition of the ULS and in the way the non exceedance of this limit state is controlled. For example, the US code (UBC (1997)) presently requires that the superstructure be designed for the maximum forces in the isolation system divided by a
21
factor R ranging from 1.8 to 3.0, depending on the structural typology (e.g. R = 2.6 for shear wall systems). The level of protection this procedure is capable of ensuring remains unspecified. Other codes, and in particular the Italian guidelines (1998), adopt a more strict approach. The declared requirement is to preserve the superstructure from yield, and this is presumed to be fulfilled using a factor R = 1.5 , which is meant as a conservative compensation for the structures overstrength. The requirement, however, is not expressed in proper reliability terms, since it should be accompanied by the acceptable probability of exceedance and, on the other hand, the basis for the factor R = 1.5 is purely heuristic, since no systematic confirmation studies have ever been carried out.
3.3.1 Base Isolation in EN 1998-1:2004 [Fardis et al., 2004] The 10.4(6) sentence Although it may be acceptable that, in certain cases, the substructure has inelastic behaviour, it is considered in the present section that it remains in the elastic range simplifies a lot modelling because all elements can be assumed to behave linearly. But, dealing with isolation-system modelling is not banal and it needs a particular attention.
Table 3.1. Summary of the types of analyses and conditions to be met for their application [Fardis et al., 2004] EQUIVALENT LINEAR (10.9.2) Only when conditions in 10.9.2(5) are fulfilled Simplified linear (10.9.3) Only when conditions in 10.9.3(2,3,4) are fulfilled Simplified Only when conditions in 10.9.3(3,4) are fulfilled Modal analysis (10.9.4) Complete All other cases (conditions in 10.9.2(5) fulfilled) NON LINEAR All other cases Time-History (10.9.5)
Values of physical and mechanical properties of the isolation system to be used in the analysis shall be the most unfavourable ones to be attained during the lifetime of the structure (10.8(1)). They shall reflect, where relevant, the influence of:
rate of loading; magnitude of the simultaneous vertical load; magnitude of simultaneous horizontal load in the transverse direction; temperature; change of properties over projected service life.
Moreover, modelling of the isolation system should reflect with a sufficient accuracy the spatial distribution of the isolator units, so that the translation in both horizontal directions, the corresponding overturning effects and the rotation about the vertical axis are adequately accounted for. It should reflect adequately the characteristics of the different types of units used in the isolation system (10.9.1(3)).
22
Generally speaking, the system used for isolation has a behaviour that is more non-linear than linear. Sometimes, under certain conditions, an equivalent linear viscoelastic forcedeformation relationship can be assumed for the isolation system and a simplified analysis can be carried out with effective valued of stiffness ( K eff )and damping ( eff ). Eurocode 8 states these conditions in 10.9.2(5): the behaviour of the isolation system may be considered as being equivalent to linear if all the following conditions are met: a) the effective stiffness of the isolation system, , is not less than 50% of the effective stiffness at a displacement of 0.2d dc (where d dc is evaluated at the stiffness centre of the isolation system); b) the effective damping ratio of the isolation system, , does not exceed 30% (in fact high damping values can cause modal coupling, increasing floor accelerations and base shears); c) the force-displacement characteristics of the isolation system do not vary by more than 10% due to the rate of loading or due to the vertical loads; d) the increase of the restoring force in the isolation system for displacements between 0.5d dc and d dc is not less than 2.5% of the total gravity load above the isolation system. The simplified linear analysis is the simplest approach into seismic effects evaluation. The structure is assumed to behave like a simple oscillator, whose mass is the superstructure mass and the isolation stiffness as structural stiffness. This particular analysis can be done only when conditions 10.9.3(2,3,4) are fulfilled: The torsional movement about the vertical axis may be neglected in the evaluation of the effective horizontal stiffness and in the simplified linear analysis if, in each of the two principal horizontal directions, the total eccentricity (including the accidental eccentricity) between the stiffness centre of the isolation system and the vertical projection of the centre of mass of the superstructure does not exceed 7.5% of the length of the superstructure transverse to the horizontal direction considered. The simplified method may be applied to isolation systems with equivalent linear damped behaviour, if they also conform to all of the following conditions: e) the distance from the site to the nearest potentially active fault with a magnitude M S 6.5 is greater than 15 km; f) the largest dimension of the superstructure in plan is not greater than 50 m; g) the substructure is sufficiently rigid to minimise the effects of differential displacements of the ground;
23
h) all devices are located above elements of the substructure which support vertical loads; i) the effective period Teff satisfies the following condition: 3T f Teff 3s , where T f is the period of the superstructure assuming a fixed base (estimated through a simplified expression); j) the lateral-load resisting system of the superstructure should be regularly and symmetrically arranged along the two main axes of the structure in plan; k) the rocking rotation at the base of the substructure should be negligible; l) the ratio between the vertical and the horizontal stiffness of the isolation system should satisfy the following expression: KV K eff 150 ; m) the fundamental period in the vertical direction, TV , should be not longer than 0.1 s, where TV = 2 M KV .
Isolation displacements and seismic forces are evaluated with:
d dc =
MSa (Teff , eff K eff ,min
(3.25)
f j = m j Sa (Teff , eff )
(3.26)
where Se (Teff , eff ) is the spectral acceleration and m j the mass at level j . Consequently, the seismic forces along the height are no more in a linear variation but have a constant distribution: the structure is supposed to move as a rigid body.
If the isolation system may be modelled as linear, but some of the conditions above are not met, the structural system shall be analyzed with a modal dynamic analysis, where both the superstructure and the isolation system are modelled as linear elastic. A simplified model, with a rigid mass with three horizontal degrees of freedom simulating the superstructure, may still be used when only the conditions from e) to m) are fulfilled, i.e. when the torsional displacement can produce significant differences in the displacement of the isolation system. These differences must be taken into account when evaluating the effective stiffness of the single isolator units. A time-history analysis can always be made in any case; it becomes mandatory if it is not possible to model the mechanical behaviour of the isolation system as equivalent linear. The only condition is to model non-linearly the isolation system, while a linear model is kept for the structure. The non-linear model shall represent the actual constitutive law of the isolation system in the actual range of deformations and velocities related to the seismic design situation. In the most complete case a full non-linear analysis can also be done, in order to have a clear response behaviour of the structure which is considered in the analysis.
24
3.4 Modelling State of the Art for LRBs [Grant et al., 2005] The more used type of modelling isolation systems is based on linearised viscoelastic model. The nonlinear hysteretic response of a bearing is represented by two parameters: an effective stiffness, K eff , and an equivalent viscous damping, eff . Usually, equivalent stiffness and damping values are fixed for a certain design peak displacement, and equivalent viscous damping is fixed for a single natural frequency of the excitation. Viscoelastic linearised model is a design tool that can be verified with time-history analyses by a more sophisticated model. A bilinear force-displacement model represents the next step into modelling these types of devices. For LRBs this physical interpretation is, as a matter of fact, more apparent. The lead plug dominates the elastic stiffness, and when lead yields, the post-yield stiffness is basically the shear stiffness of the rubber. Three parameters are required in order to define the model, for example initial stiffness, K , post-yield stiffness ratio, , and yield force, Fy . The relationship between viscoelastic and bilinear models are shown in Figure 3.2, using the secant stiffness to characterise the equivalent linearization. The total restoring force, that is the sum of the elastic (spring) restoring force, Fs , with the viscous damping force, Fd , is shown in the same figure. For the rate-independent bilinear model the viscous force is zero, while for the viscoelastic model is linearly proportional to the velocity. The equivalent damping for the linearised model is calculated usually in a way that the energy dissipated in a cycle at resonant frequency is equal to the energy dissipated in hysteresis by the bilinear model.
Figure 3.13. Relationship between bilinear and linearised viscoelastic models in terms of dynamic restoring force versus displacement [Grant et al., 2005].
3.5 Examples of seismic storey isolation
Base isolation is a relative new earthquake resistance design. Many applications were made up to now, but basically they are strictly base isolation ones. That means using the devices at the basement of a building or at the superstructure basement of a bridge. Few examples dealt with a type of floor isolation. Nothing in literature treats the single-floor isolation as it has
25
been carried out in this work of research. There are few literature papers regarding this field of investigation and they are synthesised in the following paragraphs.
3.5.1 Floor Response of SDF Systems An important application of studying floor spectra in order to establish if metallic fuses have positive effects on isolation and/or retrofitting was made by Vargas [2004]. The structural fuse concept was investigated as a way to protect primary moment frame structures from experiencing inelastic behaviour of beams and columns, by concentrating all damage on easily replaceable elements. Furthermore, limiting storey drift indirectly allows mitigation of damage to non-structural components that are sensitive to lateral deformations (i.e. elements that are generally attached to consecutive floors). However, many non-structural elements are only attached to one floor, which makes them vulnerable to shifting or overturning. Damage to the internal components of sensitive equipment may also occur due to severe floor vibrations. In order to protect these components, floor acceleration and, in some cases, floor velocity (e.g., in the case of toppling of furniture) should be kept under certain limits.
Studies were made on SDF systems designed with metallic dampers acting as structural fuses. In this case study, results obtained from time-history analysis indicate that floor spectral acceleration, Sa , and floor spectral velocity, Sv , are 0.40 g and 484 mm/s, respectively. Sa and Sv on the bare frame are respectively 0.32 g and 728 mm/s. In this particular example, it may be noted that adding unbonded braces to the system result in an increase of 25% in the floor acceleration, and a reduction of 33% in the floor velocity. Floor acceleration response histories of SDF systems have been taken as the input signal to generate elastic floor acceleration and velocity spectra, to analyze the response of nonstructural components attached to the floor of bare frame systems, and structures designed with metallic fuses. A damping ratio of 5% was selected for this study. Approximately, the critical period, may be determined as the average between the period of the bare frame, and the period of the structural fuse system. That is a useful indicator to identify when using metallic fuses can increase or decrease the dynamic acceleration and velocity response of non-structural components. It was observed that non-structural elements having a period shorter than the critical one may be susceptible to greater acceleration (which would increase their likelihood of sliding on their support if unrestrained, for example), and greater velocity (which would for example increase their probability of overturning) when metallic fuses are added. On the other hand, it was found that retrofit works may improve the seismic behaviour of flexible non-structural components that have a period longer than the critical period; however, adequate judgement must be exercised in retrofitting these elements.
3.5.2 Floor Response Spectra Evaluation Kingston [2004] in his work of research, was evaluating the acceleration response of elastic non-structural components subjected to earthquake-induced supporting motions: a field that is in a particular way related with the work carried out by this dissertation. The floor accelerations are deeply investigated in order to predict the non-structural components behaviour. Earthquake ground motions can be severely amplified due to the dynamic characteristics of
26
the supporting structures and non-structural components supported on these structures. Floor response spectra are developed in this study to evaluate the maximum acceleration response of NSCs and provide significant insight into their dynamic behaviour. The amplification factor of the ground acceleration is related with the ratio between the nonstructural component and first mode building periods. An increase in the inelastic behaviour of the supporting structure significantly reduces the component amplification factor. For elastic frames, especially short period frames, the higher the location of the NSC in the building, the larger the maximum accelerations it will experience. For inelastic frames, the higher the location of the NSC in the building, the smaller the maximum accelerations it will experience.
3.5.3 A Storey-Isolation System This is a storey-isolation system [Mar and Tipping, 2002] which utilises stiffness control and passive damping to achieve high performance during earthquakes. The system consists of a buildings floors and columns (the gravity frame), which are connected to the lateral load resisting elements (the reaction frames) via a unique assembly of springs and passive dampers located at each floor. The gravity frame is laterally isolated from the base through slide bearings. Seismic resistance is gained through spring and damper forces that are developed by the relative displacement and velocity between the gravity frame and the reaction frames.
Figure 3.14. 2-D diagram of the high-performance seismic technology [Mar and Tipping, 2002]
Figure 3.15. Slider at interior column [Mar and Tipping, 2002]
27
The system is comprised of five components: the gravity frame, the reaction frames, the isolators, the springs, and the dampers (Figure 3.3). The gravity frame consists of the structures floors, beams and columns. The gravity frame is isolated from the ground and allowed to move relative to the reaction frame by means of low friction sliders (Figure 3.4). The preferred placement of the low friction sliders is at the top of the first floor columns. Reaction frames are typically three-dimensional core type frames that are self-supporting. They can be made of reinforced concrete or masonry or with steel braces. The springs are used to set the period of the structure, resist wind forces, and re-centre the building. If the gravity frame is relatively soft and the reaction frame is relatively stiff, then KTOT = K spring . The dampers that proved to provide the most optimal performance are non-linear viscous dampers. These devices give resisting forces in proportion to the velocity in the form of F = cv n (the nonlinear exponent used is in the range of 0.3 to 0.5). Initial analysis included extensive non-linear time-history simulations with DRAIN 2DX and SAP2000 and earthquake simulator testing of the storey-isolation system was conducted at the University of California at San Diego. In summary, the storey isolation system gives control in establishing a buildings seismic response through the independent establishment of the period and level of damping. Due to the direct coupling of floors to the reaction frame via springs and dampers, the system can employ large amounts of damping without changing its modal behaviour or be subject to uplift limitations. As such, the system can be simply proportioned to control seismic response, and achieve high-performance with essentially no structural damage during a major earthquake. The system also possesses reserve strength and ductility through the reaction frames, which can be activated during an overload condition while protecting the springs and dampers.
28
Chapter 4. Numerical Testing
4. NUMERICAL TESTING
The computational tool is computer program ANSRuop, developed in the Structures Laboratory, University of Patras, as a development and expansion of the ANSR-I program developed at UC Berkeley. Programs features are: 1. linear static analysis, under lateral forces proportional to nodal masses and a certain force pattern (linear or modal); 2. eigenmode and eigenvalue evaluation; 3. nonlinear static, better known as pushover, analysis, under increasing lateral forces proportional to specified patterns; 4. nonlinear dynamic analysis. Modelling characteristics involve also the estimation of the effective (secant) stiffness of columns to yielding. The main developed method of analysis is here the non linear timehistory analysis: while, in a linear time history analysis, all objects behave linearly and only the linear properties assigned to link elements are considered, in a nonlinear time-history analysis the nonlinear dynamic properties assigned to link elements are considered.
4.1 Process Scheme The experiments chronologic schedule can be resumed by the following points:
1. modelling the 4-storey RC building (called original building from now on), as it was designed to EC8 provisions [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004] and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses; 2. modelling the same building with the facilities mass added on the 1st floor and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses; 3. modelling the LRBs to isolate the 1st-floor facilities mass in two separate cases: with 15% or 30% damping ratio devices (15DLRBs and 30DLRBs) and running 7 nonlinear time-history analyses per device type; 4. modelling the original building of the 1st point with the 2nd-floor facilities mass in the no isolated case and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses;
29
5. modelling the 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs to isolate the 2nd-floor facilities mass and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses per device type; 6. modelling the original building with the 3rd-floor facilities mass in the no isolated case and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses; 7. modelling the 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs to isolate the 3rd-floor facilities mass and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses per device type; 8. modelling the original building with the 4th-floor facilities mass in the no isolated case and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses 9. modelling the 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs to isolate the 4th-floor facilities mass and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses per device type; 10. modelling the original building with facilities mass all over the 4th floor and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses; 11. modelling the 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs to isolate the whole-4th-floor facilities mass and running 7 non-linear time-history analyses per device type; 12. data analysis.
4.2 Design of the 4-Storey RC Building The building, subject of any test done for the achievement of this work of research, is brought from a study by Panagiotakos and Fardis [2004]. The performance of RC buildings designed with Eurocode 8 was evaluated through systematic nonlinear analyses. Regular 4-, 8- or 12storey RC frames were designed for a PGA of 0.2g or 0.4g and to the three alternative ductility classes in EC8. The performance of alternative designs under the life-safety (475year return period) and the damage limitation (95-year return period) earthquakes was evaluated through nonlinear seismic response analyses.
For the case in analysis, ductility class (or DC) Medium (or M) and PGA of 0.4 g is taken. In EC8 (for Medium, and High or H) design is based on energy dissipation and on ductility. There are some basic rules that are applied in order to have a control all over the inelastic seismic response in multistorey RC frames. The structural configuration and the relative sizing of members are chosen to have strong column/weak beam frames, with an overstrength factor of 1.3 on beam flexural capacities. Detailing of plastic hinge regions, to safely accommodate the corresponding inelastic deformation demands, is necessary: relating the quantities of deformation demands (e.g. the curvature ductility factor) in these regions to the behaviour factor q that reduces the elastic spectrum for design based on linear elastic analysis. Member verification in terms of forces and resistances for the Ultimate Limit State (ULS) under the design earthquake (475-year return period), is supposed to be done with the elastic spectrum reduced by a behaviour factor q equal to 3 times an overstrength factor R for frame redundancy in DC M, or to 4.5 times the overstrength factor R in DC H.
30
Damage is limited under an occasional earthquake (95-year return period): controlling the storey drift ratio up to a limit of 0.5% for brittle non-structural infills in contact with the RC frame, assuming 50% of uncracked gross section rigidities. Capacity design of beams and columns is made against pre-emptive shear failure. Detailing rules to control the deformation capacity of plastic hinges in concrete members through the amount of compression reinforcement ' in beam end sections or of the confining reinforcement, wd , in columns, are linked analytically to the local curvature ductility factor, , and through it to the value of q (prior to any reduction due to irregularity in elevation):
= 2q 1 if T1 TC
= 1 + 2 ( q 1) TC / T1 if T1 < TC
(4.1) (4.2)
where T1 the fundamental period of the building and TC the transition period between the constant acceleration region and the constant pseudovelocity regions of the spectrum. Rules for confinement of column end regions do not apply uniformly to all column ends, but only where plastic hinges are meant to develop. RC frame with 4 storeys of 3 m height were designed to EC2 and EC8, for the Type 1 spectrum recommended in EC8 for soil type C (stiff soil, with transition period between the acceleration- and velocity-controlled regions of 0.6s) and a PGA of 0.4g. For this type of soil the PGA at grade level is obtained by multiplying the PGA on rock with an S factor of 1.15; therefore the frames are designed to a PGA on rock of 0.4/1.15=0.35g. Concrete of class C30/37 (nominal cylindrical strength of 30 MPa) and class B S500 steel (relatively ductile tempcore type of steel, with nominal yield stress of 500 MPa) are assumed. The frames have three 5 m-long bays. A two-way system of beams with a span of 5 m is considered in both horizontal directions. The slab is 0.15 m thick and in the design is considered to contribute to the moment of inertia of the beams with an effective flange width according to EC2. In addition to the self weight of the beams and the slab, a distributed dead load of 2kN / m2 due to floor finishing and partitions and imposed live load with nominal value of 1.5kN / m 2 are considered. In the combination of gravity loads (persistent design situation) nominal dead and live loads are multiplied with load factors of 1.35 and 1.5, respectively. Following EC8, in the seismic design situation, dead and live loads enter with their nominal value and with 30% of the nominal value, respectively. Frame columns are square; their side length hc is the same in all storeys but is smaller in the two exterior columns, so that their uncracked gross-section stiffness is about half that of the interior ones. In this way elastic seismic chord rotation demands at the two beam ends in the exterior bays of the frame are approximately equal (and, to the extent the equal displacement approximation holds at the level of member chord rotations, inelastic chord rotation demands are about equal at the two ends of exterior beams). Beams have the same web width ( bw = 0.35m ) in all storeys but different depth, hb .
31
Design is based on the results of linear elastic (equivalent) static analysis, for lateral earthquake forces distributed over the height according to an assumed linear mode shape (termed lateral force procedure in EC8). Because such a static analysis systematically overestimates the results of a more representative modal response spectrum analysis, EC8 allows multiplying its results by 0.85. Lateral forces are derived from the design spectrum (5%-damped elastic spectrum divided by the behaviour factor q ) at the fundamental period of the building, which is estimated through the Rayleigh quotient on the basis of the storey elastic horizontal displacements resulting from equivalent lateral forces with (inverted) triangular distribution. 50% of the uncracked gross section stiffness is considered in the EC8 designs. Design neglects any torsional effects due to accidental eccentricity and simultaneous action of the two horizontal components of the earthquake (according to the familiar 0.3:1 rule), as the nonlinear analyses of the response of the frames to the design earthquake are performed in 2D, under only one component of the seismic action and without accidental eccentricity. In the analysis the columns of the bottom storey are assumed fixed at grade level. The finite size of beam-column joints is considered, but joints are assumed rigid. P- effects are neglected. Beam gravity loads are computed on the basis of beam tributary areas in the twoway square slab system. At a preliminary design stage, the (uniform) column depth hc and the beam depths hbi at each storey are tailored to the interstorey drift ratio limitation of 0.5% (for brittle non-structural infills) for the damage limitation earthquake (taken as 50% of the design earthquake, i.e. with a PGA on Type C soil of 0.10g or 0.20g).
Figure 4.16. 3D model of the 4-storey building modelled in ANSRuop
Member sizing takes place iteratively, via a simplified analysis in which inflection points due to the lateral earthquake loading are assumed at beam mid-span and at column mid-height. Member depths are rounded up to the nearest 50 mm. Internal forces to be used for the calculation of member reinforcement for the ULS in bending, are obtained from a linear
32
elastic analysis of the full model of the so-sized frame. During the dimensioning of beam reinforcement, beam depths in some storeys may increase further, to respect the maximum top steel ratio at beam supports to columns. In such cases the linear elastic analysis is repeated, for conformity of the fundamental period and of the analysis results with the final member depths.
5 5 Exterior Interior 4 4 4 5 Exterior Interior 4 5 Exterior Interior
3 Storey
1 DC-M 0 0.0 0.2 0.4 hb (m) 0.6
0 0.0 0.5 1.0 (%) 1.5 2.0
0 0.0 0.5 ' (%) 1.0 1.5
0 0.0 0.5 1.0 c (%) 1.5 2.0
Figure 4.17. Beam depth ( hb ), beam top ( ) and bottom ( ' ) reinforcement ratio and column total reinforcement ratio ( c ) in 4-storey frames for EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g.; closed circles: exterior and open circles: interior members [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004]
5 (Beam s - Exterior) 5 (Beam s - Interior) 5 (Colum ns - Exterior) 5 (Colum ns - Interior)
Storey
Storey
1 DC - M 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
1 DC - M
0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Figure 4.18. Minimum-maximum range and mean member damage ratio from 7 time-history analyses of 4-storey frames designed to EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004]
5 exterior interior
Storey
1 DCM 0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Figure 4.19. Ratio of sum of column flexural capacities to sum of beam flexural capacities around joints in frames designed to EC8 DC M; design PGA of 0.4g. Closed circles: exterior joints; open circles: interior joints [Panagiotakos and Fardis, 2004]
33
Final column depths are of 0.55m and 0.65m for exterior and interior columns respectively. The resulting axial load ratios, d = N / Ac f cd , are 0.077 and 0.122 (for exterior and interior columns respectively) at the base of the column under the gravity loads which are considered to act simultaneously with the design earthquake. Design base shear Vb is of 1152kN. The concrete volume is of 37.98m3 and the steel weight is of 4.29t per frame.
Figure 4.20. External column characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.21. Internal column characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
34
Figure 4.22. 1st-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.23. 2nd-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.24. 3rd-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
35
Figure 4.25. 4th-floor beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.26. 1st-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.27. 2nd-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
36
Figure 4.28. 3rd-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
Figure 4.29. 4th-floor transverse beam characteristics as it is shown by ANSRuop
4.3 Seismic Isolation System with Lead Rubber Bearings The four fundamental functions of LRBs are, as it is alreadt known:
1. transmission of vertical loads: LRBs act as conventional bearings transferring vertical loads; 2. allowance of displacements on the horizontal plane providing the horizontal flexibility: LRBs produce uncoupling between foundation and superstructure reducing transmitted forces or the amount of mechanical energy. The rubber is providing the horizontal flexibility;
37
3. dissipation of substantial quantities of energy: this limits the relative displacement of the isolated structural mass and provides better structural control with bigger safety for the structure. This dissipation is given by the rubber and the inner lead core; 4. assurance of self-centring: this prevents cumulative displacement during the seismic event: the recentring effect is based on the natural elasticity of the applied rubber. In designing LRBs, two methods are simultaneously applied.
(a) Seismic isolation. The superstructure gets de-coupled from the ground. This isolation limits the energy to a minimum to enter into the structure. Because of that, the natural period of the structure is increased reducing, by this way, the spectral acceleration in a seismic attack. (b) Energy dissipation. By means of passive energy dissipation the seismic rest energy into the superstructure will be effectively dissipated by additional damping within the lead core of the LRB relieving the entire structure from additional strain. The concept of the energy approach reduces effectively the energy induced ( Ei ) into the structure by ground motion through its foundations. The amount of the structurally stored energy ( Es ) has to be as low as possible to avoid damages. Therefore the value of the dissipated energy ( ED ) must be great. The energy part ( Eh ) out of the dissipated energy due to plastic deformation of the structure has to be kept low, as this way of energy dissipation causes structural yielding and cracks. The drastic increase of the value of the energy of viscous phenomena ( Ev ) is the final opportunity to control the energy balance of the structure. In fact, Ev is directly correlated with the LRB. Therefore this Ev increase is realized by the use of specially developed highly efficient LRBs. A single degree of freedom system has the following equation:
&& + cu & + ku + h ( u ) = mu &&g mu
(4.3)
By integrating with respect to x we find:

&& = m mudu & du 1 & & = mu & 2 = Ek du = mudu 2 dt
2
(4.4)
& = cu & dt = E Fudu = cudu
(4.5)
kudu = 2 ku
= Ee
(4.6)
h ( u ) du =E
g
(4.7) (4.8)
&& du = E mu
38
Following the same order we define kinetic energy, the viscous energy, the elastic energy, the energy dissipated hysteretic or plastic deformation and the energy of the ground motion. We are in this situation:
Ei Es + ED = ( Ee + Ek ) + ( Eh + Ev ) = Eg
(4.9)
4.3.1 The Design and Characteristics of LRBs LRBs are consisting of a standard elastomeric laminated rubber bearing. The rubber compound can be of natural rubber or chloroprene rubber. The shape can be either round or rectangular. For this testing a round shape is chosen. The LRBs are generally constructed with low-damping (unfilled) elastomers with shear modules of 0.4 1.2 N / mm 2 and lead cores with diameters ranging 15% and 33% of the bonded bearing diameter for round bearings. The minimum 0.4 N / mm 2 is selected for the testing carried out. The elastomer provides the isolation and recentring, while the lead core offers the necessary energy dissipation or damping component. The maximum shear strain value is generally between 125% and 200%. The inner steel shims do not only grant for good load capacity, but also for a proper confinement of the lead core. The yield stress of lead core is depending on the temperature: 18MPa at 35C, 10 MPa at 75C, 7 MPa at 125C and 4 MPa at 225C. Therefore after one load cycle it can be assumed that the yield stress is 13MPa and after three it is 11MPa . The yield stress value of 11MPa is assumed for the testing.
The calculation of a LRB can be carried out like following: 1. deciding the minimum bearing rubber diameter depending on vertical loads: the maximum admissible stress on LRBs is considered to be 15MPa . Every bearing is supporting a weight of 75kN which is due to the facilities mass, but in the whole-4thfloor case there are bearing supporting also 150kN ; 2. setting the target period Teff (2 seconds appears to be the desired one) and the effective damping , which are related respectively with the structure modes and with the bearing typology (from 15% to 30%, depending on the lead-core size); 3. Reading the spectral acceleration Sa from the response spectrum graph in relation with the desired period; 4. Getting the spectral displacement, that is the desig displacement too:
Teff dbd = Sa 2
(4.10)
5. The required stiffness to provide a Teff period is the effective stiffness:

K eff 2 = T eff Wi g
2
(4.11)
39
where Wi is the weight on the isolator; 6. The global energy dissipated per cycle is:
ED = 2 K eff dbd 2
(4.12)
7. The relationship of these quantities to the two lead-plug bearing parameters F0 and K r is
K eff = K r +
F0 dbd
(4.13)
and
ED = 4 F0 ( dbd d y )
where
dy = F0 Ke K p
(4.14)
(4.15)
and as an approximate rule of thumb K e 10 K p ; 8. Neglecting d y , a first approximation of F0 can be found:
F0 =
ED 4dbd
(4.16)
9. The post-elastic tangent stiffness can be found as follows:
K p = K eff
F0 dbd
(4.17)
10. A correction can be made on the F0 value with:

dy = F0 9K p
(4.18)
F0 =
ED 4 ( dbd d y )
(4.19)
11. The lead yield stress of the is Pb = 11MPa , so that the lead-plug diameter needed is:
40
F0 =
DPb 2 4 F0 Pb DPb = 4 Pb
(4.20)
12. It can be define the K Pb contribute with: K Pb = F0 dbd (4.21)
13. The total rubber thickness can be now defined with: K r = K eff K Pb Dbearing 2 4 tr tr = Dbearing 2 4 Kr (4.23) (4.22)
Kr =
where G is the shear module (varying from 0.4 to 1.1 MPa); 14. The response force is resulting, with vb as the displacement, in: F = K p vb + Pb
(D 4
bearing
DPb 2 )
(4.24)
15. Some useful parameters are the first and second shape factors and the shear strain: S= Dbearing 4t Dbearing tr (4.25)
S'=
(4.26)
dbd tr
(4.27)
where t is the single layer rubber thickness.
4.4 Ground Motion Spectra Recorded earthquake time histories are the most important information needed in earthquake engineering. Seismic design procedures are strongly based on response spectrum representation. When design procedures rely totally on the response spectrum, the response
41
spectrum constitutes all of the ground motion information required for designing. If the design procedures involve time history analyses in conjunction with a design response spectrum, then some method is required in order to find the appropriate representative time histories. The process by which earthquake records are manipulated to produce some level of design spectrum compatibility is called scaling. Scaling may be made in the time domain or in the frequency domain as well. Recorded accelerograms, or accelerograms generated through a physical simulation of source and travel path mechanisms, may be used, provided that the samples used are adequately qualified with regard to the seismogenetic features of the sources and to the soil conditions appropriate to the site, and their values are scaled to the value of ag S for the zone under consideration. For the numerical testing carried out in this work of research, seven real ground motions are manipulated in order to obtain a response spectrum which is compatible with the Eurocode 8 target spectrum, for a C type soil and a 0.35g of PGA. A soil placed in the C-type definition is made of deep deposits of dense or medium-dense sand, gravel or stiff clay with thickness from several tens to many hundreds of metres; with an average value of propagation velocity of S waves in the upper 30 m of the soil profile at shear strain of 105 or less ( vs ,30 ) ranging between 180 and 360m/s; with a standard penetration test blow-count ( N SPT ) between 15 and 50; with an undrained shear strength of soil ( cu ) between 70 and 250. If the response is obtained from at least 7 nonlinear time-history analyses with ground motions in accordance with Eurocode 8 prescriptions, the average of the response quantities from all of these analyses should be used as the design value of the action effect. Otherwise, the most unfavourable value of the response quantity among the analyses should be used.
42
Figure 4.30. 1st ground motion (Kalamata 1986 Greece) and related acceleration response spectrum
Figure 4.31. 2nd ground motion (Capitola building Loma Prieta 1989 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum
Figure 4.32. 3rd ground motion (Bonds Corner Imperial Valley 1979 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum
43
Figure 4.33. 4th ground motion (Tolmezzo Friuli 1976 Italy) and related acceleration response spectrum
Figure 4.34. 5th ground motion (Ulcinj Montenegro 1979) and related acceleration response spectrum
Figure 4.35. 6th ground motion (Herceg Novi Montenegro 1979) and related acceleration response spectrum
44
Figure 4.36. 7th ground motion (El Centro Imperial Valley 1940 California, USA) and related acceleration response spectrum
Figure 4.37. Mean acceleration response spectrum of all the 7 ground motions
45
46
Chapter 5. Design and Analysis of Storey-Isolation Systems
5. DESING AND ANALYSIS OF STOREY-ISOLATION SYSTEMS

5.1 First-Storey-Isolation System Having the model of the building, the first modification is regarding the facilities mass addition. In this first case a mass of 300kN is supposed to be in the middle of the first floor. Every node of the square central deck is consequently supporting a 75kN weight mass, representing what is going to be isolated in the next design steps.
At this point the first fundamental check deals with the response spectra, and, in particular, with floor spectra in order to understand the building behaviour floor by floor under a seismic action.
Figure 5.38. 1st-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra
Comparing the spectra obtained from the original building with the ones from the w/ 1st-floor facilities model, there are the following observations:
47
the 1st-floor spectrum has 3 peaks at the first three main modes: adding facilities mass at the first floor amplifies the spectral floor accelerations for the 2nd and the 3rd modes, that means at higher frequencies; the 2nd-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the first floor decreases basically the spectral floor acceleration only for the 1st mode; the 3rd-floor spectrum has 3 peaks, even if the 2nd- and the 3rd-mode peaks are negligible if compared with the 1st-mode peak: adding facilities mass at the first floor decreases the floor spectral acceleration for the 1st mode; the 4th-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the first floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for the 1st mode. To design an isolation system, it is suitable a main period for the non-structural component around 2 seconds in order to be safely away from any mode Peak Floor Acceleration. From the 1st-floor spectrum in the w/ 1st-floor facilities curve, the absolute spectral acceleration at 2 seconds is 3.35m / s 2 so that the design displacement for LRBs becomes 0.17 m . To continue through the storey-isolation system design, the damping is set: both 15% and 30% are considered separately, following the design process expressed in 4.3.1. In Table 5.1 there are the 1st-storey-isolation LRBs design final results.
Table 5.2. 1st-floor LRBs design
Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
T eff b d bd G Wi K eff ED F0 Kp Ke K e /K p dy Fy D bearing D Pb K Pb Kr t n ts t s.ext Ar tr L S S' g
1 st -floor 15DLRBs 2.00 15% 0.170 0.40 75 75.456 2.048 3.124 57.677 576.769 0.100 0.006 3.353 200 20 18.409 57.046 8 27 2 25 31102 216 5027 6.25 0.93 79%
1 st -floor 30DLRBs 2.00 30% 0.170 0.40 75 75.456 4.097 6.698 39.898 398.980 0.100 0.017 6.705 200 28 39.466 35.990 8 43 2 25 30800 344 5027 6.25 0.58 49%
48
Successively, non-linear springs, supporting the 75kN weight mass, are modelled always in ANSRuop and non-linear time histories analyses are carried out for the seven ground motions treated in 4.4. Looking at the relative floor spectra, the consequences of a 15DLRBs isolation system are quite similar with the 30DLRBs case, but the facilities get different behaviours: the 1st-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing for the 2nd and the 3rd modes and a less appreciable decreasing for the 1st mode; the facilities on the LRBs gain a drastic drop of the 2nd and 3rd mode peaks, while there is only a significant attenuation of for the 1st-mode spectral acceleration, better in the 15DLRBs than the 30DLRBs, but at higher periods the behaviour is the opposite; 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor spectra underline only a little reduction for the spectral acceleration next to the 2nd and the 3rd structural modes. It is important to compare the results, ground motion by ground motion, to see if the storeyisolation system is working properly and to check the global effects into the whole building. The following graphs are developed: 1. absolute acceleration for the 1st-floor facilities mass; 2. absolute displacement for the 1st-floor facilities mass; 3. force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities; 4. Peak Floor Accelerations per floor; 5. Peak Floor Displacements per floor; 6. peak interstorey drift ratios per floor. In Appendix A there are all the produced graphs for every ground motion analysis.
Figure 5.39. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion
49
Figure 5.40. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.41. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.42. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion
To have more useful results, three more bar plots are produced, making the mean of the seven values to which they refer: 7. mean PFAs per floor; 8. mean PFDs per floor; 9. mean peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
50
Figure 5.43. 1st-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD
Figure 5.44. 1st-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio
The most important aspect is getting an efficient isolation for the facilities because of the many reasons treated in 1.1: the means of the maximum shear forces are:
o for 15DLRBs: 14.80kN ; o for 30DLRBs: 13.29kN ;
the means of the real maximum displacements are:

o for 15DLRBs: 0.21m ; o for 30DLRBs: 0.18m ;
the peak absolute acceleration 4.875m / s 2 ( = 0.50 g ) to:
going
into
the
facilities
is
cut
from
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 2.127 m / s 2 ( = 0.22 g ) ; o for 30DLRBS isolation system: 1.983m / s 2 ( = 0.20 g ) .
51
Global effects are important too, to have the idea of the feasibility of the 1st-storey-isolation system: PFAs are influenced by the 1st-floor isolation system in such a way that 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor PFAs drop respectively from 4.875m / s 2 , 6.033m / s 2 , 6.180m / s 2 , 8.837m / s 2 to:
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 8.436m / s 2 ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 8.379m / s 2 ;
4.473m / s 2 , 4.407m / s 2 ,
5.402m / s 2 ,
6.044m / s 2 ,
5.304m / s 2 , 5.996m / s 2 ,
PFDs go down from 74mm , 125mm , 167 mm , 200mm to:

o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 68mm , 118mm , 161mm , 192mm ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 68mm , 117 mm , 160mm , 192mm ;
peak interstorey drift ratios reduces from 1.86% , 1.35% , 1.19% , 0.90% to:
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 1.69% , 1.31% , 1.17% , 0.88% ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 1.69% , 1.31% , 1.16% , 0.87% .
5.2 Second-Storey-Isolation System In this second case a mass of 300kN is supposed to be in the middle of the second floor. Every node of the square central deck is consequently supporting a 75kN weight mass, representing what is going to be isolated in the next design steps.
At this point the first fundamental check deals again with the response spectra, and, in particular, with floor spectra in order to understand the building behaviour floor by floor under a seismic action. Comparing the spectra obtained from the original building with the ones from the w/ 2ndfloor facilities model, there are the following observations: the 1st-floor spectrum has 3 peaks at the first three main modes: adding facilities mass at the second floor amplifies the spectral floor accelerations for the 2nd and the 3rd modes, that means at higher frequencies, while there is a little decrease for the spectral acceleration around the first mode frequency; the 2nd-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the second floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for both;
52
the 3rd-floor spectrum has 3 peaks, even if the 2nd- and the 3rd-mode peaks are negligible if compared with the 1st-mode peak: adding facilities mass at the second floor decreases the floor spectral acceleration for the 1st mode and for the 2nd one too; the 4th-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the second floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for both.
Figure 5.45. 2nd-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra
To design an isolation system, it is chosen again a main period for the non-structural component of 2 seconds in order to be safely away from any mode peak floor acceleration. From the 2nd-floor spectrum in the w/ 2nd-floor facilities curve, the absolute spectral acceleration at 2 seconds is 3.95m / s 2 so that the design displacement for LRBs becomes 0.20m . To continue through the storey-isolation system design the damping is set, separately, of 15% and 30%. In Table 5.2 there are the 2nd-storey-isolation LRBs design final results. Successively, non-linear springs, supporting the 75kN weight mass, are modelled in ANSRuop and non-linear time-histories analyses are carried out for the seven ground motions treated in 4.4. Looking at the relative floor spectra, the consequences of a 15DLRBs isolation system are quite similar with the 30DLRBs case, for the building considered as a whole and for the facilities too: the 1st-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing for the 2nd mode and a less appreciable increasing for the 1st mode;
53
the 2nd-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing for the 2nd mode only; the facilities on the LRBs gain a drastic decrease of the 2nd-mode peak, while there is only an attenuation of more than the 50% for the 1st-mode spectral acceleration; 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor spectra underline only a little reduction for the spectral acceleration next to the 1st and the 2nd structural modes. It is important to compare the results ground motion by ground motion to see if the storeyisolation system is working properly and to check the global effects into the whole building: 1. absolute acceleration for the 2nd-floor facilities mass; 2. absolute displacement for the 2nd-floor facilities mass; 3. force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities; 4. Peak Floor Accelerations per floor; 5. Peak Floor Displacements per floor; 6. peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Table 5.3. 2nd-floor LRBs design
Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
2 nd -floor 15DLRBs 2.00 15% 0.200 0.40 75 75.456 2.848 3.684 57.677 576.769 0.100 0.007 3.953 230 21 18.409 57.046 8 36 2 25 41201 288 5781 7.19 0.80 69%
2 nd -floor 30DLRBs 2.00 30% 0.200 0.40 75 75.456 5.695 7.897 39.898 398.980 0.100 0.020 7.906 230 31 39.466 35.990 8 57 2 25 40793 456 5781 7.19 0.50 44%
54
Figure 5.46. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.47. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.48. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion
55
Figure 5.49. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion
In Appendix B there are all the produced graphs for every ground motion analysis. To have more useful results, three more bar plots are produced, making the mean of the seven values to which they refer: 7. mean PFAs per floor; 8. mean PFDs per floor; 9. mean peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Figure 5.50. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD
Figure 5.51. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio
56
The most important aspect is getting an efficient storey-isolation for the facilities because of the many reasons treated in 1.1: the means of the maximum shear forces are:

o for 15DLRBs: 0.27 m ; o for 30DLRBs: 0.25m ;
going
into
the
facilities
is
cut
from
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 2.415m / s 2 ( = 0.25 g ) ; o for 30DLRBS isolation system: 2.354m / s 2 ( = 0.24 g ) .
Global effects are important too, to have the idea of the feasibility of the 2nd-storey-isolation system: PFAs are influenced by the 2nd-floor isolation system in such a way that 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor PFAs drop respectively from 4.613m / s 2 , 5.645m / s 2 , 6.109m / s 2 , 8.547m / s 2 to:
4.426m / s 2 , 4.416m / s 2 ,
5.258m / s 2 , 5.854m / s 2 , 5.238m / s 2 , 5.815m / s 2 ,
PFDs go down from 77 mm , 134mm , 174mm , 203mm to:

o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 70mm , 120mm , 162mm , 191mm ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 69mm , 119mm , 159mm , 189mm ;
57
5.3 Third-Storey-Isolation System The first modification in this case study is regarding the facilities mass addition. In this third case a mass of 300kN is supposed to be in the middle of the third floor. Every node of the square central deck is consequently supporting a 75kN weight mass, representing what is going to be isolated in the next design steps.
Floor spectra are developed in order to understand the building behaviour, floor by floor, under a seismic action.
Figure 5.52. 3rd-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra
Comparing the spectra obtained from the original building with the ones from the w/ 3rdfloor facilities model, there are the following observations: the 1st-floor spectrum has 3 peaks at the first three main modes: adding facilities mass at the third floor decreases the spectral floor accelerations for the 1st mode; the 2nd-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the third floor decreases basically the spectral floor acceleration only for the 1st mode; the 3rd-floor spectrum has 3 peaks, even if the 2nd- and the 3rd-mode peaks are negligible if compared with the 1st-mode peak: adding facilities mass at the third floor decreases the floor spectral acceleration for the 1st mode; the 4th-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the third floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for the 1st mode.
58
A 2-second main period for the isolation system is set. From the 3rd-floor spectrum in the w/ 3rd-floor facilities curve, the absolute spectral acceleration at 2 seconds is 4.48m / s 2 so that the design displacement for LRBs becomes 0.23m . Both 15% and 30% damping ratios are considered separately, following the design expressed in 4.3.1. In Table 5.3 there are the 3rd-storey-isolation LRBs design final results.
Table 5.4. 3rd floor LRBs design
3 rd -floor 15DLRBs Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
3 rd -floor 30DLRBs 2.00 30% 0.227 0.40 75 75.456 7.326 8.957 39.898 398.980 0.100 0.022 8.967 260 33 39.466 35.990 8 73 2 25 52238 584 6535 8.13 0.45 39%
2.00 15% 0.227 0.40 75 75.456 3.663 4.178 57.677 576.769 0.100 0.008 4.483 260 23 18.409 57.046 8 46 2 25 52677 368 6535 8.13 0.71 62%
Successively, non-linear bilinear springs, supporting the 75kN weight mass, are again modelled in ANSRuop and non-linear time-histories analyses are carried out for the seven ground motions treated in 4.4. Looking at the relative floor spectra, the consequences of a 15DLRBs isolation system are quite similar with the 30DLRBs case, but the facilities mass gets different behaviours: the 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing for the 2nd and the 3rd modes, while it is noticed a less appreciable increasing for the 1st mode; the facilities on the LRBs gain a decrease of the mode peaks, better in the 30DLRBs than the 15DLRBs for the 1st mode spectral acceleration reduction, but at higher periods the behaviour is the opposite; It is important to compare the results, ground motion by ground motion, to see if the storeyisolation system is working properly and to check the global effects into the whole building:
59
1. absolute acceleration for the 3rd-floor facilities mass; 2. absolute displacement for the 3rd-floor facilities mass; 3. force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities; 4. Peak Floor Accelerations per floor; 5. Peak Floor Displacements per floor; 6. peak interstorey drift ratios per floor. In Appendix C there are all the produced graphs for every ground motion analysis.
Figure 5.53. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.54. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion
60
Figure 5.55. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.56. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion
To have more useful results, three more bar plots are produced once again, making the mean of the seven values to which they refer: 7. mean PFAs per floor; 8. mean PFDs per floor; 9. mean peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Figure 5.57. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD
61
Figure 5.58. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio

the peak absolute acceleration 5.867 m / s 2 ( = 0.60 g ) to:
going
into
the
facilities
is
cut
from
Global effects are important too, to have the idea of the feasibility of the 3rd-storey-isolation system: PFAs are influenced by the 3rd-floor isolation system in such a way that 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor PFAs change respectively from 4.684m / s 2 , 5.851m / s 2 , 5.867 m / s 2 , 7.863m / s 2 to:
4.462m / s 2 , 4.386m / s 2 ,
5.451m / s 2 , 5.292m / s 2 ,
5.865m / s 2 , 5.697 m / s 2 ,
PFDs go down from 78mm , 136mm , 181mm , 211mm to:

62
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 67 mm , 117 mm , 158mm , 188mm ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 66mm , 113mm , 153mm , 182mm ;
peak interstorey drift ratios changes from 1.94% , 1.47% , 1.22% , 0.83% to:
5.4 Fourth-Storey-Isolation System Facilities mass (75kN weight mass per central deck node) is modelled, representing what is going to be isolated in the next design steps.
Response floor spectra are obtained in order to understand the building behaviour floor by floor under a seismic action.
Figure 5.59. 4th-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra
Comparing the spectra obtained from the original building with the ones from the w/ 4thfloor facilities model, there are the following observations: the 1st-floor spectrum has 3 peaks at the first three main modes: adding facilities mass at the fourth floor amplifies the spectral floor accelerations for the 2nd and the 3rd
63
modes, that means at higher frequencies, while there is an opposite behaviour near the 1st mode period; the 2nd-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the fourth floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration only for the 1st mode and it increases the 2nd one; the 3rd-floor spectrum has 3 peaks, even if the 2nd- and the 3rd-mode peaks are negligible if compared with the 1st-mode peak: adding facilities mass at the fourth floor decreases the floor spectral acceleration for the 1st mode; the 4th-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the fourth floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for both mode. A 2-second main period for the isolation system is set. From the 4th-floor spectrum in the w/ 4th-floor facilities curve, the absolute spectral acceleration at 2 seconds is 4.9m / s 2 so that the design displacement for LRBs becomes 0.25m . Both 15% and 30% damping ratios are considered separately, following the design expressed in 4.3.1. In Table 5.4 there are the 4th-storey-isolation LRBs design final results. Successively, non-linear bilinear springs, supporting the 75kN weight mass, are again modelled in ANSRuop and non-linear time-histories analyses are carried out for the seven ground motions treated in 4.4. Looking at the relative floor spectra, the consequences of a 15DLRBs isolation system are quite similar with the 30DLRBs case: the 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing; the facilities on the LRBs gain a decrease of the mode peaks, better in the 30DLRBs than the 15DLRBs for the 1st-mode spectral acceleration reduction, but at higher periods the behaviour is the opposite; It is important to compare the results, ground motion by ground motion, to see if the storeyisolation system is working properly and to check the global effects into the whole building: 1. absolute acceleration for the 4th-floor facilities mass; 2. absolute displacement for the 4th-floor facilities mass; 3. force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities; 4. Peak Floor Accelerations per floor; 5. Peak Floor Displacements per floor; 6. peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
64
Table 5.5. 4th floor LRBs design

4 th -floor 15DLRBs Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
4 th -floor 30DLRBs 2.00 30% 0.248 0.40 75 75.456 8.764 9.797 39.898 398.980 0.100 0.025 9.807 280 34 39.466 35.990 8 84 2 25 60667 672 7037 8.75 0.42 37%
2.00 15% 0.248 0.40 75 75.456 4.382 4.570 57.677 576.769 0.100 0.009 4.904 280 24 18.409 57.046 8 54 2 25 61123 432 7037 8.75 0.65 57%
Figure 5.60. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.61. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion
65
Figure 5.62. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.63. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion
In Appendix D there are all the produced graphs for every ground motion analysis. To have more useful results, three more bar plots are produced, making the mean of the seven values to which they refer: 7. mean PFAs per floor; 8. mean PFDs per floor; 9. mean peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Figure 5.64. 4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD
66
Figure 5.65. 4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio

o for 15DLRBs: 0.37 m ; o for 30DLRBs: 0.33m ;
going
into
the
facilities
is
cut
from
Global effects are important too, to have the idea of the feasibility of the 4th-storey-isolation system: PFAs are influenced by the 4th-floor isolation system in such a way that 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor PFAs modify respectively from 4.721m / s 2 , 6.112m / s 2 , 6.142m / s 2 , 7.708m / s 2 to:
4.474m / s 2 , 4.399m / s 2 ,
5.475m / s 2 , 5.916m / s 2 , 5.355m / s 2 , 5.735m / s 2 ,

67
o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 65mm , 113mm , 154mm , 185mm ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 64mm , 110mm , 149mm , 178mm ;
5.5 Whole-Fourth-Storey-Isolation System From the same original building model, a new type of isolation is developed always at the top storey for the 4-storey RC building object of this work of research. Facilities to be isolated are thought to be present all over the fourth floor so that 900kN are supposed to be distributed on it. Every node of the 4 ones in the square central deck is consequently supporting a 150kN weight mass, while the remaining other 4 external nodes of the same floor are getting a 75kN weight mass each one. In this final storey-isolation system 8 bearings are going to be modelled.
Response floor spectra are obtained as well in order to understand the building behaviour floor by floor under a seismic action.
Figure 5.66. Whole-4th-floor facilities consequences: floor spectra
68
Comparing the spectra obtained from the original building with the ones from the w/ 4thfloor facilities model, there are the following observations: the 1st-floor spectrum has 3 peaks at the first three main modes: adding facilities mass all over the fourth floor amplifies the spectral floor accelerations for the 2nd and the 3rd modes, that means at higher frequencies, while there is a complete opposite behaviour near the 1st mode period; the 2nd-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass all over the fourth floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration only for the 2nd mode and it increases the 1st one; the 3rd-floor spectrum has 3 peaks, even if the 2nd- and the 3rd-mode peaks are negligible if compared with the 1st-mode peak: adding facilities mass all over the fourth floor decreases the floor spectral acceleration for the 1st mode and increases a little for the 2nd one; the 4th-floor spectrum has 2 peaks at the first two main modes: adding facilities mass at the fourth floor decreases the spectral floor acceleration for both mode. A 2-second main period for the non-structural component is set. From the 4th-floor spectrum in the w/ 4th-floor facilities curve, the absolute spectral acceleration at 2 seconds is 5.62m / s 2 so that the design displacement for LRBs becomes 0.28m . Both 15% and 30% damping ratios are considered separately, following the design expressed in 4.3.1. In Tables 5.5 and 5.6 there are the whole-4th-storey-isolation LRBs design final results. Successively, non-linear bilinear springs, supporting the 150kN weight mass (Type A) and the 75kN weight mass (Type B), are again modelled in ANSRuop and non-linear time-histories analyses are carried out for the seven ground motions treated in 4.4. Looking at the relative floor spectra, the consequences of a 15DLRBs isolation system are quite similar with the 30DLRBs case: the 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor spectra show a spectral acceleration decreasing for periods less than 0.5 second, while there is a significant increase near the 1st mode, a less augment with 30DLRBs is noticeable; the facilities on the LRBs gain a decrease of the mode peaks, better in the 30DLRBs than the 15DLRBs for the 1st-mode spectral acceleration reduction, but at higher periods the behaviour is the opposite. It is important to compare the results, ground motion by ground motion, to see if the storeyisolation system is working properly and to check the global effects into the whole building: 1. absolute acceleration for the whole-4th-floor facilities mass; 2. absolute displacement for the whole-4th-floor facilities mass;
69
Table 5.6. Whole-4th-floor 15DLRBs design

whole-4 th -floor 15DLRBs Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
whole-4 th -floor 15DLRBs Type B 2.00 15% 0.285 0.40 75 75.456 5.765 5.241 57.677 576.769 0.100 0.010 5.624 310 25 18.409 57.046 8 66 2 25 74986 528 7791 9.69 0.59 54%
Type A 2.00 15% 0.285 0.40 150 150.911 11.529 10.483 115.354 1153.537 0.100 0.010 11.249 310 35 36.819 114.093 8 33 2 25 74515 264 7791 9.69 1.17 108%
Table 5.7. Whole-4th-floor 30DLRBs design

whole-4 th -floor 30DLRBs Design period [s] Effective damping Design displacement [m] Rubber shear modulus [MPa] Axial load on the LRB [kN] Effective stiffness [kN/m] Dissipated energy per cycle [kNm] Short term yield force [kN] Post-elastic tangent stiffness [kN/m] Elastic estiffness [kN/m] Stiffness ratio Yield displacement [m] Yield force [kN] Total bearing diameter [mm] Lead-plug diameter [mm] Lead-plug stiffness [kN/m] Total rubber stiffness [kN/m] Single layer rubber thickness [mm] Number of rubber layers Steel plates thickness [mm] Top & bottom steel plates thickness [mm] Cross sectional area of the rubber [mm ] Total rubber thickness [mm] Total lateral area per rubber layer [mm 2 ] Shape factor Second shape factor Shear strain
2
whole-4 th -floor 30DLRBs Type B 2.00 30% 0.285 0.40 75 75.456 11.529 11.236 39.898 398.980 0.100 0.028 11.249 310 37 39.466 35.990 8 103 2 25 74402 824 7791 9.69 0.38 35%
Type A 2.00 30% 0.285 0.40 150 150.911 23.059 22.473 79.796 797.961 0.100 0.028 22.497 310 52 78.931 71.980 8 51 2 25 73353 408 7791 9.69 0.76 70%
70
3. force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole-4thfloor facilities; 4. Peak Floor Accelerations per floor; 5. Peak Floor Displacements per floor; 6. peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Figure 5.67. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.68. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole-4th-floor facilities during the 1st ground motion
Figure 5.69. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 1st ground motion
71
Figure 5.70. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 1st ground motion
In Appendix E there are all the produced graphs for every ground motion analysis. To have more useful results, three more bar plots are produced here again, making the mean of the seven values to which they refer: 7. mean PFAs per floor; 8. mean PFDs per floor; 9. mean peak interstorey drift ratios per floor.
Figure 5.71. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of PFA and PFD
Figure 5.72. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: mean values of the interstorey drift ratio
72
o for 15DLRBs
for Type A: 47.42kN ; for Type B: 23.71kN ;
o for 30DLRBs
for Type A: 44.91kN ; for Type B: 22.45kN ;

going
into
the
facilities
is
cut
from
Global effects are important too, to have the idea of the feasibility of the whole-4th-storeyisolation system: PFAs are influenced by the whole-4th-floor isolation system in such a way that 1st-, 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-floor PFAs modify respectively from 4.592m / s 2 , 6.070m / s 2 , 5.328m / s 2 , 6.366m / s 2 to:
4.347m / s 2 , 4.275m / s 2 ,
5.267m / s 2 , 5.538m / s 2 , 5.117m / s 2 , 5.138m / s 2 ,

o for 15DLRBs isolation system: 62mm , 102mm , 139mm , 168mm ; o for 30DLRBs isolation system: 61mm , 96mm , 127 mm , 150mm ;
73
74
Chapter 6. Conclusions
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 General In earthquake building design, the main purpose is to have a building with minimized interstorey drifts and floor accelerations: damages onto NSCs and to equipments are then reduced. If the structure becomes stiffer, the interstorey drifts reduce, but floor accelerations increase. If the system becomes more flexible, floor accelerations reduce but interstorey drifts cannot decrease. The use of base isolation seems the best method to get at the same time interstorey drifts and floor accelerations reduction.
During the last 20 years of the last century a big forward step was made into the concept of seismic isolation. Multilayer elastomeric bearings devices are very stiff vertically in order the carry the structure load and they are very flexible horizontally in such a way to allow the building to move laterally while the ground is shaking. The natural evolution of the rubber bearings became the lead-rubber bearings. NSCs are sensitive to large floor accelerations and displacements. When a building is subjected to a ground motion, it amplifies this motion, resulting in PFAs higher than the PGA. Facilities are then subjected to these amplified accelerations, which cause severe damage to NSCs. The survival of some particular non-structural components during an earthquake event can be fundamental, so that an isolation system must be chosen. The problem might consist only on a particular part of the storey needing to be isolated, a zone with facilities that are going to be put onto a storey-isolation system. Furthermore, a retrofit action might be necessary to reduce eventual accelerations onto some delicate floors, because of their contents; these floors might be in a building impossible to fully redesign by a base-isolation method. This new system type appears to be more localised and focused directly into the problem, getting the desired behaviour in the NSCs. Response spectrum is the most common tool allowing an immediate analysis. Floor response spectra are broadly used to evaluate the maximum acceleration response of NSCs. The Finite Element Method program, ANSRuop, allows to model non-linear links so that the choice between a linearised viscoelastic model and a bilinear one was for the second, which is also representing the best compromise between practice application and theoretic study at the state of art. Storey-isolation systems are a fully new type of applications for the general base isolation. In literature there is a big lack of tests or papers dealing with a single-storey isolation system.
75
6.2 Numerical Testing ANSRuop is used for the 4-storey RC building modelling and also for the 112 time-histories analyses carried out for this work of research. The building is design following the Eurocode 8 provisions, like a fixed base building.
Five isolation cases were treated, that means one per floor plus a last one getting a whole-topstorey isolation. Lead-rubber bearings are the target devices for isolating the facilities and 12 types of them were design for the purpose of isolating the facilities on the selected floor, case by case. To see the real non-linear behaviour of the whole system (building plus facilities plus LRBs), non-linear time-histories analyses were run with 7 real recorded ground motions which are made spectrum equivalent with the EC8 design spectrum. The results are shown schematically in the Tables from 6.1 to 6.10. In Table 6.1 there are PFAs for the building without isolation system per every facilities location, so that by Tables 6.3 and 6.4 it is easy to see global consequences of each isolation case evaluating that in percentage. Furthermore, in Table 6.2 the dropping acceleration gain is showed for the facilities.
Table 6.8. PFAs for every facilities location

PFAs [g] 1 st -floor 2 nd -floor 3 rd -floor 4 th -floor 1 st -floor facilities 0.50 0.61 0.63 0.90 2
nd
-floor facilities 0.47 0.58 0.62 0.87
3 rd -floor facilities 0.48 0.60 0.60 0.80
4 th -floor facilities 0.48 0.62 0.63 0.79
whole-4 th -floor facilities 0.47 0.62 0.55 0.65
Table 6.9. PFAs and percentage variation onto the facilities for every isolation case
PFAs [m/s 2 ] 15DLRBs PFA reduction 30DLRBs PFA reduction 1 st -floor facilities 0.22 -56.4% 0.20 -59.3% 2
nd
-floor facilities 0.25 -57.2% 0.24 -58.3%
3 rd -floor facilities 0.32 -46.8% 0.27 -54.5%
4 th -floor facilities 0.35 -55.7% 0.30 -61.5%
whole-4 th -floor facilities 0.32 -50.5% 0.30 -53.5%
Table 6.10. PFAs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs
PFAs [g] 1 st -floor PFA difference 2 nd -floor PFA difference 3 rd -floor PFA difference 4 th -floor PFA difference 1 st -floor 15DLRBs 0.46 -8.3% 0.55 -10.5% 0.62 -2.2% 0.86 -4.5% 2
nd
-floor 15DLRBs 0.45 -4.2% 0.54 -6.9% 0.60 -4.2% 0.84 -3.3%
3 rd -floor 15DLRBs 0.45 -4.8% 0.56 -6.8% 0.60 0.0% 0.86 7.3%
4 th -floor 15DLRBs 0.46 -5.2% 0.56 -10.4% 0.60 -3.7% 0.89 12.7%
whole-4 th -floor 15DLRBs 0.44 -5.3% 0.54 -13.2% 0.56 3.0% 0.88 35.3%
76
Table 6.11. PFAs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs
PFAs [g] 1 st -floor PFA difference 2 nd -floor PFA difference 3 rd -floor PFA difference 4 th -floor PFA difference 1 st -floor 30DLRBs 0.45 -9.6% 0.54 -12.1% 0.61 -3.0% 0.85 -5.2% 2
nd
-floor 30DLRBs 0.45 -4.4% 0.53 -7.2% 0.59 -4.8% 0.84 -3.6%
3 rd -floor 30DLRBs 0.45 -6.4% 0.54 -9.5% 0.58 -2.9% 0.85 5.6%
4 th -floor 30DLRBs 0.45 -6.8% 0.55 -12.4% 0.58 -6.6% 0.87 11.3%
whole-4 th -floor 30DLRBs 0.44 -6.9% 0.52 -15.7% 0.52 -4.5% 0.82 25.7%
Table 6.12. PFDs for every facilities location

PFDs [m] 1 st -floor 2 nd -floor 3 rd -floor 4 th -floor 1 st -floor facilities 0.074 0.125 0.167 0.200 2
nd
Table 6.13. PFDs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs
PFDs [m] 1 st -floor PFD difference 2 nd -floor PFD difference 3 rd -floor PFD difference 4 th -floor PFD difference 1 st -floor 15DLRBs 0.07 -9.2% 0.12 -6.0% 0.16 -4.1% 0.19 -3.7% 2
nd
-floor 15DLRBs 0.07 -9.6% 0.12 -9.8% 0.16 -7.1% 0.19 -5.8%
3 rd -floor 15DLRBs 0.07 -13.4% 0.12 -14.3% 0.16 -12.6% 0.19 -10.8%
4 th -floor 15DLRBs 0.07 -13.2% 0.11 -14.8% 0.15 -14.7% 0.18 -14.2%
whole-4 th -floor 15DLRBs 0.06 -13.7% 0.10 -19.4% 0.14 -23.7% 0.17 -26.2%
Table 6.14. PFDs and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs
PFDs [m] 1 st -floor PFD difference 2 nd -floor PFD difference 3 rd -floor PFD difference 4 th -floor PFD difference 1 st -floor 30DLRBs 0.07 -9.0% 0.12 -6.1% 0.16 -4.3% 0.19 -3.9% 2
nd
-floor 30DLRBs 0.07 -10.7% 0.12 -11.1% 0.16 -8.6% 0.19 -7.0%
3 rd -floor 30DLRBs 0.07 -15.1% 0.11 -16.7% 0.15 -15.4% 0.18 -13.5%
4 th -floor 30DLRBs 0.06 -14.9% 0.11 -17.6% 0.15 -17.9% 0.18 -17.3%
In Table 6.5 there are PFDs for the building without isolation system per every facilities location, so that by Tables 6.6 and 6.7 it is easy to see global consequences of each isolation case evaluating that in percentage too. In Table 6.8 there are interstorey drift ratios for the building without isolation system per every facilities location, so that by Tables 6.9 and 6.10 it is easy to see global consequences of each isolation case evaluating that in percentage too.
77
Table 6.15. Interstorey drift ratios for every facilities location

DRIFT RATIO 1 st -floor 2 nd -floor 3 rd -floor 4 th -floor 1 st -floor facilities 1.86 1.35 1.19 0.90 2
nd
Table 6.16. Interstorey drift ratios and percentage variation for every isolation case by 15DLRBs
DRIFT RATIO 1 st -floor DR difference 2 nd -floor DR difference 3 rd -floor DR difference 4 th -floor DR difference 1 st -floor 15DLRBs 1.69 -9.2% 1.31 -2.6% 1.17 -1.6% 0.88 -3.1% 2
nd
-floor 15DLRBs 1.74 -9.6% 1.34 -7.8% 1.12 -3.0% 0.85 -0.4%
3 rd -floor 15DLRBs 1.68 -13.4% 1.30 -11.9% 1.15 -6.1% 0.85 1.8%
4 th -floor 15DLRBs 1.63 -13.2% 1.27 -13.2% 1.13 -11.2% 0.84 -14.8%
Table 6.17. Interstorey drift ratios and percentage variation for every isolation case by 30DLRBs
DRIFT RATIO 1 st -floor DR difference 2 nd -floor DR difference 3 rd -floor DR difference 4 th -floor DR difference 1 st -floor 30DLRBs 1.69 -9.1% 1.31 -2.9% 1.16 -2.4% 0.87 -3.9% 2
nd
-floor 30DLRBs 1.72 -10.7% 1.32 -9.4% 1.11 -4.4% 0.84 -1.4%
3 rd -floor 30DLRBs 1.65 -15.1% 1.25 -15.2% 1.11 -9.4% 0.83 -0.5%
4 th -floor 30DLRBs 1.60 -14.9% 1.22 -17.0% 1.08 -15.0% 0.82 -16.5%
6.2.1 First-Storey-Isolation System The first analysed case dealt with the isolation of the facilities supposed to be on the first floor. The design displacement was stated to be at 0.17m while only for 30DLRBs it was obtained a quite close real displacement of 0.18m. The 30DLRBs work better also if PFA reduction for the facilities is considered, with a big decrease of 59.3%.
By isolating the first storey of this building, the system as a whole gets benefit because PFAs, PFDs and interstorey drift ratios go down.
6.2.2 Second-Storey-Isolation System The second analysed case dealt with the isolation of the facilities supposed to be on the second floor. The design displacement was stated to be at 0.20m while only for 30DLRBs it was obtained a quite close real displacement of 0.25m. The 30DLRBs work better also if PFA reduction for the facilities is considered, with a big decrease of 58.3%.
By isolating the second storey of this building, the system as a whole gets benefit because PFAs, PFDs and interstorey drift ratios go down.
78
6.2.3 Third-Storey-Isolation System The third analysed case dealt with the isolation of the facilities supposed to be on the third floor. The design displacement was stated to be at 0.23m while only for 30DLRBs it was obtained a quite close real displacement of 0.28m. The 30DLRBs work better also if PFA reduction for the facilities is considered, with a big decrease of 54.5%.
By isolating the third storey of this building, the system as a whole gets partial benefits because PFAs increase only for the floor, and again 30DLRBs appears to give better response. PFDs are always less than for the non-isolated case and only the interstorey drift ratio for top storey in the 15DLRBs isolation system case goes up. Once again having a higher damping is useful.
6.2.4 Fourth-Storey-Isolation System The fourth analysed case dealt with the isolation of the facilities supposed to be on the fourth floor. The design displacement was stated to be at 0.25m while only for 30DLRBs it was obtained a quite close real displacement of 0.33m. The 30DLRBs work better also if PFA reduction for the facilities is considered, with a big decrease of 61.5%.
By isolating the first storey of this building, the system as a whole gets partial benefit because PFAs increase even if only for the top floor and less for the 30DLRBs case. PFDs and interstorey drift ratios go down for any storey.
6.2.5 Whole-Fourth-Storey-Isolation System The last analysed case dealt with the isolation of the facilities supposed to be on all over the top floor. The design displacement was stated to be at 0.28m while only for 30DLRBs it was obtained a quite close real displacement of 0.31m. The 30DLRBs work better also if PFA reduction for the facilities is considered, with a big decrease of 53.5%.
By isolating the fourth storey considered as a whole, the building gets partial benefit because PFAs increase for 3rd- and 4th-storey level in the 15DLRBs and only for the 4th one in the 30DLRBs; once again 30DLRBs appears to work better. PFDs and interstorey drift ratios go consistently down for any storey.
6.2.6 Final Deductions From the ground motions spectra, it is easy to establish that between 5 Hz and 1.67 Hz there is the greatest earthquake power. That means that building modes being in that range are amplified more than the others outside of that range. For the 4-storey RC building of this work of research, that means a greater attention on 2nd and 3rd modes, more than on the 1st one.
With 1st- and 2nd-storey-isolation systems there is always a fully benefit for the facilities themselves and for the RC building as well. 30DLRBs work better because they reduce more both PFAs and interstorey drift ratios. In fact, from the floor response spectra it is easy to see that 2nd- and 3rd-mode peaks reduce while for the 1st one there is not so much difference.
79
With 3rd- and 4th-storey-isolation systems there is a general benefit: facilities receive a 50% less input acceleration while the RC building gets a very little undesired behaviour. In fact top floor gets higher PFAs and 30DLRBs work better allowing the lowest increase. Interstorey drift ratios reduce always but for the 3rd floor in the 15DLRBs case. This is correlated with the related floor spectra: in these two cases there is a significant increase around the 1st-mode peak that is more marked with 15DLRBs isolation system. An increase of the 1st-mode peak is related with the PFAs increase for the top floor. The best system to isolate facilities (highest acceleration reduction) and to get an optimum behaviour onto the building too (highest interstorey drift ratios reduction) is obviously the 4thfloor isolation case, and, more specifically, the 30DLRBs isolation system. The consequent step, after the 4 treated cases, was a system covering all the top floor extension, isolating facilities laying there. For this last analysis, floor response spectra show a more significant augmenting of the 1st-mode peak so that it is more natural to see that also the 3rd floor gets higher PFAs, even if only for 15DLRBs case. However, the peak acceleration onto the facilities drops down in a way comparable with the 4th-floor isolation case, while there is a huge interstorey drift ratio decrease. Having a whole-4th-floor-isolation system is very useful to reduce damage into NSCs all over the building.
6.3 Recommendations for Further Research After this work of research, it becomes obvious the benefit obtained by isolating a single floor, part of it or considered as a whole. That benefit is present into both the PFAs reduction and acceleration input reduction for the facilities and also in a general interstorey drift ratios decrease. The 30DLRBs isolation system works always better.
The next step should be to try a complete floor isolation system for the other floors and to extend the testing into 8- and 12-storey RC buildings to better understand the global behaviours in taller buildings. New isolation devices can be designed in order to increase the damping ratio, or some damping addition can be made for the LRBs to increase the benefits appear in the 30DLRBs more than in the other case.
80
References
REFERENCES
Chopra, A.K. [2001] Dynamic of Structures, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA. Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Ponzo, F.C., Di Cesare, A. [2004] Progetto di Edifici con Isolamento Sismico, IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy. EN 1998-1:2004 Eurocode 8 - Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance - Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings. Fardis, M.N., Calvi, G.M. [2002] Innovative Seismic Design Concepts, ECOEST/ICONS Rep. 3, 206p., Laboratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil Publications, Lisbon, Portugal. Fardis, M.N., Carvalho, E., Elnashai, A., Faccioli, E., Pinto, P., Plumier, A. [2004] Designers' Guide to EN 1998-1 and EN 1998-5: Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. General Rules, Seismic Actions, Design Rules for Buildings, Foundations and Retaining Structures, 285p., Thomas Telford Publishers, London, UK. Grant, D.N., Fenves, G.L., Auricchio, F. [2005] Modelling and Analysis of High-damping Rubber Bearings for the Seismic Protection of Bridges, IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy. Kingston, K.M. [2004] An Evaluation of Floor Response Spectra for Acceleration-Sensitive NonStructural Components Supported on Regular Frame Structures, MSc Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, USA. Mar, D., Tipping, S. [2000] A New High-Performance Seismic Technology. Proceedings of 9th U.S.-Japan Workshop on the Improvement of Structural Design, Laurel Point Inn in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Naeim, F., Kelly, J.M. [1999] Design of Seismic Isolated Structures: from Theory to Practice, John Wiley & Sons Inc. Panagiotakos, T.B., Fardis, M.N. [2004] Seismic Performance of RC Frames Designed to Eurocode 8 or to the Greek Codes 2000, BEE, Vol. 2, No. 2. Skinner, R.I., Robinson, W.H., McVerry, G.H. [1993] An Introduction to Seismic Isolation, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., England. Vargas, R.E. [2004] Floor Response of Single Degree of Freedom Systems with Metallic Structural Fuses, Individual study, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering, University of Buffalo, USA.
81
References
82
Appendix A
APPENDIX A
Figure A.73. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion
Figure A.74. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion
Figure A.75. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion
A1
Appendix A
Figure A.76. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion
Figure A.77. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion
Figure A.78. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion
A2
Appendix A
Figure A.79. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure A.80. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure A.81. 1st-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion
A3
Appendix A
Figure A.82. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 1st-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion
Figure A.83. 1st-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion
Figure A.84. 1st-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion
A4
Appendix A
A5
Appendix A
A6
Appendix A
A7
Appendix A
A8
Appendix B
APPENDIX B
Figure B.97. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion
Figure B.98. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion
Figure B.99. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion
B1
Appendix B
Figure B.100. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion
Figure B.101. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion
Figure B.102. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion
B2
Appendix B
Figure B.103. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure B.104. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure B.105. 2nd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion
B3
Appendix B
Figure B.106. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 2nd-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion
Figure B.107. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion
Figure B.108. 2nd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion
B4
Appendix B
B5
Appendix B
B6
Appendix B
B7
Appendix B
B8
Appendix C
APPENDIX C
Figure C.121. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion
Figure C.122. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion
Figure C.123. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion
C1
Appendix C
Figure C.124. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion
Figure C.125. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion
Figure C.126. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion
C2
Appendix C
Figure C.127. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure C.128. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure C.129. 3rd-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion
C3
Appendix C
Figure C.130. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 3rd-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion
Figure C.131. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion
Figure C.132. 3rd-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion
C4
Appendix C
C5
Appendix C
C6
Appendix C
C7
Appendix C
C8
Appendix D
APPENDIX D
Figure D.145. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion
Figure D.146. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion
Figure D.147. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion
D1
Appendix D
Figure D.148. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion
Figure D.149. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion
Figure D.150. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion
D2
Appendix D
Figure D.151. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure D.152. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure D.153. 4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion
D3
Appendix D
Figure D.154. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the 4th-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion
Figure D.155. 4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion
Figure D.156. 4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion
D4
Appendix D
D5
Appendix D
D6
Appendix D
D7
Appendix D
D8
Appendix E
APPENDIX E
Figure E.169. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 2nd ground motion
Figure E.170. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole-4th-floor facilities during the 2nd ground motion
Figure E.171. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 2nd ground motion
E1
Appendix E
Figure E.172. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 2nd ground motion
Figure E.173. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 3rd ground motion
Figure E.174. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole-4th-floor facilities during the 3rd ground motion
E2
Appendix E
Figure E.175. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure E.176. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 3rd ground motion
Figure E.177. Whole-4th-floor facilities absolute acceleration and displacement during the 4th ground motion
E3
Appendix E
Figure E.1780. Force-displacement hystereses for 15DLRBs and 30DLRBs isolating the whole-4th-floor facilities during the 4th ground motion
Figure E.1791. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: PFA and PFD due to the 4th ground motion
Figure E.1802. Whole-4th-floor facilities global effects: interstorey drift ratio due to the 4th ground motion
E4
Appendix E
E5
Appendix E
E6
Appendix E
E7
Appendix E
E8

Earth Quick

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Earth Quick

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

University of Patras

Erasmus Mundus Masters Course

DESIGN OF STOREY-ISOLATION SYSTEM IN MULTI-STOREY BUILDING

Supervisor: Prof MICHAEL N. FARDIS May, 2007

Prof . M.N. Fardis _________________

ag bw c cb cs cu dbd d cd d dc dy f cd fn h hc hb kb ks m mb q t tr ts ts ,ext u & u && u ub

ug &&g u us u0 &0 u &&0 u v vb vs vs ,30 A Ac Ar D Dbearing DPb DC ED Ee Eg Eh Ei Ek Es Ev EDE F Fd Fs Fy F0 G HDRB K ; Ke K eff Kp K Pb Kr KV

& = Peak values of u && = Peak values of u

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Figure 2.8. Conventional and base isolation approaches

S a ,i (Teff , eff ) /1.5

S a , f (T f ) 1.5 S a , f (T f ) 1.5625 Sa , f (T f ) = 0.267 q Sa ,i (Teff ) q Sa ,i (Teff ) Sa ,i (Teff ) S a , f (T f ) Sa , f (T f ) 1.0417 Sa ,i (Teff ) Sa ,i (Teff )

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Figure 2.11. Principle structure of a Maurer Shne LRB

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 2. Seismic Isolation

Chapter 3. State of the Art

3. STATE OF THE ART

Chapter 3. State of the Art

&&b + mv &&s + cs v &s + k s vb = mu &&g mv

If we introduce the total mass M = m + mb the mass ratio

the nominal frequencies

the damping factors

the basic equations of motion become, in a matrix notation,

The characteristic equation of the frequencies is

and the mode shapes are

Chapter 3. State of the Art

The shear coefficient can be defined as:

and (3.19) (3.20) (3.21)

Chapter 3. State of the Art

&&t0 (Tn , ) max u &&t ( t , Tn , ) u

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Isolation displacements and seismic forces are evaluated with:

MSa (Teff , eff K eff ,min

Chapter 3. State of the Art

3.5 Examples of seismic storey isolation

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Figure 3.15. Slider at interior column [Mar and Tipping, 2002]

Chapter 3. State of the Art

Chapter 4. Numerical Testing

Chapter 4. Numerical Testing

Chapter 4. Numerical Testing

Chapter 4. Numerical Testing

Figure 4.16. 3D model of the 4-storey building modelled in ANSRuop

Chapter 4. Numerical Testing

1 DC-M 0 0.0 0.2 0.4 hb (m) 0.6

0 0.0 0.5 1.0 (%) 1.5 2.0

0 0.0 0.5 ' (%) 1.0 1.5

0 0.0 0.5 1.0 c (%) 1.5 2.0

1 DC - M 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4