Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Seismic base isolation is now a days moving towards a very efficient tool in seismic design of
structure. Increasing flexibility of structure is well achieved by the insertion of these additional
elements between upper structure and foundation as they absorb larger part of seismic energy.
However in Bangladesh, this research is still young for building structures. Therefore, this is a burning
question to design isolation device in context of Bangladesh. Effort has been made in this study to
establish an innovative simplified design procedure for isolators incorporated in multi-storey building
structures. Isolation systems namely lead rubber bearing (LRB) and high damping rubber bearing
(HDRB) have been selected for the present schoolwork. Numerical formulation and limiting criteria for
design of each element have been engendered. The suitability to incorporate isolation device for
seismic control has been sight seen in details. The study reveals simplified design procedures for LRB
and HDRB for multi-storey buildings in Bangladesh. The detail design progression has been proposed
to be included in Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC).
Key words: Seismic base isolation, simplified design, building structures, rubber bearing, response
modification, base shear, yield force, shear modulus, damping.
INTRODUCTION
Civil engineering structures, such as buildings, bridges,
towers and other structures in addition to gravity loads
are liable to be subjected to time varying loads while
subjected to strong wind or earthquake excitations.
Earthquakes present serious threats to human lives and
economies as they can damage the structure and the
contents of infrastructure systems. Over the past
decades, designing structures in Bangladesh to withstand
seismic damage have been based on the traditional
approach, which is an increase in structure strength and
ductility, but high strength and ductile construction
materials are usually expansive and ductility for most
structural materials equals structural damage. Major
earthquakes occurred in literature have proved the
5468
Figure 1. Lead rubber bearing (a) geometry and (b) deformation due to loading.
Islam et al.
Attachment
plate
(a)
5469
Rubber layers
(b)
Figure 2. High damping rubber bearing: (a) Geometry and (b) Deformation due to
loading.
(1)
5470
KC< 0.70*KD
or
KC<0.80*(KD+KE+KF)/3.0
b>a
a
Figure 6. In-plane displacement.
WD> 1.50*WE
or
WD> 1.50*WC
irregularity
due
to
mass
a>1.30*b
a
Figure 5. Geometric irregularity.
Islam et al.
5471
Item
Seismic status
Level of
earthquake risk
Seismic design
requirements
Check
Is earthquake design required? Seismic isolation is best suited for moderate and high seismic areas
If seismic design adds to costs significantly then isolation is likely to be more effective
Site suitability
Geologic
conditions
Site sub soil
conditions
Potential for resonance effects may rule out isolation (e.g. Mexico City)
Distance to fault
Stiff soil is best for isolation. As site condition becomes softer, isolation becomes less effective and more
expensive
Near fault motions may add to the response at the isolated periods. If the distance to the nearest active fault is
small isolation displacements may be excessive
Structural suitability
Weight of the
Heavy structures tend to be the most cost effective to isolate.
structure
Period of the
Generally, the period of the non-isolated structure should be less than 2 seconds, although there are exceptions.
structure
Structural
Isolators are usually placed in a crawl space or basement. If a slag-on-grade is planned, these will be replaced
configuration
with a suspended floor; Large aspect ratio of the structural system (height to width ratios) may cause overturning
problem; For retrofit, assess how difficult to separate the structure from the ground
(a)
(b)
STRUCTURAL
SYSTEM
PARAMETERS
FOR
ISOLATION
5472
Table 2. Response modification coefficients for structural systems above isolation interface.
Structural system
Bearing wall system
Dual system
Fixed base R
6
6
Isolated base RI
2.0
2.0
10
8
8
8
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
12
12
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Shear walls
Concrete with SMRF
Concrete with steel OMRF
Masonry with SMRF
Masonry with steel OMRF
12
6
8
6
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Steel EBF
With steel SMRF
With steel OMRF
12
6
2.0
2.0
10
6
2.0
2.0
(2)
(3)
Islam et al.
5473
Occupancy category
Essential facilities
Hazardous facilities
Special occupancy
Standard occupancy
Low risk structures
I
1.25
1.25
1.0
1.0
1.0
of:
DEVICE MODELING
CI =
Cv I
RT
(4)
CvI
RI BDT
(5)
STRUCTURAL ANAYSES WITH ISOLATORS
(6)
Static analysis
Drift limitation
The drift limitations for isolated structures may also limit
the design of the structural system. The allowable drift is
different for dynamic response spectrum and time history
analysis cases.
0.015 / RI for Response spectrum analysis
0.020 / RI for Time history analysis
5474
Soil profile
type
S1a
S1b
S2
S3
S4
Other
Dynamic analysis
Dynamic analysis procedures shall be based on an
appropriate ground motion representation and shall be
performed using acknowledged principles of dynamics.
Dynamic analysis can be done by frequency domain
using seismic response spectra and time domain utilizing
earthquake time history.
Design iteriation
Islam et al.
Define material
properties
5475
Set assumed
bearing
dimensions
Define
bearing
types
LRB
HDRB
Choose yield displacement
5476
Effective damping
a,b
(percentage of critical)
2
5
10
20
30
40
50
Shape factor
Damping coefficient
BD or BM
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.0
(8)
(9)
Vertical stiffness
= 0.25(1-ln)
(7)
(10)
Kvi =
(11)
Ar = 0.5{B2sin-1(
(12)
(13)
where
=
(14)
Islam et al.
sc + s,s + sr5.0
(22b)
sc + s,eq + 0.5sr5.5
(22c)
sc = 6Sic
(23)
(15)
For S 15, or
where
c =
5477
P
K vi t i
(16)
(17)
sc =
S>15
(24)
sh =
(18)
For service loads such as dead and live load the limiting
strain criteria are
fu sc
(19)
(20)
P =
Pcr =
(25)
Strain limitation
The total strain formulation is used with the exception that
the MCE displacement is designed using f = 1.0.
1. The total strain is a constant value for each load
combination, rather than a function of ultimate elongation.
Strain due to non-seismic deformations, s,s and a strain
due to seismic displacements, s,eq. The limits are then:
sc 2.5
(22a)
T = EbI
(26)
R = KrHr
(27)
Q=
(28)
5478
Hr = (nti) +(n-1)tsh
(29)
Keff = Fm/,
Eb = E(1+0.742Si2)
(30)
where
(31)
(32)
(35)
Fm = Qd + Kr
(36)
Effective period:
Te=2
(37)
(38)
(39)
Kr=
m=
(33)
(34a)
(34b)
(40)
Islam et al.
5479
Gravity
DBE
MCE
Factor of safety
>3.0 for both strain and buckling
>1.5 for both strain and buckling
>1.25 for both strain and buckling
Remark
>6.0 for high seismic zone
2.0 preferable
1.5 preferable
Isolator dimensions
Supplementary bearing constraints
The dimension (B) of bearing isolator is very vital for
incorporation after design and there are some constraints
from which the optimum size of bearing will be selected.
The cases for evaluation the optimum dimensions are as
follows.
1. B is to be ensured as required for the maximum gravity
loads.
2. The increment of B for iterative design based on a F.S.
of 3 in the design progresses equals 50 mm
3. ti = generally 10 mm, may be reduced to 8 mm or even
6 mm if vertical loads are critical. ti should not exceed 10
mm for LRBs but thicker layers may be used for
elastomeric or HDR bearings.
4. The number of layers defines the flexibility of the
system which to be set so that the isolated period is in
the range required and so that the maximum shear strain
is not excessive.
5. The ratio of QD/W = 3 to 10%
Factors of safety
Design of isolator
For ensuring the structural protection, it is urged for
calculation of the strain and buckling force that the
5480
No. of story
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Layer thickness,
ti (mm)
Thickness of
mountain plates, tpl
Thickness of
shim plate, tsc
No. of layer
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12
12
12
12
14
15
16
Islam et al.
5481
5482
Islam et al.
APPENDIX
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Ratio R/RI
Shear modulus
Figure A1. Allowable damping for structural response modification and importance factor.
Shear modulus
Figure A2. High damping rubber properties.
5483
5484
Hardness
IRHD2
37
40
45
50
55
60
Youngs modulus E
(MPa)
1.35
1.50
1.80
2.20
3.25
4.45
Shear Modulus G
(MPa)
0.40
0.45
0.54
0.64
0.81
1.06
Material constant,
k
0.87
0.85
0.80
0.73
0.64
0.57
Table A2. Shear- damping relation for relatively low damping rubber.
Islam et al.
BM
C
CI
CA
CV
CAD
CVD
CAM
CVM
DBE
DD
E
Eb
Ec
E
f
FB
Fs
Fm
Fw
Fy
g
G
G
H
Hc
Hr
I
Im
k
K
KDmax
Kd
Keff
Kr
Ku
Kv
Kvi
M
MCE
MM
Na
NV
n
5485
5486
P
Pcr
P
Qd
R
RI
S
Sa
Si
T
Te
TD
ti
tsc
tsh
tpl
Tr
W
Z
m
y
eff
u
c
sc
sh
sr
s,s
s,eq