Possibility of Application of Energy Dissipation Device on RC

Building with Pilotis*

Eun-Lim Baek, Sang-Hoon Oh, and Sang-Ho Lee

Abstract In Korea, the structure type with shear walls on upper stories and pilotis on the first story is often used for housing
building. Particularly low-rise buildings with this structure type were constructed substantially in the 90s. However it is highly
possible that those do not have enough performance for resisting earthquake since seismic standards did not applied to low-rise
building below 5th floor. In this study, the retrofit method using steel damper that was kind of energy dissipation device was presented
to improve seismic performance of RC buildings with pilotis. Nonlinear seismic response analysis for the 5-mass system idealized was
carried out to understand applicability of the damper to a RC structure and its performance considering strength and stiffness ratios
between damper and RC members. In addition the shaking table test of two RC specimens with and without retrofit was conducted to
confirm that represented from the analysis results

I. INTRODUCTION
In Korea the low-rise reinforced concrete(below RC) buildings that have open first story, which are called piloti type
buildings, are popular since the first story of this kind of buildings can be utilized as parking space or commercial facilities.
Generally, the first story consists of columns, girders, and the least core wall, on the other hand upper stories are made up by many
shear walls. There are much difference of lateral stiffness or strength between the first story and the upper stories of this structural
type and it can cause collapse of the whole first story by soft story mechanism. The vulnerability with respect to earthquake of this
kind of structure was validated as damage like collapse and permanent deformation of the first story was investigated more than
that of the building without the soft first story when historical magnificent earthquakes such as Kobe in Japan(1995), Chi-Chi in
Taiwan(1999), Izmit in Turkey(1999), and LAquila in Italy(2009) happened.
A lot of existed low-rise RC piloti buildings in Korea were not subjected to domestic seismic standard or doesnt satisfy
current seismic demand, so most of piloti buildings would be destroyed if more than moderate magnitude earthquake happened.
Thus piloti buildings need to be retrofitted to have proper seismic performance for earthquake. For meeting this needs, in this
study we presented the retrofit method using energy dissipation device and investigated whether this method may serve as
effective retrofit by nonlinear seismic response analysis and shaking table test.
II. RETROFIT METHOD
A. Failure mechanism of piloti type building according to stiffness and strength ratio between core wall and columns
First of all, failure mechanism of piloti type buildings needs to be identified to properly retrofit it considering its behavior. Fig.
1 shows some failure modes that are already well known. These are : (1) Bending(tensile yielding of reinforcing bar), (2) Collapse
by formation of plastic hinge at the end of column, and (3) Collapse by shear failure of column. However, these modes do not
consider core walls on the first floor. The core walls are inevitable member to move to upstairs and these are commonly stiffer
than columns with respect to lateral stiffness. This type can be classified a kind of the flexible and stiff mixed structure for that
reason. If the members were arranged in a line and connected with rigid beam or diaphragm, lateral force would be distributed to
each member depending on their lateral stiffness. In this case, the core wall would be subjected to stronger force than columns and
damage would be concentrated on the core wall, while columns have minor damage as shown in Fig. 2.
B. Existed retrofit methods
Various retrofit methods for a RC frame were presented and studied by many researchers. The most used way is strengthening
the frame setting up a RC shear wall or bracing with steel in it. Another way is to improve ductility by wrapping the column using
fiber sheets that are made of carbon, glass, etc. The former methods by means of RC shear wall and steel brace were not preferred
generally in Korea because the installations not only can disturb movement of vehicles and people, but also spoil the appearance
of buildings. The latter methods contribute to earn more escape time of people from the building when earthquake strick. But
*Research supported by National Emergency Management Agency of Korea.
Eun-Lim is with the Department of Architectural Engineering, Pusan National University, Pusan, Korea (e-mail: ufo35@naver.com).
Sang-Hoon OH is with the Department of Architectural Engineering, Pusan National University, Pusan, Korea (corresponding author to provide phone:
+82-51-510-1009; fax: +82-51-514-2230; e-mail: osh@pusan.ac.kr)
Sang-Ho Lee is with the Department of Architectural Engineering, Pusan National University, Pusan, Korea (e-mail: sangho@pusan.ac.kr).

main structural members will be destroyed and its impossible to reuse them. These methods did not consider aforementioned
failure mechanism with respect to the lateral stiffness difference between the core walls and columns.
Method of reducing input seismic energy using hysteretic steel damper
In this study, the retrofit method using hysteretic steel damper was presented for improving the seismic performance of piloti
buildings. The device is a kind of energy dissipation device. It should be stiffer than RC structure including core walls and
columns at the first soft story. Also, it applies to the columns in order to distribute input energy concentrated on the core wall to
columns according to stiffness ratio among the members. It dissipates a lot of input energy in a form of strain energy by its
hysteretic behavior since it is induced to yield faster than the main RC structural members. While the RC member would be
subjected to smaller and reduced input energy comparing that without retrofit and it also could remain elastic as represented in
Fig. 3.

(a) Bending

(b) Formation of plastic hinge

(c) Shear failure of column

Figure 1. Failure mechanism of building with first soft story

Figure 2. Force distribution in case of the flexible and stiff mixed structure

Figure 3. Retrofit method and behavior of composite system with retrofit

III. NONLINEAR SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

A. Analysis Methods
Nonlinear seismic response analysis was carried out considering varying stiffness and strength ratios between RC core wall
and damper in order to find out condition which the damper is required to behave effectively. There are 3 cases for designing
damper as shown in Fig. 4. These cases have difference in stiffness and strength ratios of damper to RC structure. Although Case
I was expected poor performance since its lateral stiffness was smaller than the RC members, this was included as variable for
comparison. Table 1 represents variables and properties of all analysis cases. The NS component of the record at El-Centro(1940,
PGA=351cm/sec2) that was normalized so that the peak ground acceleration was 0.2g was used as input excitation.
B. Analysis Model
A 5-story housing building with first soft story in Korea was modeled for analysis. The model was assumed as a 5
lumped-mass system as shown in Fig. 5. Shear walls from second to the top story were modeled as equivalent column and the one
core wall and two columns were modeled for the first story. All members were assumed as a linear element with nonlinear springs
that represented rotation and shear behaviors. The tri-linear model which represents the stiffness degradation, pinching behavior
was applied to the rotational spring. For the shear spring, the model adding strength deterioration to flexural behavior was used.
For the model with retrofit, a shear spring, which was behave according to bi-linear skeleton curve, was added at the location of
each column. Beams in the first story were modeled as a rigid element.

Figure 4. Retrofit cases using damper

(a) Model without retrofit

(b) Model with retrofit

Figure 5. Analysis model

TABLE I.

ANALYSIS CASES
Properties of Analysis Model

Variable

Without
Retrofit

1K1P
(1DR)

1K0.5P
(2DR)

1K0.25P
(4DR)

2K0.25P
(8DR)

4K0.25P
(16DR)

4K0.2P
(20DR)

4K0.15P
(27DR)

Stiffness Ratio(dKy/RCKy)

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

Strength Ratio(dPy/RCPy)

1.0

1.0

0.5

0.25

0.25

0.25

0.2

0.15

1.0

1.0

1/2

1/4

1/8

1/16

1/20

1/27

Yield Displacdment Ratio

(dy/RCy)

C. Analysis Results
Analysis results of dynamic responses were summarized in Table 2. The values in mark ( ) means the ratio of the retrofit case
to case without it(below the non-retrofit) and the letters of K, P, and subscripted d, RC means stiffness, yield strength, yield
displacement, damper, RC structural members on the first floor respectively. Generally, displacement responses were decreased
drastically by 90% in all retrofit cases comparing that of the non-retrofit. Although acceleration responses and base shear forces
were increased for the model whose stiffness ratio (dKy/RCKy) was 1.0, those were gradually decreased as stiffness ratio increased.
As shown in Fig. 6 (a), Fig. 6 (b), Fig. 7 (a), and Fig 7 (b), while displacement responses were reduced, the acceleration
increased as strength ratio (dPy/RCPy) increased for the models of having same stiffness ratio. And mentioned figures showed that
the decrease ratio in the case of stiffness ratio of 4.0 was higher than that of 1.0. When strength ratio of damper to RC structure is
constant with 0.25, displacement and acceleration responses decreased as stiffness ratio increased as given in Fig. 6(c) and Fig. 7
(c).
The dynamic responses were affected both stiffness and strength ratios of the damper to the main RC structural members,
considering the results. It needs to be explained by yield displacement ratio (RCy /dy, below YDR) of the RC members to the
damper since it is the value affected by two variables as shown in (1). Also, strain energy of RC structural members could be
evaluated as damage level quantitatively. The strain energy ratio of the RC members to the whole members including damper was
given in Fig. 8 according to varying YDR. The strain energy was calculated by an area of the hysteretic curve for each member.

y Py / Ke

(1)

where, y : yield displacement, Py : yield force, K e : initial stiffness

Strain energy ratio, which means damage, of RC structural members decreased as the YDR increased. The three points under
5.0 of YDR represented that these cases were not effective to control damage of main structural member. That was an expected
result since stiffness of the damper for the cases was not obtained more than that of the RC members. It was represented that the
YDR more than 15 could be caused minor damage that were less than about 20% of the whole damage. This YDR was the value
larger than that of steel structure which was presented in previous studies. The yield displacement of the RC members included
both flexural rotation and shear deformation because the core wall was governed by both behaviors. So it was larger than that of
a general steel member governed bending behavior principally. This was considered as one of the reason and seismic behavior
and characteristics of RC structure such as earlier cracks, stiffness degradation, etc. could be considered as other reasons
additionally. Further studies are needed to understand it clearly.

TABLE II.
Peak Response
of the 1st story
Displacement
(mm)
Acceleration
(cm/sec2)
Base Shear Force
(kN)

ANALYSIS RESULTS ACCORDING TO ANALYSIS MODEL

Analysis Model

Without
Retrofit

1K1P
(1DR)

1K0.5P
(2DR)

1K0.25P
(4DR)

2K0.25P
(8DR)

4K0.25P
(16DR)

4K0.2P
(20DR)

4K0.15P
(27DR)

16.29

1.51(0.09)

1.51(0.09)

2.03(0.12)

1.12(0.07)

0.69(0.04)

0.78(0.05)

1.73(0.11)

294

336(1.14)

336(1.14)

309(1.05)

286(0.97)

281(0.96)

274(0.93)

254(0.86)

2,388

3,100(1.30)

3,100(1.30)

2,389(1.00)

2,148(0.90)

1,937(0.81)

1,720(0.72)

1,804(0.76)

(a) Stiffness ratio(dKy/RCKy) : 1.0

(b) Stiffness ratio(dKy/RCKy) : 4.0

Figure 6. Displacement response ratio of the retrofit to the non-Retrofit

(c) Strength ratio(dPy/RCPy) : 0.25

(a) Stiffness Ratio(dKy/RCKy) : 1.0

(b) Stiffness Ratio(dKy/RCKy) : 4.0

(c) Strength Ratio(dPy/RCPy) : 1.0

Figure 7. Acceleration response ratio of the retrofit to the non-Retrofit

Figure 8. Damage of RC structural members according to yield displacement ratio

IV. SHAKING TABLE TEST

A. Design of Specimens and Test Method
In this study, the shaking table test of piloti building specimen with and without retrofit using steel damper was conducted to
confirm whether the retrofit method may be effective to control damage of the structure. The specimens were designed as
simplified model considering the characteristics of existed buildings such as natural period, strength and stiffness distribution
among RC members. The RC specimens consisted of one U-shaped core wall and 4 columns on the first floor, and 4 walls with
opening on the second floor. For retrofit specimen, steel damper was set up to the columns and composite panel that were made
of thin steel plate and 2 layered carbon fiber sheets (CFS) was attached to the core wall in X (excitation) direction. The circular
cross section was used for the steel damper to resist irrespective of excitation direction. It was supported by thick and stiff steel
plates to achieve aimed lateral stiffness and the plates were connected to the bottom and the top of the column by means of
anchoring of bolts and grouting of mortar. The steel and CFS composite panel contributed only to improve ductility of the core
wall. Images of the specimens were given in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10.
The record of El-Centro NS ground motion (1940, PGA=351cm/sec2) was used for the earthquake simulation with gradually
increasing intensity of peak ground acceleration. The intensity was decided by considering the damage level of the specimens at
each step. Applied excitation scales of PGA were 10%, 50%, 100%, 120%, 150% for non-retrofit specimen and 180%, 200%,
and 220% were added for retrofit specimen.

B. Test Results
The non-retrofit specimen was finally destroyed at 150% scale of excitation as the core wall fractured by shear behavior as
shown in Fig. 11 (a). While the columns had the slight cracks since the columns were softer than the core wall as mentioned in Fig.
2. At the same stage, retrofit specimen remained good in shape. The core wall underwent slight damage having a few flexural
cracks whereas the steel damper yielded and dissipated input energy at the same stage. In addition, displacement response of the
retrofit was reduced drastically as shown in Fig. 12.

Figure 9. RC specimen

Figure 10. RC Specimen retrofitted using steel damper and composite panel

(a) Core Wall and Column without retrofit

(b) Core Wall and Damper of Retrofitted Specimen

Figure 11. Damages

(a) Acceleration response

(b) Displacement response

Figure 12. Time history of the responses at the step 5 (El-Centro NS 150%)

Floor distribution of peak responses for the two specimens were given in Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 at the first, third, fifth step whose
scale of the input wave were 10%, 100%, 150% respectively. The acceleration response of both specimens was measured
similarly like the tendency of the analysis result. Displacement response of the retrofit decreased by 50% than the non-retrofit
specimen at the fifth step since damage was reduced by the function of steel damper. However, the displacement response of the
retrofit was similar with that of the non-retrofit at the former stages before the non-retrofit was failed. As a result of analyzing the
recorded video data, the connection of the upper support plate on the RC member was not perfect and this caused rotation of the
supporter. This was considered why the displacement response of the retrofit was large. Fig. 15 represents accumulated input
energy and damage level of the two specimens according to excitation steps. The accumulated input energy was computed by
the equilibrium equation of energy by Akiyama. The retrofit specimen sustained five times as much accumulated energy as the
non-retrofit and the former underwent slighter damage than the latter. Hence the presented retrofit method using steel damper
was thought to be effective to control damage of the RC member.

Figure 13. Dynamic response of the non-retrofit specimen

Figure 14. Dynamic response of the retrofit specimen

Figure 15. Accumulated input energy and damage according to the test step

V. CONCLUSION
In this study, the retrofit method using energy dissipation device was suggested to improve seismic performance of RC piloti
buildings. To confirm whether the method may serve effectiveness for retrofitting RC structure, nonlinear seismic response
analysis and shaking table test was carried out. The conclusions can be drawn as follows;
(1) The retrofit method using steel damper was suggested. The steel damper was assumed to be installed at the columns on the
first story of the piloti building. It was expected to serve as energy dissipation device by its hysteretic behavior and to
distribute input energy from the core wall to other members.
(2) The response analysis results for models with and without retrofit showed the retrofit was effective on reducing
displacement response of the building and damage of the main RC structural member.
(3) According to the analysis results varying yield displacement ratio of RC structural member to damper, damage can be
reduced by 20% of the whole damage when the ratio was obtained more than 15.0.
(4) As the results of the shaking table test for RC piloti type specimens with and without retrofit, the non-retrofit specimen was
finally destroyed at the fifth step whose excitation scale of the input wave was 150%. While the retrofit specimen stayed in
good shape at the same stage and the damper dissipated most input energy by its hysteretic behavior.
(5) Hence, it was thought that the retrofit method using steel damper was applicable to the RC structure considering stiffness
and strength ratio between damper and main structural members.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by a grant [NEMA-BAEKDUSAN-2012-1-4] from the Volcanic Disaster Preparedness Research
Center sponsored by National Emergency Management Agency of Korea.

REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]

D. A. Ko, Shaking table tests and analysis studies on the piloti-type high-rise RC building structures, Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Arch. Eng., Korea Univ.,
Seoul, Korea, 2005.
Structural Engineering Reconnaissance of the August 17, 1999 Earthquake : Kocaeli (Izmit), Turkey, PEERC, 2000.
K. C. Tsai, C. P. Hsiao, M. Bruneau, Overview of Building Damages in 921 Chi-Chi Earthquake, EEES, 2000.

G. M. Verderame, F. D.Luca, P. Ricci, G. Manfredi, Preliminary analysis of a soft-storey mechanism after the 2009 LAquila earthquake, Earthquake
Engng Struct. Dyn., Vol. 40, pp. 925-944, 2011
[5] S. H. Oh, J. W. Kim, T. S. Moon, An experimental study of flexible-stiff mixed system of high yield ratio-high strength steel for the practical use,
Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction. Vol.17, no. 4, pp. 395-405, Aug. 2005.
[6] H. Akiyama, M. Takahashhi, Z. Shi, Ultimate energy absorption capacity of round-shape steel rods subjected to bending, J. Struct. Constr. Eng., Vol.
475, Sep 1995.
[7] Akiyama H. Earthquake-resistant design method for buildings based on energy balance. 1 st ed. Oh SH. Seoul: Goomibook, 2002.
[8] K. LI, Users Manual for the CANNY: 3-Dimensional Nonlinear Static/Dynamic Structural Analysis Computer Program, 2009.
[9] K. LI, Data-Input Manual for the CANNY: 3-Dimensional Nonlinear Static/Dynamic Structural Analysis Computer Program, 2009.
[10] E. L. Baek. S. H. OH, S. H. Lee, Shaking table test of reinforced concrete piloti structures retrofitted by steel damper, in Proc. 15th Asi Pasific
Vibration Conf. Jeju, Korea, 2013.
[11] E. L. Baek. S. H. OH, S. H. Lee, Performance of seismic retrofit according to the stiffness and strength ratios of steel damper to reinforced concrete
frame, EESK J. Earthquake Eng., Vol. 17, no. 4, pp.171-180. Jul 2013.
[4]