This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

In this project, a frame structure is being designed for earthquake. In the first part of the project, the project input values are given such as span lengths, the storey height, slab thickness, live load values for the floors, soil type and the ground acceleration value that the structure will be designed to. The structure was to be designed for Ductility Class Medium, meaning the energy dissipating in the plastic hinges were expected to be in some limits, defining the relative value called behavior factor to be 3.9, whereas in Ductility Class High structures, the energy being dissipated is assumed to be higher in the plastic zones so a higher behavior factor is adopted. The software Drain2DX has been used for the multi – modal linear analysis. For multi – modal linear analysis, information must be provided such as the section sizes and properties, nodal loads and masses as well as the spectrum acceleration that is characteristic of the soil type and which is being divided by the behavior factor which represents the assumed dissipated energy during the earthquake in the plastic deformations, and the ground acceleration value. In order to achieve this, bearing in mind the ductility class being medium, first the column and beam sections were assumed and their properties were input in the file, with the other necessary information including nodal mass and load values. After getting the results from the multi – modal linear analysis, sections were designed according to design values. Because of the design logic, the beams were tried not to be over – designed, so that they could make plastic deformations and dissipate energy. The connections were designed in a manner with stronger column – weaker beam sections, so that the plastic hinges form in beams, rather than in columns. If columns form plastic hinges before the beams, that can cause a total collapse of the structure, with beams having higher resistance and not going into plastic deformation, which is totally not logical. In the last part of this project, the structure is being assessed against the recorded El Centro and Mexico earthquakes. In the results it can be seen that, the design was successful in the way it was meant to work, with forming the hinges at the beams in the most disastrous intervals of the earthquake. At the end of the results, comments are made how to improve the structures performance during the earthquake and there are comments after every graph and figure provided. Because of the limited time and the report being tried to be kept in few pages, only relevant graphs and results has been tried to be included in the report and detailed calculations has not been included. For the ending, a little comparison is made with the Mexico City earthquake and the performance of the building against this earthquake is investigated.

1

Part I: Project Input Values

**Given frame building and values:
**

Student Registration No: 090116809 Spans: lx1 = lx2 = lx3 = 6.8 m, ly = 6.5 m Storey Height: h = 4.2 m Floor Slab Thickness: hf = 0.20 m Variable Load: Top Floor: 1 kN/m2, Other Floors: 2.5 kN/m2 Assumed Material Properties: fck = 50 MPa, fsteel,yield = 460 MPa, Concrete Density = 25kg/m3 Ground Acceleration: 0.40 g Figure 1 – Given Frame Structure Ductility Class: DCM, Ground Type: A

The first thing that will be is; the column and beam sizes will be assumed for getting the needed loads and masses at the nodes for the modal analysis. After calculating all the needed values for the nodes, modal analysis will be carried out, and sections will be designed for design actions. After the sections are designed, the response of the building to a recorded earthquake will be tested.

Node and Element Numbering for the Project

Figure 2 – Element Numbering and Assumed Beam and Column Sections In figure 2, the element numbering and the column and beam sections are given. The sections are assumed in symmetrical manner, therefore only the right handside of the structure is given.

2

**Assumed Column Section and Properties
**

Internal columns have been chosen with bigger sections bearing mind the DCM and that the column sections will have to have more resistance than beams in connections.

Column Section 1 2 3 4

b (mm) h (mm) 500 500 450 450 500 500 450 450

I (mm4) 520833.3 341718.8 520833.3 341718.8

Ac (mm2) 250000 202500 250000 202500

Ash(mm2) 207500 168000.75 207500 168000.75

Table 1 – Column Section Properties

**Assumed Beam Section and Properties
**

BS 1 2 3 4 bw 300 300 300 300 hw 350 400 300 300 htotal 550 600 500 500 bf-int 2100 2100 2050 2050 bf-ex 1300 1250 Aint 525000 540000 500000 500000 Aext 365000 340000 Iyint Iyext As 8.82E+09 7.59E+09 165000 1.14E+10 180000 6.65E+09 5.64E+09 150000 6.65E+09 150000

Table 2 – Beam Section Properties – All values in mm, mm2 and mm4 For energy dissipation and for plastic hinges to occur in the beams, the design is intended to be made with stronger columns – weaker beams principle. The beam in y – direction is assumed to 300 x 600 mms. The earthquake action will be higher on lower floors and lower on higher floors, beams sections are getting smaller in higher floors. The beams sections will be designed to be weaker in external conditions of the building but will be need to have higher resistance in internal conditions. Figure 3 – Beam Dimensions

**Procedure for Finding Nodal Mass and Load Values
**

Now that the beam and column sections are assumed, the nodal mass and load vales can be calculated the procedure given below. The calculations are not given in detail for every node.

Example Procedure for Node 3010 Distributed Loads between 3010 - 3020 Slab: 0.2 x 6.5 x 1 x 25 = 32.5 kN/m Beam: 0.3 x 0.35 x 1 x 25 = 2.63 kN/m Variable: 6.5 x 2.5 x 1 x 0.3 x 0.8 x 0.3 = 3.9 kN/m Sum : 39.4 kN/m Point Loads at node 3010 y – beam: 6.5 x 0.3 x 0.4 x 25 = 19.5 kN Column Above: 0.45 x 0.45 x 25 x 4.2/2 = 10.63 kN Column Below: 0.50 x 0.50 x 25 x 4.2/2 = 13.13 kN Sum: 43.26 kN Final Nodal Load and Mass Values: 2 Moment = 39.4 x 6.8 / 12 = 15037.62 kN.cm Point Load = 39.4 x 6.8 / 2 + 43.26 = 175.94 kN 2 Mass = Total Point Load / g = 0.1794 (kN / m / sec )

3

**Final Nodal Mass and Load Values
**

Node 2010 2020 2030 2040 3010 3020 3030 3040 Point Load 178.44 312.40 312.40 178.44 175.94 309.90 309.90 175.94 Moment 15037.63 144.50 -144.50 -15037.63 15037.63 144.50 -144.50 -15037.63 Mass 0.18189 0.31845 0.31845 0.18189 0.17935 0.31590 0.31590 0.17935 Node 4010 4020 4030 4040 5010 5020 5030 5040 Point Load 172.17 303.58 303.58 172.17 154.91 279.69 279.69 154.91 Moment 14893.13 0.00 0.00 -14893.13 14141.73 0.00 0.00 -14141.73 Mass 0.17551 0.30946 0.30946 0.17551 0.15791 0.28511 0.28511 0.15791

Table 3 – Nodal Load and Mass Values (Units: kN / m / sec)

**Design Earthquake Spectrum
**

Assuming the structure will have Ductility Class M – the above design spectrum was created with a behavior factor of 3.9 and a ground acceleration value of 0.4g for the given soil type. For example, a structure with the dominant period at 1 sec. excited by this ground type earthquake will be designed to an acceleration value of approximately 163.1 cm/sec2 at the top floor. The 3.9 behavior factor represents the energy dissipated by ductile behavior of the structure. So with the assumed ductility, the structure with 1 second period would be assumed not to fail for an acceleration value of 3.9 x 163.1 = 636.1 cm/sec2 at the top floor with forming plastic hinges throughout the structure. Figure 4 – Design Spectrum

Summary of Part I

This completes all the input value that is needed to run the multi – modal non – linear analysis. The sections have been assumed in a way that earthquake will be have the higher impact on the lower floors, and also, that the design will be have to made with logic of stronger columns – weaker beams, so that the plastic hinges occur in beams rather than columns and dissipate energy. In part II, the multi modal analysis will be run using the software DRAIN2DX and the sections will be designed to resist the earthquake actions.

4

**Part II: Multi – Modal Non – Linear Analysis
**

Analysis Results – Mode Shapes and Periods

Mode 1 2 3 4 Period (sec) 1.020 0.357 0.266 0.1484 Frequency (1/sec) 0.980 2.801 3.759 6.739 Effective Mass (%) 82 12.5 3.3 2.1 Table 4 – Modal Period, Frequency and Effective Mass Values

Mode Shapes

The first mode consists 82% of the modal mass, so when exited the first mode will cause the most action on the structure. The first mode has a period of 1.02. The second mode has a greater Spectral Acceleration value, however the effective modal mass is 12%. Because of the very low modal mass values, the third and forth modes will not contribute as much. In the analysis process, the value that will be used for the top floor acceleration will be around 0.16g according to the design spectrum we had, and the effective mass will be 82% for this value. For the second mode, which has a period of 0.356 seconds, the design acceleration value will be around 0.30g, however with an effective mass of 12.5 %

Mode Shape 1 Mode Shape 3

Mode Shape 2 Mode Shape 4

The software makes the calculations automatically and gives the results.

Figure 5 – Mode Shapes

Ground Floor First Floor Second Floor Third Floor Forth Floor

Unit Normalized Mode Shapes Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.23 0.68 0.78 1.00 -0.52 1.00 0.15 -0.95 -0.82 0.18 -1.00 0.55 -1.00 -0.93 0.62 -0.20

Table 5 – Unit Normalized Mode Shape Values

5

**Column Axial Load Values
**

El No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Axial E 177.230 118.470 62.300 20.560 17.400 12.840 7.720 2.360 Max Axial 900.83 655.17 412.90 189.36 1180.40 872.24 567.42 268.16 Min Axial 546.37 3 418.23 288.30 4 148.24 1145.60 1 846.56 551.98 2 263.44

Node 1010 2010 2010 3010 3010 4010 4010 5010 1020 2020 2020 3020 3020 4020 4020 5020

Axial G 723.6 -723.6 536.7 -536.7 350.6 -350.6 168.8 -168.8 1163 -1163 859.4 -859.4 559.7 -559.7 265.8 -265.8

CS

When designing the columns, the worst case scenario will be considered for every individual column section. The lowest of the minimum axial load on the column will be considered for moment resistance and the maximum compression value will be used for a possible axial load failure. Because the earthquake can hit from both side, the earthquake axial load value is both added and subtracted from the gravity load analysis of the structure in order to find the worst case possible. All the values for each column section are given in the table left handside.

Table 6 – Column Axial Load Results (units: kN)

**Column Moment Values
**

El No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Moment Absolute Moment Moment G MG E Design CS 2109 4345 6326 6191 4260 4526 6099 7483 -311.8 -642.3 -1022 -1094 -761.8 -755.8 -1264 -1802 2109 4345 6326 6191 4260 4526 6099 7483 311.8 642.3 1022 1094 761.8 755.8 1264 1802 19874 11799 11871 12503 10182 9803.3 5996.8 7308.4 32236 22116 24119 24869 19653 19149 12431 14456 21983 16144 18197 18694 14442 14329.3 12095.8 14791.4 32547.8 22758.3 25141 25963 20414.8 19904.8 13695 16258 2 1 4 3

Node 1010 2010 2010 3010 3010 4010 4010 5010 1020 2020 2020 3020 3020 4020 4020 5020

Moment G values stand for the static load case moment values and Moment E values are for the modal analysis values. In order to obtain the design values (M-Ed) the absolute value of the G moment values are added to earthquake values because earthquake can strike in both directions. The worst case for each individual column section has been considered.

Table 7 – Column Moment Results (units: kN.cm)

6

**Beam Moment Values
**

El No 1 2 4 5 7 8 10 11 Fixed End Rotation Rotation Node Moments Moments Sign MG 2010 15038 4366 1.00 106.72 2020 -15038 2056 -1.00 -129.82 2020 15182 -392 -1.00 155.74 2030 -15182 392 1.00 -155.74 3010 15038 4585 1.00 104.53 3020 -15038 2232 -1.00 -127.06 3020 15182 -477 -1.00 156.59 3030 -15182 477 1.00 -156.59 4010 14893 4268 1.00 106.25 4020 -14893 2330 -1.00 -125.63 4020 14893 -310 -1.00 152.03 4030 -14893 310 1.00 -152.03 5010 14142 6658 1.00 74.84 5020 -14142 2759 -1.00 -113.83 5020 14142 -957 -1.00 150.99 5030 -14142 957 1.00 -150.99

ME 229.39 214.28 238.54 238.54 212.89 199.26 224.07 224.07 148.74 139.12 162.15 162.15 73.084 66.787 77.786 77.786

MG + ME 336.11 84.46 394.28 82.80 317.42 72.20 380.66 67.48 254.99 13.49 314.18 10.12 147.92 -47.04 228.77 -73.20

MG-ME -122.67 -344.10 -82.80 -394.28 -108.36 -326.32 -67.48 -380.66 -42.49 -264.75 -10.12 -314.18 1.75 -180.61 73.20 -228.77

M-Ed 336.10 344.09 394.28 394.28 317.41 326.31 380.66 380.66 254.99 264.75 314.18 314.18 147.92 180.61 228.77 228.77

BS 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 4

Table 8 – Beam Moment Results (units: kN.cm) When finding design moments, the moments caused by rotations are either added or subtracted to the fixed end moments, depending on their condition. For instance, because, the joint rotation at external conditions will be in the same direction with the moment, it will release the moment at that node, so that the rotational moment is subtracted. Also, the same procedure has been used for finding the final values, both considering that earthquake can hit from both sides.

**Final Column Design Values for Each Section
**

Column Section Design Max Compression Design Min Compression Design Moment 1 1180.40 846.56 325.478 2 567.42 263.44 204.148 3 900.83 418.23 219.83 4 412.90 148.24 147.914 Table 9 – Final Column Design Values for Each Section (units: kN and kN.cm)

**Final Beam Design Values for Each Section
**

Beam Section External Condition Moment Internal Condition Moment 1 336.11 344.10 2 x 394.28 3 254.99 264.75 4 x 314.18 Table 10 – Final Beam Design Values for Each Section (units: kN.cm)

Summary of Part II

Values are obtained from the program and the design values have been found for worst cases.

7

**Part III: Section Design
**

Beam Section Design

Section designs have been made using the software sect.exe. The input values that are not included in the table 2 are shown here as well. Assumed covers are 20 mms for all columns and beams, and the links are assumed as 8mms.

Beam Section 1 External Condition Design Value Reinforcement Top Reinforcement Bottom z Top z Bottom T Section Resistance I - T Section Resistance Design Value Reinforcement Top Reinforcement Bottom z Top z Bottom T Section Resistance I - T Section Resistance 336.11 3 T 32 3 T 32 44 506 420.04 Internal Condition 344.1 3 T 32 3 T 32 44 506 427.65 Beam Section 2 Internal Condition 394.28 3 T 32 3 T 32 44 556 473.8 448.83 Beam Section 4 344.1 3 T 32 3 T 32 44 456 381.25 358.7 mm mm kN.m kN.m mm mm kN.m kN.m kN.m kN.m

404.64 404.65 Beam Section 2 254.99 4 T 25 4 T 25 40.5 459.5 312.99 300.96 264.75 4 T 25 4 T 25 40.5 459.5 318.73 300.96

Table 11 – Beam Section Design

**Column Section Design
**

Steel Top Steel Bottom z top z bottom Design Compression Design Tension Pyt Pyc Mr0 Mmax Nmax Design Moment Moment Res Steel Ratio CS 1 5 T 32 5 T 32 16 -16 1180.4 846.56 -3216.99 15716.99 597.84 1042.22 3457.74 325.47 732.41 0.0322 CS 2 5 T 32 5 T 32 16 -16 567.42 263.44 -3216.99 13341.99 521.92 845.00 2801.82 204.48 559.76 0.0397 CS 3 5 T 25 5 T 25 12.5 -12.5 900.83 418.23 -1963.50 14463.50 378.05 817.80 3471.23 219.83 446.88 0.0196 CS 4 5 T 25 5 T 25 12.5 -12.5 412.9 148.24 -1960.50 12088.50 331.40 651.92 2780.35 147.91 353.33 0.0242

mm mm kN kN kN kN kN.m kN.m kN kN.m kN.m <0.04

Table 12 – Column Section Design The column Moment Resistance values are obtained for the lowest axial load acting on each section from the corresponding axial load – moment graph for every section. Example for section 1 is given in the next page.

8

**Moment – Axial Force Interaction Diagrams Column Section 1 - Moment - Axial Load Interaction Diagram
**

5000 4500 4000 Axial Load (kN) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050

Moment Values (kN.m)

Figure 6 – Axial Load – Moment Interaction Diagram for Column Section 1 The horizontal lines show the lowest and highest axial design loads on the column section possible. The lower line is used to get the moment resistance of the section, and the higher line is to see that the possible highest axial load is not huge enough to decrease the moment capacity of the section.

**Check of Ratio of Column / Beam Resistance at Each Node
**

Node 2010 2020 3010 3020 4010 4020 Beam Res. Left (kN.m) 0 427.65 0 427.65 0 318.73 Beam Res. Right (kN.m) 420.04 473.8 420.04 473.8 312.99 381.25 Total Beam Resistance (kN.m) 420.04 901.45 420.04 901.45 312.99 699.98 Column Res. Up (kN.m) 446.88 732.41 353.33 559.76 353.33 559.76 Total Column Resistance (kN.m) 893.76 1464.82 800.21 1292.17 706.66 1119.52 Ratio Check (Column / Beam >1.3) 2.13 1.62 1.91 1.43 2.26 1.60

Column Res. Down (kN.m) 446.88 732.41 446.88 732.41 353.33 559.76

Table 13 – Column / Beam Resistances at Each Node

**Summary of Part III
**

In this part, each individual section has been reinforced considering the worst cases and combinations possible. At all nodes the total column resistance is greater than at least a factor of 1.3 for assuring that the plastic hinges will form in beams rather than columns. The beams are not highly over-designed so that the structure does not stay fully elastic and store all the energy, but rather go in plastic deformations in beams and dissipate the earthquake load energy. 9

Figure 7 - Nodes

**Part IV: Non – Linear Time History Analysis
**

In this part of the project, the performance of the building against the recorded El-Centro earthquake is being investigated in detail, and the Mexico earthquake is investigated in little detail for a better understanding and a comparison.

El Centro Earthquake

Figure 8 – El Centro Earthquake Recorded Ground Accelerations The above figure gives the recorded accelerations of the El Centro earthquake. The peak ground acceleration value is 3417.00 cm/sec2.

Figure 9 – El Centro Earthquake Power Spectrum Our structure has a fundamental mode frequency of 0.98 and second mode of frequency of 2.8 which have the most modal contributions. As can be seen from the power spectrum, El Centro earthquake will attack our structure pretty well in the first mode and second mode with having high spectral amplitudes. The spectral amplitude for first mode is around 0.02, as can be seen from the figure above. We are lucky that our structures fundamental frequency is not around 1.3 or 1.6, or it would be much more disastrous for the structure being affected by this earthquake.

10

**Amplification Factor for El Centro Earthquake
**

The maximum absolute acceleration of the top floor divided by the maximum absolute acceleration of the ground gives the “acceleration amplification factor”. The absolute maximum acceleration value of the ground is: 3417.00 cm/sec2.

The acceleration graph for the top floor is as follows:

**Top Floor Acceleration Time History for El Centro Earthquake
**

Acceleration Values (cm/sec2) 600.00 400.00 200.00 0.00 -200.00 561.08 497.79

-400.00 -600.00

-563.40 -549.88 0.00 5.00 10.00

-325.35 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00

Time (sec)

Figure 10 – Top Floor Acceleration Time History for El Centro Earthquake The absolute maximum acceleration value of the top floor is: 585.25 cm/sec2. Therefore the Acceleration Amplification Factor = 0.17 Also it can be seen from the acceleration diagram that the peak accelerations occur between seconds 2 and 5 and a little less between 12 and 14.

**Floor Displacement Time History for El Centro Earthquake
**

Floor displacement time history for floor 4 is given here for example: Forth Floor Displacements for El Centro Earthquake

Displacement (cm) 14.00 4.00 -6.00 -16.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00

Time (sec)

Figure 11 – Forth Floor Displacement Time History for El Centro Earthquake

11

**Maximum and Minimum Absolute Floor Displacements for El Centro Earthquake
**

The maximum and minimum storey displacements values and appearing times are: Floor Max Displacement (cm) Time (sec) Min Displacement (cm) Time (sec) First 2.74 3.00 -2.96 4.42 Second 6.58 3.00 -6.62 4.42 Third 10.27 2.96 -9.61 4.46 Forth 12.58 2.94 -11.17 4.46 Table 14 – Maximum and Minimum Floor Displacements for El Centro Earthquake The deformation of the structure at sec 2.94 and 4.46 are as follows: Floor First Second Third Forth Displacement (cm) Time Displacement (cm) Time (sec) 2.53 2.94 -2.82 4.46 6.21 2.94 -6.53 4.46 10.20 2.94 -9.61 4.46 12.58 2.94 -11.17 4.46 Table 15 –Floor Displacements at specific times for El Centro Earthquake

The following figure shows the deformed shapes and the mode shapes together, with mode shape being balanced to the displacement at top floor and being multiplied the other floors by this ratio. Actual Displacements - Mode Shape 1

4

3 Floor Numbers

2

Mode Shape 1 - min Minimum Mode Shape 1 - max

1

Maximum

0 -12 -7 -2 3 8 13

Floor Displacements (cm)

Figure 12 – Comparison of Actual Displacements and Mode Shape 1 for El Centro Earthquake

As it can be seen from the diagram, the worst deformations occur almost exactly in the first mode vibration of the structure, due to high modal mass and being exited by the earthquake in the particular time intervals. As can be seen, the structure also responses in the second mode as well.

12

**Inter – Storey Drift Time Histories for El Centro Earthquake First Storey Drift
**

4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 Drift (cm)

Time (sec)

**Second Storey Drift
**

4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 Drift (cm)

Time (sec)

**Third Storey Drift
**

4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 Drift (cm)

Time (sec)

**Forth Storey Drift
**

4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 Drift (cm)

Time (sec)

Figure 13 – Inter – Storey Drifts for Floors for El Centro Earthquake

Inter – storey drifts are important because it tells you about the stiffness distribution thru the structure. The inter – storey drifts should be at closer values at all times indicating that there are no soft storys so that the structure above the storey does not act as rigid and that all the force does not act on the soft storey.

13

Mean Maximum Inter-Storey Drifts for El Centro Earthquake Mean Maximum Values of Inter – Storey Drifts (cm)

First Floor Second Floor Third Floor Forth Floor 2.96 3.85 4.02 2.65 Table 16 –Mean Maximum Inter – Storey Drifts for El Centro Earthquake Although, occurring at the different times (the differences are very small in terms of seconds of maximum inter-storey drifts), when mode shape 1 maximum displacement is normalized with the maximum floor inter-storey of the structure, it can be seen that the maximum storey drifts are very close to the inter-storey drifts of the first mode shape of the structure. This is again due to high modal mass and that the first mode is being attacked by the earthquake.

Mean Maximum Storey Drifts for El Centro Earthquake and Mode Shape 1 Drifts

Forth Floor

Third Floor Mode Shape 1 Drifs Second Floor Maximum Relative Floor Displacements

First Floor

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

Figure 14 – Comparison of Actual Drifts and Mode Shape 1 for El Centro Earthquake

**Damage Limitation Control According to Eurocode 8
**

Floor h (cm) ν Drift (cm) ν × Drift h / 133 Ratio EC8 Check 4 420 0.5 2.96 1.48 3.16 2.13 OK 3 420 0.5 3.85 1.92 3.16 1.64 OK 2 420 0.5 4.02 2.01 3.16 1.57 OK 1 420 0.5 2.65 1.32 3.16 2.39 OK Table 17 – Damage Limitation Control According to Eurocode 8 for El Centro Earthquake The damage limitation requirement is satisfied due to Eurocode 8 with all the drift values multiplied with the reduction factor are being less than the storey height values divided by 133 which is the value given for buildings with ductile non-structural elements.

14

**Occurring of Plastic Hinges thru the Beams between seconds 1.80 – 5 for El Centro Earthquake
**

9

8

7

Beam Element Number

6

5

4

3

2

1 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 4.00 4.20 4.40 4.60 4.80 5.00

Time

Figure 15 – Plastic Hinges at Beams between Seconds 2 – 5 for El Centro Earthquake

*Black bars represent Node I, Gray Bars Represent Node J of the relevant beam element.

15

Figure 15 shows the plastic hinges occurring in the beams between seconds 1.80 and 5. In the figure the y - axis numbers are showing the beam element numbers. The black rectangular intervals are for that particular beam’s I node being in the yield moment value and making plastic deformations, and the gray ones are for node J. The beams go to plastic deformations in some other intervals of earthquake as well, but not for such long times which means less plastic deformations. This is why; this interval is most important and is examined to understand the behavior of the structure to El Centro earthquake. Beam element 9 – Node J is given here as an example for first 15 seconds of earthquake of forming plastic hinges: As can be seen the only important interval is between seconds 2 and 5. Most of the other beam elements do not even make plastic deformations after 5th second of the earthquake. After second 15 no more plastic hinges are formed at any element in the structure and the structure stays within limit moment values at all elements and not reaching the yield moments anymore.

**Beam Element 9 - Joint J
**

Plastic Hinges 1.00

3.00

5.00

7.00 9.00 Time (sec)

11.00

13.00

15.00

Figure 16 – Plastic Hinges for Beam Element 9 – Joint J during El Centro Earthquake

Plastic Hinges

Column Element 1 - Node I - Plastic Hinges

2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 4.00 4.20 4.40 4.60 4.80 5.00 Time (sec)

Plastic Hinges

Column Element 13 - Node I - Plastic Hinges

2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 4.00 4.20 4.40 4.60 4.80 5.00 Time (sec)

Figure 17 – Plastic Hinges Columns for El Centro Earthquake

These two figures show where the columns make plastic deformations. None of the other columns and these two columns form plastic hinges at any time during the structure except these and remain in elastic zone. This verifies that, the design was successful in the intended way, with stronger columns and weaker beams, with beams forming plastic hinges and dissipating energy during the most disastrous interval of the earthquake and avoiding energy to be stored in the structure.

16

Occurring of Plastic Hinges thru the Structure between seconds 2.20 – 4 El Centro EQ

Figure 18 - Occurring of Plastic Hinges thru the Structure between seconds 2.20 – 4 El Centro The figure above shows the plastic hinges that form during the most critical interval of the earthquake in the structure. In order to improve structures performance, the two columns that form plastic hinges can be improved at the nodes they undergo plastic deformations to avoid any plastic deformations of the columns. From the relevant figures, beam section 1 (Beam elements 1, 3, 4 and 6) external conditions seem to be the nodes that make the most plastic deformations.

17

**Hinge Rotations of Beams for El Centro Earthquake
**

Beam Section 1 - Beam Element 3 - Node J - Hinge Rotation - Moment Values - Moment Capacity

8.00E-03 6.00E-03 Hinge Rotation 4.00E-03 420.04 450 350 250 150 50 -50 -150 -250 -4.00E-03 -6.00E-03 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 -404.64 -350 -450 45.00

2.00E-03

-1.00E-17 -2.00E-03

Time (sec)

Figure 19 - Beam Section 1 - Beam Element 3 - Node J - Hinge Rotation - Moment Values - Moment Capacity The above figure shows the hinge rotations, moment values, and the positive and the negative moment capacity of the beam element 3 – node J during the earthquake. The y – axis left handside is for the hinge rotations, and the y – axis right handside shows the moment values. The dashed lines are the moment capacity values in kN.m As it can be seen from this graph clearly, because the moment value cannot exceed the capacity moment value, instead, the beam goes to plastic hinge deformations and makes hinge rotations and dissipates energy without failing. As long as the moment values are below the yielding values, no plastic deformations occur. This check has to be done for each beam section at internal and external conditions, and ductile behavior must be guaranteed to allow the desired hinge deformations. This is done in next page for elements of Beam Section 1 – External Conditions in the following page.

18

Hinge Rotations of Beam Section for El Centro Earthquake

**Beam Element 1 - Node I - Hinge Rotation
**

6.00E-03 Hinge Rotation 4.00E-03 2.00E-03 0.00E+00 -2.00E-03 2.00 7.00 -2.92E-03 12.00 17.00 22.00 27.00 32.00 37.00 42.00 5.29E-03 2.46E-03

-4.00E-03

Time (sec)

**Beam Element 3 - Node J - Hinge Rotation
**

5.00E-03 Hinge Rotation 3.65E-03 2.04E-03 0.00E+00 2.00 -5.00E-03 7.00 -3.44E-03 Time (sec) 12.00 17.00 22.00 27.00 32.00 37.00 42.00

**Beam Element 4 - Node I - Hinge Rotation
**

5.00E-03 Hinge Rotation 0.00E+00 2.00 -5.00E-03 -1.00E-02 7.00 -5.19E-03 Time (sec) 12.00 17.00 22.00 27.00 32.00 37.00 3.09E-03 3.17E-04 42.00

**Beam Element 6 - Node J - Hinge Rotation
**

5.00E-03 Hinge Rotation 0.00E+00 1.93E-03 2.98E-04

2.00

-5.00E-03 -1.00E-02

7.00 -5.15E-03

12.00

17.00

22.00

27.00

32.00

37.00

42.00

Time (sec)

Figure 20 – Plastic Hinge Rotations for Beam Section 1 – External Conditions – El Centro Earthquake The hinge rotation values for Beam Section 1, external conditions can be seen in the above figures. Beam element 1, node I makes a rotation of 5.29 × 10-3 radians. This external condition of BS1 has to have so much ductility in order not to fail and dissipate energy. All the beam sections have to be designed for enough ductility to make the rotations as this beam to dissipate energy and show ductile behavior. 19

**Shear Force Information for Beams for El Centro Earthquake
**

Beam Element 2 - Node I and Node J

200.00

150.00 Shear Forces (kN) 100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00 -100.00 -150.00 -200.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00

Time

**Beam Element 5 - Node I and Node J
**

200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00 -100.00 -150.00 -200.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00

Shear Forces (kN)

Time

Figure 21 – Shear Force Values for Beam Section 2 for El Centro Earthquake

Maximum Shear Forces (kN) Beam Section External Condition Internal Condition Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum 1 -129.50 129.80 -129.80 129.80 2 x -143.50 143.50 3 -95.52 93.75 -93.75 95.52 4 x -95.52 95.52 Table 18 – Maximum and Minimum Shear Force Values at Beam Sections for El Centro Earthquake The maximum shear force values are given in the table above. Shear failure is a brittle failure and never wanted in a structure. Beam and column sections has to be designed to stay in elastic zone during the whole earthquake with sufficient links at the connections, also providing confinement and curvature ductility at the beam – column connections.

20

Column Moment Capacity with Changing Axial Load – Moment Values Acting – Hinge Formation Column Section 3 - Column Element 1 - Node I - Moment Capacity and Acting Moment - Plastic Hinge Rotations

800.00 600.00 Moment Values (kN.m) 400.00 2.18E-03 2.00E-03 1.50E-03 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 0.00E+00 -5.00E-04 -1.00E-03 -1.39E-03 0.00 5.00 10.00 Time (sec) 15.00 20.00 -1.50E-03 25.00

200.00

0.00 -200.00 -400.00 -600.00 -800.00

Figure 22 - Column Section 3 - Column Element 1 – Node I - Hinge Rotation - Moment Values - Moment Capacity The above figure shows the moment acting on the column element I at node I during the earthquake in first 25 seconds. The two lines at top and bottom show the positive and negative moment capacity of the column changing with the axial load acting on the column during the earthquake. As it can be seen, especially around seconds 2 and 4, when the structure is deforming in the positive direction, with the decreasing axial load on the column, the moment capacity decreases, and of course, acting moment increases. This is where this column element forms a plastic hinge and makes plastic deformations. The dashed line shows the plastic hinge rotations of the considered node during the earthquake. The values are given in the right handside y axis. As it can be seen, where the moment capacity goes down due to low axial load, and the acting moment reaches the capacity, again plastic hinges form and hinge rotations occur. The graph is limited to first 25 seconds, because the moment values stay in elastic zone for the rest of the earthquake. The maximum hinge rotation this column element makes at this node is given in the figure with a value of 2.18 × 10-3 radians. This column section has to have so much ductility in order to make this amount of rotation, however, better yet, the moment capacity should be increased at this node so that it stays in elastic zone.

21

Mexico Earthquake

In this part of the coursework, the same structure will be assessed against the recorded Mexico EQ.

Figure 23 – Mexico Earthquake Recorded Ground Accelerations

The Mexico earthquake has less peak ground acceleration compared to the El Centro; however the power spectrum should also be checked.

Figure 24 – Mexico Earthquake Power Spectrum As can be seen from the above figure, the Mexico earthquake has the most energy in low frequencies. Our structure has a frequency of 2.8 in second mode and higher frequencies in higher modes, and this earthquake should not affect these modes almost at all according to this power spectrum.

Also, as can be seen from the acceleration time history, Mexico earthquake has longer duration of the damaging interval where as El Centro only hits the structure with the peak acceleration only for a short time.

22

**Acceleration Amplification Factor for Mexico Earthquake
**

The maximum acceleration of the top floor is 153.66 m/sec2 The maximum ground acceleration is 1584 m/sec2 The amplification factor for this earthquake is therefore: 0.097

Storey Displacements

Maximum storey displacements and times are given for the Mexico earthquake in table: Floor Max Disp (cm) Time (sec) Min Disp (cm) Time (sec) 1 2.07 57.88 -2.12 59.00 2 4.45 57.86 -4.56 59.00 3 6.52 57.84 -6.70 57.00 4 7.69 57.82 -7.94 57.00 Table 19 – Maximum and Minimum Floor Displacements for Mexico Earthquake Due to less peak ground acceleration and the power spectrum, as expected, our structure makes less deformation compared to EL CENTRO earthquake at each floor. The structure deformation at exactly time = 57 compared with the mode shape 1 gives us: Structure Deformation at t = 57 sec

4 Storey Number 3 2 1 0 -10.00 -5.00 Deformations (cm) 0.00 Structure Deformation Mode Shape 1

As expected, the structure is responding mainly in first mode and the deformed shape is very close to the mode shape 1.

Figure 25 – Structure Deformation at t = 57 for Mexico Earthquake

**Damage Limitation Control According to Eurocode 8
**

Floor h (cm) ν Max Drift (cm) ν × Drift h / 133 Ratio EC8 Check 4 420 0.5 2.12 1.06 3.16 2.98 OK 3 420 0.5 2.44 1.22 3.16 1.59 OK 2 420 0.5 2.19 1.01 3.16 2.89 OK 1 420 0.5 1.26 0.63 3.16 5.02 OK Table 20 – Damage Limitation Control for Mexico Earthquake According to Eurocode 8 Compared with EL CENTRO earthquake, we have less storey displacements, less storey drifts, therefore automatically we check with the damage limitation control according to EC8.

23

Hinge Rotations of Beams for Mexico Earthquake Beam Section 1 - Beam Element 3 - Node J - Hinge Rotation - Moment Values - Moment Capacity

500.00 1.40E-04 420.04 9.00E-05 400.00 300.00 200.00

4.00E-05

-1.00E-05 -6.00E-05 -1.10E-04 -1.60E-04 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 Time 60.00 70.00 80.00

100.00 0.00 -100.00 -200.00 -300.00 -404.06 -1.48E-04 90.00

-400.00

-500.00 100.00

Figure 26 – Beam Section 1 - Beam Element 3 – Node J - Hinge Rotation - Moment Values - Moment Capacity For a comparison with EL CENTRO earthquake, the same beam element and same node has been taken into account. As it can be seen from above graph, this time the considered node only reaches the yield moment value once, and for a short interval, causing a rotation value of 1.48 × 10-4 whereas in EL CENTRO there were rotation in both direction for several intervals with a maximum rotation value of 3.65 × 10-3which is around 24 times larger than the one in this earthquake. Also as in EL CENTRO, the plastic deformations at columns appeared at the same nodes with this Earthquake. This confirms, even with the relatively weaker earthquake plastic hinges are being formed in the columns, and in order to improve the structures performance, those connections (Column 1 and Column 13 node I) can be strengthened so that we do not form plastic deformations at columns at all.

24

**Part V: Non – Ultimate Limit State Verification and Detailing
**

Beams Resistance in Bending and Shear

The bending and shear resistance of beams should be calculated in accordance with EC2. (Because beyond the scope of this project, the shear links has not been calculated but assumed.) The top reinforcement in flanged beams should be placed within the web.

**Detailing For Local Ductility
**

Critical regions of beams (zones where plastic hinges form) are considered to be located within a length lcr = hw from the faces of the columns. The transverse reinforcement in the critical regions should provide confinement to enable sufficient rotational ductility of the plastic hinges. 1) ρ' > 0.5 ρ × + ρ'ULS Reinforcement ratios are same at top and bottom and greater than ULS 2) ρmin = 0.5 × fctm / fyk 0.0147 > 0.5 × 4 / 460 = 0.043

**Columns Resistance in Bending and Shear
**

Flexural and shear resistance should be computed in accordance with Eurocode 2 Normalized axial force in columns should be limited to < 0.65 CS 1: 8038.4 / 250000 = 0.032; CS2: 8038.4 / 202500 = 0.040 CS3: 4906.25 / 250000 = 0.020; CS4: 4906.25 / 202500 = 0.025

**Detailing For Local Ductility
**

0.1 < Total longitudinal reinforcement ratio < 0.4 with minimum of 3 bars on each side-> Check The length of the critical regions is maximum of : lcr = hc , lcr = lcl / 6, lcr = 0.45m

**Beam – Column Joints
**

The confinement reinforcement in joints of primary seismic beams and columns should be not less than that specified for critical regions.

25

Design of Earthquake Resistance Structures, Design to Eurocode 8, Plastic Hinges, Drain 2DX, Energy Dissipation in Earthquakes, Earthquake Resistant Structures, Non Linear Time History Analysis, El...

Design of Earthquake Resistance Structures, Design to Eurocode 8, Plastic Hinges, Drain 2DX, Energy Dissipation in Earthquakes, Earthquake Resistant Structures, Non Linear Time History Analysis, El Centro,Ductility,Ductile Design

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd