IITG-IITK Workshop: 25-06-2016

Experimental and Numerical Study on Seismic

Response Control of Unreinforced Masonry
Test Model using U-FREI

Prof. S.K. Deb

Department of Civil Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
Other Members of the Research Group:

 Prof. Anjan Dutta, IITG

 Mr. Ngo Van Thuyet, Research
Scholar (R/S)
 Dr. Animesh Das, BHEL (former R/S)
 Mr. A. Hazarika, former PG student
 Mr. K. Reddy, former UG student

Industry Partner:
M/S METCO Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
 Outline of the presentation

 Basic Concepts of Base Isolation

 Design and detailing issues
 Brief Literature Review
 FE Simulation of Isolator
 Comparison of Experimental and FE Results
 Shake Table Testing of unreinforced masonry test model
 Prototype Implementation
 Philosophy of base isolation
 Lengthening of time period
 Enhancement of damping

Advantages of Base Isolation System

 Reduced floor acceleration and inter-story

drift
 Less (or no) damage to structural members
 Better protection of secondary structural
systems
 Prediction of response is more reliable
 The Concept of Base Isolation

Fixed Base

Significantly Increase the

Period of the Structure and
the Damping so that the
Response is Significantly
Reduced

Period
Base Isolated
Idealized force-displacement hysteretic behavior
of isolation system
Laminated Rubber bearing: Design Concept
Conventional Laminated Rubber Seismic
Isolation Bearings
Estimation of Displacement [ASCE / SEI: 7-05]
Construction Details
Construction Details
 Literature Review

 Experimental and Analytical Study on FREI

 Kelly(2001), Tsai (2005), Moon(2008), Nezhad et al. (2008)
 FE Analysis
 Mordini (2008), Nezhad (2011), Kelly(2012), Osgooei (2014),
Spizzuoco (2014), Das et al. (2014)
 Shake Table Testing of Base Isolated building
 Nezhad (2009), Das et al. (2016)
 The main objectives of this study are:

(i) To carry out numerical simulation of FREI

(ii) To develop lightweight, low cost FREI

(iv) To carry out experimental study on U-FREI

(v) To carry out shake table testing of base isolated Test

Model

(vi) Prototype implementation

 Designs of Seismic Isolator

The simple single degree-of-freedom natural frequency

(fn) of the base isolated model structure is given by
1 𝐾𝐾𝐻𝐻
𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑛 =
2𝜋𝜋 𝑚𝑚𝑡𝑡
Horizontal stiffness of bearing
𝐾𝐾𝐻𝐻
𝐾𝐾ℎ = = 60.217 kN⁄m
Number of bearings

For (SREI), the horizontal stiffness is given by simple shear

formula
𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
𝐾𝐾ℎ =
𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟
From above equation, 𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟 =95 mm. To achieve high stiffness
of the bearings, 19 layers of elastomer, each of 5 mm thick,
is selected. The elastomer layers are separated by 0.55 mm
thick fiber reinforcement.

𝐸𝐸𝐶𝐶 𝐴𝐴
The vertical stiffness is given by, 𝐾𝐾𝑣𝑣 =
𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟

The compression modulus EC modulus for square isolator is

given by:

96𝐺𝐺𝑆𝑆 2 ∞ 2 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝛾𝛾𝑛𝑛 𝑎𝑎 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝛽𝛽𝑛𝑛 𝑎𝑎

𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐 = ∑ −
𝜋𝜋2 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼 2 𝑛𝑛=1 𝑛𝑛−1/2 2 𝛾𝛾𝑛𝑛 𝑎𝑎 𝛽𝛽𝑛𝑛 𝑎𝑎
𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐 = 101212.6 kN/m2. 𝐾𝐾𝑣𝑣 = 10653.96 kN/m. Therefore,
ratio of the compressive stiffness to shear stiffness is equal
173.

Cross section of isolator

Geometrical properties of square and circular isolator
Description Square Circular
Width (2a) or radius (R) of isolator = 100 mm 112 mm
Thickness of fiber layer (tf) = 0.55 mm 0.55 mm
Number of fiber layer = 18 18
Thickness of single rubber layer (te) = 5 mm 5 mm
Number of rubber layer = 19 19
Total height of isolator (h) = 104.9 mm 104.9 mm

Material properties of elastomer

Hardness IRHD = 60
Shear modulus of elastomer (G) = 0.7 MPa
Elongation at break > 400%
Young’s modulus of fiber reinforcement (Ef) = 4400 MPa
Poisson’s ratio of rubber (ϑf) = 0.20
 Buckling load of Square Isolator

sl No. Investigator Buckling Load (kN)

1 Gent 43.99
2 Koh and Kelly 42.77
3 Kelly 40.50
 FE Simulation of Isolator Behaviour

Finite Element Modeling

 Element Type for Finite Element Model

Element type of fiber reinforcement

SOLID46, 8-Node Layered Structural Solid is used to model the

reinforcement.
Element type of Elastomer
SOLID185, 8-Node Structural Solid element is
used to model the elastomer

Contact, Target Elements

This modeling is done using 3-D surface-to-
surface contact elements CONTA173 and
TARGE170.
Material Model
Ogden 3-terms model
 Loading History
16
14
A vertical load of 12.0kN ±
Vertical Load (kN)

12
10 3.0kN
8
6
4
2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (s)
Horizontal Displacement (mm) 70
50
Three cycles of 30
specific displacement 10
up to 60 mm is -10

applied on the top of -30

-50
isolator with constant
-70
vertical load 0 3 6 9 12 15 18
Time (s)
 FE Analysis of Square Isolator

X axis aligned with fibers

oriented along 0°, while Y
axis aligned with fibers along
90°. The orientation of
horizontal loading 00 and 450
are along X-axis and 450 to
X-axis respectively
Free body diagram in laterally deformed FREI with
different boundary condition
The top and bottom surfaces can roll off the support surfaces
and no tension stresses are produced in un-bonded FREI. Tensile
stresses are not transferred to the contact surfaces of un-bonded
application
 Stress and Strain of Square Isolator

Square isolator with 00 loading direction

 Distribution of normalized stress S33/Pn.
2
Square Unbonded (0)

Normalized stress S33/Pn

Square Bonded (0)
0

-2

-4

-6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Normalized width of isolator

(a) 60mm horizontal displacement

2 2
Square Unbonded (0) Square Unbonded (0)
Normalized stress S33/Pn

Normalized stress S33/Pn

Square Bonded (0) Square Bonded (0)
0 0

-2 -2

-4 -4

-6 -6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Normalized width of isolator Normalized width of isolator

(b) 40mm horizontal displacement (c) 20mm horizontal displacement

Peak stress is 44% higher for bonded.
Contour of normal stress S33 (kN/m2) in mid rubber layer of the
isolator at horizontal displacement 60mm (00 loading direction &
positive value indicate tension)

(a) Un-bonded isolator at 60mm (b) Bonded isolator at 60mm

displacement displacement
Contour of shear strain in the
0.50

rubber layer of isolator at

0.40

Shear strain
horizontal displacement 60mm
0.30
60mm horizontal
displacement
0.20
(00 loading direction) and strain 0.10 Square unbonded
along mid height of elastomer 0.00
Square Bonded

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Normalized width of isolator
0.50
40mm horizontal
0.40
displacement

Shesr strain
0.30

0.20

0.10 Square unbonded

(a) Un-bonded Square Bonded
0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Normalized width of isolator
0.50
20mm horizontal
displacement
0.40

Shear strain 0.30

0.20

0.10
(b) Bonded Square unbonded
Square Bonded
0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Normalized width of isolator
 Hysteresis of square isolator with 00 loading direction
3
2
Shear Force (kN)

1
0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
-1
-2
-3
Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Shear force vs horizontal displacement for un- Un-bonded isolator at 60mm displacement (0°
bonded isolator at 0° loading Loading)
5
3.75
2.5
Shear Force (kN)

1.25
0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
-1.25
-2.5
-3.75
-5
Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Shear force vs horizontal displacement for Bonded isolator at 60mm displacement (0°
bonded isolator at 0° Loading)
 Computation Effective Stiffness and Damping

Kheff = (Fmax – Fmin)/(dmax – dmin) and β = Wd/(4πWs)

un-bonded bonded
Displac- Effective Damping Effective Damping
ement Horizontal (β) (%) Horizontal (β) (%)
(mm) Stiffness (𝑲𝑲𝒉𝒉𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 ) Stiffness (𝑲𝑲𝒉𝒉𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆 )
(kN/m) (kN/m)
10 88.3 12.3 89.7 12.1
20 76.5 12.8 86.4 12.3
30 66.2 13.1 83.2 12.3
40 56.9 13.9 79.3 12.5
50 46.2 15.2 74.7 12.8
60 39.3 16.1 70.7 13.1
 Hysteresis of square isolator with 450 loading direction
4
3
2
Shear Force (kN)

1
0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
-1
-2
-3
-4
Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Shear force vs horizontal displacement for un- Un-bonded isolator at 60mm displacement (45°
bonded isolator at 45° loading Loading)
5
3.75
Shear Force (kN)

2.5
1.25
0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
-1.25
-2.5
-3.75
-5
Horizontal Displacement (mm)

Shear force vs horizontal displacement for Bonded isolator at 60mm displacement (45°
bonded isolator at 45° loading Loading)
 Lateral load vs displacement of the bonded
& un-bonded square isolator
5000
Unbonded FREI 3750
Bonded FREI
2500
Shear Force (N)
1250

0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
-1250

-2500

-3750

-5000
Horizontal displacement (mm)

Horizontal stiffness (N/mm) of bonded square FREI

Analytical (𝐾𝐾ℎ =
𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
) From Eq. (3.1) FE Analysis
𝑡𝑡𝑟𝑟
73.68 73.65 70.7
Horizontal Stiffness of un-bonded is 70% less than bonded
 Effect of Vertical Load on Shear Capacity
3 3
2 2
Shear Force (kN)

Shear Force (kN)

1 1
0 0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
-1 -1
-2 Analysis (100% Vertical load) -2 Analysis (100% Vertical load)
Analysis (75% Vertical load) Analysis (125% Vertical load)
-3 -3
Horizontal Displacement (mm) Horizontal Displacement (mm)

100% and 75% of total 100% and 125% of total

vertical load vertical load

Vertical Maximum shear Minimum shear

Load (%) force (kN) force (kN)
75 2.37 -2.37
100 2.42 -2.41
125 2.52 -2.50
 Lateral Load Testing Arrangement and Instrumentation

Total weight arrangement consists of a two storied frame structure

placed on a steel plate, concrete slabs and beams.

Front view of the experimental Top cross sectional view of the

set up for lateral loading test experimental set up
 Comparison of Numerical and Experimental Results

 Result of Loading along 00 Orientation

3 3
Test Result Test Result

Shear Force (kN)

Shear Force (kN)

Analysis Result 2 Analysis Result 2

1 1
0 0
-12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
-1 -1
-2 -2
-3 -3
Horizontal Displacement (mm) Horizontal Displacement (mm)

10mm displacement 20mm displacement

 3 3
Test Result
Shear Force (kN) 2 Analysis Result 2

Shear Force (kN)

1 1
0 0
-35 -28 -21 -14 -7 0 7 14 21 28 35 -45 -36 -27 -18 -9 0 9 18 27 36 45
-1 -1
Test Result
-2 -2
Analysis Result
-3 -3
Horizontal Displacement (mm) Horizontal Displacement (mm)

30mm displacement 40mm displacement

3 3
Test Result Test Result

Shear Force (kN)

2 Analysis Result 2
Shear Force (kN)

Analysis Result

1 1
0 0
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -70 -56 -42 -28 -14 0 14 28 42 56 70
-1 -1
-2 -2
-3 -3
Horizontal Displacement (mm) Horizontal Displacement (mm)

50mm displacement 60mm displacement

 Displaced Shape of Isolator (00 loading direction)

at 10mm maximum at 20mm maximum at 30mm maximum

displacement displacement displacement

at 40mm maximum at 50mm maximum at 60mm maximum

displacement displacement displacement
Concluding Remarks on Isolator Testing

 Horizontal stiffness as obtained from numerical solution

shows close agreement with those obtained from experiment.

 Horizontal stiffness of un-bonded isolator corresponding to

450 loading is observed to be slightly higher than that for 00
loading.

 Experimentally observed displaced shapes of the isolators

are matching with analytically obtained shapes.
Shake Table Testing of Test Model
The experiment carried out on a 1/5th scaled two storey unreinforced
masonry building supported on four square un-bonded fiber reinforced
elastomeric isolator (U-FREI)

A scale factor of 1:5 is considered shake table size and its payload
capacity

The laws of similitude are as follows

Prototype
Parameters Scale
1/5-scale model
Length S 5
Mass S2 25
Displacement S 5
Time 𝐒𝐒 2.236
Acceleration S 5
 Model building and its details

Parameter Prototype Model

Building Building
Length (m) 7.5 1.5
Width (m) 5.5 1.1
Height of storey (m) 3 0.6
Thickness of slab (m) 0.15 0.08
Base beam (m x m) 0.625x0.7 0.125x0.15
50 0
Total weight of 12140 971
building (kg)
 Sample Ground Motions for Shake Table Test
(1) Koyna (1967): Comp - Longitudinal,
(2) Parkfield (1966): Comp - C02065,
(3) El Centro (1940): Comp - 180,
(4) Victoria (1980): Comp - CPE045 transverse earthquakes.

Table: Characteristics of selected earthquake records

Earthquake Components Peak Ground Frequency
Acceleration (g) Range (rad/sec)
Koyna (1967): Comp - Longitudinal 0.63 0-12
Parkfield (1966): Comp - C02065 0.48 0-40
El Centro (1940): Comp - 180 0.32 0-65
Victoria (1980): Comp - CPE045 0.62 0-160
Time scaled representation of the four selected earthquakes
acceleration histories are shown in following figures
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4

Acceleration (g)
0.2
Acceleration (g)

0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0
-0.2 0 5 10 15 20
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6 -0.4

-0.8 -0.6
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(a) Koyna (1967): Comp - Longitudinal (b) Parkfield (1966): Comp - C02065
0.4 0.6
0.4
Acceleration (g)

Acceleration (g)
0.2 0.2
0
0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0 3 6 9 12 15 -0.2
-0.4
-0.2
-0.6

-0.4 -0.8
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(c) El Centro (1940): Comp - 180 (d) Victoria (1980): Comp - CPE045
  Displaced shape of isolator during shake table
test for Parkfield input earthquake

(a) Parkfield (for 100% acceleration amplitude (b) Parkfield (for 70% acceleration amplitude
of earthquakes along X-axis). of earthquakes along 450 to X-axis.)
Peak Responses of Base Isolated Model
0.8 0.8
Shake Table Shake Table
Base of bldg Base of bldg

Acceleration (g)
0.4
Acceleration (g)

0.4

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20

-0.4 -0.4

-0.8 -0.8
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(a) Koyna (b) Parkfield

0.4 0.8
Shake Table Shake Table
Base of bldg Base of bldg
Acceleration (g)

0.2

Acceleration (g)
0.4

0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 3 6 9 12
-0.2 -0.4

-0.4 -0.8
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(c) El Centro (d) Victoria

Fig: Acceleration response at shake table level and base level subjected to four
earthquakes (full intensity) applied along X-axis
Peak Responses of Base Isolated Model
0.12 0.3
Base level Base level
First floor First floor
Roof level Roof level

Acceleration (g)
0.15
Acceleration (g)

0.06

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20

-0.06 -0.15

-0.12 -0.3
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(a) Koyna (b) Parkfield
0.2 0.2
Base level Base level
First floor First floor
Roof level Roof level
Acceleration (g)

Acceleration (g)
0.1 0.1

0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 3 6 9 12

-0.1 -0.1

-0.2 -0.2
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(c) El Centro (d) Victoria
Fig: Comparison of acceleration responses at base level, first floor and roof level
subjected to four earthquakes (full intensity) applied along X-axis
Peak Responses of Base Isolated Model
10 60
Base level Base level
First floor First floor

Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)

5 30

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 5 10 15 20

-5 -30

-10 -60
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(a) Koyna (b) Parkfield
22.5 30
Base level Base level
15 First floor First floor

Displacement (mm)
20
Displacement (mm)

7.5 10

0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 3 6 9 12
-7.5 -10

-15 -20

-22.5 -30
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(c) El Centro (d) Victoria
Fig: Displacement at base level and first floor level subjected to four earthquakes (full
intensity) applied along X-axis
Peak acceleration and displacement at different levels of model
subjected to four earthquakes (full intensity) along X-axis

Peak Displacement
Peak Accelerations (g)
(mm)
Earthquake At Shake At First At Roof At Base At First
At Base
Table Floor Level level Floor

Koyna 0.632 0.0873 0.0700 0.0867 6.326 7.240

Parkfield 0.476 0.2145 0.2081 0.2463 36.199 39.920

El Centro 0.319 0.1524 0.1601 0.1686 17.789 19.409

Victoria 0.615 0.1230 0.1310 0.1459 19.452 21.251

The following conclusions are drawn from the scaled
model study:

 U-FREIs are observed to be very effective in reducing

seismic responses of model structure.

 The effectiveness in seismic isolation increases with

increased displacement, where U-FREI maintains a
stable rollover configuration within the estimated
displacement limit.

 The U-FREIs are observed to be effective irrespective

of loading directions.

 Inertia forces, shear forces and bending moment of

the test model supported on U-FREI are substantially
lesser than the fixed base structure.
 The designed U-FREIs used in this study are applicable
to the scaled model building only. The isolators for this
model building are slender because of lesser vertical
load. This constraint would not be encountered in the
design of prototype U-FREIs, and hence higher aspect
ratio for prototype bearings is achievable.

 Experimental study demonstrated potential of U-FREI

in reducing the seismic vulnerability of un-reinforced
masonry buildings . Introduction of U-FREI at the
interface of superstructure and substructure of an un-
reinforced masonry building would be simple and hassle
free.
 Base Isolated Masonry Building at Tawang
Arunachal Pradesh (under-construction)

Isolation System:
Un-bonded Fiber Reinforced Isolator (U-FREI)
R&D and design: IIT Guwahati and
Manufacturee: M/s METCO Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata
Testing of prototype FREIs

Validation of Numerical Model

 IITG CAMPUS: SPRING 2016

Thank you for your kind attention