See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/332422964

Effect of Viscous Wall Dampers on Response of Reinforced Concrete

Structures Subjected to Seismic Excitation

Conference Paper · March 2019

CITATION READS

1 537

3 authors:

Siddiq Shaik Farzad Hejazi

CDM Smith The University of Sheffield
1 PUBLICATION   1 CITATION    182 PUBLICATIONS   889 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Visuvasam JosephAntony
VIT University
10 PUBLICATIONS   13 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

STUDY OF PRECAST FOAMED CONCRETE SANDWICH WALL PANEL BEHAVIOUR UNDER HORIZONTAL DISTRRIBUTION LOAD View project

Analysis of contiguous pile wall subjected to seismic loading View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Visuvasam JosephAntony on 19 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

Effect of Viscous Wall Dampers on

Response of Reinforced Concrete
Structures Subjected to Seismic Excitation
Siddiq S T M1, Visuvasam J*2, Farzad Hejazi3
1M. tech, Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, VIT University, Vellore. 1siddiqsk7@gmail.com
2Asst. Professor, School of Civil Engineering, VIT University, Vellore. visuasam.j@vit.ac.in
3Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University Putra Malaysia. farzad@fhejazi.com

Abstract--- Earthquake-resistant buildings are provided with special energy dissipating devices to enhance
the seismic performance of the buildings. Viscous wall dampers (VWDs) are one of the passive energy
dissipating devices, which provide the supplemental damping to the structures and improve the structure’s
performance. In this paper, numerical modelling of viscous wall dampers using finite element analysis tool is
discussed and also the effect of viscous wall dampers on response of reinforced concrete (RC) frames is studied.
A total of 7 ground motions (4 near-fault and 3 far-fault) are used to assess the performance of VWDs in
reducing the seismic response of RC frame. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of 6 storey 3 bay frame with VWDs in
the middle bay and another identical frame without VWDs was performed using finite element software
SAP2000. The numerical results show that the primary effect of VWDs is providing large supplemental damping
to the structures. As a result, the displacement and drift responses are reduced significantly. While results of
acceleration response, axial forces in the columns adjacent to VWD’s bay and the base shear are increased
significantly. VWDs are more effective in near-fault earthquakes than in far-fault earthquakes.
Keywords— viscous wall damper, nonlinear, near-fault, far-fault, damping, SAP2000.

devices, numerous wall-type dampers have been

I. INTRODUCTION
To mitigate the earthquake or wind induced
energy in the structures, passive energy -dissipating
devices are very common in engineering practice.
Unlike the active/semi-active energy dissipating
systems, passive energy dissipating devices do not
require external power source and require relatively
less installation efforts and maintenance. So, they are
popularly used in the new buildings and in retrofit of
existing buildings. Researchers have been
investigated the behaviour of various passive energy
dissipating systems for the past four decades [3], [9].
Majority of passive systems are engrossed on
diagonal type damping devices, and their exceptional
ability to mitigate the seismicresponse for steel
structures has been enormously proved in abundant
past studies. Though, there are some downsides when
diagonal type damper devices are used for seismic
response reduction of reinforced concrete _RC_
structures. Apart from the architectural flexibility and
the occupational loss at the location of dampers, for
example, no doors or windows can be set at the
location of brace-type dampers, the connection
between diagonal dampers and their relating RC
member will be prone to stress concentration and thus
the concrete of RC members at the connection will
spall off, even there is a possibility of damage to the
members in the event of strong earthquakes. So as to
avoid this kind of damage and to ensure the safety of
structural members that are connected to damper
proposed ([5], [8]) and created to augment the family
of passive energy dissipating systems.
(Miyazaki et al. 1980) developed the concept of a
viscous wall damper, and studied that effectiveness of
the viscous wall damper was confirmed by 5-floor
model. [4] carried out a series of experimental
studies to investigate the performance of viscous wall
dampers. Both the cyclic test of the VWD itself and
shaking table test of two different building models
with VWD were conducted. However, both building
models used in the shaking table test investigation are
steel frames, therefore, some features of RC
structures with VWD cannot be reflected in their test
results. [13] presented a study on the application of
viscous wall damper devices to a 14-story steel rigid
frame structure. Their analytical results demonstrated
that using the damper system can provide over
20%supplemental damping to the building, and
seismic responses of the building can be reduced by
70 to 80%. However, the building is still a steel
structure. [11] presented a thorough investigation of
the viscous wall damper (VWD) for seismic response
mitigation on reinforced concrete frames.additional
dampers on the reinforced concrete frames of more
than 20% and simultaneously drastically stiff the
structure, decrease the displacement response by
about 30% - 60%, the acceleration response and the
reduced shear force on some cases, but increased in
other cases. The same case had been done by [10],
who had completed the construction of Hospitals in

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

145
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
California, described an analysis of a 94,000 m2
building. He concluded that it is possible to design a
very important structure in areas with high seismicity.
The efficiency of the designed structural system is
evidenced by the reduced tonnage of building steel.
This paper presents the comprehensive numerical
study on effects of viscous wall dampers (VWDs) in
reducing the seismic response of six-storey reinforced
concrete frame and evaluated the performance of
VWDs in different earthquake ground motions. To
assess the influence of different type of ground
motions nonlinear dynamic analysis of RC frame
with and without VWD has been performed using
finite element software SAP2000.
II. COMPONENTS AND MECHANISM OF VWD
A viscous wall damper consists of a steel vane
and hollow rectangular tank filled with high viscous
fluid. As shown in the Fig. 1, the vane is attached to
the top beam and the tank is attached to the bottom
beam of the same storey. when a structure subjected
to earthquake or dynamic loads, each storey will
encounter relative displacement. when the interstorey
drift occurs the vane shears through the high viscous
fluid and generates the viscous damping and restoring
force due to which interstorey drifts, as well as
overall deformation of structure will be reduced.
More damping force can be achieved by increasing
the vane area.
Fig. 1 Viscous wall-damper
III. MODELLING AND PROPERTIES
A. 3.1 Numerical Modelling
VWDs are best represented by an Exponential
Maxwell Damper model, as shown in the Fig.2. The
finite element software SAP2000 element type is
nonlinear link. The model consists of a linear spring,
K, in series with an exponential damper characterized
by C and, such that the forcein thedamper is related to
the velocity across the damper through the force-
velocity relationshipF = CVα.
Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027
Fig.2 Finite element model of VWD
In the damper bay(s), the beams are divided into
three elements (Fig. 2) such that the length of the
centre element is the same as the width of the VWD.
The centre elements are divided into two equal
elements. Since the VWD properties include the
stiffness of the tank and vanes and their effect on the
beams above and below the VWD, beam elements
within the width of the VWD can be modelled as very
stiff. At the mid-height of each bay and story
containing a VWD, a pair of nodes a small distance
has created. This pair of nodes should be cantered
within the width of the VWD. With a stiff frame
element, the centre of the beam below to one of these
nodes and the centre of the beam above to the other
are connected. The in-plane bending stiffness of these
stiff elements should be comparable to that of the
stiffened mid-section of the beam below and the
beam above.
B. 3.2 Properties of VWD
The load-deformation response of VWDs is
temperature, displacement, velocity, and cyclic-
history dependent. Temperature and cyclic-
historydependence are accounted for by use of the
property modification factors. In order to
appropriately account for the expected range of
building response due to variation in damper
properties due to first-cycle effect, temperature
variation, aging, and specification tolerance an upper
and lower bounddamper properties analysis scheme
was adopted. Based on the past studies the upper
bound and lower bound modification properties are
λmax (1.55-1.8) and λmin (0.85) respectively.
IV. PRESENT STUDY
A six-storeyreinforced concrete commercial
building served as paper’s exemplary test model. As
shown in the Fig. 3 (a), This building was assumed to
be located in zone VI with soft soil. The thickness of
slab and live load are 125 mm and 5 kN/m2. The
building was designed for moment resisting. One of
146
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

interior frame in the longitudinal direction serves as
the study frame. Frame without VWD is model 1 (Fig.
3(b)) and another with VWD is model 2 (Fig.3(c)).
VWDs are provided in the middle bay of the frame.
As, shown in the Fig. 3(c). VWD’s width and height
are 2.4m and3.6m respectively and its nominal
properties, stiffness, damping coefficient and velocity
exponent are 47284 kN/m, 2512 kN-s/m2 and 0.5
respectively. Nonlinear behaviour of frame members
is modelled by assigning the concentrated hinges at
the ends of the members. A total of 7 ground motions
(4 Near-fault, 3 Far-fault) were used to perform the
nonlinear response history analyses.

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 3, (a) Plan view of 6-storey building (b) interior frame without VWDs (model 1) (c) Frame with VWDs
(model 2)
Table 1. ground motion record set
V. GROUND MOTIONS Near-Fault record set
Ground motion record set (Table 2.) include a set M Year Name Station
of 7 (4 Near-fault and 3 Far- Fault) ground motions
Duzce,
which are used in FEMA 695-P. ground motions 7.1 1999 Duzce
Turkey
recorded at sites located greater than or equal to 10
km from fault rupture, referred to as the “Far-Field” Sylmar-
Northridge-
record set, and a set of ground motions recorded at 6.7 1994 Olive
01
sites less than 10 km from fault rupture, referred to as View
the “Near-Field” record set. The Near-Field record set Saratoga-
6.9 1989 Loma prieta
includes two subsets: (1) ground motions with strong Aloha
pulses, referred to as the “NF-Pulse” record subset 7.3 1992 Landers Lucerne
and (2) ground motions without such pulses, referred Far-Field record set
to as the “NF-No Pulse” record subset. Selected
ground motions are matched (Fig. 4) in the range 0.2 M Year Name Station
T- 1.5 T (T= fundamental time period of the structure) Kocaeli,
7.5 1999 Duzce
and amplitude scaled by using the appropriate scale Turkey
factor to the target response spectrum (Zone VI soft Yermo
soil response spectrum) in SeismoMatch software as 7.3 1992 Landers Fire
per [1] (16.2.3.1 and 16.2.3.2). Station
7.4 1990 Manjil Abbar
VI. NONLINEAR DYNAMIC ANALYSIS cases under 4 near-fault and 3 far-fault ground
Nonlinear response history (NRH) analyses by motions using finite element software SAP2000.
direct integration (using one of the available Time historyanalysiswasperformed by considering
numerical methods available) method were carried
out for all

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

147
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

Fig. 4 Matched accelerograms of FF and NF ground motion records

both material nonlinearity (lumped plasticity) at the Fig.5(a), and (b) showsdisplacement response of the
both the ends of members, as well as geometric model 1under near-fault (FF) and far-fault (NF)
nonlinearity (P-Delta effects and large deformations). ground motions respectively. Due to the pulse-like
Nonlinear responses, for which the mode shapes are and long-period accelerations, in near-fault ground
not fixed but are changing with changes of stiffness, motions, they cause more demand in the structures
it is appropriate to define the proportional damping than that of far-fault ground motions. VWDs dissipate
matrix for the initial elastic state of the system seismic induced energy and reduces the roof
(before nonlinear deformations have occurred) and to displacement demand on an average by 30-40 % in
assume that this damping property remains constant the FF ground motions and 40-60 % in the NF ground
during the response even though the stiffness may be motions as shown in the Fig. 6 (a) and (b)
changing and causing hysteretic energy losses in respectively. VWDs has also reduced the inetrstorey
addition to the viscous damping losses. A 5% of drift ratio significantly as shown in both FF and NF
critical damping in the first two fundamental modes ground motions as shown in the Fig. 7 (a) and (b)
was assumed. Plastic hinges should not be formed VWDs has performed better in NF ground
adjacent to VWD’s. Finally, convergence, stability motions.VWDs provides the additional stiffness to
and accuracy has been checked. the structure, due to which the base shear and roof
accelerations (Table. 2) will increase. when the
VII. NRH ANALYSIS RESULTS interstorey drift occurs the dampers will move, and
A total of 28 nonlinear response historyanalyses creates the additional moment in the beams, which
were carried out. The main parameters evaluated are causes additional axial force in the columns adjacent
interstorey drift ratio, floor displacements, roof to the VWD bay as shown in the tables (Table. 2 and
accelerations, member forces and the base shear. 3 ).
6 6
Landers
5 5
Loma
4 Prieta
4 SYLMAR
Storey

Landers
Storey

3
3 Manjil Duzce
2
2 Kocaeli
1
1
0
0 0 50 100 150 200
0 50 100 150 200
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
(a) (b)
Fig. 5 Displacement response of model 1 under (a)FF and (b) NF ground motion records

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

148
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

Table 2. Various responses of the frame models under near-fault ground motions
Duzce, Northridge, Loma
Landers
Turkey Sylmar Prieta
Resp Resp Resp Resp
Flo Mod Mod onse Mod Mod onse Mod Mod onse Mod Mod onse
or el 1 el 2 ratio el 1 el 2 ratio el 1 el 2 ratio el 1 el 2 ratio
(%) (%) (%) (%)
0.31 0.50 0.49 0.56 0.56 0.60
1 59 0.305 0.424 39 14 7
9 8 5 2 4 6
0.29 0.48 0.48 0.54 0.69
2 63 0.380 0.458 20 0.46 5 27
8 6 1 6 2
Peak 0.33 0.50 0.48 0.50 0.58 0.64
floor 3 52 0.337 0.447 33 5 11
1 4 0 3 3 6
acceler
0.42 0.56 0.45 0.52 0.53
ation 4 32 0.439 0.512 16 16 0.47 14
8 3 5 8 7
(g)
0.45 0.60 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.53
5 34 0.421 0.63 50 34 6
3 7 3 6 4 4
0.55 0.84 0.63 0.77 0.60 0.68
6 53 0.583 0.79 36 22 14
4 5 5 5 3 6
1011 2043 1008 1755
1 102.1 1013 2052 103 1012 1942 92 74
.2 .7 .7 .8
832. 1641 833. 833. 1451
2 97.1 833.5 1661 99 1555 87 74
Peak 9 .7 5 58 .5
axial 653. 1231 653. 653. 1107
3 88.6 649.9 1230 89 1137 74 69
force in 1 .7 3 71 .5
the 480. 853. 480. 770. 480. 774.
4 77.6 479.6 840.7 75 60 61
column 8 8 8 2 51 962
s. 317. 497. 323. 443. 320. 453.
5 56.4 317.7 480.1 51 37 42
8 0 2 6 12 90
165. 193. 166. 187. 162. 190.
6 16.9 160.3 186.5 16 13 18
7 6 3 6 41 90
Table 3. Various responses of the frame models under far-fault ground motions
Manjil,
Landers Kocaeli
Abbar
Flo Mod Mod Response Mod Mod Response Mod Mod Response
or el 1 el 2 ratio (%) el 1 el 2 ratio (%) el 1 el 2 ratio (%)
1 0.601 0.625 4 0.346 0.376 9 0.352 0.379 8
Peak 2 0.607 0.657 8 0.342 0.391 14 0.317 0.32 1
floor 3 0.557 0.756 36 0.375 0.405 8 0.347 0.428 23
acceler
ation 4 0.632 0.629 0 0.391 0.459 18 0.482 0.492 2
(g) 5 0.460 0.561 22 0.440 0.552 25 0.433 0.585 35
6 0.711 0.934 +31 0.583 0.637 9 0.575 0.685 19
1012. 1885. 1012. 1898. 1009. 1916.
1 86.2 87 90
8 8 8 7 8 8
833.5 1494. 1529. 830.8 1551.
2 79.3 833.7 84 87
Peak 9 5 9 2 1
axial 653.6 1127. 651.3 1151.
3 1131 73.0 654.1 72 77
force in 2 1 8 4
the 486.1 807.8 480.4 779.0
4 66.2 482.3 755.2 57 62
columns 4 6 3 2
*. 333.2 315.5 443.9
5 481 44.3 321.4 426.7 33 41
2 7 3
168.5 192.7 164.4 176.1
6 14.3 166.0 175.8 6 7
8 6 5 4
*Columns adjacent to VWD bays.

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

149
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

response. However, acceleration response is

VIII. CONCLUSIONS
increased significantly in all the cases. Structures
A comprehensive analytical investigation on the with VWD would not yield, even under strong
control effects of VWD in seismic performance earthquake excitations, which results in sufficiently
enhancement of RC frames was first carried out on higher base shear forces and accelerations than those
Six-storey RC frames with and without six viscous of the ordinary structures. The additional axial forces
wall dampers. The analytical results show that the produced in the columns adjacent to VWD due to the
installation of VWD can moderately change structural movement of VWD are very large. Different types of
natural frequencies. Moreover, the deformation ground motion do have certain influence, evidently
responses of the frame models can be reduced greatly, change the effectiveness of VWD on response control.
with the reduction of 30 to 60% for displacement
VWDs performance depends on the
relativedisplacement and velocity. NF ground
motions have more frequency, it causes VWDs to
displacefrequently and results in dissipating more
nergymotions than in the FF ground motion. The
performance of VWD is effective in NF ground
motion.

6 6

5 5

4 4
Model 1
Storey
Storey

3 Model 2 3
MODEL 1
2 2
Model 2
1 1

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200

Avg displacement (mm) Avg displacement (mm)

(a) (b)
Fig. 6 Avg displacement response of RC frames under(a) FF and (b) NF ground motion records

6 6
Model 1 Model 1
5 5
Model2 Model 2
4 4
Storey

Storey

3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Drift ratio (%) Avg drift ratio(%)
(a) (b)

Fig. 7 Avg ratio ofRC frames under(a) FF and (b) NF ground motion records

[2] ASCE/SEI 41-13. (2013). Seismic evaluation and retrofitof

REFERENCES
[1] ASCE/SEI 7-16. (2016) Minimum design loads and
associated criteria for buildings and other structures. Virginia:
American Society of Civil Engineers
existing buildings. Virginia: American Society ofCivil
Engineers.
[3] Aiken, I. D., et al. _1993_. “Testing of passive energy
dissipation systems.” EarthquakeSpectra, 9_3_, 335–370.

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

150
 International conference on Industry 4.0 and Advancements in Civil Engineering (i4ACE’19)
21 - 23 March 2019
ISBN 978-93-87862-53-1
Paper No: 1027

[4] Arima, F., Miyazaki, M., Tanaka, H., and Yamazaki, Y.

_1988_.“A study on buildingswith large damping using
viscous dampingwalls.” Proc.,9th World Conf. on
Earthquake Engineering, Toky Kyoto, Japan, 821–826.
[5] Cho, C. G., and Kwon, M. _2004_. “Development and
modeling of a frictional wall damper and its applications in
reinforced concrete frame structures.” Earthquake Eng.Struct.
Dyn., 33, 821–838
[6] Dynamic Isolation System, Viscous Wall Dampers
Guidelines for Modeling, (2015).
[7] James, Newell., Jay, Love., Mark, Sinclair., Yu-Ning, Chen.,
and Amarnath, Kasalanati.,2011. “SeismicDesign of a 15
Story Hospital Using Viscous Wall Dampers” Structures
Congress.
[8] Miyazaki, M., and Mitsusaka, Y. _1992_. “Design of a
building with 20% or greater damping.” Proc., 10th
World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Balkema,
Rotterdam,Netherlands, 4143–4148
[9] Pall, A. S., and Marsh, C. _1982_. “Response of friction
damped braced frames.” J. Struct. Div., 108_6_, 1313–1323.
[10] R. Love., J. Newell., M. Sinclair., Y. Chen., & C. Poland.,
2012. “Performance- Based Design of an Essential Hospital
with Supplemental Viscous Damping in a High
SeismicZone”Proc.,15th World Conf. on Earthquake
Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
[11] Wilson, E. L. _2002_. Three-dimensional static and dynamic
analysis of structures, 3rd Ed., Computers and Structures,
Inc., Berkeley, Calif, 268–283.
[12] Xilin, Lu., Ying, Zhou., and Feng, Yan., 2008. “Shaking
Table Test and NumericalAnalysis of RC Frames with
Viscous Wall Dampers” J. Struct. Eng., 134:64-76.

Department of Civil Engineering, PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research

151

View publication stats