Lecture 8 - Nonlinear Spectra

Structural Dynamics
Prof. Eduardo Miranda
Nov. 20th – Dec. 16th, 2006

Rose School, Pavia, Italy
Structural Dynamics
Prof. Eduardo Miranda
8. Nonlinear Spectra, Strength Reduction Factors

and Displacement Modification Factors
Structural Dynamics 2 © Eduardo Miranda
1
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVES
1. To discuss effects of yielding displacement and/or lateral strength

on the seismic response of nonlinear SDOF systems.
2. To present the concept of nonlinear response spectrum.
3. Illustrate how to compute nonlinear response spectra.
4. Illustrate how to compute strength reduction factors and

displacement modification factors
PEAK
PEAK STRUCTURAL
STRUCTURAL RESPONSE
RESPONSE FROM
FROM THE
THE
RESPONSE
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
From lecture 6:
The peak equivalent static lateral force in the system (base shear) is
computed as the peak relative displacement times the lateral stiffness:
F0 = kD = kS d
Since A = ω n S d
2
then the lateral force in the system can also be
computed as:
A S
F0 = mA = W ≈ aW
g g
2
PEAK
PEAK STRUCTURAL
STRUCTURAL RESPONSE
RESPONSE FROM
FROM THE
THE
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
Determine the peak lateral strength demand of a SDOF system with

Tn=2.0 s and ζ=0.05 required to maintain the system elastic under the
NS components of El Centro record.
Sa [g] NS Comp of El Centro record

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Structural Dynamics PERIOD [s] © Eduardo Miranda

5
PEAK
PEAK STRUCTURAL
STRUCTURAL RESPONSE
RESPONSE FROM
FROM THE
THE
RESPONSE
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
The peak lateral strength demand is then given by:
A
F0 = mA = W = 0.137W
g
For a system with unitary mass (1 kip s2/in) this corresponds to:
A
F = mA = W = 0.137(386.2) = 53.07 kip
g
3
PEAK
PEAK STRUCTURAL
STRUCTURAL RESPONSE
RESPONSE FROM
FROM THE
THE
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
If the system has F ≥ 53.07 kip, when subjected to this record, the
response will be linear elastic and will be the same regardless of how
much additional lateral strength is supplied to the system above this
value.
However, if the lateral strength is F < 53.07 kip, when subjected to this
record, the response will be inelastic (i.e., the peak relative displacement
will be larger than the yield displacement).
Hence, this lateral strength represents a boundary between elastic and

inelastic response.
ELASTIC
ELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
The elastic strength demand Fe is defined as the minimum lateral

strength required to maintain the system elastic when subjected to a
particular earthquake ground motion.
A
Fe = mA = W
g
Fe A S a
Ce = = ≈
W g g
4
ELASTIC
ELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
If the system has Cy ≥ Sa/g , then the response will be ELASTIC.
Cy
1.0
0.8
ELASTIC BEHAVIOR
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
ELASTIC
ELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
If the system has Cy < Sa/g , then the response will be INELASTIC.
Cy
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
INELASTIC BEHAVIOR
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
5
ELASTIC
ELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
For structures built on rock or firm soil sites with period of vibration
longer than about 0.6s, elastic strength demands decrease as period of
vibration increases.
Sa [g] A brahamson & Silva (1997) M=6.5

0.6
R = 10 km
0.5 R = 20 km
R = 50 km
R = 90 km
0.4
R = 120 km
R = 180 km
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Tn
DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND
In general, for a given period of vibration a decrease in lateral

strength will result in an increase in displacement ductility
demand.
Fy
μ
6
DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND
Example of relationship between lateral strength and displacement

ductility demand.
Fy
El Centro NS 1940
80
Tn = 2.0s, ζ=0.05
70
Elastic 60 (Fe=53.07)
strength Fe 50
demand
40
30
20
10
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND
Example of relationship between lateral strength coefficient (seismic

coefficient) and displacement ductility demand.
Cy El Centro NS 1940
0.20
Tn = 2.0s, ζ=0.05
0.18
ELASTIC
0.16
Elastic (Ce=0.1372)
strength Ce 0.14
demand 0.12
INELASTIC
0.10
0.08
0.06 ELASTIC
0.04 INELASTIC
0.02
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
7
ELASTIC
ELASTIC AND
AND PLASTIC
PLASTIC DEFORMATION
DEFORMATION
F
TOTAL DEFORMATION
ELASTIC PLASTIC
DEFORMATION DEFORMATION
Fy Δ max Δ y + Δ p Δ
μ= = = 1+ p
Δy Δy Δy
Δ p = Δ y ( μ − 1)
k
Δ
Δy Δmax
MAXIMUM
MAXIMUM TOLERABLE
TOLERABLE DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND
In earthquake resistant design, one is interested in controlling plastic

deformations demands, that is trying to keep plastic deformation demands
below a maximum tolerable plastic deformation. This can be achieved by
controlling the displacement ductility demand below a maximum value
referred to as MAXIMUM TOLERABLE DUCTILITY DEMAND
sometimes also referred to as DUCTILITY CAPACITY.
8
MAXIMUM
MAXIMUM TOLERABLE
TOLERABLE DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND
ACCEPTABLE REGION OF
DEFORMATIONS
Fy
Other nomenclature used:
k μt = μ max
μ
1 μmax
DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY DEMAND
DEMAND IN
IN THE
THE CONTEXT
CONTEXT OF
OF
FORCE-BASED
FORCE-BASED DESIGN
DESIGN
Assume that
μt = 3
What is the minimum lateral strength that the structure should
have in order to guarantee that when subjected to a given
earthquake ground motion
μ ≤ μt
To answer this question one is interested in computing the

lateral strength that will produce (within a given tolerance) a
ductility demand equal to maximum tolerable ductility.
9
LATERAL
LATERAL STRENGTH
STRENGTH ASSOCIATED
ASSOCIATED TO
TO A
A
SPECIFIC
SPECIFIC DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY
For a given earthquake record, the lateral strength that will produce a certain
displacement ductility can be obtained by iteration.
Basic approach:
1. Give a certain lateral strength to the SDOF system
2. Perform a nonlinear response history analysis (RHA) to determine the

displacement ductility demand
3. Compare the computed ductility to the maximum tolerable

displacement ductility
4. If the computed ductility is not equal to the maximum tolerable

displacement ductility (within a certain tolerance), then adjust the lateral
strength accordingly and repeat steps 2 to 4.
TARGET
TARGET DUCTILITY
DUCTILITY
Since one modifies the lateral strength until one “hits” the desired
displacement ductility, the maximum tolerable displacement ductility
ratio is sometimes also referred to as TARGET DUCTILITY.
10
PROBLEM
PROBLEM STATEMENT
STATEMENT
Main goal:
μ ≤ μt
Approach:
Cy ≥ Ci (μ=μt)
then
Fy = Cy W
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
The minimum lateral strength required to limit the maximum displacement

ductility demand below a certain maximum tolerable ductility demand is
known as INELASTIC STRENGTH DEMAND.
Fi (μ =μt)
Any lateral strength smaller than Fi (μ=μt) will result in a ductility demand
larger than the maximum tolerable (μ >μt).
11
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
Example of inelastic strength demand:
Fy
El Centro NS 1940
80
Tn = 2.0s, ζ=0.05
70
Elastic 60
(Fe=53.07)
strength Fe 50
demand
40
Inelastic 30
(Fi =21.493)
strength Fi 20
demand
10
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
μt = 3
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMAND
DEMAND
Cy
El Centro NS 1940
0.20
Tn = 2.0s, ζ=0.05
0.18
0.16
Elastic (Ce=0.1372)
0.14
strength Ce
demand 0.12
0.10
0.08
Inelastic 0.06
(Ci =0.0557)
strength Ci
0.04 INTOLERABLE
demand TOLERABLE
0.02 DUCTILITY DUCTILITY
DEMANDS DEMANDS
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
Fy = Cy W = 0.0557 W μt = 3
12
PROBLEMS
PROBLEMS WITH
WITH MULTIPLE
MULTIPLE STRENGTHS
STRENGTHS
For certain ground motions, certain periods and certain target ductilities
one may find that SEVERAL different lateral strengths may produce
ductility demands that are equal to the target ductility.
For earthquake resistant design purposes only the largest of these

strengths is of interest, because it is the only lateral strength that
guarantees that no other lateral strength above this value will produce a
ductility demand larger than the maximum tolerable. Therefore, when
multiple roots are identified, the largest root corresponds to the
INELASTIC STRENGTH DEMAND.
PROBLEMS
PROBLEMS WITH
WITH MULTIPLE
MULTIPLE STRENGTHS
STRENGTHS
Example of multiple strengths corresponding to the same ductility.

Consider the same system and same ground motions as before, but now
consider μt = 1.35
Cy
0.20
0.18
Inelastic
strength 0.16 Caution when using solver, as it will
demand 0.14 usually converge to the nearest root and
(Ci =0.1056) 0.12
not necessarily the largest.
0.10
(Ci =0.0899)
0.08
(Ci =0.0834) 0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
Structural Dynamics
μt = 1.35 © Eduardo Miranda
26
13
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH DEMANDS
DEMANDS AT
AT
VARIOUS
VARIOUS PERIODS
PERIODS
Just like elastic strength demands vary with changes in the period of
vibration, inelastic strength demands also will exhibit variations as a
function of the period of vibration.
Cy
0.30
T = 0.5 s
T = 1.0 s
T = 2.0 s
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
Structural Dynamics 27
μt = 3 © Eduardo Miranda
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
Tn = 0.5 s
Cy
0.30
T = 0.5 s
T = 1.0 s
T = 2.0 s
0.25
0.20
Cy El Centro NS, 1940

0.15 1.0
0.9
0.10 0.8
0.7
0.05
0.6
0.5
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.4
μ 0.3
0.2
μt = 3 0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s ]
14
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
Tn = 1.0 s
Cy
0.30
T = 0.5 s
T = 1.0 s
T = 2.0 s
0.25
0.20

0.15 1.0
0.9
0.10 0.8
0.7
0.05
0.6
0.5
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.4
μ 0.3
0.2
μt = 3 0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s ]
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
Tn = 2.0 s
Cy
0.30
T = 0.5 s
T = 1.0 s
T = 2.0 s
0.25
0.20

0.15 1.0
0.9
0.10 0.8
0.7
0.05
0.6
0.5
0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.4
μ 0.3
0.2
μt = 3 0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s ]
15
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
Repeating for Tn = 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, … 3.0.

1.0
μ = 1.0
0.9
μ = 3.0
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
Inelastic spectra, by definition, are smaller than their elastic counterpart.

1.0
μ = 1.0
0.9
μ = 3.0
0.8
0.7
0.6
Strength required to maintain the system elastic
0.5
0.4
Strength required to avoid μ > 3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
16
INELASTIC
INELASTIC STRENGTH
STRENGTH SPECTRUM
SPECTRUM
inelastic spectra are often also calculated by dividing elastic spectra through
a strength reduction factor.
Sa
Fy = W
Rμ
Again Fy represents the minimum lateral strength that need to be provided

in order not to exceed the maximum tolerable deformation (e.g., the
maximum tolerable ductility demand).
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
The ratio of the strength required to main the system elastic to the strength
required to maintain the ductility demand lower than a maximum tolerable
ductility is referred to as STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR.
Fy ( μ = 1)
Rμ =
Fy ( μ = μt )
Alternatively
C y ( μ = 1)
Rμ =
C y ( μ = μt )
17
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
For a given ground motion, the STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR is

the maximum strength reduction that one can use in order to limit the
displacement ductility demand to the maximum tolerable ductility. If one
uses a larger reduction factor, then the ductility demand will exceed the
maximum tolerable.
Rμ
El Centro NS 1940
6
Tn = 2.0s, ζ=0.05
5
3
(Rμ=2.46)
2
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
μ
Structural Dynamics 35
μt = 3 © Eduardo Miranda
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
A STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR SPECTRA can be computed from the

ratio of the elastic strength demand spectrum and the inelastic strength
demand spectra.
Cy Fy ( μ = 1)
El Centro NS, 1940
Rμ =
1.0
μ = 1.0
Fy ( μ = μt )
0.9
μ = 3.0
0.8
0.7
0.6
Strength required to maintain the system elastic
0.5
0.4
Strength required to avoid μ > 3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
18
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
There are many investigations that have studied strength reduction factors
computed from recorded ground motions and produced statistical studies (e.g.,
mean or expected values of strength reduction factors). One example:
Rμ
7.0 μ = 6.0
6.0 μ = 5.0
5.0 μ = 4.0
4.0 μ = 3.0
3.0 μ = 2.0
2.0 μ = 1.5
1.0 μ = 1.0
264 ground motions
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD, T [s]
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
One can propose approximate equations to estimate these reduction factors.

As an example the following figure compares statistical results with simplified
equations:
Rμ
7.0
μ = 6.0
6.0 μ = 5.0
μ = 4.0
5.0 μ = 3.0
μ = 2.0
μ = 1.5
4.0 μ = 1.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
264 ground motions
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD, T [s]
19
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
One should keep in kind that there is significant scatter (variability) around
mean or median values.
COV(Rμ )
264 ground motions μ = 6.0
0.6
μ = 5.0
0.5 μ = 4.0
μ = 3.0
0.4
μ = 2.0
0.3 μ = 1.5
μ = 1.0
0.2
0.1
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD, T [s]
STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
For design purposes, there have been many investigators that have proposed
approximate equations to estimate strength reduction factors that can be used
in design.
In the U.S. strength reduction factors used in codes are referred to as

R factors. In Europe (i.e., in the EuroCode) strength reduction factors are
referred to as q factors.
20
APPROXIMATE
APPROXIMATE STRENGTH
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Newmark and Hall 1982.
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Newmark and Hall (cont.).
21
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Newmark and Hall (cont.).
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Nassar and Krawinkler 1991
22
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Nassar and Krawinkler 1991
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1991
23
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1991
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1991
24
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Comparison of two proposed factors
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Comparison of various models
25
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Comparison of various models
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1991
26
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1991
APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Miranda 1996 (simple equation that can be used in design)
⎡− 16T ⎤
Rμ = μ + (1 − μ ) exp ⎢ ⎥
⎣ μ ⎦
27
USE
USE OF
OF APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH
REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
F
Ve = S aW
Elastic strength demand Ve Vd S a
=
W R
k
Sa
Vd = W
Design strength Vd
R
USE
USE OF
OF APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH
REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
S a [g]
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
Sa
0.4
R
0.2
Sa/R 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Period [s]
28
USE
USE OF
OF APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH
REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
Please note that strength reduction factors in current U.S. seismic

provisions (e.g., International Building Code, IBC or National
Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program, NEHRP) are period
independent, which is clearly incorrect.
Reduction factors in the EuroCode or in seismic provisions of many

other countries (e.g., Mexico, Colombia, NZ, etc.) are period-
dependent and therefore lead to more rational designs.
USE
USE OF
OF APPROXIMATE
STRENGTH
REDUCTION
REDUCTION FACTOR
FACTOR
A thorough discussion of approximate reduction factors to be used in

design is beyond the scope of this course. Interested students are
referred to the following reference for more information:
Miranda, E. and Bertero, V.V., (1994) Evluation of Strength

Reduction Factors, Earthquake Spectra, Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute, Vol. 10, No. 2, May, 1994, pp. 357-379.
29
ESTIMATION
ESTIMATION OF
OF PEAK
PEAK INELASTIC
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT (DEFORMATION)
(DEFORMATION) DEMANDS
DEMANDS
Main goal:
Δ i ≤ Δ max t
Basic approach:
Δi = C ⋅ Δe = C ⋅ Sd
?
We need:
Δi
CC =
Δe
INELASTIC
INELASTIC DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Estimating deformation demands in inelastic systems:
Fe
Fy
k
Δ
Δy Sd =Δelastic Δinelastic
Δi
C=
Δe
30
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
D [cm] Elastic
18
T = 1.15s, ξ0=5%, Elastic
12
6
0
-6
Δmax = 10.47 cm
-12 Δapprox = C Δmax = 1.13 (10.47) = 11.8 cm
-18
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
TIME [s]
D [cm]
18
Inelastic
T = 1.15s, ξ0=5%, μ=4
12 Δi = 11.4 cm
6
0
-6
-12
-18
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
TIME [s]
Δi
=
Δe
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
The ratio of the maximum displacement demand of an inelastic

system to the maximum displacement demand of an elastic system
with the same period of vibration and same damping ratio as the
inelastic system is defined as INELASTIC DISPLACEMENT RATIO.
Δi
C=
Δe
31
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
There are two kinds of inelastic displacement ratios one can compute:
1. For systems undergoing a pre-determined (i.e., target)

displacement ductility ratio.
Δ i Δ ( μ = μt )
Cμ = =
Δe Δ ( μ = 1)
2. For systems having certain lateral strength or certain relative

strength (i.e., for a given value of R). m Sa
R=
Fy
Δ i Δ ( R = Rt )
CR = =
Δe Δ ( R = 1)
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Similarly to Rμ factors, the computation of Cμ factors require iteration

and therefore their computation is time consuming. Iteration is done by
modifying either the lateral strength of the system or the yield
displacement of the system.
Δ Δ( μ = μt )
Cμ = i =
Δe Δ ( μ = 1)
In contrast, CR does not require iteration since only a single nonlinear

response history analysis is needed.
Δ i Δ( R = Rt )
CR = =
Δe Δ ( R = 1)
32
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
There are several investigations that have studied inelastic displacement ratios
computed from recorded ground motions and produced statistical studies (e.g.,
mean or expected values). One example:
Δ inelastic
Mean constant ductility inelastic displacement ratios: C μ =
Δ elastic
Cμ
4.0
μ = 6.0
3.5 μ = 5.0
μ = 4.0
3.0 μ = 3.0
μ = 2.0
2.5 μ = 1.5
μ = 1.0
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
(m ean of 264 ground m otions )
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
If an approximate INELASTIC DISPLACEMENT RATIO is known,

then the inelastic displacement demand can be determined as:
Δi = C ⋅ Δe = C ⋅ Sd
33
APPROXIMATE
APPROXIMATE INELASTIC
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Newmark and Hall (1982)
APPROXIMATE
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Newmark and Hall (1982)
34
APPROXIMATE
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Miranda (2000)
APPROXIMATE
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Miranda (2000)
Cμ Cμ
4.0 4.0
μ = 6.0 μ = 6.0
3.5 μ = 5.0 3.5 μ = 5.0
μ = 4.0 μ = 4.0
3.0 μ = 3.0 3.0 μ = 3.0
μ = 2.0 μ = 2.0
2.5 2.5
μ = 1.5 μ = 1.5
2.0 μ = 1.0 2.0 μ = 1.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
MEAN FOR SITE CLA SSES A , B, C, D PROPOSED EQUA TION
0.0 0.0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
PERIOD [s] PERIOD [s]
35
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
There are a few investigations that have studied constant relative strength
inelastic displacement ratios computed from recorded ground motions and
produced statistical studies (e.g., mean or expected values). One example:
Mean constant relative strength inelastic displacement ratios:

CR
4.0
R= 6.0
R= 5.0
3.0 R= 4.0
R= 3.0
R= 2.0
2.0 R= 1.5
R= 1.0
1.0
MEAN 264 ground motions

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Comparison of Cμ and CR
Constant ductility CR
Constant relative strength
Cμ
4.0 4.0
μ = 1.0
3.5 R = 6.0
μ = 1.5
R = 5.0
μ = 2.0
3.0 3.0 R = 4.0
μ = 3.0
2.5 μ = 4.0 R = 3.0
μ = 5.0 R = 2.0
2.0 μ = 6.0 2.0 R = 1.5
R = 1.0
1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 MEAN (264 ground motions) MEAN 264 ground motions
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
PERIOD [s]
36
APPROXIMATE
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Approximate CR (Ruiz-Garcia and Miranda 2002)
⎡ 1 1 ⎤
CR = 1 + ⎢ − ⎥( R − 1)
⎣ a (T/Ts )
b
c ⎦
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
Approximate CR - Proposed C1 in FEMA 440 ( ATC-55 Project )
⎡ 1 ⎤
C1 = 1 + ⎢ 2⎥
( R − 1)
⎣ aT ⎦
where
a = 130 for site class B
a = 90 for site class C
a = 60 for site class D
37
INELASTIC
DISPLACEMENT RATIOS
RATIOS
A thorough discussion of approximate inelastic displacement ratios to be

used in design is beyond the scope of this course. Interested students are
referred to the following references for more information:
For constant ductility inelastic displacement ratios:

Miranda, E. and Ruiz-Garcia, J., “Evaluation of approximate methods to
estimate maximum inelastic displacement demands,” Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 31, No.2, 2001, pp. 539-560.
For constant relative strength inelastic displacement ratios:

Akkar, S. and Miranda, E. “Statistical Evaluation of Approximate Methods
for Estimating Maximum Deformation Demands on Existing Structures,” J.
Struct. Eng., 131(1), January 2005, pp. 160-172.
38

Lecture 8 - Nonlinear Spectra

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture 8 - Nonlinear Spectra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Dynamics

Prof. Eduardo Miranda

Nov. 20th – Dec. 16th, 2006

8. Nonlinear Spectra, Strength Reduction Factors

Structural Dynamics 2 © Eduardo Miranda

1. To discuss effects of yielding displacement and/or lateral strength

2. To present the concept of nonlinear response spectrum.

3. Illustrate how to compute nonlinear response spectra.

4. Illustrate how to compute strength reduction factors and

Structural Dynamics 3 © Eduardo Miranda

Structural Dynamics 4 © Eduardo Miranda

Determine the peak lateral strength demand of a SDOF system with

Sa [g] NS Comp of El Centro record

Structural Dynamics PERIOD [s] © Eduardo Miranda

The peak lateral strength demand is then given by:

Structural Dynamics 6 © Eduardo Miranda

Hence, this lateral strength represents a boundary between elastic and

Structural Dynamics 7 © Eduardo Miranda

The elastic strength demand Fe is defined as the minimum lateral

Structural Dynamics 8 © Eduardo Miranda

If the system has Cy ≥ Sa/g , then the response will be ELASTIC.

Structural Dynamics 9 © Eduardo Miranda

Structural Dynamics 10 © Eduardo Miranda

Sa [g] A brahamson & Silva (1997) M=6.5

In general, for a given period of vibration a decrease in lateral

Example of relationship between lateral strength and displacement

Structural Dynamics 13 © Eduardo Miranda

Example of relationship between lateral strength coefficient (seismic

Structural Dynamics 14 © Eduardo Miranda

Structural Dynamics 15 © Eduardo Miranda

In earthquake resistant design, one is interested in controlling plastic

Structural Dynamics 16 © Eduardo Miranda

Other nomenclature used:

Structural Dynamics 17 © Eduardo Miranda

To answer this question one is interested in computing the

Structural Dynamics 18 © Eduardo Miranda

1. Give a certain lateral strength to the SDOF system

2. Perform a nonlinear response history analysis (RHA) to determine the

3. Compare the computed ductility to the maximum tolerable

4. If the computed ductility is not equal to the maximum tolerable

Structural Dynamics 19 © Eduardo Miranda

Structural Dynamics 20 © Eduardo Miranda

Structural Dynamics 21 © Eduardo Miranda

The minimum lateral strength required to limit the maximum displacement

Structural Dynamics 22 © Eduardo Miranda

Example of inelastic strength demand:

Structural Dynamics 24 © Eduardo Miranda

For earthquake resistant design purposes only the largest of these

Structural Dynamics 25 © Eduardo Miranda

Example of multiple strengths corresponding to the same ductility.

Cy El Centro NS, 1940

Structural Dynamics 28 © Eduardo Miranda

Cy El Centro NS, 1940

Structural Dynamics 29 © Eduardo Miranda

Cy El Centro NS, 1940

Structural Dynamics 30 © Eduardo Miranda

Repeating for Tn = 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, … 3.0.

Cy El Centro NS, 1940

Structural Dynamics 31 © Eduardo Miranda

Inelastic spectra, by definition, are smaller than their elastic counterpart.

Cy El Centro NS, 1940

Structural Dynamics 32 © Eduardo Miranda

Again Fy represents the minimum lateral strength that need to be provided

Structural Dynamics 33 © Eduardo Miranda