Sect 7 LinearRespSpec 09-1
Sect 7 LinearRespSpec 09-1
Uses
Envelop of a computed peak
dynamic response parameter for
Characterize ground motions and
assess demands on various types of
single degree of freedom elastic
simple structures.
systems having a range of
periods, for a given ground motion Basis for computing design
displacements and forces in SDOF
and viscous damping ratio
SD= umax
=2%
=5%
=7%
Period, sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-1
Period, sec.
2.5
Median
Median + 1
2
Acceleration,
SA
Spectral
Topics
Developing design spectra from site
specific ground motion time histories
Selection of damping values
Plotting formats
Analytic relations for developing
Elastic Design Response Spectrum
Deterministic
1.5
0.5
Sa
0
0
0.5
1.5
Period,
2.5
sec.
5% in 50 yrs.
Period
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-2
median + 1
median
Period, sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-3
median + 1
median
Period, sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-4
Viscous Damping
Viscous damping is a convenient
analytical concept to account for
general energy dissipation in a system
and analytical uncertainties.
Friction between and with structural
and non-structural elements.
Localized yielding due to stress
concentrations and residual stresses
under low loading and gross yielding
under higher loads.
Energy radiation through foundation.
Aeroelastic damping.
Viscous damping.
Analytical modeling errors.
Material
Amplitude (stress)
Type of nonstructural elements
Type of foundations and supporting
soils
Frequency
Type of connections
Complexity of model (different parts of
structure will be responding differently)
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-5
From: Hashimoto et al
Data for Welded Steel Moment
Frames, From Hashimoto et al, 1992
30
20
10
?
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
References
NRC, "Regulatory Guide 1.61,
Damping Values for Seismic
Design of Nuclear Power Plants,"
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.,
Oct. 1973.
Coats,D., "Damping in Building
structures During Earthquakes,
Test Data and Modeling,"
NUREG/CR-3006, Jan. 1989.
Hashimoto, P. et al, "Review of
Regulatory Guide 1.61 Structure
Damping Values for Elastic
Seismic Analysis of Nuclear
Power Plants," Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 1992
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-6
Structure Type
Welded Steel
Bolted Steel
Prestressed
Concrete
Reinforced
Concrete
Coats
2
4
2
2 to 3
5 to 7
2 to 3
3.5
4.5
TBD
2 to 5*
Coats
Hashimoto
4
7
5
5 to 7
10 to 15
5 to 7
4**
6
TBD
7 to 10
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-7
SV
Period, sec.
SA
Log SV
Log SA
0.03 0.13
SV = SD
Recall: Only
SD vs T
plotted here
SA = SV = 2SD
SD= umax
Period, sec.
T=0.2 0.5
2.0
SA = 2 S D
SE =
Period, sec.
Log T
SA-SD Format
SA
SE
Building
Period, T
4.0 sec.
mSV2/2
6.0
Period, sec.
SD
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-8
Log SV
100 in/sec
Log SA
10g
1g
0.1g
0.01g
Log T
Log SV
Log SV
Line of Constant
Spectral Acceleration
100 in
10 in
10 in/sec
Line of Constant
Spectral
Displacement
1 in
Line of constant
Spectral Velocity
1 in/sec
Log SD
0.1 in
0.01 in
0.1 in/sec
Log T
0.01sec 0.1sec
1sec
Log T
10sec
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7-9
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 10
SA-SD Format
An alternative form of plotting
spectra has been introduced
recently and has started to appear
in building codes.
Intent is to plot information on
acceleration (force) and displacement on same graph with out
complexity of tripartite paper
Based on: SA = 2SD 2 = SA/ SD
Used to interpret nonlinear
response in conjunction with
Capacity Spectrum and Yield
Point Spectrum Methods -Discussed later
SA
Line of constant T2
SD
T=0.2
SA
0.5
2.0
Building
Period, T
4.0 sec.
6.0
SD
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 11
Deterministic Approaches
Statistical attenuation relations for a given
magnitude, distance, soil condition, fault type, etc.
Simplified empirical methods by Newmark and
others for a given peak ground acceleration
Spectra based on Probabilistic Hazard Analysis
Uniform hazard methods (focus on USGS data)
NEHRP Tentative Provisions for Seismic
Regulations for New Buildings
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 12
Median
Median + 1
Spectral
Acceleration,
1.5
0.5
0
0
0.5
1.5
Period,
2.5
sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 13
Many Investigators
Western US
References:
Interactive Tool on OpenSHA
Abrahamson &Silva
Boore, Joyner &Fumal
Campbell
Sadigh
Spudich
Subduction Zones
Anderson
Atkinson & Boore
Youngs
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 14
+ b r +cS
Simple form, but imprecise
definition of soil conditions
and small number of ground
motions considered.
Period extend to 4 seconds.
Damping = 5% only
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 15
Campbell and
Bozorgnia, 2006
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 16
Median
Median + 1
1.5
1.8
1.6
0.5
0
0
0.5
1.5
Period,
2
sec.
2.5
Acceleration,
1.4
Spectral
Spectral
Acceleration,
Soil
Rock
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
Period,
2.5
sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 17
r=1 km
M = 6.8
3 km
10 km
20 km
40 km
0.8
0.6
0.4
1.4
0
0.3
0.8
1.3
Period,
1.8
2.3
sec.
2.8
3.3
Acceleration,
0.2
-0.2
M = 7.8
M = 6.8
M = 5.8
1.2
Spectral
Spectral
Acceleration,
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
r = 3 km
0
0
0.5
1.5
Period,
2.5
sec.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 18
Sadigh
Abrahamson and Silva
Campbell
Spectral
Acceleration,
1.2
Spudich
Joyner & Boore
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5 sec.
Period,
2.5
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 19
Directivity Effects
The fault normal component of motion
generally is substantially worse than
the fault parallel component. This is
primarily true for T >1 sec.
This depends on the direction of fault
rupture relative to the site. If the fault
ruptures toward a building site, the
effect is worse.
See:
Section 5.4.5.3 in Ch. 5 Bozorgnia
and Bertero Text;
Somerville papers on Class
Reference List
May result in need for increased design
forces / displacements for long period
structures close to faults (in one direction)
Hypocenter
Site
Propagation
SANormal/SAave
2
1
0
45
90
SA
T, sec.
Fault Normal
Median
Fault Parallel
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 20
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 21
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 22
Need to know ag
max
dg
plus a, v and d
Get ag
max
max,
, vg
max
and
Structural Response
Amplification factors
from deterministic or
Get vg
max
and dg
max,
from:
max
Estimating dg
is problematic,
max
but not generally important unless
T is > 4 sec.
Damping
%
1
2
5
10
20
Median Structural
Response
Amplification
Factors
!d
!v
!a
1.82
1.63
1.39
1.2
1.01
2.31
2.03
1.65
1.37
1.08
3.21
2.74
2.12
1.64
1.17
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 23
Damping
1
2
5
10
20
Median Structural
Response
Amplification
Factors
"d
"v
"a
"d
"v
"a
1.82
1.63
1.39
1.20
1.01
2.31
2.03
1.65
1.37
1.08
3.21
2.74
2.12
1.64
1.17
2.73
2.42
2.01
1.69
1.38
3.38
2.92
2.30
1.84
1.37
4.38
3.66
2.71
1.99
1.26
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 24
Note:
SV = SA / [SA=2Sv/T]
(constant SV proportional
to 1/T on conventional SA
versus T plot)
SD = SA / 2 [SD=4 2SA/T2]
(constant SD proportional
to 1/T 2 on conventional SA
versus T plot)
SA
max
SA=PGA
max
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 25
Log SV
100 in/sec
10g
10 in
1g
0.1g
1 in/sec
0.1 in/sec
0.01 in
1 in/sec
1 in
0.1 in/sec
0.1 in
1sec
SD
SDT
SD =constant
= SA(T/2)2
10 in/sec
Not to scale
0.01sec 0.1sec
Log SV
SV = constant = SAT/2
10sec
Log T
SD =constant
SA=const.
SA=PGA
0.01sec 0.1sec
SA
1sec
SA=const.
SD=dg
10sec
Log T
SA1/T
SA1/T2
SDT2
SA=PGA
SD=dg
T
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 26
Log SV
Log SA
ag = constant
LogSD
Log SA
SA= a ag
ag = constant
LogSD
SV=v vg
vg = constant
vg = constant
dg = constant
dg = constant
0.03 0.13
Log T
Log T
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 27
Log SV
LogSD
Log SV
Log SA
E
A
0.03 0.13
ag = constant
LogSD
SV=v vg
SA
Log T
C
vg = constant
SD = d dg
dg = constant
0.03 0.13
D
A
Log T
E
T
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 28
Newmarks estimates,
get ground skeleton curve:
vg = 24 in/sec
dg =18 in
Damping
Get
Amplified Structural
Response Values (here for +1)
1
2
5
10
20
Median Structural
Response
Amplification
Factors
"d
"v
"a
"d
"v
"a
1.82
1.63
1.39
1.20
1.01
2.31
2.03
1.65
1.37
1.08
3.21
2.74
2.12
1.64
1.17
2.73
2.42
2.01
1.69
1.38
3.38
2.92
2.30
1.84
1.37
4.38
3.66
2.71
1.99
1.26
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 29
Log Sv
Using
Newmarks estimates,
get ground skeleton curve:
55.2 in/sec
vg = 24 in/sec
dg =18 in
LogSd
36.2 in.
1.36g
0.5g
Amplified Structural
Response Values (here for +1)
D
C
Get
Log Sa
0.03 0.13
Sa
1.36g
0.5g
Log T
Sv
= Sa Tc/2
max
max
A Sa1/T
0.03 0.13
Sv = 2SdT-1
TD= 4.11 sec.
Sa1/T2
T
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 30
Aside
Current IBC & NEHRP provisions very
similar to Newmarks approach
Short period range straight line to:
To = 0.2Sa / Sa
1
0.2
0.2
Sa
1.0
Sa
1/T2
0.2
Sa varies with
for periods
greater than 4 seconds (or
tabulated value of TL)
Sa = Sa1/T
To 0.2 Tc 1.0
Sa
1.36g
0.2
Tc = Sa /Sa
0.5g
0.2
Sa
Tc=Sa1/Sa0.2
To=0.2Sa1/Sa0.2
0.5g
Sa= 4Sa1/T2
T
Sv
= Sa Tc/2
max
max
55.2
in/sec
=1.36gT/2
C
TC=0.66sec.
Sv = 2SdT-1
TD= 4.11 sec.
A Sa1/T
0.03 0.13
Sa1/T2
T
Sa
U.C. Berkeley
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 31
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 32
Log Sv
Log Sa
LogSd
C
Firm
A
0.03 0.13
AD/V
6
5.2-5.3
4.2-5.3
3.8-5.1
3.5-3.9
Sa
Soft
Log T
Alluvium
D
Rock
Firm
T
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 33
max
Sv = 2SDT -1
= S D = SV
/T
max
T/2
using
T =2 [M / K] 1/2
Change
0.5M
1.5M
0.5K
1.5K
0.5M 0.5K
!
0.71
1.22
1.41
0.82
1.0
Vb a s e
0.71
1.22
0.71
1.22
0.5
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 34
2% in 50 yr.
Uniform Hazard
Spectrum
SA / g
SAS
SA = SA1/T
SA1
PGA/g
Period, sec.
0.2
To
Ts
T1
To = 0.2SA1/SAS
TS = SA1/SAS
Sa=4S A1/T2 for T > 4 sec
3g!
CEE 227 - Earthquake Engineering
U.C. Berkeley
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 35
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 36
based on
probabilistic estimates by
USGS (for 2% in 50 years)
Smaller of deterministic or
probabilistic estimates
1.5 times median deterministic
values for a characteristic event
for a know fault
1994 UBC values (depends on
version of NEHRP/FEMA
documents)
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 37
SA
Soft
D
Firm
0.2
1.0
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 38
NEHRP Spectrum
Basic form looks like typical
code, Newmark and Hall or
uniform hazard spectrum.
Corner points:
To = 0.2SD1/SDS
TS = SD1/SDS
Spectral Response
Acceleration / g
SDS
Sa =SD1/T
SD1
0.4SDS
D
Use:
expressed as a fraction
of g, not in/sec2 !
V = Cs W
Cs=SDS/(R / I) < SD1/(T R / I)
Value
Depends
on Code
Used!
Minimum
Force
Minimum Force
permitted for safety,
Uncertainty related
to P- effects,
and near-fault
directivity effects
Period, sec.
0.2
To
Ts
T1
TL
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 39
Damping
1
2
5
10
20
Median Structural
Response
Amplification
Factors
"d
"v
"a
"d
"v
"a
1.82
1.63
1.39
1.20
1.01
2.31
2.03
1.65
1.37
1.08
3.21
2.74
2.12
1.64
1.17
2.73
2.42
2.01
1.69
1.38
3.38
2.92
2.30
1.84
1.37
4.38
3.66
2.71
1.99
1.26
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 40
Period
[d(5%)/d(x%)]
[v(5%)/v(x%)]
[a(5%)/a(x%)]
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 41
(FEMA
356)
!2
0.8
Newmark
(constant
acceleration
range)
0.77
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10
1.3
1.29
1.2
1.20
Bs
(FEMA
356)
0.8
Newmark
(constant
velocity
range)
0.81
B1
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 42
Summary
A variety of methods exist for estimating the elastic response
of systems responding in the elastic range.
deterministic methods
probabilistic methods
Elastic spectra applicable to performance levels for which the
structure is to remain elastic.
Clear that for large earthquakes, such as anticipated in
seismically active regions of CA, these elastic spectra result in
very large design forces if the structure must remain elastic.
Next: Use of nonlinear response to improve response and
lower design forces.
Spring 2009
UC Regents
7 - 43