31 Kurauchi

14th U.S.
-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices
Nobuyuki KURAUCHI AZUSA SEKKEI Co.,Ltd. Osaka , Japan
Why was needed the seismic retrofit ?

Improvement of the seismic retrofit of this building was needed, the controller escaped by intense fear in the Great East Japan Earthquake.
The important facility as the main gate of Japan.

Preparation for Tokyo metropolitan earthquake
which may happen from now on.
14th U.S.-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices December, 2012
Why adopted the damping structure?

The reinforcement work must be done while the building is being used.
No change was allowed concerning
the main electric cables and building equipment.

The cost of the seismic retrofit must be kept in
the limited budget.
Existing Building Outline-1
Airport Administration Building

6
Connecting bridge Control Tower
SITE
Existing Building Outline-2

Location : Chiba , Japan Building area : 241.43 Total floor area : 1778.26 Standard floor area : 169.74(13.16 sq. meters) Number of floors : L21
Structure : S , partly SRC or RC Foundation : pile
Y3
13.16m 4.16 4.84 4.16
Y4
13.16m 6.58 6.58
87.3m
Height of building : 87.3
Y2
Y1
X1
X2
X3
SRC,RC
December, 2012
14th U.S.-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices
Structural Planning-Structural design of Existing Building

Frame Form Main Frame : S , Moment Frame with braces (L2~ ) SRC , Box-frame construction(L1) : Column section is a shape of 550mm-box and a shape of 450mm-diameter-pipe. Maximum depth of H-Beam is 700mm. Maximum depth of H-Brace is 400mm. Thickness of bearing wall is 900mm. Foundation : Mat slab form(Thickness is 5m) Cast-in-place concrete pile(Diameter is 1.5m) Material Strength : Tensile strength of Steel is 490N/mm2 . Compressive strength of concrete is 21N/mm2. Tuned liquid damper(TLD)is installed on the L15
Situation of installed TLD (L15)

Structural Planning-Application design of viscous dampers

Y4 Y3
Y2 Y1
X1
X2
X3
Y Fig. Beam plan X

:Viscous Damper :Brace :Reinforcement Beam
Y1,4
Y2,3
X2
Fig. Section plan for disposition of viscous dampers

Structural Planning-type-1 of viscous dampers
For example
[leaned arrangement type(Y2 L2-3)]
Structural Planning-type-2 of viscous dampers
For example of installing out-frame

[Amplification mechanism type(X2 L9-11)]
Dynamic characteristics of existing building

VFR Room
Fig. Free vibration of horizontal motion Table. 1st natural period and damping coefficient
Damping Natural period(s) coefficient(%)
Fig. Seismographs arrangement Before installing TLD
1st(1992) 2nd(1992) 3rd(1993)
After installing TLD
4th(1994) 5th(1998) 6th(2004)
Structural Design Criteria1000

cm 00 10
2
Selection of Input Earthquake Motion

Level-2 KOBE Phase(Foundation position)
500
10 0c m
Acceleration(cm/s )
10 00 0g al
Velocity Response Spectra(cm/s
Maximum-387.82(cm/s2)
Level-2 KOBE Phase(Foundation position) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
100
Level-2(three kinds of phase)

al
-500
10
g 00
10
Acceleration(cm/s )
l ga 0 50
Level-1(three kinds of phase)

10 . 0c m
500
Level-2 HACHINOHE Phase(Foundation position)
Maximum-316.58(cm/s2)
1. m 0c
l ga 0 10
10 g
0.
1 0.
al
1g al
1 0.1
05 cm
Level-2 HACHINOHE Phase(Foundation position) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
cm
-500
Period(s)
10
(h=5%)
Second(s)
Structural Design CriteriaStructural design criteria of seismic retrofit building

Table. Structural Design Criteria of seismic retrofit building
* The top of building partly cannot meet the design criteria of Inter-story drift angle. Therefore, total inter-story drift is divided into bending deformation and shear deformation and, paying attention to shear deformation, breakage and fall of the exterior are checked
A D C b D
s
C
A B
Total inter-story drift ;
rotational moment of floor horizontal displacement of floor Bending deformation ; b shear deformation ; s
Figure . Outline of Inter-Story Drift Angle

Structural Modeling and Analysis Method(1)

1) Boundary condition: bottom of column installed on the L1 is Pin support 2) Node has six degrees of freedom, while node installed on the slab has three degrees of freedom 3) restoring force characteristics of structural element Beam bending: end of member has rotational spring (Fig. a) Restoring force characteristics is Bi-linear Type Shear : center of member has shear spring (Fig. b) Restoring force characteristics is Bi-linear Type Brace : Axial direction spring (Fig c) Restoring force characteristics is Bi-linear Type Column, wall : fiber (MS) model (Fig. d)
Fig a. Beam bending model
Fig b. Beam shear model Fig c. Axial direction spring Fig d. Fiber model Fig. Analysis model
December, 2012
14th U.S.-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices
Structural Modeling and Analysis Method(2)

Viscous damper : Maxwell Model.(Fig e) )Type-1 (Leaned Arrangement Type) Damping coefficient ; C1 , C2 =750, 14.4[kNsec/cm] Stiffness coefficient ; K=5800[kN /cm], constant value )Type-2 (Amplification Mechanism Type) Damping coefficient ; C1 , C2 =120, 4.0[kNsec/cm] Stiffness coefficient ; K=2352[kN /cm], constant value Axial stiffness of brace is slip model in consideration of a displacement loss
2000kN Viscous damperLeaned arrangement type 2500 1000 Maximum force Damping forcekN 800 600 400 200 0 5 10 15 20 Velocitycm/s 25 30 0 Maximum force 800kN Viscous damper(Amplication mechanism type)
Damping forcekN)
2000 1500 1000 500 0
C2
Product Error : 10%
C2
Product Error : 10%
Inter Node Fig e. Maxwell Model
C1
0
C1
20 40 Velocitycm/s 60 80
4) Damping; Structural Damping is type of internal viscous damping of initial stiffness coefficient and first mode damping ration(=h1) is =0.01. 5) Stiffness;
Fig . Nonlinear curve (type-1)
Fig . Nonlinear curve (type-2)
Shear deformation for junction of the intersection portions of column and beam must be taken into consideration. The rigidity of beam bending must be increased by slab. ( =1.3:single-sided slab, =1.5:both-sides slab)
Analysis ResultComparison Comparison of of Maximum Maximum Response Response based based on on damper damper disposition disposition
Y1,4 Y2,3 Y1,4 Y2,3 Y1,4 Y2,3
Maximum inter-story drift angle 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 Case-1 4 3 Case-2 2 Case-3 1 0 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 Inter-story drift angle(rad)
[CASE-2] [CASE-3] [CASE-1] Fig. Damper disposition proposal of X-direction X2 X1 X3 X2 X1 X3
Floor
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Maximum inter-story drift angle
Fig. damper disposition
Floor
Table . 1st Natural period(s)

Exsiting Case-1 Case-2 Case-3 Model 1.31 1.41 1.31 X-direction 1.31 1.30 1.30 1.30 Y-direction
Case-1 Case-2 0.005 0.010 0.015 Inter-story drift angle(rad)
[CASE-1] [CASE-2] Fig. Damper disposition proposal of Y-direction
0.000
Analysis Result-Effect of viscous dampers(1)

Maximum inter-story drift angle 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 Maximum story share force Existing model Retrofit model
Average; about 38%

Floor
Average; about 35%
Existing model Retrofit model
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Inter-story drift anglerad
Maximum acceleration response 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 Average; about 25% 9 8 7 6 5 4 Existing model 3 2 Retrofit model 1 0 0 1000 2000 3000 Acceleration responsecm/s2
Floor
10000 20000 30000 story share forcekN
Fig. Maximum Response of X-direction

Floor

Maximum inter-story drift angle 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 Average; about 9% 8 7 6 5 4 Existing model 3 Retrofit model 2 1 0 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Inter-story drift anglerad
Maximum story share force 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0
Maximum acceleration response 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Floor
Floor
Floor
Average; about 7%
Average; about 7%
Existing model Retrofit model 0 1000 2000 3000 Acceleration responsecm/s2
10000 20000 30000 story share forcekN
Fig. Maximum Response of Y-direction


X-Direction 2000.00 1500.00 1000.00 500.00 0.00 -500.00 -1000.00 -1500.00 -2000.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00
X-Direction 500.00
floor acceleration response(cm/s2)
floor acceleration response(cm/s2)
0.00
The highest response; about 18%

40.00 Second(s) 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
-500.00 60.00 70.00 Second(s) 80.00
Fig. Time History of Response acceleration (X-direction / L20)

Y-Direction 2000.00 1000.00 500.00 0.00 -500.00 -1000.00 -1500.00 -2000.00 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 Second(s) 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Y-Direction 500.00 floor acceleration response(cm/s2)

1500.00 floor acceleration response(cm/s2)
Existing model Retrofit model 0.00
The highest response; about 5.5%
-500.00 60.00 70.00 Second(s) 80.00
Fig. Time History of Response acceleration (Y-direction / L20)

Conclusions
Earthquake-proof performance was improved with the proposed seismic retrofit using viscous dampers, in compliance with structural design criteria.
After this reinforcement work ended, we are scheduled to experiment on dynamic characteristics based on microtremor measure and free vibration test.

31 Kurauchi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

31 Kurauchi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

14th U.S.

-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices

Nobuyuki KURAUCHI AZUSA SEKKEI Co.,Ltd. Osaka , Japan

Why was needed the seismic retrofit ?

The important facility as the main gate of Japan.

which may happen from now on.

Why adopted the damping structure?

the main electric cables and building equipment.

the limited budget.

Existing Building Outline-1

Airport Administration Building

Connecting bridge Control Tower

Existing Building Outline-2

Structure : S , partly SRC or RC Foundation : pile

13.16m 4.16 4.84 4.16

13.16m 6.58 6.58

Height of building : 87.3

14th U.S.-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices

Structural Planning-Structural design of Existing Building

Situation of installed TLD (L15)

Structural Planning-Application design of viscous dampers

Y Fig. Beam plan X

Fig. Section plan for disposition of viscous dampers

Structural Planning-type-1 of viscous dampers

Structural Planning-type-2 of viscous dampers

For example of installing out-frame

Dynamic characteristics of existing building

Fig. Seismographs arrangement Before installing TLD

1st(1992) 2nd(1992) 3rd(1993)

After installing TLD

4th(1994) 5th(1998) 6th(2004)

Structural Design Criteria1000

Selection of Input Earthquake Motion

Velocity Response Spectra(cm/s

Level-2(three kinds of phase)

Level-1(three kinds of phase)

Level-2 HACHINOHE Phase(Foundation position)

Level-2 HACHINOHE Phase(Foundation position) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Structural Design CriteriaStructural design criteria of seismic retrofit building

Total inter-story drift ;

Figure . Outline of Inter-Story Drift Angle

Structural Modeling and Analysis Method(1)

Fig a. Beam bending model

14th U.S.-Japan Workshop on Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices

Structural Modeling and Analysis Method(2)

2000 1500 1000 500 0

Product Error : 10%

Product Error : 10%

Inter Node Fig e. Maxwell Model

Fig . Nonlinear curve (type-1)

Fig . Nonlinear curve (type-2)

[CASE-2] [CASE-3] [CASE-1] Fig. Damper disposition proposal of X-direction X2 X1 X3 X2 X1 X3

Maximum inter-story drift angle

Fig. damper disposition

Table . 1st Natural period(s)

Case-1 Case-2 0.005 0.010 0.015 Inter-story drift angle(rad)

[CASE-1] [CASE-2] Fig. Damper disposition proposal of Y-direction

Analysis Result-Effect of viscous dampers(1)

Average; about 38%

Average; about 35%

Existing model Retrofit model

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Inter-story drift anglerad