SEISMIC EVALUATION AND PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENT OF

INDUSTRIAL STORAGE RACKS

by
YUAN GAO

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

For the degree of Master of Science

Thesis Adviser: Prof. Michael Pollino

Civil Engineering Department

Case Western Reserve University
January, 2013

CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

We hereby approve the thesis/dissertation of

Yuan Gao
candidate for the

Master of Science

degree*.

Prof. Michael Pollino

(chair of the committee)
Prof. Arthur Huckelbridge

Prof. Dario Gaspaini

December 3rd, 2012

*We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any
proprietary material contained therein.

Table of Content
1. Introduction and purpose of study 1
2. Background2
2.1 Existing guidelines for seismic design of steel storage rack .. 2
2.2 Ground motions used in the project ... 5
2.3 Recent study on merchandise behavior . 6
2.4 Recent studies on elastomer damper and the damped structures under
earthquakes .7
3. Investigation of merchandise flexibility on storage rack seismic response...10
3.1 General ....10
3.2 Linear viscous modeling .10
3.2.1

Rack/merchandise transient analysis model ... 11

3.2.2

Results and discussion 12

3.3 Linear viscous with sliding model .. 12

3.3.1

Linear viscous with sliding model .. 12

3.3.2

Results and discussion 14

3.4 Failure conditions discussion ..14

4. Damper design .. 29
4.1 General 29
4.2 Elastomeric damper behavior . 29
4.3 Damper implementation to rack...31
4.4 Damper design procedure ....31
4.4.1

Simplified iterative design procedure . 32

Page | i

4.4.2

Time history analysis 34

4.5 Results and discussion . 35

5. Impact of merchandise mass configuration on seismic response of damped
racks 45
5.1 General...... 45
5.3 Parameters and analysis input .. 45
5.3 Results... 47
5.3.1

Results with 5 kip merchandise .. 47

5.3.2

Results with 3 kip merchandise .. 48

5.3.3

Results with 1 kip merchandise .. 48

6. Conclusions and future research . 77

Page | ii

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio Strain Dependence..9
Figure 3.1 4-Shelf Heavy-duty Retail Rack..18
Figure 3.2 Analytical Model for Linear-viscous Merchandise Behavior..19
Figure 3.3 Spectral Acceleration for DBE Motions..19
Figure 3.4 Spectral Acceleration for MCE Motions.20
Figure 3.5 Response for Linear-viscous Merchandise..21
Figure 3.6 Analytical Model for Behavior of Linear-viscous with Sliding..22
Figure 3.7 Fundamental of Linear-viscous with Sliding Merchandise.22
Figure 3.8 Response for Sliding Merchandise..23
Figure 3.9 Merchandise Deformation for Linear-viscous with Sliding24
Figure 3.10 Failure Conditions..25
Figure 3.11 Merchandise Deformation for Linear-viscous with Sliding under DBE
Motions...26
Figure 3.12 Merchandise Deformation for Linear-viscous with Sliding under MCE
Motions...27
Figure 4.1 Sketch of Proposed Elastomeric Damper.37
Figure 4.2 Force-deformation curve for Elastomeric Damper...38
Figure 4.3 Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio Strain Dependence..39
Figure 4.4 Sketch of Rack with Damper39
Figure 4.5 Response of Baseline Rack..40
Figure 4.6 Response of Damped Rack41
Figure 4.7 Normalized Impulse...42

Page | iii

Figure 5.1 Mass Configuration Conditions50

Figure 5.2 Flowchart for ANSYS Program Input File...51
Figure 5.3 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 5 kip Merchandise54
Figure 5.4 Median Value for Fourier Transform of DBE Motions54
Figure 5.5 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 3 kip Merchandise.57
Figure 5.6 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 1 kip Merchandise.59
Figure 5.7 Peak Displacement Comparison for 5 kip Merchandise62
Figure 5.8 Peak Displacement Comparison for 3 kip Merchandise64
Figure 5.9 Peak Displacement Comparison for 1 kip Merchandise67
Figure 5.10 Normalized Impulse for 5 kip Merchandise69
Figure 5.11 Normalized Impulse for 3 kip Merchandise72
Figure 5.12 Normalized Impulse for 1 kip Merchandise74

Page | iv

List of Tables
Table 3.1 Merchandise Properties Considered for Linear-viscous Model..28
Table 3.2 Section Properties for Rack Members.28
Table 4.1 Values of Spectral Damping Coefficient (Adapted from ASCE 7-05)43
Table 4.2 Resulting Damper Properties from Simplified Iterative Design Procedure.43
Table 4.3 Resulting Damper Properties from Time History Analysis.44
Table 5.1 Modal Properties of Baseline Rack..75
Table 5.2 Model Properties of Damped Rack..76

Page | v

Seismic Evaluation and Performance Enhancement

Of Industrial Storage Racks

Abstract
by

YUAN GAO

The use of industrial storage racks in large warehouse stores and the publics direct
access to merchandise on these racks has significantly increased over the last twenty
years. Such racks and their supported merchandise have in some cases performed poorly
in past earthquakes as a result of rack failure or product shedding (palletized merchandise
falling off shelves). While the warehouse buildings themselves may be adequately
designed for seismic effect, the rack performance also significantly impacts the seismic
risk to society both in terms of life-safety and economic losses. The seismic behavior of
industrial storage racks is fundamentally different than typical civil engineering structures
due to the high percentage of mass from the merchandise which is flexible and not fixed
to the structural system, as opposed to buildings for example that have significant dead
load from relatively rigid sources (floor slabs, members, fixed equipment, etc.). This
research first explores the influence of merchandise dynamic characteristics on rack
seismic performance. Behavior of the pallet merchandise varies significantly and is quite
complex therefore bounding parametric analyses are performed for response assessment.
A number of mechanical model increasing in complexity are considered for modeling of

Page | vi

the merchandise which includes linear-viscous, and linear-viscous with sliding. Secondly,
a simple highly compressed elastomeric damper is proposed to enhance the seismic
performance of industrial storage racks by decreasing merchandise damage and
probability of merchandise shedding. Finally, the impact of merchandise mass variability
on the effectiveness of damped rack is evaluated through parametric seismic analyses.

Page | vii

Section 1 Introduction and Purpose of Study

The seismic risk associated with storage rack failure is increasing as publicly
accessible warehouse shopping has grown across North America and Europe. Such stores
often display merchandise directly on pallets on cold-formed steel storage racks. These
steel storage racks effectively make use of the available space by combining storage and
retail space but places customers close to large pallets of merchandise. The risk to public
safety during an earthquake is significant and proper design, installation, and
maintenance is required and should be considered as important as the warehouse building
for evaluation of seismic design. In addition to the racks design, the merchandise
supported on the racks imposes a hazard to safety and can result in significant economic
loss. Significant damage has been reported in past earthquakes since storage rack use has
significantly increased. Investigating the seismic performance of industrial storage racks
requires knowledge of both the rack and merchandise behavior since the merchandise
constitutes nearly all of the rack seismic mass and failure could be a result of
merchandise shedding or failure of the rack itself.
Unlike conventional buildings, rack merchandise configuration is highly variable
and seismic response and design must consider this significant mass variation. This
research first explores the effect of merchandise flexibility on rack seismic response.
Various analytical models are considered to model merchandise dynamic behavior and
assess the impact of merchandise response on rack response and also to provide
quantitative information to assess merchandise shedding. Note that common practice in
rack seismic design is to consider the merchandise mass fixed to the rack with 10%
damping. Then, an elastomer damping system is proposed to improve the rack seismic
Page | 1

performance in the cross-aisle direction since product shedding can only occur in this
direction. The elastomeric dampers are intended to replace the diagonal steel braces in the
cross-aisle direction, reduce rack shelf acceleration and cumulative impulse imparted on
the merchandise without exceeding the racks elastic design strength. Finally, a
parametric analysis study is performed to further investigate the effect of mass variability
on the seismic response of steel storage rack and its impact on design of the added
damping system.

Page | 2

Section 2 Background
Due to the large spread of public warehouse stores, the use of steel storage racks
has become more popular. More rack and merchandise failures have been reported during
earthquakes, which has drawn more attentions from researchers and the rack industry. In
this section, previous work is reviewed to assess the current knowledge on seismic
behavior of steel storage racks and its supported merchandise. The development of the
damping system in partnses guidelines provided in structural building code provisions.
The utilization of elastomeric dampers in place of the diagonal steel brace member has
been considered in previous studies on improvement of seismic behavior of conventional
buildings.
2.1 Existing guidelines for seismic design of steel storage racks
FEMA 460 provides guidance for the seismic design of storage racks in areas
accessible to the public. According to previous damage reports for storage racks, the
failure mode of racks includes the global overturning and down-aisle beam to upright
connection failure. Even in cases where rack damage does not occur, merchandise
shedding could occur. In addition, the friction between the merchandise and the shelves
has a significant influence on the seismic behavior of storage rack. Therefore, a lifesafety design to prevent the collapse or overturn of the rack and the shedding of contents
is required per FEMA 460 for the rack which is higher than 8 feet.
To prevent rack collapse and overturning, FEMA 460 recommends optional
displacement-based and limit state design procedures developed in 2008 NEHRP
Recommended Provisions (NEHRP, 2008) and ASCE 7-05 (ASCE, 2005) for the crossPage | 3

aisle direction. The choice of procedure depends on the level of seismicity. However, the
recommendations do not account for merchandise flexibility or sliding relative to the rack.
FEMA 460 also offers guidelines to prevent, or at least reduce the risk of falling
merchandise during earthquakes. First, for merchandise stored on pallets, wire decking,
spaced wood boards or metal channels with angles or plates, or perforated metal decking
is recommended to prevent the lateral movement of the pallet in earthquakes. Also,
several approaches are recommended to secure individual merchandise to pallets
including stretch-wrapping, shrink-wrapping, banding, and integral box-pallet. For
merchandise not stored on pallets, FEMA 460 provides approaches to protect
merchandise shedding in earthquakes, including restraining bars, restraining chains or
cables, or netting. To further improve merchandise behavior, pallet friction needs to be
tested to determine whether pallets (wood, plastic, or metal) will slide off shelves in
earthquake.
FEMA 460 lists some previous research on seismic behavior of storage racks which
includes both experimental and analytical studies. Experiments are performed on the rack
and merchandise using with shake table testing methods. Two kinds of numerical rack
models are presented in previous analytical research, which include linear and nonlinear
models. By reviewing these past research, FEMA 460 gives future research needs related
to the seismic response of steel storage racks. Experimental and analytical studies are
needed for cross-aisle response since most failures are reported in the cross-aisle
direction. The development analytical models are needed to predict the rack and
merchandise seismic behavior under earthquakes. Experimental test results are needed for
storage racks and merchandise preferably by shake-table testing.
Page | 4

This research focuses on analytical methods for investigating the seismic behavior of
steel storage racks and the merchandise. Finite-element based models are developed to
investigate the merchandise flexibility and quantitatively assess failure. Also, only crossaisle direction behavior is considered in this research.
ASCE 7-05 (ASCE, 2005) specifies the design loads and analysis procedures for
structures including added damping systems for seismic design. The elastomeric damper
developed in this study is based on the response spectrum procedure provided by ASCE
7-05, in which design seismic forces are determined based on rack modal properties and
the site response spectrum. The forces applied to each floor are distributed over the
height of the structure based on dominant mode shape. The proposed elastomeric damper
is designed for each cross-aisle panel to dissipate the rack energy through shear
deformations on the elastomer. The seismic forces are calculated based on an equivalent
linear viscous SDOF representation of the rack.
2.2 Ground motions used in the project
FEMA 355C summarizes steel moment-frame buildings behavior under a range of
different ground motions and was prepared under the SAC Joint Venture following the
1994 Northridge, CA earthquake. The ground motions used in FEMA 355C consists of
both recorded ground motions and synthetically generated records scaled to represent
seismic hazards with return periods of 475 years (10% probability of being exceeded in
50 years), and 2475 years (2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years) for the Los
Angeles, California area. Ten ground motions from each hazard level are utilized in this
study.

Page | 5

2.3 Recent study on merchandise behavior

Sideris (2010) performed pull tests and shake table tests to investigate the seismic
behavior of palletized merchandise stored on steel storage racks. The pull tests aimed to
find the frictional properties of the pallet interface to rack and the relative velocity of the
pallets relative to the rack shelf. The friction force between wooden pallets and rack
shelves with wired decking varied from 37 and 45% of the merchandise weight during
the pull test. A model with a linear spring and a coulomb spring connected in series is
considered to describe the response of a loaded pallet. Sideris also performed a shaking
table test for inclined shelving to investigate its effect to reduce merchandise shedding.
The input motion is varied to simulate the behavior of different rack shelves. Sideriss
study on seismic behavior of palletized merchandise focused more on the friction
between the shelf and the pallet, which is important but not sufficient to describe the
merchandise behavior under earthquakes. In the thesis project, a more complex numerical
model for the merchandise is considered.
2.4 Recent studies on elastomer damper and the damped structures under earthquakes
A summary of current applications in passive energy dissipation systems for seismic
resistance of buildings is presented by Symans (2008). Various passive energy dissipation
systems are considered to reduce seismic damage to the framing system, which includes
viscous fluid damper, viscoelastic solid damper, friction damper and metallic damper.
The mechanical behavior of each type of passive energy dissipation system is discussed
along with the advantages and disadvantages of each device, design philosophy, and
design considerations. The damping system employed in this research is similar to the

Page | 6

viscoelastic solid damper, which generally consists of solid elastomeric pads bonded to
steel plates. The viscoelastic solid damper described in the paper is frequency and
temperature dependent. A general design procedure is recommended for the passive
energy dissipation system based on the 2004 NEHRP Recommended Provisions and
ASCE 7-05.
Lin (2002) presents a displacement-based design procedure for added passive energy
dissipation systems by a rational linear iteration method. By specifying a target
displacement, the nonlinear behavior structure is replaced by a static equivalent linear
system which is composed of an equivalent effective stiffness, and an equivalent
hysteretic damping ratio similar to the ASCE 7-05 procedure. In addition, Lin gives
various effective viscous damping ratio and effective stiffness for different energy
dissipation system: viscous device, friction device, metallic yielding device, and
viscoelastic device.
Burtscher (1998) presents an overview of natural rubber which is frequently used in
seismic isolation of structures because of its high elasticity and high damping. A plot (Fig.
2.1) is shown in the paper to illustrate the effect of shear strain on shear modulus and
damping ratio. The damper philosophy of energy dissipation is explained in the paper. By
targeting a shear strain for the damper, shear modulus and damping ratio could be read
from the plot. These two parameters will be used in the elastomeric damper design.
Although the temperature, strain and cyclic loading would affect the rubber behavior, it
will not be considered in the damper design.

Page | 7

Karavasilis (2011) investigated the hysteretic behavior of compressed elastomer

damper and its application on seismic response improvement of steel moment-resisting
frames (MRF). The elastomer damper is represented by a model with a Bouc-Wen model
and a dashpot connected in parallel, and calibrated using experimental data obtained
under sinusoidal loadings at different amplitudes and frequencies. The high-damping
elastomer material is pre-compressed together into a steel tube, and energy is dissipated
due to the slip of the elastomer relative to the tube. After nonlinear seismic response
analyses under both the design basis earthquake and the maximum considered earthquake,
Karavasilis drew conclusions that elastomer dampers equipped on the steel MRF are
effective on the control of drift and floor acceleration. Also, the compressed elastomer
damper is more effective for lighter weight steel MRFs.

Page | 8

Figure 2.1 Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio Strain Dependence

(Adapted from Burtscher (1998))

Page | 9

Section 3 Investigation of Merchandise Flexibility on

Storage Rack Seismic Response
3.1 General
In previous analysis of the seismic behavior of industrial racks, focus is often
placed on the behavior of the rack itself, and the merchandise behavior grossly
approximated in analysis as described in Section 2. The merchandise behavior is very
complex exhibiting nonlinear force-deformation response with large deformation effects.
The force-deformation behavior is affected by sliding of the pallet relative to the rack
shelf, sliding of the material (item to item), and potentially engagement of shrink wrap (if
present). Explicitly modeling merchandise behavior is included in the analyses of this
section which will allow assessment of merchandise flexibility on rack response and also
allow quantification of merchandise response to predict failure (merchandise shedding).
Two models are considered in this section to describe the merchandise flexibility: (1)
Linear-Viscous model with varying merchandise frequency and (2) Linear-Viscous with
sliding model which includes varying merchandise frequency and sliding (assumed
between the pallet and shelf).
3.2 Linear viscous modeling
The behavior of the merchandise is first considered linear viscous and modeled by
a spring and a dashpot connected in parallel. The damping ratio is assumed to be 10 % to
account for the energy dissipated by the merchandise consistent with past studies. The
frequency of the merchandise is varied from 0.5 Hz to 4 Hz to investigate the trends and
bounds in response due to the variability in actual merchandise behavior. The weight of
Page | 10

the merchandise is assumed to be 5 kip. Only cross-aisle direction response is considered

since merchandise can only shed off the rack in this direction. Based on varied
merchandise frequency and constant weight, the stiffness input into the spring could be
calculated by Eq. 3.1:
(3.1)
The damping coefficient c is calculated with the damping ratio (10%) by:
(3.2)
The tributary mass for each upright column is of the total mass for each shelf (5 kip).
The merchandise properties used in the linear viscous model are provided in Table 3.1.
3.2.1 Rack/Merchandise transient analysis model
The rack considered in the analysis is typical of a 4-shelf, heavy-duty retail rack
with dimensions shown in Fig. 3.1. Rack configuration and sections were obtained from a
large rack manufacturer. The material of the rack is steel. The rack is fabricated with two
cold-formed steel sections in the cross-aisle direction (Section A and Section B). Section
A is used for uprights, and section B is used for cross-aisle beam and bracing. Section
properties are shown in Table 3.2. All rack members are modeled using elastic beam
elements. By modal analysis, the rack described above with fixed merchandise has a first
mode of 3.66 Hz, a second mode of about 10.97 Hz, a third mode of about 16.54 Hz and
a fourth mode of about 25.05 Hz.

Page | 11

The merchandise is modeled using a spring and damper element as seen in Figure
3.2 connecting the tributary merchandise mass to the upright at the down-aisle beam
connection point.
Ten ground motions are applied as uniform nodal horizontal acceleration histories
at the base of the uprights. Fig. 3.3 shows the spectral acceleration of the motions applied.
The average one-second spectral acceleration (SD1) equals 0.69 g, and short period
acceleration (SDS) equals 1 g. These spectral values and ground motions are consistent
with a Los Angeles, CA design basis earthquake on a firm rock site. The ground motions
used in this study were developed as part of the SAC steel Project (FEMA 355C) and
used as design basis earthquake (DBE).
There are another ten ground motions used as maximum considered earthquake
(MCE) from SAC Steel Project (FEMA 355C), which have an average S1 of 1.25 g and
an average SS of 1.75 g. The spectral acceleration of the MCE set of ground motion is
shown in Fig. 3.4.
3.2.2 Results and discussion
The median response value of linear viscous merchandise for ten ground motions
are shown in Fig. 3.5. The peak acceleration for merchandise and shelf is compared in
Fig. 3.5 (a) and (b). The peak relative displacement for merchandise and shelf is
compared in Fig. 3.5 (c) and (d). With a larger frequency, the peak absolute acceleration
is bigger.
3.3 Linear viscous with sliding

Page | 12

3.3.1 Linear viscous with sliding modeling

A more sophisticated approach of modeling merchandise behavior, compared to
the linear-viscous merchandise model, would include sliding between the pallets and rack
shelves. The merchandise is not commonly attached to the rack for operational flexibility,
and thus it can slide relative to the rack. The linear viscous model includes 10 % inherent
damping which in part is intended to account for the energy dissipated through frictional
sliding. Thus, with the sliding explicitly modeled, the inherent merchandise damping will
also need to be decreased. The static and dynamic friction coefficient between the pallet
and the rack is assumed to be 0.25. The same 4-shelf rack described in section 3.2 is also
used here.
The weight of the merchandise is 5 kip, and the frequency of the merchandise is
ranged from 0.5 Hz to 4 Hz. The merchandise behavior is modeled using a bilinear
hysteretic model and viscous damper in parallel connected between the mass
(representing the merchandise) and the rack as shown in Fig 3.6. The merchandise is
considered to have a combined frictional and viscous behavior as shown in Fig. 3.7. The
merchandise flexibility relative to the pallet is assumed linear up to the initiation of
sliding, which is captured with the bilinear hysteretic model. A small amount of
additional damping exists due to the deformations of the merchandise relative to the
pallet and is modeled using a viscous damping with 2% damping.
The model is represented with the nonlinear beam element (BEAM188) in
ANSYS. A bilinear, kinematic plasticity model is assigned to these elements. The
elements are oriented to behave in the axial degree of freedom. The material model is

Page | 13

defined by the elastic modulus, post-yield modulus ratio and yield stress to simulate the
linear viscous with sliding merchandise behavior. The elastic stiffness is obtained using
Eq. 3.1with varying frequencies of the merchandise and setting it equal to the axial
stiffness of the beam element (EA/L). The post-yield modulus is assumed to be very
small (sliding), and the post-yield modulus ratio, is set to be 0.001. The yield force could
be calculated with the friction coefficient by:
(3.3)
3.3.2 Results and discussion
The analysis results are presented in Fig. 3.8. Compared to merchandise behavior
for linear viscous model, the sliding merchandise has a smaller peak absolute acceleration
and a bigger peak relative displacement with same frequency. The sliding behavior
dissipated a certain amount of energy of merchandise, which results in a reduction on
merchandise acceleration compared to the linear viscous merchandise. The relative
displacement for linear viscous with sliding model defined as the merchandise
displacement relative to the rack is larger than the linear viscous merchandise due to the
sliding displacement added to.
3.4 Failure Conditions Discussion
The advanced merchandise model allows for direct calculation of merchandise
response to evaluate key merchandise limit states. To further investigate the behavior of
merchandise, the merchandise displacement relative to the rack is obtained from the
nodal displacement in ANSYS separated to sliding displacement Ds and product

Page | 14

deformation Dm as shown in Fig. 3.9. A few merchandise failure conditions are evaluated
using the sliding displacement and product deformation.
Three failure conditions are considered here for the flexible merchandise and are
shown in Fig. 3.10:

Failure Condition 1 (Ds > 3in): the merchandise pallet is supported directly on the
two down-aisle beams as shown in Fig. 3.10 (a). Failure occurs when the pallet
outside edge passes the inside edge of the down-aisle beam. The width of the
pallet is assumed to be 48 in, and the width of the down-aisle beams is 42 in, thus
the failure condition will happen when the sliding displacement exceeds 3 in. In
this failure condition, merchandise might not fall off the rack immediately, but
would likely be significantly damaged and produce a significant falling hazard.

Failure Condition 2 (Ds+Dm > 21in): the failure happens when the displacement
of the centroid of the mass exceeds the half width of the rack (21in) as shown in
Fig. 3.10(b). The displacement includes the merchandise deformation relative to
the pallet and sliding of the pallet. This failure condition considers overturning
instability about the edge of the down-aisle beam.

Failure Condition 3 (Dm > 18in): the failure occurs when the center of mass of the
merchandise exceeds its edge resulting in overturning instability of the
merchandise on top of the pallet, which is shown in Fig. 3.10 (c). This failure may
only happen for very flexible of slender merchandise such that sliding is not the
dominant mode of response.

Page | 15

The median value of merchandise displacement for ten ground motions are plotted in
Fig. 3.11 with varying merchandise frequencies. As the frequency increases, the total
displacement and merchandise deformation gets smaller. The sliding displacement
decreases as the frequency increases to 2 Hz but increases with increasing frequency to 4
Hz. The reason for that is the merchandise frequency is reaching the natural frequency of
the rack, and a resonance happens. When sliding displacement Ds is bigger than 3 in,
failure condition 1 has occurred and is observed for nearly all frequencies and all shelves.
The use of a stiffened wire rod rigid is attached on top of the down aisle beams which
would prevent this failure condition. The other two failure conditions do not occur under
the LA DBE motions.
The merchandise displacements under the MCE motions are similarly plotted in
Fig.3.12. The failure condition 1 occurs for all merchandise as expected since it occurs
during the DBE motions. Failure condition 3 does not occur for all merchandise
frequencies. Failure condition 2 only occurs with 0.5 Hz frequency merchandise, since
the total displacement exceeds 21 in.
The results show that Failure condition 1 occurs under both DBE and MCE motions
and a horizontal diaphragm is needed on top of the two down-aisle beams. Failure
condition 2 only occurred for very flexible merchandise. Failure condition 3 is not
observed for the frequencies considered. Note that while this merchandise model is more
sophisticated and believed to more accurately capture merchandise and pallet sliding
behavior, the linear behavior of the merchandise should be revisited in future research to
determine appropriate nonlinear hysteretic behavior for merchandise and account for the

Page | 16

cumulative permanent deformations that occur as a result of merchandise package to

package sliding, shrink wrap stretching, and package damage.

Page | 17

Figure 3.1 4-Shelf Heavy-Duty Retail Rack

Page | 18

Figure 3.2 Analytical Model for Linear-viscous Merchandise Behavior

Figure 3.3 Spectral Acceleration for DBE motions

Page | 19

Figure 3.4 Spectral Acceleration for MCE motions

Page | 20

Merchandise

Shelf

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 3.5 Response for linear viscous merchandise: (a) Peak acceleration for
merchandise; (b) Peak acceleration for shelf; (c) Peak displacement for merchandise; (d)
Peak relative displacement for shelf

Page | 21

Figure 3.6 Analytical Model for Behavior of Linear-viscous With Sliding

Figure 3.7 Fundamentals of Linear-viscous with Sliding Merchandise

Page | 22

Merchandise

Shelf

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 3.8 Response for sliding merchandise: (a) Peak acceleration for merchandise; (b)
Peak acceleration for shelf; (c) Peak relative displacement for merchandise; (d) Peak
relative displacement for shelf

Page | 23

Figure 3.9 Merchandise Deformation for Linear-viscous with Sliding

Page | 24

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 3.10 Failure Conditions: (a) Failure condition 1; (b) Failure condition 2; (c)
Failure condition 3.

Page | 25

0.5 Hz

1.0 Hz

1.5 Hz

2 Hz

3 Hz

4 Hz

Figure 3.11 Merchandise Deformations for Linear-viscous with Sliding under DBE
Motions (Failure Condition 1 noted by the solid vertical line)
Page | 26

0.5 Hz

1.0 Hz

1.5 Hz

2 Hz

3 Hz

4 Hz

Figure 3.12 Merchandise Deformations for Linear-viscous with Sliding under MCE
Motions
Page | 27

Table 3.1 Merchandise Properties Considered for Linear-viscous Model

f (Hz)

k (kip/in)

c (kip*sec/in)

m (kip*sec2/in)

0.5

0.03193

0.002033

0.003235

0.12771

0.004065

0.003235

1.5

0.28735

0.006098

0.003235

0.51085

0.00813

0.003235

1.14941

0.012196

0.003235

2.04340

0.016261

0.003235

Table 3.2 Section Properties for Rack Members

Section A

Section B

Ix (in4)

1.61

0.17

Iy (in4)

1.10

0.07

A (in2)

1.08

0.34

Page | 28

Section 4 Damper Design

4.1 General
An elastomer damper is designed in this project to improve the seismic
performance of racks during earthquakes. The dampers are intended to be implemented in
the rack cross-aisle direction in place of the steel bracing member. It is anticipated that
the damper will increase the rack drift however the rack will still remain within elastic
limits and will reduce peak acceleration and total impulse to the merchandise, thus
reducing likelihood of merchandise shedding. The proposed damper dissipates energy
through shear deformations of two layers of a highly damped rubber material which is
adhered to steel plates as shown in Fig. 4.1. A unique characteristic of this damper design
is incorporation of high-strength bolts which are capable of providing a prescribed precompression to the elastomer which is expected to enhance the elastomer to steel bond
and also increase the effective damping of the rubber. Under small shear strain, elastomer
material is commonly considered to behave in a viscoelastic manner however under
earthquakes the elastomer is commonly expected to undergo shear deformations of 100200% strain. Under these levels of strain, the elastomer behaves similar to a bi-linear
hysteretic device with less rate dependence.
4.2 Elastomeric damper behavior
The force-deformation behavior of the damper can be determined for design
purposes based on mechanics principles and empirical relationships (Naeim and Kelly,
1999). Establishing this behavior is critical for design of the dampers. General forcedeformation behavior is shown in Fig. 4.2. Due to the complex constitutive behavior of
Page | 29

the material, a number of the mechanical properties are dependent on cyclic shear strain
and are read from experimentally derived curves. As shown in Fig. 4.3, the effective
shear modulus and damping ratio are shear stain dependent for different elastomer
material properties. The effective stiffness, Kd, is the stiffness at the design displacement
and determined by the effective shear modulus, Geff, the area of the rubber pads, A, and
the total thickness of the rubber pads, T, and is equal:

(4.1)

Thus, Geff can be obtained from curves similar to that shown in Figure 4.3 with shear
strain corresponding to the design damper displacement. The second-slope stiffness, Kp is
defined as:

(4.2)

Where the characteristic strength, Qd, is the force-intercept at zero displacement and
calculated to provide the same empirical effective damping, d, such that:

(4.3)
Where d is the damping ratio of the damper pads and is shear strain dependent. Highdamping rubber bearing is considered here, which has a damping ratio of 15% at 100%
shear strain from Fig 4.3. The design damper deformation, , will be calculated based on
the design rack drift. The yield displacement Y is commonly taken as approximately 10%
of the elastomer thickness, or
(4.4)
Page | 30

Note that the damping ratio and the effective stiffness here are strictly for the damper.
4.3 Damper implementation to rack
The objective of the damper design is to limit rack drift to 1.5 % which is within
elastic limits of the rack. For the 4-shelf rack used in previous sections, the maximum
displacement at the top shelf is thus limited to 2.90 inches in terms of the total height of
193.5 in. As noted previously, the purpose of the damper design is to reduce the absolute
acceleration and total impulse to the merchandise without exceeding the elastic limits of
the rack itself. Dampers are implemented at every panel and replace the diagonal steel
member and are proportioned to achieve a uniform drift assuming an inverted triangular
force distribution along the rack height. The shear force distribution factor at each floor is
thus 1.0, 0.9, 0.7 and 0.4 from bottom to top. The target displacement of the damper is
calculated from compatibility with the rack target drift and is defined as the local damper
displacement as:
(4.5)
Where h is the height of the cross-aisle panel and is the angle between the diagonal
bracing member and the horizontal. Fig. 4.4 shows one shelf panel deformations with
damper implemented to illustrate the relationship between the target displacement and
local target displacement. Total rack stiffness with the dampers is obtained by
considering the bare frame rack stiffness and damper stiffness together similar to a dual
braced and moment frame.
4.4 Damper Design Procedure

Page | 31

There are two approaches considered here to design the elastomeric dampers: (1)
A simplified iterative design procedure described in ASCE 7-05 and (2) Iterative time
history analysis. The first procedure is amenable for hand calculations but requires a
series of iterations due to the shear strain deformation dependence of a number of input
parameters. The time history procedure is more accurate but time consuming to iterate
damper dimensions until a target rack drift is achieved. These two approaches are
described in section 4.4.1 and 4.4.2 respectively. A sample calculation of the simplified
iterative design procedure is provided in Appendix A.
4.4.1 Simplified Iterative Design Procedure
The ASCE 7-05 specifies that the response of the structures with damping
systems is reduced by spectral damping coefficient, BD, which is based on the effective
damping coefficient, T, of the mode of interest. Effective damping of the fundamental
mode of the damped structure is based on the nonlinear force-displacement behavior of
the rack with implemented dampers. This behavior is calculated by hand accounting for
the elastic moment frame behavior of the bare rack without dampers and the nonlinear
force deformation of the dampers. Similar to multi-story frames, lateral loads must be
consistent with the distribution of inertia forces. For the uniform vertical distribution of
merchandise and short period of the rack, the distribution can be assumed to be inverted
triangular. For response in the fundamental mode, the effective damping at the target
displacement is calculated based on an equivalent linear-viscous representation of the
nonlinear system. The displacement of the equivalent system is calculated using a
spectrum reduced for the equivalent damping. If the calculated displacement is the same
or is within an acceptable tolerance with the initially assumed target drift, the solution has
Page | 32

converged. If not, damper properties should be modified and the calculation repeated
until the calculated displacement converges to the assumed target drift. The effective
damping for this system consists of two components: (1) inherent damping of structure at
or just below yield, I, and assumed equal to 2% for this bare steel frame structure; (2)
hysteretic damping of the elastomeric dampers, H.
For the damping system design, the effective damper stiffness in the first crossaisle panel is used as the iterated parameter and all other dampers sized accordingly. The
nonlinear pushover capacity of the generalized dynamic SDOF system is calculated. The
effective stiffness and period of the damped system at the target displacement, u, can be
calculated. The effective damping T is calculated by adding the inherent damping I and
the damper hysteretic damping H together, where the hysteretic damping is calculated
from the energy dissipated per cycle from the elastomeric dampers as:
(4.6)

Where is the effective ductility demand of the rack, and qH is hysteresis loop
adjustment factor, which is set equal to 1 here.
From the effective damping, the spectral damping coefficient can be taken from
ASCE 7-05 with the values shown in Table 4.1
The displacement of the structure is calculated with effective period, and the
damping coefficient using Eq. 4.7 or 4.8:
(

(4.7)

Page | 33

(4.8)

Where SDS=the design spectral response acceleration parameter in the short period range
SD1=the design spectral response acceleration parameter at a period of 1 s
=mode participation factor
Teff=effective period of the structure of the design displacement with added
damping system as defined by Eq. 4.9:

(4.9)

If the calculated DD converges with the initially assumed target drift u, the design is
complete. Otherwise damper effective stiffness is changed and the calculation repeated
until the displacement converges. The spectral values used for the calculation here are the
average value of the ten Los Angeles DBE ground motions used in Section 3, which SD1
is 0.69 g and SDS is 1 g. The thickness per pad of the rubber is determined by the target
local displacement of the damper divided by the target maximum strain set by the
designer, or:

(4.10)

The target maximum strain is set to be 100%, so the thickness per pad for the damping
system could be determined. The resulting damper properties using the simplified
iterative design process are shown in Table 4.2
4.4.2 Time History Analysis
Page | 34

A more rigorous approach of damper design is performing a series of time history

analyses of the damped rack. By changing the damper properties until the target rack drift
is achieved. The analysis program used here is ANSYS. The rack is modeled using elastic
beam elements as described in section 3.2. The only difference to the model is the
elastomeric damper with force-deformation response shown in figure and is simulated
using a nonlinear beam element (BEAM188). The merchandise flexibility is not
considered here to keep consistent with the simplified iterative design procedure and
focus on damper design. The Los Angeles DBE ground motions described in Section 3
are input into the program, which has the same spectral values used in simplified iterative
design process. The median value of the maximum displacement for the ten ground
motions is compared to the target displacement to determine if the damper design
objective is satisfied.
Using time history analysis for design results in a set of dampers with properties
shown in Table 4.3 to achieve the target drift of 1.5 % at the top shelf.
4.5 Results and discussion
As seen in Table 4.2 and 4.3, the simplified iterative design procedure results in
damper sizes significantly smaller compared with the results of time history analysis. The
iterative design process is a simplified analysis and design approach that replaces the
nonlinear system by an equivalent linear-viscous system. The procedure represents an
approximation that does not appear to be valid for the damped system considered here.
The baseline rack with the steel diagonal member was first analyzed for
comparison and has calculated response using time history analysis shown in Fig. 4.5.
Page | 35

The median value for the maximum displacement of ten ground motions is 1.2 inches at
the top shelf. The median value for the maximum acceleration of ten ground motions is
1.6 g and the median value plus the standard deviation is 2.5 g.
After replacing the diagonal member with the dampers, the response of rack has
been improved in terms of maximum absolute acceleration however drift is increased. Fig.
4.6 shows the improved response of the rack. Without exceeding the 1.5% drift limit
(2.90 inches) at the top shelf, the median value for maximum acceleration reduced to 1.1g
and the median value plus the standard deviation reduces significantly to 1.6g.
Total shelf impulse could be used as a measure of merchandise damage and is
calculated by the integration of absolute acceleration times the mass for each shelf over
duration, or:

| |

(4.11)

Furthermore, a normalized impulse ratio is used here to compare the baseline and damped
rack for protection of merchandise. The normalized impulse is defined as the impulse for
damped rack divided by the impulse for rigid rack. Fig. 4.7 shows the median normalized
impulse. The minimum normalized impulse is 0.65 and occurs on the third shelf. A much
smaller reduction in impulse is observed in general over the lower shelves however note
that the peak acceleration is also less on the lower shelves and merchandise shedding less
likely and risky from the lower shelves. Finally, the elastomeric damper is considered
effective at reducing merchandise damage for the analyses and assumptions considered
however the simplified iteration design procedure is not effective for design.

Page | 36

Figure 4.1 Sketch of Proposed Elastomeric Damper

Page | 37

Figure 4.2 Force-deformation curve for elastomeric damper

Page | 38

Figure 4.3 Shear Modulus and Damping Ratio Strain Dependence

Figure 4.4 Sketch of Rack with Damper

Page | 39

(a)

(b)
Figure 4.5 Response of Baseline Rack. (a) Maximum displacement for baseline rack; (b)
Maximum acceleration for baseline rack

Page | 40

(a)

(b)
Figure 4.6 Response of Damped Rack: (a) Maximum displacement for damped rack; (b)
Maximum acceleration for damped rack

Page | 41

Figure 4.7 Normalized Impulse

Page | 42

Table 4.1 Values of Spectral Damping Coefficient (Adapted From ASCE 7-05)
Effective Damping T

Damping coefficient BD

0.8

1.0

10

1.2

20

1.5

30

1.8

40

2.1

50

2.4

60

2.7

70

3.0

80

3.3

90

3.6

100

4.0

Table 4.2 Resulting Damper Properties from Simplified Iterative Design Procedure
Shelf No.

Kd (kip/in)

nlay

tr (in)

Ar (in2)

Q (kip)

12.5

0.434

27

1.6

11.25

0.456

26

1.51

8.75

0.456

20

1.174

0.474

12

0.698

Page | 43

Table 4.3 Resulting Damper Properties from Time History Analysis

Shelf No.

Kd (kip/in)

nlay

tr (in)

Ar (in2)

Q (kip)

19

0.434

41

2.431

17.1

0.456

39

2.295

13.3

0.456

30

1.785

7.6

0.474

18

1.061

Page | 44

Section 5 Impact of Merchandise Mass Configuration

On Seismic Response of Damped Racks
5.1 General
The ability to quickly and easily reconfigure pallet merchandise by forklifts
makes industrial racks popular in large warehouses. However this significant variation in
mass results in challenges for damping system design. Unlike conventional buildings, the
seismic weight of the rack is highly variable due to the large portion of the weight from
the merchandise (likely 90% or more). Warehouse employees can load the merchandise
on different rack shelves preferably without load configuration constraints. Rated load
limits for the shelves must still be respected. In seismic design, the total mass and mass
configuration significantly affects design through variation in inertia mass and dynamic
characteristics. Therefore, this section seeks to consider the impact of mass variation on
the design of damped racks. In this section, analysis is performed on the 4-shelf Heavyduty industrial rack described in Section 3 with varying merchandise weights (1kip, 3kip,
5kip) and merchandise configurations (i.e. fully loaded, top shelf only, etc.) and using the
final damper design properties from Section 4.
5.2 Parameters and analysis input
The weight of merchandise is varied from 1 kip to 5 kip, which is consistent with
the rack considered and warehouse operation. It is assumed that only one weight
condition (1kip, 3 kip, or 5 kip) would load the rack at one time. Five mass
configurations are considered: fully loaded, top shelf loaded, top two shelves loaded,
bottom shelf loaded, and bottom two shelves loaded as shown in Fig. 5.1. While other

mass configurations are possible, it is expected that these configurations would bound the
racks critical response. The total number of the analysis cases considered is 15 cases. For
each analysis case, the ten LA DBE ground motions described in section 3 are input into
the analysis here.
Due to the large amount of calculations and post-processing with the analysis
results, the parametric analyses are performed using the ANSYS parametric design
language (APDL) to perform the analyses. The ANSYS input files are divided into five
different files: Run Control, Model Input, Generate Run, Post-process, and
Modal. The function of each input file is described in the list below.

Run Control: Calls all the other files in a certain sequence

Model Input: Defines all of the model input data to perform dynamic analysis.
Includes the merchandise weight and configuration parameters.

Generate Run: Defines the element types and material properties. Builds the
model using the input data from the Model Input file. Initiates both the modal
and transient analysis. Modal analysis is performed for each mass configuration.
Time history analysis is performed by applying the ground motion acceleration to
the base of the rack.

Post-process: Extract the solution of time history analyses.

Modal: Defines the input to perform modal analysis.

A flowchart is shown in Fig. 5.2 to illustrate the programing command structure. The
solution data is extracted for every mass configurations and ground motions. MATLAB

is then used to perform further post-processing on the analyses output and calculate
response quantities of interest.
5.3 Results
Results of the parametric analysis are compared between the baseline rack and
damped rack. Note that the merchandise flexibility discussed in section 3 has not been
added in parametric analysis.
5.3.1 Results with 5 kip merchandise
The peak shelf acceleration is compared between the baseline rack and the
damped rack in Fig. 5.3 for 5 kip merchandise. From the comparison, we can see that the
damping system is effective to reduce the acceleration of the rack in mass configuration 1,
4 and 5, which are fully loaded, top shelf loaded, and top two shelves loaded. Especially
for case of the top two shelves loaded, the maximum acceleration of the rack, which
happened at the top shelf, is reduce about 41 %. For the fully loaded case, the maximum
acceleration is reduced about 31%, and for the case of loaded only on top shelf, it is
reduced about 35 %. The damping system has the opposite effect for mass configuration
2, which is the case of loading only on the bottom shelf. The maximum acceleration
increases from 0.7 g to 1 g. The reason for acceleration increasing is that the damper
increases the flexibility of the rack, however does not generate inertia forces to activate
the dampers. The first mode frequency of the baseline rack with these mass
configurations is quite large and likely out of the strong energy content of the ground
motions. The dampers increase the flexibility of the frame and for these mass
configurations likely move the response into a frequency range with larger ground motion

energy content. Similar response is observed in mass configuration 2 with a reduced

frequency and dampers in the 3rd and 4th shelf are not activated. Modal properties for bare
rack and damped rack are shown in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2. The median value for the
Fourier transform of ten LA DBE motions is shown in Fig. 5.4. The median value for
maximum peak acceleration doesnt have a significant change, but the standard deviation
is reduced for the damped rack.
5.3.2 Results with 3 kip merchandise
The weight of the merchandise also influences the performance of the rack and
dampers. Using damper properties developed for 5 kip merchandise, the rack
performance from the parametric analysis with 3 kip merchandise is shown in Fig. 5.5.
Due to the reduced total weight, damper activation does not occur but simply increases
the rack flexibility compared to the baseline rack. Mass condition 1 and 5 are the two
worst conditions considering the peak acceleration and damping system works good to
reduce the peak acceleration. For mass condition 2 and 3, peak acceleration is increased,
due to the increased flexibility due to the inactivated damping system. For mass
configuration 4, peak acceleration is not changed much. After implemented by dampers,
mass condition 3 has the biggest peak acceleration, which reaches 1.5 g from 1.25 g for
baseline rack. For 3 kip merchandise, damping system does not work as good as in 5 kip
merchandise cases.
5.3.3 Results with 1 kip Merchandise
Fig. 5.6 shows the peak acceleration comparison between baseline rack and
damped rack. From the comparison, the peak accelerations for all mass configurations are

all increased for the damped case. The reason for this phenomenon is that most dampers
are not activated due to the huge reduction of the total weight. Before implementing the
damping system to the rack, the maximum peak acceleration is 1.25 g occurring at mass
configuration 1. The elastic behavior of the damping system increases the rack flexibility
for all mass configurations, and maximum peak acceleration reaches 1.55 g at mass
configuration 1 and 5.
The displacement for all mass configurations at three weight conditions never
exceeds 1.5 % drift, which was the target and design drift. The displacements from both
baseline rack and damped are compared in Fig. 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9.
As defined in section 4, the normalized impulse is used as a measure of damper
performance on merchandise shedding. When the normalized impulse is less than one,
the damping system decreases the cumulative impulse imparted to the merchandise
compared to the baseline rack. The results shown in Fig. 5.10, 5.11 and 5.12 are
consistent with the peak acceleration comparison discussed above.

Mass Configuration No.

Figure

Figure 5.1 Mass Configuration Conditions

Figure 5.2 Flowchart for ANSYS Program Input File

Mass
Bare Rack
Configt.

Damped Rack

Figure 5.3 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 5 kip Merchandise

Figure 5.4 Median Value for Fourier Transform of DBE Motions

Mass
Bare Rack
Configt.

Damped Rack

Figure 5.5 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 3 kip Merchandise

Mass
Bare Rack
Configt

Damped Rack

Figure 5.6 Peak Acceleration Comparison for 1 kip Merchandise

Mass
Rigid Rack
Configt

Damped Rack

Figure 5.7 Peak Displacement Comparison for 5 kip Merchandise

Mass
Bare Rack
Configt

Damped Rack

Figure 5.8 Peak Displacement Comparison for 3 kip Merchandise

Mass
Bare Rack
Configt

Damped Rack

Figure 5.9 Peak Displacement Comparison for 1 kip Merchandise

Mass
Configuration

Normalized Impulse

Figure 5.10 Normalized Impulse for 5 kip Merchandise

Mass
Configuration

Normalized Impulse

Figure 5.11 Normalized Impulse for 3 kip Merchandise

Mass
Configuration

Normalized Impulse

Figure 5.12 Normalized Impulse for 1 kip Merchandise

Table 5.1 Modal Properties of Baseline Rack

Weight
per shelf

5kip

3kip

1kip

Mass
configuration

Frequency 1
(Hz)

Frequency 2
(Hz)

Frequency 3
(Hz)

Frequency 4
(Hz)

3.66

10.97

16.54

25.05

13.98

7.92

4.67

3.92

13.08

4.71

14.11

21.24

32.18

17.52

10.09

6.00

5.04

16.82

8.02

24.07

33.20

35.89

26.05

16.36

10.16

8.57

23.17

29.57

47.85

28.55

Table 5.2 Modal Properties of Damped Rack

Weight
per shelf

5kip

3kip

1kip

Mass
configuration

Frequency 1
(Hz)

Frequency 2
(Hz)

Frequency 3
(Hz)

Frequency 4
(Hz)

3.09

8.61

14.79

22.74

11.99

6.83

3.84

3.28

11

3.10

8.21

14.37

21.35

11.36

6.59

3.85

3.29

10.60

5.29

14.01

24.49

36.47

17.49

6.54

5.61

5.29

19.81

18.96

39.71

14.01

Section 6 Conclusions and Future Research

This research investigated the seismic behavior of steel storage racks and its
supported merchandise. The effect of merchandise flexibility is investigated using finite
element models. Linear viscous model and linear viscous with sliding model are used to
predict the merchandise behavior with varying merchandise frequencies. The linear
viscous with sliding model is believed to more accurately reflect merchandise behavior
compared to existing practice which often only considers rigid merchandise with 10%
equivalent damping of the merchandise. However, a more sophisticated model should be
considered to capture the actual nonlinear hysteretic merchandise behavior arising from
the merchandise package-to-package sliding, possible rocking of slender merchandise
and effect of the shrink wrap. Shaking table testing is likely required in future research to
evaluate behavior to incorporate in analysis. The research also proposed an elastomeric
damper to improve the cross-aisle rack performance during earthquakes. Without
exceeding rack elastic limits, the dampers are capable of dissipating earthquake energy,
decrease peak acceleration and cumulative impulse to reduce likelihood of merchandise
shedding. A parametric analysis of a damper equipped steel storage rack was performed
to assess the impact of mass variation. The damper effectiveness is reduced for mass
configuration for which it was not designed, however in terms of cumulative impulse the
damper was effective for fully loaded or upper shelf loaded mass configurations. The
merchandise flexibility was not considered in the damper design nor in the parametric
analysis, but should be considered in future work. Furthermore, a prototype damper
should be designed and tested to evaluate its performance and damper design should
consider both seismic and operational performance objectives.

Appendix

DATE
PROJECT

Seismic Evaluation and Performance Enhancement of Industrial Storage Racks

SUBJECT

Appendix A: Damper Design for Steel Storage Rack

Number of Shelfs

BY

07 December 2012
Yuan Gao

n 4
i 1 2 n

Cross-Aisle Width

b 42in

Shelf Weight

W 2.5kip
ws W
i

Shelf Heights and

Damper Orientation
Angles

h
i

hi

atan
i

40in
44in
44in
48in

Target Drift

Drift 1.5%

Rack Height

H 193.5in

Target Top Shelf

Rack Displacement

u max Drift H 2.902 in

Maximum Local
Displacement

Drift h cos

Rack "Bare Frame"

Effective Stiffness
(Moment Frame
without dampers)

kip
KM 0.1577
in

43.603
46.332 deg
46.332
48.814

0.434

0.456

in
0.456
0.474

Shear Force Resisted

by Bare Frame at
Target Displacement

VM KM u max 0.458 kip

Total Rack Weight

WT W n 10 kip
Page A-1

Damper Dimensions
Effective Damper Stiffness
-Iterated Parameter

kip
Kdamp1 19
in

Shelf Shear
Distribution Factor

Cv
i

1.0
0.9
0.7
0.4

Effective stiffness
of elastomer

Kd Kdamp1 Cv
i
i

Effective damping
of elastomer

d 0.15

Target Strain

max 100%

19
17.1 kip
Kd

13.3 in
7.6

Page A-2

Number of elastomeric
layers in damper

n lay 2

Effective Shear Modulus

of Elastomer

Geff 100psi

Thickness per pad

i

Total Thickness

Required Area for each

elastomer pad

0.434
0.456
tr
in
0.456
0.474

tr

max

0.869
0.911
Tr
in
0.911
0.948

Tr n lay tr
i
i

tr Kd
i

Ar

i
n lay Geff

41
39
2
Ar in
30
18

Page A-3

Elastomer "Yield"
Displacement

Damper Characteristic
Strength

0.08690
0.09114
Y
in
0.09114
0.09482

Y 0.1 Tr
i
i

Q d Kd
i
i 2 Y

Post yield stiffness

13.404
12.064 kip
Kp

9.383 in
5.362

Q
Kp Kd
i
i

Yield Strength

Fy Q Kp Y
i
i
i i

Yield Stiffness

Fy
i

3.596
3.395
Fy
kip
2.64
1.57

41.384
37.245 kip
Ky

28.969 in
16.554

Ky
i
Y

0.324
0.324

0.324
0.324

Kp
i

Post-yield stiffness
ratio

Damper force at peak

displacement

Fmaxi Kdi i

Rack stiffness provided

by dampers while damper
are elastic

k d

Ky
i

Cv

2.431
2.295
Q
kip
1.785
1.061

8.255
7.793
Fmax 6.061 kip
3.603

2
Ky cos
i
i

Cv

k d 4.922

kip
in

Page A-4

Rack stiffness while

dampers are elastic

Yield displacement of rack

k o KM k d

Fyi cos i

2
Ky i cos i

Post yield stiffness of rack

k PY

Cv

Yield force of rack

k o 5.08

i
2
Kp cos
i
i

Cv

kip
in

y 0.528 in

KM

k PY 1.752

Vy k o y

kip
in

Vy 2.682 kip

Fy cos KM y 2.687 kip

1
1
0.1in 0.2in 10in
P( )

k o if y

Vy k PY y

otherwise

0.8
P ( ) 0.6
WT
0.4
0.2
0

in

Page A-5

Design Spectral
Accelerations

SD1 0.69
SDS 1

Spectral characteristic
period

Fundamental period

Fundamental mode shape

SD1

Ts S sec
DS

Ts 0.69 s

T 0.4sec
1

f
1

0.25
0.5

1
0.75
1.0

1
T

2.5 Hz

Effective seismic weight of

w

si 1

i
fundamental mode of vibration

i 1

W
1
n
w 2
si 1
i

W 8.333 kip
1

T1 2

g ko

0.833

0.41 s

Effective stiffness
of rack

k eff

Effective period
of rack

WT

W
Fundamental modal
participation factor

wsi 1
i

i 1

1.333
1

P u max

k eff 2.357

u max

Teff 2

Inherent effective damping

by dampers

I 0.02

Effective ductility demand

of the rack

Hysteresis loop
adjustment factor

q H 1.0

kip
in

WT
g k eff

Teff 0.659 s

u max
y

5.497

Page A-6

j
Hysteretic damping

1
d2 q H 0.64 I 1

d2 0.507

Effective damping

T I d2

T 0.527

( k 1 2 14)
Damping Spectrum
Modification Factors

Top Shelf displacement

veck B1.veck

0
0.8

2
0.8

5
1.0

10
1.2

20
1.5

30
1.8

40
2.1

50
2.4

60
2.7

70
3.0

80
3.3

90
3.6

100 4.0

200

vec

B1.vec T
100

BD linterp

BD 2.482

g SDS Teff

DD max

if Teff Ts
2

BD
4

g SD1 Teff sec

max

otherwise
BD
4 2

DD 2.279 in
u max 2.902 in
Convergance

"OK" if

DD u max
u max

0.01

"NG"

"NG" otherwise

Page A-7

Final Damper Properties

Drift 1.5 %
Effective damping
of dampers

d 0.15

Effective Shear Modulus

of Elastomer

Geff 100psi

Thickness per pad

0.434
0.456
tr
in
0.456
0.474

Total Thickness

0.869
0.911
Tr
in
0.911
0.948

Required Area for each

elastomer pad

41
39
2
Ar in
30
18

Yield force of dampers

3.596
3.395
Fy
kip
2.64
1.57

Yield stiffness of dampers

41.384
37.245 kip
Ky

28.969 in
16.554

0.324
0.324

0.324
0.324

8.255
7.793
Fmax 6.061 kip
3.603

19
17.1 kip
Kd

13.3 in
7.6

Fmax
i
n 1 i

i 1

ws
i

0.826
1.039
1.212
1.441

Page A-8

Bibliography
1. ANSYS., Computer software, ANSYS, Inc., 1970
2. Building Seismic Safety Council (U.S.), United States. & National Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Program (U.S.). (2005). Seismic considerations for steel
storage racks located in areas accessible to the public (FEMA 460). Washington,
D.C: National Institute of Building Sciences, U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security,
FEMA, NEHRP.
3. Burtscher, S., Dorfmann, A., Bergmeister, K. (1998). Mechanical aspects of high
damping rubber. 2nd Int. PhD symposium in civil engineering 1998 budapest.
4. American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE) (2005). Minimum design loads
for buildings and other structures. Seismic Design Requirements for structures
with damping system. Reston, Va.: American Society of Civil Engineers.
5. Karavasilis, T. L., Sause, R., Ricles, J. M. (2011). Seismic design and evaluation
of steel moment-resisting frames with compressed elastomer dampers.
Earthquake Engineering and structural dynamics. 41,411-429. doi:
10.1002/eqe.1136
6. Krawinkler, H. (2000). State of the art report on systems performance of steel
moment frames subject to earthquake ground shaking (FEMA 355C). California:
SAC Joint Venture.
7. Lin, Y.Y., Tsai, M.H., Hwang, J.S., Chang, K.C. (2002). Direct displacementbased design for building with passive energy dissipation systems, Engineering
Structures, 25(1), 25-37. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00099-8

8. Naeim, F., Kelly, J. M. (1999). Design of seismic isolated structure: from theory
to practice. New York: John Wiley. Print.
9. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (U.S.). (2008). NEHRP
recommended provisions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP.
10. Sideris, P., Filiatrault, A., Leclerc, M,Tremblay, R. (2010). Experimental
investigation on the seismic behavior of palletized merchandise in steel storage
racks. Earthquake Spectra, 26(1), 209-233. doi:10.1193/1.3283389
11. Symans, M. (2008). Energy dissipation systems for seismic application: Current
practice and recent developments. Journal of Structural Engineering. 134(1), 3-21.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:1(3)