Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. What is strengthening, when and why is it needed?
Strengthening
Retrofitting
Rehabilitation
Improvement
Protection
Repair
Upgrading
Modification
mu t cu t ku t mu g t
ug t u t
u t 2u t 2u t u g t
k
c
,
m
2m
k, c
ug t
utot t
ug t u t
k, c
In terms of forces:
FI(t) + FC(t) + FK(t) = Fg(t)
FI inertia force
FC damping force
FK elastic (shear) force
Fg external force
ug t
If the behaviour of the system is nonlinear, FK(t) = ku(t) is no longer valid because
the stiffness k is changing in the time. Then we must replace FK(t) with elastoplastic
force F(t) and the equation of motion is
mu t cu t F t mu g t
u t 2u t eff2 u t ug t
where secant (effective) stiffness keff is used instead of the elastic stiffness k and
eff
keff
m
, Teff 2
m
keff
keff
u
( t )
u
e
sin D (t ) d
g
0
Once again we can see that we can affect the response changing the natural
frequency, the damping and/or the effect of the ground motion accelerations
(i.e. the external force) on the structure.
Energy formulation
If we integrate all members of the equation of motion over the time
interval of the ground motion, we will obtain the following energy
balance equation for the linear case of response:
EK + ED + ES = EI
where
EK kinetic energy obtained from the inertia force in the mass;
ED damping energy of the structure obtain from the inherent damping;
ES elastic strain energy obtained from the elastic (shear) force;
EI input energy imposed on the structure by the external excitation.
10
11
12
13
Teq T
collapse
Vy
k
1
uy
keff
eq 2
ductility demand
umax = uy
14
15
16
Operational Operational
Damage
Limitation
Significant
Damage
Limit States
according to EC8-1
Near
Collapse
Limit States
according to ATC-40
17
LS of Significant Damage (SD). The structure is significantly damaged, with some residual
lateral strength and stiffness, and vertical elements are capable of sustaining vertical loads. Nonstructural components are damaged, although partitions and infills have not failed out-of-plane.
Moderate permanent drifts are present. The structure can sustain after-shocks of moderate intensity.
The structure is likely to be uneconomic to repair.
LS of Damage Limitation (DL). The structure is only lightly damaged, with structural
elements prevented from significant yielding and retaining their strength and stiffness properties.
Non-structural components, such as partitions and infills, may show distributed cracking, but the
damage could beeconomically repaired. Permanent drifts are negligible. The structure does not
need any repair measures.
NOTE: The definition of the Limit State of Collapse given in this Part 3 of Eurocode 8 is closer to
the actual collapse of the building than the one given in EN1998-1: 2004 and corresponds to the
fullest exploitation of the deformation capacity of the structural elements. The Limit State
associated with the no collapse requirement in EN1998-1: 2004 is roughly equivalent to the one
that is here defined as Limit State of Significant Damage. [18]
18
Differences between
EC8-1 and EC8-3:
Common
performance
objectives
EC8-1
EC8-3
DL
SD
NC
Collapse
~DL
----~SD
NC
19
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.
20
a) Conceptual design:
(i) Selection of techniques and/or materials, as well as of the type and configuration of the
intervention.
(ii) Preliminary estimation of dimensions of additional structural parts.
(iii) Preliminary estimation of the modified stiffness of the retrofitted elements.
b) Analysis.
c) Verifications. Safety verifications shall be carried out in general, for both existing, modified
and new structural elements. [18]
21
[19]
22
23
2.1. Establish performance objectives: goals that the structure achieve a certain
level of performance for a specific level of seismic ground shaking hazard. [6]
There are 3 levels of seismic hazard based on the following primary criteria: site geology and soil
characteristics; site seismicity characteristics; site elastic response spectra:
Serviceability Earthquake (SE): Ground motion with a 50% chance of being exceeded in a 50-year
period.
Design Earthquake (DE): Ground motion with a 10% chance of being exceeded in a 50-year period.
Maximum Earthquake (ME): Maximum level of ground motion expected within the known
geologic framework due to a specified single event (median attenuation), or the ground motion with a
5% chance of being exceeded in a 50 year period. [6]
Typically there are established 2 performance objectives for 2 perf. levels and 2 types of hazard:
Performance Level LS for the Design Earthquake level of ground motion;
Performance Level SS for the Maximum Earthquake level of ground motion. [6]
NC: return period 2475 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 2% in 50 years;
SD: return period 475 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 10% in 50 years;
DL: return period 225 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 20% in 50 years. [18]
The National Authorities decide whether all three Limit States shall be checked, or two of them, or
just one of them. [18]
24
25
Vulnerability Assessment
Seismic vulnerability assessments help to pinpoint expected earthquake failures and help determine if structural
retrofitting is necessary.
Three tiers of seismic vulnerability assessment are practiced for buildings, namely Rapid Visual Screening, Quick
Structural Evaluation, and Detailed Assessment. These assessments are performed in telescopic sequence; when
the building fails at one tier, it is subject to the next tier of assessment. [17]
Rapid Visual Screening consists of configuration-related checks based on the building layout and configuration
including load path, weak story, soft story, geometry, effective mass, torsion, and pounding.
Quick Structural Evaluation involves general strength related checks based on structural design aspects like
shear and axial stress checks of the vertical members resisting earthquake loads.
Detailed Assessment is a quantitative and rigorous evaluation of the vulnerability of the building. Detailed
Assessments include a detailed vulnerability assessment of the structural system that resists the earthquake loads,
as well as the non-structural elements (i.e., the contents, finishes and elements that do not resist earthquake loads).
The assessment of structural performance is the heart of the process to determine the level of risk represented by a
building, and in particular to determine whether or not it meets the requirements to perform satisfactorily in a
design earthquake. [4]
Assessment is a quantitative procedure for checking whether an existing undamaged or damaged building will
satisfy the required limit state appropriate to the seismic action under consideration.
On the basis of the conclusions of the assessment of the structure and/or the nature and extent of the damage,
decisions should be taken for the intervention. As in the design of new structures, optimal decisions are pursued,
taking into account social aspects, such as the disruption of use or occupancy during the intervention. [18]
26
27
Deficiencies (weaknesses)
28
Deficiencies (weaknesses)
29
Deficiencies (weaknesses)
30
Deficiencies (weaknesses)
31
32
33
Damage
An earthquake can cause a building
to experience several types of
damage:
1. The entire building collapses.
2. Portions of the building collapse.
3. Components of the building fail
and fall.
4. Entry-exit routes are blocked,
preventing evacuation and rescue.
5. Pounding between two adjacent
structures. [12]
34
35
2.3. Formulate a strategy: develop a plan for the detailed evaluation and
possible retrofit. [6]
A retrofit system is the specific method used to achieve the selected strategy.
While the retrofit systems are closely tied to the strategies, it is not necessary to
select a specific system in order to evaluate the applicability of a given strategy.
However, it is necessary to select a specific system in order to complete a
design. [6]
Management Retrofit
Strategies:
1. Occupancy change.
2. Demolition.
3. Temporary retrofit.
4. Phased retrofit.
5. Retrofit during occupancy.
6. Retrofit of vacant building.
7. Exterior retrofit.
8. Interior retrofit.
36
37
38
The retrotting of a structure involves improving its performance in earthquakes through one or more of:
Increasing its strength and/or stiffness.
Increasing its ductility.
Reducing the input seismic loads.
This may be done through modications to one or more of: Columns; Beams; Bracings; Walls; Foundations;
Horizontal diaphragms; Joints between structural elements; Damping; Period of vibration. [4]
Strategies for improving strustural performance:
1. Local modification of Components.
2. Removal or lessening of irregularities and discontinuities.
3. Global structural strengthening and stiffening.
4. Seismic isolation.
39
40
41
42
43
Linear static
Linear dynamic
Non-linear static
Non-linear dynamic
type
linear dynamic
linear static
nonlinear static
nonlinear dynamic
linear static
44
45
46
47
Deformations
Determination of the deformations expected in a structure, when subjected to the design earthquake, is the most
important task in seismic rehabilitation design. Given a ground motion criteria, and the desired performance level
for that ground motion, the real task of seismic retrofit becomes one of controlling structural deformations, in
response to that ground motion, to within acceptable levels.
There are three types of deformations that must be considered and controlled in a seismic retrot design. These are
global deformations, elemental deformations, and interstructural deformations. Although they are all interrelated, for
purposes of seismic upgrade it is convenient to consider each of these separately.
Global deformations are the only type explicitly controlled by the building codes and are typically considered by
reviewing interstory drift. The basic concern is that large interstory drifts can result in P- instabilities. Control of
interstory drift can also be used as a means of limiting damage to non-structural elements of a structure.
Elemental deformation is the amount of seismic distortion experienced by an individual element of a structure such
as a beam, column, shear wall, or diaphragm. Building codes have very few provisions that directly control these
deformations. They rely on ductility to ensure that individual elements will not fail at the global deformation levels
predicted for the structure. In existing structures with questionable ductility, it is therefore critical to evaluate the
deformation of each element and to ensure that expected damage to the element is acceptable.
Interstructural deformations are those that relate to the differential movement between elements of the structure.
Failures that result from lack of such control include failures of masonry walls that have not been anchored to
diaphragms and failures resulting from bearing connections slipping off beam seats. Building codes control these
deformations, which may cause separation of one element from another, by requiring interconnection of all portions
of structures. A similar technique should be considered in the retrot of an existing structure. [7], [12]
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.
48
49
50
51
52
SIGNIFICANT
SIGNIFICANT
YES
SIGNIFICANT
VERY SMALL
YES
MODERATE
MODERATE
53
54
55
56
5) Open Storefront
The deciency in a building with an open storefront is the lack of a vertical line of resistance along one or two sides of a building. This
results in a lateral system that is excessively soft at one end of the building, causing signicant torsional response and potential
instability. The most effective method of correcting this deciency is to install a new stiff vertical element in the line of the open-front
side or sides. If the open-front appearance is desired, the steel frames may be located directly behind the storefront windows. Shear
walls may also be used to provide adequate strength. In both cases collectors are required to adequately distribute the loads from the
diaphragm into the vertical lateral-load-resisting element. Adequate anchorage of vertical elements into the foundation is also required
to resist overturning forces. Steel moment frames instead of brace frames can also be utilized to provide adequate strength, provided that
inelastic deformations of the frame under severe seismic loads are carefully considered to ensure that displacements are controlled.
6) Clerestory
A clerestory, typically designed to produce an open airy feeling, can result in signicant discontinuity in a horizontal diaphragm. A
common method of correcting the diaphragm discontinuity is to add a horizontal steel truss. Steel members can be designed to transfer
diaphragm shears while minimizing the visual obstruction of the clerestory. An alternate approach is to reduce the demands on the
diaphragm through the addition of new vertical lateral-force-resisting elements such as shear walls or braced frames.
7) Deep Foundations
The following rehabilitation measures may be considered for deep foundations:
1. Providing additional piles or piers to increase the load bearing capacity of the existing foundations.
2. Increasing the effective depth of a pile cap by adding concrete and reinforcement to its top. This method is effective in increasing its
shear and moment capacity, provided the interface is designed to transfer loads between the existing and new materials.
3. Improving the soil adjacent to an existing pile cap by injection-grouting.
4. Increasing the passive pressure bearing area of a pile cap by addition of new reinforced concrete extensions.
5. Changing the building system to reduce the demands on the existing elements by adding new lateral-load-resisting elements.
6. Adding batter piles or piers to the existing pile or pier foundation to increase resistance to lateral loads. It should be noted that batter
piles have performed poorly in recent earthquakes when liqueable soils were present. This is especially important to consider near
wharf structures and in areas with a high water table.
7. Increasing tension tie capacity from a pile or pier to the superstructure.
57
8) Shallow Foundations
The following rehabilitation measures may be considered for shallow foundations:
1. Enlarging the existing footing to resist the design loads. Care must be taken to provide adequate shear and moment transfer capacity
across the joint between the existing footing and the additions.
2. Underpinning the existing footing, removing of unsuitable soil underneath and replacing it with concrete, soil cement, or another
suitable material. Underpinning should be staged in small increments to prevent endangering the stability of the structure. This
technique may be used to enlarge an existing footing or to extend it to a more competent soil stratum.
3. Providing tension hold-downs to resist uplift. Tension ties consisting of soil and rock anchors with or without prestress may be drilled
and grouted into competent soils and anchored in the existing footing. Piles or drilled piers may also be effective in providing tension
hold-downs for existing footings.
4. Increasing the effective depth of the existing footing by placing new concrete to increase shear and moment capacity. The new
concrete must be adequately doweled or otherwise connected so that it is integral with the existing footing. New horizontal
reinforcement should be provided, if required, to resist increased moments.
5. Increasing the effective depth of a concrete mat foundation with a reinforced concrete overlay. This method involves placing an
integral topping slab over the existing mat to increase shear and moment capacity.
6. Providing pile supports for concrete footings or mat foundations. Adding new piles may be effective in providing support for existing
concrete footing or mat foundations, provided the pile locations and spacing are designed to avoid overstressing the existing
foundations.
7. Changing the building structural characteristics to reduce the demand on the existing elements. This may be accomplished by
removing mass or height from the building or adding other elements such as energy dissipation devices to reduce the load transfer at the
base. New shear walls or braces may be provided to reduce the demand on foundations.
8. Adding new grade beams to tie existing footings together when soil conditions are poor. This method is useful for providing xity to
column bases, and to distribute lateral loads between individual footings, pile caps, or foundation walls.
9. Grouting techniques to improve existing soil.
Traditional methods of seismic retrofitting fall essentially into two categories, one based on the classical principles of structural design
which requires an increase of strength and stiffness, and the other based on mass reduction. Thus the first one tends to satisfy the
design inequality by an increase of the capacity while the second one achieves the same result by a reduction of the demand. Since
seismic design is different from ordinary design, both techniques may turn out to be quite ineffective. [3]
58
3) Excessive Flexibility:
Introducing elements to increase stiffness.
59
5) Inadequate Diaphragms:
Common deficiencies: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate flexural capacity, extreme flexibility, poor connectivity to vertical elements
of the lateral force resisting system, and lack of continuity.
a) Concrete diaphragms: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate chord capacity and excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or
plan irregularities.
Inadequate shear capacity: providing supplemental vertical lateral force resisting elements or increasing the diaphragm capacity by
adding a concrete overlayment.
Increasing the chord capacity of existing concrete diaphragms can be accomplished by adding new concrete or steel members or by
improving the continuity of existing members.
Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities can be mitigated by distributing the forces in the diaphragm by
means of reinforced concrete drag struts cast beneath the slab and made integral through the use of drilled and grouted dowels.
Alternately, if the opening can be eliminated, the stress concentration can be removed by infilling the opening. Excessive local
diaphragm stresses at a reentrant corner can also be reduced through the introduction of drag struts.
b) Precast Concrete Diaphragms: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate chord capacity and excessive shear stresses at diaphragm
openings or plan irregularities.
Inadequate shear capacity: addition of supplemental shear walls or braced frames.
Inadequate chord capacity on a precast concrete deck can be mitigated in a similar fashion as discussed earlier for a cast-in-place
concrete diaphragm. A new chord member can be added above or below the precast concrete deck.
Excessive stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities in precast concrete diaphragms can also be mitigated in a similar manner
as described earlier for cast-in-place concrete diaphragms.
60
61
62
63
[22]
64
[16]
65
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.
66
67
Design Objectives.
General. Passive control systems can be used to achieve different design objectives
or performance goals ranging from a life-safety standard to a higher standard that
would provide damage control and post-earthquake functionality. The energy
dissipation units used in passive control systems are generally simple devices that
exhibit stable and predictable inelastic behavior when subjected to repeated cycles of
seismic loading. Nevertheless, there is nothing inherent in these devices that
guarantees better building performance. The addition of energy dissipation devices
will only improve the seismic performance of a building if the devices have been
carefully integrated into the seismic design of the structural system, taking into
consideration the dynamic characteristics of the building, the dissipators, and the soil
at the site.
Performance Objectives. Passive energy systems can be used to achieve building
performance goals ranging from a life-safety standard to a higher standard that
would provide damage control and post-earthquake functionality. The life-safety
standard is currently reflected in the minimum design lateral-force requirements of
conventional building codes. Damage control and post-earthquake functionality
reflect higher performance goals that would provide additional protection from
structural and nonstructural damage and loss of function. The discussion below
compares how these various performance objectives can be met using either
conventional design or passive control systems.
68
69
70
71
Atlante FVD
72
73
Nonlinear FVD:
P t Cu
P t C u sgn u
74
Analytical models
Viscous dashpot
Kelvin model
Maxwell model
Wiechert model
75
76
77
78
79
, depends on
80
Chevron brace
Diagonal bracing
81
uD = f u
where u drift, f amplification
factor for the displacement
The damping ratio is obtained
from:
Cf 2 gT
4 W
where W weight of the structure
82
83
84
85
Dampers location
86
87
88
Linear models of viscoelastic devices: (a) Kelvin model and corresponding forcedeformation response, (b) damper-brace assembly model
89
Viscous fluid
Elastic solid
Visco-elastic
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
P t P0 Ku Cu
where P0 preload force, K stiffness, C
damping coefficient and damping
exponential constant ( = 0.15)
Inner plate
Viscous fluid
Outer plate
Upper floor
Lower floor
97
98
99
When the brace in tension forces the damper to slip, the damper mechanism forces the
other brace to shorten and thus avoid buckling. In this manner, the other brace is
immediately ready to slip the damper on reversal of cycle.
10
0
10
1
102
Modeling:
103
104
105
106
Fitzgerald, 1989
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
Idealized hysteretic
behavior of friction
dampers:
(a) friction device on rigid
bracing,
(b) friction device mounted
on flexible support.
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Comparison of maximum response quantities along the building height for distributions of
damper parameters obtained according to different performance indices.
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
Conclusions:
1) The energy dissipation is confined primarily in the devices;
2) Other structural elements remain essentially elastic;
3) The devices must be placed where sufficiently large relative
displacements are expected under earthquake motion (e.g.,
interstory drift).
Attention:
1) Lateral force imposed on the structure is increased;
2) Bending moment and shear in the columns connected to the
braces are decreased, but axial force is increased => adding of
foundation or local strengthening may be necessary! [24]
142
143
144
145
Teq T
Vy
eq
keff
k0
1
umax= uy
- DUCTILITY DEMAND
u
uy
2 1
146
5% DAMPING RATIO
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
0 eq
0 5%
eq depends on ductility demand
168
169
[34]
170
171
Stiffening
172
173
174
Verifications
EC8-3:
175
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
REFERENCES
[1] Symans, M. D., F. A. Charney, A. S. Whittaker, M. C. Constantinou, C. A. Kircher,
M. W. Johnson and R. J. McNamara. Energy Dissipation Systems for Seismic
Applications: Current Practice and Recent Developments. Journal of Structural
Engineering ASCE, January 2008, pp. 3-21.
[2] CECW-EG Engineer Manual 1110-2-2002. Evaluation and Repair of Concrete
Structures. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Department of the Army, Washington, DC
20314-1000, 30 June 1995.
[3] Oliveto, G. and M. Marletta. Seismic retrofitting of reinforced concrete buildings
using traditional and innovative techniques. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology,
Paper No. 454, Vol. 42, No. 2-3, June-September 2005, pp. 21-46.
[4] Dowrick, D. J. Earthquake Risk Reduction. Chapter 13. Retrofitting. 2003 John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd ISBN: 0-471-49688-X (HB), pp. 467-487.
[5] Assessment and Improvement of the Structural Performance of Buildings in
Earthquake. Initial Evaluation, Detailed Assessment, Improvement Measures.
Recommendations of a NZSEE Study Group on Earthquake Risk Buildings. Study
Group Draft, December 2005.
[6] ATC-40. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings. Volume 1. Applied
Technology Council, 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 550, Redwood City, California
94065, November 1996.
184
REFERENCES
[7] Hamburger, R. O. and C. A. Cole. Seismic Upgrading of Existing Structures.
Chapter 12 of Seismic Design Handbook. pp. 523-680.
[8] Fardis, M. N. Seismic Design, Assessment and Retrofitting of Concrete Buildings.
Chapter 6. Seismic Assessment and Retrofitting of Existing Concrete Buildings.
Springer, 2009, pp. 595-693.
[9] Dowrick, D. J. Earthquake Risk Reduction. Chapter 8. The Design and Construction
Process Choice of Form and Materials. 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd ISBN: 0-47149688-X (HB), pp. 247-286.
[10] IAEE Manual, Chapter 9. Repair, Restoration and Strengthening of Buildings.
[11] Ellingwood, B. R. et al. Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive
Collapse in Buildings. National Institute of Standards and Technology, August 2009, pp.
55-80.
[12] Taranath, B. S. Wind and Earthquake Resistant Buildings. Structural Analysis and
Design. Marcel Dekker, New York, 2005.
[13] Priestley, M. J. N., G. N. Calvi and M. J. Kowalski. Displacement-Based Seismic
Design of Structures. IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy, 2007.
[14] Soong, T. T. and G. F. Dargush. Passive Energy Dissipation and Active Control.
Chapter 27 of Structural Engineering Handbook. Ed. Chen Wai-Fah. Boca Raton: CRC
Press LLC, 1999.
185
REFERENCES
[15] FEMA 274 Seismic Rehabilitation Commentary. Chapter 9. Seismic Isolation and
Energy Dissipation (Systematic Rehabilitation). Pp. 9-1 9-60.
[16] Unknown Author. Chapter 8. Seismic Isolation and Energy Dissipation Systems.
Pp. 8-1 8-42.
[17] At Risk: The Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frame Buildings with
Masonry Infill Walls. A Tutorial Developed by a committee of the World Housing
Encyclopedia a project of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute and the
International Association for Earthquake Engineering. November 2006.
[18] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance Part 3: Assessment
and retrofitting of buildings. 2005 CEN.
[19] Holmes, W. T. Risk Assessment and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. 12WCEE,
2000, art. 2826.
[20] Viti, S., G. P. Cimellaro and A. M. Reinhorn. Retrofit of a hospital through strength
reduction and enhanced damping. Smart Structures and Systems, Vol. 2, No. 4 (2006),
pp. 339-355.
[21] Huang, H. Theory of Control II: Passive Control of Structures. Department of
Bridge Engineering, Tongji University.
[22] Soong, T. T. and B. F. Spencer Jr. Supplemental energy dissipation: state-of-the-art
and state-of-the-practice. Engineering Structures 24 (2002), pp. 243259.
186
REFERENCES
[23] Kaliske, M. and A. Mandara. Innovative Seismic Protection Technologies and Case
Studies. COST C26 Urban Habitat Constructions under Catastrophic Events. WG2
Earthquake Resistance. Naples, 16-18 September 2010.
[24] Serino, G. Energy Dissipation Design. University of Naples Federico II School
of Engineering, Department of Structural Engineering.
[25] Reinhorn, A. M. and C. Li. Retrofit of R/C Structures with Supplemental Damping.
[26] Atlante Anti-seismic Devices. ARC Series Product Data Sheet.
[27] Dung, P. N. Seismically retrofitting reinforced concrete moment resisting frames
by using expanded metal panels. Doctors Thesis, Facult des Sciences Appliques,
Universite de Liege, 2011.
[28] Elgamal, A. and M. Fraser. Seismic Isolation & Energy Dissipation Systems.
[29] Moreschi, L. M. Seismic Design of Energy Dissipation Systems for Optimal
Structural Performance. Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia, July, 2000.
[30] FEMA 451B Handouts. FEMA 451B Notes.
[31] Tabatabaei, A. S. Energy Dissipation Systems for Seismic Resistance.
IranCivilCenter.com The Construction Industry Portal of Iran. 2003-2006.
[32] Anti-seismic devices. FIP Industriale Brochure.
[33] Bonev, Z. Lecture Notes on PKSV. UACEG, Sofia, Bulgaria.
187
REFERENCES
[34] NEHRP 2003 Chapter 15 Commentary. Structures with Damping Systems. Pp 309316.
[35] Ramirez, O. M. et al. Evaluation of Simplified Methods of Analysis of Yielding
Structures with Damping Systems. 2002, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Earthquake Spectra, Volume 18, No. 3, August 2002, pp. 501530.
[36] Chesca, A.-B., R. Vacareanu and R. Ghica. Strategy for Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings Using Fluid Viscous Dampers. Case Study. First European Conference on
Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 3-8 September 2006.
Paper Number: 406.
[37] Passive and Active Structural Vibration Control in Civil Engineering. Ed. T.T.
Soong and M.C. Constantinou. CISM, Udine, 1994.
[38] Cheng, F. Y., H. Jiang and K. Lou. Smart Structures. Innovative Systems for
Seismic Response Control. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, 2008.
[39] Ibrahim, Y. E.-H. A New Visco-Plastic Device for Seismic Protection of Structures.
Dissertation submitted tothe faculty ofthe Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, 02-07-2005, Blacksburg, VA.
[40] Lpez, W. A. and R. Sabelli. Seismic Design of Buckling-Restrained Braced
Frames. Steel Tips, Structural Steel Education Council, Techinical Education and
Product Service, July 2004.
THANK YOU!
188