Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Scott E. Breneman
H. Allison Smith
such as the peak bearing displacement for the isolation system. As a result, fewer control analyses may
be required to estimate the expected structural behavior. The resulting annual hazard curves can be
used to evaluate the effect of different control parameters as well as provide a basis for comparison
between different control strategies.
2 BACKGROUND
The final objective of the methodology devised by
Cornell (1996) is the estimation of the annual probability of exceedance of a given level of inelastic response in a specific MDOF structure. The structure
is located at a specific site with an associated potential seismic hazard. The response of interest can be
any structural response parameter, representing either local or global structural demands. The procedure couples conventional Probabilistic Seismic
Hazard Analysis (PSHA) with nonlinear dynamic
structural analyses in order to determine the annual
probability of exceedance of a given response parameter. This procedure is referred to as the Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis (PSDA). These
concepts are then extended to the analysis of controlled response, referred to as Probabilistic Seismic
Control Analysis (PSCA).
2.1 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA)
In view of the rareness of seismic events and the
variability of their characteristics, it has become
common to describe the seismic threat in probabilistic terms. The earliest work in this area has defined
this threat in terms of some measure of the ground
motion intensity, such as peak ground acceleration
(PGA). More recent work has commonly sought to
characterize the ground motion by its response spectral acceleration Sa -- i.e., the peak acceleration the
earthquake will induce in a 1DOF system with a
specified period T and damping ratio . Commonly,
T and are chosen to describe the properties of the
first mode of the building of interest. In any case, the
aim is to describe the probability that the ground
motion characteristic of interest (PGA, Sa, spectral
velocity Sv, or spectral displacement Sd) is exceeded
over a reference period of interest.
For example, the probability that Sa exceeds a
critical value scr in an arbitrary earthquake is formally written as
P [ S a > scr ] =
m.r
(1)
H ( S a ) = k0 S a
k1
(2)
The coefficients k0 and k1 thus serve to characterize the seismic threat at a given site of interest.
The approximation in Equation (2) has the advantage of being linear in log-log space and has been
shown to be satisfactory over a range of spectral accelerations (Shome 1999)
2.2 Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis (PSDA)
Unfortunately, Sa does not provide sufficient information to determine the precise response of actual
buildings, which generally show both nonlinear and
multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) behavior. Indeed,
there is a growing trend toward performancebased seismic design, in which a range of increasingly rare hazards are specified, together with a correspondingly increasing level of permissible damage (i.e., nonlinear behavior). This implies the
need for explicit recognition, and statistical quantification, of the degree of nonlinear behavior-- e.g., the
drift demand -- as a function of the desired exceedance rate (return period).
Extension of conventional PSHA, to directly describe the seismic demand of a complex, nonlinear structure, has become known as probabilistic
seismic demand analysis (PSDA) (Cornell 1996,
Luco et. al. 1998).
The power of this method hinges on the following
observations. First, given knowledge of the ground
motion's intensity, as measured by Sa at the building's first mode, the nonlinear behavior is often
found to be not substantially influenced by additional ground motion parameters (e.g., M, R, duration). While somewhat counterintuitive, this result
has been demonstrated by detailed comparisons
(Shome 1999, Shome et. al. 1996), at least in the
context of non-degrading systems. This result permits Sa to be used as a powerful, scalar descriptor
used to summarize the ground motion threat.
Secondly, in practice, considerable variability exists in Sa, which reflects the elastic demand (of a
simplified, 1DOF building). A positive consequence
of this fact is that one need not have a very precise
description of the true nonlinear (MDOF) demand
as a function of the elastic 1DOF demand Sa. In particular, it generally suffices to have a reasonably accurate estimate of the median demand for a given
2 b
signed for gravity, wind, and seismic loads, with a
The structures are modeled as twodimensional frames that represent half of the structure in the north-south direction. The frame is given
half of the seismic mass of the structure at each floor
level. A basic centerline model of the bare moment
resisting frame is developed for both structures. The
strength, stiffness, and shear distortions of panel
zones is neglected. A finite element model of the
structure was developed where an assembly of interconnected elements describes the hysteretic behavior
of structural members. The inelastic behavior of the
members is taken to be concentrated at the end of
girders and beams. Thus each structural member is
constructed using a lumped plasticity model with
nonlinear rotational springs at each end joined by a
linear beam-column element. The resulting modal
properties for both the 3- and 9-story structures are
given in Table 1.
Table 1. Modal Properties of the SAC3 and SAC9 Elastic
Models
SAC3 Frame
SAC9 Frame
Damping
Period
Damping
Period
1st Mode
1.02 sec
2.0%
2.27 sec
2.0%
2nd Mode
0.33 sec
1.5%
0.85 sec
1.1%
3rd Mode
0.17 sec
2.2%
0.49 sec
1.1%
3.2 Earthquakes
Suites of ten time histories were generated by Paul
Somerville (1997) to represent ground motions having probabilities of exceedance of 50% in 50 years,
10% in 50 years, and 10% in 250 years in the Los
Angeles region. These sets of ground motions are referred to as the 50 in 50 Set, 10 in 50 Set, and 2 in
50 Set respectively. A single scaling factor was
found for each time history that minimized the
squared error between the target spectrum and the
average response spectrum of the two horizontal
components of the time history assuming lognormal
distribution of amplitudes. The weights used were
0.1, 0.3, 0.3, and 0.3 for periods of 0.3, 1, 2, and 4
seconds respectively. The scale factor was then applied to all components of the time history. An important note regarding the earthquake sets is that
they should be used only as a set, and not individually or as small sub-sets as representative of the
probability levels specified. At any particular period
the median spectral acceleration of the set may
match the target value reasonably well; however,
any individual record may have a value quite different than the expected target spectral acceleration.
4 RESULTS
The Probabilistic Seismic Control Analysis described in Section 2 is applied to the response of
both structures. The details of the application of the
procedure are discussed for the 3-Story Structure
and the final hazard curves are shown for both systems.
Annual Hazard
10
10
0.5
1.5
2.5
Structure
k0
k1
System
(sec)
(%)
Uncontrolled 1.01
2
1.42e-3
3.25
FPS
3.00
2
1.10e-4
2.14
3-story
VS
1.01
30
2.84e-4
2.33
ATB
1.00
36.7
2.59e-4
2.42
Uncontrolled 2.27
2
2.62e-4
2.08
FPS
4.00
2
3.90e-5
1.89
9-story
VS
2.27
30
6.67e-5
2.22
ATB
2.27
35.6
2.62e-4
2.08
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
0.12
50 in 50
10 in 50
2 in 50
50 in 50
10 in 50
2 in 50
Drift Angle
0.1
0.08
Drift Angle
0.2
0.1
50 in 50
10 in 50
2 in 50
0.05
Drift Angle
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.02
0
0
0.5
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
1.5
2.5
0.05
50 in 50
10 in 50
2 in 50
Drift Angle
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
No
Simulated
All
Median
All
Median
All
Median
All
2.84e-2
2.74e-2
2.63e-2
3.31e-2
3.30e-2
2.99e-2
2.98e-2
1.04
1.04
0.996
1.02
1.01
0.944
0.943
0.128
0.0978
0.0935
0.287
0.287
0.280
0.280
10
VS
10
10
10
10
10
FPS T3, f1
Viscous 30%, D1
ATB S1k
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
10
Uncontrolled
FPS T4, f1
Viscous 30%, D1
ATB S1k
cr
10
REFERENCES
10
10
10
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
5 CONCLUSION
Current performance guidelines provide for the determination of seismic demands for a given scenario
event, which is then compared with an allowable
limit. These procedures do not account for the variability in seismic demand estimation. One approach
to address this issue is the development of probabilistic seismic demand curves. This study uses the
Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis methodology developed by Cornell (1996) that combines information regarding the seismic hazard and nonlinear structural response. The procedure relates a
record specific quantity, such as the elastic spectral
acceleration, to a structural response parameter, such
as drift, to estimate the probability of exceeding the
selected structural parameter.
The elastic spectral acceleration at the fundamental period of the structure is a measure of ground
motion intensity that is structure specific. However,
the addition of supplemental control devices changes
the fundamental properties of the structural system.
Therefore, the determination of spectral acceleration
hazard curves and relationships between record
quantities and structure response need to be determined with respect to the new system. Relationships
between spectral acceleration and interstory drift are
developed for all systems. For the uncontrolled
structure, a significant amount of scatter is present,
especially due to responses from the 2 in 50 set of
ground motions. The addition of control reduces the
scatter of the response in all 3 cases.
Once this information is combined with the spectral hazard, the resulting demand hazard curves can
be used to compare the effects of different parameters for a single control type as well as the performance between the different control strategies. Results
from these curves indicate that no single control
strategy is the most effective at all hazard levels. For
example, at low return periods the VS system has
Barroso, L. 1999. Performance Evaluation of Vibration Controlled Steel Structures Under Seismic Loading. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering.
Stanford University.
Barroso, L.R., S.E. Breneman and H.A. Smith. 1998. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Structural Control within the Context of Performance-Based Engineering. Proc. of the 6th
U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington
Breneman, S.E. 2000. Practical Design Issues in the Design of
Active Control for Civil Engineering Structures. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. Civil & Environmental Engineering. Stanford
University.
BSSC. 1997. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Regulation of
Exhisting Buildings and Other Structures. Technical Report
FEMA 273. Building Seismic Safety Council, U.S.A.
Cornell, C. A. (1968). Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis.
Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 58(5), 15831606.
Cornell, C. A. 1996. Calculating Building Seismic Performance Reliability; A Basis for Multi-level Design Norms."
Proc. of 11th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Acapulco, Mexico.
Gupta, A. (1999). Seismic Demands for Performance Evaluation of Steel Moment Resisting Frame Structures. Ph. D. for
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University.
Krawinkler, H.K. and A. Gupta. 1998. Story Drift Demands for
Steel Moment Frame Structures in Different Seismic Regions. Proc. of the 6th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington.
Luco, N. and C. A. Cornell. 1998. Effects of Random Connection Fractures on the Demands and Reliability for a 3-Story
Pre-Northridge SMRF Structure. Proc. 6th U.S. National
Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, Washington.
SEAOC. 1995. Vision 2000 - A Framework for Performance
Based Design, Volumes I, II, III. Technical report, Structural Engineers Association of California. Vision 2000
Committee, Sacramento, California.
Shome, N. and Cornell, C.A. 1999. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis of Nonlinear Structures. Report No. RMS-35 (Ph.D. Thesis), RMS Program, Stanford University.
Shome, N, Cornell, C.A., Bazzurro, P., and Carballo, J.E.
1997. Earthquakes, Records and Nonlinear MDOF Records. Report No. RMS--29, RMS Program, Stanford University.
Somerville, P., D. Anderson, J. Sun, S. Punyamurthula, and N.
Smith. 1998. Generation of Ground Motion Time Histories
for Performance-Based Seismic Engineering. Proc. 6th U.S.
National Conference in Earthquake Engineering, Seattle,
Washington.