The engineering merit of the “Effective Period” of bilinear isolation systems

This paper examines whether the “effective period” of bilinear isolation systems, as defined invariably in most current design codes, expresses in reality the period of vibration that appears in the horizontal axis of the design response spectrum. Starting with the free vibration response, the study proceeds with a comprehensive parametric analysis of the forced vibration response of a wide collection of bilinear isolation systems subjected to pulse and seismic excitations. The study employs Fourier and Wavelet analysis together with a powerful time domain identification method for linear systems known as the Prediction Error Method. When the response history of the bilinear system exhibits a coherent oscillatory trace with a narrow frequency band as in the case of free vibration or forced vibration response from most pulselike excitations, the paper shows that the “effective period” of the bilinear isolation system is a dependable estimate of its vibration period; nevertheless, the period associated with the second slope of the bilinear system is an even better approximation regardless the value of the dimensionless strength of the system. As the frequency content of the excitation widens and the intensity of the acceleration response history fluctuates more randomly, the paper reveals that the computed vibration period of the systems exhibits appreciably scattering from the computed mean value. This suggests that for several earthquake excitations the mild nonlinearities of the bilinear isolation system dominate the response and the expectation of the design codes to identify a “linear” vibration period has a marginal engineering merit.

[1]  Ronald L. Mayes,et al.  Closure of "AASHTO Seismic Isolation Design Requirements for Highway Bridges" , 1992 .

[2]  P. Spanos,et al.  Random vibration and statistical linearization , 1990 .

[3]  Wilfred D. Iwan,et al.  The effective period and damping of a class of hysteretic structures , 1979 .

[4]  Y. Wen Method for Random Vibration of Hysteretic Systems , 1976 .

[5]  Thomas K. Caughey,et al.  Random Excitation of a System With Bilinear Hysteresis , 1960 .

[6]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Teflon Bearings in Base Isolation II: Modeling , 1990 .

[7]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Evaluation of Peak Ground Velocity as a “Good” Intensity Measure for Near-Source Ground Motions , 2004 .

[8]  J. M. Chiou,et al.  An equivalent linear model of lead-rubber seismic isolation bearings , 1996 .

[9]  Wilfred D. Iwan,et al.  Estimating inelastic response spectra from elastic spectra , 1980 .

[10]  T. Caughey Equivalent Linearization Techniques , 1962 .

[11]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Dimensional Analysis of Rigid-Plastic and Elastoplastic Structures under Pulse-Type Excitations , 2004 .

[12]  Shih-Po Chang,et al.  Effect of viscous, viscoplastic and friction damping on the response of seismic isolated structures , 2000 .

[13]  Andrei M. Reinhorn,et al.  Teflon Bearings in Base Isolation I: Testing , 1990 .

[14]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  Numerical Identification of Linear Dynamic Systems from Normal Operating Records , 1965 .

[15]  A. Veletsos,et al.  Effect of Inelastic Behavior on the Response of Simple Systems to Earthquake Motions , 1975 .

[16]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Dimensional analysis of bilinear oscillators under pulse-type excitations , 2004 .

[17]  N. Ricker,et al.  Further developments in the wavelet theory of seismogram structure , 1943 .

[18]  James M. Kelly,et al.  Aseismic base isolation: review and bibliography , 1986 .

[19]  L. H. Sheng,et al.  Equivalent elastic seismic analysis of base-isolated bridges with lead-rubber bearings , 1994 .

[20]  A. Veletsos,et al.  Response of Ground-Excited Elastoplastic Systems , 1971 .

[21]  Lennart Ljung,et al.  System Identification: Theory for the User , 1987 .

[22]  Michael S. Ford,et al.  The Illustrated Wavelet Transform Handbook: Introductory Theory and Applications in Science , 2003 .

[23]  I. Anastasopoulos,et al.  Asymmetric ‘Newmark’ Sliding Caused by Motions Containing Severe ‘Directivity’ and ‘Fling’ Pulses , 2011 .

[24]  L. Ljung Prediction error estimation methods , 2002 .

[25]  Nicos Makris,et al.  The existence of ‘complete similarities’ in the response of seismic isolated structures subjected to pulse‐like ground motions and their implications in analysis , 2011 .

[26]  Ronald L. Mayes,et al.  Seismic Isolation: History, Application, and Performance—A World View , 1990 .

[27]  Farzad Naeim,et al.  Design of seismic isolated structures , 1999 .

[28]  N. Ricker,et al.  WAVELET FUNCTIONS AND THEIR POLYNOMIALS , 1944 .

[29]  A S Veletsos,et al.  Deformation Spectra for Elastic and Elastoplastic Systems Subjected to Ground Shock and Earthquake Motions , 1965 .

[30]  L. Ljung State of the art in linear system identification: time and frequency domain methods , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference.

[31]  L. H. Sheng,et al.  Effective Stiffness and Equivalent Damping of Base-Isolated Bridges , 1993 .

[32]  Y. Wen Approximate Method for Nonlinear Random Vibration , 1975 .

[33]  S. Mallat A wavelet tour of signal processing , 1998 .

[34]  Stephen H. Crandall A half-century of stochastic equivalent linearization , 2006 .

[35]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Estimating time scales and length scales in pulselike earthquake acceleration records with wavelet analysis , 2011 .

[36]  Farzad Naeim,et al.  The Seismic Design Handbook , 1989 .