Statistical insight into constant‐ductility design using a non‐stationary earthquake ground motion model

SUMMARY A recently developed earthquake ground motion model non-stationary in both intensity and frequency content is validated at the inelastic Single-Degree-Of-Freedom (SDOF) structural response level. For the purpose of this study, the earthquake model is calibrated for two actual earthquake records. The objective of a constant (or target) displacement ductility used in conventional earthquake-resistant design is examined from the statistical viewpoint using this nonstationary earthquake model. The non-linear hysteretic structural behaviour is modelled using several idealized hysteretic SDOF structural models. Ensemble-average inelastic response spectra corresponding to various inelastic SDOF response (or damage) parameters and conditioned on a constant displacement ductility response are derived from the two identified stochastic ground motion models. The e⁄ects of the type of hysteretic behaviour, the structural parameters, the target displacement ductility factor, and the ground motion model on the statistics of the inelastic response parameters are thoroughly investigated. The results of this parametric study shed further light on the proper interpretation and use of inelastic response or damage parameters in earthquake-resistant design in order to achieve the desirable objective of ‘constant-damage design’. ( 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  A. Ang,et al.  Seismic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Buildings , 1985 .

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

[3]  Y. K. Wen,et al.  Damage-Limiting Aseismic Design of Buildings , 1987 .

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

[5]  M. Shinozuka,et al.  Digital simulation of random processes and its applications , 1972 .

[6]  R. Clough.  Effect of stiffness degradation on earthquake ductility requirements , 1966 .

[7]  W. J. Hall,et al.  Earthquake Energy Absorption in SDOF Structures , 1984 .

[8]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  Cumulative damage in steel structures subjected to earthquake ground motions , 1983 .

[9]  R. Bouc.  Forced Vibration of Mechanical Systems with Hysteresis , 1967 .

[10]  Vitelmo V. Bertero,et al.  An Evaluation of Inelastic Seismic Design Spectra , 1981 .

[11]  Joel P. Conte,et al.  An explicit closed-form solution for linear systems subjected to nonstationary random excitation , 1996 .

[12]  M. Shinozuka,et al.  Modeling of Concrete Damage , 1989 .

[13]  Vitelmo V. Bertero,et al.  Evaluation of Strength Reduction Factors for Earthquake-Resistant Design , 1994 .

[14]  Peter Fajfar,et al.  Equivalent ductility factors, taking into account low‐cycle fatigue , 1992 .

[15]  Graham H. Powell,et al.  Seismic damage prediction by deterministic methods: Concepts and procedures , 1988 .

[16]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  Performance Assessment of Steel Components , 1987 .

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

[18]  Martin S. Williams,et al.  Seismic Damage Indices for Concrete Structures: A State-of-the-Art Review , 1995 .

[19]  A. Ang,et al.  Mechanistic Seismic Damage Model for Reinforced Concrete , 1985 .

[20]  Joel P. Conte,et al.  Fully nonstationary analytical earthquake ground-motion model , 1997 .

[21]  D. Thomson,et al.  Spectrum estimation and harmonic analysis , 1982, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[22]  Chin-Hsiung Loh,et al.  Seismic damage assessment based on different hysteretic rules , 1990 .

[23]  W. J. Hall,et al.  Assessment of Seismic Structural Damage , 1989 .

[24]  Mario H. Rodriguez,et al.  A measure of the capacity of earthquake ground motions to damage structures , 1994 .

[25]  H. Krawinkler,et al.  The Mexico Earthquake of September 19, 1985—Behavior of Steel Buildings , 1989 .