Performance assessment of buildings isolated by shape‐memory‐alloy rubber bearing: Comparison with elastomeric bearing under near‐fault earthquakes

The shape-memory-alloy supplemented rubber bearing (SMARB) has been recently proposed as a superior alternative to traditional elastomeric bearing, such as lead-rubber bearing (LRB), because of the dubious performance of conventional bearings under near-fault earthquakes. The present study establishes the significant improvement of performances in SMARB over the LRB in isolating multi-storeyed building frame against earthquakes. The response of the isolated building is evaluated through nonlinear dynamic time-history analysis under a set of recorded, near-fault, fault-normal component of ground motions. The optimal characteristic strengths for both the bearings are obtained through parametric study. The robustness of the improved performances are studied under varying characteristics of the superstructure, isolation bearing, as well as scenarios of seismic loading. It is demonstrated that the improvement of isolation efficiency, accompanied by considerable reduction of peak and residual bearing displacements can be attained by the SMARB over the LRB. The SMARB is also found to be more effective in suppressing transference of high-frequency components of ground motions to the floor acceleration, which is expected to be beneficial for frequency-sensitive equipment, mounted on the floors. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  R. S. Jangid,et al.  Performance of sliding systems under near-fault motions , 2001 .

[2]  Lucia Faravelli,et al.  Performance of a base isolator with shape memory alloy bars , 2007 .

[3]  Bassem O Andrawes,et al.  Application of shape memory alloy dampers in the seismic control of cable-stayed bridges , 2009 .

[4]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Optimal design of superelastic‐friction base isolators for seismic protection of highway bridges against near‐field earthquakes , 2011 .

[5]  Giuseppe Marano,et al.  Efficiency of base isolation systems in structural seismic protection and energetic assessment , 2003 .

[6]  F. Gandhi,et al.  Characterization of the pseudoelastic damping behavior of shape memory alloy wires using complex modulus , 1999 .

[7]  M. G. Castellano,et al.  Self‐centring capacity of seismic isolation systems , 2007 .

[8]  Stefan Hurlebaus,et al.  Evaluation of the performance of a sliding-type base isolation system with a NiTi shape memory alloy device considering temperature effects , 2010 .

[9]  Vasant Matsagar,et al.  Influence of isolator characteristics on the response of base-isolated structures , 2004 .

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

[11]  Donatello Cardone,et al.  THE BEHAVIOUR OF SMA ISOLATION SYSTEMS BASED ON A FULL-SCALE RELEASE TEST , 2006 .

[12]  E. J. Graesser,et al.  Shape‐Memory Alloys as New Materials for Aseismic Isolation , 1991 .

[13]  Julian J. Bommer,et al.  THE USE OF REAL EARTHQUAKE ACCELEROGRAMS AS INPUT TO DYNAMIC ANALYSIS , 2004 .

[14]  Satish Nagarajaiah,et al.  Semi‐active control of sliding isolated bridges using MR dampers: an experimental and numerical study , 2005 .

[15]  R. S. Jangid,et al.  Passive hybrid systems for earthquake protection of cable-stayed bridge , 2007 .

[16]  Gregory L. Fenves,et al.  Feasibility Assessment of an Innovative Isolation Bearing System with Shape Memory Alloys , 2009 .

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

[18]  S. Hurlebaus,et al.  Smart structure dynamics , 2006 .

[19]  S. Hurlebaus,et al.  Seismic Response Control Using Shape Memory Alloys: A Review , 2011 .

[20]  Arata Masuda,et al.  An overview of vibration and seismic applications of NiTi shape memory alloy , 2002 .

[21]  Farzad Naeim,et al.  On the Use of Design Spectrum Compatible Time Histories , 1995 .

[22]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Smart base‐isolated benchmark building part IV: Phase II sample controllers for nonlinear isolation systems , 2006 .

[23]  Vasant Matsagar,et al.  Seismic response of base-isolated structures during impact with adjacent structures , 2003 .

[24]  Lucia Faravelli,et al.  A passive control device with SMA components: from the prototype to the model , 2009 .

[25]  R. S. Jangid,et al.  Seismic behaviour of base-isolated buildings : a state-of-the-art review , 1995 .

[26]  Lucia Faravelli,et al.  An SMA passive device proposed within the highway bridge benchmark , 2009 .

[27]  Chin-Hsiung Loh,et al.  GA-based optimum design of a shape memory alloy device for seismic response mitigation , 2010 .

[28]  E. J. Graesser,et al.  A Proposed Three-Dimensional Constitutive Model for Shape Memory Alloys , 1994 .

[29]  Krzysztof Wilde,et al.  Base isolation system with shape memory alloy device for elevated highway bridges , 2000 .

[30]  Murat Dicleli,et al.  Supplemental elastic stiffness to reduce isolator displacements for seismic-isolated bridges in near-fault zones , 2007 .

[31]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Seismic Response Analysis of a Highway Overcrossing Equipped with Elastomeric Bearings and Fluid Dampers , 2004 .

[32]  Reginald DesRoches,et al.  Seismic retrofit of simply supported bridges using shape memory alloys , 2002 .

[33]  Eunsoo Choi,et al.  An isolation bearing for highway bridges using shape memory alloys , 2006 .

[34]  Y. Wen.  Equivalent Linearization for Hysteretic Systems Under Random Excitation , 1980 .

[35]  R. S. Jangid,et al.  Base isolation for near‐fault motions , 2001 .

[36]  Donatello Cardone,et al.  Mechanical behaviour of shape memory alloys for seismic applications 1. Martensite and austenite NiTi bars subjected to torsion , 2001 .

[37]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Structural control benchmark problem: Phase II—Nonlinear smart base-isolated building subjected to near-fault earthquakes , 2008 .

[38]  Osman E. Ozbulut,et al.  Superelastic semi‐active damping of a base‐isolated structure , 2008 .