International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials

Korea Concrete Institute (한국콘크리트학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Isolation Period Difference and Beam-Column Stiffness Ratio on the Dynamic Response of Reinforced Concrete Buildings

  • Chun, Young-Soo (Land and Housing Institute, Korea Land & Housing Corporation) ;
  • Hur, Moo-Won (Department of Architectural Engineering, Dankook University)
  • Received : 2015.01.21
  • Accepted : 2015.11.12
  • Published : 2015.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed the isolation effect for a 15-story reinforced concrete (RC) building with regard to changes in the beam-column stiffness ratio and the difference in the vibration period between the superstructure and an isolation layer in order to provide basic data that are needed to devise a framework for the design of isolated RC buildings. First, this analytical study proposes to design RC building frames by securing an isolation period that is at least 2.5 times longer than the natural vibration period of a superstructure and configuring a target isolation period that is 3.0 s or longer. To verify the proposed plan, shaking table tests were conducted on a scaled-down model of 15-story RC building installed with laminated rubber bearings. The experimental results indicate that the tested isolated structure, which complied with the proposed conditions, exhibited an almost constant response distribution, verifying that the behavior of the structure improved in terms of usability. The RC building's response to inter-story drift (which causes structural damage) was reduced by about one-third that of a non-isolated structure, thereby confirming that the safety of such a superstructure can be achieved through the building's improved seismic performance.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Land and Housing Institute

References

  1. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2010). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7-10.
  2. Architectural Institute of Korea. (2009). Korean Building Code and Commentary (KBC) (in Korean).
  3. Ariga, T., Kanno, Y., & Takewaki, I. (2006). Resonant behaviour of base isolated high-rise buildings under long-period ground motions. Structural Design Tall Special Buildings, 15, 325-338. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.298
  4. Casciati, F., & Hamdaoui, K. (2008). Modelling the uncertainty in the response of a base isolator. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 23, 427-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2007.10.014
  5. China Association for Engineering Construction Standardization. (2001). Technical specification for seismic-isolation with laminated rubber bearing isolators. CECS126 (in Chinese).
  6. Chun, Y. S., Son, C. H., Joo, I. D., Ahn, K. S., Kim, J. P., & Choi, K. Y. (2007). Development of flat plate structure with base isolation system and analysis of economical efficiency. Research Report of Housing & Urban Research Institute, pp. 30-36.
  7. Deb, S. K. (2004). Seismic base isolation-an overview. Current Science, 87(10), 1426-1430.
  8. Di Egidio, A., & Contento, A. (2010). Seismic response of a non-symmetric rigid block on a constrained oscillating base. Engineering Structures, 32, 3028-3039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.022
  9. Dicleli, M., & Buddaram, S. (2007). Comprehensive evaluation of equivalent linear analysis method for seismic-isolated structures represented by SDOF systems. Engineering Structures, 29, 1653-1663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.09.013
  10. Feng, D. (2007). A comparative study of seismic isolation codes worldwide. Proceedings of SIViC international seminar (pp. 1-28).
  11. Feng, D., et al. (2012). A new design procedure for seismically isolated buildings based on seismic isolation codes worldwide. Proceedings of 15WCEE: Paper No. 0435. Lisbon, Portugal.
  12. Japan Society of Seismic Isolation (JSSI). (2006). Response control and seismic isolation of buildings. Tokyo, Japan: JSSI (in Japanese).
  13. Kilar, V., & Koren, D. (2009). Seismic behaviour of asymmetric base isolated structures with various distributions of isolators. Engineering Structures, 31, 910-921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.12.006
  14. Komodromos, P., Polycarpou, P., Papaloizou, L., & Phocas, M. (2007). Response of seismically isolated buildings considering poundings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 36, 1605-1622. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.692
  15. Korea Society of Seismic Isolation and Vibration Control (SIVIC). (2009). Isolation design manual and collection of practical examples. Technical Report. Seoul, Korea (in Korean).
  16. Ministry of Construction, P. R. China. (2010). Code for Seismic Design of Buildings. GB50011-2010 (in Chinese).
  17. Olsen, A., Aagaard, B., & Heaton, T. (2008). Long-period building response to earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay area. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(2), 1047-1065. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120060408
  18. Roehl, J. L. (1972). Dynamic response of ground-excited building frames. Houston, TX: Rice University.

Cited by

  1. Optimum Proportion of Masonry Chip Aggregate for Internally Cured Concrete vol.11, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-017-0196-5
  2. Effects of the isolation parameters on the seismic response of steel frames vol.15, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.3.319
  3. Effects of Inherent Structural Characteristics on Seismic Performances of Aseismically Base-Isolated Buildings vol.44, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-019-00317-4