Seismic Response History Procedure: A Program For Nonlinear Structural Analysis
Seismic Response History Procedure: A Program For Nonlinear Structural Analysis
2. Equation of Motion
The seismic analysis/design is based on the following equation of motion.
.. . ..
[ m ]{u} + [c ]{u} + [ k ]{u} = { f g} [ m ]{u g } (Eq. 2.1)
Where:
{u} = Displacement vector at each floor diaphragm center points, including horizontal X,
Y directions, and rotation. Typical for velocity {} and acceleration {}.
[k] = Lateral stiffness full matrix based on each floor diaphragm center points, which
concentrated from each vertical 2D frames.
4 ( ) ( ) T 1T 2 [k ]
[c] = [m] +
T1 +T 2 (T 1 + T 2 ) (Eq. 2.2)
1. Only damping ratio of has been called out, 5%, on ASCE 7-10, 16.1.3 &
21.1.3. There are no other adapted law document for damping input. The
(Eq. 2.2) has reached the code requirement.
2. The (Eq. 2.2) is an applicable math method to solve the equation of
motion(Eq. 2.1), because structural period T1 & T2 are not constants in
nonlinear structural analysis. The T1 & T2 are changed in each time steps
after plastic hinges formed.
{fg } = Must be Zero vector. Otherwise, the equation (Eq. 2.1) cannot be solved as
classical damped system. The static gravity loads are not vectors changed on
time steps in Equation of Motion.
3. Lateral Resisting Frame
The lateral resisting frames are 2D vertical substructures.
The reasons to use 2D lateral resisting frame, not 3D, as substructure are
1. For steel design, the Special Moment Frame (SMF) is based on 2D requirements
of AISC 341-05 and AISC 358-05, and orthogonal moment frames sharing
common column are not permitted by 2010 CBC 2205A.5.
2. For concrete design, the biaxial bending cannot be separated. If orthogonal
moments exist con-currently, the ACI 318-08 Chapter 21 cannot be applied.
4. Finite Element
Nonlinear Beam-Column element:
1. Concrete beam/column/brace
2. Steel beam/column/brace
3. Super composite column
JOINTS = i to j
X = 0 ft 0 ft
Y = 16 ft 26 ft
o
= 90
E = 4030.50865 ksi
G = 1550.19564 ksi
A = 1080 in
I = 116640 in*
k = 1.2 , (1.2 for rectanglar section, 10/9 for circular section.)
2
= 12 E I k / (G A L ) = 2.82371095
i i i j j j
i 1115.763618 5.99382E-13 -71868.25492 -1115.763618 -5.99382E-13 -62023.37924
i 5.99382E-13 10900.39978 4.40246E-12 -5.99382E-13 -10900.39978 3.79939E-12
[K] = [T]T [k] [T] = i -71868.25492 4.40246E-12 5806401.165 71868.25492 -4.40246E-12 2817789.426
(kips, in) j -1115.763618 -5.99382E-13 71868.25492 1115.763618 5.99382E-13 62023.37924
j -5.99382E-13 -10900.39978 -4.40246E-12 5.99382E-13 10900.39978 -3.79939E-12
j -62023.37924 3.79939E-12 2817789.426 62023.37924 -3.79939E-12 4625016.083
Concrete Section Design Based on ACI 318-08
Section RC-1
No. 1
ANALYSIS
3500
3000
2500
2000
Pn (k)
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
-500
-1000
-1500
Mn (ft-k)
Pn (k) Mn (ft-k) (
2 0.85 f 'C ) '
AT AXIAL LOAD ONLY 2967 0
o = , E c = 57 f C , E s = 29000ksi
Ec
AT MAXIMUM LOAD 2967 790
2
AT 0 % TENSION 2570 1131
0.85 f C' 2 c c ,
for 0 < c < o
AT 25 % TENSION 2159 1390 fC= o o
AT 50 % TENSION 1830 1532 '
AT t = 0.002 1342 1674
0.85 f C , for c o
AT BALANCED CONDITION 1323 1695 s E s , for s t
AT t = 0.005 866 2074 fS =
f , for s > t
y
AT FLEXURE ONLY 0 1276
AT PURE TENSION -1080 0
WF, Tube, or Pipe Design Based on AISC 360-05
Section ST-1
No. 1
ANALYSIS
CHECK COMBINED COMPRESSION AND BENDING CAPACITY (AISC 360-05, H1)
P r 8 M rx M ry P r 0.2
+ + , for
c
P 9 M
cx M cy Pc
= 0.23 < 1.0 [Satisfactory]
P r M rx M ry P r < 0.2
+ + , for
2 P M M Pc
c cx cy
ANALYSIS
80000
60000
40000
20000
Pn (k) 0
0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000
-20000
-40000
-60000
-80000
Mn (ft-k)
JOINTS = 1 2 3 4
X = 288 in
Y = 120 in
t = 8 in, (thickness)
E = 3320.6 ksi
(wc1.5 33 f'c0.5 for concrete, 29000 ksi for steel)
1x 1y 2x 2y 3x 3y 4x 4y
6174.922507 -1211.24393 -956.3157582 269.7714154 -1969.676208 -963.1755491 -3248.930541 1904.648063 1x
-1211.24393 9967.162057 -74.77244726 -48.59230415 -618.6316864 -9431.3219 1904.648063 -487.2478529 1y
-956.3157582 -74.77244726 6414.402796 2892.834619 -3488.41083 -2199.430485 -1969.676208 -618.6316864 2x
[K] = [k11] - [k12] [k22]-1 [k21] = 269.7714154 -48.59230415 2892.834619 10749.07441 -2199.430485 -1269.16021 -963.1755491 -9431.3219 2y
(kips, in) -1969.676208 -618.6316864 -3488.41083 -2199.430485 6414.402796 2892.834619 -956.3157582 -74.77244726 3x
-963.1755491 -9431.3219 -2199.430485 -1269.16021 2892.834619 10749.07441 269.7714154 -48.59230415 3y
-3248.930541 1904.648063 -1969.676208 -963.1755491 -956.3157582 269.7714154 6174.922507 -1211.24393 4x
1904.648063 -487.2478529 -618.6316864 -9431.3219 -74.77244726 -48.59230415 -1211.24393 9967.162057 4y
-35.1828 1x 0.0020 1x
-59.6315 1y 0.0030 1y
-30.3125 2x 0.0040 2x
[F] = -19.1750 2y ] =
[ 0.0100 2y
(kips) 41.0183 3x (in) 0.0100 3x
86.9212 3y 0.0100 3y
24.4770 4x 0.0100 4x
-8.1147 4y 0.0100 4y
5. Input Data
The input data include structural information and ground acceleration, as shown on the
following example.
SMF-COL = 30" x 36" ,20 # 9 (7 # 9 at Bending Side), 4 Legs - # 5 @ 4" O.C. (ACI 318 21.6)
SMF-BM = 24" x 36" ,9 # 9 Top 6 # 9 Bot., 5 Legs - # 5 @ 8" O.C. (ACI 318 21.6)
Gravity-COL = 24" x 24" ,12 # 8, 4 Legs - # 4 @ 12" O.C., Continued as Built.
Gravity-BM = 20" x 24" ,4 # 8 Bot., 4 Legs - # 4 @ 12" O.C., Pinned both Ends.
fc' = 5 ksi fy = 60 ksi Mass & Moment of Inertia per 0.125 kips/ft2
0.2
A/g 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-0.2
-0.4
Time T, Seconds
VELOCITY
20
10
V 0
-10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-20
Time T, Seconds
Vmax = -14.216 in/s @ T= 1.580 sec
DISPLACEMENT
5
0
D
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-10
Time T, Seconds
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
Sa / g
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Period T, Seconds
Fig. 5.2 Input El Centro (100% at X direction & 30% at Y direction, ASCE 7-10 12.5)
6. Output Results
(1). Structural periods. The first structural period is not constant on Nonlinear
Structural Analysis. For the example of 5 story concrete building, after time step 0.82
sec, the structure changed from linear to nonlinear, and, at step 2.14 sec., the
structural period reached maximum value of 0.735 sec.
The 1 st Period
0.8
0.6
T 0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time, Seconds
Fig. 6.1 History Procedure of the first structural period, T1, of the example
The damping matrix, [c], is also updated at each time steps on nonlinear stage,
although damping ratio, , constantly 5%, which this concept is matched with the
passive physical damping. It is inadequate to keep damping matrix without changes,
and the analysis results are wrong.
(2). Equivalent base shear forces. The base shear forces at each directions may
govern concrete structural design.
800
600
400
200
V
0
-200 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-400
-600
-800
Time T, Seconds
Fig. 6.2 History Procedure of the Equivalent Base Shear force at X Direction
The maximum X direction base shear force is 692.3 kips (0.601 W) at time step 2.48
sec., which is larger than the load, 144 kips, by Equivalent Lateral Force Procedure
(ASCE 7-10 12.8).
(3). Story drifts. The story drift at each level and each direction always govern steel
structural design.
0.3
0.2
0.1
Drift 0
-0.1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-0.2
-0.3
Time T, Seconds
The maximum 2nd story drift, at Y direction, is 0.272 inch at time step 17.14 sec .The
code elastic allowable value is 0.35 inch based on Equivalent Lateral Force
Procedure (ASCE 7-10 12.8.6).
(4).Floor acceleration. The Floor acceleration at each level and each direction can be
used to design equipment mounting (special for School and Hospital).
ACCELERATION
1
0.5
A/g 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-0.5
-1
Time T, Seconds
The maximum 5th floor acceleration, at X direction, is 0.793 g, at time step 2.18
sec .The corresponding to Response Spectrum, with damping ratio of 2%, for
equipment mounting design, is shown on Fig. 6.5, which is much different with the
ground Response Spectrum on Fig. 5.2 (4).
The floor acceleration is bigger than ground, and the most equipment damping ratio
is 2%, not the same with building 5%, so the building code Response Spectrum may
not be directly apply to School and Hospital design.
(5).Other eyes to see structure. The software can set up eyes, as many as possible,
to record structural responses, including each joint movements, section forces,
although the non-linear section forces cannot be used with linear load combinations
(IBC/CBC 1605).
7. Conclusion
For any single actual structure, the earthquake is a point history procedure of ground
three dimensional movements. Based on the real recorded X, Y, (& even vertical Z)
direction ground accelerations, this SRHP software can directly check the structure if
adequate for both capacity and deformation, without probability and/or fuzzy math
(neither SRSS/CQC, nor Scale Factor).
Reference
Li, Tian (1997). A Study on Damping Values Applied to The Time-History Dynamic
Analysis of Structures, China Civil Engineering Journal, 30 (3), 68-73.
Li, Tian, and Wu, Xuemin (1992). Elasto-Plastic Dynamic Analysis of Multistory and
Complex Structures at Multi-Dimensional Ground Accelerations, Journal of Building
Structures, P. R. China, 13 (6), 2-11.
IBC (2009). International Building Code, International Code Council, Washington, DC.
ASCE 7 (2010). Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI
7-10), American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
ACI 318 (2008). Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and
Commentary, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.
AISC 360 (2005). Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 360-05), American
Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.
AISC 341 (2005). Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 341-05),
American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.
AISC 358 (2009). Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment
Frames for Seismic Applications (ANSI/AISC 358-05s1-09), American Institute of Steel
Construction, Chicago, IL.
Abbreviations
2D: Two Dimensional SMF-BM: Beam of Special Moment
Frame
3D: Three Dimensional
SMF-COL: Column of Special
DOF: Degree of Freedom Moment Frame
Gravity-BM: Gravity Beam SRSS: Square Root of Sum of
Gravity-COL: Gravity Column Squares
Q & A
1. Why this SRHP software results have made a big difference with others?
The SRHP software is more accurate than Modal Superposition Method, because the
Modal Superposition Method is a probability method, which always requires a Scale
Factor (ASCE 7 12.9.2, 12.9.4, & CBC 1614A.1.9) with SRSS/CQC, or even just SUM,
to reach the determined analysis results.
The physical damping concept is a passive force/load, not constant one. When
structural stiffness (periods) changed, the damping matrix [c] has to be updated, at each
time step.
3. Why the SRHP software does not include nonlinear shear wall?
The software can input nonlinear shear wall, since opening system. But as lateral frame,
shear wall cannot be designed with plastic hinges. Based on ACI 318-08 Chapter 21,
the SD level elastic section forces are always used to check shear wall capacity if
adequate, which means that the shear wall is linear within Mn capacity. Out-of fMn
capacity, the shear wall, no matter its linear or nonlinear, cannot be as lateral frame any
more.
Shear wall may keep gravity capacity, at upper-bound seismic load, but not plastic
hinge stiffness (dog bone).
The most lateral resisting frames are built by W-Shape steel with almost zero torsional
stiffness, and/or by concrete element with brittle torsional crushing. The current 3D
element stiffness matrix (12 x 12) cannot cover them well.
Although ASCE 7-10 included 3D nonlinear section, the upper level 2010 CBC general
section 1.1.7 say that the specific provision shall apply in the event of any differences
between ASCE 7 and ACI/AISC, so the 2D frame, based on ACI 318-08 Chapter 21 and
AISC 341-05/AISC 358-05, still governs lateral design.
Before the load combinations (IBC/CBC 1605), all loads have to be known. Also, all
load combinations are linear point combinations, not nonlinear history procedure
combinations.
This SRHP software is focus on getting correct seismic load (equivalent base shear
force) and the maximum value.
6. Why are artificial acceleration time history game?
There are very strong assumptions that have been made, from {P(t)} to -[m] {g}.
All real recordings of acceleration time history are ground acceleration, {g},
which from a mass that not included in the [m] of equation of motion, no
matter the recording point is at ground, roof, floor, soft soil, rigid soil, mountain
top, or valley bottom.
(2). All actual structural stiffness in the equation of motion, [k], is full matrix, which
means that all DOFs of responses coupled together. Any modification of real
recordings of acceleration time history, scale or filter, will result in some DOFs
responses inadequate.
(3). An artificial acceleration time history has the exactly same of response spectrum,
with a real recordings of acceleration time history, only means that the two time
histories have the same PROBABILITY of only one DOF in the real structure.