Seismic Analysis of Regular and Irregular Reinforced Concrete Framed Building Using Lead Rubber Bearing

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 42-52
Author(s):  
Dharmesh N. ◽  
V. Devaraj
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
SINGH RAVIKANT ◽  
KUMAR SINGH VINAY ◽  
YADAV MAHESH ◽  
◽  
◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 875529302098196
Author(s):  
Siamak Sattar ◽  
Anne Hulsey ◽  
Garrett Hagen ◽  
Farzad Naeim ◽  
Steven McCabe

Performance-based seismic design (PBSD) has been recognized as a framework for designing new buildings in the United States in recent years. Various guidelines and standards have been developed to codify and document the implementation of PBSD, including “ Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings” (ASCE 41-17), the Tall Buildings Initiative’s Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings (TBI Guidelines), and the Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design Council’s An Alternative Procedure for Seismic Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings Located in the Los Angeles Region (LATBSDC Procedure). The main goal of these documents is to regularize the implementation of PBSD for practicing engineers. These documents were developed independently with experts from varying backgrounds and organizations and consequently have differences in several degrees from basic intent to the details of the implementation. As the main objective of PBSD is to ensure a specified building performance, these documents would be expected to provide similar recommendations for achieving a given performance objective for new buildings. This article provides a detailed comparison among each document’s implementation of PBSD for reinforced concrete buildings, with the goal of highlighting the differences among these documents and identifying provisions in which the designed building may achieve varied performance depending on the chosen standard/guideline. This comparison can help committees developing these documents to be aware of their differences, investigate the sources of their divergence, and bring these documents closer to common ground in future cycles.


Author(s):  
Iswandi Imran ◽  
Marie Hamidah ◽  
Tri Suryadi ◽  
Hasan Al-Harris ◽  
Syamsul Hidayat

<p>In order to overcome stringent seismic requirement in the new Greater Jakarta Light Rail Transit Project, a breakthrough seismic system shall be chosen to obtain expected structural performance. This seismic system shall be designed to provide operational performance level after strong earthquake events. To achieve the criteria, seismic isolation system using Lead Rubber Bearings is chosen. With this isolation system, Greater Jakarta LRT has become the first seismically isolated infrastructure and apparently an infrastructure with the largest numbers of LRBs in one single project in Indonesia. More than 10.400 Pcs LRBs are used for the first phase of the construction and the numbers will be certainly increased in the next phase of the construction. To evaluate the structural performance, non-linear time history analysis is used. A total of 3 pair matched ground motions will be used as the input for the response history analysis. The ability of the lead rubber bearing to isolate and dissipate earthquake actions will determine its structural performance level. This will be represented by the nonlinear hysteretic curves obtained throughout the earthquake actions.</p>


2018 ◽  
Vol 195 ◽  
pp. 02013
Author(s):  
Santi Nuraini ◽  
Asdam Tambusay ◽  
Priyo Suprobo

Advanced nonlinear analysis in light rail transit (LRT) structures has been undertaken to examine the influence of seismic isolation devices for reducing seismic demand. The study employed the use of two types of commercially available bearings, namely lead rubber bearing (LRB) and friction pendulum system (FPS). Six LRT structures, designed to be built in Surabaya, were modelled using computer-aided software SAP2000, where each of the three structures consisted of three types of LRB and FPS placed onto the pier cap to support the horizontal upper-structural member. Nonlinear static pushover and dynamic time history analysis with seven improved ground motion data was performed to gain improved insights on the behavioural response of LRT structures, allowing one to fully understand the supremacy of seismic isolations for protecting the structure against seismic actions. It is shown that both devices manage to isolate seismic forces, resulting in alleviation of excessive base shear occurring at the column. In addition, it is noticeable that the overall responses of LRB and FPS shows marginal discrepancies, suggesting both devices are interchangeable to be used for LRT-like structures.


2012 ◽  
Vol 268-270 ◽  
pp. 646-655
Author(s):  
Fabio de Angelis ◽  
Donato Cancellara

In the present work we discuss on the seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete existing buildings. In particular we consider a reinforced concrete building originally designed for only gravitational loads and located in a zone recently defined at seismic risk. According to the Italian seismic code NTC 2008 a displacement based approach is adopted and the N2-method is considered for the nonlinear seismic analysis. In the analysis all the masonry infill panels in effective interaction with the structural frame are considered for the nonlinear modeling of the structure. The influence of the effective masonry infills on the seismic response of the structure is analyzed and it is discussed how the effect of the masonry infills irregularly located within the building can give rise to a worsening of the seismic performance of the structure. It is shown that in the present case a not uniform positioning of the masonry infills within the building can give rise to a fragile structural behavior in the collapse mechanism. Furthermore a comparative analysis is performed by considering both the structure with the effective masonry infills and the bare structural frame. For these two structures a pushover analysis is performed, the relative capacity curves are derived and it is shown that fragile collapse mechanisms can occur depending on the irregular positioning of the effective masonry infills. Accordingly it is discussed how in the present case a decoupling of the effective masonry infills from the structural frame can give rise to a smoother response of the capacity curves. For the examined case of an obsolete building with irregular positioning of the masonry panels, the choice of decoupling the effective masonry panels from the structural frame may facilitate the retrofitting strategies for the achievement of the proper safety factors at the examined limit states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document