Seismic performance of steel MRF building with nonlinear viscous dampers

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study of the seismic response of a 0.6-scale three-story seismic-resistant building structure consisting of a moment resisting frame (MRF) with reduced beam sections (RBS), and a frame with nonlinear viscous dampers and associated bracing (called the DBF). The emphasis is on assessing the seismic performance for the design basis earthquake (DBE) and maximum considered earthquake (MCE). Three MRF designs were studied, with the MRF designed for 100%, 75%, and 60%, respectively, of the required base shear design strength determined according to ASCE 7-10. The DBF with nonlinear viscous dampers was designed to control the lateral drift demands. Earthquake simulations using ensembles of DBE and MCE ground motions were conducted using the real-time hybrid simulation method. The results show the drift demand and damage that occurs in the MRF under seismic loading. Overall, the results show that a high level of seismic performance can be achieved under DBE and MCE ground motions, even for a building structure designed for as little as 60% of the base shear design strength required by ASCE 7-10 for a structure without dampers.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

seismic response / steel MRF / nonlinear viscous damper / design basis earthquake / real-time hybrid simulation

References

[1] ASCE. Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41–06). American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 2007

[2] BSSC. NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures (FEMA P-750 2009 Edition). Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D C, 2009

[3] ASCE. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures (ASCE/SEI 7–10). American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, 2010

[4] Constantinou M C, Symans M D. Experimental and analytical investigation of seismic response of structures with supplemental fluid viscous dampers. NCEER Rep. No.92- 0032, State University of New York at Buffalo, N Y, 1992

[5] Reinhorn A M, Li C, Constantinou M C. Experimental and analytical investigation of seismic retrofit of structures with supplemental damping. Part i: Fluid viscous damping devices.Technical Rep. No. NCEER-95–0001, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State Univ. of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, N Y, 1995

[6] Seleemah A, Constantinou M C. Investigation of seismic response of buildings with linear and nonlinear fluid viscous dampers. Report No. NCEER 97–0004, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State Univ. of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, N Y, 1997

[7] Whittaker A S, Constantinou M C, Ramirez O M, Johnson M W, Chrysostomou C Z. Equivalent lateral force and modal analysis procedures of the 2000 NEHRP provisions for buildings with damping systems. Earthquake Spectra, 2003, 19(4): 959–980

[8] Charney F A, McNamara R J. A comparison of methods for computing equivalent viscous damping ratios of structures with added viscous damping. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 134(1): 32–44

[9] Takewaki I, Yoshitomi S. Effects of support stiffness on optimal damper placement for a planar building frame. Structural Design of Tall Buildings, 1998, 7(4): 323–336

[10] Singh M P, Moreschi L M. Optimal placement of dampers for passive response control. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2002, 31(4): 955–976

[11] Wongprasert N, Symans M D. Application of a genetic algorithm for optimal damper distribution within the nonlinear seismic benchmark building. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2004, 130(4): 401– 406

[12] Chen Y T, Chai Y H. Effects of brace stiffness on performance of structures with supplemental Maxwell model–based brace–damper systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2011, 40(1): 75–92

[13] Pekcan G, Mander J B, Chen S S. Fundamental considerations for the design of nonlinear viscous dampers. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 1999, 28(11): 1405–1425

[14] Terenzi G. Dynamics of SDOF systems with nonlinear viscous damping. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 1999, 125(8): 956–963

[15] Lin W, Chopra A. Earthquake response of elastic single-degree-of-freedom systems with nonlinear viscoelastic dampers. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 2003, 129(6): 597–606

[16] Sorace S, Terenzi G. Seismic protection of frame structures by fluid viscous damped braces. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 134(1): 45–55

[17] AISC. Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360–10). American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois, 2010

[18] AISC. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 341–10). American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois, 2010

[19] AISC. Prequalified connections for special and intermediate steel moment frames for seismic applications (ANSI/AISC 358–10). American Institute of Steel Construction Inc, Chicago, Illinois, 2010

[20] Dong B. Large-scale experimental, numerical, and design studies of steel MRF structures with nonlinear viscous dampers under seismic loading. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University, 2015

[21] Chopra A K. Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. 4th ed. Prentice Hall: New Jersey, 2011

[22] Sause R, Hemingway G J, Kasai K. Simplified seismic response analysis of viscoelasticdamped frame structures. Proceedings of the 5th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1994, I: 839–848

[23] Dong B, Sause R, Ricles J M.Accurate real-time hybrid earthquake simulations on large-scale MDOF steel structure with nonlinear viscous dampers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2016, 44(12): 2035–2055

[24] PEER NGA. Pacific Engineering Research Database. 2008

[25] Galambos T V, Ellingwood B. Serviceability limit states: deflection. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1986, 112(1): 67–84

[26] Ellingwood B R. Earthquake risk assessment of building structures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2001, 74(3): 251–262

[27] McCormick J, Aburano H, Ikenaga M, Nakashima M. Permissible residual deformation levels for building structures considering both safety and human elements. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. 2008

[28] Engelhardt M D, Winneberger T, Zekany A J, Potyraj T J. Experimental investigation of dogbone moment connections. Engineering Journal, 1998, 35(4): 128–139

[29] Chi B, Uang C M. Cyclic response and design recommendations of reduced beam section moment connections with deep columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2002, 128(4): 464–473

[30] Zhang X, Ricles J M. Experimental evaluation of reduced beam section connections to deep columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2006, 132(3): 346–357

[31] Lignos D G, Kolios D, Miranda E. Fragility assessment of reduced beam section moment connections. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2010, 136(9): 1140–1150

[32] Lignos D G, Krawinkler H. Deterioration modeling of steel components in support of collapse prediction of steel moment frames under earthquake loading. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2011, 137(11): 1291–1302

Acknowledgements

This paper is based upon work supported by grants from National Science Foundation, Award No. CMS-0936610 in the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation Research (NEESR) program, and Grant No. CMS-0402490 for the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) consortium operations. Support was also provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development through the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Technology Alliance. The experiments were conducted at the NEES Real-Time Multi-Directional (RTMD) earthquake simulation facility located at the ATLSS Center at Lehigh University. The authors acknowledge the contributions of the NEES RTMD staff and the ATLSS Center staff. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of those acknowledged here.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2016 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg