Multi-component seismic response analysis - A critical review

Alfredo Reyes-Salazar, Arturo Lopez-Barraza, Alfonso Lopez-Lopez, Achintya Haldar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Issues related to multi-components seismic response analysis are critically reviewed and their implications with respect to the current codified approaches are studied. The issues specifically addressed are: (1) the directions of earthquake forces to excite a structure when the direction of the potential epicenter is known; (2) different commonly used combination rules to obtain the critical response when responses are available in different directions; and (3) the applicability of the combination rules for elastic and inelastic analyses. Based on an extensive parametric study consisting of three-dimensional 1-, 3-, 8-, and 15- story buildings made of moment-resisting steel frames and 20 recorded earthquakes, it is observed that the principal components produce larger responses than the normal components. The 30% and SSRS rules generally underestimate the axial loads in columns. The 30% combination rule is slightly better than the SSRS rule. For both rules, the uncertainty in the estimation of the axial loads in terms of COV is very large (about 25%). The statistics obtained for axial loads and total base shear indicate that the combination rules are applicable for both elastic and inelastic cases. The critical response could be obtained for an orientation different from that of the principal components. The differences are found to be slightly greater for the scaled earthquakes producing a considerable inelastic behavior. Considering the enormous amount of efforts needed to address the directionality effect, it is believed that the responses obtained by the principal components will be acceptable in most cases; however, for critical structures the components should be rotated to obtain the critical responses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)779-799
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of Earthquake Engineering
Volume12
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2008

Fingerprint

response analysis
Axial loads
Seismic response
seismic response
Earthquakes
earthquake
earthquake epicenter
steel
Statistics
Steel

Keywords

  • International Building Code
  • Multi-Component Seismic Inelastic Response
  • Multi-Degree of Freedom Systems
  • Principal Component and Combination Rules
  • Three-Dimensional Moment Resisting Steel Frames
  • Time History Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this

Multi-component seismic response analysis - A critical review. / Reyes-Salazar, Alfredo; Lopez-Barraza, Arturo; Lopez-Lopez, Alfonso; Haldar, Achintya.

In: Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 5, 06.2008, p. 779-799.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Reyes-Salazar, Alfredo ; Lopez-Barraza, Arturo ; Lopez-Lopez, Alfonso ; Haldar, Achintya. / Multi-component seismic response analysis - A critical review. In: Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2008 ; Vol. 12, No. 5. pp. 779-799.
@article{8c9e27887f8a4e53abcecce84520d4dc,
title = "Multi-component seismic response analysis - A critical review",
abstract = "Issues related to multi-components seismic response analysis are critically reviewed and their implications with respect to the current codified approaches are studied. The issues specifically addressed are: (1) the directions of earthquake forces to excite a structure when the direction of the potential epicenter is known; (2) different commonly used combination rules to obtain the critical response when responses are available in different directions; and (3) the applicability of the combination rules for elastic and inelastic analyses. Based on an extensive parametric study consisting of three-dimensional 1-, 3-, 8-, and 15- story buildings made of moment-resisting steel frames and 20 recorded earthquakes, it is observed that the principal components produce larger responses than the normal components. The 30{\%} and SSRS rules generally underestimate the axial loads in columns. The 30{\%} combination rule is slightly better than the SSRS rule. For both rules, the uncertainty in the estimation of the axial loads in terms of COV is very large (about 25{\%}). The statistics obtained for axial loads and total base shear indicate that the combination rules are applicable for both elastic and inelastic cases. The critical response could be obtained for an orientation different from that of the principal components. The differences are found to be slightly greater for the scaled earthquakes producing a considerable inelastic behavior. Considering the enormous amount of efforts needed to address the directionality effect, it is believed that the responses obtained by the principal components will be acceptable in most cases; however, for critical structures the components should be rotated to obtain the critical responses.",
keywords = "International Building Code, Multi-Component Seismic Inelastic Response, Multi-Degree of Freedom Systems, Principal Component and Combination Rules, Three-Dimensional Moment Resisting Steel Frames, Time History Analysis",
author = "Alfredo Reyes-Salazar and Arturo Lopez-Barraza and Alfonso Lopez-Lopez and Achintya Haldar",
year = "2008",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1080/13632460701672979",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "779--799",
journal = "Journal of Earthquake Engineering",
issn = "1363-2469",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multi-component seismic response analysis - A critical review

AU - Reyes-Salazar, Alfredo

AU - Lopez-Barraza, Arturo

AU - Lopez-Lopez, Alfonso

AU - Haldar, Achintya

PY - 2008/6

Y1 - 2008/6

N2 - Issues related to multi-components seismic response analysis are critically reviewed and their implications with respect to the current codified approaches are studied. The issues specifically addressed are: (1) the directions of earthquake forces to excite a structure when the direction of the potential epicenter is known; (2) different commonly used combination rules to obtain the critical response when responses are available in different directions; and (3) the applicability of the combination rules for elastic and inelastic analyses. Based on an extensive parametric study consisting of three-dimensional 1-, 3-, 8-, and 15- story buildings made of moment-resisting steel frames and 20 recorded earthquakes, it is observed that the principal components produce larger responses than the normal components. The 30% and SSRS rules generally underestimate the axial loads in columns. The 30% combination rule is slightly better than the SSRS rule. For both rules, the uncertainty in the estimation of the axial loads in terms of COV is very large (about 25%). The statistics obtained for axial loads and total base shear indicate that the combination rules are applicable for both elastic and inelastic cases. The critical response could be obtained for an orientation different from that of the principal components. The differences are found to be slightly greater for the scaled earthquakes producing a considerable inelastic behavior. Considering the enormous amount of efforts needed to address the directionality effect, it is believed that the responses obtained by the principal components will be acceptable in most cases; however, for critical structures the components should be rotated to obtain the critical responses.

AB - Issues related to multi-components seismic response analysis are critically reviewed and their implications with respect to the current codified approaches are studied. The issues specifically addressed are: (1) the directions of earthquake forces to excite a structure when the direction of the potential epicenter is known; (2) different commonly used combination rules to obtain the critical response when responses are available in different directions; and (3) the applicability of the combination rules for elastic and inelastic analyses. Based on an extensive parametric study consisting of three-dimensional 1-, 3-, 8-, and 15- story buildings made of moment-resisting steel frames and 20 recorded earthquakes, it is observed that the principal components produce larger responses than the normal components. The 30% and SSRS rules generally underestimate the axial loads in columns. The 30% combination rule is slightly better than the SSRS rule. For both rules, the uncertainty in the estimation of the axial loads in terms of COV is very large (about 25%). The statistics obtained for axial loads and total base shear indicate that the combination rules are applicable for both elastic and inelastic cases. The critical response could be obtained for an orientation different from that of the principal components. The differences are found to be slightly greater for the scaled earthquakes producing a considerable inelastic behavior. Considering the enormous amount of efforts needed to address the directionality effect, it is believed that the responses obtained by the principal components will be acceptable in most cases; however, for critical structures the components should be rotated to obtain the critical responses.

KW - International Building Code

KW - Multi-Component Seismic Inelastic Response

KW - Multi-Degree of Freedom Systems

KW - Principal Component and Combination Rules

KW - Three-Dimensional Moment Resisting Steel Frames

KW - Time History Analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=47549090816&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=47549090816&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13632460701672979

DO - 10.1080/13632460701672979

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:47549090816

VL - 12

SP - 779

EP - 799

JO - Journal of Earthquake Engineering

JF - Journal of Earthquake Engineering

SN - 1363-2469

IS - 5

ER -