Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회논문집)

Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Seismic Responses of Updated Lumped-Mass Stick Model and Shaking Table Test Results

업데이트된 집중질량스틱모델과 진동대실험 지진응답 비교

  • Sun, Hwichang (Department of Civil Engineering, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Hong, Sanghyun (Department of Civil, Environmental & Plant Engineering, Hanyang University) ;
  • Roh, Hwasung (Department of Civil Engineering, Chonbuk National University)
  • 선휘창 (전북대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 홍상현 (한양대학교 건설환경플랜트공학과) ;
  • 노화성 (전북대학교 토목공학과)
  • Received : 2019.05.02
  • Accepted : 2019.06.13
  • Published : 2019.07.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A conventional lumped-mass stick model is based on the tributary area method to determine the masses lumped at each node and used in earthquake engineering due to its simplicity in the modeling of structures. However the natural frequencies of the conventional model are normally not identical to those of the actual structure. To solve this problem, recently an updated lumped-mass stick model is developed to provide the natural frequencies identical to actual structure. The present study is to investigate the seismic response accuracy of the updated lumped-mass stick model, comparing with the response results of the shaking table test. For the test, a small size four-story steel frame structure is prepared and tested on shaking table applying five earthquake ground motions. From the comparison with shaking table test results, the updated model shows an average error of 3.65% in the peak displacement response and 9.68% in the peak acceleration response. On the other hand, the conventional model shows an average error of 5.15% and 27.41% for each response.

Keywords

References

  1. Huo L, Qu C, Li H. TLCD Parametric optimization for the vibration control of building structures based on linear matrix inequality. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2014 Jun; Article ID. 527530.
  2. Halabian AM, El Naggar MH, Vickery BJ. Nonlinear seismic response of reinforced-concrete free-standing towers with application to TV towers on flexible foundations. The Structural Design of Tall Buildings, 2002 Apr;11(1):51-72. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.190
  3. Wilson JL. Earthquake response of tall reinforced concrete chimneys. Engineering Structures, 2003 Jan;25(1):11-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00098-6
  4. Varma V, Reddy GR, Vaze KK. and Kushwaha HS. Simplified approach for seismic analysis of structures. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics. 2002;2(2):207-225. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021945540200052X
  5. Paskalov A, Saudy A, Elgohary M. Response of ACR-1000 nuclear power plant to eastern north America high frequency input motions. Proceeding 19th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMIRT-19). 2007 Aug. Toronto, Canada.
  6. Huang YN, Whittaker AS, Luco N. Seismic performance assessment of base-isolated safety-related nuclear structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 2010 Sep;39(13):1421-1442. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1038
  7. Agrawal S, Jain AK. Seismic analysis of a S-curved viaduct using stick and finite element models. International Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering. 2009;3(2):34-44.
  8. Wibowo H, Sanford DM, Buckle IG, Sanders D. Preliminary parametric study of the effects of live load on seismic response of highway bridges. Proceedings of the 10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 2014 Jul. Anchorage, Alaska.
  9. Amirihormozaki E, Pekcan G, Itandi A. Analytical modeling of horizontally curved steel girder highway bridges for seismic analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2015 Sep;19(2):220-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2014.962667
  10. Roh H, Ovileto ND, Reinhorn AM. Experimental test and modeling of hollow-core composite insulators. Nonlinear Dynamics. 2012 Sep; 69(4):1651-1663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-012-0376-4
  11. Chen B, Guo WH, Li PY, Xie WP. Dynamic response and vibration control of the transmission tower-line system: A State-of-the-Art Review. The Scientific World Journal. 2014 Jul; Article ID. 538457.
  12. Chopra AK. Dynamics of structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall. New Jersey. c2014.
  13. Roh H, Youn J, Lee H, Lee JS. Development of a new lumped-mass stick model using the eigen-properties of structures. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. 2012 Aug;16(4):19-26. https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2012.16.4.019
  14. Roh H, Lee, H, Lee JS. New lumped-mass-stick model based on modal characteristics of structures: development and application to a nuclear containment building. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration. 2013 Jun;12(2):307-317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-013-0173-1
  15. Lee H, Ou YC, Roh H, Lee JS. Simplified model and seismic response of integrated nuclear containment system based on frequency adaptive lumped-mass stick modeling approach. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2015 Sep;19(6):1757-1766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-1295-3
  16. Ou YC, Hashlamon I, Kim WS, Roh H. Development of basic technique to improve seismic response accuracy of tributary area-based lumped-mass stick models. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration. 2019 Jan;18(1):113-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-019-0493-x