JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Evaluation of combination rules for multi-story buildings with asymmetric set-backs
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Earthquakes and Structures
  • Volume 11, Issue 1,  2016, pp.179-193
  • Publisher : Techno-Press
  • DOI : 10.12989/eas.2016.11.1.179
 Title & Authors
Evaluation of combination rules for multi-story buildings with asymmetric set-backs
Aksoylu, M. Gunhan; Durgun, Yavuz; Darilmaz, Kutlu;
 Abstract
The effectiveness of 100/30, 100/40 and SRSS directional combination rules on the response of asymmetric setback buildings is examined. Because of the irregularity in setback buildings, the maximum seismic response would be correlative with the direction of earthquake. To verify the directional combination rules of mode superposition methods, the time history analyses of setback buildings to real earthquake records are carried out. Example analyses have been used to compare the validty and accuracy of SRSS and percentage methods for frame and dual frame-wall systems.
 Keywords
combination rules;seismic analysis;multi-story buildings;asymmetric set-backs;
 Language
English
 Cited by
1.
Estimating seismic response under bi-directional shaking per uni-directional analysis: Identification of preferred angle of incidence, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 106, 163  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
ATC-63 (2010), Quantification of Building System Performance and Response Parameters, FEMA.

2.
American Society of Civil Engineers (1986), Seismic Analysis of Safety Nuclear Structures and Commentary on Standard for Seismic Analysis of Safety Related Nuclear Structures, New York, 91.

3.
Cacciola, P.E., Colajanni, P.E. and Muscolino, P.E. (2004), "Combination of Modal Responses Consistent with Seismic Input Representation", ASCE, 130(1), 47-55. crossref(new window)

4.
Cantagallo, C., Camataa, G. and Spaconeb, E. (2015), "Influence of ground motion selection methods on seismic directionality effects", Earthq. Struct., 8(1), 185-204. crossref(new window)

5.
Correnza, J.C. and Hutchinson, G.L. (1994), "Effect of transverse load resisting elements on inelastic response of eccentric-plan buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 23(1), 75-89. crossref(new window)

6.
Fontara, I.-K.M., Kostinakis, K.G., Manoukas, G.E. and Athanatopoulou, A.M. (2015), "Parameters affecting the seismic response of buildings under bi-directional excitation", Struct. Eng. Mech., 53(5), 957-979. crossref(new window)

7.
Jayatilake, I.N., Dias, W.P.S., Jayasinghe, M.T.R. and Thambiratnam, D.P. (2010), "Response of tall buildings with symmetric setbacks under blast loading", J. Nat. Sci. Found., Sri Lanka, 38(2), 115-123.

8.
Gupta, I.D. and Joshi, R.G. (1998), "An improved spectrum superposition method for structures with rigid modes", Nuclear Eng. Des., 185(2), 293-307. crossref(new window)

9.
Joshi, R.G. and Gupta, I.D. (1998), "On the relative performance of spectrum superposition methods considering modal interaction effects", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 17(6), 357-369. crossref(new window)

10.
Gao, X.A., Zhou, X.Y. and Wang, L. (2004), "Multi-component seismic analysis for irregular structures", 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 1156, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.

11.
Gonzalez, P. (1992), "Considering earthquake direction on seismic analysis", Earthquake Engineering, Tenth World Conference 1992, Balkema, Rotterdam.

12.
Giuseppe, Muscolino, Alessandro, Palmeri and Claudia, Versaci (2013), "Damping-adjusted combination rule for the response spectrum analysis of base-isolated buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 42(2), 163-182. crossref(new window)

13.
Kostinakis, K., Athanatopoulou, A. and Avramidis, I. (2013), "Evaluation of inelastic response of 3D singlestory R/C frames under bi-directional excitation using different orientation schemes", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 11(2), 637-661. crossref(new window)

14.
Kostinakis, K.G., Athanatopoulou, A.M. and Tsiggelis, V.S. (2013), "Effectiveness of percentage combination rules for maximum response calculation within the context of linear time history analysis", Eng. Struct., 56, 36-45. crossref(new window)

15.
Kostinakis, K., Morfidis, K. and Xenidis, H. (2015), "Damage response of multistorey r/c buildings with different structural systems subjected to seismic motion of arbitrary orientation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 44(12), 1919-1937. crossref(new window)

16.
Li, H.N., Sun, L. and Song, G. (2004), "Modal combination method for earthquake resistant design of tall structures to multidimensional excitations", Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., 13(4), 245-263. crossref(new window)

17.
Lopez, O.A., Chopra, A.K. and Hernandez, J.J. (2004), "Adapting the CQC3 rule for three seismic components with different spectra", ASCE, 130(3), 403-410. crossref(new window)

18.
Lucchini, A., Monti, G. and Kunnath, S. (2011), "Nonlinear response of two-way asymmetric single-story building under biaxial excitation", J. Struct. Eng., 137(1), 34-40. crossref(new window)

19.
Maleki, S. and Bisadi, V. (2006), "Orthogonal effects in seismic analysis of skewed bridges", ASCE, 11(1), 122-130.

20.
Newmark, N.M. (1975), "Seismic design criteria for structures and facilities, Trans-Alaska pipeline system", Proceedings of the U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Institute, 94-103.

21.
Newmark, N.M. (1975), "Seismic design criteria for structures and facilities, trans-Alaska pipeline system", Proceedings of the U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, 94-103.

22.
Penzien, J. and Watabe, M. (1975), "Characteristics of 3-Dimensional earthquake ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 3(4), 365-373.

23.
Rosenblueth, E. (1980), Design of Earthquake Resistance Structures, Pentech Press Ltd.

24.
Rosenblueth, E. and Contreras, H. (1977), "Approximate design for multicomponent earthquakes", J. Eng. Mech. Div., ASCE, 103(5), 881-893.

25.
Smeby, W. and Der Kiureghian, A. (1985), "Modal combination rules for multicomponent earthquake excitation", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 13(1), 1-12. crossref(new window)

26.
Rosenblueth, E. and Contreras, H. (1977), "Approximate design for multicomponent earthquakes", J. Eng. Mech. Div., ASCE, 103, 895-911.

27.
Reyes-Salazar, A., Juárez-Duarte, J.A., López-Barraza, A. and Velázquez-Dimas J.I. (2004), "Combined effect of the horizontal components of earthquakes for moment resisting steel frames", Steel Compos. Struct., 4(3), 89-209.

28.
Reyes-Salazar, A., Lopez-Barraza, A., Lopez-Lopez, A. and Haldar, A. (2008), "Multiple-components seismic response analysis - A critical review", J. Earthq. Eng., 12(5), 779-799. crossref(new window)

29.
Rigato, A. and Medina, R. (2007), "Influence of angle of incidence on seismic demands for inelastic singlestorey structures subjected to bi-directional ground motions", Eng. Struct., 29(10), 2593-2601. crossref(new window)

30.
Salazar, A.R., Duarte, J.A.J., Barraza, A.L. and Haldar, A. (2004), "Combination rules for the effects of the horizontal components of earthquakes: A critical evaluation", 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper No.1994, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.

31.
TS500 (2000), Requirements for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Turkish Standards.

32.
TSC2007, Specification for Buildings to be Built in Seismic Zones (2007), Ministry of Public Works and Settlement Government of Republic of Turkey.

33.
Wilson, E.L., Suharwardy, I. and Habibullah, A. (1995), "A clarification of the orthogonal effects in a threedimensional seismic analysis", Earthq. Spectra, 11(4), 659-666. crossref(new window)