Seismic pounding damage to adjacent reinforced concrete frame–shear wall buildings and freestanding contents
Yang Lu
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorFeng Xiong
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ming-Ming Ran
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Correspondence
Ming-Ming Ran, Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, No. 24 South Section 1, Yihuan Road, Chengdu, 610065, PR China.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorQi Ge
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorJianze Wang
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
State Key Lab of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
Search for more papers by this authorYang Lu
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorFeng Xiong
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ming-Ming Ran
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Correspondence
Ming-Ming Ran, Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, No. 24 South Section 1, Yihuan Road, Chengdu, 610065, PR China.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorQi Ge
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
Search for more papers by this authorJianze Wang
Key Laboratory of Deep Underground Science and Engineering, Ministry of Education, College of Architecture and Environment, Sichuan University, Chengdu, PR China
State Key Lab of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Closely spaced tall buildings are common in modern urban areas due to limited supply of land to accommodate rapid growth of population. These buildings are vulnerable in seismically active regions particularly when earthquake-induced pounding occurs between adjacent buildings, resulting in high floor acceleration spikes that may lead to excessive demands on building contents (BCs). This paper examines the effect of seismic pounding on damage to adjacent reinforced concrete (RC) frame–shear wall buildings and their freestanding contents using nonlinear response-history analyses (RHA). A cascading analysis approach is adopted to obtain absolute floor accelerations of pounding tall buildings, which are then applied to determine response of freestanding contents dominated by either sliding or rocking motions. In order to provide a useful tool for practicing engineers and facilitate analyses, the buildings are simplified as story-based multiple-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) flexural-shear models, and unanchored contents are idealized as single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) oscillators, all of which are approximated using OpenSees and verified against solutions to their exact equations of motion solved using Matlab. It is shown that seismic pounding leads to higher building damage and alters story damage distribution patterns. It is concluded that pounding significantly increases sliding potential and maximum sliding displacement demands on stocky contents, especially those on higher floors. The transitions of stick–slip response of the contents coincide well with pounding occurrences. It is also concluded that pounding has detrimental effects on slender rocking contents, but rocking rotation histories of these contents do not show abrupt changes upon impact.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no potential conflict of interests.
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- 1Miari M, Choong KK, Jankowski R. Seismic pounding between adjacent buildings: identification of parameters, soil interaction issues and mitigation measures. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2019; 121: 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.02.024
- 2Anagnostopoulos SA. Pounding of buildings in series during earthquakes. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1988; 16(3): 443–456. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290160311
- 3Anagnostopoulos SA, Spiliopoulos KV. An investigation of earthquake induced pounding between adjacent buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1992; 21(4): 289–302. http://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290210402
- 4Kasai K, Jagiasi AR, Jeng V. Inelastic vibration phase theory for seismic pounding mitigation. J Struct Eng. 1996; 122(10): 1136–1146. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1996)122:10(1136)
- 5LIN JH. Separation distance to avoid seismic pounding of adjacent buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1997; 26(3): 395–403. h ttps://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199703)26:3<395::AID-EQE655>3.0.CO;2-F
- 6Zanardo G, Hao H, Modena C. Seismic response of multi-span simply supported bridges to a spatially varying earthquake ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2002; 31(6): 1325–1345. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.166
- 7Masroor A, Mosqueda G. Experimental simulation of base-isolated buildings pounding against moat wall and effects on superstructure response. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2012; 41(14): 2093–2109. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2177
- 8Mavronicola EA, Polycarpou PC, Komodromos P. Spatial seismic modeling of base-isolated buildings pounding against moat walls: effects of ground motion directionality and mass eccentricity. Earth Eng Struct Dyn. 2017; 46(7): 1161–1179. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2850
- 9Pant DR, Wijeyewickrema AC. Structural performance of a base-isolated reinforced concrete building subjected to seismic pounding. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2012; 41(12): 1709–1716. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2158
- 10Mavronicola EA, Polycarpou PC, Komodromos P. Effect of ground motion directionality on the seismic response of base isolated buildings pounding against adjacent structures. Eng Struct. 2020; 207:110202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110202
- 11Agarwal VK, Niedzwecki JM, van de Lindt JW. Earthquake induced pounding in friction varying base isolated buildings. Eng Struct. 2007; 29(11): 2825–2832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.01.026
- 12Dai K, Luo X, Lu Y, et al. Seismic collision potential of adjacent base-isolated buildings with corridor bridges subjected to bidirectional near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2020; 135:106202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106202
- 13Ghandil M, Aldaikh H. Damage-based seismic planar pounding analysis of adjacent symmetric buildings considering inelastic structure-soil-structure interaction. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2017; 46(7): 1141–1159. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2848
- 14Fatahi B, Van Nguyen Q, Xu R, Sun Wj. Three-dimensional response of neighboring buildings sitting on pile foundations to seismic pounding. Int J Geomech. 2018; 18(4):04018007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001093
- 15Lu Y, Xiong F, Yan H, Ge Q. Dimensional analysis of dynamic interaction between adjacent SDOF buildings to forward directivity and fling step pulses. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2021; 149:106831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106831
- 16Jeng V, Tzeng W. Assessment of seismic pounding hazard for Taipei City. Eng Struct. 2000; 22(5): 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00123-0
- 17Efraimiadou S, Hatzigeorgiou GD, Beskos DE. Structural pounding between adjacent buildings subjected to strong ground motions. Part I: the effect of different structures arrangement. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2013; 42(10): 1509–1528. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2285
- 18Kazemi F, Miari M, Jankowski R. Investigating the effects of structural pounding on the seismic performance of adjacent RC and steel MRFs. Bull Earthq Eng. 2021; 19(1): 317–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00985-y
- 19Bhagat S, Wijeyewickrema AC. Seismic collapse probability considering pounding and financial loss estimation of base-isolated reinforced concrete buildings. J Earthq Tsunami. 2018; 12(03):1850008. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793431118500082
- 20Konstantinidis D, Nikfar F. Seismic response of sliding equipment and contents in base-isolated buildings subjected to broadband ground motions. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2015; 44(6): 865–887. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2490
- 21Lin SL, MacRae GA, Dhakal RP, Yeow TZ. Building contents sliding demands in elastically responding structures. Eng Struct. 2015; 86: 182–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.004
- 22Linde SA, Konstantinidis D, Tait MJ. Rocking response of unanchored building contents considering horizontal and vertical excitation. J Struct Eng. 2020; 146(9):04020175. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002735
- 23Fragiadakis M, Diamantopoulos S. Fragility and risk assessment of freestanding building contents. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2020; 49(10): 1028–1048. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3276
- 24D'Angela D, Magliulo G, Cosenza E. Seismic damage assessment of unanchored nonstructural components taking into account the building response. Struct Saf. 2021; 93:102126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2021.102126
- 25Contento A, Di Egidio A. On the use of base isolation for the protection of rigid bodies placed on a multi-storey frame under seismic excitation. Eng Struct. 2014; 62-63: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.01.019
- 26Bao Y, Konstantinidis D. Dynamics of a sliding-rocking block considering impact with an adjacent wall. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2020; 49(5): 498–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3250
- 27Jaimes MA, Arredondo C, Fernández-Sola L. Rocking of non-symmetric rigid blocks in buildings considering effects associated with dynamic soil-structure interaction. J Earthq Eng. 2018; 22(8): 1509–1536. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1286620
- 28Al Abadi H, Paton-Cole V, Gad E, Lam N, Patel V. Rocking behavior of irregular free-standing objects subjected to earthquake motion. J Earth Eng. 2019; 23(5): 793–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2017.1342305
- 29Buccella N, Wiebe L, Konstantinidis D, Steele T. Demands on nonstructural components in buildings with controlled rocking braced frames. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2021; 50(4): 1063–1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3385
- 30Di Egidio A, Contento A. Seismic response of a non-symmetric rigid block on a constrained oscillating base. Eng Struct. 2010; 32(10): 3028–3039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.022
- 31Harvey PS. Behavior of a rocking block resting on a rolling isolation system. J Eng Mech. 2017; 143(8):04017045. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001249
- 32McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL. Nonlinear finite-element analysis software architecture using object composition. J Comput Civil Eng. 2010; 24(1): 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000002
- 33Xiong C, Lu X, Guan H, Xu Z. A nonlinear computational model for regional seismic simulation of tall buildings. Bull Earthq Eng. 2016; 14(4): 1047–1069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9880-0
- 34Miranda E, Taghavi S. Approximate floor acceleration demands in multistory buildings. I: formulation. J Struct Eng. 2005; 131(2): 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:2(203)
- 35Steelman JS, Hajjar JF. Influence of inelastic seismic response modeling on regional loss estimation. Eng Struct. 2009; 31(12): 2976–2987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.07.026
- 36Ibarra L, Krawinkler H. Global Collapse of Frame Structures under Seismic Excitations [Technical report 152]. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford Digital Repository; 2005. http://purl.stanford.edu/dj885ym2486.
- 37Konstantinidis D, Makris N. Experimental and analytical studies on the response of freestanding laboratory equipment to earthquake shaking. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2009; 38(6): 827–848. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.871
- 38Housner GW. The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 1963; 53(2): 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0530020403
10.1785/BSSA0530020403 Google Scholar
- 39D'Angela D, Magliulo G, Cosenza E. Towards a reliable seismic assessment of rocking components. Eng Struct. 2021; 230:111673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111673
- 40Diamantopoulos S, Fragiadakis M. Seismic response assessment of rocking systems using single degree-of-freedom oscillators. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2019; 48(7): 689–708. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3157
- 41Diamantopoulos S, Fragiadakis M. Modeling of rocking frames under seismic loading. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3558
- 42Vassiliou MF, Mackie KR, Stojadinović B. Dynamic response analysis of solitary flexible rocking bodies: modeling and behavior under pulse-like ground excitation. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2014; 43(10): 1463–1481. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2406
- 43Liu H, Huang Y, Qu Z. A discretely damped SDOF model for the rocking response of freestanding blocks. Earthq Eng Eng Vib. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-022-2085-4
- 44Vassiliou MF, Broccardo M, Cengiz C, et al. Shake table testing of a rocking podium: results of a blind prediction contest. Earth Eng Struct Dyn. 2021; 50(4): 1043–1062. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3386
- 45Vassiliou MF, Sieber M. Dimensionality reduction of the 3D inverted pendulum cylindrical oscillator and applications on sustainable seismic design of bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3575
- 46 MATLAB. MATLAB Version 9.2.0. R2017a. 2017.
- 47 ATC-63. Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors [Technical report FEMA P-695]. Redwood City, CA; 2009.
- 48 GB50011. Code for Seismic Design of Buildings. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press; 2010.
- 49 ASCE/SEI7-16. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2017
- 50Crozet V, Politopoulos I, Yang M, Martinez JM, Erlicher S. Sensitivity analysis of pounding between adjacent structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 2018; 47(1): 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2949
- 51Chopra AK, McKenna F. Modeling viscous damping in nonlinear response history analysis of buildings for earthquake excitation. Earth Eng Struct Dyn. 2016; 45(2): 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2622
- 52Nikfar F, Konstantinidis D. Effect of the stick-slip phenomenon on the sliding response of objects subjected to pulse excitation. J Eng Mech. 2017; 143(4):04016122. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001183
- 53Park Y, Ang AH, Wen YK. Seismic damage analysis of reinforced concrete buildings. J Struct Eng. 1985; 111(4): 740–757. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1985)111:4(740)
- 54Williams MS, Sexsmith RG. Seismic damage indices for concrete structures: a state-of-the-art review. Earthq Spectra. 1995; 11(2): 319–349. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585817
10.1193/1.1585817 Google Scholar