جستجو در تالارهای گفتگو

Comparison between non-linear dynamic and static seismic analysis of structures according to European and US provisions مقایسه تحلیل لرزه ای استاتیکی و دینامیکی غیر خطی بر مبنای آیین نامه اروپا و آمریکا Mehmed Causevic · Sasa Mitrovic Abstract Several procedures for non-linear static and dynamic analysis of structures have been developed in recent years. This paper discusses those procedures that have been implemented into the latest European and US seismic provisions: non-linear dynamic time-history analysis; N2 non-linear static method (Eurocode 8); non-linear static procedure NSP (FEMA 356) and improved capacity spectrum method CSM (FEMA 440). The presented methods differ in respect to accuracy, simplicity, transparency and clarity of theoretical background. Non-linear static procedures were developed with the aim of overcoming the insufficiency and limitations of linear methods, whilst at the same time maintaining a relatively simple application. All procedures incorporate performance-based concepts paying more attention to damage control. Application of the presented procedures is illustrated by means of an example of an eight-storey reinforced concrete frame building. The results obtained by non-linear dynamic time-history analysis and non-linear static procedures are compared. It is concluded that these non-linear static procedures are sustainable for application. Additionally, this paper discusses a recommendation in the Eurocode 8/1 that the capacity curve should be determined by pushover analysis for values of the control displacement ranging between zero and 150% of the target displacement. Maximum top displacement of the analyzed structure obtained by using dynamic method with real time-history records corresponds to 145% of the target displacement obtained using the non-linear static N2 procedure. Keywords Non-linear dynamic analysis · Non-linear static methods · Pushover analysis · N2, NSP and CSM methods منبع مقایسه_تحلیل_استاتیکی_و_دینامیکی.pdf

Performance Evaluation of Viscoelastic and Friction Passive Damping System in Steel Structures Mohammad Taghi Kazemia; Hosein Hoseini Additional dampers are employed in order to decrease the dynamic response of structure against the earthquake and wind loading recently. In this study, two types of systems related to waste of inactive energy, i.e. frictional damper which is categorized in dampers dependent on movement and viscoelastic damper which is categorized in dampers dependent on velocity, in making steel structures resistant are investigated and evaluated. Results of structures with dampers (viscoelastic damper, friction damper and combination of both dampers) were compared with the results of structures without damper. Increasing trend in dissipating energy was observed. Then, the behavior of these dampers in frames of 4, 8 and 12 stories was studied by modeling the damper directly. The analyses were conducted via nonlinear time history technique and by using earthquake records (near fault and far fault) scaled with peak acceleration and SAP 2000 14.2.2 software. The results indicate the appropriate function of the selected dampers in controlling and decreasing the seismic responses of the structure. Given that in frictional dampers the maximum force created in the damper is specified, the use of this damper in resistance building of structures is very effective especially by considering the limitation of structure capacity. منبع دانلود JSEG391435606200.pdf

Seismic Performance of Torsionally Stiff and Flexible Single Story Buildings Designed Based on Iranian Seismic Code(Standard 2800) Seiyed Ali Haj Seiyed Taghia; A.S. Moghadam This paper examines differences in performances of a range of torsionally stiff and flexible single story buildings designed with the provisions of Iranian Standard 2800. Seismic nonlinear dynamic time history behavior of eight building models subjected to seven horizontal bi-directional design spectra compatible ground motions are investigated. These models cover a wide range of very torsionally stiff to very flexible buildings. Response parameters are element ductility demand and building story drift ratio. These criteria are appropriate indices for structural and nonstructural damages, respectively. This investigation shows that the linear static analysis of building code such as Iranian Standard 2800 is not generally adequate for structures with very low torsional stiffness. منبع دانلود JSEG271354307400.pdf