THE EFFECT OF STRUCTURAL POUNDING DURING SEISMIC EVENTS

Abstract

This project entitled aims at the investigation of the effect of structural pounding to the dynamic response of structures subject to strong ground motions. In many cases structural pounding during earthquake may result in considerable and incalculable damages. It usually need to be accounted for in the case of adjacent structures, bridges, base isolated buildings, industrial and port facilities, and in ground pipelines. The phenomenon of that impact force pounding has been noted by researchers and engineers over the past several decades. As we see through dull historical strokes and performance, in different investigations of past and recent earthquakes damage have illustrated several cases of pounding damage such as those that have occurred in the Imperial Valley (May 18, 1940), the Sequenay earthquake in Canada (1988), Kasai & Maison (1991), the Cairo earthquake (1992), the Northridge earthquake (1994), California (1994), Kobe, Japan (1995) Turkey (1999), Taiwan (1999) and Bhuj, Central Western India (2001). Some of the most memorable seismic events were in the 1972 Managua earthquake, when the five-storey Grant Hotel suffered a complete collapse, also in the 1964 Alaska earthquake, the 14-storey Anchorage Westwood hotel pounded against its low rise ballroom and the most recently extent of pounding in Mexico City in 1985 confirmed this as a major problem. Those all evidences have continued to illustrate the annihilation of earthquakes, with devastation of engineered in both buildings and bridges structures. Amongst the feasible structural destructions, seismic produced pounding has been frequently distinguished in numerous earthquakes, as a result this phenomenon plays a key role to the structures. As engineers, we have a responsibility to prevent it or take the necessary steps to mitigate it for the future constructions by considering the properties that affect and led pounding to occur. In order to examine the effect of the various parameters associated with pounding forces on the dynamic response of a seismically excited structure, a number of simulations and parametric studies have been performed, using SAP2000. By more precise investigations that have been done from professional earthquake investigators and engineers pounding produces acceleration and shear at various story levels. Also, significantly depends on the gap size between superstructure segments, which we will examine later on in the project. The main aim of the project is to conduct a detailed investigation on pounding-involved response structure during a seismic event as well as observed the structural behaviour as the result of ground motion excitation by examine the properties that affect pounding and determine the solutions and the mitigations that we have to take into account before we construct a structure in order to avoid future disasters.

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Seismic Pounding effect (Overview)

Looking throughout the time, investigations and observations of the effects of historical earthquakes have demonstrated that many structures are susceptible to significant damage which may lead to collapse. Numerous devastating earthquakes have hit various seismically active regions. Some investigations that have been followed after those seismic events are distinguished fact providing that, an earthquake within the range of six is capable of creating and generating incalculable and irreversible damages, of both buildings and bridges. Those seismic losses have further consequences, most likely to present economical problem to the community hit. The main target of most seismic excitations are, the primary frequencies of rigid buildings between the ranges of low to medium height, resulting by this in significant accumulations of soil acceleration. Also, addition to this is the causing the presence of the inevitable enduring seismic loads in engineered structures, creating inflexible responses. In recent years it becomes more urgent need to minimize seismic damage not only to avoid structures failures but especially in crucial building facilities such as hospitals, telecommunications etc. as well as the protection of the critical equipment that is accommodated by those buildings.

(a)barrier rail damage (Northridge earthquake 1994)

(b)Connector collapse (Northridge earthquake 1994)

In seismically active areas the phenomenon of pounding may need to be accounted for, in the case of closely spaced structures to avoid extensive damages and human losses. The phenomenon of that impact force-pounding has been noted by earthquake investigators over the past several decades when the presence of pounding occurred into an extent. Looking throughout the time, some historical performance of pounding has been denoted, different investigations of past and recent earthquakes damage have illustrated several cases of pounding damage such as those that have occurred in the Imperial Valley (May 18, 1940), California (1994) the Northridge earthquake, Kobe, Japan (1995) and etc. in both engineered structures, buildings and bridges. One of the most remarkable example of pounding-involved destruction resulted from interactions between the Olive View Hospital main building and one of its independently standing stairway towers during the San Fernando earthquake of 1971. The extent of pounding was recently observed in Mexico City in 1985, which then it follows the most recent one in Central Western India (2001). Considerable pounding was observed at sites over 90 km from the epicentre thus indicating the possible catastrophic damage that may occur during future earthquakes having closer epicentres. Is remarkable to denote that pounding of adjacent buildings could have defective damage such as adjacent structures with different dynamic characteristics which vibrate out of phase and there is inadequate separation gap or energy diffusion system to board the relative moderate motions of adjacent buildings.

(a)Collapse of a department store building (Northridge earthquake 1994)

(b)Collapse of the first story of a wooden residential building (Northridge earthquake 1994)

Several researchers considered the topic of pounding between adjacent buildings (Anagnostopoulos 1988; Maison & Kasai, 1990; Papadramakis et al, 1996) with proving or deriving mathematical expression in order to evaluate and calculate the pounding force, by using experimental procedures. But few people have actually addressed the topic of pounding between adjacent buildings (Tsai, 1997; Malhotra, 1997; Matsagar & Jangid, 2003; Komodromos et al 2007) for which the behaviour and the requirements differ from the conventional structures. Likewise, those projects are limited especially to the study and investigation of pounding between adjacent buildings and based isolated buildings without investigating the case of conflict with neighbouring buildings and the resulting of great deformations of the superstructure.

In the past engineers couldn’t prevent the pounding due to some factors such as the past seismic codes did not give explicit guidance, because of this and due to particular economical factors and considerations, that are concerning the maximum land usage requirements, especially in the high density populated areas of cities pounding was unavoidable. Due to that, we are able to identify and investigate many buildings in global system which are already been built in contact or overmuch close to another that could easily cause them to suffer from pounding damage in future earthquake strikes. A large rupture is controvertible from both aspects. The overcrowded construction system in many cities complements a dominant apprehension for seismic pounding damage. For these major reasons, it has been comprehensively acquired that pounding is a disastrous phenomenon that should be anticipated or mitigated. Acceleration range will guidance in many cases to quake activities which are appreciably higher than designed by the design codes that have been used up to now.

The most affordable and easy active way for mitigating pounding effects and diminishing pounding damage, is to consider enough separation gap size between close adjacent structures, this causing difficulties to be accomplished, owing to the detailing engineered work that supposed to be done and the high cost of land in this present time. A flipside to the seismic separation gap precaution in the construction design is to reduce the effect or pounding force through devaluating lateral motion, some researchers involved in extent with lateral ground motions due to pounding such as (Kasaiet al. 1996, Abdullah et a.2001, Jankowski et al 2000, Ruangrassamee & Kawashima 2003, Kawashima & Shoji 2000). This procedure can be accomplished by joining adjacent structures at critical locations of the supports so that their motion could be in-phase with one another or by lessening the pounding buildings damping capacity by means of passive structural control of energy dissipation system.

1.2 Pounding force and impact element

Various impact elements are usually used to illustrate the pounding between adjoining construction buildings or bridge structures. Pounding between two conflicting structures, is often simulates by using contact force-based impact models such as the linear spring, Kelvin-Voigt element and Hertz contact model element, and additionally the restitution momentum-based stereo mechanical method.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 1.2.1 shows the pounding problem in: (a) bridge structures [1] S. Mithikimar and R. DesRoches 2006; (b) adjacent buildings with link elements [2] V. Annasaheb Matsagar and R. Shyam Jangid 2005; (c) adjacent building with gap size structures [1] S. Mithikimar and R. DesRoches 2006;

Also another view of pounding effect beyond that in buildings is on the bridges. Many damages during strong earthquakes have occurred in bridge due to pounding between the girders when the gap is not sufficient. From many experimental studies that have been made showed that pounding damage of a bridge can have severe after-effects as it has been observed in many major earthquakes, such as the 1994 Northridge earthquake etc. As we can see from our daily routine bridges belong to one of the important lifeline systems, their proper function play major role in both our life and in the culture, especially after a devastating earthquake in order to survive and/or recovery.

According to some studies [3] Chouw and Hao (2003) and [4] Hai SUI et al. (2004) showed that gap size in the bridges plays the major key role for a bridge to survive under a pounding impact force. The examined the gap size and the outcomes showed that a smaller gap size can expect larger pounding force; therefore the possibility of damage of bridge decks is higher. So on in general designs a small gap should be avoided, if is possible. Moreover according to their experiment the results showed that friction device can decrease pounding impact force that works in different earthquakes.

a) Multiple-pier bridge model [4] H. SU, et al 2004;

b) Two Single degree of freedom model [4] H. SU, et al 2004;

An adequate gap size can contribute to the reduction of pounding effect, but nevertheless in real life the gap size for the designs is unavoidable and due to the limited space that we have to build the design the gap size end up to has smaller values. And thus we resort to other solutions in order to reduce the pounding effect, such as the friction device and bumpers (steel spring with viscous damper). Moreover friction device is much more practical and effective than bumpers. Bumpers can avoid the immediate damage but they cannot reduce the pounding force between the bridge girders, in the other hand friction device can be applied to any earthquake and also is less sensitive to various ground movements.

Linear spring element

The linear spring element is the easiest and simplest contact element that used to model impact. When the gap between the adjoining structures adjournments, the spring take effect and is presentational of the force established in the meanwhile of impact force. According to Maison & Kasai [5] (1992) have used this model widely, to study further analyse pounding between adjacent buildings. Nonetheless, the linear spring cannot resolve the energy dissipation during impact. The linear spring element illustrated in Figure 1.2.3(a).

The Kelvin-Voigt Element

The Kelvin-Voigt element can be described by a linear spring in parallel with a damper, as depicted in Figure 1.2.3(b), this model has been used in some studies [6] Anagnostopoulos, 1988; [7] Anagnostopoulos and Spiliopoulos, 1992; [8] Jankowski 2005; The linear spring illustrates the force during impact and the damper accounts for the energy dissipation during impact and is mostly used. The damping coefficient (ck) can be related to the coefficient of restitution (e), by equating the energy dissipations during impact, following the form of equations below:

Where, and Kk is the stiffness of the contact spring, and m1, m2 are the masses of the colliding bodies.

Hertz contact law

Additionally, a non linear spring based on Hertz contact law can be used to model impact, as depicted in Figure 1.2.3(c). Nonetheless, the Hertz contact law is a characteristic representing of the static contact between elastic bodies and fails to contain energy loss during impact. The impact force can be expressed in the form of the equation below:

Where R is the impact stiffness parameter that depends on the material properties of the colliding structures and the contact surface geometry, g is the at-rest separation and n is the Hertz coefficient.

The use of the Hertz contact law has an intuitive appeal in modelling pounding, since one would expect the contact area between the colliding structures to increase as the contact force increases, leading to a non-linear stiffness described by the Hertz coefficient n which typically is taken ad 1.5. Several analysts have adopted this approach, including [9] Davis 1992; [10] Pantelides and Ma 1998; [11] Chau and Wei 2001; and [3] Chau et al. 2003;

More, for pounding simulation we can also meet the Hertzdamp model, which is a contact model based on the Hertz contact law and using a non linear hysteresis damper. According to experimental theories, for low peak ground acceleration levels, Hertz model produces sufficing results and the Hertzdamp model can be used in advance for moderate and high peak ground acceleration levels (PGA).

The contact element approach has its limitations, with the exact value of spring stiffness to be used, being unclear. Uncertainty in the impact stiffness arises from the unknown geometry of the impact surfaces, uncertain material properties under loading and variable impact velocities. The contact spring stiffness is typically taken as the in plane axial stiffness of the colliding structure (Maison and Kasai, 1990). Another reasonable estimate is twenty times the stiffness of the stiffer structure [6] Anagnostopoulos, 1988; However, using a very stiff spring can lead to numerical convergence difficulties and unrealistically high impact forces. The solution difficulties arise from the large changes in stiffness upon impact or contact loss, thus resulting in large unbalanced forces affecting the stability of the assembled equations of motion.

(a) Linear spring element

(b) Kelvin Voigt Element

(c) Hertz non-linear spring element

Figure 1.2.3: Various impact models and their contact force relations [12] Thomas G.Mezger 2006;

1.3 Method of Seismic Analysis

1.3.1 Non-linear Dynamic Analysis

Non-linear Dynamic analysis involves step-by step in time integration of the non-linear governing equations of motion, a powerful analysis that can evaluate any given seismic event motion. An earthquake accelerogram is correlated and the consistent response-history of a structural model during seismic events is evaluated. Computer software’s have been designed for these kinds of purposes. Sap can utilized a non-linear dynamic analysis for both linear elastic and non-linear inelastic material response, using step by step integration methods. Is a suitable computer program that is able to evaluate and analyze the response of a two-dimensional and a three-dimensional non-linear structure taking as an input the accelerogram component of an Earthquake? This program will be used to analyse our structural model and to produce a real time of time-history displacement. In a nonlinear dynamic procedure the building model followed static procedures incorporating directly the inelastic material response using in general finite elements. Because this program is using step-by step integration method of analysis the response of the structure, is one of the most sophisticated analysis procedure for predicting forces and displacements under seismic input. However, the calculated response can be very sensitive to the characteristics of the individual ground motion used as seismic input; therefore several time-history analyses are required using different ground motion records. The main value of nonlinear dynamic procedures has the objective to simulate the behaviour of a building structure in detail.

1.4 Main Objectives of this project

The main focus of this project is the development of an analytical model that pounding force will present based on the classical impact theory by using parametric study to identify the most important parameters that affecting pounding. Those factors that give arise to that impact force, therefore investigate of the different practical types of structures that pounding can be occurred. The main objective and scope of this study are, to explore the global response of buildings structures when the pounding effects take place under seismic events, therefore to review the main outcomes of the literature and how the impact theory come across to the practical cases. Create a structural modelling and perform a non linear time history analysis on it. Examine the realistic model of pounding that we will create if it satisfies the properties in order for the structure to work. Determine the relative importance of the dynamic characteristics of pounding.

Dynamic analysis will be carried out on the model structure to observe the displacement of the structure due to earthquake excitation. When we examine the main structure we are mainly concerned with displacement, velocity and acceleration, the general dynamic behaviour of the structure under the action of dynamic loads such as earthquake lateral loads. For the purpose of the project appropriate computer software will be used for its purposes (e.g. SAP2000). Creation and versatile of the model, accomplishment of the analysis, and checking and breakthrough of the design must be all done through this interface. Graphical displays of the results, including the real-time of time-history displacements will be easily produced by the use of that software.

At the end of that modelling analysis by gathering all the necessary and useful outcomes and explored in deep the main parameters derived by this, the conclusion and results of what we have to adopt as engineering before retrofitting a structure. The appropriate structural parameters are the separation gap size between adjacent structures (storey mass, structural stiffness and yield strength etc.), the dynamic behaviour of a damped multi-degree of freedom bridge system separated by an expansion joint, considering the limited width of clearance around a seismically isolated buildings, that pounding can cause high over stresses when the colliding buildings have different height, periods or masses and the isolators in bridge structures are effective in mitigating the induced seismic forces, cable restrainers etc.

Engineers should adopt those realistic facts before they construct new structures in order to succeed future sustainability of the structures and avoiding by this the impact phenomenon of pounding. Accomplish to mitigate the phenomenon of pounding in order to prevent future collisions and/or engineering disasters when seismic events occur.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Practical Cases

Pounding-impact force generated by earthquakes between different analytical structure models may provoke extensive damage and in general most of the times the result of that force is not pleasant, it may lead the structure to a total collision as it can be seen from different practical cases. Pounding problem is phenomenon that has been observed during earthquakes and in accordance to ground motions, and has been extensively investigated by various researchers’ that have used a variety of impact analytical models. Because of the importance of what pounding will have as a result of different engineering structures, attracted the attention of several scientists and analyzers? This absorption is a consequence fact of a plenty growing amount of evidence, which can be found in reports and journals, which have been created after dominant exceeding earthquakes. Demonstrating, the power of that certain impact force which may cause considerable damage. The conclusions and results of successive series of various numerical, integrated analytical and experimental studies have been conducted using individual structural models and administering different models of practical cases confirm that pounding, due to constraining additional impact forces, may result in damage as well as significantly increase the structural response.

Moreover, there are many practical case histories of engineered buildings with different dynamic properties and characteristics, which have been constructed under the old earthquake resistant design codes. Analogous conditions concern also bridge constructions. When a structure is under earthquake vibrations will move according to ground motions. These vibrations can be entirely exaggerated, creating at the same time stresses and deformations throughout the structure. Evaluation of methods can be carry out in engineering practise to estimate the parameters that give a rise to pounding. The accuracy and the ability of computational appliance have increased a lot this century by helping us evaluate the seismic structural response of structure, a variety of software’s computing programs have been designed for those purposes, and can accomplished to calculate the dynamic seismic response of a structure which help engineers mitigate pounding effects in structure by avoiding future disasters . Linear and nonlinear models are realistic pounding models that have been used for studying the performance of a structural system under the mode of structural pounding effect under seismic events. Significance to notice in seismically active areas the serious hazard that pounding can cause and in what practical cases does it occurs by review of some critical and enlightened journals and reports, according to history performance of an exceeding major earthquakes. Also a time history analysis is a dynamic tool for the investigation of a structural seismic enforcement. Because of all the above reasons, investigations have been carried out on pounding mitigation in order to improve the seismic response.

2.1.1 Linear and non-linear pounding of structural systems

Pantellides and Ma [13] examined by experimental procedures, the dynamic response of a damped single degree-of-freedom structural model during a seismic event. They analysed the structural behaviour of SDF with both elastic and inelastic structural impact response by using realistic parameters for the pounding model in numerical calculations of the earthquake response. The method of analysis that they used can be used to examine pounding in both buildings and bridges. In order to accomplished to evaluate the effects that concerning pounding force during earthquake in structures, they made a comparison between linear and non-linear models. In the non-linear pounding model they produced results that showed the one-sided pounding model produces more dangerous effects than the two-sided. In their analysis they derived a mathematical equation that concerns the impact force effects in order to represent pounding model for both elastic and inelastic structures.

A realistic pounding element was used for this studying and numerical simulations have demonstrated that pounding impact behaviour is not responsive to the values of the stiffness parameter. Furthermore, their experimental results for both elastic and inelastic structures in order to balance damping levels have showed that the higher deformation occurred in the elastic model. According to some observations that have been made the values of pounding force is relatively small in the inelastic structures in comparison to the elastic structures. The value codes of moderate the damping levels are controlled as compared to the actual seismic separation gap size found through the analysis of SDF structural model. The value of seismic gap is decreased considerably as the damping capacity of the pounding structural model is increased.

Jankowski [14], addressed to an extent of a non-linear modelling due of earthquake that generated pounding of structural buildings, by deriving the essential fundamental mathematical expressions, involving the function and the applications of the non-linear analysis. By analysing various earthquake records, he derived appropriate mathematical expressions showing the limitation and the feasibility of a non-linear model, in anticipating values for a seismic pounding gap size as well as values for mass, elastic stiffness and damping coefficients between buildings. In his analysis of two inadequately separated buildings with different dynamic characteristics, modelled by elastoplastic multi-degree-of-freedom lumped mass models are used to simulate the functioning structural behaviour and non-linear viscoelastic impact specificity elements are applied to a model collision. The results of the study demonstrate that pounding has an indicative impact on the behaviour of structural buildings, and furthermore the results that he derived confirm the performance of the non-linear, viscoelastic model which endures to simulate the pounding phenomenon more accurately.

2.1.2 Seismic Pounding Effects between adjacent buildings

In these last decades, the pounding phenomenon between closely spaced building structures can be a serious hazard especially in seismically active areas with strong ground motion. Because of that critical fact a beneficial awareness of pounding response on engineer structures and numerical formulas for calculating building separation gap size based on linear or analogous linear methods have been introduced.

Abdel Raheem [14] established and achieved a tool for the inelastic analysis of seismic pounding effect between buildings. He carried out a parametric study on buildings pounding response as well as proper seismic hazard mitigation practice for adjacent buildings. Three categories of recorded earthquake excitation were used for input. He studied the effect of impact using linear and nonlinear contact force model for different separation distances and compared with nominal model without pounding consideration. Therefore the results of these studies lean on the stimulation characteristics and the relationship between the buildings fundamental period. Furthermore because pounding produces acceleration and shear in various story levels that are greater than those from the no pounding case.

Westermo [16] suggested, in order improving the earthquake response of structures without adequate in-between space of the structures, to linking buildings by beams, which can carry the forces between the structures and thus annihilating collisions. Anagnostopoulos [6] analysed the effect of pounding for buildings under strong ground motions by a simplified single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) model. Miller and Fatemi [17] explored in to an extent the phenomenon of pounding-impact force, of adjacent buildings subjected to harmonic motions by the vibroimpact concept. Maison and Kasai [18] modelled the buildings as multiple-degree-of-freedom systems and analysed the response of structural pounding with different types of idealizations. Papadrakakis et al. [19] studied the pounding response of two or more close separated buildings based on the Lagrange multiplier approach by which the geometric compatibility conditions due to proximity are constrained. A three-dimensional model developed for the simulation of the pounding behaviour of adjacent buildings is presented by Papadrakakis et al. [20]. In the evaluation of building separation, Jeng et al. [18] estimated the minimum separation distance required to avoid pounding of adjacent buildings by the spectral difference (SPD) method. Kasai et al. [4] extended Jeng’s results and proposed a simplified rule to predict the inelastic vibration phase of buildings based on the numerical results of dynamic time-history analyses.

Anagnostopoulos and Spiliopoulos [7] examined the behaviour of common pounding between adjacent buildings in city blocks to several strong earthquakes. In the study, the buildings were idealized as lumped-mass, shear beam type, multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) systems with bilinear force deformation characteristics and with bases supported on translational and rocking spring dashpots. Collisions between adjacent masses can occur at any level and are simulated by means of viscoelastic impact elements. They used five real earthquake motions to study the effects of the following factors: building configuration and relative size, seismic separation distance and impact element properties. It was found that pounding can cause high over stresses, mainly when the colliding buildings have significantly different heights, periods or masses. They suggest a possibility for introducing a set of conditions into the codes, combined with some special measures, as an alternative to the seismic separation requirement.

Figure 2.1.2-2 on the left there is a finite element mathematical model and on the right shows the elevation view of a 2 different height building with the separation gap size [14] Abdel Raheem 2006;

2.1.3 SEISMIC POUNDING EFFECT AND RESTRAINERS ON SEISMIC RESPONCE OF MULTIPLE-FRAME BRIDGES

DesRoches and Muthukumar [22] used analytical illustrations to check out, the factors and the parameters affecting the worldwide reaction and behaviour of a multiple-frame bridge as a result of pounding of adjacent frames. They have conducted parameter studies of one-sided and two-sided pounding, to dispose the effects of frame stiffness ratio, ground motion characteristics, frame yielding, and restrainers on the pounding behaviour of bridge frames. They showed that the addition of restrainers has a minor effect on the one-sided pounding response of highly out-of-phase frames. It is determined that the most important parameters are the frame period ratio and the characteristic period of the ground motion. The current study explores the effect that pounding impact-force and restrainers have on the worldwide appeal of bridge frames in a multi-frame bridge. They used investigations of two-sided pounding using MDOF models, which showed a favourable post impact response for the flexible frame and a detrimental effect for the stiff frame demand, for all period ratios. The results from both one-sided and two-sided impact reveal that the response of bridge frames due to pounding, irrespective of the ground motion period ratio, thus validating the recommendations suggested by Caltrans. Current recommendations by Caltrans for limitations in frame period ratios to reduce the effects of pounding are evaluated through an example case. The effect of restrainers on the pounding response of bridge frames is evaluated. The results show that restrainers have very little effect on the demands on bridge frames compared with pounding.

2.1.4 GIRDER POUNDING ON BRIDGES

Hao and Chouw [23] introduced a new design principle for anticipating bridge girders from pounding due to devastating earthquakes. They examined the cause of relative movement between bridge girders, and therefore stated that for an appropriate construction of a bridge to prevent the results of pounding under devastating earthquakes, not only we have to concern about the minimum gap size but also encounter the maximum opening movement of a joint. They investigated a soil structure system and stated that, until so far in order to avoid the consequence of relative big movements between bridge girders, several measures have been developed and applied (e.g. Stoppers and restrainers).

On the other hand they brought out that is not possible to prevent girder pounding under a huge impact force of earthquake, because in order to assure the serviceability of the bridge the gap at the expansion joint should not be more than few centimetres. Some design parameters have been adopted in order to determine the minimum gap sized, by showing the dependence of that size to the frequency ratio, the apparent wave velocity and SSI. In a comparison that they made of the results of the experiment with or without SSI, it has been denoted that an additional effect of SSI increases the minimum gap size that a MEJ (modular expansion joints) must have to confirm that pounding will not occurred. Furthermore, for this study investigations and examinations have showed that in the new design modular expansion joints are installed so that the adjacent bridge girders can have a large relative movement by avoiding pounding and therefore a damage to the girders. Also is been indicated in this work the influence of the spatially various ground motions and excitations, SSI and the combined effects. Those investigations showed that when the frequency ratio of adjacent bridge spans is larger than 1.15, the effect of the wave velocity leads to the analogous response, also that in the smaller frequency ratio range the associated effect of the ground motion spatial difference, SSI and the vibration frequencies of the adjacent structures conducts the minimum required gap, in almost all cases SSI causes a larger total gap.

The superstructure, which refers to the composite slab and girder section, is expected to remain linear and is thus modelled using linear elastic beam-column elements. Pounding between the decks is accounted for using the contact element approach including the effects of hysteretic energy loss which is outlined in the work by Muthukumar and DesRoches [22].

2.1.5 POUNDING AND IMPACT OF BASED ISOLATED BUILDINGS

In nowadays, various phenomena grow the interest of various researchers, the significant pounding phenomenon attracted a lot of earthquake analyzers, in order to minimize the structural damage and avoid any other future structural disasters under extremely devastating seismic events. Seismic isolation is a commencing earthquake resistant design advance. The seismic loads can be reduced by introduce the seismic isolation.

Komodromos [24], introduced the numerical simulations using specially developed software, how potential poundings of seismically isolated buildings with adjacent structures affect the effectiveness of seismic isolation. In his particular study, is being discussed the main effects of poundings on seismically isolated buildings during strong earthquakes, in an effort to gain insight into this complicated problem, considering only some of the many influencing parameters. The simulations results indicate that the effectiveness of seismic isolation may be significantly affected from potential poundings when the provided seismic clearance is exceeded. His parametric studies indicated that both inter story deflections and floor accelerations increase with the value of the impact stiffness, particularly up to a certain level of the impact stiffness. In his investigation he showed that the change of the stiffness during poundings can be smoothed and therefore prevent, to some extent, the acceleration peaks due to impacts.

2.1.6 GROUND PIPELINES

Anderson and Johnston [25], they investigated the non-linear earthquake response of an above-ground oil pipeline on friction supports. Their main consideration was to arbitrate of the non-linear friction on both static and dynamic stresses in pipe. The study also concerns the presence of some other essential parameters such as: pipeline configuration, seismic way velocity, initial temperature differential and internal pressure, and ground motion properties. They generated two structural elements, which represented the type of the system. The outcomes of this certain study are showing the presence of friction between the pipe and the support evoke the consequential bending moments, by cause of operating pressure and differential temperature, to be engrossed in the domain where the pipe curves.

The arrangement of the pipeline assented to this relevant study is balanced by the static loading, and the consequences of seismic events an activity is to decrease the static design moments, must be significantly distinguished that the dynamic forces contribute to increase the deformations. The friction coefficients have considerably chain reaction on the initial static moment of the pipeline. Furthermore, the pressure force and temperature differential, play a dominating role on the initial static displacement and bending moment, they have a key role to control the design but from the other hand apparently they have no sensible effects on the dynamic response. The forces that derived from friction are disposed on decreasing the effects of the alterations in the response characteristic of a variation impact motions.

Chapter 3

ANALYSIS OF A SIMPLE FRAME ACCOUNTING FOR POUNDING

EFFECTS USING SAP2000

3. ANALYSIS OF A SIMPLE FRAME ACCOUNTING FOR POUNDING EFFECTS USING SAP2000

3.1 General

In order to induce pounding in the structure and create a time history analysis to obtain the pounding in the structures two sample building were adopted. The buildings designed with the same height but with different characteristics. Also we used two method of connecting the two structures by changing the link elements (e.g. first model using seismic gap with a linear spring and then using the Kelvin Voigt element) to examine both cases. The details of the buildings are replicated in section 3.2. The finite element analysis was carried out using the software SAP2000. SAP2000 is utilized to create 2-D model and run all analyses. The computing software is able to predict the nonlinear behaviour of the frames under static, dynamic, modal and non linear modal history loadings, considering both non linearity and inelastic materials. The program also has the ability to carry out Eigen values, Ritz modes, and nonlinear dynamic analyses such as time history analysis that we used to obtain the results for our project.

Figure 3.1 shows a (SDOF) 2 buildings adjacent connecting with a linear gap and a Kelvin Voigt done using SAP200

3.2 Details of the Models

The models which have been created for this certain study are symmetric two storey buildings. For the 1st model the buildings were connecting through a spring with a gap. The first building is consisting of square columns with dimensions W18X60 and of beams with dimensions of W10X68. The second building is consists of square columns with dimensions W18X50 and of beams with dimensions of W8X48. The height of each story is 4000mm and the width 3000mm. The natural gap size in the program is 6.25mm and the length of the spring with the gap is 400mm.

Figure 3.2-1 shows the linear spring with the gap opening

The modulus of Elasticity (E), poison’s ratio (v) and the Shear modulus (G) have been taken as 199.948 KN/mm, 0.3 and 76.9031 for the selected steel I Sections. Beams and columns members have been assigned as ‘frame elements’. All the details are listed below with order as they taken from the software. The self weight of beams and columns is automatically evaluated by the program. Soil structure behaviour is neglected and the columns have been restrained at the base.

W18X60 & W10X68

W18X50 & W8X48

Material Properties (Steel)

For the 2nd model the buildings were the same as before with the same properties but the main difference is the way that the two buildings are connected. In this case they are connecting with a Kelvin Voigt element (which consisting of a linear spring and damper in parallel) in a series with a linear spring gap.

Two models have been adopted for the aim of this study.

Figure 3.2-2 the two different cases of inducing pounding in 3-d created using SAP2000

After modelling all the components of the structures, all the necessary load cases are assigned. In this particular study we are mainly concerned with the behaviour of the structure accounting pounding under the effect of ground motion and dynamic excitations (e.g. Earthquake) and the displacement of the structure. The analysis that we used to accomplish that was a Non-Linear Time History Analysis.

3.3 Time History Analysis

Time history analysis has been carried out using the Time History Data File from El Centro Site Imperial Valley record of May 18, 1940 for obtaining pounding in the floors. The record has 1559 data points with a period of 0.02 seconds. The peak ground acceleration is 0.319g.

Fig: 3.2-1 Time history plot of El Centro earthquake

In this study, for both our cases of inducing pounding the non linear time history analysis in SAP200 is descript in step by step as follow:

o First of all we define a Time History function by adding a function from file. In our case the El Centro earthquake record has been connected to the program.

o Defining an analysis case under the load type Ritz modes with the appropriate analysis case Modal, select Ritz Vectors from the Modes, apply the number of the maximum modes (in this particular study for the first one is 15 and the second one is 25), then add the loads that apply e.g. acceleration and the links.

o Defining a separate analysis case under the load type El Centro with the appropriate analysis case type Time History, analysis type Non-Linear, modal load case using the one from the Ritz modes.

o Applying therefore the earthquake acceleration values from the defined Time History function

o Complete the number of output time step to be 5000 and the output step size to be equal to 0.002

o Verifying that the modal damping is equal to 0.05

o After that run the analysis cases

Figure 3.2-2 Shows details of a segment accelograph extracted from the 1979 El Centro earthquake ground motion using Sap2000

3.4 DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.3-1. (a) A 2D model of the first case by connecting the two buildings with a spring element with gap separation created in SAP2000. (b) A 3D model for the 1st case created in SAP200.

After analysed the structure with using non linear time history analysis, we can easily obtain the deformations that have been made to both Pounding and Dead Load in any desirable time between the ranges of 0-10 seconds.

Figure 3.3-2. The 1st case model showing the deformation under pounding load at a time of 10 seconds after the time history analysis completed.

Figure 3.3-3. Is the 1st case of the model, by showing the deformation of the structure under the dead load? After the analysis completed.

From the figures above we can obtain the phenomenon of pounding in the structure, whilst the gap that was connecting the both buildings closed and both buildings deformed.

Figure 3.3-4. The 2D model with labelling the links, joints and frames.

In order to examine if the structure can work properly and be accepted, we have to examine first if some certain joints, links element which are connecting the two buildings are the same. According to the Figure 3.3-4 from above we focused in those joints in order to see how they response under the earthquake, and how they deform by plotting the displacement of the joints against the time.

Figure 3.3-4. A time function traces that shows the pounding occurred at the first building (with joint 10).

Figure 3.3-5. A time function traces that shows the pounding force and the non pounding that occurred at the current floors of the buildings.

Figure 3.3-6. This certain plot shows the displacement between the two floors.

As we can see that the link 1 belongs to roof level (2nd floor) has much higher response under the ground excitation unlike the link 2 that belongs to floor level (1st floor) which deflects less than the roof floor. So we come to the conclusion that the roof level induced pounding by having double displacements than those in the floor level .Also from the figure 3.3-2 we can see this happening in the model by obtain that the gap closed at the upper floor. So the impact force is higher in the top of the buildings and is decreasing as we go down to the ground base. Therefore pounding phenomenon represent to the first case.

Figure 3.3-7. This time traces plot shows the displacement between the joints of the two floors floors.

The Graph from figure 3.3-7 shows both the pounding that is presenting in the joints of the top floor and also it clarifying that the design was appropriated, while we can easily see from the graph that joints labelled 1, 7 and 12 (which are referring to the top floor) are follow the same trend against the time and their displacements are evaluated to have same or even equal values. The same is happening to the joints labelled 2, 9 and 4 (which are referring to the floor level). The tables below showing the deformation of the joints under pounding case clarify the above opinion.

TABLE: Joint Displacements

Joint

OutputCase

Case Type

Step Type

Step Num

U1

U2

U3

R1

R2

R3

Txt

Txt

Txt

txt

mm

mm

mm

Rads

Rads

Rads

1

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0.510103

9.845E-14

0.014598

5.446E-18

0.000136

1.085E-16

2

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-0.511398

-9.475E-14

-0.014557

-6.106E-18

-0.000136

-1.181E-16

4

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0.510103

3.964E-13

0.014557

2.089E-17

0.000136

1.077E-16

4

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-0.511398

-4.22E-13

-0.014598

-2.045E-17

-0.000136

-1.182E-16

5

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

1.100002

4.851E-14

0.020468

5.927E-17

0.000098

6.087E-17

6

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-1.098901

-4.816E-14

-0.020392

-5.55E-17

-0.000098

-5.617E-17

7

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

1.100002

2.172E-13

0.020392

2.3E-16

0.000098

6.066E-17

7

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-1.098901

-2.004E-13

-0.020468

-2.467E-16

-0.000098

-5.571E-17

8

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0.680477

4.382E-13

0.01525

2.615E-17

0.000183

8.928E-17

9

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-0.616536

-4.954E-13

-0.013872

-2.172E-17

-0.000166

-8.568E-17

10

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0.680477

2.255E-13

0.013872

1.375E-17

0.000183

8.854E-17

10

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-0.616536

-2.364E-13

-0.01525

-1.383E-17

-0.000166

-8.577E-17

11

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

11

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

12

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

1.475297

2.465E-13

0.021431

2.536E-16

0.000132

4.463E-17

12

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-1.341435

-2.183E-13

-0.019501

-2.89E-16

-0.00012

-4.575E-17

13

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

1.475297

1.116E-13

0.019501

1.356E-16

0.000132

4.484E-17

13

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-1.341435

-1.073E-13

-0.021431

-1.381E-16

-0.00012

-4.702E-17

Table 3.3-1 Joint displacement min-max

TABLE: Total Energy Components

OutputCase

CaseType

Input

Kinetic

Potential

ModalDamp

LinkDampers

LinkHystrtc

Error

Text

Text

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

DEAD

LinStatic

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

MODAL

LinModal

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

LIVE

LinStatic

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

RITZMODES

LinModal

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

POUNDING

NonModHist

22.83

2.54

6.39

22.35

0

0

4.867E-13

Table 3.3-2 Total energy components of the various load cases and the presence of the error.

Figure 3.3-8. A 2D model for the second case was created using SAP2000 to induce pounding by connecting the two buildings with a Kelvin Voigt element.

After analysed the second case of inducing pounding in the structure, time history analysis showed all the deformed shapes of the structure under both Pounding and Dead Loads in any time range between 0-10 seconds.

Figure 3.3-9. A 3D model of the second case for the time of 0s.

Figure 3.3-10. A 3D deformed shape of the structure after applied the dead load using time history analysis.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Figure 3.3-11. The deformed shapes of the structure in different step-time e.g. (a) at 250 (b) at 500 (c) at 750 (d) at3500 and (e) at 5000 steps.

According to the figure 3.3-11 pounding phenomenon took place in all steps. As we can obtain from the figures above the gap closed and the impact element that connected the two buildings deformed under a different range of time, the response of the spring under the earthquake excitation was captured in the above figures.

Figure 3.3-12. The deformed structure at 7.5s with a plot of acceleration.

Figure 3.3-13. A Plot of time traces of the acceleration against time.

In order to examine if the structure can work properly, we had to adopt the same properties as for the 1st case. Examine the link nodes that are connecting the two floors of the buildings how they respond and if they deformed equally. Because our impact element is more complicated than that in the first case we have to look closely the joints and then plot a graph of the displacement against the time for the relative nodes.

(a) Roof level

(b) Floor level

Figure 3.3-14. Impact element (Kelvin Voigt) in closest view in both floors (a) roof & (b) floor, labelled with the joints.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Figure 3.3-15 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) & (f).Graphs of joints displacement against the time.

The relative results from the graphs in the figure 3.3-15 are following the same trend against the time. Having those results recorded on the graph we can see that we achieved the relative links to have the same or similar displacements against the time by this we accomplished to make the desirable model that we needed. In the particular graphs corresponding to figure 3.3-15 (c) & (f) we can see the existence of the gap between the nodes.

Figure 3.3-16 A plot function showing the pounding and non pounding cases.

Figure 3.3-16 Displacement of the two different floors. The floor level deformed more than the roof level

Figure 3.3-17 Displacement of the joints in the two different floors. Higher deflection in the floor level.

TABLE: Joint Displacements

Joint

OutputCase

CaseType

StepType

StepNum

U1

U2

U3

R1

R2

R3

Text

Text

Text

Text

Unitless

mm

mm

mm

rads

rads

Rads

1

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

103.2733

0

4.208375

0

0.03136

0

2

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.422

0

-7.03521

0

-0.05476

0

3

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

104.2599

0

8.318911

0

0.032806

0

3

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.474

0

-5.05025

0

-0.05601

0

4

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

4

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

270.3231

0

6.293775

0

0.030731

0

5

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-467.361

0

-10.2703

0

-0.04953

0

6

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

271.1383

0

12.41981

0

0.034087

0

6

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-468.587

0

-8.13434

0

-0.051

0

7

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

103.7842

0

2.701568

0

0.032507

0

8

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-3.46481

0

-0.07115

0

-0.00095

0

9

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

103.783

0

0.071151

0

0.032448

0

9

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-3.47354

0

-2.70157

0

-0.00095

0

10

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

10

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

11

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

264.5173

0

3.935024

0

0.028457

0

11

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-7.61562

0

-0.1012

0

-0.00075

0

12

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

263.9839

0

0.101195

0

0.028323

0

12

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-7.58531

0

-3.93502

0

-0.00073

0

14

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

271.4187

0

44.87131

0

0.03702

0

14

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-469.629

0

-30.9484

0

-0.05316

0

15

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

0

0

0

0

0

0

15

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

0

0

0

0

0

0

17

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

104.5026

0

43.44293

0

0.036179

0

17

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.519

0

-27.4083

0

-0.05812

0

18

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

104.5148

0

43.0195

0

0.036179

0

18

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.531

0

-27.1443

0

-0.05812

0

19

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

271.2811

0

17.91287

0

0.035538

0

19

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-468.804

0

-12.0004

0

-0.05202

0

21

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

268.5027

0

17.95392

0

0.035927

0

21

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-464.708

0

-12.0424

0

-0.05219

0

22

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

274.9282

0

17.92637

0

0.036316

0

22

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-474.186

0

-12.0221

0

-0.05273

0

24

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

275.001

0

36.88607

0

0.037148

0

24

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-474.376

0

-25.3904

0

-0.05322

0

25

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

268.5525

0

36.88137

0

0.036918

0

25

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-464.9

0

-25.384

0

-0.05314

0

26

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

271.5336

0

36.85375

0

0.03702

0

26

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-469.629

0

-25.3663

0

-0.05316

0

27

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

104.6714

0

34.72629

0

0.036179

0

27

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.519

0

-21.9732

0

-0.05812

0

28

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

104.4346

0

14.15747

0

0.034434

0

28

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-185.483

0

-8.82788

0

-0.05704

0

29

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

106.8068

0

14.1751

0

0.035088

0

29

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-191.011

0

-8.86097

0

-0.05742

0

30

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

106.8468

0

34.73105

0

0.036193

0

30

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-191.015

0

-21.9762

0

-0.05813

0

31

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

103.1693

0

34.72473

0

0.036194

0

31

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-180.06

0

-21.9721

0

-0.05814

0

32

POUNDING

NonModHist

Max

103.1065

0

14.16598

0

0.035134

0

32

POUNDING

NonModHist

Min

-180.044

0

-8.85582

0

-0.05751

0

Table 3.3-3 Joint displacement under the El-Centro earthquake min-max

TABLE: Total Energy Components

OutputCase

CaseType

Input

Kinetic

Potential

Modal Damp

Link Dampers

LinkHystrtc

Error

Text

Text

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

KN-mm

DEAD

LinStatic

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

LIVE

LinStatic

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

RITZ

LinModal

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

POUNDING

NonModHist

1097265.18

798094.34

417862.87

392379.55

0.09067

0

6.77

Table 3.3-4 Total energy components of the various load cases and the presence of the error.

In this project, a non-linear model of pounding force, which have been created using SAP2000 was examined and therefore analyzed in order to increase the accuracy of the modelling of structural pounding during massive ground excitations (e.g. Earthquakes). If we make a comparison between the model in the second case proposed and to the other in the first case both used pounding forces models. In order to confirm the precision of the models, the results of the integrated analysis using SAP2000 have been compared with the results of impact theories. Also the results for both cases have been compared as well. The results of the study of case 1 of the model give the smallest simulation errors in the pounding force time histories during the impact force. In the practical theory the loss of energy during collision is not taking into account while we were doing the analysis but in order for the results to be more accurate according to impact theory of Kelvin Voigt the energy loses are taking into account and the restitution coefficient e, that’s the main reason of the errors presented in our modelling.

Due to the program that we use any improvement may be difficult to apply in the general purpose of the software. In the practical function of the objective of the model for simulation principles, obligates the knowledge of the model’s parameters. In this particular study the parameters have been taken based on the examples and tutorials that have been conducted in various journals. However more broad experimental studies are necessary in order to calculate the range of the models parameters more accurately for various types of structures (Asymmetric buildings) with different materials (properties and characteristics) and using different impact elements to connect the structures.

3.5 MITIGATION OF POUNDING BETWEEN ADJACENT BUILDINGS UNDER A SEISMIC EVENT

Adjoining buildings that are under seismic events are colliding against each other when the gap size is not large enough in order to accommodate the deflection response on the structures relative to one another. As it demonstrated by numerical models or some other observations, that been made from researchers that examine the pounding impact force, are showing clearly that pounding that occurred during seismic event can cause large incalculable damage on the affected buildings. Despite the fact that those undesired effects can easily take place, they could also be prevented by considering the factors that give arise to pounding force such as the main one is the provision of adequate separation gap size even thought the implementation for sufficient separating distance is not feasible most of the times. Especially if we are talking about countries that appear to have a sufficiently large population and the particular maximization of land usage takes place, resulted to gap sizes distances to be efficiently small.

Firstly extensive reviews of many studies, which have been made around this topic, by lot of researchers investigating all the likelihood results, are presented. However, most results have come out around pounding effect on the response of a structure are very complex ones; mainly reason is that pounding depends on various factors and parameters of the structure and mostly to the characteristics of the ground motion and excitations. Due to complexity that exists around all the poundings’ problems, many assumptions made. According to single degree of freedom (SDOF) systems models that researchers made have been the problem still exists because a simple frame cannot represent the deformation of a storey structure and also the impact between the slab and the column. Another assumption was to model a linear structure, but this assumption faced other problem meanwhile pounding occurred.

This study implies not only to examine the different practical cases that pounding occurred, and to create a finite element model in order to apply time history analysis in order to examine the response of an adjacent buildings under seismic event but also to establish mitigation solutions for most of the typical problems of poundings between adjacent structures. Because each problem is different and the cases of having adjacent buildings are varying, they require a different appropriate method of mitigation. The most critical method that could be present to most of the problems is by providing the sufficient separation gap size between the adjoining structures. Other alternative methods of pounding mitigation are exist and are presented in details in Warnotte [20]. The proposed mitigation that is being studying in this project is by linking with impact elements the adjacent structures.

As a result of this project by studying the pounding, simplified intelligible design guidelines are established for a fitting construction of buildings. The suggested simplified guideline can be adopted by any practical engineer and can be used for basic fundamental design of dampers for alternation buildings, according to this guideline the mitigation methods are indicated which should be advantageous in any construction.

Moreover, pounding reduction devices are capable and effective in order to mitigate impact pounding effects between adjoining structures when a seismic event is occurred. As for the example the model that have been made for this project show that using a base isolated (fixed) beams between similar structures can mitigate pounding by preventing them to oscillate out of phase. The links/connections impose the structures to behave as only one body. By using this method the seismic demands are transferring between the structures. In general in any adjacent structures either with the same characteristics or different ones, the use of an appropriate impact element (springs, viscous dampers, gap size etc) can be a reliable and a good way of mitigate the pounding effect.

Chapter 4

CONCLUSION

4. CONCLUSION

Closely spaced structures, adjacent buildings and girder ends in bridges are susceptible to seismic pounding damage, as have been obtained in various latest earthquakes. In this current project, our initial aim was to model a simple structure that takes into account the pounding effects, analyse the model and examine the results. Analytical models for pounding replication include the spring in a series with a gap, Kelvin model etc. For this study two models of two buildings were designed with inadequately separation gap and different dynamic characteristic of the structures. The results of the study denote that pounding has a major influence on the response of a more flexible/elastic that may result to its permanent deformation due to yielding. On the other side, the response of the heavier and rigid structure is not subjecting to any deformations that response to conclusion of Jankowski R. 2005;

In order to improve the effectiveness of the viscous dampers the damping constant and their locations should be appropriately selected. In addition, the results adopted from the analysis above indicate the efficiency of the non linear model of collisions which lets to simulate the pounding phenomenon more accurately. The investigation of the effect of the impact elements connection (spring with a gap and Kelvin Voigt) reveals that pounding can cause reduction of the behaviour of the adjacent structures. Also the viscous damper, and the elastic spring can decrease the structural response. There are some factors that tend to keep the gap between the buildings having as a result to decrease the chances of pounding such as the lumped mass and the characteristics of the buildings.

Pounding can be categorized as resulting from in-phase and out of phase impacts, where in phase impacts occurred while the buildings are moving in the same way and out of phase is when are moving in the opposite direction. Also a rise in the peak displacement response was observed when the gap linking the buildings was very small. This is in conformity with the study done by Anagnostopoulos 1988, who attained the same conclusion for buildings with very small gap size.

In order to avoid vicious collisions, the natural vibration period of the structure should be adjusted with the period of a stiffer building or a sufficient gap separation should be available. Moreover experimental tests on large-scale samplings are essential in order to determine precise values of the stiffness parameter for the contact elements.

References

[1]S. Mithikimar and R. DesRoches (2006), A Hertz contact model with non-linear damping for pounding simulation, Earthquake engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol 35, 811-828

[2] V. Annasaheb Matsagar and R. Shyam Jangid (2005) VISCOELASTIC DAMPER CONNECTED TO ADJACENT STRUCTURES INVOLVING SEISMIC ISOLATION, Civil engineering and Management, Col XI, No4, 309-322

[3] Chouw, N., Hao, H. (2003) Effect of simultaneous spatial near-source ground excitation and soil on the pounding response of bridge girders, Journal of Applied Mechanics Vol. 6, 779-788.

[4] Hai SUI, Takeo TANIGUCHE and N. CHOUW (2004) Bumpers for reducing the effect of pounding between bridge decks, Faculty of Environmental Science and Technology,Okayama University Vo1.9, No.2 111-116,

[4] Maison BF, Kasai K. (1992) Dynamics of pounding when two buildings collide. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 21:771- 786.

[6] Anagnostopoulos SA. (1988) Pounding of buildings in series during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 16: 443-456.

[7] Anagnostopoulos S.A and Spiliopoulos K.V. (1992) an investigation of earthquake induced pounding between adjacent buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 21, 289-302.

[8] Jankowski R, Wilde K, Fujino Y 1998; Pounding of superstructure segments in isolated elevated bridge during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27:487- 502.

[9] David J. Dowrick 1992; Earthquake Resistant Design for Engineers and Architects, 2nd

Edition

[10] Pantelides C.P. and Ma X. (1998) Linear and non-linear pounding of Structural systems. Computers and Structures; 66, 79-92.

[11]Chau KT, Wei XX 2001; Pounding of structures modelled as non-linear impacts of two oscillators. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol 30:633-51.

[12] T. G, Mezger. The rheology handbook: for users of rotational and oscillatory rheometers 2nd ed.

[13] Pantelides C.P. and Ma X. (1997) Linear and non-linear pounding of Structural systems. Computers and Structures; 66, 79-92

[14] Jankowski R. (2005) Non-linear viscoelastic modeling of earthquake-induced structural pounding. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 34, 595 -611.

[15] Shehata E. Abdel Raheem 2006; Seismic Pounding between Adjacent Building Structures Journal of Structural Engineering, 6

[16] Westermo BD 1989; the dynamics of inter structural connection to prevent pounding. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 18:687-699.

[17] Miller RK, Fatemi B.1983; An efficient technique for the approximate analysis of vibroimpact. ASME Journal of Vibrational Acoustics; Stress Reliability and Design; 105:332-336.

[18] Maison BF, Kasai K. (1992) Dynamics of pounding when two buildings collide. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 21:771- 786.

[19] Papadrakakis M, Mouzakis H, Plevris N, Bitzarakis S.(1991) A Lagrange multiplier solution method for pounding of buildings during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 20:981-998.

[20] Papadrakakis M, Apostolopoulou C, Zacharopoulos A, Bitzarakis S (1996) Three-dimensional simulation of structural pounding during earthquakes. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE; 122:423-431.

[21] Jeng V, Kasai K. (1996) Spectral relative motion of two structures due to seismic travel waves. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE); 122:1128 -1135.

[22], DesRoches R and Muthukumar S. (2002) Effect of pounding and restrainers on seismic response of multiple-frame bridges. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE); 128, 860-869.

[23] H. Hao, N. Chouw (2008). Seismic Design of Bridges for Prevention of Girder Pounding. Earthquake Engineering in the low and moderate seismic regions of Southeast Asia and Australia

[24], Petros Komodromos (2009) Simulation of the earthquake-induced pounding of seismically isolated buildings. Computers and Structures; 86, 618-626

[25], James C. Anderson, Sterling B. Johnston (1975) SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF ABOVE-GROUND OIL PIPELINES. EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS, VOL. 3, 319-336

[26] Alireza M.Goltabar, R. Shamstabar Kami and A. Ebadi (2006); Study of Impact between Adjacent Structures during of Earthquake and their Effective Parameters Engineering and Applied Sciences 1 (3): 210-218

[27] Kasai K, Maison BF. (1997) Building pounding damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Engineering Structures; 19:195-207.

[28] Papadrakakis M, Mouzakis H, Plevris N, Bitzarakis S.1991; A Lagrange multiplier solution method for pounding of buildings during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 20:981-998.

[29] Papadrakakis M, Apostolopoulou C, Zacharopoulos A, Bitzarakis S 1996; Three-dimensional simulation of structural pounding during earthquakes. Engineering Mechanics ASCE; 122:423-431.

[30] Maison BF, Kasai K.1992; Dynamics of pounding when two buildings collide. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics; 21:771- 786.

[31] Stavroulakis, G. E., and Abdalla, K. M. 1991; Contact between adjacent structures. Struct. Eng., 117(10), 2838 – 2850.

1