Modification of Park-Ang Damage Index to Accommodate Effect of Aftershocks on RC Structures

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES)

2 University of Kurdistan

Abstract

Seismic design codes do not consider the effects of aftershocks on structures.
Moreover, most damage estimation methods disregard the effects of consecutive
earthquakes. Recent earthquakes have demonstrated that the aftershocks can cause
major damage to mainshock-damaged structures. After a strong seismic event, it
should be determined if a mainshock-damaged building is safe for reoccupation in
the event of aftershocks. This study examined the effects of both the main shock and
aftershocks on the damage index of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Records
from 19 mainshocks that occurred in the Japan seismic region with moment
magnitudes of greater than 4 were examined. More than 100 acceleration time
series from these events (mainshock + aftershock events) were applied to evaluate
the damage index. Seismic damage analysis was performed on a series of RC
columns and RC frames. The natural period of these structures varied from 0.1 to 2.5
s. The damage index introduced by Park and Ang was employed to estimate the
structural damage. Acceleration time series were applied to the structures in two
steps. First, only mainshocks were applied to the structures and the damage index
was obtained. Next, both the mainshock and aftershocks were applied to the
structures and structures damaged by a mainshock were analyzed under periodic
aftershock events. The results showed that the increase in structural period and the
PGA of the aftershocks amplified the damage index under the effects of the
aftershocks. A modification to Park-Ang damage index is proposed using a dimensionless
term to accommodate the effect of aftershocks.

Keywords

References

1. Ruiz-Garcia, J. (2012) Mainshock-aftershock ground motion features and their influence in
building's seismic response. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 16(5), 719-737.
2. Sunasaka, Y. and Kiremidjian, A.S. (1993) A Method for Structural Safety Evaluation
Under Mainshock-After shock Ear thquake Sequences. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering
Center.
3. Gallagher, R.P., Reasenberg, P., and Poland, C.D. (1999) Earthquake aftershocks: entering
damaged buildings. Applied Tech Council.
4. Amadio, C., Fragiacomo, M., and Rajgelj, S. (2003) The effects of repeated earthquake ground motions on the non-linear response of SDOF systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 32, 291-308.
5. Fragiacomo, M., Amadio, C., and Macorini, L. (2004) Seismic response of steel frames under
repeated earthquake ground motions. Engineering Structures, 26, 2021-2035.
6. Luco, N., Bazzurro, P., and Cornell, C.A. (2004) Dynamic versus static computation of the residual capacity of a mainshock-damaged building to withstand an aftershock. Presented at 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, paper#2405.
7. Iancovici, M. and Georgiana, I. (2007) Evaluation of the inelastic demand of structures subjected to multiple ground motions. Journal of Structural Engineering, 4, 143-154.
8. Maeda, M. and Kang, D.E. (2009) Post-earthquake damage evaluation of reinforced concrete
buildings. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology, 7, 327-335.
9. Hatzigeorgiou, G.D. and Beskos, D.E. (2009) Inelastic displacement ratios for SDOF structures subjected to repeated earthquakes. Engineering Structures, 31, 2744-2755.
10. Hatzigeorgiou, G.D. and Liolios, A.A. (2010) Nonlinear behaviour of RC frames under repeated strong ground motions. Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, 30, 1010-1025.
11. Moustafa, A. and Takewaki, I. (2011) Response of nonlinear single-degree-of-freedom structures to random acceleration sequences. Engineering Structures, 33, 1251-1258.
12. Powell, G.H. and Allahabadi, R. (1988) Seismic damage prediction by deterministic methods: concepts and procedures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 16, 719-734.
13. Ghobarah, A., Abou-Elfath, H., and Biddah, A. (1999) Response-based damage assessment of structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28, 79-104.
14. Chai, Y.H., Fajfar, P., and Romstad, K.M. (1998) Formulation of duration-dependent inelastic seismic design spectrum. Journal of Structural Engineering, 124, 913-921.
15. Park, Y.J. and Ang, A.H.S. (1985) Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 111, 722-739.
16. Banon, H. and Veneziano, D. (1982) Seismic safety of reinforced concrete members and
structures. Ear thquake Engineer ing and Structural Dynamics, 10, 179-193.
17. Zhang, X., Wong, K.K., and Wang, Y. (2007) Performance assessment of moment resisting
frames during earthquakes based on the force analogy method. Engineering Structures, 29, 2792-2802.
18. Li, Q. and Ellingwood, B.R. (2007) Performance evaluation and damage assessment of steel frame buildings under main shock-aftershock earthquake sequences. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 36(3), 405-427.
19. Zhang, S., Wang, G., and Sa, W. (2013) Damage evaluation of concrete gravity dams under mainshock-aftershock seismic sequences. Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, 50,
16-27.
20. Zhai, C.H., Wen, W.P., Chen, Z., Li, S., and Xie, L.L. (2013) Damage spectra for the mainshockaftershock sequence-type ground motions. Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, 45, 1-12.
21. Jeon, J.S. (2013) Aftershock Vulnerability Assessment of Damaged Reinforced Concrete
Buildings in California. Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA.
22. Polese, M., Di-Ludovico, M., Prota, A., and Manfredi, G. (2013) Damage-dependent vulnerability curves for existing buildings. Earthquake Engineer ing and Structural Dynamics, 42(6), 853-870.
23. Yaghmaei-Sabegh, S. and Ruiz-Garcia, J. (2016) Nonlinear response analysis of SDOF systems subjected to doublet earthquake ground motions: A case study on 2012 Varzaghan-Ahar events. Engineering Structures, 110, 281-292, DOI:10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.11.044.
24. Zhai, C.H., Wen, W.P., Li, S., Chen, Z., Chang, Z., and Xie, L.L. (2014) The damage investigation of inelastic SDOF structure under the mainshock-aftershock sequence-type ground
motions. Soil Dynamic and Ear thquake Engineering, 59, 30-41.
25. Iervolino, I., Giorgio, M., and Chioccarelli, E. (2014) Closed?form aftershock reliability of damage-cumulating elastic perfectly-plastic systems. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 43, 613-625.
26. Abdelnaby, A.E. and Elnashai, A.S. (2015) Numerical modeling and analysis of RC frames
subjected to multiple earthquakes. Earthquakes and Structures, 9(5), 957-981, DOI: 10.12989/
eas.2015.9.5.957.
27. Zafar, A. and Andrawes, B. (2015) Seismic behavior of SMA-FRP reinforced concrete
frames under sequential seismic hazard. Engineering Structures , 98, 163-173, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.045.
28. Furtado, A., Rodrigues, H., Arêde, A., and Varum, H. (2017) Assessment of the mainshockaftershock collapse vulnerability of RC structures considering the infills in-plane and out-of-plane behavior. Procedia Engineering, 199, 619-624, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.107.
29. Hosseinpour, F. and Abdelnaby, A.E. (2017) Effect of different aspects of multiple earthquakes on the nonlinear behavior of RC structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering, 92, 706-725. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.11.006.
30. www.kyoshin.bosai.go.jp.
31. Newmark, N.M. (1959) A method of computation for structural dynamics. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics Division, 85, 67-94.
32. Park, Y.J., Ang, A.H., and Wen, Y.K. (1987) Damage-limiting aseismic design of buildings.
Earthquake Spectra , 3, 1-26.
33. Valles, R.E., Reinhorn, A.M., Kunnath, S.K., Li, C., and Madan, A. (1996) IDARC-2D Version
5.5: A Program for the Inelastic Damage Analysis of Buildings.
34. Ghosh, S., Datta, D., and Katakdhond, A.A. (2011) Estimation of the Park-Ang damage
index for planar multi-storey frames using equivalent single-degree systems. Engineering Structures, 33(9), 2509-2524.
35. Fajfar, P. (1992) Equivalent ductility factors, taking into account low-cycle fatigue. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 21(10), 837-48.
36. Carr, A.J. and Tabuchi, M. (1993) The structural ductility and the damage index for reinforced concrete structure under seismic excitation. 2nd European Conference on Structural Dynamics, 1, 169-76.
37. Cosenza, E., Manfredi, G., and Ramasco, R. (1993) The use of damage functionals in
earthquake engineering: a comparison between different models. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 22(10), 855-68.
38. Kunnath, S.K. and Jenne, C. (1994) Seismic damage assessment of inelastic RC structures.
In: 5th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1, 55-64.
39. Williams, M.S. and Sexsmith, R.G. (1995) Seismic damage indices for concrete structures:
a state-of-the-art review. Earthquake Spectra, 11(2), 319-49.
40. Van de Lindt, J.W. (2005) Damage-based seismic reliability concept for woodframe
structures. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 131(4), 668-75.
Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering
Volume 21, Issue 4
November 2019
Pages 21-35

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics