Comparison of seismic responses of a reticulated dome under stochastic uniform and spatially correlated and coherent multiple-support excitation for a scenario seismic event
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2020
Comparison of seismic responses of a reticulated dome under stochastic uniform and spatially correlated and coherent multiple-support excitation for a scenario seismic event
Structures with multiple supports can be sensitive to spatial coherence and spatial correlation. Since the historical recordings are insufficient for selecting records that match predefined inter-support distances of a structure, desired seismic magnitude (or intensity) and site to seismic source distance for structural analysis, such records need to be simulated. In this study, we use a procedure that is extended based on the stochastic point-source method to simulate records for scenario events. The application of the simulated records to a single-layer reticulated dome with multiple supports is presented. The application is aimed at investigating the differences between the responses subjected to spatially uniform excitation and to spatially correlated and coherent multiple-support excitation for a scenario seismic event, assessing the relative importance of the spatial coherence and spatial correlation on the responses, and evaluating the effect of the uncertainty in the spatially correlated and coherent records for a scenario event on the statistics of the seismic responses. The analysis results indicate that the spatial correlation of the Fourier amplitude spectrum has a predominant influence on the linear/nonlinear responses, and the consideration of spatially correlated and coherent excitation at multiple supports is very important. The consideration of uniform excitation severely underestimates the seismic load effects as compared to those obtained under spatially correlated and coherent multiple-support excitation.
AbrahamsonNA. Generation of spatially incoherent strong motion time histories. In: Proceedings of the 10th world conference on earthquake engineering, Rotterdam, 19–24 July 1992.
2.
HaoHOliveiraCSPenzienJ.Multiple-station ground motion processing and simulation based on SMART-1 array data. Nucl Eng Des1989; 111: 293–310.
3.
HarichandranRSVanMarckeEH.Stochastic variation of earthquake ground motion in space and time. J Eng Mech1986; 112: 154–174.
4.
LucoJEWongHL.Response of a rigid foundation to a spatially random ground motion. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn1986; 14(6): 891–908.
5.
LiuTJAtkinsonGMHongHP, et al. Intraevent spatial correlation characteristics of stochastic finite-fault simulations. B Seismol Soc Am2012; 102(4): 1740–1747.
6.
GodaKAtkinsonGM.Intraevent spatial correlation of ground-motion parameters using SK-net data. B Seismol Soc Am2010; 100: 3055–3067.
7.
GodaKHongHP.Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra. B Seismol Soc Am2008; 98: 354–365.
8.
HongHPZhangYGodaK.Effect of spatial correlation on estimated ground motion-prediction equations. B Seismol Soc Am2009; 99: 928–934.
9.
JayaramNBakerJW.Correlation model for spatially distributed ground-motion intensities. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn2009; 38: 1687–1708.
10.
SokolovVWenzelFWenKL, et al. On the influence of site conditions and earthquake magnitude on ground-motion within-earthquake correlation: analysis of PGA data from TSMIP (Taiwan) network. B Earthq Eng2012; 10(5): 1401–1429.
11.
WangMTakadaT.Macrospatial correlation model of seismic ground motions. Earthq Spectra2005; 21: 1137–1156.
12.
LiuTJHongHP.Simulation of multiple-station ground motions using stochastic point-source method with spatial coherency and correlation characteristics. B Seismol Soc Am2013; 103(3): 1912–1921.
13.
GhobarahAAzizTSEl-AttarM.Response of transmission lines to multiple support excitation. Eng Struct1996; 18(12): 936–946.
14.
NazmyASAbdel-GhaffarAM.Effect of ground motion spatial variability on the response of cable-stayed bridges. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn1992; 21: 1–20.
15.
SextosAGPitilakisKDKapposAJ.Inelastic dynamic analysis of RC bridges accounting for spatial variability of ground motion, site effects and soil–structure interaction phenomena. Part 2: parametric study. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn2003; 32: 629–652.
16.
SoylukKSicacikEA.Soil-structure interaction analysis of cable-stayed bridges for spatially varying ground motion components. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng2012; 35: 80–90.
17.
SuLDongSKatoS.Seismic design for steel trussed arch to multi-support excitations. J Constr Steel Res2007; 63: 725–734.
18.
YeJHZhangZQChuY.Strength failure of spatial reticulated structures under multi-support excitation. Earthq Eng Eng Vib2011; 10(1): 21–36.
19.
ZervaA.Spatial variation of seismic ground motions: modeling and engineering applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; Taylor & Francis Group, 2009.
20.
YangSCLiuTJHongHP.Reliability of tower and tower-line systems under spatiotemporally varying wind or earthquake loads. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2017; 143(10): 04017137.
21.
FanFLiYGZhiXD, et al. Structural response analysis of K8 single-layer reticulated shell structures under multiple support excitations. China Civ Eng J2012; 45(1): 112–116.
22.
LiYGZengQLZhiXD, et al. Research of seismic spatial correlation effects on Kiewitt 8 single-layer reticulated shells. Eng Mech2013; 30: 132–136, 141.
23.
KatoSNakazawaS.Dynamic collapse characteristics of single layer reticular domes with substructure absorbing seismic energy due to strong earthquake motions. J Struct Constr Eng2001; 548: 81–88.
24.
LiYGFanFHongHP.Effect of support flexibility on seismic responses of a reticulated dome under spatially correlated and coherent excitations. Thin Wall Struct2014; 82: 343–351.
25.
NakazawaSKatoS.Estimation of seismic responses of single layer reticular domes supported by substructures to reduce the responses by yielding of substructures. J Constr Steel2002; 10: 391–398.
26.
BooreDM.Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure Appl Geophys2003; 160: 635–676.
27.
SamarasEShinozukaMTsuruiA.ARMA representation of random processes. J Eng Mech1985; 111(3): 449–461.
28.
ShinozukaMJanCM.Digital simulation of random processes and its applications. J Sound Vib1972; 25(1): 111–128.
29.
BooreDMJoynerWB.Site amplifications for generic rock sites. B Seismol Soc Am1997; 87: 327–341.
30.
RoumeliotiZBeresnevIA.Stochastic finite-fault modeling of ground motions form the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquake: application to rock and soil sites with implications for nonlinear site response. B Seismol Soc Am2003; 93: 1691–1702.
31.
AtkinsonGM.Single-station sigma. B Seismol Soc Am2006; 96: 446–455.
32.
HongHPLiuTJ.Site, local and regional earthquake ground motion characterization and application. Adv Struct Eng2017; 20(1): 34–50.
33.
LinPSChiouBAbrahamsonNA, et al. Repeatable source, site, and path effects on the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models. B Seismol Soc Am2011; 101: 2281–2295.
34.
HarichandranRS.Estimating the spatial variation of earthquake ground motion from dense array recordings. Struct Saf1991; 10: 213–233.
35.
BazzurroPCornellCA.Disaggregation of seismic hazard. B Seismol Soc Am1999; 89: 501–520.
36.
HongHPGodaK.A comparison of seismic-hazard and risk deaggregation. B Seismol Soc Am2006; 96: 2021–2039.
37.
MakowskZS. Space structures – a review of the developments within the last decade. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on space structures (ed GAR Parke and CM Howard), Guildford, 5–10September1993, pp. 1623–1630. London: Thomas Telford.
38.
YuZ-WZhiXDFanF, et al. Effect of substructures upon failure behaviour of steel reticulated domes subjected to the severe earthquake. Thin Wall Struct2011; 49: 1160–1170.
39.
ZhiXDNieGBFanF, et al. Vulnerability and risk assessment of single-layer reticulated domes subjected to earthquakes. J Struct Eng2012; 138(12): 1505–1514.
40.
JGJ61. Technical specification for reticulated shells. Beijing, China: China Architecture & Building Press, 2003. (in Chinese).
