This article focuses on the energy factor of single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems subjected to mainshock–aftershock (MSAS) sequences, of which 163 and 143 are collected from crustal and subduction regions, respectively. The recorded MSAS sequences are divided into four groups based on the relative intensity that is defined as the ratio of the peak ground acceleration (PGA) of an aftershock to the PGA of the corresponding mainshock. Constant-ductility inelastic spectra are calculated to assess the energy factor, γ, defined as the ratio of the covered area of the skeleton load-deformation curve of the inelastic structural system to that of the corresponding elastic system with identical elastic properties, by considering various levels of structural inelasticity. Moreover, the effect of the hysteresis law, damping ratio, post-yield stiffness ratio, soil condition, and relative intensity on the energy factor is thoroughly analyzed. A predictive model is also developed as a function of the ductility factor, vibration period, damping ratio, and post-yield stiffness ratio. Such a model is expected to facilitate the energy-based seismic design of structures.
AsanoYSaitoTItoYShiomiKHiroseHMatsumotoTAoiSHoriSSekiguchiS (2011) Spatial distribution and focal mechanisms of aftershocks of the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Earth, Planets and Space63(7): 669–673.
3.
BatesDMWattsDG (1988) Nonlinear Regression Analysis and Its Applications. New York: Wiley.
4.
BojórquezEReyes-SalazarATerán-GilmoreARuizSE (2010) Energy-based damage index for steel structures. Steel and Composite Structures10(4): 343–360.
5.
ChaiYHFajfarP (2000) A procedure for estimating input energy spectra for seismic design. Journal of Earthquake Engineering4(4): 539–561.
6.
ChaiYHFajfarPRomstadKM (1998) Formulation of duration-dependent inelastic seismic design spectrum. Journal of Structural Engineering124(8): 913–921.
7.
ChaiYHRomstadKMBirdSM (1995) Energy-based linear damage model for high-intensity seismic loading. Journal of Structural Engineering121(5): 857–864.
8.
ChandramohanRBakerJWDeierleinGG (2016) Quantifying the influence of ground motion duration on structural collapse capacity using spectrally equivalent records. Earthquake Spectra32(2): 927–950.
9.
ChristidisAADimitroudiEGHatzigeorgiouGDBeskosDE (2013) Maximum seismic displacements evaluation of steel frames from their post-earthquake residual deformation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering11(6): 2233–2248.
10.
ChungAINeighborsCBelmonteAMillerMSepulvedaHHChristensenCJakkaRSCochranESLawrenceJF (2011) The quake-catcher network rapid aftershock mobilization program following the 2010 M 8.8 Maule, Chile Earthquake. Seismological Research Letters 82(4): 526–532.
FEMA P-450 (2003) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures.
13.
GardnerJKKnopoffL (1974) Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America64(5): 1363–1367.
14.
GledhillKRistauJReynersMFryBHoldenC (2011) The Darfield (Canterbury, New Zealand) Mw 7.1 Earthquake of September 2010: A preliminary seismological report. Seismological Research Letters82(3): 378–386.
15.
GodaK (2012) Nonlinear Response Potential of Mainshock-Aftershock Sequences from Japanese Earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102(5): 2139–2156.
16.
GodaKAtkinsonGM (2009) Seismic demand estimation of inelastic SDOF systems for earthquakes in Japan. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99(6): 3284–3299.
17.
GodaKTaylorCA (2012) Effects of aftershocks on peak ductility demand due to strong ground motion records from shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics41(15): 2311–2330.
18.
GoelSCLiaoW-CReza BayatMChaoS-H (2009) Performance-based plastic design (PBPD) method for earthquake-resistant structures: An overview. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings19(1–2): 115–137.
19.
HancockJBommerJJ (2006) A state-of-knowledge review of the influence of strong-motion duration on structural damage. Earthquake Spectra22: 827–845.
20.
HaseltonCBLielABLangeSTDeierleinGG (2008) Beam-column element model calibrated for predicting flexural response leading to global collapse of RC frame buildings. PEER 2007/03. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
21.
HatzigeorgiouGD (2010) Ductility demand spectra for multiple near- and far-fault earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering30(4): 170–183.
22.
HatzigeorgiouGDBeskosDE (2009) Inelastic displacement ratios for SDOF structures subjected to repeated earthquakes. Engineering Structures31(11): 2744–2755.
23.
HatzigeorgiouGDLioliosAA (2010) Nonlinear behaviour of RC frames under repeated strong ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering30(10): 1010–1025.
24.
HaukssonEJonesLMHuttonK (1995) The 1994 Northridge earthquake sequence in California: Seismological and tectonic aspects. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 100(B7): 12335–12355.
25.
HayesGPBriggsRWBarnhartWDYeckWLMcNamaraDEWaldDJNealyJLBenzHMGoldRDJaiswalKSMaranoKEarlePSHearneMGSmoczykGMWaldLASamsonovSV (2015) Rapid characterization of the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence and its seismotectonic context. Seismological Research Letters86(6): 1557–1567.
26.
HeidariAGharehbaghiS (2015) Seismic performance improvement of Special Truss Moment Frames using damage and energy concepts. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics44(7): 1055–1073.
27.
HousnerGW (1956) Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the 1st WCEE, Berkeley, CA, pp. 5.1–5.13, Oakland: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
28.
JiDWenWZhaiC (2019) Constant ductility site-specific yield point spectra for seismic design. Advances in Civil Engineering2019: 7286284.
29.
JiangYLiGYangD (2010) A modified approach of energy balance concept based multimode pushover analysis to estimate seismic demands for buildings. Engineering Structures32(5): 1272–1283.
30.
JoynerWBBooreDM (1982) Prediction of earthquake response spectra. Open-file report. Reston, VA: US Geological Survey.
31.
KalkanEGulkanP (2004) Site-Dependent Spectra Derived from Ground Motion Records in Turkey. Earthquake Spectra20(4): 1111–1138.
32.
KatsanosEIVamvatsikosD (2017) Yield frequency spectra and seismic design of code-compatible RC structures: An illustrative example. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics46: 1727–1745.
33.
KeKKeSChuanG (2015) The energy factor of systems considering multiple yielding stages during ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering71: 42–48.
34.
KeKZhaoQYamMCHKeS (2018) Energy factors of trilinear SDOF systems representing damage-control buildings with energy dissipation fuses subjected to near-fault earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering107: 20–34.
35.
KhampanitALeelataviwatSKochaninJWarnitchaiP (2014) Energy-based seismic strengthening design of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames using buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures81: 110–122.
36.
KharmaleSBGhoshS (2013) Performance-based plastic design of steel plate shear walls. Journal of Constructional Steel Research90: 85–97.
37.
KuwamuraHGalambosTV (1989) Earthquake load for structural reliability. Journal of Structural Engineering115(6): 1446–1462.
38.
LeeS-SGoelSCChaoS-H (2004) Performance-based seismic design of steel moment frames using target drift and yield mechanism. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
39.
LeelataviwatSSaewonWGoelSC (2009) Application of Energy Balance Concept in Seismic Evaluation of Structures. Journal of Structural Engineering135(2): 113–121.
40.
LesgidisNSextosAKwonO (2017) Influence of frequency-dependent soil-structure interaction on the fragility of R/C bridges. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics46(1): 139–158.
41.
LiXZhouZHuangMWenRYuHLuDZhouYCuiJ (2008) Preliminary analysis of strong-motion recordings from the magnitude 8.0 Wenchuan, China, Earthquake of 12 May 2008. Seismological Research Letters79(6): 844–854.
42.
LignosDGKrawinklerH (2011) Deterioration modeling of steel components in support of collapse prediction of steel moment frames under earthquake loading. Journal of Structural Engineering137(11): 1291–1302.
43.
McNallyKCGonzález-RuizJRStolteC (1986) Seismogenesis of the 1985 Great (Ms=8.1) Michoacan, Mexico Earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters13(6): 585–588.
44.
MarafiNABermanJWEberhardMO (2016) Ductility-dependent intensity measure that accounts for ground-motion spectral shape and duration. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics45(4): 653–672.
45.
NewmarkNMHallWJ (1973) Procedures and Criteria for Earthquake-Resistant Design (Building Research Series No. 46). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce.
46.
PanPPanZCaoHQiuFYeL (2011) Experimental studies of full-scale self-centering beam-to-column exterior connection. In: 2011 International Conference on Electric Technology and Civil Engineering (ICETCE), Lushan, China, 22–24 April, pp. 5014–5017. New York: IEEE.
47.
ParkR (1989) Evaluation of ductility of structures and structural assemblages from laboratory testing. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering22(3): 155–166.
48.
PekcanGItaniAMLinkeC (2014) Enhancing seismic resilience using truss girder frame systems with supplemental devices. Journal of Constructional Steel Research94: 23–32.
49.
PekcanGLinkeCItaniA (2009) Damage avoidance design of special truss moment frames with energy dissipating devices. Journal of Constructional Steel Research65(6): 1374–1384.
50.
QiuCXZhuS (2017) Performance-based seismic design of self-centering steel frames with SMA-based braces. Engineering Structures130: 67–82.
RaghunandanMLielABLucoN (2015b) Collapse risk of buildings in the Pacific Northwest region due to subduction earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra31(4): 2087–2115.
53.
RathjeEMKottkeARTrentWL (2010) Influence of input motion and site property variabilities on seismic site response analysis. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering136(4): 607–619.
54.
Reza BanihashemiMMirzagoltabarARTavakoliHR (2015) Development of the performance based plastic design for steel moment resistant frame. International Journal of Steel Structures15(1): 51–62.
55.
RodriguezMEAristizabalJC (1999) Evaluation of a seismic damage parameter. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics28(5): 463–477.
56.
Ruiz-GarcíaJNegrete-ManriquezJC (2011) Evaluation of drift demands in existing steel frames under as-recorded far-field and near-fault mainshock–aftershock seismic sequences. Engineering Structures33(2): 621–634.
ShinTCKuoKWLeeWHKTengTLTsaiYB (2000) A preliminary report on the 1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquake. Seismological Research Letters71(1): 24–30.
59.
ShoeibiSKafiMAGholhakiM (2017) New performance-based seismic design method for structures with structural fuse system. Engineering Structures132: 745–760.
60.
SoleimaniSAziminejadAMoghadamAS (2017) Extending the concept of energy-based pushover analysis to assess seismic demands of asymmetric-plan buildings. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering93: 29–41.
61.
StewartJPZimmaroPLanzoGMazzoniSAusilioEAversaSBozzoniFCairoRCapattiMCCastigliaMChiabrandoFChiaradonnaAd’OnofrioADashtiSDe RisiRde SilvaFdella PasquaFDeziFDi DomenicaADi SarnoLDuranteMGFalcucciEFotiSFrankeKWGaladiniFGialliniSGoriSKayenREKishidaTLinguaALingwallBMucciacciaroMPagliaroliAPasseriFPelekisPPizziAReimschiisselBSantoAde MagistrisFSScasserraGSextosASicaSSilvestriFSimonelliALSpanòATommasiPTropeanoG (2018) Reconnaissance of 2016 Central Italy Earthquake Sequence. Earthquake Spectra34(4): 1547–1555.
62.
Teran-GilmoreAJirsaJO (2005) A damage model for practical seismic design that accounts for low cycle fatigue. Earthquake Spectra21(3): 803–832.
WangFKeKZhangHYamMCH (2018) Constant-ductility-based energy factor demands of oscillators with modified Clough hysteretic model. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering115: 36–40.
68.
WongpakdeeNLeelataviwatSGoelSCLiaoW-C (2014) Performance-based design and collapse evaluation of Buckling Restrained Knee Braced Truss Moment Frames. Engineering Structures60: 23–31.
69.
WooddellKEAbrahamsonNA (2014) Classification of main shocks and aftershocks in the NGA-West2 Database. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1257–1267.
70.
YamanakaHChimotoKMiyakeHTsunoSYamadaN (2016) Observation of earthquake ground motion due to aftershocks of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake in damaged areas. Earth, Planets and Space68(1): 197.
71.
ZahrahTFHallWJ (1982) Seismic Energy Absorption in Simple Structures. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Engineering Experiment Station, College of Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
72.
ZhaiCJiDWenWLeiWXieL (2017) Constant ductility energy factors for the near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Journal of Earthquake Engineering21(2): 343–358.
73.
ZhaiCJiDWenWLeiWXieLGongM (2016) The inelastic input energy spectra for main shock-aftershock sequences. Earthquake Spectra32(4): 2149–2166.
74.
ZhaiCJiDWenWLiCLeiWXieL (2018) Hysteretic energy prediction method for mainshock-aftershock sequences. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration17(2): 277–291.
75.
ZhaiC-HWenW-PLiSXieL-L (2015) The ductility-based strength reduction factor for the mainshock–aftershock sequence-type ground motions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13(10): 2893–2914.
76.
ZhaiC-HWenW-PLiSChenZChangZXieL-L (2014) The damage investigation of inelastic SDOF structure under the mainshock–aftershock sequence-type ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering59: 30–41.
77.
ZhouJTangKWangHFangX (2014) Influence of ground motion duration on damping reduction factor. Journal of Earthquake Engineering18(5): 816–830.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
