Monitoring of a rehabilitated building in soft soil in Mexico and structural response to the September 2017 earthquakes: Part 1: structural health monitoring system
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online November, 2021
Monitoring of a rehabilitated building in soft soil in Mexico and structural response to the September 2017 earthquakes: Part 1: structural health monitoring system
The seismic response of an instrumented 22-story rehabilitated building is presented. The building analyzed is as part of a complex (called CCUT) with three low-rise structures and a common basement founded on soft soil that was built in 1964. Since it was under construction until date, the building tower has experienced differential settlements and tilting. To mitigate such problems, the building has been subjected to several rehabilitations over the years. During the 1985 and 2017 high-intensity earthquakes in Mexico City, the tower suffered some damage. The aim of this article is to discuss the structural health monitoring system implemented for the tower and to describe the structure’s performance since the last rehabilitation in 2009. A monitoring methodology designed and implemented as a structural warning system based on five structural health indicators, two on seismic severity and three on structural performance, to automatically process seismic records, is presented. The results of the seismic response of the CCUT tower between 2011 and 2018 indicate that the structure had suffered moderate damage. Analysis of data, corroborated by building inspection, confirmed that the structure exhibited good performance during the 19 September 2017 Puebla-Morelos earthquake. The importance of the information obtained from the structural warning system is highlighted as a promissory tool for establishing a robust decision framework for occupants’ safety.
AguilarGG (2016) Simulación de la Respuesta Inelástica del Edifico CCUT Calibrando un Modelo Elástico. MSc Thesis, Posgrado de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Ciudad de México, México (in Spanish).
2.
AldamaBD (2009) Proceso Automatizado Para Determinar el Estado Estructural en Edificios Instrumentados. MSc Thesis, Posgrado de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Ciudad de México, México (in Spanish).
3.
AndersonJGBodinPBruneJN, et al. (1986) Strong ground motion from the Michoacán, Mexico, earthquake. Science233(4768): 1043–1049.
4.
AriasA (1970) A measure of earthquake intensity. In: HansenRJ (ed.) Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 438–483.
5.
BeckJLJenningsPC (1980) Structural identification using linear models and earthquake records. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics8: 145–160.
6.
BendatJSPiersolAG (1986) Random Data. 2nd ed.New York: Wiley InterScience.
7.
BoroschekRLBilbaoJA (2019) Interpretation of stabilization diagrams using density-based clustering algorithm. Engineering Structures178: 245–257.
8.
BoroschekRLMahinSA (1991) Investigation of the seismic response of a lightly-damped torsionally-coupled building. Report no. UCB/EERC-91/18, December. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
9.
CamargoJMurià-VilaD (2011) Implementation of genetic algorithms in a system identification method for instrumented buildings. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on structural health monitoring of intelligent infrastructure, Cancún, México, 11–15 December.
10.
ÇelebiM (2019) Chapter 1: S2HM of buildings in USA. In: LimongelliMPÇelebiM (eds) Seismic Structural Health Monitoring: From Theory to Successful Applications (Springer tracts in civil engineering). Cham: Springer, pp. 3–30.
11.
ClintonJFBradfordSCHeatonTH, et al. (2006) The observed wander of the natural frequencies in a structure. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96(1): 237–257.
12.
DiPasqualeECakmakAS (1988) Identification of the serviceability limit state and detection of seismic structural damage. Technical Report NCEER-88-0022, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York at Buffalo, June 15.
13.
García-IllescasMAMurià-VilaDAldamaBD, et al. (2019) Frequency monitoring in a structure on soft soil by means of N4SID identification method. In: Proceedings of the 8th international operational modal analysis conference (IOMAC’19), Copenhagen, 12–14 May.
14.
KaloopMRElbeltagiEHuJW, et al. (2017) Recent advances of structures monitoring and evaluation using GPS-time series monitoring systems: A review. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information6: 382.
15.
MamdaniEH (1976) Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic synthesis. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on multiple-valued logic, Logan, UT, 25–28 May, pp. 196–202. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society Press.
16.
MeliRFaccioliEMurià-VilaD, et al. (1998) A study of site effects and seismic response of an instrumented building in Mexico city. Journal of Earthquake Engineering2(1): 89–111.
17.
Murià-VilaD (2007) Experiencia mexicana sobre la respuesta sísmica de edificios instrumentados. In: Proceedings of the III Coloquio de Ingreso a La Academia, México, 20 September. México: Academia de Ingeniería (in Spanish).
18.
Murià-VilaDAldamaBDLoeraS (2010) Structural warning for instrumented buildings. In: Proceedings of the 14th European conference on earthquake engineering, Ohrid, 29 August–3 September.
19.
Murià-VilaDArnau DelgadoOAguilar SilvaGG, et al. (2020) Monitoring of a rehabilitated building in soft soil in Mexico and structural response to September 2017 earthquakes: Part 2: Numerical simulation. Earthquake Spectra36: 238–261.
20.
Murià-VilaDCamargoJRodríguezG, et al. (2017a) Tilt and seismic response monitoring of a rehabilitated building. In: Proceedings of 8th international conference on structural health monitoring of intelligent infrastructure, Brisbane, Australia, 5–8 December.
21.
Murià-VilaDCamargoJAldamaBD (2017b) Influence of soil structure interaction and subsoil consolidation in the seismic response of a building. In: Proceedings of 16th world conference on earthquake engineering, Santiago de Chile, Chile, 9–13 January.
22.
Murià-VilaDRodríguezGZapataA, et al. (2001) Seismic response of a twice retrofitted building. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology38(2–4): 67–92.
23.
Murià-VilaDTabordaRZapataA (2004) Soil-structure interaction effects in two instrumented tall buildings. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–5 August.
24.
NakamuraY (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Quarterly Report of Railway Technical Research Institute30(1): 25–33.
25.
Normas Rehabilitación (NR) (2017) Normas para la Rehabilitación Sísmica de edificios de concreto dañados por el sismo del 19 de septiembre de 2017 [Norm for seismic rehabilitation of concrete buildings damaged by the earthquake of September 19, 2017]. No. 211 bis, 4 December. Ciudad de México: Gaceta Oficial de la Ciudad de México (in Spanish).
26.
Normas Técnicas Complementarias (NTC) (2017) Normas Técnicas Complementarias para el Diseño y Construcción de Edificios [Complementary Technical Norms for Design and Construction of Buildings]. Gaceta Oficial de la Ciudad de México, no. 220 bis, 15 December (in Spanish).
27.
OkuHKimuraH (1999) A recursive 4SID from the input-output point of view. Asian Journal of Control1(4): 258–269.
28.
Ovando-ShelleyEOssaARomoMP (2007) The sinking of Mexico City: Its effects on soil properties and seismic response. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering27: 333–343.
29.
PeetersBVenturaCE (2003) Comparative study of modal analysis techniques for bridge dynamic characteristics. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing17(5): 965–988.
30.
RodríguezJFLópez-AcostaNPAuvinetG (2008) 3D numerical modelling of the behaviour of large buildings founded on Mexico City soft clays. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop held in Glasgow, Scotland, 3–5 September 2008 pp.87–94. CRC Press.
31.
RodríguezMRojasRMurià-VilaD (2018) Estimación de los periodos predominantes de vibrar del terreno y de la estructura de velocidad de corte en cuatro sitios (edificios PC, CCUT, JAL y DUR), Instituto para la Seguridad de las Construcciones de la Ciudad México (proy. 8583). México: Instituto de Ingeniería, UNAM (in Spanish).
32.
RomoMPJaimeAResendizD (1988) General soil conditions and clay properties in the valley of Mexico. Earthquake Spectra4: 731–752.
33.
RosenbluethEOvandoE (1991) Geotechnical lessons learned from Mexico and other recent earthquakes. In: Proceeding of the second international conferences on recent advances in geotechnical earthquake engineering and soil dynamics (11), St. Louis, MO, 11–15 March, Paper no. SOA8.
34.
TrifunacMDEbrahimianM (2014) Detection thresholds in structural health monitoring. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering66: 319–338.
35.
TrifunacMDIvanovicSSTodorovskaMI (2001) Apparent periods of a building. II: Time-frequency analysis. Journal of Structural Engineering: ASCE127(5): 527–537.
36.
Van OverscheePDe MoorB (1994) N4SID: Subspace algorithms for the identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems. Automatica30(1): 75–93.
37.
ZadehLA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Information and Control8(3): 338–353.
38.
ZonnoGAguilarRBoroschekRL, et al. (2018) Automated long-term dynamic monitoring using hierarchical clustering and adaptive modal tracking: Validation and applications. Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring8: 791–808.
