0 Stimmen dafür0 Stimmen dagegen

547 Aufrufe55 SeitenDiseno de pendulo de friccion triple en sap2000

Nov 17, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

Diseno de pendulo de friccion triple en sap2000

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

547 Aufrufe

Diseno de pendulo de friccion triple en sap2000

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- CSI Sap2000 Bridge Examples
- Dynamic Testing of Machines and Structures
- Post Tension BIJAN AALAMI
- Structural Engineering
- Seismic Base Isolation
- Research Paper - Critical Comparative Feature Analysis of Structural Software (Sap2000 and Staad.pro)
- Dynamic-module-of-CAESAR-II.pdf
- modelling of triple friction pendulum bearing in sap2000.pdf
- Learning Dynamics and Vibrations by Msc Adams
- Vibration Test
- WB1401_wholebook_120516
- Base Isolation Design Guidelines
- Aerospace Structural Dynamics 2013.pdf
- OPTIMUM STRENGTH RATIO OF HYSTERETIC DAMPER
- Model of Triple Friction Pendulum
- AISC Seismic Design-Module4-Eccentrically Braced Frames
- Vibration Analysis
- Response of a Stable Second Order System
- Numerical Evaluation of Dynamic Response
- Seismic response of isolated bridges with abutment transverse restraint

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 55

A. A. S. Sarlis1 and M.C. Constantinou2

1

Graduate Student, Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo, State

University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260

Professor, Department of Civil, Structural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo, State University

of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260.

1. INTRODUCTION

This document presents guidelines on modeling the Triple Friction Pendulum isolator in program

SAP2000. Particularly, this document presents the following:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

Presentation of the parallel model for modeling Triple Friction Pendulum isolators.

Implementation of parallel model in SAP2000.

Use of direct integration and fast nonlinear analysis in SAP2000.

Modeling of global damping in seismically isolated structures in SAP2000.

Significance of Ritz vector modes in capturing correctly the response of seismically

isolated structures in SAP2000.

7) Consideration of isolator P- effects in direct integration and in fast nonlinear analysis in

SAP2000.

8) Verification examples including input files for modeling Triple Friction Pendulum

isolators using the parallel and the series models.

While the document concentrates on the Triple Friction Pendulum isolator, the issues discussed

on damping specification, Ritz vector modes, and P- analysis also apply to other isolation

systems. Moreover, while the presentation is restricted to program SAP2000, the concepts are

transferable to program ETABS that shares the same features as SAP2000 but limited to fast

nonlinear analysis.

The Triple Friction Pendulum (FP) isolator exhibits multiple changes in stiffness and strength

with increasing amplitude of displacement. Details on the behavior of the isolator, including test

data, shake table testing and comparison of analytical and experimental data may be found in

Morgan (2007) and Fenz and Constantinou (2008a to 2008e) .

The construction of the force-displacement loop is complex as it may contain several transition

points which depend on the geometric and frictional properties. Figure 1 shows the geometry of

a Triple FP bearing. Its behavior is characterized by radii R1, R2, R3 and R4 (typically R1=R4 and

R2=R3), heights h1, h2, h3 and h4 (typically h1=h4 and h2=h3), distances (related to displacement

capacities) d1, d2, d3 and d4 (typically d2=d3 and d1=d4) and friction coefficients 1 , 2 , 3 and 4

(typically 2 = 3 ). The actual displacement capacities of each sliding interface are given by:

d i*

Reffi

d , i 1...4

Ri i

(1)

Reffi Ri hi , i 1...4

(2)

The lateral force-displacement relation of the Triple FP isolator is illustrated in Figure 2. Five

different loops are shown in Figure 2, each one valid in one of five different regimes of

displacement. The parameters in the loops relate to the geometry of the bearing, the friction

coefficient values and the gravity load W carried by the isolator as described in Fenz and

Constantinou (2008a and 2008b). Triple FP isolators are typically designed to operate in

regimes I to IV, whereas regime V is reserved to act as a displacement restrainer. In regime V

the isolator has consumed its displacement capacities d1 and d4 and only slides on surfaces 2 and

3 (see Figure 1).

3

Table 1 (adopted from Fenz and Constantinou, 2008a) presents a summary of the forcedisplacement relationships of the Triple FP bearing in the five regimes of operation. Note that

Ffi iW is the friction force at interface i and W is the axial compressive load on the bearing.

*

*

*

*

Consider the special case in which Reff 1 Reff 4 , Reff 2 Reff 3 , d1 d 4 , d 2 d 4 , 1 4 and

2 3 . Furthermore, consider that the bearing does not reach regime V. The result is an

isolator with tri-linear hysteretic behavior as illustrated in Figure 3. Note this special case

represents a typical case of configuration of Triple FP isolators.

The force-displacement relation of the special Triple FP isolator is described by:

R

W

u 1 (1 2 ) eff 2 W

Reff 1

2 Reff 1

(3)

Force

22W

1W

W

W/2Reff1

W/2Reff2

2W

u*=2(1-2 )Reff2

Displacement

2u*

The relation given by equation (3) is valid until the lateral force and displacement reach the

values given by the following equations:

W *

d1 F f 1

Reff 1

(4)

4

(5)

u* u** 2( 1 2 ) Reff 2

(6)

W 1 ( 1 2 )

Reff 2

W

Reff 1

(7)

Regime

I

II

III

IV

Description

Sliding on surfaces 2

and 3 only

Motion stops on

surface 2; Sliding on

surfaces 1 and 3

Motion is stopped on

surfaces 2 and 3;

Sliding on surfaces 1

and 4

Slider contacts

restrainer on surface

1; Motion remains

stopped on surface 3;

Sliding on surface 2

and 4

Slider bears on

restrainer of surface 1

and 4; Sliding on

surfaces 2 and 3

Force-Displacement Relationship

Ff 2 Reff 2 Ff 3 Reff 3

W

u

Reff 2 Reff 3

Reff 2 Reff 3

Valid until:

F Ff 1 , u u 1 2 Reff 2 1 3 Reff 3

Valid until:

F Ff 4 , u u u 4 1 Reff 1 Reff 3

F Fdr1

Reff 4

W *

d1 F f 1 , u udr1 u d1* 1

4 1 Reff 1 Reff 4

Reff 1

Reff 1

W

W *

d1 F f 1

u udr1

Reff 2 Reff 4

Reff 1

Valid until:

W

u

Reff 1 Reff 4

Reff 1 Reff 4

Valid until:

F Fdr 4

d *

d*

W *

d 4 F f 4 , u udr 4 udr1 4 4 1 1 Reff 2 Reff 4

Reff 1

Reff 4

Reff 4

W

W *

d 4 Ff 4

u udr 4

Reff 2 Reff 3

Reff 4

Assumptions: (1) Reff 1 Reff 4 Reff 2 Reff 3 , (2) 2 3 1 4 , (3) d1* 4 1 Reff 1 , (4), d 2* 1 2 Reff 2

(5) d 3* 4 3 Reff 3

3.1 Introduction

The series model has been developed by Fenz and Constantinou (2008d, e) in order to model

behavior of the Triple FP bearings in all five regimes of operations. The series model, although

unable to provide information on the motion of the internal components, is an exact

representation of the triple FP bearing which indeed behaves as a series arrangement of single FP

elements. However, the series model requires the introduction of artificial masses at the

connecting joints of the FP elements and the use of a large number of degrees of freedom per

bearing. These requirements typically have the following effects:

1) An increased computational effort for analysis.

2) The analysis produces results that are sensitive to the selection of values for secondary

parameters used in the model, such as link element masses, effective stiffness and the

elastic stiffness.

3) The required number of Ritz vector modes for use in fast nonlinear analysis is increased.

The parallel model is a much simpler model capable of describing the behavior of the special

*

*

*

*

case Triple FP bearing, for which Reff 1 Reff 4 , Reff 2 Reff 3 , d1 d 4 , d 2 d 4 , 1 4 , 2 3

and the bearing does not enter the final regime of operation (stiffening). The parallel model was

originally described in Sarlis et al (2009), where it was implemented in computer program 3DBASIS (Nagarajaiah et al, 1989 and Tsopelas et al, 1994 and 2005). This report describes the

implementation of the parallel model in program SAP2000 (and, through its similarity, to

program ETABS).

The parallel model consists of a parallel arrangement of FP elements instead of a series

arrangement of such elements. It has the following limitations:

1) Is incapable of exactly capturing the motion of the internal components of the triple FP

bearing. However, the motion may be derived on the basis of the theory described in

Fenz and Constantinou (2008a, 2008b), except for very small displacements.

2) The above limitation results in inability to exactly describe the velocity dependence of

the friction coefficient. This limitation is bypassed by using the theory in Fenz and

Constantinou (2008a, 2008b) to partition the total bearing motion to the two main sliding

surfaces. Accordingly, the model describes well the velocity dependence of the friction

coefficient except for the case of very small velocities.

3) The model cannot describe the behavior of the bearing in regime V as shown in Figure 2

(stiffening range).

While the parallel model has been extended to describe the more general configuration of the

triple FP where different friction coefficients are used at each sliding interface, this report

specifically focus on the special case isolator due to its simplicity and wide practical use. The

extended, so-called bundle model, will be described in another report.

The parallel model consists of two FP elements arranged in parallel and connected to two shared

nodes. The first element (called FP1) represents a flat slider. The second element (called FP2) is

a single Friction Pendulum element. The two elements share the same joints (nodes) and they

overlap each other. The assembly is shown in Figure 4. The top joint is connected to the structure

above, while the bottom joint is either fixed on the ground or rigidly connected to the structure

below. Due to their arrangement, and provided the two elements are assigned equal axial

stiffness, the elements equally share the total load on the isolator. The properties of the FP

elements are selected as schematically depicted in Figure 5 to represent the global behavior of

the Triple FP isolator (details of the parameters are provided in the sequel).

1W

K1

2W

K2

u

Y1

0

2W

W

R2

FP1

FP2

Figure 5 Force Displacement Loops of Elements FP1 and FP2 of the Parallel Model

The use of overlapping elements results in zero rotational stiffness of the element, which

correctly represents the actual behavior. Note that earlier descriptions of the parallel element

(Sarlis et al, 2009) placed the two elements of the model at a distance between them that created

an artificial rotational stiffness. The rotational stiffness may affect the accuracy of the results of

analysis.

8

3.3.1 Limit on Displacement

The parallel model cannot capture the stiffening behavior of the triple FP bearing and therefore

should not be used when the calculated displacement from response history analysis exceeds the

limit (see Table 1):

(8)

The friction coefficients of elements FP1 and FP2 (see Figure 5) are calculated so the sum of the

forces in the assembly of FP1 and FP2 elements equals the actual forces shown in Figure 3:

2W 1W K 2 Y 1

(9)

(10)

1W 1W 2 W

In the above equations,

1 is the friction coefficient of the FP1 element

W is the axial load in the FP1 and FP2 elements, which equals to W/2.

K 1 is the elastic stiffness of the FP1 element.

K 2 is the elastic stiffness of the FP2 element

R 2 is the radius of curvature of the FP2 element.

Y 1 is the yield displacement of the FP1 element. This is a small quantity, typically assumed to be

about 0.01inch or larger (although see example of calculation later in this document).

i is the friction coefficient of i-th surface of the triple FP isolator, where i=1,2,3 or 4.

W is the axial load carried by the bearing.

Assuming that the yield displacement of FP1 in SAP2000 is a small number and using W W / 2

1 2 2

(11)

2 21 2

(12)

The friction coefficients are defined at fast velocities (related to parameter FAST in SAP2000).

For slow velocities, the friction coefficient (related to parameter SLOW in SAP2000) may be

assumed to be half of the fast velocity value.

9

The FP1 is a flat slider (in SAP2000 this condition is represented as one with radius equal to

zero). The post-elastic stiffness of element FP2 is equal to the post-elastic stiffness of the

bearing, so that:

(13)

W

W

W

2 Reff 1 R 2 2 R 2

Therefore,

3.3.4

(14)

R 2 Reff 1

Elastic Stiffness

The elastic stiffness of the bearing when motion in regime II starts is equal to the elastic stiffness

of the FP2 element of the parallel model.

K2

(15)

W

2 Reff 2

K1

2W

2Y 1

3.3.5

(17)

2 Reff 2

The force intercept at zero displacement normalized by the axial load (or coefficient of friction at

zero displacement), is given by the following expressions (see Figures 3 and 5):

*

2 2

2W

K 2 R2

2 1 2

Reff 1 Reff 2

Reff 1

1 1 2 2

3.3.6

(18)

(19)

Rate Parameter

The rate parameter specified for coefficients of friction 1 and 2 should be half the values of

the rate parameter for the coefficients of friction 2 and 1 , respectively of surfaces 2 (or 3) and

1 (or 4) of the bearing. Note that this is due to fact that the parallel model is limited to cases in

10

which 2 3 and 1 4 for which the sliding displacements and sliding velocities on surfaces

1 and 4 are equal to half of the total displacement and velocity (this is only an approximation for

small displacements).

3.3.7

Effective Stiffness

The effective stiffness should be specified to be low in order to minimize damping leakage in the

isolation system. In fast nonlinear analysis (FNA), SAP2000 constructs a global damping matrix

using the specified effective stiffness of the link elements in the nonlinear isolation system.

Accordingly, artificial viscous damping elements are introduced in the isolation system.

Specification of a small effective stiffness ensures that the artificial damping is low to affect the

calculated response and prevents magnification of damping in nonlinear dynamic analysis as the

element develops an instantaneous effective stiffness that is less than the initial specified value.

It is advised that an appropriate value for the effective stiffness to use is the value of the post

elastic stiffness (or less) of each element, although some trial and error investigation may be

needed to confirm that that damping leakage is minimal. Note that the effective stiffness is also

used to calculate Ritz vector modes and, therefore, the values specified have some additional

effect in FNA. As it will be discussed later in this report, the results of FNA can be exact if an

appropriate number of Ritz vector modes are used regardless of the specified value of effective

stiffness.

3.3.8

Vertical Stiffness

It is important that the FP1 and FP2 elements in the parallel model have the same vertical

stiffness so that they equally share the axial load on the bearing. Otherwise, the model is invalid.

For the triple FP bearing, it is appropriate to calculate the vertical stiffness as the axial stiffness

of a column having the height of the bearing, diameter of the inner slider and modulus of

elasticity equal to about one half the modulus of elasticity of steel in order to account for the

some limited flexibility in the bearing. The calculated vertical stiffness is then equally divided to

the FP1 and FP2 elements.

3.3.9

The shear deformation location should be specified at the mid-point of the two nodes of the FP1

and FP2 elements. This parameter has significance only in the calculation of the moment

transferred by the bearing to the structure above and below (including P- moments, if such

effects are included). The use of the mid-point for the shear deformation location is strictly valid

for the special case isolator considered herein. (When friction on the two main sliding surfaces

is different, the shear deformation location should be selected on the basis of the partition of the

isolator displacement-theory in Fenz and Constantinou, 2008a and 2008c. It will be closer to the

surface of the largest friction).

11

The element height should be the same as the total height of the isolator including the thickness

of the top and bottom concave plates in order to correctly calculate the moment acting at the

bottom of the bearing concave plates (including P- moments, if such effects are included).

3.3.11 Rotational Stiffness (degrees of freedom R2, R3)

The rotational stiffness of elements FP1 and FP2 should be zero. Given that the two elements

are at the same location, the combined rotational (or bending) stiffness of the model is zero. This

is very close to the actual behavior of the isolator, which has minor resistance to rotation (the

resistance results from friction tractions on the inner spherical sliding surfaces).

3.3.12 Torsional Stiffness (degree of freedom R1)

The torsional stiffness of elements FP1 and FP2 should be zero. The isolator has insignificant

rotational resistance.

3.3.13 Link Element Mass

For each of the FP1 and FP2 elements, we recommend the use of a value equal to half of the total

mass of the isolator. Use of larger values for the link element mass may speed up execution of

analysis although results may be slightly affected.

3.3.14 Link Element Rotational Mass Moment of Inertia

A rotational mass moment of inertia must be assigned for the FP1 and FP2 elements for proper

execution of the program. We recommend the approximate calculation of a mass moment of

inertia for the bearing using equation (20) below and then dividing the moment equally to the

two elements. Use of larger values for the link element mass moment of inertia may speed up

execution of analysis although results may be slightly affected.

I FP

misolator ( DR 2 h 2 )

12

(20)

In this equation, misolator is the mass of the bearing, DR is the diameter of the rigid slider of the

bearing and h is the bearing height.

3.3.16 Addition of Gap Element to Parallel Model

It would appear as straight forward exercise to add gap elements in parallel to the Triple FP

isolator parallel model to capture the stiffening behavior of the isolator in regime V. However,

the behavior produced is not exactly correct. This is due to the fact that a gap element in

SAP2000 engages and disengages at specified displacements (the gap displacement) while this is

12

not true for the Triple FP bearing. Use of a gap element will produce correct stiffening behavior

but the unloading branch of the hysteresis loop will be incorrect. Note that the same problem

exists when other approximations are used to model the Triple FP model (e.g., the bilinear

hysteretic model) together with gap elements. Only the series model (Fenz and Constantinou,

2008d) of the Triple FP bearing is capable of correctly modeling this behavior. However, a gap

element added in parallel to the parallel element of the Triple FP bearing produces correct results

for the very special case of 1 2 3 4 .

A summary of element properties for the parallel model is presented in Table 2.

Table 2 FP1 and FP2 Element Properties in Parallel Model of Triple FP Bearing

Supported Weight W

Elastic Stiffness K 1 , K 2

2W

FP1

FP2

2

W

2 Reff 2

2Reff 2

2Y 1

Friction Coefficient 1 , 2

2 2

*

*

Zero Displacement 1 , 2

2 2

a1

Rate Parameter a

21 2

2(1 2 )(

Reff 1 Reff 2 )

Reff 1

a1

Radius of Curvature R1 , R 2

0(flat)

Reff 1

Element Height

h

h

2

h

h

2

0

0

0

0

misolator / 2

misolator / 2

Rotational Stiffness (R2,R3)

Torsional Stiffness (R1)

Link Element Mass1

Rotational Mass Moment of

Inertia1

I FP

misolator DR h 2

24

I FP

misolator DR h 2

24

DR=diameter of rigid slider, h=bearing height, Y 1 =yield displacement equal to about 0.01inch or larger

13

3.4

3.4.1

Damping Specification in Fast Nonlinear Analysis (FNA)

The specification of structural damping in the analysis of seismically isolated structures (with

nonlinear isolator elements) may appear to be of secondary importance. However, if improperly

specified, damping may have significant effects.

When modeling an isolated structure, the inherent damping of the structure exclusive of the

isolation system is assigned based on the type structure (height, materials, construction method)

and expected level of deformation. For a building, the damping ratio is only approximately

known for the superstructure when fixed at the isolator locations. For example, the data

presented in Satake et al (2003) may be used to select the values of damping ratio for the

superstructure of isolated buildings. It should be noted that when data on damping for

conventional structures are used in the modeling of seismically isolated structures, each mode of

vibration of the fixed-based structure corresponds to two modes of vibration of the

corresponding seismically isolated structure. For example, both the first and second modes, in

say the longitudinal direction, of a seismically isolated exhibit a shape for the superstructure part

that is basically identical to that of the first mode of the non-isolated structure. Accordingly,

when a value of damping ratio is selected for the first mode of the non-isolated structure, that

value should be used for the first six modes of the corresponding three-dimensional isolated

structure (first and second modes in each of the two principal directions and torsion). Note that

this is applicable when diaphragm constraints are used but it may be more complex otherwise

(see discussion on Purely Isolated Modes below).

Program SAP2000 constructs a global damping matrix which involves the degrees of freedom of

the isolation system. The calculation of the global damping matrix makes use of the specified

effective stiffness of each isolator element and of the mass and moment of inertia of the part of

the structure between the superstructure and the isolator supports (e.g., basemat above isolators).

This leads to the introduction of artificial viscous elements in the isolation system. We term this

phenomenon damping leakage in the isolation system. This may significantly affect the

calculation of isolator displacements by artificially damping its response as if viscous dampers

were present in the isolation system. For example, consider that the isolation system has bilinear hysteretic behavior with yield displacement of 1inch. The damping is specified as 5% of

critical in each mode of vibration and the effective stiffness of each isolator is specified as the

elastic stiffness (that is, the 5% damping ratio is anchored on the elastic stiffness). Say that upon

yielding of the isolator in dynamic analysis the displacement reaches 20inch amplitude. The

effective damping is then equal to 0.0520/1=0.224! The magnification of effective damping by

the square root of the ductility ratio is a well understood effect (for example see Chapter 18 of

ASCE-7, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, 2010).

In Fast Nonlinear Analysis (FNA), the stiffness matrix remains always the same and is based on

the specified effective stiffness of the isolator elements. Nonlinear forces from the isolator

elements are treated as loads on the right hand side of the equations of motion. This allows the

user to have control on the amount of damping that is leaked into the isolation system by

14

specifying a small effective stiffness of the isolators. When a small effective stiffness is

specified, one can distinguish the following Ritz vectors modes:

Purely Isolated: An example of purely isolated Ritz vector mode is shown in Figure 6. In

this mode, the superstructure responds nearly as a rigid block. The number of purely

isolated modes depends on the extent of discretization of the structure. When a

diaphragm constraint is specified for all floor levels and all masses are specified as point

masses, the number of such modes is reduced to one for two-dimensional analysis and to

three for three-dimensional analysis.

Mixed Modes: These modes are characterized by the mixed response of the superstructure

and the isolation system. When a diaphragm constraint is specified for all floor levels

and all masses are specified as point masses, the number of such modes is reduced to a

number equal to the number of floors for two-dimensional analysis and to three times the

number of floors for three-dimensional analysis. Figure 7 shows examples of mixed

modes.

Local or vertical Modes: These are high frequency modes that mostly involve local

response of members or the vertical response of the structure on the isolators. These

15

modes typically create numerical difficulties and negatively affect the computational

effort. However, they are important in the calculation of quantities such as accelerations,

member internal forces and isolator uplift. Figure 8 shows an example of local mode.

The distinction between modes becomes complicated when vertical modes are of relatively low

frequency so that they appear in between the mixed modes or when combined horizontal and

vertical responses exist in a mode. In such cases, the modes should be classified as mixed rather

than local.

Damping may be specified in SAP2000 as follows:

Specifying constant damping for all modes together with small effective stiffness is the simplest

approach for reducing, but not eliminating, damping leakage. Note that in this approach the

specified damping ratio of each mode is the same.

This method is similar to the previous one but combined with zero damping override for the

purely isolated modes in order to minimize damping leakage in the isolation system. This

approach significantly affects the computational speed of the analysis so that, practically, may be

used when the number of isolators is small. However, the user may want to use override in order

to specify different (typically larger) damping ratio values for the higher modes.

Rayleigh Damping

Rayleigh damping is based on the specification of damping ratio values at two selected

frequencies. A simple approach is to select the two frequencies such that they bound the

frequencies of the purely isolated and mixed modes as illustrated in Figure 9.

16

Damping Ratio

Modes

Local or vertical

Modes

Selected

Frequencies

j

Frequency

Two important considerations related to Rayleigh damping specifications are:

1) The two specified frequencies should be the first isolated mode frequency and the last

mixed mode frequency. Accordingly, frequencies i and j are significantly different

(the difference is even larger when low effective element stiffness is specified).

Therefore, modes that lie in between these two frequencies will have significantly lower

damping than the specified value, as illustrated in Figure 9. This typically leads in overestimation of the superstructure response (accelerations, drifts and isolator uplift).

2) Rayleigh damping provides the advantage of having higher damping for the higher

modes. This is both correct (e.g., see Satake et al, 2003) and also computationally

efficient as it reduces numerical difficulties and increases the speed of computation.

This method is similar to the Rayleigh Damping approach but allows for more control. It is the

most effective way of specifying damping in a seismically isolated structure when the number of

isolators is large and the speed of analysis is a concern.

The procedure requires identification of the purely isolated modes, mixed modes and local

modes. This is relatively easy when low values for the isolator element effective stiffness are

used. The Rayleigh coefficients are calculated using the lowest and highest frequency of the

mixed modes. Modes that have a frequency lower than the lowest mixed mode (these are the

purely isolated modes) should be assigned zero (or very low) damping using the damping

override option in SAP2000. Figure 10 illustrates the assigned damping ratio based on this

approach.

17

Damping Ratio

Purely

Isolated

Modes

Mixed Modes

Local or vertical

Modes

j

Frequency

An advantage of the Rayleigh Damping with Override approach is that frequencies i and j are

closely spaced so that the damping ratio in the modes with frequencies between the two selected

frequencies are not substantially less than the specified value of damping ratio. The analysis

speed with this approach is similar to the Rayleigh Damping case but damping leakage is better

controlled due to the damping override.

Interpolated Damping

In this method, a different damping ratio may be specified for various frequency ranges.

Therefore the user can implement zero damping or nearly so for the frequency range of the

purely isolated modes, a specified damping ratio for the mixed modes, and a higher damping

ratio for local modes. For the local modes, either a high constant damping ratio can be specified

or a linearly varying damping ratio may be specified up to a maximum value of damping ratio.

This is illustrated in Figure 11.

In terms of minimizing damping leakage and accuracy of superstructure response, this damping

specification approach can produce results similar to the constant damping with override and

Rayleigh damping with override but with increased speed of analysis.

18

Damping Ratio

Purely

Isolated

Modes

Local or vertical

Modes

j

Frequency

3.4.2

Fast nonlinear analysis requires the specification of the number of Ritz vectors modes for use in

the analysis. A sufficient number of Ritz vector modes are needed to accurately capture the

response of the analyzed structure. When the number of isolators is large, Ritz vector modes

associated with high frequencies may be included which often creates numerical difficulties. The

use of Rayleigh damping with override for the damping specification may be most useful in such

cases.

An important consideration in the selection of the number of Ritz vector modes has to do with

the development of gravity load on the isolators (which is very important for sliding isolators).

In FNA and prior to start of the seismic analysis, the gravity load is applied through analysis in

which the structure is subjected to vertical ground acceleration that slowly increases with time.

If the number of Ritz vector modes is not sufficiently large to fully develop the gravity load

effects, the analysis with sliding isolators is equivalent to one in which the structure is subjected

a vertical constant downward acceleration. This results in over-prediction of isolator

displacements. Figure 12 provides an example from analysis of a bridge structure (bridge is the

example in Constantinou et al, 2007). The figure shows the sum of axial forces on the bridge

supports (which equal to the weight of the bridge) as function of time and the number of Ritz

vector modes considered. The history of axial load evolves as the vertical acceleration is slowly

imposed to develop the gravity load prior to starting the dynamic response history analysis. The

weight is nearly equal to 6000kip. It requires at least 33 Ritz vector modes to develop correctly

the load. The typically utilized minimum number of Ritz vector modes equal to 3 times the

number of isolators plus rigid masses would have resulted in this case a requirement for use of

30 vectors, which should be sufficient for this example. Note that when the number of Ritz

vector modes is insufficient for the development of the isolator gravity load, member forces are

also underestimated which affects the adequacy assessment of the analyzed structure. It should

also be noted that the required number of Ritz vector modes may depend on the form of the ramp

19

function used to develop the gravity load. That is, the cut-off time of 10 second in Figure 12

may affect the required number of Ritz vector modes. Moreover, it is important to first

determine the number of Ritz vector modes needed to correctly develop the load and then

conduct analyses with that number and with larger number in order to observe the sensitivity of

the calculated response on the number of modes used. It is possible to correctly develop the load

with a small number of Ritz vector modes but require many more modes to obtain correct results

in dynamic analysis.

6000

4000

FNA-129 MODES

FNA-5 MODES

FNA-15 MODES

2000

FNA-30 MODES

FNA- 50 MODES

FNA-33 MODES

0

0

10

20

Time (sec)

3.4.3

Direct Integration

Program SAP2000 has the option of Direct Integration for dynamic analysis. In this approach,

the effect of any nonlinear elements is accounted for by the use of instantaneous stiffness and

damping matrices. This prevents the program user from controlling damping leakage in the

isolation system. Actually, artificial damping in the isolation system may substantially fluctuate

depending on the instantaneous stiffness of the nonlinear elements. We do not recommend use

of the direct integration method unless damping is specified as zero or nearly so.

20

4.

4.1 Introduction

Isolator P- effects can have important contributions to structural drift and acceleration. Figure

13 illustrates the transfer of forces at the sliding interfaces of a Double or a Triple FP bearing (a

similar situation exists in elastomeric bearings). The moment P1will cause rotation of the

column on top of the deformed isolator that, in turn, will result in increased first story drift.

P- effects can be explicitly accounted for in dynamic analysis in SAP2000 by use of the direct

integration method of analysis. There is no explicit way of accounting for these effects in FNA

analysis.

4.2 Approximate P- Analysis when using Fast Nonlinear Analysis

In FNA analysis, P- effects cannot be explicitly analyzed. However, it is possible to

approximately account for these effects by performing two analyses as described below:

1) First a dynamic response history analysis is performed, ignoring P- effects, so that

histories of the bearing axial loads and the displacements for each isolator are calculated.

The P- moment at the top of each isolator is calculated (for the Triple FP isolator or any

elastomeric isolator, the moment is equal to one half of the axial load times the

displacement-note that the component of moment resulting from the shear force times the

21

height is accounted for directly by the program and need not be added to the axial force

component).

2) Dynamic response history analysis is performed with the calculated P- moment applied

as time history function at the top and bottom joints of each isolator and ensuring that the

direction of the moments is such that it causes a shear force in the same direction as the

isolator displacement. Note that the P- moment at the bottom joints is not needed if the

isolators are directly supported on the ground.

The procedure described above is one of a number of options for approximately accounting for

isolator P- effects. Engineers have already tried other approximate ways for accounting for

these effects such as first performing the response history analysis and then performing static

analysis to only calculate the P- moment effects. Such a procedure can provide information on

the effects on the structural drift but not on structural accelerations.

22

5.1 Description of Analyzed Two-Dimensional Structure and Verification Study

A four story isolated structure is used herein to demonstrate aspects of modeling and analysis

procedures described above. It is two-dimensional slice of an actual building. It is a moment

frame with all connections being rigid. The structure is supported by six isolators. It is assumed

that each isolator carries a load of 900kip, for a total weight on the isolators equal to 5400kip. In

the analysis model, the mass is lumped at the joints as shown in Figure 14 with each joint

assigned the same mass.

Table 3 presents the periods of vibration of the first four modes of the superstructure when

assumed fixed to the ground.

Table 3 Periods of Vibration of Superstructure when Fixed at the Base

Mode

1

2

3

4

Period (sec)

0.776

0.253

0.138

0.093

In modeling the isolated structure, structural damping of 2% of critical for all modes is assumed

(constant damping model). The effective stiffness of each isolator is specified as equal to the

post-elastic stiffness. Analysis is performed using the TCU-065-E component of the 1999 ChiChi, Taiwan earthquake.

23

Table 4 Properties of Triple FP Isolators

82.5

7.5

d1* d 4* (inch)

17.8

d 2* d 3* (inch)

0.94

1 4

0.108

2 3

0.030

a1 a 2 a 3 a 4

(sec/in)

2.54

In order to verify the accuracy of the parallel model, analysis is performed using the parallel

model described herein and the series model described in Fenz and Constantinou, 2008d. It is

presumed that the series model provides an exact description of behavior of the Triple FP

isolator. The series model as implemented in program SAP2000 is depicted in Figure 15.

Figure 15 Assembly of Friction Pendulum Link Elements, Gap Elements and Rigid Beam

Elements Used in the Series Model of Triple FP Bearing in SAP2000

Table 5 presents the parameters of the series model of Triple FP bearings in SAP2000.

24

Friction

Radii of

Gap

Elastic

Rate

Element

Coefficient

Curvature

Displacement Stiffness

Parameter

FP1

2 3

FP2

FP3

Reff 1 Reff 2

Reff 1

Reff 4 Reff 3

Reff 4

1 a2 a3

2

2

2W

d1

1W

2Y

Reff 1 Reff 2

d4

4W

Reff 4

NA

2Y

2Y

Reff 1

Reff 4 Reff 3

a1

a4

Table 6 presents numerical values of the properties implemented in SAP2000 for the series and

parallel models of each bearing.

Results of analysis obtained with the two models are compared in Figures 16 to 20. Analysis

was performed using the FNA method and utilizing 53 Ritz vector modes for the parallel model

and 77 Ritz vector modes for the series model. These correspond to the maximum Ritz vector

modes calculated by SAP2000. Evidently, the two models produce identical results for all

practical purposes. Some small differences in the results are attributed to small differences in

structural damping modeling and in small differences in modeling velocity dependence of the

friction coefficient in the two models.

25

Table 6 Values of Properties of the Series and Parallel Models of Bearings in SAP2000

Series Model

Parallel Model

FP1

FP2

FP3

FP1

FP2

16

16

(in)-(distance from top joint

of FP element)

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.0025

0.0025

900

900

900

450

450

213530

213530

213530

35588.4

35588.4

1350

4860

4860

807.9

54.55

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.0155

60

12

12

5.45

0.015

0.054

0.054

0.030

0.0709

0.030

0.108

0.108

0.060

0.1418

Radius (inch)

15

75

75

82.5

1.27

2.794

2.794

1.27

1.27

Rotational/Torsional

Stiffness (R1,R2,R3)

Fixed

Fixed

Rotational Moment of

Inertia (kip-in-sec2)

1.0

0.5

0.5

1.

26

27

28

5.2 Description of Analyzed Three-Dimensional Structure and Verification Study

A three-dimensional structure is generated using three frames identical to the two-dimensional

frame of Figure 14, placed at distance of 384inch, center to center. All connections are assumed

rigid. Figure 21 illustrates the three-dimensional model. The TCU-065-E and TCU-065-N

components of the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake are used as seismic excitation along the

principal building directions. Structural damping is again specified as 2% of critical in each

mode (constant damping model) with the effective stiffness of each of the18 isolators specified

equal to the post-elastic stiffness. Each isolator is modeled using the data in Tables 4, 5 and 6.

Analysis was performed using the FNA method and utilizing 196 Ritz vector modes for the

parallel model and 200 Ritz vector modes for the series model. The results are shown in Figures

22 to 24. Evidently, the two models produce identical results for all practical purposes.

29

30

31

32

The number of Ritz vector modes affects the accuracy of analysis through (a) its effect on the

development of the axial load on the isolators and the development of actions in the structural

members, and (b) the incomplete description of the structural response when an insufficient

number of modes are used.

The two-dimensional, 4-story structure example of Section 5.1 with constant 2% damping (and

effective isolator stiffness specified equal to the post-elastic isolator stiffness) was analyzed

using the parallel Triple FP model in fast nonlinear analysis with varying number of Ritz vector

modes. Selected peak response results are presented in Table 7.

Table 7 Effect of Number of Ritz Vector Modes on Peak Response Results for TwoDimensional Structure

No. of Ritz

Vector

Modes

2

5

10

20

30

40

50

Isolator

Base

Displacement

Shear/Weight

(inch)

0.234

0.235

0.236

0.235

0.235

0.235

0.235

22.18

22.22

22.38

22.31

22.29

22.29

22.29

First Story

Drift Ratio

(%)

Roof

Acceleration

(g)

CPU

Time

(sec)

0.18

0.33

0.34

0.32

0.31

0.31

0.31

0.24

0.34

0.43

1.55

0.43

0.42

0.42

14

17

84

158

188

229

257

Note that stable response prediction in this example is obtained when the number of modes

exceeds 30. Also, note that the prediction of acceleration response is very sensitive to the

number of modes. It is apparent that some experimentation is needed to determine a sufficient

number of modes for use in the analysis.

5.4 Effect of Gap Element

As described in Section 3.3.16, the addition of a gap element in parallel with the parallel model

for the Triple FP bearing does not correctly capture the behavior of the isolator. To demonstrate

the effects of such modeling, the two-dimensional structure of Section 5.1 was analyzed with the

TCU-065-E component of the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake scaled up by a factor equal to 1.4 so that

the bearing enters the stiffening regime V. Each isolator was modeled using the parallel model

described in Section 5.1 and with a gap element added. The gap opening was calculated using

equation (8) and gap element stiffness after closing was selected in accordance with equation

(21) below. Note that the gap element stiffness is such that the sum of the post elastic stiffness

of the parallel model and the gap element stiffness equals to the stiffness of the FP bearing when

sliding occurs simultaneously on surfaces 2 and 3.

33

K gap

W

2 Reff 2

(21)

2 Reff 1

Moreover, and just for the purpose of demonstrating the gap element effects, the displacement

capacities of surfaces 2 and 3 have been considered unlimited so that the parallel model can be

used.

Figure 25 compares the isolation system force-displacement loops for the case of the series

model (exact) to the approximate parallel model with added gap element. The error introduced

by the incorrect use of the gap element in the parallel model is seen in the enlarged figure.

Nevertheless, the calculated displacement of the isolation system is practically unaffected.

Figure 25 Comparison of Results Obtained with the Exact Series Model and the

Approximate Parallel Model with Gap Element

34

The enlarged version of Figure 25 demonstrates the error introduced by the gap element in the

parallel model. The gap element engages and disengages at the same displacement as specified

in the gap element parameters. The stiffening behavior of the Triple FP bearing, however, starts

and ends at different displacements, which depend on the geometric and frictional properties of

the bearing. Moreover, the fluctuating loop seen in Figure 25 for the series model is a result of

numerical difficulty in the integration process.

35

The two-dimensional model of Figure 14 is used to demonstrate the damping specification

effects discussed in Section 3.4.1.

6.1 Demonstration of Damping Leakage

Figure 26 compares the isolator displacement in the two-dimensional example of Section 5.1

when modeling damping using the constant damping model with 2% damping ratio and when

specifying zero damping. All other parameters in the analysis model are identical for the two

analyses. Note the effective stiffness of each isolator has been specified as equal to the postelastic stiffness.

The difference in the peak isolator displacement observed in Figure 26 is primarily attributed to

leakage of damping in the isolation system when the 2% constant damping specification is used.

While the difference in peak isolator displacement is small in this case, it is noticeably larger

when 5% damping is specified.

Specification

6.2 Effect of Effective Stiffness Value on Damping Leakage

The effect of the specified value of effective stiffness of each isolator used in analysis is

demonstrated by analyzing the two-dimensional example of Section 5.1 using the constant

damping model with various values of the effective isolator stiffness. Results are compared in

Figure 27 when the damping ratio is specified as 2% in each mode and in Figure 28 when the

damping ratio is specified as 5% in each mode. The effective stiffness is specified as either

equal to the post-elastic stiffness (case KEFF=KPE) or equal to the elastic stiffness (case

KEFF=KEL).

36

Damping and with Different Values of Effective Stiffness (equal to the post-elastic stiffness

or equal to the elastic stiffness)

The results in Figure 27 demonstrate a significant effect when a large value of stiffness is used.

As discussed earlier, the observed substantial difference in peak displacement is the result of

magnification of effective damping that leaked into the isolation system and is magnified as

inelastic action occurs in the isolation system.

and 5% Damping and with Effective Stiffness Equal to the Elastic Stiffness

The results of Figure 28 show that an incorrect specification of damping (although seemingly

appropriate) may lead to totally erroneous results. Incorrect specification of the effective

stiffness results in so much damping leakage in the isolation system that the predicted peak

isolator displacement is reduced to less than half of the actual value.

37

Figure 29 compares isolator force-displacement loops in the example of Section 5.1 when

damping is specified either as zero or as 2% constant damping with a 0% damping override for

the first mode and with effective stiffness equal to the post-elastic stiffness. The results of the

two models of damping are identical for all practical purposes. Note that constant damping with

override, as described in Section 3.4.1, is an appropriate damping specification for seismically

isolated structures. In this example, non-zero damping was specified but prevented from leaking

into the isolation system.

2% Constant Damping with Override and with Effective Stiffness Equal to the Post-Elastic

Stiffness

6.4 Use of Rayleigh Damping

Table 8 presents information on the calculated modes of the 4-story isolated structure. The

identification was based on observation of the shapes as discussed in Section 3.4.1.

Table 8 Properties of Modes of Four Story Isolated Structure

Mode No.

Mode Identification

Period (sec)

1

Purely Isolated

4.167

2

0.462

3

0.216

Mixed Modes

4

0.131

5

0.091

6

0.0885

Local or vertical

0.0884

7

Damping was modeled either as constant in all modes with value equal to 2% or as Rayleigh

damping with values of 2% at frequencies of 0.24 and 11.1Hz (which correspond to the first and

38

sixth modes as shown in Table 8). The effective stiffness of the isolators was specified equal to

the post-elastic stiffness for both analyses. Results for the two cases are compared in Figure 30.

Evidently the two methods of specifying damping produce practically identical results.

Damping and 2% Rayleigh Damping and with Effective Stiffness Equal to the Post-Elastic

Stiffness

Nevertheless, the use of 2% Rayleigh damping as described above still had some damping

leakage in the isolation system. This is demonstrated in Figure 31 where the zero damping case

is compared to the 2% Rayleigh damping case.

2% Rayleigh Damping and with Effective Stiffness Equal to the Post-Elastic Stiffness

Use of Rayleigh damping as described in Section 3.4.1 may significantly increase the speed of

the analysis. Figure 32 compares the CPU time required for the analysis of the two cases of 2%

39

constant damping and 2% Rayleigh damping described above as function of the number of Ritz

vector modes used in the analysis.

Figure 32 Comparison of CPU Time for Analysis Using the Constant Damping and

Rayleigh Damping Methods

Small CPU time is achieved in the Rayleigh damping specification method because the method

assigns large damping ratio values to very high frequency modes which effectively removes their

effects and reduces numerical difficulties associated with high frequency response. Despite the

differences in computational speed, the two methods produce practically identical results as

demonstrated in Figure 30.

6.5 Use of Rayleigh Damping with Override

Figure 33 compares results of analysis for the two-dimensional structure of Section 5.1 when

damping is specified as (a) 2% using the Rayleigh method for frequencies f i 2.16 Hz and

f j 11.1Hz (bounding frequencies of mixed modes) with 0% damping override for the first

mode (purely isolated mode) and (b) as zero. For both cases the effective stiffness was specified

equal to the post-elastic stiffness.

Note that the case of zero damping is used herein to provide the most accurate results for the

isolation system displacement as it does not have damping leakage in the isolation system.

However, the specification of zero damping affects the computation of accelerations and bearing

uplift displacements, which are then typically overestimated.

40

2% Rayleigh Damping at f i 2.16 Hz , f j 11.1Hz with 0% Override for the First Mode

In this example, damping was specified in three ranges as follows: (a) 0% for frequencies less

than 2.13Hz, (b) 2% for frequencies in the range of 2.13 to 11.1 Hz and (c) linearly varying from

2% at frequency of 11.1Hz to a value of 40% at frequency of 1515Hz. The latter frequency

corresponds to the last mode included in the analysis. Results are compared in Figure 34. The

two methods of damping specification produce practically identical results.

6.7 Comparison of Results for all Analyzed Cases

Table 9 compares peak response quantities in the analysis of the two-dimensional structure of

Section 5.1 using the five methods of damping specification studied. Figure 35 presents a

comparison of damping ratio values as function of frequency for the five cases.

On the basis of these results we conclude that Rayleigh damping with override and interpolated

damping are most appropriate for use in the analysis of seismically isolated structures.

41

Interpolated Damping

0.05

Rayleigh

Rayleigh with Override

Interpolated

Constant Damping

Constant Damping with Override

Damping Ratio

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0.00

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

Frequency (Hz)

Figure 35 Damping Ratio as Function of Frequency for Studied Cases

42

120

2%

2%

Constant

2%

2%

Rayleigh Interpolated

Zero

Damping

Rayleigh

Constant

with

damping

Damping

Damping

with

Damping

Override

Override

Base Shear/

0.235

0.242

0.235

0.241

0.241

0.242

Weight

Isolator

22.3

23.4

22.2

23.3

23.3

23.4

Displacement

(inch)

First Story

0.31

0.32

0.32

0.32

0.32

0.34

Drift Ratio

(%)

Roof

0.42

0.42

0.48

0.43

0.42

0.51

Acceleration

(g)

43

The Direct Integration (DI) method of analysis is presumed to provide the most accurate results

and accordingly often used to verify results of fast nonlinear analysis. Yet it is known, and will

be demonstrated herein too, that the direct integration and the fast nonlinear method of analysis

do not, in general, produce the same results. We will show herein that actually the fast nonlinear

analysis method allows the user for better control of the analysis procedures and most often

produces results of higher fidelity than direct integration.

In the direct integration method the damping matrix is continuously updated during the

integration process, whereas in the fast nonlinear analysis method the damping matrix remains

constant. It is apparent that the two analysis methods are comparable in terms of results only

when damping is zero. Figures 36 and 37 compare results of analysis of the two-dimensional

structure of Section 5.1 when damping is specified as zero and analysis is performed (a) with

direct integration using a time step equal to 1/10th of the excitation time step (integration time

step equal to 0.0005 sec ), and (b) with fast nonlinear analysis using 53 Ritz vector modes. The

two methods produce identical results.

Integration and with Fast Nonlinear Analysis in Zero-Damped Structure

44

Figure 37 Comparison of First Story Drift Histories Obtained with Direct Integration and

with Fast Nonlinear Analysis in Zero-Damped Structure

Figure 38 compares the isolator force-displacement loops of the same structure with non-zero

damping when analyzed with direct integration (integration time step equal to 0.0005 sec ) and

fast nonlinear analysis (53 Ritz vector modes). Damping was specified as 2% using the Rayleigh

damping method with limit frequencies equal to 0.24 and 11.1Hz (first and sixth modes). Direct

integration in this case produces a lesser isolator displacement. This is likely due to more

leakage of damping in the isolation system in the direct integration method rather than errors in

the fast nonlinear analysis. On the basis of these examples, the authors of this report believe that

1) The fast nonlinear analysis method, when properly implemented, is sufficiently accurate.

2) Comparison of fast nonlinear analysis results to direct integration analysis results for

verification of the analysis model is not warranted nor recommended.

3) When verification of the analysis model is required, other programs should be used. For

example, program 3D-BASIS (Nagarajaiah et al, 1989; Tsopelas et al, 1994 and 2005;

Sarlis et al, 2009) may be used.

45

Integration and with Fast Nonlinear Analysis in 2%-Damped Structure

46

8.1 Introduction

The two-dimensional structure of Section 5.1 is used for demonstration of analysis with isolator

P- effects. However, in order to magnify the P- effects for the demonstration, the sections of

the girders above the isolators (see Figure 14) were changed from W36X300 to W27X217 and

the earthquake was scaled up by a factor equal to 1.2.

Exact P- analysis requires use of the direct integration method. Approximate P- analysis is

performed using the fast nonlinear analysis. Due to the differences in modeling damping in the

two methods of analysis, we utilize zero damping in order to have comparable results.

8.2 Comparison of Response with Exact and Approximate Isolator P- Effects

Analysis was performed in SAP2000 with direct integration and with the P- effects first deactivated and then activated. When P- effects are activated, the calculated P- moment was

equally distributed as moments at ends I and J of each element. A comparison of the calculated

first story drift ratio history in the two cases is presented in Figure 39. In this case, isolator P-

has some effect on drift.

Analysis was performed in two steps for approximate isolator P- effects as described in

Section 4. In this case the isolator displacements was first calculated in dynamic analysis

without the P- effects, and then used to calculate P- moment histories. The calculated moment

histories were added as time history functions, acting on top of each isolator. This requires the

introduction of separate load patterns, separate time history and a separate point moment for each

isolator. Dynamic analysis was then repeated with both the P- moment and the ground

acceleration histories as input.

Figure 40 compares the calculated first story drift ratio history, with P- effects accounted for

either by the exact method in direct integration or by the approximate 2-step method in fast

nonlinear analysis. The results are identical.

47

48

Figure 40 Comparison of First Story Drift History Calculated with Exact and Approximate

Isolator P- Effects

49

9. CONCLUSIONS

This document presented the following:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

Presentation of the parallel model for modeling Triple Friction Pendulum isolators.

Information on the implementation of the parallel model in SAP2000.

Information on the use of direct integration and fast nonlinear analysis in SAP2000.

Information on modeling of global damping in seismically isolated structures in

SAP2000.

6) Information on the significance of Ritz vector modes in capturing correctly the response

of seismically isolated structures in SAP2000.

7) Information on how isolator P- effects can be accounted for in fast nonlinear analysis in

SAP2000.

On the basis of the results presented in this report, the authors have the following conclusions:

1) Fast nonlinear analysis in SAP2000 (and by similarity in ETABS), when properly

implemented, produces results of acceptable accuracy in the analysis of seismically

isolated structures.

2) Direct integration should not be used as means of verification of the analysis model in

fast nonlinear analysis unless structural damping is specified to be zero.

3) Important considerations in the application of the fast nonlinear analysis are the number

of Ritz vector modes and the specification for damping.

4) A criterion for determining the minimum required number of Ritz vector modes is the

development of the correct vertical load on the isolators in the initial application of

vertical acceleration prior to staring the dynamic response history analysis. However, a

larger number of modes may be needed to correctly perform dynamic analysis.

5) Damping may be specified in a variety of ways of which the constant damping with

override and the Rayleigh damping with override result in control of the damping leakage

problem in the isolation system. The Rayleigh damping with override approach typically

results in least computational time.

6) Regardless of the damping specification method used, the effective stiffness of the

isolators needs to specified low for preventing or reducing damping leakage in the

isolation system. We recommend use of the post-elastic isolator stiffness value (or a

value less than that) for the effective stiffness together with low damping ratio values.

50

10. REFERENCES

1. Computers and Structures Inc. (2007), SAP2000: INTEGRATED FINITE ELEMENT

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF STRUCTURES, Version 11.0.8, Berkeley, CA.

2. Constantinou, M.C., Whittaker, A.S., Fenz, D.M. and Apostolakis, G. (2007b), Seismic

Isolation of Bridges, University at Buffalo, Report to Caltrans for contract 65A0174, June.

3. Fenz, D.M. and Constantinou, M.C. (2008a),MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF MULTISPHERICAL SLIDING BEARINGS, Report No. MCEER-08-0007, Multidisciplinary

Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY.

4. Fenz, D.M. and Constantinou, M.C. (2008b), SPHERICAL SLIDING ISOLATION

BEARINGS WITH ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR: THEORY, Earthquake Engineering and

Structural Dynamics, Vol. 37, No. 2, 163-183.

5. Fenz, D.M. and Constantinou, M.C. (2008c), SPHERICAL SLIDING ISOLATION

BEARINGS WITH ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR: EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION,

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 37, No. 2, 185-205.

6. Fenz, D.M. and Constantinou, M.C., (2008d), MODELING TRIPLE FRICTION

PENDULUM BEARINGS FOR RESPONSE-HISTORY ANALYSIS, Earthquake Spectra,

Vol. 24, No. 4, 1011-1028.

7. Fenz, D.M. and Constantinou, M.C. (2008e),DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION

AND VERIFICATION OF DYNAMIC ANALYSIS MODELS FOR MULTISPHERICAL SLIDING BEARINGS, Report No. MCEER-08-0018, Multidisciplinary

Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY.

8. Morgan, T. A. (2007), THE USE OF INNOVATIVE BASE ISOLATION SYSTEMS TO

ACHIEVE COMPLEX SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES, Ph.D. Dissertation,

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.

9. Nagarajaiah, S., Reinhorn, A.M., and Constantinou, M.C. (1989), NONLINEAR

DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF THREE DIMENSIONAL BASE ISOLATED STRUCTURES

(3D-BASIS) Report NCEER-89-0019, National Center for Earthquake Engineering

Research, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY.

10. Satake, N., Suda, K., Arakawa, T., Sasaki, A and Tamura, Y. (2003), DAMPING

EVALUATION USING FULL-SCALE DATA OF BUILDINGS IN JAPAN, ASCE, J.

Structural Engineering, 129 (4).

11. Sarlis, A.A., Tsopelas, P.C., Constantinou, M.C. and Reinhorn, A.M., 3D-BASIS-ME-MB:

Computer Program for Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Seismically Isolated Structures,

Element for Triple Pendulum Isolator and Verification Examples(2009), supplement to

MCEER Report 05-009, document distributed to the engineering community together with

executable version of program and example files, University at Buffalo.

51

12. Tsopelas, P.C., Constantinou, M.C., and Reinhorn, A.M. (1994), 3D-BASIS-ME:

COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF

SEISMICALLY ISOLATED SINGLE AND MULTIPLE STRUCTURES AND LIQUID

STORAGE TANKS, Report NCEER-94-0010, National Center for Earthquake Engineering

Research, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY.

13. Tsopelas, P.C., Roussis, P.C., Constantinou, M.C., Buchanan, R. and Reinhorn, A.M. (2005),

3D-BASIS-ME-MB: COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR NONLINEAR DYNAMIC

ANALYSIS OF SEISMICALLY ISOLATED STRUCTURES, Report MCEER-05-0009,

Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New

York, Buffalo, NY.

52

APPENDIX A

CALCULATION OF MODEL PARAMETERS

SERIES MODEL

Vertical Stiffness

The bearing vertical stiffness is approximately calculated as AE/h, where A is the area of the

center slider (herein a circle of 10inch diameter), E is a representative modulus (typically

assumed about half of that of steel to account for flexibilities in the bearing assembly, herein

14500ksi) and h is the height (herein 16inch). The vertical stiffness is thus equal to

x52x14500/16=71176.7kip/in.

The three elements of the series model each have vertical stiffness K so that the combined

stiffness equals 7176.7kip/in. That is, (1/K+1/K+1/K)-1=71176.7kip/in or K=213530kip/in.

Elastic Stiffness (see Table 5)

Element FP1 Elastic Stiffness: K1

Element FP2 Elastic Stiffness: K2

Element FP3 Elastic Stiffness: K3

2W

2Y

1W

2Y

4W

2Y

0.03x900

1350kip / in

2 x0.01

0.108 x900

4860kip / in

2 x0.01

0.108 x900

4860kip / in

2 x 0.01

Element FP1 Effective Stiffness: K1

W

W

900

60kip / in

Reff 1 Reff 2 Reff 3 7.5 7.5

W

W

900

12kip / in

Reff 2 Reff 1 Reff 2 82.5 7.5

W

W

900

12kip / in

Reff 3 Reff 4 Reff 3 82.5 7.5

Element FP1 Rate Parameter:

Element FP2 Rate Parameter:

1 a2 a3 (2.54 2.54)

2

2

4

Reff 1

Reff 1 Reff 2

a1

82.5

x 2.54 2.794 sec/ inch

82.5 7.5

53

Reff 4

Reff 4 Reff 3

a1

82.5

x 2.54 2.794sec/ inch

82.5 7.5

PARALLEL MODEL

Vertical Stiffness

The vertical stiffness of 71176.7kip/in is equally divided to elements FP1 and FP2 of the parallel

model. That is, each element is assigned vertical stiffness of 35588.4kip/in.

Elastic Stiffness (see Table 2)

Element FP1 Elastic Stiffness:

K1

2W

2Y 1

W

2 Reff 2

0.03 900

2 0.0155

900

2 7.5

807.9kip / in

Note that the yield displacement Y 1 was assumed to be equal to 0.0155inch so that the elastic

stiffness of the parallel model is the same as the elastic stiffness of the series model (see

demonstration below). In general, the value of the yield displacement Y 1 is arbitrarily assumed

to be about or larger than 0.01inch.

Element FP2 Elastic Stiffness: K 2

W

900

60kip / in

2 Reff 2 2 x 7.5

The value to be specified in SAP2000 is not 60kip/in but a value equal to 60kip/in minus the

post-elastic stiffness of the element (SAP2000 adds the specified value of elastic stiffness to the

post-elastic stiffness and uses that as the elastic stiffness):

K2

W Reff 1 Reff 2

W

W

54.55kip / in

2 Reff 2 2 Reff 1

2 Reff 2 Reff 1

Note that the elastic stiffness of the parallel model of the bearing is equal to the elastic stiffness

of the series model as a result of the choice of the yield displacement Y 1 . Specifically, the two

1

1

1

1

. In this equation, K1, K2 and K3 are the

K

K

K

2

3

1

elastic

stiffness

of

the

three

elements

of

the

series

model.

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

867.9kip / in

1350 4860 4860

K1 K 2 K3

K1 K 2 807.9+60=867.9kip/in

54

Note that SAP2000 also performs the operation mentioned above (SAP2000 adds the specified

value of elastic stiffness to the post-elastic stiffness and uses that as the elastic stiffness) for the

elastic stiffness in each of the three elements of the series model. However, since the values of

elastic stiffness of each of the elements in the series model are very large, the effect of the

modification is insignificant and neglected. For example the specified value of elastic stiffness

for element FP3 of the series model should be specified in SAP2000 as

K3

4W

2Y

W

0.108 x 900

900

4860 12 4848kip / in .

Reff 4 Reff 3

2 x 0.01

82.5 7.5

The difference between the value of 4848 and 4860kip/in is insignificant, and neglected.

Effective Stiffness

The effective stiffness is specified to be the post-elastic stiffness of each element. For the FP1

W

900

element is zero (flat slider). For the FP2 element it is equal to

5.45kip / in .

2 Reff 1 2 x82.5

Note that these values are consistent with the values specified for the series model. For the

parallel model, the total effective stiffness is 0+5.45=5.45kip/in. For the series model, the total

1

1

1

1

1 1 1

effective stiffness is

5.45kip / in .

60 12 12

K1 K2 K3

Rate Parameter

For each element, the parameter is specified as 2.54/2=1.27sec/in. This is based on the

assumption that the velocity is equally partitioned between sliding surfaces (true for surfaces 1

and 4).

55

- CSI Sap2000 Bridge ExamplesHochgeladen vonJose Luis Bazualdo Cabrera
- Dynamic Testing of Machines and StructuresHochgeladen vonjjiitthhiinn
- Post Tension BIJAN AALAMIHochgeladen vonKhaled Abdelbaki
- Structural EngineeringHochgeladen vonBTE
- Seismic Base IsolationHochgeladen vonprabhu81
- Research Paper - Critical Comparative Feature Analysis of Structural Software (Sap2000 and Staad.pro)Hochgeladen vonMuhannad AbdulRaouf
- Dynamic-module-of-CAESAR-II.pdfHochgeladen vonPrashant Agrawal
- modelling of triple friction pendulum bearing in sap2000.pdfHochgeladen vonJ Guerhard Guerhard
- Learning Dynamics and Vibrations by Msc AdamsHochgeladen vonFrancuzzo Danili
- Vibration TestHochgeladen vonRajAnand
- WB1401_wholebook_120516Hochgeladen vonMariana Contreras
- Base Isolation Design GuidelinesHochgeladen vonbluefish80
- Aerospace Structural Dynamics 2013.pdfHochgeladen vontinkudhull
- OPTIMUM STRENGTH RATIO OF HYSTERETIC DAMPERHochgeladen vonÁngelDeJesúsLópezPérez
- Model of Triple Friction PendulumHochgeladen vonlaherrerac
- AISC Seismic Design-Module4-Eccentrically Braced FramesHochgeladen vonyaramouna
- Vibration AnalysisHochgeladen vonAhmet Semih Parlak
- Response of a Stable Second Order SystemHochgeladen vonNKHICQ1mEbIw
- Numerical Evaluation of Dynamic ResponseHochgeladen vongabrielitos7891
- Seismic response of isolated bridges with abutment transverse restraintHochgeladen vonEnrico Calcetto
- Chapt 07 Lect03Hochgeladen vonShanmukha Sundaram
- 629-1666-1-PBHochgeladen vonelangandhi
- Gazetas(1982)-Shear Vibrations of vertically inhomogeneous earth damsHochgeladen vonEleni Katsanou
- AERO_7SEM_AE2403NOL.pptHochgeladen vonsivak1575
- Proyecto Final en InglésHochgeladen vonLeonardo José
- MCHE485 MidTerm1 Solutions Spring2016Hochgeladen vonAliOuchar
- 00b7d53623436b7ea8000000Hochgeladen vonHiongyii
- AASHTO LRFD 2012 BridgeDesignSpecifications 6th Ed (US)Hochgeladen vonJoel H A Vargas
- Current Directions in Earthquake Engineering Education UCISTHochgeladen vonShobbah Selamat Pagi
- AT6604 QBHochgeladen vonCody Lee

- ACI-349.2R-97 Embedment Design Examples (1).pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous IwqK1Nl
- AWS100 Appendix 12 FatigueHochgeladen vonHector Tixe
- Work Hardening TheoryHochgeladen voncris
- Design of Headed Anchor BoltsHochgeladen vonMuhammad Baiquni
- ANSYS FatigueHochgeladen vonRaghu_Nandana__1312
- Adopting Adaptive Meshing _ CAE AssociatesHochgeladen voncris
- Mech BNL 14.0 L04-PlasticityHochgeladen voncris
- EC8 Seismic Design of Buildings - Worked examplesHochgeladen vonMarco Fasan
- Plasticity Simulation Tips & Tricks _ CAE AssociatesHochgeladen voncris
- SJD-SJI-2010.pdfHochgeladen vonwillowdo
- CCD-AISC-360-10Hochgeladen vonDaudHussain
- Tranformadores Electricos Con FPendulum Njit-etd2003-088Hochgeladen voncris
- Etabs ManualHochgeladen vonMichael Y Lee
- AASHTO Standard Specifications For Highway BridgeHochgeladen vonasifcbm

- Watlow981 982 ManualHochgeladen vonIsidro Igigi Hernández
- E plane THochgeladen vonHrisheeshwar Kaushik
- Rudolf Carnap - The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language 1957Hochgeladen vonapi-3702097
- (SpringerBriefs in applied sciences and technology) Jabbar, Abdul-Sustainable jute-based composite materials _ mechanical and thermomechanical behaviour-Springer (2017).pdfHochgeladen vonAleksandar Milanovic
- HomeTips for BOILERSHochgeladen vonEdwin Geeq
- Redox ReactionsHochgeladen vonD Singal
- Eurocode 2 Part 2 - DDENV 1992-2-1996Hochgeladen vonMarkel Baballëku
- 114601239-International-Workshop-Bridges-Integral-Abutments-LTU-TR-0614-SE.pdfHochgeladen vonGeorge Blay
- CataractHochgeladen vonNader Smadi
- knock alarm using piezoelectric material;Hochgeladen vonRaj Shekar
- P2 Forces and Motion Questions (1)Hochgeladen vonaby251188
- Gait Abnormality Detection UsingMultimodal Sensors and Machine LearningHochgeladen vonAdrian
- Process Control FundamentalsHochgeladen vonfghabboon
- Geotechnical ReportHochgeladen vonAnggi Siregar
- PolynomialHochgeladen vonRamel Oñate
- RadioHochgeladen vonAlex Taylor
- Geometry Calendar 2012-2013 P4Hochgeladen voneuler_kronecker
- One Way Slab - DesignHochgeladen vonsalman
- Pola BilanganHochgeladen vonWew Nigga
- EIA 5 Industrial Air Pollutants Summer 2014Hochgeladen vonAltaf Ur Rehman
- Applications of Chaos and Nonlinear Dynamics in Science and Engineering.pdfHochgeladen vonCarlos Augusto Sánchez Rondón
- Heat and Mass Transfer Guia ARTICULOSHochgeladen vonCarlos Martínez
- Chapter 9 Chemical PeriodicityHochgeladen vonTilak K C
- possibly Q4.pdfHochgeladen vonAbdel Darwish
- ASTM D 715 – 86 (Reapproved 1999) Analysis of Barium Sulfate PigmentHochgeladen vonalin2005
- Masud Rana Series - Major Rahat [Part.1 and 2].pdfHochgeladen vonShamim Hadi
- powtech2.pdfHochgeladen vonricotelon
- 324-ENloctiteHochgeladen vonUgan Git Padayachee
- static compensator statcom.pdfHochgeladen vonLeibniz Miranda
- Double Layered Weft Knitted FabricsHochgeladen vonAhmad Samer

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.