8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
1/87
THE UNLOADING STIFFNESS OF
REINFORCED CONCRETE MEMBERS
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Master Degree in
Earthquake Engineering & Engineering Seismology
By
Viviana Iris Novelli
Supervisors: Dr. T.J. Sullivan, Dr. R. Pinho, Prof. Calvi G. M.
December, 2008
Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia
Universit degli Studi di Pavia
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
2/87
i
The dissertation entitled The unloading stiffness of reinforced concrete members, by
Viviana Iris Novelli, has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Master Degree in Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology.
Timothy Sullivan
Name of Reviewer 2
Name of Reviewer 3
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
3/87
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
4/87
Acknowledgements
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to Professor T.J. Sullivan for his valuable guidance throughout the duration of this
dissertation. I want also to thank Professor R. Pinho and Professor G.M. Calvi for their important
reviews of the present research and suggestions. I am thankful to MEEES (Masters in Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Seismology) consortium for providing the financial support to take part
and complete the MEEES program.
Moreover, I would like to express few words for all nice people that were with me in this short time of
my life .Everything started receiving the admission letter for this master, and Ro, you were with me,
how many jumped of happiness. September came very fast and I got on that ferry for Patrawith my
Vale.. I felt safe with you but I was alone too early and you came.. Rajesh. Your strength, enthusiasmand passion impressed me, although I felt very little in front of you. In March I was in Pavia, courses,
home-works but when I was with you, Myrto, my life smiled to me. The time to work for my
dissertation arrived too fast and I thought that the most complicated moment of my life was coming,
but Lena mou arrived making unforgettable each moment lived together. Today I am here. The first
acknowledgement is for my team. It would be impossible to arrive at the end of this travel without
you where I didnt learn to format a word document but I understood that nothing is without a
solution if I have people that love me.
And so thanks to:
Lenuccia.. for your single word.
Igor.. ino.. for your suggestions.. and if the dinners with us were good excuses to complain about you
it was a pleasure for me.
Juan.. become a perfect young house husband.
Myrto.. for your sweetness that made simpler my experience.
Rajesh.. for your energy, current in this my work.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
5/87
Acknowledgements
iv
my friends of my life..
Vale.. always with me in each small step.
Andrea.. for your cute reproaches.
Daniele.. for the happiness that u feel for my success.
Manu.. for her way to look at the world
R: for the important position that you gave to me in your life.
Pat: for your passion.
Daniel.. because you are always on my side.
My parents.. for the patience to understand my choices.
Kika.. this success is dedicated to you, because without you my life doesnt make sense.
Sono grata al Professor T.J. Sullivan per il suo prezioso giudizio durante il periodo della mia tesi. Inoltre vorrei
ringraziare i Professori R. Pinho e Professor , G.M . Calvi per le loro importanti revisioni e suggerimenti
riguardanti il mio lavoro di ricerca. Sono riconoscente alla MEEES (Masters in Earthquake Engineering and
Engineering Seismology) per aver provveduto al supporto finanziario e per avermi dato lopportunit dicompletare il mio corso di studio.
Ora mi piacerebbe dedicare alcune parole a tutte le belle persone che mi hanno accompagnato in questo piccolo
pezzo di strada, per me tanto importante. Tutto incominci ricevendo la lettera di ammissione per questo
master.. momento indimenticabile.. Ro tu eri con me, quanti salti di gioia. Settembre arriv velocemente e su
quella nave per Patrasso io ci salii con la mia Vale.. con te mi sentivo al sicuro ma presto rimasi sola e le
difficolt non furono poche, ma arrivisti tu. Rajesh, la tua forza, il tuo entusiasmo e la tua passione mi colp
particolarmente, anche se a volte mi sentivo molto piccola davanti a te. In marzo ero in Pavia.. corsi,
homeworks, ma quando ero con te Myrto la mia vita mi sorrideva. Arriv troppo velocemente il tempo di
lavorare alla mia tesi e quando pensavo che avrei trascorso uno dei periodi pi complicati della mia vita arrivata Lena mou.. rendendo indimenticabili ogni singolo momento trascorso insieme. Ed oggi sono qui.. al
termine di questo percorso e il primo ringraziamento speciale per la mia squadra. Senza di voi non c lavrei
mai fatta di certo non ho imparato a formattare un documento word ma ho capito che niente impossibile se
intorno a me ci sono persone che mi vogliono bene
.E quindi grazie a...
Lenuccia.. per ogni tua singola parola
Igor.. ino.. per i tuoi consigli.. e anche se ogni cena da noi era un modo per lamentarmi sappi che ogni sera era
un piacere aspettarti
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
6/87
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
7/87
Table of contents
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................. ii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................ xiii
LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................................................ xiv
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 General ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Literature review ...................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Relationships between Force-Displacement (F-) and Moment-Curvature (M-)................. 32 EXPERIMENTAL OBSERVATIONS ........................................................................................... 6
2.1 Description ............................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Description of test .................................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Analysis procedure ................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Experimental results ............................................................................................................... 13
3 ANALYTICAL PREDICTIONS ................................................................................................... 16
3.1 Numerical model .................................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Numerical results ................................................................................................................... 18
3.3 Influence of the Aspect ratio, the Section ratio and the axial load ratio on the alpha-factor. 23
3.4 Computation of the yielding displacement ............................................................................ 30
3.5 Alpha- factor as a function of curvature ductility .................................................................. 35
4 SMALL DISPLACEMENT NONLINEAR TIME-HISTORY ANALYSES ............................... 40
4.1 Description ............................................................................................................................. 40
4.2 Accelerograms ....................................................................................................................... 40
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
8/87
Table of contents
vii
4.3 Ground- Motion Time Histories ............................................................................................ 40
4.4 Response Spectra ................................................................................................................... 42
4.5 Ground Motion Spectra Comparison and Comment .............................................................. 43
4.6 Modelling ............................................................................................................................... 44
4.7 Case-study: structural periods ................................................................................................ 45
5 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................... 64
6 APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................... 66
7 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 69
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
9/87
List of figures
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1.1.Takeda hysteresis model Ref:Hysteresis Models of Reinforced Concrete for Earthquake
Response Analysis by Otani [May 1981]................................................................................................. 2
Figure 1.2. Effect of element slenderness on unloading displacements for =0.50 ................................ 5
Figure 2.1. The experimental specimen used for the present work is reported to show the method used
for the computation of the alpha-factor. .................................................................................................. 6
Figure 2.2. Geometrical characteristics and reinforcement detailing (in mm) of pier TP-01 Ref:
website of the Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp) .................................................... 7
Figure 2.3. The time-history of lateral displacement and the cyclic loading correspondence of pier TP-
01. ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Figure 2.4. Hysteresis loop of the TP-01st : the loading cycles in black are used for the computation
of alpha-factor. ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2.5. Correction of initial force of the loading test ........................................................................ 8
Figure 2.6. Estimation of the yielding force Fy and displacement Dy of the case study. ...................... 9
Figure 2.7. Definition of maximum and unloading force and displacement amplitude....................... 10
Figure 2.8. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot consideringFunlequal to 0.50Fm................ 11
Figure 2.9. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot consideringFunlequal to 0.25Fm................ 11
Figure 2.10. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funl equal to 0.50 Fm ............. 12
Figure 2.11. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funlequal to 0.25 Fm............... 12
Figure 2.12. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot. .................................................................. 15
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
10/87
List of figures
ix
Figure 3.1. Idealization of curvature distribution [Ref: Priestley, M.J.N. Calvi G.M. Kowalsky M.J.
(2007)]. .................................................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 3.2. Effect of P-delta on lateral resistence [Ref: Priestley, M.J.N. Calvi G.M. Kowalsky M.J.
(2007)] ................................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 3.3. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results (TP-
01). ......................................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 3.5. Value of yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-01) ...................... 19
Figure 3.6. Alpha factor and displacement ductility comparison between the experimental and
numerical results (TP-01) ...................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 3.7. Geometrical characteristics and reinforcement detailing (in mm) for TP-31 and TP-32 -
Ref: website of the Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp) .......................................... 20
Figure 3.8. The time-history of lateral displacement for TP-31 a) and TP-32 b) - Ref: website of the
Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp) ......................................................................... 21
Figure 3.9. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results (TP-
31). ......................................................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 3.10. Yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-31). ................................. 21
Figure 3.11. Alpha factor and displacement ductility comparison between the experimental andnumerical results (TP-31) ...................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 3.12. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results ... 22
Figure 3.13. Yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-32). ................................. 22
Figure 3.14. Alpha factor and displacement ductility comparison between the experimental and
numerical results (TP-32) ...................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 3.15. The aspect ratioH/dand the section ratio used in the numerical computation. ............... 24
Figure 3.16. Cyclic loading response used to obtain to numerical results for H/d=3; H/d=7and
H/d=10. .................................................................................................................................................. 24
Figure 3.17. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison for H/d=3; H/d=7and
H/d=10. .................................................................................................................................................. 25
Figure 3.18. The time histories of the lateral displacement for the different section ratio ................... 26
Figure 3.18. Cyclic loading response for numerical analyses forL/d=1;L/d=3and;L/d=7 andL/d=10.
............................................................................................................................................................... 27
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
11/87
List of figures
x
Figure 3.19. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison from numerical
analyses for l/d=1; l/d=5; l/d=7; L/d=10. ............................................................................................... 27
Figure 3.20. The axial load used in the numerical computation. .......................................................... 28
Figure 3.21. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental results for different values
of the axial load ratio. ............................................................................................................................ 28
Figure 3.22. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison obtained from
numerical analyses for =0; =0.05; =0.10; =0.15; =020 ............................................................... 29
Figure 3.23. Comparison a) Aspect ratio , b) Section ratio and c) Axial load ratio. ............................ 29
Figure 3.24. Yielding displacement for analytical models with H/d=3; H/d=7and H/d=10 computed
according to method 1 and method 2 ..................................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.25. Yielding displacement obtained for analytical models with a) l/d=1; b) l/d=5 according to
both methods, c1) l/d=7; d1) L/d=10 according to method 1 and c2) l/d=7; d2) L/d=10 according to the
method 2. ............................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 3.26. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison relative to analytical
models for l/d=1; l/d=5; l/d=7; L/d=10, where the yielding displacement is computed according to
method 2. ............................................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 3.27. Yielding displacement relative to a1) =0.0; according to method 1; a2) =0.0; according
to method 2; b) =0.05, c) =0.10, d) =0.15, e) =0.20 according to both methods. ........................ 34
Figure 3.28. Alpha factor as function of the displacement ductility: comparison relative to analytical
models for =0; =0.05; =0.10; =0.15; =020, where the yielding displacement is computed
according to method 2. ........................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.29. Alpha factor as a function of the curvature ductility: comparison for analytical results for
H/d=3; H/d=7and H/d=10. ..................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 3.30. Alpha factor as a function of the curvature ductility: comparison for analytical results for
l/d=1; l/d=5; l/d=7; L/d=10. ................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 3.31. Alpha factor as function of the curvature ductility: comparison relative to numerical
results for =0; =0.05; =0.10; =0.15; =020. ................................................................................. 38
Figure 4.1. Time histories of earthquake ground motions .................................................................... 41
Figure 4.2. Linear elastic response spectra for the LA09 record. ......................................................... 42
Figure 4.3. Linear elastic response spectra for the LA19 record. ......................................................... 42
Figure 4.4. Linear elastic response spectra for the EC record. ............................................................. 43
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
12/87
List of figures
xi
Figure 4.5.Comparison of the linear elastic response spectra for the 3 ground motions use. Damping is
5% of critical .......................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 4.6. Modeling SDOF column and spring ................................................................................... 44
Figure 4.7. Modified Takeda Model Ref: Ruaumoko 2D, Appendix [Carr, 2004] .......................... 44
Figure 4.8. Effect of using different alpha ratios - SDOF: H/Lp=13 LA09....................................... 47
Figure 4.9. Effect of using different alpha ratios - SDOF: H/Lp=15 LA09....................................... 47
Figure 4.10. Effect of using different alpha ratios - SDOF: H/Lp=13 ELCE .................................... 49
Figure 4.11. Effect of using different alpha ratios - SDOF: H/Lp=15 ELCE ................................... 49
Figure 4.12. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=5 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ................. 51
Figure 4.13. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=10 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ............... 51
Figure 4.14. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=15 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ............... 52
Figure 4.15. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=5 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ................. 52
Figure 4.16. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=10 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ............... 53
Figure 4.17. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=15 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ............... 53
Figure 4.18. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=5 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ................. 54
Figure 4.19. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=10 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m .............. 54
Figure 4.20. Effect of using different alpha ratios Ar=15 H1=15m; H2=30m; H3=45m ............... 55
Figure 4.21. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loop in terms of Force and displacement of Column and SDOF spring models - System 1
=0 ......................................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 4.22. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loops in terms of Force and displacement of Column and SDOF spring models - System 1
=0.5. ..................................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 4.23. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loops in terms of Force and displacement of Column and SDOF spring models - System 2
=0 ......................................................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 4.24. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loops in terms of Force and displacement of Column and SDOF spring models - System 2
=0.5. ..................................................................................................................................................... 58
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
13/87
List of figures
xii
Figure 4.25. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loop s in terms of Force and displacement of Column and SDOF spring models - System 3
a=0 ......................................................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 4.26. a) Comparison of displacements of Column and SDOF spring models; b) Comparison of
hysteresis loops in terms of Force and displacement of column and SDOF spring models - System 3
=0.5. ..................................................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 4.27. a) Time-history response in terms of a)Moment-Curvature and b) Force-Displacement
for ........................................................................................................................................................... 60
Figure 4.28. Hysteresis loop in terms of Moment and curvature relative to SDOF column ................. 62
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
14/87
List of tables
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2.1. Identifications numbers of the cyclic test on the bridge piers Ref: website of the
Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp) ......................................................................... 14
Table 4.1. Ground motion characteristic parameters. ........................................................................... 41
Table 4.2. Height and Plastic hinge used in SDOF column .................................................................. 45
Table 4.3. Moment of Inertia corresponding to different undamped natural periods of the SDOF
column. .................................................................................................................................................. 45
Table 4.4. Height and Plastic hinge used in SDOF column .................................................................. 50
Table 4.5. Moment of Inertia estimated fixing the fundamental period of the SDOF column. ............ 50
In the following section the SDOF systems having the properties indicated in the Table 4.6 with
ductility equal to 4 and damping equal to zero are analyzed. ................................................................ 55
Table 4.7. Properties of the SDOF column. .......................................................................................... 55
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
15/87
List of symbols
xiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Kun Unloading stiffness
ki Initial stiffness
ky Yielding stiffness
E Young's modulus of elasticity
Iunl(i) Unloading moment of inertia for each cycle
Iin Initial moment of inertia
f*M-(i) EIun(i)/ EIin
Lp Plastic hinge length
H Height of column
Dunl Unloading displacement
Dm Maximum displacement
Dy Yielding displacement
Dt Total displacement demand
De Elastic displacement component
Dp Plastic displacement component
kr(i) unloading stiffness of the loading cycle i
Lsp strain penetration length
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
16/87
List of symbols
xv
yielding strengthdbl diameter of the longitudinal reinforcement
fc0 unconfined concrete strength in compression
ft0 concrete strength in tension
kc confinement factor
fcc confined concrete strength in compression
f* the ratio between kr(i)the unloading stiffness of the loading cycle i
and the unloading stiffness of the system after reaching the first
maximum displacement amplitude when the ductility is greater than
one
Ec0 Concrete Youngs modulus of elasticity is estimated, according to
Priestley et al. [1996]
Feq,max Equivalent maximum force amplitude for each cycle without P-
delta effect
P Axial load
d section depth
L section length
Axial load ratio
Ag gross section
a*(i) logf*/log(1/(i)) Unloading stiffness degradation parameter in
terms of the displacement ductility
a*M-(i) Unloading stiffness degradation parameter in terms of the curvature
ductility
co unconfined concrete strain
cc confined concrete strain
Displacement ductility
Curvature ductility
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
17/87
List of symbols
xvi
(i) Displacement ductility for each cyclei
(i) Curvature ductility for each cycle i
Unloading stiffness degradation parameter
t Plastic curvature
e Elastic curvature
unl Unloading curvature
y Yielding curvature
m Total curvature
m(i) Maximum curvature for each cyclei
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
18/87
Chapter 1: Introduction
1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Concrete structures experience a reduction in stiffness as function of the ductility. Recent
work by Tuan H. P., Sullivan T. J., Calvi G. M. et al (2008) highlighted a potentialinconsistency in the use of the unloading factor in lumped plasticity non-linear time history
analyses. For this reason the goal of the present research is to undertake a review of the
behaviour of RC structures, considering how the unloading stiffness varies as a function of the
ductility and other characteristics of the structure.
The scope of the work is:
To undertake a literature review on the hysteresis behaviour of concrete structure
(introduction)
To review experimental results available from the Kawashima Laboratory of the
Tokyo Institute of Technology (chapter 2)
To develop models of various single-degree-of-system (SDOF) oscillators in
SeismoStruct to simulate the hysteretic behaviour observed in experimental analyses
(chapter 3)
To investigate the behaviour of the unloading stiffness as a function of the
displacement ductility of the SDOF systems modeled in SeismoStruct with different
section ratio, aspect ratio and axial load ratio (chapter 3)
To create a lumped-plasticity model , that follows the unloading rules defined by
Takeda for hysteresis cycles, to determine the behaviour of the unloading stiffness as a
function of the curvature ductility of SDOF systems having different section ratio,
aspect ratio and axial load ratio (chapter 3)
To model an equivalent SDOF spring having a hysteretic force-displacement
behaviour that replicates the cantilever column defined by a hysteretic moment-
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
19/87
Chapter 1: Introduction
2
curvature relationship and compare the responses of the two models with different
unloading stiffnesses.
Make conclusions & recommendations.
1.2 Literature review
The Takeda hysteresis model was developed by Takeda, Sozen and Nielsen [1970], Otani
[1981] and Kabeyasawa, Shiohara, Otani, Aoyama [1983]to represent the force-displacement
hysteretic properties of RC structures.
The Takeda model according to Otani (1981) includes (a) stiffness changes at flexural
cracking and yielding, (b) rules for inner hysteresis loops inside the outer loop, and (c)
unloading stiffness degradation with deformation. The hysteresis rules are extensive and
comprehensive (Figure 1.1). In this work the modified Takeda Model [Ref: Kabeyasawa,
Shiohara, Otani, Aoyama; May 1983. Analysis of the full-scale Seven storey Reinforced
Concrete Test structure] is considered, in which the initial elastic branch up until cracking is
neglected. Instead the response is linear up until yield with the unloading stiffness defined as
(1.1)
in which (Dy, Fy): yielding point deformation and resistance, Dm: maximum deformation
amplitude greater than Dy, : unloading stiffness degradation parameter (normally between0.0 and 0.6).
Figure 1.1.Takeda hysteresis model Ref: Hysteresis Models of Reinforced Concrete for Earthquake
Response Analysis by Otani [May 1981]
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
20/87
Chapter 1: Introduction
3
According to the following literature reviews:
Reinforced concrete response to simulated earthquakes by Takeda, Sozen and Nielsen,
December [1970]:the unloading stiffness degradation parameter is equal to 0.4.
Hysteresis Models of Reinforced Concrete for Earthquake Response Analysis by Otani [May
1981]: the unloading stiffness degradation parameter, alpha, is normally between 0.0 and 0.5.
Analysis of the full-scale Seven storey Reinforced Concrete Test structure by Kabeyasawa,
Shiohara, Otani, Aoyama [May 1983]: the unloading stiffness degradation parameter is
normally between 0.0 and 0.6.
1.3 Relationships between Force-Displacement (F-) and Moment-Curvature (M-
)
In this section the relationship between Force-Displacement (F-) and Moment-Curvature
(M-) is explained.By specifying a plastic hinge length, Lp, increasing curvature demands on a SDOF cantilever
system with height H can be translated to an equivalent displacement response in accordance
with Equation (1.2).
D D D
H
3 LH
(1.2)
where De is the elastic displacement component, Dp is the plastic deformation component
associated with the inelastic rotation of a plastic hinge, t isthe total curvature at the plastic
hinge location and eis the elastic curvature. Note that the ratio of the total displacement to
the yield displacement (i.e. the displacement ductility demand) can be expressed for a
cantilever in terms of the curvature ductility demand by Equation (1.3).
1 3 1 (1.3)
After reaching a total displacement of t, the Takeda model instructs the structure to unload
with a reduced stiffness given by Equation (1.1).
If we assume, for simplicity, that there is no strain hardening and note that the Takeda model
is specified for NLTHAs in a Moment-Curvature environment, then the elastic curvature
recovered in unloading the structure from a total displacement demand of D t is given by
Equation (1.4).
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
21/87
Chapter 1: Introduction
4
(1.4)
The ratio of the elastic displacement recovered in unloading to the yield displacement of acantilever is therefore given by Equation (1.5).
3
3
(1.5)
Dividing Equation (1.2) by Equation (1.5), we obtain Equation (1.6) which expresses the ratio
of the total displacement demand to the unloading displacement as a function of the curvature
ductility demand, the ratio Lp/H, and the alpha factor.
1 3 1
(1.6)
This has interesting implications if we consider the displacement ratios predicted for
structures with different ratios of Lp/H, unloading from different levels of ductility demand
As shown in Figure 1.1., for an alpha of 0.5 and for low values of Lp/H (i.e. for tall slenderstructures), the ratio of unloading displacement to the peak displacement reduces below a
value of 1. This is equivalent to saying that a slender structure subject to a big push into the
inelastic range would be predicted to have residual displacements in the opposite direction.
This essentially highlights a potentially serious problem with application of the Takeda model
in a moment-curvature format and accounts for observations made by Sullivan et al (2008).
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
22/87
Chapter 1: Introduction
5
Figure 1.2. Effect of element slenderness on unloading displacements for =0.50
Before proposing solutions to this matter, the next chapters will consider how the unloading
stiffness varies , as observed in experimental testing.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Curvature ductility demand
Ratioofpeakdisplace
mentto
unloadingdisplace
ment
Lp/H = 0.05
Lp/H = 0.10
Lp/H = 0.15
Lp/H = 0.20
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
23/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
6
2 EXPERIMENTAL OBSERVATIONS
2.1 Description
In order to obtain a better understanding of the unloading stiffness of concrete columns, first
of all we study the behavior the unloading coefficient as a function of the displacementductility by examining the experimental results available from the Kawashima Laboratory of
the Tokyo Institute of Technology as described in the following paragraphs.
2.2 Description of test
The validity of the value of the alpha-factor is carried out here by considering experimental
results available from the Kawashima Laboratory of the Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Several results of experimental tests for the study of the cyclic behavior of reinforced concrete
bridge piers are available at the website of the Kawashima Laboratory
(http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp). These experiments involved the simultaneous application ofvertical and horizontal loads to reinforced concrete specimens. Figure 2.2 depicts the
experimental set-up and the corresponding simplified structural model.
Figure 2.1. The experimental specimen used for the present work is reported to show the method used for
the computation of the alpha-factor.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
24/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
7
The data taken is identified with the number TP-01; the general geometrical characteristics, as
well as the reinforcement detailing, are presented in Figure 2.2. The cylinder strength of
concrete is 35.9 MPa and the yield strength of the longitudinal reinforcement is 363 MPa. The
vertical load is constant and equal to 163 kN. Figure 2.3 includes the time-history of lateral
displacement and the cyclic loading and corresponding response in terms of Force-
Displacement.
Figure 2.2. Geometrical characteristics and reinforcement detailing (in mm) of pier TP-01 Ref: website
of the Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp)
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm Figure 2.3. The time-history of lateral displacement and the cyclic loading correspondence of pier TP-01.
2.3 Analysis procedure
Using the hysteresis loop defined by the force-displacement relationship in Figure 2.3 the
alpha factor for each loading cycle ican be defined as in formula (2.1)
i log KiK
log 1i
(2.1)
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
25/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
8
where the displacement ductility is given by equation (2.2)
i Dmi
Dy
(2.2)
In order to avoid considering systems prone to shear failure the values of alpha-factors are
not consideared when the lateral resistence drops below 80% of the yileding force. For this
reason the unloading stiffness degradetion parameters are computed for the loading cycles of
Figure 2.6 in black and neglected for the ones in grey.
Figure 2.4. Hysteresis loop of the TP-01st : the loading cycles in black are used for the computation of
alpha-factor.
As shown in Figure 2.5 at the beginning of cyclic loading the initial force is not equal to zero
(grey line), so to have a null value of it, the hysteresis loop has been offsetted (black line).
Figure 2.5. Correction of initial force of the loading test
-160-140-120-100-80-60-40-20
020406080
100120140160
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
-140
-110
-80
-50
-20
10
40
70
100
130
160
190
-6 -3 0 3 6 9 12F
orce(kN)
Displacement (mm)
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
26/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
9
Figure 2.6. Estimation of the yielding force Fy and displacement Dy of the case study.
The yielding stiffness
/for the case study presented in Figure 2.6, is computed
through a trend line used to approximate the first cycle until the yielding point of the system.
It is not always very simple to evaluate the yielding displacement, because the structure
doesnt yield from the first cycle.
In this specific case Fy=157 kN; Dy=8mm.
-140
-110
-80
-50
-20
10
4070
100
130
160
190
-6 -3 0 3 6 9 12Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
27/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
10
The unloading stiffness for each cycle ican be obtained from equation (2.3) between themaximum (m) and unloading (unl) force and deformation amplitude.
Ki Fi FiDi Di (2.3)
Figure 2.7. Definition of maximum and unloading force and displacement amplitude.
Clearly there is some uncertainty in the exact unloading stiffness due to the very non-linear
response obtained with Fibre-Element, distributed plasticity modelling. For this reason, two
different unloading stiffness definitions were considered. As is shown in Figure 2.7, the
unloading force considered in the first case is taken equal to 0.50 and in the second case to
0.25 of the maximum force amplitude.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
28/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
11
The following figures indicate the values of alpha factor as a function of different values of
displacement ductility.
0
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
0,12
0,14
0,16
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
alpha-factora
ductility
Figure 2.8. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funlequal to 0.50 Fm
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
alpha-factora
ductility
Figure 2.9. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funlequal to 0.25 Fm
Analyzing the data it observed that after reaching a maximum displacement Dm in the first
cycle of loading, the structure unloads with stiffness greater than the initial one, therefore Kr
doesnt depend on the alpha-factor. Observing such independence between alpha-factor, Krfor ductility values less than 3.5 in Figure 2.8 and 2.0 in Figure 2.9, gives negative values of
the alpha-factor. The negative values are neglected in the plots, and are assumed equal to
zero.
The value of the alpha-factor starts to increase for higher values of ductility (=0.11. in Figure
2.8 and =0.28 in the Figure 2.9 form=5.1).
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
29/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
12
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,350,4
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
alpha-factora
*
ductility
Rather than consider the ratio of the unloading to initial stiffness, it appears more reasonable
to consider the ratio at the unloading stiffness (at cycle i) to the initial unloading stiffness (at
yield). For this reason, in the following figures the alpha-factor is computed by using equation
(2.4)
logflog 1i (2.4)
wheref*is defined equal to the ratio betweenKr(i)the unloading stiffness of the loading cycle
loading i and the unloading stiffness of the system after reaching the first maximum
displacement amplitude for which the ductility is greater than one.
(3,1)
Figure 2.10. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funl equal to 0.50 Fm
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
alpha-factora
*
ductility
Figure 2.11. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot considering Funlequal to 0.25 Fm
Although for Figure 2.10 and Figure 2.11 the previous considerations about alpha-factor are
still valid for low ductility values, it has to be noted that the values obtained from the new
definition of alpha-factor have a trend to remain constant as a function of ductility as
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
30/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
13
compared to the ones observed calculated from equation (2.1), which is more in accordance to
the Takeda model, that proposes the same unloading stiffness degradation parameter (between
0.0 and 0.6) to compute the unloading stiffness in consecutive loading cycles. Moreover with
this formulation of the alpha-factor, the initial stiffness of the reinforced concrete bridge piers
for m=1 under cyclic loading can be modelled successfully.
For these reasons, for the experimental results reported in the next section, the alpha-factor is
computed from equation (2.4) considering an unloading force equal to 0.25 of the maximum
force amplitude in each cycle.
2.4 Experimental results
Table 2.1 indicates the legend used in the plot (Figure 2.12) computed to evaluate the
dependence of the alpha-factor (calculated by formula (2.4)) on the ductility. The same legend
classifies the general geometrical characteristics of the sections analyzed and the several
identifications of the cyclic test on the bridge piers as they are referred to on the website of
the Kawashima Laboratory.
For each test examined, the axial load ratio is computed as (=P/fcc*Ag, wherePis the axial
load, fccthe confined compressive strength andAgthe gross section area) to be equal to 0.04.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
31/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
14
Table 2.1. Identifications numbers of the cyclic test on the bridge piers Ref: website of the Kawashima Laboratory
(http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp)
Test # ID Number Section Section Size
(mm)TP-001 Square 400400
TP-002 Square 400400
TP-003 Square 400400
TP-004 Square 400400
TP-005 Square 400400
TP-006 Square 400400
TP-007 Oval 400900
TP-008 Oval 400900
TP-009 Oval 400901
TP-010 Square 400400TP-011 Square 400400
TP-012 Square 400400
TP-013 Square 400400
TP-027 Square 400400
TP-028 Square 400400
TP-029 Square 400400
TP-030 Square 400400
TP-031 Square 400400
TP-032 Square 400400
TP-033 Square 400400
TP-034 Square 400400
TP-035 Square 400400
TP-036 Square 400400
TP-037 Square 400400
TP-038 Square 400400
TP-039 Square 400400
TP-040 Square 400400
TP-041 Square 400400
TP-042 Square 400400
TP-074 Square 400400
TP-075 Square 400400
TP-076 Square 400400
TP-077 Square 400400
TP-078 Square 400400
TP-079 Square 400400
TP-086 Square 400400
TP-087 Square 400400
TP-088 Square 400400
TP-089 Square 400400
Four reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the seismic performance of reinforced
concrete arch ribs with hollow section.
Four reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the effectiveness of densely arranged spiral
confinement zone in reinforced concrete section
columns with hollow section
Sixreinforcedconcrete specimens withsame sizeand
strength were loaded under different loading
hystereses to evaluate the effect of loading hystereses.
8
9
Six reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the seismic performance of reinforced
concrete bridge columns under bi-directional flexural
loading.
Six reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the seismic performance of C-bent columns
under bi-lateral seismic excitation based on a hybrid
loading test.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Threereinforcedconcrete specimens withovalsection
for bridge columns were loaded to evaluate the
confinement effect of interlocking hoops.
Four reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the effect of a longitudinal reinforcement
diameter on a plastic hinge length.
Four reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the effect of aspect ratio on a plastic hinge
length.
Four reinforced concrete specimens were loaded to
evaluate the seismic performance under varyingaxialforce.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
32/87
Chapter 2: Experimental observations
15
Figure 2.12. Alpha factor and displacement ductility plot.
The results are very interesting and from the plot (Figure 2.12) the variation of alpha-factor
as a function of ductility can be understood.
It can be noted that for low ductility alpha-factor assumes the highest values (a=1.04 for
m=1.30) obtained from formula (2.4). The exception mentioned happens for m-range from 1
to 2.5, whenf* is very close to 1 (obviously lower than unity).
In addition it can be highlighted that the alpha-factor is always below 0.5 when the ductility is
from 2.5 to 10. Moreover it is observed for each cyclic test on the bridge piers that the alpha-
factor tends to remain constant which is in accordance with Takeda Hysteresis Model, that
proposes the same (normally between 0.0 and 0.6) to compute the unloading stiffness in
the consecutive loading cycles.
Finally, it is observed that the increasing values of the ductility yield a regular increase ofalpha-factor, expect for low mwhen aassumes very high values when constant a-notion is no
longer valid. At low values of ductility, the alpha value appears to be sensitive to the exact
value of ductility chosen.
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1
1,1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
alpha-factora
ductility
test 1
test 2
test 3
test 4
test 5
test 6
test 7
test 8
test 9
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
33/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
16
3 ANALYTICAL PREDICTIONS
3.1 Numerical model
Numerical models were developed and analyzed in SeismoStruct [Seismo soft 2008] for the
same geometrical and loading characteristics of the experimental test TP-01 previouslypresented. The 1.25m high pier was modeled by four finite elements, the first two from the
bottom are 1/6 and the last two 1/3 of the column height. Two integration sections per element
were used (Gauss quadrature), each one containing around 250 integration points. The column
is also modeled with the length of the plastic hinge Lpover which strain and curvature are
considered to be equal to the maximum value at the base column. The plastic hinge length
incorporates the strain penetration length Lsp as shown in Figure 3.1. Further, the curvature
distribution higher up the column is assumed to be linear, in accordance with the SDOF
model being examined.
The strain penetration length, Lspmay be taken as:
0.022 (3.1)
Where fye and dbl are the expected yield strength and diameter of the longitudinal
reinforcement.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
34/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
17
Figure 3.1. Idealization of curvature distribution [Ref: Priestley, M.J.N. Calvi G.M. Kowalsky M.J.
(2007)].
For the constitutive relation for concrete in compression, the well known model of Mander et
al. [1988] was adopted, with the improvements later introduced by Martnez-Rueda and
Elnashai [1997]. A linear behavior for the concrete in tension was assumed, followed by an
abrupt reduction after exceeding the tension resistance. This is achieved by setting ft0 = 0.34
fc01/2.where fc0 is the unconfined concrete strength in compression ([Vinagre, 1997], [Lin and
Scordelis, 1975]). Youngs modulus of elasticity for concrete is estimated according to
Priestley et al. [1996], asEc0 = 4700fc01/2. In order to account for the effect of confinement due
to the presence of stirrups, the compressive strength and the corresponding strain were
modified using thefollowing confinement factor (kc):
(3.2)
1 5 1 (3.3)
The unconfined concrete strain (co) corresponding to the maximum compression strength is
taken as 0.002. while the value for the confinement factor kc was 1.161 for the confined
concrete and 1.0 for the concrete cover.
The model of Giuffr, Menegotto and Pinto ([Giuffr and Pinto, 1970], [Menegotto and Pinto,
1973]) was applied for the longitudinal reinforcement, along with the subsequent
improvements introduced by Filippou et al. [1983]. In order to account for the cyclic
degradation of steel strength depicted by the experimental results without changing the steel
model, a negative value of the parameter a3 was considered [Ref: Seismostruct help,
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
35/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
18
Seismosoft (2008)]. Youngs modulus of elasticity for steel was taken equal to 205 GPa,
while the hardening and cyclic behavior parameters were calibrated in order to better
reproduce the experimental results: b = 0.015, R0 = 20, a1 = 19.3. a2 = 0.15, a3 = -0.025 and a4
=15.
3.2 Numerical results
Before presenting the comparison of the unloading stiffness during the cyclic loading between
numerical and experimental results, it is important to consider that the single-degree-of-
freedom systems experience gravity-load-induced overturning moments in addition to those
resulting from lateral inertia forces. Therefore according to the behavior of the structure with
reference to Figure 3.2 it can be seen that for a SDOF system with a given level of lateral
strength, P-delta effects effectively cause a reduction in the lateral resistance. The reduced
effective stiffness implies that the maximum and unloading force amplitude obtained for each
cyclic loading (Figure 2.7) estimated with a numerical model in SeismoStruct, are affected bythe P-delta effects. It becomes necessary to compute through equations (3.4) and (3.5) the
equivalent maximum and unloading lateral force amplitude for each cyclic loading.
, (3.4)
Feq,unliFunliPDunliH
(3.5)
Figure 3.2. Effect of P-delta on lateral resistence [Ref: Priestley, M.J.N. Calvi G.M. Kowalsky M.J.
(2007)]
In Figure 3.3, which compares the numerical and experimental results, it can be observed that
for each loading cycle and maximum resistance, the loading and unloading stiffnesses are
very similar.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
36/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
19
-180
-160
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
6080
100
120
140
160
180
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
Numerical results
Experimental results
Figure 3.3. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results (TP-01).
Moreover the values of alpha-factors computed from equation (2.4) for each cycle of the
hysteresis loop obtained from the numerical results are very close to the unloading stiffness
degradation *previously calculated with the experimental results (Figure 3.5) and as it was
noted previously from the data of the cyclic test on the bridge piers, they have a trend to
remain constant with increasing values of ductility, which is in accordance to the Takeda
Model.
In the following Figure 3.5 the value of the yielding displacement evaluated according to
method explained in the section 2.3 is reported.
Figure 3.4. Value of yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-01)
-140
-110
-80
-50
-20
10
40
70
100
130
160
190
-6 -3 0 3 6 9 12F
orce(kN)
Displacement (mm)
dy= 8mm; Fy=157 kN
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
37/87
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
38/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
21
a) -50-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 7
b) -40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 7
Figure 3.7. The time-history of lateral displacement for TP-31 a) and TP-32 b) - Ref: website of the
Kawashima Laboratory (http://seismic.cv.titech.ac.jp)
-180
-160
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
6080
100
120
140
160
180
-50-45-40-35-30 -25 -20-15-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
Numerical results
Experimental results
Figure 3.8. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results (TP-31).
Figure 3.9. Yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-31).
-200
-150-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
dy=8 mm; Fy=163 kN
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
39/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
22
Figure 3.10. Alpha factor and displacement ductility comparison between the experimental and
numerical results (TP-31)
-180
-160
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
-60-55-50-45-40-35-30 -25-20 -15-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
Numerical results
Experimental results
Figure 3.11. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental and numerical results
(TP-32).
Figure 3.12. Yielding displacement and Force in the numerical model (TP-32).
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5
alpha-factora
ductility
Experimental resultsNumerical results
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
dy=9.2 mm; Fy=104 kN
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
40/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
23
Figure 3.13. Alpha factor and displacement ductility comparison between the experimental and numerical
results (TP-32)
Figure 3.8 to Figure 3.13 show the cyclic response according to numerical and experimental
results and the alpha-factor trend as a function of the displacement ductility corresponding to
the tests identified with TP-31 and TP32 respectively.
The previous considerations about the alpha-factor explained for test TP-01 are still valid, and
therefore it can be concluded that the results obtained from the comparison between the
experimental and the numerical results are satisfactory.
3.3 Influence of the Aspect ratio, the Section ratio and the axial load ratio on the alpha-
factor.
After obtaining satisfactory results from the comparison between the experimental and the
numerical results, in this section the behavior of the alpha-factor is investigated through
numerical computation. The goal is to evaluate how the values of the alpha-factor change with
varyingH/d,aspect ratio,andL/d, section ratio of the pier identified with the number TP-31.
in Figure 3.14, whereHis the column height, dthe section depth andL is the section length
of the pier.
In each numerical model studied an axial load is applied on the pier so that the axial load ratio
(=P/fcc*Ag, where P is the axial load, fccconfined compressive strength and Ag the gross
section area) is equal to 0.05.
Moreover when L/d changes, the aspect ratio is fixed (H/L=3) and the longitudinal
reinforcement ratio is fixed to 1.5% of the gross section area Ag.
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
1 2 3 4 5
alpha-factor
a
ductility
Experimenta l results
Numerica l results
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
41/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
24
Figure 3.14. The aspect ratioH/dand the section ratio used in the numerical computation.
For the time-histories of cyclic loading in the numerical model when H/d=7 and H/d=10 the
displacement in each time step used for H/d=3. shown in Figure 3.7a is increased as the
square of H/d so that the structure can reach displacement ductility values around 6.
The following plots (Figure 3.15) show the cyclic loading response for the numerical models
with different values of the aspect ratioH/d.
H/d=3. =0.05 H/d=7; =0.05
-50-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
-350-300-250-200-150-100-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
H/d=10, =0.05
Figure 3.15. Cyclic loading response used to obtain to numerical results forH/d=3;H/d=7andH/d=10.
H
d
H/d=3
H/d=7
H/d=10
L
d
3L
5L
10L
d
d
d
- =0.05 =0.05-H/L=3-Aspect ratio Sectional ratio
load direction
-160
-140
-120
-100-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50Force(kN)
Dis lacement (mm)-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-140-120-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
42/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
25
The alpha-factor is estimated in the three models according to the formula (2.4).
Figure 3.16. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison for H/d=3; H/d=7andH/d=10.
In Figure 3.16 the plot shows that increasing the slenderness of the structure, or to be more
precise changing the aspect ratio from 3 to 10, the alpha-factor does not change a function of
the displacement ductility and instead assumes values of around 0.07. Therefore observing a
constant trend of the alpha-factor it can be concluded that the aspect ratio doesnt have a
significant influence on the cases studied.
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,350,4
0,45
0,5
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6
alpha-factora
ductility
H/d=3 H/d=7 H/d=10
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
43/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
26
The time histories of the lateral displacement used to investigate the effect of the section ratio
on the alpha factor are shown in the Figure 3.17 for L/d=3.L/d=5,L/d=10 and in the Figure
3.7a forL/d=1.
L/d=3
L/d=5
L/d=10
Figure 3.17. The time histories of the lateral displacement for the different section ratio
-150
-50
50
150
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 7
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 7
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
44/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
27
The following plots (Figure 3.18) show the cyclic loading response of the numerical models
with different values of the section ratioL/d.
-160
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100120
140
160
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50Force(kN)
Displacement (mm) L/d=1;H/d=3; =0.05 L/d=5;H/d=3; =0.05
-1000
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
-700-600-500-400-300-200-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Force(kN)
Displacement (mm) L/d=7; H/d=3; =0.05 L/d=10; H/d=3; =0.05
Figure 3.18. Cyclic loading response for numerical analyses forL/d=1;L/d=3and;L/d=7 andL/d=10.
The alpha-factor is estimated in the three models according to the formula (2.4).
Figure 3.19. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison from numerical analyses
for l/d=1; l/d=5; l/d=7; L/d=10.
From the plot in Figure 3.19 it is observed that the values of alpha-factor are very low (less
than 0.15) and demonstrate a slightly increasing slope.
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-140-120-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
-1500
-1200
-900
-600
-300
0
300
600
900
1200
1500
-1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5
alpha-factora
ductility
L/d=1 L/d=3 L/d=5 L/d=10
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
45/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
28
Figure 3.21 shows the plot of cyclic loading response obtained from the numerical
computations of the pier having values of the axial load ratio reported in Figure 3.20. For
each model the aspect ratio (H/d=3) and the section ratio (L/d=1) are fixed.
Figure 3.20. The axial load used in the numerical computation.
The load history of the lateral displacement used to investigate the effect of the axial load
ratio on the alpha factor is shown in the Figure 3.7a.
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
=0
=0.05
=0.10
=0.15
=0.20
Figure 3.21. Cyclic loading response: comparison between the experimental results for different values of
the axial load ratio.
-H/L=3-Axial load ratio L/d=1
=0.10=0.15
=0.20
=0.05=0.00
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
46/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
29
The alpha-factor is estimated in each of the three models according to equation (2.4).
Figure 3.22. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison obtained from numericalanalyses for =0; =0.05; =0.10; =0.15; =020
From Figure 3.22 it is observed that increasing the axial load on the structure gives higher
values of the alpha-factor.
a) Aspect ratio
b) Section ratio c) Axial load ratio
Figure 3.23. Comparison a) Aspect ratio , b) Section ratio and c) Axial load ratio.
From Figure 3.23 the variation of the alpha factor as a function of aspect ratio and axial load
ratio can be observed.
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6
alpha-factora
ductility
=0 =0.05 =0.10 =0.15 =0.20
0
0,05
0,10,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
a
lpha-factora
H/d=3 H/d=7 H/d=10
0
0,05
0,1
0,150,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
alpha-factora
L/d=1 L/d=3L/d=5 L/d=10
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
alpha
-factora
=0 =0.05 =0.10 =0.15 =0.20
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
47/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
30
First of all, Figure 3.20.a and Figure 3.20b record lower values of the alpha-factor compared
to that presented in the Figure 3.20.c.
In particular it is observed that the trend line related to the slenderness of the system could be
considered constant (Figure 3.20.a) while the second one (Figure 3.20.b) related to the sectionratio is slightly increasing with increased values of section ratio.
Figure 3.20.c illustrates that varying the axial load ratio from 0.00 to 0.20 the alpha-factor
tends to increase significantly.
Moreover, it is very interesting to note that the values of the alpha-factor as a function of the
displacement ductility for axial load ratio equal to 0.20 are very close to the unloading
stiffness degradation parameter provided in the Takeda model (usually equal to 0.5), in fact
it even reaches a value of 0.52.
From these considerations it can be said that alpha-factor as a function of displacement
ductility depends in particular on the axial load ratio.
3.4 Computation of the yielding displacement
The section presents the computation of the yielding displacement by two methods.
The first approach (method 1) is explained in paragraph 2.3. where the yielding displacement
is determined using a trend line set by eye, that approximates the necessary loading cycles
to yield the structure. This method has been used in the previous analyses preformed to study
the influence of the aspect ratio, section ratio and axial load ratio on the alpha-factor
The second method (method 2) is introduced by Priesltey, M.J.N. Calvi G.M. Kowalsky M.J.
[2007] (pag 76), through the following equations.
Equation 3.6 is approxiamted for design propose and defines the yielding displacement:
3 (3.6)
The yielding curvature is provided for different section shapes by the following equations for
rectangular concrete column:
2.10 (3.7)
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
48/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
31
and for concrete walls:
2.00
(3.8)
where y, hcand lware the yield strain of the flexural reinforcement (=fy/Es), the section depth
of the rectangular column and the length of the rectangular walls respectively.
In the numerical models where the goal is to evaluate the influence of the aspect ratio on the
alpha-factor, the yielding displacement obtained was the same for the two different methods.
H/d=3. =0.05 H/d=7; =0.05
H/d=10; =0.05
Figure 3.24. Yielding displacement for analytical models with H/d=3; H/d=7and H/d=10 computed
according to method 1 and method 2
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
dy=6 mm; Fy=144 kN
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Force(kN)
Dis lacement (mm)
dy=17 mm; Fy=380 kN
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
010
20
30
40
50
-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100
Force(kN)
Displacement (mm)
dy=49 mm; Fy=39 kN
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
49/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
32
The following plots are related to the analytical models with different section ratio. It is noted
that by computing the yielding displacement through the two formulations, the obtained
values are the same for L/d=1 and L/d=5, while they are very similar for L/d=7 and L/d=10.
a) b)
L/d=1; H/d=3; =0.05 L/d=5; H/d=3; =0.05
c1) c2)
L/d=7; H/d=3; =0.05
d1) d2)
L/d=5; H/d=3; =0.05
Figure 3.25. Yielding displacement obtained for analytical models with a) l/d=1; b) l/d=5 according to both
methods, c1) l/d=7; d1) L/d=10 according to method 1 and c2) l/d=7; d2) L/d=10 according to
the method 2.
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
dy=6 mm; Fy=144 kN
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Force(kN)
Dis lacement (mm)
dy=17 mm; Fy=380 kN
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Force(kN)
Dis lacememt mm
dy=32mm; Fy=670 kN
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Force(kN)
Dis lacememt mm
dy=29mm; Fy=670 kN
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100
Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
dy= 51 mm; Fy=1250 kN
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
-100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100
Force(kN)
Dis lacement mm
dy= 55 mm; Fy=1250 kN
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
50/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
33
Observing such differences regarding the yielding displacement, the values of alpha factor
are recomputed according the formula 2.4.
Figure 3.26. Alpha factor as a function of the displacement ductility: comparison relative to analytical
models for l/d=1; l/d=5; l/d=7; L/d=10, where the yielding displacement is computed
according to method 2.
Comparing the plot in the Figure 3.26 with one in the Figure 3.19 it can observed that the
results are very similar. For this reason the previous conclusions about the influence of the
aspect ratio on the alpha-factor are still valid, and therefore it is possible to neglect the small
difference and to take in account only of the value of alpha-factor computed according to the
method 1.
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
2 3 4 5
alpha-factora
ductility
L/d=1 L/d=3 L/d=5 L/d=10
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
51/87
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
52/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
35
Figure 3.28. Alpha factor as function of the displacement ductility: comparison relative to analytical
models for =0; =0.05; =0.10; =0.15; =020, where the yielding displacement is
computed according to method 2.
Comparing the plot in the Figure 3.28 with Figure 3.19 it can be observed that the results are
very similar. For that reason the previous conclusions about the influence on the axial load
ratio on the alpha-factor are still valid, and therefore it is possible to neglect the small
difference and to take into account only the value of the alpha-factor computed according to
method 1.
3.5 Alpha- factor as a function of curvature ductility
In order to obtain an equivalent force-displacement response for the intended Takeda model
using a plastic hinge model described in terms of moment and curvature, the alpha-factor is
defined as a function of curvature ductility.
Using lumped-plasticity modeling it could be interesting to define later the hinge
characteristics and initial stiffness in terms of moment-curvature by using a non linear time
history analysis program (e.g. Ruaumoko).
Recalling the alpha-factor definition, first of all it is necessary to define the curvature ductility
for each loading cycle, given by equation (3.9)
(3.9)
Where m(i) and y are the maximum curvature for each loading cycle and the yielding
curvature respectively. The curvatures are known because they depend on the maximum
deformation amplitudeDm(i)and the yielding displacementDydefined in the paragraph 2.3.
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5 6
alpha-factora
ductility
=0 =0.05 =0.10 =0.15 =0.20
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
53/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
36
Dm(i)can also be expressed by equation (3.10)
(3.10)
where H andLp( Lsp, whereLspis defined in the formula (3.1)) are the height and the length
of the plastic hinge of the cantilever system defined with formula (3.11), respectively.
knowing that k=0.08 and Lc is the length of the critical section to the point of contraflexure in
the member,the length of the plastic hinge can be defined by equation 3.11.
2
whileDycan be defined through the following equation
(3.11)
(3.12)
In this section the alpha-factor is defined as a function of the curvature ductility, according tothe following equation
1
(3.13)
where is defined by equation (3.14) specifying that E is the elastic modulus of thesystem,
is the unloading moment of inertia for each loading cycle, formula (3.15), and
Iinis the initial moment of inertia of the single-degree-of-freedom system, formula (3.16).
(3.14)
(3.15)
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
54/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
37
(3.16)
In equation (3.15) (=Fm*H) and (=Funl*H) are the maximum and theunloading moment for each loading cycle (i) respectively.
The unloading curvature for each cyce of loading , is known because it can beobtained by the unloading deformation amplitude through equation (3.17), defined inFigure 2.7 and also given by the following equation
(3.17)
and the residual curvature is defined by
(3.18)
By defining the alpha-factor aM-as function of the curvature ductility
,the following plots
(Figure 3.29 to Figure 3.31) show how the values of the alpha-factor, formula (3.13), changewhen varying H/d, the aspect ratio and L/d, the section ratio and , the axial load ratio
according to the analyses done for the alpha-factor as a function of the displacement ductility.
0,0
0,20,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
alpha
-factor*M-
Ductility
H/L=3 H/L=7 H/L=10
Figure 3.29. Alpha factor as a function of the curvature ductility: comparison for analytical results for
H/d=3; H/d=7and H/d=10.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
55/87
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
56/87
Chapter 3: Analytical predictions
39
From this study it is observed that in the Moment-curvature Takeda model, in particular in the
plots related to the aspect ratio and section ratio, the unloading stiffness degradation
parameter could only be given using a non-linear expression, surely not simple to implement.
Therefore this study supports the definition of the alpha-factor introduced by the force-
displacement Takeda Model.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
57/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
40
4 SMALL DISPLACEMENT NONLINEAR TIME-HISTORYANALYSES
4.1 Description
The effect of using different alpha ratios is investigated in this section by using non-lineartime-history analyses of single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems. The analysis are carried
out using the computer program Ruaumoko [Carr, 2004]
4.2 Accelerograms
Non linear time-history analyses are performed for three ground motions; two of them are
selected from a suite of historical recordings from magnitude M=6 to M=7.3 earthquakes
which were scaled to match the uniform hazard spectrum for Los Angeles at an uniform
hazard level of 10% probability of exceedence in 50 years (SAC Joint Venture 1997), and the
third one is a historical record for California that have been used extensively in past.
The three ground motions are listed below:
LA09- Landers EQ, 28 Jun. 92. Yermo Fire Station, fault normal component.
LA19- North Palm Springs EQ, 8 Jul. 86, fault normal component.
El Centro- El Centro EQ, 1940, S00E component.
4.3 Ground- Motion Time Histories
The acceleration time-history of the three ground motions is presented indicating the peak
ground acceleration PGA. All the time histories are scaled to a similar intensity.
The peak ground acceleration points are highlighted in the plots and general properties are
also reported in Table 4.1. For every record the PGA value, the time at which it occurs and
other duration properties are reported. Regarding the duration, this considers the first and the
last time at which a threshold acceleration value is crossed in the record, which is taken as
0.05g and 0.10g respectively.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
58/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
41
Table 4.1. Ground motion characteristic parameters.
PGA Interval ag>0.05g Interval ag>0.10g
t
[s]
acc.
[g]
ti
[s]
tf
[s]
ti - tf
[s]
ti
[s]
tf
[s]
ti - tf
[s]
LA09 16.30 0.5196 2.96 43.96 41.00 12.30 31.32 19.02
LA19 2.48 1.0190 0.32 22.68 22.36 0.32 14.44 14.12
El
Centro
2.12 0.3483 0.90 26.76 25.86 1.40 26.08 24.68
Figure 4.1. Time histories of earthquake ground motions
As a general comment in terms of PGA, it is clear that the LA19 record is significantly more
severe than the others, being almost twice in amplitude than LA09 and three times than El
Centro.
Regarding the duration parameters, if the threshold of 0.05g acceleration is considered the
LA09 record is two times longer than the others whilst for a higher acceleration threshold of
0.10g the differences in duration interval are small.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
59/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
42
4.4 Response Spectra
For each earthquake ground motion, the relative displacement and acceleration response
spectrum for 5% of critical damping are presented below for a period range of 0 to 4 s with an
increment of 0.01s.
Fi
gure 4.2. Linear elastic response spectra for the LA09 record.
Figure 4.3. Linear elastic response spectra for the LA19 record.
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
60/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
43
Figure 4.4. Linear elastic response spectra for the EC record.
4.5 Ground Motion Spectra Comparison and Comment
To compare and comment on the differences between the different ground motions, different
spectra have been plotted in the same graph, as shown in Figure 4.5.
Regarding the frequency content and the spectral responses it is noted that:
The most severe condition in terms of acceleration response is given by the LA19
ground motion, for which the low period spectral acceleration from 0.0 to 0.5s is aboutthree times higher than that of other ground motions whilst for a period range of 0.5 to
2.0s LA09becomes critical in terms of spectral acceleration.
Figure 4.5.Comparison of the linear elastic response spectra for the 3 ground motions use. Damping is 5%
of critical
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
61/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
44
4.6 Modelling
To investigate the effect of using different alpha values for practical purposes, a cantilever
column exhibiting hysteretic moment-curvature relationship and its equivalent SDOF (spring)
with the same initial stiffness have been modeled and analyzed in Ruaumoko 2D [Carr, 2004],
as shown in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6. Modeling SDOF column and spring
The hysteretic behavior used is the modified Takeda hysteretic model [Otani 1974] reported
in Figure 4.7, where the unloading stiffness degradation parameter assumes values [0.0;
0.25; 0.50] and the reloading stiffness is set equal to 0.0.
Figure 4.7. Modified Takeda Model Ref: Ruaumoko 2D, Appendix [Carr, 2004]
The small displacement analysis regime and an integration time step of 0.005s is utilized in
the analyses.
The models analyzed are prepared with a series of natural periods of 0.5s, 1.0s, 2.0s and 3.0
respectively. The intensity of the accelerograms are adjusted to achieve displacement ductility
demands of 2, 4 and 6 respectively.
m
EIH
max
m
K=3EI
H3
8/11/2019 Dissertao de mestrado de Novelli
62/87
Chapter 4: Small displacement nonlinear time-history analyses
45
4.7 Case-study: structural periods
Non-linear time history analysis of the modeled column requires the definition of a plastic
hinge length, which can be defined as the region of concentrated plasticity near the base of the
cantilever and can be calculated by using Equation 4.1 [Priestley et al 2007]
0.10 (4.1)where K and Lsp are respectively equal to 0.04 and 0.25 and the factor is related to theaspect ratio of the cantilever by the equation Ar(=H/LW). Assuming the aspect ratio of 5 and
10, the corresponding values of and the length of plastic hinge are presented in Table 4.2.Table 4.2. Height and Plastic hinge used in SDOF column
The moment of inertia of the sections are fixed so as to achieve undamped natural period of
0.5s, 1s, 2s and 3s respectively. The corresponding values are reported in Table 4.3
Table 4.3. Moment of Inertia corresponding to different undamped natural periods of the SDOF column.
The Young's elasticity modulus E is equal to 25740 MPa.
The lateral stiffness and yield strength of the equivalent spring can be calculated by using the
relation kx=3EI/H3and Fy=M/H respectively for a known moment of resistance, M and the
height of the cantilever, H.
In the following plots it is possible to observe the effect of using different alpha ratios on the
SDOF running the non-linear time history analyses with the accelerograms identified with
La09 and Elce.
The figures show the variation of the ratio of the maximum displacement demand of the
equivalent spring and the cantilever as a function of the undamped natural period of vibration.
The results obtained by non linear time history analyses with LA09 ground motion and are
reported in Figure 4.8 to 4.11, are calculated with a ratio between the column height,Hand
the length of the plastic hinge,Lpequal to 13 in the first group and 15 in the second group
respectively.
height Lw Lpm m m