Smart Structures and Systems

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Seismic performance of concrete frame structures reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys

  • Alam, M. Shahria (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Western Ontario) ;
  • Nehdi, Moncef (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Western Ontario) ;
  • Youssef, Maged A. (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Western Ontario)
  • Received : 2008.03.25
  • Accepted : 2009.06.29
  • Published : 2009.09.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Superelastic Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs) are gaining acceptance for use as reinforcing bars in concrete structures. The seismic behaviour of concrete frames reinforced with SMAs is being assessed in this study. Two eight-storey concrete frames, one of which is reinforced with regular steel and the other with SMAs at the plastic hinge regions of beams and regular steel elsewhere, are designed and analyzed using 10 different ground motion records. Both frames are located in the highly seismic region of Western Canada and are designed and detailed according to current seismic design standards. The validation of a finite element (FE) program that was conducted previously at the element level is extended to the structure level in this paper using the results of a shake table test of a three-storey moment resisting steel RC frame. The ten accelerograms that are chosen for analyzing the designed RC frames are scaled based on the spectral ordinate at the fundamental periods of the frames. The behaviour of both frames under scaled seismic excitations is compared in terms of maximum inter-storey drift, top-storey drift, inter-storey residual drift, and residual top-storey drift. The results show that SMA-RC frames are able to recover most of its post-yield deformation, even after a strong earthquake.

Keywords

References

  1. Alam, M.S., Youssef, M.A. and Nehdi, M. (2008), "Analytical prediction of the seismic behaviour of superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced concrete elements", Eng. Struct., 30(12), 3399-3411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.05.025
  2. Alam, M.S., Youssef, M.A. and Nehdi, M. (2007), "Seismic behaviour of concrete beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys", 9th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, June, ON, Canada 2007, Paper no. 1125, 10 p.
  3. ANSYS, Inc. (2005), Version 10.0, Southpoint, Canonsburg, PA, USA.
  4. Auricchio, F. and Sacco, E. (1997), "Superelastic shape-memory-alloy beam model", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 8(6), 489-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X9700800602
  5. Auricchio, F., Fugazza, D. and DesRoches, R. (2006), "Earthquake performance of steel frames with Nitinol braces", J. Earthq. Eng., 10(SPEC), 45-66.
  6. Auricchio, F., Taylor, R.L. and Lubliner, J. (1997), "Shape-memory alloys: macromodelling and numerical simulations of the superelastic behaviour", Comput. Methods Appl. M., 146(3-4), 281-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(96)01232-7
  7. Bariola, J. (1992), "Drift response of medium-rise reinforced concrete buildings during earthquakes", ACI Struct. J., 89(4), 384-390.
  8. Bracci, J.M., Reinhorn, A.M. and Mander, J.B. (1992), "Seismic resistance of reinforced concrete frame structures designed only for gravity loads:part I-design and properties of a one-third scale model structure", Technical report NCEER-92-0027.
  9. Broderick, B.M. and Elnashai, A.S. (1994), "Seismic resistance of composite beam-columns in multi-storey structures, Part 2: Analytical model and discussion of results", J. Constr. Steel Res., 30(3), 231-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-974X(94)90002-7
  10. Campos-Costa, A. and Pinto, A.V. (1999), European seismic hazards scenarios - An approach to the definition of input motion for testing and reliability assessment of Civil Engineering structures, JRC Special publication No.X.99.XX 1999, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy.
  11. Chi-Chi Earthquake (2007), http://www.cwb.gov.tw/V5e/index.htm, January 2007.
  12. Clark, P.W., Aiken, I.D., Kelly, J.M., Higashino, M. and Krumme, R. (1995), "Experimental and analytical studies of shape-memory alloy dampers for structural control", Proc. of SPIE, 2445, 241-251.
  13. Canadian Standards Association (2004), Design of Concrete Structures, CSA A23.3-04, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada, 240p.
  14. DesRoches, R. and Delemont, M. (2002), "Seismic retrofit of simply supported bridges using shape memory alloys", Eng. Struct., 24, 325-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00098-0
  15. Digitized Strong-Motion Accelerograms of North and Central American Earthquakes (2007), http://nsmp.wr.usgs.gov/data_sets/ncae.html, January 2007.
  16. Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Marnetto, R., Mucciarelli, M., Nigro, D., Ponzo, F.C. and Santarsiero, G. (2004), "Experimental static and dynamic response of a real RC frame upgraded with SMA re-centering and dissipating braces", Proc. of the 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Canada, Paper no. 2878.
  17. Elfeki, M.A. and Youssef, M.A. (2007), "Effect of the vertical earthquake component on the seismic response of reinforced concrete moment frames", 9th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, June 2007, ON, Canada, Paper no. 1129, 10 p.
  18. Hassanein, A. (1997), "Reliability Assessment of Rehabilitated Buildings of Moderate Height", M.Sc. Thesis, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
  19. Indirli, M., Castellano, M.G., Clemente, P. and Martelli, A. (2001), "Demo-application of shape memory alloy devices: The rehabilitation of the S. Giorgio Church Bell-Tower", The Proc. of SPIE, 4330, 262-272.
  20. Kappos, A.J. (1997), "A comparative assessment of R/C structures designed to the 1995 Eurocode 8 and the 1985 CEB seismic code", Struct. Des. Tall Build., 6(1), 59-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1794(199703)6:1<59::AID-TAL85>3.0.CO;2-8
  21. Kwon, O.S. and Elnashai, A. (2006), "The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structure", Eng. Struct., 28(2), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.07.010
  22. MacGregor, J.G. and Wight, J.K. (2005), Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design, fourth edition.
  23. Martinez-Rueda, J.E. and Elnashai, A.S. (1997), "Confined concrete model under cyclic load", Mater. Struct. 30(197), 139-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02486385
  24. McCormick, J. and DesRoches, R. (2003), "Seismic response using smart bracing elements", The Proc. of the Extreme Loading Conf., Toronto, Canada, August.
  25. National Building Code of Canada (2005), National Research Council, Canada.
  26. Naumoski, N., Tso, W.K. and Heidebrecht, A.C. (1988), "A selection of representative strong motion earthquake records having different A/V ratios", EERG Report 88-01, Earthquake Engineering Research Group, Dept. of Civil Engg., McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada.
  27. Nehdi, M., Alam, M.S. and Youssef, M.A. (2007), "Seismic behaviour of repaired beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys", ACI Struct. J., in review.
  28. Ocel, J., DesRoches, R., Leon, R.T., Hess, W.G., Krumme, R., Hayes, J.R. and Sweeney, S. (2004), "Steel beamcolumn connections using shape memory alloys", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 130(5), 732-740. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:5(732)
  29. Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N. (1992), Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings, New York: J. Wiley.
  30. PEER Strong Ground Motion Database (2007), http://peer.berkeley.edu/svbin, January 2007.
  31. Saiidi, M.S. and Wang, H. (2006), "Exploratory study of seismic response of concrete columns with shape memory alloys reinforcement", ACI Struct. J., 103, 435-442.
  32. Salichs, J., Hou, Z. and Noori, M. (2001), "Vibration suppression of structures using passive shape memory alloy energy dissipation devices", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 12, 671-680. https://doi.org/10.1106/RGRQ-VJKM-QWCF-QQDE
  33. SeismoStruct, http://www.seismosoft.com/SeismoStruct/index.htm.
  34. Shahin, A.R., Meckl, P.H. and Jones, J.D. (1997), "Modeling of SMA tendons for active control of structures", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 8, 51-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X9700800106
  35. Strong Motion Databases (2007), www.seismosoft.com, January 2007.
  36. Tamai, H., Miura, K., Kitagawa, Y. and Fukuta, T. (2003), "Application of SMA Rod to Exposed-type Column Base in Smart Structural System", the Proc. of SPIE, 5057, 169-177.
  37. UCSC Seismographic Station (2007), http://emerald.ucsc.edu, January 2007.
  38. Wilde, K., Gardoni, P. and Fujino, Y. (2000), "Base isolation system with shape memory alloy device for elevated highway bridges", Eng. Struct., 22, 222-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00097-2
  39. Youssef, M.A., Alam, M.S. and Nehdi, M. (2008), "Experimental investigation on the seismic behaviour of beam-column joints reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys", J. Earthq. Eng., accepted January.
  40. Zhu, S. and Zhang, Y. (2007), "Seismic behaviour of self-centring braced frame buildings with reusable hysteretic damping brace", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 36, 1329-1346. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.683

Cited by

  1. Probabilistic performance assessment of low-ductility reinforced concrete frames retrofitted with dissipative braces vol.42, pp.7, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2255
  2. Seismic Fragility Assessment of Concrete Bridge Pier Reinforced with Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy vol.31, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1193/112512EQS337M
  3. A simple and efficient 1-D macroscopic model for shape memory alloys considering ferro-elasticity effect vol.16, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2015.16.4.641
  4. Lateral load resistance of bridge piers under flexure and shear using factorial analysis vol.59, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.12.009
  5. High-mode effects on seismic performance of multi-story self-centering braced steel frames vol.119, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.12.008
  6. Seismic Retrofit of Concrete Shear Walls with SMA Tension Braces vol.144, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001936
  7. Seismic behavior of self-centering reinforced concrete wall enabled by superelastic shape memory alloy bars vol.16, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0213-8
  8. Seismic fragility assessment of SMA-bar restrained multi-span continuous highway bridge isolated by different laminated rubber bearings in medium to strong seismic risk zones vol.10, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-012-9381-8
  9. Cyclic response sensitivity of post-tensioned steel connections using sequential fractional factorial design vol.112, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.04.022
  10. Three-dimensional finite element modelling of rocking bridge piers under cyclic loading and exploration of options for increased energy dissipation vol.118, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.03.042
  11. Fire performance curves for unprotected HSS steel columns vol.15, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2013.15.6.705
  12. Behavior of mortar beams with randomly distributed superelastic shape memory alloy fibers 2017, https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X17721029
  13. Seismic overstrength and ductility of concrete buildings reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloy rebar vol.34, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.08.030
  14. Performance of Advanced Materials during Earthquake Loading Tests of a Bridge System vol.139, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000611
  15. Overall damage identification of flag-shaped hysteresis systems under seismic excitation vol.16, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2015.16.1.163
  16. Statistical distribution of seismic performance criteria of retrofitted multi-column bridge bents using incremental dynamic analysis: a case study vol.11, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-013-9467-y
  17. Exploring the synergy of ECCs and SMAs in creating resilient civil infrastructure vol.70, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1680/jmacr.17.00033
  18. Numerical study on the seismic performance of precast segmental concrete columns under cyclic loading vol.148, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.06.062
  19. SMA tension brace for retrofitting concrete shear walls vol.140, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.045
  20. Seismic assessment of concrete buildings reinforced with shape memory alloy materials in different stories vol.26, pp.15, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1384
  21. Performance-based prioritisation for seismic retrofitting of reinforced concrete bridge bent vol.10, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2013.772641
  22. Use of SMA bars to enhance the seismic performance of SMA braced RC frames vol.6, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.6.3.267
  23. Performance-Based Seismic Design of Shape Memory Alloy–Reinforced Concrete Bridge Piers. I: Development of Performance-Based Damage States vol.142, pp.12, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001458
  24. Pilot Experiences in the Application of Shape Memory Alloys in Structural Concrete vol.26, pp.11, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000974
  25. Seismic performance comparison between direct displacement-based and force-based design of a multi-span continuous reinforced concrete bridge with irregular column heights vol.41, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2012-0278
  26. Shape memory alloy reinforced concrete frames vulnerable to strong vertical excitations vol.13, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.08.011
  27. Fragility Analysis of Retrofitted Multicolumn Bridge Bent Subjected to Near-Fault and Far-Field Ground Motion vol.18, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000452
  28. Acoustic emission analysis of cyclically loaded superelastic shape memory alloy fiber reinforced mortar beams vol.95, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.021
  29. Plastic hinge length of shape memory alloy (SMA) reinforced concrete bridge pier vol.117, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.02.050
  30. Ductile corrosion-free GFRP-stainless steel reinforced concrete elements vol.182, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.037
  31. Seismic performance evaluation of multi-column bridge bents retrofitted with different alternatives using incremental dynamic analysis vol.62-63, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.01.005
  32. An experimental study on self-centering and ductility of pseudo-elastic shape memory alloy (PESMA) fiber reinforced beam and beam-column joint specimens vol.49, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0538-1
  33. Seismic performance of concrete columns reinforced with hybrid shape memory alloy (SMA) and fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) bars vol.28, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.020
  34. Performance of pre-1970s squat reinforced concrete shear walls pp.1208-6029, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2017-0595
  35. Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls Detailed with Innovative Materials: Seismic Performance vol.22, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000893
  36. Seismic performance of reinforced concrete frames retrofitted using external superelastic shape memory alloy bars pp.1573-1456, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0477-7
  37. Investigation of MRS and SMA Dampers Effects on Bridge Seismic Resistance Employing Analytical Models pp.2093-6311, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0125-8
  38. Modeling of Concrete Shear Walls Retrofitted with SMA Tension Braces pp.1559-808X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1452804
  39. Smart Structures with Pseudoelastic and Pseudoplastic Shape Memory Alloy: a critical review of their prospective, feasibility and current trends. vol.469, pp.1757-899X, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/469/1/012123
  40. Seismic performance of concrete frames reinforced with superelastic shape memory alloys vol.9, pp.4, 2009, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2012.9.4.313
  41. Incremental dynamic analyses of concrete buildings reinforced with shape memory alloy vol.23, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2017.23.1.095
  42. Seismic response of RC structures rehabilitated with SMA under near-field earthquakes vol.63, pp.4, 2009, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.63.4.497
  43. Behavior of exterior concrete beam-column joints reinforced with Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) bars vol.28, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.28.1.083
  44. Effect of Replacing Steel with Shape Memory Alloy in Shear Wall Systems vol.11, pp.3, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.12.043
  45. Numerical seismic performance evaluation of concrete beam-column joint reinforced with different super elastic shape memory alloy rebars vol.194, pp.None, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.054
  46. Earthquake effect on the concrete walls with shape memory alloy reinforcement vol.24, pp.4, 2009, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2019.24.4.491
  47. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) Reinforced Concrete Bridge Bents Under Long-Duration Motion vol.6, pp.None, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2020.601736
  48. Performance-based wind design of tall buildings: concepts, frameworks, and opportunities vol.31, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/was.2020.31.2.103
  49. State-of-the-Art Review of Seismic-Resistant Precast Bridge Columns vol.25, pp.10, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0001620
  50. Adaptive tuned mass damper with shape memory alloy for seismic application vol.223, pp.None, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111171
  51. Thermomechanical and electrical response of a superelastic NiTi shape memory alloy cable vol.31, pp.19, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389x20943952
  52. Nonlinear Dynamic Response of Single-Degree-of-Freedom Systems Subjected to Along-Wind Loads. I: Parametric Study vol.147, pp.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0003125