Blagov D. Seismic Strengthening of RC Structures Using PED Devices

Bauhaus Summer School 2013
Weimar, August 5th16th

Model Validation and Simulation
Seismic strengthening of R/C structures

using devices for passive energy dissipation
Dilyan Blagov, Assist. Prof.

Department of Structural Mechanics
UACEG, Sofia, Bulgaria

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE.
3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING.
4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION
DEVICES.
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. What is strengthening, when and why is it needed?
Strengthening
Retrofitting
Rehabilitation
Improvement
Protection
Repair
Upgrading
Modification
Seismic strengthening (also known as seismic retrofitting) represents a

judicious modification of the structural and nonstructural components
in a building with a purpose to improve its performance and reduce the
risk in future earthquakes. [17], [5]
Seismic retrofit can take place before an earthquake (as a preventive
measure) or after an earthquake, when it is usually combined with the
repair of earthquake-induced damage. [17]
Why retrofitting is needed?

Standards of design and construction for earthquake resistance are slowly improving. As
most of what we build lasts much longer than any given construction standard, this obviously
means that at the time of any given earthquake most of the built environment is not as
earthquake resistant as the latest standards could make them. Hence, there is a huge need to
improve the existing built environment by replacing or making safer (i.e. retrotting) parts of
the existing built environment. [4]

Factors which may affect the need for improving the seismic structural performance
It is extremely important that the structural engineer work with the building owner to carefully define the intended purpose of seismic
strengthening based on specific safety and economic performance objectives. These are likely to vary considerably from one structure to
another based on several key factors. These factors include:
Economic value of the structure and remaining years of service life.
Occupancy of the structure including the number of persons at risk within the structure, as well as the potential for structural failure to
result in release of hazardous substances and injuries outside the structure.
Function of the structure and the economic or societal cost which would result from loss of service due to earthquake induced damage.
Historic significance of the structure and the effects of seismic upgrades on the cultural resource.
The site-specific seismic hazard.
The relative cost of achieving upgrades to various criteria. [7]
Because of the vast variety of existing structures, the development of general rules of real use is difcult and to a large extent each
structure must be approached as a strengthening problem on its own merits. Some of the factors which need consideration are as follows:
(1) The form of the structure and non-structure, and the need for change, e.g. to create symmetry.
(2) The materials used in the existing construction.
(3) The permissible visual and functional effect of the strengthening.
(4) The desired further design life.
(5) The desired seismic resistance.
(6) The acceptable damage to the existing fabric in the design event.
(7) The parts requiring strengthening and the problems of access thereto, e.g. piles.
(8) The degree to which ductile failure modes are required. (Signicant ductility is not reliably achievable at reasonable cost in many
older constructions, particularly of masonry, or may imply heavy damage to the existing fabric.)
(9) The extent to which other components are to be upgraded as well as the strength, e.g. architectural features and building services.
(10) Continuance of normal function during the strengthening works.
(11) Costs.
Depending upon the above factors, signicant seismic resistance can be obtained for most structures for only a small fraction (530%) of
their replacement cost. [4]

1.2. Formulation of the problem.

Inverted pendulum SDOF system with fixed base linear equation of motion:
utot t
mu t cu t ku t mu g t
ug t u t
u t 2u t 2u t u g t
k
c
,
m
2m
m [t] mass of the SDOF system

c [t/s] inherent damping coefficient of the structure
k [kN/m] linear elastic stiffness of the structure
u [m] relative displacement of the mass
utot [m] total displacement of the mass
ug [m] displacement of the ground (imposed on the structure)
[rad/s] natural frequency of the SDOF system
damping ratio of the structure
k, c
ug t

We can affect this equation eighter:

changing mass (thus changing frequency);
changing damping;
changing stiffness (thus changing frequency);
changing the influence of the external
excitation.
utot t
ug t u t
k, c
In terms of forces:
FI(t) + FC(t) + FK(t) = Fg(t)
FI inertia force
FC damping force
FK elastic (shear) force
Fg external force
ug t

If the behaviour of the system is nonlinear, FK(t) = ku(t) is no longer valid because
the stiffness k is changing in the time. Then we must replace FK(t) with elastoplastic
force F(t) and the equation of motion is
mu t cu t F t mu g t
u t 2u t eff2 u t ug t
where secant (effective) stiffness keff is used instead of the elastic stiffness k and
eff
keff
m
, Teff 2
m
keff
keff
u

When the external excitation is stochastic (as in earthquake), the structure

response u(t) is expressed through the Duhamel integral
u t
( t )
u
e
sin D (t ) d
g
0
where D 1 2 is the damped frequency of the SDOF system.
Once again we can see that we can affect the response changing the natural
frequency, the damping and/or the effect of the ground motion accelerations
(i.e. the external force) on the structure.

Energy formulation
If we integrate all members of the equation of motion over the time
interval of the ground motion, we will obtain the following energy
balance equation for the linear case of response:
EK + ED + ES = EI
where
EK kinetic energy obtained from the inertia force in the mass;
ED damping energy of the structure obtain from the inherent damping;
ES elastic strain energy obtained from the elastic (shear) force;
EI input energy imposed on the structure by the external excitation.

If the response of the structure is nonlinear then

ES = ESe + Esp
where
ESe elastic strain energy (recoverable),
ESp inelastic (plastic) strain energy (irrecoverable => dissipated, hysteretic)
If we add new (control) element in the structure to change the energy

balance then we should add in the left side of the equation EC energy
dissipated by the control device. Then
EK + ED + ESe + ESp + EC = EI
The control device energy can be elastic (viscous) or elastoplastic (hysteretic)
depending on the type and characteristics of the device.
10

Design strategies to improve the performance of the

structure during an earthquake event in terms of energies:
Decrease the amount of the kinetic energy, EK

Increase the amount of inherent damping energy, ED
Increase the amount of elastic strain energy, ESe
Increase the amount of hysteretic strain energy, ESp
Increase the amount of energy dissipated by the control
device, EC
Decrease the amount of energy input to the structure, EI
11

12
1.3. Demand, Capacity, Ductility, Performance.

Basic design inequality which have to be satisfied in all code
provisions:
Ed Rd (Demand Capacity)
This inequality shall be satisfied in terms of: strength (forcebased); stiffness (displacement-based).
When this inequality is not satisfied in some of its aspects
considering existing building, then it is necessary to retrofit the
structure to allow for its satisfaction.
Demand is a representation of the earthquake ground motion.
Capacity is a representation of the structure's ability to resist the
seismic demand.

13
The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation

capacities of the individual components of the structure.
For a given structure and ground motion, the displacement demand is an
estimate of the maximum expected response of the building during the
ground motion.
V
Teq T
collapse
Vy
k
1
uy
keff
eq 2
ductility demand
umax = uy
Chopra and Kowalsky
umax displacement demand

14
Once a capacity curve and demand displacement are defined, a performance

check can be done. A performance check verifies that structural and
nonstructural components are not damaged beyond the acceptable limits of
the performance objective for the forces and displacements implied by the
displacement demand. [6]
The ability of a member to undergo large deformations beyond the elastic
range is termed ductility. The same property in a building that allows it to
absorb earthquake-induced damage and yet remain stable may be considered,
in a conceptual sense, similar to ductility. Ductile structures may deform
excessively under load, but they remain by and large intact. This characteristic
prevents total structural collapse and provides protection to occupants of
buildings. Therefore, providing capacity for displacement beyond the
elastic range without collapse is a primary goal. [12]
The aim of retrotting is to modify the seismic demands, Ed, and/or the
capacities, Rd, so that all relevant elements of the retrotted building fulll the
general verication inequality, Ed Rd, at all performance levels (Limit
States) under the corresponding seismic action. [8]

1.4. Performance objectives, Performance levels and levels of

Earthquake ground motion.
Performance Objective = Desired Performance Level for a Given
Earthquake Ground Motion [6]
Seismic performance of the structure is described by designating the

maximum allowable damage state (performance level) for an identified
seismic hazard (earthquake ground motion).
A performance level describes a limiting damage condition which may be
considered satisfactory for a given building and a given ground motion.
The limiting condition is described by the physical damage within the
building, the threat to life safety of the building's occupants created by the
damage, and the post-earthquake serviceability of the building.
Target performance levels for structural and nonstructural systems are
specified independently.
15

Performance Levels (Limit States) (EC8-1): Damage Limitation (DL),
Significant Damage (SD), Near Collapse (NC).
Performance Levels (Limit States) (ATC-40): Immediate Occupancy (IO),
Life Safety (LS), Structural Stability (SS).
There are 3 levels of earthquake ground motion considered based on the
probability of exceedance over a certain observation period: occasional,
rare and maximum (serviceability, design and maximum).
A seismic performance objective is defined by selecting a desired
building performance level for a given level of earthquake ground
motion. [6]
Attention: The performance level criteria are based on probabilistic
approach and cannot be considered guaranteed! The protection of life
rather than prevention and repairability of damage is the primary purpose
of the codes; the protection of life is thus reasonably provided for but not
with complete assurance. [12]
16

Operational Operational
Damage
Limitation
Significant
Damage
Limit States
according to EC8-1
Near
Collapse
Limit States
according to ATC-40
17

LS of Near Collapse (NC). The structure isheavily damaged, with low residual lateral strength
and stiffness, although vertical elements are still capable of sustaining vertical loads. Most nonstructural components havecollapsed. Large permanent drifts are present. The structure is near
collapse and would probably not survive another earthquake, even of moderate intensity.
LS of Significant Damage (SD). The structure is significantly damaged, with some residual
lateral strength and stiffness, and vertical elements are capable of sustaining vertical loads. Nonstructural components are damaged, although partitions and infills have not failed out-of-plane.
Moderate permanent drifts are present. The structure can sustain after-shocks of moderate intensity.
The structure is likely to be uneconomic to repair.
LS of Damage Limitation (DL). The structure is only lightly damaged, with structural
elements prevented from significant yielding and retaining their strength and stiffness properties.
Non-structural components, such as partitions and infills, may show distributed cracking, but the
damage could beeconomically repaired. Permanent drifts are negligible. The structure does not
need any repair measures.
NOTE: The definition of the Limit State of Collapse given in this Part 3 of Eurocode 8 is closer to
the actual collapse of the building than the one given in EN1998-1: 2004 and corresponds to the
fullest exploitation of the deformation capacity of the structural elements. The Limit State
associated with the no collapse requirement in EN1998-1: 2004 is roughly equivalent to the one
that is here defined as Limit State of Significant Damage. [18]
18

Differences between
EC8-1 and EC8-3:
Common
performance
objectives
EC8-1
EC8-3
DL
SD
NC
Collapse
~DL
----~SD
NC
At the Damage Limitation (DL) Limit State, structural elements, ductile

or brittle, should stay below yielding;
At the Limit State of Signicant Damage (SD), ductile elements should
not exceed certain damage-related deformations and brittle ones their
conservatively estimated strengths; and
At the Near Collapse (NC) Limit State, ductile elements should stay
below appropriately dened ultimate deformations and brittle ones below
their ultimate strengths.
19

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
DEVICES.
20

2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE

I. Initiate the process, select qualified professionals.
II. Basic Evaluation and Retrofit Strategy:
1. Establish performance objectives.
2. Review building conditions.
3. Formulate a retrofit strategy.
4. Begin the approval process.
5. Conduct detailed investigations.
III. Evaluation and Retrofit Concept:

6. Characterise seismic capacity.
7. Determine seismic demand.
8. Verify seismic performance.
IV. Final Design and Construction:
prepare construction documents,
monitor construction quality. [6]
a) Conceptual design:
(i) Selection of techniques and/or materials, as well as of the type and configuration of the
intervention.
(ii) Preliminary estimation of dimensions of additional structural parts.
(iii) Preliminary estimation of the modified stiffness of the retrofitted elements.
b) Analysis.
c) Verifications. Safety verifications shall be carried out in general, for both existing, modified
and new structural elements. [18]
21

[19]
22

23
2.1. Establish performance objectives: goals that the structure achieve a certain
level of performance for a specific level of seismic ground shaking hazard. [6]
There are 3 levels of seismic hazard based on the following primary criteria: site geology and soil
characteristics; site seismicity characteristics; site elastic response spectra:
Serviceability Earthquake (SE): Ground motion with a 50% chance of being exceeded in a 50-year
period.
Design Earthquake (DE): Ground motion with a 10% chance of being exceeded in a 50-year period.
Maximum Earthquake (ME): Maximum level of ground motion expected within the known
geologic framework due to a specified single event (median attenuation), or the ground motion with a
5% chance of being exceeded in a 50 year period. [6]
Typically there are established 2 performance objectives for 2 perf. levels and 2 types of hazard:
Performance Level LS for the Design Earthquake level of ground motion;
Performance Level SS for the Maximum Earthquake level of ground motion. [6]
NC: return period 2475 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 2% in 50 years;
SD: return period 475 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 10% in 50 years;
DL: return period 225 years, corresponding to a probability of exceedance of 20% in 50 years. [18]
The National Authorities decide whether all three Limit States shall be checked, or two of them, or
just one of them. [18]

24
2.2. Review building conditions: preliminary investigation of a building (visual

inspection, review of existing drawings and other documents, preliminary
calculations, considering the potential site hazards, eventual supplemental
detailed investigations). [6]
For the purpose of choosing the admissible type of analysis and the appropriate confidence factor
(CF) values, the following three knowledge levels are defined: [18]
KL1: Limited knowledge Confidence Factor CF1 = 1,35
KL2: Normal knowledge Confidence Factor CF2 = 1,20
KL3: Full knowledge Confidence Factor CF3 = 1,00
The factors determining the appropriate knowledge level (i.e. KL1, KL2 or KL3) are: geometry,
details, materials.
The basic scope here is the vulnerability assessment of the existing structure.
Since existing structures:
(i) reflect the state of knowledge at the time of their construction,
(ii) possibly contain hidden gross errors,
(iii) may have been submitted to previous earthquakes or other accidental actions with unknown effects,
structural evaluation and possible structural intervention are typically subjected to a different degree of uncertainty
(level of knowledge) than the design of new structures. Different sets of material and structural safety factors are
therefore required, as well as different analysis procedures, depending on the completeness and reliability of the
information available. [18]

25
Vulnerability Assessment
Seismic vulnerability assessments help to pinpoint expected earthquake failures and help determine if structural
retrofitting is necessary.
Three tiers of seismic vulnerability assessment are practiced for buildings, namely Rapid Visual Screening, Quick
Structural Evaluation, and Detailed Assessment. These assessments are performed in telescopic sequence; when
the building fails at one tier, it is subject to the next tier of assessment. [17]
Rapid Visual Screening consists of configuration-related checks based on the building layout and configuration
including load path, weak story, soft story, geometry, effective mass, torsion, and pounding.
Quick Structural Evaluation involves general strength related checks based on structural design aspects like
shear and axial stress checks of the vertical members resisting earthquake loads.
Detailed Assessment is a quantitative and rigorous evaluation of the vulnerability of the building. Detailed
Assessments include a detailed vulnerability assessment of the structural system that resists the earthquake loads,
as well as the non-structural elements (i.e., the contents, finishes and elements that do not resist earthquake loads).
The assessment of structural performance is the heart of the process to determine the level of risk represented by a
building, and in particular to determine whether or not it meets the requirements to perform satisfactorily in a
design earthquake. [4]
Assessment is a quantitative procedure for checking whether an existing undamaged or damaged building will
satisfy the required limit state appropriate to the seismic action under consideration.
On the basis of the conclusions of the assessment of the structure and/or the nature and extent of the damage,
decisions should be taken for the intervention. As in the design of new structures, optimal decisions are pursued,
taking into account social aspects, such as the disruption of use or occupancy during the intervention. [18]

Determination of Deficiencies (Vulnerability Assessment)
Coburn and Spence (2002) list of principal weaknesses in reinforced concrete buildings:
(a) Insufcient lateral load resistance, as a result of designing for too small a lateral load.
(b) Inadequate ductility caused by insufcient connement of longitudinal reinforcement, especially at beam
column or slab column junctions.
(c) A tendency to local overstressing due to complex and irregular geometry in plan and elevation.
(d) Interaction between structure and non-structural walls resulting in unintended torsional forces and stress
concentrations.
(e) Weak ground oor due to lack of shear walls.
(f) High exibility combined with insufcient spacing between buildings resulting in risk of neighbouring
structures pounding each other during shaking.
(g) Poor quality materials or work in the construction. Also:
(h) Changes in column construction at mid height up multi-storey build-ings. [4]
(i) Unrepaired damage from previous earthquakes. [4]
Evaluation of performance of the existing buildings (NZSEE, 2002) list of structural weaknesses: [4]
1. Plan Irregularity.
2. Vertical Irregularity.
3. Short Columns.
4. Pounding Potential.
5. Site Characteristics.
6. Other Factors (benefitial or detrimental).
26

Common deficiencies which can lead to poor earthquake performance: [7]
Incomplete Lateral Force Resisting System: open store fronts/house over garage, clerestory conditions,
expansion joint conditions, lack of foundation anchorage.
Lack of Structural Continuity and Inter-element deformations: inadequate anchorage of walls to diaphragms;
insufficient bearing at sliding connections; inadequate attachment of architectural elements, equipment and
utilities to the structure.
Excessive Lateral Flexibility: results in very large lateral displacements when subjected to ground shaking;
possibility to become unstable under large lateral deformation, as a result of P-delta effects.
Brittle elements: unreinforced masonry walls, non-ductile concrete frames, reinforced concrete and masonry
walls, shear failure of reinforced concrete columns and beams, shear failure of joints in moment resisting frames,
inadequate development of reinforcing steel, inadequate concrete confinement.
Inadequate diaphragms: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate flexural capacity, extreme flexibility, poor
connectivity to vertical elements of the lateral force resisting system, and lack of continuity.
Common Deficiencies: [12]
Buildings with irregular congurations, such as those with abrupt changes in stiffness, large oor openings,
very large oor heights, reentrant corners in plan, and soft stories.
Buildings with walls of unreinforced masonry, which tend to crack and crumble under severe ground motions.
Buildings with inadequate diaphragms lacking ties between walls and oors or roofs.
Buildings with nonductile concrete frames, in which shear failures at beamcolumn joints and column failures
are common.
Concrete buildings with insufcient lengths of bar anchorage and splices.
Concrete buildings with at-slab framing, which can be severely affected by large story drifts.
Buildings with open storefronts.
Buildings with clear-story conditions.
Buildings with elements that tend to fail during ground shaking: examples are unreinforced masonry parapets
and chimneys, and nonstructural building elements, which may fall, blocking exits and injuring people.
27

Deficiencies (weaknesses)
28

29

30

31

Deficiencies in Reinforced Concrete Buildings
Two main building types: concrete frame buildings (frames also function as the lateral force
resisting systems); concrete frame-wall buildings (walls provide all or part of the lateral force
resisting systems). In some instances, such as at stair and elevator cores, concrete walls may also
carry some local vertical gravity loads. [6]
I. Concrete Frame Systems

1. Typical Configuration Deficiencies:
1.1. Incomplete Load Path.
1.2. Vertical Irregularities.
1.3. Horizontal Irregularities.
1.4. Weak Column/Strong Beam.
2. Detailing Concerns:
Quantity, size, and spacing of column transverse reinforcement ties;
Column ties in exterior column/beam joints;
Location and length of column and beam main bar splices in critical regions;
Continuity of top and bottom beam bars through column/beam joints;
Use of bent longitudinal beam bars for shear reinforcement;
Anchorage of beam stirrups and column ties into the concrete core with 135 degree hooks;
Continuous bars at flat slab (or plate) joints with columns acting as a frame.
2.1. Beams.
2.2. Columns.
2.3. Beam/Column Joints.
2.4. Flat Slab/Column Frame Systems.
32

II. Concrete Frame-Wall Systems
1. Typical Deficiencies:
1.1. Vertical Discontinuity.
1.2. Weak Stories.
1.3. Perforated Walls and Pier/Spandrel Conditions.
1.4. Coupling Beams.
1.5. Shear Cracking and Diagonal Tension/Compression.
1.6. Sliding Shear.
1.7. Reinforcement Anchorage and Confinement.
1.8. Foundation Anchorage and Uplift.
33

Typiacl deficiencies of existing
diaphragms: insufcient strength or
stiffness; absence of chords and
collectors or proper connections to
them.
Cast-in-place concrete diaphragms:
common deciencies at diaphragm
openings or plan irregularities
include inadequate shear capacity,
inadequate chord capacity, and
exces-sive shear stresses. [12]
Damage
An earthquake can cause a building
to experience several types of
damage:
1. The entire building collapses.
2. Portions of the building collapse.
3. Components of the building fail
and fall.
4. Entry-exit routes are blocked,
preventing evacuation and rescue.
5. Pounding between two adjacent
structures. [12]
34

35
2.3. Formulate a strategy: develop a plan for the detailed evaluation and
possible retrofit. [6]
A retrofit strategy is a basic approach adopted to improve the probable seismic

performance of the building or otherwise reduce the existing risk to an
acceptable level. Both technical strategies and management strategies can be
employed to obtain seismic risk reduction. [6]
A retrofit system is the specific method used to achieve the selected strategy.
While the retrofit systems are closely tied to the strategies, it is not necessary to
select a specific system in order to evaluate the applicability of a given strategy.
However, it is necessary to select a specific system in order to complete a
design. [6]

Technical Retrofit Strategies:
1. System completion retrofit systems:

a) chords, collectors, and drags;
b) element connectivity;
c) anchorage and bracing of components.
2. System strengthening and stiffening
retrofit systems:
a) shear walls;
b) braced frames;
c) buttresses;
d) moment resisting frames;
e) diaphragm strengthening.
3. Enhancing deformation capacity
retrofit systems:
a) adding confinement;
b) column strengthening;
c) local stiffness reductions;
d) supplemental support.
4. Reducing earthquake demands

retrofit systems:
a) base isolation;
b) energy dissipation systems;
c) mass reduction.
Management Retrofit
Strategies:
1. Occupancy change.
2. Demolition.
3. Temporary retrofit.
4. Phased retrofit.
5. Retrofit during occupancy.
6. Retrofit of vacant building.
7. Exterior retrofit.
8. Interior retrofit.
36

Other categorizations and guidelines of retrofit strategies and systems
Generally speaking, the strengthening can be made adopting one of the following
approaches or strategies, or even combining them:
1. By reducing the seismic demands on members and the structure as a whole;
2. By increasing the member capacities. [8]
Each retrotting intervention is a special case, with more than one appropriate solutions. So, generalisation of
rules is neither possible nor advisable. With this in mind, there are some general (but not absolute) guidelines to
follow, depending on the outcome of the assessment of the as-built structure:
1. If there is general deciency in the building, retrotting Strategy no. 1 above is more cost-effective, as it can
reduce the seismic demands throughout.
2. If there are capacity deciencies in just a few scattered members, it is more cost-effective to focus on them and
upgrade their capacities with retrotting Strategy no. 2.
3. If the deciencies are concentrated in a single or few (weak) storeys, they may be due to a vertical
irregularity. Retrotting Strategy no. 2 is an option, to upgrade the capacities of the members of these storeys.
Retrotting Strategy no. 1 could be adopted instead, to remove the irregularity by adding strong and stiff new
elements from the ground to the weak storey(s) and beyond, or to strengthen and stiffen existing elements there to
overshadow the irregularity and suppress storey-sway mechanisms.
4. If the deciencies are concentrated at a single side of the building, they may be due to a torsional imbalance in
plan. It may be chosen to stiffen and strengthen existing elements on that side or add new ones there, to balance
the stiffness and strength (retrotting Strategy no. 1). Alternatively, the deformation capacity and the shear
strength of the members of the exible side may be upgraded, to accommodate the larger demands on them
(retrotting Strategy no. 2).
5. Two more: introducing vertical joints to split the building and joining parts by removing the joint. [8]
37

Retrotting Techniques for Concrete Members:
1 Repair of Damaged Members
2 Concrete Jacketing
3 Jackets of Externally Bonded Fibre Reinforced
Polymers (FRP)
4 Steel Jacketing [8]
38
Stiffening and Strengthening of the Structure as a

Whole:
1 Addition of New Concrete Walls
2 Addition of a New Bracing System in Steel [8]
The retrotting of a structure involves improving its performance in earthquakes through one or more of:
Increasing its strength and/or stiffness.
Increasing its ductility.
Reducing the input seismic loads.
This may be done through modications to one or more of: Columns; Beams; Bracings; Walls; Foundations;
Horizontal diaphragms; Joints between structural elements; Damping; Period of vibration. [4]
Strategies for improving strustural performance:
1. Local modification of Components.
2. Removal or lessening of irregularities and discontinuities.
3. Global structural strengthening and stiffening.
4. Seismic isolation.
5. Supplementary energy dissipation.

6. Removal of unnecessary seismic mass.
7. Widening seismic joints.
8. Linking buildings together across seismic joints.
9. Seismic emergency gravity supports. [5]
Modification of global response to improve structural performance: [13]

protecting part of the structure, assuring its elastic response;
shifting the main period of vibration to a convenient value to modify both acceleration and displacement demand;
increasing the global energy dissipation capacity of the structure, thus reducing the displacement demand;
regularizing the response, modifying the relative effective stiffness and strength of different parts of the structure.

Earthquake resistance in RC frame buildings can be enhanced either by:
(a) increasing their seismic capacity increasing stiffness, strength & ductility, and reducing irregularity this is
a conventional approach to seismic retrofitting which has been followed in the past few decades, or;
(b) reducing their seismic response increasing damping by means of energy dissipation devices, reducing mass,
or isolating the building from the ground.
Seismic capacity of existing buildings is typically enhanced by increasing strength or ductility of individual
existing structural members (e.g., jacketing existing beams and columns with steel, concrete or fiberwrap
overlays) or by introducing new structural members (e.g., shear walls). In any case, the purpose is to significantly
increase the ability of a building structure to resist earthquake effects.
The alternative approach is to reduce seismic forces in the structure either by installing special devices which can
increase damping in the structure (so-called seismic dampers), or isolate a building from the ground by means of
base isolation devices. These emerging technologies can be used to retrofit existing RC frame structures;
however, their high cost and the sophisticated expertise required to design and implement such projects represent
impediments for broader application at this time. [17]
39

Commonly, strengthening procedures should aim at one or more of the following objectives:
(i) Increasing the lateral strength in one or both directions, by reinforcement or by increasing wall areas or the
number of walls and columns.
(ii) Giving unity to the structure by pro-viding a proper connection between its resisting elements, in such a way
that inertia forces generated by the vibration of the building can be transmitted to the members that have the
ability to resist them. Typical im-portant aspects are the connections between roofs or floors and walls, between
intersecting walls and be-tween walls and foundations.
(iii) Eliminating features that are sources of weakness or that produce concen-trations of stresses in some
members. Asymmetrical plan distribution of resisting members, abrupt changes of stiffness from one floor to the
other, concentration of large masses, large openings in walls without a proper peripheral reinforcement are
exam-ples of defect of this kind.
(iv) Avoiding the possibility of brittle modes of failure by proper reinforcement and connection of resisting
members. Since its cost may go to as high as 50 to 60% of the cost of re-building, the justification of such
strengthening must be fully consid-ered.
All these methods are traditional. [10]
A rehabilitation objective may be achieved by implementing a variety of measures, including:

1. Local modication of decient components.
2. Removal or partial mitigation of existing irregularities.
3. Global stiffening.
4. Global strengthening.
5. Reduction of mass.
6. Seismic isolation.
7. Installation of supplemental energy dissipation devices. [12]
40

41
Technical criteria [18]

The selection of the type, technique, extent and urgency of the intervention shall be based on the structural
information collected during the assessment of the building. The following aspects should be taken into account:
a) All identified local gross errors should be appropriately remedied;
b) In case of highly irregular buildings (both in terms of stiffness and overstrength distributions), structural regularity
should be improved as much as possible, both in elevation and in plan;
c) The required characteristics of regularity and resistance can be achieved by either modification of the strength
and/or stiffness of an appropriate number of existing components, or by the introduction of new structural elements;
d) Increase in the local ductility supply should be effected where required;
e) The increase in strength after the intervention should not reduce the available global ductility.
Type of intervention [18]
An intervention may be selected from the following indicative types:
a) Local or overall modification of damaged or undamaged elements (repair, strengthening or full replacement),
considering the stiffness, strength and/or ductility of these elements;
b) Addition of new structural elements (e.g. bracings or infill walls; steel, timber or reinforced concrete belts in
masonry construction; etc);
c) Modification of the structural system (elimination of some structural joints; widening of joints; elimination of
vulnerable elements; modification into more regular and/or more ductile arrangements);
d) Addition of a new structural system to sustain some or all of the entire seismic action;
e) Possible transformation of existing non-structural elements into structural elements;
f) Introduction of passive protection devices through either dissipative bracing or base isolation;
g) Mass reduction;
h) Restriction or change of use of the building;
i) Partial demolition.
One or more types in combination may be selected. In all cases, the effect of structural modifications on the
foundation should be taken into account.

2.4. Begin the approval process: peer review process and other quality control
measures. [6]
2.5. Conduct detailed investigations: a general sense of expected building
performance should be developed before performing a detailed analysis.
Preliminary evaluation using simplified analysis is done. Preliminary evaluation
involves acquisition of building data, review of the seismic hazard,
identification of building attributes, limited analysis, and characterization of
potential seismic deficiencies. Based pn the whole information available,
conclusions and recommendations for the retrofit are made. [6]
2.6. Characterise seismic capacity: specify the force and displacement
characteristics of the structure. [6]
2.7. Determine seismic demand: demand depends on capacity through
inelastic deformations and hysteretic damping. [6]
2.8. Verify performance: acceptability criteria check on 2 levels: global
displacement and element deformations (each of them for 2 performance
levels). Choose the strategy. [6]
42

43
Methods of analysis: possible choices: [18]
Linear static
Linear dynamic
Non-linear static
Non-linear dynamic
applicable to buildings that are 'regular' in elevation,

with a period T1 < 2 s, and T1 < 4TC (corner period of
the spectrum) and satisfy 'uniform strength conditions'
as above
EC8 standard assessment method, applicable without
restrictions
applicable in all cases
Methods of analysis permitted for use: [18]

Modal response spectrum analysis (linear)
Lateral force analysis (linear)
Nonlinear static (pushover) analysis
Nonlinear time history dynamic analysis
q-factor approach
type
linear dynamic
linear static
nonlinear static
nonlinear dynamic
linear static

FEMA 356: Any of the following analysis procedures may be used in the rehabilitation
study and upgrade design: [12]
Linear static procedure (LSP). This procedure replaces the equivalent lateral force
procedure included in most seismic design codes. It incorporates techniques for
considering the nonlinear response of individual seismic elements. The distribution of
forces is similar to equivalent lateral force procedures for new buildings.
Linear dynamic procedure (LDP). In this method, the modeling and acceptance
criteria are similar to those of LSP. However, calculations are carried out using modal
spectra analysis or time history analysis using response spectra or time-history records
that are not modified to account for inelastic response for distribution of forces.
Nonlinear static procedure (NSP). This method is frequently referred to as a
pushover analysis. It has been in use for some time without specific guidance from
building codes and standards regarding modeling assumptions and acceptance criteria.
This is now alleviated to some extent because FEMA 356 sets forth specific procedures.
Nonlinear dynamic procedure (NDP). The modeling approaches and acceptance
criteria for this method are similar to those of NSP. It differs from NSP in that response
calculations are made using inelastic time history dynamic analysis to determine
distribution of forces and corresponding internal forces and system displacements. Peer
review by an independent engineer with experience in seismic design and nonlinear
procedures is recommended because this method requires assumptions that are not
included in FEMA 356.
44

45
Simplified nonlinear analysis procedures using pushover methods, such as the

capacity spectrum method and the displacement coefficient method, require
determination of three primary elements: capacity, demand (displacement) and
performance.
In order to determine compliance with a given performance level, a displacement
along the capacity curve must be determined that is consistent with the seismic
demand. [6]
Different force-based and displacement-based procedures for assessment are
proposed. The displacement-based approach appears to be the better of the two
methods, because displacements more directly reect damage than does forcebased analysis. [4]
For the verification of the structural elements a distinction is made between

ductile and brittle ones.
The ductile elements shall be verified by checking that demands do not exceed
the corresponding capacities in terms of deformations (except when using the
q-factor approach).
The brittle elements shall be verified by checking that demands do not exceed
the corresponding capacities in terms of strengths.

For the calculation of the capacities of ductile or brittle elements,
where these will be compared with demands for safety
verifications, mean value properties of the existing materials shall
be used as directly obtained from in-situ tests and from the
additional sources of information, appropriately divided by the
confidence factors, accounting for the level of knowledge attained.
Nominal properties shall be used for new or added materials.
Some of the existing structural elements may be designated as
secondary seismic and shall be verified with the same
compliance criteria as primary seismic ones, but using less
conservative estimates of their capacity than for the elements
considered as primary seismic. [18]
46

47
Deformations
Determination of the deformations expected in a structure, when subjected to the design earthquake, is the most
important task in seismic rehabilitation design. Given a ground motion criteria, and the desired performance level
for that ground motion, the real task of seismic retrofit becomes one of controlling structural deformations, in
response to that ground motion, to within acceptable levels.
There are three types of deformations that must be considered and controlled in a seismic retrot design. These are
global deformations, elemental deformations, and interstructural deformations. Although they are all interrelated, for
purposes of seismic upgrade it is convenient to consider each of these separately.
Global deformations are the only type explicitly controlled by the building codes and are typically considered by
reviewing interstory drift. The basic concern is that large interstory drifts can result in P- instabilities. Control of
interstory drift can also be used as a means of limiting damage to non-structural elements of a structure.
Elemental deformation is the amount of seismic distortion experienced by an individual element of a structure such
as a beam, column, shear wall, or diaphragm. Building codes have very few provisions that directly control these
deformations. They rely on ductility to ensure that individual elements will not fail at the global deformation levels
predicted for the structure. In existing structures with questionable ductility, it is therefore critical to evaluate the
deformation of each element and to ensure that expected damage to the element is acceptable.
Interstructural deformations are those that relate to the differential movement between elements of the structure.
Failures that result from lack of such control include failures of masonry walls that have not been anchored to
diaphragms and failures resulting from bearing connections slipping off beam seats. Building codes control these
deformations, which may cause separation of one element from another, by requiring interconnection of all portions
of structures. A similar technique should be considered in the retrot of an existing structure. [7], [12]

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
DEVICES.
48

3. METHODS FOR STRENGTHENING

Traditional methods for strengthening [5]
49

50

51

52
How Seismic Retrofit Affects Structural

Characteristics
Usually, a retrofit method influences one or
more structural characteristics. The effects of
some traditional retrofit methods are listed in
the following Table. [17]
Retrofit Method
Installing new RC
walls
Strengthening existing
masonry infills with
CFRPs
Jacketing
Results in the increase of

Strength
Stiffness
Ductility
YES
SIGNIFICANT
SIGNIFICANT
YES
SIGNIFICANT
VERY SMALL
YES
MODERATE
MODERATE

1. Reduction of Seismic Action Effects Through Retrotting
The most effective and common means for the reduction of seismic deformation demands is by increasing the global lateral stiffness.
Normally this brings about an increase in global lateral strength, which, however, should be seen as a by-product and not as the main
target of the retrotting. In order of decreasing effectiveness, global lateral stiffness may be increased by:
1. Adding a whole new lateral-load-resisting system to take almost the full seismic action. This system may consist of steel bracing,
new concrete walls, new moment frames, or combinations thereof. The new elements are normally placed at the perimeter, to
facilitate their foundation and to limit disruption of use of the building (under certain conditions, operation may continue during
retrotting). The new system can overshadow completely any irregularities in plan or elevation. Critical elements in this approach
are the foundation of the new lateral-load-resisting system and the connection to the existing system for the transfer of inertia forces.
2. Adding new elements (new concrete walls or steel bracing), to supplement the existing structural system. The new elements may
be used to advantage to balance a strongly asymmetric layout in plan, or to eliminate soft/weak storeys. If the contribution of the
added elements to lateral stiffness is large, this approach may be considered as a scaled-down version of approach 1.
3. Converting non-structural inll walls into structural elements, integrating them with the surrounding frame.
4. Concrete jacketing, mainly of columns. This is closer to retrotting for the pur-poses of increasing the capacities. Only when
practically all columns are jack-eted, it might also be considered as part of a strategy to reduce seismic demands.
5. Reduction of mass is another means of reducing deformation and displacement demands. The introduction of base isolation and
energy dissipation is also a means to reduce seismic deformation demands.
2. Upgrading of Member Capacities

The deformation capacity and shear strength of individual members may be significantly upgraded by FRP-wrapping, without
modifying at all their stiffness. Concrete jackets also improve deformation capacity and shear strength, but increase stiffness as well.
So, when applied to many elements they also reduce deformation demands, not only locally but also globally. Improvement of
certain details (e.g., of poor connections between the oor diaphragms and the lateral-load-resisting system or within diaphragms)
may also be considered to belong to this retrotting strategy. Unless very specic and substantial deciencies are identied in some
beams, upgrading of existing members may be limited to vertical elements, possibly including their joints with the beams.
3. Completeness of the Load Path

No matter which retrotting strategy and technique he/she chooses, the engineer should check carefully the retrotted structure for
continuity of the load path(s). Transfer of inertia forces from the masses to the (primary) elements of the lateral-load-resisting system
and from there to the foundation should be ensured. Note that inertia forces that may need to be transferred are proportional to peak
oor acceler-ations, which are increased by global strengthening and stiffening. [8]
53

54
Traditional methods for strengthening: [12]

1) Diaphragms
Cast-in-Place Concrete Diaphragms
Two alternatives may be effective in correcting the deciencies: either improve strength and ductility, or reduce demand. Providing
additional reinforcement and encasement may be an effective measure to strengthen or improve individual components. Increasing the
diaphragm thickness may also be effective, but the added weight may overload the footings and increase the seismic loads. Lowering
seismic demand by providing additional lateral-force-resisting elements, introducing additional damping, or base isolating the structure
may also be effective rehabilitation measures. Inadequate shear capacity of concrete diaphragms may be mitigated by reducing the shear
demand on the diaphragm by providing additional vertical lateral-force-resisting elements or by increasing the diaphragm capacity by
adding a concrete overlay. Adding supplemental vertical lateral-force-resisting elements will provide additional benets by reducing
demand on other elements that have deciencies. Increasing the chord capacity of existing concrete diaphragms can be realized by
adding new concrete or steel members or by improving the continuity of existing members.
The following measures may be effective in rehabilitating chord and collector elements: 1) Strengthening the connection between
diaphragms and chords and collectors; 2) Strengthening steel chords or collectors with steel plates attached directly to the slab with
embedded bolts or epoxy, and strengthening slab chord or collectors with added reinforcing bars; 3)Adding chord members.
Precast Concrete Diaphragms
Common deciencies of precast concrete diaphragms include inadequate shear capacity, inadequate chord capacity, and excessive shear
stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities. The most cost-effective approach is generally to reduce the diaphragm shear forces
through the addition of supplemental shear walls or braced frames. Inadequate chord capacity in a precast concrete deck can be
mitigated by adding new concrete or steel members, as discussed earlier for a cast-in-place concrete diaphragm. A new chord member
can be added above or below the precast concrete deck. Excessive stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities in precast
concrete diaphragms can also be mitigated by introducing drag struts, as described earlier for cast-in-place concrete diaphragms.
2) Concrete Shear Walls

The problems that are most difcult to x are those caused by the irregular conguration of a building (e.g., abrupt changes in stiffness,
soft stories, large oor openings, and reentrant oor corners). These cases may require the addition of vertical or horizontal rigid
structural elements, as well as strengthening of existing foundations or addition of new ones. There are several approaches to the
reinforcement of existing concrete shear walls: 1. Increasing Wall Thickness; 2. Increasing Shear Strength of Wall; 3. Inlling Between
Columns; 4. Addition of Boundary Elements; 5. Addition of Connement Jackets; 6. Repair of Cracked Coupling Beams; 7. Adding New
Walls; 8. Precast Concrete Shear Walls: Enhancement of connections between adjacent or intersecting precast wall panels;
Enhancement of connections between precast wall panels and foundations.

55
3) Inlling of Moment Frames

In many cases, the existing concrete or steel skeleton is stiffened by lling in the space between the beams and columns with masonry
or cast-in-place concrete. These inll walls can be a cost-effective method of increasing the lateral strength and rigidity of the building.
Rehabilitation measures commonly used for concrete frames with masonry inlls may also be effective in rehabilitating concrete
frames with concrete inlls. Additionally, application of shotcrete to the face of an existing wall to increase the thickness and shear
strength may be effective. For this purpose, the face of the existing wall should be roughened, a mat of reinforcing steel doweled into
the existing structure, and shotcreate applied to the desired thickness.
4) Reinforced Concrete Moment Frames

Most problems in concrete frames involve bar splices and failures of beamcolumn joints that lack connement and in which
reinforcement is stopped prematurely. Methods available for strengthening traditional concrete frames include encasing the beam
column joints in steel or high-strength ber jackets. One such design uses jackets consisting of four U-shaped corrugated-metal parts,
two around the beam and two around the column. The column jackets are bolted to the end of the beam, the pieces are welded together,
and the space between the jackets and the frame is lled with grout. Frame joints damaged during earthquakes can be repaired with
epoxy injection, and badly fractured concrete can be removed and replaced. To minimize shrinkage, the replacement concrete should be
made with shrinkage-compensating (type K) cement, or should utilize a shrinkage-reducing admixture. Frame members that have been
pushed out of alignment during an earthquake should be jacked back into the proper position before repair. Damaged columns can also
be strengthened with ber-reinforced plastic wraps or other methods of exterior concrete connement. Another structural issue that
requires consideration is the transfer of load from the oor diaphragms to the frames and walls. This may require new drag struts. These
elements can be added by attaching new concrete or structural steel sections to the underside of existing oors. They are typically
placed against cleaned and roughened concrete surfaces and anchored to the oors and to frames by drilled-in dowels or through-bolts.
Another method of seismic rehabilitation is to jacket existing beams, columns, or joints with new reinforced concrete, steel, or berwrap overlays. Post-tensioning existing beams, columns, or joints using external post-tensioned reinforcement is an effective strategy of
seismic rehabilitation. Post-tensioned reinforcement should be unbounded within a distance equal twice the effective depth from
sections where inelastic action is expected. Anchors should be located away from regions where inelastic action is anticipated.

56
5) Open Storefront
The deciency in a building with an open storefront is the lack of a vertical line of resistance along one or two sides of a building. This
results in a lateral system that is excessively soft at one end of the building, causing signicant torsional response and potential
instability. The most effective method of correcting this deciency is to install a new stiff vertical element in the line of the open-front
side or sides. If the open-front appearance is desired, the steel frames may be located directly behind the storefront windows. Shear
walls may also be used to provide adequate strength. In both cases collectors are required to adequately distribute the loads from the
diaphragm into the vertical lateral-load-resisting element. Adequate anchorage of vertical elements into the foundation is also required
to resist overturning forces. Steel moment frames instead of brace frames can also be utilized to provide adequate strength, provided that
inelastic deformations of the frame under severe seismic loads are carefully considered to ensure that displacements are controlled.
6) Clerestory
A clerestory, typically designed to produce an open airy feeling, can result in signicant discontinuity in a horizontal diaphragm. A
common method of correcting the diaphragm discontinuity is to add a horizontal steel truss. Steel members can be designed to transfer
diaphragm shears while minimizing the visual obstruction of the clerestory. An alternate approach is to reduce the demands on the
diaphragm through the addition of new vertical lateral-force-resisting elements such as shear walls or braced frames.
7) Deep Foundations
The following rehabilitation measures may be considered for deep foundations:
1. Providing additional piles or piers to increase the load bearing capacity of the existing foundations.
2. Increasing the effective depth of a pile cap by adding concrete and reinforcement to its top. This method is effective in increasing its
shear and moment capacity, provided the interface is designed to transfer loads between the existing and new materials.
3. Improving the soil adjacent to an existing pile cap by injection-grouting.
4. Increasing the passive pressure bearing area of a pile cap by addition of new reinforced concrete extensions.
5. Changing the building system to reduce the demands on the existing elements by adding new lateral-load-resisting elements.
6. Adding batter piles or piers to the existing pile or pier foundation to increase resistance to lateral loads. It should be noted that batter
piles have performed poorly in recent earthquakes when liqueable soils were present. This is especially important to consider near
wharf structures and in areas with a high water table.
7. Increasing tension tie capacity from a pile or pier to the superstructure.

57
8) Shallow Foundations
The following rehabilitation measures may be considered for shallow foundations:
1. Enlarging the existing footing to resist the design loads. Care must be taken to provide adequate shear and moment transfer capacity
across the joint between the existing footing and the additions.
2. Underpinning the existing footing, removing of unsuitable soil underneath and replacing it with concrete, soil cement, or another
suitable material. Underpinning should be staged in small increments to prevent endangering the stability of the structure. This
technique may be used to enlarge an existing footing or to extend it to a more competent soil stratum.
3. Providing tension hold-downs to resist uplift. Tension ties consisting of soil and rock anchors with or without prestress may be drilled
and grouted into competent soils and anchored in the existing footing. Piles or drilled piers may also be effective in providing tension
hold-downs for existing footings.
4. Increasing the effective depth of the existing footing by placing new concrete to increase shear and moment capacity. The new
concrete must be adequately doweled or otherwise connected so that it is integral with the existing footing. New horizontal
reinforcement should be provided, if required, to resist increased moments.
5. Increasing the effective depth of a concrete mat foundation with a reinforced concrete overlay. This method involves placing an
integral topping slab over the existing mat to increase shear and moment capacity.
6. Providing pile supports for concrete footings or mat foundations. Adding new piles may be effective in providing support for existing
concrete footing or mat foundations, provided the pile locations and spacing are designed to avoid overstressing the existing
foundations.
7. Changing the building structural characteristics to reduce the demand on the existing elements. This may be accomplished by
removing mass or height from the building or adding other elements such as energy dissipation devices to reduce the load transfer at the
base. New shear walls or braces may be provided to reduce the demand on foundations.
8. Adding new grade beams to tie existing footings together when soil conditions are poor. This method is useful for providing xity to
column bases, and to distribute lateral loads between individual footings, pile caps, or foundation walls.
9. Grouting techniques to improve existing soil.
Traditional methods of seismic retrofitting fall essentially into two categories, one based on the classical principles of structural design
which requires an increase of strength and stiffness, and the other based on mass reduction. Thus the first one tends to satisfy the
design inequality by an increase of the capacity while the second one achieves the same result by a reduction of the demand. Since
seismic design is different from ordinary design, both techniques may turn out to be quite ineffective. [3]

58
Common upgrade methods: [7]

1) Incomplete Lateral Force Resisting System:
a) Open Store-front: install a new stiff vertical element in the line of the open front side shear wall, steel moment resisting frame, steel
braced frame
b) Clerestory: addition of a horizontal steel truss; addition of new vertical lateral force resisting elements
c) Expansion joints: (1) installing vertical lateral load resisting elements along both sides of the joint; (2) modifications to the connection
such that horizontal shear can be transferred across the joint, but not axial forces; and (3) elimination the joint.
d) Lack of Foundation Anchorage: providing wall to anchors; adding plywood sheating on the inside of the cripple wall.
2) Lack of Structural Continuity and Inter-element Deformation:

a) Inadequate wall-to-diaphragm anchorage; install a diaphragm collector; install out-of-plane tension connections at the perimeter wall
and continuity ties across the diaphragm.
b) Insufficient Bearing at Sliding Connections 4 methods: enlarge the beam bearing area; stiffen the lateral systems on one or both sides
of the connection; elimination of the sliding connection; provide a redundant vertical support under the beam.
3) Excessive Flexibility:
Introducing elements to increase stiffness.
4) Brittle Structural Systems:

a) Nonductile concrete frames: (1) reducing the drift demands by adding supplemental resisting elements, such as shear walls, braced
frames or additional moment frames; (2) increasing the available ductility of the elements such as increasing confinement of reinforcing
steel; or (3) changing the system to a shear wall system by infilling the concrete frames with reinforced concrete.
b) RC and masonry walls: Brittle reinforced concrete and masonry wall buildings can be upgraded by installing elements to control
inelastic deformations. This can be accomplished by increasing the wall strength and stiffness through: (1) placement of reinforcing steel
and shotcrete on the inside or outside of existing walls; (2) infilling window or door openings; or (3) by reducing the demands on existing
walls by providing new supplemental walls.

59
5) Inadequate Diaphragms:
Common deficiencies: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate flexural capacity, extreme flexibility, poor connectivity to vertical elements
of the lateral force resisting system, and lack of continuity.
a) Concrete diaphragms: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate chord capacity and excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or
plan irregularities.
Inadequate shear capacity: providing supplemental vertical lateral force resisting elements or increasing the diaphragm capacity by
adding a concrete overlayment.
Increasing the chord capacity of existing concrete diaphragms can be accomplished by adding new concrete or steel members or by
improving the continuity of existing members.
Excessive shear stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities can be mitigated by distributing the forces in the diaphragm by
means of reinforced concrete drag struts cast beneath the slab and made integral through the use of drilled and grouted dowels.
Alternately, if the opening can be eliminated, the stress concentration can be removed by infilling the opening. Excessive local
diaphragm stresses at a reentrant corner can also be reduced through the introduction of drag struts.
b) Precast Concrete Diaphragms: inadequate shear capacity, inadequate chord capacity and excessive shear stresses at diaphragm
openings or plan irregularities.
Inadequate shear capacity: addition of supplemental shear walls or braced frames.
Inadequate chord capacity on a precast concrete deck can be mitigated in a similar fashion as discussed earlier for a cast-in-place
concrete diaphragm. A new chord member can be added above or below the precast concrete deck.
Excessive stresses at diaphragm openings or plan irregularities in precast concrete diaphragms can also be mitigated in a similar manner
as described earlier for cast-in-place concrete diaphragms.
Methods for upgrading RC elements: [18]

Concrete jacketing
Concrete jackets are applied to columns and walls for all or some
of the following purposes: increasing the flexural and/or shear
strength, increasing the deformation capacity, increasing the
bearing capacity, improving the strength of deficient lap-splices.
Steel jacketing
Steel jackets are mainly applied to columns for the purpose of:
increasing shear strength and improving the strength of deficient
lap-splices. They may also be considered to increase ductility
through confinement.
FRP plating and wrapping

The main uses of externally bonded FRP (fibre-reinforced
polymers) in seismic retrofitting of existing reinforced concrete
elements are as follows: enhancement of the shear capacity of
columns and walls, by applying externally bonded FRP with the
fibers in the hoop direction, enhancement of the available
ductility at member ends, through added confinement in the form
of FRP jackets, with the fibres oriented along the perimeter,
prevention of lap splice failure, through increased lap
confinement again with the fibers along the perimeter.

Innovative methods for strengthening

systems for structural control
1. Passive Control:
1.1. Base Isolation (+ Stories Isolation) Systems:
1.1.1. Elastomeric Bearings:
1.1.1.1. Low-Damping Natural or Synthetic Rubber Bearings.
1.1.1.2. High-Damping Natural Rubber Bearings.
1.1.1.3. Lead-Rubber Bearings (Low-Damping Natural Rubber with Lead
Core).
1.1.2. Sliding Bearings.
1.1.2.1. Flat Sliding Bearings.
1.1.2.2. Spherical Sliding Bearings (Friction Pendulum, Double and Triple FP).
1.1.2.3. Others.
60

1.2. Passive Energy Dissipation Systems:
1.2.1. Velocity-dependent (Viscous) Systems:

1.2.1.1. Visco-Elastic Fluid Dampers and Non-Linear Viscous Fluid Dampers.
1.2.1.2. Visco-Elastic Solid Dampers.
1.2.1.3. Other Dampers: Fluid Spring Dampers, Viscous Damping Walls, etc.
1.2.2. Displacement-dependent (Hysteretic) Systems:
1.2.2.1. Friction Dampers: Pall Friction Device (X-Brace), Sumitomo FD,
Slotted-Bolted FD, Energy Dissipating Restraint (EDR), Tekton FD, Wire
Rope, Damptech FD, Wall FD, etc.
1.2.2.2. Metallic Yielding Dampers: Steel Plate Dampers (Added Damping
and Stiffness, ADAS) X-shaped, Triangular-shaped (TADAS), U-shaped,
Torsional Energy Absorbers, U-shaped Strips, Bell-shaped Dampers,
Honeycomb Damping System (HDS), Buckling-Restrained Braces (BRB,
Unbonded Braces), etc.
1.2.2.3. Other Displacement-dependent Systems: Shape-memory Alloys
(SMA), Lead Joint Dampers, Lead Extrusion Dampers (LED), etc.
61

1.2.3. Other Systems:
1.2.3.1. Dynamic Vibration Absorbers: Tuned Mass Dampers (TMD), Tuned
Liquid Dampers (TLD), Tuned Rolled Dampers (TRD), Tuned Liquid
Column Dampers (TLCD).
1.2.3.2. Expanded Metal Panels, Shock Transmitters (Rigid Connection
Devices RCD), Buffers, etc.
2. Semi-Active Control: Systems Based on Piezoelectric materials,

Electrorheological materials, Magnetorheological materials, etc.; AVD, VD,
etc.
3. Active Control: Active Tendon; AMD, ATMD, HMD; Active bracing
systems; Active mass dampers; Variable stiffness or damping systems [9],
etc.
4. Hybrid Control: Rocking Walls, Composite Isolation, Dissipative
Coupling, etc.
62

The primary goal of structural control is to provide the necessary strength,
ductility or energy dissipation capacity to save lives by preventing collapse.
A secondary goal is for structures to be able to withstand whatever hazard is
present and still function with minimal repair. Although the inclusion of
these types of devices add up-front building costs, the protection of occupants
and reduction of lost production time can more than offset the initial
investment.
The major fields of structural control are passive, active, hybrid and semiactive control (Housner et al., 1997).
The main innovative methods of seismic retrofitting may be grouped into the following
classes:
Stiffness reduction
Ductility increase
Damage controlled structures
Composite materials
Any suitable combination of the above methods
Active control. [3]
63

[22]
64

[16]
65

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
DEVICES.
66

4. PASSIVE ENERGY DISSIPATION DEVICES

The principal function of a passive energy dissipation system
is to reduce the inelastic energy dissipation demand on the
framing system of a structure (Constantinou and Symans,
1993; Whittaker et al., 1993). The result is reduced damage to
the framing system.
Passive control devices require no external power. They use

the relative deformation between the attachment points of
the device to the structure to dissipate energy. (Whittaker and
Aiken 1993).
67

Design Objectives.
General. Passive control systems can be used to achieve different design objectives
or performance goals ranging from a life-safety standard to a higher standard that
would provide damage control and post-earthquake functionality. The energy
dissipation units used in passive control systems are generally simple devices that
exhibit stable and predictable inelastic behavior when subjected to repeated cycles of
seismic loading. Nevertheless, there is nothing inherent in these devices that
guarantees better building performance. The addition of energy dissipation devices
will only improve the seismic performance of a building if the devices have been
carefully integrated into the seismic design of the structural system, taking into
consideration the dynamic characteristics of the building, the dissipators, and the soil
at the site.
Performance Objectives. Passive energy systems can be used to achieve building
performance goals ranging from a life-safety standard to a higher standard that
would provide damage control and post-earthquake functionality. The life-safety
standard is currently reflected in the minimum design lateral-force requirements of
conventional building codes. Damage control and post-earthquake functionality
reflect higher performance goals that would provide additional protection from
structural and nonstructural damage and loss of function. The discussion below
compares how these various performance objectives can be met using either
conventional design or passive control systems.
68

Damping Device: A flexible structural element of the damping system that dissipates
energy due to relative motion of each end of the device. Damping devices include all
pins, bolts, gusset plates, brace extensions, and other components required to connect
damping devices to other elements of the structure. Damping devices may be classified
as either displacement-dependent or velocitydependent, or a combination thereof, and
may be configured to act in either a linear or nonlinear manner. [FEMA 274]
Damping System: The collection of structural
elements that includes all individual damping
devices, all structural elements or bracing
required to transfer forces from damping
devices to the base of the structure, and all
structural elements required to transfer forces
from damping devices to the seismic-forceresisting system. [FEMA 274]
Damping devices must be designed for maximum
considered earthquake displacements, velocities, and
forces. Likewise, prototype damper units must be fully
tested to demonstrate adequacy for maximum considered
earthquake loads and to establish design properties (such
as effective damping).
69

Definition of damping device and

damping system
SDOF Systems with damping devices
70

Velocity-dependent (Viscous) Systems

Visco-Elastic Fluid Dampers
Non-Linear Viscous Fluid Dampers
71

Atlante FVD
Data required for the design:

Service axial load
Service movement
Preload force
Maximum force to be transmitted
Maximum seismic movement
72

73

Fluid Viscous Dampers: Force P Velocity u relationship

Linear FVD:
Nonlinear FVD:
P t Cu
P t C u sgn u
where C damping coefficient, u relative velocity, damping

exponential constant (for usual seismic applications between 0.2 and 1.0)
= 1 => linear FVD
74

Analytical models
Viscous dashpot
Kelvin model
Maxwell model
Wiechert model
75

76
Frequency dependency of the stiffness and damping in Maxwell model

Force Displacement relationship
77

Force Velocity relationship
78

Actual hysteretic behaviour of fluid damper
79

Energy dissipated per cycle for fluid viscous damper
, depends on
80

Typical configurations of damping devices and bracings
Chevron brace
Toggle brace-damper system
Diagonal bracing
81

Effectiveness of the different
damper placements:
The relative displacement
developed in the damper:
uD = f u
where u drift, f amplification
factor for the displacement
The damping ratio is obtained
from:
Cf 2 gT
4 W
where W weight of the structure
82

83

84

85

Dampers location
86


Visco-Elastic Solid Dampers
87

(two layers of an acrylic

copolymer (3M))
Instalation detail (Aiken 1990)
Santa Clara Country Building damper
88

Linear models of viscoelastic devices: (a) Kelvin model and corresponding forcedeformation response, (b) damper-brace assembly model
89

Viscous fluid
Elastic solid
Visco-elastic
90

91

Actual hysteretic behaviour of viscoelastic damper
92

Optimal distribution of total damping in different stories for 40% response

reduction: (a) normed floor accelerations, (b) base shear.
93

Comparison of controlled and uncontrolled responses quantities:

(a) floor accelerations corresponding to the design of optimum normed floor
accelerations,
(b) shear forces corresponding to the design of optimum base shear.
94

95


Fluid Spring Dampers, Viscous Damping Walls, etc.
96

P t P0 Ku Cu
where P0 preload force, K stiffness, C
damping coefficient and damping
exponential constant ( = 0.15)
Inner plate
Viscous fluid
Outer plate
Upper floor
Lower floor
97

Visco-plastic device (Ibrahim, 2005)
98

Displacement-dependent (Hysteretic) Systems

Friction Dampers
Pall Friction Device
99

When the brace in tension forces the damper to slip, the damper mechanism forces the
other brace to shorten and thus avoid buckling. In this manner, the other brace is
immediately ready to slip the damper on reversal of cycle.
10
0

10
1

102

Sumitomo Friction Damper
Modeling:
103

104

Actual hysteretic loops of Sumitomo Friction Damper
105

Slotted-bolted Friction Damper
106

Fitzgerald, 1989
107

Energy Dissipating Restraint (EDR)
108

109

Tekton Friction Damper
110

Friction Connection Brace
111

Friction System Constantinou and Reinhorn (1991)
112

Other friction devices
113

Idealized hysteretic
behavior of friction
dampers:
(a) friction device on rigid
bracing,
(b) friction device mounted
on flexible support.
114

Comparison of maximum responses quantities for distributions of damper

parameters obtained by different approaches
115

Comparison of uncontrolled and controlled responses for the San Fernando

acceleration record, (a) top floor displacement, (b) 1st story drift.
116

117

Displacement-dependent (Hysteretic) Systems

Metallic Yielding Dampers
Steel Plate Dampers
(Added Damping and Stiffness System ADAS)
118

X-shaped, Triangular-shaped, U-shaped ADAS devices
119

120

121

122

123

(a) Typical configuration, (b) bracing and yielding element parameters,

(c) stiffness properties of device-bracing assembly.
124

125

126

Comparison of maximum response quantities along the building height for distributions of
damper parameters obtained according to different performance indices.
127

128
Other metallic yielding devices
Yielding steel bracing system (Tyler 1985)

Cantilever steel plate dampers
129

Lead Extrusion Damper, Lead Joint Damper
130

131
Buckling Restraint Braces (BRB, Unbonded Brace Dampers)

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

Conclusions:
1) The energy dissipation is confined primarily in the devices;
2) Other structural elements remain essentially elastic;
3) The devices must be placed where sufficiently large relative
displacements are expected under earthquake motion (e.g.,
interstory drift).
Attention:
1) Lateral force imposed on the structure is increased;
2) Bending moment and shear in the columns connected to the
braces are decreased, but axial force is increased => adding of
foundation or local strengthening may be necessary! [24]
142

The Concept of Equivalent Viscous Damping
143

144

145
Teq T
Vy
eq
keff
k0
1
umax= uy
A. Chopra and M. Kowalsky
keff secant stiffness of the inelastic system
- DUCTILITY DEMAND
u
uy
2 1

146
Idea of Wilfred Iwan:

Two structures same amount of dissipated energy
GIVEN INELASTIC STRUCTURE
EQUIVALENT ELASTIC STRUCTURE
5% DAMPING RATIO
DAMPING RATIO GREATER THAN 5%

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.
DEVICES.
159

160
5. ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATIONS
Methods for analysis

FEMA 356 procedures:
Linear static procedure (LSP). This procedure replaces the equivalent
lateral force procedure included in most seismic design codes. It incorporates
techniques for considering the nonlinear response of individual seismic
elements. The distribution of forces is similar to equivalent lateral force
procedures for new buildings.
Linear dynamic procedure (LDP). In this method, the modeling and

acceptance criteria are similar to those of LSP. However, calculations are
carried out using modal spectra analysis or time history analysis using
response spectra or time-history records that are not modified to account for
inelastic response for distribution of forces.

161
FEMA 356 procedures (continued):

Nonlinear static procedure (NSP). This method is frequently referred to as
a pushover analysis. It has been in use for some time without specific
guidance from building codes and standards regarding modeling assumptions
and acceptance criteria. This is now alleviated to some extent because FEMA
356 sets forth specific procedures. Available nonlinear static methods:
Capacity Spectrum Method (CSM), Displacement Coefficient Method
(DCM), Secant Method (Priestley), N2 Method (Fajfar), etc.
Nonlinear dynamic procedure (NDP). The modeling approaches and
acceptance criteria for this method are similar to those of NSP. It differs from
NSP in that response calculations are made using inelastic time history
dynamic analysis to determine distribution of forces and corresponding
internal forces and system displacements. Peer review by an independent
engineer with experience in seismic design and nonlinear procedures is
recommended because this method requires assumptions that are not
included in FEMA 356.

162
EC8 proposes several methods to analyse the response of a structure

subjected to an earthquake. The choice of method depends on the structure
and on the objectives of the analysis. [22]
The standard method used in design is the modal response using a design
spectrum. This is a linear method in which the inelastic behaviour is
considered in the definition of the design spectrum, through the use of
a behaviour factor q, accounting for the ductility and overstrength of the
structure. This method is applicable to all types of buildings.
The lateral force method is a simplified version of the modal response

method and is a static analysis which can only be employed for regular
structures which respond essentially in one single mode of vibration.
Similarly to the equivalent force, F, applied to the mass m of the simple
cantilever, it is possible to define in multi-storey buildings a set of storey
forces Fi, which are applied at each storey level and which induce the same
deformed shape as the earthquake.

163
EC8 methods (continued):

The Pushover analysis is a nonlinear static analysis carried out
under constant gravity loads and monotonically increasing horizontal
loads. It is applied essentially:
to verify or revise the overstrength ratio values u/1;
to estimate the expected plastic mechanisms and the distribution of
damage;
to assess the structural performance of existing or retrofitted buildings.
Non-linear time-history analysis is a dynamic analysis obtained through

direct numerical integration of the differential equations of motion.
The earthquake action is represented by accelerograms (minimum 3).
This type of analysis is often used for research and code background
studies.

164
Evaluation of Capacity using nonlinear static analysis (Pushover)

Step 1: Create a computer model of the structure. In order to obtain the more
realistic seismic behaviour of the structure, all their components should be
modelled based on their real behaviour. Nonlinearities in material and in
geometry should be taken into account.
Step 2: Apply lateral story shear force patterns tothe structure. The gravity load
should be imposed as well.
Step 3: Create the analysis with the maximum desired top displacement.
Step 4: Carry out the analysis until the desired top displacement is reached or
the structure is unstable. The relationship between base shear and top
displacement is recorded after each step of increasing displacement.

165

166
Conversion from the Capacity Curve of a multi degree of freedom

(MDOF) structure to the Capacity Spectrum of an equivalent
single degree of freedom (SDOF) structure (using CSM)

167
Evaluation of Displacement Demand from the Elastic Response

Spectra in ADRS format using Damping Correction
Step 1: Conversion of the elastic response spectra Se and SDe to ADRS format.
Step 2: Estimation of damping and reduction of the 5% damped Response
Spectrum.
Step 3: Construction of the Reduced Demand Spectra in ADRS format.

0 eq
0 5%
eq depends on ductility demand
168

169
[34]

170
Evaluation of Performance (Finding the Performance Point)

Effects of Retrofitting on the Structural Performance

Strengthening
171

Stiffening
172

Deformation Enhancement (Ductility Increase)
173

174
Adding Energy Dissipation Devices (EDD)

Family of reduced demand
spectra depending on max displ.
d for system without EDD and
d for system with EDD
Performance point
with EDDs
Initial performance
point

Verifications
EC8-3:
4.6 Summary of criteria for

analysis and safety verifications
(1)P Table 4.3 summarises:
The values of the material
properties to be adopted in
evaluating both the demand
and capacities of the elements for
all types of analysis.
The criteria that shall be
followed for the safety
verification of both ductile and
brittle elements for all types of
analysis.
175

176
Safety verifications shall be carried out in general, for both existing, modified and new structural elements.
For existing materials, mean values from in-situ tests and any additional sources of information shall be
used in the safety verification, modified by the confidence factor CF. However, for new or added materials
nominal properties shall be used, without modification by the confidence factor CF.
In case the structural system, comprising both existing and new structural elements, can be made to fulfill
the requirements of EN1998-1: 2004, the verifications may be carried out in accordance with the provisions
therein. [18]
Justification of the selected intervention type

In all cases, the documents relating to retrofit design shall include the justification of the type of intervention
selected and the description of its expected effect on the structural response. This justification should be made
available to the owner. [18]

Example Study [20]
177

178

179

180

181

182

183
REFERENCES
[1] Symans, M. D., F. A. Charney, A. S. Whittaker, M. C. Constantinou, C. A. Kircher,
M. W. Johnson and R. J. McNamara. Energy Dissipation Systems for Seismic
Applications: Current Practice and Recent Developments. Journal of Structural
Engineering ASCE, January 2008, pp. 3-21.
[2] CECW-EG Engineer Manual 1110-2-2002. Evaluation and Repair of Concrete
Structures. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Department of the Army, Washington, DC
20314-1000, 30 June 1995.
[3] Oliveto, G. and M. Marletta. Seismic retrofitting of reinforced concrete buildings
using traditional and innovative techniques. ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology,
Paper No. 454, Vol. 42, No. 2-3, June-September 2005, pp. 21-46.
[4] Dowrick, D. J. Earthquake Risk Reduction. Chapter 13. Retrofitting. 2003 John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd ISBN: 0-471-49688-X (HB), pp. 467-487.
[5] Assessment and Improvement of the Structural Performance of Buildings in
Earthquake. Initial Evaluation, Detailed Assessment, Improvement Measures.
Recommendations of a NZSEE Study Group on Earthquake Risk Buildings. Study
Group Draft, December 2005.
[6] ATC-40. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings. Volume 1. Applied
Technology Council, 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 550, Redwood City, California
94065, November 1996.

184
REFERENCES
[7] Hamburger, R. O. and C. A. Cole. Seismic Upgrading of Existing Structures.
Chapter 12 of Seismic Design Handbook. pp. 523-680.
[8] Fardis, M. N. Seismic Design, Assessment and Retrofitting of Concrete Buildings.
Chapter 6. Seismic Assessment and Retrofitting of Existing Concrete Buildings.
Springer, 2009, pp. 595-693.
[9] Dowrick, D. J. Earthquake Risk Reduction. Chapter 8. The Design and Construction
Process Choice of Form and Materials. 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd ISBN: 0-47149688-X (HB), pp. 247-286.
[10] IAEE Manual, Chapter 9. Repair, Restoration and Strengthening of Buildings.
[11] Ellingwood, B. R. et al. Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive
Collapse in Buildings. National Institute of Standards and Technology, August 2009, pp.
55-80.
[12] Taranath, B. S. Wind and Earthquake Resistant Buildings. Structural Analysis and
Design. Marcel Dekker, New York, 2005.
[13] Priestley, M. J. N., G. N. Calvi and M. J. Kowalski. Displacement-Based Seismic
Design of Structures. IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy, 2007.
[14] Soong, T. T. and G. F. Dargush. Passive Energy Dissipation and Active Control.
Chapter 27 of Structural Engineering Handbook. Ed. Chen Wai-Fah. Boca Raton: CRC
Press LLC, 1999.

185
REFERENCES
[15] FEMA 274 Seismic Rehabilitation Commentary. Chapter 9. Seismic Isolation and
Energy Dissipation (Systematic Rehabilitation). Pp. 9-1 9-60.
[16] Unknown Author. Chapter 8. Seismic Isolation and Energy Dissipation Systems.
Pp. 8-1 8-42.
[17] At Risk: The Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frame Buildings with
Masonry Infill Walls. A Tutorial Developed by a committee of the World Housing
Encyclopedia a project of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute and the
International Association for Earthquake Engineering. November 2006.
[18] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance Part 3: Assessment
and retrofitting of buildings. 2005 CEN.
[19] Holmes, W. T. Risk Assessment and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. 12WCEE,
2000, art. 2826.
[20] Viti, S., G. P. Cimellaro and A. M. Reinhorn. Retrofit of a hospital through strength
reduction and enhanced damping. Smart Structures and Systems, Vol. 2, No. 4 (2006),
pp. 339-355.
[21] Huang, H. Theory of Control II: Passive Control of Structures. Department of
Bridge Engineering, Tongji University.
[22] Soong, T. T. and B. F. Spencer Jr. Supplemental energy dissipation: state-of-the-art
and state-of-the-practice. Engineering Structures 24 (2002), pp. 243259.

186
REFERENCES
[23] Kaliske, M. and A. Mandara. Innovative Seismic Protection Technologies and Case
Studies. COST C26 Urban Habitat Constructions under Catastrophic Events. WG2
Earthquake Resistance. Naples, 16-18 September 2010.
[24] Serino, G. Energy Dissipation Design. University of Naples Federico II School
of Engineering, Department of Structural Engineering.
[25] Reinhorn, A. M. and C. Li. Retrofit of R/C Structures with Supplemental Damping.
[26] Atlante Anti-seismic Devices. ARC Series Product Data Sheet.
[27] Dung, P. N. Seismically retrofitting reinforced concrete moment resisting frames
by using expanded metal panels. Doctors Thesis, Facult des Sciences Appliques,
Universite de Liege, 2011.
[28] Elgamal, A. and M. Fraser. Seismic Isolation & Energy Dissipation Systems.
[29] Moreschi, L. M. Seismic Design of Energy Dissipation Systems for Optimal
Structural Performance. Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia, July, 2000.
[30] FEMA 451B Handouts. FEMA 451B Notes.
[31] Tabatabaei, A. S. Energy Dissipation Systems for Seismic Resistance.
IranCivilCenter.com The Construction Industry Portal of Iran. 2003-2006.
[32] Anti-seismic devices. FIP Industriale Brochure.
[33] Bonev, Z. Lecture Notes on PKSV. UACEG, Sofia, Bulgaria.

187
REFERENCES
[34] NEHRP 2003 Chapter 15 Commentary. Structures with Damping Systems. Pp 309316.
[35] Ramirez, O. M. et al. Evaluation of Simplified Methods of Analysis of Yielding
Structures with Damping Systems. 2002, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Earthquake Spectra, Volume 18, No. 3, August 2002, pp. 501530.
[36] Chesca, A.-B., R. Vacareanu and R. Ghica. Strategy for Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings Using Fluid Viscous Dampers. Case Study. First European Conference on
Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland, 3-8 September 2006.
Paper Number: 406.
[37] Passive and Active Structural Vibration Control in Civil Engineering. Ed. T.T.
Soong and M.C. Constantinou. CISM, Udine, 1994.
[38] Cheng, F. Y., H. Jiang and K. Lou. Smart Structures. Innovative Systems for
Seismic Response Control. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, 2008.
[39] Ibrahim, Y. E.-H. A New Visco-Plastic Device for Seismic Protection of Structures.
Dissertation submitted tothe faculty ofthe Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, 02-07-2005, Blacksburg, VA.
[40] Lpez, W. A. and R. Sabelli. Seismic Design of Buckling-Restrained Braced
Frames. Steel Tips, Structural Steel Education Council, Techinical Education and
Product Service, July 2004.

THANK YOU!
188

Blagov D. Seismic Strengthening of RC Structures Using PED Devices

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Blagov D. Seismic Strengthening of RC Structures Using PED Devices

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Weimar, August 5th16th

Seismic strengthening of R/C structures

Dilyan Blagov, Assist. Prof.

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Seismic strengthening (also known as seismic retrofitting) represents a

Why retrofitting is needed?

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

1.2. Formulation of the problem.

m [t] mass of the SDOF system

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

We can affect this equation eighter:

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

When the external excitation is stochastic (as in earthquake), the structure

where D 1 2 is the damped frequency of the SDOF system.

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

If the response of the structure is nonlinear then

If we add new (control) element in the structure to change the energy

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Design strategies to improve the performance of the

Decrease the amount of the kinetic energy, EK

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

1.3. Demand, Capacity, Ductility, Performance.

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

The overall capacity of a structure depends on the strength and deformation

Chopra and Kowalsky

umax displacement demand

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Once a capacity curve and demand displacement are defined, a performance

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

1.4. Performance objectives, Performance levels and levels of

Seismic performance of the structure is described by designating the

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

At the Damage Limitation (DL) Limit State, structural elements, ductile

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

2. SEISMIC RETROFIT PROCEDURE

III. Evaluation and Retrofit Concept:

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

2.2. Review building conditions: preliminary investigation of a building (visual

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

I. Concrete Frame Systems

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

A retrofit strategy is a basic approach adopted to improve the probable seismic

Bauhaus Summer School 2013

1. System completion retrofit systems: