ANALYSIS OF THE COLLISION EFFECT FOR ADJACENT STRUCTURES IN THE TIME-FREQUENCY DOMAIN

Year 2022, Volume: 23 Issue: 3, 195 - 206, 27.09.2022

Ömer Fatih Sak Kemal Beyen

https://doi.org/10.18038/estubtda.975913

Abstract

Many reinforced concrete structures are built side by side in our cities. There are very few applications of earthquake joints in adjacent apartment buildings, most of them were constructed completely adjacent. Adjoining buildings or any property should be protected from damage or collapse during construction, restoration and demolition work. In case of the static condition, protection must be supplied for foundations, walls and roofs. We have already observed many building collapses in Turkey with a great number of life lost. For the constructed buildings, there is a need to understand the structural system of an existing building to manage risk. In case of earthquakes like dynamic loading, earthquake joints are essential. The Turkish Building Earthquake Code (TBEC) 2018 requires calculations of vertical joints for some types of structures. Earthquake joints should be left in the gap calculated for structures of some height. It is thought that this gap will prevent the structures from colliding. However, it has been the subject of research how the performance of the building will change when it is produced adjacent or when floor offsets cause collisions at earthquake joints. In this study, structures of different heights were analyzed in the time domain for specific earthquake motions. Collision situations of more than two buildings are discussed by making a street model. Structural performances of discrete and adjacent structures obtained from nonlinear analysis were compared. The motion parameters obtained from the structures were analyzed in the time-frequency domain by wavelet and Hilbert transforms. To determine the effects of earthquake joints, condition assessment and damage detection studies were carried out and the sufficiency of seismic joints was discussed.

Keywords

Attached RC Structures, Collision Effect, Time-Frequency Analysis, Vertical Seismic Joints, Wavelet Analysis, Hilbert Transforms.

References

• [1] Anagnostopoulos SA. Pounding of buildings in series during earthquakes. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1988; 16: 443-456.
• [2] Davis RO. Pounding of buildings modelled by an impact oscillator. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1992; 21: 253–274.
• [3] Maison B, Kasai K. Dynamics of pounding when two building collide. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1992; 21: 771-786.
• [4] Filiatrault A, Wagner P, Cherry S. Analytical prediction of experimental building pounding. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1995; 24: 1131–1154.
• [5] Papadrakakis M, Mouzakis H. Earthquake simulator testing of pounding between adjacent buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1995; 24: 811–834.
• [6] Papadrakakis M, Apostolopoulou C, Zacharopoulos A, Bitzarakis S. Three-dimensional simulation of structural pounding during earthquakes. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 1996; 122: 423–431.
• [7] Stavroulakis GE, Abdalla KM. Contact between adjacent structures. Journal of Structural Engineering 1991; 117: 2838–2850.
• [8] Filiatrault A, Cervantes M. Separation between buildings to avoid pounding during earthquakes. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1995; 22: 164–179.
• [9] Lin JH. Separation distance to avoid seismic pounding of adjacent buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1997; 26: 395–403.
• [10] Jeng V, Kasai K. Spectral relative motion of two structures due to seismic travel waves. Journal of Structural Engineering 1996; 122: 1128–1135.
• [11] Hao H, Zhang SR. Spatial ground motion effect on relative displacement of adjacent building structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1999; 28: 333–349.
• [12] Pantelides CP, Ma X. Linear and non-linear pounding of structural systems. Computers and Structures 1998; 66: 79–92.
• [13] Chau KT, Wei XX. Pounding of structures modelled as non-linear impacts of two oscillators. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000; 30: 633–651.
• [14] Rahman AM, Carr AJ, Moss PJ. Seismic pounding of a case of adjacent multiplestorey buildings of differing total heights considering soil flexibility effects. Bull NZ Soc Earthquake Eng 2001; 34: 140–159.
• [15] Muthukumar S. A contact element approach with hysteresis damping for the analysis and design of pounding in bridges. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy in civil and environmental engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia, 2003.
• [16] Gong L, Hao H. Analysis of coupled lateral-torsional-pounding responses of one storey asymmetric adjacent structures subjected to bi-directional ground motions Part I: Uniform ground motion input. Advances in Structural Engineering 2005; 8(5): 463-479.
• [17] Wang LX, Chau KT. Chaotic Seismic Torsional Pounding between two Single story Asymmetric Towers. The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 2008.
• [18] Jankowski R. Non-linear FEM analysis of earthquake-induced pounding between the main building and the stairway tower of the Olive View Hospital. Engineering Structures 2009; 31: 1851-1864.
• [19] Pant R, Wijeyewickrema AC. Seismic pounding between reinforced concrete buildings: A study using recently proposed contact element models. Proc. of Fourteenth European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Ohird, Republic of Macedonia, 2010.
• [20] Çetinkaya G. Deprem Yer Hareketine Maruz Komşu Binalarda Çarpışma Analizi (Pounding analysis of adjacent buildings to earthquake ground motion). Master’s thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Türkiye. 2011.
• [21] Mahmoud S, Elhamed AA, Jankowski R. Earthquake-induced pounding between equal height multi-storey buildings considering soil-structure interaction. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2013; 11: 1021-1048.
• [22] Mate N U, Bakre SV, Jaiswal OR. Comparative Study of Impact Simulation Models for Linear Elastic Structures in Seismic Pounding. The 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 2012.
• [23] Akköse M, Sunca F. Seismic performance evaluation of a train station building considering earthquake-induced pounding effects. Symposium on Innovate Technologies in Engineering and Science, Antalya, Türkiye. 2016.
• [24] Beyen K. Titreşim verisiyle güncellenmiş sonlu eleman modeliyle hasar simulasyonu (Damage simulation by finite element updating using vibration characteristics). 10.17341/gazimmfd.322165, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 2017; 32(2): 403-415.
• [25] Kamal M, Inel M. Effects of pounding on displacement demands in mid-rise RC buildings. Pamukkale University Journal of Engineering Sciences 2021; 27(6): 703-710.
• [26] Cayci BT, Akpinar M. Seismic pounding effects on typical building structures considering soil-structure interaction. Structures 2021; 34: 1858-1871.
• [27] Jankowski R. Non-Linear Viscoelastic Modeling of Earthquake-Induced Structural Pounding. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2005; 34: 595-611.
• [28] Design and Construction Rules of Reinforced Concrete Structures, Turkish Standard (TS) 500, Turkish Standards Institute, Ankara, 2000.
• [29] Türkiye Building Earthquake Code (TBEC) 2018, Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency, Ankara, Türkiye, 2018.
• [30] Beyen K. Dalgacık spektrumlarının yapı sağlığı durum değerlendirme çalışmalarında önemi (The importance of wavelet spectra in structural health assessment studies), 3. International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, İzmir, Türkiye, 2015.
• [31] Sak ÖF, Beyen K. Hasar tanılamasında istatistiki değerlendirme yöntemlerinin zaman-frekans ortamında irdelenmesi (Study on statistical evaluation in time-frequency domain for damage identification). 5. International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Ankara, Türkiye, 2019.
• [32] Beyen K. Damage identification analyses of a historic masonry structure in T-F domain. Teknik Dergi 2021; 32(2): 10577-10610.