This study compared displacement demands obtained from linear and nonlinear
time history analyses of 2D and 3D models to investigate how 2D models reflect
3-D models. Estimates of 2D and 3D linear and 2D nonlinear models were also
compared to that of 3D nonlinear model to visualize success of linear and 2D
nonlinear models in seismic displacement estimates of RC buildings. A total of
288 dynamic analyses were performed with 12 different records taking into
account two principal directions of 10-, 15- and 20-storey buildings. Outcomes
of the current study imply that 2D representation of 3D models needs careful
modelling. Buildings are usually designed according to related earthquake code
considering both gravity and seismic loads. Then, an interior frame is used for
2D modelling. The periods of 3D and 2D models need to be closer for proper
representation. Another observation is that the 2D linear elastic models do not
properly represent the 3D nonlinear models. Thus, it is recommended to use 3D
models when linear modelling is preferred. Since 2D nonlinear models represent
reasonably well their 3D nonlinear ones, 2D modelling can be preferred for
buildings with no irregularity due to extensive labor and time required for 3D
nonlinear models.
displacement demands 2D and 3D frame models linear and nonlinear analyses time history analysis ground motions with forward directivity effects
Konular | Mühendislik |
---|---|
Bölüm | Makaleler |
Yazarlar | |
Yayımlanma Tarihi | 27 Aralık 2017 |
Kabul Tarihi | 13 Aralık 2017 |
Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2017 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4 |