Accounting for building torsional behaviour during strong earthquake shaki…

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In major seismic events, a number of plan-asymmetric buildings which experienced element failure or structural collapse had twisted significantly about their vertical axis during the earthquake shaking. This twist, known as “building torsion”, results in greater demands on one side of a structure than on the other side. The Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission’s reports describe the response of a number of buildings in the February 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. As a result of the catastrophic collapse of one multi-storey building with significant torsional irregularity, and significant torsional effects also in other buildings, the Royal Commission recommended that further studies be undertaken to develop improved simple and effective guides to consider torsional effects in buildings which respond inelastically during earthquake shaking. Separately from this, as building owners, the government, and other stakeholders, are planning for possible earthquake scenarios, they need good estimates of the likely performance of both new and existing buildings. These estimates, often made using performance based earthquake engineering considerations and loss estimation techniques, inform decision making. Since all buildings may experience torsion to some extent, and torsional effects can influence demands on building structural and non-structural elements, it is crucial that demand estimates consider torsion. Building seismic response considering torsion can be evaluated with nonlinear time history analysis. However, such analysis involves significant computational effort, expertise and cost. Therefore, from an engineers’ point of view, simpler analysis methods, with reasonable accuracy, are beneficial. The consideration of torsion in simple analysis methods has been investigated by many researchers. However, many studies are theoretical without direct relevance to structural design/assessment. Some existing methods also have limited applicability, or they are difficult to use in routine design office practice. In addition, there has been no consensus about which method is best. As a result, there is a notable lack of recommendations in current building design codes for torsion of buildings that respond inelastically. There is a need for building torsion to be considered in yielding structures, and for simple guidance to be developed and adopted into building design standards. This study aims to undertaken to address this need for plan-asymmetric structures which are regular over their height. Time history analyses are first conducted to quantify the effects of building plan irregularity, that lead to torsional response, on the seismic response of building structures. Effects of some key structural and ground motion characteristics (e.g. hysteretic model, ground motion duration, etc.) are considered. Mass eccentricity is found to result in rather smaller torsional response compared to stiffness/strength eccentricity. Mass rotational inertia generally decreases the torsional response; however, the trend is not clearly defined for torsionally restrained systems (i.e. large λty). Systems with EPP and bilinear models have close displacements and systems with Takeda, SINA, and flag-shaped models yield almost the same displacements. Damping has no specific effect on the torsional response for the single-storey systems with the unidirectional eccentricity and excitation. Displacements of the single-storey systems subject to long duration ground motion records are smaller than those for short duration records. A method to consider torsional response of ductile building structures under earthquake shaking is then developed based on structural dynamics for a wide range of structural systems and configurations, including those with low and high torsional restraint. The method is then simplified for use in engineering practice. A novel method is also proposed to simply account for the effects of strength eccentricity on response of highly inelastic systems. A comparison of the accuracy of some existing methods (including code-base equivalent static method and model response spectrum analysis method), and the proposed method, is conducted for single-storey structures. It is shown that the proposed method generally provides better accuracy over a wide range of parameters. In general, the equivalent static method is not adequate in capturing the torsional effects and the elastic modal response spectrum analysis method is generally adequate for some common parameters. Record-to-record variation in maximum displacement demand on the structures with different degrees of torsional response is considered in a simple way. Bidirectional torsional response is then considered. Bidirectional eccentricity and excitation has varying effects on the torsional response; however, it generally increases the weak and strong edges displacements. The proposed method is then generalized to consider the bidirectional torsion due to bidirectional stiffness/strength eccentricity and bidirectional seismic excitation. The method is shown to predict displacements conservatively; however, the conservatism decreases slightly for cases with bidirectional excitation compared to those subject to unidirectional excitation. In is shown that the roof displacement of multi-storey structures with torsional response can be predicted by considering the first mode of vibration. The method is then further generalized to estimate torsional effects on multi-storey structure displacement demands. The proposed procedure is tested multi-storey structures and shown to predict the displacements with a good accuracy and conservatively. For buildings which twist in plan during earthquake shaking, the effect of P-Δλ action is evaluated and recommendations for design are made. P-Δλ has more significant effects on systems with small post- yield stiffness. Therefore, system stability coefficient is shown not to be the best indicator of the importance of P-Δλ and it is recommended to use post-yield stiffness of system computed with allowance for P-Δλ effects. For systems with torsional response, the global system stability coefficient and post- yield stiffness ration do not reflect the significance of P-Δλ effects properly. Therefore, for torsional systems individual seismic force resisting systems should be considered. Accuracy of MRSA is investigated and it is found that the MRSA is not always conservative for estimating the centre of mass and strong edge displacements as well as displacements of ductile systems with strength eccentricity larger than stiffness eccentricity. Some modifications are proposed to get the MRSA yields a conservative estimation of displacement demands for all cases.

Question Time for 9 December 2010

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Questions to Ministers 1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy moving away from government spending, housing speculation and borrowing, and towards savings and exporting? 2. Hon PETE HODGSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to question No 11 yesterday that Sammy Wong did not accompany Pansy Wong on any ministerial trips to China? 3. HONE HARAWIRA to the Associate Minister of Health: What is the rationale behind the move to prohibit the display of tobacco products for sale in retail outlets? 4. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Has he received any feedback or information in support of lowering the adult blood alcohol concentration to 0.05 that has given him any doubt or cause for reflection this year about his decision to retain the level at 0.08? 5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcement has he made about the direction of social housing in New Zealand? 6. BRENDON BURNS to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is the Government's response package, announced last week to assist Canterbury businesses affected by the 4 September earthquake, universally supported by the Government and its supporters? 7. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Alternative Welfare Working Group that welfare reform should be focused on "the relentless pursuit of well-being"? 8. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will the mining of lignite form part of his New Zealand Energy Strategy? 9. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Programme for International Assessment (PISA), which looked at New Zealand students' achievement in reading, maths and scientific literacy? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Transport: How many emails has he received on the decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency to start charging CarJam and similar web-based information services for accessing the Agency's stored basic motor vehicle information? 11. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent steps has the Government taken to control bovine TB? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Which Minister is to be responsible for the enforcement of the Education Act 1989 in relation to limited attendance early childhood centres following the passing of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2)? Questions to Members 1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Student Loan Scheme Bill? 2. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submitters on the Student Loan Scheme Bill have requested to be heard in person? 3. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill? 4. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill have requested to be heard in person? 5. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill? 6. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill have requested to be heard in person? 7. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill? 8. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submitters on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill have requested to be heard in person? 9. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill? 10. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submitters on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill have requested to be heard in person? 11. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: Has the Finance and Expenditure Committee conducted the 2009/10 financial review of the Office of the Retirement Commissioner? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill? 13. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submitters on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 14. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 15. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill? 16. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 17. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Legal Services Bill? 18. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Legal Services Bill have requested to be heard in person? 19. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill? 20. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill have requested to be heard in person? 21. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Food Bill? 22. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Food Bill have requested to be heard in person? 23. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill? 24. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?