Seismic Design of Structures Using Base Isolation Qualitative Guidelines
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PBS8-235338 Project No. 86-246 Paul C. Rizzo Associates, Inc. March 1988 CONSULTANTS Report Seismic Design of National Science Foundation Structures Using Washington, D.C. Base Isolation Qualitative Guidelines IS RESPONSE NO ACCEPTABLE? YES EVALUATE (IS OUCnLlTY D[MAND f--------'--<: >----------1 COSTS ACCEPTABLE?) REFlNE ISOLAnON SYSTEM OR S1RUCruRE DESIGN REPRODUCED BY ns EYALUA IT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE COSTS NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE SPRMFIELD. VA 22161 NO REPORT DOCUMENTATION 11. Jt£PO'"' MO. PAGE I NSF/ENG-88003 4. TItle aftCl SuMItIe L lIle....tt o.te Seismic Design of Structures Using Base Isolation, Qualitative March 1988 Guidelines Co 1.~&) L ~....i.. o..."iZat-. lItwpt. ..... N.R. Vaidya; E. Bazan-Zurita 86-246 Paul C. Rizzo Associates, Inc. 10 Duff Road, Suite 300 11. e-ntdfC) or GrantC(o) ..... Pittsburgh, PA 15235 (C) (ei) CE58615 240 U. 5ponw.on"C o..al\lZat~ H..... • ftC! Adcl..... Directorate for Engineering (ENG) National Science Foundation 1800 G Street~ N.W. Washington, DC 20550 J-----------------.---- -----_.-._-- 'Trie pv.y··pc(se C('f trlE' ·~"'·e~sc(,~...··t is tCi ',,"'e'l/ie\ll~ 'erie {:(ve'("iEtl1 c·c,·t$c:·e~d; c"f base :~ 50<,.:( 1 (:;('C ~i:. Cf')"'( ia',"jt::i to r.:, f,j ~~~'V ~~ :;, <:tp r:"C:'rit::'~:q! f:rt U iiit], f':"j~" i ,~; e,;,.,:i ii~ of' c:q'" d f,~~'t. fll.'·~"'·!n i 'rl '5. '(~Ej 't;. h f.~! applicability of b •••-isolated systems. The repc~~ dev.lops qualita~ive guideliY,es fc(~' selec~iYss base isolatio~ as a d'esigys =.. ·t·~""~,<"tf~~fYn B~~sec~ ()'rt t1-,2 base isc'le::{'cic"(f d~:3-:ig·t~ pr'filc}sCtj:d"f'y' 2~"'"fd C'\:itse rr i r:;t Cf'r'"' i f..?S, ~~ q '<..,{i:!{ 1 i t {::~ t :i ,v~, C"i"" i t. e'('" i f::r, t"C('f' St~ 1. \:?,{::·t j. "(f9 b~::{ S~::;- i 5(,) 1 i~i:. i en's is P'~'Cf~(c~sed'f c:(t'~d t.rn:.:: ·S.rp,'pcnr··'C,i:-t'(ft iE.Stles y.~hic.:·h H1~_ts:.t: be c'cnI'1side'['",erJ i'("/ -t;t-fis selectiOYr proces5 8Y'e discussedn Various base isc,latio~, schernes ar'e b~~'iefly surnrtlarized ay:d their a~;'ticipa'ted pe~r'forrn~~lce describedn The purpose here is ~cc chal~ac~erizE the various base isolatiCllrl coY,cep·ts, ideYt't:l'fy ·thei)~ ~~'ele"/~t'l't p~Y'~r('e't~~~$1 ~~:d di~~c\~~S bV":ie'fr:ty 'ht1~~l~~, j::<'l'"rt i c' i ;:7JEt't. ed ).:.(E'y·,·f C(lr'r()i:~'j~rC'€! i 'ff 'fl"~£1t'.; 'c\t'::i 'f~q t. tMtF,~: f2i:-'f fE!C::t !:::. Ct"f ei:~·r""·t. h q 'M\i:!\ ~.e.r:~'!~.:- tt 17. Doc:u...-t Malyo&i& a. t>-el"\yrlors Structural design Isolation Structural engineering Earthquake resistant structures Earthquakes Damage .. ~11WI",/~T_ Earthquake engineering Base isolation n ...... of ~.... IJj6 NTIS ... ItIWft'UCt'.... _ It_ SEISHIC DESIGN OF STRUCTURES USING BASE ISOLATION QUALITATIVE GUIDELINES BY: NISHIKANT R. VAIDYA ENRIQUE BAZAN-ZURITA A REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION PROJECT No. 86-246 HARCH 1988 PAUL C. RIZZO ASSOCIATES, INC. 10 DUFF ROAD, SUITE 300 PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA 15235 PHONE: (412) 242-7900 TELEX: 882225 RIZZO ASSOC Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF TABLES iii LIST OF FIGURES lV 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 2.0 BASE ISOLATION DESIGN PHILOSOPHY 2-1 2.1 CONCEPT 2-1 2.2 SEISMIC RESPONSE 2-2 2.3 SEISMIC PERFORMANCE 2-4 2.4 DISCUSSION 2-5 3.0 SURVEY OF USE 3-1 3.1 HEINRICH PESTALOZZI SCHOOL, SKOPJE, YUGOSLAVIA 3-2 3.2 OFFICE BUILDINGS, ATHENS, GREECE 3-2 3.3 THE WILLIAM CLAYTON BUILDING, WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND 3-3 3.4 KOEBERG NUCLEAR PLANT, SOUTH AFRICA 3-4 3.5 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, LAMBESC, MARSEILLES, FRANCE 3-5 3.6 RADIOACTIVE WASTE BUILDING, TORILLON, FRANCE 3-6 3.7 CRUAS-MEYSSE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, FRANCE 3-6 3.8 FOOTHILL COMMUNITIES LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER 3-7 (FCLJC BUILDING) 3.9 SEBASTOPOL, USSR 3-9 3.10 SCHOOL BUILDING, MEXICO D.F., MEXICO 3-9 3.11 OILES TECHNICAL CENTER, JAPAN 3-9 3.12 THE CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 3-10 3.13 UNION HOUSE BUILDING, NEW ZEALAND 3-11 4.0 ISSUES IN THE SELECTION OF BASE ISOLATION 4-1 4.1 SEISMIC HAZARD 4-3 4.2 SITE CONDITIONS 4-5 4.3 SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION 4-6 4.4 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS 4-6 4.5 INELASTIC BEHAVIOR 4-8 4.6 QUALITATIVE SELECTION PROCEDURE 4-10 5.0 BEARING SYSTEMS 5-1 5.1 ELASTOMER SYSTEMS 5-4 5.1.1 Plain Elastomer Bearing 5-4 5.1.2 Reinforced Elastomer Bearing 5-5 ib TABLE OF CONTEHTS (Continued) 5.1.3 Reinforced Elastomer Bearings/High Damping Rubber 5-6 5.1.4 Reinforced Elastomer Bearings with an External 5-7 Energy Dissipation Mechanism 5.1.5 Reinforced Elastomer Bearings with an Internal 5-8 Energy Dissipating Mechanism 5.1.6 Reinforced Elastomer Bearings with a Frictional 5-9 Interface 5.2 FRICTIONAL BASE ISOLATION SYSTEMS 5-10 5.2.1 The A1exisismon (Ikonomu, 1979) 5-10 5.2.2 The Resilient-Friction Base Isolator (R-FBI) 5-11 5.2.3 The Earthquake Barrier System 5-12 5.2.4 Steel Roller Bearings 5-12 5.2.5 The Coil Spring Concept 5-12 5.2.6 Friction Pendulum System 5-13 5.3 OBSERVATIONS 5-13 6.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 6-1 6.1 TENTATIVE SEISMIC ISOLATION DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 6-6 (SEAONC, 1986) 6.2 DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR THE DESIGN OF BUILDINGS WITH 6-10 BASE ISOLATION (SEAOSC, 1987) 7.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS 7-1 REFERENCES TABLES FIGURES ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The work described in this report was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. CES-86l5240 and in part by the Army Corps of Engineers and Naval Facilities Engineering Command. The support of the above organizations is gratefully acknowledged. III DISCLAIMER This report was prepared on the basis of work funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation in cooperation with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Naval Facilities Engineering Command. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, the Army Corps of Engineers, or the Naval Facilities Engineering Command , IV LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. TITLE 1 GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING BASE ISOLATED STRUCTURES 2 PEAK GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS 3 SPECTRUM AMPLIFICATION FACTORS FOR HORIZONTAL ELASTIC RESPONSE 4 FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY VERSUS BUILDING HEIGHT 5 DUCTILITY DEMAND RATIOS OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS 6 SUMMARY OF SEISMIC BUILDING SYSTEMS 7 BASE ISOLATION TYPES 8 ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF ELASTOMERS 9 APPLICATIONS OF BASE ISOLATION ELASTOMERIC BEARINGS 10 COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED BEARINGS iii v LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. TITLE 1 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF BASE ISOLATION 2 CROSS-SECTION OF THE FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER BUILDING 3 BASE ISOLATION OF THE KOEBERG NUCLEAR ISLAND 4 RESPONSE OF STRUCTURES TO EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTIONS 5 IDEALIZED SEISMIC GROUND RESPONSE SPECTRUM 6 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION FOR CASE STUDY 3-STORY STRUCTURE WITH SHEAR WALLS 7 COMPARISON OF BASE-ISOLATED AND CONVENTIONAL RESPONSE DISPLACEMENTS AND ACCELERATIONS 8 COMPARISON OF BASE-ISOLATED AND CONVENTIONAL RESPONSE STORY SHEARS AND OVERTURNING MOMENTS 9 SEAOC SEISMIC DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRA 10 TRANSVERSE SECTION, WILLIAM CLAYTON BUILDING, WELLINGTON, N.Z. 11 ACCELERATION LEVELS IN REACTOR BUILDING UNDER 0.6 G EL CENTRO EARTHQUAKE 12 RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT BETWEEN THE UPPER AND LOWER RAFT 13 HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRUM AT BASE OF REACTOR BUILDING lV vi LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) FIGURE NO. TITLE 14 HORIZONTAL FLOOR RESPONSE SPECTRUM AT BASE OF REACTOR BUILDING 15 SCHEMATIC PLAN AND CROSS-SECTION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE BUILDING IN FRANCE 16 ACCELEROGRAMS OBTAINED IN THE FCLJC BUILDING DURING THE REDLANDS EARTHQUAKE OF OCTOBER 2, 1985 17 COMPUTED ACCELERATION TIME HISTORIES FOOTHILL COMMUNITY LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER BUILDING 18 STEEL-ROLLER ISOLATION SYSTEM USED FOR A BUILDING IN MEXICO D.F. 19 SECTION OF THE OILES TECHNICAL CENTER BUILDING, JAPAN 20 ELEVATION OF UNION HOUSE BUILDING, AUCKLAND, N.Z. 21 PREDOMINANT PERIODS FOR MAXIMUM ACCELERATION IN ROCK 22 PSEUDO-VELOCITY RESPONSE SPECTRA AT VARYING DISTANCE FROM EPICENTER 23 IMPERIAL VALLEY EARTHQUAKE, MAY 18, 1940, GROUND MOTION TIME HISTORIES, SOOE 24 KERN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE, JULY 21, 1952, GROUND MOTION TIME HISTORIES, S69E 25 RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR THE EL CENTRO 1940 N-S EARTHQUAKE RECORD 26 RESPONSE SPECTRA FOR THE KERN COUNTY 1952 SOOE EARTHQUAKE RECORD v LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) FIGURE NO. TITLE 27 AVERAGE ACCELERATION SPECTRA FOR DIFFERENT SITE CONDITIONS 28 84 PERCENTILE ACCELERATION SPECTRA FOR DIFFERENT SITE CONDITIONS 29 NEWMARK-HALL SPECTRUM 30 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING BASE ISOLATION 31 STEPS IN THE SELECTION OF SEISMIC DESIGN STRATEGY 32 FEASIBLE REGION FOR BASE ISOLATION 33 PLAIN ELASTOMER BEARING 34 REINFORCED ELASTOMER BEARING 35 TYPICAL HIGH-DAMPING RUBBER BEARING IN THE FOOTHILLS COMMUNITY LAW AND JUSTICE CENTER BUILDING 36 SHEAR LOAD-DEFLECTION RELATIONSHIP OF HIGH DAMPING RUBBER BEARING USED IN FCLJC BUILDING 37 REINFORCED ELASTOMER BEARING WITH EXTERNAL ENERGY DISSIPATING DEVICE 38 MECHANICAL ENERGY DISSIPATING DEVICES 39 HYSTERIS LOOPS FOR A TORSION BEAM ENERGY DISSIPATING DEVICE 40 LEAD-RUBBER BEARING INSTALLATION USING KEEPER PLATES 41 TYPICAL FORCE-DEFLECTION HYSTERESIS LOOP FOR LEAD/RUBBER DEVICE 42 FOUNDATION METHOD AT THE KOEBERG POWER PLANT, SOUTH AFRICA vi viii LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) FIGURE NO.