Quantitative Shaking Evaluation of Bracing-Strengthened and Base-Isolated Buildings Using Seismic Intensity Level

Henda Febrian Egatama, N. G. Wariyatno, Han Ay Lie, Muhammad Zulfikar, Adhi Muliawan, Buntara Sthenly, Gan
{"title":"Quantitative Shaking Evaluation of Bracing-Strengthened and Base-Isolated Buildings Using Seismic Intensity Level","authors":"Henda Febrian Egatama, N. G. Wariyatno, Han Ay Lie, Muhammad Zulfikar, Adhi Muliawan, Buntara Sthenly, Gan","doi":"10.46604/peti.2024.13578","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In current design practice, the seismic strength design of buildings is commonly based on the strength concept, lacking a quantitative evaluation tool that can show the performance of the buildings during earthquakes. This paper demonstrates the application of seismic intensity level (SIL) as a quantitative evaluation tool for aseismic building performance. A simulation test is conducted on three categories of building-frame: non-strengthened (NA), bracing-strengthened (BS), and base-isolated (BI), subjected to a north-south (N-S) 1940 El Centro seismic wave. The criteria evaluated include maximum acceleration, energy dissipation, and the measured seismic intensity level (m-SIL). The effect of strengthening methods is compared based on those criteria. The results show that despite the apparent reduction in structural response metrics, the SIL value diminishes more substantially for base isolators (4.5 level decrease) than bracing (0.4 level decrease). This confirms that SIL provides higher consistency results and is straightforward to comprehend.","PeriodicalId":33402,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of Engineering and Technology Innovation","volume":" 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of Engineering and Technology Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46604/peti.2024.13578","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In current design practice, the seismic strength design of buildings is commonly based on the strength concept, lacking a quantitative evaluation tool that can show the performance of the buildings during earthquakes. This paper demonstrates the application of seismic intensity level (SIL) as a quantitative evaluation tool for aseismic building performance. A simulation test is conducted on three categories of building-frame: non-strengthened (NA), bracing-strengthened (BS), and base-isolated (BI), subjected to a north-south (N-S) 1940 El Centro seismic wave. The criteria evaluated include maximum acceleration, energy dissipation, and the measured seismic intensity level (m-SIL). The effect of strengthening methods is compared based on those criteria. The results show that despite the apparent reduction in structural response metrics, the SIL value diminishes more substantially for base isolators (4.5 level decrease) than bracing (0.4 level decrease). This confirms that SIL provides higher consistency results and is straightforward to comprehend.
使用地震烈度等级对支撑加固建筑和基础隔震建筑进行定量摇晃评估
在目前的设计实践中,建筑物的抗震强度设计通常基于强度概念,缺乏能够显示建筑物在地震中性能的定量评估工具。本文展示了地震烈度等级(SIL)作为建筑物抗震性能定量评估工具的应用。本文对三类建筑框架(非加固(NA)、支撑加固(BS)和基底隔震(BI))进行了模拟测试,这些建筑框架都受到了 1940 年埃尔中心罗(El Centro)南北向(N-S)地震波的影响。评估标准包括最大加速度、能量耗散和测得的地震烈度水平(m-SIL)。根据这些标准对加固方法的效果进行了比较。结果表明,尽管结构响应指标明显降低,但与支撑(降低 0.4 级)相比,底座隔震器(降低 4.5 级)的 SIL 值降低幅度更大。这证实了 SIL 可提供一致性更高的结果,而且易于理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信