利用基于弹性和位移的公式对现有建筑的二维建模进行时间历程非线性分析

M. Belgasmia, Sabah Moussaoui, Rebadj Chabane
{"title":"利用基于弹性和位移的公式对现有建筑的二维建模进行时间历程非线性分析","authors":"M. Belgasmia, Sabah Moussaoui, Rebadj Chabane","doi":"10.15587/2706-5448.2024.298870","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The object of the research is the response of a structure in time between formulations, namely force-based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based.\nAn existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility based) and displacement based.\nThis research aimed to compare between two formulations namely displacement based and force-based (flexibility-based), in order to show the accuracy and the reliability of the second one. In the case of nonlinear time history response of a residential two-storey reinforced concrete building, which is representative of typical residential building construction in Italy in the 1970’s and 1980’s with the aim of taking advantages of flexibility-based formulation if the comparison proves conclusive.\nIn the course of the research, the former approach is a classical two-node, displacement-based, Euler-Bernoulli frame element with the disadvantage of discretizing the structure thus increasing the number of degrees of freedom and equation, in order to achieve the required precision. The latter is a two-node, force-based, Euler Bernoulli frame element. The main advantage of the second element is that it is «exact» within the relevant frame element theory. This implies that one element per frame member (beam or column) is used in preparing the frame mesh, thus leading to a reduction of the global number of degrees of freedom. Therefore, a reduction in number of equations to solve, resulting in a saving of time with increased precision.\nAn existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based. As a result of the research, it is shown that with flexibility-based approach no discretization error occurs and all governing equations are satisfied exactly, making a possibility of simpler and faster numerical modeling. In the proposed approach will be of great use in the field of numerical modeling due to its ease and accuracy. This elegant formulation is promising for future work thanks to its advantages.","PeriodicalId":22480,"journal":{"name":"Technology audit and production reserves","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Time history nonlinear analysis for 2D modelization of an existing building using flexibility and displacement-based formulation\",\"authors\":\"M. Belgasmia, Sabah Moussaoui, Rebadj Chabane\",\"doi\":\"10.15587/2706-5448.2024.298870\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The object of the research is the response of a structure in time between formulations, namely force-based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based.\\nAn existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility based) and displacement based.\\nThis research aimed to compare between two formulations namely displacement based and force-based (flexibility-based), in order to show the accuracy and the reliability of the second one. In the case of nonlinear time history response of a residential two-storey reinforced concrete building, which is representative of typical residential building construction in Italy in the 1970’s and 1980’s with the aim of taking advantages of flexibility-based formulation if the comparison proves conclusive.\\nIn the course of the research, the former approach is a classical two-node, displacement-based, Euler-Bernoulli frame element with the disadvantage of discretizing the structure thus increasing the number of degrees of freedom and equation, in order to achieve the required precision. The latter is a two-node, force-based, Euler Bernoulli frame element. The main advantage of the second element is that it is «exact» within the relevant frame element theory. This implies that one element per frame member (beam or column) is used in preparing the frame mesh, thus leading to a reduction of the global number of degrees of freedom. Therefore, a reduction in number of equations to solve, resulting in a saving of time with increased precision.\\nAn existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based. As a result of the research, it is shown that with flexibility-based approach no discretization error occurs and all governing equations are satisfied exactly, making a possibility of simpler and faster numerical modeling. In the proposed approach will be of great use in the field of numerical modeling due to its ease and accuracy. This elegant formulation is promising for future work thanks to its advantages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology audit and production reserves\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology audit and production reserves\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2024.298870\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology audit and production reserves","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2024.298870","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是比较基于位移的计算方法和基于力(基于柔性)的计算方法这两种计算方法之间的结构时间响应,以显示第二种计算方法的准确性和可靠性。在研究过程中,前一种方法是经典的双节点、基于位移的欧拉-伯努利框架元素,其缺点是为了达到所需的精度而将结构离散化,从而增加了自由度和方程的数量。后者是一种基于力的双节点欧拉-伯努利框架元素。第二种元素的主要优势在于它在相关框架元素理论中是 "精确的"。这意味着在编制框架网格时,每个框架构件(梁或柱)只需使用一个元素,从而减少了整体自由度数。为了对上述基于力(基于柔性)和基于位移的两种计算方法的时间历史结构响应进行比较研究,本文介绍了一个分别经受三次地震的现有两层钢筋混凝土结构。研究结果表明,基于柔性的方法不会产生离散化误差,所有的控制方程都能得到精确满足,从而使数值建模变得更加简单和快速。由于其简便性和准确性,所提出的方法将在数值建模领域大有用武之地。由于其优点,这种优雅的表述方式在未来的工作中大有可为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Time history nonlinear analysis for 2D modelization of an existing building using flexibility and displacement-based formulation
The object of the research is the response of a structure in time between formulations, namely force-based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based. An existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility based) and displacement based. This research aimed to compare between two formulations namely displacement based and force-based (flexibility-based), in order to show the accuracy and the reliability of the second one. In the case of nonlinear time history response of a residential two-storey reinforced concrete building, which is representative of typical residential building construction in Italy in the 1970’s and 1980’s with the aim of taking advantages of flexibility-based formulation if the comparison proves conclusive. In the course of the research, the former approach is a classical two-node, displacement-based, Euler-Bernoulli frame element with the disadvantage of discretizing the structure thus increasing the number of degrees of freedom and equation, in order to achieve the required precision. The latter is a two-node, force-based, Euler Bernoulli frame element. The main advantage of the second element is that it is «exact» within the relevant frame element theory. This implies that one element per frame member (beam or column) is used in preparing the frame mesh, thus leading to a reduction of the global number of degrees of freedom. Therefore, a reduction in number of equations to solve, resulting in a saving of time with increased precision. An existing two-story reinforced concrete structure subjected to three earthquakes separately is presented in order to carry out a comparative study in terms of time history structure response between the two formulations cited above namely force based (flexibility-based) and displacement-based. As a result of the research, it is shown that with flexibility-based approach no discretization error occurs and all governing equations are satisfied exactly, making a possibility of simpler and faster numerical modeling. In the proposed approach will be of great use in the field of numerical modeling due to its ease and accuracy. This elegant formulation is promising for future work thanks to its advantages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
89
审稿时长
8 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