Ground motion duration effects on nonlinear seismic response

Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 21-38

  Iervolino, Iunio ^a   Manfredi, Gaetano ^a   Cosenza, Edoardo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

Author keywords

Demand; Duration; Fragility; Hypothesis test; Time history

Indexed keywords

DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS); DUCTILITY; ELASTICITY; OSCILLATIONS; PROBABILITY; SEISMOLOGY;

FRAGILITY CURVES; GROUND MOTION DURATION; HYPOTHESIS TEST; NONLINEAR SEISMIC RESPONSE;

EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE;

FAILURE MECHANISM; HYSTERESIS; SEISMIC RESPONSE;

EQUIDAE;

EID: 29644441806     PISSN: 00988847     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.529     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Sewell RT. Impacts of earthquake strong motion duration on inelastic structural response factors and on ground-motion damage potential. Final Report, Risk Engineering Inc., 1993.
2. Cosenza E, Manfredi G. Damage indices and damage measures. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials 2000; 2:50-59.
3. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31:491-514.
4. Bommer J, Magenes M, Hancock J, Penazzo P. The influence of strong-motion duration on the seismic response of masonry structures. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 2004; 2:1-26.
5. Uang CM, Bertero VV. Evaluation of seismic energy in structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1990; 19:77-90.
6. Malhotra PK. Cyclic-demand spectrum. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002; 31:1441-1457.
7. Kunnath SK, Chai YH. Cumulative damage-based inelastic cyclic demand spectrum. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 33:499-520.
8. Trifunac MD, Brady AG. A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1975; 65:581-626.
9. Trifunac MD, Novikova EI. Duration of strong ground motion in terms of earthquake magnitude epicentral distance, site conditions and site geometry. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994; 23: 1023-1043.
10. Cosenza E, Manfredi G. The improvement of the seismic-resistant design for existing and new structures using damage criteria. In Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes, Fajfar P, Krawinkler H (eds). Balkema: Rotterdam, 1997; 119-130.
11. Manfredi G. Evaluation of seismic energy demand. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2001; 30:485-499.
12. Mahin SA, Bertero VV. An evaluation of inelastic seismic design spectra. Journal of Structural Division (ASCE) 1981; 107:1777-1795.
13. Krawinkler H, Nassar AA. Seismic design based on ductility and cumulative damage demands and capacities. In Nonlinear Seismic Analysis and Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings, Fajfar P, Krawinkler H (eds). Elsevier Applied Science: Oxford, 1992; 23-40.
14. Cosenza E, Manfredi G, Ramasco R. The use of damage functionals in earthquake engineering: a comparison between different methods. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1993; 22:855-868.
15. Fajfar P, Vidic T. Consistent inelastic design spectra: hysteretic and input energy. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994; 23:523-532.
16. Farrow KT, Kurama YC. SDOF demand index relationships for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra 2003; 19:799-838.
17. Cornell CA, Sewell RT. Non-linear behavior intensity measures in seismic hazard analysis. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Seismic Zonation, Guangzhou, China, December 1987.
18. Conte JP, Pandit H, Stewart JP, Wallace J. Ground motion intensity measures for performance-based earthquake engineering. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering (ICASP9), San Francisco, CA, U.S.A., 2003.
19. Shome N, Bazzurro P, Cornell CA, Carballo JE. Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear MDOF responses. Earthquake Spectra 1998; 14:469-500.
20. Iervolino I, Cornell CA. Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures. Earthquake Spectra 2005; 21(3):685-713.
21. Benjamin JR, Cornell CA. Probability Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1970.
22. Lanzano G. Effetti, sulla Risposta Sismica delle Strutture, della Durata del Terremoto. B.S. Thesis, Department of Structural Analysis and Design, University of Naples Federico II, Italy. Advisor: E. Cosenza, co-advisor: I. Iervolino, 2004 (in Italian).