An objective seismic damage index to evaluate RC structures

J.C. Vielma a A.H. Barbat a,b S. Oller a

a Politechnical

University of Catalonia (UPC), Edicio C1, Campus Nord, C/ Gran Capit an s/n, 08034, Barcelona, Spain
b Corresponding

author

Abstract In modern earthquake-resistant design codes is considered that the structural elements (columns and beams) have a nonlinear behaviour during the action of an earthquake similar to the considered in design process. This implies that these elements are damaged and it is very interesting for the designer to be able to estimate the expected global damage in the structure and to relate it to the design ductility, and also with the ductility demand. The damage index calculated applying nite elements method, have values that do not reect the deterioration in the case of buildings designed for low ductility, this feature is contrary with the damage index calculated for ductile buildings. Therefore, in this work an objective damage index is proposed, based on the ductility and the values of the elastic and ultimate stiness, that is independent of the selected structural typology. The procedure is illustrated by means of the assessment of the index from damage to three buildings, two of which have been designed for low ductility (building with wae slabs and framed building with wide beams) and a third one that is framed building with depth beams, designed for high ductility. For the three buildings the static nonlinear response has been determined by means of a force-based procedure, and also the performance point corresponding to the three buildings are calculated applying the N2 method. The results obtained demonstrate that the objective damage index proposed provides values that characterize suitably the damage suered by the three buildings, at the instant of collapse.

Key words: Damage Index, Seismic Damage, Pushover Analysis, Limit States, RC buildings PACS:

Preprint submitted to Elsevier

11 January 2008

Introduction

In current earthquake-resistant design procedures elastic procedures are using, applying Response reduction factors to reduce elastic response to convert it in equivalent elasto-plastic response.This approach implicitly accepts that structures has a plastic deformation capacity without loss of stability. But the concept of ductility also impply that the structure reachs a state of damage when are subjected to earthquakes. It is ussefull for the structural designer the assessment of the magnitude of this damage, and coorrelate this with the structural ductility and the dcutility demands Vielma et al.[1]. Damage Indexes have received special attention during past two decades, mainly based in the possibility of correlate this Damage Indexes with the Limit States of the Performace-based design. For Kunnath [2] in the performancebased design procedures, the process to transform calculated demands into demands that suitably quantify the behaviour of the buildings, is a questionable part of the global procedure. For this reason, it is necessary to consider index that accounts in objective way the seismic damage in buildings. Global seismic damage indexes provides a measure of the structural deterioration. They are computed from numarical simulations of structures due lateral static or dynamic forces, that represent seismic forces. Deppending on the load type, various damage indexes have been formulated. These damage indexes include some of the main characteristics of the non-linear response (static or dynamic) of the structure. For RC structures, damage indexes can be clasied according to the parameters considerated in their formulation. This parameters are related to: maximum lateral displacements, plastic dissipated energy and a combination of both. Some indices measure the overall seismic damage of a structure from its local damage, ie, the contribution of cumulative damage in the structural elements in a given instant to the structure being subjected to a seismic demand. Among the indices which have served as the baseline for many researches, it can be citing the proposed by Park and Ang [3] that can determine the damage in an element, based on the non-linear dynamic response by the following expression: m + u u Py

DIe =

dEh

(1)

Where m is the maximum displacement of the element, u is the last movement, is a parameter that is adjusted depending on the materials and the structural type, Py is the yield strength and dEh is the dissipated hyteretic energy. This damage index is at local level, at an element, however it is possible to apply this index in the computation of values for an specic structural 2

level, or for the whole structure. For non linear analisys due static horizontal loads, it is usefull to considerate damage indexes that incorporate the stiness degradation. Skrbk et al.[4] proposes the following damage index: Ki Ki1

DIe = 1

(2)

Where DIe is the damage index of the beam or column, Ki is the current tangent stiness and Ki1 is the initial tangent stiness. Period degradation provides a measure of the stiness degradation. For this reason, Hori and Inoue [5] has been formulated an expression to calculate this period degradation based on the design ductility as follows: T0 y

T = 2

(3)

where T is te period on the collapse state, is the design ductility, y is a stiness-degradation dependent coecient and T0 is the elastic period of the structure. Other damage index based on stiness degradation, is the proposed for Gupta et al. [6]. They formulated an expression basen on the relationship between the ultimate and yielding displacements, that is equivalent to ultimate and yielding stinesses. Also this formulation includes the design ductility value according to: xmax /z00 1 1

DI =

(4)

Among the desirable features that should have a damage index, Catbas and Aktan [7] includes: Must be sensitive to the accumulation of deterioration. There should be sensitive to changes in the properties of the structures or the acelerogramas applied. Must remain valid and meaning through the State Boundaries of service and collapse. It should allow the location and quantication of damage to the index correlated with the integrity of the structure. These damage indexes, especially those calculated with the stinesses relationship, have the shortcoming that produces consistent results in the case of 3

structures with ductile behavior. However, in the case of structures designed to low ductilities, i.e. framed buildings with wide beams or wae slabbs buildings, this damage indexes does not describe objectively the overall state of damage when the response is close to the collapse threshold. To overcome this drawback, in this article it is developed an objective seismic damage index, independent of the structural typology, formulated as a function that depends on the stinesses relationship and maximum ductility values, computed directly from the capacity curve of the buildings. Numerical examples of the application of this index are presented, which consist in three RC buildings that have been designed for dierent values of ductility, typied on the Spanish seismic code NCSE-02 [8], and characterized by the corresponding performance point computed by the method N2 Fajfar [9].

Formulation

The above mentioned indexes, have been developed in order to quantify the global damage in ductile structures. However, when the non-linear response of restricted-ductility structures is studied, it is possible to observe that the damage index velues corresponding to collapse threshold, are lower than the corresponding to ductile structures Vielma et al. [10]. This shortcoming does not allow that the referenced indexes can be used in order to carry out an objective characterization of the damage in restricted-ductility buildings. The following analysis is done starting from the assumed hypothesis that the non-linear behaviour of the structures follows the principles of the Mechanicaldamage Theory Oliver et al. [11]. This theory, based on the continuum mechanics, fullls the fundamental thermodynamics principles. Not all the materials used with structural purposes follow a behavior that can be asimilable to the damage (degradation/loss of stiness) instead their behavior follow the Plasticity Theory (development of irreversible deformations), see Figure 1. Other materials combined both behaviour, and they have loss of stiness with irreversible deformations, which is the case of the RC structures. To determine whether damage or plastic behaviour has occurred, it is necessary to observe the unload branch in Figure 1. It is accepted that damage has occurred if the unload branch pass throgh the origin; on the other hand, if the unload branch is paralel to the load branch, the behaviour corresponds to plasticity. Reinforced concrete has a combined behaviour (plasticity and damage) but the main feature corresponds to the degradation Oller [12]. The last armation can be validated by laboratory test or by numerical simulations using the Mixing Theory of simple substances Car et al. [13] and [14] 4

Fig. 1. Schemes of the damage and plastic behaviour

The following procedure has been proposed with the aim to describe the structural degradation under seismic loads starting from a few non-linear characteristics. This feature allows the procedure in a simple way and its application is quickly and eciently in evaluating the seismic behaviour. For an structure an static non-linear analysis (pushover analysis) is applied. Calculated roof displacements are plotted vs base shear V . The resultant curve called Capacity curve, has a initial slope that corresponds to the initial stiness K0 , see Figure 2.

Fig. 2. Determination of the initial stiness from capacity curve

If the yield base shear is knonw, and for a specic ductility value postulated in seismic code, the damage at the point C where the maximun damage is reached, can be evaluated according to the continuum-damage mechanical: 1 Vy /u 1 KC =1 =1 = Ko Vy /y

DC = 1

(5)

According to Equation 5, the maximum damage is developed at the collapse point C ; this impply that the damage deppends only on the adopted structural ductility, then it is possible to arm that:

Ductile structure = 4 DC = 0, 75 F ragile structure = 2 DC = 0, 50 In other words, ductile structures have a damage value greather than the damage value reached for fragile structures at the collapse point. However, this way to compute damage values possibilitates a misunderstandings: structural designer can interpretate that ductile structures have a greather damage than the dcorresponding to fragile ones, at the Collapse Limit State. This shortcoming impply that the damage index must be reformulated, in order to avoid its deppendence on the structurla fragility. This aim is possible if the damage index is normalized respect to the maximum damage that can occurs obj in the structure. Thus, the objective damage index 0 DP 1 achieved by a structure at any point P is dened as: DP (1 KP /K0 ) 1 = = DP DC 1

obj DP =

(6)

For example, P might be the performance point, resulting from the intersection between inelastic spectrum (demand) and the capacity curve (obtanied from pushover analysis). Under these conditions, Equation 6 provides that maximum damage would reach the structure subjected to earthquake prescribed by the code.

Numerical Examples

In this section, the objective damage index is applied on evaluating the nonlinear behaviour of three buildings that are designed according dierents ductility levels. The rst building is designed to a ductility value of two, is a wae slabs buildings. The second one, is a framed building with wide beams, 6

designed to ductility of two, and the third one is a framed moment-resisting building, designed to ductility value of four. In order to compute the non-linear response of these buildings a force-bases procedure is applied. The selected pattern of the forces corresponds a inverted traingle, this shape is reccomendable only if the buildings have plan and elevation regularities, see Figure 3. This method has the advantage of that the pattern of forces is suitably to reproduce the seismic forces and produce a damage pattern that is similar to the damage patern that an earthquake produce. This procedure has a shortcoming that it is stable until a singular point is reached; a singular point is a point in which the base shear does not increases with the displacement increases. In order to avoid this shortcoming, a force-based procedure is used; the collapse displacement is obtained when a minimun value of nite element-based damage index is reached.
Fn F2 F1 h2 h1 hn

Fig. 3. Forces distribution according to inverted triangle pattern

Seismic equivallent forces are computed to all buildings levels, when foces values deppends on the level height. Ths procedure requires some iterations to achieve its convergence. A well criteria to initialize the iterations it is recommendable to start from a base shear that corresponds to the design shear base. This value is used to compute the initial levels forces, that obviously does not produce the wanted maximum displacement or not fulll the convergence criteria. In next iteration, base shear is incremented, levels forces are recalculated and the non-linear analysis is performed again. Iterations are repeated until the covergence criteria is reached. The algoritm of the complete prcedure is shown in the Figure 4. In the Figure 5 is shonw a typical capacity curve obtained from non-linear analysis and the associated curve of nite elements-based damage. In this gure, it is possible to identify three important points that reects the main features of the non linear response: point A corresponding to the formation of rst plastic hinges at the ends of the beams, point B corresponding to the formation of the plastic hinges at the end of the columns and point C, corresponding to the collapse threshold, in which a widespread distribution of plastic hinges at beams and columns is observed,. Cases studied Cases studied consist on three RC buildings designed according 7

Fig. 4. Algoritm of force-based non-linear analysis

to Spanish seismic code NCSE-02, for two dierent ductility: low ( = 2) and intermediate ( = 4). Two buildings belong to the rst goup, they are a wae slabs building and a framed building with wide beams. In the second group is a moment-resisting frame building. The buildings have 15mx24m in plan dimensions, and are 4,5m high.Framed buildings have four and three uniform spaced spans in x and x direction, respectively. Wae slabs building have non uniform spans because its columns are not aligned according to straight lines, and consecuantly, does not form resistant frames. The plan and elevation views of the three buildings are sow in Figure 6. The buildings are modelized as 2D frames and equivalent frame in the case of the wae slabs building. Discretization was performed according to the dierent connment applied, thus it is necessary to dene elements for the conned zone near the nodes and in the middle of beams and columns, in Figure 7 a typical frame discretization is show. Longitudes of the connement zones deppend on the dimensions of the sections of beams or colums, span longitude, interstory high or diameter of the reinforcement steel. Sectional discretization is also applied. This consist in to split sections in strips parallels to the main exure axis. Reinforcement chracteristics are incorporated by means of the application of the Mixing Theory, Mata et al. [15]. All the strips have a particular combination of materials (concrete or reinforce steel) expressed in percentage. The eect of the dierent connement provided by the longitudinal and transversal reinforcement is incorporated with the modication of the strength of the concrete according to the Mander et al. [16] procedure. 8

Fig. 5. Algoritm of force-based non-linear analysis

Capacity curves are product of the static non-linear analysis of the frames or equivalent frame, deppending of the case studied. These capacity cuves plots normalized base shear (V /W ) vs. normalized roof displacement (/H ) of the whole structure modelized as a multiple degree of freedon (MDOF) system. In order to determine its performance point, it is necessary to intersect the capacity cuve with the demand, tipyed on the seismic codes by the inelastic spectrum. Therefore it is necessary to convert the non-linear of the MDOF into the response of the equivalent SDOF by means of the dynamic characteristics of the rst mode. Roof displacements are converted in pseudo-displacements according to the Equation 7: 9

Fig. 6. Algoritm of force-based non-linear analysis

Sd =

c FPM

(7)

where Sd is the pseudo-displacement, c is the roof displacement and F P M is the modal participation factor, obtained from dynamic characteristics of the frames:
n i=1 n i=1

FPM =

mi 1,i mi 2 1,i

(8)

In Equation 8 n is the story number, mi is the mass of the story i, 1,i is the normalized amplitude of the rst mode at a story i. By the other hand, inelastic spectrum is plotted in Sa vs. Sd format, that requires the transformation of the base shear of the capacity curve into pseudo-acceleration. This is achieved 10

Fig. 7. Typical frame discretization

through the application of Equation 9: V /W

Sa =

(9)

where V is the base shear, W is the seismic weight and is a dimensionless parameter computed from: (
2 n i=1 mi 1,i ) n 2 i=1 mi 1,i

(10)

Generally, he codes prescribes spectra in T vs.Sa format. Thus, it is necessary to convert this format into Sd vs.Sa format. This conversion is achieved by appling the Equation 11 Sa gT 2 4 2

Sd =

(11)

here, g is the gravity and T is the rst mode period. Once transformations have been made, it is necessary to plot together the capacity spectrum and the elastic and inelastic demand spectra in order to obtain the performance point. The performace point represents the point with maximum lateral displacement of the equivalent SDOF system, produced for seismid demand. In this article the performance points are computed through the N2 procedure, that consist in to determine a bilinear idealized shape of the capacity spectrum by following these steps: 11

 The plastic branch of the capacity spectrum must be horizontal, ensuring the compensation of thr areas above and below of the plastic branche. The elastic branch is determined by means of a secant from the origin to a point at the capacity spectrum with 60% of the maximum base shear. The intersection of the projection of the elastic branch of the capacity spectrum with the elastic demand spectrum, provides the displacement of the performance point. An alternative procedure is to determine the performance point by means of the intersection of the inelastic branch of the idealizes capacity spectrum with the inelastic demand spectrum, computed from the elastic demand spectrum reduced by a response reduction factor R, dened as:
( 1) T + 1 TC R =

when T TC when T > TC

(12)

In Equation 12 T is the rst mode period, is the design ductility and TC is the corner period of the elastic design spectrum, that limit the branch of constant acceleration to the decreasing one.
1,2

Capacity curve Idealized capacity curve Elastic spectrum Demand spectrum

0,8

Sa (g)
0,4

Performance point

0 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400

Sd (mm)

Fig. 8. Determination of the performance point of the wae slabs building

Computed values of the performance points displacements are show in Table 1. It is necessary to point out that tese displacements are computed by applying the Equation 7, in order to transform the displacements of the equivalent SDOF system to the MDOF one. Capacity curves of case studied are show in Figures 11, 12 and 13. In these gures, the base shear V is normalized respect to the siesmic wieght W . Oth12

1,2

Capacity curve Idealized capacity curve Elastic spectrum Demand spectrum

0,8

Sa (g)
0,4

Performance point

0 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400

Sd (mm)

Fig. 9. Determination of the performance point of the framed building with wide beams
1,2

Capacity curve Idealized capacity curve Elastic Spectrum Demand spectrum

0,8

Performance point

Sa (g)
0,4

0 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400

Sd (mm)

Fig. 10. Determination of the performance point of the moment-resisting framed building

erwise, it can be seen the stinesses evolution, from the elastic behavior to the collapse threshold. Note that for restricted ductility buildings, the performance points are nearer to the collapse threshold than the in the case of the moment-resisting framed building. The objective damage index is computed by applying the Equation 6 and is plotted vs the normalized roof drift. In Figure shows the evolution of the dam13

Table 1 Performance points displacements of the of the studied buildings Building Wae slabs building Framed building with wide beams Moment-resisting framed building
0,6

Performance point displacement (mm) 222.07 170.22 120.18

Base shear coefficient (V/W)

0,4

0,2

Capacity curve Original stiffness Performance point stiffness Ultimate stiffness

0 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400

Roof drift (mm)

Fig. 11. Performance point displacement and stiness degradation of the wae slabs building

age index of the buildings studied, a special chracteristic of these curves is the smooth aproximation of the ductile building curve to the collapse threshold,; by the other hand the curves of the two restricted-ductility buildings have a pronunciated slope near to the collapse threshold. This feature highligth that restricted-ductility have a abrupt collapse in contrast to the ductile behavior of the moment-resisting framed buildings. In Table 2 are show the values of damage index computed for the performance point displacements.
Table 2 Damage index (Dobj ) computed for the performance points of cases studied Building Wae slabs building Framed building with wide beams Moment-resisting framed building Damage index (Dobj ) 0.79 0.80 0.69

14

0,6

Base shear coefficient (V/W)

0,4

0,2

Capacity curve Original stiffness Performance point stiffness Ultimate stiffness

0 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250

Roof drift (mm)

Fig. 12. Performance point displacement and stiness degradation of the framed building with wide beams
0,6

Base shear coefficient (V/W)

0,4

0,2

Capacity curve Original stiffness Performance point stiffness Ultimate stiffness

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Roof drift (mm)

Fig. 13. Performance point displacement and stiness degradation of the moment-resisting framed building

According to the computed values of the objective damage index, is possible to identify that the damage that occur in the restricted ductility buildings near to the performance point is greather than the damage obtained for the ductile moment-resisting framed building. Also this last typology have an adequate ductility value that exceed the design ductility prescribed in the Spanish seismic code. 15

1 0,9

Objective damage index (DIobj)

0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0 0 0,25 0,5 0,75 1 1,25 1,5 1,75 2 2,25 2,5 2,75 3 3,25 3,5 Moment-resisting framed building Framed building with wide beams Waffle slabs building

Normalized displacement (%)

Fig. 14. Damage index curves and damage at performance point displacement of the cases studied

Conclusions

According to computed nonlinear response of reinforced concrete buildings, conventional damage indexes values deppend on the structural typology. Thus, for RC restricted ductility buildings, damage conventional indexes do not provide results comparable to those calculated by applying the nite element method. The structural analysis previously performed allows objective assessment of structural damage in a simple manner. Specically, the use of the equation (6) allows to obtain indexes values very close to those that result from more expensive computational procedures. Thus, it is possible to know the level of global structural damage, in an specic point, for example the performance point obtained by means of the intersection of the demand curve, or demand spectrum, with the capacity curve of the structure. The objective damage index, which incorporates the stiness degradation and the maximum value of the structural ductility enables appropriate values of the global structural damage, regardless of the typology of the analyzed structure. The moment-resisting framed buildings has an acceptable value of damage at the performance point and their behaviour remain ductile, this nonlinear response feature exceeded the expected design values. Among the three cases studied, it is possible to arm that the framed building 16

with wide beams and the wae slabs building, it is possible to anticipate a high value of the damage index corresponding to the performance point. Also, these buildings has an insucient structural ductility compared with Spanish seismic code requirements. A new procedure for calculating the response nonlinear static-controlled forces is proposed. This solves the problem of singularity at the threshold of collapse by implementing an iterative process of calculation which considers obtaining a certain damage index as a convergence criterion.

References
[1] J. C. Vielma, A. H. Barbat and S. Oller, Evaluaci on de la respuesta no lineal de edicios de hormig on armado proyectados para baja ductilidad, Hormig on y Acero, In Press, 2007. [2] S. Kunnath, Performance-based seismic design and evaluation of building structures. Earthquake engineering for structural design, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1th ed., 2006. [3] Y. J. Park and Ang, A. H.-S., Mechanistic seismic damage model for reinforced concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 111, pp. 722739, 1985. [4] P. S. Skrbk, S. R. Nielsen, P. H. Kierkegaard and A. S. Cakmak, Damage localization and quantication earthquake excited RC-frames, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 27, pp. 903916, 1998. [5] N. Hori and N., Inoue, Damaging properties of ground motions and prediction of maximum response of structures based on momentary energy response, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic, vol. 31, pp. 16571679, 2002. [6] P. S. Gupta, S. R. Nielsen and P. H. Kierkegaard, A preliminary prediction of seismic damage-based degradation in RC structures, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, vol. 30, pp. 981933, 2001. [7] N. Catbas and E. Aktan, Condition and damage assessment: issues and some promising index, Earthquake Spectra, vol. 16, pp. 573591, 2000. [8] NCSE 2002, Norma de construcci on sismorresistente, Madrid: BOE N 244, 2002. [9] P. Fajfar, A Nonlinear Analysis Method for Perfomance Based Seismic Design, Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 128, pp. 10261036, 2002. [10] J. C. Vielma, A. H. Barbat and S. Oller, Comportamiento s smico de edicios de hormig on armado con ductilidad limitada, Hormig on y Acero, In Press, 2007.

17

[11] X. Oliver, M. Cervera, S. Oller and J. Lubliner, Isotropic damage models and smeared cracks analysis of concrete, Computer aided analysis and design of concrete structures, vol. 2, pp. 945958, 1990. [12] S. Oller, Modelizaci on num erica de materiales friccionales, Barcelona: Monograf a N 3. Centro Internacional de M etodos Num ericos en Ingenier a, 1991. [13] E. Car, S. Oller, and E. O nate, An Anisotropic Elasto Plastic Constitutive Model for Large Strain Analysis of Fiber Reinforced Composite Materials, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 185, pp. 245 277, 2000. [14] E. Car, S. Oller, and E. O nate, A Large Strain Plasticity for Anisotropic Materials: Composite Material Application, International Journal of Plasticity, vol. 17, pp. 14371463, 2001. [15] P. Mata, S. Oller, and E. O nate, Static analysis of beam structures under nonlinear geometric and constitutive behaviour, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 196, pp. 44584478, 2007. [16] J. B. Mander, M. J. N. Priestley, and R. Park, Observed stress-strain behaviour of conned concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 114, pp. 1827 1849, 1988.

18