Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:25:42.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

C1 in Displacement Coefficient Method for Taiwan to Estimate Maximum Inelastic Displacement Demands of Existing Structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2011

Y.-Y. Lin*
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Water Resources Engineering, National Chiayi University, Chiayi, Taiwan 60004, R.O.C.
*
*Associate Professor
Get access

Abstract

The coefficient C1 in the displacement coefficient method of FEMA-273/356 is the modification factor to relate the expected maximum displacements of elasto-plastic inelastic SDOF systems to displacements calculated for linear response. It permits the estimation of maximum inelastic displacements from maximum elastic displacements for structures with known lateral strength (usually, the existing structures). Recently, an improved C1 has been presented in FEMA-440 because it was shown that the C1 in FEMA-273/356 underestimates the maximum inelastic displacement demands of structures significantly. However, the improved C1 in FEMA-440 was derived from the earthquake ground motions recorded in California. In addition, it was mentioned in FEMA-440 that “caution should be used when extrapolating the results presented in the report for ground motions and site conditions that differ”. Because the characteristics of earthquakes occurred in Taiwan are different from those occurred in California, the coefficient for used in Taiwan needs to be modified. The objective of this paper is to propose appropriate C1 for use in Taiwan.

Type
Technical Note
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C. 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), “NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,” Report FEMA-273 (Guidelines) and Report 274 (Commentary), Washington, DC, USA (1997).Google Scholar
2. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), “Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,” Report FEMA-356, Washington, DC, USA (2000).Google Scholar
3.Ruiz-Garcia, J. and Miranda, E., “Inelastic Displacement Ratios for Evaluation of Existing Structures,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 32, pp. 12371258 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), “Improvement of Inelastic Seismic Analysis Procedures,” Report FEMA-440, Washington, DC, USA (2005).Google Scholar
5.Miranda, E., “Inelastic Displacement Ratios for Structures on Firm Sites,” Journal of Structural Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE), 126, pp. 11501159 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Miranda, E., “Estimation of Inelastic Deformation Demands of SDOF Systems,” Journal of Structural Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineering (ASCE), 127, pp. 10051012 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Song, J. K. and Pincheira, J. A., “Spectral Displacement Demands of Stiffness and Strength Degrading Systems,” Earthquake Spectra, 16, pp. 817851, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California (2000).Google Scholar
8. MOI, Provisions for Seismic Design and Commentary of Buildings, Ministry of the Interior, Taipei, Taiwan (2005).Google Scholar
9.Bevington, P. R. and Robinson, D. K., Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA (1992).Google Scholar