簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 馬亦瓦
Maizuar - Mahyiddin
論文名稱： 印尼新建校舍之耐震性能評估與分析
Evaluation of Seismic Performance for Renewed School Building in Indonesia
指導教授： 黃慶東
Ching-Tung Huang
口試委員: 鄭蘩
Van Jeng
陳瑞華
Rwey-Hua Cherng
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 工程學院 - 營建工程系
Department of Civil and Construction Engineering
論文出版年： 2007
畢業學年度： 95
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 137
中文關鍵詞： 耐震規範(印尼) 、磚牆 、靜力側推分析 、非線性動力歷時分析
外文關鍵詞： seismic design code, infill brick walls, pushover analysis, nonlinear dynamic time history analysis
相關次數： 點閱：238  下載：6 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 論 文 摘 要
    本研究針對典型印尼新建校舍進行靜力與動力耐震性能評估與分析。研究首先針對印尼不同年代之建築耐震設計規範進行比較研究，並著重於概念性的設計物、經常使用的規範，以及建築耐震設計等面向。此外，研究並以強化水泥構建的典型校舍進行未含磚牆之抗彎矩構架和考慮磚牆構架二種分析。耐震能力分析包含側推程序靜力分析法及非線性歷時分析法。非線性動力分析以SAP2000執行，且以El Centro, Pacoima與集集大地震三個不同的地震資料為震動源。根據承載力與容量譜之分析結果，磚塊牆壁可大幅改變RC抗彎矩構架之耐震能力。非線性歷時分析結果亦顯示整體結構位移反應對於集集地震型態之特有地表運動非常敏感。整體結構反應顯示出RC結構較弱之部分為樑桿件，有賴強化設計以承受強烈的地震刺激。

    ABSTRACT
    The current seismic design code represents many changes for seismic-resistant building design in Indonesia. The level of design effort will be increased in areas of relatively high seismic risk. This paper presents the comparative study of Indonesian seismic design codes for buildings. The conceptual comparison of the design objectives and approaches of commonly used codes and standards for the seismic resistant design of buildings were reviewed. For seismic performance evaluation purposes, a typical school building composed of reinforced concrete frames was studied. The structure was analyzed twice for the cases of open moment resisting frames and frames with unreinforced infill brick walls incorporated into the analysis. The evaluation was done by performing pushover analysis and nonlinear dynamic time history analysis using SAP 2000. The nonlinear dynamic time history analysis is realized by three different earthquake data of El Centro, Pacoima, and Chi Chi ground motions. The results show that the presence of infill brick walls can considerably improve the performance of reinforced concrete moment resisting frames in terms of load resistance and energy dissipation capability. It was also found that the calculated response of nonlinear dynamic time history analysis can be very sensitive to the characteristic of the individual ground motion used as seismic input. In terms of the global response of the structure, the weak section of the reinforced concrete structure was observed in the beam elements. Thus, it is necessary to strengthen them to have adequate strength during strong seismic excitation.

    Table of Content Abstract ……………………………………………………………………….. i Acknowledgements ….………………………………………………………... iii Table of Content ….…………………………………………………….…….. iv List of Figures ….……………………………………………………….…….. vii List of Tables ….…………………………………………………………….... xi List of Notations ….…………………………………………………………... xvi Chapter 1 Introduction ………………………………………………………. 1 1.1. Overview ………………………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Performance-Based Seismic Design ………...………………………......... 2 1.3 Pushover Analysis ………………………………………………………… 2 1.4 Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis ………………………………. 3 1.5 Objectives and Scope ……………………………………………………... 3 Chapter 2 Indonesian Seismic Design Codes for Buildings ……………….. 6 2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………. 6 2.2 Current Seismic Design Codes for Buildings …………………………….. 7 2.2.1 Indonesian Loading Code (PMI-1970) or NI-18 …………………… 8 2.2.2 Seismic Design Code for Buildings (PPTGIUG-1983) ...................... 10 2.2.3 Seismic Design Code for Buildings (SNI-1989) ……..……………... 13 2.2.4 Seismic Design Code for Buildings (SNI 03–1726–2002) …………. 18 2.2.5 Seismic Design Code for Buildings (SNI 03–1726–2003) …………. 28 Chapter 3 Comparative Study of Seismic Design Codes …………………... 49 3.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 49 3.2 New Trend of Performance Based Design ………………………………. 50 3.2.1 Elastic Methods …………………………………………………….. 51 3.2.2 Inelastic Methods …………………………………………………... 51 3.3 Design Earthquake and Performance Objectives ………………………… 52 3.4 Seismic Map ……………………………………………………………… 52 3.5 Soil Types ………………………………………………………………… 53 3.6 Design Lateral Forces …………………………………………………….. 53 3.7 Seismic Load Reduction Factor ………………………………………...... 54 3.8 Base Shear Coefficient ………………………………………………........ 55 3.9 Design Response Spectrum ………………………………………………. 57 3.10 Natural Period of Vibration ........................................................................ 58 Chapter 4 Inelastic Analysis Procedures for Seismic Performance Evaluation ……………..................................................................... 64 4.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………….............. 64 4.2 Pushover Analysis ………………………………………………………… 64 4.2.1 Lateral Load Pattern …………………………………………………. 65 4.2.2 Nonlinear Hinge properties ………………………………………….. 65 4.2.3 Pushover Curve ………………………………………….................... 66 4.3 Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis………………………………... 67 4.4 Unreinforced Infill Brick Walls ……………………………………………. 68 4.5 Description of Case Study Frame ………………………………………….. 70 Chapter 5 Results …………….......................................................................... 84 5.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………............. 84 5.2 Pushover Analysis Results………………………………………………… 84 5.2.1 Global Structure Behavior…………………………………………… 84 5.2.2 Story Displacement ………………………………………………….. 86 5.2.3 Plastic Hinge Locations …………………………………………....... 87 5.3 Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis Results……………………….. 88 5.3.1 Natural Period of Vibration …………………………………………. 89 5.3.2 El Centro Ground Motion Record …………………………………... 89 5.3.3 Chi Chi Ground Motion Record …………………………………….. 90 5.3.4 Pacoima Ground Motion Record ……………………………………. 91 5.4 Seismic Performance Evaluation Based on SNI 2003 ……………………... 91 5.4.1 Design Lateral Forces ………………………………………………... 91 5.4.2 Story Drift Ratio Limitation …………………………………………. 92 5.4.3 Natural Period of Vibration Limitation …………………………….... 92 5.4.4 Time History Results ………………………………..……………….. 93 Chapter 6 Conclusion …………………………………………….................... 134 References ……………………………………………………………………… 136 List of Figures 1.1 Illustration of performance based-seismic design, ATC 55 5 2.1 Horizontal seismic coefficient, PMI-1970 31 2.2 Design response of spectrum, SNI-1989 31 2.3 Load – displacement curve, SNI-2002 32 2.4 Design response of spectrum, SNI-2002 32 2.5 Base shear distribution, SNI-2002 33 2.6 Seismic zones for structural design loadings, PPITGUG-1983 and SNI-1989 33 2.7 Basic seismic coefficient, SNI-1989 34 2.8 Seismic map of Indonesia, SNI-2002 35 2.9 Seismic response coefficient, SNI-2002 36 2.10 Seismic response coefficient, SNI-2003 37 3.1 SDOF system under earthquake forces, SNI-1989 60 4.1 Global capacity curve of a structure 72 4.2 Force-deformation for pushover hinge 72 4.3 El Centro accelerogram input ground motion 73 4.4 Chi Chi accelerogram input ground motion 73 4.5 Pacoima accelerogram input ground motion 73 4.6 5%-damping spectral acceleration of input ground motions 74 4.7 5%-damping spectral displacement of input ground motions 74 4.8 Unreinforced infill brick walls model 75 4.9 Force - displacement curve for unreinforced brick walls 75 4.10 Building plan view 76 4.11 Building front side view 76 4.12 Building backside view 76 4.13 Building right side view 77 4.14 Detail of building structural members 77 4.15 Detail of roof structure 78 4.16 Detail of foundation 78 4.17 3D open frames model 79 4.18 3D frame + brick model 79 4.19 2D open frames model in x-direction 80 4.20 2D open frames model in y-direction 80 4.21 2D frame + brick 1 model 81 4.22 2D frame + brick 2 model 81 4.23 2D frame + brick model in y-direction 81 5.1 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 2D and 3D open frames in x direction 94 5.2 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 2D and 3D open frames in y-direction 94 5.3 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 2D and 3D frames with brick walls in x-direction 95 5.4 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 2D and 3D frames with brick walls in y-direction 95 5.5 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 2D open frame and 2D frames with brick walls in x-direction 96 5.6 Comparison of pushover results between 2D open frame and 2D frame with brick walls in y-direction 96 5.7 Comparison of pushover results between 3D open frame and 3D frame with brick walls in x-direction 97 5.8 Comparison of pushover analysis results between 3D open frame and 3D frame with brick walls in y-direction 97 5.9 Plastic hinges location of 3D open moment resisting frames case in x-direction at the moment of termination in pushover analysis 98 5.10 Plastic hinges location of 3D open moment resisting frames case in y-direction at the moment of termination in pushover analysis 98 5.11 Plastic hinges location of 3D infill brick walls moment resisting frames case in x-direction at the moment of termination in pushover analysis 99 5.12 Plastic hinges location of 3D infill brick walls moment resisting frames case in y-direction at the moment of termination in pushover analysis 99 5.13 Comparison results between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for frames in x-direction 100 5.14 Comparison results between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for frames in x direction 100 5.15 Comparison results between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for frames in x-direction 101 5.16 Comparison results between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for open frames in y-direction 101 5.17 Comparison results between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for open frames in y direction 102 5.18 Comparison results between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for open frames in y-direction 102 5.19 Comparison results between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 103 5.20 Comparison results between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 103 5.21 Comparison results between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 104 5.22 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for frames in x-direction 104 5.23 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for frames in x-direction 105 5.24 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for frames in x-direction 105 5.25 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for open frames in y-direction 106 5.26 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for open frames in y-direction 106 5.27 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for open frames in y-direction 107 5.28 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and El Centro time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 107 5.29 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Chi Chi time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 108 5.30 Comparison results of spectral acceleration and spectral displacement between pushover and Pacoima time history analysis for frames with brick walls in y-direction 108 List of Tables 2.1 Soil coefficient, PMI-1970 38 2.2 Load reduction coefficient, PMI-1970 38 2.3 Seismic coefficient and load direction, PMI-1970 38 2.4 Seismic coefficients for special structures, PMI-1970 39 2.5 Basic seismic coefficient, C, PPITGUG-1983 39 2.6 Importance factor, PPITGUG-1983, SNI-1989 40 2.7 Structural framing system types, K, SNI-1989 41 2.8 Importance factor, SNI-2002 42 2.9 Ductility parameters of structure, SNI-2002 42 2.10 Maximum ductility parameters of structure, SNI-2002 43 2.11 Soil types, SNI-2002 45 2.12 Peak ground acceleration, SNI-2002 45 2.13 Values of Am and Ar based on seismic zone, SNI-2002 46 2.14 Vertical seismic forces coefficient , SNI-2002 46 2.15 Natural period coefficient , SNI-2002 46 2.16 Importance factor, SNI-2003 47 2.17 Peak ground acceleration, SNI-2003 47 2.18 Values of Am and Ar based on seismic zone, SNI-2003 48 2.19 Natural period coefficient , SNI-2003 48 3.1 Comparison of ductility parameters 60 3.2 Relationship between ductility and design parameters 60 3.3 Comparison of the seismic base shear coefficient 61 3.4 Input values of parameters R and K 61 3.5 The results of the seismic base shear coefficient of steel structure 61 3.6 The results of the seismic base shear coefficient of reinforce concrete structure 62 3.7 The results of the seismic base shear coefficient of ductile couple RC shear wall structure 62 3.8 The results of the seismic base shear coefficient of ductile cantilever RC shear wall structure 63 3.9 Percentage improvement of SNI-2003 seismic response coefficient C 63 4.1 Brick walls properties 82 4.2 Dead load properties (Load A) 82 4.3 Dead load properties (Load B) 82 4.4 Dead load properties (Load C) 83 5.1 Pushover results of 2D open frame in x-direction 109 5.2 Pushover results of 2D open frame in y-direction 110 5.3 Pushover results of 3D open frame in x-direction 111 5.4 Pushover results of 3D open frame in y-direction 112 5.5 Pushover results of 2D frame + brick 1 in x-direction 113 5.6 Pushover results of 2D frame + brick 2 in x-direction 114 5.7 Pushover results of 2D frame + brick in y-direction 115 5.8 Pushover results of 3D frame + brick in x-direction 115 5.9 Pushover results of 3D frame + brick in y-direction 116 5.10 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 2D open frame in x-direction 116 5.11 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 2D open frame in y-direction 117 5.12 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 2D frame+brick 1 in x-direction 117 5.13 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 2D frame+brick 2 in x-direction 118 5.14 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 2D frame+brick in y-direction 118 5.15 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 3D open frame in x-direction 119 5.16 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 3D open frame in y-direction 119 5.17 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 3D frame+brick in x-direction 120 5.18 Spectral acceleration and spectral displacement of 3D frame+brick in y-direction 120 5.19 Initial stiffness ratio of moment resisting frames in x-direction 121 5.20 Initial stiffness ratio of moment resisting frames in y-direction 121 5.21 Ultimate displacement ratio of moment resisting frames in x-direction 121 5.22 Ultimate displacement ratio of moment resisting frames in y-direction 121 5.23 Initial yielding-to-ultimate base shear ratio of moment resisting frames in x-direction 122 5.24 Initial yielding-to-ultimate base shear ratio of moment resisting frames in y-direction 122 5.25 Natural period of 2D open frame case in x-direction 122 5.26 El Centro time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in x-direction 122 5.27 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in x-direction 123 5.28 Pacoima time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in x-direction 123 5.29 Natural period of 2D open frame case in y-direction 123 5.30 El Centro time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in y-direction 123 5.31 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in y-direction 124 5.32 Pacoima time history analysis results of 2D open frame case in y-direction 124 5.33 Natural period of 2D frame + brick 1 case in x-direction 124 5.34 El Centro time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick 1 case in x-direction 124 5.35 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick 1 case in x-direction 125 5.36 Pacoima time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick 1 case in x-direction 125 5.37 Natural period of 2D frame + brick 1 case in x-direction 125 5.38 El Centro time history results of 2D frame + brick 2 case in x-direction 126 5.39 Chi Chi time history results of 2D frame + brick 2 case in x-direction 126 5.40 Pacoima time history results of 2D frame + brick 2 case in x-direction 126 5.41 Natural period of 2D frame + brick case in y-direction 127 5.42 El Centro time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick case in y-direction 127 5.43 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick case in y-direction 127 5.44 Pacoima time history analysis results of 2D frame + brick case in y-direction 128 5.45 Natural period of 3D open frame case 128 5.46 El Centro time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in x-direction 128 5.47 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in x-direction 129 5.48 Pacoima time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in x-direction 129 5.49 El Centro time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in y-direction 129 5.50 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in y-direction 129 5.51 Pacoima time history analysis results of 3D open frame case in y-direction 130 5.52 Natural period of 3D frame + brick case 130 5.53 El Centro time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in x-direction 130 5.54 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in x-direction 130 5.55 Pacoima time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in x-direction 131 5.56 El Centro time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in y-direction 131 5.57 Chi Chi time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in y-direction 132 5.58 Pacoima time history analysis results of 3D frame + brick case in y-direction 132 5.59 Design lateral load in x-direction 133 5.60 Design lateral load in y-direction 133 5.61 Story drift ratio of case study frames in x-direction 133 5.62 Story drift ratio of case study frames in y-direction 133 5.63 Drift ratio limitation based on ATC-40 133

    References

    Applied Technology Council, “Seismic Evaluation & Retrofit of Concrete Buildings”, ATC-40, Volume 1, Report No. SSC 96-01, 1996.

    Applied Technology Council, “Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures”, FEMA 440, ATC-55 Project, 2004.

    ASCE, “FEMA 356 – Pre-standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 2000.

    ATC-33 Project, “FEMA 273 – NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington, D.C., 1997a.

    ATC-33 Project, “FEMA 274 – NEHRP Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings”, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington D.C., 1997b.

    Cheng, L. W.,“A Seismic Experiment and Equivalent Truss Analysis for Brick Wall with Boundary RC Frame”, Master Thesis, National Chengkung University, Taiwan, 1995.

    Chopra A.K., “Dynamics of Structures-Theory and Application to Earthquake Engineering”, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1995.

    Clough, R., W., and Penzien, J., “Dynamics of Structures”, McGraw – Hill International Editions, Printed in Singapore, 1993.

    Computers and Structures, Inc., “CSI Analysis Reference Manual for SAP 2000, ETABS and SAFE”, Berkeley, California, USA, 2005.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Loading Code (in Indonesian)”, PMI-1970, Bandung, 1980.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Loading Code for Buildings” (in Indonesian), PPIUG-1983, Jakarta, 1983.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Seismic Design Code for Buildings” (in Indonesian), PPTGIUG-1983, Jakarta, 1983.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Seismic Code for Buildings” (in Indonesian), SNI-1989F, Jakarta, 1989.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Seismic Code for Buildings” (in Indonesian), SNI 1726-2002, Jakarta, 2002.

    Department of Public Works, “Indonesian Seismic Code for Buildings” (in Indonesian), SNI 1726-2003, 2003.
    Jianguo, N., et al, “Push-Over Analysis of the Seismic Behavior of a Concrete-Filled Rectangular Tubular Frame Structure”, Journal of Tsinghua Science and Technology, Volume 2, pp. 124-130, 2006

    Mangkosoebroto, S., P., “Structural Performance-Based Seismic Engineering According to the Proposed Indonesian Seismic Code (Draft SNI-1726)”, Proceeding on the Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction, pp.70-76., 2003.

    Merati, W., and Surahman, A., “Research for Indonesian Seismic Design Code Update”, Proceeding: Asia Pacific Workshop on Seismic Design and Retrofit of Structures, pp. 71 – 82, August 10-12, 1998

    National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHERP) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulation for New Buildings and Other Structures, 1997 Edition, Part 1-Provisions, Part 2-Commentary, FEMA 302, Feb. 1998.

    Sieh, K., “The Science behind the Aceh Earthquake”, Caltech Media Relations, http://pr.caltech.edu/media/Press_Releases/PR12628.html, 2004.

    Surahman, A., et al., “The Indonesian Seismic Code”, State of the Art Report, Presented for the Fifth APEC Seminar and Workshops on Alignment of Standards in the Building
    Industry, Melbourne, Australia, March 15-17, 2000

    Uniform Building Code (UBC), “Structural Engineering Design Provisions”, International Conference of Building Officials 1997 Edition, Volume 2, April 1997.

    QR CODE