Chapter 1

Seismology

1.1. Introduction
A study of earthquake engineering calls for a good understanding of geophysical
process that causes earthquakes and various effects of earthquakes. Seismology is
the study of the generation, propagation and measurement of seismic waves through
earth and the sources that generate them. The word seismology originated from
Greek words, ‘seismos’ meaning earthquake and ‘logos’ meaning science. The study
of seismic wave propagation through earth provides the maximum input to the
understanding of internal structure of earth.
1.2. Internal Structure of Earth
The earth’s shape is an oblate spheroid with a diameter along the equator of about
12740 km with the polar diameter as 12700km. The higher diameter along equator is
caused by the higher centrifugal forces generated along the equator due to rotation
of earth. Though the specific gravity of materials that constitute the surface of earth
is only about 2.8, the average specific gravity of earth is about 5.5 indicating
presence of very heavy materials towards interior of earth. The interior of the earth
can be classified into three major categories as Crust, Mantle and Core (refer Figure
1.1).

Crust, 5-70 km

Outer mantle, 2900 km

Inner mantle, 2200 km

Core, 1370 km radius

Figure 1.1 Cross-section of interior of earth.

1
Crust: or the lithosphere, is the outer part of the earth is where the life exist. The
average thickness of crust beneath continents is about 40km where as it decreases
to as much as 5km beneath oceans. The oceanic crust is constituted by basaltic
rocks and continental part by granitic rocks overlying the basaltic rocks. Compared to
the layers below, this layer has high rigidity and anisotropy.
Mantle: is a 2900 km thick layer. The mantle consists of 1) Upper Mantle reaching a
depth of about 400 km made of olivine and pyroxene and 2) Lower Mantle made of
more homogeneous mass of magnesium and iron oxide and quartz. No earthquakes
are recorded in the lower mantle. The specific gravity of mantle is about 5. The
mantle has an average temperature of about 2200degree Celsius and the material is
in a viscous semi molten state. The mantle act like fluid in response to slowly acting
stresses and creeps under slow loads. But it behaves like as solid in presence of
rapidly acting stresses, e.g. that caused by earthquake waves.
Core: has a radius of 3470 km and consists of an inner core of radius 1370 km and
an outer core (1370 km < R < 3470 km). The core is composed of molten iron,
probably mixed with small quantities of other elements such as nickel and sulphur or
silicon. The inner solid core is very dense nickel-iron material and is subjected to
very high pressures. The maximum temperature in the core is estimated to be about
3000 degree Celsius. The specific gravity of outer core is about 9-12 where as that
of inner core is 15.
1.3. Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics
1.3.1. Continental drift theory
German scientist Alfred Wegener, in 1915, proposed the hypothesis that the
continents had once formed a single landmass before breaking apart and drifting to
their present locations. His observations were based on the similarity of coastlines
and geology between south America, Africa and Indian peninsula, Australia and
Antarctica, Figure 1.2. He proposed that a large continent termed Pangae existed in
earth around 200 million years ago and was surrounded by an ocean called
Panthalassa. It was postulated that this super continent broke into several pieces
that formed the present continents. These pieces have subsequently drifted into their
current position. Although, he presented much evidence for continental drift, he was
unable to provide a convincing explanation for the physical processes which might
have caused this drift. He suggested that the continents had been pulled apart by the
centrifugal pseudo force of the Earth's rotation or by a small component of
astronomical precession. But the calculations showed that these forces were not
sufficient cause continental drift.

2
Figure 1.2 Similarity between the coastlines continents and distribution of fossils of
ancient biota [Source: http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore /Earth&
Space/images/Fig4.gif].

1.3.2. Plate tectonics

The theory of plate tectonics, presented in early 1960s, explains that the lithosphere
is broken into seven large (and several smaller) segments called plates as shown in
Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3 Tectonic plate map of the world.

The upper most part of the earth is considered to be divided into two layers with
different deformation properties. The upper rigid layer, called the lithosphere, is
about 100 km thick below the continents, and about 50 km under the oceans, and
consists of Crust and rigid upper-mantle rocks. The lower layer, called the
asthenosphere, extends down to about 700 km depth. The rigid lithospheric shell is
broken into several irregularly shaped major plates and a large number of minor or
secondary plates. The lithospheric plates are not stationary, on the contrary, they
float in a complex pattern, with a velocity of some 2-10 cm/year on the soft rocks of
the underlying asthenosphere like rafts on a lake.
3
Figure 1.4 The state of convection currents below the earth’s surface and their effect
on plate movement (From http://www.pbs.org/gbh/aso/ tryit/
tectonics/intro.html].
This theory requires a source that can generate tremendous force is acting on the
plates. The widely accepted explanation is based on the force offered by convection
currents created by thermo-mechanical behavior of the earth’s subsurface. The
variation of mantle density with temperature produces an unstable equilibrium. The
colder and denser upper layer sinks under the action of gravity to the warmer bottom
layer which is less dense. The lesser dense material rises upwards and the colder
material as it sinks gets heated up and becomes less dense (refer Figure 1.4).
These convection currents create shear stresses at the bottom of the plates which
drags them along the surface of earth.

Figure 1.5 Map of distribution of earthquake epicentres around the world.

The continental sized plates are African, American, Antarctic, Indo-Australian,
Eurasian and pacific plate. Apart from this, several smaller plates like Andaman,
Philippine plate also exist. As plate glides over the asthenosphere, the continents
and oceans move with it. Because the plates move in different directions, they
knock against their neighbors at boundaries. The great forces thus generated at
4
plate boundary build mountain ranges, cause volcanic eruptions and earthquakes.
Most of the Earth’s major geological activity occurs at plate boundaries, the zones
where plates meet and interact. Figure 1.5 depicts the distribution of earthquake
epicentres around the world.
The earthquake that occurs at a plate boundary is known as inter-plate earthquake.
Not all earthquakes occur at plate boundaries. Though, interior portion of a plate is
usually tectonically quiet, earthquakes also occur far from plate boundaries. These
earthquakes are known as intra-plate earthquakes. The recurrence time for an intra-
plate earthquake is much longer than that of inter-plate earthquakes
1.4. Movement of Plate Boundaries
Owing to the difference in movement between the plates that are in motion, three
types of plate boundaries are found to exist along their edges:
1) Spreading ridges
Spreading ridges or divergent boundaries are areas along the edges of plates move
apart from each other, Figure 1.6. This is the location where the less dense molten
rock from the mantle rises upwards and becomes part of crust after cooling. Highest
rate of spreading or expansion between plates is found to occur near Pacific Ocean
ridges and the lowest rate of spreading occurs along mid-Atlantic ridges. Generally,
spreading ridges are located beneath the oceans. A few areas where the spreading
occurs along the continental mass are East African rift valley and Iceland.

Figure 1.6 A cross-section of the divergent plate boundary.

2) Convergent boundaries
The convergent boundaries are formed where the two plates move toward each
other. In this process, one plate could slip below the other one or both could collide
with each other.
a. Subduction boundaries
These boundaries are created when either oceanic lithosphere subducts beneath
oceanic lithosphere (ocean-ocean convergence), or when oceanic lithosphere
subducts beneath continental lithosphere (ocean-continent convergence), Figure 1.7.
The junction where the two plates meet, a trench known as oceanic trench is formed.
5
Figure 1.7 Creation of subduction boundaries [From: http://www.tulane.edu/
~sanelson/geol204/struct&materials.htm].
When two plates of oceanic lithosphere run into one another, the subducting plate is
pushed to depths where it causes melting to occur. When a plate made of oceanic
lithosphere runs into a plate with continental lithosphere, the plate with oceanic
lithosphere subducts because it has a higher density than continental lithosphere.
The subducted plate melts as it encounters higher temperature regime inside earth
melts and produces magma. This magma rises to the surface to produce chains of
volcanos and islands known as island arcs. One of the areas around Indian
peninsula where subduction process is in progress is near Andaman-Sumatra
region, where the Indo-Australian plate is subducting below the Andaman and Sunda
plates, Figure 1.8.

Figure 1.8 Subduction process along Andaman-Sumatra arc, [From Geological

Survey of India, http://www.portal.gsi.gov.in/gsiDoc/pub/cs_sumatra.pdf].
b. Collision Boundaries
When two plates with continental lithosphere collide, subduction ceases and a
mountain range is formed by squeezing together and uplifting the continental crust
on both plates, Figure 1.9. The Himalayan Mountains between India and China were
formed in this way.

6
Figure 1.9 Creation of collision boundaries [From
http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson /geol204/struct&materials.htm].
3) Transform boundaries
Transform boundaries occur along the plate margins where two plate moves past
each other without destroying or creating new crust, Figure 1.10.

Figure 1.10 A typical profile of a transform plate boundary.

1.5. Faults
The term fault is used to describe a discontinuity within rock mass, along which
movement had happened in the past. Plate boundary is also a type of fault.
Lineaments are mappable linear surface features and may reflect subsurface
phenomena. A lineament could be a fault, a joint or any other linear geological
phenomena. Most faults produce repeated displacements over geologic time.
Movement along a fault may be gradual or sometimes sudden thus, generating an
earthquake.

7
Figure 1.11 Various terminolgies assocaited with the rupture plane of a fault.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 1.12 Types of faults (Arrow shows direction of relative displacement)

(a) Normal fault; (b) Reverse fault; (c) Strike-slip fault; (d) Oblique fault.

There are two important parameters associated with describing faults, namely, dip
and strike, Figure 1.11. The strike is the direction of a horizontal line on the surface
of the fault. The dip, measured in a vertical plane at right angles to the strike of the
fault, is the angle of fault plane with horizontal. The hanging wall of a fault refers to
the upper rock surface along which displacement has occurred, whereas the foot
wall is the term given to that below. The vertical shift along a fault plane is called the
throw, and the horizontal displacement is termed as heave.
Faults are classified in to dip-slip faults, strike-slip faults and oblique-slip faults based
on the direction of slippage along the fault plane, Figure 1.12. In a dip-slip fault, the
slippage occurred along the dip of the fault, Figure – 1.12(a) and (b). In case of a
strike-slip fault, the movement has taken place along the strike, Figure 1.12(c). The
movement occurs diagonally across the fault plane in case of an oblique slip fault,
Figure 1.12(d). Based on relative movement of the hanging and foot walls faults are
classified into normal, reverse and wrench faults. In a normal fault, the hanging wall
has been displaced downward relative to the footwall, Figure 1.12(a). In a reverse
fault, the hanging wall has been displaced upward relative to the footwall, Figure
1.12 (b). In a wrench fault, the foot or the hanging wall do not move up or down in
8
relation to one another, Figure 1.12 (c). Thrust faults, which are a subdivision of
reverse faults, tend to cause severe earthquakes.
Faults are nucleating surfaces for seismic activity. The stresses accumulated due to
plate movement produces strain mostly along the boundary of the plates. This
accumulated strain causes rupture of rocks along the fault plane.
1.6. Elastic Rebound theory
As the plate try to move relative to each other, strain energy gets built up along the
boundaries. When the stress buildup reaches the ultimate strength of rock, rock
fractures and releases the accumulated strain energy, Figure 1.13. The nature of
failure dictates the effect of the fracture. If the material is very ductile and weak,
hardly any strain energy could be stored in the plates due to their movement. But if
the material is strong and brittle, the stress built up and subsequent sudden rupture
releases the energy stored in the form of stress waves and heat. The propagation of
these elastic stress waves causes the vibratory motion associated with earthquakes.
A`

Unstressed
Fault
A`
Stressed

A`
After rupture

Fault

Elevation

Figure 1.13 Elastic rebound across a fault.

The region on the fault, where rupture initiates is known as the focus or hypocenter
of an earthquake. Epicenter is the location on the earth surface vertically above the
focus. Distance from epicenter to any place of interest is called the epicentral
distance. The depth of the focus from the epicenter is the focal depth. Earthquakes
are sometime classified into shallow focus, intermediate focus and deep focus
earthquakes based on its focal depth. Most of the damaging earthquakes are
shallow focus earthquakes.

9
1.7. Earthquakes

Surface waves
Buildings

Earthquake Continental crust

focus

Figure 1.14 General depiction of an earthquake rupture scenario.

Earthquake is the vibration of earth’s surface caused by waves coming from a

source of disturbance inside the earth (refer Figure 1.14). Most earthquakes of
engineering significance are of tectonic origin and is caused by slip along geological
faults.
The typical characteristics of earthquake depends on
1. Stress drop during the slip
2. Total fault displacement
3. Size of slipped area
4. Roughness of the slipping process
5. Fault shape( Normal fault, Reverse fault, Strike slip fault)
6. Proximity of the slipped area to the ground surface
7. Soil condition
As the waves radiate from the fault, they undergo geometric spreading and
attenuation due to loss of energy in the rocks. Since the interior of the earth consists
of heterogeneous formations, the waves undergo multiple reflections, retraction,
dispersion and attenuation as they travel. The seismic waves arriving at a site on the
surface of the earth are a result of complex superposition giving rise to irregular
motion

10
1.8. Earthquake Waves
Earthquake vibrations originate from the point of initiation of rupture and propagates
in all directions. These vibrations travel through the rocks in the form of elastic
waves. Mainly there are three types of waves associated with propagation of an
elastic stress wave generated by an earthquake. These are primary (P) waves,
secondary (S) waves and surface waves. In addition, there are sub varieties among
them. The important characteristics of these three kinds of waves are as follows:
1.8.1. Primary (P) Waves
These are known as primary waves, push-pull waves, longitudinal waves,
compressional waves, etc. These waves propagate by longitudinal or compressive
action, which mean that the ground is alternately compressed and dilated in the
direction of propagation, Figure 1.15. P waves are the fastest among the seismic
waves and travel as fast as 8 to 13 km per second. Therefore, when an earthquake
occurs, these are the first waves to reach any seismic station and hence the first to
be recorded. The P waves resemble sound waves because these too are
compressional or longitudinal waves in nature. Hence, the particles vibrate to and fro
in the direction of propagation (i.e. longitudinal particle motion). These waves are
capable of traveling through solids, liquids and gases.

Figure 1.15 Nature of propagation of P waves.

The P-waves propagates radial to the source of the energy release and the velocity
is expressed by
E (1 − ν)
Vp =
ρ (1 + ν)(1 − 2ν) (1.1)
where E is the Young’s modulus; ν is the Poisson’s ratio (0.25); and ρ is the density.
1.8.2. Secondary (S) Waves
These are also called shear waves, secondary waves, transverse waves, etc.
Compared to P waves, these are relatively slow. These are transverse or shear
waves, which mean that the ground is displaced perpendicularly to the direction of
propagation, Figure 1.16. In nature, these are like light waves, i.e., the waves move
perpendicular to the direction of propagation. Hence, transverse particle motion is
characteristic of these waves. These waves are capable of traveling only through
solids. If the particle motion is parallel to prominent planes in the medium they are

11
called SH waves. On the other hand, if the particle motion is vertical, they are called
SV waves. The shear wave velocity is given by

E G
Vs = =
2ρ(1 + ν) ρ (1.2)
E
where G = is the shear modulus.
2(1 + ν)

Figure 1.16 Nature of propagation of S waves.

They travel at the rate of 5 to 7 km per second. For this reason these waves are
always recorded after P waves in a seismic station.
1.8.3. Surface Waves
When the vibratory wave energy is propogating near the surface of the earth rather
than deep in the interior, two other types of waves known a Rayleigh and Love
waves can be identified. These are called surface waves because their journey is
confined to the surface layers of the earth only. Surface waves travel through the
earth crust and does not propagate into the interior of earth unlike P or S waves.
Surface waves are the slowest among the seismic waves. Therefore, these are the
last to be recorded in the seismic station at the time of occurrence of the earthquake.
They travel at the rate of 4 to 5 km per second. Complex and elliptical particle
motion is characteristic of these waves. These waves are capable of travelling
through solids and liquids. They are complex in nature and are said to be of two
kinds, namely, Raleigh waves and Love waves.

(a) (b)
Figure 1.17 Nature of propagation of (a) Rayleigh waves and (b) Love Waves
(from http://earthquake.usgs.gov)
The Rayleigh surface waves are tension-compression waves similar to the P-waves
expect that their amplitude diminishes with distance below the surface of the ground.
Similarly, the Love waves are the counterpart of the “S” body waves; they are shear
waves that diminishes rapidly with distance below surface, Figure 1.17.

12
The damage and destruction associated with earthquakes can be mainly attributed
to surface waves. This damage potential and the strength of the surface waves
reduce with increase in depth of earthquakes.
1.9. Earthquake Terminology
The motion of plates results in stress buildup along plate boundaries as well as in
interior domain of the plate. Depending on the state of buildup of stress and amount
of resistance offered by the fault strata, rupture is initiated as stress exceeds the
capacity of the strata. Generally, the rupture causing earthquakes initiates from a
point, termed as hypocenter or focus, which subsequently spreads over to a large
area. Depending on the characteristics of strata where rupture occurs, the shape of
the ruptured area could be highly irregular and the amount of interface slip along the
ruptured surface could also vary. Several terms associated with earthquake
rupture/propagation are discussed given below:

EPICENTRAL DISTANCE

EPICENTER SITE
FOCAL DEPTH

HYPOCENTRAL
DISTANCE

FOCUS OR HYPOCENTER

Figure 1.18 Various distance measurements associated with earthquake.

The place of origin of the earthquake in the interior of the earth is known as focus or
origin or centre or hypocenter (refer Fig. 1.18). The place on the earth's surface,
which lies exactly above the centre of the earthquake, is known as the 'epicenter'.
For obvious reasons, the destruction caused by the earthquake at this place will
always be maximum and with an increasing distance from this point, the intensity of
destruction also decreases. The point on earth's surface diametrically opposite to the
epicenter is called the anti-center. An imaginary line which joins the points at which
the earthquake waves have arrived at the earth's surface at the same time is called a
'co-seismal'. In homogeneous grounds with plain surfaces, the iso-seismals and co-
seismals coincide. Of course, in many cases due to surface and subsurface
irregularities, such coincidence may not occur.

13
1.10. Recording Earthquakes [Murty, 2005]
The vibratory motion produced during an earthquake could be measured in terms of
displacement, velocity or acceleration. A seismologist is interested in even small
amplitude ground motions (in terms of
displacement) that provides insight into the wave
propagation characteristics and enables him to
estimate the associated earthquake parameters.
As accelerations are the causative phenomena
for forces that damage structures (Force = mass
x acceleration), engineers are more concerned
with the earthquake causing structural damage,
hence are interested in acceleration
measurement.
The instruments measure the ground
displacements and are called seismographs. Figure 1.19 Schematic of a
The record obtained from a seismograph is seismograph [Source: IIT-K
called a seismogram. BMTPC Eq Tips – 02].

The seismograph has three components – the sensor, the recorder and the timer.
The principle on which it works is simple and is explicitly reflected in the early
seismograph – a pen attached at the tip of an oscillating simple pendulum (a mass
hung by a string from a support) marks on a chart paper that is held on a drum
rotating at a constant speed. A magnet around the string provides required damping
to control the amplitude of oscillations. The pendulum mass, string, magnet and
support together constitute the sensor; the drum, pen and chart paper constitutes the
recorder; and the motor that rotates the drum at constant speed forms the timer,
Figure 1.19. By varying the characteristics of equipment one could record
displacement, velocity or acceleration during an earthquake
The devises that measure the ground accelerations are called accelerometer. The
accelerometers register the accelerations of the soil and the record obtained is called
an accelerogram. Further discussions on accelerograms and its engineering
applications are covered in section 2.

1.11. Determination of Hypocenter or Earthquake Focus

Seismologists use the elapsed time between the arrival of a P-waves and S-waves
at a given site to assist them in estimating the distance from the site to the center of
energy release. The distance of focus from the observation station is determined by
the relative arrival times of the P and S waves. The distance from hypocenter to
observation point is given by
T
S=
 1 1 
 −  (1.3)
 Vs V p 
 
14
where, T=difference in time of arrival of P and S waves at an observation point; S=
distance from hypocenter to observation point; and Vp and Vs are the velocity of P
and S waves, respectively.
The time T can be taken as the time of duration of the initial tremor to it built-up while
Vp and Vs are geological properties for a given locations. Thus, the distance from the
hypocenter to the observation point is approximately proportional to the time of
duration of the initial tremor; the coefficient of proportionality is about 8 km/sec.
When S has been determined for each of three observation points the hypocenter is
located as the point of intersection of these spheres.

1.12. Size of Earthquakes

The size of earthquake could be related to the damage caused or parameters like
magnitude. These two useful definitions of the size of earthquakes are sometimes
confused.
1.12.1. Intensity of Earthquakes
The intensity of an earthquake refers to the degree of destruction caused by it. In
other words, intensity of an earthquake is a measure of severity of the shaking of
ground and its attendant damage. This, of course, is empirical to some extent
because the extent of destruction or damage that takes place to a construction at a
given place depends on many factors. Some of these factors are: (i) distance from
the epicenter, (ii) compactness of the underlying ground, (iii) type of construction (iv)
magnitude of the earthquake (v) duration of the earthquake and (vi) depth of the
focus. Intensity is the oldest measure of earthquake.
The seismic intensity scale consists of a series of certain key responses such as
people awakening, movement of furniture, damage to chimneys, and finally - total
destruction. Numerous intensity scales have been developed over the last several
hundred years to evaluate the effects of earthquakes, the most popular is the
Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale. This scale, composed of 12 increasing levels
of intensity that range from imperceptible shaking to catastrophic destruction, is
designated by Roman numerals. It does not have a mathematical basis; instead it is
an arbitrary ranking based on observed effects. The lower numbers of the intensity
scale generally deal with the manner in which the earthquake is felt by people. The
higher numbers of the scale are based on observed structural damage. An
abbreviated version of the MMI scale is given in Table 1.1 as per IS-1893:1984.
Another intensity scale is Mendvedev-Spoonheuer-Karnik scale (MSK 64). This
scale is more comprehensive and describes the intensity of earthquake more
precisely. Indian seismic zones were categorized on the basis of MSK 64 scale.
Some of the other intensity scales used are Rossi-Forel (RF) scale, Japanese
Meteorological Agency (JMA) intensity scale, etc. Figure 1.20 gives a comparison of
the various seismic intensity scales used worldwide.
An imaginary line joining the points of same intensity of the earthquake is called an
'iso-seismal'. In plan, the different iso-seismals will appear more or less as concentric
circles over a plain, homogeneous ground if the focus of the earthquake is a point.
On the other hand, if the focus happens to be a linear tract, the iso-seismals will

15
occur elongated. Naturally, the areas or zones enclosed by any two successive iso-
seismals would have suffered the same extent of destruction.

Over the years, researchers have tried to develop more quantitative ways for
estimating earthquake intensity. One of such relationships correlating earthquake
intensity to peak ground velocity is given by

log1014Vg
MMI= (1.4)
log10 2

where Vg is the peak ground velocity in cm/sec.

Another such relation reported by Wald et.al, (1999) based on Californian

earthquake database is

MMI = 3.47 log(Vg) + 2.35 (1.5)

In addition to peak ground velocity, empirical relationships correlating peak ground

acceleration to MMI has also been reported. For e.g.,
MMI = 3.66 log (Peak Ground Acceleration in cm/sec/sec) – 1.66 (1.6)

16
Figure 1.20 A comparison of various seismic intensity scales used worldwide.

17
 Table 1.1 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale (IS-1893:1984).
MMI Remarks
Intensity

I Not felt except by a very few under specially favourable circumstances

II Felt only by a few persons at rest, specially on upper floors of buildings; and
delicately suspended objects may swing.
III Felt quite noticeably indoors, specially on upper floors of buildings but many
people do not recognise it as an earthquake; standing motor cars may rock
slightly; and vibrations may be felt like the passing of a truck.
IV During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by a few, at night some awakened;
dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make creaking sound, sensation like
heavy truck striking the building; and standing motor cars rock noticeably.
V Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened; some dishes, windows, etc, broken; a
few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned; disturbance of
trees, poles and other tall objects noticed sometimes; and pendulum clocks may
stop.
VI Felt by all, many frightened and run outdoors; some heavy furniture moved; a few
instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys; and damage slight.
VII Everybody runs outdoors, damage negligible in buildings of good design and
construction; slight to moderate in well built ordinary structures; and some
chimneys broken, noticed by persons driving motor cars.
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary but
substantial buildings with partial collapse; very heavy in poorly built structures;
panel walls thrown out of framed structures; falling of a chimney, factory stacks,
columns, monuments, and walls; heavy furniture overturned, sand and mud eject
in small amounts; changes in well water; and disturbs persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well designed framed
structures thrown out of plumb; very heavy in substantial buildings with partial
collapse; building shifted off foundations; ground cracked conspicuously; and
underground pipes broken.
X Some well built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and framed
structures with foundations destroyed; ground badly cracked; rails bent; landslides
considerable from river banks and steep slopes; shifted sand and mud; and water
splashed over banks.
XI Few, if any, masonry structures remain standing; bridges destroyed; broad
fissures in ground, underground pipelines completely out of service; earth slumps
and landslips in soft ground; and rails bent greatly.
XII Total damage; waves seen on ground surfaces; lines of sight and levels distorted;
and objects thrown upward into the air.

18
1.12.2. Magnitude of Earthquake
The magnitude of an earthquake is related to the amount of energy released by the
geological rupture causing it, and is therefore a measure of the absolute size of the
earthquake, without reference to distance from the epicenter. While earthquake
intensity is depicted in Roman numerals and is always a whole number, magnitude is
depicted in Arabic numerals and need not be a whole number. Similar to intensity
scales, over the years, a number of approaches for measurement of magnitude of an
earthquake have come into existence.
1.12.3. Richter Magnitude, ML
A workable definition of magnitude was first proposed by C.F. Richter. He based on
the data from Californian earthquakes, defined the earthquake magnitude as the
logarithm to the base 10 of the largest displacement of a standard seismograph
(called Wood-Anderson Seismograph with properties T=0.8 sec; m=2800; and
damping nearly critical ≈ 0.8) situated 100 km from the focus.
M=log10 A (1.7)
where A denotes the amplitude in micron (10-6m) recorded by the instrument located
at an epicentral distance of 100 km; and M is the magnitude of the earthquake.
When the distance from the epicenter at which an observation is obtained other than
100 km, a correction is introduced to the equation as follows:
 100 
M=M ∆ -1.73log10   (1.8)
 ∆ 
where M is the magnitude of the earthquake; ∆=distance from epicenter (km), M∆=
magnitude of the earthquake calculated for earthquake using the values measured
at a distance ∆ from the epicenter. The graphical form of this procedure is given in
Figure 1.21.

19
Figure 1.21 A graphical form of the estimation of Gutenberg – Richer magnitude
[From Lay and Wallace, 1995].
Because of the logarithmic nature of the definition a difference of 1.0 in the
magnitude represents a difference of 10 in the seismograph amplitude. Magnitude
observations by different recording stations usually differ quite widely, often by as
much as one magnitude, which is later corrected taking into account the recordings
from a large number of instruments.
1.12.4. Moment magnitude
Over the years, scientists observed that different magnitude scales had saturation
points and the magnitudes estimated by different approaches did not point to a
unique value of earthquake size The Richter magnitude saturates at about 6.8, and
the surface wave magnitude at about 7.8. In addition, these magnitude estimates did
not have a linear relation with the energy released due to earthquake rupture. To
address these short falls, Hanks and Kanamori, in 1979 proposed a magnitude
scale, termed as ‘moment magnitude’, based on the seismic moment due to
earthquake rupture. The moment magnitude is given by

Mw =
2
(log10 M 0 − 9.1) (1.9)
3
where Mw is the moment magnitude, M0 is the seismic moment in N-m.

In addition to the magnitude scales as discussed, Surface wave magnitude, Ms,

based on the amplitude of Rayleigh waves having a period of about 20 seconds,
body wave magnitude, Mb based on the amplitude of first few P wave cycles are also
being used.
A comparison of various magnitude scales are given in Figure 1.22. It can be noted
from Figure that the moment magnitude does not saturate.

20
Figure 1.22 A comparison of different magnitude scales.

Example 1.1
Calculate the moment magnitude of an earthquake with the rupture area dimensions
of length 35km, width 15km and slip 1meter. Assume modulus of rigidity, mu = 3.5 x
1010 N/m2
Solution: Given
Length of ruptured area of fault : 35 km
Width of ruptured area of fault : 15km
Average slip : 1 m

Seismic moment = mu x Length x Widthx Slip

= 3.5 x 1010 x (35 x 1000) x (15 x 1000) x 1
= 1.84 x 1019 N-m

Earthquake magnitude, Mw = (2/3) x [log(1.84 x 1019) – 9.1]

= 6.8

1.13. Energy of an Earthquake

An approximate relationship between surface wave magnitude, Ms, and the energy
released by an earthquake, E, is given by
log10 E = 4.8 + 1.5M s
(1.10)
21
where E is measured in joules. Thus the ratio of energies released by two
earthquakes differing by 1 is magnitude is equal to 31.6. The ratio is 1000 for
earthquakes differing by 2 in magnitude, Table 1.2. Comparisons have been made
between natural forces and nuclear weapons. The energy released by a 1 megaton
hydrogen bomb is roughly equivalent to a magnitude 7.4 earthquake. Figure 1.23
shows the variation of the energy released against the magnitude.

Table 1.2: Increase in Energy Release for Various Range of Increase in Value
of Magnitude
Increase in Magnitude Increase in Energy Release
0.2 2 Times
0.447 5 Times
0.67 10 Times
1 31.6 Times
2 1000 Times

1E20

1E19

1E18

1E17
Energy Released (J)

1E16

1E15

1E14

1E13

1E12

1E11

1E10
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Magnitude

Figure 1.23: Energy magnitude relationships.

1.14. Comparison of Magnitude and Intensity

Comparisons between magnitude and intensity are fraught with difficulty. Firstly,
intensity varies with distance from the epicentre. Secondly, a large earthquake may
occur away from inhabited areas and therefore cause little apparent damage. Focal
depth, ground conditions and quality of building construction can have a
considerable effect on subjective assessments of damage. Magnitude-intensity
relationships are not favoured for engineering purposes. However, intensity could be
22
the only information available for large historical earthquakes and the inputs from
intensity measurements would be necessary in estimating the maximum earthquake
potential of the region.
In 1956, Richter proposed a simple relationship between magnitude and epicentral
intensity given by

ML = 2
3
(I 0 ) + 1 (1.11)
The equation was derived by comparison of magnitude and epicentral intensity data
of Californian earthquakes.
This relationship could vary from region to region. For e.g., Street and Turcotte in
1977 proposed a magnitude intensity relation specific to North-eastern North
America, given by
mbLg = 0.49( I 0 ) + 1.66
(1.12)
However, it is found that correlations between intensity and magnitude are not
particularly accurate for estimation of earthquake magnitude. In addition to epicentral
intensity, researchers have attempted to associate other intensity related parameters
like log of area with intensity greater than IV; log of felt area, fall off intensity, etc.,
with varying levels of success. Figure 1.24 shows a comparison of magnitudes
estimated from intensity using different approaches as mentioned above.

Figure 1.24 Correlation between earthquake magnitude and various intensity

measures. [From Reiter L., 1989].

23
24
1.16 Tutorial Problems

1. Where do earthquakes happen?

2. Where do over 90% of earthquakes occur?

3. Why do earthquakes happen?

4. What are the formulae for P and S velocity?

5. What is an earthquake?
6. Indicate the approximate radius of the earth, inner core, and outer core.

7. How are Earthquake Magnitudes Measured?

8. What is a fault?

9. What are different types of faults?

10. What is the biggest earthquake recorded?

11. What is intensity?

12. The Mohorovicic discontinuity is the seismic boundary between

(A) Crust and mantle.

(B) Asthenosphere and lithosphere

(C) Core and mantle

(D) Mantle and lithosphere

13. Which type of seismic wave does not pass through a fluid?

(A) Surface wave

(B) Body wave

(C) S-wave

(D) P-wave

14. The size and shape of the earth's core can be measured by information from
the

(A) Earth's weight

(B) S-wave shadow zone

(C) nature of meteorites

25
 (D) P-wave shadow zone

15. Part of the earth's core is believed to be liquid as indicated by information

from the

(A) Nature of meteorites

(B) S-wave shadow

(C) Earth's magnetic field.

(D) P-wave shadow

16. The least dense rocks are found in

(A) Continental crust.

(B) Oceanic crust.

(C) The mantle.

(D) the core.

17. At a recording station a difference in time of arrival between P waves and S
waves was observed to be 1.5 seconds. What is the approximate distance
from the station at which the event occurred? Assume P wave velocity as 4
km/sec and S wave velocity as 2 km/sec.

18. During an earthquake the maximum amplitude recorded at a site by Wood-

Anderson Seismograph is 20 cm. The maximum ground velocity recorded
was 25 cm/sec. The site was found to be 75 km away from the epicenter.
Determine the Magnitude and Intensity of the occurred earthquake.

19. The epicentral intensity of an earthquake that occurred in 1870 is estimated to

be IX in MMI scale. Estimate the approximate magnitude of the earthquake.

20. Estimate the moment magnitude of an event with rupture length of 100km,
rupture width of 45km and slip of average fault slip of 3m. Take modulus of
rigidity, mu as 3.5 x 1010 N/m2

26
1.17 Answers to Tutorial Problems
1. Earthquakes occur all the time all over the world, both along plate edges and
along faults. Most earthquakes occur along the edge of the oceanic and
continental plates. The earth's crust (the outer layer of the planet) is made up
of several pieces, called plates. Earthquakes usually occur where two plates
are running into each other or sliding past each other.

2. At plate boundaries

3. Earthquakes are usually caused when rock underground suddenly breaks

along a fault. This sudden release of energy causes the seismic waves that
make the ground shake.
4. The P-waves propagates radial to the source of the energy release and the
velocity is expressed by
E (1 − ν)
Vp =
ρ (1 + ν)(1 − 2ν)

where E is the Young’s modulus; ν is the Poisson’s ratio (0.25); and ρ is the
density.

The shear wave velocity is given by

E G
Vs = =
2ρ(1 + ν) ρ
E
where G = is the shear modulus
2(1 + ν)

5. Earthquake is the vibration of earth’s surface caused by waves coming from a

source of disturbance inside the earth. Most earthquake of engineering
significance is of tectonic origin and is caused by slip along geological faults.
6. The average thickness of crust beneath continents is about 40km where as it
decreases to as much as 5km beneath oceans. Mantle is a 2900 km thick
layer. The mantle consists of 1) Upper Mantle reaching a depth of about 400
km made of olivine and pyroxene and 2) Lower Mantle made of more
homogeneous mass of magnesium and iron oxide and quartz. Core has a
radius of 3470 km and consists of an inner core of radius 1370 km and an
outer core (1370 km < R<3470 km).
7. The magnitude of most earthquakes is measured on the Richter scale,
invented by Charles F. Richter in 1934. The Richter magnitude is calculated
from the amplitude of the largest seismic wave recorded for the earthquake,
no matter what type of wave was the strongest. The Richter magnitudes are
based on a logarithmic scale (base 10).
27
8. A fault is a fracture or zone of fractures between two blocks of rock. Faults
allow the blocks to move relative to each other. Faults may range in length
from a few millimeters to thousands of kilometers.
9. During an earthquake, the rock on one side of the fault suddenly slips with
respect to the other. The fault surface can be horizontal or vertical or some
arbitrary angle in between. Earth scientists use the angle of the fault with
respect to the surface (known as the dip) and the direction of slip along the
fault to classify faults. Faults which move along the direction of the dip plane
are dip-slip faults and described as either normal or reverse, depending on
their motion. Faults which move horizontally are known as strike-slip faults
and are classified as either right-lateral or left-lateral. Faults which show both
dip-slip and strike-slip motion are known as oblique-slip faults
10. The largest earthquake to occur in the twentieth century is the 1960 Chilean
earthquake, which occurred off the coast of South America. The magnitude of
this earthquake has been estimated to be a 9.5. The earthquake created a
deadly tsunami more than 10 m in height along the Chile coast, eliminating
entire villages. Some hours later, the tsunami killed hundreds more in Japan,
more than 13000 km from the earthquake source.
11. Of the two ways to measure earthquake size, magnitude is based on
instrumental readings and intensity is based on qualitative effects of
earthquakes.
12. Ans: A, Ugoslavian scientist Mohorovicic in 1909 discovered the boundary
between the crust and the mantle. The boundary is a zone where seismic P-
waves increase in velocity because of changes in the composition of the
materials.
13. Ans: C, S-wave cannot because you can compress a fluid (P-wave) but you
cannot shear a fluid (S-wave).
14. Ans: D, Seismic P-waves spread throughout the earth from a large
earthquake. These waves are measured by seismic recording stations all
around the world except between 103o and 142o of arc from the earthquake.
This is the P-wave shadow zone,
15. Ans: B, The S-wave shadow zone is formed because S-waves cannot travel
through the earth's core. This, and other seismic data indicate that the outer
part is liquid, or at least it acts like a liquid.
16. Ans: A, continental crust.
17. Given
Vp = 4000m/sec, Vs = 2000m/sec
T = 1.5 sec

Distance = 1.5 / { (1/2000) – (1/4000) }

= 6000m = 6km.
18. Solution: Given Data

28
 A=20 cm = 0.2 m = 0.2×106 micron

∆=75km

Vg=25 cm/sec

The magnitude of the earthquake

 100  = 5.1
M = log10 (0.2 × 10 6 ) - 1.73log10  
 75 

The intensity of the earthquake

log10 14 × 25
MMI = = 8.45 (say VIII)
log 10 2

19. Solution: Given Data

Epicentral Intensity, I0 = IX.
Equivalent earthquake magnitude = (2/3) I0 +1
= (2/3) * 9 + 1 = 7

20. Solution: Given Data

Fault length = 35km = 35 x 1000 m

Fault width = 15km = 15 x 1000 m
Slip = 1m

Seismic moment = 3.5 x 1010 x 35 x 1000 x 15 x 1000 x 1 = 1.84 x 1019 N-m

Moment magnitude = (2/3)(log10(1.84 x 1019) – 9.1) = 6.8

29
Chapter 2
Strong Motion and Estimation of Seismic Hazard

2.1. General
The propagation of seismic waves and resulting ground displacement during an
earthquake is picked up even at far off places. But scientists had noticed that the
damages caused by earthquakes were restricted to within few hundreds of kilometers
from the causative fault. The quest for recording, understanding and characterizing the
ground motion so as to make it amenable for structural design was initiated well before
the beginning of 20th century and the efforts commenced in design of accelerographs.
The latest accelerographs are capable of providing digital records of ground
acceleration with frequency content from DC to even upto 100Hz with a sampling
frequency of 200 sps or more.

The recorded ground motions are used to analyze related site and earthquake
characteristics and its impact on seismic behavior of structures and equipments. For
this purpose, various types of parameters derived from ground motion records are used.
For designing a structure against earthquake at a particular site calls for not only
understanding of characteristics controlling ground motion but also detailed
understanding of seismo-tectonic characteristics of site and evaluation of seismic
hazard in the region surrounding the site. The evaluation of seismic hazard primarily
hinges upon past seismicity, rate of earthquake activity, and tectonic potential of the
region. The evaluation procedure could be based on a deterministic approach where in
only the maximum values of estimates are considered or based on a probabilistic
approach which is amenable for incorporation of rate of earthquake activity and
incorporation of uncertainties in a better way.

This section describes the instruments for measurement of earthquake ground motion
as used in evaluation of structural response (also termed as strong ground motion),
various parameters derived from strong ground motion to represent the motion
characteristics and approaches for evaluation of seismic hazard.

2.2. Earthquake Ground Motion

For the design of structures to resist earthquakes, it is necessary to have some

knowledge of ground motions. Earthquakes motion can be recorded in terms of ground
displacement, velocity or acceleration. During earthquakes, the ground movement is
very complex, producing translations in any general direction combined with rotations
about arbitrary axes. Modern strong motion accelerographs are designed to record
three translational components of ground acceleration, switching on by themselves
automatically once an earthquake ground motion reaches a certain threshold level,

30
usually about 0.005 g. The first complete record of strong ground motion was obtained
during the 1940 El-Centro earthquake in California (Figure 2.1). Over a period of years
increasing numbers of strong motion recorders have been installed in many parts of the
world and have yielded much useful data.

0 .4
Acceleration (g)

0 .2

0 .0

-0 .2

-0 .4
40
Velocity (cm/sec)

20

-2 0

-4 0
10
Displacement (cm)

-1 0

-2 0

-3 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
T im e ( s e c )

Figure 2.1 Example of strong motion earthquake record (N-S component of El-Centro,
1940 earthquake).

The strong ground motion is recorded with the help of accelerometers. When the natural
frequency of the instrument is very high compared to that of the vibrations to be
measured, the instrument picks up the acceleration of the motion measured. Hence
accelerometers have high natural frequency. Alternately this implies that stiffness K of
accelerometer should be very large and mass m should be small. Therefore, the
accelerometers are compact in size.

Before the arrival of digital era, the accelerations were recorded on light sensitive paper.
However, these records were often exposed to stray light and during large high
frequency oscillations, the optical density of the trace would become faint due to faster
movement of light beam. With the advent of new technologies, the design strong motion
instruments have taken large strides in terms of types of devises used for triggering of
recording, measurements of motion and recording of motion. The recent digital

31
instruments are also capable of recording certain length of pre-event history, thus
including data before exceedence of trigger level. However, any strong motion
instrumentation essentially requires the following components:

1. Vibrating machine
2. Vibration transducer
3. Signal conversion
4. Display / recording.
5. Data analysis.

The recorded data is corrected to remove instrumental error, if any, and is analysed to
derive the relevant characteristics of recorded motion.

2.3. Errors in Strong Motion Records

Errors are introduced into recorded motion at various stages in the processes leading to
their final form. The source of these errors and approximations for their magnitudes,
wherever possible, are summarized here.

2.3.1. Errors in Recording

The trace produced by a strong-motion accelerograph is considered to be a record of

ground acceleration during an earthquake. The basic element of an accelerograph is
essentially a damped, simple oscillator. Since an earthquake motion contains a range
of frequencies, some distortions in amplitude and phase invariable occur, depending
upon the damping of the recording element and the ratio of the natural frequency of the
element to the input frequencies. From an analysis of the instrument response it can be
shown that the percentage of amplitude distortion and the phase distortion in degrees
given by

e A = 100 ( k − 1) (2.1)

eP = ( φ − 90β) (2.2)

in which eA and eP are the amplitude and phase errors, respectively and
1
k= (2.3a)
( )
1 − β 2 + ( 2ξβ )
2 2

ω
β= ; (2.3b)
ω0

2ξβ
φ = tan −1 (2.3c)
1 − β2

32
in which ω = input frequency in radians per second, ω0 = natural frequency of the
element, ξ = fraction of critical damping.

For damping of the order of 60 percent (usually provided in the accelerographs)

and 0 < β < 1, it can be shown from above equations that amplitude distortion is less
than 10 percent and phase distortion less than 5 degrees. Thus, the accelerograph will
record with this accuracy, frequency content from zero up to its natural frequency, which
is typically about 25 cycles per second in the case of analog accelerographs and 50-100
cycles per second for digital accelerographs. If the ground motion contains frequencies
higher than the natural frequency of the accelerograph, both the amplitude and the
phase of these frequency components will be distorted significantly.

2.3.2. Errors in Digitization

1. Scaling Error – This error arises from the inherent limitations of the resolving
power of any scaling device. For most instruments now in use it is of the order of
0.01 in.

2. Random Error in Time and Acceleration Records – The thickness of the line
defining the record makes the choice of points at which discernible changes of
slope occur and the scaling of magnitudes a matter of individual judgment. This
leads to errors in both time and acceleration coordinates. If the same record is
digitized by different persons, the standard deviations of the random errors in
time and acceleration typically may be 0.018 secs and 0.001 g respectively.
These reading errors may in turn, causes errors up to 20 percent in undamped
spectra calculated from the records.

3. Baseline Correction – The unknown distortion introduced into the ground

acceleration during recording and digitization is corrected to some degree by
adjusting the baseline, herein by a technique which minimizes the resulting
ground velocity. A detailed discussion on various baseline correction schemes
and their impact is available in Boore (2001) and Boore and Bommer (2005).

4. Distortion of the Record – For data sampling at equal time intervals, the cutoff
frequency, called the Nyquist frequency, is given by

1
fc = (2.4)
2∆t

in which ∆t is the sample interval. Such sampling causes aliasing error, since
frequency content higher than fc is folded into the lower frequency range 0 to fc
and confused with the data in this lower range. In earthquake records, with
closely spaced, sharp peaks and many changes of slope this problem is
important and it is necessary to use small intervals of digitization.

33
2.4. Strong Motion Arrays in India

Starting from 1976, Department of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of

Technology, Roorkee (formerly known as University of Roorkee), operated a network of
about 200 analog strong motion accelerographs covering parts of Himachal Pradesh,
Punjab, Haryana, Uttaranchal, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Sikkim, and
northeastern India.

However, due to technological obsolescence of the components/instruments used for

the network Department of Science and Technology (DST), sanctioned a project titled
“National Strong Motion Instrumentation Network” to the Indian Institute of Technology,
Roorkee (IITR), in 2004 to install 300 state-of-the-art digital strong motion
accelerographs in northern and northeastern India to monitor earthquake activity in
seismic zones V and IV, and in some heavily populated cities in seismic zone III. The
locations of instruments in this network are given in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2 Location of instrumental in Indian strong motion network (based on Ashok
Kumar et.al, 2012).

2.5. Ground Motion Characteristics

Several earthquake parameters are reported in the literature for quantitatively
describing the various characteristics of the ground motion. These cover characteristics
such as amplitude of motion, frequency content of motion, duration of motion, etc.
Loading effect of earthquake ground motion at a site is generally represented by three
ground motion (GM) parameters viz. peak ground acceleration, response spectrum and
acceleration time history. The combined influence of the amplitude of ground
accelerations, their frequency content and the duration of the ground shaking on
different structures is represented by means of response spectrum.

The three ground motion parameters i.e. peak ground acceleration (PGA) value,
response spectrum and acceleration time history of a site, commonly used in the design
of structure, are known as design basis ground motion parameters (DBGM).

34
2.6. Amplitude Parameters
2.6.1. Peak Ground Acceleration
The earthquake time history contains several engineering characteristics of ground
motion and maximum amplitude of motion is one of the important parameter among
them. The PGA is a measure of maximum amplitude of motion and is defined as the
largest absolute value of acceleration time history.

The response of very stiff structures (i.e., with high frequency) is related to PGA.
Though PGA is not a very good measure of damage potential of ground motion; due to
its close relation with response spectrum and usability in scaling of response spectrum,
PGA is extensively used in engineering applications.

Generally, at distances several source dimensions away, vertical PGAs are found to be
less than horizontal PGA though at near source distances it could be equal to higher
than the corresponding horizontal PGA. For engineering purposes, vertical PGA is
assumed to be two thirds of the horizontal PGA.

2.6.2. Peak Velocity

Peak velocity is the largest absolute value of velocity time history. It is more sensitive to
the intermediate frequency components of motion and characterizes the response to
structures that are sensitive to intermediate range of ground motions, e.g. tall buildings,
bridges, etc.

2.6.3. Peak Displacement

Peak displacements reflect the amplitude of lower frequency components in ground
motion. Accurate estimation of these parameters is difficult as the errors in signal
processing and numerical integration greatly affect the estimation of amplitude of
displacement time history.

2.7. Frequency Content of Motion

Earthquake ground motion is an amalgamation of harmonic motion with a range of
frequency components and amplitudes. Several approaches have been proposed in the
literature to quantitatively estimate these characteristics. Some of these are discussed
below

2.7.1. Response Spectra

A plot showing the maximum response induced by ground motion in single degree of
freedom oscillators of different fundamental time periods having same damping is
known as response spectrum. The maximum response could be spectral acceleration,
spectral velocity or spectral displacement.

35
The spectral
pectral velocity and spectral acceleration are related by:

SA = ω0 SV (2.5)

acceleration SV spectral velocity and ω0 the natural circular

where SA is the spectral acceleration,
frequency. Similarly, it can be shown that

SV = ω0 SD (2.6)

where SD is the spectral displacement.

As response spectra represents the frequency content of the motion after propagation
through earth’s crust,, large amount of variability is expected across the response
spectra. Figure 2.3 depicts the time histories (all normalized to 1g PGA) and
corresponding response spectra, bringing out the variations observed in the response
spectra with respect to time histories.

Figure 2.3 Plot of time histories and corresponding response spectra (Abscissa is in
seconds and ordinate is in ‘g’)
‘g’).

The shape of response spectrum and location of peaks are controlled by characteristics
of site condition (soil/rock) at the location of measurement, magnitude of earthquake,
distance, etc. It is seen that in general, the motion on rock contains more shore period
content of motion compared to that in soil. Similarly, the response spectra from a low
magnitude event recorded at closer distances will be rich in small period or high
frequency components
ponents compared to a large magnitude event recorded at farther
distances. The design response spectral shape, as suggested by Indian standard, BIS
1893, for three types of site conditions are given in Figure 2.4.

36
Figure 2.4 Design response spectral shape suggested by BIS (IS 1893-2002).

The response spectra can be plotted with any of the three parameters (acceleration,
velocity and displacement) as mentioned above as ordinate and period/frequency as
abscissa. Since these parameters are interconnected through the expressions (2.5 and
2.6) as given, all three parameters can also be represented in a single graph known as
tripartite plot or Displacement velocity acceleration (DVA) spectrum. Figure 2.5 depicts
a typical tripartite plot of a response spectrum for two levels of damping. It can be also
noted from the figure that the effect of the damping on the response spectrum is
greatest in the velocity sensitive region, and is least in the acceleration sensitive and
displacement sensitive regions. This is possible due to the fact that in logarithmic
domain, these relationships boils down to a group of straight lines, which are at 45
degree angles with the line corresponding to the spectral velocity.

It can be seen that there are three main regions in a DVA spectrum. The portion of the
response spectrum to the left of point period = 0.1sec is almost constant and is most
directly related to the maximum ground acceleration. Similarly, the portion of response
spectrum to the right of 10 sec period is most directly related to the maximum ground
displacement, which is also constant in that region. The intermediate portion is related
to the maximum velocity of the ground motion.

37
Figure 2.5 A typical tripartite plot or DVA spectrum (From Datta, 2010).

Based on this information, a three zone model of the tripartite plot can be postulated.
These are a displacement sensitive region (that is, long period region), an acceleration
sensitive region (that is, the short period region), and a velocity sensitive region (that is,
the intermediate period region), Figure 2.6. This input is used for estimation of a design
response spectrum from the inputs of peak ground acceleration, peak velocity and peak
displacement.

Figure 2.6 A typical tripartite plot of response spectrum magnifying the constant
acceleration, velocity and displacement regions [From Datta, 2010].

38
2.7.2. Fourier Spectra

The plot of Fourier amplitude of input time history vs time period or frequency is known
as Fourier spectrum. Since the Fourier analysis provides both amplitude and phase
angles, Fourier spectra could either be a Fourier amplitude spectrum or Fourier phase
spectrum. The Fourier amplitude spectrum provides inputs on the frequency content of
the motion and helps to identify the predominant frequency of motion. Similar to
observation made in the case of response spectra, Fourier spectra of two time histories
could be vastly different.

The shape of Fourier spectra is related to seismic moment. The smoothened Fourier
amplitude spectra when plotted in log-log scale shows a shape similar to that given in
Figure 2.5 above, i.e. with a raising limb, a horizontal portion and a falling limb. The
lowest frequency of the horizontal portion is known as corner frequency and the highest
frequency of the horizontal limb as known as cutoff frequency. It is seen that the corner
frequency is inversely proportional to the cube root of seismic moment. This means
large earthquakes produces motions with higher low frequency content compared to
smaller earthquakes (Kramer, 2007).

2.7.3. Power Spectra

Frequency contents of ground motion can also be represented by a power spectrum or

power spectral density function. The ordinate of power spectra is calculated as

1 2
G(ω ) = Cn (2.7)
πTd

where G (ω ) is the spectral density at natural circular frequency, ω ; Td the duration of

time history and Cn the Fourier amplitude at natural circular frequency, ω .

Figure 2.7 depicts a typical plot of power spectral density function.

Figure 2.7 Typical power spectral density function.

39
2.8. Instruments for Direct Recording of Response Spectral
Accelerations

Under the Indian National Strong Motion Network (INSMIN) Program, Department of
Earthquake Engineering (DEQ), IIT Roorkee has installed more than three hundred
Structural Response Recorders (SRR) in different parts of India. The SRR consists of
six recording instruments, in the form of conical pendulums, which measure the vector
sum of horizontal component of motion on a smoked glass plate (Figure 2.8a). These
seismoscopes are relatively inexpensive instruments and do not require a power source
to operate. Their natural periods are adjusted to 0.40sec, 0.75sec and 1.25sec and the
damping provided is 5% and 10% of critical damping. Thus the output from a SRR
provides ordinates of vector sum of spectral acceleration at natural periods 0.4sec,
0.75sec and 1.25sec for 5% and 10% damping. A typical SRR recording is shown in
Figure 2.8(b).

(a)

40
 (b)

Figure 2.8: (a) Photograph of SRR; (b) A typical record from SRR (from Jain et.al,
2012).

2.9. Predictive Relationships for Earthquake Parameters

It is well known fact the strength of earthquake waves generally decrease as they
propagate away from the source. Anomalies to this on observed behavior could be
contributed by reflections from the underlying strata or local site effects. In general, the
attenuation of ground motion parameter depends on the distance from the source and
the magnitude of the earthquake and it is one of the important parameters used in
seismic hazard evaluation of site. The ground motion parameter predicted by the
attenuation relation can be peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, peak
ground displacement, intensity of shaking, or shape of the response spectrum. The

41
attenuation relationships developed are constantly updated based on the availability of
new data for the particular region.

2.9.1. Predictive Relationships for PGA

The acceleration produced by an earthquake is a function of earthquake magnitude and

distance from the source. The attenuation of ground motion is represented by
attenuation relationships. Generally, these empirical relationships have the following
form:

Ln(y) = C1 + C2 m − C3 R (2.8)

where ‘m’ is the magnitude of the earthquake and R is the distance from site. C1, C2 and
C3 are constants and are a function of the regional geology and soil conditions. ‘y’ is the
acceleration at site due to earthquake of magnitude ‘m’ occurring at distance R.

In addition to the above terms, recent attenuation relationships also include functions to
account for non linear dependence of attenuation on distance (usually a log (R)
function), site conditions (soft soil, stiff soil, rock, etc), source type and location of
measurement (reverse/strike slip/normal, hanging wall side or foot wall side), etc.

So a more comprehensive form of attenuation relation would be of the type:

[ ]
ln( y ) = C1 + C 2 m + C 3 m c4 + C 5 ln R + C 6 e C7 m + C 8 R + C 9 f (site _ effects) + C10 f (source)
(2.9)

The coefficients of the equation are determined from observed data using regression
techniques, which uses minimization of error between the measured and predicted
values to calculate the coefficients. Because of this, the predicted value of parameter
would represent a mean estimate with an associated value of standard deviation. It can
be seen from the equation that the acceleration is directly proportional to magnitude and
inversely proportional to distance. Hence, for estimating the maximum acceleration at a
site, one needs to estimate the upper limit magnitude and lower limit of distance.

The attenuation relation for peak ground acceleration (in terms of g) for shallow crustal
earthquakes, as reported by Boore et. al. (1997), is given by

VS
ln Y = b1 + 0.527 ( M − 6) − 0.778 ln r − 0.371 ln (2.10)
1396
where

− 0.313 for strike − slip faults


b1 = − 0.117 for reverse − slip faults
 − 0.242 if mechanism is not specified


42
r is the closest distance to surface projection of rupture and VS is the average shear
wave velocity which depends on the site class.
The standard deviation of the predicted acceleration is given as σ ln Y = 0 .520 . With the
availability of more strong motion data, separate relationships have been developed for
different regions. These include shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regimes,
shallow crustal earthquakes in stable continental regions, subduction zone earthquakes,
and earthquakes in extensional regimes.

M5

M4
Station
Epicenter M2

M3

M1

High Stress Zone

Surface of Fault Slippage

Hypocenter

Figure 2.9 Several type of distance measures used in attenuation relationships, M1:
hypocentral distance, M2 : Epicentral distance, M3: distance to zone of
highest energy release, M4: Distance zone of seismogenic rupture Rseis, M5:
Distance to surface projection of fault, rjb.

Different attenuation relationships use different forms of distance measures (such as Re,
Rhypo, Rz, Rrup, rjb, etc) for prediction of acceleration, Figure 2.9. For smaller
earthquakes and at larger distances, the difference between these may not be of much
concern, but for large events and at closer distances these would be significantly
different. Similarly, depending on the attenuation relation, the predicted parameter ‘y’
could be mean of two horizontal components of acceleration, or geometric mean, or
largest component, etc.

User should be aware of issues with respect to the distance measure adopted b the
particular attenuation relation, nature of predicted parameter, validity range of
attenuation relation with respect to magnitude, distance, source mechanism etc, before
implementing them in analysis. Figure 2.10 depicts the variability in the predicted values
of peak ground acceleration over the distance by different attenuation relations.

43
 1.0000

Campbell, 97
Sadigh, 97
0.1000 Ambraceys, 96
Mc Guire'78
Acceleration, 'g'

0.0100

0.0010

0.0001
10.00 100.00 1000.00
Distance, km

Figure 2.10 Variation of Peak ground acceleration with distance as predicted by

attenuation relationships developed by Campbell (1997), Sadigh et.al, (1997),
Ambraseys (1996), and McGuire (1978).

2.9.2. Predictive Relationships for Response Spectrum

Attenuation relationships are not only available for predicting the peak ground
acceleration but also the spectral ordinates of the response spectrum. In all the
available relationships, the ordinates of response spectrum are calculated for a single
degree of freedom system with 5% of critical damping, Figure 2.11. In these
relationships, the coefficients, Ci’s associated with the attenuation relation will also be a
function of time period/frequency.

0.6

0.5 Campbell - Bozorgnia, (2008), Vs = 760

Atkinson - Boore (2006) ENA hard rock

0.4 Idriss, (2008), Vs=900

Atkinson Boore, (1997)
SA, 'g'

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency, Hz

Figure : 2.11 Comparison of attenuation relationships (developed for intraplate and

interplate regions) for response spectral ordinates corresponding to 6.5
magnitude event with rjb of 30km.

44
2.10. Earthquake Site Effects
Depending on the soil cover underlying the point of observation and the topographical
location; it is observed that the amplitude as well as the frequency content of the
earthquake motion varies. Some of the contributing factors that are responsible for
ground motion modification are discussed below.

2.10.1. Effect of Soil Cover

The magnitude 8.1 Mexico earthquake of 1985 caused heavy causalities in the city of
Mexico. About 10,000 people are estimated to be dead during this event. Since the
epicenter of the earthquake was about 350km away, severity of damage in the city
perplexed the scientific community. It was noticed that majority of the damage was
restricted to the part of the city which was built on an ancient lake bed. The soft
sediment layers of lake bed amplified the earthquake waves in certain frequencies that
caused the damage. Similarly, Narayan and Sharma (2004) reported that the damage
patterns during Bhuj earthquake of 2001 illustrated the strong influence of local geology
conditions on the severity of the damage at many places like soil amplification in
Ahmedabad, Morbi city,etc.
The ground motion amplitude could vary significantly depending on the properties and
configuration of the material located along the near surface. The parameters that govern
this behavior are known as impedance and absorption. It is observed that seismic
waves at the same epicentral distance would be higher on low density, low velocity soil
compared with the high density, high velocity rock. The second parameter, absorption,
counteracts the increase in amplitude. Absorption is the damping associated with the
propagation media and is higher in soils compared to rocks.
When an elastic wave travels through a layered media, at the interface, part of the wave
is transmitted and part of it gets reflected, and the process is governed by the term,
impedance ratio, α z . Impedance ratio is defined as
α z = ρ 2V 2 ρ 1V1 (2.11)
where ρ 1 and V1 are the density and wave velocity of the bottom layer and ρ 2 and V 2
are that of top layer. The amplitude of reflected and transmitted waves in case of one
dimensional wave propagation are:
1−αz
Ar = Ai
1+αz (2.12)

2
At = Ai
1+αz (2.13)

where Ai , Ar and At are the amplitudes of incident, reflected and transmitted waves.

45
From these, it can be observed that for a value of impedance ration equal to zero, i.e.,
free surface, the amplitude of transmitted wave will be twice that of incident wave.
Similarly, an impedance ratio of 0.25 implies that transmitted wave will have 60% more
amplitude compared with incident wave. A comparison of the peak ground accelerations
estimated in soil sites viz-a-viz that in rock sites are given in Figure 2.12. It is noted that
the site conditions effects not only the peak acceleration at the site, but also the
frequency content of the motion. The deeper soil layer is found to shift the predominant
period of the ground motion into the longer periods. But the amount of amplification or
de-amplification shift depends on the depth of soil layer and the related soil properties.
Figure 2.13 depicts the relative amplification of motion with respect to depth of soil
cover.

Figure 2.12 A comparison of ground motions recorded on soil and

rock sites [From Kramer, 2008].

Figure 2.13 Relative amplificaiton factors for a 5% damped response spectrum for sites
with different depths of overlying soil [From Reiter, 1989].

46
2.10.2. Effect of Site Topography
The location of the site in a ridge or a valley will have profound effects on the incident
motion. The theoretical formulations indicate that the in case of a ridge that is
approximated as a triangular wedge, the apex displacements is amplified by a factor of
2π / φ , where φ is the vertex angle of the wedge.
Analysis of topographic irregularities pose a complex problem owing to interaction of
amplification and de-amplification arising from irregular geometry, frequency content of
motion and incident wave angles.

2.10.3. Basin Effect

The curvature of the basin where the soft soil is deposited can trap the waves and
amplify the motion experienced on the surface. This could also significantly increase
the duration of the earthquake motion.

2.11. Seismic Hazard Analysis

Seismic hazard analysis is the process by which the site specific design basis ground
motion (DBGM) parameters are arrived at. For estimating the DBGM parameters of a
site, the earthquake sources (e.g. faults) around the site needs to be identified and
maximum potential earthquake of each source need to be estimated. This is achieved
by conducting a detailed investigation of geological and seismological environment of
the site. The data on historical and pre-historical seismicity are also collected.

The areas are investigated through satellite imageries, aerial photographs, detailed
maps to determine tectonic structures that could be considered as the sources for
earthquakes. The historic earthquake data available in earthquake catalogues are also
collected. Information on prehistoric seismicity can be obtained by paleoseismic studies.
Paleoseismology is the study of the timing, location, and size of prehistoric earthquakes.
This focuses on instantaneous deformation of landforms and sediments during
individual earthquakes. Paleoseismic history helps to understand aspects of earthquake
geology such as regional patterns of tectonic deformation and the long-term behavior of
specific faults. It can be used to supplement the calculation of seismic hazard.

Using the information obtained from the investigations, all regional geological and
seismological information are compiled, and all related tectonic information around the
site are plotted on a map. Epicenters of all known earthquakes are superimposed on the
same. Based on these compiled information, one would be able to identify seismogenic
faults (faults that are capable of generating seismicity) and tectonic provinces (areas
with diffused seismicity) in the region. Subsequently, the size and shape of earthquake
source and its distance from site and maximum earthquake potential associated with
each source are estimated.

47
2.11.1. Deterministic Hazard Analysis
In deterministic approach, depending on the seismotectonic conditions and number of
earthquake sources, one or more than one earthquakes will be postulated in the region
and the PGA is estimated for each postulated earthquake using appropriate attenuation
relationship. The parameters that are necessary for estimation are: size of the
earthquake (magnitude or intensity) and distance from the site. For example, Figure
2.14 shows various faults/areas of diffused seismicity and their estimated maximum
earthquake potential. This information along with the input on distance (usually
minimum distance) from the site can be used to estimate the peak ground acceleration
using the appropriate attenuation relationships.

Figure 2.14 Calculation model showing the sources around a site with associated
maximum earthquake potential (m) and shortest distance (R).

Figure 2.15 depicts predictions by attenuation relation for PGA with respect to distance
for different values of maximum earthquake potential. Using this information, the
acceleration at site due to earthquakes from each source (with associated maximum
earthquake potential, m and minimum distance to site, R) is determined. Table 2.1
tabulates the maximum acceleration at site due to each fault/tectonic province
estimated from Figure 2.9. The maximum acceleration among these is considered as
the site specific PGA for design.

48
Figure 2.15: Predictions by attenuation relation for PGA with respect to distance for
different values of maximum earthquake potential.

Table 2.1 Maximum acceleration at site due to different faults/tectonic provinces.

Sl No. Max potential Distance PGA at site
of fault/tectonic from site
province
1 4.0 70km 0.02g
2 5.0 90km 0.04g
3 6.0 60km 0.12g
4 7.0 120km 0.15g (Max PGA)
5 8.0 290km 0.11g

Response Spectrum Shape

Due considerations are given for size of the earthquake, source mechanism, distance
from the source, transmission path characteristics and site characteristics during the
development of site specific response spectra to be adopted in the design. Response
spectral shape for site specific spectra is generally derived from records of strong
motion time histories at site. In case of non-availability of sufficient records, response
spectral shapes derived for sites having seismic, geological and soil characteristics
similar to that of the site under consideration can be used.

Depending on the importance and failure consequences of the structure being

designed, the regulations require use of mean or mean + 1 sigma response spectrum in
the design. For estimating the design response spectrum, the response spectral shape
is scaled with the PGA, as described in the preceding paragraphs.

49
 0.7
Campbell - Bozorgnia, 2008, Vs = 760
0.6 Atkinson - Boore (2006) ENA hard rock
Chiou and Youngs (2008), Vs1500
0.5
Idriss, 2008, Vs=900
0.4
SA, 'g'

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency, Hz

Figure 2.16 Mean + 1 sigma spectra predicted by Campbell & Bozorgnia (2008),
Atkinson & Boore (2006), Chiou & Youngs (2008) and Idriss (2008)
corresponding to a M6.0 earthquake at 20km distance and 15km focal
depth.

The recent attenuation relations also report the coefficients from which not only PGA but
also the spectral ordinates can also be derived. Using this approach, a complete
response spectrum can be derived directly from attenuation relations. Figure 2.16
depicts the mean + 1 sigma spectra obtained using the attenuation relationships
available in the literature

For some sites the design spectrum could be the envelope of two or more different
spectra. Such sites are affected by more than one active fault. The design spectra
obtained by considering the earthquake occurring from the two faults are different,
Figure 2.17.

Figure 2.17: Estimation of design response spectrum from multiple scenarios (From
Datta, 2010].

50
2.11.2. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis [AERB, 2008; Roshan and Basu,
2010]

Determination of ground motion parameters by probabilistic method is accomplished by

performing a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). The subject of PSHA of a
site was initiated by Cornell (1968). Unlike maximisation of single valued earthquake
events as in deterministic approach, probabilistic approach takes into account the
probable distribution of earthquake magnitudes in each source, probable distances
within that source where earthquakes could originate and dispersion of acceleration
estimated using attenuation equations. In PSHA methodology, occurrence of
earthquakes is usually considered as Poisson process. This means that the events
have an average occurrence rate and could occur independent of the time elapsed
since last event.

PSHA involves four steps (Figure 2.18):

• Specification of the seismic-hazard source model(s) (zonation);
• Specification of earthquake recurrence relationships which reflect earthquake activity
in the source
• Specification of the ground motion model(s) (attenuation relationship(s)); and
• The probabilistic calculation.

The seismic hazard is determined from the following form of expression:

N mmax,i r = ∞

E (Z > z ) = ∑α i ∫ ∫ f (m) f (r ) P(Z > z m, r )drdm

i i (2.14)
i =1 mmin r =0

Left side of equation (2.14), E(Z>z), is the frequency that acceleration Z being greater
than z. For obtaining the probability, one has to consider the temporal distribution of the
earthquake, which is normally taken as a Poisson process.

For PSHA of a site, earthquake sources within a defined region containing the site are
considered. These sources, depending on its characteristics are modeled as point, or
line, or aerial, or volume sources. Each source is assigned a maximum potential
magnitude mmax,i of earthquake. Total number of such sources (N) to be considered in
the PSHA study, their geometry and value of mmax,i are derived from the geological and
seismological information of the region/area around the site, and past earthquake data.
One value of minimum earthquake magnitude, mmin is generally assigned to all sources
from practical consideration of hazardous effect of minimum earthquake that can affect
the facility under consideration.

Activity rate of each source, αi, is determined from the earthquake recurrence
relationship of the region/source/fault based on Gutenberg-Richter relationship,
log10 n(m) = a − bm (2.15)

Where n(m) is the number of earthquakes with magnitude m or greater per unit time,
and ‘a’ and ‘b’ are constants representing the seismic activity of the region/source/fault.

51
The alternate form of Guttenberg-Richter relationship is,
n ( m ) = ν 0e −β m (2.16)

In which, ν 0 = 10 a and β = b ln 10 .

The activity rate is the rate of earthquake corresponding to mmin and is given by,
α = ν 0 e − βmmin (2.17)

αi is calculated from α

The probability distribution of earthquake magnitude fi(m), is related to β, mmin and mmax,i
and generally follows the probability distribution function:
β e [− β ( m − m )]
f i (m) =
min

[1 − e[− β (mmax,i − mmin ) ]

] (2.18)

For estimation of α as well as f i (m) , the recurrence relation for the sources, i.e., ‘a’ and
‘b’ values needs to be determined from the earthquake database of the region under
consideration.
(a) Zonation of earthquake sources (b Reccurrence

Aerial source2 Upper Bound cutoff

Mmax=7 for magnitude, = Mmax
SITE

Line
Source
Mmax=6 Aerial source1
Mmax=6.5

(d) Hazard computation

(c) Attenuation

Shaded area = P(Z>z|m,r)

10% in 50 years (Return period = 475 years)

2% in 50 years (Return period = 2500 years)

Figure 2.18: Various steps associated with probabilistic seismic hazard analysis.

52
Probability of exceedance of acceleration, P(Z>z/m,r), due to an earthquake of
magnitude m originated in a source at a distance ‘r’ is derived from the distribution
function of Z which has the form of log-normal distribution. The mean value µ(lnZ) and
standard deviation σ(lnZ) are determined from the attenuation relation.

Distance measure is an important parameter for attenuation relationship. Various

distance measures ‘r’ used in the attenuation relationships are: (a) epicenter distance
(Re), (b) hypo-central distance (Rhypo), (c) distance to zone of energy release (Rz), (d)
closest distance to rupture (Rrup), (e) closest distance to surface projection of rupture (r-
jb). For the sites located at a distance of several times source dimensions (say, length of
fault) from earthquake source, there is little difference between the results obtained
using different distance measures. This may not be true in case of shorter distances;
e.g., the case of near source earthquakes. It is further noted that the type of distance
measures that should be considered is very much dependent on the attenuation
relation.

The probability that earthquake occurs at a distance ‘r’ from the site is calculated from
the distribution function of distance measure, fi(r). The function, fi(r) depends on the
geometry of the source and location of the site with respect to the source and also the
distance measure used in attenuation formula. As analytical expressions for fi(r) are
available only for simple source geometries, PSHA with complex source geometries
usually adopts numerical methods for the evaluation of fi(r) (Kramer, S.L., 2007).

In summary, primary input to evaluate seismic hazard from equation (2.14) are source
configuration, mmax, mmin, ‘a’ and ‘b’ values to determine αi and β, attenuation
relationships and r. Sources of major data/information required to develop the input
parameters of this eqn. are geology and seismology, historical earthquake data,
maximum earthquake potential of sources, and attenuation relationship as well as
distance. The data/information should be as site specific as possible for rational
application of PSHA technique to assess seismic hazard of the site.

One of the major advantages in this method is the possibility for incorporation of
uncertainties. Uncertainties are introduced by lack of data and/or lack of knowledge,
inadequate modeling, etc. These uncertainties can be taken into account by developing
alternate scenarios and models.

2.11.3. Uniform Hazard Spectrum

For generation of a uniform hazard spectrum, the only change with respect to the
procedures brought out in sec. 2.11.2 is in the attenuation relation used for evaluation.
Unlike the attenuation relation used for PGAs, the coefficients vary for each spectral
period/frequency selected for derivation of hazard curve.

The general steps for generation of a uniform hazard spectrum are as follows:

53
 1. Select a suitable attenuation relation which in addition to PGA, is also available
for prediction of response spectral ordinates.
2. Undertake the investigations on seismotectonics and identify the tectonic sources
and the maximum potential, as discussed in sec. 2.11.1
3. Generate the hazard curve for PGA using the procedures covered in sec. 2.11.2
4. For a spectral time period Ti, replace the coefficients attenuation relation so that
the corresponding spectral ordinates are obtained.
5. Generate the hazard curve, say corresponding to period T1
6. Repeat the procedure for each spectral periods so that the hazard curves for
corresponding periods are generated, Figure 2.19.
7. For the chosen frequency of exceedence or return period, select the abscissa of
each hazard curve. i.e., from the hazard curve corresponding to time period T1,
calculate Sa1, from the hazard curve corresponding to time period T2, calculate
Sa2, etc.
All these values have same probability of exceedence (hence the term uniform
hazard ) but correspond to different time periods of a response spectrum,.
8. Generate the uniform hazard spectrum by plotting the ordinates (T1, Sa1), (T2,
Sa2), (T3, Sa3), (T4, Sa4), etc., Figure 2.20.

1.0E+00

1.0E-01

1.0E-02

T1 T5 T2 T4 T3
1.0E-03
Prob Y>y'/year

1.0E-04

1.0E-05

1.0E-06

1.0E-07

1.0E-08
Sa1 Sa5 Sa2 Sa4 Sa3
0.01 0.1 1 10
PGA 'g'

Figure 2.19 Hazard curves corresponding to different spectral periods and extraction of
ordinates of a uniform hazard spectrum.

54
 Sa3

Sa2
Spectral ordinate

Sa4

Sa1

Sa5

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Spectral period, s

Figure 2.20 A uniform hazard spectrum generated from Figure 2.14.

55
2.12 Tutorial Problems

1. What is a response spectrum?

2. What is a Fourier spectrum?

3. What is a DVA spectrum?

4. Enumerate the different peak amplitude parameters for a earthquake ground

motion.

5. What is an attenuation relationship?

6. What are the parameters that attenuation relations use as input?

7. What is seismic hazard analysis?

8. What is Gutenberg-Richter relationship?

9. Estimate the variation in mean peak ground acceleration with respect to distance
for the attenuation relation proposed by Boore (1997) for a magnitude 7 event
with reverse type mechanism. Use the values of closest distance to surface
projection of rupture as 10km, 30km and 70km. Assume a Vs of 760m/s.

56
2.13 Answers to Tutorial Problems

1. A plot showing the maximum response induced by ground motion in single degree of
freedom oscillators of different fundamental periods having same damping is known
as response spectrum. The maximum response could be spectral acceleration,
spectral velocity or spectral displacement.

2. The plot of Fourier amplitude of input time history vs time period or frequency is
known as Fourier spectrum. The Fourier amplitude spectrum provides inputs on the
frequency content of the motion and helps to identify the predominant frequency of
motion.

3. The response spectra can be plotted with any of the three parameters (acceleration,
velocity and displacement) as mentioned above as ordinate and period/frequency as
abscissa. Since these parameters are interconnected, all three parameters can also
be represented in a single graph known as tripartite plot or Displacement velocity
acceleration (DVA) spectrum.

4. The parameters are

• Peak ground acceleration
• Peak velocity
• Peak displacement

5. The acceleration produced by the earthquake is a function of earthquake magnitude

and distance from the source. The attenuation of ground motion is represented by
attenuation relationships. Generally, these empirical relationships generated from
observed data.

6. The magnitude of the earthquake and distance from source are the main inputs used
in attenuation relations. In addition, recent attenuation relationships also include
functions to account for non linear dependence of attenuation on distance (usually a
log (R) function), site conditions (soft soil, stiff soil, rock, etc), source type and
location of measurement (reverse/strike slip/normal, hanging wall side or foot wall
side), etc.

7. Seismic hazard analysis is the process by which the site specific design basis
ground motion (DBGM) parameters are arrived at. For estimating the DBGM
parameters of a site, the earthquake sources (e.g. faults) around the site needs to
be identified and maximum potential earthquake of each source need to be

57
 estimated. This is achieved by conducting a detailed investigation of geological and
seismological environment of the site.

The Gutenberg-Richter relationship expresses the relation between the number of

earthquakes occurring at any particular region and the magnitude of earthquake, for
a given time period. This is of the form

log10 n(m) = a − bm

Where n(m) is the number of earthquakes with magnitude m or greater per unit time,
and ‘a’ and ‘b’ are constants representing the seismic activity of the
region/source/fault.
8.
The relationship was first proposed by Charles Francis Richter and Beno Gutenberg.
The variation in b-values range from 0.5 to 1.5 depending on the tectonic
environment of the region. The constant b is typically equal to 1.0 in seismically
active regions. In this case, for every magnitude 5.0 event there will be 10
magnitude 4.0 events and 100 magnitude 3.0 events.

9.
Attenuation relation by by Boore.et.al(1997), is given by

VS
ln Y = b1 + 0.527 ( M − 6) − 0.778 ln r − 0.371 ln
1396
Where
− 0.313 for strike − slip faults

b1 = − 0.117 for reverse − slip faults
 − 0.242 if mechanism is not specified

r is the closest distance to surface projection of rupture
and VS is the average shear wave velocity which depends on the site class.
The standard deviation of the predicted acceleration is given as σ ln Y = 0 .520 .

b1 for reverse fault = -0.117

For 10 km distance, ln Y = -0.117 +0.527(6.5-6)-0.778 ln(10) -0.371 ln(760/1396)

i.e., Y = 0.241 g

For 30 km distance, ln Y = -0.117 +0.527(6.5-6)-0.778 ln(30) -0.371 ln(760/1396)

58
i.e., Y = 0.103 g

For 70 km distance, ln Y = -0.117 +0.527(6.5-6)-0.778 ln(70) -0.371 ln(760/1396)

i.e., Y = 0.053 g

59
Chapter 3
Dynamics of Earthquake Analysis

3.1 Introduction
Earthquake or seismic analysis is a subset of structural analysis which involves the calculation of
the response of a structure subjected to earthquake excitation. This is required for carrying out
the structural design, structural assessment and retrofitting of the structures in the regions where
earthquakes are prevalent. Various seismic data are necessary to carry out the seismic analysis of
the structures. These data are accessible into two ways viz. in deterministic form or in
probabilistic form. Data in deterministic form are used for design of structures etc whereas data
in probabilistic form are used for seismic risk analysis, study of structure subjected to random
vibration and damage assessment of structures under particular earthquake ground motion. Major
seismic input includes ground acceleration/velocity/displacement data, magnitude of earthquake,
peak ground parameters, duration etc.

In this chapter, the seismic response of the structures is investigated under earthquake excitation
expressed in the form of time history of acceleration. The response is investigated for the
structures modeled as Single Degree of Freedom (SDOF) and discrete Multi Degree of Freedom
(MDOF) System.

3.2 Equation of Motion for SDOF System

Consider a SDOF system (shown in Figure 3.1), subjected to an earthquake acceleration, ɺɺ x g (t ) .
Let m, k and c represent the mass, stiffness and damping, respectively of the SDOF system
undergoing relative displacement, velocity and acceleration of x (t ) , xɺ (t ) and ɺɺ
x (t ) , respectively.
The various forces acting on the system will be inertial force, stiffness force and damping force.

x(t)

m x (t ) + ɺɺ
m ( ɺɺ x g ( t ))

k m
c
kx (t )
cxɺ (t )
x g (t )
ɺɺ

(a) (b)
Figure 3.1 (a) SDOF system (b) Free body diagram.

60
Consider the equilibrium of the various forces acting on the mass, as shown in Figure 3.1(b), we
get,
x ( t ) + ɺɺ
m ( ɺɺ x g ( t )) + cxɺ ( t ) + kx ( t ) = 0
(3.1)
or
mxɺɺ( t ) + cxɺ ( t ) + kx ( t ) = − mxɺɺg ( t )
(3.2)

where,
x (t ) = relative displacement of mass with respect to ground

xɺ (t ) = relative velocity of mass with respect to ground

x (t ) = relative acceleration of mass with respect to ground

ɺɺ

x g (t ) = earthquake ground acceleration

ɺɺ

The equation of motion is expressed in the normalized form as

x(t ) + 2ξω0 xɺ(t ) + ω02 x(t ) = − ɺɺ
ɺɺ xg (t )
(3.3)

where, ξ and ω0 denotes the damping ratio and natural frequency of SDOF system, respectively

expressed as
k
ω0 =
m (3.4)
c
ξ =
2 mω 0 (3.5)
The damped natural frequency of SDOF system is given by

ω d = ω0 1 − ξ 2 (3.6)

The equation of motion for a linear, viscously damped SDOF system is second order differential
equation with constant coefficients. The solution of this equation for the specified earthquake
acceleration, ɺɺ
x g (t ) will provide the response of the SDOF system.

61
3.3 Response Analysis of SDOF System
For a given time history (acceleration versus time data) of earthquake ground motion, the
response of viscously damped SDOF system can be obtained either by Time Domain Analysis or
Frequency Domain Analysis.

3.3.1 Time Domain Analysis

This method helps in obtaining response of SDOF system in both linear and non linear range.
Duhamel integration and Numerical schemes such as Newmark integration, Runge-Kutta
methods are invariably accompanied for obtaining numerical solution of differential equation.

Duhamel Integral is used to obtain the response of SDOF system subjected to earthquake ground
motion. Equation of motion for a SDOF system subjected to ground motion acceleration is given
by equation (3.2). The solution of which can be split into homogeneous and particular part as
x (t ) = xh (t ) + x p (t )
(3.7)
where,
xh(t) = homogeneous solution, and xp(t) = particular solution.
Homogeneous or complimentary solution (as depicted from Figure 3.2) is the damped free-
vibration response given by equation (3.8)

xh (t ) = g (t ) x0 + h(t ) xɺ0 (3.8)

where, x0 and xɺ0 are initial displacement and velocity of the SDOF system, respectively.

x0 =1
SDOF g(t)
xɺ0 = 0

x0 = 0
SDOF h(t)
xɺ0 = 1

Figure 3.2 Response of SDOF system to initial unit displacement and velocity.

62
Putting the boundary conditions (as shown in Figure 3.2) in the solution of the homogeneous
part, g(t) and h(t) can be obtained as
 ξω0 
g (t ) = e−ξω0 t cos ωd t + sin ωd t 
 ωd  (3.9)
e−ξω0 t
h(t ) = sin ωd t
ωd (3.10)
For obtaining particular solution part of equation (3.7), it is assumed that the irregular ground
acceleration is made up of very brief impulses as shown in Figure 3.3. The vibration caused by
all the impulse are added together to obtain the total response.

xg ( t )
ɺɺ

xg ( τ )
ɺɺ

τ t-τ
dτ

Figure 3.3 Impulse from earthquake acceleration.

Consider the vibration caused by a single impulse. Newton’s second law states that the rate of
change of moment of a mass is equal to the applied force i.e.
d
(mxɺ (t )) = − m ɺɺ
xg (t )
dt (3.11)
Thus, the change in momentum over a brief interval, dτ brought by the instantaneous force
− m ɺɺ
x g ( τ ) is given by

d ( mxɺ ( t )) = − m ɺɺ
x g ( τ) d τ
(3.12)

63
It should be noted that the small changes in velocity and displacement occurring during the time
interval dτ will make a negligible contribution to the change in momentum. The change in
velocity during the interval is
dxɺ ( t ) = − ɺɺ
xg (τ) d τ (3.13)

Thus, the change in displacement at time, t caused by the impulse at τ is given by

dx p (t ) = − ɺɺ
x g ( τ ) d τ. h (t − τ)
(3.14)

Each impulse in Figure (3.3) will produce a vibration of this form. Because the system is linear,
the effect of each impulse is independent of every other impulse and the total resulting motion
can be obtained by the principle of super position.
t
x p (t ) = − ∫ ɺɺ
xg (τ) h(t − τ) d τ (3.15)
0

This integral is known as convolution or Duhamel integral. Explicit solution may be obtained
for simple forms of forcing function such as rectangular and triangular.

From equations (3.8), (3.9), (3.10) and (3.15), the total response (given in equation (3.7)) of
system can be given by
t
x g (τ )]h (t − τ )dτ
x ( t ) = x0 g (t ) + xɺ0 h (t ) − ∫ [ ɺɺ (3.16)
0

For the system with at rest condition (i.e. x0 =0 and xɺ0 =0) the response is given by
t
x (t ) = − ∫ ɺɺ
x g ( τ) h (t − τ) d τ (3.17)
0

This is known as time domain solution because the response is calculated using time as a
variable.

In order to obtain recurrence formulas for time domain analysis, consider a SDOF system with
displacement and velocity defined at initial time, ti and the response is required at, ti+1 (refer
Figure 3.4). Suppose xi and xɺi are the initial displacement and velocity of the system,
respectively,

64
 xg ( t )
ɺɺ

xgi+1
ɺɺ

ɺxɺgi

τ
Time
t
dτ
∆ti

Figure 3.4 Linear variation of ground acceleration across chosen time step ti .

The response of the system (reproducing equation (3.16)) is expressed as

t
x(t ) = g (t − ti ) xi + h (t − ti ) xɺi − ∫ ɺɺx (τ)
ti g h (t − τ) d τ (3.18)

 ξω 
g (t − ti ) = e −ξω0 ( t −ti )  0 sin ωd (t − ti ) + cos ωd (t − ti ) 
 ωd 
e −ξω0 ( t −ti ) 
h(t − ti ) = sin ωd (t − ti ) 
ωd 
i +1
 (3.19)
x
ɺɺ − x
ɺɺ i

xg ( τ) = ɺɺ
ɺɺ xgi + g g
( τ − ti ) 
∆ti

e −ξω0 ( t −τ ) 
h ( t − τ) = sin ωd (t − τ) 
ωd 

Back substituting in equation (3.18),

t  x i +1 − ɺɺ
ɺɺ xgi   e −ξω0 ( t −τ ) 
x (t ) = g (t − ti ) xi + h(t − ti ) xɺi − ∫  ɺɺ xgi + g ( τ − ti )   sin ωd (t − τ)  d τ
ti
 ∆ti   ωd  (3.20)

x(t ) = g (t − ti ) xi + h(t − ti ) xɺi + f1 ( t − ti ) ɺɺ

xgi + f 2 ( t − ti ) ɺɺ
xgi +1
(3.21)

65
Similarly, the velocity of the system at time, t is given by
xɺ (t ) = gɺ (t − ti ) xi + hɺ(t − ti ) xɺi + fɺ1 ( t − ti ) ɺɺ
xgi + fɺ2 ( t − ti ) ɺɺ
xgi +1 (3.22)

At t = ti +1 , x (t ) = xi +1 and xɺ (t ) = xɺi +1 , the displacement and velocity of the system are

expressed as

xi +1 = g (∆ti ) xi + h(∆ti ) xɺi + f1 ( ∆ti ) ɺɺ

xgi + f2 ( ∆ti ) ɺɺ
xgi +1 (3.23)

xɺi +1 = gɺ (∆ti ) xi + hɺ(∆ti ) xɺi + fɺ1 ( ∆ti ) ɺɺ

xgi + fɺ2 ( ∆ti ) ɺɺ
xgi +1 (3.24)

In the matrix form, the above equations can be re-written

 xi +1   g (∆ti ) h(∆ti )   xi   f1 ( ∆ti ) f 2 ( ∆ti )   ɺɺ

xgi 
 =    + ɺ   i +1  (3.25)
 xɺi +1   gɺ (∆ti ) h(∆ti )   xɺi   f1 ( ∆ti ) fɺ2 ( ∆ti )   ɺɺ
ɺ xg 

or

 xi +1   a11 a12   xi   b11 b12   ɺɺ

x gi 
 =    + b b   ɺɺ i +1 
(3.26)
 xɺi +1   a21 a22   xɺi   21 22   x g 
or
{xi +1} = [ A]{ xi } + [ B]{ ɺɺ
xgi } (3.27)

where,

x   ɺɺx gi  a a  b b 
{xi } =  i  , {x g } =  i +1  ,
ɺɺ i
[A] =  11 12  , and [B] =  11 12 
 xɺi   ɺɺ
x g  a21 a22  b21 b22 

The elements of matrices [A] and [B] from Nigam and Jennings (1969) are given by equations
(3.28) and (3.29)

66
  ξ  
a11 = e −ξω0∆ti  sin ωd ∆ti + cos ωd ∆ti  
 1 − ξ2  
 

e −ξω0∆ti 
a12 = sin ωd ∆ti 
ωd 
 (3.28)
ω0 −ξω0 ∆ti 
a21 = − e sin ωd ∆ti
1 − ξ2 

 ξ 
a22 = e −ξω0∆ti  cos ωd ∆ti − sin ωd ∆ti  
 1 − ξ2 
  

 2ξ2 − 1 ξ  sin ωd ∆ti  2ξ 1   

b11 = e −ξω0∆ti  2 +  + 3 + 2  cos ωd ∆ti  
 ω0 ∆ti ω0  ωd  ω0 ∆ti ω0   


  2ξ − 1  sin ωd ∆ti
2
2ξ  1 2ξ 
b12 = e −ξω0 ∆ti  2  + 3 cos ωd ∆ti  − 2 + 3 
 ω0 ∆ti  ωd ω0 ∆ti  ω0 ω0 ∆ti 

 2ξ2 − 1 ξ   ξ  
b21 = e−ξω0 ∆ti  2 +   cos ωd ∆ti − sin ωd ∆ti  
 ω0 ∆ti ω0   1 − ξ2 
 

 2ξ 1   1 
− 3 + 2  ( ωd sin ωd ∆ti + ξω0 cos ωd ∆ti )  + 2
ω ∆ ω ω ∆ 
 0 i t 0   0 ti

 2   
−ξω0 ∆ti 2ξ − 1 ξ 
b22 = e  2  cos ωd ∆ti − sin ωd ∆ti 
 ω0 ∆ti  1− ξ 2 



2ξ  1 
− 3 ( d
ω sin ω ∆ t + ξω cos ω ∆ ti ) − 
ω0 ∆ti  ω0 ∆ti
d i 0 d 2
 (3.29)

67
Finally, the acceleration response of the SDOF system can be obtained by reproducing the
equation of motion as
( − cxɺi +1 − kxi +1 − mxɺɺgi +1 )
xi +1 =
ɺɺ (3.30)
m

Hence, if the displacement and velocity of the system are known at some time ti, the state of the
system at all subsequent times, ti+1 can be computed exactly by a step-by-step application of
equation (3.27) to (3.30). The computational advantage of this approach lies in the fact that the
elements of [A] and [B] matrix depend only on ξ, ω0 and ∆ti. The value ξ and ω0 are constant

and if ∆ti is also constant, xi , xɺi and ɺɺ

xi can be evaluated by the execution of multiplication and
summation operations for each step of integration. The matrices [A] and [B], defined by rather
complicated expressions, equations (3.28) and (3.29) need to be evaluated only at the beginning
of each response evaluation. If varying time intervals are used, it is necessary, in general, to
compute [A] and [B] at each step of integration. However, by rounding the time coordinates of
the record, the number of these matrices needed during the calculation can be reduced to only a
few. These, too can be computed at the beginning of the calculation and called upon when
needed, thereby saving the computational time.

68
3.3.1.1 Numerical Methods for Seismic Analysis of SDOF System

There are number of numerical methods available for solving initial boundary value problems.
Most commonly used methods are Newmark’s Beta method (Linear acceleration method) and
Runge-Kutta method which are described here.

3.3.1.1.1 Newmark’s Beta Method

In this method, acceleration, velocity and displacement at time, t = ti+1 is obtained as a function
of acceleration, velocity and displacement at t = ti (which is always known), assuming linear
acceleration during small time step (Figure 3.5). Assume a SDOF system subjected to earthquake
ground motion, the equation of motion is given by

mxɺɺ(t ) + cxɺ (t ) + kx (t ) = − mxɺɺg (t ) (3.31)

∆ti
(a) (b)
Figure 3.5 (a) Linear ground acceleration, (b) Linear relative acceleration of SDOF system over
time step, ∆ti .

In the incremental form, equation (3.31) can be re-written as

m∆ɺɺ
xi + c∆xɺi + k ∆xi = − m∆ɺɺ
xgi (3.32)

where,

∆ɺɺ
xi = ɺɺ
xi +1 − ɺɺ
xi 
∆xɺi = xɺi +1 − xɺi 

∆xi = xi +1 − xi  (3.33)
∆ti = ti +1 − ti 

∆ɺɺ xgi +1
xgi = ɺɺ − ɺɺ
xgi 

69
Assuming linear variation of acceleration (see Figure 3.5(b))
xi +1 − ɺɺ
ɺɺ xi
x (t ) = ɺɺ
ɺɺ xi + .t (3.34)
∆ ti

On integrating,
xi +1 − ɺɺ
ɺɺ xi t 2
xɺ (t ) = xɺi + ɺɺ
xi t + . (3.35)
∆ti 2

t2 x − ɺɺ
ɺɺ x t3
x(t ) = xi + xɺi t + ɺɺ
xi + i +1 i . (3.36)
2 ∆ti 6

In equation (3.36) put t = ∆ti and express in terms of ∆ɺɺ

xi i.e.
6 6
∆ɺɺ
xi = ∆xi − xɺi − 3ɺɺ
xi (3.37)
∆ ti2
∆ ti

Similarly, from equation (3.35) put t = ∆ti and solve for ∆ɺxi
3 ∆ ti
∆xɺi = ∆xi − 3 xɺi − xi
ɺɺ (3.38)
∆ ti 2

Substituting ∆ɺɺ
xi , ∆xɺi in equation (3.32) and solve for ∆xi i.e.
peff
∆xi = (3.39)
keff

where,

 6   ∆t 
peff = − m∆ɺɺxgi +  m + 3c  xɺi +  3m + i c  ɺɺ
xi (3.40)
 ∆ti   2 
6 3
keff = m + c + k (3.41)
∆ti 2
∆ti

Knowing the ∆xi , determine ∆ɺxi from equation (3.38). At t = ti+1, displacement and velocity can
be determined as
xi +1 = xi + ∆xi 
 (3.42)
xɺi +1 = xɺi + ∆xɺi 

70
The acceleration at time ti+1 is calculated by considering equilibrium of equation (3.31) to avoid
the accumulation of the unbalanced forces i.e.
1
xi +1 =
ɺɺ  − mxɺɺgi +1 − cxɺi +1 − kxi +1  (3.43)
m

In this way, using this step-by-step numerical integration scheme, the response of SDOF system
can be obtained for given time history. Repeat the same steps to obtain response at t =ti+2 and so
on. The accuracy of output response depends upon the magnitude of time-step ‘ ∆ti ’ chosen.

Optimum values of ‘ ∆ti ’ should be chosen to obtain fastest converging results with required
precision. Time stepping methods has got limitation that error goes on accumulating with
calculation proceeds. In order to keep Newmark’s Beta method stable, the time step should be
taken such that (Chopra, 2007)
∆ti
≤ 0.551 (3.44)
T0

where, T0 = 2π / ω0 ,is the time period of the SDOF system.

This method is conditionally stable if above inequality satisfies, otherwise method will “blow-
up” giving illogical results.

3.3.1.1.2 Runge-Kutta Method

Knowing the initial conditions, response of SDOF system with time can be determined using
Runge-Kutta method. Let the equation of motion of the SDOF system be

mxɺɺ( t ) + cxɺ (t ) + kx ( t ) = − mxɺɺg (t ) (3.45)

Define a vector,

x
x =   (3.46a)
 xɺ 
On differentiating the above equation

71
  xɺ 
xɺ =   (3.46b)
 ɺɺ
x

Using Equation (3.45) and (3.46a), above equation can be reproduced as,

 0 1
 xɺ  x  0 
  =  −k −c    +  ɺɺ 
 ɺɺ
x  xɺ   − xg 
 m m 

or, xɺ = Ex + F (3.47)
 0 1 
 0 
where, E =  −k −c  ; F = 
 − ɺɺ
xg 
 m m 

x gi +1
ɺɺ
ɺxɺgi

∆ti
Figure 3.6: Time step for Runge-Kutta method

Determine the following constant vectors,

k1 = ∆ti  Exi + F i  (3.48)

  k   ∆F i 
k2 = ∆ti  E  xi + 1  +  F i +  (3.49)
  3  3  
  2k   2∆ F i 
k3 = ∆ti  E  xi + 2  +  F i +  (3.50)
  3   3  

(Note: Subscript ‘i’ refers to the value at time t = ti , ‘∆’ refers to difference in value at ti+1 and ti,
and ‘¯ ’ indicates a matrix)

72
then,
∆xi  k + 2k2 + k3
∆xi =   = 1 (3.51)
∆xɺi  4

 xi +1 
xi +1 =   = xi + ∆xi (3.52)
 xɺi +1 

From equations (3.52) and (3.45)

( − cxɺi +1 − kxi +1 − mxɺɺgi +1 )
xi +1 =
ɺɺ (3.53)
m

Repeat same steps to obtain response at time t = ti+2 and so on. A Runge-Kutta method is
conditionally stable for linear second order differential equation like equation (3.45). But still the
time step, ∆ti should be taken short enough to ensure required precision in results.

73
3.3.2 Frequency Domain Analysis

This method is used for obtaining response of linear systems subjected to irregular excitations
such as earthquake forces and it requires knowledge of complex frequency response function for
its proper application. If the stiffness ‘k’ and damping ‘c’ of the SDOF system are frequency
dependent, then this approach is much superior to the time domain.

In frequency domain analysis, the response of a SDOF system is given by

∞
1
x(t ) = ∫ Xɺɺ g (ω) H (ω)eiωt d ω (3.54)
2π −∞

x g ( t ) ] and H ( ω) is the complex frequency

where, Xɺɺ g ( ω ) is the Fourier transform of [- ɺɺ

response function.

Consider a SDOF system (Figure 3.7), subjected to the forcing function of eiωt, producing

displacement response as
x(t ) = H (ω)eiωt (3.55)

e iω t SDOF x(t ) = H (ω)eiωt

Figure 3.7: Explanation of complex frequency response function.

Consider equation of motion of SDOF system

x + 2 ξω o xɺ + ω o2 x = e iω t
ɺɺ (3.56)

Substituting equation (3.55) in equation (3.56)

H(ω)(iω) 2 e iωt + 2 ξωo H ( ω)iω e iωt + ω o2 H( ω) e iωt = e iωt (3.57)

or, H ( ω)[ −ω2 + 2 ξωωo i + ωo2 ] = 1 (3.58)

Thus, the complex frequency response function is expressed as

74
 1
H (ω) = (3.59)
(ω − ω ) + i 2ξωωo
2
o
2

x g (t ) ] is expressed as
The Fourier transform of [- ɺɺ
∞

∫ [− ɺɺx (t )]e
− iωt
Xɺɺ g (ω) = g dt
−∞ (3.60)

The response of a SDOF system can be obtained by substituting equations (3.59) and (3.60) in
equation (3.54) and solving the integral.

Note: Properties of Fourier transform are as follows,

Consider a function f (t ) which is periodic and it is absolutely integrable i.e.,

∞

∫
−∞
f (t ) dt < ∞ (3.61)

Then the Fourier transform of f (t ) exists and given by

∞
F (ω) = ∫
−∞
f (t )e −iωt dt (3.62)

From the inverse Fourier transform

∞
1
∫ F (ω)e d ω
iωt
f (t ) = (3.63)
2π −∞
The f (t ) and F ( ω) makes the Fourier Pair.

75
3.4 Numerical Examples on SDOF system
Example 3.1
xg (t ) = ɺɺ
A SDOF system is subjected to a harmonic ground motion of ɺɺ xo sin ωt . Determine the

steady state response using time and frequency domain method and considering that the system
starts from rest. The natural frequency and fraction of critical damping of SDOF system are ωo
and ξ , respectively.
Solution: Equation of motion is given by

x (t ) + 2 ξω o xɺ (t ) + ω 2o x (t ) = − ɺɺ
ɺɺ xo sin ω t

A. Time Domain Analysis (Using Duhamel Integration)

Using equation (3.17) steady state response of system in time domain is given by
t
xg (τ )h(t − τ )dτ
x(t ) = −∫ ɺɺ
0

e −ξωo ( t −τ )
x g ( τ) = ɺɺ
where, ɺɺ xo sin ωτ and h(t − τ) = sin(ωd (t − τ))
ωd

Thus,
e−ξωo (t −τ)
t
x(t ) = −∫ ( ɺɺ
xo sin ωτ) sin(ωd (t − τ))d τ
0
ωd

xo
ɺɺ 1
=− sin(ωt − θ)
ωo (1 −β )2 + (2ξβ)2
2 2

ω  2ξβ 
where, β = and θ = tan −1  2 
ωo  1− β 

B. Frequency Domain Analysis

The steady state response is given by equation (3.54) i.e.,

∞
1
x(t ) = ∫
2π −∞
Xɺɺ g (ω) H (ω)eiωt d ω

76
where,
1
H (ω) =
ω − ω + i 2ξωωo
2
o
2

and
∞
Xɺɺ g (ω) = FT [ − ɺɺ
xo sin( ωt )] = ∫ [ − ɺɺx sin(ωt )] e
o
− iωt
dt
−∞

Evaluating the integral,

∞
Xɺɺ g (ω) = FT [ − xo sin(ωt )] = − ∫ ɺɺ
xo sin(ωt )e − iωt dt
−∞

∞
 eiωt − e−iωt 
∫ ( e − e ) e dt
xo
ɺɺ
=− iωt − iωt − iωt
 Note : sin ωt = 
2i −∞  2i 

xo  ∞ i ( ω−ω)t
ɺɺ ∞

=− ∫ e dt − ∫ ei ( −ω−ω) t dt 
2i  −∞ −∞ 

xo
ɺɺ
=−  2πδ ( ω − ω) − 2πδ ( −ω − ω) 
2i 

xo [ δ(ω− ω) − δ(ω+ ω)]

= iπɺɺ

Figure 3.8 Graphical Representation of FT [ − ɺɺ

x0 sin ωt ] .

Recalling the properties of Fourier Transform,

∞ ∞
1
∫ δ(t )e dt and δ ( t ) =
− iωt
1= ∫ 1.eiωt d ω
−∞
2π −∞

77
Implying that,
∞

∫e
iωt
d ω = 2πδ(t )
−∞

Recalling the properties of Dirac Delta ‘δ(t)’ function

1
δ(kt) = δ(t) and δ(t − to ) = 0 if t ≠ to
k
∞

∫ δ(t − t )dt = 1
−∞
o

∫ δ(t − t )ψ(t )dt = ψ(t )

−∞
o o

δ(t − to ) = δ(to − t )

Using the above properties, the response of the SDOF system is expressed as
1
x(t ) = ∫ eiωt H (ω) Xɺɺ g (ω)d ω
2π
∞
 
x(t ) =
1
∫
2π −∞
eiωt  2
1
 iπɺɺ (
xo [ δ(ω − ω) − δ(ω + ω)] d ω )
 ωo − ω + i 2ξωωo 
2

ixɺɺo  ∞ eiωt
∞
eiωt 
= ∫ 2 δ( ω− ω) d ω − ∫ δ(ω + ω)d ω
2  −∞ ωo − ω + i 2ξωωo
2
ω − ω + i 2ξωωo
2
−∞ o
2


ixɺɺo  eiωt e−iωt 

=  2 − 
 ωo − ω + i 2ξωωo ωo − ω − i 2ξωωo 
2 2 2
2

ω  2ξβ 
Taking β = and θ = tan −1  
ωo  1− β
2
,

 
ixɺɺo  eiωt − iθ e−iωt 
+ iθ
= e − e 
2 
(ω ) + ( 2ξβωω )
2 2
(ω − ω2 ) + ( 2ξβωωo )
2
−ω
2 2 2 2
 o o o 

78
 ixɺɺo  1 
=  (ei ( ωt −θ) − e − i ( ωt −θ ) ) 
2ωo2  (1 − β2 ) 2 + (2ξβ)2 

ixɺɺo  1 
=   2i sin( ωt − θ)
2ωo  (1 − β )2 + (2ξβ)2
2 2 


xo
ɺɺ 1
=− sin(ωt − θ)
ωo (1 −β2 )2 + (2ξβ)2
2

Thus, the same expression for the steady state response of the SDOF system subjected to the
harmonic earthquake acceleration is obtained using the time and frequency domain approach.

Example 3.2
Show that the displacement response of an undamped SDOF system subjected earthquake
x0e− at is given by
xg (t ) = ɺɺ
acceleration, ɺɺ

x0
ɺɺ a − at 
x(t ) = −  sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e 
a + ω02
2
 ω0 

where, ω0 = natural frequency of the SDOF system; and a = parameter having the same unit as

that of ω0 .

Solution: The displacement response of the SDOF system to earthquake acceleration,

x0e− at
xg (t ) = ɺɺ
ɺɺ
is expressed in time domain analysis as

x ( t ) = − ∫ ɺɺ
xg ( τ ) h ( t − τ ) d τ
t

x0
ɺɺ
x (t ) = − sin ω0 ( t − τ ) d τ
t
− aτ

ω0 ∫e
0

On integrating by parts,

79
 t
x
ɺɺ  e − aτ  x
ɺɺ ω0 − aτ
x (t ) = − 0 sin ω0 ( t − τ )  + 0 e cos ω0 ( t − τ ) d τ
t

ω0
−
 a  0 ω0
∫
0 a

t
x0  1
ɺɺ x0  e − aτ
 ɺɺ xω
 ɺɺ
x ( t ) = −  sin ω0t  +  − cos ω0 ( t − τ )  + 0 2 0 sin ω0 ( t − τ ) d τ
t
− aτ

ω0  a  a  a 0 a ∫e
0

xg  1
ɺɺ  ɺɺ
x0 − at ɺɺ
x0 ω20
x ( t ) = −  sin ω0t  − 2 e + 2 cos ω0t − 2 x ( t )
ω0  a  a a a

 ω2  x
ɺɺ a − at 
x ( t ) 1 + 20  = − 02  sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e 
 a  a  ω0 

x0
ɺɺ a − at 
x (t ) = −  sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e 
a + ω02
2
 ω0 

Alternate Solution by Direct Solution of Differential Equation

The differential equation of motion of an SDOF system is expressed as

x(t ) + ω02 x(t ) = −ɺɺ
ɺɺ xg (t )

Let the solution of the equation be

x ( t ) = xh (t ) + x p (t )

where xh(t) is the solution of homogeneous part of differential equation and xp(t) is the particular
solution.

The homogeneous solution will take the following form

xh (t ) = A cos ω0t + Bsin ω0t

The particular solution of the given differential equation will be

xp (t ) = ce−at

xɺ p (t ) = −a c e− at

80
x p (t ) = a 2ce− at
ɺɺ

xe − at
x ( t ) + ω 02 x ( t ) = − ɺɺ
Substituting the above in the equation, ɺɺ

a 2 ce − at + ω02 ce − at = − ɺɺ
x0 e − at
x0
ɺɺ
c=−
a 2 + ω02

x0
ɺɺ
x p (t ) = − e − at
a + ω0
2 2

The response of the system will be

x (t ) = xh (t ) + x p (t )

x0
ɺɺ
x (t ) = A cos ω0t + B sin ω0t − e − at
a + ω0
2 2

The initial conditions for system with at rest are i.e. at t = 0 are x (0) = 0 and xɺ (0) = 0 .
x0
ɺɺ
x (0) = 0 A− =0
a + ω02
2

x0
ɺɺ
A=
a + ω02
2

Similarly,
axɺɺ0
xɺ (0) = 0 −ω0 A × 0 + ω0 B × 1 + e − a ×0 = 0
a + ω0
2 2

a x0
ɺɺ
B=−
ω0 a + ω20
2

Substitute the expression for A and B, the response of SDOF system simplifies to

x0
ɺɺ − a ɺɺx0 x
ɺɺ
x (t ) = cos ω0t + sin ω0t − 2 0 2 e − at
a + ω0
2 2
ω0 a + ω0
2 2
a + ω0

x0
ɺɺ a − at 
=−  ω sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e 
a + ω02
2
 0 
81
Example 3.3

Using the frequency domain approach and time domain analysis, show that the displacement of
xg ( t ) = c0δ ( t ) is given by
an undamped SDOF system subjected to earthquake acceleration, ɺɺ

c0
x (t ) = − sin ( ω0t )
ω0

where ω0 is the natural frequency of the SDOF system and δ ( t ) is the Dirac delta function.

Solution:

A. Frequency Domain Analysis

The displacement of SDOF system to earthquake excitation is given by

1 ∞ ɺɺ
x (t ) = X g ( ω) H ( ω) eiωt d ω
2π ∫−∞

where,
1
H ( ω) = (For undamped system)
ω − ω2
2
0

xg ( t ) is
And Fourier transform of ɺɺ
∞
Xɺɺ g ( ω) = ∫ − ɺɺ
xg ( t ) e−iωt dt
−∞

∞
Xɺɺ g ( ω) = −∫ c0 δ ( t ) e−iωt dt
−∞

Xɺɺg ( ω) = −c0e−iωt t =0

Xɺɺ g ( ω) = −c0

Therefore, the response of the SDOF system is given by

1 ∞ 1
x (t ) = ∫ ( − c0 ) 2 e iωt d ω
2π −∞ ω0 − ω 2

c0 ∞ e iωt
2π ∫−∞ ω02 − ω2
=− dω

82
The integral have two poles at ω = ± ω0 Applying Cauchy residual theorem for solving the
.
integral

c0  eiωt eiωt 
x (t ) = −  2 πi lim ( ω − ω ) + 2 πi lim ( ω + ω0 ) 
2π  ω→ω0 ω − ω ω→ω0 ω − ω
2 2 0 2 2
0 0 
 eiω0t e−iω0t 
x ( t ) = −ic0 − + 
 2ω0 2ω0 
ic0 iω0t −iω0t
x (t ) = e − e 
2ω0 
ic0
x (t ) = [ 2i sin ω0t ]
2 ω0

i 2c0
x (t ) = sin ω0t
ω0
c0
x (t ) = − sin ( ω0t )
ω0

B. Time Domain Approach

x ( t ) = − ∫ h ( t − τ ) ɺɺ
xg ( τ ) d τ
t

where,
sin ω0 ( t − τ )
h (t − τ) =
ω0

xg ( τ) = c0 δ ( τ)
ɺɺ

Therefore, the response of the SDOF system is given by

sin ω0 ( t − τ )
x (t ) = −∫ c0δ ( τ ) d τ
t

0 ω0

 sin ω0 ( t − τ ) 
x ( t ) = − c0 
 ω0  τ= 0

c0
x (t ) = − sin ω0t
ω0

83
Example 3.4

Show that the maximum displacement response of a damped SDOF system subjected earthquake
x g ( t ) = xɺ g 0δ (t ) is
acceleration, ɺɺ

xɺ g 0  ξ  1 − ξ2 
xmax = − exp − tan −1  
ω0  1 − ξ2  ξ 
  
where ω0 and ξ are natural frequency and damping ratio of the SDOF system, respectively; xɺ g 0 is

the increment in velocity or the magnitude of acceleration impulse and δ (t ) is the Dirac delta
function.

Solution: The general solution of SDOF system will be given by

t
xg ( τ) h(t − τ)d τ
x(t ) = −∫ ɺɺ
0
t
sin ( ωd ( t − τ) ) d τ
1 −ξω0 ( t −τ)
= −∫ xɺg 0δ ( τ) e
0
ωd
xɺ g 0
=− e−ξω0t sin ( ωd t )
ωd

For the maximum displacement of the system, xɺ (t ) = 0

xɺ g 0
i.e. − e −ξω0t [ −ξω0 sin ωd t + ωd cos ωd t ] = 0
ω0

ωd ω0 1 − ξ2 1 − ξ2
i.e. tan(ωd t ) = = =
ξω0 ξω0 ξ

From above equation, the time at which maximum displacement occurs will be

1 1 − ξ2
tm = tan −1
ωd ξ

−1
 1 − ξ2 
ω t
If d m = tan   , it implies that the sin ω d t m = 1 − ξ 2 (refer Figure 3.9)
 ξ 
 

84
 1
1

Figure 3.9

The maximum displacement will be given by

xɺ g 0
xmax = − e−ξω0tm sin ( ωd tm )
ωd

xɺ g 0  1  1 − ξ2 
=− exp −ξω0 tan −1    × 1 − ξ2
ωd  ωd  ξ 
  

Substituting for ω d = ω0 1 − ξ 2 and simplifying

xɺ g 0  ξ  1 − ξ2 
xmax = − exp − tan −1  
ω0  1 − ξ2  ξ 
  

85
Example 3.5

Find the response of SDOF system having time period as 1 sec and damping ratio as 0.02
subjected to the El-Centro, 1940 earthquake motion (refer Appendix-I for the digitized
acceleration values). Plot the displacement response of the SDOF system using (a) Exact method
of time domain analysis, (b) Newmark’s Beta method, and (c) Runge-Kutta method.

Solution:

Based on the computer program written in the FORTAN language, the response of the SDOF

system with time period as 1 sec and damping ratio as 0.02 subjected to the El-Centro, 1940

earthquake motion were obtained and is plotted in Figure 3.10. The calculated maximum

displacement of the system is found to be 0.15163m, 0.15166m and 0.15158m for exact method

of time domain analysis, Newmark’s Beta method and Runge-Kutta method, respectively. As

expected all the methods predict the same response of the system. Further, time interval taken for

numerical integration of equation of motion of the system is 0.002 sec for Newmark’s Beta and

Runge-Kutta methods.

86
Figure 3.10 Response of SDOF system of Example 3.5 by various methods.

87
3.5 Response Analysis of MDOF System

Multi degree of freedom (MDOF) systems are usually analyzed using modal superposition
analysis. A typical MDOF system with n degrees of freedom is shown in Figure (3.11). This
system when subjected to ground motion undergoes deformations in number of possible ways.
These deformed shapes are known as modes of vibration or mode shapes. Each shape is vibrating
with a particular natural frequency. Total unique modes for each MDOF system are equal to the
possible degrees of freedom of system. The equations of motion for MDOF system is given by

x (t )} + [c ]{ xɺ ( t )} + [ k ]{ x ( t )} = - [ m ]{r} ɺɺ
[m ]{ɺɺ x g (t) (3.64)

where, [m] = Mass matrix (n × n); [k] = Stiffness matix (n × n); [c] = Damping matrix (n × n);
{r} = Influence coefficient vector (n×1); { x ( t )} = relative displacement vector; { xɺ ( t )} = relative
velocity vector, {ɺɺ
x ( t )} = relative acceleration vector, and ɺɺ
x g (t ) = earthquake ground acceleration.

Xn

X2

X1

ɺxɺg (t)

Figure 3.11 MDOF system.

88
The undamped eigen values and eigen vectors of the MDOF system are found form the
characteristic equation

{[k ] − ω 2
i [m ]} φ i = 0 i = 1, 2, 3, … , n (3.65)

d et {[k ] − ω 2
i [m ]} = 0 (3.66)

where,

ωi2 = eigen values of the i mode

th

φi = eigen vector or mode shape of the ith mode

ωi = natural frequency in the ith mode.

Let the displacement response of the MDOF system is expressed as

{x(t)} = [φ] {y(t)} (3.67)

where {y(t)} represents the modal displacement vector, and [ φ] is the mode shape matrix given

by

[φ] = [ φ1 , φ2 ,......... φn ] (3.68)

Substituting { x} = [ φ]{ y} in equation (3.64) and pre-multiply by [φ] T

[φ] [ m ][ φ]{ ɺɺy (t )} + [ φ] [c ][φ]{ yɺ (t )} + [ φ] [ k ][ φ]{ y (t )} = − [φ] [ m ]{r } ɺɺxg (t )

T T T T
(3.69)

The above equation reduces to

y ( t ) } + [ C d ] { yɺ ( t ) } + [ K d ] { y ( t ) } = − [ φ ]
] { ɺɺ [m ]{r } ɺɺx g ( t )
T
[M m (3.70)

where,

[φ ] [ m ][φ ] = [ M m ] = generalized mass matrix

T

[φ ] [c ][ φ ] = [Cd ]
T
= generalized damping matrix

[φ] [ k ][φ] = [ K d ]
T
= generalized stiffness matrix

89
By virtue of the properties of the [φ], the matrices [Mm] and [Kd] are diagonal matrices. However,
for the classically damped system (i.e. if the [Cd] is also a diagonal matrix), the equation (3.70)
reduces to the following equation

y i ( t ) + 2 ξ i ω i yɺ i ( t ) + ω i2 y i ( t ) = − Γ i ɺɺ
ɺɺ x g (t ) ( i = 1, 2, 3, … , n ) (3.71)

where,
yi (t ) = modal displacement response in the ith mode,

ξi = modal damping ratio in the ith mode, and

Γ i = modal participation factor for ith mode expressed by

{φi }T [m ]{r}
Γi = (3.72)
{φi }T [m ]{φi }

The equation (3.71) represents n second order differential equations (i.e. similar to that of a
SDOF system) and the solution of which will provide the modal displacement response in the ith
mode, yi (t ) for i=1 to n. The displacement response of the MDOF system can be obtained by
equation (3.67) using the {y(t)}. The other response quantities of the structure can be obtained
from the displacement response of the system.

90
3.6 Numerical Examples on MDOF System

Example 3.6

A two-story building is modeled as 2-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in the Figure 3.12.
Determine the top floor maximum displacement and base shear due to El-Centro, 1940
earthquake ground motion. Take the inter-story stiffness, k =197.392 × 103 N/m, the floor mass,
m = 2500 kg and damping ratio as 2%.

m
x2

2m
x1

2k

Figure 3.12

Solution:

Mass of each floor, m = 2500 kg and stiffness, k = 197.392 kN/m

 3k −k 
Stiffness matrix = [k] =  
 −k k 
5000 0 
Mass matrix = [m] = 
 0 2500 

Using the equations (3.65) and (3.66), the frequencies and mode-shapes of the structures are

ω1 = 6.283 rad/sec and ω2 =12.566 rad/sec

91
 0.5  −1
{φ1} =   , and {φ2 } =  
1  1 

The modal column matrix is given by

0.5 −1
[φ] = [φ1 φ2 ] =  
 1 1

The modal participation factors are given by

{φ } [m]{r}
T

Γi = i T
{φi } [m ]{φi }
5000 0  1
[0.5 1]   
{φ } [m]{r} = 2500 1
T

Γ1 = 1 T  0 =1.333
{φ1} [m]{φ1} [0.5 1] 5000 0  0.5
 0 2500 1 


Similarly,

5000 0  1
[ −1 1]   
{φ2 } [m]{r} 2500 1
T

Γ2 = =  0
= −0.333
{φ2 } [m]{φ2 } [ −1 1] 5000 0   −1
T

 0 2500 1 


The response in the each mode of vibration is computed by solving the Equation (3.71) for the

system. The displacement and base shear response is shown in the Figures 3.13 and 3.14,

respectively. The maximum top floor displacement and base shear are found to be 0.202 m and

40.72 kN, respectively.

92
Figure 3.13 Top floor displacement response of two DOF system of Example 3.6.

93
Figure 3.14 Base shear response of two DOF system of Example 3.6.

94
Example 3.7

An industrial structure is modeled as 2-DOF system as shown in the Figure 3.15. Determine the
horizontal and vertical displacement of the free end of the structure due to El-Centro, 1940
earthquake ground motion. Take EI =80 × 103 N.m2, L= 2m, m1= 100kg and m2= 200kg. The
damping shall be considered as 2 percent.

m1=100kg m2=200kg
EI, L
x1

x2

EI, L

Figure 3.15

Solution: Given,

Mass, m1= 100kg, m2= 200kg, Length, L= 2 m and flexural rigidity, EI= 80 × 103 Nm2

6 EI  8 −3
Stiffness matrix = [k ] = ;
7 L3  −3 2 

300 0 
Mass matrix = [m] =  
 0 200 

Using equation (3.65), eigen values and eigen vectors can be obtained as

ω1 = 5.4925 rad/sec; ω2 = 16.856 rad/sec

 2.7   5.103 
{φ1} =  ; {φ2 } =  
6.25  −3.307 

95
Modal participation can be obtained by

{φi } [m]{r}
T

Γi =
{φi } [m ]{φi }
T

Γ1 = 0.081 and Γ 2 = 0.153

The displacement response in the each mode of vibration is computed by solving the Equation

(3.71) for the system. The horizontal and vertical displacement of the free end of the structure is

shown in the Figures 3.16 and 3.17, respectively. The maximum horizontal and vertical

displacement of the free end of the structure is found to be 0.039 m and 0.0699 m, respectively.

96
Figure 3.16 Horizontal displacement response of the Industrial Structure of Example 3.7.

97
Figure 3.17 Vertical displacement response of the Industrial Structure of Example 3.7.

98
3.8 Tutorial Problems

Q1. Develop general computer programs (preferably using Matlab or Scilab) to obtain the

response of a SDOF system under earthquake excitation using (a) Newmark’s Beta method,

(b) Runge-Kutta method, and (c) Exact method of time domain analysis. Compare the

results from above three methods by plotting the response of a SDOF system having time

period as 0.5 sec and damping ratio as 0.05 under the El-Centro, 1940 motion.

Q2. Derive the expressions for the elements of matrices [A] and [B] (i.e. equations (3.28) and
(3.29)) used in exact method for evaluation of the response of a SDOF system under
earthquake excitation.
Q3. Derive the expression for displacement response of an undamped SDOF system subjected to
earthquake ground motion of ɺɺx g ( t ) = ɺɺxo ( e − at − e − bt ) . Take, ω0 = natural frequency of the

SDOF system; and a = parameter having the same unit as that of ω0 .

Q4. A rigid-jointed plane frame is fixed at A and roller support at C as shown in Figure 3.18.
The members AB and BC are rigidly connected at B making a right angle and are
supporting a mass of 200 kg. Neglect the mass of frame, determine the maximum horizontal
displacement and base shear due to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake. Take the flexural rigidity,
EI = 294772.2 Nm2 and length, L = 4m for both members. Consider the damping as 2%.

B
C

Figure 3.18

99
Q5. A 2-degrees-of-freedom system (Figure 3.19) is subjected to horizontal earthquake
excitation of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake. Take the flexural rigidity, EI = 106 Nm2 and
length, L = 2m. The each lumped mass is 100 kg. Determine the maximum displacement of
the two masses. Take 2% damping in each mode of vibration.

100 kg

EI, L

100 kg

EI, L

Figure 3.19
Q6. A three-story building is modeled as 3-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in Figure
3.20. Determine the maximum top floor maximum displacement and base shear due to El-
Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion. Take the inter-story lateral stiffness of floors i.e. k1
= k2= k3=16357.5 kN/m, the floor mass m1= m2=10000 kg and m3=5000 kg and damping
ratio as 2%.
m3
x3

k3
m2
x2

k2
m1
x1

k1

Figure 3.20

100
3.8 Answers to Tutorial Problems

Q1. Maximum Displacement = 0.057 m

Q3.

x0
ɺɺ a − at  x0
ɺɺ b − bt 
x(t ) = −  sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e  + 2  sin ω0t − cos ω0t + e 
a + ω02
2
 ω0  b + ω0
2
 ω0 

Q4. Horizontal displacement = 0.0684 m

Base shear = 2160.2 N

Q5. Displacement of lower mass = 7.76×10-3 m

Displacement of top mass = 24.02×10-3 m

Q6. Top floor displacement = 0.0234 m

Base shear = 196.4 × 103 N

101
Chapter 4
Response Spectrum Method

4.1 Introduction
In order to perform the seismic analysis and design of a structure to be built at a particular
location, the actual time history record is required. However, it is not possible to have such
records at each and every location. Further, the seismic analysis of structures cannot be
carried out simply based on the peak value of the ground acceleration as the response of the
structure depend upon the frequency content of ground motion and its own dynamic
properties. To overcome the above difficulties, earthquake response spectrum is the most
popular tool in the seismic analysis of structures. There are computational advantages in
using the response spectrum method of seismic analysis for prediction of displacements and
member forces in structural systems. The method involves the calculation of only the
maximum values of the displacements and member forces in each mode of vibration using
smooth design spectra that are the average of several earthquake motions.

This chapter deals with response spectrum method and its application to various types
of the structures. The codal provisions as per IS:1893 (Part 1)-2002 code for response
spectrum analysis of multi-story building is also summarized.

4.2 Response Spectra

Response spectra are curves plotted between maximum response of SDOF system subjected
to specified earthquake ground motion and its time period (or frequency). Response spectrum
can be interpreted as the locus of maximum response of a SDOF system for given damping
ratio. Response spectra thus helps in obtaining the peak structural responses under linear
range, which can be used for obtaining lateral forces developed in structure due to earthquake
thus facilitates in earthquake-resistant design of structures.

Usually response of a SDOF system is determined by time domain or frequency

domain analysis, and for a given time period of system, maximum response is picked. This
process is continued for all range of possible time periods of SDOF system. Final plot with
system time period on x-axis and response quantity on y-axis is the required response spectra

102
pertaining to specified damping ratio and input ground motion. Same process is carried out
with different damping ratios to obtain overall response spectra.

Consider a SDOF system subjected to earthquake acceleration, 

xg (t ) the equation of motion

is given by
mx(t ) + cx (t ) + kx(t ) =
- mxg (t ) (4.1)

c
Substitute ω0 = k/m and ξ = and ωd = ω0 1 − ξ 2
2mω0
The equation (4.1) can be re-written as

x(t ) + 2ξω0 x (t ) + ω02 x(t ) = - xg (t )

(4.2)
Using Duhamel’s integral, the solution of SDOF system initially at rest is given by (Agrawal
and Shrikhande, 2006)
t - ξω0 ( t - τ )
e
x=
(t ) - ∫ x (τ)
g
ωd
insωd (t - τ) d τ
0 (4.3)

The maximum displacement of the SDOF system having parameters of ξ and ω0 and
subjected to specified earthquake motion, 
xg (t ) is expressed by

t - ξω0 ( t - τ )
e
x(t ) max= ∫ x (τ)
0
g
ωd
insωd (t - τ) d τ
max (4.4)

The relative displacement spectrum is defined as,

Sd (ξ, ω0 )= x(t ) max
(4.5)
where Sd ( ξ, ω0 ) is the relative displacement spectra of the earthquake ground motion for the

parameters of ξ and ω0.

Similarly, the relative velocity spectrum, Sv and absolute acceleration response spectrum, Sa

are expressed as,

Sv (ξ, ω0 )= x (t ) max (4.6)

Sa (ξ, ω0 )=  = 
xa (t ) max x(t ) + 
xg (t ) (4.7)
max

The pseudo velocity response spectrum, Spv for the system is defined as

103
Spv (ξ, ω0 ) = ω0 Sd (ξ, ω0 )
(4.8)

Similarly, the pseudo acceleration response, Spa is obtained by multiplying the Sd to ω02 , thus
Spa (ξ, ω0 ) = ω02 Sd (ξ, ω0 )
(4.9)

Consider a case=
where ξ 0 i.e. 
x(t ) =
+ ω02 x(t ) - 
xg (t )

Sa | 
= x ( t ) + 
x g ( t ) |max

= | − ω02 x (t ) | max

= ω02 | xmax |

= ω02 S d

= S pa
(4.10)
The above equation implies that for an undamped system, Sa = Spa.

The quantity Spv is used to calculate the maximum strain energy stored in the structure
expressed as
1 1 1
Emax = 2
k xmax = m ω0 2 S d2 = 2
m S pv
2 2 2 (4.11)
The quantity Spa is related to the maximum value of base shear as
Vmax = k xmax = m ω02 Sd = m Spa
(4.12)

The relations between different response spectrum quantities is shown in the Table 4.1.

As limiting case consider a rigid system i.e. ω0 → ∞ or T0 → 0 , the values of various

response spectra are

lim Sd → 0
ω0 →∞ (4.13)

lim Sv → 0
ω0 →∞ (4.14)

lim Sa → 
x g (t )
ω0 →∞ max (4.15)
The three spectra i.e. displacement, pseudo velocity and pseudo acceleration provide the
same information on the structural response. However, each one of them provides a
physically meaningful quantity (refer equations (4.11) and (4.12)) and therefore,
all three spectra are useful in understanding the nature of an earthquake and its
influence on the design. A co mbined p lo t sho w ing a ll t hr ee o f t he spect r a l

104
q u ant it ies is possible because of the relationship that exists between these three
quantities. Taking the log of equations (4.8) and (4.9)

log S pv= log Sd + log ω0

(4.16)

log S=
pv log S pa − log ω0
(4.17)

From the Equations (4.16) and (4.17), it is clear that a plot on logarithmic scale with logS pv as
ordinate and logω0 as abscissa, the two equations are straight lines with slopes +45º and -45º
for constant values of logS d and logSpa, respectively. This implies that the combined spectra
of displacement, pseudo velocity and pseudo acceleration can be plotted in a single graph
(refer Figure 2.5 for combined Displacement, Velocity and Acceleration Spectrum taken
from Datta, 2010).

Table 4.1 Response Spectrum Relationship.

Sv Sa S pv S pa
Relative displacement, x (t ) max = Sd   *
= =
ω0 ω02 ω0 ω02

Sa S pa
Relative velocity, x (t ) max  ω0 Sd = Sv   S pv 
ω0 ω0

Absolute acceleration, 
xa (t ) max  ω02 Sd *
 ω0 Sv = Sa  ω0 S pv  S pa *

(* If ξ =0 these relations are exact and the sign  is valid up to 0 < ξ < 0.2 )

4.2.1 Factor Influencing Response Spectra

The response spectral values depends upon the following parameters,

I) Energy release mechanism

II) Epicentral distance
III) Focal depth
IV) Soil condition
V) Richter magnitude
VI) Damping in the system
VII) Time period of the system

105
4.2.2 Errors in Evaluation of Response Spectrum
The following errors are introduced in evaluation of response spectra (Nigam and Jennings,
1969),

1. Straight line Approximation: - In the digital computation of spectra, the actual

earthquake record is replaced by linear segments between the points of digitization.
This is a minor approximation provided that the length of the time intervals is much
shorter than the periods of interest.

2. Truncation Error: - In general, a truncation error exists in numerical methods for

integrating differential equations. For example, in third-order Runge-Kutta methods
the error is proportional to (Δti)4.

3. Error Due to Rounding the Time Record: - For earthquake records digitized at
irregular time intervals, the integration technique proposed in this report requires
rounding of the time record and the attendant error depends on the way the rounding
is done. For round-off to 0.005 sec, the average error in spectrum values is expected
to be less than 2 percent.

4. Error Due to Discretization: - In any numerical method of computing the spectra, the
response is obtained at a set of discrete points. Since spectral values represent
maximum values of response parameters which may not occur at these discrete points,
discretization introduces an error which gives spectrum values lower than the true
values. The error will be a maximum if the maximum response occurs exactly
midway between two discrete points as shown in Figure 4.1. An estimate for the
upper bound of this error is shown in Table 4.2 by noting that at the time of maximum
displacement or velocity, the response of the oscillator is nearly sinusoidal at a
frequency equal to its natural frequency. Under this assumption the error can be
related to the maximum interval of integration, Δti and the period of the oscillator as
shown in Figure 4.1.

Actual Maximum Value

Response
quantity Recorded Maximum Value

∆t
2

∆t Time, t

Figure 4.1 Error in response spectra due discretization.

106
Table 4.2 Variation of Percentage error in response quantity with time step chosen.

∆ti Maximum Error (%)

≤ T/10 ≤ 4.9

≤ T/20 ≤ 1.2

≤ T/40 ≤ 0.3

107
4.2.3 Response Spectra of El-Centro-1940 Earthquake Ground Motion
The response spectra of the El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion are computed using
the exact method described in the earlier Chapter (refer Appendix-I, for digitized values of
the earthquake). The spectra are plotted for the three damping ratios i.e. ξ=0.02, 0.05 and 0.1.
The displacement, velocity and acceleration spectra are shown in the Figures 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4,
respectively.

Further, comparison of the real and pseudo spectra for velocity and acceleration response is
shown in the Figure 4.5. As expected, there is no difference between real and pseudo absolute
acceleration response spectra. However, the velocity response spectra may have some
difference.

The digitized values of the response spectra Sd, Sv and Sa of the El-Centro, 1940 earthquake is
given in the Appendix – II at an interval of 0.01 sec time period for damping ratio of 2% and
5%.

Figure 4.2 Displacement response spectra of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake

ground motion.

108
 Figure 4.3 Velocity response spectra of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
ground motion.

Figure 4.4 Acceleration response spectra of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake

ground motion.

109
Figure 4.5 Comparison of real and pseudo velocity and acceleration response
spectra of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion (damping ratio=0.02).

110
4.3 Numerical Examples

Example 4.1

Consider a SDOF system with mass, m = 2 × 103 kg, stiffness, k = 60 kN/m and damping, c =
0.44 kN.sec/m. Using the response spectra of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake, compute (a)
Maximum relative displacement, (b) Maximum base shear and (c) Maximum strain energy.

Solution: The natural frequency, time period and damping ratio of the SDOF system are

k 60 × 103
ω
= = = 5.48 rad / sec
2 × 103
0
m
2π
T0 = = 1.15 sec
ω0

c 0.44 ×103
ξ= = = 0.02
2mω0 2 × 2 × 103 × 5.48

From the response spectrum curve of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion for the time
period of 1.15 sec and damping ratio of 0.02 (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II)
Sd = 0.11147m and Sa = 3.321 m/sec2
(a) The maximum displacement
xmax = Sd = 111.47 mm

Sa 3.321
Alternatively, xmax  = = 0.11055 m = 110.55 mm
ω0 2
5.482

(b) The maximum base shear

Vmax = mSa = 2 ×103 × 3.321 = 6.64 kN

Alternatively, Vmax = k xmax = 60 ×103 × 0.11147 = 6.688 kN

(c) The maximum strain energy

1 1
× 60 ×103 × ( 0.11147 ) = 372.76 N.m
2
E max = k xmax 2 =
2 2

111
 Example 4.2

Plot the pseudo acceleration response spectra for the earthquake acceleration expressed as
 ( t ) x0 sin ( ω=
xg = t ) 0.5g sin (10t )

Solution: Using time domain analysis (Duhamel’s integral)

x ( t ) = − ∫ h ( t − τ ) 
xg ( τ ) d τ
t

where,
−ξω0 ( t −τ )
e
h (t − τ)
= sin ( ωd t )
ωd

 x0 sin ( ωt )
xg (t ) 
=

On integrating,

x0 1
x (t ) = − sin ( ωt − θ )
ω02
(1 − β ) + ( 2ξβ )
2 2 2

ω  2ξβ 
where β = and θ = tan −1  2 
ω0 1-β 

The displacement spectra is given by

S d = x(t ) max


x0 1
=
ω02 (1 − β ) + ( 2ξβ )
2 2

Pseudo acceleration spectra is given by

S pa =ω02 × S d


x0
=
(1 − β ) + ( 2ξβ )
2 2 2

The required response spectra is plotted in Figure 4.6 for damping ratios of 2%, 5% and 10%.

112
Figure 4.6 Pseudo acceleration response spectra for different damping ratios of Example 4.2.

113
Example 4.3

Plot the pseudo acceleration response spectra of the ground motion given by
xg (t ) = c0 δ ( t − 2 )


where ‘δ’ is Dirac delta function. Take duration of acceleration as 30 sec.

Solution: Using Duhamel’s integral the displacement of the system is (i.e. equation 4.3)
−ξω0 ( t −τ )
e
x (t ) = −∫ sin ωd ( t − τ ) c0 δ ( t − 2 ) d τ
t

0 ωd

 e −ξω0 (t −τ) 
= −c0  sin ωd ( t − τ ) 
 ωd  τ=2
c
− 0 e −ξω0 ( t −2) sin ωd ( t − 2 )
=
ωd
For the maximum displacement
dx(t )
= 0,
dt
c
− 0  −ξω0 e −ξω0 (t − 2) sin ωd ( t − 2 ) + e −ξω0 (t − 2) ωd cos ωd ( t − 2 ) 
0=
ωd

−c0 e −ξω0 ( t −2)  −ξω0 sin ωd ( t − 2 ) + ωd cos ωd ( t − 2 ) 

0=

−ξω0 sin ( t − 2 ) + ωd cos ωd ( t − 2 ) = 0

ωd 1 − ξ2
tan ωd ( t − 2 )= =
ξω0 ξ

Thus, the time tm at which the maximum displacement occurs is

 1 − ξ2 
ωd ( tm − 2 ) =
tan −1  
 ξ 
 

and implying from the Figure 4.7 that,

sin ( ωd ( tm − 2 )=
) 1 − ξ2

114
 1

1
ωd ( tm − 2 )

Figure 4.7

The maximum displacement will be given by

c
− 0 e −ξω0 ( tm −2) sin ωd (tm − 2)
xmax =
ωd

c0  1  1 − ξ2 
= − exp −ξω0 tan −1    × 1 − ξ2
ωd  ωd  ξ 
 

Substituting for ωd = ω0 1 − ξ 2 and simplifying

c0  ξ  1 − ξ2 
−1
xmax = − exp − tan  
ω0  1 − ξ2  ξ 
 

The displacement spectra is given by

Sd = xmax

c0  ξ  1 − ξ2 
= exp − tan −1  
ω0  1 − ξ2  ξ 
 
The pseudo acceleration spectra is expressed by
Spa = ω02 Sd

 ξ  1 − ξ2 
−1
S pa= c0ω0 exp − tan  
 
 1 − ξ2  ξ  

115
4.4 Response Spectra Method for MDOF System

4.4.1 Response Analysis of MDOF System

Multi degree of freedom (MDOF) systems are usually analyzed using Modal Analysis. A
typical MDOF system with ‘n’ degree of freedom is shown in Figure (4.8). This system when
subjected to ground motion undergoes deformations in number of possible ways. These
deformed shapes are known as modes of vibration or mode shapes. Each shape is vibrating
with a particular natural frequency. Total unique modes for each MDOF system are equal to
the possible degree of freedom of system. The equations of motion for MDOF system is
given by

[m]{
x(t )} + [c]{x (t )} + [k ]{x(t )} =
- [ m]{r} 
xg (t) (4.18)

where, [m] = Mass matrix (n × n); [k] = Stiffness matix (n × n); [c] = Damping matrix (n ×
n); {r} = Influence coefficient vector (n×1); {x (t )} = relative displacement vector; {x (t )} =

x (t )} = relative acceleration vector, and 

relative velocity vector, { xg (t ) = earthquake ground

acceleration.

Xn

X2

X1

xg (t)

Figure 4.8 MDOF system with ‘n’ degrees-of-freedom.

116
The undamped eigen values and eigen vectors of the MDOF system are found form the
characteristic equation

{[k ] − ω [m]=
2
i }φ i 0 =i 1, 2, 3, …, n    (4.19)

det {[k ] − ω [m]} =0

2
i (4.20)

where,
th
ωi2 = eigen values of the i mode

φi = eigen vector or mode shape of the ith mode

ωi = natural frequency in the ith mode.

Let the displacement response of the MDOF system is expressed as

{x(t )} = [φ] { y (t )} (4.21)

where {y(t)} represents the modal displacement vector, and [ φ] is the mode shape matrix

given by

[φ] = [ φ1 , φ2 ,......... φn ] (4.22)

Substituting {x} = [φ]{ y} in equation (4.18) and pre-multiply by [φ] T

[φ] [ m][φ]{ y(t )} + [φ] [c ][φ]{ y (t )} + [φ] [ k ][φ]{ y (t )} =− [ φ] [ m]{r} xg (t )

T T T T
(4.23)

The above equation reduces to

y (t )} + [Cd ]{ y (t )} + [ K d ]{ y (t )} =− [ φ]
[ M m ]{  [m ]{r} xg (t )
T
(4.24)

where,

[φ] [ m][φ] = [ M m ] = generalized mass matrix

T

[φ] [c ][φ] =[Cd ]

T
= generalized damping matrix

[φ] [ k ][φ] =[ K d ]
T
= generalized stiffness matrix

117
By virtue of the properties of the [φ], the matrices [Mm] and [Kd] are diagonal matrices.
However, for the classically damped system (i.e. if the [Cd] is also a diagonal matrix), the
equation (4.24) reduces to the following equation


yi (t ) + 2ξi ωi y i (t ) + ωi2 yi (t ) = −Γi 
x g (t ) (i = 1, 2, 3, …, n ) (4.25)

where,
yi (t ) = modal displacement response in the ith mode,

ξi = modal damping ration in the ith mode, and

Γi = modal participation factor for ith mode expressed by

{φ }T [m ]{r}
Γi = i T (4.26)
{φi } [m ]{φi }

Equation (4.25) is of the form of equation (4.1), representing vibration of SDOF system, the
maximum modal displacement response is found from the response spectrum i.e.

yi ,max =| yi (t ) |max =Γi S d (ξi , ωi )

(4.27)

The maximum displacement response of the structure in the ith mode is

xi ,max = φi yi ,max (i = 1, 2, ……. , n) (4.28)

The maximum acceleration response of the structure in the ith mode is

{ xa }i ,max = {φi } Γi S pa (ξi , ωi ) (i = 1, 2,……. , n)

(4.29)

The required response quantity of interest, ri i.e. (displacement, shear force, bending moment
etc.) of the structure can be obtained in each mode of vibration using the maximum response
obtained in equations (4.28) and (4.29). However, the final maximum response, rmax shall be
obtained by combining the response in each mode of vibration using the modal combinations
rules. Some of the modal combinations rules commonly used are described here.

118
4.4.2 Modal Combination Rules
The commonly used methods for obtaining the peak response quantity of interest for a
MDOF system are as follows:

• Absolute Sum (ABSSUM) Method,

• Square root of sum of squares (SRSS) method, and
• Complete quadratic combination (CQC) method

In ABSSUM method, the peak responses of all the modes are added algebraically,
assuming that all modal peaks occur at same time. The maximum response is given by
n
rmax = ∑ ri
(4.30)
i =1

The ABSSUM method provides a much conservative estimate of resulting response

quantity and thus provides an upper bound to peak value of total response. (Chopra, 2007)
In the SRSS method, the maximum response is obtained by square root of sum of square
of response in each mode of vibration and is expressed by
n
(4.31)
rmax = ∑r
i =1
i
2

The SRSS method of combining maximum modal responses is fundamentally sound where
the modal frequencies are well separated. However, this method yield poor results where
frequencies of major contributing modes are very close together.
The alternative procedure is the Complete Quadratic Combination (CQC) method.
The maximum response from all the modes is calculated as
n n

∑ ∑r
(4.32)
rmax = i α i j rj
=i 1 =j 1

where ri and rj are maximum responses in the ith and jth modes, respectively and αij is
correlation coefficient given by

(ξ ξj ) (ξ + βξ j ) β
1 3
2 2
8 (4.33)
αij =
i i

(1 - β2 ) + 4 ξi ξ jβ (1 + β ) (ξ + ξ2j ) β 2
2 2
+ 4 2
i

where ξ i and ξ j are damping ratio in ith and jth modes of vibration, respectively and

ωi
β ( ω j > ωi ) (4.34)
ωj
119
The range of coefficient, αij is 0 < αij < 1 and αii =α jj =1.

For the system having the same damping ratio in two modes i.e. ξi= ξj= ξ, then

8 ξ2 (1 + β ) β
3
2
αij = (4.35)
(1 - β2 ) + 4 ξ2β (1 + β )2
2

120
4.4.3 Numerical Examples

Example 4.4
A two-story building is modeled as 2-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in the Figure
4.9. Determine the top floor maximum displacement and base shear due to El-Centro, 1940
earthquake ground motion using the response spectrum method. Take the inter-story
stiffness, k =197.392 × 103 N/m and the floor mass, m = 2500 kg and damping ratio as 2%.
m
x2

2m
x1

2k

Figure 4.9

Solution:

Mass of each floor, m = 2500 kg and stiffness, k = 197.392 kN/m

thus,
 3k −k 
Stiffness matrix = [k] = 
 −k k 

5000 0 
and mass matrix = [m] = 
 0 2500 

Using equation (4.19), eigen values and eigen vectors can be obtained as
ω1 = 6.283 rad/sec and ω2 =12.566 rad/sec

0.5  −1
[φ1 ] =   , and [φ2 ] =  
1  1 

121
 Modal participation factors are given by

{φ } {m}{r}
T

Γi = i T
{φi } {m}{φi }
5000 0  1
[0.5 1]  
{φ1} {m}{r} 2500  1
T

=Γ1 =  0
=1.333
{φ1} {m}{φ1} [0.5 1] 5000 0  0.5
T

 0 2500  1 


Similarly,
5000 0  1
[ −1 1]  
{φ2 } {m}{r} 2500  1
T

Γ2 = =  0
=−0.333
{φ2 } {m}{φ2 } [ −1 1] 5000 0   −1
T

 0 2500  1 

1st Mode Response
2π 2π
=
T1 = = 1 sec
ω1 6.283
ξ =0.02

From the response spectra, (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II)
S a1 = 6.17 m s 2 and S d 1 = 0.153m

Top floor displacement = Γ1 × φ21 × S d 1 = 1.333 ×1× 0.153

= 0.204m

Base shear = 2k × φ11 × Γ1 × S d 1 = 2 ×197.392 ×103 × 0.5 ×1.33 × 0.153

= 40.16 kN

2nd Mode Response

2π 2π
=
T2 = = 0.5 sec
ω2 12.566
ξ =0.02

From response spectra, (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II)

S a 2 = 10.582 m s 2 and S d 2 = 0.06445m

122
Top floor displacement = Γ 2 × φ22 × S d 2 = −0.333 × 1× 0.06445
= −0.0214m

Base shear = 2k × φ12 × Γ 2 × S d 2 = 2 × 197.392 × 103 × 1× −0.333 × 0.06445

= −8.652 kN

Mode Top floor displacement (m) Base shear (kN)

1 0.204 40.16

2 -0.0214 -8.652

SRSS 0.2052 41.08

Exact Response
0.202 40.72
(from Example 3.6)

123
Example 4.5

An industrial structure is modeled as 2-DOF system as shown in the Figure 4.10. Determine
the lateral displacement, base shear and base moment of the structure due to El-Centro, 1940
earthquake ground motion using the response spectrum method. Take EI =80 × 103 Nm2, L=
2 m, m1= 100 kg; m2= 200 kg.
m1=100kg m2=200kg
EI, L
x1

x2

EI, L

Figure 4.10

Solution: Given, Mass, m1= 100 kg; m2= 200 kg; L= 2 m; EI= 80 × 103 Nm2

Stiffness matrix (found by the inverse of flexibility matrix) and mass matrix of above MDOF
system is given by,

6 EI  8 −3 300 0 
[k ] =  −3 2  ; [m] =  0 200 
7 L3    

Finding eigen values and eigen vector using equation (4.19)

{[ k ] − ω [ m]}{φ} = 0
2

det [ k ] − ω2 [ m ] = 0

ω1 = 5.4925 rad/sec; ω2 = 16.856 rad/sec

 2.7   5.103 
{φ1} =   ; {φ2 } =  
6.25  −3.307 

Modal participation factor,

{φ } {m}{r}
T

Γi = i T
{φi } {m}{φi }

124
 300 0  1 
[ 2.7 6.25] 
 0 200  0 
Γ1 = 0.081 ;
300 0   2.7 
[ 2.7 6.25]   
 0 200  6.25

300 0  1 
[5.103 − 3.307 ] 
 0 200  0 
Γ2 = 0.153
300 0  5.103 
[5.103 − 3.307]   
 0 200   −3.307 

1st Mode Response

2π
T1 = =1.1439 sec; ξ1 = 2%
ω1

From response spectra, (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II)

S a1 = 3.203 m/s2; S d1 = 0.1053 m

Lateral displacement

x1,1 =Γ1 × φ11 × S d 1 =0.081×2.7×0.1053

= 0.023 m

Force vector

300 0   2.7 
{ f }1 [m]{φ1} × Γ1=
= × S a1    × 0.081 × 3.203
 0 200 6.25

210.15
= 
 324.3 

Base shear= 210.15 N

Base moment = 2 × (210.15+324.3) = 1068.9 N.m

125
 2nd Mode Response

2π
T2 = =0.375 sec; ξ2 = 2%
ω2

From response spectra, (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II)

S a2 = 9.7 m/s2 and S d2 = 0.034 m

Lateral displacement

x1,2 =Γ 2 × φ12 × S d 2 =0.153×5.103×0.034

= 0.0269 m

Force vector

300 0   5.103 
{ f }2 [m]{φ2 } × Γ 2=
= × Sa 2    × 0.153 × 9.7
 0 200  −3.307 

 2272 
= 
−981.6 

Base shear = 2272 N

Base moment = 2 × (2272 - 981.6) = 2580.8 N.m

The peak responses using the modal combination rules SRSS and CQC method are
summarized below

Lateral Displacement (mm) Base Shear (N) Base Moment (Nm)

Mode 1 23 210.15 1068.9

Mode 2 26.9 2272 2580.8

SRSS 35.4 2281.7 2793.4

CQC 35.5 2290 2798

126
Example 4.6

A 2-degree-of-freedom system is subjected to horizontal earthquake excitation (Figure 4.11)

with its response spectra as given below. Take the flexural rigidity, EI = 106 Nm2 and length,
L = 2m. Each lumped mass is 100 kg. Determine the maximum top mass floor displacement
and base shear. Take 2% damping in each mode of vibration.

100 kg x2

EI, L Sa/g

Sa =
/ g (0.1 + T ) eT
100 kg x1

EI, L

Time Period, T (sec)

Figure 4.11

Solution: Given, EI = 106 N.m2, m = 100 kg and L = 2 m.

The flexibility matrix of the structure is

L3  2 5 
[f]=
6 EI  5 16 

Thus, the stiffness matrix,

6 EI 16 −5
[ k ] [=
= f ]−1  −5 2 
7 L3  

Eigen values and eigen vector using equation (4.19) are

{[ k ] − ω [ m]}{φ} = 0
2

det [ k ] − ω2 [ m ] = 0

6 EI 16 −5 2 m o
 −5 2  − ω  0 m = 0
7 L3    

7 mL3 2
Let, =λ ω
6 EI

Thus,

127
 16 − λ −5
=0
−5 2−λ

(16 − λ )( 2 − λ ) − 25 = 0
λ 2 − 18λ + 7 = 0

λ = 9 ± 74 = 9 ± 8.6023

λ1 =0.39767 and λ 2 =
17.6023

On substituting λ, the natural frequency of the system will be

ω1 =
20.64 rad sec ; T1 0.3044sec

ω2 137.33
= rad sec ; T2 0.04575sec

On substituting, ω2 in characteristic equation (4.19), eigen vectors are obtained as

 1   1 
{φ1} =  and {φ2 } = 
3.1204   −0.32 

Modal Participation factors

{φ } {m}{r}
T

Γi = i T
{φi } {m}{φi }

100 0  1
[1
3.1204]  
 0 100  1 412.04
=Γ1 = = 0.383
100 0   1  1073.68
[1 3.1204]   
 0 100  3.1204 

100 0  1
[1
−0.32]   
=
Γ2  0 100 1= 68
= .616
100 0   1  110.24
[1 −0.32]   
 0 100  −0.32 

1st Mode Response

T1 = 0.3044sec

From the response spectra curve,

128
=
Sa1 (=
0.1 + 0.3044 )
0.298 and S=
Sa1 0.298 × 9.81
= = 6.86 × 10−3 m
ω1
d1
g e0.3044 2
20.64 2

× S d 1 3.1204 × .383 × 6.86 × 10−3

Top mass displacement = Γ1 × φ21=

= 8.2 × 10−3 m

100 0   1 
=
f s1 [m ]{φ1} × Γ1 × S=
a1  0 100 3.1204  0.383 × 0.298 × 9.81
  

 100 
=   0.383 × 0.298 × 9.81
312.04 

Base Shear = (100 + 312.04 ) 0.383 × 0.298 × 9.81 = 461.34N

2nd Mode Response

T2 = 0.04575sec

Sa
From response spectra, S d1 .072 ×10−3 m
= 0.138 and =
g

Top mass displacement = Γ 2 × φ22 × Sd 2 = −0.32 × 0.616 × 0.072 × 10−3 = −0.014 × 10−3 m

100 0   1 
=
f s [m ]{φ2 } × Γ 2 × S=
a2  0 100  −0.32  0.616 × 0.138 × 9.81
  

Base Shear = 100 × .68 × 0.616 × 0.138 × 9.81 = 56.7N

Final Response by SRSS Method

= 8.2 × 10−3 m
Top mass displacement

Base Shear = 464.8 N

129
 Example 4.7

A three-story building is modeled as 3-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in Figure 4.12.
Determine the top floor maximum displacement and base shear due to El-Centro, 1940
earthquake ground motion using the response spectrum method. Take the inter-story lateral
stiffness of floors i.e. k1 = k2= k3=16357.5 x 103 N/m and the floor mass m1 = m2= 10000 kg
and m3=5000 kg. m3
x3

k3
m2
x2

k2
m1
x1

k1

Figure 4.12

Solution: The mass matrix of the structure

 m1 0 0 10000 0 0 
 0 m2 0   0 0 
=[ m] =  10000
 0 0 m3   0 0 5000 

and the stiffness matrix,

 k1 + k2 −k2 0   32715 −16357.5 0 

[ k ] = −k2 k 2 + k3 
−k3  =−
 16357.5 32715 −16357.5
 0 − k3 k3   0 −16357.5 16357.5 

Finding eigen values and eigen vectors using the equation (4.19)

{[ k ] − ω [ m]}{φ} = 0
2

det [ k ] − ω2 [ m ] = 0

130
 2 −1 0  2 0 0

det 16357.5 ×10  −2 2 − 2λ
3
0  − ω × 5000  0 2 0  = 0
 2

 0 −1 1 − λ   0 0 1 

ω2 × 5000
λ=
16357.5 × 103

2 − 2λ −1 0
det −1 2 − 2λ 0 =0
0 −1 1− λ

( 2 − 2λ ) ( 2 − 2λ )(1 − λ ) − 1 + [ −1 + λ ] =0

( 2 − 2λ )  2 − 2λ − 2λ + 2λ 2 − 1 − 1 + λ =0

2 − 2λ  2λ 2 − 4λ + 1 + λ − 1 = 0

4λ 2 − 8λ + 2 − 4λ 3 + 2λ 2 − 2λ + λ − 1 = 0

−4λ 3 + 12λ 2 − 9λ + 1 = 0

=
λ1 0.134, =
λ2 1 , =
λ 3 1.866

Implying that

ω1 =20.937 rad sec ω2 =57.2 rad sec ω3 =78.13 rad sec

On substituting ω2 in the characteristic equation,

For Mode 1

 2 − 2 × 0.134 −1 0   φ11 
 −1 2 − 2 × 0.134 −1  φ21  = 0

 0 −1 1 − 0.134   φ31 

Assuming Φ11 = 1,
2 − 2 × 0.134 =φ21

φ21 =
1.732 and φ31 =2.0

 1 
 
{φ1} =1.732 
 2.0 
 

131
 For Mode 2

 2 − 2 −1 0   φ12 
 −1 2 − 2 −1  φ  =
   22  0
 0 −1 1 − 1  φ32 

1 
 
{φ2 } =0 
1 
 

For Mode 3

 2 − 2 ×1.866 −1 0   φ13 
 −1 2 − 2 ×1.866 −1  φ23  = 0

 0 −1 1 − 1.866   φ33 

 1 
{φ3} =−1.733
 2.0 
 

The influence coefficient vector is given by

1
 
{r} = 1
1
 

Modal Participation Factors

2 0 0  1
[1 1.733 2] × 5000 0 2 0  1
{φ=
1} {m}{r}
 0 0 1  1
T

=Γ1
{φ1} {m}{φ} 2 0 0  1 
T

[1 1.733 2] × 5000 0 2 0  1.733

 0 0 1   2 

Γ1 =0.622

Similarly,

{φ=
2 } {m}{r}
T

=Γ2 0.333
{φ2 } {m}{φ2 }
T

132
 {φ=
2 } {m}{r}
T

=Γ3 0.045
{φ3} {m}{φ}
T

1st Mode Response

2π 2π
=
T1 = = 0.30 sec
ω1 20.937

ξ1 =0.02

From the response spectra (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II),

S d 1 = 0.01902m

Top floor displacement = Γ1 × φ31 × S d 1 = 2 × 0.622 × 0.01902

= 0.0236m

Base shear = k × φ11 × Γ1 × S d 1 = 16.357 ×106 ×1× 0.622 × 0.01902

= 193 kN

2nd Mode Response

2π
=
T2 = 0.11sec
57.2

ξ2 =0.02

from response spectra (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II),

S d 2 = 0.00231m

Top floor displacement = φ32 × Γ 2 × S d 2 = −1× 0.333 × 0.00231

−7.69 ×10−4 m
=

Base shear = k × φ12 × Γ 2 × S d 2 = 16357 × 103 × 1× 0.333 × 0.00231= 12.58kN

3rd Mode Response

2π
=T3 = 0.08sec
78.13

ξ3 =0.02

133
from response spectra (refer Figures 4.2 and 4.4 or Appendix-II),

S d 3 9.77 ×10−4 m
=

Top floor displacement = φ33 × Γ3 × S d 3

2 × 0.045 × 9.77 ×10−4 m

=

= 8.793 × 10−5 m

Base shear = k × φ13 × Γ3 × S d 3

= 16357.5 × 103 × 1× 0.045 × 9.77 ×10−4

= 0.719 kN

Peak responses using the SRSS modal combination rule are given below

Mode Top floor displacement (mm) Base shear (kN)

1 23.6 193

2 -0.769 12.58

3 0.0879 0.719

SRSS 23.6 193.41

Exact Response (from time
23.4 196.4
history analysis)

134
4.5 Design of Earthquake Resistant Structure Based on Codal Provisions

General principles and design philosophy for design of earthquake-resistant structure are as

follows:

a) The characteristics of seismic ground vibrations at any location depends upon the
magnitude of earth quake, its depth of focus, distance from epicenter, characteristic of
the path through which the waves travel, and the soil strata on which the structure
stands. Ground motions are predominant in horizontal direction.
b) Earthquake generated vertical forces, if significant, as in large spans where
differential settlement is not allowed, must be considered.
c) The response of a structure to the ground motions is a function of the nature of
foundation soil, materials size and mode of construction of structures, and the
duration and characteristic of ground motion.
d) The design approach is to ensure that structures possess at least a minimum strength
to withstand minor earthquake (DBE), which occur frequently, without damage; resist
moderate earthquake without significant damage though some nonstructural damage
may occur, and aims that structures withstand major earthquake (MCE) without
collapse. Actual forces that appeared on structures are much greater then the design
forces specified here, but ductility, arising due to inelastic material behavior and
detailing, and over strength, arising from the additional reserve strength in structures
over and above the design strength are relied upon to account for this difference in
actual and design lateral forces.
e) Reinforced and pre-stressed members shall be suitably designed to ensure that
premature failure due to shear or bond does not occur, as per IS:456 and IS:1343.
f) In steel structures, members and their connections should be so proportioned that high
ductility is obtained.
g) The soil structure interaction refers to the effect of the supporting foundation medium
on the motion of structure. The structure interaction may not be considered in the
seismic analysis for structures supporting on the rocks.
h) The design lateral forces shall be considered in two orthogonal horizontal directions
of the structures. For structures, which have lateral force resisting elements in two
orthogonal directions only, design lateral force must be considered in one direction at
a time. Structures having lateral resisting elements in two directions other than
135
 orthogonal shall be analyzed according to clause 2.3.2 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002. Where
both horizontal and vertical forces are taken into account, load combinations must be
according to clause 2.3.3 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002.
i) When a change in occupancy results in a structure being re-classified to a higher
importance factor (I), the structure shall be confirm to the seismic requirements of the
new structure with high importance factor.

4.6. Design Criteria

For the purpose of determining the design seismic forces, the country (India) is classified into
four seismic zones (II, III, IV, and V). Previously, there were five zones, of which Zone I and
II are merged into Zone II in fifth revision of code. The design horizontal seismic forces
coefficient Ah for a structure shall be determined by following expression

ZIS a
Ah =
2 Rg (4.36)

Z = zone factor for the maximum considerable earthquake (MCE) and service life of the
structure in a zone. Factor 2 in denominator is to reduce the MCE to design basis earthquake
(DBE).

I = importance factor , depending on the functional purpose of the building, characterized by

hazardous consequences of its failure , post earthquake functional needs, historical value , or
economic importance.

R = response reduction factor, depending upon the perceived seismic damage performance of
the structure, characterized by ductile or brittle deformations however the ratio I/R shall not
be greater than 1.

Sa /g = average response acceleration coefficient (Figure 4.13).

For rocky, or hard soil sites;

1 + 15T (0.00<T <0.10)
Sa 
=  2.50 (0.10<T <0.40)
g 1.00 / T (0.4<T <4.00)

(4.37)

For medium soil sites

136
 1 + 15T (0.00<T <0.10)
Sa 
=  2.50 (0.10<T <0.55)
g 1.36 / T (0.55<T <4.00)
 (4.38)

For soft soil sites

1 + 15T (0.00<T<0.10)
Sa 
=  2.50 (0.10<T<0.67)
g 1.67 / T (0.67<T<4.00)
 (4.39)

Figure 4.13: Design response spectra curve as per IS:1893-2002 code.

137
4.7 Design Lateral Force

The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear (Vb) along any principal direction
of the building shall be determined by the following expression
Vb=AhW (4.40)
where Ah is the horizontal seismic forces coefficient (refer equation (4.36) and W is the
seismic weight of building.

4.7.1 Seismic Weight

The seismic weight of each floor is its full dead load plus appropriate amount of imposed
load as specified. While computing the seismic weight of each floor, the weight of columns
and walls in any storey shall be equally distributed to the floors above and below the storey.

The seismic weight of the whole building is the sum of the seismic weights of all the floors.

Any weight supported in between the storey shall be distributed to the floors above
and below in inverse proportion to its distance from the floors.

4.7.2 Fundamental Natural Period

The fundamental natural time period as mentioned in clause 7.6 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002 for
moment resisting RC frame building without brick infill walls and moment resisting steel
frame building without brick infill walls, respectively is given by
Ta = 0.075h0.75 (4.41)
0.75
Ta = 0.085h (4.42)

where, h = height of the building in ‘m’ excluding basement storey, if it is connected with
the ground floor decks or fitted in between the building column.

If there is brick filling, then the fundamental natural period of vibration, may be taken as
0.09h
Ta =
d (4.43)

where, h = height of the building in m, as defined above, and d = base dimension of the
building at the plinth level, in meter, along the considered direction of the lateral force.

138
4.7.3 Distribution of Design Force

The design base shear, Vb computed above shall be distributed along the height of the
building as per the following expression,

Wi hi2
Qi = n

∑W h
j =1
j
2
j
(4.44)

where,
Qi = design lateral force at ith floor
Wi = seismic weight of ith floor
hi = height of ith floor measured from base, and
n = numbers of storey in the building is the number of the levels at which the
masses are located

In case of buildings whose floors are capable of providing rigid horizontal diaphragm action,
the total shear in any horizontal plane shall be distributed to the various vertical elements of
lateral force resisting system, assuming the floors to be infinitely rigid in the horizontal plane.

In case of building whose floor diaphragms cannot be treated infinitely rigid in their own
plane , the lateral shear at each floor shall be distributed to the vertical elements resisting the
lateral forces, considering the in plane flexibility of the diaphragms.

139
4.8 Response Spectrum Method (Dynamic Analysis)

4.8.1 General Codal Provisions

Dynamic analysis should be performed to obtain the design seismic force, and its distribution
to different levels along the height of the building and to various lateral load resisting
elements, for the following buildings:

• Regular buildings- Those are greater than 40 m in height in zone IV, V and those
are greater than 90 m height in zones II,III, and
• Irregular buildings-All framed buildings higher than 12 m in zone IV and V, and
those are greater than 40 m in height in zone II and III.

Dynamic analysis may be performed either by time history method or by the response
spectrum method. However in either method, the design base shear Vb shall be compared with
a base shear Vb calculated using a fundamental period Ta. When Vb is less than Vb all the

response quantities shall be multiplied by Vb /Vb

The values of damping for a building may be taken as 2 and 5 percent of the critical, for the
purpose of dynamic analysis of steel and reinforced concrete buildings, respectively.

4.8.2 Modes to be Considered

The number of modes to be considered in the analysis should be such that the sum of the total
modal masses of all modes considered is at least 90% of the total seismic mass and the
missing mass correction beyond 33%.If modes with natural frequency beyond 33 Hz are to be
considered, modal combination shall be carried out only for modes up to 33 Hz.

4.8.3 Computation of Dynamic Quantities

Buildings with regular ,or nominally irregular plan configuration may be modeled as a system
of masses lumped at the floor levels with each mass having one degree of freedom, that of
lateral displacement in the direction of consideration. In such a case, the following
expressions shall hold in computations of various quantities.

a) Modal mass

140
 2
n 
∑ Wiφ ik 
M k =  in=1 
(4.45)
g ∑ Wi (φ ik ) 2
i =1

where,
g = acceleration due to gravity
φ ik = mode shape coefficient of floor, i in mode, k, and
Wi = seismic weight of floor, i

b) Modal Participation Factor: The factor is given by

n

∑W ϕ i ik
Pk = n
i =1

∑W ( ϕ
i =1
i ik )2
(4.46)
c) Design lateral force at each floor in each Mode: The peak lateral force at floor i in kth
mode is given by
Qik = Ak φ ik p k Wi (4.47)
where, Ak = Design horizontal acceleration spectrum values using the natural period
of vibration
d) Storey shear force in each mode: The storey peak shear force at ith storey in mode k is
given by
n
Vik = ∑Q
j =i +1
ik
(4.48)

141
4.9 Numerical on Seismic Design of Structures
Example 4.7

An eight-story residential RC building is to be constructed in an area of seismic Zone IV

having hard soil. The plan dimension of the building is 15m x 20m with storey height of
3.6m. Determine the base shear as per the IS:1893-2002 (Part 1) code. Use both seismic
coefficient and response spectrum approach. Take the inter-story lateral stiffness of floors i.e.
k1=k2=k3=k4=671.52×106 N/m and k5=k6=k7=k8=335.76×106 N/m. The loading on the floors
shall be taken as:

Location Self Wight + Dead Load (kN/m2) Live Load (kN/m2)

Roof 5 1.5
Floors 10 4

Solution:

Zone factor, Z=0.24 (Table 2 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002)

Importance factor, I=1.0 (Table 6 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002)

Response reduction factor, R=3 (Table 7 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002)

Seismic weight of building (Clause 7.3.1 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002)

Seismic weight of roof = 15×20×5 = 1500 kN

Seismic weight of each floor = dead load + a fraction of imposed load

= 15×20×10 + 0.5× (15×20×4) =3600kN

Total seismic weight of building, W= 1500 + 7×3600 = 26700 kN

(A) Analysis by Seismic Coefficient Method

Fundamental natural time period, Ta = 0.075h0.75 = 0.075× (3.6×8)0.75 = 0.9324 sec

Spectral acceleration, Sa/g = 1/Ta = 1/0.9324 = 1.0725

ZISa
Design horizontal seismic coefficient, Ah =
2 Rg

Ah = 0.0429

Total base shear is given by

142
 Vb=Ah×W

Vb= 0.0429 × 26700 = 1145.42 kN

The lateral forces calculated using the equation (4.44) and are presented below.

Floor/Roof hi (m) Wi (kN) Wi hi2 / ΣWi hi2 Qi (kN) Base Shear

(kN)

Roof 28.8 1500 0.16 183.27 183.27

7 25.2 3600 0.294 336.75 520.02

6 21.6 3600 0.216 247.41 767.43

5 18 3600 0.15 171.81 939.25

4 14.4 3600 0.096 109.96 1049.21

3 10.8 3600 0.054 61.85 1111.06

2 7.2 3600 0.024 27.49 1138.55

1 3.6 3600 0.006 6.87 1145.42

(B) Analysis by Response Spectrum Method

Stiffness Matrix of the building is,

1343.04 -671.52 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 -671.52 1343.04 -671.52 0 0 0 0 0 
 0 -671.52 1343.04 -671.52 0 0 0 0 
 
[k ] =  0 0 -671.52 1007.28 -335.76 0 0 0 
×106 N / m
 0 0 0 -335.76 671.52 -335.76 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 -335.76 671.52 -335.76 0 
 0 0 0 0 0 -335.76 671.52 -335.76 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 -335.76 335.76 

143
The mass matrix of the building is,

3 60 00 0 0 0 0 0 

 0 3 60 00 0 0 0 0 
 0 0 3 60 00 0 0 0 
 
[ m] 
0 0 0 3 60 00 0 0 
×103 Kg
 0 0 0 0 3 60 00 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 3 60 00 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 60  0
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1  5 0

The mode-shapes and frequencies of the building are obtained using the equation (4.19) and
are given below
φ1 φ2 φ3 φ4 φ5 φ6 φ7 φ8
 .927538E-03 .858964E-03 .998116E-03 .855939E-03 .966417E-03 .154996E-02 .575802E-04 .223343E-05 
 .901977E-03 .698991E-03 .477048E-03 .433966E-04 -.287197E-03 -.107689E-02 -.630515E-04 -.441046E-05 
 
 .816761E-03 .226586E-03 -.641725E-03 -.868018E-03 -.646702E-03 .676496E-03 .133359E-03 .204813E-04 
 
 .677526E-03 -.347097E-03 -.956468E-03 .198184E-03 .100712E-02 -.321754E-03 -.340780E-03 -.100992E-03 
[φ] =
 .493480E-03 -.765637E-03 -.728334E-04 .812858E-03 -.474450E-03 -.112684E-04 .898599E-03 .499308E-03 
 
 .385138E-03 -.803796E-03 .414611E-03 .194222E-03 -.476702E-03 .166894E-03 -.740874E-03 -.984752E-03 
 .264060E-03 -.662318E-03 .642317E-03 -.645664E-03 .263085E-03 .563832E-05 -.517710E-03 .105008E-02 
 
 .134250E-03 -.372819E-03 .467637E-03 -.750037E-03 .593351E-03 -.167083E-03 .100703E-02 -.667407E-03 

ω1   7.85398 
ω   
 2   20.4176 
ω3   34.1842 
   
ω4  =  46.0967  rad/sec
ω5   53.8850 
   
ω6   61.5923 
ω   68.4809 
 7   
ω8   81.6427 

144
The corresponding time periods are given by

T1   0.8 
T   
 2   0.3076 
T3   0.1837 
   
T4  =  0.1362  sec
T5   0.1165 
   
T6   0.1020 
T   0.0917 
 7   
T8   0.0769 

The modal participation factors using the equation (4.46) are

 P1   1461.48 
P   
 2   -600.55 
 P3   268.73 
   
 P4  =  -237.03 
 P5   137.22 
   
 P6   -29.57 
 P   144.20 
 7   
 P8   -67.23 

The horizontal seismic coefficient, Ak in the kth mode is calculated as

 A1   0.5 
A   
 2  1.0 
 A3  1.0 
   
 A4  = 1.0 
 A  1.0 
 5  
 A6  1.0 
 A   0.95 
 7  
 A8   0.86 

145
Design lateral load at ith floor in kth mode (i.e. Qik = Ak φ ik p k Wi ) is given as

Qi1 Qi 2 Qi 3 Qi 4 Qi 5 Qi 6 Qi 7 Qi 8
 101.67 -77.38 40.23 -30.43 19.89 -6.88 1.18 -0.02 
 237.28 -151.12 46.15 -3.70 -14.19 11.47 -3.11 0.09 
 
 214.86 -48.99 -62.08 74.07 -31.95 -7.20 6.58 -0.43 
 
178.23 75.04 -92.53 -16.91 49.75 3.43 -16.82 2.11 
[Qik ] =  kN
 129.82 165.53 -7.05 -69.36 -23.44 0.12 44.34 -10.41 
 
 101.32 173.78 40.11 -16.57 -23.55 -1.78 -36.56 20.54 
 69.47 143.19 62.14 55.10 13.00 -0.06 -25.55 -21.90 
 
 35.32 80.60 45.24 64.00 29.31 1.78 49.69 13.92 

The storey shear forces in each mode as per equation (4.48) are as follows:

Vi1 Vi 2 Vi 3 Vi 4 Vi 5 Vi 6 Vi 7 Vi8
 101.67 -77.38 40.23 -30.43 1.18 -0.02 
19.89 -6.88
 338.95 -228.50 86.38 -34.14 5.70-1.93 0.07 
4.59

 553.81 -277.48 24.30 39.93 4.65 -0.35 
-26.24 -2.61
 
 732.05 -202.44 -68.23 23.02 23.51 0.81
-12.16 1.75 
[Vik ] = kN
 861.86 -36.91 -75.27 -46.34 0.0732.18 -8.66 
0.93
 
 963.18 136.86 -35.16 -62.91 -4.38 11.88 
-23.48 -0.84
 1032.65 280.06 26.97 -7.82 -10.48 -0.90 -29.93 -10.03 
 
 1067.96 360.66 72.22 56.18 18.83 0.87 19.77 3.90 

The modal combination rule (SRSS method) is applied to obtain storey shear given below,

Vroof   138.97 
   
V7   419.26 
V6   621.78 
   
V5  =  763.39  kN
V   867.81 
 4   
V3   975.89 
V   1070.83 
 2   
V1   1131.26 

Peak Lateral Forces on Each Storey,

146
Lateral forces are back calculated by storey shear. For example QRoof = VRoof and Q7 = V7 –
VRoof similarly Q6 = V6 - V7 and so on.

QRoof   138.97 
   
Q7   280.39 
Q6   202.52 
   
Q5  =  141.6  kN
Q   104.4 
 4   
Q3   108.1 
Q   94.9 
 2   
Q1   60.4 

The total base shear obtained is

= 138.97+280.39+202.52+141.6+104.4+108.1+94.9+60.4

= 1131.26 kN

Since the above calculated base shear is less than that obtained using seismic coefficient
method (i.e. 1145.42 kN), therefore, according to Clause 7.8.2 IS 1893 (part 1): 2002, the
calculated base shear shall multiplied by the factor,

1145.42
=1.0125
1131.26

The corrected final lateral forces and storey shears are

Qroof  140.70  Vroof  140.70 

       
Q7   283.89  V7   424.50 
Q6   205.05  V6   629.55 
       
Q5  143.37  V5   772.93 
Q  = 105.705  kN V  =  878.65  kN
 4     4   
Q3  109.45  V3   988.08 
      1084.21 
Q2   96.086  V2   
Q1   61.16  V1  1145.40 

147
The values of lateral forces and base shear thus obtained by seismic coefficient method and
response spectra method are summarized below

Floor/Roof Seismic Coefficient Method Response Spectrum Method

Qi (kN) Vi (kN) Qi (kN) Vi (kN)

Roof 183.27 183.27 140.70 140.71

7 336.75 520.02 283.89 424.50

6 247.41 767.43 205.05 629.55

5 171.81 939.25 143.37 772.93

4 109.96 1049.21 105.70 878.66

3 61.85 1111.06 109.45 988.09

2 27.49 1138.55 96.08 1084.22

1 6.87 1145.42 61.16 1145.40

148
4.10 Tutorial Problems

Q1. Determine the displacement response spectra of SDOF system subjected to earthquake
=
acceleration,  =
xg 0.3 g cos(12t ) 
x0 cos(ωt ) .

Q2. A two-story building is modeled as 2-DOF system and rigid floors shown in Figure 4.14.
The inter-story lateral stiffness of first and second floor is k1 and k2, respectively. Take
mass value, m=10000 kg. Determine the k1 and k2 so that the time periods in first and
second mode of vibration of building are 0.2 sec and 0.1 sec, respectively. Take 2%
damping in each mode of vibration. Determine maximum base shear and top floor
displacement due to earthquake excitation whose response spectra for 2% damping are
given below.

Period (sec) S a ( m/s2) S d ( m)

0.1 6.45 1.65×10-3
0.2 10.29 10.42 ×10-3

m
x2

k2

2m
x1

k1

Figure 4.14

149
 Q3. A uniform bridge deck is simply supported as shown in Figure 4.15. The mass of each
lumped mass is m and flexural rigidity of deck is EI. The bridge is modeled as a two-
degrees-of-freedom discrete system as indicated in the figure. Assuming same
earthquake acts simultaneously on both the supports in the vertical direction. Determine
the maximum displacement of each mass. Take L = 8m, m = 1000 kg/m and EI = 8 × 108
kN.m2. Use SRSS method for combining the response in two modes. The spectrum of
the ground motion is given in the Figure 4.15(b).

Sa/g
x1 x2
/ g (0.1 + T ) e−T
Sa =

Time Period, T (sec)

L L L

(a) Model of Bridge (b) Response Spectrum

Figure 4.15

Q4. A 5-story building is to be constructed in the area of seismic zone III having medium
soil. The dimension of the building is 15m × 20m. The height of each story is 3.5m. The
live and dead load on each floor is 2.5 kN/m2 and 10 kN/m2, respectively. The live and
dead load on the roof is 1.5 kN/m2 and 5 kN /m2, respectively. Take importance factor as
1 and response reduction factor as 5. Determine the seismic shear force in each story and
overturning moment at the base as per IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2002. Take the value of Z=0.16
for Zone III and spectral acceleration for medium soil from IS: 1893 (Part 1)-2002 as

1 + 15T for 0 ≤ T ≤ 0.1

Sa 
=  2.5 0.1 ≤ T ≤ 0.55
g 
1.36 / T 0.55 ≤ T ≤ 4

150
Q5.An 9-story RCC residential building, shown in Figure
k9
4.16 is to be constructed in an area of seismic Zone III
having medium soil. The plan dimension of the k8

building is 20m x 30m with storey height of 3.65m. k7

Determine the base shear and lateral forces on each
k6
floor as per the IS: 1893-2002 code. Use both seismic
coefficient and response spectrum approach. Take inter- k5

story lateral stiffness of floors i.e. k1=k2=k3=1326×106 k4

6 6
N/m, k4=k5=k6= 994.5×10 and k7=k8=k9=663×10 N/m.
k3
The loading on the floors shall be taken as
k2
Location Floors Roof
k1
Self Wt + Dead load (kN/m2) 10 4
Live load (kN/m2) 5 1.5
Figure 4.16
Natural Frequencies (rad/sec)

6.98 18.78 30.40 41.96 50.91 59.79 62.21 69.64 79.60

Mode-shapes

1.91 2.01 1.79 2.21 1.91 3.07 2.11 0.17 0.00

1.87 1.69 1.04 0.45 -0.33 -1.90 -1.59 -0.20 -0.01
1.73 0.72 -0.75 -2.17 -1.64 0.50 1.38 0.48 0.03
1.50 -.52 -1.79 -.64 1.67 0.95 -1.46 -1.38 -0.14
1.29 -1.22 -1.29 1.20 0.75 -1.21 0.74 2.22 0.39
1.04 -1.60 0.08 1.51 -1.58 -0.24 0.87 -1.98 -0.88
.75 -1.58 1.39 -0.10 -0.94 1.35 -1.43 0.76 1.88
.51 -1.25 1.68 -1.21 0.86 -.08 -0.15 0.81 -2.52
.26 -.69 1.12 -1.16 1.45 -1.36 1.45 -1.28 1.75

151
4.11Answers to Tutorial Problems
Q1. The displacement spectra is given by


x0 1
Sd =
ω02 (1 − β ) + ( 2ξβ )
2 2

ω 12
where, =
β = and 
x0 = 0.3 g
ω0 ω0

Q2. For first set of values of stiffness (i.e. k1=59157600 N/m and k2= 13146133.33 N/m)
Mode Top floor displacement (mm) Base shear(kN)

1 13.7544 203.919

2 -0.5445 65

SRSS 13.765 214.03

For second set of values of stiffness (i.e. k1=39438400 N/m and k2= 19719200 N/m)
Mode Top floor displacement (mm) Base shear(kN)

1 13.7544 271.225

2 -0.5445 21.474

SRSS 13.765 272.073

Q3. The maximum displacement of each mass = 36.37mm

Q4.

Qi (kN) Vi (kN)

4014.1 4014.1

5459.2 9473.2

3070.8 12544.0

1364.8 13908.8

341.2 14250.0

152
Q5.

Floor/Roof Seismic Coefficient Method Response Spectrum Method

Qi (kN) Vi (kN) Qi (kN) Vi (kN)

Roof 222.8 222.8 160.7 160.7

8 422.5 645.3 217.4 378.1

7 323.5 968.8 236.0 614.1

6 237.7 1206.5 218.8 832.9

5 165.0 1371.5 194.7 1027.7

4 105.6 1477.1 175.3 1203.0

3 59.4 1536.5 137.0 1340.0

2 26.4 1562.9 148.1 1488.1

1 6.6 1569.5 81.4 1569.4

153
Chapter 5

Response Analysis for Multi Support Earthquake

Excitation

5.1 Introduction

It is very important to perform the dynamic analysis for the structure subjected to
random/dynamic loadings. The dynamic analysis of structures mainly involves the response
spectrum analysis and time history analysis. In some of the structures having very large
spans, the effects of ground motion at different supports may be different and in such cases it
is necessary to perform the time history analysis considering the effects of time delay of
earthquake ground motions. This chapter deals with the derivation of equations of motion for
single and multi degree of freedom systems subjected to single and multi support earthquake
excitations. Further, a step by step procedure is explained to calculate the numerical response
by using state space method.

5.2. Equations of Motion for Single Degree of Freedom (SDOF)

System subjected to Earthquake Excitation
Consider a SDOF system as shown in Figure 5.1, which is subjected to an earthquake ground
motion. Four types of forces will be acting on the mass as follows,

i) Inertial force ( )
ii) Stiffness force ( )
iii) Damping force ( )
iv) External force ( )

/2 /2 ,

Figure 5.1 (a) SDOF system (b) Lumped mass model of SDOF

In Figure 5.1 (a), the SDOF system is represented by a mass at the top of a column. The
rotation and vertical deflection at the end of the columns are ignored. Also, the floor is

154
assumed to be axially rigid. Figure 5.1 (b) represents the lumped mass distribution of SDOF
system (Chopra, 2007; Clough and Penzien, 1993; Datta, 2010).

From Newton’s law, where the sum of forces is equal to the mass time acceleration,

(5.1)

Stiffness force ( ): This force acts on the floor when there is a lateral displacement of the
mass. For a linear system, this force is directly proportional to the relative displacement of
the top and bottom ends of the column.
Damping force ( ): This force acts on the floor when there is a relative lateral velocity
between the mass and the ground. For a linear viscous damping, this force is directly
proportionally to the velocity and the constant of proportionality is the damping coefficient.

External force ( ): This force is an external force applied to the system.

Inertial force ( ): This represents the inertial force due to the acceleration of the floor.

As shown in Figure 5.1 (b), is the absolute displacement of mass and is the
absolute displacement of the ground. The relative displacement between the mass and the
ground is denoted by .

(5.2)

Hence, the stiffness force,

(5.3)

Similarly, the damping force,

(5.4)

The inertial force is mass times the absolute acceleration.

Hence,
(5.5)

Now, Rewriting Equation (5.1) in form of above equations,

(5.6)

Therefore,
(5.7)

Equation (5.7) is defined as the equation of motion for the SDOF system, subjected to ground
acceleration .

155
where,
= mass of the system
= damping coefficient of the damper system
= stiffness of the structural system
= relative displacement of mass with respect to ground/support
= relative velocity of mass with respect to ground/support
= relative acceleration of mass with respect to ground/support
= ground acceleration
Now, Substituting Equation (5.2) in Equation (5.7), and rearranging the terms,

(5.8)

Equation (5.8) is defined as the equation of motion for the SDOF system, subjected to ground
acceleration in terms of absolute (total) motion of the mass.

5.3 Response of SDOF System: Solution by State Space Method

The equation of motion for SDOF system as derived earlier in Equation (5.7) may be
rewritten as,

(5.9)

where, F is the external force. Now, dividing Equation (5.9) with mass ‘m’,

(5.10)

2
! #
"
Replacing and in above equation,

Thus,
2 # (5.11)

State space method analyzes the response of the system using both the displacement and

response variables are expressed as state vector, $ which can be written as, (Hart and Wong,
velocity as independent variables and these variables are called states. The two independent

2000)
$ % & (5.12)

Further, Equation (5.11) can be written in matrix form as follows (Hart and Wong, 2000),

0 1 0
$ % & ' *% & % ⁄ &
#
2
(5.13)

Simplifying the above equation by substituting the following equations,

2 2 .#0"1
# ! ,- / ,-
"
and (5.14)

156
Hence, Equation (5.13) will be,

0 1 0
$ 2 ,- ,- 3% & % ⁄ &
(5.15)

$ 4$ 5 (5.16)

Equation (5.16) is the 1st order linear matrix differential equation of motion and is called as

In general, the solution for any time 6 , where ‘ ’ represents the time when the initial
continuous state space equation of motion.

displacement and velocity are given , can be written as, (Hart and Wong, 2000)

$ 74 , 8
$ 74 9 7,4 5 : ;: (5.17)
8

In the above equation, the matrix 74 is called state transition matrix and has the same
dimension as ‘4’ matrix. If the initial conditions are given at time equal to zero (i.e. 0),
then

$ 74 < 9 74 ,
5 : ;: (5.18)

In the above Equation (5.18), the 1st part is the homogeneous solution with initial condition
taken into considerations and 2nd part is the particular solution which is expressed in terms of
time-integration of forcing function.

0
$= $ 0 % & > ?
=
0
where, (5.19)

Let !@- , ! , A

Hence,
CDE

$!@- 74 $ B 74 CDE 9 7,4 5 : ;: (5.20)

C

The objective of the numerical analysis using the integration method is to integrate the
forcing function as given in Equation (5.20). Since the forcing function is usually given in
digitized for, approximation of this forcing function within the time interval is necessary.
Two methods are used to integrate the forcing function (Hart and Wong, 2000).

(i) Delta forcing function method

(ii) Constant forcing function method

In delta forcing function method, the forcing function is digitized using a series of delta
functions. The forcing function is represented by,

157
 0
5 : 5! F : ! A % ⁄ &F : ! A ! G: G !@-
!
; (5.21)

Substituting Equation (5.21) into Equation (5.20),

CDE

$!@- 7 $B
4
74 CDE 9 7,4 5! F : ! A ;: (5.22)
C

CDE

$!@- 74 $ B 74 CDE H 9 7,4 F : ! ;:I 5! A (5.23)

C

$!@- 74 $ B 74 CDE 7,4 C 5! A (5.24)

$!@- 74J $B A 74J 5! (5.25)

In constant forcing function method, the forcing function is assumed to be constant within the
time interval. The value of the force in the interval is equal to the values of the force at the
beginning of the interval.

0
5 : 5! % ⁄ & G: G
Therefore,
! !@-
!
; (5.26)

Substituting Equation (5.26) into Equation (5.20),

CDE

$!@- 74 $ B 74 CDE 9 7,4 5! ;: (5.27)

C

$!@- 74 $ B 74 CDE 4,- 7,4 C 7,4 CDE 5! (5.28)

$!@- 74J $B 4,- 74J K 5! (5.29)

Now, considering the earthquake ground excitation to SDOF system, the forcing function is
given by,

5! L! (5.30)

where, L! is the ground acceleration at time step .

The external force vector,

0 0 0 0
5! % ⁄ & % & % & > ?L
! L! ⁄ L! 1 !
(5.31)

Substituting Equation (5.31) into Equation (5.29),

158
 0
$!@- 74J $B 4,- 74J K > ?L
1 !
(5.32)

$!@- 4M $B NM OB (5.33)

where, 4M 74J (5.34)

NM 4,- 74J K N (5.35)

0
N > ?
1
(5.36)

$!@- 4$B@- NOB@- (5.37)

$!@- > ? and $!@- % &

where,
!@- !@-
!@- !@-
(5.38)

Equations (5.33) and (5.37) will give the solution of equation of motion in terms of the
response quantities, displacements, velocity and acceleration (Hart and Wong, 2000).

5.4 Effects of Support Excitations

It is very important to perform dynamic analysis for the structures subjected to earthquake
induced ground motions. The support induced vibrations cause deformations and stresses in
the structural systems. The support excitations can be divided into two types:
(i) Single-support excitation
(ii) Multi-support excitation
In single-support excitation, it is assumed that all the supports undergo an identical (uniform)
ground motion. In other words, due to the same ground motion at all supports, the supports
move as one rigid base as shown in Figure 5.2. Hence, the masses attached to dynamics
degrees of freedom are excited by the ground motion. For example, tall buildings, towers,
chimneys etc. for which the distances between the supports are not very large compared with
the predominant wave length of the ground motion (Chopra, 2007; Datta, 2010)

Figure 5.2 A system subjected to single-support excitation

159
In multi-support excitations, the ground/support motions or excitations are different at
difference supports as shown in Figure 5.3. For the same travelling wave of an earthquake,
the time histories of ground motion at two supports could be different if the two supports are
separated by a large distance. This is the case because the travel time of the wave between
any two supports is not sufficiently negligible to make the assumption that the ground
motions are the same at the two supports. For examples, big network of pipe lines, very long
tunnels, long dams, bridges etc. Although the piping may not be especially long, its ends are
connected to different locations of the main structure and would therefore experience
different motions during as earthquake (Chopra, 2007; Datta, 2010).

- # S
Figure 5.3 A system subjected to multi-support excitations

5.5 Equations of Motion for MDOF System with Single-Support

Excitation

For single-support excitation, the same earthquake ground motion excites all the masses. As
discussed in Section 5.2, the Equation (5.7) is the equation of motion for SDOF system,
which can be extended for the multi degree of freedoms system (MDOF) as follows:

TU VU WU T X UY (5.39)
where,
n is the number of degrees of freedom

T is the mass matrix of the system of size n x n

r is the number of components of input ground motion

W is the stiffness matrix of the system of size n x n

V is the damping matrix of the system of size n x n
U is the relative displacement vector of size n x 1
U is the relative velocity vector of size n x 1
U is the absolute acceleration vector of size n x 1
UY is the ground acceleration vector of size r x 1
X is the influence coefficient matrix of size n x r

For example, for the single component of earthquake ground motion, UY =

160
for the two component of earthquake ground motion, UY % &
-
#

-
and, for the three component of earthquake ground motion, UY Z #[
S

X is the influence coefficient matrix of size n x r, having ‘1’ for elements corresponding to
degree of freedom in the direction of the applied ground motion and ‘0’ for other degree of
freedom

1
with single component of ground motion, X 2 3
For example, for two storey lumped mass system and hence 2 degrees of freedom system

1
1 0
with two component of ground motion, X 2 3
0 1
1 0 0
and, with three component of ground motion, X \0 1 0]
0 0 1

5.5.1 Equations of Motion in State Space for MDOF System with Single-
Support Excitation and its Solution

Equation (5.7) represents the equation of motion for SDOF system and it can be expressed in
form of state space as shown in Equation (5.16). In a similar way, the Equation (5.39)
represents the equations of motion for MDOF system, for which the state space expression
can be extended as follows (Hart and Wong, 2000).

^ K U ^
$ 2 3% & % XU &
T,- W T,- V U Y
(5.40)

$ 4$ _ (5.41)
where,

U ^ K U ^
$ > ?; 4 2 3;$ > ?;_ % XU &
U T,- W T,- V U Y
(5.42)

The above Equation (5.42) is the state space form of Equation (5.39) in terms of relative
motion of the mass.

Further, the equations of motion as defined in Equation (5.39) can be further extended in
terms of absolute (total) motion of the mass and it can be written as,

TU VU WU V UY W UY (5.43)

where,

161
 Absolute (total) displacement, Ua U UY
Absolute (total) velocity, Ua U UY
Absolute (total) acceleration, U a
U UY
(5.44)

Rewriting Equation (5.43) in state space form as discussed earlier (Hart and Wong, 2000),

^ K Ua ? ^ ^ UY
$a 2 3 > 2 ,- 3 % &
T,- W T,- V Ua T W T,- V UY
(5.45)

$a 4 $a 5_ (5.46)
where,

^ K
>Ua ? ; 4 >Ua ? ;
a a
$a 2 3 ; $a
U T,- WT,- V U
^ ^ UY
5 2 ,- 3 ; _ %UY &
T W T,- V
(5.47)

The above Equation (5.46) is the state space form of Equation (5.43) in terms of absolute
(total) motion of the mass. The solution of above derived equation of motion can be obtained
by using the procedure as defined in Section 5.3 using the Equations (5.33) and (5.37).

5.6 Equations of Motion for MDOF System with Multi-Support

Excitations
In the case when a linear elastic structure is supported at more than one support and is
subjected to different input ground motions, the formulation of the response to each input
component is different from a system having uniform support excitation. The difference is
that when the multiple supports move independently of each other, they induce quasi-static
stresses that must be considered in addition to the dynamics response effects resulting from
inertial forces. The frame as shown in Figure 5.4 represents the various degrees of freedoms
(Chopra, 2007; Datta, 2010).

Super structure / Non-support

degree of freedom,

Support degree of freedom,

Figure 5.4 A frame representing the degrees of freedom

For the system with single-support excitation, the total displacement of the super structure is
obtained by adding the input ground motion to the relative displacements of the structure with
respect to the supports. This relationship is given by,

b1c (5.48)

162
where, the vector b1c expresses the fact that a unit static translation of the base of the
structure produces directly a unit displacement of all degrees of freedom.

For the system with multi-support excitations, where the relative displacements are not
measured parallel to the ground motion, the support motions at any instant of time are
different for the various supports and therefore, the total displacements of the super structure
/ non-support degrees of freedom may be expressed as the sum of the relative displacements
of the structure with respect to the supports and the quasi-static displacements that
would result from a static-support displacement (or the displacements produced at non-
support degrees of freedom due to quasi-static motions of the supports) (Chopra, 2007;
Clough and Penzien, 1993; Datta, 2010).

Ua U Ud (5.49)

The quasi-static displacements can be expressed conveniently by an influence coefficient

vector ‘X’ which represents the displacements resulting from the unit support displacements.

Thus, Ud X UY (5.50)

and Ua U X UY (5.51)

where, X is an influence coefficient matrix of size n x r

In which n is the number of super structure non-supports degree of freedom and r is the
number of components of input ground motion

The equations of motion for MDOF system with multi-support excitations can be written as
follows (Chopra, 2007; Datta, 2010),
T T Ua V V Ua W W Ua ^
' *% & ' *% & ' *% & %e &
T T UY V V UY W W UY Y
(5.52)

where,

T
T
is the mass matrix corresponding to super structure / non-support degrees of freedom

T and T
is the mass matrix corresponding to support degrees of freedom
are the coupling mass matrices that expresses the inertia forces in super
structure degrees of freedom of the structure due to motions of the supports

Ua is the vector of total displacements corresponding to super structure degrees of freedom

The terms of damping and stiffness matrices are defined in similar ways

UY is the vector of input ground displacements at the supports

Ua , UY , Ua , UY are the velocity and accelerations vectors defined in similar ways
eY is the vector of forces generated at the support degrees of freedom.

163
freedom and the matrices T, V and W can be determined from the properties of structure.
In Equation (5.52), no external forces are applied along the super structure degrees of

Further, to write the governing equations in a form similar to the formulation for single
support excitation as per Equation (5.51) and hence separating the displacements into two
parts,

Ua Ud U
% & %U & > ?
UY Y ^
(5.53)

In the above equation, vector Ud is the vector of structural displacements, due to static
application of the prescribed support displacements, UY at each time instant. To find the
quasi-static displacements, Ud , produced due to the support displacements, UY ,the quasi-static
equation of equilibrium can be written as (Chopra, 2007; Datta, 2010),

W W Ud ^
' * %U & %e d&
W W Y Y
(5.54)

where, eY d are the support forces necessary to statically impose displacements, UY , that vary
with time. Further, eY d ^, if the structure is statically determinate or if the support
undergoes rigid body motion.

From Equation (5.54),

W Ud W UY ^ (5.55)

Simplifying the above equation gives,

Ud X UY (5.56)

where, X W:: ,- W:f (5.57)

Equation (5.56) is showing the quasi-static displacements, Ud , in terms of the specified

support displacements, UY . Further, substituting Equation (5.56) into (5.55),

W X W UY ^ (5.58)

Now, to calculate the response of non-support degrees of motion the following equation can
be written from Equation (5.52),

T Ua T UY V Ua V UY W Ua W UY ^ (5.59)

Hence, T Ua V Ua W Ua T UY V UY W UY (5.60)

In most cases, there are few non-zero terms in the mass coupling matrix and damping matrix,
and when present they are generally relatively small and hence those two terms usually
contributes little and hence can be ignored.

Therefore, T Ua V Ua W Ua W UY (5.61)

164
Now, substituting Equation (5.51) and its similar velocity and acceleration components into
Equation (5.60),

T U V U W U gT ГT iUY – gV ГV iUY W ГW UY (5.62)

As derived earlier in Equation (5.58), W Г W UY ^ and the term T denoting the

neglecting T is that for structures with mass idealized as lumped at the degree of freedom,
inertia coupling which can be neglected for most structures. Another assumption for

the mass matrix is diagonal, implying that T is null matrix and T is diagonal. Also, the
contribution of the damping term gV ГV iUY is very small and can be neglected.

Hence, T U V U W U T XUY (5.63)

The above Equation (5.63) is the equations of motion for the MDOF system subjected to

subjected to single-support excitation. The matrix X for a single support excitation is obtained
multi-support excitation and is similar in a form with Equation (5.44) of SDOF system

straight away whereas, for multi-support excitations it is obtained from a static analysis of
structure for relative movements.

5.6.1 Equations of Motion in State Space for MDOF System with Multi-
Support Excitations and its Solution

Equation (5.63) represents the equations of motion for MDOF system subjected to multi-
support excitations, for which the state space expression can be expressed as follows (Hart
and Wong, 2000).

^ K U ^
$ ' *% & % XU &
T:: ,-
W:: T:: ,-
V:: U Y
(5.64)

$ 4$ _ (5.65)
where,

U ^ K U ^
$ > ?; 4 ' *;$ > ? ;_ % XU &
U T:: ,-
W:: T:: ,-
V:: U Y
(5.66)

The above Equation (5.65) is the state space form of Equation (5.63) in terms of relative
motion of the mass. The solution of above derived equation of motion can be obtained by
using the procedure as defined in Section 5.3 using the Equations (5.33) and (5.37).

Further, the equations of motion as defined in Equation (5.63) can be further extended in
terms of absolute (total) motion of the mass and it can be written as,

T U V U W U W UY (5.67)

Absolute (total) displacement, Ua U UY

where,

165
 Absolute (total) velocity, Ua U UY
Absolute (total) acceleration, U a
U UY
(5.68)

Rewriting Equation (5.67) in state space form as discussed earlier (Hart and Wong, 2000),

^ K U ^
$ ' *% & % W T ,- U &
T:: ,-
W:: T:: ,-
V:: U :f :: Y
(5.69)

$ 4$ _k (5.70)
where,

U ^ K U
$ > ?; 4 ' *;$ > ? ; _k
U T:: ,- W:: T:: ,- V:: U
^
% W T ,- U &
(5.71)
:f :: Y

The above Equation (5.71) is the state space form of Equation (5.67) in terms of absolute
(total) motion of the mass.

5.7 MATLAB Steps for Computing the Response

Step 1:

system model. Mass matrix will be T T:: of size n x n. where ‘n’ is the number of super
Generate the mass matrix by modeling the system as the lumped mass model or continuous

structure / non-support degrees of freedom.

Generate the overall stiffness matrix Wl using the static analysis procedure by calculating the
Step 2:

stiffness influence coefficients. As discussed earlier in Section 5.6, the general form of
stiffness matrix will be as follows,

W W
Wl ' *
W W
(5.72)

Recall again, ‘n’ is the number of super structure / non-supports degrees of freedom, whereas

freedom). Hence, size of W will be ‘n x n’, size of W will be ‘n x r’, size of W will be ‘r
‘r’ is the number of components of input ground motion (or number of support degrees of

x n’, size of W will be ‘r x r’ and the overall size of Wl will be ‘(n + r) x (n + r)’.

Step 3:
Calculate the eigen values and natural frequencies ( m ).

Generate the Rayleigh’s damping matrix, V by assuming percentage of critical damping (ξ)
Step 4:

for all modes by using following equation.

V L= T L- W (5.73)

166
 L= and L-
#noE op #n
oE @ op oE @ op (5.74)

Derive the influence coefficient matrix, X.

Step 5:

For single support excitation, it may be obtained by arranging ‘1’ and ‘0’ at proper places
corresponding to degrees of freedom as discussed in Section 5.5.

For multi support excitations, it may be calculated by using Equation (5.47) as derived in
Section 5.6. It is rewritten as follows,

X W:: ,- W:f (5.75)

Generate the ground motion (generally, acceleration) vector, UY corresponding to the support
Step 6:

degrees of freedom considering the effects of time delay and the size of UY will be ‘r x 1’,
where ‘r’ is number of support degrees of freedom.

Calculate the state transition matrix, 4M as discussed in previous sections.

Step 7:

4M 74J (5.76)

^ K
4 ' *
T:: ,- W:: T:: ,- V::
where, (5.77)

For single support excitation, T T, V V, W W that means without considering the

and ‘A ’ is the time step considered corresponding to input ground motion.

coupling effects.

Calculate the state vector, $ for each time step, A as follows,

Step 8:

(i) For Single-Support Excitation:

$!@- 4M $B N M UY
B
(5.78)

where, NM 4,- 4M K N (5.79)

^qrs
N % &
sqrs
and (5.80)

(ii) For Multi-Support Excitations:

$!@- 4M $B NM (5.81)

167
 ^qrs
N % XU &
Y qrs
where, (5.82)

The solution of above equation gives the responses of relative displacement and relative
velocity at super structure degrees of freedom as follows,

-
w #{
u Su
u u
.
$
v.z
(5.83)

u -u
u #u
t Sy

Calculate the state vector, $ for each time step, A as follows,

Step 9:

(i) For Single-Support Excitation:

$|@s 4 $B N UY
B@-
where, N is as defined in Step 8 (i).
(5.84)

(ii) For Multi-Support Excitations:

$|@s 4 $B N (5.85)

where, N is as defined in Step 8 (ii).

The solution of above equation gives the responses of relative velocity and relative
acceleration at super structure degrees of freedom as follows,

w {
-

u #u
u Su
.
$
v.z
(5.86)
u -u
u #u
t Sy

Example 5.1 For the multi-bay portal frame as shown in Figure 5.5a, calculate the
displacements - and # when subjected to El-Centro, 1940 (N-S component) earthquake
ground motion for the following cases.
Case (i) Considering the same excitation at all supports (uniform excitation)

Assume percentage of critical damping as 5 %, ⁄ = 100 and all members are inextensible
Case (ii) Considering multi-support excitations with a time delay of 5 s between supports

and EI values same for all members.

168
Solution:
#

4
2
- 2
2 2 2 2
8

S € • ‚

Figure 5.5 (a) A multi-bay portal frame (b) Lumped mass model of frame

Calculation of General Elements :

Step 1: Generation of mass matrix

With the help of lumped mass assumption, the frame can be represented as shown in Figure
5.5b and the mass matrix can be expressed as follows,

2 0
T 2 3
0

Step 2: Generation of stiffness matrix

The overall stiffness matrix for the given system is to be calculated by considering the effects
of coupling between super structure and support degrees of freedom. The stiffness influence
coefficients, m} are derived to assemble the stiffness matrix. Where m} is the force required
along degree of freedom, ~ due to unit displacement at degree of freedom, •.

(a) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 1, i.e. - =1

To obtain the first column of the stiffness matrix, imposing - = 1 and zero displacement at
all other degrees of freedom. The forces necessary at the top and bottom of each storey
corresponding to all degrees of freedom to maintain the deflected shape as shown in Figure
5.6a are expressed in terms of storey stiffnesses.
-- = 4(2 +4( = 12
#- = - 4( =-4
S- = €- = •- = ‚- = - 2( = -2

(b) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 2, i.e. # =1

Similarly, to obtain the second column of the stiffness matrix, imposing # = 1 and zero
displacement at remaining degrees of freedom. The forces necessary at the top and bottom of
each storey corresponding to all degrees of freedom to maintain the deflected shape as shown
in Figure 5.6b are expressed as follows,
-# = - 4( =-4
## = 4( = 4
S# = €# = •# = ‚# = 0

(c) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 3, i.e. S =1

169
In the above similar manner, imposing S = 1 and zero displacement at remaining degrees of
freedom. The forces as shown in Figure 5.6c are expressed as follows,
-S = - 2
#S = 0
SS = 2
€S = •S = ‚S = 0

(d) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 4, i.e. € = 1

Similarly imposing € = 1 and zero displacement at remaining degrees of freedom. The
forces as shown in Figure 5.6d are expressed as follows,
-€ = - 2
#€ = S€ = 0
€€ = 2
•€ = ‚€ = 0

(e) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 5, i.e. • =1

Now, imposing • = 1 and zero displacement at remaining degrees of freedom. The forces as
shown in Figure 5.6e are expressed as follows,
-• = - 2
#• = S• = €• = 0
•• = 2
‚• = 0

(f) Imposing unit displacement at degree of freedom, 6, i.e. ‚ =1

Finally, imposing ‚ = 1 and zero displacement at remaining degrees of freedom. The forces
as shown in Figure 5.6f are expressed as follows,
-‚ = - 2
#‚ = S‚ = €‚ = •‚ = 0
‚‚ = 2

influence coefficients to get the overall stiffness matrix, Wl .

Here, for the considered frame, n = 2 and r = 4. Hence assembling the above derived stiffness

12 4 2 2 2 2
‡ 4 4 0 0 0 0 Š
W W † ‰
† 2 0 2 0 0 0 ‰
Wl ' *
W W † 2 0 0 2 0 0 ‰
Therefore,
† 2 0 0 0 2 0 ‰̂
… 2 0 0 0 0 2

Step 3: Generation of damping matrix

critical damping, ξ = 5 % in all modes. As per the given data consider, = 1000 N/m and =
Assuming the Rayleigh’s mass and stiffness proportional damping and for that considering

10 kg and from the eigen values analysis, the eigen values and hence natural frequencies are
obtained as follows,

- = 14.1421 rad/sec and # = 28.2843 rad/sec.

170
Further, the constants to derive the damping matrix can be obtained as follows,

L= = 0.9428 and L-
#noE op #n
oE @ op oE @ op
= 0.002357

Considering W = W and using the Equation (5.73), the damping matrix can be derived as

47.1405 9.4281
V L= T L- W 2 3
follows,

9.4281 18.8562

# =1
#- ##

- =1

-- -#

2 2 2 2

S- €- •- ‚- S# €# •# ‚#

(a) (b)

#S #€

-S -€

2 2

SS €S •S ‚S S€ €€ •€ ‚€
S
€ =1
=1
(c) (d)
#• #‚

-• -‚

2 2

S• €• •• ‚• S‚ €‚ •‚ ‚‚

• =1 ‚ =1
(e) (f)

Figure 5.6 A Frame with stiffness influence coefficients

171
Case (i) Considering the single support (uniform) excitation at all supports

2
-

2 2 2 2

S € • ‚

Figure 5.7 A Frame subjected to single support excitation

For the system as shown in above figure, the equations of motion can be written as follows,

TU VU WU T K UY

2 0 12 4
2 3 % -& •L= T L- W‘ % - & 2 3> ?
-
0 # # 4 4 #
2 0 1
2 3> ?
0 1

Now, the system is subjected to uniform El-Centro earthquake ground motion as shown in

‘1x1’. The time step, A is considered as 0.02 s. Assume = 1000 N/m and
Figure 5.8 (http://www.vibrationdata.com/elcentro.dat) , hence will be having size of
= 10 kg.
Further, with the state space method using the constant forcing function method, the solution
of equations of motion can be obtained as follows,

^ K
4 2 3=
0 0 1 0

T,- W T,- V
0 0 0 1
-600 200 -2.3570 0.4714
400 -400 0.9428 -1.8856

0.8849 0.0378 0.0188 0.0003

4M 74J =
0.0757 0.9228 0.0007 0.0191
-11.1235 3.6160 0.8410 0.0460
7.2319 -7.5075 0.0921 0.8871

0
0
N ’ “
1
1

172
 -0.0001949
NM 4,- 4M K N= -0.0001987
-0.0191134
-0.0198025

$!@- 4M $B NM UY and $|@s 4 $B N UY

B B@-

By considering the above calculated matrices and equations and assuming the initial
displacements and velocities as zero, the response quantities for next time step are to be
calculated. Table 5.1 gives the response for first 10 time steps for relative displacements and
relative as well as absolute accelerations at super structure degrees of freedom. Note that
in this table is the absolute (total) acceleration of the mass, which is equal to,

Ua U s

Table 5.1 Response of the system subjected to El-Centro earthquake

- # - # - #
Time
(m/s2) (m) (m) (m/s2) (m/s2) (m/s2) (m/s2)
(s)
0.00 0.06180 0.00000 0.00000 -0.06180 -0.06180 0.00000 0.00000
0.02 0.03571 -0.00001 -0.00001 -0.02873 -0.03442 0.00698 0.00129
0.04 0.00971 -0.00004 -0.00004 0.00896 -0.00654 0.01868 0.00317
0.06 0.04199 -0.00007 -0.00008 -0.01362 -0.03489 0.02837 0.00710
0.08 0.07436 -0.00010 -0.00013 -0.03752 -0.05945 0.03684 0.01491
0.10 0.10663 -0.00014 -0.00019 -0.05884 -0.07999 0.04780 0.02665
0.12 0.06690 -0.00019 -0.00028 -0.00241 -0.02475 0.06449 0.04215
0.14 0.02717 -0.00026 -0.00039 0.05368 0.03295 0.08085 0.06013
0.16 -0.01256 -0.00031 -0.00049 0.10101 0.09259 0.08845 0.08003
0.18 0.03610 -0.00033 -0.00056 0.04527 0.06349 0.08138 0.09959
0.20 0.08476 -0.00032 -0.00060 -0.01749 0.03143 0.06727 0.11619

Extending the above sample calculations up to 30 sec gives the entire time histories for the
responses. Figures 5.9 (a) and (b) show the time histories of relative displacements
corresponding to the super structure degrees of freedom 1 and 2 and similarly, Figures 5.10
(a) and (b) show the time histories of absolute accelerations.

173
 0.4
0.3

Ground Acceleration (g)

0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)
Figures 5.8 Acceleration time history of El-Centro, 1940 (N-S) earthquake
(http://www.vibrationdata.com/elcentro.dat)

0.03

0.02
Displacement, x1 (m)

0.01

0.00

-0.01

-0.02

-0.03

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)
(a)
0.06

0.04
Displacement, x2 (m)

0.02

0.00

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)
(b)
Figures 5.9 Time histories of relative displacements (a) displacement, - ; and
(b) displacement, #

174
 Absolute acceleration, x¨1 (m/s )
8

2
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)
(a)
Absolute acceleration, x2¨ (m/s )

10
2

-5

-10

-15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)
(b)
Figures 5.10 Time histories of absolute accelerations (a) acceleration, - ; and
(b) acceleration, #
Case (ii) Considering the multi support excitations

2
-

2 2 2 2

S € • ‚

- # S €

Figure 5.11 A Frame subjected to multi support excitation

For the system as shown in figure 5.11, the equations of motion can be written as follows,

T U V U W U T XUY

As derived earlier, the influence coefficient matrix, X can be calculated as follows,

2 12
X W:: ,- W:f = 4 3,- 2 2 2 2 2
3 20.25 0.25 0.25 0.253
4 4 0 0 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

175
For the given system, the four supports are subjected to earthquake excitation with time
delay. Hence, there will be four component of acceleration in the vector of earthquake ground

w -{
motion as follows.

u #u
UY
v Sz
u u
t €y

Hence, the equations of motion for this system with multi support excitation can be written as
follows,

2 0 •L= T 12 4
2 3 % -& L- W‘ % - & 2 3> ?
-
0 # # 4 4 #

w f1 {

2 0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 u u

2 32 3
f2
0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 v f3 z
u u
t f4 y

Considering the Time Delay Effect in Earthquake Ground Motion:

The given system is subjected to El-Centro earthquake ground motion of total duration of 30
s. The time delay between two supports is given as 5 s, the total duration of earthquake
records for - , # , S and € is to be considered as 45 s with details for individuals as
follows.

for - :
The record of - will have, the first 30 s as the actual El Centro record and the last 15 s of
the record will consists zeros.

for # :
The record of # will have, the first 5 s record values as zeros followed by 30 s of the actual
El Centro record and the last 10 s of the record will consists again the zeros.

for S :
The record of S will have, the first 10 s record values as zeros followed by 30 s of the
actual El Centro record and the last 5 s of the record will consists again the zeros.

for € :
The record of € will have, the first 15 s record values as zeros followed by 30 s of the
actual El Centro record as last values.

in Figure 5.12, hence as discussed earlier, UY will be having size of ‘4x1’. The time step, A
Now, the system is subjected to multi support El-Centro earthquake ground motion as shown

is considered as 0.02 s. Assume = 1000 N/m and = 10 kg. Using the state space method
with constant forcing function method, the solution of equations of motion can be obtained as
follows.

176
 0.4

0.2

0.0

-0.2

-0.4
0.4

0.2

0.0
Accelertaion (g)

-0.2

0.4
-0.4

0.2

0.0

-0.2

-0.4
0.4

0.2

0.0

-0.2

-0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (s)

Figures 5.12 Acceleration time history of El-Centro, 1940 earthquake for four supports with
time delay of 5 s between supports

The matrices 4 and 4M will be exactly same as those obtained for the case (i) (i.e. for single

0
support excitation).

^ w 0 {
NM 4 4M K N , where N % XU &
,- qrs
Y qrs v 0.25 - # S €z
t 0.25 - # S €y

$!@- 4M $B NM and $|@s 4 $B N

By considering the above equations and assuming the initial displacements and velocities as
zero, the response quantities for next time step are to be calculated. Table 5.2 gives the
response for first 10 time steps for relative displacements and relative as well as absolute
accelerations at super structure degrees of freedom. Note that in this table is the absolute

Ua U XUY
(total) acceleration of the mass, which is equal to,

U 0.25 - # S €

177
 Table 5.2 Response of the system subjected to El-Centro earthquake

#
Time (s) - (m/s2) S € - (m) # (m) - (m/s2) # (m/s2) - (m/s2) - (m/s2)
(m/s2)
0.00 0.06180 0.00000 0.00000000 0.00000000 -0.01545 -0.01545 0.00000 0.00000
0.02 0.03571 0.00000 -0.00000301 -0.00000307 -0.00718 -0.00861 0.00174 0.00032
0.04 0.00971 0.00000 -0.00001017 -0.00001089 0.00224 -0.00163 0.00467 0.00079
0.06 0.04199 0.00000 -0.00001776 -0.00002064 -0.00341 -0.00872 0.00709 0.00177
0.08 0.07436 0.00000 -0.00002509 -0.00003224 -0.00938 -0.01486 0.00921 0.00373
0.10 0.10663 0.00000 -0.00003453 -0.00004812 -0.01471 -0.02000 0.01195 0.00666
0.12 0.06690 0.00000 -0.00004818 -0.00007035 -0.00060 -0.00619 0.01612 0.01054
0.14 0.02717 0.00000 -0.00006407 -0.00009703 0.01342 0.00824 0.02021 0.01503
0.16 -0.01256 0.00000 -0.00007667 -0.00012239 0.02525 0.02315 0.02211 0.02001
0.18 0.03610 0.00000 -0.00008129 -0.00014048 0.01132 0.01587 0.02034 0.02490
0.20 0.08476 0.00000 -0.00007899 -0.00014981 -0.00437 0.00786 0.01682 0.02905

Further, extending the above sample calculations up to 45 sec gives the entire time histories
for the responses. Figures 5.13 (a) and (b) show the time histories of relative displacements
corresponding to the super structure degrees of freedom 1 and 2 and similarly, Figures 5.14
(a) and (b) show the time histories of absolute accelerations.

178
 0.01

Displacement, x1 (m)
0.00

-0.01

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (s)
(a)
0.02
Displacement, x2 (m)

0.01

0.00

-0.01

-0.02

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (s)
(b)
Figures 5.13 Time histories of relative displacements (a) displacement, - ; and
(b) displacement, #
3
Absolute acceleration, x1 (m/s )
2

-1

-2

-3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (s)
(a)
Absolute acceleration, x2 (m/s )
2

-2

-4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Time (s)
(b)
Figures 5.14 Time histories of absolute accelerations (a) acceleration, - ; and
(b) acceleration, #

179
Exercise Problem
Example 1: For the portal frame as shown in Figure 5.15, calculate the peak and RMS values
of relative displacements and absolute accelerations corresponding to the super structure
degrees of freedom. (i.e. - and # ) when subjected to El-Centro earthquake ground motion
for the following cases.
Case (i) Considering the same excitation at all supports (uniform excitation)
Case (ii) Considering multi-support excitations with a time delay of 5 s between supports
Assume percentage of critical damping as 5 %, = 2000 N/m and = 50.

3 4

S €

Figure 5.15

Answer 1:
Case (i)

Response quantities Peak values RMS values

Relative displacement at level 1, - (m) 0.0291 0.0077
Relative displacement at level 2, # (m) 0.1073 0.0139
-
2
Absolute acceleration at level 1, (m/s ) 6.0421 1.1364
#
2
Absolute acceleration at level 2, (m/s ) 6.4195 1.6229

Case (ii)

Response quantities Peak values RMS values

Relative displacement at level 1, - (m) 0.0191 0.0051
Relative displacement at level 2, # (m) 0.0622 0.0094
-
2
Absolute acceleration at level 1, (m/s ) 3.3174 0.6371
#
2
Absolute acceleration at level 2, (m/s ) 3.7429 1.0894

180
Chapter 6

Seismic Soil-Structure Interaction

6.1 Introduction

The scales of socio–economic damages caused by an earthquake depend to a great extent on the
characteristics of the strong ground motion. It has been well known that earthquake ground
motions results primarily from the three factors, namely, source characteristics, propagation
path of waves, and local site conditions. Also, the Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) problem has
become an important feature of Structural Engineering with the advent of massive
constructions on soft soils such as nuclear power plants, concrete and earth dams. Buildings,
bridges, tunnels and underground structures may also require particular attention to be given to
the problems of SSI. If a lightweight flexible structure is built on a very stiff rock foundation, a
valid assumption is that the input motion at the base of the structure is the same as the free-field
earthquake motion. If the structure is very massive and stiff, and the foundation is relatively
soft, the motion at the base of the structure may be significantly different than the free-field
surface motion. For code design buildings it is important to consider the effect of the SSI. The
objective of this chapter is to understand the basic concept of the Soil-Structure Interaction,
following the different methods of analysis with some solved examples.

6.2 Free Field Motion and Fixed Base Structures

Ground motions that are not influenced by the presence of structure are referred as free field
motions.

181
Structures founded on rock are considered as fixed base structures. When a structure founded on
solid rock is subjected to an earthquake, the extremely high stiffness of the rock constrains the
rock motion to be very close to the free field motion.

6.3 Soil-Structure Interaction

If the structure is supported on soft soil deposit, the inability of the foundation to conform to the
deformations of the free field motion would cause the motion of the base of the structure to
deviate from the free field motion. Also the dynamic response of the structure itself would
induce deformation of the supporting soil. This process, in which the response of the soil
influences the motion of the structure and the response of the structure influences the motion of
the soil, is referred as SSI as shown in Figure. 6.1.

These effects are more significant for stiff and/ or heavy structures supported on relatively soft
soils. For soft and /or light structures founded on stiff soil these effects are generally small. It is
also significant for closely spaced structure that may subject to pounding, when the relative
displacement is large.

In order to understand the SSI problem properly, it is necessary to have some information of the
earthquake wave propagation through the soil medium for two main reasons. Firstly, when the
seismic waves propagates through the soil as an input ground motion, their dynamic
characteristics depends on the modification of the bedrock motion. Secondly, the knowledge of
the vibration characteristics of the soil medium is very helpful in determining the soil impedance
functions and fixing the boundaries for a semi-infinite soil medium, when the wave propagation
analysis is performed by using numerical techniques. To understand the influence of local soil
conditions in modifying the nature of free field ground motion it is very essential to understand
the terminology of local site effect. Therefore, in this chapter, the terminology of local site effect
is discussed first and then, seismic SSI problems are presented.

The first significant structure where the dynamic effect of soil was considered in the analysis in
industry in India was the 500MW turbine foundation for Singrauli (Chowdhary, 2009).

182
 Structure

Ground Level

Foundation

Pile

Soft Soil

Earthquake Waves

Figure 6.1: Seismic Soil-Structure Interaction.

6.4 Terminology of Local Site Effects

6.4.1 Basin /soil effect on the ground motion characteristics

6.4.1.1 Impedance contrast

Seismic waves travels faster in hard rocks in compare to softer rocks and sediments. As the
waves passes from harder to softer rocks they become slow and must get bigger in amplitude to
carry the same amount of energy. Thus, shaking tends to be stronger at sites with softer surface
layers, where seismic waves move more slowly. Impedance contrast defined as the product of
velocity and density of the material (Pisal, 2006).

183
6.4.1.2 Resonance

When the signal frequency matches with the fundamental frequency or higher harmonics of the
soil layer, we say that they are in resonance with one another. This results in to tremendous
increase in ground motion amplification. Various spectral peaks characterize resonance
patterns. The frequencies of these peaks are related to the surface layer’s thickness and
velocities. Further, the amplitudes of spectral peaks are related mainly to

• The impedance contrast between the surficial layer and the underlying bedrock.
• To sediment damping.
• To a somewhat lesser extent, to the characteristics of the incident wave-field.

6.4.1.3 Damping in Soil

Absorption of energy occurs due to imperfect elastic properties of medium in which the particle
of a medium do not react perfectly elastically with their neighbor and a part of the energy in the
waves is lost instead of being transferred through medium, after each cycle. This type of
attenuation of the seismic wave is described by a parameter called as quality factor (Q). It is
defined as the fractional loss of energy per cycle

π ∆E
= (6.1)
Q E
where ∆ E is the energy lost in one cycle and E is the total elastic energy stored in the wave. If
we consider the damping of a seismic wave as a function of the distance and the amplitude of
seismic wave, we have

 −π r 
A = A0 exp   = A0 exp (− α r ) (6.2)
 Qλ 
where α is called the absorption coefficient and is inversely proportional to quality factor Q .
Damping of soil mainly affects the amplitude of surface waves (Narayan, 2005).

184
6.4.1.4 Basin Edge Effect

When the seismic waves incident near the basin edge, it enter the basin from its edge and travel
in the direction in which the basin is thickening. Figure 6.2 shows that when the wave can
become trapped within the basin, if post critical incident angles develop. Interference of
trapped waves generates surface waves, which propagate across the basin. The generation of
surface waves near the basin is known as basin-edge effect (Bard and Bouchon 1980 a & b,
Bakir et al. 2002, Graves et al., 1998, Hatyama et al.1995, Pitarka et al., 1998, Narayan, 2005) .
Waves that become trapped in deep sedimentary basins can produce stronger amplitudes at
intermediate and low frequencies than those recorded on comparable surface material outside
basins, and their durations can be twice as long. This basin edge effect can amplify long period
components of ground motion and significantly increases the duration of strong shaking. Basin
induced surface waves cause intense damage which is confined in a narrow strip parallel to the
edge.

Figure 6.2: Schematic diagram showing that seismic waves entering a sedimentary layer from
below will resonate within the layer but escape if the layer is flat (left) but become trapped in the
layer if it has varying thickness and the wave enters the layer through its edge (right) (After
Grave, 1998).

185
6.4.1.5 Basement Topography

Irregular basement topography when subjects to body wave incidence below, results in focusing
and defocusing effects. This effects are strongly depends on the azimuth and angle of incident
waves.

Figure 6.3, Shows seismic waves traveling in the upward direction from depth may be redirected
by subtle irregularities at geological interfaces. As wave pass from the deeper unit across the
curved interface, their velocity and direction changes, and once again changes at the unit nearest
to the surface. Sometimes they meet at certain points on the surface. At these points, the
amplification and de-amplification caused due to focusing and defocusing phenomenon (After
USGS, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1996/ofr-96-0263/localeff.htm ).

The damage pattern caused by the Northridge earthquake, Sherman Oaks and Santa Monica
reveals effect of basement topography very well.

6.4.1.6 Trapping of Waves

Due to the large impedance contrast between the soft sediments and underlying bedrock, seismic
waves trapped over soft sediments. This results in increase in the duration of ground motion.

186
When layers are horizontal this trapping affects only body waves. While in case of lateral
heterogeneities this trapping also affect the surface waves. Interference of these waves also leads
to resonance pattern. As discussed earlier, the basin edge effect causes the total reflection of the
wave at the base of the layer, making them potentially very damaging. As reported by Kawase
(1996) this type of effect was also observed in the 17 January 1995 Hyogo-ken Nabu earthquake,
which was the most destructive earthquake in Japan even though of moderate magnitude (M=6).

6.4.2 Effect of Surface Topography

Surface topography considerably affects the amplitude, the frequency content and duration of
ground motion (Celebi, 1987 and Geli et al., 1988).

6.4.2.1 Effect of Ridge

The ridge causes strong generation of surface wave near the top of the ridge and their
propagation towards the base of the ridge, Narayan and Rao (2003). Amplification of the ground
motion depends on the slope and the elevation of the ridge.

In India it had observed when it had damaged very badly the village of Kutri and at Sajan Garh
fort, constructed on a hill near the city of Udaipur.

6.4.2.2 Effect of Valley

It has been predicted numerically that in the valley, due to defocusing effect de-amplification of
the amplitude of motion takes place. The intensity in a valley may be 1-2 scales lesser as
compared with the surrounding, if it is free from the soil deposits.

The effect of valley was observed in the Mandal valley and Pingala Pani, Unali and Chandrapuri
villages. The damage in the Mandal Proper village and the Khalla village was lesser as compared

187
to the other villages of the Mandal valley, since these villages are situated at the base of the
valley. The houses of the other villages (Siroli, Makroli and Gondi), which were situated at some
elevation suffered much more damage.

6.4.2.3 Slope Effect

Hills with variable slope revels complicated damage patterns. The houses situated on or near the
bank of a steeply sloping hills suffers much more damages as compare to the houses which were
at some distance away from the steep portion or are on the gentle sloping part of the same hill.

6.4.3 Strong Lateral Discontinuity Effect

Lateral discontinuities are nothing but the areas where a softer material lies besides a more rigid
one (for instance, ancient faults, anomalous contacts, debris zones, etc.)

The best example of damage caused by strong lateral discontinuity (softer rock sandwiched
between hard rocks) was observed in the Bhatwari- Sonar village during Chamoli earthquake of
1999. The village situated on a sloping hill at the left bank of river Mandakini received greater
damage. The hill mass is composed of rounded pebbles and young soil and is surrounded by hard
older quartzite rocks. Amplitude amplification, generation of local surface waves in the softer
medium and larger differential motion caused by shorter wavelength of the surface waves may
be reason behind the greater structural damage.

6.5 Degree of Influence of SSI

The degree of Influence of SSI on response of structure depends on the following factors

• Stiffness of soil.

188
 • Dynamic Characteristics of structure itself i.e. Natural Period and damping factor.
• Stiffness and mass of structure.

6.6 Interaction between Ground and Structure during Earthquake

When the seismic wave E0 generated by an earthquake fault reaches the bottom of the
foundation, they are divided into two types as shown in Figure 6.4:

Figure 6.4: Wave propagation during SSI (Miura, 2011)

Transmission Waves which are entering in the building shown as E1 and Reflection Waves
which are reflected back in to the ground shown as F0.

When the transmission wave enters in to the building they travels in upward direction due to
which the structure subjects to vibration. And then they are reflected at the top and travel back
down to the foundation of the structure shown as F1. At this stage Soil-Structure Interaction
phenomenon takes place. Again a part of wave are transmitted into the ground, while the rest is
reflected back again and starts to move upwards through the sructure shown as F2. The wave

189
which are transmitted to the ground known as Radiation Waves shown as R1. When the radiated
waves are in small amount, the seismic waves once transmitted into the structure continue to
trapped in the building, and the sructure starts to vibrate continuously for a long time, similar to
the lightly damped structure.

The damping caused by radiation waves is popularly known as Radiation Damping of the soil.
The radiation damping results in increase of total damping of the soil-structure system in
compare to the structure itself. Also, under the influence of SSI the natural frequency of a soil-
structure system shall be lower than the natural frequency of the soil.

These interactions results not only in reducing the demands on the structure but also increasing
the overall displacement of the structure as due to these interactions foundation can translate and
rotate. Basically the dynamic soil-structure interaction consists of two interactions, namely,
kinematic interaction and inertial interaction.

6.7 Kinematic Interaction

The SSI effect which is associated with the stiffness of the structure is termed as kinematic
interaction. It is explained with the help of Figure 6.5 (a–d). In Figure 6.5 (a), the massless mat
foundation restricts the vertical movement of the ground motion because of its flexural stiffness.
Due to this, instead of free field ground motion the mat foundation moves differently (that is, the
ground motion is away from the foundation) along with the change in nature of ground motion in
the close vicinity and below the foundation. Similar examples of kinematic interaction are shown
in Figure 6.5 (b and c). In Figure 6.5 (b), a vertically propagating shear wave is confined by the
embedded foundation. In Figure 6.5 (c), the axial stiffness of the foundation slab prevents the
incoherent ground motion produced below the foundation. For vertically propagating purely S-
waves, the rotational movement induced in foundation due to kinematic interaction is shown in
Figure 6.5 (d).

190
Figure 6.5: Kinematic interaction: (a) vertical motion modified; (b) horizontal motion modified;
(c) incoherent ground motion prevented; and (d) rocking motion introduced (Datta, 2010).

The tau ( τ ) effect, derived by Clough and Penzien (1993), explains the kinematic interaction due
to translational excitation with reference to the rigid slab. In Figure 6.6, the shear wave moving
in the y-direction produces ground motion in the x-direction which varies with y. At the site of
slab where the free field earthquake motion varies significantly, due to the rigidity of slab these
motions are constrained to some extent.

Figure 6.6: Horizontally propagating shear wave in the y-direction below the rigid slab of
a large structure. (Clough and Penzien, 1993)

191
If τ is defined as the ratio of amplitude of harmonic component of translational motion to the
amplitude of harmonic component of respective free field motion, then it is shown that

1
τ = 2(1 − cos α ) (6.3)
α
ωD 2πD
α= =
Va λ (ω ) (6.4)

where,
2πVa
λ (ω ) = is the wavelength.
ω
D = Dimension of the base in the y-Direction.
Va = Apparent wave velocity.

Also the values of τ decrease from unity at α = 0 and λ → ∞ to zero at α = 2π and λ = D . This
means that if the base dimension of the foundation is very small compared with the wavelength
of the ground motion, then the τ effect is negligible (i.e. the slab will exert little constraint on
the soil and the slab motions will be essentially the same as the free field motions at that
location). On the other hand, if the base dimension of the foundation is fairly large in compared
to the wavelength of the ground motion, then the τ effect should be considered and the base
motion could be much smaller than the free field ground motion.

whenever the stiffness of the foundation system obstructs the development of the free-field
motion, kinematic interaction takes place. When foundation subjects to vertically propagating S-
waves of wavelength equal to the depth of embedment, the kinematic interaction induces
rocking and torsion modes of vibration in the structure, which are not present in case of free field
motion. The deformation caused by kinematic interaction alone can be computed by assuming
that the structure and foundation has stiffness but no mass as shown in Figure 6.7. The equation
of motion for this case is

[ M soil ] { uɺɺKI } + [K ∗ ] { u KI } = − [ M soil ] uɺɺb (t ) (6.5)

192
where [M soil ] is the mass matrix assuming that the structure and foundation are massless and

{ uKI } is the foundation input motion, [K ∗ ] is the stiffness matrix and uɺɺb is the acceleration at the
boundary (Kramer, 1996).

Massless structure

ub

Figure 6.7: Kinematic interaction analysis (Kramer, 1996).

6.8 Inertial Interaction

The mass of structure and foundation causes them to respond dynamically. The SSI effect which
is associated with the mass of the structure is termed as inertial interaction. It is purely caused by
the inertia forces (seismic acceleration times mass of the structure) generated in the structure due
to the movement of masses of the structure during vibration. The inertial loads applied to the
structure lead to an overturning moment and a transverse shear. If the supporting soil is
compliant, the inertial force transmits dynamic forces to the foundation causing its dynamic
displacement that would not occur in case of a fixed-base structure. The deformations due to
inertial interaction can be computed from the equation of motion (Kramer,1996).

193
 [M ] { uɺɺΙΙ } + [K ∗ ]{ u ΙΙ } = −[M structure ] { uɺɺkΙ (t ) + uɺɺb (t )} (6.6)

where [M structure ] is the mass matrix assuming that the soil is massless as shown in Figure 6.8.
Note that the right hand side of equation (6.6) shows the inertial loading on the structure
foundation system which depends on base motion and foundation input motion including
kinematic interaction effect.

Inertial forces Mass

applied to lumped at
structure and the center
foundation

Massless soil

ub

Figure 6.8: Inertial interaction analysis

6.9 Illustration of Soil-Structure Interaction Effects

The soil-structure interaction is illustrated by a simple analysis following the approach of Wolf
(1985). Consider a Single degree of freedom system (SDOF) of mass m , stiffness k , and
damping coefficient c , connected to a massless rigid, L-shaped foundation of height h as shown
in Figure 6.9 (a). The system is subjected to a horizontal excitation of amplitude ug . If the

194
material supporting the foundation is rigid, the natural frequency ω 0 of the resulting fixed-base
system will be

k
ω0 = (6.7)
m
and the hysteretic damping ration ξ of the structure will be

cω0
ξ= (6.8)
2k

c
ut
m hθ u
c
0
.0
4
R otational A cceleration (g)

0
.0
3

0
.0
2

0
.0
1

0
.0

θ
-0
.0
1

-0
.0
2

-0
.0
3

-0
.0
4
0 2 4 6 8 1
0

m kh k

h h
0
.2

k
R elativ e Ac celration (g)

0
.1

0
.0

-0
.1

-0
.2

0 2 4 6 8 1
0

ch k cr
r

ug u0

u g (t ) u g (t ) t
u0
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 6.9: Model with compliant base material having one dynamic degree of freedom:
(a) SDOF system on a compliant supporting material; (b) idealized discrete system in
which the compliance of base is shown by translational and rotational springs and
dashpots and (c) total displacements of base and mass.

If the supporting material is compliant, the foundation can translate and rotate. The stiffness and
damping characteristic of the compliant soil-foundation system can be represented by k h and ch

in the horizontal (translational) direction and by kr and cr in the rotational (rocking) direction.

195
 t
The total displacement of the mass u t and the base of the structure u0 can split into their
individual components as

u t = u g + u 0 + hθ + u (6.9)

u0 = u g + u0
t
(6.10)
where,

ug = Amplitude of horizontal excitation or free field motion.

u0 = Amplitude of base relative to the free field motion.

h θ = Rigid body component due to the base rotation (rocking) of the structure by an angle θ .

u = Amplitude of the relative displacement of the mass with respect to the moving frame
attached to the rigid base. It is equal to the structural deformation.

θ = Angle of base rotation (rocking).

For a soil without material damping ( ξ s = 0 ) , the horizontal force amplitude p h acting on it is
written as

p x = k x u0 + cxuɺ0 (6.11)

where the subscript x denotes the horizontal direction for a purely elastic soil ( ξ s = 0 ) .While for
a soil with material damping, the corresponding equation is written as

ph = kh u0 + chuɺ0 (6.12)
For a frequency dependent harmonic excitation

uɺ 0 = iω u 0 (6.13)

196
applying in equation (6.11), leads to

 
p x = k x 1 + x i ω  u0 = k x (1 + 2ξ x i ) u0
c
 k  (6.14)
 x 

where ξ x represents the ratio of the viscous radiation damping in the horizontal direction.

The material damping can be introduced in an approximate manner by multiplying the spring
coefficient k x (for frequency ω ) with the factor (1 + 2 ξ s i ) , where ξ s is the hysteretic damping

ratio, and substituting equation (6.13) in equation (6.12), gives

ph = k x (1 + 2ξ s i + 2ξ x i ) u0 (6.15)

Comparing equation (6.12) and equation (6.15) and using equation (6.13), the obtained
horizontal stiffness and damping coefficient are

kh = kx

2 (6.16)
ch = c x + ξs kx
ω

The first term on the right side of equation (6.16) corresponds to radiation damping and the
second term to the material damping. If the structure is assumed to be rigid (k = ∞) and the

foundation unable to rock or rotate (kr = ∞ ) , the natural frequency for translational vibration
would be

kh
ωh = (6.17)
m

197
Similarly the moment amplitude M r acting on the soil, considering rotational (rocking) degree of
freedom can be written as

M r = krθ + crθ (6.18)

Also

M r = kθ (1 + 2ξ s i + 2ξθ i ) θ (6.19)

Comparing equation (6.18) and equation (6.19), the obtained rotational stiffness and damping
coefficient are

k r = kθ (6.20)

2
c r = cθ + ξ s kθ
ω

If the structure is assumed to be rigid (k = ∞) and the foundation unable to translate (k h = ∞ ) , the
natural frequency for rotational vibration would be

kr
ωr = (6.21)
m h2

To illustrate the soil-structure interaction, an equivalent SDOF system of same mass m is

considered. Its properties like natural frequency ω e , ratio of hysteretic damping ξ e are selected

such that when excited by the equivalent seismic input motion U g it will respond in essentially

the same way as the system shown in Figure 6.9. The subscript e is used to describe the

198
properties of this equivalent system. For harmonic motion, the equation of motion for the
equivalent system can be written as

(− mω 2
)
+ iω ce + ke u = mω 2U g (6.22)

ke
ωe =
m (6.23)

ceω
ξe = (6.24)
2ke

The response of the equivalent system goes to infinity at its natural frequency for an undamped
system (i.e. ξ e = 0 ). This occurs when

1 1 1 1
= + +
ωe2 ω02 ω h2 ω r2 (6.25)

Substituting the value of ω 0 , ω h and ωr in above eq. and solving leads to

ω0
ωe =
1 + k / k h + kh 2 / k r (6.26)

It reveals that the fundamental frequency ω e of the soil-structure (equivalent) system is always

lesser than the frequency ω 0 of the fixed base structure. It shows that the considering the soil-
structure interaction is important from the point of view to reduce the natural frequency of the
soil-structure system to a value lower than that of the structure with a fixed base condition. For
resonance condition (i.e. ω 0 = ω e ) the hysteretic damping ratio can be formulated as

199
 ωe 2  ω e 2  ω 2 ω 2
ξe = ξ + 1 − ξ s + e ξ x + e ξθ (6.27)
ω0 2  ω 0 2  ωh 2 ωr 2

If no radiation damping occurs in the horizontal and translation direction, ξ x = ξ θ = 0 and if the

damping of the structure is equal to the damping of the soil, ξ = ξ s than above equation results in

ξ e = ξ . As under normal conditions ξ s will not be smaller than ξ , the equivalent damping ξ e will
be larger than the damping of the structure. It shows that the SSI increases the effective damping
ratio to a value greater than that of the structure.

For the fixed base structure, translation and rotation of the base is not possible. The base
translation, base rotation and motion of the mass of the equivalent system with respect to the free
field motion (which is given by sum of the base displacement u0 , the displacement of the top of

the structure due to rotation of the base h θ , and the displacement due to the distortion of the
structure u ) can be shown as

ω02
u0 = (1 + 2ξ i − 2ξ x i − 2ξ s i )u (6.28)
ωh2

ω0 2
hθ = (1 + 2ξ i − 2ξθ i − 2ξ s i )u (6.29)
ωr 2

 1  1 1  2ξ x i 2ξθ i 
u + u 0 + hθ = ω 0 2  + 2(ξ − ξ s ) i  − − − u (6.30)
ω 2  ω 2 ω 02  ω 2 ω 2 
 e  e  h r 

Following dimensionless parameters are to be considered to see the effect of the soil-structure
interaction:

• Stiffness ratio defines as the ratio of the stiffness of the structure to that of the soil.

ω0 h
s=
νs (6.31)

where ν s is the shear wave velocity of the soil.

200
 h
• Slenderness ratio h =
a
where a is the characteristic length of the rigid foundation( e.g., the radius for a circular
basement).

m
• Mass ratio m=
ρ a3

where ρ is the mass density of the soil.

• Poisson’s ratio ν of the soil.

• Hysteretic damping ratios of the structure ξ and soil ξ s .

If the stiffness ratio is zero, it shows the fixed base condition. If the value of stiffness ratio is
very large, it shows that a relatively stiff structure rests on a relatively soft soil. In actual
conditions the stiffness and damping coefficient of the foundation are frequency dependent. To
illustrate the effect of SSI, the following frequency independent approximate expressions (for the
undamped soil) can be used to estimate the stiffness and damping coefficient of a rigid circular
footing of radius a (Wolf, 1989)

8G a
kx = (6.32)
2 −ν

4 .6
cx = ρ vs a 2 (6.33)
2 −ν

8 G a3
kθ = (6.34)
3(1 − ν )

0 .4
cθ = ρ vs a 4 (6.35)
1 −ν
Expressing the frequency ω e and damping coefficient ξ e calculated in equation (6.26) and
equation (6.27) of a rigid circular footing using the above mentioned dimensionless parameters
leads to

201
 ωe 2 1
=
ω0 2 m s2  2 −ν 
+ 3(1 − ν )
1+  (6.36)
2
8  h 

ωe 2  ω e 2  ω 3 s 3m  2 −ν 
ξe = ξ + 1 − ξs + e  0.036 + 0.028 (1 − ν )
 2 3 h  (6.37)
ω0 2  ω0  ω0  h 2


The graphs in Figure 6.10 shows the effect of SSI on the natural frequency and damping ratio of
equivalent SDOF system by comparing its response with the fixed base system. Figure 6.10 (a)
reveals that when the stiffness ratio is high (i.e. the stiffness of the structure is larger than the
stiffness of the soil), the natural frequency of the Equivalent SDOF system reduces. It means that
the effect of soil-structure interaction on natural frequency is high at high stiffness ratios. Thus
the SSI consideration is important for stiff structures with a large mass supported on flexible soil.
In a similar way when the stiffness ratio is low (i.e. stiffness of soil is larger than the stiffness of
the structure), the natural frequency of equivalent system increases. It shows the effect of SSI on
the natural frequency is small at low stiffness ratios and is important to consider for the flexible
(tall) structures supported on stiff soil. Also when the stiffness ratio is zero (i.e. fixed base
condition), the natural frequency of the equivalent SDOF is equal to the fixed base natural
frequency.

Figure 6.10 (b) reveals that at high stiffness ratio the damping of the equivalent SDOF system is
high. It means at high stiffness ratio the effect of radiation damping and soil damping become
more apparent and the structural damping represents a small part of the overall damping of the
system. Also at the fixed base condition the damping of the equivalent SDOF system will be
same as that of the damping of fixed base structure.

202
 Figure 6.10: Effect of stiffness ratio and mass ratio on (a) natural
frequency and (b) damping ratio of soil-structure system
( h = 1,ν = 0.33, ξ = 0.025, ξ s = 0.05 ) (Wolf, 1985).

The graphs in Figure 6.11 show the effect of SSI on the structural distortion and displacement of
mass with respect to the free field of an equivalent SDOF system by using an artificial input
motion. The maximum responses are for the used artificial motion that produced an NRC
response spectrum normalized to amax = 1.0g . Figure 6.11 (a) reveals that as the stiffness ratio is
increases, the structural deformation decreases. It means that the considering effect of SSI results
in reducing the distortion of the structure. On the other hand Figure 6.11 (b) shows that as the
stiffness ratio increases, the overall displacement of the mass relative to the free field increases.
It means that considering SSI effect results in increasing the overall displacement of the mass.
Finally on one side the SSI tends to reduce the demand on the structure and on the other side as
the foundation can rotate and translate, it increases the overall displacement.

203
 Figure 6.11: Response of equivalent SDOF system to artificial time history,
considering SSI ( h = 1, m = 3,ν = 0.33, ξ = 0.025, ξ s = 0.05 ): (a) maximum
structural displacement; (b) maximum displacement of mass
relative to free field (Wolf, 1985).

6.10 Direct Method

In the direct method the soil, structure and foundation is modeled together using finite element
method (FEM) and analyzed in single step. The ground motion is specified as free field motion
and is applied at all boundaries. The soil domain with some material damping is limited by a
fictitious exterior boundary, which is placed so far away from the structure that during the total
earthquake excitation, the waves generated along the soil-structure interface does not reach it.
The nodes along the soil-structure interface are denoted by subscript f (foundation). The nodes
of the structure are denoted by st . The nodes along the interior foundation medium/soil are
denoted by s .

204
 Structure
St

Interface

Foundation medium Boundary (bb)

Boundary (bb)

S Interior soil
uɺɺg uɺɺg

Boundary (bb)

uɺɺg

Figure 6.12: Finite element model of soil-structure system for direct method of analysis.

In the above figure the soil is modeled as an assemblage of rectangular plane strain elements
having two translational degrees of freedom at each node, while the structure is modeled as an
assemblage of beam elements. It is assumed that kinematic interaction is insignificant and the
foundation block will move with free field ground motion. The inertia forces acting on the
structure produces the vibration of structure, foundation and soil at the soil-structure interface
and at the soil below it. The equation of motion for total system shown in Figure 6.12 in time
domain can be written as

M uɺɺ + C uɺ + k u = − M st I uɺɺg (6.38)

205
where,

M = Mass matrix for the entire Structure, foundation and the soil

[ M st st ] [ M st f ] 0 
 
= [ M f st ] [ M ff ] + [ M ff ] [ M f s ]
st s

 0 [M s f ] [ M s s ]


C = Damping matrix (Material) of the structure and the soil

[Cst st ] [Cst f ] 0 
 
= [C f st ] [C ff ] + [C ff ] [C f s ]
st s

 0 [Cs f ] [Cs s ]



Note: Here, the damping matrix is generated by constructing the damping matrix of soil and
structure separately from their modal damping ratio using Rayleigh damping. Then they
are combined together to form final damping matrix shown above. It is assumed that the
coupling term between the soil and structure is zero but at the interface of soil and
structure they are non-zero.

K = Stiffness matrix of total system, which can be generated using standard assembling
procedure.

[ K st st ] [ K st f ] 0 
 
= [ K f st ] [ K ff ] + [ K ff ] [ K f s ]
st s

 0 [Ks f ] [ K s s ] 


M st = Mass matrix having non-zero masses for the structural degree of freedom

[ M st st ] [ M st f ] 0
= [ M f st ] [ M stff ] 0
 
 0 0 0

I = Mass matrix having non-zero masses for the structural degree of freedom

206
uɺɺg = Free field ground acceleration (can be calculated by doing one simple one-dimensional

analysis of site model, prior to the soil-structure analysis)

u = The vector of the relative displacement with respect to the base / foundation.

The right hand side of equation (6.38) shows the inertia force, which tends to deform the soil at
the soil-structure interface, when transferred to the base (foundation) in the form of shear force
and moment. The material damping of soil contributes the response reduction of the structure-
soil on system is very insignificant and can be neglected. The deformation of soil due to inertia
forces at the interface propagates in the form of radiation waves giving radiation damping which
mostly affects the structure-soil foundation response. If the radiation damping will not die out or
reflect back from the boundary, some error in the solution may introduce and also the problem
may become very large. In order to reduce the size of the problem, the concept of absorbing
boundaries has been introduced in the FEM.

By using the direct method of analysis, like time domain method problem can also be solved in
frequency domain method using Fourier transform function for a specific free field ground
motion. If the time histories of the ground motion are different at different supports, then
problem can be solved by modifying the influence coefficient vector {I } used in equation (6.38).

The direct method is well suited for non-linear material laws of the soil to be taken into account.
To solve the dynamic SSI problem by direct method, computer programs can be used. There are
few shortcomings of the direct method of analysis; some of them are listed below.

- The good representation of damping matrix is difficult.

- If the superstructure is modeled as 3D system, the problem size becomes very large and
the modeling of soil/foundation – structure interface becomes complex.

207
6.11 Sub-Structure Method

Sub-structure method is computationally more efficient than the direct method as most of the
disadvantages of the direct method can be removed, if the substructure method is employed. In
this method the effective input motion is expressed in terms of free-field motions of the soil layer
initially. In continuation to this step, the soil/foundation medium and the structure are
represented as two independent mathematical models or substructures as shown in Figure 6.13.
The connection between them is provided by interaction forces of equal amplitude, acting in
opposite directions of the two sub-structures. The total motions developed at the interface are the
sum of the free-field motions at the interface of the soil without the added structure and the
additional motions resulting from the interaction. As it is explained in this paragraph, the
substructure method is advantageous as it allows to break down the complicated soil-structure
system into more manageable parts which can be more easily solved and checked. As the
stiffness and damping properties of the soil are frequency dependent, it is most convenient to
carry out the earthquake response analysis in the frequency domain, then to obtain the response
history and again transform it in the time domain.

Figure 6.13: Seismic soil-structure interaction with substructure method. (Wolf, 1985)

Note – In case of soil/foundation medium modeling of some structures, a portion of the soil may
be included in the superstructure as shown in Figure 6.14(c).

208
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 6.14: Seismic soil-structure interaction with substructure method: (a) SDOF system
resting on a half space; (b) modeling superstructure and soil medium separately; (c) some
portion of the soil is included in the superstructure model.

For such structures two interfaces exists, one at the free ground surface and the other at the
surface between the superstructure and the soil/foundation medium.

The substructure method of analysis can be explained in detail with SDOF structure supported by
a rigid foundation slab resting on an elastic half space.

6.11.1 SDOF System Considering SSI

Consider a SDOF system, supported on a rigid base of mass mb and mass moment of inertia I mb ,
resting on a half-space as shown in Figure 6.15 (a). To make the τ effect negligible, the
horizontal dimensions of the base are assumed as sufficiently small.

209
 v (t )
m, I m
m, I m

Fixed reference
h
k k
k k 2 2
2 2
h
mb , I mb
mb , I mb θ (t )
u g (t ) Mb
Vb
vt (t ) v(t )
Mb

Half-space θ (t )
Rigid massless plate

Half-space

(a) (b)

Figure 6.15: Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis using substructure method

for SDOF system.

The uniform free-field ground acceleration uɺɺg (t ) at the half-space surface will introduce the

foundation forces at the interface between the base of the structure and the half-space. Under the
influence of these forces i.e. horizontal base shear forces and moment at the base of SDOF
system will translate and rotate the system due the SSI phenomenon, as shown in Figure 6.15 (b).
It is also assumed that a rigid massless plate is present on the surface of the half-space to ensure
its displacement compatibility with the lower surface of the rigid base.

The total base displacement of the SDOF system shown in Figure 6.15 v t (t ) will be

v t (t ) = u g (t ) + v(t ) (6.39)

where,

210
u g (t ) = Free field ground displacement.

v (t ) = Added displacement (or base displacement) caused by SSI.

Also θ (t ) represents the base rotation caused by SSI. It is also noted that as the SSI results in
translation and rotation of the base of SDOF system, it introduces the v (t ) and θ (t ) displacement
of the system and thus the overall system has 3 DOF. The equation of motion for substructure
no.1 (i.e. the top mass of the SDOF system) may be written as

m uɺɺ + 2 m ξ ω 0 uɺ + k u + m h θɺɺ + m vɺɺt = 0 (6.40)

where,

u = Relative displacement of the top mass with respect to the base.

m = Lumped mass at the top.

ξ = Percentage critical damping.

ω0 = Natural frequency of the SDOF system.

k = Total lateral stiffness of the mass with respect to the base.

h = Height of the column.

θ = Displacement due to rotation of base of SDOF system.

v t = Total displacement of the base.

Considering the equilibrium of the substructure no. 1, we will get the base interaction forces Vb

and M b developed between the super-structure and the half space.

m uɺɺ + m h θɺɺ + (m + mb ) vɺɺt = Vb (6.41)

m h uɺɺ + (m h 2 + I m + I mb ) θɺɺ + m h vɺɺt = M b (6.42)

211
where,

mb = Mass of the base.

I m b = Mass moment of inertia of the base.

Equation (6.40), (6.41) and (6.42) can also be written in the frequency domain by using a fourier
transform function as

g (ω ) u (ω ) − m h 2ω 2θ (ω ) − mω 2 v t (ω ) = 0 (6.43)

− m ω 2 u (ω ) − m h ω 2θ (ω ) − (m + mb )ω 2 v t (ω ) = Vb (ω ) (6.44)

− m h ω 2 u (ω ) − I mω 2θ (ω ) − m h ω 2 v t (ω ) = M b (ω ) (6.45)
where,

I m = I m + I mb + m h 2 .

g (ω ) = Inverse of complex frequency response functions of a SDOF system.

The complex frequency response functions forms the dynamic stiffness (i.e. impedance function)
for the rigid massless circular footing of radius r resting on an isotropic homogeneous half
space for translational and rotational degrees of freedom as shown below (Datta, 2010),

G G vθ 
G d (ω ) =  vv
G θv G θθ  (6.46)

where, G vv , G vθ , G θv , Gθθ are the complex frequency response functions. These functions have
real and imaginary parts and can be written as

G (ia ) = G R ( a ) + iG I ( a ) (6.47)

212
In the above expression R denotes the real part which represents the soil resistance (stiffness)
and I denotes the imaginary part which represents the radiation damping of the soil. Also a
represents the non-dimensional frequency, which can be given as

rω
a= (6.48)
vs

Where, v s is the shear wave velocity for the material of the uniform half-space. Plots of the

G R (a ) and G I (a) in the non dimensional form for the elements of the Gd (ω ) matrix are

available in many publications of various investigators, in the form of graphs. (Note: - for
rectangular footings, approximate expressions for impedance functions may be derived from
those expressions which are available for the equivalent area of circular footings.) The resulting
displacements of the degrees of freedom of the plate are obtained as complex number and are
arranged in a column to form a flexibility matrix. The inverse of flexibility matrix gives the
impedance matrix as shown in equation (6.46). These impedance functions are the key
parameters for the substructure method of analysis.

Equation (6.43), (6.44), (6.45) can be rearrange as (Datta, 2010)

K g (ω ) d (ω ) = M uɺɺg (ω ) (6.49)
where,

K g (ω ) = Frequency dependent complex stiffness matrix of the soil-structure system.

d (ω ) = Complex frequency components of the displacement vector (i.e. degrees of freedom)

{u v θ }T .

uɺɺg (ω ) = Complex frequency components of the free field ground acceleration.

M = −{m (m + mb ) m h}
T

213
Also Vb (ω ) and M b (ω ) can be written in terms of the impedance matrix Gd (ω ) as

 Vb  u (ω ) 
  = Gd (ω )   (6.50)
M b  θ (ω ) 
And

ω 2vt (ω ) = ω 2v(ω ) + uɺɺg (ω ) (6.51)

The elements of matrix K g (ω ) are given as

K g 11 = g (ω )

K g 12 = K g 21 = −ω 2 m

K g 13 = K g 31 = −ω 2 m h
(6.52)
K g 22 = −ω 2 (m + mb ) + Guu (ω )

K g 23 = K g 32 = −ω 2 m h + Guθ (ω )

K g 33 = −ω 2 I m + Gθθ (ω )

Equation (6.49) can be solved for discrete value of ω , which gives the response vector d (ω ) in

the frequency domain. Fourier transform of ground acceleration gives uɺɺg (ω ) . Also the inverse

Fourier transform of d (ω ) gives the response u (t ), v (t ), θ (t ) in time domain in the form of time
histories.

6.11.2 MDOF System with Multi-Support Excitation Considering SSI

The basic principles involved in the analysis of SDOF system are same and applicable for the
MDOF system except that the formulation of the equation in case of MDOF system with multi-
support excitation is more complex. The situation of multi-support excitation can occur in case
214
of large structures such as bridges and arch dams etc, where the free-field motion at all points of
contact of structure and foundation are not constant. The approach normally used to solve this
kind of problem is to define a quasi-static component of the response in the total or absolute
response of different degrees of freedom. The total displacement of the system can be given as
combination of two quasi-static components of displacement and a dynamic displacement.

{u }= {u }+ { u } + { u }
t
r d (6.53)
where,

{u }= Total/absolute displacement of the system from a fixed reference.

t

{u } =The vector of the displacements produced at all non-supported degrees of freedom

produced due to the ground displacements at the supports.

{ u r } =The vector of the displacements at the supports for maintaining elastic compatibility
between the foundation and the soil.

{ u d } =The vector of the relative dynamic displacements produced at all non-supported degrees of
freedom due to the inertial actions.

The quasi-static displacement involves the stiffness of the soil-structure system only. Initially the
free field ground motion tends to move the supports with the same distance with which the soil
supporting the support moves. The different supports have different ground motion (as it is not
constant for large structures), due to this the relative motion between the supports takes place.
This results in the development of the elastic forces in the structure. Due to these elastic forces a
set of equal and opposite reactions develops at the interface between the substructure no.1 and
substructure no.2. This equal and opposite reactions produces the deformations in the interface
and induces compatible displacement in the structure and soil. Also the inertia forces developed
at the masses related to each degree of freedom of the structure intoduces a pair of equal and
opposite dynamic forces at the foundation and soil interface. This results in the development of
the compatible dynamic displacements in the structure and the soil. The dynamic displacements
caused in the soil, propagates in the form of a wave within the soil giving rise to radiation
215
damping in the soil-structure interaction. To formulate the governing equations of motion for the
general soil-structure system, consider a MDOF system as shown in Figure 6.16.

Figure 6.16: Seismic SSI with substructure method: (a) MDOF system with multi-support
excitation; (b) modeling superstructure (substructure no. 1) and soil medium (i.e.
substructure no. 2) separately; (c) some portion of the soil is included in the superstructure
model referred as substructure no.1 and remaining soil as substructure no. 2.

216
 The equation of motion of the system shown in Figure 6.16 (a), can be written as

M st st M st f 0  uɺɺstt  Cst st Cst f 0  uɺstt  Kst st Kst f 0  ustt   0 

          
M f st M ff M fs  uɺɺtf  + C f st C ff C fs  uɺ tf  +  K f st K ff K fs  u tf  =  Pft  (6.54)
 0
 M sf M ss  uɺɺst   0 Csf Css  uɺst   0 Ksf Kss  ust  Pst = −Pft 

Partitioning the equation of motion, will lead to the two sets of equation of motion of both
substructures, shown in Figure 6.16(b)

The equation of motion of the substructure no. 1 would take the form

 M st st M st f  uɺɺstt  C st st C st f  uɺ stt   K st st K st f  u stt   0 

M  +  +  =  
M ff  uɺɺtf  C f st C ff  uɺ tf   K f st K ff  u tf   Pft 
(6.55)
 f st

In a similar way the equation of motion of substructure no. 2 is

[M ss ]{uɺɺt s }+ [Css ]{uɺ t s }+ [K ss ]{u t s }= {Ps t }− [M sf ]{uɺɺt f }− [Csf ]{uɺ t f }− [K sf ]{u t f } (6.56)

where,

st : Represents the nodes of structure.

f : Represents the nodes of foundation or common interface between substructure 1 & 2.

s : Represents the nodes of soil i.e. substructure no. 2.

For the model (c) shown in Figure 6.16, the equation of motion will be

0  uɺɺst  Cst st 0  uɺ st   K st st 0  u st 

t t t
M st st M st f 0
 t 
C st f 0
 t 
K st f 0
 t  0
M M ff M fi 0  uɺɺ f  C f st C ff C fi 0  uɺ f   K f st K ff K fi 0  u f   0 
 f st   +   +   = 
 0 M if M ii M is   uɺɺt   0 Cif Cii Cis   uɺ t   0 K if K ii K is   u t   0t  (6.57)
i i i
 0 0 M si M ss   ɺɺt   0 0 Csi Css   ɺ t   0 0 K si K ss   t  Ps 
u
 s u
 s u
 s

where,

217
st : Represents the nodes of structure.

f : Represents the nodes (DOF) of base/foundation i.e. soil-structure interface but

Excluding st and s.

i : Represents the nodes in the soil region excluding the nodes of f and s .

s : Represents the nodes at the interface of substructure no. 1 & 2 and also the nodes of

substructure no. 2.

Partitioning this equation as indicated gives the equation of similar form of equation (6.55).

where,

 M st st M st f 0 
 
[ M st st ] of equation (6.55) and  M f st M ff M fi  of equation (6.57) shows the mass matrix for
 0 M if M ii 

the nodes/DOF of the substructureno.1 excluding the nodes of the interface between the
 0 
 
substructure no. 1 and 2. [M st f ] and  0  of equation (6.55) and equation (6.57) respectively
 M fi 
 
shows the mass of the DOF of the substructure no.1 and the interface of substructure no. 1.

[
Similar is the case of [ M f st ] and 0 0 M if . ]

[ M f f ] of equation (6.55) and [ M ii ] of equation (6.57) represents the mass of the DOF at the

interface of substructure no. 1 and 2, excluding the DOF inside the substructure no. 2.

{P } of
f
t
{ }
equation (6.55) and Ps t of equation (6.57) respectively shows the nodal forces

developed at the interface of substructure 1 and substructure 2. In a similar way the damping and
stiffness matrix are having same relation. So now onwards the solution of equation (6.55) and

218
(6.57) will follow the same steps as mention below though the steps are written, by keeping
equation (6.55) in mind.

In order to obtain the quasi-static components of the responses i.e. u and u r , only stiffness terms
of the equation of motion are considered. Let the quasi-static response of non support degrees of
freedom due to free field ground motion at the support be denoted by u st and the free field
ground motion at the support be denoted by u f = u g . Also the quasi-static displacements at non

support degrees of freedom produced due to the compatible displacements at the soil foundation
interface be denoted by u r st and the compatible displacement at the supports be denoted by u r f .
Then the equilibrium of forces at the soil-structure interface written in the frequency domain is
given as

(
K f st u st + u r
st
)+ K (u ff
f
+ ur
f
)+ G ff ur = 0
f
(6.58)

In which G ff is the impedance matrix for the soil corresponding to the interface degrees of

freedom. As this equation is written only for quasi-static motion, the imaginary part of the
impedance matrix is not included in it.

After simplifying this equation, we will get

st
( )
K f st ur + K ff + G ff ur = − K f st u st − K ff u f = − p f
f
(6.59)

If the displacement, due to the free-field ground motion of the non support degrees of freedom
the supports and the ground motions at the support are only considered, then

K st st u st + K st f u f = 0 (6.60)

219
 −1
u st = − K st st K st f u f

= − K st st −1 K st f u g
Or (6.61)
1 −1
= K st st K st f uɺɺg
ω 2

Substituting equation (6.61) in the R.H.S. equation (6.59), leads to

pf = −
1
ω2
(K ff
−1
− K f st K st st K st f uɺɺg ) (6.62)

If the displacements at the non support degrees of freedom produced due to the compatible
displacements at the soil foundation interface and the compatible displacements at the supports
are only considered then

K st st u r + K st f ur = 0
st f
(6.63)

Adding equation (6.63) to the L.H.S. of equation (6.59) (as there is no external set of forces
acting on the structure), the following expression for u r is obtained.

 K st st K st f  u r st   0 
K  = 
K ff + G ff  u r f  − p f 
(6.64)
 f st

Equation (6.53) can also be written as

220
 {u }= { u } + { u }
t
a d

where, { ua } = { u} + { u r }

{ u }= {u }+ {u }
st st st
(6.65)
and a r

also { u }= {u }+ {u }
a
f f
r
f

Further substituting equation (6.65) in equation (6.55) and rearranging it, we will get the
expression for u d .

 M st st M st f  uɺɺdst  C st st C st f  uɺ dst   K st st K st f  u dst 

M   f +   f  +  f =
 f st M ff  uɺɺd  C f st C ff  uɺ d   K f st K ff  u d 
(6.66)
 M st st M st f  uɺɺast  C st st C st f  uɺ ast   K st st K st f  u ast   0 
−   f −   f  −  f + t 
 M f st M ff  uɺɺa  C f st C ff  uɺ a   K f st K ff  u a   Pf 

In the above expression the damping terms of the R.H.S. makes little contribution to the effective
load of a relatively low damped system, say ξ ≺ 0.1 , and can be neglected. Using equation (6.58),
equation (6.66) can be written in frequency domain by performing Fourier transform, as

 2
M st st M st f  C st st C st f   K st st K st f   u dst 
− ω   + iω  +  =
  M f st M ff  C f st C ff   K f st K ff   u df 

(6.67)
 M st st M st f  u ast   0 
ω2   f + t 
 M f st M ff  u a   Pf − prf 

where, prf = −G ff ur f . Also Pft − prf represents the dynamic component of the loading at the

foundation which is arise due to dynamic characteristic of displacement at the interface. It may
be obtained in a similar way as that of quasi-static displacement (equation 6.58) i.e.

Pft − prf = p f = −G ff ud
d f
(6.68)

221
In this equation G ff have both real and imaginary components. The imaginary component

denotes the radiation damping due to which overall damping of the system increases.

Substituting equation (6.68) in equation (6.67), gives

 2
M st st M st f  C st st C st f   K st st K st f   u dst  2
M st st M st f  u ast 
− ω   + iω  +  f = ω   
  M f st M ff  C f st C ff   K f st 
K ff + G ff   u d   M f st M ff  u af  (6.69)


st f
u d and u d can be determine by solving equation (6.69) and inversing complex matrix for each

value of ω . Using these results u t can be obtained. Inverse Fourier transform of u t gives the
desire response in time domain.

222
6.12 Solution of SSI Problem Using ABAQUS Software

The SSI problem can be solved using ABAQUS software by following the steps mentioned
below

1. Part Module: Forming the geometry of the structure and soil.

2. Property Module: Generating the property of the structure and soil.

3. Assembly Module: Assembly of the structure and soil into common platform.

4. Step Module: Define the analysis type.

5. Interaction Module: Define the interaction between the structure and soil medium.

6. BC Module: Define the boundary condition in the structure.

7. Mesh Module: Meshing of the structure and soil.

8. Job Module: Submission of the Job for the analysis.

9. Visualization Module: Viewing the result.

223
Example 6.1

Analyze the frame shown in Figure 6.17 by performing soil-structure interaction analysis in
ABAQUS by
• Direct Method.
• Sub-Structure Method.
The frame is supported by two isolated footings having properties as mentioned below.

1. Structural Configuration

Figure 6.17: Frame to be analyzed by Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis.

2. Properties of structure

Size of Beams = 400 mm x 400 mm

Size of columns = 400 mm x 400 mm

Size of foundation = 750 mm radius

3. Material properties of structure

Density ρ st = 2500.00 kg m 3

Modulus of Elasticity E st = 2500.00 N m 2

Poisson’s ratio µ st = 0.15

224
 Damping ξ st = 5.00 0 0

4. Properties of Soil

Density ρ s = 1800.00 kg m 3

Shear Velocity ν s = 200.00 m sec

Poisson’s ratio µ s = 0.3
Damping ξ s = 20.00 0 0
5. Input Time History = El Centro Earthquake Time History as shown in
figure 6.18

0.3

0.2
Acceleration (g)

0.1

0.0

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)
Figure 6.18: Input El-Centro Earthquake Time - history.

6. Problem requirement = Find the time histories of relative acceleration

and
Rotational acceleration at the top floor of the
given frame.

Soution:

A. Procedure by Direct Method

1. Modeling of structure geometry

225
 • Structure is modeled with beam elements and soil is modeled with plain strain
elements.
• Mesh size for beam elements is 1m and mesh size for plain strain elements is
3m x 3m.
• To avoid reflecting effect of wave sufficient amount of soil beyond the structure
i.e. 30m is modeled.
• Abaqus Model of structure along with soil is shown in the Figure 6.19 below

Figure 6.19: ABAQUS model of structure with soil.

2. Soil Structure interaction and support conditions

• Appropriate boundaries for the soil medium are assumed - Support conditions at
bed rock level are assumed to be fixed.
• Interaction between structure / footing with soil is modeled with tie elements.
• Contact surface between footing and soil is defined as
Hard contact in vertical direction.
Friction contact in tangential direction.
There is no separation in vertical direction.

226
3. Analysis of structure and results
• Structure is analyzed in ABAQUS and following results are presented.

Relative acceleration time history at top floor

1.5
Relative Acceleration (g)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (sec)

Figure 6.20: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

Rotational acceleration time history at top floor

0.06
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.03

0.00

-0.03

-0.06
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.21: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

227
B. Procedure by Sub-Structure Method

Basically there are 3 steps for soil structure interaction analysis by sub-structure method
using ABAQUS.
1. Input time history is at bedrock level and we need the time history at foundation level.
• In first step time history at the bedrock level is converted to time history at foundation
level by kinematic interaction analysis.
• Procedure - Massless structure (i.e. structure with stiffness only) is modeled along
with soil and time history analysis is carried out by applying the time history at the
bed rock level.
• The modified time history at the foundation level is shown in Figure 6.22. By
comparing time history at bed rock level shown in Figure 6.18 and time history at
foundation level shown in Figure 6.22, one can notice that the foundation level time
history is having some more peaks but small value of acceleration amplitude.
Acceleration from Kinem. Int.(g)

0.6

0.3

0.0

-0.3

-0.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (sec)

Figure 6.22: Time -history (modified) after performing kinematic interaction analysis.

2. Estimation of spring constants for soil-spring constants are estimated for foundation by
considering properties of soil.
Shear wave velocity νs = G / ρS

228
 Shear modulus G = ρ s × ν s2

= 1800 × 200 2

= 7.2 × 10 7 N / m 2
Spring constants are given by
K x = 32 ( 1 − µ s ) G R / ( 7 − 8 µ s )

= 32 ( 1 − 0.3 ) × 7.2 ×10 7 × 0.75 / ( 7 − 8 × 0.3 )

= 2.63 ×10 8 N / m

K z = 4 G R / (1 − µ s )

= 4 × 7.2 ×10 7 × 0.75 / ( 1 − 0.3 )

= 3.08 ×10 8 N / m

K r = 8 G R 3 / [ 3 (1 − µ s ) ]

= 8 × 7.2 ×10 7 × 0.753 / [ 3 × ( 1 − 0.3 ) ]

= 1.16 ×10 8 N / m

3. Modeling of structure

• Superstructure is modeled as per the requirement of the problem.

• Support conditions are modeled by spring constants and values of spring constants are
considered as estimated in step 2.
• Time history analysis is carried out for the structure, using modified time history
obtained in step 1(i.e. after performing kinematic interaction analysis). This
procedure is called as inertial interaction analysis.
• Model of the structure along with spring supports is shown in Figure 6.23.

229
 Figure 6.23 : Model of structure only,
with spring supports.

4. Analysis of structure and results

• Structure is analyzed in ABAQUS and the following results are presented.

Relative acceleration time history at top floor.

1.0
Relative Accelration (g)

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)
Figure 6.24: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

230
 Rotational acceleration time history at top floor.

0.04
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.02

0.00

-0.02

-0.04
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.25: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

Discussion
By comparing the obtained results of the acceleration response of the system, we can see
there is difference in the acceleration response time history of the two analysis. The
reason for the difference between the results of the two analysis is that in direct method
we are applying original time history (with higher amplitude) directly at the foundation
level of the structure. While in case of substructure method firstly we are applying time
history at the bed rock level and then modifying it to the foundation level. Due to which
the modified time history is having somewhat small acceleration amplitude in compare
to the original time history. Further in this method we are modeling soil also, due to
which the two results are differing.

231
6.13 Tutorial Problems

Q1. Analyze the frame shown in Figure 6.26 by performing soil-structure interaction analysis
in ABAQUS by
• Direct Method.
• Sub-Structure Method.
The frame is supported by two isolated footings having properties as mentioned below.

1. Structural Configuration
3m

3m

3m

3m

3m

3m

3m

Figure 6.26: Frame to be analyzed by Seismic soil-structure interaction analysis.

232
 2. Properties of structure

Size of Beams = 450 mm x 450 mm

Size of columns = 450 mm x 450 mm

Size of foundation = 900 mm radius

Material properties of structure and soil are same as taken in solved example 6.12.
Find the time histories of relative acceleration and Rotational acceleration at the
top floor of the given frame when it is subjected to El-Centro Earthquake time
history.

Q2. Analyze the frame shown in Figure 6.26 by performing soil-structure interaction analysis
in ABAQUS by
• Direct Method.
• Sub-Structure Method.
The frame is supported by two isolated footings having properties as mentioned below.
Structural configuration, Properties of structure and material properties of structure are
same as mentioned in the previous problem. The properties of soil are as mentioned
below

Density ρ s = 2000.00 kg m 3

Shear Velocity ν s = 600.00 m sec

Poisson’s ratio µ s = 0.3

Damping ξ s = 20.00 0 0
Find the time histories of relative acceleration and Rotational acceleration at the top floor
of the given frame when it is subjected to El-Centro Earthquake time history.

233
6.14 Answer to Tutorial Problems

Q1

• Direct Method
2
Relative Acceleration (g)

-1

-2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (sec)

Figure 6.27: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

0.10
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.05

0.00

-0.05

-0.10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Sec)

Figure 6.28: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

234
• Sub-Structure Method

2
Relative Accelration (g)

-1

-2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.29: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

0.10
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.05

0.00

-0.05

-0.10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.30: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

235
Q2.

• Direct Method

1.5
Relative Acceleration (g)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (sec)

Figure 6.31: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

0.06
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.03

0.00

-0.03

-0.06
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Sec)

Figure 6.32: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

236
• Sub-Structure Method

1.5
Relative Accelration (g)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.33: Relative acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

0.08
Rotational Acceleration (g)

0.04

0.00

-0.04

-0.08
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (Sec)

Figure 6.34: Rotational acceleration time - history at top floor of frame.

237
Chapter 7

Non-linear Seismic Response of Structures

7.1 Introduction
As per the conventional earthquake-resistant design philosophy, the structures are designed
for forces, which are much less than the expected design earthquake forces. Hence, when a
structure is struck with severe earthquake ground motion, it undergoes inelastic deformations.
Even though the structure may not collapse but the damages can be beyond repairs. In
reinforced cement concrete (RCC) structures, a structural system can be made ductile, by
providing reinforcing steel according to the IS:13920-1993 code. A sufficiently ductile
structural system undergoes large deformations in the inelastic region. In order to understand
the complete behaviour of structures, time history analysis of different Single Degree of
Freedom (SDOF) and Multi Degree of Freedom (MDOF) structures having non-linear
characteristics is required to be performed. The results of time history analysis, i.e. non-linear
analysis of these structures will help in understanding their true behavior. From the results, it
can be predicted, whether the structure will not collapse / partially collapse or totally
collapse.
In this chapter, the modeling of SDOF and MDOF structures having non-linear
characteristics for seismic response analysis is carried out. The push over analysis of the RCC
building is also presented.

7.2 Non-linear Force-Deformation Behavior

The structural systems which have linear inertia, damping and restoring forces, are analysed
by linear methods. Whenever, the structural system has any or all of the three reactive forces
(i.e. inertia, damping and stiffness) having non-linear variation with the response parameters,
namely displacement, velocity, and acceleration; a set of non-linear differential equations is
evolved. To obtain the response, these equations need be solved. The most common non-
linearity is the stiffness and the damping non-linearity. The stiffness non-linearity comprises
of two types namely the geometric non-linearity and the material non-linearity.
For the material non-linearity, restoring action shows a hysteretic behavior under
cyclic loading. For the geometric non-linearity, no such hysteretic behavior is exhibited.
During unloading, the load deformation path follows that of the loading. Figure 7.1(a) shows

238
the case of load deformation behavior of the non-hysteretic type. Figure 7.2(b) shows the
hysteretic behavior of a non-linear restoring force under cyclic loading (material non-
linearity).

Damping non-linearity may be encountered in dynamic problems associated with

structural control, offshore structures, and aerodynamics of structures. Most of the damping
non-linearities are of a non-hysteretic type. Most structures under earthquake excitation
undergo yielding. Hence, it is necessary to discuss material non-linearity exhibiting hysteretic
behavior.
For structural systems having linear behaviour (when subjected to weak ground
motions) of inertial forces, spring elastic forces and linear damping characteristics, linear
methods of analysis can be employed. Displacement, velocity and acceleration are important
response parameters of any structural system. When any or all of the reactive forces, viz.
inertia force / spring force or damping force has nonlinear variation with the response
parameters, the analysis involves non-linear differential equations. Solution of these
equations will give the response of the system. The popular method to obtain the response is
Newmark’s Beta method.

Force
Force

Displacement Displacement

Figure 7.1 (a) Non-linear restoring force for geometrical non-linearity (non-hysteretic type)
and (b) Non-linear restoring forces (hysteretic type)

239
7.3 Non-Linear Analysis of SDOF system
Consider a SDOF system having non-linear damping and stiffness characteristics as shown in
the Figure 7.2.

m m ( 
x + 
xg )

kt m
ct
Fs
Fd
xg

Figure 7.2 Non-linear SDOF system and its free body diagram.

For the SDOF system, the equation of motion in the incremental form is expressed as

m∆
xi + ct ∆xi + kt ∆xi =−m∆
x gi (7.1)

where m is the mass of the SDOF system, ct is the initial tangent damping coefficient and

kt is the initial tangent stiffness at the beginning of the time step, respectively.

The solution of the equation of motion for the SDOF system is obtained using the numerical
integration technique. The incremental quantities in the equation (7.1) are the change in the
responses from time ti to ti+1 given by

∆
xi = 
xi +1 − 
xi 
∆xi = xi +1 − xi 

∆xi = xi +1 − xi 
(7.2)
∆ti = ti +1 − ti 

∆ xgi +1 − 
xgi =  xgi 

Assuming the linear variation of acceleration over a small time interval, ∆ti the incremental
acceleration and velocity (refer Section 3.3.1.1.1 Newmark’s Beta Method) are expressed as
6 6
∆
xi = ∆xi − xi − 3
xi (7.3)
∆ti2
∆ti

240
 3 ∆ti
∆xi = ∆xi − 3 xi − 
xi (7.4)
∆ti 2

Substituting ∆
xi and ∆xi in equation (7.1) and solving for the ∆xi will give
peff
∆xi = (7.5)
keff

where peff and keff are the incremental force and incremental stiffness during the ith time step

respectively expressed as.

 6   ∆t 
peff = − m∆
x gi +  m + 2ct  xi +  2m + i ct  
xi (7.6)
∆
 i t   2 

6 3
keff = m + ct + kt (7.7)
∆ti 2
∆ti

Knowing the ∆xi , determine ∆xi from equation (7.4). At time, t = ti+1, the displacement and
velocity can be determined as
xi +1= xi + ∆xi 
 (7.8)
xi +1= xi + ∆xi 

The acceleration at time, t = ti+1 is calculated by considering equilibrium of the system (refer
Figure 7.1) to avoid the accumulation of the unbalanced forces i.e.
1

xi +1 =  − mxgi +1 − Fdi +1 − Fsi +1  (7.9)
m
where Fdi +1 and Fsi +1 denote the damping and stiffness/restoring force at time, ti+1,

respectively.
While obtaining the above solution, it is assumed that the damping and restoring force non-
linearities follow the specified path during loading and unloading condition.

7.3.1 Elasto-plastic Material Behavior

For the elasto-plastic material behavior, ct is assumed to be constant. The stiffness matrix

kt is taken either as k or zero depending upon whether the system is elastically loaded and
unloaded or plastically deformed. When the system enters from elastic to plastic state or vice-
versa, the stiffness varies within the time step. Due to variation of stiffness with respect to
time, the system no more remains in equilibrium.

241
If the system is elastic at the beginning of the time step and remains elastic at the end of the
time step, then the computation is not changed i.e.

Fsi +1 < Q (7.10)

and the computations for the next time step start. In equation (7.10), Q is the yield force.

The system enters into plastic state from elastic state as soon as
Fsi +1 = Q (7.11)

Normally, it is not possible to have the scenario that at time, ti+1, the spring force is just equal
to the yield force. However, this can be archived by reducing the time interval of the
computation.

Once the system enters into the plastic state, it continues to remain in that state until the
incremental displacement and the stiffness force are in the same direction. Thus, the plastic
state exists until
Fsi +1 × ∆xi > 0 (7.12)

When the velocity at the end of the time interval changes the sign then the unloading takes
place. Thus, the system changes from plastic to elastic state when

Fsi +1 × ∆xi < 0 (7.13)

The system remains in the elastic state until equation (7.10) is satisfied otherwise, it will
change from elastic to plastic state.

242
Example 7.1

Consider an elasto-plastic SDOF system having mass = 1 kg, elastic stiffness = 39.478 N/m

and damping constant = 0.251 N.sec/m. Determine the displacement response of the system

under the El-Centro, 1940 motion for (i) yield displacement = 0.05m and (ii) yield

displacement = 0.025m.

Solution:

Based on the method developed in the Section 7.2, a computer program is written in the

FORTAN language and the response of the SDOF system with the above parameters and

elasto-plastic behavior under El-Centro, 1940 earthquake motion is obtained. The time period

of the system based on the elastic stiffness is 1 sec and the damping ratio is 0.02. The time

variation of displacement and spring force of the system is plotted in Figures 7.2 and 7.3 for

the yield displacement, q = 0.05m and 0.025m, respectively. The salient values of the

maximum response of the system are summarized as below:

Response quantity q = 0.05m q = 0.025m

Maximum displacement (m) 0.099 0.113

Maximum Stiffness force (N) 1.974 0.987

Time of change of first elastic to plastic state 1.92 sec 1.84 sec

Time of change of first plastic to elastic state 1.98 sec 2.02 sec

Maximum elastic deflection (refer Example 3.5) 0.1516 m

243
Figure 7.3 Response of elasto-plastic SDOF system with yield displacement of 0.05m.

244
Figure 7.4 Response of elasto-plastic SDOF system with yield displacement of 0.025m.

245
7.4 Non-linear Force-Deformation Behaviour using Wen’s Equation

Wen (1976) proposed the equation for modeling non-linear hysteretic force-deformation
behavior, in which the force, Fs is given by

Fs =α k0 x + (1 − α) Q Z (7.14)

where k0 is the initial stiffness; α is an index, which represents the ratio of post to pre-
yielding stiffness; x is the relative displacement; Q is the yield strength; and Z is a non-
dimensional hysteretic component satisfying the following non-linear first order differential
equation expressed as

dZ n −1
=β x Z Z − τ x Z + Ax = g ( x , Z )
n
q (7.15)
dt

where β, τ, A and n are the dimensionless parameters which control the shape of the
hysteresis loop; q is the yield displacement; and x is the relative velocity.
The parameter n is an integer constant, which controls the smoothness of transition from
elastic to plastic state. Various parameters of the Wen’s equation are selected in such a way
that predicted response from the model closely matches with the experimental results. In
order to solve, the equation of motion of a system in the incremental form using the
Newmark’s step-by-step method will require the incremental force (refer equation (7.1))
which is given by

∆Fs =α k0 ∆x + (1 − α) Q ∆Z (7.16)

The above equation involves the incremental displacement component, ΔZ which can be
obtained by solving the differential equation (7.15) using the fourth order Runge-Kutta
method by

K + 2 K1 + 2 K 2 + K 3
∆Z = 0 (7.17)
6

K 0 = ∆t g ( x , Z t ) / q (7.18)

∆t g ( x t +∆t /2 , Z t + K 0 / 2) / q
K1 = (7.19)

∆t g ( x t +∆t /2 , Z t + K1 / 2) / q
K2 = (7.20)

246
 ∆t g ( x t +∆t , Z t + K 2 ) / q
K3 = (7.21)

It is to be noted that the above solution requires the velocity of the system at time, t+Δt/2 and
t+Δt which are not known initially. To start with, it is assumed the same velocity at time, t
and t+Δt and the value of the incremental hysteretic displacement component is obtained to
find the velocity at time, t+Δt. This is to be iterated until the following convergence criterion
is satisfied for incremental hysteretic displacement component i.e.

(δZ ) j +1 − (δZ ) j
≤ε (7.22)
(δZ ) j

where ε is a small threshold parameter. The superscript to the ΔZ denotes the iteration
number.

The typical force-deformation hysteresis loops generated using the equations (7.14) and
(7.15) are shown in the Figure 7.5 under a sinusoidal motion (amplitude of 7.5 cm and
frequency of unit Hz). The other parameters of the model considered are q = 2.5 cm, β = τ =
0.5 and A = 1. Thus, by changing the different parameters of the Wen’s model one can
achieve the desired hysteretic behavior such as elasto-plastic and bi-linear type. The
comparison of the loop for two values of the n indicates that for n=1, there is smooth
transition from elastic to plastic state and vice versa where as for n=15 the change in the
states takes place immediately.

247
Figure 7.5 Different hysteresis loops from the Wen's equation.

248
Example 7.2

Consider an elasto-plastic SDOF system having mass = 1kg, elastic stiffness = 39.478 N/m

and damping constant = 0.251 N.sec/m. The yield displacement = 0.05m. Determine the

displacement response of the system under the El-Centro, 1940 motion using the Wen’s

equation.

Solution:

Based on the given input, the values of the various parameters of the Wen’s equation will be

k0 = 39.478 N/m

q = 0.05m

Q = 39.478 × 0.05 =1.974 N

β = τ = 0.5
A=1
n = 15

Based on the method developed in the Section 7.3, a computer program is written in the

FORTAN language and the response of the SDOF system with above parameters subjected to

the El-Centro, 1940 earthquake motion is obtained. The time variation of displacement and

spring force response is plotted in Figure 7.6. As expected, the response of the system is

similar to that shown in the Figure 7.3 using the conventional approach. A comparison of the

displacement response of the elasto-plastic system with two approaches is shown in the

Figure 7.7. The maximum response is the same for the two methods; however, there is

difference in the permanent drift of the system by two approaches.

249
Figure 7.6 Response of the elasto-plastic SDOF system of Example 7.2.

250
Figure 7.7 Comparison of displacement response of the system by two approaches.

251
7.5 Non-Linear Analysis of Multi-Storey Building Frames
mN
xn
kN
Fs

Qi αki

ki
q xi
m2
x2
k2
m1
x1
k1

Figure 7.8 Idealized multi-storey building frame with non-linear behavior of columns.

The multi-storey building frames can be idealized as 2D frames as shown in the Figure 7.8.
The equations of motion for a MDOF system with bi-linear stiffness are a set of coupled non-
linear differential equations. The governing equations of motion are expressed as

[m ]{
x} + [c ]{x} + [kt ]{x} =
- [m ]{r} 
xg (7.23)

where, [m] = mass matrix (n × n); [kt] = time dependent stiffness matix (n × n); [c] =
damping matrix (n × n); {r} = influence coefficient vector (n×1); {x (t )} = relative
displacement vector; {x (t )} = relative velocity vector, {
x (t )} = relative acceleration vector,

and 
xg (t ) = earthquake ground acceleration.

The solution can be obtained by using Newmark’s Beta iterative technique or any other
numerical procedure, by solving the incremental equations of motion. Over the small time
interval ∆t, the response of the structure is assumed to be linear. The response of the structure
in the next time step is obtained from the response in the earlier time step. The incremental
equations of motion will be of the form
[m ]{∆
x} + [c ]{∆x} + [kt =
]{∆x} - [m ]{r} ∆
xg (7.24)

252
The solution of the equation of motion for the MDOF system is obtained using the numerical
integration technique. The incremental quantities in the equation (7.24) are the change in the
responses from time ti to ti+1 given by

{∆
xi } = {
xi +1} − {
xi } 
{∆xi } = {xi +1} − {xi } 

{∆xi } = {xi +1} − {xi }  (7.25)
∆ti = ti +1 − ti 

{∆ xgi +1} − {
xgi } = { xgi } 

Assuming the linear variation of acceleration over a small time interval, ∆ti the incremental
acceleration and velocity (refer Section 3.3.1.1.1 Newmark’s Beta Method) are expressed as
6 6
{∆
xi }= {∆xi } − {xi } − 3{
xi } (7.26)
∆ti2
∆ti
3 ∆ti
{∆xi }= {∆xi } − 3{xi } − {
xi } (7.27)
∆ti 2

Substituting {∆
xi } and {∆xi } in equation (7.19) and solving for the ∆xi will give
[keff ]−1{ peff }
{∆xi } = (7.28)

where,

 6   ∆t 
{ peff } =− [m ]{r}∆
xgi +  [m ] + 2[c ]  {xi } +  2[m] + i [c ]  {
xi } (7.29)
∆
 i t   2 
6 3
[keff ] = [m ] + [c ] + kt [] (7.30)
∆ti 2
∆ti

Knowing the {∆xi } , determine {∆xi } from equation (7.4). At t = ti+1, the displacement and
velocity can be determined as
{xi +1=} {xi } + {∆xi } 
 (7.31)
{xi +1=
} {xi } + {∆xi } 

The acceleration at time, t = ti+1 is calculated by considering equilibrium of the system (refer
Figure 7.8) to avoid the accumulation of the unbalanced forces i.e.
{
xi +1} =[m ]−1  − [m]{r}{
x gi +1} − [c]{x i +1} − {Fsi +1} (7.32)

where {Fsi +1} denotes the stiffness/restoring force at time, ti+1.

253
Example 7.3
A two-story building is modeled as 2-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in the Figure
7.9. Determine the floor displacement responses due to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground
motion. Take the inter-story stiffness, k =197.392 × 103 N/m and the floor mass, m = 2500
kg. The columns of the building are having elasto-plastic behavior with yield displacement of
0.05m.
m
x2

2m
x1

2k

Figure 7.9

Solution:

Based on the method developed in the Section 7.5, a computer program is written in the

FORTAN language and the response of the system with the above parameters under El-

Centro, 1940 earthquake motion is obtained. The time variation of displacement response of

the frame is plotted in Figures 7.10 and 7.11. The peak displacement of the top and bottom

floor is observed as 0.1483 m and 0.068 m, respectively. The corresponding elasto-plastic

force-deformation loops of the two floors are also plotted in the above figures.

254
Figure 7.10 Top floor displacement response of two DOF system of Example 7.3.

255
Figure 7.11 Bottom floor displacement response of two DOF system of Example 7.3.

256
7.6 Pushover Analysis
Amongst the natural hazards, earthquakes have the potential for causing the greatest
damages. Since earthquake forces are random in nature & unpredictable, the engineering
tools need to be sharpened for analyzing structures under the action of these forces.
Earthquake loads are to be carefully modeled so as to assess the real behavior of structure
with a clear understanding that damage is expected but it should be regulated. In this context
pushover analysis which is an iterative procedure is looked upon as an alternative for the
conventional analysis procedures. Pushover analysis of multi-story RCC framed buildings
subjected to increasing lateral forces is carried out until the preset performance level (target
displacement) is reached. The promise of performance-based seismic engineering (PBSE) is
to produce structures with predictable seismic performance.

The recent advent of performance based design has brought the non linear static push
over analysis procedure to the forefront. Pushover analysis is a static non linear procedure in
which the magnitude of the structural loading along the lateral direction of the structure is
incrementally increased in accordance with a certain pre-defined pattern. It is generally
assumed that the behavior of the structure is controlled by its fundamental mode and the
predefined pattern is expressed either in terms of story shear or in terms of fundamental mode
shape.
With the increase in magnitude of lateral loading, the progressive non-linear behavior
of various structural elements is captured, and weak links and failure modes of the structure
are identified. In addition, pushover analysis is also used to ascertain the capability of a
structure to withstand a certain level of input motion defined in terms of a response spectrum.
Recently, modifications to push over procedures have also been proposed so as to capture
contribution of higher modes of vibration of structure, change in distribution of story shear
subsequent to yielding of structural members, etc. Push over procedure is gaining popularity
during the last few years as appropriate analytical tools are now available (SAP-2000,
ETABS).
Pushover analysis is of two types, (i) force controlled or (ii) displacement controlled.
In the force control, the total lateral force is applied to the structure in small increments. In
the displacement control, the displacement of the top storey of the structure is incremented
step by step, such that the required horizontal force pushes the structure laterally. The
distance through which the structure is pushed, is proportional to the fundamental horizontal
translational mode of the structure. In both types of pushover analysis, for each increment of

257
the load or displacement, the stiffness matrix of the structure may have to be changed, once
the structure passes from the elastic state to the inelastic state. The displacement controlled
pushover analysis is generally preferred over the force controlled one because the analysis
could be carried out up to the desired level of the displacement (refer Figure 7.12).

Roof displacement
Lateral loads

(Structural Model) Base Shear

Figure 7.12 Static Approximations in the Pushover Analysis.

In Pushover analysis, a static horizontal force profile, usually proportional to the

design force profiles specified in the codes, is applied to the structure. The force profile is
then incremented in small steps and the structure is analyzed at each step. As the loads are
increased, the building undergoes yielding at a few locations. Every time such yielding takes
place, the structural properties are modified approximately to reflect the yielding. The
analysis is continued till the structure collapses, or the building reaches certain level of lateral
displacement. It provides a load versus deflection curve of the structure starting from the state
of rest to the ultimate failure of the structure. The load is representative of the equivalent
static load of the fundamental mode of the structure. It is generally taken as the total base
shear of the structure and the deflection is selected as the top-storey deflection. The selection
of appropriate lateral load distribution is an important step. The first step then is to select a
displacement shape and the vector of lateral loads is determined as
=
{F } p[m ]{Φ} (7.33)
where {Φ} is the assumed displacement shape, and p is the magnitude of the lateral loads.
From equation (7.33), it follows that the lateral force at any level is proportional to the
assumed displacement shape and story mass. If the assumed displacement shape was exact
and remained constant during ground shaking, then distribution of lateral forces would be
equal to distribution of effective earthquake forces.

258
 For pushover analysis of any structure, the input required is the assumed collapse
mechanism, moment–rotation relationship for the sections that are assumed to yield, the
fundamental mode shape, the limiting displacement, and the rotational capacity of the plastic
hinges. In addition to data needed for usual elastic analysis, the non-linear force deformation
relationship for structural elements under monotonic loading is also required. The most
commonly used element is beam element modeled as line element. Seismic demand is
traditionally defined in the form of an elastic acceleration spectrum Sae, in which spectral
accelerations are given as a function of the natural period of structure, T.
The structure is modeled as a SDOF system. The displacement shape is assumed to be
constant. This is the basic and most critical assumption. The starting point is the equation of
motion of planar MDOF model that explicitly includes only lateral translation degrees of
freedom.
[m ]{u} +{R} = [m]{1}
xg (7.34)

where {u} and {R} are the vectors representing displacements and internal forces, {1} is a
unit vector, and xg is ground acceleration as a function of time. The displacement vector, {u}

is defined as
{u} = {Φ}Dt (7.35)

where Dt is the time dependent top displacement.

For equilibrium, the internal forces, {R} are equal to statically applied external loads {F}.
The equation of motion of equivalent SDOF is written as
−m * 
m * D "* + F * = xg (7.36)

where m* is equivalent mass of the SDOF system, D* and F * are the displacement and force
of the equivalent SDOF system, respectively.
For simplification the force-displacement relationship is assumed to be elastic perfectly
plastic for equivalent SDOF as shown in the Figure 7.13.

259
 F*

Fy*

Dy* D*

Figure 7.13 Approximate elasto-plastic force-displacement relationships.

Determine the strength, Fy* , yield displacement, Dy* and period T * . The T * is given by

m* Dy *
T = 2π
*
(7.37)
Fy *

From the acceleration spectrum, the inelastic spectrum in acceleration-displacement format is

determined. The capacity diagram in acceleration displacement (AD) format is obtained by
dividing the forces in force deformation diagram by m* .

F*
Sa = * (7.38)
m

Sae T*=0.15sec
T*=0.6sec
T*=1sec

T*=2sec

T*=3sec

Sde
Figure 7.14 Demand in the AD format.

260
The displacement demand for the SDOF model Sd is transformed into the maximum top
displacement Dt of the MDOF system. The local seismic response (e.g. story drifts, joint
rotations) can be determined by pushover analysis. Under increasing lateral loads with a fixed
pattern the structure is pushed to a target displacement Dt. Consequently it is appropriate the
likely performance of building under push load up to target displacement. The expected
performance can be assessed by comparing seismic demands with the capacities for the
relevant performance level. Global performance can be visualized by comparing
displacement capacity and demand.
The seismic performance of a building can be evaluated in terms of pushover curve,
performance point, displacement ductility, plastic hinge formation etc. The base shear vs.
roof displacement curve (Figure 7.15) is obtained from the pushover analysis from which the
maximum base shear capacity of structure can be obtained. This capacity curve is
transformed into capacity spectrum by SAP as per ATC40 and demand or response spectrum
is also determined for the structure for the required building performance level. The
intersection of demand and capacity spectrum gives the performance point of the structure
analyzed. This is illustrated in the Figure 7.14.

Base Shear

Pushover Curve by NSP Analysis

Roof Displacement

Figure 7.15 Base shear vs roof displacement.

261
 At the performance point, the resulting responses of the building should then be
checked using certain acceptability criteria. The Performance Point thus obtained from
pushover analysis is then compared with the calculated target displacement.

Sa
Capacity Spectrum:
Representation of structure’s
ability to resist the seismic
demand
Sd
Sa
Demand Spectrum:
Representation of earthquake
ground motion
Sd
Sa Performance Point
Performance Point:
Intersection point of demand
Spectrum and Capacity
Spectrum Sd

Figure 7.16 Determination of Performance Point.

There are three procedures described in ATC-40 to find the performance point.
Procedure A, which uses a set of equations described in ATC-40.
Procedure B is also an iterative method to find the performance point, which uses the
assumption that the yield point and the post yield slope of the bilinear representation, remains
constant. This is adequate for most cases; however, in some cases this assumption may not be
valid.
Procedure C is graphical method that is convenient for hand as well as software analysis.
SAP2000 uses this method for the determination of performance point. To find the
performance point using Procedure C the following steps are used:
First of all, the single demand spectrum (variable damping) curve is constructed by doing the
following for each point on the Pushover Curve:

1) Draw a radial line through a point (P) on the Pushover curve. This is a line of constant
period.

2) Calculate the damping associated with the point (P) on the curve, based on the area
under the curve up to that point.

262
 3) Construct the demand spectrum, plotting it for the same damping level as associated
with the point ‘P’ on the pushover curve.

4) The intersection point (P’) for the radial line and associated demand spectrum
represents a point on the Single Demand Spectrum (Variable Damping Curve).

A number of arbitrary points are taken on the Pushover curve. A curve is then drawn by
joining through these points. The intersection of this curve with the original pushover curve
gives the performance point of the structure as shown in Figure 7.16.

Radial line with constant

Spectral period drawn through any
Acceleration, point P on pushover curve
Sa/g

P’ Demand curve drawn for

same drawing as that for
P point P on pushover curve

P
Pushover curve in A-D form

Damping based on area

under curve upto point P

Spectral Displacement, Sd

Figure 7.17 Capacity Spectrum Procedure ‘C’ to Determine Performance Point

It has been recognized that the inter-story drift performance of a multistory building is an
important measure of structural and non-structural damage of the building under various
levels of earthquake motion. In performance based design, inter-story drift performance has
become a principal design consideration. The system performance levels of a multistory
building are evaluated on the basis of the inter-story drift values along the height of the
building under different levels of earthquake motion. Inter-storey drift is defined as the ratio
of relative horizontal displacement of two adjacent floors (δ) and corresponding storey height
(h).
δ δi – δi-1
Inter-story Drift = = (7.39)
h h

263
The sequence of plastic hinge formation and state of hinge at various levels of building
performance can be obtained from SAP output. This gives the information about the weakest
member and so the one which is to be strengthened in case of a building need to be
retrofitted. Accordingly the detailing of the member can be done in order to achieve the
desired pattern of failure of members in case of severe earthquakes. It is concluded that
pushover analysis is a successful method in determination of the sequence of yielding of the
components of a building, possible mode of failure, and final state of the building after a
predetermined level of lateral load is sustained by the structure.
Following assumptions are made while analyzing a structure in the SAP: (i) The
material is homogeneous, isotropic, (ii) All columns supports are considered as fixed at the
foundation, (iii) Tensile strength of concrete is ignored in sections subjected to bending, (iv)
The super structure is analyzed independently from foundation and soil medium, on the
assumptions that foundations are fixed, (v) Pushover hinges are assigned to all the member
ends. In case of Columns PMM hinges (i.e. Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Hinge) are
provided while in case of beams M3 hinges (i.e. Bending Moment hinge) are provided, (vi)
the maximum target displacement of the structure is calculated in accordance with the
guidelines given by FEMA 356 for maximum roof level lateral drift. Performance of building
has been classified into 5 levels, viz. (i) Operational (OP), (ii) Immediate Occupancy (IO),
(iii) Damage Control (DC), (iv) Life Safety (LS) and (v) Collapse Prevention (CP).

Structural Performance Level S-1, Immediate Occupancy, means the post earthquake
damage state in which only very limited structural damage has occurred. The basic vertical-
and lateral-force-resisting systems of the building retain nearly all of their pre-earthquake
strength and stiffness. In the primary concrete frames, there will be hairline cracking. There
may be a few locations where the rebar will yield, but the crushing of concrete is not
expected. The transient drift will be about 1%, with negligible permanent drift. In the brick
infill walls, there will be minor cracking and minor spalling of plaster. The risk of life-
threatening injury as a result of structural damage is very low, and although some minor
structural repairs may be appropriate, these would generally not be required prior to re-
occupancy.

Damage Control Performance Range (S-2) means the continuous range of damage
states that entail less damage than that defined for the Life Safety level, but more than that
defined for the Immediate Occupancy level. Design for Damage Control performance may be

264
desirable to minimize repair time and operation interruption; as a partial means of protecting
valuable equipment and contents; or to preserve important historic features when the cost of
design for Immediate Occupancy is excessive. Acceptance criteria for this range may be
obtained by interpolating between the values provided for the Immediate Occupancy (S-1)
and Life Safety (S-3) levels.

Life Safety Performance Level (S-3) means the post-earthquake damage state in
which significant damage to the structure has occurred, but some margin against either partial
or total structural collapse remains. Some structural elements and components are severely
damaged, but this has not resulted in large falling debris hazards, either within or outside the
building. In the primary concrete frames, there will be extensive damage in the beams. There
will be spalling of concrete cover and shear cracking in the ductile columns. The transient
drift will be around 2%, with 1% being permanent. In the brick infill walls, there will be
extensive cracking and some crushing. But the walls are expected to remain in place. The
transient drift will be about 0.5%, with 0.3% being permanent. Injuries may occur during the
earthquake; however, it is expected that the overall risk of life threatening injury as a result of
structural damage is low. It should be possible to repair the structure; however, for economic
reasons this may not be practical. While the damaged structure is not an imminent collapse
risk, it would be prudent to implement structural repairs or install temporary bracing prior to
re-occupancy.

Collapse Prevention Performance Level (S-5) means the building is on the verge of
experiencing partial or total collapse. Substantial damage to the structure has occurred,
potentially including significant degradation in the stiffness and strength of the lateral-force-
resisting system, large permanent lateral deformation of the structure and to more limited
extent degradation in vertical-load-carrying capacity. However, all significant components of
the gravity load-resisting system must continue to carry their gravity load demands. In the
primary concrete frames, there will be extensive cracking and formation of hinges in the
ductile elements. There will be about 4% inelastic drift, transient or permanent. There will be
extensive cracking and crushing in the brick infill walls. Walls may dislodge due to out-of-
plane bending. There will be 0.6% inelastic drift, transient or permanent. Significant risk of
injury due to falling hazards from structural debris may exist. The structure may not be
technically practical to repair and is not safe for re-occupancy, as aftershock activity could
induce collapse. Figure 7.18 depicts various performance levels and damage functions.

265
 Operational Immediate Life Collapse
Occupancy Safety Prevention

No Damage Less Damage Little more damage

Large Damage
System is functional but serviceable to nonstructural to structural
Members but members too
Serviceable & not
serviceable
Figure 7.18 Performance levels and damage Functions.

7.6.1 Procedure of Pushover Analysis using SAP 2000

The procedure of Pushover Analysis using SAP 2000 software is summarized below:

1. Select the type of model and scale of system

2. Fill in the blanks and click the ‘+’ to select the sections and their properties

to create required structure / structural frame/ model

3. Select the bottom Joints and assign the support conditions as per requirement

Assign – Joint – Restraint

4. For Loading (Response Spectrum or Time History)

Define – Functions

5. For Dead Load, Live Loads, Wind Load etc

Define- Load Patterns

6. To assign loads to beam / slab

Define – Load Case

7. Add New Load Case to add Response Spectrum/ Time History and details

8. Define – Load Combinations – Add New Combination

9. Analyze – Set Analysis Options – Analysis Options

266
10. Analyze – Run Analysis

11. Design – Concrete Frame Design – View/Revise Preference..... to Select IS code

12. Design – Concrete Frame Design – Start Design / Check of Design to design

13. Click Unlock Model

14. Select Beams and Columns – Assign – Frame – Hinges – Assign Hinges

15. Define – Load Cases – Select Dead Load – Assign Non Linear – OK

16. Define – Load Cases - Add new Load Case

Type - Push X in Load Case Name

Click – Non Linear in Analysis Type

Select - Accel in Load Applied – Load Type and write -1 in Scale Column

In Other Parameters Column - Select Modify / Show of Load Application

And then click Displacement control and then OK

In Other Parameters Column - Select Modify / Show of Results saved

And then click Multiple States and then OK

Now Click Ok twice to come out of Load Case window.

17. Click Run Analysis and then select Response Spectrum / Time History and click Run / Do no

Run Case and then Click Run Now Button to run analysis for Pushover Analysis

18. Now Click Display- Show Static Pushover Curve to see Pushover curve by FEMA 356,

Capacity Curve using ATC 40

19. To get performance point – Click – Modify / show Parameters and then change Ca and Cv to

get performance point.

20. Click – File – Display Tables – and check the Teff (i.e. T*)at which performance point is
achieved

and see the step number and then click OK twice to come out of the Pushover Curve

Window.

21. Now Click – Display – Show Deformed Shape and select Push X in Case / Combo Window

and then select same step to get hinge pattern at that particular step and conclude with respect

to the hinge pattern.

267
Example 7.4
Perform the pushover analysis and draw pushover curve, capacity curve and demand curve
using SAP 2000 for a two storied RCC frame (refer Figure 7.19) having the properties.
i) RCC frame with single bay and two storied
ii) Floor to floor height is 3.5m and bay width is 4m
iii) Reinforcement – Fe 415 and Concrete – M20

iv) Column Size – 400mm x 230mm

v) Beam Size – 300mm x 230mm
vi) Response Spectra- IS:1893 (Part 1)-2002
vii) Soil strata- Hard Rock
viii) Zone – V
ix) Importance Factor- 1

x) Lumped Mass – 1500kg at each floor

xi) Modal Combination – Square root of sum of squares (SRSS)
xii) Directional Combination - Square root of sum of squares (SRSS)
xiii) Load Combination- 1.5 (DL+EL) as per IS: 1893-2002

Figure 7.19 Model of the frame.

268
 Table 7.1 Data of Push Over Curve.

Step Displacement Base Force OP IO LS CP Beyond Total

(m) (kN) CP
0 4.06E-06 0 12 0 0 0 0 12
1 0.006007 21.524 11 1 0 0 0 12
2 0.015512 39.235 8 4 0 0 0 12
3 0.016973 40.611 7 5 0 0 0 12
4 0.019389 41.097 6 6 0 0 0 12
5 0.047389 41.838 6 6 0 0 0 12
6 0.075389 42.569 6 2 4 0 0 12
7 0.103389 43.292 6 0 6 0 0 12
8 0.131389 44.007 6 0 4 2 0 12
9 0.15703 44.654 6 0 1 3 2 12
10 0.173724 44.663 6 0 0 3 3 12
*SAP 2000 Advanced 14.2.0 do not provide data for Damage Control Level (DC)

Figure 7.20 Capacity spectrum curve.

269
Figure 7.20 shows that performance point is at Teff = 0.297 sec which is close value of Teff at
Step No. 4. Hence, it is required to see the hinge formations at Step No. 4. From Fig. 7.20, it
also becomes clear that hinges formed in beams and columns are below immediate
occupation level. Hence, structure is very safe to use.

Figure 7.20 Hinge formations at Step No. 4.

Table 7.2 Modal Periods and Frequencies.

Output Eigen
Case Step Type Step Num Period Frequency Circ Freq value
Text Text Unitless Sec Cyc/sec rad/sec rad2/sec2
MODAL Mode 1 0.263335 3.7974 23.86 569.3
MODAL Mode 2 0.075421 13.259 83.308 6940.2
MODAL Mode 3 0.017003 58.814 369.54 136560
MODAL Mode 4 0.016885 59.224 372.12 138470
MODAL Mode 5 0.009896 101.05 634.94 403150
MODAL Mode 6 0.008829 113.26 711.64 506430
MODAL Mode 7 0.006795 147.17 924.72 855100
MODAL Mode 8 0.006789 147.31 925.55 856640

The mode shapes for all eight steps are as shown in Figure 7.21 and deformed shapes and
hinge formation has been shown in Figure 7.22.

270
Deformed Deformed Deformed Deformed
Shape 01 Shape 02 Shape 03 Shape 04

Deformed Deformed Deformed Deformed

Shape 05 Shape 06 Shape 07 Shape 08

Figure 7.21 Deformed Shapes as per Modal Analysis (Mode Shapes)

Deformed Deformed Deformed Deformed Deformed

Shape 00 Shape 01 Shape 02 Shape 03 Shape 04

Figure 7.22 Deformed Shapes and Hinge Formation due to Push X .

271
7.7 Tutorial Problems
Q1. Consider an elasto-plastic SDOF system having mass = 1kg, elastic stiffness = 157.914
N/m and damping constant = 1.1257 N.sec/m. Determine the maximum response of the
system under the El-Centro, 1940 motion for (i) yield displacement = 0.025m and (ii)
yield displacement = 0.0125m.
Q2. A three-story building is modeled as 3-DOF system and rigid floors as shown in Figure
7.23. Determine the maximum floor displacements under El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
ground motion. Take the inter-story lateral stiffness of floors are modeled as elasto-
plastic with elastic stiffness i.e. k1 = k2= k3=16357.5 kN/m and the yield displacement of
0.005m. The floor masses are m1= m2=10000 kg and m3=5000 kg.

m3
x3
m1 = m2 = 10000 kg
k3 m3 = 5000 kg
k=
1 k=
2 k=
3 16357.5 kN / m
m2
x2

k2
m1
x1

k1

Figure 7.23

272
Q3. For a three storied frame (refer Figure 7.24), perform pushover analysis and draw
pushover curve, capacity curve and demand curve using SAP 2000.
i) RCC frame with single bay and three storied

ii) Floor to floor height is 4m and bay width is 4m

iii) Reinforcement – Fe 415 and Concrete – M20
iv) Column Size – 400mm x 230mm
v) Beam Size – 300mm x 230mm
vi) El-Centro Time History
vii) Lumped Mass – 10000kg at each floor

viii) Load Combination- 1.5 (DL+EL) as per IS: 1893-2002

Figure 7.24

273
7.8 Answers to Tutorial Problems
Q1. (i) Maximum displacement =0.04277 m
(ii) Maximum displacement = 0.038 m

Q2. Maximum displacement, x3 = -0.0176m

Maximum displacement, x2 = -0.0153m
Maximum displacement, x2 = -0.0115m
Q3.

Performance point is very close to Teff equal to 0.362 sec which is at step number 3 and as per
the hinge formation at Step 3, structure is safe from the pushover analysis.

274
Chapter 8
Base Isolation for Earthquake-Resistant design

8.1 Introduction
A natural calamity like an earthquake has taken the toll of millions of lives through the ages
in the unrecorded, and recorded human history. A disruptive disturbance that causes shaking
of the surface of the earth due to underground movement along a fault plane or from volcanic
activity is called earthquake. The nature of forces induced is reckless, and lasts only for a
short duration of time. Yet, bewildered are the humans with its uncertainty in terms of its
time of occurrence, and its nature. However, with the advances made in various areas of
sciences through the centuries, some degree of predictability in terms of probabilistic
measures has been achieved. Further, with these advances, forecasting the occurrence and
intensity of earthquake for a particular region, say, has become reasonably adequate,
however, this solves only one part of the problem to protect a structure - to know what’s
coming! The second part is the seismic design of structures - to withstand what’s coming at
it! Over the last century, this part of the problem has taken various forms, and improvements
both in its design philosophy and methods have continuously been researched, proposed and
implemented.
In this chapter, the concept of base isolation for earthquake-resistant design of the structures
is presented. The modeling and analysis of multi-storey building, bridges and tanks supported
on isolators is developed and demonstrated the effectiveness of seismic isolation.

8.2 Conventional Seismic Design Approach

Over the past few decades, earthquake resistant design of structures has been largely
based on a ductility design concept worldwide. Looking at the Indian code specifically, the
design philosophy evolve around the intensity of the earthquake: moderate earthquake or
design basis earthquake (DBE) which has a 10% chance in a return period of 250 years, and
most credible earthquake (MCE) which has a 2% chance in a return period of 250 years. The
seismic philosophy in the Indian code expects the structure to possess a minimum strength to
protect structural and non-structural contents for intensities less than DBE. For intensity
equal to DBE, it should withstand without much structural damage, however, some non-
structural damage is allowed, and for major earthquakes, it must not collapse suddenly. The

275
ductility helps to dissipate energy while undergoing large permanent deformations causing
damage that can incur heavy repair costs, as much as building the structure itself. It is
apparent from this approach that more emphasis is laid on life safety, and not much
importance is given to protect the non-structural contents. Non-structural damage sometime
costs more than the structure itself, for example, telecommunication data centers, nuclear
facilities, laboratories etc. Hence, ductility arising from inelastic material behavior and
detailing is relied upon in this philosophy.
Indian code follows the seismic coefficient method in determining the lateral design
forces to build the structure. It is important to understand how the ductility is procedurally
inculcated in this method. Seismic coefficient method helps to determine base shear
considering only the fundamental mode of the structure. The performances of the intended
ductile structures during major earthquake, however, have been proved to be unsatisfactory,
and indeed far below expectation (Wang, 2002). High uncertainty of the ductility design
strategy is primarily attributed to:
1. The desired strong-column weak-beam mechanism may not form in reality, due to
existence of walls.
2. Shear failure of columns due to inappropriate geometrical proportions of short-column
effect.
3. Construction difficulty in grouting, especially at beam-column joints, due to complexity
of steel reinforcement required by ductility design.
Thus, it necessitates finding a method that is devoid of the shortcomings of the ductility
approach. We shall see how the uncertainty in ductility design and the performance levels are
increased in following section by an alternative and innovative approach.
8.3 Alternative and Emerging Approach: Base Isolation
We have seen that though ductile approach strives to tackle the effects of the earthquake,
it had various shortcomings as discussed before. Base isolation is a passive control system;
meaning thereby that it does not require any external force or energy for its activation. It is
necessary to understand why base isolation is needed to enhance performance levels of the
structure subjected to seismic excitations. To design structure in such a way, that it may
withstand the actual force by fixed base structure elastically, is not feasible in two senses.
First, the construction cost of the structure will be highly uneconomical. Second, if the
overall strength of the structure is increased by making it more rigid, then it will be at the

276
expense of imparting actual ground forces to the structural contents, thus causing heavy non-
structural damage.
Apparently, as the name implies base isolation tries to decouple the structure from the
damaging effects of ground motion in the event of an earthquake. Base isolation is not about
complete isolation of the structure from the ground, as with magnetic levitation, which may
be very rarely practical. Most of the base isolation systems that have been developed over the
years provide only ‘partial’ isolation. ‘Partial’ in the sense that much of the force transmitted,
and the consequent responsive motions are only reduced by providing flexibility and energy
dissipation mechanisms with the addition of base isolation devices to the structure.
Base isolation, as a strategy to protect structure from earthquake, revolves around a few
basic elements of understanding:
1. Period-shifting of structure: Base isolator is a more flexible device compared to the
flexibility of the structure. Thus, coupling both an isolator and the superstructure together
increases the flexibility of the total isolated structural system. In this way, this technique
lengthens the structures natural time period away from the predominant frequency of the
ground motions, thus evading disastrous responses caused due to resonance.
2. Mode of vibration: The fundamental mode of vibration (first mode shape) is altered
from continuous cantilever type structure to an almost rigid superstructure with
deformations concentrated at the isolation level.
3. Damping and cutting of load transmission path: A damper or energy dissipater is used
to absorb the energy of the force to reduce the relative deflection of the structure with
respect to the ground.
4. Minimum rigidity: It provides minimum rigidity to low level service loads such as wind
or minor earthquake loads.
Abundant literature is available on the base-isolated structures and their seismic
performance (Kelly, 1986; Buckle and Mayes, 1990; Stanton and Roeder, 1991; and Ibrahim,
2008, Kelly and Jangid, 2001). It has been reported that several types of isolation systems
were proposed by researchers and are being used in seismic isolation of structures (Jangid
and Datta, 1995). The base isolation technique of protection of structures from earthquakes is
also reported to be used for liquid storage tanks with different types of isolation systems
(Shrimali and Jangid, 2002).
The isolation systems are also used nowadays in bridges as reported by Kunde and Jangid
(2003). For bridges, earlier vertical mounting or bearings have been used widely; however, its
primary uses have been for isolation of the vertical vibrations, and to control thermal stresses
277
due to expansion. With the advances in rubber technology in the 1980s, it became possible to
produce bearings that had high vertical stiffness and low horizontal stiffness, thus enabling
the concept of period-shifting and additional means of damping. However, with increasing
flexibility the displacement response may get undesirable. This is where energy dissipater or
damping is required. In elastomeric isolation systems, damping is provided by lead extrusion
and in friction system, friction provides the means for energy dissipation. Figure 8.1 shows
the effect of damping on acceleration response for various time periods. Such kinds of rubber
based isolation systems are able to provide damping of the order of 10% to 15%.
In order to maintain vertical stiffness steel shims / plates are used which does not alter the
horizontal flexibility. The two materials, namely rubber and steel, are vulcanized together
resulting in elastomeric isolation systems. More details about isolation systems, their types,
behavior and mathematical modeling will be dealt with in the subsequent topics.

Figure 8.1 Idealized acceleration response spectrum ( ξ a < ξ b < ξ c ).

Midrise structures with 10 to 15 stories are the most suitable to be base-isolated. Base
isolation provides an excellent substitute for fixed base design where earthquakes are
frequent. The economy of base isolation is not viewed in terms of its initial installment but
over the design period of the structure during which it is expected to experience earthquake.
After an event of earthquake, the repair of structure, and loss of non-structural components
may be a more costly affair than installing base isolation. So far, base isolation technology
has been adapted in very important structures such as hospitals, laboratories, and data centers
etc. Also, base isolation has been found to be extremely useful for retrofitting of the old

278
structures where the aesthetic, architectural and heritage value is required to be maintained
intact (Matsagar and Jangid, 2008).
In few countries located in high seismic zones, momentum of development and use of
base isolation has increased over the years. New Zealand, United States, and Japan are the
leading countries that have adopted this technology rapidly, and have put in great deal of
energy and funds in this regard. Thus far no base-isolated buildings have been subjected to
the designed earthquake motion to ascertain its ultimate capacity. It is worthwhile to mention
that during the recent major earthquake in Tohoku, Japan some base-isolated structure had
performed well within its limits (Takewaki, 2011). This will build confidence in the base
isolation technology and its widespread use in routine constructions.
Though research has been going in this area during past 100 years, it was only since
1980s had base isolation been implemented following the modern engineering realms. Yet, a
formalized and simple procedure for its implementation is not very well developed. The
formalization through codes itself have been at the rudimentary level. Hopefully, with the
simplified code procedures, construction techniques, and financial incentive (like lesser
insurance premiums) earthquake protection can be a reality, and base isolation will gain
popularity.

8.4 Elastomeric Base Isolation Systems

The developments in rubber technology made the base isolation a practical reality. In the
implemented projects of base isolation worldwide, it is observed that elastomeric based
systems are the most common. Typically, these systems consist of big rubber block, which
can be natural or synthetic (in case of neoprene) that are generally characterized by high
vertical stiffness compared to the horizontal stiffness and damping capacity. The vertical
stiffness is kept close to rigid, as the structural members are designed to take care of the
vertical force component of the seismic excitation. Providing high vertical stiffness also
prevents undesirable bouncing motion that is induced if vertical flexibility is provided.
Discussions on few popular base isolation systems are provided in the next sections.
8.4.1 Laminated Rubber Bearing
The laminated rubber bearings (LRB) represent the most commonly used elastomeric
isolation system. The basic components of LRB are steel and rubber plates, built through
vulcanization process in alternate layers (Simo and Kelly, 1984), as shown in Figure 8.2(a).
The dominant feature of LRB is parallel action of linear spring and damping. A schematic

279
diagram for the mechanism is shown in Figure 8.2(b). Generally, the LRB is characterized
with high damping capacity, horizontal flexibility and high vertical stiffness. The relatively
low shear stiffness in the horizontal plane is provided by the rubber, and the high vertical
stiffness is provided by steel shims to control the bouncing effect on the structure due to
vertical vibration caused by the earthquake. The steel shims also help to confine the rubber
from bulging out. The damping constant of the system varies considerably with the strain
level of the bearing. The system operates by decoupling the structure from the horizontal
components of the earthquake ground motion by interposing a layer of low horizontal
stiffness between the structure, and its foundation. The isolation effects in this type of system
are produced not by absorbing the earthquake energy, however by deflecting through the
dynamics of the system. Usually, there is a large difference in the damping of the structure,
and the isolation device, which makes the system non-classically damped.
The high-damping rubber bearings (HDRB) also exhibit similar properties, and falls in
the same category of elastomeric systems (Kikuchi and Aiken, 1997; Koo et al., 1999;
Tsopelas et al., 1991). The ideal force-deformation behavior of these isolation systems is
generally represented by non-linear characteristics, as shown in Figure 8.2(c). The HDRB
may exhibit hardening at higher strains values. However, the code specifies an equivalent
linear viscous model (to be used for response spectrum analysis), which represents the linear
stiffness with viscous damping.
Permanent residual displacement is very less in LRB after an event of earthquake as the
rubber mobilizes sufficient restoring force required to re-position the building to its initial
state. The restoring force Fb, can be mathematically modeled from the force-deformation plot
as,
Fb = c b xɺ b + k b x b (8.1)

where, c b and k b are damping and stiffness of the LRB, respectively.

The two parameters that characterize the LRB system are namely: (a) the isolation time-
period Tb, and (b) damping ratio, ξ b . Their specific values are obtained from the stiffness and
damping for which the LRB is designed. These two parameters are defined as,

M
Tb = 2 π (8.2)
kb

cb
ξb = (8.3)
2 M ωb

280
 ( )
where, M = m b + ∑ j =1 m j is the total mass of the base-isolated building; mj, is the mass of
N

jth floor; and ωb = 2π/Tb is the isolation frequency.

Top cover plate

Rubber
Steel
shim

Bottom cover plate

(a) (b)

Fb
kb
kb
xb
xb

cb

(c) (d)
Figure 8.2 Laminated rubber bearing: (a) LRB; (b) Schematic diagram of LRB; (c) Force-
deformation behavior of LRB.

The laminated rubber bearings generally exhibit linear force-deformation behavior (with

some hardening effects at large strains i.e. 200 percent) and are characterized by their lateral

stiffness and viscous damping ratio.

The vertical stiffness of the laminated rubber bearing is expressed by

E A
Kv = c (8.4)
tr

where A is the area of the bearing; tr is the total thickness of rubber in the bearing; and Ec is

the instantaneous compression modulus of the rubber-steel composites.

281
 For a bearing square in plan the instantaneous compression modulus (Naeim and Kelly,
1999) is given by

E c = 6.73S 2 G (8.5)
where S is the shape factor (i.e. ratio of the loaded area to the force-free area of the rubber
layer); and G is the shear modulus of the bearing typically dependent on the rubber hardness.
For a bearing circular in plan the instantaneous compression modulus is given by
Ec = 6 S 2G (8.6)
The horizontal stiffness of the laminated rubber bearings is expressed by
GA
Kh = (8.7)
tr
8.4.2 New Zealand Bearing
The second category of elastomeric bearings are lead-rubber bearings, which are similar
to the LRB except that a central lead-core is used as in Figure 8.3(a), to provide additional
means of energy dissipation, and initial rigidity against minor earthquakes and winds
(Skinner et al., 1975; Robinson, 2000, Matsagar and Jangid, 2004, Jangid, 2010). Because
this bearing is developed, and widely used in New Zealand, it is generally referred to as N-Z
system. The lead-core provided, reduces the isolation level displacement by virtue of its
energy absorbing capacity. The N-Z systems also provide an additional hysteretic damping
through the yielding of the lead-core. This seismic isolation system provides the combined
features of vertical load support, horizontal flexibility, restoring force and damping in a
single unit. The schematic diagram of the combined mechanism is shown in Figure 8.3(b).
The ideal force-deformation behavior of the N-Z system is generally represented by non-
linear characteristics following a hysteretic nature as shown in Figure 8.3(c).
The N-Z system also poses the capability of mobilizing the restoring force as LRB.
However, the mathematical modeling is done with the help of a non-linear model (Wen,
1976) to characterize the hysteretic behavior of the N-Z systems. The restoring force
developed in the isolation bearing is given by,
Fb = c b xɺ b + αk b x b + (1 − α )Fy Z (8.8)

where, Fy is the yield strength of the bearing; α is an index which represent the ratio of post
to pre-yielding stiffness; kb is the initial stiffness of the bearing; cb is the viscous damping of
the bearing; and Z is the non-dimensional hysteretic displacement component satisfying the
following non-linear first order differential equation expressed as,

282
 n −1
qZɺ = Axɺ b + β xɺ b Z Z − τxɺ b Z
n
(8.9)

where, q is the yield displacement; dimensionless parameters β, τ, A and n are selected such
that predicted response from the model closely matches with the experimental results. The
parameter n is an integer constant, which controls smoothness of transition from elastic to
plastic response.
The N-Z system is characterized by three parameters: (a) isolation period Tb, (b) damping
ratio ξ b and (c) normalized yield strength i.e. Fy/W (where, W=Mg is the total weight of the

building; and g is the acceleration due to gravity). The bearing parameters Tb and ξ b are
computed by equations (8.2) and (8.3).
In the above equation, post-yield stiffness of the bearing is used. The typical values of
parameters of the N-Z system are q = 2.5 cm, β = τ = 0.5, A = 1 and n = 2.

Top cover
Lead plug
kb

Rubber xb
cb
Steel Shim

Bottom cover plate

(a) (b)

Fb
Fy
αkb

q xb

(c)
Figure 8.3 New Zealand bearing: (a) N-Z; (b) Schematic diagram of N-Z; (c) Force-
deformation behavior of N-Z.

283
Example 8.1

Determine the horizontal and vertical stiffness of square (300mm×300mm) and circular
(diameter = 300mm) bearing as shown in the Figure 8.4. The height of the bearing between
top and bottom steel plates is 75mm. The five number of 5mm thick steel plates are provided
in the bearings. Take the shear modulus of the rubber as 1.06 N/mm2.
300

Top steel plate

5mm Steel Plate

75

Rubber 10
5
5
Bottom Steel Plate

Figure 8.4 Cross-section of the bearing (all dimension in mm).

Solution: Given for the each bearing

Total thickness of the rubber = 75 - 5×5 = 50mm

The shear modulus, G = 1.06 N/mm2

(a) Square Bearing

300
The shape factor, S = = 10
2 × 15

E c = 6.73 × 10 2 × 1.06 =713.4 N/mm2

713.4 × (300 × 300)

Kv = = 1284120 N/mm
50

The horizontal stiffness of the bearing

1.06 × 300 × 300

Kh = = 1908 N/mm
50

284
(b) Circular Bearing

300
The shape factor, S = = 10
2 × 15

Ec = 6 × 102 × 1.06 = 636 N/mm2

π
636 × ( × 300 × 300)
Kv = 4 = 899123.8 N/mm
50

The horizontal stiffness of the bearing

π
1.06 × ( × 300 × 300)
Kh = 4 = 1498.5 N/mm
50

285
8.5 Sliding Base Isolation Systems
Sliding systems with restoring force offers advantages over elastomeric isolation systems.
The sliding system is effective in the sense that it is capable of taking care of wide range of
frequency input from the seismic excitation. The frictional force is proportional to the mass
of the structure and hence the center of mass and the center of resistance of the sliding
support coincide, thus diminishing the torsional effects produced by asymmetric building.

8.5.1 Pure Friction System

The simplest sliding isolation system, used popularly for bridges in particular, is the pure
friction (P-F) system based on the mechanism of sliding friction (Westermo and Udwadia,
1983) as shown in Figure 8.5(a). The use of layer of sand or roller in the foundation of the
building is the example of P-F base isolator. Under normal conditions of ambient vibrations,
and small magnitude earthquakes, the system acts like a fixed base system due to the static
frictional force. For large earthquake, the static value of frictional force is overcome, and
sliding occurs with reduced dynamic resistance thereby reducing the accelerations. The
horizontal frictional force at the bearing interface offers resistance to the motion, and
dissipates energy. The schematic and force-deformation behavior of P-F system is rigid
elastic-plastic as shown respectively in Figure 8.5(b) and 8.5(c). It should be noted that the
coefficient of friction µ of P-F system varies significantly with the nature of friction surface
used. Generally, in addition to these types of bearings supplemental devices are indispensable
to provide restoring capacity, and check on the excessive displacements across isolation
layers. Coulomb’s frictional resistance is used to model the limiting frictional force. It is to be
noted that the frictional coefficient µ is independent of the sliding velocity. The limiting
frictional force in the bearing is given by,
Fs = µMg (8.10)
Depending upon the magnitude of the frictional force, Fx the system will be in stick or slip
conditions. If Fx < Fs, then it will be in non-sliding (stick) phase, and the bearing force, Fb is,
Fb = Fx (8.11)
If Fx > Fs, then it will be in sliding (slip) phase with bearing force,Fb as,
Fb = Fs sgn ( xɺ b ) (8.12)

286
 Polished-surface
interface
µ xb

(a) (b)
Fb
µWs

xb

(c)

Figure 8.5 Pure friction system: (a) P-F; (b) Schematic diagram of P-F; (c) Force-
deformation behavior of P-F.
8.5.2 Friction Pendulum System
One of the most popular and effective techniques for seismic isolation is through the use
of sliding isolation devices. The sliding systems exhibit excellent performance under a
variety of severe earthquake loading and are very effective in reducing the large levels of the
superstructure acceleration. These isolators are characterized by their insensitivity to the
frequency content of earthquake excitation, because of the tendency of sliding system to
reduce and spread the earthquake energy over a wide range of frequencies. There is another
advantage of sliding isolation systems over conventional rubber bearings. Due to
development of the frictional force at the base, it is proportional to the mass of the structure,
and the center of mass and center of resistance of the sliding support coincides.
Consequently, the torsional effects produced by the asymmetric building are diminished.
The concept of sliding bearings is combined with the concept of a pendulum type
response, resulting in a conceptually interesting seismic isolation system known as a friction
pendulum system (FPS) (Zayas et al., 1990) as shown in Figure 8.6(a). A simple pendulum
type response model is shown in Figure 8.6(b) to illustrate the similarity to friction pendulum
system. The concept of sliding systems is marked by sliding of an articulated slider on

287
spherical concave chrome surface. The slider is faced with a bearing material which when in
contact with the polished chrome surface results in development of friction force while
concave surface produces restoring force. The system is activated only when the earthquake
forces overcome the static value of friction and coefficient of friction depends upon the
velocity attained. The FPS develops a lateral force equal to the combination of the mobilized
frictional force, and the restoring force that develops because of the rising of the structure
along the spherical concave surface (Jangid, 2005). The combined mechanism of FPS system,
and its ideal force-deformation behavior is shown in Figure 8.6(c) and 8.6(d), respectively.

Displacement Articulating Self-lubricating

slider bearing material Restoring
restraint force

Concave plate Stainless steel concave surface

Frictional resistance

(a) (b)

Fb
kb
µWs
xb kb

µ
xb

(c) (d)
Figure 8.6 Friction pendulum system: (a) FPS; (b) Pendulum action; (c) Schematic
diagram of FPS; (d) Force-deformation behavior of FPS.

The resisting force provided by the system can be mathematically modeled as,
Fb = kb xb + Fx (8.13)
where, kb is the bearing stiffness provided by virtue of inward gravity action at the concave
surface, and Fx is the frictional force.
The system is characterized by two parameters: (a) bearing isolation period Tb that

288
depends upon radius of curvature of concave surface, and (b) friction coefficient µ. The
isolation stiffness kb is adjusted such that the specified value of the isolation period evaluated
by equation (8.2).
8.5.3 Resilient-Friction Base Isolation System
Resilient-friction base isolator (R-FBI) system consists of concentric layers of Teflon-
coated plates in friction contact with each other, and a central rubber core (Mostaghel and
Khodaverdian, 1987; Mostaghel and Mortazavi, 1991) as shown in Figure 8.7(a). It combines
the beneficial effect of damping provided through friction, and the resiliency of the rubber.
The rubber core distributes the sliding displacement, and velocity along the height of the R-
FBI. The rubber does not carry any vertical loads, and are vulcanized to the sliding ring. The
system provides isolation through the parallel action of friction, damping, and restoring force.

Central rubber
core

kb

Rubber cb xb
Sliding
rings
µ

Peripheral rubber
core
(a) (b)

Fb
µWs

xb

(c)
Figure 8.7 Resilient friction base isolation system: (a) R-FBI; (b) Schematic diagram of R-
FBI; (c) Force-deformation behavior of R-FBI.

A schematic diagram of the mechanism is shown in Figure 8.7(b) As the R-FBI is very
rigid in the vertical direction it does not provide isolation against vertical ground motion. The

289
ideal force-deformation characteristic of R-FBI is as shown in Figure 8.7(c) along with the
schematic diagram. The bearing force in case of R-FBI system is,
Fb = cb xɺb + kb xb + Fx (8.14)
Thus, the parameters, defining behavior of R-FBI, are (a) the isolation period Tb, (b)
damping ratio ξ b , and (c) friction coefficient µ. The Tb and ξb are evaluated respectively

from equations (8.2) and (8.3).

8.5.4 Electricite-de-France System
This system was developed under the auspices of “Electric de France” (EDF)
standardized for nuclear power plants in region of high seismicity (Gueraud, 1985). The EDF
base isolator consists of laminates (steel reinforced) of neoprene pad topped by lead-bronze
plate which is in friction contact with steel plate anchored to the base-raft of the structure as
shown in Figure 8.8(a). The EDF base isolator essentially uses elastomeric bearing and
friction plate in series. An attractive feature of EDF isolator is that for lower amplitude
ground excitations, the lateral flexibility of neoprene pad provides seismic isolation, and at
high level of excitation sliding will occur which provides additional protection. Such dual
isolation technique was intended for small earthquakes where the deformations are
concentrated only at the bearings. However, for larger earthquakes the bronze and steel plates
are used to slide, and dissipate seismic energy. The conceptual schematic model, and force
deformation behavior of EDF isolator is shown in Figure 8.8(b) and 8.8(c), respectively.
The restoring force Fb from the force-deformation behavior can be mathematically modeled
as,
Fb = cb xɺb + kb xb (8.15)
When the restoring force exceeds the limiting frictional force Fs the sliding at the top
plate of the EDF system takes place. The restoring force during the sliding phase remains
constant and is given by,
Fb = Fs sgn ( xɺ b ) (8.16)
Thus, the EDF system is characterized by the parameters: (a) isolation period Tb, (b)
damping ratio ξ b , and (c) friction coefficient of top plate µ.

290
 Sliding surface

Rubber

(a)
Fb

kb µWs
xb
cb
xb

(b) (c)
Figure 8.8 Electricite-de-France system: (a) EDF; (b) Schematic diagram of EDF; (c)
Force-deformation behavior of EDF.

291
8.6 Modeling and Analysis of Base-Isolated Buildings
Buildings are places of dwelling and work. Buildings occupy people and for a good
duration of time. The destruction of buildings in an earthquake can result in both heavy
causalities and economic damage, which is evident from previous such catastrophic events.
So these must be many of the structures that require earthquake protection. In this section, we
analyze simple building in 2D plane as shear type building model subjected to understand its
dynamic responses when subjected to earthquake excitation. It should be emphasized that the
accuracy of a solution of any problem depends upon how closely the model simulates the
exact behavior of a real-life structure. However, any assumption to simplify the complex
models to decrease the computational cost and time to obtain sufficiently accurate results is
welcome.

8.6.1 Assumptions
1. The superstructure is considered to remain within the elastic state during the period of
seismic excitation. This assumption is considered appropriate because the base isolation
attempts to reduce the earthquake response keeping it within the elastic state.
2. The floors are assumed to be rigid in its plane, and the mass is assumed to be lumped at
each floor level.
3. The columns are inextensible and weightless, providing lateral stiffness, which governs
superstructure time period of the structure.

mn
xn

mn-1
xn-1

m1
x1

mb
xb
`
(a) (b)
Figure 8.9 Building model: (a) Assumed deformed shape; (b) Lumped mass model.

292
8.6.2 Governing Equations of Motion
For a multi-storied building, an assumed deformation profile is shown in Figure 8.9(a).
The columns in the model is assumed to undergo shear deformation and floor diaphragm,
being relatively more rigid than the columns, do not bend or undergo axial deformation under
earthquake excitation. Therefore degrees of freedom xi corresponds to floor level lumped
with mass mi in the horizontal plane. The displacement across the isolation (isolator
displacement) is denoted by xb. Generally, the displacements of floors are expressed relative
to the base mass / slab, whereas the displacement of the base mass is expressed relative to the
ground.
A mathematical model of a base-isolated building with a base slab, resting over the
isolator device, is shown in Figure 8.9(b). Under the most ideal conditions, this model holds
good. However, all the isolators may not have the same force-deformation behavior, hence
even for unidirectional forcing there maybe three motions. The restoring actions to these
motions are provided by the isolators. Before formulating the necessary equations of motion,
the dynamic degrees of freedom are chosen as shown in Figure 8.10 when dissimilar isolators
are provided.

xyb

xxb
θ

Figure 8.10 Dynamic degrees of freedom of base mass or slab.

The equation of motion for the superstructure placed over the base slab under seismic
excitation takes the form as follows,
[M s ]{ɺxɺs }+ [Cs ]{ɺxɺs }+ [K s ]{xs } = −[M s ]{r}(ɺxɺb + ɺxɺg ) (8.17)
where, [M s ] , [Cs ] and [K s ] are the mass, damping, and stiffness matrices of the

superstructure, respectively; {xs } , {xɺ s } and {ɺxɺs } are the unknown relative displacement,
velocity, and acceleration vectors of each floor level with respect to the base slab,

293
respectively; ɺxɺb and ɺxɺg are the base slab and earthquake ground acceleration, respectively,

and {r} is the vector of influence coefficient.

The equation of motion for the base mass under seismic excitation is given by,
mb ɺxɺb + Fb − k1 x1 − c1 xɺ1 = mb ɺxɺg (8.18)

where, mb is the base slab mass; x1 and xɺ1 are the first floor displacement and velocity

respectively; k1 and c1 is the damping and stiffness of the first floor of the superstructure,
respectively, and Fb is the restoring force of the base isolator. Equations (8.15) and (8.16) can
be coupled, and written as,
[ M ]{ɺxɺ} + [C ]{xɺ} + [ K ]{x} + [ D]{Fb } = −[ M ]{r}( ɺxɺg ) (8.19)

where, [D] is the location matrix of the isolator.

The response of the base-isolated building can be obtained by solving the equation (8.19)
using the step-by-step Newmark’s Beta method given in the Section 7.5.

Example 8.2
Consider a five-storey building having the fundamental time period of the superstructure be
0.5 sec and damping of the order of 2 percent. The building has the same inter-storey stiffness
at all floors. The masses at all the floors as well as base mass are also same. Two base
isolation systems are designed for this building namely: (i) LRB system with characteristics
as Tb = 2 sec and ξb = 10 percent and (ii) FPS system with Tb = 2 sec and µ = 0.05.

xa = ɺɺ
Determine the top floor absolute acceleration of the superstructure (i.e. ɺɺ xn + ɺɺ
xb + ɺɺ
xg ) and

the relative base displacement (xb). Also, compare the results for fixed base condition.

Solution:
The response building to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion is shown in Figures 8.11
and 8.12 for LRB and FPS system, respectively. Figures show that there is significant
reduction in the absolute acceleration of superstructure for both models confirming the
effectiveness of base isolation in reducing the seismic response of structures. The maximum
isolator displacement is observed to be 12.34cm and 7.11cm for LRB and FPS system,
respectively.

294
Figure 8.11 Response of a five-storey building isolated by LRB system.

295
Figure 8.12 Response of a five-storey building isolated by FPS system.

296
8.7 Modeling and Analysis of Base-Isolated Bridges
Like buildings, bridges also need to be protected from earthquake events. Bridges are
lifeline structures and require seismic design, why so, because they provide the necessary
transportation network which is critical to conducting emergency relief and rehabilitation for
post-earthquake operations. Thus, dynamic assessment should carefully be taken into account
while designing bridges. In this, section a 3D three-span continuous deck bridge, as shown in
Figure 8.13, subjected to earthquake excitation is analyzed (refer Kunde and Jangid,
2003,2006, Jangid, 2004, Jangid, 2008).

Deck

Isolation system
or bearings
Abutment
Rock Pier
line

Figure 8.13 Model of three-span continuous girder bridge

8.7.1 Assumptions
1. Bridge superstructure and piers are assumed to remain in the elastic state during the
earthquake excitation. This is a reasonable assumption as the isolation attempts to reduce
the earthquake forces in such a way that the structure remains within the elastic range.
2. Piers of the bridge are fixed at the foundation level and effects of soil-structure interaction
are ignored. The abutments of the bridge are assumed as rigid.
3. The bridge is founded on firm soil or rock and the earthquake excitation is perfectly
correlated at all supports.
4. The base isolation system provided at the piers and abutments have the same dynamic
characteristics.
5. The bridge deck and piers are modeled as a lumped mass system assumed to be divided
into number of small discrete elements.

297
 y1 yi
1 x1 2 i xi

Isolation
Abutment Abutment
system

Pier
yN
xN

Figure 8.14 Lumped mass bridge model

8.7.2 Governing Equations of Motion

The structure is discretized along the length of the deck with masses lumped at abutments
and intermediate supports, and at mid-spans as shown in Figure 8.14. Also, structure is
discretized and masses are lumped along the pier. Each lumped mass mi corresponds to a
node i, which has two degree of freedom- one in longitudinal direction xi and other, in
transverse direction yi of the deck.
The equation of motion of the isolated bridge system under the horizontal component of
earthquake ground motion is expressed in the following matrix form,
[ M ]{ɺzɺ} + [C ]{zɺ} + [ K ]{z} = −[ M ]{r}{ɺzɺg }
(8.20)
 ɺxɺg 
{ɺzɺg } =  
 ɺyɺg  (8.21)
where [M], [K] and [C] represents the mass, stiffness and damping matrices, respectively of
the isolated bridge system; {zɺɺ} , {zɺ} and {z} represent the structural acceleration, structural
velocity and structural displacement vectors, respectively; {r} is the influence coefficient
matrix; {ɺzɺg } is the earthquake acceleration vector; ɺxɺg and ɺyɺg are the earthquake ground

accelerations acting in the longitudinal and transverse direction of the bridge, respectively.
The damping matrices of the bridge deck and piers are not explicitly known. These are
constructed from assumed modal damping in each mode of vibration using its mode-shapes
and frequencies.
The response of the base-isolated bridge can be obtained by solving the equation (8.20)
using the step-by-step Newmark’s Beta method given in the Section 7.5.

298
 The stiffness of the bearings is obtained by the following expression

md
Tb = 2π (8.22)
∑ kb

where md is the mass of the bridge deck; Σkb is the sum of the horizontal stiffness of all the

bearings provided for bridge isolation; and Tb is the isolation time period of the bearings.

Note that the Tb may be interpreted as the fundamental time period of the isolated bridge if

the deck and piers of the bridge are perfectly rigid. However, the flexibility of the bridge deck

and piers will slightly increase the fundamental time period of the bridge beyond the Tb.

The total viscous damping of the elastomeric bearings is expressed as

cb = 2 ξ b md ωb (8.23)

where cb is total viscous damping of all the bearings; ξb is the damping ratio of the

elastomeric bearings; and ωb = 2π/Tb is the isolation frequency of the bearings.

299
Example 8.3
Consider a three-span continuous bridge with properties of the deck and piers given below.

Properties Deck Piers

2
Cross-sectional area (m ) 3.57 4.09
Moment of inertia as (m4) 2.08 0.64
2
Modulus of elasticity (N/m ) 25×109 25×109
Mass density (kg/m3) 2.4×103 2.4×103
Length/height (m) 3@30 = 90 8

The bridge is isolated using the elastomeric bearings with Tb = 2 sec and ξ b = 12.5%.
Determine the absolute acceleration at the center of bridge deck, base shear in the piers and
the relative displacement of the elastomeric bearings at the abutment and piers under El-
Centro, 1940. The N-S component is applied in the longitudinal direction and other
orthogonal component with scaling factor of 1.6 is applied in the transverse direction.

Solution:
Based on the method developed in the Section 8.7, the computer program in the FORTRAN
was written and the response of the bridge to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion is
shown in Figures 8.15 and 8.16 in the longitudinal and transverse direction, respectively.
Figures show that there is significant reduction in the absolute acceleration of deck and base
shear in the piers. The maximum response of the bridge is summarized below:

Response quantity Longitudinal Transverse

Deck acceleration of non-isolated bridge (g) 0.905 0.985

Deck acceleration of isolated bridge (g) 0.150 0.219

Reduction in deck acceleration (%) 83.42 77.76

Pier base shear of non-isolated bridge (W) 0.492 0.541

Pier base shear of isolated bridge (W) 0.079 0.120

Reduction in pier base shear (%) 83.94 77.81

Displacement of bearing at abutment (cm) 14.67 21.41

Displacement of bearing at pier (cm) 13.91 20.37

(W = md g = weight of the bridge deck)

300
Figure 8.15 Time variation of the absolute deck acceleration, base shear in piers and bearing
displacements in the longitudinal direction of the bridge to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
excitation (Tb = 2 sec and ξ b = 12.5 %).

301
Figure 8.16 Time variation of the absolute deck acceleration, base shear in piers and bearing
displacements in the transverse direction of the bridge to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
excitation (Tb = 2 sec and ξ b = 12.5 %).

302
8.8 Modeling and Analysis of Base-Isolated Liquid Storage Tanks
Liquid storage tanks are very important structure, which is connected to social life. It has
also wide applications in the industry. Apart from these applications it is strategically
important since it is used for storage in the nuclear power plants. In past earthquakes there
had been a number of reports on damage to liquid storage tanks. Therefore, it is necessary to
design liquid storage tanks against earthquake. Figure 8.17 shows the schematic model of a
typical liquid storage tank (refer Shrimali and Jangid, 2002, 2003, Panchal and Jangid, 2008).
8.8.1 Assumptions
1. The entire liquid mass is assumed to have three components.
2. Masses are connected by corresponding equivalent springs.
3. Earthquake excitation imparted to the tank is unidirectional.

Flexible uc
Wall kc/2 kc/2
mc
cc/2 ui cc/2
ki/2 ki/2
H mi Hc
Liquid ub
ci/2 ci/2
Isolator Rigid Rigid Hi
mr
Hr

uɺ
ɺg
2R

Figure 8.17 Model of base-isolated liquid storage tank.

8.8.2 Governing Equation of Motion

The mass components are convective, impulsive and rigid masses referred as mc, mi and mr,
respectively. The convective and impulsive masses are connected to the tank by
corresponding equivalent springs. The system has three-degrees-of-freedom under
unidirectional earthquake motion. These degrees-of-freedom are denoted by uc, ui and ub,
which denote the absolute displacement of convective, impulsive and rigid masses,
respectively at each lumped mass. The parameters of the tanks considered are liquid height
H, radius, R and average thickness of tank wall, t. The effective masses are defined in terms
of total liquid mass, m from the parameters as
Yc = 1.01327 − 0.87578S + 0.35708 S 2 − 0.06692S 3 + 0.00439S 4 (8.24)
Yi = −0.15467 + 1.21716S − 0.62839 S 2 + 0.14434S 3 − 0.0125S 4 (8.25)

303
 Yr = −0.01599 + 0.86356 S − 0.30941 S 2 + 0.04083S 3 (8.26)
where, S = H/R is the ratio of the liquid height to radius of the tank; also known as aspect
ratio, and Yc, Yi, and Yr are the mass ratios defined as
mc
Yc =
m (8.27)
mi
Yi =
m (8.28)
mr
Yr =
m (8.29)
m = π R2 H ρ w
(8.30)
where, ρw is the mass density of liquid. The natural frequencies of sloshing mass, ωc and
impulsive mass, ωi are given by following expressions,

P E
ωi =
H ρs
(8.31)

g   H
ωc = 1.84   tanh 1.84 
R  R (8.32)
where, E and ρs are the modulus of elasticity and density of tank wall, respectively; g is the
acceleration due to gravity; and P is a dimensionless parameter expressed by
P = 0.07726 + 0.17563S − 0.106S 2 + 0.02609S 3 − 0.0025S 4 (8.33)
The equations of motion of isolated liquid storage tank subjected to earthquake ground
motion are expressed in the matrix form as
[m]{ɺxɺ} + [c]{xɺ} + [k ]{x} = −[m]{r}uɺɺg
(8.34)
where, {x} = {xc , xi , xb }T is the displacement vector; xc = u c − u b is the displacement of the

convective mass relative to bearing displacement; xi = u i − u b is the displacement of the

impulsive mass relative to bearing displacement; xb = u b − u g is the displacement of the

bearings relative to ground; [m], [c] and [k] are the mass, damping and stiffness matrix of the
system, respectively; {r}= {0 0 1}T is the influence coefficient vector; and uɺɺg is the

earthquake ground acceleration; and T indicates the transpose. The matrices [m], [c] and [k]
are expressed as

304
 mc 0 mc 
[m] =  0 mi mi 

m c mi m c + m i + m r 
(8.35)
c c 0 0
[c] =  0 ci 0 
 0 0 c b 
(8.36)
k c 0 0
[k ] =  0 ki 0 
 0 0 k b 
(8.37)
where, cc and ci represent the damping and kc and ki represent the stiffness associated with the
vibration of convective and impulsive masses of the storage tank while; cb and kb are the
damping and stiffness of the isolation system, respectively. The response of the base-isolated
tank can be obtained by solving the equation (8.34) using the step-by-step Newmark’s Beta
method given in the Section 7.5.
The equivalent stiffness and damping of the convective and impulsive masses are
expressed as,
k c = m c ω c2 (8.38)
k i = m i ω i2 (8.39)

c c = 2ξ c m c ω c (8.40)

ci = 2ξi mi ωi
(8.41)
The damping and stiffness of the bearing are designed to provide the desired value of two
parameters namely the period of isolation, Tb and bearing damping ratio, ξ b expressed as

m c + mi + m r
Tb = 2π
kb
(8.42)
cb
ξb =
2 (mc + mi + m r ) ω b (8.43)
where, ωb = 2π/Tb is the isolation frequency. The total base shear in the liquid storage tank,
Fb, due to earthquake ground motion is expressed as
Fb = m c uɺɺc + m i uɺɺi + m r uɺɺb
(8.45)

305
Example 8.4
Consider a water storage tank with properties given below.

Type of Tank S (H/R) H (m) t/R ωc (Hz) ωi (Hz)

Slender 1.85 11.3 0.004 0.273 5.963

The tank is considered as filled to a height, H with water. The damping ratios for convective
mass and impulsive mass are taken as 0.5 per cent and 2 per cent, respectively. For the tank
with steel wall the modulus of elasticity is taken as E = 200 MPa and the mass density, ρs=7,
900 kg/m3. The tank is isolated using the elastomeric bearings with Tb = 2 sec and ξ b = 10%.
Determine the base shear, sloshing displacement, impulsive displacement and bearing
displacement of the tank under El-Centro, 1940 earthquake motion.

Solution:
Based on the method developed in the Section 8.8, the computer program in the FORTRAN
was written and the response of the tank to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion is
shown in Figure 8.18. The maximum response of the bridge is summarized below:

Type of Non-isolated Isolated

Tank xc (cm) xi (cm) Fb /W xc (cm) xi (cm) xb (cm) Fb /W
Slender 41.54 0.39 0.319 61.10 0.09 10.02 0.105

It is observed from the Figure 8.18 that the base shear and impulsive displacement of isolated
tanks are significantly less in comparison to that without isolation system. Therefore, the
isolation system is quite effective in reducing the base shear and impulsive displacement due
earthquake ground motions. The peak bearing displacement for the tank is observed as 10.02
cm. The peak sloshing displacement as a result of seismic isolation is slightly increased.

306
Figure 8.18 Time variation of the base shear, sloshing displacement, impulsive displacement
and bearing displacement of the tank of Example 8.4.

307
8.9 Applications of Base Isolation
Base isolation was first formally used by Frank Lloyd Wright to design Imperial Hotel in
Tokyo in 1921, though the technique then used is not prevalent as of today. Under the site,
there was an 8 inch layer of fairly good soil, and below that, a layer of soft mud. This layer
partially provided the necessary isolation from the horizontal ground movement during
earthquake. The building was tied to the upper layer of good soil by closely spaced short piles
that penetrated only as far as the top of the soft mud. The building performed extremely well
in the devastating 1923 Tokyo earthquake.

Different type of
structures
New &
existing
structures
Different
EMERGING countries
AND
POPULAR

Financial
Incentives
Different
isolation systems

Figure 8.19 Rising popularity of base isolation method

Base isolation application as a means of earthquake mitigation is becoming a popular

method. As depicted in Figure 8.19, ever since the base isolation was illustrated practically in
1909 by a medical doctor from Scarborough in England, the method became popular due to
its simplicity, and its tremendous impact to mitigate damaging earthquake consequences.
This method is used in new, and existing (as retrofit) structures, both important and civilian,
in different type of structures and in different countries. From this simple concept, newer
isolation system patents are often awarded, and some governments have also proposed
financial incentives to reduce insurance premiums for the structures built utilizing these
technologies as the confidence in its mitigation efforts are being proved.
Generally, the “old, traditionally-built” structures, such as the monuments and traditional
buildings, are more affected by earthquakes. These buildings are mainly constructed in the

308
period before the ample use of reinforced concrete, with elements and technology based on
the experience of the builders alone, without any structural-seismic design. Nevertheless,
interesting construction techniques can be seen in these historical buildings throughout the
pre-historic period up to the first half of the twentieth century. Therefore, increase on seismic
performance of traditional-historical buildings is considered necessary, especially for those
located in seismically active regions. The retrofitting by base isolation of such buildings
becomes an obvious choice as the historical architectural characteristics of the building
remains preserved (Matsagar and Jangid, 2008).
In bridges, the base isolation devices can rather easily be incorporated by replacing the
traditional bridge bearings by isolation systems. Base isolation bearings serve the dual
purpose of providing means for thermal movement as well as protecting the bridge from
dynamic forces by increasing the fundamental time period, and dissipating the seismic energy
by hysteretic damping.
Also, this method has started to be introduced in liquid storage tanks. Liquid storage tanks
are lifeline structures, and strategically very important, since they have vital use in industries
and nuclear power plants. Past earthquakes have demonstrated the seismic vulnerability of
tanks wherein the damage occurred in the form of buckling of tank wall due to excessive
development of compressive stresses, failure of piping systems, and uplift of anchorage
system. The seismic behavior of liquid storage tanks is highly complex due to liquid-
structure-interaction leading to a tedious design procedure from earthquake-resistant design
point of view. Base isolation technique can be effectively used as retrofit scheme for liquid
storage tanks as well.
Introduction of base isolation technique as means to mitigate earthquake in sensitive
nuclear structures have got immense attention. It is mainly due to the fact that the provision
of base isolators helps to maintain the standard design of nuclear structures which otherwise
would escalate cost on relocation to different sites due to different seismic activities.
Different projects using base isolation technology are explained briefly to express its
emerging and confident trend, country-wise. It is not possible to enlist all cases of base-
isolated structures, however a few projects that sufficiently state its emergence and popularity
is discussed. The details of some of the base-isolated projects are presented in Appendix-IV.

In the United States of America (USA), Foothill Communities Law and Justice Center,
County of San Bernardino, California was the first newly constructed building in 1986 in the
United States applied with base isolation technology. The building is a five story plus

309
basement braced steel frame supported on 98 high-damping rubber bearings. It is located near
to one of the most active San Francisco faults. Some of the systems installed were removed
and tested as part of long term monitoring, and were found to perform satisfactorily (Clark et
al., 1997). The Oakland City Hall, built in 1914 is one of the most noted retrofitted old
structures utilizing base isolation technology. This nineteen stories high and 97.5 m tall
building has a full basement, a three-story podium, a ten-story office tower, and a two storied
base for the clock tower that is itself 26.5 m high. The structure of the building is a riveted
steel frame with infill masonry walls of brick, granite and terracotta. The isolation system
uses a combination of 36 lead rubber bearings, and 75 ordinary rubber bearings. The bearings
range from 737 mm to 940 mm in diameter, and are 445 mm tall. A moat was constructed
around the building to provide a seismic gap of 508 mm to avoid impounding (Walters,
2003). The City Halls such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and historical building Utah State
Capitol are the important base isolation projects. The Golden Gate Bridge North was built in
1973, however the proximity of the bridge to the San Andreas Fault places it at risk for a
significant earthquake. Once, this bridge was thought to have been able to withstand any
magnitude of anticipated earthquake, however, it was actually vulnerable to complete
structural failure triggered by the failure of the supports on the 320 feet (98 m) arch over fort
point. A $392 million program was initiated to improve the structure’s ability to withstand
such an event with only minimal (repairable) damage. The retrofit program, using lead rubber
bearings, is planned to be completed date in 2012. In New Zealand, William Clayton
Building was the first building to be built using lead rubber base isolation system in 1970.
The idea of introducing central lead plug to rubber bearing was first used in this building to
increase the damping up to 10-15% of the critical damping. The building is four-storied high,
and has a reinforced concrete frame. The natural period of the isolated building is 2.5
seconds. The building sits on 80 LRBs. Later in 1995, energy dampers were introduced to
compensate for the small seismic gaps that were provided earlier due to less understanding of
ground motion variations at that time (Robinson, 2000). The function and heritage of the
New Zealand Parliament Building constructed in 1922 were crucial criteria for its protection
using base isolation system. The building consists of five stories of unreinforced masonry
bearing walls supporting concrete floors totaling 70,000 sq. m of floor area. A total of 417
high damping rubber (HDR), and lead rubber bearings (LRB) were installed between the
foundations and the superstructure. The retrofit involved re-piling the building with lead-
rubber bearings and rubber bearings in the supports, as well as cutting a seismic gap in the
500 mm thick concrete walls. During an earthquake the building will be able to move in any
310
direction on a horizontal plane up to distances of 300 mm (Robinson, 2000).
Museum of New Zealand-Te Papa is a structure on the Waterfront in Central Wellington.
Te Papa is believed to be the heaviest seismically isolated building in the world. This
190×104 m building, with a triangular floor plan, is isolated by 142 lead-rubber bearings with
Teflon sliding bearings under the shear walls. The museum with five floor levels has a total
floor area of 35,000 sq. m, and height of 23 m. The building was not designed according to
code, however it is required to suffer no damage in a 250 year return period earthquake, and
not collapse with a 2000 year earthquake (Robinson, 2000).
In Japan, the isolation performance of the base-isolated computer center of the Ministry
of Post and Telecommunications. The superstructure of the steel reinforced concrete structure
has six stories, and a total floor area of 46,823 sq. m. The seismic isolation system in this
building, considered as the largest base-isolated building in the world, comprises of 54 lead-
rubber bearings.

In India, the first base isolation project in India was completed for a hospital in 2003. The
three hundred bed, 4-storied, Bhuj hospital (Figure 8.20) replaces the old hospital building
that claimed 176 lives when it collapsed during the major 26th January 2001 Bhuj earthquake.
The isolation system comprises of 280 lead-rubber and sliding bearings developed using
technology in New Zealand (Sharpe, 2002).

Figure 8.20 Bhuj Hospital (Source: Science Learn -

http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Contexts/Earthquakes/Sci-Media/Images/Bhuj-Hospital).

As of 2005, there are six seismically isolated nuclear power plants; four in France, and
two in South Africa (Malushte and Whittaker, 2005). At the Cruas plant in France, each of

311
the four units has been constructed on 1,800 neoprene pads measuring 500×500×65 mm. The
seismicity at the site is moderate with a safe shutdown earthquake design acceleration of 0.2g
(g is gravitational acceleration). In Koeberg, South Africa, two units are isolated on a total of
2,000 neoprene pads measuring 700×700×100 mm. For this site, the safe shutdown
earthquake design acceleration is 0.3g. The pads are outfitted with flat sliders on the top
surface, consisting of a lead-bronze alloy lower plate, and a polished stainless steel upper
plate.

312
8.10 Tutorial Problems
Q1. Determine the horizontal and vertical stiffness of square (200mm×200mm) and circular
(diameter = 200mm) having height between top and bottom steel plate as 50mm. The five
number of 3mm thick steel plates are provided in the each bearing. Take the shear
modulus of the rubber as 0.9 N/mm2.

Q2. Consider a three-story base-isolated building modeled as 4-DOF system and rigid floors
as shown in Figure 8.21 with fixed base and isolated condition. Take the inter-story
lateral stiffness of floors i.e. k1 = k2= k3=16357.5 kN/m and the floor & base mass
mb=m1= m2=10000 kg and m3=5000 kg. The above building is isolated by the
elastomeric bearings with Tb=2 sec and ξb=0.1. Determine the maximum top floor
absolute acceleration and isolator displacement due to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
ground motion.
m3
x3

k3
m2
x2

k2
m1
x1

k1
mb
xb
Isolator

x g (t )
ɺɺ
Figure 8.21 Model of fixed base and base isolated building.

Q3. If the building of Q2 is to be isolated by lead-rubber bearings with Tb=2 sec, Fy/W=0.05
and ξb=0.1, determine the maximum top floor absolute acceleration and isolator
displacement due to El-Centro, 1940 earthquake ground motion.

Q4. Let the building of Q2 be isolated by FPS system with Tb=2 sec and µ=0.05. Determine
the maximum top floor absolute acceleration and isolator displacement due to El-Centro,
1940 earthquake ground motion.

313
Q5. Consider a two-span continuous bridge with properties of deck and piers given below.

Properties Deck Piers

2
Cross-sectional area (m ) 4 3
4
Moment of inertia as (m ) 2 0.8
Modulus of elasticity (N/m2) 25×109 25×109
Mass density (kg/m3) 2.4×103 2.4×103
Length/height (m) 2@25 = 50 6

The bridge is isolated using the elastomeric bearings with Tb = 2 sec and ξ b = 10%.
Determine the absolute acceleration at the center of bridge deck and the relative
displacement of the bearings in the longitudinal direction under the El-Centro, 1940
earthquake motion.

Q6. Consider a water storage tank with properties given below.

Type of
S (H/R) H (m) t/R ωc (Hz) ωi (Hz)
Tank
Broad 0.60 14.6 0.004 0.123 3.944

The tank is considered as filled to a height, H with water. The damping ratios for
convective mass and impulsive mass are taken as 0.5 per cent and 2 per cent, respectively.
For the tank with steel wall the modulus of elasticity is taken as E = 200 MPa and the
mass density, ρs=7, 900 kg/m3. The tank is isolated using the elastomeric bearings with Tb

= 2 sec and ξ b = 10%. Determine the base shear, sloshing displacement, impulsive
displacement and bearing displacement of the tank under El-Centro, 1940.

314
8.11 Solution of Tutorial Problems
1.

Bearing Shape Kv (N/mm) Kh (N/mm)

Square 692228.6 1028.6

Circular 484702.8 807.8

2. Top floor absolute acceleration = 1.3m/sec2 and isolator displacement = 0.12m

3. Top floor absolute acceleration = 2.04m/sec2 and isolator displacement = 0.066m
4. Top floor absolute acceleration = 3.35m/sec2 and isolator displacement = 0.057m
5. Absolute deck acceleration = 1.2m/sec2 and isolator displacement = 0.117m
6.
Type of Non-isolated Isolated
Tank xc (cm) xi (cm) Fb /W xc (cm) xi (cm) xb (cm) Fb /W
Broad 53.08 1.28 0.258 57.41 0.22 7.71 0.079

315
 References
Books

Agrawal, P. and Shrikhande, M. (2006), "Earthquake resistant design of structures”, Prentice

Hall of India, Inc.

Chopra, A.K. (2007), “Dynamics of structures: Theory and application to earthquake

engineering”, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall of India.

Chowdhary, I. and Dasgupta, S.P. (2009). “Dynamics of structure and foundation – A unified
approach : 2 Applications”, CRC Press, Balkema.

Clough, R. W. and Penzien, J. (1993). “Dynamics of structures”, McGraw Hill, Inc., New
York.

Datta, T. K. (2010). “Seismic analysis of structures”, John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd.
Singapore.

Hart, G. C. and Wong, K. (2000). “Structural dynamics for structural engineers”, John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., New York.

Kramer, S. L. (1996), “Geotechnical earthquake engineering”, Prentice Hall, 2007, ISBN 81-
317-0718-0.

Lay, T. and Wallace, T.C.,(1995) “Modern global seismology”, Academic press, 1995, ISBN
0-12-732870-X.

Naeim, F. and Kelly, J. M. (1999), “Design of seismic isolated structures: From theory to
practice”, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA.

Reiter L., (1989), “Earthquake hazard analysis: Issues and insights”, Columbia University
Press.

Wolf, J.P. (1985). “Dynamic soil-structure interaction”, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey.

316
Research Papers

Ambraseys, N.N., (1996), “The prediction of earthquake peak ground acceleration in

europe”, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, Vol. 24, pp. 467 – 490.

Kumar, A., Mittal., H and Sachdeva., R. 2012, “Indian strong motion instrumentation
network”, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 83(1), pp. 59-66.

ATC, 1996, “Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings”, ATC-40 Report, Volumes
1 and 2, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.

Atkinson, G.M. and Boore, D.M., (2006), “Earthquake ground motion prediction equations
for eastern North America”, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, Vol. 96(6),
2181-2205.

Bakir, B.S., Ozkan, M.Y. and Ciliz, S. (2002). “Effects of basin edge on the distribution of
damage in 1995 dinar, Turkey earthquake”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,
Vol. 22, 335-345.

Bard, P.Y. and Bouchon, M. (1980a). “The seismic response of sediment-filled valleys. Part
1. The case of incident SH waves”, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, Vol. 70,
1263-1286.

Bard, P.Y. and Bouchon, M. (1980b). “The seismic response of sediment-filled valleys. Part
2. The case of incident P and SV waves”, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America,
Vol. 70, 1921-1941.

Boore, D.M., Joyner, W.B. and Fumal, T.E. (1997), “Equations for estimating horizontal
response spectra and peak acceleration from Western North American earthquakes: A
summary of work”, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp.128-153.

Boore, D.M., (2001), “Effect of baseline corrections on displacements and response spectra
for several recordings of the 1999 Chi-Chi”, Taiwan earthquake, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 91, 5, pp. 1199–1211.

Boore D.M. and Bommer, J.J (2005), “Processing of strong-motion accelerograms: Needs,
options and consequences”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 25, pp. 93–
115.

317
Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y. (2008), “NGA ground motion model for the geometric
mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response
spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10s”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 24(1), pp 139-
172.

Campbell, W.K. (1997), “Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and
vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity and pseudo-
absolute acceleration response spectra”, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1,
pp.154-179.

Celebi, M. (1987). “Topographical and geological amplifications determined from strong-

motion and aftershock records of the 3 March 1985 Chile earthquake”, Bulletin of
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 77, 1147-1167.

Chiou, B.J. and Youngs, R., (2008), “An NGA model for average horizontal component of
peak ground motion and response spectra”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 24(1), pp 173-216.

Clark, P.W., Aiken, I.D. and Kelly, J.M. (1997) “Ongoing studies of the foothill communities
law and justice center”, Proceedings of Structures Congress XV, April 13-16, Portland,
Oregon, USA.

Computers and Structures SAP-2000: “Three dimensional static and dynamic finite element
analysis and design of structures”, Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, California,
USA.

Cornell, C.A., (1968), “Engineering seismic risk analysis”, Bulletin of Seismological society
of America, Vol. 58(5), pp. 583-606.

Geli, L., Bard, P. Y. and Jullien, B. (1988). “The effect of topography on earthquake ground
motion: a review and new results”, Bulletin of Seismological society of America, Vol. 78,
42-63.

Gent A. N. (1964), “Elastic stability of rubber compression springs”, Journal of Mechanical

Engineering Science, Vol. 4(6), 318-326.

Graves, R. W., Pitarka, A. and Somerville, P. G. (1998), “Ground motion amplification in the
santa monica area: Effects of shallow basin edge structure”, Bulletin of Seismological
society of America, Vol. 88, pp. 1224-1242.

318
Gueraud, R., Noel-Leroux, J.P., Livolant, M. and Michalopouls, A.P. (1985) “Seismic
isolation using sliding-elastomer bearing pads”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol.
84(3), 363-377.

Hanks, T. and Kanamori, H. (1979). “A moment magnitude scale”, Journal of Geophysical

Research, Vol. 84(B5), pp. 0148-0227.

Hatyama, K., Matsunami, K., Iwata, T. And Irikura, K. (1995). “Variability of site response
in seattle”, Washington, BSSA, Vol. 90, pp. 237-1250.

Ibrahim, R.A. (2008), “Recent advances in nonlinear passive vibration isolators”, Journal of
Sound and Vibration, Vol. 314(3-5), pp. 371-452.

Idriss, I.M., (2008), “An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values
generated by shallow crustal earthquakes”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 24(1), pp. 217-255.

Jangid, R.S. (2005) “Optimum friction pendulum system for near-fault motions”, Engineering
Structures, USA, Vol. 27, pp. 349-359.

Jangid, R.S. (2006) “Seismic response of isolated bridges”, Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE,
USA, Vol. 9, pp. 156-166.

Jangid, R.S.(2008) “Stochastic response of bridges seismically isolated by friction pendulum system”,
Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE, USA, Vol. 13, pp. 319-330.

Jangid, R.S. (2010) “Stochastic response of building frames isolated by lead-rubber bearings”,
Structural Control and Health Monitoring, Vol. 17, pp. 1-22.

Jangid, R.S. and Datta, T.K. (1995) “Seismic behavior of base isolated building : A State-of-
the-art review”, Structures and Buildings, 110(2), 186-203.

Jangid, R.S. and Kelly, J.M. (2001) “Base isolation for near-fault motions”, Earthquake
Engineering and Structural Dynamics, USA, Vol. 30, pp. 691-707.

Jain, S.K., Roshan, A. D. Yadav, S, Srivastava, S and Basu, P.C., 2012, “Strong-motion data
from structural response recorders in Indian earthquakes”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol.
28(1), pp. 77–103.

319
Kawase, H. (1996). “The cause of the damage belt in Kobe: The Basin-edge effect,
Constructive interference ofthe direct S-wave with the basin-induced diffracted/Rayleigh
waves”, Seismological Research Letter, Vol. 67, No.5, pp. 25-34.

Kelly, J.M. (1986) “Aseismic base isolation: Review and bibliography”, Soil Dynamics and
Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 5(3), pp. 202-216.

Kikuchi, M. and Aiken, I.D. (1997) “An analytical hysteresis model for elastomeric seismic
isolation bearings”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 26(2), pp.
215-231.

Koo, G.H., Lee, J.H., Yoo, B. and Ohtori, Y. (1999) “Evaluation of laminated rubber
bearings for seismic isolation using modified macro-model with parameter equations of
instantaneous apparent shear modulus”, Engineering Structures, 21(7), 594-602.

Kunde, M.C. and Jangid, R.S. (2003) “Seismic Behaviour of Isolated Bridges: A State-of-the-
Art Review”, Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 3, pp. 140-170.

Kunde, M.C. and Jangid, R.S. (2006) “Effects of pier and deck flexibility on the seismic
response of the isolated bridges”, Journal of Bridge Engineering, ASCE, USA, Vol. 11,
pp. 109-121.

Malushte, S.R. and Whittaker, A.S. (2005) “Survey of past base isolation applications in
nuclear power plants and challenges to industry/regulatory acceptance”, 18th International
Conference on Structural Mechanics and Reactor Technology, August 7-12, Beijing,
China.

McGuire R.K., (1978), “Seismic ground motion parameter relations”, Journal of

Geotechnical Engineering Division (ASCE), Vol. 104, pp. 481-490.

Matsagar, V.A. and Jangid, R.S. (2004) “Influence of isolator characteristics on the response
of base-isolated structures”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 26(12), pp. 1735-1749.

Matsagar, V.A. and Jangid, R.S. (2008) “Base isolation for seismic retrofitting of structures”,
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction (ASCE), Vol. 13(4), pp. 1-11.

Mostaghel, N. and Khodaverdian, M. (1987) “Dynamics of resilient-friction base isolator (R-

FBI)”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 15(3), pp. 379-390.

320
Mostaghel, N. and Mortazavi, A.R. (1991) “An assessment of seaonc draft code for resilient
sliding isolators”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 20(6), pp. 523-
533.

Narayan and Sharma (2004), “Effects of local geology on damage severity during Bhuj, India
earthquake”, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C.,
Canada, August 1-6, 2004.

Narayan, J.P. and Rao, P.V. (2003). “Two and half dimensional simulation of ridge effects on
the ground motion characteristics”, Pure and Applied Geophysics, Vol. 160, pp. 1557-
1571.

Narayan, J.P. (2005). “Study of Basin-edge effects on the ground motion characteristics using
2.5-D modeling”, Pure and Applied Geophysics., Vol. 162, pp. 273-289.

Nigam, N. C. Jennings, P. C. (1969), “Calculation of response spectra from strong-motion

earthquake records”, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp.
909-922.

Panchal , V.R. and Jangid, R.S. (2008) “Variable friction pendulum system for seismic
isolation of liquid storage tanks”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, USA, Vol. 238, pp.
1304-1315.

Pisal, A.Y. (2006). “Effect of strong lateral discontinuity on ground motion characteristics
and aggravation factor”, Mtech. Thesis, IIT Roorkee.

Pitarka, A., Irikura, K. Iwata, T. and Sekiguchi, H. (1998). “Three-dimensional simulation of

the near fault motion for the 1995 Hyogoken Nanbu (Kobe), Japan, earthquake”, Bulletin
of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 88, pp. 428-440.

Robinson, W.H. (2000) “Seismic isolation of civil buildings in New Zealand”, Progress in
Structural Engineering and Materials, Vol. 2(3), pp. 328-334.

Roshan, A.D. and Basu, P.C., (2010), “Application of PSHA in low seismic region: A case
study on NPP site in peninsular India”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 240, Issue
10, pp. 3443-3454.

321
Sadigh, K., Chang, C.Y., Egan, J.A., Makdisi, F. and Youngs, R.R., (1997), “Attenuation
relations for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data”,
Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68(1), pp. 180-189.

Sharpe, R. (2002) “Base isolation”, E-Conference on Indian Seismic Codes, January 26-
February 8, National Information Centre of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology (IIT) Kanpur, Kanpur, India.

Shrimali, M.K. and Jangid, R.S. (2002) “A comparative study of performance of various
isolation systems for liquid storage tanks”, International Journal of Structural Stability
and Dynamics, Vol. 2(4), pp. 573-591.

Shrimali, M.K. and Jangid, R.S., (2003), “Seismic response of base-isolated liquid storage
tanks”, Journal of Vibration and Control, USA, Vol. 9, pp. 1201-1218.

Simo, J.C. and Kelly, J.M. (1984), “The analysis of multi-layer elastomeric bearings”,
Journal of Applied Mechanics (ASME), Vol. 51, pp. 256-262.

Skinner, R.I., Kelly J.M. and Heine A.J. (1975), “Hysteretic dampers for earthquake resistant
structures”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 287-
296.

Stanton, J. and Roeder, C. (1991) “Advantages and limitations of base isolation”, Earthquake
Spectra, Vol. 7, No.2, pp. 301-324.

Street, R. L. and Turcotte, F. T., (1977), “A study of northeastern North American spectral
moments, magnitudes and intensities”, Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, Vol.
67, pp. 599- 614.

Takewaki, I. (2011), “Preliminary report of the 2011 of the Pacific Coast Tohoku
earthquake”, Journal of Zhejiang University - SCIENCE A (Applied Physics and
Engineering), Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 327-334.

Tsopelas, P.C., Constantinou, M.C. and Reinhorn, A.M. (1991), “3D-BASIS-M: Nonlinear
dynamic analysis of multiple building base-isolated structures”, National Center for
Earthquake Engineering Research, University at Buffalo, Report No. NCEER-91-0014,
Buffalo, New York, USA.

322
Walters, M. (2003), “The seismic retrofit of the Oakland City Hall”, Proceedings of Strong
Motion Instrumentation Program, May 22, Oakland, California, USA.

Wang, Y.P. (2002), “Fundamentals of seismic isolation”, International Training Program of

Seismic Design of Building Structures, Taipei, Taiwan. pp. 21-25,

Wald , D. J., Quitoriano, V., Heaton, T. H. and Kanamori, H., 1999a, “Relationships between
peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity and Modified Mercalli intensity in
California”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 15,No. 3, pp. 557-564.

Wen, Y.K. (1976), “Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems”, Journal of
Engineering Mechanics Division (ASCE), Vol. 102, No. 2, pp. 249-263.

Westermo, B.D. and Udwadia, F. (1983), “Periodic response of a sliding oscillator system to
harmonic excitation”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 11, No.1,
pp. 135-147.

Wolf J.P. (1989), “Soil-structure interaction analysis in time domain”, Nuclear engineering
and design, pp.381-393.

Zayas, V.A., Low, S.S. and Mahin, S.A. (1990), “A Simple pendulum technique for
achieving seismic isolation”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 6, No 2, pp.317-333.

Relevant Codes

IS 1343: 1980, “Code of Practice for Prestressed Concrete,” First Revision, Indian Standard,
New Delhi, India.

IS 13920-1993, “Code of practice for ductile detailing of RC structures”, Bureau of Indian

Standards, New Delhi, India.

IS 1893:1984, “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”, Bureau of Indian

Standards, New Delhi, India.

IS 1893:2002, “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures”, Part-1 General

provisions and Buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.

IS 456:2000, “Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice,” Fourth Revision, Indian
Standard, New Delhi, India.

323
Websites

AERB (2008), “Seismic safety of nuclear power plants” – A Monograph, Atomic Energy
Regulatory Board, available from www.aerb.gov.in.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov

http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore /Earth& Space/images/Fig4.gif

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1996/ofr-96-0263/localeff.htm

http://www.pbs.org/gbh/aso/ tryit/ tectonics/intro.html

http://www.portal.gsi.gov.in/gsiDoc/pub/cs_sumatra.pdf

http://www.tulane.edu/ ~sanelson/geol204/struct&materials.htm

http://www.vibrationdata.com/elcentro.dat

MCEER, Multi-Disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research

http://mceer.buffalo.edu

Miura, K. (2011). “Dynamic soil structure interaction,” IISEE-UNESCO lecture notes from
web site http://iisee.kenken.go.jp/lna/?mod=view&cid=E0-190-2008#

Murthy, C.V.R., “Earthquake tips, Learning earthquake design and construction”, Building
material and technology promotion council, Government of India, New Delhi, 2005.
Available from http://www.ourvmc.org/Files/EQTips_Full.pdf

NICEE website, http://www.nicee.org

Science Learn, http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Contexts/Earthquakes/Sci-

Media/Images/Bhuj-Hospital

324
 APPENDIX – I

Time History of El-Centro, 1940 Earthquake Ground Motion

The time history of acceleration of North-South component of the El-Centro, 1940 earthquake
ground motion is given here at an interval of 0.02 sec. The unit of the acceleration is g. This is
taken from the http://www.vibrationdata.com/elcentro.dat and are also given in the book by
Professor A.K. Chopra (refer Chopra, 2001). This include 1559 data points to be read by row by
row; the first value is at 0.02 sec and acceleration at time t=0 is zero. These data are also
available NISEE website http://www.eerc.berkeley.edu.

325
 0.0063 0.00364 9.90E-04 0.00428 0.00758 0.01087 0.00682 0.00277 -0.00128 0.00368
0.00864 0.0136 0.00727 9.40E-04 0.0042 0.00221 2.10E-04 0.00444 0.00867 0.0129
0.01713 -0.00343 -0.024 -0.00992 0.00416 0.00528 0.01653 0.02779 0.03904 0.02449
0.00995 0.00961 0.00926 0.00892 -0.00486 -0.01864 -0.03242 -0.03365 -0.05723 -0.04534
-0.03346 -0.03201 -0.03056 -0.02911 -0.02766 -0.04116 -0.05466 -0.06816 -0.08166 -0.06846
-0.05527 -0.04208 -0.04259 -0.04311 -0.02428 -0.00545 0.01338 0.03221 0.05104 0.06987
0.0887 0.04524 0.00179 -0.04167 -0.08513 -0.12858 -0.17204 -0.12908 -0.08613 -0.08902
-0.09192 -0.09482 -0.09324 -0.09166 -0.09478 -0.09789 -0.12902 -0.07652 -0.02401 0.02849
0.08099 0.1335 0.186 0.2385 0.21993 0.20135 0.18277 0.1642 0.14562 0.16143
0.17725 0.13215 0.08705 0.04196 -0.00314 -0.04824 -0.09334 -0.13843 -0.18353 -0.22863
-0.27372 -0.31882 -0.25024 -0.18166 -0.11309 -0.04451 0.02407 0.09265 0.16123 0.22981
0.29839 0.23197 0.16554 0.09912 0.0327 -0.03372 -0.10014 -0.16656 -0.23299 -0.29941
-0.00421 0.29099 0.2238 0.15662 0.08943 0.02224 -0.04495 0.01834 0.08163 0.14491
0.2082 0.18973 0.17125 0.13759 0.10393 0.07027 0.03661 0.00295 -0.03071 -0.00561
0.01948 0.04458 0.06468 0.08478 0.10487 0.05895 0.01303 -0.03289 -0.07882 -0.03556
0.00771 0.05097 0.01013 -0.03071 -0.07156 -0.1124 -0.15324 -0.11314 -0.07304 -0.03294
0.00715 -0.0635 -0.13415 -0.2048 -0.12482 -0.04485 0.03513 0.1151 0.19508 0.12301
0.05094 -0.02113 -0.0932 -0.02663 0.03995 0.10653 0.17311 0.11283 0.05255 -0.00772
0.01064 0.029 0.04737 0.06573 0.02021 -0.0253 -0.07081 -0.04107 -0.01133 0.00288
0.01709 0.03131 -0.02278 -0.07686 -0.13095 -0.18504 -0.14347 -0.1019 -0.06034 -0.01877
0.0228 -0.00996 -0.04272 -0.02147 -2.10E-04 0.02104 -0.01459 -0.05022 -0.08585 -0.12148
-0.15711 -0.19274 -0.22837 -0.18145 -0.13453 -0.08761 -0.04069 0.00623 0.05316 0.10008
0.147 0.09754 0.04808 -0.00138 0.05141 0.1042 0.15699 0.20979 0.26258 0.16996
0.07734 -0.01527 -0.10789 -0.20051 -0.06786 0.06479 0.01671 -0.03137 -0.07945 -0.12753
-0.17561 -0.22369 -0.27177 -0.15851 -0.04525 0.06802 0.18128 0.14464 0.108 0.07137
0.03473 0.09666 0.1586 0.22053 0.18296 0.14538 0.1078 0.07023 0.03265 0.06649
0.10033 0.13417 0.10337 0.07257 0.04177 0.01097 -0.01983 0.04438 0.1086 0.17281
0.10416 0.03551 -0.03315 -0.1018 -0.07262 -0.04344 -0.01426 0.01492 -0.02025 -0.05543
-0.0906 -0.12578 -0.16095 -0.19613 -0.14784 -0.09955 -0.05127 -0.00298 -0.01952 -0.03605
-0.05259 -0.04182 -0.03106 -0.02903 -0.02699 0.02515 0.0177 0.02213 0.02656 0.00419
-0.01819 -0.04057 -0.06294 -0.02417 0.0146 0.05337 0.02428 -0.0048 -0.03389 -0.00557
0.02274 0.00679 -0.00915 -0.02509 -0.04103 -0.05698 -0.01826 0.02046 0.00454 -0.01138
-0.00215 0.00708 0.00496 0.00285 7.40E-04 -0.00534 -0.01141 0.00361 0.01863 0.03365
0.04867 0.0304 0.01213 -0.00614 -0.02441 0.01375 0.01099 0.00823 0.00547 0.00812
0.01077 -0.00692 -0.02461 -0.0423 -0.05999 -0.07768 -0.09538 -0.06209 -0.0288 0.00448
0.03777 0.01773 -0.00231 -0.02235 0.01791 0.05816 0.03738 0.0166 -0.00418 -0.02496
-0.04574 -0.02071 0.00432 0.02935 0.01526 0.01806 0.02086 0.00793 -0.00501 -0.01795
-0.03089 -0.01841 -0.00593 0.00655 -0.02519 -0.05693 -0.04045 -0.02398 -0.0075 0.00897
0.00384 -0.00129 -0.00642 -0.01156 -0.02619 -0.04082 -0.05545 -0.04366 -0.03188 -0.06964
-0.05634 -0.04303 -0.02972 -0.01642 -0.00311 0.0102 0.0235 0.03681 0.05011 0.02436
-0.00139 -0.02714 -0.00309 0.02096 0.04501 0.06906 0.05773 0.0464 0.03507 0.03357
0.03207 0.03057 0.0325 0.03444 0.03637 0.01348 -0.00942 -0.03231 -0.02997 -0.03095

326
-0.03192 -0.02588 -0.01984 -0.01379 -0.00775 -0.01449 -0.02123 0.01523 0.0517 0.08816
0.12463 0.16109 0.12987 0.09864 0.06741 0.03618 0.00495 0.0042 0.00345 0.00269
-0.05922 -0.12112 -0.18303 -0.12043 -0.05782 0.00479 0.0674 0.13001 0.08373 0.03745
0.06979 0.10213 -0.03517 -0.17247 -0.13763 -0.10278 -0.06794 -0.0331 -0.03647 -0.03984
-0.00517 0.0295 0.06417 0.09883 0.1335 0.05924 -0.01503 -0.08929 -0.16355 -0.06096
0.04164 0.01551 -0.01061 -0.03674 -0.06287 -0.08899 -0.0543 -0.01961 0.01508 0.04977
0.08446 0.05023 0.016 -0.01823 -0.05246 -0.08669 -0.06769 -0.0487 -0.0297 -0.01071
0.00829 -0.00314 0.02966 0.06246 -0.00234 -0.06714 -0.04051 -0.01388 0.01274 0.00805
0.03024 0.05243 0.02351 -0.00541 -0.03432 -0.06324 -0.09215 -0.12107 -0.0845 -0.04794
-0.01137 0.0252 0.06177 0.04028 0.0188 0.04456 0.07032 0.09608 0.12184 0.0635
0.00517 -0.05317 -0.03124 -0.0093 0.01263 0.03457 0.03283 0.03109 0.02935 0.04511
0.06087 0.07663 0.09239 0.05742 0.02245 -0.01252 0.0068 0.02611 0.04543 0.01571
-0.01402 -0.04374 -0.07347 -0.0399 -0.00633 0.02724 0.0608 0.03669 0.01258 -0.01153
-0.03564 -0.00677 0.0221 0.05098 0.07985 0.06915 0.05845 0.04775 0.03706 0.02636
0.05822 0.09009 0.12196 0.10069 0.07943 0.05816 0.03689 0.01563 -0.00564 -0.0269
-0.04817 -0.06944 -0.0907 -0.11197 -0.11521 -0.11846 -0.1217 -0.12494 -0.165 -0.20505
-0.15713 -0.10921 -0.06129 -0.01337 0.03455 0.08247 0.07576 0.06906 0.06236 0.08735
0.11235 0.13734 0.12175 0.10616 0.09057 0.07498 0.08011 0.08524 0.09037 0.06208
0.03378 0.00549 -0.02281 -0.05444 -0.0403 -0.02615 -0.01201 -0.02028 -0.02855 -0.06243
-0.03524 -0.00805 -0.04948 -0.03643 -0.02337 -0.03368 -0.01879 -0.00389 0.011 0.02589
0.01446 0.00303 -0.0084 0.00463 0.01766 0.03069 0.04372 0.02165 -4.20E-04 -0.02249
-0.04456 -0.03638 -0.02819 -0.02001 -0.01182 -0.02445 -0.03707 -0.04969 -0.05882 -0.06795
-0.07707 -0.0862 -0.09533 -0.06276 -0.03018 0.00239 0.03496 0.04399 0.05301 0.03176
0.01051 -0.01073 -0.03198 -0.05323 0.00186 0.05696 0.01985 -0.01726 -0.05438 -0.01204
0.03031 0.07265 0.11499 0.07237 0.02975 -0.01288 0.01212 0.03711 0.03517 0.03323
0.01853 0.00383 0.00342 -0.02181 -0.04704 -0.07227 -0.0975 -0.12273 -0.08317 -0.04362
-0.00407 0.03549 0.07504 0.1146 0.07769 0.04078 0.00387 0.00284 0.00182 -0.05513
0.04732 0.05223 0.05715 0.06206 0.06698 0.07189 0.02705 -0.01779 -0.06263 -0.10747
-0.15232 -0.12591 -0.0995 -0.07309 -0.04668 -0.02027 0.00614 0.03255 0.00859 -0.01537
-0.03932 -0.06328 -0.03322 -0.00315 0.02691 0.01196 -0.003 0.00335 0.0097 0.01605
0.02239 0.04215 0.06191 0.08167 0.03477 -0.01212 -0.01309 -0.01407 -0.05274 -0.02544
0.00186 0.02916 0.05646 0.08376 0.01754 -0.04869 -0.02074 0.00722 0.03517 -0.00528
-0.04572 -0.08617 -0.0696 -0.05303 -0.03646 -0.01989 -0.00332 0.01325 0.02982 0.01101
-0.00781 -0.02662 -0.00563 0.01536 0.03635 0.05734 0.03159 0.00584 -0.01992 -0.00201
0.01589 -0.01024 -0.03636 -0.06249 -0.0478 -0.03311 -0.04941 -0.0657 -0.082 -0.0498
-0.0176 0.0146 0.0468 0.079 0.0475 0.016 -0.0155 -0.00102 0.01347 0.02795
0.04244 0.05692 0.03781 0.0187 -4.10E-04 -0.01952 -0.00427 0.01098 0.02623 0.04148
0.01821 -0.00506 -0.00874 -0.03726 -0.06579 -0.026 0.0138 0.05359 0.09338 0.05883
0.02429 -0.01026 -0.0448 -0.01083 -0.01869 -0.02655 -0.03441 -0.02503 -0.01564 -0.00626
-0.01009 -0.01392 0.0149 0.04372 0.03463 0.02098 0.00733 -0.00632 -0.01997 0.00767
0.03532 0.03409 0.03287 0.03164 0.02403 0.01642 0.00982 0.00322 -0.00339 0.02202
-0.01941 -0.06085 -0.10228 -0.07847 -0.05466 -0.03084 -0.00703 0.01678 0.01946 0.02214
0.02483 0.01809 -0.00202 -0.02213 -0.00278 0.01656 0.0359 0.05525 0.07459 0.06203

327
 0.04948 0.03692 -0.00145 0.04599 0.04079 0.03558 0.03037 0.03626 0.04215 0.04803
0.05392 0.04947 0.04502 0.04056 0.03611 0.03166 0.00614 -0.01937 -0.04489 -0.0704
-0.09592 -0.07745 -0.05899 -0.04052 -0.02206 -0.00359 0.01487 0.01005 0.00523 4.10E-04
-0.00441 -0.00923 -0.01189 -0.01523 -0.01856 -0.0219 -0.00983 0.00224 0.01431 0.00335
-0.0076 -0.01856 -0.00737 0.00383 0.01502 0.02622 0.01016 -0.0059 -0.02196 -0.00121
0.01953 0.04027 0.02826 0.01625 0.00424 0.00196 -3.10E-04 -0.00258 -0.00486 -0.00713
-0.00941 -0.01168 -0.01396 -0.0175 -0.02104 -0.02458 -0.02813 -0.03167 -0.03521 -0.04205
-0.04889 -0.03559 -0.02229 -0.00899 0.00431 0.01762 0.00714 -0.00334 -0.01383 0.01314
0.04011 0.06708 0.0482 0.02932 0.01043 -0.00845 -0.02733 -0.04621 -0.03155 -0.01688
-0.00222 0.01244 0.02683 0.04121 0.05559 0.03253 0.00946 -0.0136 -0.01432 -0.01504
-0.01576 -0.04209 -0.02685 -0.01161 0.00363 0.01887 0.03411 0.03115 0.02819 0.02917
0.03015 0.03113 0.00388 -0.02337 -0.05062 -0.0382 -0.02579 -0.01337 -9.50E-04 0.01146
0.02388 0.03629 0.01047 -0.01535 -0.04117 -0.06699 -0.05207 -0.03715 -0.02222 -0.0073
0.00762 0.02254 0.03747 0.04001 0.04256 0.04507 0.04759 0.0501 0.04545 0.0408
0.02876 0.01671 0.00467 -0.00738 -0.00116 0.00506 0.01128 0.0175 -0.00211 -0.02173
-0.04135 -0.06096 -0.08058 -0.06995 -0.05931 -0.04868 -0.03805 -0.02557 -0.0131 -6.30E-04
0.01185 0.02432 0.0368 0.04927 0.02974 0.01021 -0.00932 -0.02884 -0.04837 -0.0679
-0.04862 -0.02934 -0.01006 0.00922 0.02851 0.04779 0.02456 0.00133 -0.0219 -0.04513
-0.06836 -0.04978 -0.0312 -0.01262 0.00596 0.02453 0.04311 0.06169 0.08027 0.09885
0.06452 0.03019 -0.00414 -0.03848 -0.07281 -0.05999 -0.04717 -0.03435 -0.03231 -0.03028
-0.02824 -0.00396 0.02032 0.00313 -0.01406 -0.03124 -0.04843 -0.06562 -0.05132 -0.03702
-0.02272 -0.00843 0.00587 0.02017 0.02698 0.03379 0.04061 0.04742 0.05423 0.03535
0.01647 0.01622 0.01598 0.01574 0.00747 -8.00E-04 -0.00907 7.20E-04 0.01051 0.0203
0.03009 0.03989 0.03478 0.02967 0.02457 0.03075 0.03694 0.04313 0.04931 0.0555
0.06168 -0.00526 -0.0722 -0.06336 -0.05451 -0.04566 -0.03681 -0.03678 -0.03675 -0.03672
-0.01765 0.00143 0.02051 0.03958 0.05866 0.03556 0.01245 -0.01066 -0.03376 -0.05687
-0.04502 -0.03317 -0.02131 -0.00946 0.00239 -0.00208 -0.00654 -0.01101 -0.01548 -0.012
-0.00851 -0.00503 -0.00154 0.00195 5.10E-04 -9.20E-04 0.01135 0.02363 0.0359 0.04818
0.06045 0.07273 0.02847 -0.01579 -0.06004 -0.05069 -0.04134 -0.03199 -0.03135 -0.03071
-0.03007 -0.01863 -0.00719 0.00425 0.0157 0.02714 0.03858 0.02975 0.02092 0.02334
0.02576 0.02819 0.03061 0.03304 0.01371 -0.00561 -0.02494 -0.02208 -0.01923 -0.01638
-0.01353 -0.01261 -0.0117 -0.00169 0.00833 0.01834 0.02835 0.03836 0.04838 0.03749
0.0266 0.01571 0.00482 -0.00607 -0.01696 -0.0078 0.00136 0.01052 0.01968 0.02884
-0.00504 -0.03893 -0.02342 -0.00791 0.00759 0.0231 0.00707 -0.00895 -0.02498 -0.041
-0.05703 -0.0292 -0.00137 0.02645 0.05428 0.03587 0.01746 -9.60E-04 -0.01937 -0.03778
-0.02281 -0.00784 0.00713 0.0221 0.03707 0.05204 0.06701 0.08198 0.03085 -0.02027
-0.0714 -0.12253 -0.08644 -0.05035 -0.01426 0.02183 0.05792 0.094 0.13009 0.03611
-0.05787 -0.04802 -0.03817 -0.02832 -0.01846 -0.00861 -0.03652 -0.06444 -0.06169 -0.05894
-0.05618 -0.06073 -0.06528 -0.04628 -0.02728 -0.00829 0.01071 0.0297 0.03138 0.03306
0.03474 0.03642 0.04574 0.05506 0.06439 0.07371 0.08303 0.03605 -0.01092 -0.0579
-0.04696 -0.03602 -0.02508 -0.01414 -0.03561 -0.05708 -0.07855 -0.06304 -0.04753 -0.03203
-0.01652 -0.00102 0.00922 0.01946 0.0297 0.03993 0.05017 0.06041 0.07065 0.08089
-0.00192 -0.08473 -0.07032 -0.0559 -0.04148 -0.05296 -0.06443 -0.0759 -0.08738 -0.09885

328
 -0.06798 -0.0371 -0.00623 0.02465 0.05553 0.0864 0.11728 0.14815 0.08715 0.02615
-0.03485 -0.09584 -0.071 -0.04616 -0.02132 0.00353 0.02837 0.05321 -0.00469 -0.06258
-0.12048 -0.0996 -0.07872 -0.05784 -0.03696 -0.01608 0.0048 0.02568 0.04656 0.06744
0.08832 0.1092 0.13008 0.10995 0.08982 0.06969 0.04955 0.04006 0.03056 0.02107
0.01158 0.0078 0.00402 2.40E-04 -0.00354 -0.00732 -0.0111 -0.0078 -0.0045 -0.0012
0.0021 0.0054 -0.00831 -0.02203 -0.03575 -0.04947 -0.06319 -0.05046 -0.03773 -0.025
-0.01227 4.60E-04 0.00482 0.00919 0.01355 0.01791 0.02228 0.00883 -0.00462 -0.01807
-0.03152 -0.02276 -0.01401 -0.00526 0.0035 0.01225 0.02101 0.01437 0.00773 0.0011
0.00823 0.01537 0.02251 0.01713 0.01175 0.00637 0.01376 0.02114 0.02852 0.03591
0.04329 0.03458 0.02587 0.01715 0.00844 -2.70E-04 -0.00898 -0.00126 0.00645 0.01417
0.02039 0.02661 0.03283 0.03905 0.04527 0.03639 0.0275 0.01862 0.00974 8.60E-04
-0.01333 -0.02752 -0.04171 -0.02812 -0.01453 -9.40E-04 0.01264 0.02623 0.0169 0.00756
-0.00177 -0.01111 -0.02044 -0.02977 -0.03911 -0.02442 -0.00973 0.00496 0.01965 0.03434
0.02054 0.00674 -0.00706 -0.02086 -0.03466 -0.02663 -0.0186 -0.01057 -0.00254 -6.30E-04
0.00128 0.00319 0.0051 0.00999 0.01488 0.00791 9.30E-04 -0.00605 0.00342 0.01288
0.02235 0.03181 0.04128 0.02707 0.01287 -0.00134 -0.01554 -0.02975 -0.04395 -0.03612
-0.02828 -0.02044 -0.0126 -0.00476 0.00307 0.01091 0.00984 0.00876 0.00768 0.00661
0.01234 0.01807 0.0238 0.02953 0.03526 0.02784 0.02042 0.013 -0.03415 -0.00628
-0.00621 -0.00615 -0.00609 -0.00602 -0.00596 -0.0059 -0.00583 -0.00577 -0.00571 -0.00564
-0.00558 -0.00552 -0.00545 -0.00539 -0.00532 -0.00526 -0.0052 -0.00513 -0.00507 -0.00501
-0.00494 -0.00488 -0.00482 -0.00475 -0.00469 -0.00463 -0.00456 -0.0045 -0.00444 -0.00437
-0.00431 -0.00425 -0.00418 -0.00412 -0.00406 -0.00399 -0.00393 -0.00387 -0.0038 -0.00374
-0.00368 -0.00361 -0.00355 -0.00349 -0.00342 -0.00336 -0.0033 -0.00323 -0.00317 -0.00311
-0.00304 -0.00298 -0.00292 -0.00285 -0.00279 -0.00273 -0.00266 -0.0026 -0.00254 -0.00247
-0.00241 -0.00235 -0.00228 -0.00222 -0.00216 -0.00209 -0.00203 -0.00197 -0.0019 -0.00184
-0.00178 -0.00171 -0.00165 -0.00158 -0.00152 -0.00146 -0.00139 -0.00133 -0.00127 -0.0012
-0.00114 -0.00108 -0.00101 -9.50E-04 -8.90E-04 -8.20E-04 -7.60E-04 -7.00E-04 -6.30E-04 -5.70E-04
-5.10E-04 -4.40E-04 -3.80E-04 -3.20E-04 -2.50E-04 -1.90E-04 -1.30E-04 -6.00E-05 0

329
 APPENDIX – II
Response Spectra of El-Centro, 1940 Earthquake Ground Motion

Time Damping Ratio, ξ = 0.02 Damping Ratio, ξ = 0.05

Period
Sd (m) Sv (m/sec) Sa (m/sec2) Sd (m) Sv (m/sec) Sa (m/sec2)
(sec)
0.00 0.00000 0.0000 3.128 0.00000 0.0000 3.128
0.01 0.00001 0.0007 3.128 0.00001 0.0006 3.128
0.02 0.00003 0.0006 3.124 0.00003 0.0007 3.127
0.03 0.00008 0.0062 3.150 0.00008 0.0056 3.127
0.04 0.00014 0.0146 3.298 0.00013 0.0130 3.134
0.05 0.00030 0.0213 4.614 0.00027 0.0186 4.124
0.06 0.00039 0.0259 4.195 0.00037 0.0208 3.934
0.07 0.00081 0.0519 6.265 0.00073 0.0401 5.527
0.08 0.00098 0.0513 5.890 0.00097 0.0488 5.870
0.09 0.00124 0.0544 5.980 0.00125 0.0559 6.074
0.1 0.00165 0.0719 6.449 0.00156 0.0701 6.236
0.11 0.00231 0.1129 7.306 0.00214 0.0990 6.643
0.12 0.00321 0.1406 8.681 0.00276 0.1085 7.455
0.13 0.00344 0.1400 8.008 0.00276 0.1134 6.535
0.14 0.00348 0.1245 6.924 0.00328 0.1137 6.520
0.15 0.00719 0.2640 12.588 0.00431 0.1586 7.487
0.16 0.00658 0.2275 9.927 0.00507 0.1691 7.733
0.17 0.00907 0.3112 12.249 0.00585 0.1891 7.858
0.18 0.00891 0.3024 10.787 0.00709 0.2228 8.654
0.19 0.01301 0.4030 13.979 0.00854 0.2492 9.153
0.2 0.01042 0.3214 10.288 0.00785 0.2359 7.636
0.21 0.01027 0.2987 9.101 0.00762 0.2078 6.690
0.22 0.00914 0.2470 7.419 0.00712 0.2010 5.822
0.23 0.01166 0.2988 8.638 0.00779 0.1978 5.749
0.24 0.01390 0.3805 9.487 0.01035 0.2424 7.011
0.25 0.01653 0.3931 10.372 0.01310 0.2993 8.345
0.26 0.01989 0.4507 11.487 0.01537 0.3577 8.847
0.27 0.01980 0.4505 10.580 0.01579 0.3726 8.665
0.28 0.01821 0.4048 9.122 0.01592 0.3579 7.917
0.29 0.01716 0.3716 8.039 0.01600 0.3584 7.528
0.3 0.01902 0.4024 8.346 0.01686 0.3758 7.447
0.31 0.02266 0.4642 9.227 0.01876 0.4020 7.658
0.32 0.02511 0.4999 9.642 0.02007 0.4155 7.742
0.33 0.02691 0.5233 9.736 0.02136 0.4323 7.819
0.34 0.02774 0.5008 9.435 0.02223 0.4249 7.608
0.35 0.02809 0.4815 8.989 0.02296 0.4089 7.315
0.36 0.02825 0.4559 8.589 0.02367 0.4133 7.258
0.37 0.03398 0.5656 9.725 0.02506 0.4266 7.200
0.38 0.03607 0.5940 9.773 0.02640 0.4422 7.215

330
0.39 0.03637 0.5900 9.360 0.02831 0.4616 7.345
0.4 0.03746 0.5790 9.172 0.03030 0.4844 7.446
0.41 0.03927 0.6161 9.191 0.03254 0.5091 7.660
0.42 0.04246 0.6233 9.423 0.03494 0.5391 7.749
0.43 0.04604 0.6438 9.814 0.03711 0.5755 7.973
0.44 0.04980 0.6881 10.097 0.03967 0.6101 8.055
0.45 0.05303 0.7353 10.320 0.04161 0.6400 8.132
0.46 0.06214 0.8064 11.514 0.04411 0.6619 8.274
0.47 0.07086 0.8854 12.625 0.04763 0.6725 8.535
0.48 0.07090 0.8314 12.130 0.05129 0.6732 8.752
0.49 0.06445 0.8287 10.582 0.05421 0.6757 8.973
0.5 0.06843 0.8144 10.722 0.05723 0.7036 9.030
0.51 0.07218 0.8513 10.927 0.05974 0.7339 9.073
0.52 0.07460 0.8965 10.865 0.06130 0.7677 9.027
0.53 0.07717 0.9257 10.810 0.06314 0.7902 8.831
0.54 0.07845 0.9413 10.628 0.06368 0.8009 8.684
0.55 0.09365 0.9897 12.169 0.06412 0.8152 8.374
0.56 0.09977 1.0579 12.557 0.06389 0.8202 8.052
0.57 0.09908 1.0470 12.016 0.06558 0.8143 7.961
0.58 0.09083 0.9511 10.605 0.06656 0.8094 7.867
0.59 0.07835 0.9324 8.846 0.06776 0.8001 7.700
0.6 0.07892 0.9109 8.645 0.06858 0.7823 7.506
0.61 0.07889 0.8887 8.370 0.06879 0.7616 7.339
0.62 0.07926 0.8580 8.102 0.06894 0.7431 7.123
0.63 0.07896 0.8236 7.840 0.06911 0.7189 6.868
0.64 0.07808 0.7933 7.535 0.06881 0.6903 6.640
0.65 0.07744 0.7624 7.198 0.06811 0.6746 6.414
0.66 0.08272 0.8008 7.488 0.06755 0.6710 6.165
0.67 0.08775 0.8225 7.706 0.06698 0.6649 5.901
0.68 0.08360 0.7501 7.138 0.06611 0.6569 5.638
0.69 0.08424 0.7336 6.974 0.06501 0.6524 5.415
0.7 0.08559 0.7119 6.880 0.06371 0.6466 5.185
0.71 0.08392 0.6973 6.544 0.06274 0.6395 4.952
0.72 0.07922 0.6807 6.008 0.06195 0.6312 4.720
0.73 0.08537 0.7282 6.298 0.06124 0.6223 4.560
0.74 0.09008 0.7688 6.495 0.06177 0.6128 4.468
0.75 0.08816 0.7509 6.168 0.06272 0.6030 4.409
0.76 0.08310 0.7048 5.682 0.06206 0.5934 4.246
0.77 0.07554 0.6360 5.033 0.06460 0.5862 4.314
0.78 0.07094 0.6135 4.604 0.06851 0.5789 4.466
0.79 0.08222 0.6270 5.201 0.07373 0.5715 4.675
0.8 0.09506 0.7181 5.847 0.07947 0.5821 4.905
0.81 0.10757 0.8108 6.467 0.08543 0.6181 5.154
0.82 0.11965 0.8915 7.023 0.09117 0.6521 5.369
0.83 0.13062 0.9595 7.481 0.09670 0.6785 5.542
0.84 0.14010 1.0114 7.834 0.10138 0.6945 5.684

331
0.85 0.14789 1.0436 8.077 0.10511 0.7299 5.763
0.86 0.15382 1.0730 8.210 0.10781 0.7625 5.779
0.87 0.15782 1.1054 8.236 0.10952 0.7811 5.735
0.88 0.16008 1.1264 8.157 0.11018 0.7909 5.630
0.89 0.16031 1.1252 7.975 0.10955 0.7861 5.466
0.9 0.15852 1.1024 7.700 0.10764 0.8018 5.256
0.91 0.15480 1.0701 7.360 0.10452 0.8068 4.996
0.92 0.14932 1.0727 6.954 0.10540 0.8085 4.931
0.93 0.14501 1.0552 6.613 0.10840 0.7981 4.966
0.94 0.14867 1.0312 6.630 0.11113 0.7762 4.974
0.95 0.15142 0.9935 6.603 0.11306 0.7584 4.965
0.96 0.15309 1.0112 6.560 0.11428 0.7871 4.915
0.97 0.15431 1.0369 6.471 0.11513 0.8071 4.847
0.98 0.15442 1.0499 6.331 0.11486 0.8186 4.750
0.99 0.15313 1.0611 6.170 0.11435 0.8289 4.622
1 0.15136 1.0593 5.971 0.11273 0.8318 4.479
1.01 0.14827 1.0466 5.723 0.11073 0.8268 4.303
1.02 0.14406 1.0322 5.470 0.11099 0.8146 4.222
1.03 0.14266 1.0070 5.304 0.11099 0.8018 4.151
1.04 0.14164 0.9722 5.160 0.11045 0.7834 4.045
1.05 0.13997 0.9358 5.013 0.10944 0.7593 3.940
1.06 0.13797 0.8933 4.838 0.10802 0.7304 3.811
1.07 0.13520 0.8443 4.659 0.10616 0.6976 3.678
1.08 0.13220 0.7901 4.473 0.10399 0.6659 3.532
1.09 0.12887 0.7549 4.274 0.10153 0.6314 3.387
1.1 0.12485 0.7209 4.074 0.09872 0.5949 3.231
1.11 0.12076 0.7086 3.865 0.09587 0.5572 3.083
1.12 0.11596 0.6964 3.648 0.09257 0.5470 2.924
1.13 0.11098 0.6794 3.428 0.08923 0.5463 2.772
1.14 0.10529 0.6577 3.203 0.08771 0.5462 2.676
1.15 0.11147 0.6358 3.321 0.08654 0.5443 2.594
1.16 0.11916 0.6711 3.491 0.08534 0.5410 2.519
1.17 0.12297 0.6787 3.543 0.08588 0.5386 2.486
1.18 0.12108 0.6520 3.435 0.08859 0.5348 2.522
1.19 0.12009 0.6155 3.346 0.09074 0.5297 2.539
1.2 0.12089 0.6090 3.309 0.09236 0.5234 2.542
1.21 0.12082 0.6017 3.253 0.09332 0.5159 2.526
1.22 0.11997 0.5978 3.182 0.09400 0.5075 2.503
1.23 0.11865 0.5990 3.095 0.09408 0.4981 2.463
1.24 0.11685 0.5919 2.996 0.09402 0.4881 2.422
1.25 0.11460 0.5803 2.890 0.09355 0.4774 2.370
1.26 0.11200 0.5635 2.784 0.09295 0.4661 2.318
1.27 0.10927 0.5424 2.673 0.09217 0.4545 2.261
1.28 0.10628 0.5208 2.559 0.09131 0.4453 2.206
1.29 0.10323 0.4987 2.446 0.09043 0.4376 2.150
1.3 0.10004 0.4821 2.338 0.08956 0.4298 2.097

332
1.31 0.09709 0.4647 2.233 0.08865 0.4260 2.045
1.32 0.09693 0.4781 2.193 0.08792 0.4288 1.998
1.33 0.09616 0.4947 2.144 0.08733 0.4315 1.955
1.34 0.10218 0.5014 2.246 0.08689 0.4340 1.917
1.35 0.10684 0.5155 2.314 0.08663 0.4365 1.883
1.36 0.11028 0.5181 2.350 0.08659 0.4388 1.855
1.37 0.11248 0.5175 2.363 0.08680 0.4411 1.832
1.38 0.11352 0.5232 2.351 0.08727 0.4432 1.816
1.39 0.11336 0.5231 2.315 0.08802 0.4452 1.806
1.4 0.11197 0.5139 2.255 0.08904 0.4472 1.800
1.41 0.10961 0.5088 2.175 0.09027 0.4490 1.800
1.42 0.10634 0.5082 2.082 0.09168 0.4507 1.802
1.43 0.10237 0.4965 1.975 0.09325 0.4526 1.808
1.44 0.10069 0.4994 1.917 0.09493 0.4546 1.815
1.45 0.10399 0.5215 1.951 0.09667 0.4564 1.824
1.46 0.10737 0.5371 1.985 0.09845 0.4581 1.832
1.47 0.11072 0.5480 2.022 0.10032 0.4597 1.841
1.48 0.11397 0.5505 2.055 0.10222 0.4612 1.850
1.49 0.11721 0.5426 2.084 0.10403 0.4626 1.859
1.5 0.12032 0.5277 2.108 0.10571 0.4638 1.865
1.51 0.12312 0.5023 2.132 0.10739 0.4650 1.868
1.52 0.12580 0.5164 2.149 0.10899 0.4661 1.870
1.53 0.12822 0.5363 2.161 0.11039 0.4670 1.870
1.54 0.13051 0.5509 2.173 0.11177 0.4679 1.867
1.55 0.13293 0.5596 2.185 0.11298 0.4686 1.863
1.56 0.13612 0.5646 2.206 0.11405 0.4706 1.856
1.57 0.14061 0.5651 2.249 0.11505 0.4736 1.848
1.58 0.14455 0.5636 2.283 0.11579 0.4757 1.838
1.59 0.14792 0.5745 2.309 0.11651 0.4769 1.825
1.6 0.15087 0.5955 2.326 0.11701 0.4780 1.812
1.61 0.15379 0.6110 2.340 0.11727 0.4784 1.794
1.62 0.15663 0.6239 2.355 0.11755 0.4779 1.775
1.63 0.15922 0.6321 2.364 0.11758 0.4766 1.755
1.64 0.16122 0.6389 2.365 0.11748 0.4746 1.732
1.65 0.16252 0.6419 2.357 0.11733 0.4726 1.708
1.66 0.16304 0.6419 2.338 0.11698 0.4711 1.683
1.67 0.16304 0.6383 2.308 0.11663 0.4708 1.657
1.68 0.16247 0.6302 2.272 0.11617 0.4705 1.630
1.69 0.16146 0.6195 2.232 0.11589 0.4701 1.613
1.7 0.16033 0.6070 2.189 0.11610 0.4696 1.596
1.71 0.15928 0.6061 2.150 0.11605 0.4691 1.579
1.72 0.16103 0.6248 2.149 0.11557 0.4685 1.557
1.73 0.16151 0.6342 2.129 0.11497 0.4680 1.530
1.74 0.16101 0.6382 2.100 0.11417 0.4676 1.501
1.75 0.16136 0.6350 2.079 0.11401 0.4671 1.475
1.76 0.16254 0.6264 2.071 0.11514 0.4666 1.471

333
1.77 0.16364 0.6179 2.062 0.11729 0.4660 1.482
1.78 0.16461 0.6148 2.051 0.11921 0.4653 1.492
1.79 0.16750 0.6111 2.062 0.12101 0.4646 1.498
1.8 0.17094 0.6053 2.084 0.12248 0.4639 1.502
1.81 0.17391 0.5970 2.096 0.12516 0.4631 1.520
1.82 0.17645 0.5863 2.103 0.12770 0.4622 1.534
1.83 0.17850 0.5773 2.106 0.12982 0.4613 1.543
1.84 0.18045 0.5724 2.103 0.13170 0.4673 1.547
1.85 0.18197 0.5973 2.101 0.13315 0.4860 1.548
1.86 0.18351 0.6207 2.093 0.13444 0.5035 1.544
1.87 0.18480 0.6425 2.087 0.13531 0.5208 1.539
1.88 0.18593 0.6631 2.078 0.13605 0.5370 1.529
1.89 0.18707 0.6824 2.067 0.13642 0.5519 1.518
1.9 0.18790 0.7016 2.056 0.13659 0.5656 1.503
1.91 0.18869 0.7203 2.042 0.13646 0.5780 1.486
1.92 0.18921 0.7377 2.026 0.13603 0.5890 1.467
1.93 0.18934 0.7536 2.008 0.13533 0.5985 1.444
1.94 0.18937 0.7678 1.986 0.13426 0.6066 1.419
1.95 0.18902 0.7800 1.962 0.13297 0.6130 1.390
1.96 0.18835 0.7910 1.935 0.13296 0.6189 1.369
1.97 0.18744 0.8007 1.906 0.13340 0.6234 1.359
1.98 0.18635 0.8077 1.876 0.13392 0.6261 1.351
1.99 0.18800 0.8116 1.874 0.13442 0.6269 1.344
2 0.18994 0.8121 1.874 0.13680 0.6258 1.357
2.01 0.19185 0.8096 1.874 0.13967 0.6226 1.371
2.02 0.19436 0.8053 1.880 0.14262 0.6174 1.386
2.03 0.19720 0.7970 1.888 0.14562 0.6102 1.401
2.04 0.20001 0.7847 1.897 0.14866 0.6022 1.416
2.05 0.20263 0.7683 1.903 0.15177 0.5924 1.432
2.06 0.20484 0.7483 1.906 0.15498 0.5807 1.447
2.07 0.20652 0.7261 1.903 0.15817 0.5671 1.463
2.08 0.20756 0.7000 1.895 0.16134 0.5518 1.479
2.09 0.20798 0.6705 1.880 0.16465 0.5350 1.494
2.1 0.20766 0.6403 1.858 0.16791 0.5350 1.509
2.11 0.20646 0.6093 1.831 0.17110 0.5427 1.524
2.12 0.20429 0.6089 1.796 0.17440 0.5503 1.538
2.13 0.20677 0.6206 1.799 0.17764 0.5576 1.552
2.14 0.21150 0.6319 1.823 0.18080 0.5647 1.566
2.15 0.21623 0.6428 1.847 0.18405 0.5716 1.579
2.16 0.22089 0.6531 1.868 0.18717 0.5786 1.590
2.17 0.22546 0.6633 1.891 0.19031 0.5853 1.602
2.18 0.23004 0.6733 1.910 0.19340 0.5916 1.613
2.19 0.23444 0.6828 1.930 0.19641 0.5975 1.624
2.2 0.23890 0.6916 1.948 0.19945 0.6029 1.633
2.21 0.24315 0.6998 1.966 0.20235 0.6079 1.643
2.22 0.24745 0.7072 1.982 0.20533 0.6125 1.651

334
2.23 0.25157 0.7140 1.997 0.20812 0.6165 1.659
2.24 0.25569 0.7199 2.011 0.21100 0.6201 1.667
2.25 0.25968 0.7260 2.025 0.21367 0.6235 1.673
2.26 0.26359 0.7315 2.037 0.21642 0.6268 1.680
2.27 0.26743 0.7370 2.049 0.21897 0.6324 1.685
2.28 0.27110 0.7476 2.059 0.22152 0.6399 1.690
2.29 0.27470 0.7578 2.068 0.22392 0.6469 1.693
2.3 0.27813 0.7672 2.075 0.22621 0.6534 1.697
2.31 0.28145 0.7759 2.083 0.22847 0.6593 1.699
2.32 0.28460 0.7838 2.087 0.23046 0.6647 1.700
2.33 0.28761 0.7909 2.092 0.23256 0.6696 1.700
2.34 0.29048 0.7973 2.094 0.23438 0.6740 1.699
2.35 0.29322 0.8027 2.096 0.23623 0.6778 1.698
2.36 0.29579 0.8074 2.097 0.23815 0.6809 1.697
2.37 0.29834 0.8118 2.097 0.24152 0.6835 1.707
2.38 0.30070 0.8159 2.096 0.24490 0.6860 1.716
2.39 0.30305 0.8192 2.094 0.24814 0.6883 1.724
2.4 0.30533 0.8216 2.093 0.25125 0.6900 1.732
2.41 0.30738 0.8232 2.090 0.25422 0.6911 1.739
2.42 0.30950 0.8240 2.086 0.25727 0.6916 1.746
2.43 0.31138 0.8240 2.082 0.26017 0.6915 1.751
2.44 0.31318 0.8231 2.076 0.26292 0.6908 1.755
2.45 0.31490 0.8217 2.071 0.26552 0.6896 1.759
2.46 0.31640 0.8247 2.065 0.26806 0.6877 1.762
2.47 0.31797 0.8269 2.057 0.27059 0.6854 1.764
2.48 0.31934 0.8283 2.050 0.27296 0.6861 1.765
2.49 0.32101 0.8288 2.045 0.27516 0.6867 1.765
2.5 0.32366 0.8286 2.046 0.27719 0.6867 1.765
2.51 0.32621 0.8278 2.046 0.27919 0.6862 1.764
2.52 0.32873 0.8284 2.045 0.28116 0.6851 1.763
2.53 0.33105 0.8324 2.043 0.28295 0.6833 1.760
2.54 0.33311 0.8359 2.039 0.28458 0.6846 1.756
2.55 0.33498 0.8394 2.036 0.28602 0.6872 1.752
2.56 0.33693 0.8620 2.031 0.28744 0.6897 1.748
2.57 0.33866 0.8830 2.026 0.28882 0.6916 1.742
2.58 0.34016 0.9004 2.018 0.29002 0.6929 1.736
2.59 0.34148 0.9146 2.011 0.29106 0.6936 1.729
2.6 0.34285 0.9270 2.004 0.29193 0.6938 1.721
2.61 0.34401 0.9358 1.995 0.29286 0.6934 1.712
2.62 0.34495 0.9410 1.985 0.29365 0.6992 1.704
2.63 0.34595 0.9424 1.975 0.29430 0.7050 1.695
2.64 0.34677 0.9402 1.965 0.29477 0.7104 1.685
2.65 0.34739 0.9366 1.954 0.29532 0.7155 1.674
2.66 0.35171 0.9295 1.962 0.29572 0.7204 1.663
2.67 0.35995 0.9194 1.993 0.29593 0.7249 1.652
2.68 0.36819 0.9107 2.023 0.29626 0.7297 1.640

335
2.69 0.37624 0.8998 2.053 0.29642 0.7341 1.627
2.7 0.38400 0.8873 2.080 0.29653 0.7382 1.616
2.71 0.39134 0.8718 2.104 0.29663 0.7421 1.603
2.72 0.39824 0.8717 2.125 0.29656 0.7456 1.591
2.73 0.40453 0.8785 2.143 0.29656 0.7488 1.578
2.74 0.41023 0.8830 2.158 0.29644 0.7518 1.566
2.75 0.41518 0.8889 2.169 0.29616 0.7566 1.554
2.76 0.41965 0.8972 2.176 0.29599 0.7621 1.542
2.77 0.42338 0.9029 2.179 0.29574 0.7673 1.533
2.78 0.42631 0.9061 2.179 0.29776 0.7722 1.533
2.79 0.42867 0.9068 2.175 0.29941 0.7768 1.531
2.8 0.43037 0.9065 2.168 0.30051 0.7811 1.525
2.81 0.43123 0.9040 2.157 0.30125 0.7852 1.519
2.82 0.43158 0.8993 2.143 0.30143 0.7889 1.509
2.83 0.43121 0.9023 2.127 0.30128 0.7924 1.498
2.84 0.42992 0.9061 2.106 0.30052 0.7961 1.484
2.85 0.42823 0.9183 2.083 0.29950 0.7995 1.468
2.86 0.42547 0.9309 2.056 0.29780 0.8027 1.450
2.87 0.42232 0.9401 2.026 0.29582 0.8055 1.431
2.88 0.41830 0.9452 1.992 0.29332 0.8081 1.410
2.89 0.41553 0.9464 1.965 0.29024 0.8105 1.386
2.9 0.41637 0.9441 1.955 0.28694 0.8125 1.362
2.91 0.41656 0.9399 1.943 0.28462 0.8144 1.335
2.92 0.41599 0.9321 1.927 0.28357 0.8159 1.319
2.93 0.41475 0.9255 1.908 0.28246 0.8172 1.304
2.94 0.41300 0.9260 1.887 0.28138 0.8182 1.290
2.95 0.41093 0.9262 1.865 0.28029 0.8191 1.276
2.96 0.40851 0.9269 1.841 0.27917 0.8196 1.262
2.97 0.40560 0.9310 1.816 0.27810 0.8200 1.249
2.98 0.40225 0.9330 1.789 0.27696 0.8201 1.236
2.99 0.39849 0.9328 1.760 0.27584 0.8199 1.223
3 0.39443 0.9318 1.730 0.27466 0.8196 1.210

336
 Appendix - III
MATLAB Program for Examples of Chapter 5

Example 5.1 (Case 1), Single Support Excitation

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Response of MDOF System with Single-Support Earthquake Excitation
%% Solution obtained by State Space Method
%% Earthquake ground motion considered is 'El Centro, 1940 (N-S component)'

clear
clc
close all
format short g

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

nd = 2; % Enter nos. of superstructure degrees of freedom

m = 10; % Enter mass of building in 'kg'
k = 1000; % Enter stiffness of frame in 'N/m'
M = [2*m 0;0 m] % Generate the mass matrix
K = [12*k -4*k;-4*k 4*k] % Generate the stiffness matrix
[V,D] = eig(K,M); % Eigen values and Eigen vectors
w = sqrt([D]);
phi1 = [V(1)/V(2);V(2)/V(1)]; % Mode shape
phi2 = [V(3)/V(4);V(4)/V(4)]; % Mode shape
w1 = sqrt(D(1)); % Natural frequency
w2 = sqrt(D(4)); % Natural frequency
zhy = 5; % Enter damping (in percentage)
w = [1/(2*w1) w1/2;1/(2*w2) w2/2];
Zhy = [zhy/100;zhy/100];
const_matrx = w\Zhy;
alpha = const_matrx(1);
beta = const_matrx(2);
C = alpha*[M]+beta*[K] % Rayleigh's Damping matrix

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

load El_centro_unit_g_dt_0.02.mat % Load the earthquake ground motion file

l = length(a);
a = a*9.81;
dt1 = 0.02; % Enter existing time step, as in original .mat file
t_t = (l-1)*dt1;
t=0:dt1:t_t;
time = t';
n = a;
div = 1; % Enter the nos. of division for required interpolation
dt = dt1/div;
ti = 0:dt:t_t;
time1 = ti';
ni = interp1(t,n,ti);
a = ni'; % Ground acceleration vector
l1= length(a);

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

337
% State Space method matrices
A = [zeros(nd,nd) eye(nd);-inv(M)*K -inv(M)*C];
Ad = expm([[A]*dt]);
D = inv(A)*[Ad-eye(2*nd)];
E = [zeros(nd,1);-1;-1];
Ed = [D]*[E];

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

% Initial conditions
z = zeros(2*nd,1);
d1 = 0;
d2 = 0;
v1 = 0;
v2 = 0;
v11 = 0;
v21 = 0;
a1 = -a(1);
a2 = -a(1);

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

j = 1; % To store the values at certain intervals, to reduce

the program execution time

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

for i = 1:l1-1

z = [Ad]*[z]+[Ed]*[a(i)]; % State vector for displacement and velocity

zdot = A*z+E*a(i+1); % State vector for velocity and acceleration

if i == j % To store the values at certain intervals, to

reduce the program execution time

d1 = [d1;z(1)]; % Relative displacement corresponding to DOF#1

d2 = [d2;z(2)]; % Relative displacement corresponding to DOF#2
v1 = [v1;z(3)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#1
(calculated from state vector 'z')
v2 = [v2;z(4)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#2
(calculated from state vector 'z')
v11 = [v11;zdot(1)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#1
(calculated from state vector 'zdot' for check)
v21 = [v21;zdot(2)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#2
(calculated from state vector 'zdot' for check)
a1 = [a1;zdot(3)]; % Relative acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
a2 = [a2;zdot(4)]; % Relative acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

j = j+div;
end
end

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

a_abs_1 = [a1+a]; % Absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#1

a_abs_2 = [a2+a]; % Absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

338
Max_d1 = max(abs(d1)); % Maximum displacement corresponding to DOF#1
Max_d2 = max(abs(d2)); % Maximum displacement corresponding to DOF#2
Max_a1 = max(abs(a1)); % Maximum acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a2 = max(abs(a2)); % Maximum acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a_abs_1 = max(abs(a_abs_1)); % Maximum absolute acceleration
corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a_abs_2 = max(abs(a_abs_2)); % Maximum absolute acceleration
corresponding to DOF#2

RMS_d1 = sqrt(sum(d1.*conj(d1))/size(d1,1)); % RMS displacement

corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_d2 = sqrt(sum(d2.*conj(d1))/size(d2,1)); % RMS displacement
corresponding to DOF#2
RMS_a1 = sqrt(sum(a1.*conj(a1))/size(a1,1)); % RMS acceleration
corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_a2 = sqrt(sum(a2.*conj(a2))/size(a2,1)); % RMS acceleration
corresponding to DOF#2
RMS_a_abs_1 = sqrt(sum(a_abs_1.*conj(a_abs_1))/size(a_abs_1,1)); % RMS
absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_a_abs_2 = sqrt(sum(a_abs_2.*conj(a_abs_2))/size(a_abs_2,1)); % RMS
absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Result_Table =
[Max_d1;Max_d2;Max_a_abs_1;Max_a_abs_2;RMS_d1;RMS_d2;RMS_a_abs_1;RMS_a_abs_
2]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

% Time history Plots

figure(1)
plot(time,d1)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Relative Displacement x1 (m)')
title('Time History for Relative Displacement corresponding to DOF#1')
grid on
figure(2)
plot(time,d2)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Relative Displacement x2 (m)')
title('Time History for Relative Displacement corresponding to DOF#2')
grid on
figure(3)
plot(time,a_abs_1)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Absolute Acceleration x1 (m/s2)')
title('Time History for Absolute Acceleration corresponding to DOF#1')
grid on
figure(4)
plot(time,a_abs_2)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Absolute Acceleration x2 (m/s2)')
title('Time History for Absolute Acceleration corresponding to DOF#2')
grid on

% Program Ends
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

339
Example 5.1 (Case 2), Multi Support Excitation

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Response of MDOF System with Multi-Support Earthquake Excitation
%% Solution obtained by State Space Method
%% Earthquake ground motion considered is 'El Centro, 1940 (N-S component)'

clear
clc
close all
format short g

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

nd = 2; % Enter nos. of superstructure degrees of freedom

m = 10; % Enter mass of building in 'kg'
k = 1000; % Enter stiffness of frame in 'N/m'
M = [2*m 0;0 m] % Generate the mass matrix
K = [12*k -4*k;-4*k 4*k] % Generate the stiffness matrix
[V,D] = eig(K,M); % Eigen values and Eigen vectors
w = sqrt([D]);
phi1 = [V(1)/V(2);V(2)/V(1)]; % Mode shape
phi2 = [V(3)/V(4);V(4)/V(4)]; % Mode shape
w1 = sqrt(D(1)); % Natural frequency
w2 = sqrt(D(4)); % Natural frequency
zhy = 5; % Enter damping (in percentage)
w = [1/(2*w1) w1/2;1/(2*w2) w2/2];
Zhy = [zhy/100;zhy/100];
const_matrx = w\Zhy;
alpha = const_matrx(1);
beta = const_matrx(2);
C = alpha*[M]+beta*[K] % Rayleigh's Damping matrix

Ksg = [-2*k -2*k -2*k -2*k;0 0 0 0]

r = -inv(K)*Ksg % Influence coefficient matrix

% for ground motion # 1

load El_centro_unit_g_dt_0.02_gm1.mat % Load the earthquake ground motion
file
l = length(agm_1);
agm_1 = agm_1*9.81;
dt1 = 0.02; % Enter existing time step, as in original .mat file
t_t = (l-1)*dt1;
t = 0:dt1:t_t;
time = t';
n = agm_1;
div = 1; % Enter the nos. of division for required interpolation
dt = dt1/div;
ti = 0:dt:t_t;
time1 = ti';
ni = interp1(t,n,ti);
agm_1 = ni'; % Ground acceleration vector for support#1
l1 = length(agm_1);

% for ground motion # 2 (with time delay of 5 sec)

load El_centro_unit_g_dt_0.02_gm2.mat % Load the earthquake ground motion
file
l = length(agm_2);
agm_2 = agm_2*9.81;

340
dt1 = 0.02; % Enter existing time step, as in original
.mat file
t_t = (l-1)*dt1;
t = 0:dt1:t_t;
time = t';
n = agm_2;
div = 1; % Enter the nos. of division for required
interpolation
dt = dt1/div;
ti = 0:dt:t_t;
time1 = ti';
ni = interp1(t,n,ti);
agm_2 = ni'; % Ground acceleration vector for support#2
l1 = length(agm_2);

% for ground motion # 3 (with time delay of 10 sec)

load El_centro_unit_g_dt_0.02_gm3.mat % Load the earthquake ground motion
file
l = length(agm_3);
agm_3 = agm_3*9.81;
dt1 = 0.02; % Enter existing time step, as in original
.mat file
t_t = (l-1)*dt1;
t = 0:dt1:t_t;
time = t';
n = agm_3;
div = 1; % Enter the nos. of division for required
interpolation
dt = dt1/div;
ti = 0:dt:t_t;
time1 = ti';
ni = interp1(t,n,ti);
agm_3 = ni'; % Ground acceleration vector for support#3
l1 = length(agm_3);

% for ground motion # 4 (with time delay of 15 sec)

load El_centro_unit_g_dt_0.02_gm4.mat % Load the earthquake ground motion
file
l = length(agm_4);
agm_4 = agm_4*9.81;
dt1 = 0.02; % Enter existing time step, as in original
.mat file
t_t = (l-1)*dt1;
t = 0:dt1:t_t;
time = t';
n = agm_4;
div = 1; % Enter the nos. of division for required
interpolation
dt = dt1/div;
ti = 0:dt:t_t;
time1 = ti';
ni = interp1(t,n,ti);
agm_4 = ni'; % Ground acceleration vector for support#4
l1 = length(agm_4);

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% State Space method matrices
A = [zeros(nd,nd) eye(nd);-inv(M)*K -inv(M)*C];
Ad = expm([[A]*dt]);

341
D = inv(A)*[Ad-eye(2*nd)];

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

% Initial conditions
z = zeros(2*nd,1);
d1 = 0;
d2 = 0;
v1 = 0;
v2 = 0;
v11 = 0;
v21 = 0;
a1 = -
[(r(1,1)*agm_1(1))+(r(1,2)*agm_2(1))+(r(1,3)*agm_3(1))+(r(1,4)*agm_4(1))];
a2 = -
[(r(2,1)*agm_1(1))+(r(2,2)*agm_2(1))+(r(2,3)*agm_3(1))+(r(2,4)*agm_4(1))];

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

j = 1; % To store the values at certain intervals, to reduce the program

execution time

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

for i = 1:l1-1

GAV_z = [agm_1(i);agm_2(i);agm_3(i);agm_4(i)];
Ez = r*GAV_z;
E_z = [zeros(nd,1);-Ez(1);-Ez(2)];
Ed = [D]*[E_z];
z = [Ad]*[z]+[Ed]; % State vector for displacement and velocity

GAV_zdot = [agm_1(i+1);agm_2(i+1);agm_3(i+1);agm_4(i+1)];
Ezdot = r*GAV_zdot;
E_zdot = [zeros(nd,1);-Ezdot(1);-Ezdot(2)];
zdot = [A]*[z]+[E_zdot]; % State vector for velocity and acceleration

if i == j % To store the values at certain intervals, to

reduce the program execution time

d1 = [d1;z(1)]; % Relative displacement corresponding to DOF#1

d2 = [d2;z(2)]; % Relative displacement corresponding to DOF#2
v1 = [v1;z(3)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#1
(calculated from state vector 'z')
v2 = [v2;z(4)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#2
(calculated from state vector 'z')
v11 = [v11;zdot(1)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#1
(calculated from state vector 'zdot' for check)
v21 = [v21;zdot(2)]; % Relative velocity corresponding to DOF#2
(calculated from state vector 'zdot' for check)
a1 = [a1;zdot(3)]; % Relative acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
a2 = [a2;zdot(4)]; % Relative acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

j = j+div;
end
end

a_abs_1 = [a1+(r(1,1)*agm_1)+(r(1,2)*agm_2)+(r(1,3)*agm_3)+(r(1,4)*agm_4)];
% Absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#1

342
a_abs_2 = [a2+(r(1,1)*agm_1)+(r(1,2)*agm_2)+(r(1,3)*agm_3)+(r(1,4)*agm_4)];
% Absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

Max_d1 = max(abs(d1)); % Maximum displacement corresponding to DOF#1

Max_d2 = max(abs(d2)); % Maximum displacement corresponding to DOF#2
Max_a1 = max(abs(a1)); % Maximum acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a2 = max(abs(a2)); % Maximum acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a_abs_1 = max(abs(a_abs_1)); % Maximum absolute acceleration
corresponding to DOF#1
Max_a_abs_2 = max(abs(a_abs_2)); % Maximum absolute acceleration
corresponding to DOF#2

RMS_d1 = sqrt(sum(d1.*conj(d1))/size(d1,1)); % RMS displacement

corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_d2 = sqrt(sum(d2.*conj(d1))/size(d2,1)); % RMS displacement
corresponding to DOF#2
RMS_a1 = sqrt(sum(a1.*conj(a1))/size(a1,1)); % RMS acceleration
corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_a2 = sqrt(sum(a2.*conj(a2))/size(a2,1)); % RMS acceleration
corresponding to DOF#2
RMS_a_abs_1 = sqrt(sum(a_abs_1.*conj(a_abs_1))/size(a_abs_1,1)); % RMS
absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#1
RMS_a_abs_2 = sqrt(sum(a_abs_2.*conj(a_abs_2))/size(a_abs_2,1)); % RMS
absolute acceleration corresponding to DOF#2

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Result_Table =
[Max_d1;Max_d2;Max_a_abs_1;Max_a_abs_2;RMS_d1;RMS_d2;RMS_a_abs_1;RMS_a_abs_
2]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% Time history Plots
figure(1)
plot(time,d1)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Relative Displacement x1 (m)')
title('Time History for Relative Displacement corresponding to DOF#1')
grid on
figure(2)
plot(time,d2)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Relative Displacement x2 (m)')
title('Time History for Relative Displacement corresponding to DOF#2')
grid on
figure(3)
plot(time,a_abs_1)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Absolute Acceleration x1 (m/s2)')
title('Time History for Absolute Acceleration corresponding to DOF#1')
grid on
figure(4)
plot(time,a_abs_2)
xlabel ('Time(s)')
ylabel ('Absolute Acceleration x2 (m/s2)')
title('Time History for Absolute Acceleration corresponding to DOF#2')
grid on
% Program Ends
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

343
 APPENDIX – IV
Notable Projects with Application of Base Isolation Technology

Sr.
Project and Country Year Isolation Systems Utilized
No.
Salt Lake City and County Building
1 1989 Lead rubber isolators
Utah, USA
Rockwell International Corporate
Lead rubber bearings and rubber
2 Headquarters-Building 80 1991
bearing
Seal Beach, California, USA
Campbell Hall, Lead rubber isolator and rubber
3 1993
Monmouth, Oregon, USA isolator
US Court of Appeals
4 1994 Friction pendulum system
San Francisco, USA
New Zealand Parliament Library and Hybrid system: Lead rubber
5 Parliament House, Wellington, New 1994 isolators, rubber isolators and sliding
Zealand bearing isolators
Rockwell International Corporate
6 1994 Lead rubber isolator
Headquarters, Seal Beach, California, USA
Oakland City Hall Lead rubber isolator and rubber
7 1994
Oakland, California, USA isolator
Hughes Aircraft Building, Lead rubber bearing and rubber
8 1994
El Segundo, California, USA bearing
Caltrans Traffic Management Center
9 1994 High-damping rubber bearings
San Diego, California, USA
Long Beach V.A. Hospital Lead rubber isolator, rubber isolator
10 1995
Long Beach, California, USA and sliding bearing
Martin Luther King, Jr. Civic Center High-damping rubber bearing and
11 1995
Building, Berkeley, California, USA Lead rubber bearing

344
 Kerckhoff Hall, UCLA Campus
12 1996 Lead rubber isolator
Westwood Village, California, USA
San Francisco City Hall and Civic Center
13 1998 Lead rubber isolator
San Francisco, California, USA
Public Safety Building-911 Emergency
Lead rubber bearing and sliding
14 Communications Center, San Francisco, 1998
system
California, USA
Head office of Himeji Shinkin Bank
15 (Himeji Credit Bank) 2000 Rubber bearings and dampers
Himeji City, Hyogo, Japan
Laboratory Building of Kansai University
Rubber bearings, sliding bearings
16 Senriyama Campus of Kansai University, 2001
and oil dampers
Suita City, Japan
Rubber bearings and viscous
17 Tokyo DIA Building, Japan 2001
dampers
Shinjuku Station West Entrance Main
18 2002 Rubber bearings
Building, Tokyo, Japan
Eel River Bridge
19 1988 Lead rubber isolators
Robinson's Ferry, Rio Dell, USA
20 Benicia-Martinez Bridge 2000 Friction pendulum bearings
Offshore Bridge Structure Spherical PTFE sliding bearing with
21 2000
Caspian Sea steel hysteretic dampers
2003
22 Highway Bridges in Illinois, USA Friction pendulum bearings

Lead-rubber and sliding bearings

23 Bhuj Hospital, India 2003 developed using New Zealand
technology
Million Dollar Bridge on the Copper River
24 Proposed Friction pendulum bearings
Cordova, Alaska, USA

345