Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

Investigation of variation in response of reinforced concrete structures under

the effect of incident angle variation using multidirectional dynamic analysis,
MIDA

MIDA
3

2 1

-1
-2
-3
morteza.razi@gmail.com

Incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) is one of the most efficient analytical methods to evaluate seismic
behavior of the structures. Obtaining relatively exact results specially in the case of concrete structures
requires multi-component IDA (MIDA) analysis on three-dimensional models. In MIDA analysis
determination of the incident angle is very important, because it considerably affects the result of
analysis. It is impossible to determine incident angle of earthquakes due to their random nature .In this
paper, the effect of incident angle variation on the response of structures is investigated and has tried to
establish a relationship to obtain critical value of incident angle which produces the maximum response in
the structure. For this purpose two three-story concrete building is selected one having regular plan and
one irregular. Then selecting some accellograms randomly and by implementing MIDA analysis this
issue is investigated. Modeling and analyses is accomplished using Opensees environment which is a
finite element based computational tool. The results are plotted in graphs which show the amount of
variation for different cases and show the sensibility of each structure to incident angle in different
intensity for each accellogram. Because of fewness of analyses, results aren't general but it could make a
good perception of the issue and provides a view of amount of influence of incident angle on concrete
structures.
MIDA :

.1

.
.[1]
.
.
. .

Page1

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

.
) (
.
. .
.
) [2] (Penzien and Watabe 1975
. . ) (Wilson , 1995
[3] 1995 .
CQC ) (Menun and Der Kiureghian 1998 ].[4
CQC .
SRSS 2800 ]. [5
2800 30
.
.
.
.2

1 2 . 1
. .
2 0.25 g
0.16g . 1 . 5 .
) C20 20 ( S500 500
.
12 .
2
. 1.5 .
25 .
. Opensees
) (force based fiber element ]. [6
.
IDA ) (Cornell 2002 et al ][7
.
.

.
.
.
.
MIDA . ]. [8

Page2

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

-1 :

-2 :

Page3

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

.

.
MIDA IDA .
-

] .[9 IDA
.
MIDA
) ( .
. 15
MIDA . .
.
.
:
.

.3

3 ow op . oxyz
. ox ow ). (

- 3

15 .
:
)1- loma prieta (waho
)2- Imperial Valley(compuertas
)3- Northridge (La bald win hills
1 .

Page4

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

0 360 5 .
. 5
0.5g , 0.3g , 0.05g .
0 360 5 .
.
5 0.5g , 0.30g , 0.05g
)

( .
-1

)(1
t y , x y , x.
x y
.
4 5 .

Page5

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

)(

)(

)(
4 :

)( ) 0.05g( 0.3g )( 0.5g

)(

) (

5 :

)(

)( ) 0.05g( 0.3g)(
0.5g .

Page6

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

5 180
185 360 .
1 .
. Loma
prieta 0.05g

0.17 0.23 . 0.5g 0.77 2.20

. .

.
. 0.30g northridge 90 130
loma prieta 90 120 .
60 120 . 2 3
) (
2 - 3

.
) 2

3 (

Page7

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

.
.
. 0.05g 10 32 .
2 .

..

84

). .(loma prieta imperial velley

50

.4

IDA .
MIDA .
. MIDA .
.

.
. .
.
.
.

.5

Page8

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Seismic Retrofitting, Tabriz, Iran, 20-22 October 2010

[1] Lagaros, N.D., Fotis, A.D., and Krikos, S.A., 2006.Assessment of seismic design procedures based on
the
[2] Penzien, J. and Watabe, M., 1975. Characteristics of 3-dimensional earthquake ground motions.
Earthquake
[3] Wilson, E.L., Suharwardy, A., and Habibullah, A., 1995. A clarification of the orthogonal effects in a
threedimensional seismic analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 11 (4), 659666
[4] Menun, C. and Der, Kiureghian, A., 1998. A replacement for the 30%, 40% and SRSS rules for
multicomponent seismic analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 14 (1), 153163.
(( [ ]
[6] McKenna, F. and Fenves, G.L., 2001. The OpenSees command language manual version 1.2.
University of California, Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
[7] Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A., 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics, 31 (3), 491514
[8] Lopez, O.A., Chopra, A.K., and Hernandez, J.J., 2000. Critical response of structures to multicomponent
earthquake excitation. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 29, 17591778.
[9] Serdar Kircil, M. and Polat, Z., 2006. Fragility analysis of mid-rise R/C frame buildings. Engineering
Structures, 28 (9), 13351345.

Page9