The accurate analysis of the seismic response of isolated structures requires incorporation of the flexibility of supporting soil. However, it is often customary to idealize the soil as rigid during the analysis of su...The accurate analysis of the seismic response of isolated structures requires incorporation of the flexibility of supporting soil. However, it is often customary to idealize the soil as rigid during the analysis of such structures. In this paper, seismic response time history analyses of base-isolated buildings modelled as linear single degree-of-freedom （SDOF） and multi degree-of-freedom （MDOF） systems with linear and nonlinear base models considering and ignoring the flexibility of supporting soil are conducted. The flexibility of supporting soil is modelled through a lumped parameter model consisting of swaying and rocking spring-dashpots. In the analysis, a large number of parametric studies for different earthquake excitations with three different peak ground acceleration （PGA） levels, different natural periods of the building models, and different shear wave velocities in the soil are considered. For the isolation system, laminated rubber bearings （LRBs） as well as high damping rubber bearings （HDRBs） are used. Responses of the isolated buildings with and without SSI are compared under different ground motions leading to the following conclusions： （1） soil flexibility may considerably influence the stiff superstructure response and may only slightly influence the response of the flexible structures; （2） the use of HDRBs for the isolation system induces higher structural peak responses with SSI compared to the system with LRBs; （3） although the peak response is affected by the incorporation of soil flexibility, it appears insensitive to the variation of shear wave velocity in the soil; （4） the response amplifications of the SDOF system become closer to unit with the increase in the natural period of the building, indicating an inverse relationship between SSI effects and natural periods for all the considered ground motions, base isolations and shear wave velocities; （5） the incorporation of SSI increases the number of significant cycles of large amplitude accelerati展开更多
为明确MSS、Casciati和Harvey and Gavin这3种常用双向恢复力模型计算基础隔震建筑风振响应的差异,采用3种模型模拟铅芯橡胶支座在水平单向和双向位移下的恢复力,对比试验或有限元结果的差异,采用3种模型对一算例在双向风荷载下隔震层...为明确MSS、Casciati和Harvey and Gavin这3种常用双向恢复力模型计算基础隔震建筑风振响应的差异,采用3种模型模拟铅芯橡胶支座在水平单向和双向位移下的恢复力,对比试验或有限元结果的差异,采用3种模型对一算例在双向风荷载下隔震层位移、顶点位移和顶点加速度3个指标的差异进行了分析。研究表明:3种模型模拟铅芯橡胶支座在单向循环位移、方形和偏置方形位移下恢复力的趋势基本一致;而模拟圆形和偏置圆形位移时,MSS模型双向恢复力形状与有限元结果不同,不能较为准确地模拟支座双向耦合行为,Casciati模型误差稍小于Harvey and Gavin模型。Casciati模型和Harvey and Gavin模型计算风振响应基本一致;对于横风向响应均方根,3种模型差距不大;对于顺风向隔震层位移、顶点位移和顶点加速度均方根,MSS模型稍小,而对于顺、横风向隔震层位移峰值因子,MSS模型稍大;对于顺、横风向顶点加速度峰值因子和双向与单向模型顶点加速度最值比值随风速变化规律,MSS模型与其他模型差异较大。基于双向耦合效应模拟及风振响应指标的差异,建议采用Casciati模型考虑双向恢复力模型对基础隔震建筑风振响应的影响。展开更多
文摘The accurate analysis of the seismic response of isolated structures requires incorporation of the flexibility of supporting soil. However, it is often customary to idealize the soil as rigid during the analysis of such structures. In this paper, seismic response time history analyses of base-isolated buildings modelled as linear single degree-of-freedom （SDOF） and multi degree-of-freedom （MDOF） systems with linear and nonlinear base models considering and ignoring the flexibility of supporting soil are conducted. The flexibility of supporting soil is modelled through a lumped parameter model consisting of swaying and rocking spring-dashpots. In the analysis, a large number of parametric studies for different earthquake excitations with three different peak ground acceleration （PGA） levels, different natural periods of the building models, and different shear wave velocities in the soil are considered. For the isolation system, laminated rubber bearings （LRBs） as well as high damping rubber bearings （HDRBs） are used. Responses of the isolated buildings with and without SSI are compared under different ground motions leading to the following conclusions： （1） soil flexibility may considerably influence the stiff superstructure response and may only slightly influence the response of the flexible structures; （2） the use of HDRBs for the isolation system induces higher structural peak responses with SSI compared to the system with LRBs; （3） although the peak response is affected by the incorporation of soil flexibility, it appears insensitive to the variation of shear wave velocity in the soil; （4） the response amplifications of the SDOF system become closer to unit with the increase in the natural period of the building, indicating an inverse relationship between SSI effects and natural periods for all the considered ground motions, base isolations and shear wave velocities; （5） the incorporation of SSI increases the number of significant cycles of large amplitude accelerati
文摘为明确MSS、Casciati和Harvey and Gavin这3种常用双向恢复力模型计算基础隔震建筑风振响应的差异,采用3种模型模拟铅芯橡胶支座在水平单向和双向位移下的恢复力,对比试验或有限元结果的差异,采用3种模型对一算例在双向风荷载下隔震层位移、顶点位移和顶点加速度3个指标的差异进行了分析。研究表明:3种模型模拟铅芯橡胶支座在单向循环位移、方形和偏置方形位移下恢复力的趋势基本一致;而模拟圆形和偏置圆形位移时,MSS模型双向恢复力形状与有限元结果不同,不能较为准确地模拟支座双向耦合行为,Casciati模型误差稍小于Harvey and Gavin模型。Casciati模型和Harvey and Gavin模型计算风振响应基本一致;对于横风向响应均方根,3种模型差距不大;对于顺风向隔震层位移、顶点位移和顶点加速度均方根,MSS模型稍小,而对于顺、横风向隔震层位移峰值因子,MSS模型稍大;对于顺、横风向顶点加速度峰值因子和双向与单向模型顶点加速度最值比值随风速变化规律,MSS模型与其他模型差异较大。基于双向耦合效应模拟及风振响应指标的差异,建议采用Casciati模型考虑双向恢复力模型对基础隔震建筑风振响应的影响。
