The Effect of Low-Cycle Fatigue on Ductility Demand Factor

Author
Lavizan, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Trainig University
Abstract
Ductility demands of structures are increased during strong ground motion as a consequence of the dissipation of hysteretic energy caused by cyclic load reversals. In other word, the cumulative damage of the structures due to cyclic loading reduces the ductility capacity of the structures. This phenomenon is called Low-cycle fatigue. If the real force-deflection model of members is used to nonlinear analysis; the effect of cumulative damage will be concluded in design automatically. But the monotonic ductility capacity could not take into account Low-cycle fatigue. Hence this ductility capacity should be reduced in design procedures (equivalent ductility factor) and should be used instead of the conventional monotonic ductility supply in design procedures. The equivalent ductility factor is applied for determination of force reduction factor. In this study, the effect of low-cycle fatigue on ductility capacity factor is examined. For this reason the replies of a single degree of freedom system was evaluated using nonlinear dynamic analysis. Seven records related to soil type II from strong ground database are extracted. Also in order to assess the effect of low-cycle fatigue on ductility factor, various models of damage have been selected. Three models have been proposed to determine the equivalent ductility factor taking into account cumulative damage. The first two models based on the maximum displacement and maximum dissipation energy are the upper and lower values. The third one model is Park-Ang model. According to the Park-Ang model, the damage is related to hysteretic energy and concluded of maximum displacement and maximum dissipation energy. The parameter γ controls the hysteretic energy and depends on maximum displacement and natural frequency of the system. In order to obtain the quantity of the parameter γ, a parametric study of the inelastic response of SDOF systems was carried out. In the parametric study, input ground motion, as well as the initial stiffness (period), strength, ductility, hysteretic behavior and damping of SDOF systems, was varied. In this paper the variation of this parameter was considered and the effect of the ductility factor, force reduction factor, time history acceleration and damping ratio was evaluated. The results show that the reduction of the ductility factor due to low-cycle fatigue (controlled by parameter γ) is significant. It is proved that the parameter is relatively stable during all length of periods. If approximate values for γ are used, the determination of equivalent ductility is very simple, and thus appropriate for design purpose. The formulae for equivalent ductility factors include damage indices. In design procedures only life safety limit states are considered and the other purposes such as serviceability, immediate occupancy and collapse prevention limit states do not. A more rational design procedure should permit the designer to choose rational limit state. This idea has been realized by including damage indices into the formula for equivalent ductility factors. The parameter γ varies from 0.6 to 1.2. For practice peruses it is assumed that the value of γ is 0.9. Using this assumption it is possible to determine equivalent ductility factor taking into account low cycle fatigue.

Keywords


. Newmark, N.M, and Hall, W.J., Earthquake Spectra and Design. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California, (1982).
2. Bojórquez, E. and Ruiz S.E., Strength reduction factors for the Valley of Mexico, considering low-cycle fatigue effects, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 516, (2004).
3. Park, Y-J, Ang A.H-S., and Wen, Y. K., Seismic  damage  analysis  damage –limiting  design  of  RC  building, Structural  Research  Series,  report  No. UILU-ENG 84-2007, University of Illinois at Urbana, Illinois, Oct, (1984).
4. Bojórquez, J., Ruiz, S.E., Terán-Gilmore, A., Bojórquez, E., Reyes-Salazar, A., Target ductility and strength reduction factors for degrading structures under the consideration of cumulative damage, Geo SIG attended the 14th ECEE in Ohrid, Macedonia, (2010).
5. Bojórquez, E. and Rivera, J.L., Effects of degrading models for ductility and dissipated hysteretic energy in uniform annual failure rate spectra, The 14th World Conference on     Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China,(2008).
6. Zarfam, P. and Niko, M., Vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete frame and shear based on energy-based damage index (Case Study: Tabas and Manjil earthquakes), Iranian Rehabilitation National Conference, Yazd University, (2007).
7. Gerami, M. and Daneshjoo, F., Cumulative Plastic Deformation as a Local Damage Index of Moment Resisting Frames in Story Level, Journal of School of Engineering,1: pp. 51-66 (2007).
8. Bojórquez, E., Reyes-Salazar, A., Terán-Gilmore, A.,  and Ruiz, S.E., Energy-based damage index for steel structures, Steel and Composite Structures, 10: pp. 343-360 (2010).
9. Fajfar P., Equivalent ductility factors taking in to account low – cycle fatigue, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamic, 21: pp.837-848 (1992).
10. Powell, G.H., and Allahabadi, R., Seismic damage  prediction  by  deterministic  methods:  Concepts  and  procedures,  Earthquake  Engineering  and  Structral  Dynamic, 16, pp.719-734 (1988). 
11. Cosenza, E., Manfredi, G., Ramasco K., An  evaluation  of  the  use  damage  function  in  earthquake–resistant  design, Earthquake  Engineering  and  Structural  Dynamic, 9, pp.303-312 (1990).
12. Banon, H., Biggs, J.M., and Irvin, H.M., Seismic damage in reinforced concrete  frames. Journal of Structural, ASCE, 107, pp.1713-1729 (1981).
13. Krawinkler, H., Performance assessment of steel components. Earthquake  spectra, 2, pp.27-41 (1987).
14. Available on: http://peer.berkeley.edu.
15. Zakeri Salehi, M., Check the magnification factor of the shift in the frame flexural reinforced concrete using nonlinear seismic analysis, Master Thesis,  school of Engineering, Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran (2008).
16. Available on: http://www.nees.org/Resources/Nonlin.
17. Available on:
http://www.seismosoft.com/en/SeismoSignal.aspx