Ambient and Forced Vibration Testing of a Reinforced

Concrete Building before and after Its Seismic Retrofitting

Serdar Soyoz1; Ertugrul Taciroglu, M.ASCE2; Kutay Orakcal3; Robert Nigbor4; Derek Skolnik5;
Hilmi Lus6; and Erdal Safak7

Abstract: This paper investigates the effects of seismic retrofitting on the modal characteristics of a 6-story RC building located in Istanbul,
Turkey. Ambient vibration surveys were carried out before, during, and after the retrofitting work, which took place between June and Decem-
ber 2010. The building was retrofitted via jacketing of columns, addition of structural walls, and construction of a mat foundation. These studies
were complemented with data from forced vibration tests performed with an eccentric-mass shaker after the retrofitting work was completed.
During retrofitting, partitions were demolished; as a result, the first modal frequency of the building decreased by 11%, based on the results of
the ambient vibration survey. The ambient vibration survey also showed that the modal frequencies after the seismic retrofitting increased by
almost 96%. During the forced vibration tests, the building was excited around its modal frequencies using an eccentric-mass shaker. It was
found that the modal damping values increased with the amplitude of the excitation force. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000568.
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Vibration; Seismic effects; Rehabilitation; Reinforced concrete; Concrete buildings; Tests.
Author keywords: Ambient vibration testing; Forced vibration testing; Seismic retrofitting; System identification; Infill walls.

Introduction
Vulnerable residential and public buildings represent the most
profound risk to life-safety in earthquake-prone regions of the world.
A significant portion of this stock in Turkey consists of RC buildings
that are nonductile—a term used to signify a structural system that
has very limited capacity to absorb and dissipate the destructive
energy of strong ground shaking beyond its limited elastic range, and
hence, one that is extremely vulnerable to collapse. Indeed, the
incidence of collapse of nonductile RC buildings (NDRCBs) during
the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake was very high (Erdik 2001), and this
was the leading cause of over 17,000 fatalities suffered.
Although their proportion among the overall building stock may
differ from region to region, NDRCBs are not specific to Turkey
1
Assistant Professor, Bogazici Univ., Dept. of Civil Engineering, Bebek-
Istanbul 34342, Turkey. E-mail: serdar.soyoz@boun.edu.tr
2
Professor, Univ. of California, Los Angeles, Civil & Environmental
Engineering Dept., 5731E Boelter Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1593
(corresponding author). E-mail: etacir@ucla.edu
3
Assistant Professor, Bogazici Univ., Dept. of Civil Engineering, Bebek-
Istanbul 34342, Turkey. E-mail: kutay.orakcal@boun.edu.tr
4
Research Engineer, Univ. of California, Los Angeles, Civil & Envi-
ronmental Engineering Dept., 6679 Boelter Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90095-
1593. E-mail: nigbor@ucla.edu
5 One such building that had been slated for seismic retrofitting
Senior Project Engineer, Kinemetrics Inc., 222 Vista Ave., Pasadena,
CA 91107. E-mail: das@kmi.com
6
Associate Professor, Bogazici Univ., Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Bebek-Istanbul 34342, Turkey. E-mail: hilmilus@boun.edu.tr
7
Professor and Chair, Dept. of Earthquake Engineering, Bogazici Univ.,
Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Cengelkoy-
Istanbul 34688, Turkey. E-mail: erdal.safak@boun.edu.tr
Note. This manuscript was submitted on April 15, 2011; approved on
January 12, 2012; published online on January 14, 2012. Discussion period
open until March 1, 2014; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, Vol. 139, No. 10, October 1, 2013. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9445/
2013/10-1741–1752/$25.00.
(USGS 2000), and many recent earthquakes that afflicted urban
areas—including Northridge, California (1994); Kobe, Japan (1995);
Chi-Chi, Taiwan (1999); Kashmir, Pakistan (2005); Sichuan, China
(2008); and L’Aquila, Italy (2009)—exposed similar vulnerabilities.
In the United States, NDRCBs were constructed prior to the mid-
1970s, when new code provisions were made for ductile designs, and
they exhibit similar seismic vulnerabilities to their Turkish counter-
parts. There are recently initiated and ongoing efforts to catalog the
NDRCB inventory in California (Anagnos et al. 2008; Comartin et al.
2008) and to develop models that can reliably predict the collapse risk
of a given NDRCB through laboratory testing (Pacific Earthquake
Engineering Research Center 2006).
Although the seismic design codes of Turkey are rigorous, they
had not been adequately enforced. Preliminary studies conducted to
address the potential scope of the problem have produced sobering
results. For example, the majority of buildings under the jurisdiction
of the Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul (MMI) are built with-
out a legal license; it is estimated that there are nearly 1 million
residential multistory buildings that should be screened for potential
collapse risks (MMI 2003). These findings have been the impetus
behind numerous reconstruction and retrofitting programs throughout
the seismic regions of Turkey [see, for example, the Istanbul Seismic
Mitigation and Earthquake Preparedness Project carried out by
Istanbul Project Coordination Unit (2011)].
was the Educational Technologies Building, Block B (ET-B), of
Bogazici University (Fig. 1). This 6-story RC structure is located on
the North Campus of Bogazici University in Istanbul, Turkey
(latitude, 41
5910:599N; longitude, 29
2938:899E). Results of code-
compliant performance-assessment studies indicated that the build-
ing did not satisfy the performance criteria set forth in the 2007
Turkish Seismic Code [Ministry of Public Works and Settle-
ment (MPWS) 2007] for existing buildings. The building lacked
adequate lateral stiffness and ductility attributes necessary to con-
form with the immediate occupancy and life-safety performance
objectives specified in the seismic code. As a result, between July

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1741

and December 2010, the building underwent a comprehensive
government-funded seismic retrofit program, during which the
columns of the building were strengthened via RC jacketing, several
structural walls were added to the building, and a mat foundation was
constructed underneath the building. Addition of structural walls
served toward improving the lateral stiffness as well as the lateral
ductility of the overall structural system, whereas the motivation
behind jacketing of the columns was to increase column capacity
(both axial and flexural) and to improve ductility (through added
confinement). Fig. 2 shows typical reinforcement configurations for
the column jackets and walls. Incorporation of structural walls
brought together the necessity to construct a mat foundation un-
derneath the building to prevent wall rocking and to reduce bearing
stresses in the underlying soil under earthquake excitation.
In the current study, modal characteristics of ET-B are obtained
from ambient surveys, and medium-level forced vibration tests are
conducted at various stages of the seismic retrofitting work. These
results enable quantification, for ET-B, of (1) the influence of masonry
infills to lateral stiffness, (2) the changes in modal characteristics at-
tributable to retrofitting work; and (3) variation in modal character-
istics of the retrofitted building attributable to intensity of shaking.
Most of the residential buildings and nearly all of the schools and
hospitals in Turkey consist of medium-rise RC frames (beam-
column-slab systems) with masonry infill walls, including ET-B.
There have been previous efforts in quantifying the influence of
masonry infills on the overall stiffness and strength characteristics of
RC (especially nonductile) structures. Both attributes are important
because a better characterization of stiffness enables a more accurate
prediction of the seismic demand on the structural frame (Amanat
and Hoque 2006; Ricci et al. 2011), and that for strength, in turn,
Fig. 1. Educational Technologies Building, Block B, before and after retrofit
Fig. 2. Construction of column jackets and add-on structural walls
1742 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013
enables a better assessment of the collapse potential (Sattar and Liel
2010). Improved knowledge of these quantities will reduce the
uncertainty in decisions on whether to reconstruct a building entirely
or to retrofit it (Sucuo

glu et al. 2006). This paper, without attempting
a comprehensive review, discusses a few such studies that are
pertinent to the present effort.
There have been numerous shake-table tests on substructural or
reduced-scale masonry infilled RC specimens (e.g., Mehrabi et al.
1996; Klinger et al. 1997; Zarnic et al. 2001; Hashemi and Mosalam
2006). These tests were primarily focused on hysteretic response,
and, like other similar investigations, attempts were made to provide
quantified values of the strength and ductility gains that the masonry
infill provides. Some of these works also present data from low-level
excitations and report natural frequencies and damping ratios. In
particular, Hashemi and Mosalam (2006) observed the presence of
unreinforced masonry infills to increase the natural frequency of
their test structure by a factor of 2. They also observed that modal
damping ratios were increased with increased intensity of shaking.
There have also been numerous studies involving ambient vi-
bration surveys (AVSs) (for recent work, see Dunand et al. 2006;
Michel et al. 2008, 2010; Herak and Herak 2010; Oliveira and
Navarro 2010) and forced vibration tests on RC structures (Satake
et al. 2003; Yu et al. 2007b). The majority of these studies seek to
provide simple formulas to predict natural frequencies from basic
data such as building type and height, and nearly all of them note the
observed amplitude dependency of natural frequencies and damping
ratios. Some provide approximate formulas for this dependency—
see, for example, Satake et al. (2003), who report that “first-mode
damping ratios in the small amplitude region increase linearly with
vibration amplitude.”
 Comparative sets of measurements from a single full-scale RC
structure with and without its masonry infills, on the other hand, are
very scarce. One such work is the investigation by Guler et al.
(2008). Close to the vein of the current study, Guler and coworkers
conducted ambient vibration surveys on six buildings during each
building’s construction. Their measurements from before and after
the infills were placed on one of their specimen structures and in-
dicate an elongation of first natural period by approximately 13% in
the strong direction and 17% in the weak direction.
The following sections describe the ambient and forced vibration
tests the authors have conducted on ET-B, along with the modal
characteristics identified at various stages of the retrofitting work.
These findings confirm the trends observed in earlier studies that
were discussed previously. Based on this, the paper concludes with
a delineation of research needs related to full-scale testing of this
type of construction, which is commonly encountered in Turkey,
especially because the seismic-resistant design (equivalent static
earthquake load calculation) and nonlinear performance assessment
(calculation of inelastic earthquake displacement demand) proce-
dures in the Turkish Seismic Code (MPWS 2007) rely on the esti-
mation of natural period of vibration and damping ratio values for the
building considered.
Ambient Vibration Survey
As part of the seismic retrofit process, ET-B was cleared out while it
underwent ambient vibration testing. All nonstructural components
(e.g., partition walls, ceilings, plumbing) were removed, the cover
concrete on the columns was scraped down, and holes were drilled
through the slabs to accommodate the extra reinforcing bars in the
column jackets. Building traffic was limited to construction activity,
which was concentrated mostly in the lower levels of the build-
ing. No machinery was running in the building regularly, but the
Fig. 3. Plan view of typical story
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1743
construction workers were using jackhammers to remove floor
coverings and the concrete cover on the columns.
Instrumentation of Building
Sensors and digitizers were Kinemetrics Episensor ES-T accel-
erometers and Quanterra Q330 data loggers, respectively. Acceler-
ation data were collected through 24 channels (with eight triaxial
accelerometers). The Episensor force-balance accelerometers have
a wide frequency and acceleration range (DC to 200 Hz and 64g,
respectively) and capture vibration amplitudes as low as 0:03 mg
from 0.1 Hz and higher. The Q330 data loggers provide signal
conditioning, 24-bit analog-to-digital conversion, and GPS time-
stamping for synchronization across multiple nodes.
Fig. 3 shows the plan view of a typical floor, and Fig. 4 displays
the elevation view of the building (both are pre-retrofit drawings).
The sensors are located at locations A and H. The sensors at location
A were on each floor of the building. At the top floor, one more
sensor unit was located at location H. Fig. 5 displays the photographs
of two of the sensors deployed.
Modal Identification Methodology and Results from
Ambient Data
System identification can be carried out in the frequency or the time
domain. A survey of these techniques is out of the scope of the
current study, and in this paper, the authors opt to cite only a few
methods that represent the several varieties applied to structural
health monitoring and damage detection and a few other recent
studies that focused on field measurements (see, for example, Beck
and Jennings 1980; Yun and Shinozuka 1980; Shinozuka et al. 1982;
Safak 1989a, b, 1991; Shinozuka and Ghanem 1995; Doebling et al.
1996; Lus et al. 1999; Soyoz and Feng 2009; Soyoz et al. 2010).
 Fig. 4. Elevation view of ET-B from North

Fig. 5. Sensors placed on slabs near columns

The literature on modal identification methodologies is vast and
the authors do not intend to provide a review in this paper. A ma-
jority of the modal identification techniques have originated in
mechanical and electrical engineering (Ewins 2000), but these
techniques have also found substantial use in the civil engineering
field (Cunha and Caetano 2006). The main challenge in system
identification of civil structures is that the structures are massive and
often highly nonlinear. Influences of environmental conditions and
soil–structure interaction can further complicate these analyses
(Safak 1995; Clinton et al. 2006; Nayeri et al. 2008).
For the current study, the authors adopted the enhanced fre-
quency domain decomposition (EFDD) method by Brincker et al.
(2001a, b), which is an output-only technique that yields natural
frequencies as well as damping ratios. The EFDD method estab-
lishes autospectral density functions of a set of single-degree-of-
freedom (SDOF) systems with modal properties equivalent to those
of the original system. The approach is based on the singular-value
decomposition of cross-spectral density matrix, SYY ðwÞ, of output
channels, YðtÞ, at discrete frequencies. The singular value de-
composition of the power spectral density (PSD) matrix is given by
SYY ðwÞ ¼ UðwÞSðwÞU H ðwÞ (1)
where SðwÞ and UðwÞ denote the diagonal matrix of singular values
and the unitary matrix of singular vectors, respectively; and H
denotes the complex conjugate and transpose. Brincker et al.
(2001b) have shown that, when the structure is loaded with
a broadband excitation near the modal frequencies, SðwÞ contains
a set of functions that are approximations of the autospectral density
functions of the modes’ equivalent SDOF systems in the normal
coordinates, whereas the vectors in UðwÞ are the modal shapes of the
corresponding modes.

1744 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013

 The inverse Fourier transform of the autospectral density func-
tion yields the time domain free-decay function of the SDOF, from
which the modal frequency and the corresponding damping ratio can
be estimated. As suggested by Brincker et al. (2001a), the initial
value (r0 ) and the logarithmic decrement (d) of the free-decay
function can be estimated through linear regression and by
substituting the numbers (k) and the values (rk ) of the extremes of the
free-decay function in


2 r
d ¼ ln 0 , k ¼ 1, 2, . . . (2)
k jrk j
The damping ratio of the SDOF is subsequently estimated by
d
j ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi (3)
d2 þ 4p2
Parametric methods such as covariance-driven stochastic subspace
identification may be used for more accurate estimates of damping
if closely spaced modes or nonproportional damping exists in the
system (Magalhães et al. 2010).
For the present case, the cross-power spectral density of two
discrete-time signals is estimated using Welch’s method (Welch
1967). The sampling frequency of the data was 200 Hz, and a Hanning
window was utilized to minimize leakage effects. For the sampling
rate used in this study, aliasing does not occur for response frequencies
smaller than 100 Hz (practically, 70 Hz). Because the structural
frequencies sought in this study are much smaller than 70 Hz, aliasing
Fig. 6. Modal frequencies and shapes in E-W direction
Fig. 7. Modal frequencies and shapes in N-S direction
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1745
was not an issue. No filtering was applied to the data. The frequency
domain decomposition analyses were carried out between 0 and 30
Hz, which is deemed adequate for modal identification purposes. To
obtain the spectral density function, a 1-h-long data set was divided
into several segments. The number of fast Fourier transform points
was 2,048 for each segment. Consecutive segments were overlapped
by 50% to obtain more reliable results.
Figs. 6 and 7 display the singular values of the cross-power
spectral density matrix of the response and the modal shapes in E-W
and N-S directions after the seismic retrofitting, respectively. Peaks
corresponding to the modal frequencies are marked on these figures.
The authors note that the singular value decomposition (SVD)
procedure yields singular values at all frequencies, and there are
usually peaks that are nonstructural harmonics (Brincker et al.
2001b). These can be discarded by evaluating the SVD of PSD
matrix using data from other time windows or by inspecting the
corresponding modal shapes.
Figs. 8–11 display the variations in identified modal values over
time. During the seismic retrofitting, partition walls were demol-
ished, and it was found that the first modal frequency of the building
decreased from 2.98 to 2.64 Hz, which is a change of nearly 11%.
This amount of decrease in the modal frequencies shows the effects
of the partition walls in the overall structural stiffness. After the
seismic retrofitting, the first modal frequency increased from 2.64 to
5.18 Hz (i.e., a 96% increase). Damping ratios identified before and
after the seismic retrofitting did not change significantly and were
between 0.5 and 1% for the first three modes. Damping ratios
identified from the ambient vibration surveys are not (and should not
 Fig. 8. Change in first modal frequency during seismic retrofitting

Fig. 9. Change in second modal frequency during seismic retrofitting

Fig. 10. Change in third modal frequency during seismic retrofitting

be) used in the seismic performance assessment of the structures
because the uncertainty in these values would be high and the vi-
bration level is too low to represent the expected response of the
structure under an earthquake (see, for example, Celebi 1996; Satake
et al. 2003; Dunand et al. 2006; Magalhães, et al. 2010). Damping
values identified from forced vibration testing or from structural
response recorded during seismic excitation would represent a better
estimation.
Finite-Element Model of Retrofitted Structure
The building with the retrofitted configuration was modeled in
SAP2000, as shown in Fig. 12. The finite-element model (FEM) of
the building incorporated the dimensions of structural members
after retrofitting. Tables 1 and 2 list the cross-sectional dimensions
of the columns and structural walls in the building before and after
seismic retrofitting, whereas the locations of the jacketed columns

1746 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013

 Fig. 11. Change in higher modal frequencies during seismic retrofitting

Fig. 12. Northwest view of finite-element model of ET-B

Table 1. Column Dimensions before and after Seismic Retrofitting Table 2. Structural Wall Dimensions before and after Seismic Retrofitting
Before retrofit After retrofit Before retrofit After retrofit
Dimensions (cm) Quantity Dimension (cm) Quantity Dimension Strong Dimension Strong
(cm) Quantity direction (cm) Quantity direction
40 3 60 13 70 3 75 9
55 3 75 2 650 3 45 1 E-W
70 3 90 1 635 3 40 1 E-W
65 3 90 1 40 3 345 1 N-S
Ø60 2 90 3 90 2 40 3 620 2 N-S
60 3 50 1 90 3 80 1 325 3 30 1 E-W 325 3 30 1 E-W
50 3 60 1 80 3 90 1 30 3 470 2 N-S 30 3 470 2 N-S
30 3 30 2 30 3 30 2
30 3 50 2 30 3 50 2
70 3 90 1 (Computers and Structures Inc. 2000), the commercial SAP2000
software uses shell elements for which in-plane displacements are
quadratic, and out-of-plane displacements are cubic. In this study,
and add-on structural walls on the building floor plan are shown in a thick-plate (Mindlin/Reissner) element formulation was used,
Fig. 13. which also considers the transverse shear deformations. The line
Structural walls and floor slabs in the FEM were modeled using (frame) element in SAP2000 is a three-dimensional beam-column
shell elements, whereas line elements were used for the beams and element formulation, which includes the effects of biaxial bending,
columns. As described in the CSI Analysis Reference Manual torsion, axial deformation, and biaxial shear deformations.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1747

 Fig. 13. Location of jacketed columns and add-on structural walls on building floor plan

Walls and columns were assumed to be restrained at the foun- Table 3. Variations in Modal Values versus Peak Top-Floor Acceleration
dation level with full fixity, owing to the existence of the mat for Retrofitted Building
foundation. Peripheral walls at basement levels of the building were Peak top-floor Mode Frequency Damping
included in the FEM. Increase in the flexural stiffness of the beams acceleration (&g) number (Hz) (percentage)
attributable to the contribution of the floor slab was also considered
in the model. An elastic modulus of approximately 35,000 MPa was 0.05 (ambient) 1 4.69 0.5
used for the structural members. This value was estimated using 1.2 1 4.65 1.1
Chang and Mander’s equation (1994) from compression test data on 3.0 1 4.60 1.3
concrete cylinder specimens that yielded an average compressive 4.5 1 4.53 1.8
strength value of approximately 49 MPa. 6.5 1 4.49 2.3
The hollow-brick partition walls in the building were conven- FEM 1 4.38 —
tionally modeled as diagonal elements (struts) connected to the 0.05 (ambient) 2 5.18 0.7
structural frame at beam-column joints. The widths of the diagonal 2.0 2 4.88 1.1
struts were calibrated using the well-known empirical relationships 4.3 2 4.81 2.3
developed by Mainstone (1971). Stiffness-reduction factors by FEM 2 4.64 —
Asteris (2003) were implemented to consider window and door 0.05 (ambient) 3 6.84 0.7
openings in the partition walls. 0.8 3 6.80 1.1
The mass of the structural and nonstructural components of the 2.4 3 6.70 1.3
building was assigned in a distributed manner, using unit weights for 4.3 3 6.60 1.6
the materials. A unit weight of 25 kN=m3 was used for the RC structural FEM 3 7.03 —
members (beams, columns, walls, and floor slabs). A distributed roof
weight of approximately 1 kN=m2 (per unit floor area) was also assigned.
The first three model frequencies predicted by the FEM are 4.38, Forced Vibration Testing
4.64, and 7.03 Hz, respectively. The level of agreement between
these FEM-predicted values and those that were identified from A small eccentric-mass shaker is used to excite the retrofitted
acceleration records are acceptable (cf., Table 3). Model-updating structure with harmonic forces (Fig. 14). It is anchored at point B
procedures can be applied to obtain better estimates of natural (Fig. 3) and level 1 (Fig. 4). It comprises a welded steel frame that is
frequencies (see, for example, Yu et al. 2007a, b). In this process, the bolted to a steel baseplate, four main bearings, two main shafts, and
effective stiffness of structural elements may be systematically six attached steel weights. The total weight is approximately 350 kg.
varied, soil springs may be added to the model, and alternative fixity The weights counterrotate about the horizontal shafts to impart
(contact) conditions between ET-B and adjacent buildings may have a unidirectional force in a horizontal or vertical plane to the test
to be considered. structure in proportion to its eccentricity and rotating speed squared.

1748 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013

 Fig. 14. Eccentric-mass shaker
Eccentricity of the vibrator can be varied between 0 and 100% in
several increments. Maximum force output is limited to 88 kN. The
shaker has an operating frequency range of 1–25 Hz with the ec-
centricity of 18.5 kg×m driven by a 7-hp motor. Table 4 displays the
force exerted by the shaker at various frequencies and eccentricities.
The authors developed a frequency response function (FRF) by
applying harmonic forces at various frequencies and measuring the
resulting structural accelerations at steady state (Fig. 15). Modal
frequencies of the structure could then be directly estimated from the
FRF by peak picking. The EFDD method, which was applied to
ambient data, is not suitable (nor necessary) for the present case—
ideal conditions for EFDD to perform well are when the meas-
urements are obtained under broadband excitations (Brincker et al.
2001b; Fraraccio et al. 2008). For determination of the modal
damping ratios, the authors opted for the simple half-power band-
width method (Chopra 2001). The accuracy of the modal damping
ratios may be increased by having more data points in the vicinity of
the modal peak; however, in this case, the operational limit of the
shaker was 0.1 Hz.
The natural frequencies identified from this resonant testing are
similar to those obtained from the ambient vibration survey. How-
ever, repeated tests with different shaking intensities (achieved by
running the shaker at different eccentricities) revealed that both the
natural frequencies and the damping ratios were amplitude-
dependent. Figs. 16–18 display the FRF functions around the vi-
cinity of the first three modes, and the aforementioned dependency
can be clearly seen from the shifting and sharpening peaks. Fig. 19
shows the first modal shape in E-W and N-S directions from AVS
and forced vibration testing. Based on the comparison of the modal
shapes obtained from AVS before and after the retrofitting, more
uniform modal displacement over the height of the building can be
observed, and this can be attributed to uniformity of add-on
structural walls over the height of the building.
Conclusions
The modal parameters of a RC building located at the Bogazici
University North Campus before and after its seismic retrofitting
were determined by ambient and forced vibration tests. The building
was seismically retrofitted via column jacketing and addition of
structural walls. The building’s modal characteristics before, during,
and after the seismic retrofit were determined from ambient vibration
data by utilizing enhanced frequency domain decomposition. The
retrofitted structure was tested again with an eccentric-mass shaker,
and modal frequencies and damping ratios were extracted from
FRF data under various increasing shaking intensities. The main
observations based on the results of these testing and identification
efforts may be summarized as follows:
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1749
Table 4. Force Exerted by Shaker at Given Eccentricity and Frequency
Eccentricity
(percentage) Frequency (Hz) Force (kN)
25 4.5 3.70
50 4.5 7.39
75 4.5 11.1
25 6.5 7.71
50 6.5 15.4
75 6.5 23.1
• The first modal frequency decreased by approximately 11%,
from 2.98 to 2.64 Hz, owing to the removal of brick-infill
partition walls. This observation generally agrees with findings
by Kose (2009), who performed detailed numerical studies with
finite-element models and found that fundamental periods of RC
buildings with infill walls are 5–10% shorter than those without.
Moreover, another ambient survey conducted on a similar struc-
ture by Guler et al. (2008) yielded 9 and 6% increases in the two
lowest frequencies when infill walls were placed (further 31 and
19% increases in those two frequencies were recorded, respec-
tively, when the whole building was plastered). These studies
suggest that the effects of partitioning walls on the overall
structural stiffness of RC structures (especially nonductile ones)
may be significant. Partition walls are not usually taken into
account in finite-element analyses, and this modeling error may
adversely affect predictions of seismic demand on structural
members.
• The first modal frequency increased from 2.64 to 5.18 Hz—i.e.,
there was a 96% increase in the modal frequencies attribut-
able to seismic retrofitting. Measurements such as these may
be used to assess and verify the effectiveness of seismic retrofits
and to calibrate finite-element models (see, for example, Yu et al.
2007b) with which more accurate predictions of seismic demand
on the retrofitted structure can be made.
• Currently, a constant modal damping value is used in code-
compliant seismic performance assessment of buildings. How-
ever, it was found that modal damping ratio increases linearly
with the acceleration experienced by the structure. This is in
general agreement with observations elsewhere [e.g., those in
Japan, as reported by Satake et al. (2003)]. A systematic study
involving ambient surveys and medium-level forced vibration
tests on a representative set of buildings in Turkey is necessary to
develop specific formulas to represent this dependency. Inves-
tigations by Guler et al. (2008), Kose (2009), and the present
paper are steps toward this direction. By themselves, however,
they are inadequate, and only a comprehensive study can de-
finitively bracket the ground truth.
 Fig. 15. Frequency response function in E-W direction obtained from forced vibration test

Fig. 16. Frequency response function of first mode

Fig. 17. Frequency response function of second mode

1750 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013

 Fig. 18. Frequency response function of third mode
Fig. 19. Mode shapes via AVS and forced vibration testing
Acknowledgments
The work presented in this manuscript was funded by the National
Science Foundation Grant CMMI-0755333, Bogazici University
Grant BAP 5343, and in-kind support by Kinemetrics Inc. Any opin-
ions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this
material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the sponsoring agencies. The support of Bogazici Univer-
sity Administration is gratefully acknowledged. The authors also ac-
knowledge the efforts of Ben Ferrero, Fatih Kavarnali, M. Gokhan
Kesti, Ekin Ozer, Onur Seren, and Tevfik Terzioglu, who partici-
pated in the field tests; and Professor Mustafa Erdik for his guidance
throughout the project. Also, the logistical and technical help pro-
vided by nees@UCLA (John Wallace, director) is gratefully
acknowledged.
References
Amanat, K. M., and Hoque, E. (2006). “A rationale for determining the
natural period of RC building frames having infill.” Eng. Struct., 28(4),
495–502.
Anagnos, T., Comerio, M. C., Goulet, C., Na, H., Steele, J., and Stewart, J. P.
(2008). “Los Angeles inventory on non-ductile concrete buildings for
JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013 / 1751
analysis of seismic collapse risk hazards.” Proc., 14th World Conf. on
Earthquake Engineering, Beijing.
Asteris, P. G. (2003). “Lateral stiffness of brick masonry infilled plane
frames.” J. Struct. Eng., 129(8), 1071–1079.
Beck, J. L., and Jennings, P. C. (1980). “Structural identification using linear
models and earthquake records.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 8(2),
145–160.
Brincker, R., Ventura, C. E., and Andersen, P. (2001a). “Damping esti-
mation by frequency domain decomposition.” Proc., 19th Int. Modal
Analysis Conf. (IMAC), Kissimmee, FL, 698–703.
Brincker, R., Zhang, L., and Andersen, P. (2001b). “Modal identification of
output-only system using frequency domain decomposition.” Smart
Mater. Struct., 10(3), 441–455.
Celebi, M. (1996). “Comparison of damping in buildings under low-
amplitude and strong motions.” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Appl., 59(2–3), 309–
323.
Chang, G. A., and Mander, J. B. (1994). “Seismic energy based fatigue
damage analysis of bridge columns: Part I—evaluation of seismic ca-
pacity.” NCEER Technical Rep. No. NCEER-94-0006, State Univ. of
New York, Buffalo, NY.
Chopra, A. K. (2001). Dynamics of structures: Theory and application
to earthquake engineering, 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
Clinton, J. F., Bradford, S. C., Heaton, T. H., and Favela, J. (2006). “Ob-
served wander of the natural frequencies in a structure.” Bull. Seismol.
Soc. Am., 96(1), 237–257.
Comartin, C. D., Anagnos, T., Faison, H., Greene, M., and Moehle, J. P.
(2008). “The concrete coalition: Building a network to address non-
ductile concrete buildings.” Proc., 14th World Conf. on Earthquake
Engineering, Beijing.
Computers and Structures Inc. (2000). CSI analysis reference manual,
Berkeley, CA.
Cunha, A., and Caetano, E. (2006). “Experimental modal analysis of civil
engineering structures.” J. Sound Vib., 40(6), 12–20.
Doebling, S. W., Farrar, C. R., Prime, M. B., and Shevitz, D. W. (1996).
“Damage identification and health monitoring of structural and me-
chanical systems from changes in their vibration characteristics: A lit-
erature review.” Los Alamos National Laboratory Rep. LA-13070-MS,
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.
Dunand, F., Gueguen, P., Bard, P.-Y., Rodgers, J., and Celebi, M. (2006).
“Comparison of the dynamic parameters extracted from weak, moderate
and strong building motion.” Proc., 1st European Conf. of Earthquake
Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, paper 1021.
Erdik, M. (2001). “Report on 1999 Kocaeli and Düzce (Turkey) earth-
quakes.” Structural control for civil and infrastructure engineering,
F. Casciati and G. Magonette, eds., World Scientific, London, 149–186.
Ewins, D. J. (2000). Modal testing: Theory, practice and application, 2nd
Ed., Research Studies, Baldock, Hertfordshire, U.K.
Fraraccio, G., Brugger, A., and Betti, R. (2008). “Identification and damage
detection in structures subjected to base excitation.” Exp. Mech., 48(4),
521–528.
Guler, K., Yuksel, E., and Kocak, A. (2008). “Estimation of the fundamental
vibration period of existing RC buildings in Turkey utilizing ambient
vibration records.” J. Earthquake Eng., 12(S2), 140–150.
Hashemi, A., and Mosalam, K. M. (2006). “Shake-table experiment on
reinforced concrete structure containing masonry infill wall.” Earth-
quake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(14), 1827–1852.
Herak, M., and Herak, D. (2010). “Continuous monitoring of dynamic
parameters of the DGFSM building (Zagreb, Croatia).” Bull. Earthquake
Eng., 8(3), 657–669.
Istanbul Project Coordination Unit. (2011). Istanbul seismic mitigation and
earthquake preparedness project, Istanbul, Turkey.
Klinger, R. E., Rubiano, N. R., Bashandy, T. R., and Sweeney, S. C. (1997).
“Evaluation and analytical verification of shaking table data from infilled
frames.” Masonry Soc. J., 15(2), 33–41.
Kose, M. M. (2009). “Parameters affecting the natural period of RC
buildings with infill walls.” Eng. Struct., 31(1), 93–102.
Lus, H., Betti, R., and Longman, R. W. (1999). “Identification of linear
structural systems using earthquake induced vibration data.” Earthquake
Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(11), 1449–1467.
Magalhães, F., Cunha, Á., Caetano, E., and Brincker, R. (2010). “Damping
estimation using free decays and ambient vibration tests.” Mech. Syst.
Signal Process., 24(5), 1274–1290.
Mainstone, R. J. (1971). “On the stiffness and strength of infilled frames.”
Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., 4(Supp), 57–90.
Mehrabi A. B., Shing P. B., Schuller M., and Noland J. (1996). “Ex-
perimental evaluation of masonry-infilled RC frames.” J. Struct. Eng.,
122(3), 228–237.
Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul (MMI). (2003). Earthquake master
plan for Istanbul, Planning and Construction Directorate, Geotechnical
and Earthquake Investigation Dept., Istanbul, Turkey.
Michel, C., Gueguen, P., and Bard, P.-Y. (2008). “Dynamic parameters
of structures extracted from ambient vibration measurements: An aid for
the seismic vulnerability assessment of existing buildings in moderate
seismic hazard regions.” Soil. Dyn. Earthquake Eng., 28(8), 593–604.
Michel, C., Gueguen, P., and Bard, P.-Y. (2010). “Comparison between
seismic vulnerability models and experimental dynamic properties of
existing buildings in France.” Bull. Earthquake Eng., 8(6), 1295–1307.
Ministry of Public Works and Settlement (MPWS). (2007). Specifications
for buildings to be built in seismic codes, Ankara, Turkey (in Turkish).
1752 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2013
Nayeri, D., Masri, S. F., Ghanem, R. G., and Nigbor, R. L. (2008). “A novel
approach for the structural identification and monitoring of a full-scale
17-story building based on ambient vibration measurements.” Smart
Mater. Struct., 17(2), 025006.
Oliveira, C. S., and Navarro, M. (2010). “Fundamental periods of vibration
of RC buildings in Portugal from in-situ experimental and numerical
techniques.” Bull. Earthquake Eng., 8(3), 609–642.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. (2006). “Network for
Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) grand challenge project.”
Æhttp://peer.berkeley.edu/grandchallenge/æ (Jan. 1, 2011).
Ricci, P., Verderame, G. M., and Manfredi, G. (2011). “Analytical in-
vestigation of elastic period of infilled RC MRF buildings.” Eng. Struct.,
33(2), 308–319.
Safak, E. (1989a). “Adaptive modeling, identification and control of dynamic
structural systems: I. Theory.” J. Eng. Mech., 115(11), 2386–2405.
Safak, E. (1989b). “Adaptive modeling, identification and control of dynamic
structural systems: II. Applications.” J. Eng. Mech., 115(11), 2406–2426.
Safak, E. (1991). “Identification of linear structures using discrete-time
filters.” J. Struct. Eng., 117(10), 3064–3085.
Safak, E. (1995). “Detection and identification of soil-structure interaction in
buildings from vibration recordings.” J. Struct. Eng., 121(5), 899–906.
SAP2000 [Computer software]. Berkeley, CA, Computers and Structures
Inc.
Satake, N., Suda, K.-I., Arakawa, T., Sasaki, A., and Tamura, Y. (2003).
“Damping evaluation using full-scale data of buildings in Japan.”
J. Struct. Eng., 129(4), 470–478.
Sattar, S., and Liel, A. B. (2010). “Seismic performance of reinforced
concrete frame structures with and without masonry infill walls.” Proc.,
9th U.S. National and 10th Canadian Conf. on Earthquake Engineering,
Toronto.
Shinozuka, M., and Ghanem, R. (1995). “Structural system identification: 2.
Experimental verification.” J. Eng. Mech., 121(2), 265–273.
Shinozuka, M., Yun, C. B., and Imai, H. (1982). “Identification of linear
dynamic systems.” J. Eng. Mech., 108(6), 1371–1390.
Soyoz, S., and Feng, M. Q. (2009). “Long-term monitoring and identifi-
cation of bridge structural parameters.” Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct.
Eng., 24(2), 82–92.
Soyoz, S., Feng, M. Q., and Shinozuka, M. (2010). “Structural reliability
estimation with vibration-based identified parameters.” J. Eng. Mech.,
136(1), 100–106.
Sucuo
glu, H., Hopkins, D., Jury, R., Kubin, J., Özmen, A., and Özcebe, G.
(2006). “Developing retrofit solutions for the residential building stocks
in Istanbul.” Proc., 8th National Conf. on Earthquake Engineering
(8NCEE), San Francisco, paper 572.
USGS. (2000). “Implications for earthquake risk reduction in the United
States from the Kocaeli, Turkey, earthquake of August 17, 1999.” USGS
Circular No. 1193, Washington, DC.
Welch, P. D. (1967). “The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of
power spectra: A method based on time averaging over short, modified
periodograms.” IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust., 15(2), 70–73.
Yu, E., Taciroglu, E., and Wallace, J. W. (2007a). “Parameter identification
of framed structures using an improved finite element model updating
method. Part I: Formulation and verification.” Earthquake Eng. Struct.
Dyn., 36(5), 619–639.
Yu, E., Wallace, J. W., and Taciroglu, E. (2007b). “Parameter identification
of framed structures using an improved finite element model updating
method. Part II: Application to experimental data.” Earthquake Eng.
Struct. Dyn., 36(5), 640–660.
Yun, C. B., and Shinozuka, M. (1980). “Identification of non-linear
structural dynamical systems.” J. Struct. Mech., 8(2), 187–203.
Zarnic, R., Gostic, S., Crewe, A. J., and Taylor, C. A. (2001). “Shaking
table tests of 1:4 reduced-scale models of masonry infilled reinforced
concrete frame buildings.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 30(6), 819–
834.
Copyright of Journal of Structural Engineering is the property of American Society of Civil
Engineers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.