Advanced Materials Research Vols.

446-449 (2012) pp 739-744 Online: 2012-01-24

© (2012) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.446-449.739

Damage Assessment of RC Frame Structures under Multi-earthquake

Sequences

Wei Huang1, a, Jiang Qian1,b , Binbin Zhuang2,c , Qiushi Fu1,d

1
State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, P. R. China
2
China Nuclear Power Design Company, LTD, P. R. China
a
2008huangwei@tongji.edu.cn, bjqian@tongji.edu.cn, czhbb312@163.com, dqiushi.fu@gmail.com

Keywords: multi-earthquake sequences; RC frame structures; displacement; damage

accumulation; damage index

Abstract. This paper presents the results of a numerical investigation aimed at evaluation of
damage accumulation in structures under different seismic sequences. For this purpose, a
multi-story RC frame model representing the typical buildings was built and subjected to four sets
of different repeating seismic sequences with different magnitude. The results indicate that the
aftershock sequences will increase the damage accumulation in structures, and the damage index
based on the Park and Ang model can qualitatively and quantitatively ascertain the damage state of
the structure instead of the single index based on the lateral drift demands. Additionally, different
sequences with the identical energy input will cause the same damage state in structures.

Introduction
In modern performance-based design methods, the structure is designed to behave linear-elastically
without damage under a moderate single earthquake sequence and to undergo repairable damage
under a strong single earthquake sequence. However the damages caused by earthquakes in the past
indicated that aftershocks constantly happen after main-earthquake, even when there are lots of
foreshocks before the main-earthquake. For instance, after the main-earthquake on January 12,
2010(M=7.0) in Haiti, there were about 14 aftershocks with magnitude greater than 5.0, and one
with a magnitude 6.1 aftershock on January 20, 2010 [1]. Similarly, for March 11,2011 earthquake
on the east coast of the Tohoku with a magnitude of 9.0, there were several foreshocks. The biggest
one was a 7.2M earthquake on March 9, about 40 kilometers away from the main-earthquake
location. A 7.7M aftershock happened 30 minutes after the main-earthquake. There have been more
than 600 aftershocks stronger than magnitude 4.5[2]. In particular, the damage of structures under
the historical earthquakes has shown that the damage state in structures was increased in aftershocks.
For example, the Luanhe river bridge had collapsed in the 7.1M aftershock which taken place 15
hour later following the 7.8 magnitude earthquake at Tangshan, China, on July 28, 1976 [3].
Another example is that many buildings were severe damaged and collapsed in the aftershock
following the 8.0M main-earthquake on Wenchuan of China, on May 12, 2008.
There were lots of researchers studying the relationship of the earthquake sequences and the
response of structures under earthquake sequences. U. Tokuji [4] studied on aftershock sequences of
shallow earthquakes in an area near Japan with magnitude 5.5 and greater during ten years from
1959 through 1968, and their interrelations have been investigated. His studies have shown that the
characteristics of aftershocks appear to depend on the mainshock. A formula of magnitude and time
intervals between the main shock, the largest aftershock and the second largest aftershock was

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.ttp.net. (ID: 128.119.168.112, Univ of Massachusetts Library, Amherst, USA-14/07/15,09:44:07)
740 Trends in Civil Engineering

derived. S. Shigeji [5] proposed a coefficient “b” in the magnitude versus frequency equation,
which is 0.35 for the foreshocks and 0.76 for the aftershocks, by studying the 25 foreshocks and 173
aftershocks in the relation of frequency of occurrence and magnitude. B. Wu and J. P. Ou [6]
developed a statistical relationship of magnitude between mainshock and aftershock through a set of
49 sequences of main-shock and aftershock in China. R.G.. Jorge and C. Juan [7] asserted that the
frequency content of the mainshock and aftershock, by examining a set of 58 mainshock and
aftershock recorded during the January 17,1994 Northridge earthquake and a set of 6 seismic
sequences recorded during the 1980 Mammoth Lakes earthquakes, are weakly correlated from a
statistical point of view. Previous studies have given a relationship between mainshocks and
aftershocks, but its characteristics differ from region to region.
Due to the lack of earthquake records, there are lots of researches employed artificial
sequences using the mainshock acceleration time-history as a seed for simulating aftershocks, for
example by repeating and randomizing the set of mainshock-aftershock. The repeating method
assumes that the ground motion’s features such as amplitude, frequency content, and strong motion
duration of the mainshock and aftershock are similar [7,8]. B. Wang and H. J. Jiang [9] used this
method in an analysis of a 12-storey RC moment resistant frame building under the mainshock and
aftershock, which suggested that the second input could cause structural damage and increase
inter-storey drifts. The randomizing method assumes that the ground acceleration is represented as a
stationary Gaussian random process modulated by an envelope function of repeated character. M.
Abbas and T. Izuru [10] adopted this method for investigating the response of nonlinear SDOF
structures under random repeated sequences of ground motion, and assessing the safety of inelastic
structures. This method is more appropriate for reproducing a mainshock-aftershock seismic
sequence, but also excessively complex in most cases.
However, there are few researches on the effect of response of the structure subjected to
as-records sequences and artificial sequences. R.G. Jorge and C. Juan’s [7] study of existing steel
buildings with artificial sequences and as-recorded sequences showed that the artificial seismic
sequence may lead to overestimation of the maximum lateral drift peak and residual drift demands
comparing to the recorded sequences. But their lateral drift demands were increased when
aftershock was considered. Q. Li and B. R. Ellingwood [11] got the same conclusion by using the
enhanced uncoupled modal response history analysis method on steel frame buildings.
Pioneering analytical studies of the effect of earthquake sequences on the response of
structures listed above are based on the lateral displacement demands, but O. Shunsuke and M.A.
Sozen’s [12] study by testing of small scale RC frames subjected to repeating earthquake sequences
showed that the maximum peak lateral displacement with the second earthquake sequences is the
same as that subjected to the first one. The peak lateral displacement does not commendably
represent the damage accumulation in structures under earthquake sequences. Damage index is a
preferable parameter to characterize the performance of structures, but few researches have been
done on this subject. D. H. George and A. L. Asterio [13] asserted that the ductility demands of
single ground motions can be used to estimate cumulative ductility demands due to sequential
ground motions.
The purpose of the present paper is to investigate the damage accumulation of the structure in
the case of different seismic sequences actions (for example foreshock-main shock sequence, main
shock-aftershock and so on). To achieve this, nonlinear dynamic analyses were conducted for the
three-storey RC frame with different repeating earthquake sequences.
 Advanced Materials Research Vols. 446-449 741

Description of Structure and Modelling

The elevation and plan of the 3-storey RC building, as well as the typical reinforcements of
columns and beams, are shown in Figure 1. The dimension of columns is 300mm×300mm. All the
beams have rectangular cross-sections, with the width of 250mm and height of 500mm. The slabs
have a thickness of 100mm. To simplify the analysis, the component dimension does not change in
overall building.
The structure was designed according to Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GBJ11-89) for

a fortification intensity of 7, soil type . A permanent load of 8kN/m2 was assumed, and a live
load of 2kN/m2 was adopted in the design of the structure. The only exception is the roof, which
have a permanent load of 9 kN/m2 and a live load of 0.5kN/m2. Concrete with quality C30 and
Q335 longitudinal reinforcement (yield strength of normalized value amounts to 335MPa) were
used for the construction of described building. The transverse reinforcement type is Q235, with
normalized yield strength value 335MPa.

Fig.1. Dimensions of the Three-story Frame Building

Nonlinear dynamic analyses were conducted for the three-storey frame with different ground
motions. The computer software ANSYS was selected for the analyses. The beams and columns
were modeled with BEAM188 as fiber beam element based on the material characteristics. The
floor was modeled by shell63. The constitutive relationship of concrete and steel material can be
used to the multi-linear kinematic hardening of material.

Seismic Input
This study focused on the damage accumulation in structures in the case of multi-seismic sequences
actions. For this purpose, repeating sequences acceleration time histories with different amplitude
are needed for performing nonlinear dynamic analyses. In this study, the El Centro sequence is
selected to be viewed as a seed for simulating multi-seismic sequences. Four sequences were
created by the back-to-back approach with different amplitude are listed in Table1, assuming the
ground motion’s features such as frequency content, and strong motion duration of the foreshock
and aftershock are the same.
Table.1 List of the Amplitude of Seismic Sequence
Project Amplitude of foreshock (gal) Amplitude of aftershock (gal)
1 70 70
2 300 600
3 600 300
4 600 600
742 Trends in Civil Engineering

Results
Displacement time-history response and maximum displacements
Figure 2 shows the displacement time-history response of three story RC frame model subjected to
the different multi-seismic sequences actions. It can be seen that the displacement does not
significantly increase under the after-shock sequence. The foreshocks with amplitudes smaller than
the aftershocks have no effect on the maximum displacements under seismic sequences, but affect
the accumulation of damage in structures.
Figure 3 shows the inter-story drift demand response of model subjected to the aftershock
seismic sequence in different projects. It can be found that the inter-story drift ratio is increased in
varying degrees under the foreshock in Fig. 3(a). The response under aftershock sequences of which
the magnitude of the foreshock sequences are greater than the foreshock is the same, as shown in
Fig. 3(b). Therefore, the drift alone may not be the best measure of damage.
0.2

0.15

0.1
Displacement(m)

0.05

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.05

-0.1

-0.15 Project 1
Project 2
-0.2 Project 3
Project 4
Time(s)

Figure 2. The Displacement Time-history Response with the Different Multi-seismic

Sequences

3 3

2 2
Story

Story

1 1

Project2 afteshoce
Project2 foreshoce Project4 foreshoce
Project3 aftershoce Project4 aftershoce
0 0
0 0.003 0.006 0.009 0.012 0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Inter-story drift ration Inter-story drift ration

(a) (b)
Figure.3 Inter-story Drift Ratio with Different Projects
Determination of cumulative damage
Park and Ang’s goal damage index [14], which is the best known and most widely used
damage index, is based on scaled values of ductility and dissipated energy of the local element
during the seismic ground shaking. The damage index (DI) is defined as a combination of
maximum deformation and hysteretic energy:
xm e (T )
Dc = + bc (1)
xu f y xu
 Advanced Materials Research Vols. 446-449 743

where xm is the maximum deformation of the element, xu the ultimate deformation, βc a

model constant parameter(usually, βc =0.05–0.20) to control strength deterioration, ε(T) the
hysteretic energy absorbed by the element during the earthquake and fv the yield strength of the
element. Park and Ang indices for various damage states are shown for completeness reasons in
Table 2. Fig. 4 shows the global DI, for the 3-story RC frame, under different multi-seismic
sequences actions. It is evident that aftershock seismic sequences lead to increased damage of the
structures, and the damage index are the same when the foreshock sequence and aftershock
sequence are reversed (Fig. 4(b)). According to Table 2, the state of building can be qualitatively
and quantitatively ascertained.
Table 2. The Relation between Damage Index and Damage State
Degree of Damage
Physical appearance State of building
damage index
Slight Sporadic occurrence of cracking <0.1 No damage
Minor Minor cracks; partial crushing of concrete in columns 0.10-0.25 Minor damage
Moderate Extensive large cracks; spalling of concrete in weaker elements 0.25-0.40 Repairable
Extensive crashing of concrete; disclosure of buckled
Severe 0.40-1.00 Beyond repair
reinforcement
Collapse Partial or total collapse of building >1.00 Loss of building

0.35 0.6

0.3 0.5
Park-Ang Damage (DI)
Park-Ang Damage (DI)

Project 3

Project4

Project 4
Project 2

0.25
0.4
0.2
Project 2

Project 3

0.3
Project 1

0.15
Project 1

0.2
0.1
0.1
0.05

0 0

Foreshock of Project Foreshock of Project

(a) foreshock (b) aftershock

Figure.4 Global Damage Index According to the Park and Ang Model

Conclusions
This paper has investigated the response of a 3-storey RC frame under different repeating
earthquake sequences. The investigation focused on the damage accumulation of the structure in the
case of seismic sequences actions. From the results obtained in this investigation, the following
conclusions are drawn:
(1) The seismic damage for multiple earthquakes is higher than that for single ground motions.
But aftershock sequences do not significantly increase large lateral drift demands. A possible
explanation could be that the lateral drift is a single index to response the global performance, and is
not sufficient to reflect the state of the damage.
(2) Different sequences with same energy input will cause the same damage state in structures.
(3) The foreshocks with amplitudes smaller than the aftershocks have no effect on the maximum
displacements under seismic sequences, but affect the accumulation of damage in structures.
744 Trends in Civil Engineering

(4) Under the aftershock sequences, the damage of structures tends to accumulate. The damage
index based on the Park and Ang model can qualitatively and quantitatively ascertain the state of
the damage of the structure.

Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge with thanks support from (a) the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under grant No. 90815029 and No. 51021140006, (b) the Ministry of Science and
Technology of China through the Research Grant under grant No. SLDRCE10-B-07.

References
[1] M. Eberhard, S. Baldridge, J. Marshall, W. Mooney and G. Rix: USGS/EERI advance
reconnaissance team: team report V1.0 ( 2010).
[2] T. Izurui: Journal of Zhejiang University-Science, Vol.5 (2) (2011), p. 327-34.
[3] K.T. Wu and W.X. Li: Chinese Earthquake, Vol.11 (4) (1995), p. 368-73.
[4] U. Tokuji: Journal of the Faculty of Science, Vol.3 (3) (1970), p. 129-95.
[5] S. Shigeji: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America , Vol.56 (1) (1966), p. 185-200.
[6] B. Wu and J.P. Ou: Journal of Earthquake Engineer and Engineering Vibration, Vol.13 (3)
(1993), p. 28-35. (in Chinese).
[7] R.G. Jorge and C. Juan: Engineering Structures, Vol.33 (2) (2011), p. 621-34.
[8] C. Amadio, M. Fragiacomo and S. Rajgelj: Earthquake Engineering & Structure Dynamics,
Vol.32 (2) (2003), p. 291-308.
[9] B. Wang, H.J. Jiang and X.L. Lu: 8th Conference on Urban earthquake engineering, Tokyo,
Japan, (2011), p. 831-836
[10] M. Abbas and T. Izuru: Engineering Structures, Vol.33 (4) (2011), p. 1251-58.
[11] Q. Li and B.R. Ellingwood: Earthquake Engineering & Structure Dynamics, Vol.36 (3) (2007),
p. 405-27.
[12] O. Shunsuke and M.A. Sozen. Behavior of multistory reinforced concrete frames during
earthquakes. University of Illinois urban, Illinois, USA.1972
[13] D.H. George and A.L. Asterio: Soil Dynamics & Earthquake Engineering, Vol.30 (10) (2010),
p. 1010-1025.
[14] Y.J. Park and A.H. Ang: Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.111 (2) (1985), p.722-41.
Trends in Civil Engineering
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.446-449

Damage Assessment of RC Frame Structures under Multi-Earthquake Sequences

10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.446-449.739