Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inelastic Seismic Demand of Steel-Plate Shear Wall Structures: Emphasis on the PTD Effect

  • Research paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an analytical study to investigate the seismic demand of Steel-Plate Shear Wall frames (SPSW) as a system for resisting lateral loads while subjected to the Permanent Tectonic Displacement effect (PTD). PTD is considered to be one of the main characteristics of near-fault ground motions in which one or more high-amplitude pulses with a large period in velocity records can be observed. To this end, the seismic response of SPSW frames as one of the reliable structural systems for mid-, and high-rise buildings in the form of 8-, 13-, and 18-storey frames were investigated using nonlinear dynamic analysis. Three distinctive sets of ground motions (GMs) were considered. Accordingly, a technique was used to identify the PTD effect with a sinusoidal pulse in the acceleration diagram. The results proved that the presence of PTD pulse may increase or decrease the structural demands regarding various parameters that were fully discussed in this study. As the height of the structure increases, the main factors of increasing the inelastic demand are the ratio of the structure period to the pulse period and the ratio of ap/PGA. For mid-rise SPSW, the high-frequency content plays a greater role in comparison with the period ratio. For the tallest structure, the maximum demand against the fling-step effect was observed for the Yarimca record where the ratio of ap/PGA was the highest (0.65). In addition, the period ratio (Tst/Tp) was the highest (0.73) among other records.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

C :

Damping matrix

K :

Stiffness matrix

M :

Mass matrix

X :

Displacement vector

\(\dot{{\varvec{X}}}\) :

Velocity vector

\(\ddot{{\varvec{X}}}\) :

Acceleration vector

\({\ddot{{\varvec{x}}}}_{{\varvec{g}}}\) :

Ground shaking acceleration

ap :

Pulse amplitude

T st :

Period of the structure

T p :

Period of the pulse signal

T :

Fundamental period

ζ :

Damping ratio

\({\Omega }_{0}\) :

Over-strength factor

\({R}_{u}\) :

Strength reduction factor

\({c}_{d}\) :

Displacement amplification coefficient

A:

Seismicity factor

\({V}_{n}\) :

Shear strength of the plate

\({t}_{w}\) :

Thickness of the web

\({L}_{cf}\) :

Distance between columns

α :

Angle of the sheet (angle of inclination)

SPSW:

Steel-Plate Shear wall

PTD:

Permanent tectonic displacement effect

PGA:

Peak ground acceleration

PGV:

Peak ground velocity

PGD:

Peak ground displacement

GMs:

Ground motions

SDOF:

Single degree of freedom

FE:

Finite element

h :

Free height of the column

L :

Length of the span

\({\Delta t}_{w}\) :

Sheets thickness difference in the upper and lower of the beam

n :

Number of strips

\({I}_{c}\) :

Moment of Inertia of the vertical boundary elements

\({A}_{c}\) :

Is cross-sectional area of the vertical boundary element

\({A}_{b}\) :

Cross-sectional area of the horizontal boundary element

References

  1. Abdollahzadeh GR, Ghobadi F (2015) Linked mathematical–informational modeling of perforated steel plate shear walls. Thin-Walled Struct 94:512–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nooralizadeh A, Naghipour M, Nematzadeh M, Zamenian H (2017) Experimental evaluation of steel plate shear walls stiffened with folded sheets. Int J Steel Struct 17:291–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Xu T, Shao J-H, Zhang J-Y, Kaewunruen S (2019) Experimental performance evaluation of multi-storey steel plate shear walls designed by different methods. Int J Civil Eng 17:1145–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-018-0374-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gholhaki M, Ghadaksaz MB (2016) Investigation of the link beam length of a coupled steel plate shear wall. Steel Compos Struct 20:107–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jalali SA, Amini A, Mansouri I, Hu JW (2021) Seismic collapse assessment of steel plate shear walls considering the mainshock–aftershock effects. J Construct Steel Res 182:106688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Khaloo A, Foroutani M, Ghamari A (2019) Influence of diagonal stiffeners on the response of steel plate shear walls (SPSWs) considering crack propagation. Bull Earthq Eng 17:5291–5312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Qureshi RK, Bruneau M (2019) Behavior of steel plate shear walls subjected to repeated synthetic ground motions. J Struct Eng 145:4019008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hisada Y, Bielak J (2003) A theoretical method for computing near-fault ground motions in layered half-spaces considering static offset due to surface faulting, with a physical interpretation of fling step and rupture directivity. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1154–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Xie L, Xu L, Adrian R-M (2005) Representation of near-fault pulse-type ground motions. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 4:191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Xin L, Li X, Zhang Z, Zhao L (2019) Seismic behavior of long-span concrete-filled steel tubular arch bridge subjected to near-fault fling-step motions. Eng Struct 180:148–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kojima K, Fujita K, Takewaki I (2019) Double and triple impulses for capturing critical elastic-plastic response properties and robustness of building structures under near-fault ground motions. Resilient structures and infrastructure. Springer, Berlin, pp 225–242

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Güneş N, Ulucan ZÇ (2019) Nonlinear dynamic response of a tall building to near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Bull Earthq Eng 17:2989–3013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00570-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tsai M-H, Jiang Z-Y, Yeh W-C (2021) Estimating the peak longitudinal near-field seismic response of an isolated bridge using basic pulse motions. Int J Civil Eng 19:789–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-021-00610-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Somerville PG, Smith NF, Graves RW, Abrahamson NA (1997) Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismol Res Lett 68:199–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Moustafa A, Takewaki I (2010) Characterization and modeling of near-fault pulse-like strong ground motion via damage-based critical excitation method. Struct Eng Mech 34:755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nicknam A, Barkhodari MA, Hamidi Jamnani H, Hosseini A (2013) Compatible seismogram simulation at near source site using multi-taper spectral analysis approach (MTSA). J Vibroengineering 15:626–638

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tarbali K, Bradley BA, Baker JW (2019) Ground motion selection in the near-fault region considering directivity-induced pulse effects. Earthq Spectra 35:759–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rouhi A, Hamidi H (2021) Development of performance based plastic design of EBF steel structures subjected to forward directivity effect. Int J Steel Struct 21:1092–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Abbaszadeh MA, Hamidi H, Amiri JV (2022) On seismic response reduction of adjacent frame: emphasis on the different characteristics of earthquakes. Int J Civil Eng 20:91–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-021-00655-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Minaei Z, Hoseini Vaez SR, Dehghani E (2021) An approach for estimating the response of steel moment resisting frames to pulse-like ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 151:106991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamidi H, Vaseghi Amiri J, Rajabnejad H (2018) Energy distribution in RC shear wall-frame structures subject to repeated earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 107:116–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yazdani A, Nicknam A, Dadras EY, Eftekhari SN (2017) Near-field probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of metropolitan Tehran using region-specific directivity models. Pure Appl Geophys 174:117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kojima K, Takewaki I (2015) Critical earthquake response of elastic–plastic structures under near-fault ground motions (part 1: fling-step input). Front Built Environ 1:12

    Google Scholar 

  24. Alavi B, Krawinkler H (2001) Effects of near-fault ground motions on frame structures. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tian L, Pan H, Ma R, Qiu C (2017) Collapse simulations of a long span transmission tower-line system subjected to near-fault ground motions. Earthq Spectra 13:211–220

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tian L, Pan H, Ma R (2019) Probabilistic seismic demand model and fragility analysis of transmission tower subjected to near-field ground motions. J Constr Steel Res 156:266–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Xue Y, Pu W, Matsuda K, Kasai K (2020) Influence of high-pass filtering of near-fault earthquake record on the responses of base-isolated building. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 135:106182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nicknam A, Hosseini A, Hamidi Jamnani H, Barkhordari MA (2013) Reproducing fling-step and forward directivity at near source site using of multi-objective particle swarm optimization and multi taper. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 12:529–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bhagat S, Wijeyewickrema AC, Subedi N (2021) Influence of near-fault ground motions with fling-step and forward-directivity characteristics on seismic response of base-isolated buildings. J Earthq Eng 25:455–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ezzodin A, Amiri GG, Dehkordi MR (2021) Simulation of fling step pulse of near-fault ground motion by using wavelet smoothening and improved bell-shaped function. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 140:106462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hamidi H, Khosravi H, Soleimani R (2018) Fling-step ground motions simulation using theoretical-based Green’s function technique for structural analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 115:232–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Amirchoupani P, Abdollahzadeh G, Hamidi H (2020) Spectral acceleration matching procedure with respect to normalization approach. Bull Earthq Eng 18:5165–5191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00897-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Khaloo AR, Khosravi H, Hamidi JH (2015) Nonlinear interstory drift contours for idealized forward directivity pulses using “modified fish-bone” models. Adv Struct Eng 18:603–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Liossatou E, Fardis MN (2016) Near-fault effects on residual displacements of RC structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 45:1391–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hamidi H, Karbassi A, Lestuzzi P (2020) Seismic response of RC buildings subjected to fling-step in the near-fault region. Struct Concr 21:1919–1937. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201900028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nicknam A, Barkhordari MA, Hamidi Jamnani H, Hosseini A (2014) Probable contribution of fling-step effect on the response spectra at near source site. J Vibroeng 16:334–340

    Google Scholar 

  37. Akehashi H, Kojima K, Takewaki I (2018) Critical response of single-degree-of-freedom damped bilinear hysteretic system under double impulse as substitute for near-fault ground motion. Front Built Environ 4:5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Karthik Reddy KSK, Somala SN, Tsang H-H (2021) Response of inelastic SDOF systems subjected to dynamic rupture simulations involving directivity and fling step. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 151:106992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kalkan E, Kunnath SK (2006) Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings. Earthq Spectra 22:367–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Soleimani R, Hamidi H (2021) General Substitute Frame Model (GSF) for efficient estimation of seismic demands of steel and RC moment frames. Eng Struct 246:113031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.113031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mansouri I, Arabzadeh A, Farzampour A, Hu JW (2020) Seismic behavior investigation of the steel multi-story moment frames with steel plate shear walls. Steel Compos Struct 37:91

    Google Scholar 

  42. Katrangi M, Memarpour MM, Yakhchalian M (2021) Assessment of the seismic performance and the base shear contribution ratios of the RC wall-frame dual system considering soil-structure interaction. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2021.1871678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Berman JW, Bruneau M (2005) Experimental investigation of light-gauge steel plate shear walls. J Struct Eng 131:259–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Astaneh-Asl A (2001) Seismic behavior and design of steel shear walls. Structural Steel Educational Council Moraga, CA

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jalali SA, Darvishan E (2019) Seismic demand assessment of self-centering steel plate shear walls. J Constr Steel Res 162:105738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Shishkin JJ, Driver RG, Grondin GY (2009) Analysis of steel plate shear walls using the modified strip model. J Struct Eng 135:1357–1366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sabouri-Ghomi S, Sajjadi SRA (2012) Experimental and theoretical studies of steel shear walls with and without stiffeners. J Constr Steel Res 75:152–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. ASCE (2010) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7–10

  49. Ansi A (2005) AISC 341–05: seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction Inc, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  50. CSI (2007) Nonlinear analysis and performance assesment for 3-D structures, PERFORM-3D.

  51. Deierlein GG, Reinhorn AM, Willford MR (2010) Nonlinear structural analysis for seismic design. NEHRP Seismic Design Technical Brief 4:1–36

    Google Scholar 

  52. Astroza R, Ebrahimian H, Conte JP (2014) Material parameter identification in distributed plasticity FE models of frame-type structures using nonlinear stochastic filtering. J Eng Mech 141:4014149

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ghodrati Amiri G, Hamidi Jamnani H, Ahmadi HR (2009) The effect of analysis methods on the response of steel dual-system frame buildings for seismic retrofitting. Int J Eng-Trans B: Appl 22:317

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sasani M, Bertero VV (2000) Importance of severe pulse-type ground motions in performance-based engineering: historical and critical review. In: World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.

  55. Alavi B, Krawinkler H (2004) Behavior of moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 33:687–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Yang TTY, Li Y (2016) Performance assessment of innovative seismic resilient steel knee braced frame. Front Struct Civ Eng 10:291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Rajabnejad H, Hamidi H, Naseri SA, Abbaszadeh MA (2021) Effect of intensity measures on the response of a 3D-structure under different ground motion duration. Int J Eng 34:2219–2237. https://doi.org/10.5829/ije.2021.34.10a.4

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology, Babol, Iran

    Seyed Masoud Tahaii, Hamed Hamidi & Javad Vaseghi Amiri

Authors
  1. Seyed Masoud Tahaii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamed Hamidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Javad Vaseghi Amiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamed Hamidi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tahaii, S.M., Hamidi, H. & Vaseghi Amiri, J. Inelastic Seismic Demand of Steel-Plate Shear Wall Structures: Emphasis on the PTD Effect. Int J Civ Eng 20, 1145–1163 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-022-00716-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-022-00716-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation