Dynamic Characteristics of a 55-Story Building Before and After Retrofit

  • Mehmet ÇelebiEmail author
  • Toshihide Kashima
  • S. Farid Ghahari
  • Shin Koyama
  • Ertuǧrul Taciroğlu
  • Izuru Okawa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 5)


A sparsely instrumented 55-story building in Osaka, Japan, recorded unprecedented severe and long-duration, long-period resonant responses during the March 11, 2011, M9.0 Tohoku earthquake that occurred at 767 km distance. Thereafter, studies of the records resulted in implementation of a significant retrofit design, comprising dampers and buckling restrained braces (BRBs). The responses of the retrofit building were subsequently recorded during the April 24, 2016, M7.3 Kumamoto earthquake that occurred 478 km away, but at an azimuth nearly opposite to that for the Tohoku event. The earthquake records and ambient response data analyzed in this study represent a rare opportunity to assess the impact of retrofitting on an instrumented tall building subjected to strong long-period shaking from distant earthquakes. As expected, the fundamental frequency and critical damping ratio of the building increased, albeit by small amounts, after the retrofit. Increased damping percentage is a positive finding, and suggests that even larger percentages might be attained for shaking stronger than occurred following the 2016 event. The records indicate that the building still experiences significant resonance and torsion, as well as a beating effect.


Building instrumentation Frequency Damping BRB Dampers 



Data used in this paper was provided for cooperative studies between USGS and Building Research Institute of Japan as part of activities of Wind and Seismic Effects Panel of United States Japan Panel on Natural Resources. The authors thank USGS internal reviewers Chris Stephens and Kishor Jaiswal for their valuable comments.


  1. 1.
    Çelebi, M., Okawa, I., Kashima, T., Koyama, S., Iiba, M.: Response of a tall building far from the epicenter of the March 11, 2011 Mw 9.0 Great East Japan earthquake and its aftershocks. Wiley J. Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 23, 427–441 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Okawa, I., Kashima, T., Koyama, S., Iiba, M., Çelebi, M.: Summary of recorded building responses during t the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku earthquake with some implications to design motions. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering Lessons Learned from the Giant Earthquake—One year the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, 1–4 March, 2012, Kenchiku–Kaikan, Tokyo Japan. [CD-ROM Proceedings] (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kashima, T., Koyama, S., Okawa, I., Iiba, M.: Strong motion records in buildings from the 2011 great east Japan earthquake. Paper no. 1768, In: Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bendat, J.S., Piersol, A.G.: Engineering Applications of Correlation and Spectral Analysis. Wiley, New York (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mathworks and previous versions. Matlab and Toolboxes, South Natick, MA (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Overschee, P., De Moor, B.: N4SID: Subspace algorithms for the identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems. Automatica 30(1), 75–93 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Overschee, P., De Moor, B.: Subspace Identification for Linear Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1996)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ljung, L.: System Identification: Theory for the User. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ljung, L.: Prediction error estimation methods. Circ. Syst. Signal Process 21, 11–21 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bodeux, J., Golinval, J.: Application of ARMAV models to the identification and damage detection of mechanical and civil engineering structures. Smart Mater. Struct. 10, 479–489 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Çelebi, M.: On the variation of fundamental frequency (period) of an undamaged building—a continuing discussion. In: Proceedings Experimental Vibration Analysis for Civil Engineering Structures, pp. 317–325, Porto, Portugal (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kubo, T., Hisada, Y., Murakami, M., Kosuge, F., Hamano, K.: Application of an earthquake early warning system and a real-time strong motion monitoring system in emergency response in a high-rise building. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 31, 231–239 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mehmet Çelebi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Toshihide Kashima
    • 2
  • S. Farid Ghahari
    • 3
  • Shin Koyama
    • 2
  • Ertuǧrul Taciroğlu
    • 3
  • Izuru Okawa
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Earthquake Science CenterUSGSMenlo ParkUSA
  2. 2.Building Research InstituteTsukubaJapan
  3. 3.University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.Tokyo Soil Research Co. LtdTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations