Avoid Dynamic Amplifications

Chapter

Abstract

Life is pretty simple: You do some stuff, most fails, some works.

Keywords

Ground Motion Seismic Response Torsional Vibration Wind Loading Cable Stay Bridge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    EN 1998-1-1, European Committee for Standardization (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildingsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lin T, Haselton CB, Baker JW (2013) Conditional spectrum-based ground motion selection. Part I: hazard consistency for risk-based assessments. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 42(12):1847–1865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Takewaki I (2007) Critical excitation methods in earthquake engineering, 1st edn. Elsevier Science Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kramer SL (1996) Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flesch R (2012) Fundamental rules for earthquake resistant design. SAMCO (Structural Assessment, Monitoring and Control) report, Arsenal research, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jia J (2014) Essentials of applied dynamic analysis. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chopra AK, De la Llera JC (1996) Accidental and natural torsion in earthquake response and design of buildings. In: 11th world conference on earthquake engineeringGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De la Llera JC, Chopra AK (1994) Accidental and natural torsion in earthquake response and design of buildings. University of California at Berkeley, College of Engineering, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hart GC et al (1975) Torsional response of high rise buildings. J Struct Div ASCE 101:397–416Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Esteva L (1987) Earthquake engineering research and practice in Mexico after 1985 earthquake. Bull N Z Natl Soc Earthq Eng 20:159–200Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mitchell D, Tinawi R, Redwood RG (1990) Damage to buildings due to 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake: a Canadian code perspective. Can J Civ Eng 17(5):813–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Booth ED, Chandler AM, Wong P, Coburn AW (1991) The central Luzon, Philippines earthquake of 16th July 1990. Report of the earthquake engineering field investigation team. Institute of Structural Engineers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mitchell D, DeVall RH, Saatcioglu M, Simpson R, Tinawi R, Tremblay R (1995) Damage to concrete structures due to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Can J Civ Eng 22(2):361–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mitchell D, DeVall RH, Kobayashi K, Tinawi R, Tso WK (1996) Damage to concrete structures due to the Jan 17, 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu (Kobe) Earthquake. Can J Civ Eng 23(3):757–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Enache R, Demetriu S, Albota E (2009) Rotational components of the ground motion for Vrancea earthquakes. In: Proceedings of the 11th WSEAS international conference on sustainability in science engineering, pp 305–309Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sedarat H, Gupta S, Werner SD (1994) Torsional response characteristics of regular buildings under different seismic excitation levels. Report CSMIP/94-01, California Department of ConservationGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tola A (2010) Development of a comprehensive linear response history analysis procedure for seismic load analysis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, BlacksburgGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aker SolutionsBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations