Research on Destructive Power of Earthquakes to Structure

线性系统的最大潜在能量，W_E，被认为是非线性系统的可能性，W_P，如W_E = _<alpha>W_P。α与系统的周期或力衰减关系有一定的关系。这种现实是可以减少到下面的等式，使用更多的混凝土图像参数。mu=f （C_y， E， beta， gamma）···（1） where， mu is ductility ratio。Ducability Ratio是由系统的yield displacement分配的最大反应，应该是yield强度Ratio C_y的函数，破坏地面运动的功率E，从力-deflection关系的形状和恒定的gamma确定的。作为参数C_y， E，测试版被赋予了一个先验，恒定的伽马应该被确定。在这里，我们假定gamma是gamma=g （C_1/T+C_2）的函数形式。如果常数C_1和C_2已确定，我们可以获得最大响应率。 ... More 来自EQ。1.用于单度自由系统的非线性响应分析对不同的周期进行了超过10个地震记录，这些记录在日本的地震抵抗设计中通常使用。将最小正方形方法应用于响应导电性比率与周期关系，常数C_1和C_2确定。Howver， Eq。1可在0.2 <less than or equal>T1.2<less than or equal>秒的周期范围内提供。还有，课程， Mu <greater than or equal>1。最大的加速、最大的速度和光谱强度都以地面运动的破坏性力量的尺度来衡量。Although最大加速并不一定要有一个特定的尺度来评估结构的破坏性力量，一个最大速度或光谱内部被发现是一个相当正确的尺度来评估地面运动的破坏性力量。这是因为当地震记录被最大速度或光谱强度规范化时，非线性响应在价值观周围非常接近地分散。1，其他通过maximum acceleraton对其进行规范化，对数值的反应从EQ大幅度分散。1.在这种关系扩大的情况下（Eq.）（1）由于自由系统的多个层次问题，系统的最低模式形状可能不需要通过线性和非线性阶段进行更改。从这个假设mu_i的每个故事的电导率得到了mu_&lt; ： &gt;= phi_i +mu...（2）这里，phi_i是从模式形状和故事yield置换中确定的常数，并且mu对应于从EQ中捕获的电导率因素。1.反应分析是根据自由模型的数量级进行的，具有按日本代码赋予的Yield强度分布的同时故事高度，也是反向三角形力分布模式。将实际的反应价值与估计的价值进行比较。第二，两者都是共同的。Less（低）

The maximum potential energy of a linear system, W_E, is assumed to be proportional to that of the non-linear system, W_P, like W_E= _<alpha>W_P. alpha is the constant related with period or force-deflection relationship of the system. This realation is able to be reduced to the following equation, using more concrete imaged parameters. mu=f (C_y, E, beta, gamma) ・・・ (1) where, mu is ductility ratio. Ductility ratio obtained by maximum response displacement diveded by the yield displacement of the system, should be a function of yield strength ratio C_y, destructive power of ground motion E, constant beta determined from the shape of force-deflection relationship and constant gamma determined from period of teh system. As parameters C_y, E, beta are given a priori, constant gamma should be determined. Here, we assumed that gamma is a s hape of function as gamma=g (C_1/T+C_2) by the experimental work. If constants C_1, C_2 are determined, we can get the maximum response ductility ratio … More from Eq. 1. Non-linear response analysis for single-degree of freedom system having various periods were conducted to more than 10 earthquake records that are commonly used in earthquake resistant design in Japan. Appling the least square method to the reponse ductility ratios vs periods relations, constants C_1, C_2 were determined. Howver, Eq. 1 is available in the period range of 0.2 <less than or equal> T <less than or equal> 1.2 sec., and also, of course, mu <greater than or equal> 1. Maximum acceleration, maximum velocity and spectrum intensity are taken as the scale which indicates the destructive power of ground motion. Although maximum acceleration is not necessarily the adequate scale to evaluate the destructive power to structure, maximum velocity or spectrum internsity was found to be the fairly proper scale to evaluate the destructive power of ground motion to structure. This is because when earthquake records were normalized by maximum velocity or spectrum intensity, the non-linear responses were very closely scattered around the values obtained from Eq. 1, otherwise normalizing by maximum acceleraton, responses were widely scattered around the values from Eq. 1. In case of extending this relation (Eq. 1) to the problem of multi-degree of freedom system, the lst mode shape of the system was assumed not to change through linear stage and non-linear stage. From this assumption ductility ratio of each story mu_i was derived as mu_< : >=phi_i+mu・・・ (2) Here, phi_i is the constant determined from the mode shape and story yield displacement, and mu corresponds to ductility factor obtained from Eq. 1. Response analyses were conducted to the muiti-degree of freedom models, having yield strength distributions alongside story height that were given by Japanese code and also inverse triangular force distribution mode. Compared the real response values to the estimated values from Eq. 2, both were coincident well. Less