EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING & STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.

2013; 42:145161 Published online 2 May 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2198

Multiple-slider surfaces bearing for seismic retrotting of frame structures with soft rst stories
Muhannad Y. Fakhouri1,*, and Akira Igarashi2
1

Department of Urban Management, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto 615-8540, Japan 2 Department of Civil and Earth Resources Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto 615-8540, Japan

SUMMARY A new isolation interface is proposed in this study to retrot existing buildings with inadequate soft stories as well as new structures to be constructed with soft rst story intended for architectural or functional purposes. The seismic interface is an assembly of bearings set in parallel on the top of the rst story columns: the multiple-slider bearings and rubber bearings. The multiple-slider bearing is a simple sliding device consisting of one horizontal and two inclined plane sliding surfaces based on polytetrauoroethylene and highly polished stainless steel interface at both ends set in series. A numerical example of a ve-story reinforced concrete shear frame with soft rst story is considered and analyzed to demonstrate the efciency of the proposed isolation system in reducing the ductility demand and damage in the structure while maintaining the superstructure above the bearings to behave nearly in the elastic range with controlled bearing displacement. Comparative study with the conventional system as well as various isolation systems such as rubber bearing interface and resilient sliding isolation is carried out. Moreover, an optimum design procedure for the multiple-slider bearing is proposed through the trade-off between the maximum bearing displacement and the rst story ductility demand ratio. The results of extensive numerical analysis verify the effectiveness of the multiple-slider bearing in minimizing the damage from earthquake and protecting the soft rst story from excessively large ductility demand. Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 26 August 2011; Revised 27 March 2012; Accepted 30 March 2012 KEY WORDS:

seismic isolation; soft story; sliding isolator; multiple-slider bearing; sliding block motion

1. INTRODUCTION Despite the fact that structures with soft rst story are inherently vulnerable to collapse during earthquakes, it is still in demand especially in urban areas. The soft rst story offers architects an attractive model by allowing a sense of oating and bright space. The famous architect Le Corbusier is one of the pioneers who utilized the idea of soft rst story by lifting the structure off the ground, supporting it by pilotis (or piers), establishing the leading principle of the modern architecture: the pilotis-story [1]. The soft rst story might be functionally or commercially desirable by providing parking spaces, allowing for a grand entrance or ballrooms as in hotels and permitting a desirable continuous windows for display for stores located in the rst story. In addition, such a building helps in raising the inhabitant space in the building above typical storm surge levels in hurricane-prone areas. Current design guidelines such as the International Building Code [2] classify the structure as the soft story type if the lateral stiffness of a specic story of the said structure is less than 70% of that in the story immediately above it, or less than 80% of the average stiffness of the three stories above it. Moreover, the code also denes the extreme soft story when the lateral stiffness of that story is
*Correspondence to: Muhannad Y. Fakhouri, Department of Urban Management, Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto 6158540, Japan. E-mail: m.fakhouri@kt2.ecs.kyoto-u.ac.jp Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

146

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

less than 60% of that in the story immediately above it, or less than 70% of the average stiffness of the three stories above it. On the basis of the ductility design concept that utilizes inelastic behavior to increase the exibility of the structure by lengthening the fundamental period and to provide energy absorption, some structural engineers introduced the concept of exible rst story [36]. Later on, this idea was modied leading to the concept of the shock-absorbing soft story method [7]. This system renders all the inelastic deformation to take place in the soft rst story columns, whereas the superstructure above the rst story is designed to remain in the elastic range. The shock-absorbing soft rst story contains neoprene layers placed on top of stability walls so that the wall is separated from the slab above it. However, this attempt to reduce forces on structure by allowing the rst story columns to yield during an earthquake and produce energy-absorbing action is no longer an appealing idea for structural engineers because of the excessive drifts in the rst story coupled with the P- effect on the yielded columns, increasing the risk to develop a collapse mechanism known as the soft story failure [8]. Failure of this type was clearly observed during many earthquakes in the past; one example is the damage due to the 1995 Kobe earthquake. Many reinforced concrete buildings were severely damaged, and most of them were buildings with soft story [9]. Another example is the case of Californias Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989, in which the soft story failure was responsible for nearly half of all the homes that became uninhabitable. Chen et al. [10] proposed another modication to the soft rst story concept that introduces additional energy dissipation capacity to reduce drift and provides a mechanism to reduce P- effects. In this system, Teon sliders are placed on the top of some of the rst story columns, whereas the rest of the rst story columns are designed with reduced yield strength and ductile behavior to accommodate large drifts. A similar concept with the difference that the rst story shear walls are tted with Teon sliders was also proposed [11]. A further extension of the concept was proposed similar to the aforementioned philosophy with additional steel dampers to enhance the energy dissipation during earthquakes [12]. Todorovska proposed another variation of the soft story concept using inclined rubber base isolators or inclined soft rst story columns [13]. The system behaves as a physical pendulum pivoted above the center of mass and is more stable than the standard system. Briman and Ribakov [14] have developed a method for retrotting soft story buildings by replacing weak conventional columns with seismic isolation columns. The seismic isolation device is based on a friction pendulum principle. Past earthquake damage examples have proven that the performance of conventionally designed columns in soft story structures is unsatisfactory because of the high uncertainty in the ductility design concept. Although structures with soft stories may survive during earthquakes, excessive drifts and formation of plastic hinges at critical sections could make it difcult to repair the damaged structures. For that reason, more effective and reliable techniques are needed to enhance the structural safety and integrity for such special type of structures. It can be noticed from the previous studies that seismic isolation is one of the prominent alternatives that can overcome the dilemma between the need for soft story and its vulnerability to collapse. In this study, the seismic performance of soft-rst-story frame structures is upgraded by installing multiple-slider bearings consisting of multiple sliding plane surfaces, one horizontal and two inclined surfaces, on the top of rst story columns to effectively prevent the rst story damage by reducing the ductility demand to the columns and maintaining the superstructure to behave nearly in the elastic range at the same time. The mechanism and efciency of the proposed system are illustrated using nonlinear time history analysis of a moment resisting concrete frame subjected to seismic excitation. Comparative study with the conventional system and with various isolation systems such as the rubber bearing interface and the resilient sliding isolation (RSI) is carried out. Finally, an optimum design procedure for the multiple-slider bearing is proposed. 1.1. Proposed system concept The need for controlling displacement of the isolators to a minimum level is a vital issue especially in big and crowded cities where buildings are often built closely to each other because of the limited availability and high cost of the land. This leads to cause pounding of adjacent buildings due to the
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

147

insufcient or inadequate separation and can be a serious hazard in seismically active areas. Accommodating such large displacement responses by the use of the conventional rubber bearings is costly and may cause instability. The proposed seismic retrot scheme for frame structures with soft rst story to solve this problem is shown in Figure 1. Isolation between the rst story columns and the rest of the superstructure is incorporated by installing the multiple-slider bearings, which is described later in detail, on the top of interior columns and rubber bearings at the top of edge columns. The rst story columns are tied together by tie beams to ensure stability and enhance the safety. The orientation of the multiple-slider bearing is chosen as shown in Figure 1 to divert P- moments from weak elements below the isolation interfaces that resemble the orientation mechanism of friction pendulum system (FPS) [1517]. The multiple-slider bearing is a simple sliding device consisting of one horizontal and two inclined plane sliding surfaces at both ends set in series, as shown in Figure 2.These three surfaces are based on polytetrauoroethylene (PTFE) and highly polished stainless steel (SUS) interface. During normal or low intensity earthquakes, the isolator behaves as a pure friction isolator with sliding only in the horizontal direction. However, during a severe earthquake, sliding will be activated in the inclined surface producing displacements in both horizontal and vertical directions. The concept of this type of bearing was proposed to upgrade the seismic performance of multispan continuous girder bridges with reduced horizontal displacement of the girder in case of strong earthquakes, which is referred to as the Uplifting Slide Bearing [1822]. Figure 3 shows photographs of sample Uplifting Slide Bearings. The concept was later extended to include multistory structures mainly to control the maximum top oor horizontal displacement [23].

Shear Key Rubber Bearing

Slab
Multiple-Slider Bearing

Shear Key

Tie Beam

Foundation

Figure 1. Set-up arrangement of the multiple-slider bearings in a frame structure with soft rst story.

PTFE bearing material

SUS sliding plate

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the isolator with multiple-slider surfaces.

Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

148

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

Figure 3. Uplifting Slide Bearing.

The proposed system also offers a feasible solution for seismic retrotting of existing buildings with soft stories in areas where clearance between adjacent buildings is limited, as will be shown in this study. Commonly, the seismic rehabilitation can be carried out simply by transmitting the load acting on the columns temporary to jacks, then columns are cut from the top at the rst story level, and the isolation device is installed on the top of the columns before the removal of the temporary jacks. Nevertheless, more neat and reliable methods without using lifting equipments also exist [24]. According to building design codes, the requirements to isolated buildings and those to nonisolated buildings are different. For example, xed-base buildings are permitted a force reduction factor (R) that represents global ductility up to eight, which may allow signicant inelastic action. On the other hand, isolated buildings are limited to R factors no larger than two as specied in the ASCE 705 [25], Eurocode 8 [26], and IBC2003 [2]. Even the design force level is different for structural elements below or above the interface. The rst story columns in Figure 1 are to be designed for a force equal to the maximum effective stiffness of the isolation interface times the design displacement in the horizontal direction under consideration and for the design moment due to the shear force and the P- effect that should be considered if it exists depending on the slider orientation. In other words, the rst story columns should be designed elastically for the maximum force that is transmitted though the isolation system at the design level earthquake [27]. Other code requirement is that isolation systems should use rigid horizontal diaphragms or bracing systems above and below the isolator level to provide deformation compatibility among the resisting structural elements. In view of this requirement, the rst story columns are tied together by tie beams in the proposed model. It is noteworthy that the device in the present status is restricted to unidirectional motion because it was rst developed as a seismic response control device for multispan continuous girder bridges, as mentioned earlier. Currently, the device is in the process of further development and modication to take into account the bidirectional motion that is essential in the design of seismically isolated building structures.

1.2. Uniqueness of the multiple-slider bearing Sliding base isolation systems have gained attention in recent years because of economic reasons as well as their durability and stability characteristics. They are insensitive to the variation of the frequency content of ground excitation. Moreover, sliding isolators provide a natural source of damping through friction because the horizontal friction force at the sliding surface offers resistance to motion and dissipates energy. The hysteresis of PTFESUS interface is a rectangle that provides equivalent viscous damping of 63.7%. In addition, sliding bearings using Teon as the sliding surface can take much higher compressive stresses than elastomeric bearings (60 MPa or more for the former versus 15 MPa or so for the latter) and are especially suitable at the ends of shear walls [27]. The main characteristics of the friction-based isolator are high initial lateral stiffness that is an attractive feature to reduce the stiffness of the isolated buildings in the large displacement range, while resisting frequent lateral loads caused by the wind. For example, most of base isolated
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

149

high-rise buildings in Japan contain friction-type base isolated systems [28], and devices having various properties have been made available in recent years [29]. Although several friction-type isolators have been developed, the FPS [30] has been extensively used and put into practice. The restoring force is provided by the component of the self-weight tangent to the sliding surface. However, because the restoring force varies linearly to the sliding displacement, effectiveness of FPS may be reduced particularly in case of long-period earthquakes, high-intensity earthquakes, or a low-friction coefcient of the sliding surface. To overcome this problem, several researchers have introduced modications on the original concept of the FPS. One of these examples is the variable frequency pendulum isolator [31], in which the geometry of a concave sliding surface is designed such that the oscillation frequency decreases with the sliding displacement amplitude and the force transmitted to the structure is limited with an upper bound. Later on, the multiple FPS with two spherical concave surfaces and an articulated slider was proposed [32]. Several isolators derived from the conventional FPS that basically represents more than one pendulum systems connected together in series have been proposed and investigated [3338]. Another friction-based isolator is RoGlider that has been developed for seismic isolation of both light and heavy vertical loads and can be readily designed to accommodate extreme displacements [39]; it also includes elastic restoring force provided by two rubber membranes. This double acting RoGlider consists of two SUS plates with a PTFE-ended puck sitting between the plates. Two rubber membranes are attached to the puck with each being joined to the top or bottom plates. Another type of isolator that utilizes a slope surface the sloped rolling-type bearing [40] using a steel cylinder rolling on a V-shape surface has been proposed. The proposed multiple-slider bearing possesses unique features essentially attributed to the geometrical conguration and the sliding mechanism, which make it superior to other types of bearings. Some of these special features are as follows: 1. Geometrical conguration creativity: The geometry of this device was chosen to be effective in controlling the horizontal displacement by allowing a part of the earthquake transmitted energy to be transferred into a gravitational potential energy through the diagonal sliding. 2. Avoiding pounding effect by efciently controlling the displacement: Pounding of adjacent buildings due to insufcient or inadequate separation can be a serious hazard in seismically active areas. The verication of the multiple-slider bearings efciency to control displacement is numerically presented in an earlier study [23]. 3. The multiple-slider bearing is a cost-effective solution for seismic isolation. Sliding bearings have found more and more applications in recent years over rubber bearings for economic reasons. The multiple-slider bearing is basically made from three surfaces of SUS and PTFE interfaces. Therefore, the ease of manufacturing adds signicant reduction to its cost. 4. The hysteretic behavior of the multiple-slider bearing provides more freedom in the process of design that requires determination of three parameters: clearance length (L), that is, the specied distance prior to the diagonal sliding; the inclination angle (); and the friction coefcient (m) for the three surfaces in contact. 5. The conguration of the device has the potential of using different friction bearings for the horizontal and inclined plane surfaces, as shown in a previous study [23]. Use of different friction coefcients has been found to add more reduction to the horizontal displacement response, especially in the cases of strong and near fault motions. 6. It is worth pointing out that the multiple-slider bearing provides an architecturally exible and esthetic solution in terms of integration into the structural system for cases in which space consideration is an important factor, rendering the conventional rubber bearing under walls problematic. 7. Because the multiple-slider bearing is vertically stiff, the vertical deections of columns that occur during bearing installation in retrot application is minimized, and damage to architectural nishes in upper stories can be avoided. 8. Contrary to the FPS that utilizes a spherical sliding surface to develop a restoring force, the slope angle of the inclined surfaces in the multiple-slider bearing is much larger than the range of the tangential angles of the sliding surfaces of FPS, so that the vertical component of the
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

150

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

structural motion is explicitly intended and a constant restoring force is generated because of the parallel component of gravity load along the sliding surfaces. 9. During large displacement response, the horizontal force in the multiple-slider bearing is kept constant with the increase in displacement. On the other hand, the curved surface in the FPS may result an increase in horizontal force with a larger displacement because the force is directly proportioned to the displacement. 10. The multiple-slider bearing is expected to be a feasible solution for seismic retrotting of existing buildings with soft stories in areas where clearance between adjacent buildings is limited because of its high potential in minimizing the horizontal displacement response. 1.3. Maximum displacement reduction principle The dynamic behavior of the multiple-slider bearing and the supported superstructure can be represented by a simplied free-body diagram shown in Figure 4. The mechanism of the inclined surface in reducing the peak horizontal displacement in comparison with conventional isolation bearings is described in this section, utilizing the analogy of a dynamic sliding block on an inclined plane. The motion of a mass on a frictional inclined plane is the interplay of different force types and the characterizing features of the incline surface. Forces acting on a block mass (m) placed on an inclined plane, which is accelerated towards left with a horizontal acceleration at the top of rst story (ah), are shown in Figure 5. The angle of incline is , and the friction coefcient is m at the contact surface. Assuming that the block mass stays in contact with the inclined surface, the normal force N is expressed by N(t) = mg cos + mah sin . Therefore, when the mass is sliding upward, the net horizontal reaction force to the block mass or the reaction force acting on the column top yields to Fx m ah m sin cos sin2 g sin cos m cos2 (1)

If the horizontal acceleration (ah) is assumed to be constant within the duration of sliding considered, on the basis of the energy conservation law, the maximum horizontal displacement (xmax) can be written as
y N m fr L 0 1st Story Column Top Movement L Fv Fh x

Figure 4. Mechanical model of the isolator with multiple-slider bearing.

Figure 5. Free-body diagrams of an accelerated mass object on an inclined slope.

Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

151 (2)

1 cos x max v0 2 g sin ah cos mg cos mah sin 2 where v is the initial velocity. Combining Eqs (1) and (2), xmax can be expressed as 1 cos2 x max mv0 2 2 Fx mah 2m sin cos 1

(3)

In the same manner, the maximum horizontal displacement for the conventional rubber bearing (xrmax) assuming the simplest case where the conventional isolation bearings resisting horizontal forces (Fx) are kept constant can be represented by 1 1 xr max mv0 2 2 Fx mah (4)

This formulation can also be seen as a at plane when setting equal to zero in Eq. (3). This is useful observation for assessing the reduction effectiveness of the inclination surface. Comparing Eqs (3) and (4) reveals that xmax is always less than the xr,max, that is,   x max Fx mah < 1:0 cos2 xr max F x mah a (5)

where a = [1 2m sin cos ] is a constant less than unity for any combinations of and m. Equation (5) implies the effectiveness of the inclined surface in reducing the peak horizontal displacement compared with the conventional isolation bearings for the same level of horizontal reaction force on the rst story top column. The fraction of reduction depends mainly on the two factors simultaneously: cos 2 and a. 1.4. Rigid body response of multiple-slider bearing under horizontal excitation A general formulation for the equation of motion can be written depending on the direction and section of sliding. These have a great signicance because the direction determines whether the most deleterious pulses of the excitation tend to move the block mass upward or downward [41]. For the at plane section, two phases, namely the sliding and nonsliding phases, can be identied. In the nonsliding phase, the shear force at the interface is smaller than the resistance friction force, and the structure can be treated as a xed-base system. Once the lateral shear force exceeds the friction force, the structure will start to slide. The horizontal friction force at the sliding interface offers resistance to relative motion and energy dissipation during the structural response. The relative acceleration response can be written for both cases as  x t 0 stick phase _ t ah t sliding phase mg sgnx (6)

where sgn( ) is the signum function. The maximum absolute acceleration is j x a j mg. For the inclined plane section, the normal force can be written for the right-side and left-side slopes as follows: N t mg cos ah t sin (7)

Because the critical acceleration of the mass directly depends on the direction of excitation, upward and downward motions are expressed separately. It is clear that the horizontal acceleration ah must be either of the following expressions, for the transition from the stick phase to the sliding phase.
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

152

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

9 8 m cos sin > > > ! downward > = < ah cos m sin m cos sin > > > > ! upward ; : ah cos m sin

(8)

This implies that higher inertia force is required to trigger the upward sliding than that in the downward direction. This is another insight on the effectiveness of the proposed geometry in reducing the peak displacement. An extensive series of shaking table tests of the multiple-slider bearing were performed by Igarashi et al. [1822], and the effect of the maximum displacement reduction has been experimentally conrmed. It should be noted that there are some differences in the forcedisplacement relationship for the case considering dynamic response of the structure and that for the quasi-static equilibrium, including the impact forces generated as a result of the transition from the horizontal to inclined surfaces, and vice versa [2023]. However, for simplicity of the analysis, the idealized forcedisplacement relationship of the multiple slider is used in the response analysis of the system in this study. In previous studies, the validity of this simplied model is compared with past experiments on a set of sliders and sliding plates with a conguration similar to the multiple-slider bearing [20, 23, 42]. It was concluded that there are some differences especially in cases where excitation velocity is high and that impact forces generated at the transition point between sliding surfaces affect the response. The test results indicate that higher generates higher impact force. Despite these differences, the simplied hysteresis behavior of the multiple-slider bearing is still regarded as a good approximation that covers the essential characteristics of the device. A proper design of the isolator is accomplished by understanding the sensitivity of the device parameters (L, , and m) and their effects in de-amplication of the input motion. The frictional spring method has been utilized to solve the discontinuities occurring in the analysis of the sliding structure due to repeated transition phases between stick and slip modes, which introduce discontinuity and high nonlinearity [43]. The ctitious spring stiffness is taken as zero for the sliding phase and as a very large number for the nonsliding phase. This assumption may be appropriate because sliding frictional interfaces are incapable of reproducing truly rigid-plastic behavior as Teonsteel interfaces undergo some very small elastic displacement before sliding primarily due to small elastic shear deformation of the Teon material [44]. 1.5. Seismic response of ve-story frame structure with soft rst story A ve-story reinforced concrete shear frame with soft rst story (Figure 6) is considered to demonstrate the efciency of the proposed isolation system in reducing the ductility demand and damage in the structure. The system is also compared with the conventional frame structure. Table I presents the story initial stiffness (Ki) and the story yield strength to the total weight ratio (Vy / W). It is obvious that the rst story property implies sharp discontinuities in strength and stiffness relative to the above stories. In this study, the foundation connected to the structure is assumed to be rigid. Girders and oor systems are assumed to be rigid bodies and the columns do not deform axially. The fundamental natural period (T1) is equal to 0.56 s for this frame structure with equal lumped oor masses (m) of 45.34 t for each story. Rayleigh damping in the structure with the damping ratio of 5% for the rst two modes is assumed. To account for the continually varying stiffness and energy-absorbing characteristics of the columns under cyclic loading, the modied Clough bilinear stiffness degrading model is used to represent the hysteretic behavior of the columns; see Figure 7. The post-yielding to pre-yielding stiffness ratio of 0.05 and degradation stiffness rate (a) of 10% are the parameter values used for the hysteretic model. The input ground motions used in the simulations are 1940 El Centro record NS component (0.32 g) and 1995 Kobe JMA NS record (0.82 g). Only unidirectional excitation is considered. The clearance length of the multiple-slider bearing is L = 10 mm in the case of El Centro record and L = 50 mm in the case of Kobe JMA record. The inclination angle is = 15 for both cases. The
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

m5
3.5

153

m4

m3

3.5

m2

3.5

m1

3.5

6.0

6.0 m

6.0 m

6.0 m

Figure 6. Five-story shear frame structure with soft story. Table I. Properties of ve-story frame structures.
Story 1 2 3 4 5 Ki (kN/m) 41,137 154,220 133,500 96,127 60,997 Vy / W 0.1451 0.5344 0.4572 0.3488 0.2084

Figure 7. Modied Clough degradation model.

restoring force (Fb) of RB is modeled with linear forcedisplacement relationship with viscous damping and is expressed as follows: _b Fb kb xb cb x cb zb 2ob mt (9)

(10)

where cb is the effective viscous damping of RB, mt is the total mass of the superstructure above the isolation level, ob is the angular isolation frequency = 2p/Tb, and zb is the effective damping p ratio = 0.15. The period of isolation Tb 2p mt =Kb is chosen to be 2.0 s. The friction coefcient of the multiple-slider bearing for all the three sliding surfaces is assumed to be m = 0.05 in the case of
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

154

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

El Centro record and m = 0.15 in the case of Kobe JMA record. The peak response of the structures using a velocity dependent friction model was not signicantly different from that predicted by a Coulomb friction model [45, 46], which is used in this study. The dynamic equation of motion for the shear type isolated building can be written as follows: _ t ffs t g M r1 x g t r2 ffh t g M x t C x (11)

_ t and where [M] and [C] are the n n mass and damping matrices, respectively; and x x t are n 1 relative velocity and acceleration vectors, respectively. The symbol fs(t) denotes the vector of restoring forces that are designated by the modied Clough model, x g t is the ground acceleration, [r1] and [r2] are the force distribution loading vectors, and fh(t) represents the horizontal nonlinear isolators forces. Numerical time integration is performed using Newmarks b method.

2. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The analysis results for seismic response of the ve-story frame structure with soft rst story are presented in this section. The primary concern of these simulations is to show the effectiveness of the proposed system in signicantly reducing the ductility demand and drift of the soft rst story in comparison with the conventional structure. Figures 8 and 9 illustrate the ability of the proposed system to reduce both drift and ductility demand in the rst story columns without signicant changes in the upper stories in comparison with the conventional design. The drift and ductility demand were reduced both considerably by 49% when subjected to El Centro record and by 41% when subjected to Kobe JMA record. Figures 10 and 11 show the forcedisplacement relationship for the multiple-slider bearings placed on the top of the rst story columns and that for the rst story. As shown in Figures 10b and 11b, inelastic deformation of the rst story columns is reduced, indicating less energy being absorbed by these columns. It can be concluded that the proposed system is a practical cost-effective solution that can be adopted to retrot existing buildings with soft stories and increase their seismic resistance.
Conventional
20 15

Isolated

h(m)

10 5 0

(a)
20 15

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

Drift

h(m)

10 5 0

(b)

Ductility Demand Ratio

Figure 8. Comparison between conventional design and proposed isolation system subjected to El Centro record: (a) maximum story drift versus story height and (b) story ductility demand versus story height.
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

155

Conventional
20 15

Isolated

h(m)

10 5 0

(a)
20 15

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

Drift

h(m)

10 5 0

10

12

14

16

18

(b)

Ductility Demand Ratio

Figure 9. Comparison between conventional design and proposed isolation system subjected to Kobe JMA record: (a) maximum story drift versus story height and (b) story ductility demand versus story height.

(a)

(b)
Figure 10. Hysteresis loop El Centro record: (a) multiple-slider bearings and (b) soft rst story.

Installing the isolation on the top of columns rather than at the base level is a good solution to improve the seismic performance of the existing old building, especially for cases where installation at the foundation level may be difcult or inaccessible. There exist examples of retrot by a midstory seismic isolation interface where it was difcult to put the isolators below the existing foundation [24]. Furthermore, the results shown in Figures 12 and 13 indicate that the seismic performance of the soft story frame structure in terms of ductility demand and story drift with the
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

156

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

(a)

(b)
Figure 11. Hysteresis loop Kobe JMA record: (a) the multiple-slider bearings and (b) soft rst story.

Figure 12. Comparison with base isolation: El Centro record case. (a) Hysteresis loop of the multiple-slider bearings, (b) maximum story drift versus story height, (c) maximum displacement versus story height, and (d) story ductility demand versus story height.

seismic interface on the top of the columns is superior to the case when the same interface is allocated at the base level. Some researchers have studied and analyzed the effect of interstory isolation in which a seismic isolation system is installed at the middle story level [47, 48]. It is shown in those research results
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

157

Figure 13. Comparison with base isolation: Kobe JMA record case. (a) Hysteresis loop of the multiple-slider bearings, (b) maximum story drift versus story height, (c) maximum displacement versus story height, and (d) story ductility demand versus story height.

that the concentrated response control systems of this type reduce the response and improve the seismic performance of the entire building. It is indicated in Figure 14 that the displacement of the isolator at the end of seismic motion is nearly zero, afrming the fact that the multiple-slider bearing inherits a self-centering mechanism capable of returning to its original position. Figure 15 shows the absolute acceleration response time history of the top oor when the structure is subjected to the El Centro record. It is obvious that the acceleration

Figure 14. Displacement time history response of the multiple-slider bearings.

Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

158

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

Figure 15. Absolute acceleration time history response for the top story.

responses for the xed base, base isolation, and top story isolation are close to each other. The reason for the small acceleration response in the case of the xed base can be explained by the development of plastic hinges in the soft rst columns with excessive deformation as shown in the hysteresis behavior of Figures 10 and 11. Therefore, large amount of energy has been absorbed by these columns due to their nonlinear deformations, hence reducing the forces that can be developed at the upper stories. Practically, these columns could not accommodate such a ductility range and would have been collapsed, causing what is known as the soft story failure. In the previous study, a comparison of building response between the cases of the xed base and of seismic isolation using the multipleslider bearing has been performed [23]. Maintaining the superstructure in the elastic range, the maximum absolute top oor acceleration has been reduced signicantly from 1.81 to 0.77 g, implying a reduction of approximately 60%. 2.1. Optimum design for the multiple-slider bearing As previously mentioned, one of the distinctive characteristics of the multiple-slider bearing is its capability to provide more freedom in the design process while dening the optimum parameters that are required to dene the bearing to obtain the most efcient seismic performance. In this section, the optimum design for the multiple-slider bearing is discussed. This is accomplished by understanding the sensitivity of the bearing parameter selection and their effects in the control of the structural response. The most appropriate design is achieved by minimizing both the maximum bearing displacement and the ductility demand ratio for the soft story. However, these two quantities are characterized by a trade-off relationship, making it difcult to maintain the two values minimum at the same time. For this reason, extensive analysis is carried out through various combinations of variation of , L, and m to search for the most appropriate designs. The parameters used in these simulations are given in Table II. A total of 441 cases are considered in this study. The same example of the ve-story frame structure is used again in the simulation. Figure 16 shows the relationship between the maximum horizontal displacement of the multipleslider bearing and the ductility demand ratio of the soft rst story with all the cases considered in Table II, when the frame structure was subjected to Kobe JMA record. Generally speaking, any combination of , L, and m achieves a better seismic performance than the conventional design in terms of the ductility demand ratio. The selection for the optimum design can simply be made by tracking the lowest points in the lower region that can be regarded as desirable in the sense that
Table II. Parameters for the multiple-slider bearing.
Parameters [degree] L [mm] m
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Value 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, 0.30, 0.35
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161
DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

=5 18 16 14 =10 =15 =20 =25 =30 =35

159

Without Isolation

Ductility Demand Ratio

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

Conventional Isolation

Maximum Isolator Displacement xmax (cm)

Figure 16. Various design combinations for the multiple-slider bearing.

each point attains the minimum story ductility for a given isolator displacement, as shown in the line connecting these optimum design candidate points. The seismic performance represented by those points is also superior to the seismic performance of the conventional bearings. Figure 17 shows the response analysis result for another group of parameter combinations when the frame structure is subjected to El Centro record. The analysis is carried out for m = 0.05 with all combinations of and L. In addition, a comparison with the RSI, which is a combination of rubber and plane sliding bearings set in parallel, is also performed. The RSI case can be considered as a special case of the multiple-slider bearing when either is zero or L is very large. Although the RSI provides a lower story ductility demand in some cases, horizontal displacement is larger than the many cases that can be achieved by the multiple-slider bearing. In this case study, selecting equal to 5 and L equal to 20 mm, that is, point A in Figure 17, gives better results than RSI in terms of the horizontal displacement while maintaining the ductility demand ratio less than unity. As mentioned before, the maximum horizontal displacement is one of the crucial quantities in the process of design. Maintaining this displacement within an acceptable limit becomes a priority in case
=0.05:Combinations of
4.5

&L =5 =10 =15 =20 =25 =30 =35 RSI

3.5

Ductility Demand Ratio

2.5

B A
RSI

1.5

0.5 0.04

0.045

0.05

0.055

0.06

0.065

0.07

0.075

Maximum Isolator Displacement xmax (m)

Figure 17. Comparison between multiple-slide bearing and resilient sliding isolation under various combinations.
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

160

M. Y. FAKHOURI AND A. IGARASHI

where the clearance to the neighboring structure is limited or when the expansion joints in the original construction turn out to be an issue for the choice of the most suitable isolator in retrotting the structure. For example, if the maximum displacement shall not exceed 4.5 cm in this case study, the multiple-slider bearing is applicable to achieve this criteria but with an increase in ductility demand ratio at points such as B in Figure 17, whereas RSI cannot be implemented and its usage is limited.

3. CONCLUSION Seismic retrotting of soft-rst-story frame structures by introducing a seismic interface on the top of rst story columns proves its efciency to enhance the structural safety and integrity for the structures of this type. The effectiveness of the multiple-slider bearing in reducing the peak horizontal displacement in comparison with the conventional isolation has been illustrated in the analogy of a dynamic sliding block on an inclined plane. It has been shown that the multiple-slider bearing can be considered as one of the prominent cost-effective solutions that can overcome the dilemma between the need for soft story and its vulnerability to collapse. Moreover, the proposed system also offers a feasible solution that is simple and practical to be implemented for seismic retrotting of existing buildings with soft stories. The results indicate the ability of the proposed system to signicantly reduce the ductility demand and excessive drift for the rst story columns to the level the rubber bearing and RSI cannot achieve.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to express their gratitude towards Dr. Hiroshige Uno, Dr. Yukio Adachi, Dr. Tomoaki Sato, Mr. Yoshihisa Kato, and Mr. Yasuyuki Ishii for their valuable advice, support, and suggestions on this research.
REFERENCES 1. Mezzi M. Enhancing the seismic performance of existing pilotis congurations. IABSE Conference. Responding to Tomorrows Challenges in Structural Engineering 2006; Budapest. Hungary. 2. International Code Council. International Building Code 2003. Falls Church, Va, 2003. 3. Martel RR. The effects of earthquake on buildings with a exible rst storey. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1929; 19(3):167178. 4. Bednarski EJ. Discussion of paper no. 1906, exible rst-story construction for earthquake resistance. Transactions ASCE 1935; 100:657660. 5. Green NB. Flexible rst-storey construction for earthquake resistance. Transactions ASCE, 100, Paper No. 1906, 1935; 644674. 6. Jacobsen LS. Effects of a exible rst story in a building located on vibrating ground. S. Timoshenko, 60th Anniversary Vol. Macmillan Co., New York, 1938; 93103. 7. Fintel M, Khan FR. Shock-absorbing soft story concept for multistory earthquake structures. ACIJ 1969; 66:381390. 8. Chopra AK, Clough DP, Clough RW. Earthquake resistance of buildings with a soft rst storey. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1973; 1:347355. 9. Yoshimura M. Nonlinear analysis of a reinforced concrete building with a soft story collapsed by the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake. Cement and Concrete Composites 1997; 19(3):213221. 10. Chen YQ, Constantinou MC. Use of Teon sliders in a modication of the concept of soft rst storey. Engineering Structures 1990; 12:243252. 11. Mo YL, Chang YF. Application of base isolation concept to soft rst story buildings. Computers and Structures 1995; 55(5):883896. 12. Iqbal A. Soft rst story with seismic isolation system. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Napier, New Zealand, 2006. 13. Todorovska MI. Base isolation by a soft rst storey with inclined columns. Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 1999; 125(4):448457. 14. Briman V, Ribakov Y. Using seismic isolation columns for retrotting buildings with soft stories. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 2009; 18:507523. 15. Almazan JC, Llera JCDL. Physical model for dynamic analysis of structures with FPS isolators. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003; 32:11571184. 16. Earthquake Protection Systems. Technical Characteristics of Friction Pendulum Bearings. Vallejo, California., USA, 2003. 17. Eroz M, DesRoches R. Bridge seismic response as a function of the friction pendulum system (FPS) modeling assumptions. Engineering Structures 2008; 30(11):32043212. 18. Igarashi A, Adachi Y, Kato Y, Uno H, Sato T, et al. Development of uplifting slide bearing (1)(3) (11 papers). Proceedings of 64th JSCE Annual Meeting, 2009; 785794, 798808 (in Japanese).
Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe

MULTIPLE SLIDER FOR SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF SOFT STORY STRUCTURES

161

19. Igarashi A, Sato T, Shinohara M, Katou Y, Uno H, Adachi Y, Takahashi T. Uplifting slide bearing (1) characterization of dynamic properties. 34th IABSE Symposium on Large Structures and Infrastructures for Environmentally Constrained and Urbanised Areas, Venice, Italy 2010; 18. 20. Igarashi A, Sato T, Shinohara M, Katou Y, Uno H, Adachi Y. Uplifting slide bearing (2) verication of seismic response by tests. 34th IABSE Symposium on Large Structures and Infrastructures for Environmentally Constrained and Urbanised Areas, Venice, Italy 2010; 4754. 21. Igarashi A, Sato T, Shinohara M, Katou Y, Uno H, Adachi Y. Uplifting slide bearing (3) development of the analytical model. 34th IABSE Symposium on Large Structures and Infrastructures for Environmentally Constrained and Urbanised Areas, Venice, Italy, 2010; 5562. 22. Igarashi A, Sato T, Shinohara M, Katou Y, Uno H, Adachi Y. Uplifting slide bearing (4) application for a 3-span steel girder. 34th IABSE Symposium on Large Structures and Infrastructures for Environmentally Constrained and Urbanised Areas, Venice, Italy, 2010; 2430. 23. Fakhouri MY, Igarashi A. Dynamic response control of multi-story structures by isolators with multiple plane sliding surfaces: a parametric study. Journal of Engineering Structures 2012; 34:8194. 24. Kawamura S, et al. Seismic isolation retrot in Japan. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 2000. 25. American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE 705. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE standard, SEI/ASCE 705; 2006. 26. CEN. Eurocode 8, design of structures for earthquake resistance part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. EN 19981. Comit Europen de Normalisation, Brussels; 2004. 27. Kelly T, Skinner R, Robinson B. Seismic isolation for designers and structural engineers. National Information Center of Earthquake engineering (NICEE); 2010. 28. Takewaki I. Robustness of base-isolated high-rise buildings under code-specied ground motions. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 2008; 17:257271. 29. Pan P, Zamrescu D, Nakashima M, Nakayasu N, Kashiwa H. Base-isolation design practice: in Japan: introduction to the post-Kobe approach. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2005; 9(1):147:171. 30. Zayas VA, Low SS, Mahin SA. A simple pendulum technique for achieving seismic isolation. Earthquake Spectra 1990; 6:317333. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.1585573 31. Paresh M. Ravi Sinha. VFPI: an isolation device for aseismic design. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000; 29:603627. 32. Tsai CS, Chiang TC, Chen BJ. Seismic Behavior of MFPS Isolated Structure Under Near-Fault Earthquakes and Strong Ground Motions with Long Predominant Periods. Chen JC (ed.). ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference: Cleveland, Ohio, USA Vol. 466, 2003; 7379. 33. Fenz DM, Constantinou MC. Behaviour of the double concave friction pendulum bearing. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2006; 35(11):140324. 34. Tsai CS, Lu PC, Chen WS, Chiang TC, Yang CT, Lin YC. Finite element formulation and shaking table tests of direction-optimized friction pendulum system. Engineering Structures 2008; 30(9):23212329. 35. Fenz DM, Constantinou MC. Spherical sliding isolation bearings with adaptive behavior-theory. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2008; 37(2):168183. 36. Tsai CS, Lin YC, Su HC. Characterization and modeling of multiple friction pendulum isolation system with numerous sliding interfaces. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39(13):14631491. 37. Morgan, TA, Mahin, SA. Achieving reliable seismic performance enhancement using multi-stage friction pendulum isolators. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2010; 39:14431461. 38. Tsai CS, Chiang TC, Chen BJ. Experimental evaluation for piecewise exact solution of seismic responses of spherical sliding type isolated structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2005; 34(9):10271046. 39. Robinson WH, Gannon CR, Meyer J. The RoGliderTM a sliding bearing with anelastic restoring force. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 2006; 39(1):8184. 40. Tsai M-H, Wu S-Y, Chang K-C, Lee GC. Shaking table tests of a scaled bridge model with rolling-type seismic isolation bearings. Engineering Structures 2007; 29(5):694702. 41. Gazetas G, Garini E, Anastasopoulos I, Georgarakos T. Effects of near-fault ground shaking on sliding systems. ASCE Journal of Geotechnics and Geoenvironmental Engineering 2009; 135(12):19061921. 42. Oiles Corporation. Document No. EKS-487-02, 2008 (in Japanese). 43. Yang Y, Lee T, Tsai I. Response of multi-degree-of-freedom structures with sliding supports. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1990; 19:739752. 44. Constantinou M, Mokha A, Reinhorn A. Teon bearing in base isolation II: modeling. Journal of Structural Engineering 1990; 116(2):455473. 45. Fan FG, Ahmadi G, Mostaghel N, Tadjbakhsh IG. Performance analysis of aseismic base isolation systems for a multi-story building. Rep. MIE-165, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY, 1988. 46. Clark PW, Kelly JM. Experimental testing of the resilient friction base isolation system. Rep. UCB/EER ~ 90/IO, University of California, Berkeley, CA 1990. 47. Murakami K, Kitamura H, Ozaki H, Teramoto T. Design analysis of a building with the middle story isolation structural system. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2000. 48. Sueoka T, Torii S, Tsuneki Y. The application of response control design using middle-story isolation system to high-rise building. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2004.

Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2013; 42:145161

DOI: 10.1002/eqe