Abstract
Fling-step is one of the important characteristics of near-fault ground motions that is caused by a permanent static offset of the ground and appears as a one-sided velocity pulse and a large residual displacement at the end of the motion. Due to baseline errors in many ground motion records, they are processed (processing is a combination of baseline correction and filtering) before adding accelerograms to some earthquake databases whereby the residual displacements ( i.e., the permanent static offsets) in the fling records are typically eliminated. It is not clear to what extent the record processing can affect the nonlinear responses of structures subjected to fling-step records. To address this issue, the current study is conducted to investigate the sensitivity of the nonlinear structural responses to record processing. To achieve this goal, the seismic responses of three code-conforming reinforced concrete (RC) special moment-resisting frames with different heights subjected to two versions of fling-step ground motions including a processed version that static offsets are removed, and a baseline-corrected version with static offsets preserved are evaluated. The findings of this assessment indicate that even though the processing procedure does not preserve the static offsets of the fling-step ground motions, the seismic responses of the structures to the processed records may resemble those obtained under only the baseline-corrected ground motions (with static offsets preserved).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.