Parameter Identification, Damage Assessment and Seismic Retrofit of Earthquake Damaged Reinforced Concrete Structures

Li Hongquan1 OU Jinping2
(1.College of Architectural and Civil Engineering , Beijing Polytechnic University, Beijing
2.College of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090)

100022;

the structural dynamic properties, e.g., as results of

Abstract
In this paper, effectiveness and feasibility of

the effect, reduction of structural frequencies and

seismic retrofit of earthquake damaged reinforce

increase of the damping. From these points of view,

concrete (R.C.) structures using passive energy dis-

the structural damage can be evaluated by the change

sipation devices (PEDDs) are presented based on the

of structural dynamic properties and parameters

parameter identification and damage assessment of

based on the identification techniques (Li and Ou,

the structures.

1995).

Firstly, earthquake-simulated dam-

age tests on the shaking table are carried out for three

In traditional structures, aseismic design

R.C. frame models with one, two and three stories,

mainly relies upon the post-yield ductility of struc-

respectively, which are made specially for the tests.

tural members to provide the required energy dissipa-

Then, a method is put forward for the parameter

tion.

identification and damage assessment of earthquake

dissipation within a structure to dissipate a large por-

damaged R.C. structures, and the retrofit standard of

tion of the seismic energy has been accepted widely,

damaged structures and the design criterion of

and many types of energy dissipation have been de-

PEDDs used in the retrofit are put forward. Based on

veloped and applied in new or existing buildings (Ou,

this result, the two damaged frames with two and

Wu and Soong, 1996).

three stories, respectively, are retrofitted by using the

of passive energy dissipation devices in retrofit of

mild steel yielding PEDDs, and again the retrofitted

R.C. structures damaged from earthquake is studied

frames are tested by inputting simulated earthquake

based on earthquake-simulated damage tests and

ground motion on the shaking table.

identification,

The test results

However, the idea of utilizing separate energy

In this paper, the application

show that the retrofit scheme is feasible and the retrofitted frames possess roughly as same earth-

2.Earthquake-simulated damage tests

quake-resisted capacity as the original frames.

1. Introduction

of R.C. frames
2.1 Test models

Reinforced concrete structures under moder-

In order to reveal the relationship between seis-

ate or strong earthquake are generally in elastoplastic

mic damage and dynamic property change and to

state, some local damage will appear and the stiffness

establish the seismic damage model expressed by

and strength of structural members will degrade (Ou

identifiable parameters for R.C. structures, three R. C.

and Wu, 1993).

shear-type are made for the earthquake-simulated

This degradation has much effect

frames with one, two and three story, respectively, on

damage tests.

The frames are designed according to the current

The hysteretic loops of restoring force between

seismic design code of China and following condi-

adjacent stories of R.C. frames are shown inFig.2 (a)

tions: site category 2 and fortification intensity 8, and

and their skeleton-curves may be simplified as the

made in 1/4 scale models.

tri-linear model shown in Fig. 2(b).

The three R.C. models

The character-

are shown in Figs. 1(a)-(c), respectively.

istic parameters of the restoring force model, ob-

2.2 Restoring force model of R.C. frame story

tained from tests, are listed in Table 1.

(a) One story frame

(b)Two story frame

Figure 1

R.C. frame models

(a) Hysteretic loops

Figure 2
Table 1

(c)Three story frame

(b) Tri-linear model of skeleton curves

Restoring force of R.C. frame story

Characteristic parameters of restoring force model of R,C. frame story .

Parameter

xy(cm)

Fy(kN)

Xu(cm)

Fu(kN)

Xp(cm)

Fp(kN)

Frame 1

0.80

11.97

1.48

12.60

2.81

10.71

Frame 2,3

0.60

5.63

2.30

6.10

4.20

5.20

Note: Frame 1 is one story frame, Frame 2.3 are two and three story frames, respectively.

to the strong earthquake of intensity degree 8.

Be-

fore and after the earthquake-simulated damage tests,

2.3 Seismic damage and dynamic properties

In order to sustain the stability of frame models

the natural frequencies of undamaged and damaged

during shaking table tests, every two models linked

frame models are measured by inputting El Centro

together as a space frame and tested at the same time.

(SN) earthquake record with APV 0.05g.

The maximum relative seismic displacements

The mass and stiffness of each story for three R. C.

between adjacent stories and the natural frequencies

frame models are listed in Table 2.

The earthquake-simulated damage tests for the

of undamaged and damaged frame models are listed

three R.C. frame models were carried out by input-

in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. And the hysteretic

ting El Centro (SN) earthquake record with accelera-

loops between adjacent stories of two and three story

tion peak value (APV) 0.4g which is corresponding

frame models are shown in Fig. 3.

Table 2 Mass and stiffness of each story for three ILC, frame models
Story
Frame 1

Frame 2

Frame 1

Mass(kgs2 /cm)

8.00

Stiffness(kN/cm)

29.92

Mass(kgs2 /cm)

2.00

2.00

Stiffness(kN/cm)

18.76

18.76

Mass(kgs2 /cm)

2.00

2.00

2.00

Stiffness(kN/cm)

18.73

18.73

18.73

Table 3 Maximum relative seismic displacements of frame models

Story

Frame 1

2.89

Frame 2

1.12

0.56

Frame 3

1.26

0.56

0.59

Table 4 Natural frequencies of undamaged and damaged frame models

Structural state

Undamaged

Frequency order

Frame 1

3.70

Frame 2

3.01

7.89

Frame 3

2.17

8.08

(cm)

(Hz)

Damaged
3

2.60

8.79

2.60

7.30

1.80

5.58

8.60

Figure 3 Relative story seismic hysteretic loops of two and three story frame models
The earthquake-simulated damage test results

study, the modal parameter identification technique

show that the first stories in the three frames under-

infrequency domain is employed to estimate the fre-

went large plastic deformation, cracks emerged at

quencies and shape vectors of vibration modes of

two ends of the columns, but upper one or two stories

damaged frames (Li and Ou, 1995). If all modal

were still in elastic state during the simulated earth-

frequencies and shape vectors are estimated, the

quake. Besides, it can be seen from Table 4that the

stiffness of a shear-type flame story can be easily

natural frequencies, especially the first order ones, of

obtained by structural dynamics. If only one modal

three frames dropped about one third of the original

frequency and shape vector,

frequencies since damaged after earthquake.

timated, the stiffness of a shear-type frame story can

3. Parameter identification and damage assessment of damaged R.C. frames

3.1 Parameter identification
There are many efficient identification techniques developed in recent years by which the modal
or structural parameters can be estimated.

ij = {0.678,1.000}T

dj and dij , can be es-

In this

be obtained by the following formula

n

k di =

l =1

2
di

ml lj

ij i 1, j

(I=1,2,,n, oj = 0 ) (1)

For the two and three story R.C. frame models

after suffered from the simulative earthquake, the
first mode frequencies are shown in Table 3 and the
first modal vectors are, respectively,

i1 = {0.592,0.858,1.000}T And the stiffness of the three damaged frame models

from Eq. (1) are listed in Table 4.

Table 4

Stiffness of damaged R.C. frame stories (kN/cm)

Structural state

Undamaged

Frequency order

Frame 1

29.92

Frame 2

18.76

18.76

Frame 3

18.76

18.76

Damaged

14.82

18.76

It can be seen from Table 4 that the stiffness of

14.48

18.60

11.03

18.65

Di (k d ) = 1

quake dropped about one third of the original stiffness.3.2 Damage assessment

k di
k 0i

(i=1,2,n,)

(2)

The damage index of whole structure is approxi-

There have been some seismic damage

mately formulated by[4] in which 1 is the weighting

models by which the seismic damage index of R.C.

D(k d ) = i Di

elements can be formulated, e.g. and Park and Angs

i =1

model expressed by two parameters, maximum

n

i = (n + 1 i ) Di / (n + 1 i) Di (3)

seismic deformation Xm and hysteretic energy dissipated Eh(T) (Park and Aug, 1985), in which both

i =1

coefficient taking account of the fact that the lower

For the damage

stories may be more important.

assessment based on identification technique, the

The seismic damage indexes of R.C. frame

seismic damage model should be expressed by

identifiable parameters.

18.58

damaged story.

first story of R.C. frames after suffered from earth-

parameters are not identifiable.

models from Eq. (2) are listed in Table 5.

So, since the stiffness of

It can be

shear type R.C. frame stories suffered from seismic

seen from Table 5 that the lowest stories of three

damage drops large amount as shown as above test

frame models suffered from moderate damage and

results, the following seismic damage model

the upper stories slight or no damage.

expressed by stiffness is chosen to formulate the

moderate damage stories, the damage indexes ob-

seismic damage index of R.C. frame stories in which

tained from Eq. (2) are very closed to those from

k0i and kdi are, respectively, the original and residual

Park and Ang's model.

Besides, for

stiffness of damaged story.

Table 5

Seismic damage indexes of R.C. frame models

Story

Frame 1

0.519(0.550)

Frame 2

0.228(0.230)

0.000(0.000)

Frame 3

0.412(0.440)

0.000(0.010)

Structure
0.519(0.550)
0.228(0.230)

0.000(0.000)

Note: The terms in bracket are the result from Park and Ang's model.

0.412(0.430)

3.3 Restoring force model of damaged R.C. frame

that the ith story underwent, and xri is the residual

stories

displacement of the ith story and is formulated by

Another parameter, residual strength, yielding or

3
2
x ri = 0.024 x mi
+ 0.017 x mi
+ 0.47 x mi 0.03

ultimate strength, between adjacent stories of

shear-type R.C. frames after earthquake can not iden-

which is empirical formula regressed from the

tified, which is very important for the evaluation of

low-cycle fatigue test results of 280 R.C. slender

earthquake-resisted capacity and the retrofit of the

columns(Li, 1996).

damaged structure. By extending the strength esti-

The restoring force skeleton curves of damaged

mation methods in damage mechanics, we obtained

stories of shear-type R.C. frames may be simplified

the following residual strength formula of damaged

the tri-linear model as shown in Fig. 2, and the cor-

shear-type R.C. frames

responding model parameters can be determined ac-

Fdi ( X mi ) = k 0i (1 Di )( X mi x ri )

(4)

cording the method presented Ou and Wu (1993) and

listed in Table 6.

in which Xmi is the maximum seismic deformation

Table 6

Characteristic parameters of restoring force model of damaged R.C. frame stories

Parameter

xdy(cm)

Fdy(kN)

xdy(cm)

Fdu(kN)

xdp(cm)

Fdp(kN)

Frame 1

1.20

8.97

1.48

9.60

2.81

8.16

1th story of frame 2

0.80

4.72

2.30

5.13

4.20

4.20

1th story of frame 3

0.80

5.10

2.30

5.50

4.20

4.60

4. Retrofit of Damaged RC. Frames and

the stiffness and strength distribution of retrofitted

Earthquake-Simulated Tests

structure, the following retrofit criterion should be

4.1 Design of PEDDs used in the retrofit

satisfied: the primary stiffness and yielding strength

The hysteretic type of passive energy dissipation

of retrofitted stories are the same as those of the

devices developed in recent years, such as metallic

original stories and meet the requirements of the cur-

yielding or frictional devices, were used in the retrofit

rent seismic design code.

of the damaged R.C. frames with two and three stories, respectively.

The above test results shown that

The retrofitted frame models using PEEDs

are shown in Fig. 4.

The restoring force skeleton

the first stories in the two and three story frames need

curves of the damaged stories and hysteretic type of

to be retrofitted, but upper one or two stories do not

PEEDs are shown in Fig. 5(a) and 5(b), respectively,

need to be retrofitted.

and the skeleton curve of the retrofitted stories is

The purpose to retrofit a damaged structure

shown in Fig. 5(c).

is to restore its earthquake-resisted capacity to meet

The design criterion of hysteretic type of PEEDs

the seismic requirements as same as a new structure

used in the retrofit of damaged structures can be

in the region.

written as

In order to avoid the sharp change of

Figure 4 Retrofitted frame models using PEEDs

Figure 5
Fdy+Fhy=Fry

Restoring force skeleton curves

k0d+koh=k0r

(6)

in which Fry and k0r are the original or required

yielding force and yielding displacement of the frame
story retrofitted, respectively, and other symbols are

thickness of the plate.

PEED can be obtained as

k 0h =

shown in Fig. 5.
The triangular steel plate (Tsai, 1993), one of
hysteretic type PEEDs, as shown in Fig. 6, are used
in the retrofit of damaged frames.

The yielding

force, ultimate force and yielding displacement of the

device can be formulated by

Fhy =

n y bt

Fhy =

6h
x hy =

yh2
Et

n y bt

Fhy
x hy

nEbt 3
=
6h 3

the given size shown in Fig. 6(a), the number of the

plates used in the retrofit of damaged frame story can
be formulated by

4h
(7)

in which ay and E are the yielding strength and

elastic modulus of the steel plate material, and t is the

(8)

According to the design criterion Eq.(6) and for

n = (k 0 r k 0 d )

Then, the primary stiffness of

6h 3
Ebt 3

(9)

The parameters of PEEDs used in the retrofitted

of the two and three story frame models are listed in
Table 7.

Figure 6 Triangular steel plate type PEED

Table 7

Frame 2

PEED model(mm)
hbt
70703

Frame 3

70703

Retrofitted frame

Parameters of PEEDs used in the retrofit

Primary stiffness
k0h(kN/cm)
3.86

Yielding force
Fhy(kN)
0.72

7.71

1.40

Plate number

4.2 Earthquake-simulated tests of retrofitted

the maximum seismic displacements of original,

frames

damaged but retrofitted and damaged but un-retrofit-

The parameters and dynamic properties of the

ted frames under the same earthquake, El Centro (SN)

retrofitted frames are listed in Table 8. In order to

with APV 0.4g, in which the results of damaged but

verify the retrofit effectiveness, the simulative earth-

un-retrofitted flame are those calculated from charac-

quake tests of the retrofitted frames are made again

teristic parameters of restoring force model of dam-

by inputting El Centro (SN) earthquake record with

aged R.C. frame stories listed in Table 6. The test

APV 0.4g. The tested curves of seismic displace-

results show that the retrofitted frames still possess

ment time history of the retrofitted frames are shown

the same earthquake-resisted capacity as the original

in Fig. 7 and the maximum seismic displacements are

ones, and the un-retrofitted frames possess very bad

listed in Table 9.

capacity.

Table 9 lists and Fig. 8 shows also

Table 8 Parameters and dynamic properties of the retrofitted frames

Frame 2

Primary stiffness of
first Story (kN/cm)
18.30

Yielding force of first

story(kN)
10.90(11.26)

Frequency of first
mode
2.98(3.01)

Frame 3

18.74(18.76)

11.03(11.26)

2.01(2.17)

Retrofitted frame

Note: The terms are the results of original frames.

Figure 7 (a)

The tested curves of seismic displacement time history of the retrofitted two story frame

Figure 7 (b)

The tested curves of seismic displacement time history of the retrofitted three story frame

Figure 8 Maximum seismic displacements of original, retrofitted and un-retrofitted frames

Table 9 Maximum seismic displacements of original, retrofitted and un-retrofitted frames (cm)
Story

Original
1

Frame 2

1.12

0.58

Frame 3

1.13

0.59

Retrofitted
3

0.59

0.79

0.56

0.98

0.59

5. Conclusions
The main conclusions may be drawn out in the
paper:
1) A moderately damaged R.C. frames during

Un-retrofitted
3

0.54

1.85

0.56

2.32

0.70

0.32

earthquake can be determined by means of the identification method, and the damage index can be expressed by the identified parameters, which are the
basis for the design of PEDDs.

earthquake can be retrofitted by using PEDDs to re-

3) Based on the retrofit criterion of damaged

store the earthquake-resisted capacity as same as the

structures presented in the gaper, the parameters of

original frames.

the PEDDs used in the retrofit can be designed or

2) The parameters of a damaged structure after

selected easily.

References
[1] On, J. p. and Wu, B. (1993), Experimental Study

[5] Li, H. Q. (1996), Seismic Damage Identification

on Accumulative Damage of Reinforced Con-

and Retrofit Using Energy Dissipation Devices

crete Structures under Seismic Mainshock and

of R.C. Structures, Doctorate Dissertation,

Afershock, Earthquake Engineering and Engi-

Harbin University of Civil Engineering and Ar-

neering Vibration, Vol. 13, No. 4. (in Chinese)

chitecture, 1996.

[2] Li, H. Q. and Ou, J. P. (1995), Experimental

[6] Park, Y. J. and Aug, A. H-S.(1985), Mechanistic

Study on Seismic Damage Identification of Re-

Seismic Damage Evaluation of Reinforced

inforced Concrete Frames, World Earthquake

Concrete Structures, ASCE, Journal of Struc-

Engineering, No. 4. (in Chinese)

tural Engineering, Vol. 111, No. 4.

[3] Ou, J. P. and Li, H. Q. et al (1996), Experimental

[7] Tsai, K. C. (1993), Design of Steel Triangular

Study of Seismic Damage and Retrofit Using

Plate Energy Absorbers for Seismic Resistant

Passive Energy Dissipation Devices of Rein-

Construction, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 9, No. 3.

forced Concrete Frames, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Vol. 16, No. 2.
(in Chinese)
[4] Ou, J. P., Wu, B. and Soong, T. T. (1996), Resent
Advances in Research and Applications of Passive Energy Dissipation Systems, Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Vol. 16,
No. 3.