English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The purpose of this paper is to provide practitioners with further insightinto spurious damping forces that can be generated in nonlinear seismicresponse history analyses (RHA). The term 'spurious' is used to refer todamping forces that are not present in an elastic system and appear asnonlinearities develop: such damping forces are not necessarily intended andappear as a result of modifications in the structural properties as it yieldsor damages due to the seismic action. In this paper, two types of spuriousdamping forces are characterized. Each type has often been treated separatelyin the literature, but each has been qualified as 'spurious', somehow blurringtheir differences. Consequently, in an effort to clarify the consequences ofchoosing a particular viscous damping model for nonlinear RHA, this paper showsthat damping models that avoid spurious damping forces of one type do notnecessarily avoid damping forces of the other type.

Two types of spurious damping forces potentially modeled in numerical seismic nonlinear response history analysis