Premium
Seismic demands on nonstructural components anchored to concrete accounting for structure‐fastener‐nonstructural interaction (SFNI)
Author(s) -
Pürgstaller Andreas,
Quintana Gallo Patricio,
Pampanin Stefano,
Bergmeister Konrad
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
earthquake engineering and structural dynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.218
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1096-9845
pISSN - 0098-8847
DOI - 10.1002/eqe.3255
Subject(s) - fastener , structural engineering , nonlinear system , seismic analysis , shear (geology) , hysteresis , engineering , bilinear interpolation , stiffness , current (fluid) , geotechnical engineering , computer science , geology , physics , petrology , electrical engineering , quantum mechanics , computer vision
Summary This paper investigates the influence of the hysteretic shear behavior of postinstalled anchors in concrete on the seismic response of nonstructural components (NSCs) using numerical methods. The purpose of the investigation is to evaluate current design requirements for NSC and their anchorage. Current design guidelines and simplified methods, such as floor response spectra (FRS), typically approach the dynamics of the structure‐fastener‐NSC (SFN) system using simplified empirical formulae. These formulations decouple the structure from the NSC and neglect the behavior of the anchor connection, with the assumption of full rigidity. There is a lack of knowledge on the complex interaction between a host structure, the fastening system, and the NSC, herein referred to as structure‐fastener‐nonstructural interaction (SFNI). More specifically, it is important to investigate whether and how the actual hysteresis shear behavior that takes place in the anchorage could alter the seismic response of the SFN system and its components. Herein, the results of extensive nonlinear dynamic analyses (NLDA) with different models for the anchorage force‐displacement relationship are presented and compared with those obtained with FRS procedures and current code provisions. The anchor models include (a) linear‐elastic, (b) bilinear, and (c) a recently developed hysteresis rule. The results of the NLDA showed that the first two approaches are not able to reflect the behavior of an anchor loaded in dynamic shear. Moreover, when using the more refined hysteresis model, it appears that current code provisions might underestimate the component and anchor shear amplification factors for rigid NSC fixed to the host structure through anchors.