9.12 경주지진 및 11.15 포항지진의 구조손상 포텐셜 비교연구
Comparative Analysis of Structural Damage Potentials Observed in the 9.12 Gyeongju and 11.15 Pohang Earthquakes
1
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this paper, comparative analysis of the 9.12 Gyeongju and 11.15 Pohang earthquakes was conducted in order to provide probable explanations and reasons for the damage observed in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake from both earthquake and structural engineering perspectives. The damage potentials like Arias intensity, effective peak ground acceleration, etc observed in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake were generally weaker than those of the 9.12 Gyeongju earthquake. However, in contrast to the high-frequency dominant nature of the 9.12 Gyeongju earthquake records, the spectral power of PHA2 record observed in the soft soil site was highly concentrated around 2Hz. The base shear around 2 Hz frequency was as high as 40% building weight. This frequency band is very close to the fundamental frequency of the piloti-type buildings severely damaged in the northern part of Pohang. Unfortunately, in addition to inherent vertical irregularity, most of the damaged piloti-type buildings had plan irregularity as well and were non-seismic. All these contributed to the fatal damage. Inelastic dynamic analysis indicated that PHA2 record demands system ductility capacity of 3.5 for a structure with a fundamental period of 0.5 sec and yield base shear strength of 10% building weight. The system ductility level of 3.5 seems very difficult to be achievable in non-seismic brittle piloti-type buildings. The soil profile of the PHA2 site was inversely estimated based on deconvolution technique and trial-error procedure with utilizing available records measured at several rock sites during the 11.15 Pohang earthquake. The soil profile estimated was very typical of soil class D, implying significant soil amplification in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake. The 11.15 Pohang earthquake gave us the expensive lesson that near-collapse damage to irregular and brittle buildings is highly possible when soil is soft and epicenter is close, although the earthquake magnitude is just minor to moderate (M 5+).
Abstract
In this paper, comparative analysis of the 9.12 Gyeongju and 11.15 Pohang earthquakes was conducted in order to provide probable explanations and reasons for the damage observed in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake from both earthquake and structural engineering perspectives. The damage potentials like Arias intensity, effective peak ground acceleration, etc observed in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake were generally weaker than those of the 9.12 Gyeongju earthquake. However, in contrast to the high-frequency dominant nature of the 9.12 Gyeongju earthquake records, the spectral power of PHA2 record observed in the soft soil site was highly concentrated around 2Hz. The base shear around 2 Hz frequency was as high as 40% building weight. This frequency band is very close to the fundamental frequency of the piloti-type buildings severely damaged in the northern part of Pohang. Unfortunately, in addition to inherent vertical irregularity, most of the damaged piloti-type buildings had plan irregularity as well and were non-seismic. All these contributed to the fatal damage. Inelastic dynamic analysis indicated that PHA2 record demands system ductility capacity of 3.5 for a structure with a fundamental period of 0.5 sec and yield base shear strength of 10% building weight. The system ductility level of 3.5 seems very difficult to be achievable in non-seismic brittle piloti-type buildings. The soil profile of the PHA2 site was inversely estimated based on deconvolution technique and trial-error procedure with utilizing available records measured at several rock sites during the 11.15 Pohang earthquake. The soil profile estimated was very typical of soil class D, implying significant soil amplification in the 11.15 Pohang earthquake. The 11.15 Pohang earthquake gave us the expensive lesson that near-collapse damage to irregular and brittle buildings is highly possible when soil is soft and epicenter is close, although the earthquake magnitude is just minor to moderate (M 5+).
참고문헌 (12)
- "Domestic Earthquake List"[URL]
- "Detailed analysis result of 11.15 Pohang earthquake"[URL]
- "U.S. Geological Survey"[URL]
- "Estimated damage for Pohang earthquake is estimated at 97.1 billion won. 2017/12/04 10:50"[URL]
- 이철호, "2016년 9월 12일 M5.8 경주지진의 데미지 포텐셜 분석 및 내진공학 측면의 시사점", 한국지진공학회논문집, 20(7), pp.527~536 (2016), 한국지진공학회
- "Revision of second analysis of Pohang earthquske response spectra" (2017)[URL]
- 신동현, "경주지진 관측자료에 기반한 유효최대지반가속도 분석", 한국지진공학회논문집, 20(7), pp.425~434 (2016), 한국지진공학회
- Trifunac MD, "A study on the duration of strong earthquake ground motion", Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65(3), pp.581~626 (1975)
- Philippacopoulos AJ, "Recommendations for resolution of public comments on USI (unresolved safety issues) A-40, seismic design criteria", Div. of Safety Issue Resolution, Brookhaven National Lab, ~ (1989)
- Applied Technology Council, "Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. ATC-3-06 (NBS SP-510)", U.S Government Printing Office, ~ (1978)
- Architectural Institute of Korea (AIK), "Korean building code and commentary" (2016), Kimoondang
- 이영욱, "중력하중에 대하여 설계된 RC 골조의 내진 저항력 추정식의 유도", 한국지진공학회논문집, 6(3), pp.63~71 (2002), 한국지진공학회
