槓桿黏彈性制震壁的配置對高科技廠房耐震行為影響

The Distribution of Lever Viscoelastic Wall Dampers on the Seismic Performance of High-Tech Factories

連奕婷(Yi-Ting Lien)

指導教授 ： 周中哲

國立臺灣大學/工學院/土木工程學研究所/碩士(2018年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201803577

摘要

槓桿黏彈性制震壁(Lever Viscoelastic Wall, LVEW)與傳統壁式黏彈性阻尼器最大不同處在於其加裝槓桿、摩擦阻尼器與限位裝置，可在不同等級地震力作用下具備不同消能機制。對於高科技廠房而言，裝置LVEW能同時確保強震下廠內生命財產安全及中小地震乃至環境微小振動下製程設備精度與產品良率，但目前國內外規範當中，阻尼器之設計阻尼比與配置方法尚未有具體的建議與規定，鑑此，本研究將針對此種新式消能裝置發展出可應用於工程界的配置流程，過程中依據不同結構物週期提出加裝阻尼器結構之彈性反應預測公式，以公式中的阻尼比或勁度參數作為設計目標，發展三種適用於黏彈性阻尼器的簡易分配流程，其兼具減震效益、經濟價值與時間成本之優勢。
為了瞭解LVEW於三種分配理論下所提供的耐震效益，本研究選取南部高科技廠房與新竹標準廠房作為分析標的，使用PISA3D軟體建立非線性數值模型，其中南部高科技廠房採用簡化機制降低模型的複雜性，並以系統識別驗證其可信度。此外，LVEW所配置的組數會因模型簡化而與實際情況不符，亦提出配置LVEW相對應之簡化，此舉可有效提升不同分配法下模型的分析效率。本研究訂定位移降幅30%與60%兩種設計目標，採用三種分配理論配置LVEW，進行模態分析、非線性靜力側推分析與動力歷時分析，其中地震歷時的選取為八組臺灣與世界各地強地動紀錄，對其分別調整至尖峰地表加速度Elastic(0.036 g)、DBE(0.28 g)與MCE(0.36 g)三種等級地震，並由彈性動力歷時分析結果顯示三種分配法與降幅預測式皆有良好之準確度，由非線性動力歷時分析結果顯示配置LVEW構架在非線性反應具備減震效益。最後，針對兩棟結構物之特性與需求，於減震效益與經濟價值兩層面提出建議，探討不同結構特性的廠房所適用之配置方式。

關鍵字

槓桿黏彈性制震壁 ； 黏彈性阻尼器 ； 摩擦阻尼器 ； 加裝阻尼器結構之彈性反應預測 ； 阻尼器分配理論 ； 高科技廠房 ； 簡化機制 ； 非線性動力歷時分析

並列摘要

The difference between the Lever Viscoelastic Wall (LVEW) and the traditional viscoelastic wall is the addition of pivot, stopper and friction device. LVEW improves the energy dissipation of structures based on different mechanism and kinematics for different earthquake levels. For high-tech factories, LVEW is able to ensure the structural safety during a big earthquake (e.g., above design basis earthquake level and equal to maximum considered earthquake level) and control the impact of environmental vibration making the process equipment operate normally during a small earthquake (e.g., below design basis earthquake level). However, both design damping ratio and distribution method of the dampers are no specific recommendations and regulations in existing seismic design codes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop distribution procedure of this new energy dissipating device, which can be applied to pratical design. Based on structural periods, using different formula of structural elastic response prediction to calculate the damping ratio or stiffness parameter as the design demand, developing three types of simple distribution methods for viscoelastic dampers, which combines the advantages of seismic benefit, economic value and time cost.
In order to evaluate the seismic performance of an existing building with LVEWs in three types of distribution methods, a high-tech factory in Tainan, Taiwan and a high-rise steel factory in Hsinchu, Taiwan were selected and modeled by a computer program. A high-tech factory used simplified model to reduce the complexity of structure, and the reliability of this model was verified by system identification. In addition, the number of LVEW will be inconsistent with the actual situation due to simplified model, hence the corresponding simplification of LVEW is also proposed, which can improve the analysis efficiency for the models in different distribution methods. The design demand is set to 30% and 60% for the displacement reduction, and the LVEWs were installed in PISA3D model based on three types of distribution theories. The seismic performance was evaluated by modal analysis, nonlinear static pushover analysis and nonlinear dynamic time history analysis. Eight earthquake records of Taiwan and the rest of the world were selected to adjust to the three peaks of Elastic (0.036 g), DBE (0.28 g) and MCE (0.36 g). The results of the elastic dynamics analysis showed that all three methods can achieve the reduction prediction and inelastic dynamics analysis showed the seismic benefit of the building with LVEWs. Lastly, according to the characteristics and requirements of the two structures, suggestions of distribution methods will be discussed in aspects of seismic benefit and economic value.

並列關鍵字

Lever Viscoelastic Wall Damper ； Viscoeastic Damper ； Friction Device ； Elastic Response Prediction of Structure with Damper ； High-Tech Factory ； Simplified Theory ； Nonlinear Dynamic Time History Analysis

參考文獻

1. Lopez Garcia, D., & Soong, T. T. (2002). Efficiency of a simple approach to damper allocation in MDOF structures. Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 9(1), 19-30.

2. AIJ. (2001). Recommendation for the design of Base Isolated Buildings, Architectural Institute of Japan.

3. Ogawa, K., Kamura, H., & Inoue, K. (1999). Modeling of the moment resistant frame to fishbone-shaped frame for the response analysis. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering (Transactions of AIJ), 64(521), 119-126.

4. Hwang, J. S., Lin, W. C., & Wu, N. J. (2013). Comparison of distribution methods for viscous damping coefficients to buildings. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 9(1), 28-41.

5. Building Seismic Safety Council (US), United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency, & Applied Technology Council. (1997). NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings (Vol. 1). Federal Emergency Management Agency.