Response of Steel-plate Concrete (SC) Wall Piers to Combined In-plane and Out-of-plane Seismic Loadings

Transcription

1 ISSN X Response of Steel-plate Conrete (SC) Wall Piers to Combined In-plane and Out-of-plane Seismi Loadings by Brian Terranova, Andrew S. Whittaker, Siamak Epakahi and Nebojsa Orbovi Tehnial Report MCEER July 17, 2017 This researh was onduted at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, and was supported primarily by MCEER.

2 NOTICE This report was prepared by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, as a result of researh sponsored by MCEER. Neither MCEER, assoiates of MCEER, its sponsors, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, nor any person ating on their behalf: a. makes any warranty, express or implied, with respet to the use of any information, apparatus, method, or proess dislosed in this report or that suh use may not infringe upon privately owned rights; or b. assumes any liabilities of whatsoever kind with respet to the use of, or the damage resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or proess dislosed in this report. Any opinions, findings, and onlusions or reommendations expressed in this publiation are those of the author(s) and do not neessarily reflet the views of MCEER, the National Siene Foundation or other sponsors.

3 Response of Steel-plate Conrete (SC) Wall Piers to Combined In-plane and Out-of-plane Seismi Loadings by Brian Terranova, 1 Andrew S. Whittaker, 2 Siamak Epakahi 3 and Nebojsa Orbovi 4 Publiation Date: July 17, 2017 Submittal Date: June 16, 2017 Tehnial Report MCEER Researh Engineer and former Graduate Student, Department of Civil, Strutural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo, State University of New York 2 Professor and MCEER Diretor, Department of Civil, Strutural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo, State University of New York 3 Teahing Assistant Professor, Department of Civil, Strutural and Environmental Engineering, University at Buffalo, State University of New York 4 Tehnial Speialist, Canadian Nulear Safety Commission MCEER University at Buffalo, State University of New York 212 Ketter Hall, Buffalo, NY meer@buffalo.edu; Website:

4

5 Prefae MCEER is a national enter of exellene dediated to the disovery and development of new knowledge, tools and tehnologies that equip ommunities to beome more disaster resilient in the fae of earthquakes and other extreme events. MCEER aomplishes this through a system of multidisiplinary, multi-hazard researh, in tandem with omplimentary eduation and outreah initiatives. Headquartered at the University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, MCEER was originally established by the National Siene Foundation in 1986, as the first National Center for Earthquake Engineering Researh (NCEER). In 1998, it beame known as the Multidisiplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Researh (MCEER), from whih the urrent name, MCEER, evolved. Comprising a onsortium of researhers and industry partners from numerous disiplines and institutions throughout the United States, MCEER s mission has expanded from its original fous on earthquake engineering to one whih addresses the tehnial and soio-eonomi impats of a variety of hazards, both natural and man-made, on ritial infrastruture, failities, and soiety. The Center derives support from several Federal agenies, inluding the National Siene Foundation, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Energy, Nulear Regulatory Commission, and the State of New York, foreign governments and private industry. This report presents results of experimental and numerial studies on the ombined in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of steel-plate onrete (SC) omposite shear walls. Three medium-sale retangular SC wall speimens were tested at the Bowen Laboratory at Purdue University. The effets of out-of-plane loading and tie bar spaing on in-plane apaity of SC walls were the primary foi of the investigation. The results of the experiments indiate that the out-of-plane load has a signifiant effet on the in-plane behavior of SC walls and the effets beome very signifiant as the out-of-plane load develops an average shear stress that is greater than the inlined raking load of the onrete. Finite element models of the test speimens were developed in LS-DYNA. The LS-DYNA model was used in a parametri study to formulate design guidane for SC walls subjeted to ombined in-plane and out-of-plane loading. iii

6

7 ABSTRACT This report investigates the seismi response of omponents of nulear power plants onstruted using steel-plate-onrete omposite walls, subjeted to ombined in-plane and out-of-plane loadings. Steel-plate onrete (SC) omposite shear walls are omposed of steel faeplates, infill onrete, shear studs bonding the faeplate to the infill, and tie rods linking the faeplates. To date, a signifiant amount of studies have foused on the in-plane (IP) response of SC walls, but the effet of out-of-plane (OOP) loading on the IP response has not been addressed in great detail. Three medium-sale retangular SC wall speimens were built and tested under foreontrolled monotoni OOP loading and displaement-ontrolled yli IP loading at the Bowen Laboratory at Purdue University. The magnitude of OOP load and its effets on the IP apaity of SC walls were the fous of this investigation; the effet of tie bar spaing was also investigated. Finite element models of the test speimens were developed in LS-DYNA to investigate the effet of OOP loading (magnitude and loation) on the IP response of SC wall piers. The baseline DYNA model was validated for IP behavior using data from the tests of medium-sale retangular SC wall piers and for OOP behavior using data from these tests. The results of the simulations showed that OOP loading has a signifiant effet on the IP apaity of SC wall piers; the effets beome more signifiant as the shear span-to-depth ratio and magnitude of the OOP load are inreased. The validated model was used in a parametri study to investigate the effet of OOP loading (magnitude and loation) on IP response, to formulate design guidane for SC walls subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loading. The dutility of a wall pier under IP loading is small beause damage aumulates over a short height near the bottom of the wall pier. Dutility under IP loading is effetively zero under high OOP loads. These outomes should be taken into aount for both seismi design and for seismi probabilisti risk assessment, whih addresses loadings more intense than design basis. v

8 vi

9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Canadian Nulear Safety Commission funded the researh desribed in this report and this support is gratefully aknowledged. The experiments were exeuted in the Bowen Laboratory at Purdue University under the leadership of Professor Amit Varma, with important ontributions from Mr. Saahas Bhardwaj and Dr. Efe Kurt, and the tehniians and staff of the Laboratory. The authors aknowledge and thank their Purdue olleagues for their efforts on the projet. vii

10 viii

11 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION Introdution Literature Review Projet Sope Organization of this Report... 2 SECTION 2 PHYSICAL TESTING OF SC WALL PIERS Introdution Test Matrix and Test Fixture Instrumentation of the Test Speimens CNSC1 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC1 Test Protool CNSC1 Test Results Behaviors of CNSC1 and CNSC CNSC2 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC2 Test Protool CNSC2 Test Results Behaviors of CNSC2 and CNSC CNSC3 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC3 Test Protool CNSC3 Test Results Behaviors of CNSC3 and CNSC SECTION 3 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF THE SEISMIC RESPONSE OF SC WALL PIERS Introdution RC Beam Simulations Simulation of CNSC Experiments CNSC1 Simulations CNSC2 Simulations CNSC3 Simulations Summary and Conlusions SECTION 4 DEVELOPING DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR SC WALLS THROUGH PARAMETRIC STUDIES Introdution ix

12 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD.) 4.2 Parametri Study Tehnial Guidane SECTION 5 SUMMARY AND GUIDANCE FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF SC WALL PIERS Summary Guidane for the Analysis and Design of SC Walls SECTION 6 REFERENCES x

13 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: Faeplate-to-baseplate onnetion (ourtesy of Purdue University)...6 Figure 2-2: CNSC test setup (ourtesy of Purdue University)...8 Figure 2-3: Layout of strain gages, tie bars, and shear studs, CNSC1, CNSC3 (adapted from Purdue University drawings)...9 Figure 2-4: Layout of strain gages, tie bars, and shear studs, CNSC2 (adapted from Purdue University drawings) Figure 2-5: Loations of string potentiometers (ourtesy of Purdue University) Figure 2-6: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC Figure 2-7: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC Figure 2-8: In-plane fore-displaement relationship for post-yield yles, CNSC Figure 2-9: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC Figure 2-10: Aumulated damage on South fae, yles 1-12, CNSC1 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-11: Aumulated damage on the North fae, yles 1-12, CNSC1 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-12: Damage on South fae of CNSC1 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-13: Damage on North fae of CNSC1 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-14: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC Figure 2-15: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC Figure 2-16: In-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC Figure 2-17: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC Figure 2-18: Diagonal raking aused by OOP loading, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-19: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC Figure 2-20: In-plane fore-displaement relationship for post yield yles, CNSC Figure 2-21: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC Figure 2-22: Aumulated damage, yles 1-12, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-23: Aumulated damage to CNSC2 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-24: Tie bar rupture at North end of wall, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-25: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC Figure 2-26: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC Figure 2-27: In-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC Figure 2-28: Initial raking of speimen before OOP load appliation, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-29: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC Figure 2-30: Additional diagonal raking aused by OOP loading, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue).. 33 Figure 2-31: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC xi

14 LIST OF FIGURES (CONTD.) Figure 2-32: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC Figure 2-33: Aumulated damage after yle 8, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-34: Additional photographs of damage after yle 8, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-35: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC Figure 2-36: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC Figure 2-37: In-plane fore-displaement responses of ontrol speimen and CNSC Figure 3-1: Experimental setup (Bresler et al., 1963) Figure 3-2: LS-DYNA model of the Bresler et al. (1963) experiment Figure 3-3: LS-DYNA loading and boundary onditions Figure 3-4: Experimental (Bresler) and LS-DYNA results Figure 3-5: Experimental setup (Mphonde et al., (1984)) Figure 3-6: LS-DYNA model of the Mphonde et al. (1984) experiment Figure 3-7: LS-DYNA model of the CNSC experiments Figure 3-8: CNSC1 and CNSC3 tie bar details Figure 3-9: CNSC2 tie bar details Figure 3-10: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-11: Plan view of wall pier and loading Figure 3-12: Distribution of vertial stresses on tension plate at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC Figure 3-13: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC1 (units of psi) Figure 3-14: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-15: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-16: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC154 Figure 3-17: Observed and predited damage to CNSC Figure 3-18: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-19: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC Figure 3-20: IP fore-displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-21: Bakbone urves, CNSC Figure 3-22: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-23: Distributions of vertial stress in the tension plate, CNSC Figure 3-24: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC2 (units of psi) xii

15 LIST OF FIGURES (CONTD.) Figure 3-25: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-26: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-27: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC263 Figure 3-28: Observed and predited damage to CNSC Figure 3-29: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-30: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC Figure 3-31: IP fore-displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-32: Bakbone urves, CNSC Figure 3-33: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-34: Distributions of vertial stress in the tension plate, CNSC Figure 3-35: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC3 (units of psi) Figure 3-36: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-37: Observed and predited damage to CNSC Figure 3-38: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-39: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC371 Figure 3-40: IP fore-displaement relationship, yle 8, drift ratio = 0.56%, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC Figure 3-41: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-42: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC Figure 3-43: IP fore displaement relationships, CNSC Figure 3-44: Bakbone urves, CNSC Figure 4-1: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 3500 psi, s d Figure 4-2: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 3500 psi, s d Figure 4-3: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 3500 psi, s d Figure 4-4: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 3500 psi, s d / Figure 4-5: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 3500 psi, s d / Figure 4-6: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 3500 psi, s d / Figure 4-7: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 5000 psi, s d Figure 4-8: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 5000 psi, s d Figure 4-9: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 5000 psi, s d xiii

16 Figure 4-10: IP behavior of SC walls, Figure 4-11: IP behavior of SC walls, Figure 4-12: IP behavior of SC walls, LIST OF FIGURES (CONTD.) a/ d 0.5 a/ d 1.5 a/ d 3, f 5000 psi,, f 5000 psi,, f 5000 psi, s d /2 s d /2 s d / Figure 4-13: Normalized bakbone urves, CNSC experiments Figure 4-14: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, Figure 4-15: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, Figure 4-16: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, Figure 4-17: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, f 3500 psi, s d f 3500 psi, s d / f 5000 psi, s d f 5000 psi, s d / xiv

17 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: CNSC test matrix...5 Table 2-2: Loading protool for CNSC Table 2-3: Loss of IP shear apaity, CNSC Table 2-4: Sequene of damage, CNSC Table 2-5: Summary results for CNSC Table 2-6: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC Table 2-7: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC Table 2-8: Loading protool for CNSC Table 2-9: Loss of IP apaity, CNSC Table 2-10: Sequene of damage, CNSC Table 2-11: Summary results for CNSC Table 2-12: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC Table 2-13: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC Table 2-14: Loading protool for CNSC Table 2-15: Sequene of damage, CNSC Table 2-16: Summary results for CNSC Table 2-17: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC Table 2-18: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC Table 3-1: Summary of LS-DYNA simulations of plain RC speimens Table 3-2: Summary of RC beam simulation results Table 3-3: Summary of the LS-DYNA models of the CNSC speimens Table 4-1: Summary of LS-DYNA simulations xv

18 xvi

19 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introdution Steel-plate onrete (SC) omposite walls onsisting of steel faeplates, infill onrete, and onnetors used to anhor the steel faeplates together to the infill onrete may be a viable onstrution alternative to reinfored onrete (RC) and steel plate shear walls. Double skin SC wall shells an be fabriated offsite, assembled and filled on-site with onrete to reate a monolithi wall. The use of steel faeplates by-and-large eliminates the need for formwork, and the plates serve as primary reinforement. The hallenges assoiated with SC wall onstrution inlude joining the shells in the field, spliing SC walls to reinfored onrete walls and foundations, and field inspetion of the onrete behind the faeplates. Challenges remain with the analysis of SC walls for design basis and beyond design basis loadings, inluding haraterization of the effets of interation of o-existing in-plane (IP) and out-of-plane (OOP) loadings moments and shears. This report addresses suh interations of moments and shears under IP and OOP loadings. 1.2 Literature Review Varma and his o-workers (Varma et al., 2011; Kurt et al., 2013; Seo et al., 2016), Epakahi et al. (2014a; 2014b; 2015), and others have studied the IP behavior of SC walls, numerially and experimentally. Epakahi et al. present a detailed review of the literature on IP behavior and so those materials are not reported on here. The OOP behavior of slies of SC walls has been studied, albeit to a lesser degree than IP behavior. Sener et al. (2014; 2015) onduted one-way bending tests on SC beams, representative of vertial strips in SC walls, to investigate OOP behaviors in shear and flexure. They ompiled a database of test results and used it to evaluate the utility of design odes. They onluded that the ACI (ACI, 2006) equations for RC beams and slabs ould be used to predit OOP shear strength of SC walls (for shear span-to-depth ratios larger than 3) and the OOP flexural apaity of SC walls (for any shear span-to-depth ratios). Bhardwaj et al. (2015) investigated the effets of OOP fores on the IP apaity of SC walls using numerial tools developed in LS-DYNA by Kurt et al. (2013) for IP behavior. The results of a limited number of 1

20 numerial simulations indiated that the shear span-to-depth ratio and the magnitude of the OOP load signifiantly affet the IP apaity of SC wall piers. Yang et al. (2016) exeuted three fullsale experiments investigating the OOP yli behavior of SC walls. The parameters onsidered in that study inluded shear span-to-depth ratio and thikness of the steel faeplates. Analysis of nulear strutures predits large OOP moments and shears in walls at loations of load and stiffness disontinuities, where the walls are also subjeted to large IP fores. To the knowledge of the authors, there existed no data on the response of SC walls to ombinations of IP and OOP loadings. The lak of data and design guidane on response of SC walls to ombined IP and OOP loading prompted the Canadian Nulear Safety Commission (CNSC) to fund a study, whih is the subjet of this report. The sope of the CNSC projet is presented in the next setion. 1.3 Projet Sope This report summarizes work on the CNSC projet, entitled Testing and Development of Regulatory Requirements for Steel Plate Conrete (SC) Strutures. The CNSC projet was awarded to the University at Buffalo (UB); Purdue University was a subontrator to UB. The projet desribed in Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this report inluded physial and numerial simulations of the response of SC wall piers subjeted to simultaneous in-plane and out-of-plane loadings. The physial simulations were performed in the Bowen Laboratory at Purdue University under the diretion of Professor Amit Varma, with assistane from graduate student Mr. Saahas Bhardwaj. The authors assisted with the testing program, and performed all of the data redution and numerial simulations reported in the following hapters. 1.4 Organization of this Report This report is organized into four hapters. Chapter 2 desribes the physial testing of SC wall piers subjeted to IP and OOP loadings, inluding the test fixture, instrumentation, loading protool, and results of the experiments. Numerial modeling of SC wall piers subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loadings is desribed in Chapter 3. The physial tests of the SC wall piers are simulated using LS-DYNA (LSTC, 2012). Chapter 4 presents parametri studies onduted to investigate the effets of OOP loading on the 2

21 IP behavior of SC walls. The results of these studies are used to provide draft tehnial guidane for the performane assessment of SC wall piers subjeted to ombined loadings. Chapter 5 summarizes the studies presented in Chapters 2 through 4, and provides the key onlusions and findings. A list of referenes is presented in Chapter 6. 3

22 4

23 SECTION 2 PHYSICAL TESTING OF SC WALL PIERS 2.1 Introdution This hapter presents details and results of the physial tests on the SC wall piers onduted at Purdue University. The test matrix and test fixture are disussed in Setion 2.2. Instrumentation of the test speimens is presented in Setion 2.3. Results and disussion of the tests of CNSC1, CNSC2, and CNSC3 are presented in Setions 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, respetively. 2.2 Test Matrix and Test Fixture The matrix of tests is presented in Table 2-1, wherein A f is onrete ompressive strength and is the plan area of the infill onrete. This matrix was reviewed and aepted by CNSC in The speimens are labeled CNSC1, -2 and -3. Eah speimen was 12 in. thik, whih inludes the two 3/16-inh steel faeplates. The resultant faeplate reinforement ratio (total area of faeplates divided by total area of wall) is 0.031, whih is signifiant by omparison with reinfored onrete shear walls. The faeplates were onstruted with ASTM Grade A36 steel, with a minimum speified yield strength of 36 ksi and a minimum speified tensile strength of 58 ksi. Based on tension oupon tests, the yield strength and tensile strength of the steel faeplate material were 47 ksi and 80 ksi, respetively. Table 2-1: CNSC test matrix Speimen Height (in.) Length (in.) Tie spaing (in.) Stud spaing (in.) Target out-ofplane fore CNSC N.A. CNSC f A CNSC Craking CNSC Craking Eah speimen had an aspet (height-to-length) ratio of 0.6. An additional (ontrol) speimen was onstruted and tested in advane of CNSC1: tagged as CNSC0 in Table 2-1. The onrete ompressive strength of the infill onrete and faeplate yield strength of CNSC0 were 5800 psi and 57 ksi, respetively. The aspet ratio and reinforement ratio of CNSC0 were 0.6 and

24 (a 12 in. thik wall with two 3/16-inh steel faeplates), respetively. Additional information on CNSC0 is presented in Kurt et al. (2015). The shear studs and tie bars were fabriated from arbon steel with nominal yield and ultimate stress of 50 and 75 ksi, respetively. The 3/8 inh diameter tie bars were spaed at a distane equal to the wall thikness (=12 in.) in CNSC0, CNSC1, and CNSC3 and one-half the wall thikness (= 6 in.) in CNSC2. The spaing of the shear studs (onnetors) is presented in Table 2-1. The faeplate slenderness ratio (= s / t, where studs and ross ties], and t p s p s s is the spaing of the onnetors [shear is the faeplate thikness) was 16 for CNSC1, CNSC2 and CNSC3, and 21 for CNSC0, noting that the limiting value speified in Supplement No. 1 to AISC N690s1 (AISC, 2015) for steel with yield strength of 36 ksi is 28. Figure 2-1 is a ross-setion through the onnetion of a faeplate to the baseplate. This detail, whih was developed by Purdue University to enable re-use of a foundation for testing SC walls, effetively strengthens the faeplate at its onnetion to the baseplate and fores bukling, frature and tearing of the faeplate away from the baseplate. Figure 2-1: Faeplate-to-baseplate onnetion (ourtesy of Purdue University) 6

25 Eah wall was founded on a large re-usable foundation designed and onstruted by Purdue University. The onnetion of the foundation to the wall was designed to develop the apaity of the faeplates, with the goal of foring inelasti ation into the walls above the foundation. The last olumn in Table 2-1 identifies the target out-of-plane (OOP) fore to be imposed prior to in-plane loading. An out-of-plane load was not applied to the ontrol speimen, CNSC0. The amplitude of the out-of-plane (OOP) loadings for CNSC1, CNSC2 and CNSC3 were tied to equations derived in the early 1960s for shear resistane of plain onrete beams reinfored for flexure only. The onrete ontribution to shear strength of 2 f A is traditionally used for reinfored onrete design in the United States, although it has limited tehnial basis. (Wight (2015) shows that this empirial equation is unonservative for low longitudinal reinforement ratios and onservative for high reinforement ratios: for shallow speimens subjeted to monotoni loading to failure in the absene of o-existing in-plane loadings. The effet of setion depth (= wall thikness in this ase), for whih an inrease in depth results in a derease in shear strength of plain onrete, ould not be investigated given the speimen dimensions studied here. Craking denotes imposing an OOP loading suffiient to introdue a diagonal rak in the onrete, whih was estimated for preliminary alulations using equation in ACI (2014). The OOP loading was imposed statially and not yled during the IP loading to failure. A photograph of the test fixture and a 3D rendering of the fixture are shown in Figure 2-2a and Figure 2-2b, respetively. The OOP setup onsisted of one 660-kip dual ation atuator and beams to apply the OOP load to the speimen. The OOP load was applied 18 inhes above the foundation, and the resulting ratio of shear span-to-depth was 1.5. In-plane loading was imposed on the speimen via loading beams and two 660-kip dual ation atuators. The atuator levises were detailed to aommodate the rotations assoiated with the IP and OOP loadings. 2.3 Instrumentation of the Test Speimens Traditional transduers were used to monitor the response of eah test speimen: strain gages, strain rosettes, string potentiometers, and linear variable differential transduers (LVDTs). The loations of strain gages on the inner fae, outer East fae, and outer West fae, near the base of the wall for CNSC1 and CNSC3 are identified in Figure 2-3a, Figure 2-3b, and Figure 7

26 2-3, respetively. Strain rosettes on the exterior faes of the plates were used to estimate shear strain. Figure 2-3 shows the loations of the tie bars and shear studs near the base of the wall; a legend is presented in Figure 2-3a. Companion information for CNSC2 is presented in Figure 2-4. The sale in these figures an be determined by the distane between the shear studs: 3 (a) photograph of the test fixture (b) 3D rendering of the test fixture Figure 2-2: CNSC test setup (ourtesy of Purdue University) inhes. The solid blak shaded zone identifies the baseplate; the hathed zone identifies the depth of the welded onnetion joining the faeplate to the baseplate. The loations of the string potentiometers used to measure the in-plane and out-of-plane movement of a speimen are presented in Figure 2-5a and Figure 2-5b, respetively. Three 8

27 inlinometers were mounted on a speimen to measure rotation; two for in-plane movement (CM2, CM3) and one for out-of-plane movement (CM1). The loations of the inlinometers are identified in Figure 2-5. Eight LVDTs were attahed to a speimen: four to measure in-plane movement of the foundation blok with respet to the strong floor, and four to measure vertial movement of the base plate with respet to the foundation blok. (a) Typial faeplate, inner fae (b) East faeplate, outer fae () West faeplate, outer fae Figure 2-3: Layout of strain gages, tie bars, and shear studs, CNSC1, CNSC3 (adapted from Purdue University drawings) 9

28 (a) Typial faeplate, inner fae (b) East faeplate, outer fae () West faeplate, outer fae Figure 2-4: Layout of strain gages, tie bars, and shear studs, CNSC2 (adapted from Purdue University drawings) 10

29 (a) in-plane (b) out-of-plane Figure 2-5: Loations of string potentiometers (ourtesy of Purdue University) 11

30 2.4 CNSC1 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC1 Test Protool Speimen CNSC1 was tested between 06/01/15 and 06/04/15. The onrete ompressive strength on the first day of testing was 7700 psi, as determined by ylinder breaks. The speimen was initially subjeted to four yles of OOP loading, at magnitudes of 30, 60, 90, and 120 kips, respetively, to verify the test setup was funtioning as intended. The OOP load was then maintained at a onstant value of 120 kips (=1.96 f A) 1 and inremental yli IP loading imposed. The loading protool for CNSC1 is presented in Table 2-2, where P y and y are the yield load (=650 kips) and yield displaement of the speimen, respetively, alulated by pretest analysis. The yles are fully reversed loading, namely, one yle is a push half yle followed by a pull half yle. Table 2-2: Loading protool for CNSC1 Cyle IP loading Control OOP loading P y P y P y P y y y y Fore Fore Fore Displaement Displaement Displaement Displaement 120 kips CNSC1 Test Results The OOP yli fore-displaement relationship for CNSC1 is presented in Figure 2-6, where the OOP displaement was measured at the top of the wall, at the level where IP loading was applied later, as an average of the SP displaements at the ends of the wall. Data from OOP yles at loads of 30 and 90 kips were lost and are not reported here. The IP yli fore-displaement 1 The onrete area is the produt of the length of the pier (60 in.) and the thikness of the onrete ( in.). 12

31 Figure 2-6: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC1 relationship for CNSC1 is presented in Figure 2-7. The post-yield displaement yles (9 to 13) are presented in Figure 2-8. The loss of IP apaity with inreasing yles an be identified using the data presented in Table 2-3. Signifiant redutions in IP resistane were observed at large displaements. The IP displaement is the relative horizontal displaement between the level of the IP loading and the bottom of the wall (or top of footing). The IP load-displaement relationship and bakbone urve are presented in Figure 2-9. Points A, B, C, and D in the figure represent the onset of onrete raking, yielding of steel faeplates, bukling of steel faeplates, and onrete rushing, respetively. The test was terminated at the displaement shown on the plot. The sequene of damage to CNSC1 is presented in Table 2-4. Conrete raking at the open ends of the wall, steel faeplate yielding, steel fae plate bukling, and onrete rushing in the SC wall ourred at drift ratios of 0.23%, 0.38%, 0.70%, and 1.0%, respetively, and these points were identified by visual inspetion (i.e., raking and rushing of onrete, faeplate bukling) and review of strain gage data (faeplate yielding). 13

32 Figure 2-7: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC1 Figure 2-8: In-plane fore-displaement relationship for post-yield yles, CNSC1 14

33 Table 2-3: Loss of IP shear apaity, CNSC1 IP resistane at IP displaement (kips) Cyle y 1.5 y 2.1 y 3 y Push Pull Push Pull Push Pull Push Pull Figure 2-9: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC1 Key results are presented in Table 2-5. The initial stiffness of the SC wall, alulated at a drift ratio less than 0.02%, is presented in the first olumn for the push and pull diretions. The values of load and drift ratio at the onset of steel plate yielding are presented in olumns two and three. The fourth and fifth olumn present the load and drift ratio at the onset of steel faeplate 15

34 bukling. The peak loads and their orresponding drift ratios for the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns six and seven. The maximum drift ratios for the experiment and their orresponding loads in the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns eight and nine. Note that the maximum drift ratio does not orrespond to failure of the CNSC1. Cyle Drift ratio (%) Push/Pull Table 2-4: Sequene of damage, CNSC1 Damage/Observations /0.13 Craks on the North and South faes of the wall; speimen twisting /0.28 Yielding of steel faeplates, diagonal raking at the base of the South wall; new raks on the North fae of the wall /0.28 New raks; residual OOP drift /0.45 Large residual strains develop in the steel faeplates, initial separation of the faeplates from the infill onrete; new raks formed / / / / /1.52 Bukling of the steel faeplate in the northwest and southwest orners of the wall; diagonal raking on the South fae; new diagonal raks on the South fae of the wall Severe bukling of the steel faeplate in the northwest orner of the wall; bukling of the steel faeplate in the southeast orner of the wall; new diagonal raks on the South fae Propagation of faeplate bukling from the southeast orner towards the mid-length of the wall; extensive raking on the South fae Conrete rushing and spalling at the toes of the wall (North and South faes) Propagation of faeplate bukling from the Northeast orner towards the mid-length of the wall Initial stiffness (kip/in.) Push/Pull Onset of steel plate yielding Load (kips) Drift (%) Table 2-5: Summary results for CNSC1 Onset of steel plate bukling Load (kips) Drift (%) Load (kips) Push/Pull Peak load Drift (%) Push/Pull Maximum drift Load (kips) Push/Pull Drift (%) Push/Pull 5139/ / / / /1.51 The aumulated damage to the wall pier on its South and North faes from yles 1 through 12 is shown in Figure 2-10 and Figure 2-11, respetively. The text on the red fill in the figures identifies the fores at whih the related raks formed. Damage to the South and North faes of 16

35 CNSC1 after yle 13 are presented in Figure 2-12 and Figure 2-13, respetively. Loal bukling of the steel faeplates and onrete raking and spalling are learly visible. The wall twisted in the latter stages of the test and there was onsiderable OOP residual drift. Figure 2-10: Aumulated damage on South fae, yles 1-12, CNSC1 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-11: Aumulated damage on the North fae, yles 1-12, CNSC1 (UB and Purdue) 17

36 Figure 2-12: Damage on South fae of CNSC1 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-13: Damage on North fae of CNSC1 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) 18

37 The umulative energy dissipation in CNSC1 is presented in Figure The energy dissipated in eah yle ( EDC ) is presented in Table 2-6. Figure 2-14: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC1 Table 2-6: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC1 Cyle EDC (kip-in) Equivalent visous damping ( EVD ) data are presented in Figure 2-15 and Table 2-7, where EVD is omputed using equation (2-1) (Chopra, 2011). 1 EDC EVD (2-1) E 4 So where EDC is the energy dissipated per yle (area under the fore-displaement relationship) and ESo is the strain energy (defined as displaement u o ). ku o2 /2, where k is the seant stiffness to maximum 19

38 Figure 2-15: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC1 Table 2-7: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC1 Drift ratio (%) EVD (%) Behaviors of CNSC1 and CNSC0 Figure 2-16 presents the in-plane fore-displaement responses of the ontrol speimen (CNSC0) and CNSC1. The uniaxial ompressive strengths of the onrete for CNSC0 and CNSC1 were 5800 psi and 7700 psi, respetively. The yield strengths of the steel faeplates (slenderness ratios) in CNSC0 and CNSC1 were 57 ksi (21) and 47 ksi (16), respetively. These differenes in material strengths and slenderness ratios make a diret omparison of the responses of the CNSC0 and CNSC1 impossible beause both the steel faeplates and infill onrete ontribute to the in-plane strength of SC wall piers. Both speimens were pushed to a drift ratio (lateral displaement divided by the distane between the point of in-plane loading) of approximately 1.5%. The ontrol speimen failed due to yli yielding of the steel faeplates, leading to frature of the base metal lose to the weld (Kurt et al., 2015). The test of CNSC1 was terminated after yli yielding of the steel faeplates, leading to ompression failure and spalling of infill onrete. 20

39 Figure 2-16: In-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC1 2.5 CNSC2 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC2 Test Protool Speimen CNSC2 was tested on 11/11/15 and 11/12/15. The onrete ompressive strength on the first day of testing was 5300 psi. The speimen was initially subjeted to five yles of OOP loading, at magnitudes of 30, 60, 90, 120 and 240 kips, respetively, to verify the test setup was funtioning as intended, and to rak the wall due to OOP shear. Craking of the speimen due to OOP load was first observed at 220 kips. The OOP load was then maintained at 240 kips (= 4.73 f A 1.2*(2 f A A f d / s), where s y area of infill onrete, A s, f y, and s f is onrete ompressive strength, A is plan are the area, tensile yield strength, and spaing of the shear reinforement, respetively, and d is the effetive depth of the ross setion) and then inremental yli IP loading imposed. The loading protool for CNSC2 is presented in Table 2-8, where P y and y are the yield load (=504 kips) and yield displaement (=0.19 in.) of the speimen, respetively, alulated by pre-test analysis onsidering in-plane and out-of-plane loading. The yles were fully reversed: a push half yle followed by a pull half yle. 21

40 Table 2-8: Loading protool for CNSC2 Cyle IP loading Control OOP loading P y Fore P y P y P y y y y Fore Fore Displaement Displaement Displaement Displaement 240 kips CNSC2 Test Results The OOP yli fore-displaement relationship for CNSC2 is presented in Figure 2-17, where the OOP displaement was measured at the top of the wall, at the level where the IP loading was later applied. Craking was first observed at an OOP load of approximately 220 kips. The yli loading of the wall in the OOP diretion resulted in diagonal raks on its exposed North and South faes as presented in Figure The long diagonal rak on the North fae was produed by OOP loading before the appliation of IP loads. The short diagonal raks on the South fae near the base of the wall resulted from OOP loading; the longer diagonal rak propagating from the point of appliation of the OOP load formed after the first IP yle of loading. The IP yli fore-displaement relationship for CNSC2 is presented in Figure The postyield displaement yles (9 to 13) are presented in Figure The loss of IP apaity with inreasing yles an be identified using the data presented in Table 2-9. Data from yle 10 was lost. Signifiant redutions in IP resistane were observed at large displaements. 22

41 Figure 2-17: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC2 (a) North fae (b) South fae Figure 2-18: Diagonal raking aused by OOP loading, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) 23

42 Figure 2-19: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC2 Figure 2-20: In-plane fore-displaement relationship for post yield yles, CNSC2 24

43 Table 2-9: Loss of IP apaity, CNSC2 IP resistane at IP displaement (kips) Cyle y 1.5 y 2.0 y 3 y Push Pull Push Pull Push Pull Push Pull The IP load-displaement relationship and bakbone urve are presented in Figure 2-21; the hysteresis loops are offset approximately 0.03 inh from the origin due to twisting of the SC wall pier aused by the applied OOP load. Points A, B, C, and D in the figure represent the onset of onrete raking under IP loading, yielding of steel faeplates, bukling of steel faeplates, and onrete rushing, respetively. The test was terminated at the displaement shown on the plot. The sequene of damage to CNSC2 is presented in Table Conrete raking under IP loading, steel faeplate yielding, steel fae plate bukling, and onrete rushing in the SC wall ourred at drift ratios of 0.15%, 0.37%, 0.76% 2, and 1.14%, respetively. The tie bar on the North end of the wall ruptured in yle 13; the approximate point of its rupture on the IP foredisplaement relationship is identified in Figure 2-21 by point E. Key results are presented in Table The initial stiffness of the SC wall, alulated at a drift ratio less than 0.02%, is presented in the first olumn for the push and pull diretions. The values of load and drift ratio at the onset of steel plate yielding are presented in olumns two and three. The fourth and fifth olumn present the load and drift ratio at the onset of steel faeplate bukling. The peak loads and their orresponding drift ratios for the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns six and seven. The maximum drift ratios for the experiment and their orresponding loads in the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns eight and nine. The maximum drift ratio does not orrespond to failure (loss of gravity load resistane) of CNSC2. 2 Steel faeplate bukling ourred in yle 10; the drift in yle 9 is presented here and used in Figure

44 Figure 2-21: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC2 The aumulated damage to the wall pier on the South and North faes from yles 1 through 12 is shown in Figure The aumulated damage to the South and North faes of CNSC2 after yle 13 is presented in Figure Loal bukling of the steel faeplates and onrete raking and spalling are learly visible. The wall twisted in the latter stages of the test and there was onsiderable OOP residual drift. A tie bar ruptured on the North end of the wall in yle 13, as desribed previously and shown in Figure The umulative energy dissipation in CNSC2 is presented in Figure The energy dissipated in eah yle ( EDC ) is presented in Table Equivalent visous damping ( EVD ) data are presented in Figure 2-26 and Table 2-13, where EVD is alulated per equation (2-1). 26

45 Cyle Drift ratio (%) Push/Pull Table 2-10: Sequene of damage, CNSC2 Damage/Observations OOP 240 kips - Diagonal rak on the North fae propagating from the point of appliation of OOP load; short diagonal raks near the base of the wall on the South fae / / /0.24 Diagonal rak on the South fae propagating from the point of appliation of OOP load Propagation of raks on the South fae; new diagonal raks on the North fae at the top and bottom of the wall New diagonal raks on North and South fae at the point of OOP loading /0.24 Speimen twisting / / / / /0.81 Yielding of the steel faeplate on the West (tension) side of the wall; new raking observed on the North and South faes of the wall New raks form on the South fae of the wall at the point of OOP loading Yielding of the steel faeplate on the East (ompression) side of the wall; additional raking on the South fae at top and bottom of wall and IP loading loation Additional raking observed on South wall at IP loading loation; OOP residual displaement approximately 0.4 inh Drifting of wall in OOP diretion; diffiult to maintain OOP load; raks propagate on South and North faes 10 - / - 1 orners of the wall; OOP residual displaement approximately 0.8 Bukling of steel faeplate in the northwest, southeast and southwest inh / / Bukling of steel faeplate in the Northeast orner of the wall; raks propagating; onrete rushing and spalling at the toes of the wall; OOP and IP residual drifts are 1.6 and 0.17 inh, respetively Extensive raking on the South and North faes of the wall; additional spalling of onrete; shear studs visible on the South fae of the wall; severe bukling of fae plates in the North and South East orners of the wall; propagation of faeplate bukling towards the mid-point of the wall / - Tie bar rupture on the North side of the wall 1. The data from yle 10 was not reovered from the test; desription based on visual observation. 2. The drift ratios of yle 12 are slightly smaller than yle 11 due to unertainty in the stability of the wall during this yle. 27

46 Initial stiffness (kip/in.) Push/Pull Onset of steel plate yielding Load (kips) Drift (%) Table 2-11: Summary results for CNSC2 Onset of steel plate bukling Load (kips) Drift (%) Load (kips) Push/Pull Peak load Drift (%) Push/Pull Maximum drift Load (kips) Push/Pull Drift (%) Push/Pull 2658/ / / / / Peak load in the push (pull) diretion ourred in yle 9 (11) 2. Maximum drift ourred in yle 13 (11) for the push (pull) diretion; drifts in yle 12 are slightly smaller due to onerns regarding the stability of the wall; pull yle 13 not onduted (a) South fae (b) North fae Figure 2-22: Aumulated damage, yles 1-12, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) (a) South fae (b) North fae Figure 2-23: Aumulated damage to CNSC2 after yle 13 (UB and Purdue) 28

47 Figure 2-24: Tie bar rupture at North end of wall, CNSC2 (UB and Purdue) Figure 2-25: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC2 Table 2-12: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC2 Cyle EDC (kip-in)

48 Figure 2-26: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC2 Table 2-13: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC2 Drift ratio (%) EVD (%) Behaviors of CNSC2 and CNSC0 Figure 2-27 presents the in-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC2. The uniaxial ompressive strengths of the onrete (slenderness ratio) for CNSC0 and CNSC2 were 5800 psi (21) and 5300 psi (16), respetively. The faeplate yield strengths of CNSC0 and CNSC2 were 57 ksi and 47 ksi, respetively. These differenes in faeplate slenderness and material strengths make it diffiult to quantify the effets of the OOP load on the IP response by omparing speimen responses. The ontrol speimen and CNSC2 were pushed to a drift ratio of 1.5% and 1.7%, respetively. CNSC0 failed due to yli yielding of the steel faeplates, leading to frature of the base metal lose to the weld (Kurt et al., 2015). The test of CNSC2 was terminated after yli yielding of the steel faeplates leading to spalling of the infill onrete and tie bar rupture. 30

49 Figure 2-27: In-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC2 2.6 CNSC3 Test Protool, Results, and Disussion CNSC3 Test Protool Speimen CNSC3 was tested on 02/09/16 and 02/10/16. The onrete ompressive strength on the first day of testing was 5300 psi. Craks formed on the exposed North and South faes of the wall (see Figure 2-28) due to the post-tensioning of the beams to the speimen (see Figure 2-2) for the appliation of OOP loads. The speimen was subjeted to five yles of OOP loading, at magnitudes of 50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 kips, respetively, to verify the test setup was funtioning as intended, and to rak the infill onrete due to OOP shear. The OOP load was then maintained at 250 kips (= 4.92 f A ) and inremental yli IP loading imposed. The loading protool for CNSC3 is presented in Table 2-14, where P y and y are the in-plane yield load (=505 kips) and yield displaement (=0.175 in.) of the speimen, respetively, alulated by pre-test analysis. 31

50 (a) North fae (b) South fae Figure 2-28: Initial raking of speimen before OOP load appliation, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) Table 2-14: Loading protool for CNSC3 Cyle IP loading 1 Control OOP loading P y Fore P y P y Fore Fore 250 kips P y P y is the estimated in-plane yield strength Displaement CNSC3 Test Results The OOP yli fore-displaement relationship for CNSC3 is presented in Figure 2-29, where the OOP displaement was measured at the top of the wall, at the level where the IP loading was later applied. The OOP yli loading resulted in diagonal raks in both the push and pull diretions, on the exposed North and South faes of the wall, as presented in Figure The raks propagated diagonally downwards from the level of appliation of the OOP load. The IP yli fore-displaement relationship for CNSC3 is presented in Figure Signifiant redutions in IP resistane were observed in yle 8. The signifiant drop in the in-plane load in yle 8, at a displaement of 0.18 inh, resulted from the operator trying to avoid overshooting the target displaement. 32

51 Figure 2-29: Out-of-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC3 (a) North fae (b) South fae Figure 2-30: Additional diagonal raking aused by OOP loading, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) 33

52 Figure 2-31: In-plane fore-displaement relationship, CNSC3 The IP load-displaement relationship and bakbone urve are presented together in Figure 2-32; the hysteresis loops are offset from the origin by approximately inh due to twisting of the SC wall pier aused by the applied OOP load. Points A, B, C, and D in the figure represent the onset of onrete raking under IP loading, yielding of steel faeplates, bukling of steel faeplates, and onrete rushing, respetively. The test was terminated at the displaement shown on the plot (displayed at point D). The sequene of damage to CNSC3 is presented in Table Conrete raking under IP loading, steel faeplate yielding, steel fae plate bukling, and onrete rushing in the SC wall ourred at drift ratios of 0.09%, 0.19%, 0.50%, and 0.56%, respetively. Key results are presented in Table The initial stiffness of the SC wall, alulated at a drift ratio less than 0.02%, is presented in the first olumn for the push and pull diretions. The values of load and drift ratio at the onset of steel plate yielding are presented in olumns two and three. The fourth and fifth olumn present the load and drift ratio at the onset of steel faeplate bukling. The peak loads and their orresponding drift ratios for the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns six and seven. The maximum drift ratios for the experiment and their 34

53 orresponding loads in the push and pull diretions are presented in olumns eight and nine. The maximum drift ratio does not orrespond to gravity load failure of CNSC3. Cyle Drift ratio (%) Push/Pull Pre-test -/- OOP 100 kips OOP 150 kips OOP 200 kips OOP 250 kips / Table 2-15: Sequene of damage, CNSC3 Damage/Observations Diagonal raks on the North and South faes propagating from the point of appliation of OOP load on the East fae to the base plate on the West fae; diagonal raks on the North fae propagating from the West fae: raks above the point of OOP load appliation; small diagonal raks on the South fae loated mid-depth of the ross setion and above point of OOP load appliation Short diagonal raks on the North fae propagating from the East fae towards the base plate on the West fae below the point of OOP load appliation; short diagonal raks on the South fae at the mid-depth of the ross setion, propagating from East to West Diagonal raks on the North fae propagating from the point of OOP load appliation on the East fae towards the base plate on the West fae Diagonal raks on the South fae from the point of OOP load appliation to the mid-depth of the ross setion from the East fae towards the West fae Diagonal raks on the North fae propagating from the point of OOP load appliation on the West fae to the East fae towards the base plate; short diagonal raks on the South fae propagating from the West fae to the East fae Propagation of diagonal raks on the North and South faes; new diagonal raks on the South fae /0.09 New diagonal raks on the South fae / / / / / /0.56 Yielding of the steel faeplate on the West (tension) side of the wall; new diagonal raks on the North fae at the point of OOP loading Propagation of diagonal raks on the South fae; new diagonal raks on the North fae near the base of the wall New horizontal raks loated at the mid-depth of the ross setion on the South fae Signifiant growth of raks on the North and South faes; yielding of the steel faeplate on the East (ompression) side of the wall Bukling of the steel faeplate in the northeast orner of the wall; signifiant opening of raks on the North and South faes Conrete rushing and spalling at the toes of the wall; signifiant movement of wall in the OOP diretion; diffiult to maintain OOP load; bukling of the East faeplate along the length of the wall, 2 inhes above the baseplate; deformation of the steel faeplate at the point of OOP load appliation on the West fae; OOP and IP residual drifts are 1.0 and 0.07 inh, respetively 35

54 Initial stiffness (kip/in.) Push/Pull Figure 2-32: In-plane fore-displaement relationship and bakbone urve, CNSC3 Onset of steel plate yielding Load (kips) Drift (%) Table 2-16: Summary results for CNSC3 Onset of steel plate bukling Load (kips) Drift (%) Load (kips) Push/Pull Peak load Drift (%) Push/Pull Maximum drift Load (kips) Push/Pull Drift (%) Push/Pull 3500/ / / / /0.56 The aumulated damage to the wall pier on the exposed South and North faes of the wall after yle 8 is shown in Figure Loal bukling of the steel faeplates and onrete raking and spalling are learly visible. Figure 2-34 presents additional photographs of damage inluding faeplate bukling and OOP residual drift. The umulative energy dissipation in CNSC3 is presented in Figure The energy dissipated in eah yle ( EDC ) is presented in Table Equivalent visous damping ( EVD ) data are presented in Figure 2-36 and Table 2-18, where EVD is omputed using equation (2-1). 36

55 (a) South fae (b) North fae Figure 2-33: Aumulated damage after yle 8, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) (a) Faeplate bukling (b) OOP residual drift Figure 2-34: Additional photographs of damage after yle 8, CNSC3 (UB and Purdue) 37

56 Figure 2-35: Cumulative energy dissipation, CNSC3 Table 2-17: Energy dissipated per yle, CNSC3 Cyle EDC (kip-in) Figure 2-36: Equivalent visous damping ratio, CNSC3 38

57 Table 2-18: Equivalent visous damping, CNSC3 Drift ratio (%) EVD (%) Behaviors of CNSC3 and CNSC0 Figure 2-37 presents the in-plane fore-displaement responses of CNSC0 and CNSC3. The uniaxial ompressive strengths of the onrete (slenderness ratio) for CNSC0 and CNSC3 were 5800 psi (21) and 5300 psi (16), respetively. The faeplate yield strengths of CNSC0 and CNSC3 were 57 ksi and 47 ksi, respetively. These differenes between CNSC0 and CNSC3 make it impossible to diretly ompare the experimental results. CNSC0 and CNSC3 were pushed to a drift ratio of 1.50% and 0.56%, respetively. CNSC0 failed due to yli yielding of the steel faeplates, leading to frature of the base metal lose to the weld. The test of CNSC3 was terminated after signifiant bukling of the steel faeplate on the Northeast orner of the wall and spalling of the infill onrete. Figure 2-37: In-plane fore-displaement responses of ontrol speimen and CNSC3 39

58 40

59 SECTION 3 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF THE SEISMIC RESPONSE OF SC WALL PIERS 3.1 Introdution This hapter desribes numerial simulations performed to support the physial tests of Chapter 2, namely, the simultaneous in-plane (IP) and out-of-plane (OOP) loading of SC wall piers. The simulations desribed here utilized, as a starting point, validated numerial models developed in LS-DYNA (LSTC, 2012) by Epakahi et al. (2014b, 2015) for alulating the IP response of SC wall piers. The validated model developed by Epakahi et al. for the IP response of SC walls used: The smeared rak Winfrith model for infill onrete, MAT085, using onrete material properties inluding the nominal ompressive and tensile strengths, elasti modulus, Poisson s ratio of 0.18, speifi frature energy, and aggregate size. In the absene of experimental data, the speifi frature energy an be estimated for a given aggregate size using CEB (1993). The plasti-damage model for the steel faeplates, MAT081, using steel material properties inluding the nominal yield and ultimate strengths, elasti modulus, Poisson s ratio, and plasti strain thresholds orresponding to the beginning of the softening and rupture as established using oupon test results. Beam, shell, and solid elements to model onnetors, steel faeplates, and infill onrete, respetively, and a mesh size of 1 in for the solids and shells Tie onstraint to attah the studs and tie rods to the steel faeplates (and the baseplate if provided) and LAGRANGE-IN-SOLID onstraint available in LS-DYNA to attah the onnetors to the infill onrete elements. The IP response of SC wall piers is dominated by the behavior of the steel faeplates. Given that the OOP response of an SC wall will be strongly influened by the behavior of the onrete, it was prudent to first exerise the IP model desribed above using data from tests of singly reinfored onrete (RC) speimens that were not reinfored for shear. The RC beam simulations 41

60 are presented in Setion 3.2. Setion 3.3 presents numerial simulations of the physial tests desribed in Chapter RC Beam Simulations Data from tests of RC beams performed by Bresler et al. (1963) and Mphonde et al. (1984) were used to validate the Winfrith (MAT085) onrete model. The orresponding LS-DYNA simulations are summarized in Table 3-1, where w is the width of the beam, h is the height of the beam, onrete, l f t experiment), is the length of the beam, f is the tensile strength of the onrete (taken as is the longitudinal reinforement ratio, alulated as E f per ACI (ACI, 2014), G is the unonfined uniaxial ompressive strength of E 0.1 f Equation or Table of CEB-FIP Model Code (CEB, 1993), and alulated as w 2 G / f t unless speified in the is Young s modulus for onrete, is frature energy alulated using w is rak width, per Figure 3 of Wittmann et al. (1988). Test 1 was performed by Bresler et al. and Tests 2 through 6 were performed by Mphonde et al. (1984). In these experiments, the shear span-to-depth ratio, a/ d, was varied from 1.5 to 4 and the onrete ompressive strength varied between 3200 and psi. The longitudinal reinforement ratios in these beams are high, and espeially so for speimens 2 through 6. Additional simulations were then performed for a/ d 1.5 : the ratio hosen for the testing of the SC wall panels, as desribed in Chapter 2. Table 3-1: Summary of LS-DYNA simulations of plain RC speimens Beam dimensions Test a/ d w h l (in) (psi) (psi) (psi) (%) (lb-in/in 2 (in) ) , E f , E , E , E , E , E Figure 3-1 desribes the Bresler et al. experiment. The orresponding LS-DYNA model is presented in Figure 3-2. One-inh long beam elements were used to model the longitudinal reinforement (4 #9 bars with a 1-inh over, orresponding to a reinforement ratio of 1.8%). Eight-node solid elements were used to model the onrete. The onrete was modeled with in. elements. The rebar was embedded into the onrete using node sharing. The onstant f t E G w 42

61 stress formulation (ELFORM=1 in LS-DYNA) and ross setion integrated beam element (Hughes-Liu beam in LS-DYNA) were used for the solid and beam elements, respetively. The Winfrith onrete model was used to model the onrete in the beam. The d3rak database was ativated to visualize the rak pattern during loading. The PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY (MAT024) material model was used to model the Grade 60 reinforement. The pin and roller boundary onditions were applied by onstraining the displaements of three rows of nodes in the (Y and Z) and (Z) diretions, respetively. A displaement was imposed at the enter of the beam (1495 nodes) using a PRESCRIBED_MOTION_SET. Figure 3-3 shows the boundary onditions and the applied load. Figure 3-1: Experimental setup (Bresler et al., 1963) (a) Isometri view (b) Cross setion view (XZ plane) Figure 3-2: LS-DYNA model of the Bresler et al. (1963) experiment 43

62 Pin boundary ondition Loading nodes Roller boundary ondition Figure 3-3: LS-DYNA loading and boundary onditions Figure 3-4a and Figure 3-4b present the final rak pattern of the beam from the LS-DYNA simulation and the experiment, respetively. The rak pattern from the simulation is in reasonably good agreement with the experiments. Craking at the support aused by slippage of the longitudinal reinforement was not observed in the simulation beause perfet bond was assumed. Figure 3-4 presents the fore-displaement relationship at the enter of the beam for the experiment and the simulation. The peak fore observed in the simulation and experiment are 70 and 75 kips, respetively. The simulation is in good agreement with the experiment. An illustration of the beam used in the Mphonde et al. (1984) experiments is presented in Figure 3-5. The input for the simulations is presented in Table 3-1 as Tests 2 through 6. The LS-DYNA model to simulate the Mphonde experiments is presented in Figure 3-6. One-inh beam elements were used to model the longitudinal reinforement (3 #8 bars with a 1-inh over orresponding to a reinforement ratio of 3.36%). Eight-node solid elements were used to model the onrete. The onrete was modeled with in. elements. The rebar was embedded into the onrete using node sharing. The onstant stress formulation (ELFORM=1 in LS-DYNA) and ross setion integrated beam element (Hughes-Liu beam in LS-DYNA) were used for the solid and beam elements, respetively. The Winfrith onrete model was used to model the onrete in the beam. Material onstants are presented in Table 3-1. The d3rak database was ativated to visualize the rak pattern during loading. The PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY (MAT024) material model was used to model the Grade 60 reinforement. The pin and roller boundary onditions were applied by onstraining the displaements of one row of nodes in the (Y and Z) and (Z) diretions, respetively. The loation of the onstraints was moved to simulate the different span lengths (i.e., 35.25, 58.75, and 84 in). A displaement was imposed at the enter of the beam (505 nodes) using a PRESCRIBED_MOTION_SET. 44

63 (a) Simulation (b) Experiment () Fore-displaement relationships Figure 3-4: Experimental (Bresler) and LS-DYNA results Figure 3-5: Experimental setup (Mphonde et al., (1984)) 45

64 Figure 3-6: LS-DYNA model of the Mphonde et al. (1984) experiment Table 3-2 summarizes the simulations of the Mphonde experiments using average shear stress at maximum resistane, alulated here as peak load divided by the produt of the setion width and total depth. The simulations reasonably reover the maximum shear stress alulated from the experimental results for different values of a/ d. Not shown here, beause the experimental data are not available, is the post-peak shear fore response, whih will affet the IP behavior of SC walls. The Winfrith onrete model reasonably aptures the OOP peak shear strength of plain reinfored onrete beams (i.e., no shear reinforement) under monotoni loading, and is used hereafter to simulate the yli OOP and ombined IP and OOP response of SC walls. Note that the normalized maximum shear stresses for Tests 2 through 6 are muh greater than the value of 2.0 routinely used for the shear design of reinfored onrete beams and slabs in the United States for two reasons: 1) the longitudinal reinforement ratios are high for all speimens (whih inreases monotoni shear apaity of plain reinfored onrete), and 2) the ratio of a to d is 1.5 for Tests 4, 5 and 6, whih alters the shear-fore-resisting mehanism from that of a slender beam to a deep beam (i.e., strut joining the point of load appliation to the point of reation). Table 3-2: Summary of RC beam simulation results Test a/ d Maximum shear stress Maximum shear stress Differene (psi) normalized by f (%) Experiment LS-DYNA Experiment LS-DYNA

65 3.3 Simulation of CNSC Experiments A model of the CNSC experiments was prepared in LS-DYNA using the approah desribed in Setion 3.1. The model, shown in Figure 3-7, is omposed of infill onrete, baseplate, steel faeplates, tie bars, and shear studs. The foundation was not inluded in the model: the bottom nodes of the baseplate were fixed. The element types, sizes, and formulations, and material models used for eah part of the model are summarized in Table 3-3. In experiments CNSC1 and CNSC3, the tie bars were spaed at 12 inhes on enter along the height and length of the wall, with the first tie bar loated 12 inhes above the baseplate and 6 inhes from the edge of the wall (see Figure 3-8); the tie bar is shown in yellow. In CNSC2, the tie bars were spaed at 6 inhes on enter along the height and length of the wall, with the first tie bar loated 6 inhes above the baseplate and 3 inhes from the edge of the wall (see Figure 3-9). The shear studs on the faeplates were spaed at 3 inhes on enter along the height and length of the wall. The total wall thikness was 12 inhes. The yield strength and tensile strengths of the steel faeplate material were 47 ksi and 80 ksi, respetively. The OOP loading was simulated by applying nodal fores to the steel and onrete elements at a height of 18 inhes above the base of the wall. One the wall was yled OOP and the desired OOP load was reahed, the OOP load was held onstant, and the wall was then subjeted to displaementontrolled yli IP loading at its top. The follow subsetions present results of the LS-DYNA simulations. Comparisons are made between the results of the experiments and the LS-DYNA simulations. Table 3-3: Summary of the LS-DYNA models of the CNSC speimens Component Element Type Size Formulation Material model Infill onrete Solid in Constant stress solid Winfrith (MAT085) Faeplate Shell 1 1 in Belytshko-Tsay Plastiity_with_Damage (MAT081) Shear studs Beam 1 in Hughes-Liu with ross Pieewise_Linear_Plastiity setion integration (MAT024) Hughes-Liu with ross Pieewise_Linear_Plastiity Tie bars Beam 1 in setion integration (MAT024) Baseplate Solid in Constant stress solid Elasti (MAT003) Welds Solid in Constant stress solid Elasti (MAT003) 47

66 Faeplates Baseplate Infill onrete Studs attahed to faeplates Tie bars onneting two faeplates (yellow) Studs attahed to baseplate Figure 3-7: LS-DYNA model of the CNSC experiments 48

67 Tie bar Figure 3-8: CNSC1 and CNSC3 tie bar details Tie bar Figure 3-9: CNSC2 tie bar details 49

68 3.3.1 CNSC1 Simulations The uniaxial ompressive strength of the infill onrete in CNSC1 on the first day of physial testing was 7700 psi. CNSC1 was initially subjeted to four yles of OOP loading at magnitudes of 30, 60, 90 and 120 kips. The OOP load was maintained at a onstant value of 120 kips and inremental yli IP loading was then imposed. The IP loading protool in the simulation and experiment onsisted of seven load steps with two yles per load step and a maximum drift of 1.6%: see Table 2-2. The OOP fore-displaement relationship of the SC panel for the experiment and the simulation are shown in Figure The stiffness of the SC panel in the numerial model is slightly greater than that observed in the experiment beause the foundation (and its flexibility) was not modeled. A plan view of the wall pier and diretions of applied IP and OOP load are presented in Figure The onfiguration presented in Figure 3-11 shows the diretion of applied OOP load during IP loading and is denoted as the push diretion; the West and East faeplate is in tension and ompression due to the OOP load, respetively. The distribution of vertial stress on the tension faeplate (West) at the instant before the IP yli loading was imposed for the experiment and the numerial model are presented in Figure 3-12; the stresses are plotted as a funtion of the distane along the length of the wall from point O (see Figure 3-11). Points P1, P2, P3, P4, and P5 (labeled in Figure 3-11 and Figure 3-12) orrespond to distanes of 3, 15, 30, 45, and 57 inhes from point O at the bottom of the base plate. Points P1, P2, P3, P4, and P5 also orrespond to loations of strain gages on the West fae (shown in Figure 2-3). The vertial stresses alulated from the numerial analysis are in reasonably good agreement with the values measured in the experiment. No yielding of the faeplates was observed during OOP loading in either the experiment or the simulation. The axial stresses in the tie bars at the instant before appliation of the IP loading is shown in Figure 3-13; the stresses are shown in units of psi. The greatest stresses are observed in the tie bars loated below point of appliation of the OOP load, whih is an expeted outome. The maximum axial stress due to the applied OOP load is 6.2 ksi: muh less than the yield stress (=50 ksi). The IP fore-displaement relationship of the SC panel for the simulation and the experiment are shown in Figure The preditions of peak shear resistane, post-peak strength redutions, 50

69 Figure 3-10: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC1 Figure 3-11: Plan view of wall pier and loading and rate of reloading/unloading stiffness for peak and post-peak IP strength yles ompared favorably with the test results; the initial IP stiffness of the numerial model is signifiantly larger than that of the experiment beause the flexibility of the foundation was not onsidered in the numerial model. 51

70 Figure 3-12: Distribution of vertial stresses on tension plate at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC1 Figure 3-13: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC1 (units of psi) 52

71 Figure 3-14: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC1 The IP equivalent visous damping, EVD, alulated using equation (2-1) at different levels of story drift are presented in Figure 3-15 for both the numerial simulation and the experiment. The alulated damping ratios from the numerial simulation are slightly greater than from the experiment. The IP fore-displaement relationships for yles 8 and 9, whih orrespond to drift ratios of 0.5 and 0.7%, respetively, are shown in Figure 3-16a and Figure 3-16b, respetively. The numerial model slightly overshoots the peak fore and its hysteresis loops are wider, leading to an overpredition of the dissipated energy. Beause the seant stiffness to maximum displaement is similar for the numerial solution and the experiment, the overpredition of dissipated energy leads diretly to an overpredition of EVD : see Figure Figure 3-17 presents the observed and simulated loal damage to CNSC1; raking of the onrete and loal bukling of the steel faeplates at the toes of the wall were observed in both the experiment and the numerial simulation. The numerial model annot predit the rushing (spalling) of infill onrete observed in the experiment. 53

72 Figure 3-15: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC1 (a) Cyle 8, drift ratio = 0.5% (b) Cyle 9, drift ratio = 0.7% Figure 3-16: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC1 54

73 Craking of infill onrete Steel faeplate bukling Crushing of infill onrete Figure 3-17: Observed and predited damage to CNSC1 The LS-DYNA-predited yli fore-displaement relationships of the infill onrete and steel faeplates are presented in Figure 3-18a and Figure 3-18b, respetively. The IP shear fores in the infill onrete and steel faeplates were alulated at the baseplate using the SPLANE feature in LS-DYNA; the feature allows the user to perform uts using setion planes to aggregate fores. The total IP fore-displaement relationship is also presented in Figure 3-18a and Figure 3-18b (in grey), to show the ontribution of the infill onrete and steel faeplates to the overall resistane of the wall pier. The steel faeplates dominate the behavior of the SC wall pier in the IP diretion, whih is an expeted result. The pinhed hysteresis loops for the infill onrete is assoiated with damage to the infill onrete (i.e., raking), as observed in Figure The LS-DYNA-predited OOP fore history of the infill onrete and the steel faeplates is presented in Figure The SC wall pier was subjeted to four yles of OOP load at magnitudes of 30, 60, 90, and 120 kips before being held onstant (at time=1.7 seonds in Figure 3-19) for the appliation of the IP loading. The infill onrete dominates the behavior of the SC wall pier in the OOP diretion. Figure 3-20 presents the IP fore-displaement relationship for the experiment, and the LS- DYNA simulations with and without the applied OOP load. The initial stiffness, pinhing, and rate of reloading/unloading of the numerial model are similar for the numerial model with and without the applied OOP load. The bakbone urves for the fore-displaement relationships presented in Figure 3-20 are presented in Figure The differenes in initial stiffness for the experiment and the numerial model are observed learly using the bakbone urves. The OOP load redues the IP apaity of the LS-DYNA model by approximately 6%. 55

74 (a) Infill onrete (b) Steel faeplates Figure 3-18: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC1 Figure 3-19: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC1 56

75 Figure 3-20: IP fore-displaement relationships, CNSC1 Figure 3-21: Bakbone urves, CNSC1 57

76 3.3.2 CNSC2 Simulations The uniaxial onrete ompressive strength on the first day of testing was 5300 psi. The SC speimen was initially subjeted to five yles of OOP loading, at magnitudes of 30, 60, 90, 120, and 240 kips, respetively. In both the simulation and the experiment, the OOP load was then maintained at 240 kips and inremental yli IP loading was imposed. The loading protool in the experiment and the simulation onsisted of seven load steps with two yles per load step and a maximum drift of 1.7%: see Table 2-8. Figure 3-22 presents the OOP fore-displaement relationship for the experiment and the simulation. The stiffness of the numerial model is in relatively good agreement with that of the experiment. The distributions of vertial stress on the tension faeplate (West side) in the push onfiguration at OOP loads of 60, 90, 120, and 240 kips are presented in Figure 3-23a, Figure 3-23b, Figure 3-23, and Figure 3-23d, respetively; the stresses are plotted as a funtion of the distane along the length of the wall from point O (see Figure 3-11). The distanes of 3, 15, 30, 45, and 57 inhes from Point O orrespond to points P1, P2, P3, P4, and P5, respetively. The predited stresses are in relatively good agreement with the stresses measured in the experiment. The faeplates did not yield during yli OOP loading in either the experiment or the numerial simulation. Figure 3-24 presents the distributions of axial stress in the tie bars at the instant before appliation of the IP load; the magnitude of the OOP load was 240 kips. The maximum axial stress was observed in the tie bars near the base of the wall: an expeted result. The predited maximum axial stress was 37 ksi, and less than the yield value (=50 ksi). The IP fore-displaement relationship for the simulation and the experiment are presented in Figure The numerial model predited the peak shear resistane and rates of reloading/unloading with reasonable auray. The OOP load in yles 12 and 13 of the experiment was not maintained at 240 kips: it gradually dereased as the IP apaity of the wall diminished. To aount for this in the numerial simulation, the OOP load in the numerial model deayed linearly from 240 kips at the start of yle 12 to a value of 0 kips at the end of yle

77 Figure 3-22: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC2 59

78 (a) OOP load = 60 kips (b) OOP load = 90 kips () OOP load = 120 kips (d) OOP load = 240 kips Figure 3-23: Distributions of vertial stress in the tension plate, CNSC2 60

79 Figure 3-24: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC2 (units of psi) Figure 3-25: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC2 61

80 The alulated equivalent visous damping ratio, EVD, for the experiment and the numerial simulation are presented in Figure The damping ratios predited using the numerial model are signifiantly greater than those measured in the experiment. Figure 3-27a and Figure 3-27b present the IP fore-displaement relationships for yles 7 and 9, respetively; yles 7 and 9 orrespond to drift ratios of 0.55% and 0.79%, respetively. The numerial model overpredits the peak fore measured in the experiment in Cyle 7 but the values of the numerially predited energy dissipation in these yles are signifiantly greater than those alulated from the experiment, leading to greater values of EVD. The measured and predited damage to CNSC2 are shown in Figure Loal bukling of the steel faeplates and raking of the onrete are seen in both the experiment and the simulation. Large onrete strains are predited and rushing of onrete was observed at the toes of the wall. Figure 3-26: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC2 62

81 (a) Cyle 7, drift ratio = 0.55% (b) Cyle 9, drift ratio = 0.79% Figure 3-27: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC2 Craking of infill onrete Steel faeplate bukling Crushing of infill onrete Figure 3-28: Observed and predited damage to CNSC2 Figure 3-29a and Figure 3-29b show the LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships for the infill onrete and steel faeplates, respetively. The predited IP foredisplaement relationship of the pier is shown in grey to highlight the ontribution of the infill onrete and steel faeplates to the total IP shear resistane. The steel faeplates dominate the behavior of the wall piers in the IP diretion. The predited hysteresis loops for the infill onrete and the steel faeplates are pinhed, due to onrete raking and faeplate bukling, respetively. The omponents of resistane in LS-DYNA-predited OOP yli fore history are presented in Figure 3-30; the total applied load is also displayed to highlight the ontribution of eah omponent to the OOP shear resistane. The infill onrete dominates the behavior in the 63

82 (a) Infill onrete (b) Steel faeplates Figure 3-29: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC2 Figure 3-30: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC2 OOP diretion: an expeted result. The linear deay in the numerially applied OOP load in yles 12 and 13, related to the relaxation of the OOP loading in the experiment, is shown in Figure

83 The IP fore-displaement relationship for the experiment and the LS-DYNA simulations with and without applied OOP load are presented in Figure The appliation of the OOP load signifiantly redues the IP apaity of the wall piers, although the initial stiffness and rates of reloading/unloading are not signifiantly affeted. The bakbone urves for the yli loadings of Figure 3-31 are shown in Figure The appliation of the OOP load to the LS-DYNA model redued the IP apaity by 22%. Figure 3-31: IP fore-displaement relationships, CNSC CNSC3 Simulations The uniaxial onrete ompressive strength on the day of testing of CNSC3 was 5300 psi. The speimen was initially subjeted to five yles of OOP loading, at magnitudes of 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 kips, respetively, before IP yli loading was imposed. The loading protool used for the experiment and the simulation onsisted of seven load steps with two fully reversed yles per load step and a maximum drift of 0.56%: see Table The OOP fore-displaement relationship for the experiment and numerial model are presented in Figure Similar to the simulations of CNSC1 and CNSC2, the numerial model is slightly stiffer for OOP loading than that measured in the experiment. The distributions of 65

84 Figure 3-32: Bakbone urves, CNSC2 Figure 3-33: OOP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC3 66

85 vertial stress on the West faeplate (see Figure 3-11) at OOP loads of 50, 150, 200, and 250 kips are presented in Figure 3-34a, Figure 3-34b, Figure 3-34, and Figure 3-34d, respetively; the data from the yle with an applied OOP load of 100 kips was lost. The loation of points P1 through P5 on the tension faeplate are those desribed in Setions and 3.3.2, for CNSC1 and CNSC2, respetively; the strain gage data at point P5 was not reliable and not plotted. The predited and measured vertial stresses on the tension faeplate are in good agreement. The distributions of axial stress in the tie bars at the instant before appliation of IP loading is shown in Figure 3-35; the stresses are shown in units of psi. The magnitude of applied load is 250 kips. The maximum axial stress is approximately 32 ksi, ourring in the bottom row of tie bars near the onnetion to the faeplate: smaller than the yield stress (=50 ksi). The simulated and measured IP fore-displaement relationships for CNSC3 are presented in Figure 3-36; the numerial model over predited the peak IP apaity by 12% and did not predit the loss of IP apaity observed in the experiment. In the experiment, failure of CNSC3 was triggered by signifiant bukling of the steel faeplate at the Northeast orner of the wall and spalling of the infill onrete. The damage to the infill onrete was not predited using the Winfrith onrete model, whih assumes elasti-perfetly plasti behavior in ompression. The numerial model predited bukling of the East steel faeplate and onrete raking on the North and South faes (seen in Figure 3-37). The Winfrith model enabled the development of large ompressive strains in the infill onrete, but not damage in the form of spalling, for whih erosion strains (a numerial workaround) would have to be speified. A new material model would be needed to apture this loss of strength at large ompressive strains. 67

86 (a) OOP load = 50 kips (b) OOP load = 150 kips () OOP load = 200 kips (d) OOP load = 250 kips Figure 3-34: Distributions of vertial stress in the tension plate, CNSC3 68

87 Figure 3-35: Distributions of axial stress in tie bars at instant before IP yli loading, CNSC3 (units of psi) 69

88 Figure 3-36: IP fore-displaement relationship, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC3 Craking of infill onrete Steel faeplate bukling Crushing of infill onrete Figure 3-37: Observed and predited damage to CNSC3 The equivalent visous damping ratios, EVD, for the experiment and the numerial simulation are presented in Figure 3-38; the predited values of damping are greater than those bakalulated from the experimental data beause the energy dissipated per loop are greater. The IP fore-displaement relationships for yles 6 and 7, whih orrespond to drift ratios of 0.39% and 0.51%, are presented in Figure 3-39a and Figure 3-39b, respetively. The predited and measured equivalent visous damping ratios are in relatively good agreement at a drift ratio of 0.56% (seen in Figure 3-38). The measured and predited IP fore-displaement relationships for yle 8, orresponding to a drift ratio of 0.56%, are presented in Figure

89 The damping ratios are similar beause the energy dissipated per yle and strain energy are both proportionally greater in the experiment. Figure 3-38: Equivalent visous damping ratio, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC3 (a) Cyle 6, drift ratio = 0.39% (b) Cyle 7, drift ratio = 0.51% Figure 3-39: Seleted IP fore-displaement relationships, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC3 71

90 Figure 3-40: IP fore-displaement relationship, yle 8, drift ratio = 0.56%, LS-DYNA and experiment, CNSC3 Figure 3-41a and Figure 3-41b show the LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationship of the infill onrete and steel faeplates, respetively. The predited IP foredisplaement relationship of the pier is shown in grey to highlight the ontribution of the infill onrete and steel faeplates to the total IP shear resistane. Pinhing of the hysteresis loops for the onrete and the steel faeplates in the simulations is minimal. The LS-DYNA-predited OOP yli fore history is presented in Figure 3-42; the infill onrete dominated the OOP behavior of the SC walls, as expeted. Figure 3-43 shows the IP fore-displaement relationship for the experiment, and the LS-DYNA simulations with and without the applied OOP load. The orresponding bakbone urves are presented in Figure The appliation of OOP load redues the IP apaity of the numerial model by 22%. 72

91 (a) Infill onrete (b) Steel faeplates Figure 3-41: LS-DYNA-predited IP yli fore-displaement relationships, CNSC3 Figure 3-42: LS-DYNA-predited omponents of the OOP yli fore history, CNSC3 73

92 Figure 3-43: IP fore displaement relationships, CNSC3 Figure 3-44: Bakbone urves, CNSC3 74

93 3.3.4 Summary and Conlusions The physial tests of CNSC1, CNSC2, and CNSC3, as desribed in Chapter 2, were simulated using the general-purpose finite element program LS-DYNA. Numerial models developed by Epakahi et al. (2014b; 2015) that were validated for the predition of the IP response of SC wall piers were utilized as a starting point for this study. Preditions of the numerial models were ompared with the measurements from experiments at both global and loal levels, inluding yli fore-displaement relationships (in-plane and out-of-plane), equivalent visous damping ratios, vertial stresses in the steel faeplates indued by OOP load, and observed damage (e.g., raking of the infill onrete and bukling of steel faeplates). The numerial preditions for CNSC1 and CNSC2 agreed reasonably well with measurements from the experiments. The predited IP stiffness of CNSC1 and CNSC2 were both signifiantly greater than those observed in the experiment beause the foundation (and its flexibility) was not onsidered in the numerial models; the predited values of OOP stiffness agreed reasonably well with those measured in the experiments. The predited distributions of vertial stress on the tension faeplate (under OOP loading) at different levels of OOP load were similar to those measured in the experiments. The preditions of peak IP shear resistane, post-peak strength redution, and rate of reloading/unloading stiffness for peak and post-peak IP strength yles agreed reasonably well with the experimental results, with the best results for CNSC1, for whih the OOP loading (and average shear stress) were the smallest of the three tests. The predited values of EVD for IP response were greater than those alulated from the experimental data beause the numerially predited hysteresis loops were wider (more energy dissipated per yle). The damage predited using the numerial models (i.e., raking of infill onrete and bukling of steel faeplates) was in good agreement with that observed in the experiments. Crushing and spalling of onrete, indiated by large ompressive strains in the numerial models, ould not be aptured expliitly beause the Winfrith model assumes elasti-perfetlyplasti behavior in ompression. Erosion, as a numerial workaround was not implemented. Load distribution between the steel faeplates and the infill onrete in the IP and OOP diretions was also investigated using the numerial model; the steel faeplates and the infill onrete dominate the behavior of the SC wall in the IP and OOP diretions, respetively. 75

94 The predited response of CNSC3 overestimated the measured peak strength by approximately 12%. The numerial model did not reover the loss of post-peak strength and stiffness alulated from the experimental data, whih was likely due to the inability of the Winfrith model, in the absene of a alibrated erosion strain, to simulate loss of material. Under IP loading, the steel faeplates ditate seismi performane. Under OOP loading, the infill onrete ditates seismi response. Beause the Winfrith model is unable to diretly address loss of material, physial damage to the onrete under OOP loading (e.g., spalling), whih should affet the IP behavior, inluding loss of strength and stiffness, annot be aptured diretly. This limitation of the numerial model will be aommodated in the parametri study presented in Chapter 4 by investigating the IP behavior of SC wall piers subjeted to OOP shear stresses less than a threshold limit taken equal to the shear strength of onrete per ACI (ACI, 2014). If the applied OOP shear stress exeeds the shear strength of the onrete and a suffiient number of tie bars are not available to mitigate rak growth, the IP response predited using LS- DYNA will not be reliable. Conrete erosion ould be used as a numerial workaround, but the hosen value of erosion strain requires alibration for whih the authors have no data bar that for CNSC3. An updated numerial model may be able to address this issue but the development of suh a model is far beyond the sope of this projet. The parametri study presented in Chapter 4 is used to develop a relationship between the level of applied OOP shear stress and the IP apaity of SC wall piers. The results of the parametri study, ombined with the results of the CNSC experiments, are used to provide tehnial guidane on the analysis and design of SC wall piers subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loading. 76

95 SECTION 4 DEVELOPING DESIGN GUIDANCE FOR SC WALLS THROUGH PARAMETRIC STUDIES 4.1 Introdution A parametri study was onduted using the numerial model of Chapter 3 to investigate the effet of OOP loading (magnitude and loation) on the IP response of SC wall piers with different onrete ompressive strength and tie bar spaing. Setion 4.2 presents the parametri study and key results. Tehnial guidane for design of SC walls subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loading is presented in Setion 4.3, and is based on the experiments of Chapter 2, the numerial simulations of Chapter 3, and the parametri study of Setion Parametri Study The simulations onduted in this parametri study are summarized in Table 4-1, where 77 f is the ompressive strength, s is the tie bar spaing, d is the depth of the ross setion (=12 inhes), and a/ d is the ratio of shear span to depth. Two values of ompressive strength were onsidered in this study: 3500 and 5000 psi. Three values of a/ d were onsidered for eah value of ompressive strength: 0.5, 1.5, and 3. The ratio a/ d equal to 1.5 and 3 orrespond to loading at the middle and top of the wall, respetively. For eah value of of OOP shear stress were onsidered: 1 f, 2 f, and 3 performed for two values of tie bar spaing: d and d /2. a/ d, three amplitudes f. All of these simulations were Given the limitations of the Winfrith model desribed in Setion 3.3.4, the SC wall piers in this parametri study were subjeted to OOP shear stresses less than the expeted shear strength of plain onrete, whih is strongly dependent on the ratio of shear span-to-depth of the loaded member. Per Figure 6-13 in Wight (2015), the shear stress (strength) of onrete with a longitudinal reinforement ratio of 1.5% (assuming one steel faeplate ats as longitudinal reinforement when the wall is subjeted to an OOP bending moment), in the absene of shear reinforement, is between 2 beams with a/ d f and 3 f. (The data in this figure are from tests of shallow generally greater than or equal to 2.0. This range on maximum shear stress is for shallow (relatively thin) speimens, namely, 12 inhes and smaller, and the design guidane presented later addresses the issue of wall thikness. Importantly, a/ d for the speimens tested as part of this researh projet was 1.5, for whih a greater shear stress at failure is expeted.)

96 The lower end on this range of OOP shear stress, 2 f, is assoiated with good preditions of IP response using LS-DYNA: the CNSC1 simulations in Setion for whih the maximum f OOP shear stress was For CNSC2 (CNSC3), inlined raking was observed at an OOP load orresponding to a shear stress of 4.33 f ( 4.92 f ). The preditions of the yli IP response of CNSC2 and CNSC3 using LS-DYNA were reasonable but muh poorer than for CNSC1. Aordingly, on the basis of these observations, the maximum shear stress assoiated with OOP loading was limited to the numerial preditions. ' 3 f for the parametri studies in order to have onfidene in Figure 4-1a, Figure 4-2a and Figure 4-3a present the yli IP fore-displaement relationships of SC walls subjeted to OOP loads assoiated with shear stresses of 1 with a tie bar spaing of d, for a/ d f, 2 f f, and 3 equal to 0.5, 1.5, and 3, respetively. The orresponding bakbone urves for these simulations are presented in Figure 4-1b, Figure 4-2b and Figure 4-3b, respetively. The walls have a onrete ompressive strength of 3500 psi and a tie bar spaing of 12 inhes. The peak IP lateral loads of these nine SC walls are presented in Table 4-1: simulations 2 to 10. The peak lateral apaity of SC walls subjeted to an OOP shear stress of 1 f, 2 f, and 3 f for a/ d equal to 0.5 (1.5) [3] redued by 1 (2) [4]%, 5 (8) [16]%, and 11 (17) [29]%, respetively, from the IP strength with no applied OOP shear stress (=729 kips). The results of the simulations show that the magnitude and loation of the OOP load have a signifiant effet on the IP apaity of the SC walls. The redutions in IP strength beome more evident as the magnitude of the OOP load and the height of its appliation above the foundation are inreased, whih leads to larger bending moments and higher longitudinal stresses in the faeplates. Sine the IP behavior of the SC walls is governed by the steel faeplates, additional stresses indued by the OOP load, of the amplitude onsidered here, redue the IP apaity of the wall pier. The OOP load, of the amplitude onsidered here, does not have a signifiant effet on the initial stiffness, pinhing, and rate of reloading/unloading of SC walls, as observed in Figure 4-1a, Figure 4-2a and Figure 4-3a. 78

97 f Simulation (psi) Table 4-1: Summary of LS-DYNA simulations Tie bar spaing, (in.) s d a/ d d d d d OOP Load 79 OOP load (kips) IP apaity (kips) % redution in IP apaity f 2 f f d d d d d d /2 d /2 d /2 d /2 1 f 2 f 3 f f f 3 f d / d /2 d /2 d / d / d /2 d d d d f 2 f 3 f 1 f 2 f 3 f 1 f 2 f 3 f f 2 f f d f d d d f f f d 3 2 f d 3 3 f d / d / f

98 Table 4-1: Summary of LS-DYNA simulations (ontd.) d /2 d /2 d /2 d /2 d / f 3 f 1 f f d / d /2 d /2 3 3 f 1 f 2 f f To investigate the effet of OOP loading on the IP lateral apaity of SC walls with tie bar spaing smaller than d, the LS-DYNA models used in simulations 2 to 10 were revised with a tie bar spaing of d /2 (=6 inhes). The IP fore-displaement relationships for OOP shear f stresses of 1, 2 f, and 3 f for a/ d equal to 0.5, 1.5, and 3 are presented in Figure 4-4a, Figure 4-5a, and Figure 4-6a, respetively: the peak IP strengths are presented in Table 4-1 through simulations 12 to 20. The orresponding bakbone urves for these simulations are shown in Figure 4-4b, Figure 4-5b, and Figure 4-6b, respetively. The IP apaity is redued by 23% for an OOP shear stress of 3 f and a/ d of 3 with respet to the IP strength with no OOP load (=759 kips); the redution in IP apaity is slightly less than that observed for a tie bar spaing of d and an OOP shear stress of 3 f and a/ d of 3 (=29 %) (simulation 10). (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-1: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 3500 psi, s d 80

99 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-2: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 3500 psi, s d (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-3: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 3500 psi, s d 81

100 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-4: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 3500 psi, s d /2 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-5: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 3500 psi, s d /2 82

101 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-6: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 3500 psi, s d /2 The LS-DYNA models used in simulations 2 to 10 were repeated with a higher onrete uniaxial ompressive strength: 5000 psi. The inrease from 3500 psi to 5000 psi inreased the IP apaity, in the absene of OOP load, by 5%. The perentage inrease in IP strength was expeted to be small beause the IP behavior is dominated by the steel faeplates. Figure 4-7a, Figure 4-8a, and Figure 4-9a present the yli IP fore-displaement relationships of SC walls subjeted to OOP shear stresses of 1 83 f, 2 f, and 3 f for a/ d equal to 0.5, 1.5, and 3, respetively. Figure 4-7b, Figure 4-8b, and Figure 4-9b present the orresponding bakbone urves for these simulations, respetively, for a/ d of 0.5, 1.5, and 3. The peak IP lateral loads of these nine SC walls are presented in Table 4-1 through simulations 22 to 30. The peak lateral apaity of SC walls subjeted to an OOP shear stress of 1 for a/ d f, 2 f, and 3 equal to 0.5 (1.5) [3] redued by 2 (3) [5]%, 6 (8) [15]%, and 7 (17) [25]%, respetively, from the IP strength with no OOP load (=765 kips). The perentage redutions in IP apaity are similar to those obtained for 3500 psi onrete (simulations 2 to 10). Simulations 22 to 30 were repeated with a tie bar spaing of d /2. The IP fore-displaement relationships for OOP shear stresses of 1 f, 2 f, and 3 f f for a/ d equal to 0.5, 1.5, and 3 are presented in Figure 4-10a, Figure 4-11a, Figure 4-12a, respetively. Results are summarized in Table 4-1: simulations 31 to 40. The orresponding bakbone urves for a/ d values of 0.5, 1.5, and 3 are presented in Figure 4-10b, Figure 4-11b, Figure 4-12b, respetively. The IP

102 apaity was redued by 20% for an OOP shear stress of 3 f and a/ d of 3 (simulation 40) with respet to the IP strength with no OOP load (=793 kips); the redution in IP apaity is slightly less than that observed for a tie bar spaing of d and an OOP load of 3 f and a/ d of 3 (simulation 30). As the magnitude and height of appliation of the OOP load are inreased, the redutions in IP apaity are slightly less for a tie bar spaing of d /2 ompared to that of a tie bar spaing of d ; the same trends are observed for onrete ompressive strengths of 3500 and 5000 psi. (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-7: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 5000 psi, s d (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-8: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 5000 psi, s d 84

103 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-9: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 5000 psi, s d (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-10: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 0.5, f 5000 psi, s d /2 85

104 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-11: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 1.5, f 5000 psi, s d /2 (a) IP fore-displaement relationship (b) Bakbone urves Figure 4-12: IP behavior of SC walls, a/ d 3, f 5000 psi, s d /2 86

105 4.3 Tehnial Guidane Tehnial guidane for design of SC walls subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loading is provided in this setion, and is based on the experiments of Chapter 2, the numerial simulations of Chapter 3, and the parametri study of Setion 4.2. The results of the experiments were used to validate the numerial models and provide tehnial guidane on the displaement dutility apaity of SC wall piers. The parametri studies were used to provide tehnial guidane on the effets of OOP loading (height and loation) on IP apaity. Figure 4-13 presents the IP fore-displaement bakbone urves for experiments CNSC1, CNSC2, and CNSC3, normalized by their respetive IP apaities, IP. The bakbone urves for CNSC2 and CNSC3 were shifted to the origin to allow for a diret omparison of their IP performane with that of CNSC1. Figure 4-13: Normalized bakbone urves, CNSC experiments With the exeption of tie bar spaing and onrete uniaxial ompressive strength, the onstrution of the CNSC speimens was idential. Epakahi et al. (2014a) showed that onnetor (studs and tie rods) spaing had little effet on IP stiffness at levels of lateral load smaller than the peak value. The uniaxial ompressive strengths of the onrete in CNSC1, 87

106 CNSC2 and CNSC3, on the first day of testing, were 7700 psi, 5300 psi, and 5300 psi, respetively. Based on these onrete strengths, the initial stiffness of CNSC1 should have been greater than that of both CNSC2 and CNSC3. Per Figure 4-13, the initial stiffness of CNSC1 is greater than that of CNSC2 in both the first and third quadrants: the expeted result; but not greater than that of CNSC3: an unexpeted result, espeially given that CNSC3 was damaged under OOP loading prior to IP loading and CNSC1 was not. On the basis of the normalized bakbone urves of Figure 4-13, it is evident that a) idential wall piers with low OOP shear stress (e.g., CNSC1) are more deformable (dutile) than those with high OOP shear stress (CNSC3), b) the installation of ross ties at spaing d /2, where d is the thikness of the wall, results in a more deformable (dutile) SC wall than if the ties are spaed at distane d, and ) high OOP shear stress (and oexisting moment) in an SC wall pier may lead to non-dutile response IP, namely, no IP deformation apaity beyond the displaement assoiated with peak strength. Displaement dutility has been a traditional seismi measure of omponent and system performane. For the three walls tested as part of this projet, and assuming a maximum displaement equal to the displaement at whih the resistane drops below 80% of the peak value, the maximum dutility of CNSC1 (CNSC2) [CNSC3] is approximately 3 (2) [1]. The peak resistanes of CNSC1, CNSC2 and CNSC3 were 735 kips, 629 kips, and 504 kips, respetively. The greater strength of CNSC1 an be attributed in part to a) higher ompressive strength (7700 psi versus 5300 psi) for the infill onrete, and b) a relatively low OOP shear stress. A omparison of the peak resistane of CNSC2 and CNSC3 makes lear the importane to IP strength of limiting damage due to OOP shear fores, whih an be aomplished in part by the provision of losely spaed ross ties. The only meaningful differene between CNSC2 and CNSC3 was tie bar spaing beause the ompressive strength of the infill onrete was the same in both speimens and the maximum OOP shear stress was very similar: 4.73 and 4.92 f for CNSC2 f for CNSC3. In this instane, the provision of losely spaed tie bars (at d /2) enabled a muh greater peak IP resistane (629 versus 504 kips). Results from the parametri studies were mined to develop draft guidane for when to onsider o-existing OOP shearing fores for IP design of SC wall piers. The relationships between applied OOP shear stress (normalized by f ) and the peak IP apaity, IPOOP (normalized by 88

107 the IP apaity with no applied OOP load, IPNO OOP) for a uniaxial onrete ompressive strength of 3500 psi and a tie bar spaing of 12 inhes are presented in Figure The urves are shown for a/ d equal to 0.5, 1.5, and 3. A similar plot is shown in Figure 4-15 for a tie bar spaing of 6 inhes. As the magnitude of OOP shear stress and the ratio of shear span-to-depth inrease, larger longitudinal stresses develop in the steel faeplates, reduing IP apaity. The redution in tie bar spaing from d to d /2, slightly improved the IP apaity performane of the SC walls for the larger magnitudes of OOP shear stress and ratios of shear span-to-depth onsidered in this parametri study; the benefits of redued tie bar spaing are expeted to inrease as the magnitude of the OOP shear stress exeeds the inlined raking load of the onrete. Figure 4-14: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, f 3500 psi, s d Figure 4-15: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, f 3500 psi, s d /2 89

108 Figure 4-16 and Figure 4-17 present the information of Figure 4-14 and Figure 4-15, but for a uniaxial onrete ompressive strength of 5000 psi. The trends are idential to those desribed in the previous paragraph. Figure 4-16: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, f 5000 psi, s d Figure 4-17: IP apaity vs. applied OOP shear stress, f 5000 psi, s d /2 The disussions above address the effet of OOP loading on IP apaity. Two issues that ought to be addressed in a future study, whih will likely be speifi to Canadian nulear pratie, are a) the strength redution fators to be used for IP shear apaity alulations, b) strength redution fators for OOP shear apaity alulations, ) strength redution fators for ombined IP and OOP loading. ASCE (ASCE, 2005) provides guidane on how these fators should be alulated, whih depend on whether the ations are dutile or non-dutile. A goal with preditive equations for design strength (strength redution fator multiplied by a nominal 90

109 strength) is to ahieve an exeedane probability of 98%. The walls tested as part of this projet had a thikness of 12 inhes. It is well established that the shear strength of plain reinfored onrete elements is negatively affeted by setion depth, namely, an inrease in depth (thikness for walls) will lead to a derease in the average shear stress at failure. A ballot measure to address this issue has passed review by the ASCE Dynami Analysis of Nulear Strutures Committee, whih redues nominal shear stress with depth, to a minimum value of approximately 1 of ASCE 43. f to ahieve the omponent-level target probability goals Based on the physial testing of SC wall piers CNSC1, CNSC2, and CNSC3 and the observed trends in the parametri studies, the following design guidane is proposed for the onstrution of SC wall piers subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loadings OOP shear fores and bending moments an damage both infill onrete (shear fore) and the steel faeplates (bending moment). Damage to the infill onrete will depend on a) the ratio of shear span to wall thikness, and b) the amplitude of the OOP loading. Damage to the steel faeplates will also depend on these two parameters. The effets of OOP loading should be addressed expliitly for design basis alulations. Damage to the infill onrete under IP loading will degrade OOP shear apaity, whih is essentially a funtion of the apaity of the infill onrete only. The steel faeplates should not yield signifiantly (suffiient to bukle inelastially) under ombined IP and OOP design basis loadings, with an appropriate margin (through a strength redution fator) to ahieve a 98% exeedane probability. The OOP shear strength of the infill onrete should address the effet of wall thikness on maximum average shear stress. A tie bar spaing of no greater than d /2 is reommended for SC wall piers subjeted to OOP loads that exeed the design shear strength of plain onrete, aounting for depth effets, and alulated using a strength redution fator suitable to ahieve an exeedane probability of 98% per ASCE 43 (see above). Tie bars should be used instead of shear studs near the base of an SC wall in zones where onrete rushing and spalling is possible, to preserve the integrity of the ross setion and provide point restraint to the faeplates to delay their inelasti bukling. 91

110 Figure 4-14, Figure 4-15, Figure 4-16, and Figure 4-17 ould be used to help identify magnitudes of OOP shear stress and ratios of shear span-to-depth (wall thikness) beyond whih OOP loadings ought be onsidered for design basis alulations of IP strength. The threshold shown in the figures is a 10% redution in peak strength. Importantly, the negative impat of signifiant member thikness (as desribed above) is not addressed here. Although not part of the sope of this projet, it is important to onsider the effets of beyond design basis loadings on the seismi performane of SC walls and wall piers. In the United States, one path to demonstrating adequate performane in shaking more intense than design basis is to ensure that the resulting design will perform its intended funtion with 95% onfidene of a probability of failure of 5% or less for shaking equal to 167% design basis. For many omponents this requires the risk analyst to utilize deformation apaity beyond yield (or dutility) to justify adequate performane. On the basis of the tests of CNSC3 (and to a lesser degree CNSC2), this risk-oriented performane target may require that design basis strength of SC walls under OOP loading be limited to shear stress of less than 1, or even less if the wall has a thikness greater than 12 inhes. f 92

111 SECTION 5 SUMMARY AND GUIDANCE FOR SEISMIC DESIGN OF SC WALL PIERS 5.1 Summary A study was undertaken to investigate the effets of OOP loading on the IP behavior of SC omposite wall piers, with a fous on the magnitude of the OOP load and the effet of tie bar spaing. Numerial simulations and physial testing were performed to develop draft guidane for onsideration by CNSC. Three medium-sale retangular SC wall speimens were built and tested under fore-ontrolled monotoni OOP loading and displaement-ontrol yli IP loading at the Bowen Laboratory at Purdue University. The results of the experiments indiate that the OOP load has a signifiant effet on the IP behavior of SC omposite shear walls, in partiular, the deformation apaity and peak resistane; the effets beome very signifiant as the applied OOP load develops an average shear stress that is greater than the inlined raking load of the onrete. The three experiments were simulated using the general-purpose finite element program LS- DYNA. The numerial model was based on a validated model for IP loading that was developed by Epakahi et al. (2014a, 2015) for a prior projet. The model was evaluated for OOP loading using data from tests of plain reinfored onrete beams (i.e., no shear reinforement) and reasonable omparisons were obtained. The preditions of the numerial models of the tested wall piers were ompared with global and loal measurements made in the experiments, inluding yli fore-displaement relationships (IP and OOP), equivalent visous damping ratios, vertial stresses in the steel faeplates indued by OOP loading, and observed damage (i.e., raking of the infill onrete and bukling of the steel faeplates). The preditions of response for CNSC1 (low OOP shear stress) were very good, reasonable for CNSC2 (high OOP shear stress but tie bars at spaing d /2) and somewhat poor for CNSC3 (high OOP shear stress and tie bars at spaing d ). One reason for the poorer preditions for CNSC2 and CNSC3 an be traed to the use of the Winfrith model, whih assumes elasti perfetly plasti behavior in ompression. A parametri study was onduted using the numerial model desribed above to investigate the 93

112 effet of OOP loading (magnitude and loation) on the IP response of SC wall piers. Different onrete ompressive strengths and tie bar spaing were onsidered. Results of the parametri studies showed that OOP load (or shear stress) has a signifiant effet on the IP apaity of SC wall piers, and that the effets beome very signifiant as the ratio of shear span-to-depth and the magnitude of the OOP load are inreased. 5.2 Guidane for the Analysis and Design of SC Walls An important objetive of this projet was to formulate design guidane for SC walls subjeted to ombined IP and OOP loading. The following guidane is offered for onsideration of CNSC: 1. The effets of OOP loading should be addressed expliitly for design basis alulations. The steel faeplates should not yield signifiantly (suffiient to bukle inelastially) under ombined IP and OOP design basis loadings, with an appropriate margin (through a strength redution fator) to ahieve a 98% exeedane probability per ASCE The OOP shear strength of the infill onrete should address the effet of wall thikness on maximum average shear stress. The balloted ode hange provision in ASCE 43-** ould be used for this purpose. 3. A maximum tie bar spaing of d /2 is reommended for SC walls subjeted to OOP loads that exeed the nominal design strength of plain onrete, redued as appropriate for wall thikness, and alulated using a strength redution fator suitable to ahieve a 98% exeedane probability per ASCE Tie bars should be used instead of shear studs near the base of an SC wall in zones where onrete rushing and spalling is possible, to preserve the integrity of the ross setion and provide point restraint to the faeplates to delay their inelasti bukling. 5. Limits on IP and OOP design basis strength of SC walls should reognize the need for apaity in the event of beyond design basis shaking. A numerial model has been developed in LS-DYNA, whih is apable of prediting the IP yli response of SC wall piers, and the ombined IP and OOP yli response of SC walls provided the OOP shear stresses are relatively low, of the order of 2 f for shallow (relatively 94

113 thin) walls. The model is desribed in detail in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report. Charts have been developed, and presented in Chapter 4, to identify what ombinations of OOP shear stress and ratios of shear span to depth (wall thikness) may result in signifiant redutions in IP shear apaity. These harts ould be used for preliminary design of SC wall piers. 95

114 96

115 SECTION 6 REFERENCES Amerian Conrete Institute (ACI). (2006). Code requirements for nulear safety-related onrete strutures and ommentary, ACI , Farmington Hills, MI. Amerian Conrete Institute (ACI). (2014). Building ode requirements for strutural onrete and ommentary, ACI , Farmington Hills, MI. Amerian Institute of Steel Constrution (AISC). (2015). Speifiation for safety-related steel strutures for nulear failities inluding supplement no. 1, ANSI/AISC N690s1-15, Chiago, IL. Amerian Soiety of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2005). Seismi design riteria for strutures, systems and omponents in nulear failities, ASCE/SEI Standard 43-05, Reston, VA. Bhardwaj, S. R., Kurt, E. G., Terranova, B., Varma, A. H., Whittaker, A. S., and Orbovi, N. (2015). Preliminary investigation of the effets of out-of-plane loading on the in-plane behavior of SC walls, Transations, 23rd International Conferene on Strutural Mehanis in Reator Tehnology (SMiRT), Manhester, United Kingdom, August. Bresler, B., and Sordelis, A. C. (1963). Shear strength of reinfored onrete beams, ACI Journal Proeedings, 60 (1): Chopra, A. (2011). Dynamis of Strutures, Fourth Edition, Prentie-Hall. Comite Euro-international du Beton (CEB). (1993). CEB-FIP model ode 1990, Thomas Telford, London, England. Epakahi, S., Nguyen, N., Kurt, E., Whittaker, A. and Varma, A. H. (2014a). In-plane behavior of retangular steel-plate omposite shear walls, Journal of Strutural Engineering, 141 (7), Epakahi, S., Nguyen, N., Kurt, E., Whittaker, A., and Varma, A. H. (2014b) Numerial and experimental investigation of the in-plane behavior of retangular steel-plate omposite walls, Proeedings, ASCE Strutures Congress, Portland, OR, April. Epakahi, S., Whittaker, A., Varma, A. H., and Kurt, E. (2015). Finite element modeling of steel-plate onrete omposite wall piers, Engineering Strutures, 100: Kurt, E. G., Varma, A. H., Booth, P., and Whittaker, A. S. (2013). SC wall piers and basemat onnetions: numerial investigation of behavior and design, Transations, 22nd International Conferene on Strutural Mehanis in Reator Tehnology (SMiRT), San Franiso, USA, August. Kurt, E., Varma, A. H., Epakahi, S., and Whittaker, A. (2015) Retangular SC wall piers: summary of seismi behavior and design, Proeedings, ASCE Strutures Congress, Portland, OR, April. 97

116 Livermore Software Tehnology Corporation (LSTC). (2012). LS-DYNA keyword user's manual V971, Livermore, CA. Mphonde, A. G., and Frantz, G. C. (1984). Shear tests of high- and low-strength onrete beams without stirrups, ACI Journal Proeedings, 81 (4): Sener, K. C., and Varma, A. H. (2014). Steel-plate omposite walls: experimental database and design for out-of-plane shear, Journal of Construtional Steel Researh, 100: Sener, K. C., Varma, A. H., and Ayhan, D. (2015). Steel-plate omposite (SC) walls: out-ofplane flexural behavior, database, and design, Journal of Construtional Steel Researh, 108: Seo, J., Varma, A. H., Sener, K. C., and Ayhan, D. (2016). Steel-plate omposite (SC) walls: inplane shear behavior, database, and design, Journal of Construtional Steel Researh, 119: Varma, A. H., Zhang, K., Chi, H., Booth, P. N., and Baker, T. (2011). In-plane shear behavior of SC omposite walls: theory vs. experiment, Transations, 21st International Conferene on Strutural Mehanis in Reator Tehnology (SMiRT), New Delhi, India, November. Wight, J. (2015). Reinfored Conrete, Mehanis and Design, Seventh Edition, Pearson. Wittmann, F. H., Rokugo, K., Bruehwiler, E., Mihashi, H., and Simonin, P. (1988). Frature energy and strain softening of onrete as determined by means of ompat tension speimens, Materials and Strutures, 21: Yang, Y., Jingbo, L., Nie, X., and Fan, J. (2016). Experimental researh on out-of-plane yli behavior of steel-plate omposite walls, Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami, 10:

117 MCEER Tehnial Reports MCEER publishes tehnial reports on a variety of subjets written by authors funded through MCEER. These reports an be downloaded from the MCEER website at They an also be requested through NTIS, P.O. Box 1425, Springfield, Virginia NTIS aession numbers are shown in parenthesis, if available. NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "First-Year Program in Researh, Eduation and Tehnology Transfer," 3/5/87, (PB , A04, MF- A01). "Experimental Evaluation of Instantaneous Optimal Algorithms for Strutural Control," by R.C. Lin, T.T. Soong and A.M. Reinhorn, 4/20/87, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Experimentation Using the Earthquake Simulation Failities at University at Buffalo," by A.M. Reinhorn and R.L. Ketter, not available. "The System Charateristis and Performane of a Shaking Table," by J.S. Hwang, K.C. Chang and G.C. Lee, 6/1/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "A Finite Element Formulation for Nonlinear Visoplasti Material Using a Q Model," by O. Gyebi and G. Dasgupta, 11/2/87, (PB , A08, MF-A01). NCEER "Symboli Manipulation Program (SMP) - Algebrai Codes for Two and Three Dimensional Finite Element Formulations," by X. Lee and G. Dasgupta, 11/9/87, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Instantaneous Optimal Control Laws for Tall Buildings Under Seismi Exitations," by J.N. Yang, A. Akbarpour and P. Ghaemmaghami, 6/10/87, (PB , A06, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "IDARC: Inelasti Damage Analysis of Reinfored Conrete Frame - Shear-Wall Strutures," by Y.J. Park, A.M. Reinhorn and S.K. Kunnath, 7/20/87, (PB , A09, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Liquefation Potential for New York State: A Preliminary Report on Sites in Manhattan and Buffalo," by M. Budhu, V. Vijayakumar, R.F. Giese and L. Baumgras, 8/31/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "Vertial and Torsional Vibration of Foundations in Inhomogeneous Media," by A.S. Veletsos and K.W. Dotson, 6/1/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Seismi Probabilisti Risk Assessment and Seismi Margins Studies for Nulear Power Plants," by Howard H.M. Hwang, 6/15/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Parametri Studies of Frequeny Response of Seondary Systems Under Ground-Aeleration Exitations," by Y. Yong and Y.K. Lin, 6/10/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Frequeny Response of Seondary Systems Under Seismi Exitation," by J.A. HoLung, J. Cai and Y.K. Lin, 7/31/87, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Modelling Earthquake Ground Motions in Seismially Ative Regions Using Parametri Time Series Methods," by G.W. Ellis and A.S. Cakmak, 8/25/87, (PB , A08, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Detetion and Assessment of Seismi Strutural Damage," by E. DiPasquale and A.S. Cakmak, 8/25/87, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). 99

118 NCEER "Pipeline Experiment at Parkfield, California," by J. Isenberg and E. Rihardson, 9/15/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Digital Simulation of Seismi Ground Motion," by M. Shinozuka, G. Deodatis and T. Harada, 8/31/87, (PB , A04, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER NCEER "Pratial Considerations for Strutural Control: System Unertainty, System Time Delay and Trunation of Small Control Fores," J.N. Yang and A. Akbarpour, 8/10/87, (PB , A08, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Modal Analysis of Nonlassially Damped Strutural Systems Using Canonial Transformation," by J.N. Yang, S. Sarkani and F.X. Long, 9/27/87, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "A Nonstationary Solution in Random Vibration Theory," by J.R. Red-Horse and P.D. Spanos, 11/3/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER "Horizontal Impedanes for Radially Inhomogeneous Visoelasti Soil Layers," by A.S. Veletsos and K.W. Dotson, 10/15/87, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Seismi Damage Assessment of Reinfored Conrete Members," by Y.S. Chung, C. Meyer and M. Shinozuka, 10/9/87, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER NCEER NCEER "Ative Strutural Control in Civil Engineering," by T.T. Soong, 11/11/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Vertial and Torsional Impedanes for Radially Inhomogeneous Visoelasti Soil Layers," by K.W. Dotson and A.S. Veletsos, 12/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Proeedings from the Symposium on Seismi Hazards, Ground Motions, Soil-Liquefation and Engineering Pratie in Eastern North Ameria," Otober 20-22, 1987, edited by K.H. Jaob, 12/87, (PB , A23, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Report on the Whittier-Narrows, California, Earthquake of Otober 1, 1987," by J. Panteli and A. Reinhorn, 11/87, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Design of a Modular Program for Transient Nonlinear Analysis of Large 3-D Building Strutures," by S. Srivastav and J.F. Abel, 12/30/87, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Seond-Year Program in Researh, Eduation and Tehnology Transfer," 3/8/88, (PB , A04, MF- A01). NCEER "Workshop on Seismi Computer Analysis and Design of Buildings With Interative Graphis," by W. MGuire, J.F. Abel and C.H. Conley, 1/18/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Optimal Control of Nonlinear Flexible Strutures," by J.N. Yang, F.X. Long and D. Wong, 1/22/88, (PB , A06, MF-A01). "Substruturing Tehniques in the Time Domain for Primary-Seondary Strutural Systems," by G.D. Manolis and G. Juhn, 2/10/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Iterative Seismi Analysis of Primary-Seondary Systems," by A. Singhal, L.D. Lutes and P.D. Spanos, 2/23/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Stohasti Finite Element Expansion for Random Media," by P.D. Spanos and R. Ghanem, 3/14/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER "Combining Strutural Optimization and Strutural Control," by F.Y. Cheng and C.P. Pantelides, 1/10/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). 100

119 NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Seismi Performane Assessment of Code-Designed Strutures," by H.H-M. Hwang, J-W. Jaw and H-J. Shau, 3/20/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Reliability Analysis of Code-Designed Strutures Under Natural Hazards," by H.H-M. Hwang, H. Ushiba and M. Shinozuka, 2/29/88, (PB , A07, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Seismi Fragility Analysis of Shear Wall Strutures," by J-W Jaw and H.H-M. Hwang, 4/30/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Base Isolation of a Multi-Story Building Under a Harmoni Ground Motion - A Comparison of Performanes of Various Systems," by F-G Fan, G. Ahmadi and I.G. Tadjbakhsh, 5/18/88, (PB , A06, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). "Seismi Floor Response Spetra for a Combined System by Green's Funtions," by F.M. Lavelle, L.A. Bergman and P.D. Spanos, 5/1/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "A New Solution Tehnique for Randomly Exited Hystereti Strutures," by G.Q. Cai and Y.K. Lin, 5/16/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "A Study of Radiation Damping and Soil-Struture Interation Effets in the Centrifuge," by K. Weissman, supervised by J.H. Prevost, 5/24/88, (PB , A06, MF-A01). "Parameter Identifiation and Implementation of a Kinemati Plastiity Model for Fritional Soils," by J.H. Prevost and D.V. Griffiths, not available. "Two- and Three- Dimensional Dynami Finite Element Analyses of the Long Valley Dam," by D.V. Griffiths and J.H. Prevost, 6/17/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Damage Assessment of Reinfored Conrete Strutures in Eastern United States," by A.M. Reinhorn, M.J. Seidel, S.K. Kunnath and Y.J. Park, 6/15/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Dynami Compliane of Vertially Loaded Strip Foundations in Multilayered Visoelasti Soils," by S. Ahmad and A.S.M. Israil, 6/17/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "An Experimental Study of Seismi Strutural Response With Added Visoelasti Dampers," by R.C. Lin, Z. Liang, T.T. Soong and R.H. Zhang, 6/30/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Experimental Investigation of Primary - Seondary System Interation," by G.D. Manolis, G. Juhn and A.M. Reinhorn, 5/27/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "A Response Spetrum Approah For Analysis of Nonlassially Damped Strutures," by J.N. Yang, S. Sarkani and F.X. Long, 4/22/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Seismi Interation of Strutures and Soils: Stohasti Approah," by A.S. Veletsos and A.M. Prasad, 7/21/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). This report is only available through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Identifiation of the Servieability Limit State and Detetion of Seismi Strutural Damage," by E. DiPasquale and A.S. Cakmak, 6/15/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Multi-Hazard Risk Analysis: Case of a Simple Offshore Struture," by B.K. Bhartia and E.H. Vanmarke, 7/21/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). 101

120 NCEER "Automated Seismi Design of Reinfored Conrete Buildings," by Y.S. Chung, C. Meyer and M. Shinozuka, 7/5/88, (PB , A06, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Experimental Study of Ative Control of MDOF Strutures Under Seismi Exitations," by L.L. Chung, R.C. Lin, T.T. Soong and A.M. Reinhorn, 7/10/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Earthquake Simulation Tests of a Low-Rise Metal Struture," by J.S. Hwang, K.C. Chang, G.C. Lee and R.L. Ketter, 8/1/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Systems Study of Urban Response and Reonstrution Due to Catastrophi Earthquakes," by F. Kozin and H.K. Zhou, 9/22/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Seismi Fragility Analysis of Plane Frame Strutures," by H.H-M. Hwang and Y.K. Low, 7/31/88, (PB , A06, MF-A01). "Response Analysis of Stohasti Strutures," by A. Kardara, C. Buher and M. Shinozuka, 9/22/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Nonnormal Aelerations Due to Yielding in a Primary Struture," by D.C.K. Chen and L.D. Lutes, 9/19/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Design Approahes for Soil-Struture Interation," by A.S. Veletsos, A.M. Prasad and Y. Tang, 12/30/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "A Re-evaluation of Design Spetra for Seismi Damage Control," by C.J. Turkstra and A.G. Tallin, 11/7/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "The Behavior and Design of Nonontat Lap Splies Subjeted to Repeated Inelasti Tensile Loading," by V.E. Sagan, P. Gergely and R.N. White, 12/8/88, (PB , A08, MF-A01). "Seismi Response of Pile Foundations," by S.M. Mamoon, P.K. Banerjee and S. Ahmad, 11/1/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Modeling of R/C Building Strutures With Flexible Floor Diaphragms (IDARC2)," by A.M. Reinhorn, S.K. Kunnath and N. Panahshahi, 9/7/88, (PB , A07, MF-A01). "Solution of the Dam-Reservoir Interation Problem Using a Combination of FEM, BEM with Partiular Integrals, Modal Analysis, and Substruturing," by C-S. Tsai, G.C. Lee and R.L. Ketter, 12/31/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Optimal Plaement of Atuators for Strutural Control," by F.Y. Cheng and C.P. Pantelides, 8/15/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Teflon Bearings in Aseismi Base Isolation: Experimental Studies and Mathematial Modeling," by A. Mokha, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 12/5/88, (PB , A10, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Seismi Behavior of Flat Slab High-Rise Buildings in the New York City Area," by P. Weidlinger and M. Ettouney, 10/15/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Evaluation of the Earthquake Resistane of Existing Buildings in New York City," by P. Weidlinger and M. Ettouney, 10/15/88, not available. NCEER "Small-Sale Modeling Tehniques for Reinfored Conrete Strutures Subjeted to Seismi Loads," by W. Kim, A. El-Attar and R.N. White, 11/22/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Modeling Strong Ground Motion from Multiple Event Earthquakes," by G.W. Ellis and A.S. Cakmak, 10/15/88, (PB , A03, MF-A01). 102

121 NCEER "Nonstationary Models of Seismi Ground Aeleration," by M. Grigoriu, S.E. Ruiz and E. Rosenblueth, 7/15/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "SARCF User's Guide: Seismi Analysis of Reinfored Conrete Frames," by Y.S. Chung, C. Meyer and M. Shinozuka, 11/9/88, (PB , A08, MF-A01). NCEER "First Expert Panel Meeting on Disaster Researh and Planning," edited by J. Panteli and J. Stoyle, 9/15/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Preliminary Studies of the Effet of Degrading Infill Walls on the Nonlinear Seismi Response of Steel Frames," by C.Z. Chrysostomou, P. Gergely and J.F. Abel, 12/19/88, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Reinfored Conrete Frame Component Testing Faility - Design, Constrution, Instrumentation and Operation," by S.P. Pessiki, C. Conley, T. Bond, P. Gergely and R.N. White, 12/16/88, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Effets of Protetive Cushion and Soil Compliany on the Response of Equipment Within a Seismially Exited Building," by J.A. HoLung, 2/16/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Statistial Evaluation of Response Modifiation Fators for Reinfored Conrete Strutures," by H.H-M. Hwang and J-W. Jaw, 2/17/89, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Hystereti Columns Under Random Exitation," by G-Q. Cai and Y.K. Lin, 1/9/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER "Experimental Study of `Elephant Foot Bulge' Instability of Thin-Walled Metal Tanks," by Z-H. Jia and R.L. Ketter, 2/22/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Experiment on Performane of Buried Pipelines Aross San Andreas Fault," by J. Isenberg, E. Rihardson and T.D. O'Rourke, 3/10/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "A Knowledge-Based Approah to Strutural Design of Earthquake-Resistant Buildings," by M. Subramani, P. Gergely, C.H. Conley, J.F. Abel and A.H. Zaghw, 1/15/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER "Liquefation Hazards and Their Effets on Buried Pipelines," by T.D. O'Rourke and P.A. Lane, 2/1/89, (PB , A09, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER "Fundamentals of System Identifiation in Strutural Dynamis," by H. Imai, C-B. Yun, O. Maruyama and M. Shinozuka, 1/26/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Effets of the 1985 Mihoaan Earthquake on Water Systems and Other Buried Lifelines in Mexio," by A.G. Ayala and M.J. O'Rourke, 3/8/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER-89-R010 "NCEER Bibliography of Earthquake Eduation Materials," by K.E.K. Ross, Seond Revision, 9/1/89, (PB , A05, MF-A01). This report is replaed by NCEER NCEER "Inelasti Three-Dimensional Response Analysis of Reinfored Conrete Building Strutures (IDARC-3D), Part I - Modeling," by S.K. Kunnath and A.M. Reinhorn, 4/17/89, (PB , A07, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Reommended Modifiations to ATC-14," by C.D. Poland and J.O. Malley, 4/12/89, (PB , A15, MF-A01). NCEER "Repair and Strengthening of Beam-to-Column Connetions Subjeted to Earthquake Loading," by M. Corazao and A.J. Durrani, 2/28/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER "Program EXKAL2 for Identifiation of Strutural Dynami Systems," by O. Maruyama, C-B. Yun, M. Hoshiya and M. Shinozuka, 5/19/89, (PB , A09, MF-A01). 103

122 NCEER NCEER "Response of Frames With Bolted Semi-Rigid Connetions, Part I - Experimental Study and Analytial Preditions," by P.J. DiCorso, A.M. Reinhorn, J.R. Dikerson, J.B. Radziminski and W.L. Harper, 6/1/89, not available. "ARMA Monte Carlo Simulation in Probabilisti Strutural Analysis," by P.D. Spanos and M.P. Mignolet, 7/10/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER-89-P017 "Preliminary Proeedings from the Conferene on Disaster Preparedness - The Plae of Earthquake Eduation in Our Shools," Edited by K.E.K. Ross, 6/23/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the Conferene on Disaster Preparedness - The Plae of Earthquake Eduation in Our Shools," Edited by K.E.K. Ross, 12/31/89, (PB , A012, MF-A02). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "Multidimensional Models of Hystereti Material Behavior for Vibration Analysis of Shape Memory Energy Absorbing Devies, by E.J. Graesser and F.A. Cozzarelli, 6/7/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Three-Dimensional Base Isolated Strutures (3D-BASIS)," by S. Nagarajaiah, A.M. Reinhorn and M.C. Constantinou, 8/3/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). This report has been replaed by NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Strutural Control Considering Time-Rate of Control Fores and Control Rate Constraints," by F.Y. Cheng and C.P. Pantelides, 8/3/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Subsurfae Conditions of Memphis and Shelby County," by K.W. Ng, T-S. Chang and H-H.M. Hwang, 7/26/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Seismi Wave Propagation Effets on Straight Jointed Buried Pipelines," by K. Elhmadi and M.J. O'Rourke, 8/24/89, (PB , A10, MF-A02). "Workshop on Servieability Analysis of Water Delivery Systems," edited by M. Grigoriu, 3/6/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Shaking Table Study of a 1/5 Sale Steel Frame Composed of Tapered Members," by K.C. Chang, J.S. Hwang and G.C. Lee, 9/18/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "DYNA1D: A Computer Program for Nonlinear Seismi Site Response Analysis - Tehnial Doumentation," by Jean H. Prevost, 9/14/89, (PB , A07, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "1:4 Sale Model Studies of Ative Tendon Systems and Ative Mass Dampers for Aseismi Protetion," by A.M. Reinhorn, T.T. Soong, R.C. Lin, Y.P. Yang, Y. Fukao, H. Abe and M. Nakai, 9/15/89, (PB , A10, MF-A02). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "Sattering of Waves by Inlusions in a Nonhomogeneous Elasti Half Spae Solved by Boundary Element Methods," by P.K. Hadley, A. Askar and A.S. Cakmak, 6/15/89, (PB , A07, MF-A01). "Statistial Evaluation of Defletion Amplifiation Fators for Reinfored Conrete Strutures," by H.H.M. Hwang, J-W. Jaw and A.L. Ch'ng, 8/31/89, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Bedrok Aelerations in Memphis Area Due to Large New Madrid Earthquakes," by H.H.M. Hwang, C.H.S. Chen and G. Yu, 11/7/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Seismi Behavior and Response Sensitivity of Seondary Strutural Systems," by Y.Q. Chen and T.T. Soong, 10/23/89, (PB , A08, MF-A01). NCEER "Random Vibration and Reliability Analysis of Primary-Seondary Strutural Systems," by Y. Ibrahim, M. Grigoriu and T.T. Soong, 11/10/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). 104

123 NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the Seond U.S. - Japan Workshop on Liquefation, Large Ground Deformation and Their Effets on Lifelines, September 26-29, 1989," Edited by T.D. O'Rourke and M. Hamada, 12/1/89, (PB , A22, MF-A03). "Deterministi Model for Seismi Damage Evaluation of Reinfored Conrete Strutures," by J.M. Brai, A.M. Reinhorn, J.B. Mander and S.K. Kunnath, 9/27/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER "On the Relation Between Loal and Global Damage Indies," by E. DiPasquale and A.S. Cakmak, 8/15/89, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Cyli Undrained Behavior of Nonplasti and Low Plastiity Silts," by A.J. Walker and H.E. Stewart, 7/26/89, (PB , A10, MF-A01). "Liquefation Potential of Surfiial Deposits in the City of Buffalo, New York," by M. Budhu, R. Giese and L. Baumgrass, 1/17/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "A Deterministi Assessment of Effets of Ground Motion Inoherene," by A.S. Veletsos and Y. Tang, 7/15/89, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Workshop on Ground Motion Parameters for Seismi Hazard Mapping," July 17-18, 1989, edited by R.V. Whitman, 12/1/89, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Seismi Effets on Elevated Transit Lines of the New York City Transit Authority," by C.J. Costantino, C.A. Miller and E. Heymsfield, 12/26/89, (PB , A06, MF-A01). "Centrifugal Modeling of Dynami Soil-Struture Interation," by K. Weissman, Supervised by J.H. Prevost, 5/10/89, (PB , A07, MF-A01). "Linearized Identifiation of Buildings With Cores for Seismi Vulnerability Assessment," by I-K. Ho and A.E. Aktan, 11/1/89, (PB , A07, MF-A01). "Geotehnial and Lifeline Aspets of the Otober 17, 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in San Franiso," by T.D. O'Rourke, H.E. Stewart, F.T. Blakburn and T.S. Dikerman, 1/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Nonnormal Seondary Response Due to Yielding in a Primary Struture," by D.C.K. Chen and L.D. Lutes, 2/28/90, (PB , A07, MF-A01). "Earthquake Eduation Materials for Grades K-12," by K.E.K. Ross, 4/16/90, (PB , A05, MF- A05). This report has been replaed by NCEER NCEER "Catalog of Strong Motion Stations in Eastern North Ameria," by R.W. Busby, 4/3/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER "NCEER Strong-Motion Data Base: A User Manual for the GeoBase Release (Version 1.0 for the Sun3)," by P. Friberg and K. Jaob, 3/31/90 (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Seismi Hazard Along a Crude Oil Pipeline in the Event of an Type New Madrid Earthquake," by H.H.M. Hwang and C-H.S. Chen, 4/16/90, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Site-Speifi Response Spetra for Memphis Sheahan Pumping Station," by H.H.M. Hwang and C.S. Lee, 5/15/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Pilot Study on Seismi Vulnerability of Crude Oil Transmission Systems," by T. Ariman, R. Dobry, M. Grigoriu, F. Kozin, M. O'Rourke, T. O'Rourke and M. Shinozuka, 5/25/90, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER "A Program to Generate Site Dependent Time Histories: EQGEN," by G.W. Ellis, M. Srinivasan and A.S. Cakmak, 1/30/90, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Ative Isolation for Seismi Protetion of Operating Rooms," by M.E. Talbott, Supervised by M. Shinozuka, 6/8/9, (PB , A05, MF-A01). 105

124 NCEER "Program LINEARID for Identifiation of Linear Strutural Dynami Systems," by C-B. Yun and M. Shinozuka, 6/25/90, (PB , A08, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER "Two-Dimensional Two-Phase Elasto-Plasti Seismi Response of Earth Dams," by A.N. Yiagos, Supervised by J.H. Prevost, 6/20/90, (PB , A13, MF-A02). "Seondary Systems in Base-Isolated Strutures: Experimental Investigation, Stohasti Response and Stohasti Sensitivity," by G.D. Manolis, G. Juhn, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 7/1/90, (PB , A08, MF-A01). "Seismi Behavior of Lightly-Reinfored Conrete Column and Beam-Column Joint Details," by S.P. Pessiki, C.H. Conley, P. Gergely and R.N. White, 8/22/90, (PB , A11, MF-A02). NCEER "Two Hybrid Control Systems for Building Strutures Under Strong Earthquakes," by J.N. Yang and A. Danielians, 6/29/90, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Instantaneous Optimal Control with Aeleration and Veloity Feedbak," by J.N. Yang and Z. Li, 6/29/90, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Reonnaissane Report on the Northern Iran Earthquake of June 21, 1990," by M. Mehrain, 10/4/90, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "Evaluation of Liquefation Potential in Memphis and Shelby County," by T.S. Chang, P.S. Tang, C.S. Lee and H. Hwang, 8/10/90, (PB , A09, MF-A01). "Experimental and Analytial Study of a Combined Sliding Dis Bearing and Helial Steel Spring Isolation System," by M.C. Constantinou, A.S. Mokha and A.M. Reinhorn, 10/4/90, (PB , A06, MF-A01). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). "Experimental Study and Analytial Predition of Earthquake Response of a Sliding Isolation System with a Spherial Surfae," by A.S. Mokha, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 10/11/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Dynami Interation Fators for Floating Pile Groups," by G. Gazetas, K. Fan, A. Kaynia and E. Kausel, 9/10/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Evaluation of Seismi Damage Indies for Reinfored Conrete Strutures," by S. Rodriguez-Gomez and A.S. Cakmak, 9/30/90, PB , A06, MF-A01). "Study of Site Response at a Seleted Memphis Site," by H. Desai, S. Ahmad, E.S. Gazetas and M.R. Oh, 10/11/90, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "A User's Guide to Strongmo: Version 1.0 of NCEER's Strong-Motion Data Aess Tool for PCs and Terminals," by P.A. Friberg and C.A.T. Sush, 11/15/90, (PB , A03, MF-A01). "A Three-Dimensional Analytial Study of Spatial Variability of Seismi Ground Motions," by L-L. Hong and A.H.-S. Ang, 10/30/90, (PB , A09, MF-A01). "MUMOID User's Guide - A Program for the Identifiation of Modal Parameters," by S. Rodriguez-Gomez and E. DiPasquale, 9/30/90, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "SARCF-II User's Guide - Seismi Analysis of Reinfored Conrete Frames," by S. Rodriguez-Gomez, Y.S. Chung and C. Meyer, 9/30/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Visous Dampers: Testing, Modeling and Appliation in Vibration and Seismi Isolation," by N. Makris and M.C. Constantinou, 12/20/90 (PB , A06, MF-A01). "Soil Effets on Earthquake Ground Motions in the Memphis Area," by H. Hwang, C.S. Lee, K.W. Ng and T.S. Chang, 8/2/90, (PB , A05, MF-A01). 106

125 NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the Third Japan-U.S. Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures for Soil Liquefation, Deember 17-19, 1990," edited by T.D. O'Rourke and M. Hamada, 2/1/91, (PB , A99, MF-A04). "Physial Spae Solutions of Non-Proportionally Damped Systems," by M. Tong, Z. Liang and G.C. Lee, 1/15/91, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Seismi Response of Single Piles and Pile Groups," by K. Fan and G. Gazetas, 1/10/91, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "Damping of Strutures: Part 1 - Theory of Complex Damping," by Z. Liang and G. Lee, 10/10/91, (PB , A12, MF-A03). NCEER "3D-BASIS - Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Three Dimensional Base Isolated Strutures: Part II," by S. Nagarajaiah, A.M. Reinhorn and M.C. Constantinou, 2/28/91, (PB , A07, MF-A01). This report has been replaed by NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "A Multidimensional Hystereti Model for Plastiity Deforming Metals in Energy Absorbing Devies," by E.J. Graesser and F.A. Cozzarelli, 4/9/91, (PB , A04, MF-A01). "A Framework for Customizable Knowledge-Based Expert Systems with an Appliation to a KBES for Evaluating the Seismi Resistane of Existing Buildings," by E.G. Ibarra-Anaya and S.J. Fenves, 4/9/91, (PB , A08, MF-A01). "Nonlinear Analysis of Steel Frames with Semi-Rigid Connetions Using the Capaity Spetrum Method," by G.G. Deierlein, S-H. Hsieh, Y-J. Shen and J.F. Abel, 7/2/91, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Earthquake Eduation Materials for Grades K-12," by K.E.K. Ross, 4/30/91, (PB , A06, MF- A01). This report has been replaed by NCEER NCEER "Phase Wave Veloities and Displaement Phase Differenes in a Harmonially Osillating Pile," by N. Makris and G. Gazetas, 7/8/91, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER "Dynami Charateristis of a Full-Size Five-Story Steel Struture and a 2/5 Sale Model," by K.C. Chang, G.C. Yao, G.C. Lee, D.S. Hao and Y.C. Yeh," 7/2/91, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Seismi Response of a 2/5 Sale Steel Struture with Added Visoelasti Dampers," by K.C. Chang, T.T. Soong, S-T. Oh and M.L. Lai, 5/17/91, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Earthquake Response of Retaining Walls; Full-Sale Testing and Computational Modeling," by S. Alampalli and A-W.M. Elgamal, 6/20/91, not available. NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "3D-BASIS-M: Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Multiple Building Base Isolated Strutures," by P.C. Tsopelas, S. Nagarajaiah, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 5/28/91, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Evaluation of SEAOC Design Requirements for Sliding Isolated Strutures," by D. Theodossiou and M.C. Constantinou, 6/10/91, (PB , A11, MF-A03). "Closed-Loop Modal Testing of a 27-Story Reinfored Conrete Flat Plate-Core Building," by H.R. Somaprasad, T. Toksoy, H. Yoshiyuki and A.E. Aktan, 7/15/91, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "Shake Table Test of a 1/6 Sale Two-Story Lightly Reinfored Conrete Building," by A.G. El-Attar, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 2/28/91, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Shake Table Test of a 1/8 Sale Three-Story Lightly Reinfored Conrete Building," by A.G. El-Attar, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 2/28/91, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "Transfer Funtions for Rigid Retangular Foundations," by A.S. Veletsos, A.M. Prasad and W.H. Wu, 7/31/91, not available. 107

126 NCEER "Hybrid Control of Seismi-Exited Nonlinear and Inelasti Strutural Systems," by J.N. Yang, Z. Li and A. Danielians, 8/1/91, (PB , A06, MF-A02). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "The NCEER-91 Earthquake Catalog: Improved Intensity-Based Magnitudes and Reurrene Relations for U.S. Earthquakes East of New Madrid," by L. Seeber and J.G. Armbruster, 8/28/91, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Proeedings from the Implementation of Earthquake Planning and Eduation in Shools: The Need for Change - The Roles of the Changemakers," by K.E.K. Ross and F. Winslow, 7/23/91, (PB , A12, MF-A03). "A Study of Reliability-Based Criteria for Seismi Design of Reinfored Conrete Frame Buildings," by H.H.M. Hwang and H-M. Hsu, 8/10/91, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Experimental Verifiation of a Number of Strutural System Identifiation Algorithms," by R.G. Ghanem, H. Gavin and M. Shinozuka, 9/18/91, (PB , A18, MF-A04). "Probabilisti Evaluation of Liquefation Potential," by H.H.M. Hwang and C.S. Lee," 11/25/91, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Instantaneous Optimal Control for Linear, Nonlinear and Hystereti Strutures - Stable Controllers," by J.N. Yang and Z. Li, 11/15/91, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Experimental and Theoretial Study of a Sliding Isolation System for Bridges," by M.C. Constantinou, A. Kartoum, A.M. Reinhorn and P. Bradford, 11/15/91, (PB , A10, MF-A03). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Case Studies of Liquefation and Lifeline Performane During Past Earthquakes, Volume 1: Japanese Case Studies," Edited by M. Hamada and T. O'Rourke, 2/17/92, (PB , A18, MF-A04). "Case Studies of Liquefation and Lifeline Performane During Past Earthquakes, Volume 2: United States Case Studies," Edited by T. O'Rourke and M. Hamada, 2/17/92, (PB , A20, MF-A04). "Issues in Earthquake Eduation," Edited by K. Ross, 2/3/92, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "Proeedings from the First U.S. - Japan Workshop on Earthquake Protetive Systems for Bridges," Edited by I.G. Bukle, 2/4/92, (PB , A99, MF-A06). NCEER "Seismi Ground Motion from a Haskell-Type Soure in a Multiple-Layered Half-Spae," A.P. Theoharis, G. Deodatis and M. Shinozuka, 1/2/92, not available. NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the Site Effets Workshop," Edited by R. Whitman, 2/29/92, (PB , A04, MF- A01). "Engineering Evaluation of Permanent Ground Deformations Due to Seismially-Indued Liquefation," by M.H. Baziar, R. Dobry and A-W.M. Elgamal, 3/24/92, (PB , A13, MF-A03). "A Proedure for the Seismi Evaluation of Buildings in the Central and Eastern United States," by C.D. Poland and J.O. Malley, 4/2/92, (PB , A20, MF-A04). "Experimental and Analytial Study of a Hybrid Isolation System Using Frition Controllable Sliding Bearings," by M.Q. Feng, S. Fujii and M. Shinozuka, 5/15/92, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Seismi Resistane of Slab-Column Connetions in Existing Non-Dutile Flat-Plate Buildings," by A.J. Durrani and Y. Du, 5/18/92, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "The Hystereti and Dynami Behavior of Brik Masonry Walls Upgraded by Ferroement Coatings Under Cyli Loading and Strong Simulated Ground Motion," by H. Lee and S.P. Prawel, 5/11/92, not available. "Study of Wire Rope Systems for Seismi Protetion of Equipment in Buildings," by G.F. Demetriades, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 5/20/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). 108

127 NCEER NCEER "Shape Memory Strutural Dampers: Material Properties, Design and Seismi Testing," by P.R. Witting and F.A. Cozzarelli, 5/26/92, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Longitudinal Permanent Ground Deformation Effets on Buried Continuous Pipelines," by M.J. O'Rourke, and C. Nordberg, 6/15/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER "A Simulation Method for Stationary Gaussian Random Funtions Based on the Sampling Theorem," by M. Grigoriu and S. Balopoulou, 6/11/92, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER "Gravity-Load-Designed Reinfored Conrete Buildings: Seismi Evaluation of Existing Constrution and Detailing Strategies for Improved Seismi Resistane," by G.W. Hoffmann, S.K. Kunnath, A.M. Reinhorn and J.B. Mander, 7/15/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "Observations on Water System and Pipeline Performane in the Limón Area of Costa Ria Due to the April 22, 1991 Earthquake," by M. O'Rourke and D. Ballantyne, 6/30/92, (PB , A06, MF-A02). NCEER "Fourth Edition of Earthquake Eduation Materials for Grades K-12," Edited by K.E.K. Ross, 8/10/92, (PB , A07, MF-A02). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the Fourth Japan-U.S. Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures for Soil Liquefation," Edited by M. Hamada and T.D. O'Rourke, 8/12/92, (PB , A99, MF-E11). "Ative Braing System: A Full Sale Implementation of Ative Control," by A.M. Reinhorn, T.T. Soong, R.C. Lin, M.A. Riley, Y.P. Wang, S. Aizawa and M. Higashino, 8/14/92, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Empirial Analysis of Horizontal Ground Displaement Generated by Liquefation-Indued Lateral Spreads," by S.F. Bartlett and T.L. Youd, 8/17/92, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "IDARC Version 3.0: Inelasti Damage Analysis of Reinfored Conrete Strutures," by S.K. Kunnath, A.M. Reinhorn and R.F. Lobo, 8/31/92, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "A Semi-Empirial Analysis of Strong-Motion Peaks in Terms of Seismi Soure, Propagation Path and Loal Site Conditions, by M. Kamiyama, M.J. O'Rourke and R. Flores-Berrones, 9/9/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "Seismi Behavior of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures with Nondutile Details, Part I: Summary of Experimental Findings of Full Sale Beam-Column Joint Tests," by A. Beres, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 9/30/92, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Experimental Results of Repaired and Retrofitted Beam-Column Joint Tests in Lightly Reinfored Conrete Frame Buildings," by A. Beres, S. El-Borgi, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 10/29/92, (PB , A05, MF- A01). NCEER "A Generalization of Optimal Control Theory: Linear and Nonlinear Strutures," by J.N. Yang, Z. Li and S. Vonghavalitkul, 11/2/92, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Seismi Resistane of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures Designed Only for Gravity Loads: Part I - Design and Properties of a One-Third Sale Model Struture," by J.M. Brai, A.M. Reinhorn and J.B. Mander, 12/1/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER "Seismi Resistane of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures Designed Only for Gravity Loads: Part II - Experimental Performane of Subassemblages," by L.E. Ayardi, J.B. Mander and A.M. Reinhorn, 12/1/92, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER "Seismi Resistane of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures Designed Only for Gravity Loads: Part III - Experimental Performane and Analytial Study of a Strutural Model," by J.M. Brai, A.M. Reinhorn and J.B. Mander, 12/1/92, (PB , A09, MF-A01). 109

128 NCEER NCEER NCEER "Evaluation of Seismi Retrofit of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures: Part I - Experimental Performane of Retrofitted Subassemblages," by D. Choudhuri, J.B. Mander and A.M. Reinhorn, 12/8/92, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "Evaluation of Seismi Retrofit of Reinfored Conrete Frame Strutures: Part II - Experimental Performane and Analytial Study of a Retrofitted Strutural Model," by J.M. Brai, A.M. Reinhorn and J.B. Mander, 12/8/92, (PB , A09, MF-A03). "Experimental and Analytial Investigation of Seismi Response of Strutures with Supplemental Fluid Visous Dampers," by M.C. Constantinou and M.D. Symans, 12/21/92, (PB , A10, MF-A03). This report is available only through NTIS (see address given above). NCEER "Reonnaissane Report on the Cairo, Egypt Earthquake of Otober 12, 1992," by M. Khater, 12/23/92, (PB , A03, MF-A01). NCEER "Low-Level Dynami Charateristis of Four Tall Flat-Plate Buildings in New York City," by H. Gavin, S. Yuan, J. Grossman, E. Pekelis and K. Jaob, 12/28/92, (PB , A07, MF-A02). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "An Experimental Study on the Seismi Performane of Brik-Infilled Steel Frames With and Without Retrofit," by J.B. Mander, B. Nair, K. Wojtkowski and J. Ma, 1/29/93, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "Soial Aounting for Disaster Preparedness and Reovery Planning," by S. Cole, E. Pantoja and V. Razak, 2/22/93, (PB , A12, MF-A03). "Assessment of 1991 NEHRP Provisions for Nonstrutural Components and Reommended Revisions," by T.T. Soong, G. Chen, Z. Wu, R-H. Zhang and M. Grigoriu, 3/1/93, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Evaluation of Stati and Response Spetrum Analysis Proedures of SEAOC/UBC for Seismi Isolated Strutures," by C.W. Winters and M.C. Constantinou, 3/23/93, (PB , A10, MF-A03). "Earthquakes in the Northeast - Are We Ignoring the Hazard? A Workshop on Earthquake Siene and Safety for Eduators," edited by K.E.K. Ross, 4/2/93, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Inelasti Response of Reinfored Conrete Strutures with Visoelasti Braes," by R.F. Lobo, J.M. Brai, K.L. Shen, A.M. Reinhorn and T.T. Soong, 4/5/93, (PB , A05, MF-A02). "Seismi Testing of Installation Methods for Computers and Data Proessing Equipment," by K. Kosar, T.T. Soong, K.L. Shen, J.A. HoLung and Y.K. Lin, 4/12/93, (PB , A07, MF-A02). NCEER "Retrofit of Reinfored Conrete Frames Using Added Dampers," by A. Reinhorn, M. Constantinou and C. Li, not available. NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Seismi Behavior and Design Guidelines for Steel Frame Strutures with Added Visoelasti Dampers," by K.C. Chang, M.L. Lai, T.T. Soong, D.S. Hao and Y.C. Yeh, 5/1/93, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "Seismi Performane of Shear-Critial Reinfored Conrete Bridge Piers," by J.B. Mander, S.M. Waheed, M.T.A. Chaudhary and S.S. Chen, 5/12/93, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "3D-BASIS-TABS: Computer Program for Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Three Dimensional Base Isolated Strutures," by S. Nagarajaiah, C. Li, A.M. Reinhorn and M.C. Constantinou, 8/2/93, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Effets of Hydroarbon Spills from an Oil Pipeline Break on Ground Water," by O.J. Helweg and H.H.M. Hwang, 8/3/93, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Simplified Proedures for Seismi Design of Nonstrutural Components and Assessment of Current Code Provisions," by M.P. Singh, L.E. Suarez, E.E. Matheu and G.O. Maldonado, 8/4/93, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "An Energy Approah to Seismi Analysis and Design of Seondary Systems," by G. Chen and T.T. Soong, 8/6/93, (PB , A11, MF-A03). 110

129 NCEER "Proeedings from Shool Sites: Beoming Prepared for Earthquakes - Commemorating the Third Anniversary of the Loma Prieta Earthquake," Edited by F.E. Winslow and K.E.K. Ross, 8/16/93, (PB , A16, MF-A02). NCEER "Reonnaissane Report of Damage to Histori Monuments in Cairo, Egypt Following the Otober 12, 1992 Dahshur Earthquake," by D. Sykora, D. Look, G. Croi, E. Karaesmen and E. Karaesmen, 8/19/93, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER "The Island of Guam Earthquake of August 8, 1993," by S.W. Swan and S.K. Harris, 9/30/93, (PB , A04, MF-A01). NCEER "Engineering Aspets of the Otober 12, 1992 Egyptian Earthquake," by A.W. Elgamal, M. Amer, K. Adalier and A. Abul-Fadl, 10/7/93, (PB , A05, MF-A01). NCEER "Development of an Earthquake Motion Simulator and its Appliation in Dynami Centrifuge Testing," by I. Krstelj, Supervised by J.H. Prevost, 10/23/93, (PB , A-10, MF-A03). NCEER "NCEER-Taisei Corporation Researh Program on Sliding Seismi Isolation Systems for Bridges: Experimental and Analytial Study of a Frition Pendulum System (FPS)," by M.C. Constantinou, P. Tsopelas, Y-S. Kim and S. Okamoto, 11/1/93, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER "Finite Element Modeling of Elastomeri Seismi Isolation Bearings," by L.J. Billings, Supervised by R. Shepherd, 11/8/93, not available. NCEER "Seismi Vulnerability of Equipment in Critial Failities: Life-Safety and Operational Consequenes," by K. Porter, G.S. Johnson, M.M. Zadeh, C. Sawthorn and S. Eder, 11/24/93, (PB , A16, MF-A03). NCEER "Hokkaido Nansei-oki, Japan Earthquake of July 12, 1993, by P.I. Yanev and C.R. Sawthorn, 12/23/93, (PB , A07, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER "An Evaluation of Seismi Servieability of Water Supply Networks with Appliation to the San Franiso Auxiliary Water Supply System," by I. Markov, Supervised by M. Grigoriu and T. O'Rourke, 1/21/94, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "NCEER-Taisei Corporation Researh Program on Sliding Seismi Isolation Systems for Bridges: Experimental and Analytial Study of Systems Consisting of Sliding Bearings, Rubber Restoring Fore Devies and Fluid Dampers," Volumes I and II, by P. Tsopelas, S. Okamoto, M.C. Constantinou, D. Ozaki and S. Fujii, 2/4/94, (PB , A09, MF-A02 and PB , A12, MF-A03). NCEER "A Markov Model for Loal and Global Damage Indies in Seismi Analysis," by S. Rahman and M. Grigoriu, 2/18/94, (PB , A12, MF-A03). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Proeedings from the NCEER Workshop on Seismi Response of Masonry Infills," edited by D.P. Abrams, 3/1/94, (PB , A07, MF-A02). "The Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994: General Reonnaissane Report," edited by J.D. Goltz, 3/11/94, (PB , A10, MF-A03). "Seismi Energy Based Fatigue Damage Analysis of Bridge Columns: Part I - Evaluation of Seismi Capaity," by G.A. Chang and J.B. Mander, 3/14/94, (PB , A11, MF-A03). "Seismi Isolation of Multi-Story Frame Strutures Using Spherial Sliding Isolation Systems," by T.M. Al- Hussaini, V.A. Zayas and M.C. Constantinou, 3/17/94, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "The Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994: Performane of Highway Bridges," edited by I.G. Bukle, 3/24/94, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Proeedings of the Third U.S.-Japan Workshop on Earthquake Protetive Systems for Bridges," edited by I.G. Bukle and I. Friedland, 3/31/94, (PB , A99, MF-A06). 111

130 NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "3D-BASIS-ME: Computer Program for Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Seismially Isolated Single and Multiple Strutures and Liquid Storage Tanks," by P.C. Tsopelas, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, 4/12/94, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "The Northridge, California Earthquake of January 17, 1994: Performane of Gas Transmission Pipelines," by T.D. O'Rourke and M.C. Palmer, 5/16/94, (PB , A05, MF-A01). "Feasibility Study of Replaement Proedures and Earthquake Performane Related to Gas Transmission Pipelines," by T.D. O'Rourke and M.C. Palmer, 5/25/94, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Seismi Energy Based Fatigue Damage Analysis of Bridge Columns: Part II - Evaluation of Seismi Demand," by G.A. Chang and J.B. Mander, 6/1/94, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "NCEER-Taisei Corporation Researh Program on Sliding Seismi Isolation Systems for Bridges: Experimental and Analytial Study of a System Consisting of Sliding Bearings and Fluid Restoring Fore/Damping Devies," by P. Tsopelas and M.C. Constantinou, 6/13/94, (PB , A10, MF-A03). "Generation of Hazard-Consistent Fragility Curves for Seismi Loss Estimation Studies," by H. Hwang and J-R. Huo, 6/14/94, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "Seismi Study of Building Frames with Added Energy-Absorbing Devies," by W.S. Pong, C.S. Tsai and G.C. Lee, 6/20/94, (PB , A10, A03). "Sliding Mode Control for Seismi-Exited Linear and Nonlinear Civil Engineering Strutures," by J. Yang, J. Wu, A. Agrawal and Z. Li, 6/21/94, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "3D-BASIS-TABS Version 2.0: Computer Program for Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Three Dimensional Base Isolated Strutures," by A.M. Reinhorn, S. Nagarajaiah, M.C. Constantinou, P. Tsopelas and R. Li, 6/22/94, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "Proeedings of the International Workshop on Civil Infrastruture Systems: Appliation of Intelligent Systems and Advaned Materials on Bridge Systems," Edited by G.C. Lee and K.C. Chang, 7/18/94, (PB , A20, MF-A04). NCEER "Study of Seismi Isolation Systems for Computer Floors," by V. Lambrou and M.C. Constantinou, 7/19/94, (PB , A10, MF-A03). NCEER NCEER "Proeedings of the U.S.-Italian Workshop on Guidelines for Seismi Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Unreinfored Masonry Buildings," Edited by D.P. Abrams and G.M. Calvi, 7/20/94, (PB , A13, MF-A03). "NCEER-Taisei Corporation Researh Program on Sliding Seismi Isolation Systems for Bridges: Experimental and Analytial Study of a System Consisting of Lubriated PTFE Sliding Bearings and Mild Steel Dampers," by P. Tsopelas and M.C. Constantinou, 7/22/94, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER Development of Reliability-Based Design Criteria for Buildings Under Seismi Load, by Y.K. Wen, H. Hwang and M. Shinozuka, 8/1/94, (PB , A08, MF-A02). NCEER NCEER NCEER Experimental Verifiation of Aeleration Feedbak Control Strategies for an Ative Tendon System, by S.J. Dyke, B.F. Spener, Jr., P. Quast, M.K. Sain, D.C. Kaspari, Jr. and T.T. Soong, 8/29/94, (PB , A05, MF-A01). Seismi Retrofitting Manual for Highway Bridges, Edited by I.G. Bukle and I.F. Friedland, published by the Federal Highway Administration (PB , A15, MF-A03). Proeedings from the Fifth U.S.-Japan Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures Against Soil Liquefation, Edited by T.D. O Rourke and M. Hamada, 11/7/94, (PB , A99, MF-E08). 112

131 NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER Experimental and Analytial Investigation of Seismi Retrofit of Strutures with Supplemental Damping: Part 1 - Fluid Visous Damping Devies, by A.M. Reinhorn, C. Li and M.C. Constantinou, 1/3/95, (PB , A09, MF-A02). Experimental and Analytial Study of Low-Cyle Fatigue Behavior of Semi-Rigid Top-And-Seat Angle Connetions, by G. Pekan, J.B. Mander and S.S. Chen, 1/5/95, (PB , A07, MF-A02). NCEER-ATC Joint Study on Fragility of Buildings, by T. Anagnos, C. Rojahn and A.S. Kiremidjian, 1/20/95, (PB , A06, MF-A02). Nonlinear Control Algorithms for Peak Response Redution, by Z. Wu, T.T. Soong, V. Gattulli and R.C. Lin, 2/16/95, (PB , A05, MF-A01). Pipeline Replaement Feasibility Study: A Methodology for Minimizing Seismi and Corrosion Risks to Underground Natural Gas Pipelines, by R.T. Eguhi, H.A. Seligson and D.G. Honegger, 3/2/95, (PB , A06, MF-A02). Evaluation of Seismi Performane of an 11-Story Frame Building During the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, by F. Naeim, R. DiSulio, K. Benuska, A. Reinhorn and C. Li, not available. Prioritization of Bridges for Seismi Retrofitting, by N. Basöz and A.S. Kiremidjian, 4/24/95, (PB , A08, MF-A02). Method for Developing Motion Damage Relationships for Reinfored Conrete Frames, by A. Singhal and A.S. Kiremidjian, 5/11/95, (PB , A06, MF-A02). Experimental and Analytial Investigation of Seismi Retrofit of Strutures with Supplemental Damping: Part II - Frition Devies, by C. Li and A.M. Reinhorn, 7/6/95, (PB , A11, MF-A03). Experimental Performane and Analytial Study of a Non-Dutile Reinfored Conrete Frame Struture Retrofitted with Elastomeri Spring Dampers, by G. Pekan, J.B. Mander and S.S. Chen, 7/14/95, (PB , A08, MF-A02). Development and Experimental Study of Semi-Ative Fluid Damping Devies for Seismi Protetion of Strutures, by M.D. Symans and M.C. Constantinou, 8/3/95, (PB , A23, MF-A04). NCEER Real-Time Strutural Parameter Modifiation (RSPM): Development of Innervated Strutures, by Z. Liang, M. Tong and G.C. Lee, 4/11/95, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER Experimental and Analytial Investigation of Seismi Retrofit of Strutures with Supplemental Damping: Part III - Visous Damping Walls, by A.M. Reinhorn and C. Li, 10/1/95, (PB , A11, MF-A03). Seismi Fragility Analysis of Equipment and Strutures in a Memphis Eletri Substation, by J-R. Huo and H.H.M. Hwang, 8/10/95, (PB , A09, MF-A02). The Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of January 17, 1995: Performane of Lifelines, Edited by M. Shinozuka, 11/3/95, (PB , A15, MF-A03). Highway Culvert Performane During Earthquakes, by T.L. Youd and C.J. Bekman, available as NCEER The Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of January 17, 1995: Performane of Highway Bridges, Edited by I.G. Bukle, 12/1/95, not available. NCEER Modeling of Masonry Infill Panels for Strutural Analysis, by A.M. Reinhorn, A. Madan, R.E. Valles, Y. Reihmann and J.B. Mander, 12/8/95, (PB , MF-A01, A06). NCEER Optimal Polynomial Control for Linear and Nonlinear Strutures, by A.K. Agrawal and J.N. Yang, 12/11/95, (PB , A07, MF-A02). 113

132 NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER Retrofit of Non-Dutile Reinfored Conrete Frames Using Frition Dampers, by R.S. Rao, P. Gergely and R.N. White, 12/22/95, (PB , A10, MF-A02). Parametri Results for Seismi Response of Pile-Supported Bridge Bents, by G. Mylonakis, A. Nikolaou and G. Gazetas, 12/22/95, (PB , A12, MF-A03). Kinemati Bending Moments in Seismially Stressed Piles, by A. Nikolaou, G. Mylonakis and G. Gazetas, 12/23/95, (PB , MF-A03, A13). Dynami Response of Unreinfored Masonry Buildings with Flexible Diaphragms, by A.C. Costley and D.P. Abrams, 10/10/96, (PB , MF-A03, A15). State of the Art Review: Foundations and Retaining Strutures, by I. Po Lam, not available. Dutility of Retangular Reinfored Conrete Bridge Columns with Moderate Confinement, by N. Wehbe, M. Saiidi, D. Sanders and B. Douglas, 11/7/96, (PB , A06, MF-A02). Proeedings of the Long-Span Bridge Seismi Researh Workshop, edited by I.G. Bukle and I.M. Friedland, not available. NCEER Establish Representative Pier Types for Comprehensive Study: Eastern United States, by J. Kuliki and Z. Pruz, 5/28/96, (PB , A07, MF-A02). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER Establish Representative Pier Types for Comprehensive Study: Western United States, by R. Imbsen, R.A. Shamber and T.A. Osterkamp, 5/28/96, (PB , A07, MF-A02). Nonlinear Control Tehniques for Dynamial Systems with Unertain Parameters, by R.G. Ghanem and M.I. Bujakov, 5/27/96, (PB , A17, MF-A03). Seismi Evaluation of a 30-Year Old Non-Dutile Highway Bridge Pier and Its Retrofit, by J.B. Mander, B. Mahmoodzadegan, S. Bhadra and S.S. Chen, 5/31/96, (PB , MF-A03, A10). Seismi Performane of a Model Reinfored Conrete Bridge Pier Before and After Retrofit, by J.B. Mander, J.H. Kim and C.A. Ligozio, 5/31/96, (PB , MF-A02, A10). IDARC2D Version 4.0: A Computer Program for the Inelasti Damage Analysis of Buildings, by R.E. Valles, A.M. Reinhorn, S.K. Kunnath, C. Li and A. Madan, 6/3/96, (PB , A17, MF-A03). Estimation of the Eonomi Impat of Multiple Lifeline Disruption: Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division Case Study, by S.E. Chang, H.A. Seligson and R.T. Eguhi, 8/16/96, (PB , A11, MF- A03). Proeedings from the Sixth Japan-U.S. Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures Against Soil Liquefation, Edited by M. Hamada and T. O Rourke, 9/11/96, (PB , A99, MF-A06). Chemial Hazards, Mitigation and Preparedness in Areas of High Seismi Risk: A Methodology for Estimating the Risk of Post-Earthquake Hazardous Materials Release, by H.A. Seligson, R.T. Eguhi, K.J. Tierney and K. Rihmond, 11/7/96, (PB , MF-A02, A08). Response of Steel Bridge Bearings to Reversed Cyli Loading, by J.B. Mander, D-K. Kim, S.S. Chen and G.J. Premus, 11/13/96, (PB , A12, MF-A03). NCEER Highway Culvert Performane During Past Earthquakes, by T.L. Youd and C.J. Bekman, 11/25/96, (PB , A06, MF-A01). NCEER NCEER Evaluation, Prevention and Mitigation of Pounding Effets in Building Strutures, by R.E. Valles and A.M. Reinhorn, 2/20/97, (PB , A14, MF-A03). Seismi Design Criteria for Bridges and Other Highway Strutures, by C. Rojahn, R. Mayes, D.G. Anderson, J. Clark, J.H. Hom, R.V. Nutt and M.J. O Rourke, 4/30/97, (PB , A06, MF-A03). 114

133 NCEER NCEER NCEER Proeedings of the U.S.-Italian Workshop on Seismi Evaluation and Retrofit, Edited by D.P. Abrams and G.M. Calvi, 3/19/97, (PB , A13, MF-A03). "Investigation of Seismi Response of Buildings with Linear and Nonlinear Fluid Visous Dampers," by A.A. Seleemah and M.C. Constantinou, 5/21/97, (PB , A15, MF-A03). "Proeedings of the Workshop on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers in Transportation Failities," edited by G.C. Lee and I.M. Friedland, 8/29/97, (PB , A25, MR-A04). NCEER "Cumulative Seismi Damage of Reinfored Conrete Bridge Piers," by S.K. Kunnath, A. El-Bahy, A. Taylor and W. Stone, 9/2/97, (PB , A11, MF-A03). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER "Strutural Details to Aommodate Seismi Movements of Highway Bridges and Retaining Walls," by R.A. Imbsen, R.A. Shamber, E. Thorkildsen, A. Kartoum, B.T. Martin, T.N. Rosser and J.M. Kuliki, 9/3/97, (PB , A09, MF-A02). "A Method for Earthquake Motion-Damage Relationships with Appliation to Reinfored Conrete Frames," by A. Singhal and A.S. Kiremidjian, 9/10/97, (PB , A13, MF-A03). "Seismi Analysis and Design of Bridge Abutments Considering Sliding and Rotation," by K. Fishman and R. Rihards, Jr., 9/15/97, (PB , A06, MF-A02). "Proeedings of the FHWA/NCEER Workshop on the National Representation of Seismi Ground Motion for New and Existing Highway Failities," edited by I.M. Friedland, M.S. Power and R.L. Mayes, 9/22/97, (PB , A21, MF-A04). "Seismi Analysis for Design or Retrofit of Gravity Bridge Abutments," by K.L. Fishman, R. Rihards, Jr. and R.C. Divito, 10/2/97, (PB , A08, MF-A02). "Evaluation of Simplified Methods of Analysis for Yielding Strutures," by P. Tsopelas, M.C. Constantinou, C.A. Kirher and A.S. Whittaker, 10/31/97, (PB , A10, MF-A03). "Seismi Design of Bridge Columns Based on Control and Repairability of Damage," by C-T. Cheng and J.B. Mander, 12/8/97, (PB , A11, MF-A03). "Seismi Resistane of Bridge Piers Based on Damage Avoidane Design," by J.B. Mander and C-T. Cheng, 12/10/97, (PB , A09, MF-A02). NCEER Seismi Response of Nominally Symmetri Systems with Strength Unertainty, by S. Balopoulou and M. Grigoriu, 12/23/97, (PB , A11, MF-A03). NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER NCEER Evaluation of Seismi Retrofit Methods for Reinfored Conrete Bridge Columns, by T.J. Wipf, F.W. Klaiber and F.M. Russo, 12/28/97, (PB , A12, MF-A03). Seismi Fragility of Existing Conventional Reinfored Conrete Highway Bridges, by C.L. Mullen and A.S. Cakmak, 12/30/97, (PB , A08, MF-A02). Loss Asssessment of Memphis Buildings, edited by D.P. Abrams and M. Shinozuka, 12/31/97, (PB , A13, MF-A03). Seismi Evaluation of Frames with Infill Walls Using Quasi-stati Experiments, by K.M. Mosalam, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 12/31/97, (PB , A07, MF-A02). Seismi Evaluation of Frames with Infill Walls Using Pseudo-dynami Experiments, by K.M. Mosalam, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 12/31/97, (PB , A07, MF-A02). Computational Strategies for Frames with Infill Walls: Disrete and Smeared Crak Analyses and Seismi Fragility, by K.M. Mosalam, R.N. White and P. Gergely, 12/31/97, (PB , A10, MF-A02). 115

134 NCEER Proeedings of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefation Resistane of Soils, edited by T.L. Youd and I.M. Idriss, 12/31/97, (PB , A15, MF-A03). MCEER Extration of Nonlinear Hystereti Properties of Seismially Isolated Bridges from Quik-Release Field Tests, by Q. Chen, B.M. Douglas, E.M. Maragakis and I.G. Bukle, 5/26/98, (PB , A06, MF- A01). MCEER Methodologies for Evaluating the Importane of Highway Bridges, by A. Thomas, S. Eshenaur and J. Kuliki, 5/29/98, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER Capaity Design of Bridge Piers and the Analysis of Overstrength, by J.B. Mander, A. Dutta and P. Goel, 6/1/98, (PB , A09, MF-A02). MCEER Evaluation of Bridge Damage Data from the Loma Prieta and Northridge, California Earthquakes, by N. Basoz and A. Kiremidjian, 6/2/98, (PB , A15, MF-A03). MCEER Sreening Guide for Rapid Assessment of Liquefation Hazard at Highway Bridge Sites, by T. L. Youd, 6/16/98, (PB , A06, not available on mirofihe). MCEER Strutural Steel and Steel/Conrete Interfae Details for Bridges, by P. Rithie, N. Kauhl and J. Kuliki, 7/13/98, (PB , A06, MF-A01). MCEER Capaity Design and Fatigue Analysis of Confined Conrete Columns, by A. Dutta and J.B. Mander, 7/14/98, (PB , A14, MF-A03). MCEER Proeedings of the Workshop on Performane Criteria for Teleommuniation Servies Under Earthquake Conditions, edited by A.J. Shiff, 7/15/98, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER Fatigue Analysis of Unonfined Conrete Columns, by J.B. Mander, A. Dutta and J.H. Kim, 9/12/98, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER Centrifuge Modeling of Cyli Lateral Response of Pile-Cap Systems and Seat-Type Abutments in Dry Sands, by A.D. Gadre and R. Dobry, 10/2/98, (PB , A13, MF-A03). MCEER IDARC-BRIDGE: A Computational Platform for Seismi Damage Assessment of Bridge Strutures, by A.M. Reinhorn, V. Simeonov, G. Mylonakis and Y. Reihman, 10/2/98, (PB , A15, MF-A03). MCEER Experimental Investigation of the Dynami Response of Two Bridges Before and After Retrofitting with Elastomeri Bearings, by D.A. Wendihansky, S.S. Chen and J.B. Mander, 10/2/98, (PB , A15, MF-A03). MCEER Design Proedures for Hinge Restrainers and Hinge Sear Width for Multiple-Frame Bridges, by R. Des Rohes and G.L. Fenves, 11/3/98, (PB , A13, MF-A03). MCEER MCEER Response Modifiation Fators for Seismially Isolated Bridges, by M.C. Constantinou and J.K. Quarshie, 11/3/98, (PB , A14, MF-A03). Proeedings of the U.S.-Italy Workshop on Seismi Protetive Systems for Bridges, edited by I.M. Friedland and M.C. Constantinou, 11/3/98, (PB , A22, MF-A04). MCEER Appropriate Seismi Reliability for Critial Equipment Systems: Reommendations Based on Regional Analysis of Finanial and Life Loss, by K. Porter, C. Sawthorn, C. Taylor and N. Blais, 11/10/98, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER Proeedings of the U.S. Japan Joint Seminar on Civil Infrastruture Systems Researh, edited by M. Shinozuka and A. Rose, 11/12/98, (PB , A16, MF-A03). MCEER Modeling of Pile Footings and Drilled Shafts for Seismi Design, by I. PoLam, M. Kapuskar and D. Chaudhuri, 12/21/98, (PB , A09, MF-A02). 116

135 MCEER "Seismi Evaluation of a Masonry Infilled Reinfored Conrete Frame by Pseudodynami Testing," by S.G. Buonopane and R.N. White, 2/16/99, (PB , A09, MF-A02). MCEER "Response History Analysis of Strutures with Seismi Isolation and Energy Dissipation Systems: Verifiation Examples for Program SAP2000," by J. Sheller and M.C. Constantinou, 2/22/99, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Experimental Study on the Seismi Design and Retrofit of Bridge Columns Inluding Axial Load Effets," by A. Dutta, T. Kokorina and J.B. Mander, 2/22/99, (PB , A09, MF-A02). MCEER "Experimental Study of Bridge Elastomeri and Other Isolation and Energy Dissipation Systems with Emphasis on Uplift Prevention and High Veloity Near-soure Seismi Exitation," by A. Kasalanati and M. C. Constantinou, 2/26/99, (PB , A12, MF-A03). MCEER "Truss Modeling of Reinfored Conrete Shear-flexure Behavior," by J.H. Kim and J.B. Mander, 3/8/99, (PB , A12, MF-A03). MCEER "Experimental Investigation and Computational Modeling of Seismi Response of a 1:4 Sale Model Steel Struture with a Load Balaning Supplemental Damping System," by G. Pekan, J.B. Mander and S.S. Chen, 4/2/99, (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER "Effet of Vertial Ground Motions on the Strutural Response of Highway Bridges," by M.R. Button, C.J. Cronin and R.L. Mayes, 4/10/99, (PB , A10, MF-A03). MCEER "Seismi Reliability Assessment of Critial Failities: A Handbook, Supporting Doumentation, and Model Code Provisions," by G.S. Johnson, R.E. Sheppard, M.D. Quilii, S.J. Eder and C.R. Sawthorn, 4/12/99, (PB , A18, MF-A04). MCEER "Impat Assessment of Seleted MCEER Highway Projet Researh on the Seismi Design of Highway Strutures," by C. Rojahn, R. Mayes, D.G. Anderson, J.H. Clark, D'Appolonia Engineering, S. Gloyd and R.V. Nutt, 4/14/99, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER "Site Fators and Site Categories in Seismi Codes," by R. Dobry, R. Ramos and M.S. Power, 7/19/99, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Restrainer Design Proedures for Multi-Span Simply-Supported Bridges," by M.J. Randall, M. Saiidi, E. Maragakis and T. Isakovi, 7/20/99, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER "Property Modifiation Fators for Seismi Isolation Bearings," by M.C. Constantinou, P. Tsopelas, A. Kasalanati and E. Wolff, 7/20/99, (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER "Critial Seismi Issues for Existing Steel Bridges," by P. Rithie, N. Kauhl and J. Kuliki, 7/20/99, (PB , A09, MF-A02). MCEER "Nonstrutural Damage Database," by A. Kao, T.T. Soong and A. Vender, 7/24/99, (PB , A06, MF-A01). MCEER "Guide to Remedial Measures for Liquefation Mitigation at Existing Highway Bridge Sites," by H.G. Cooke and J. K. Mithell, 7/26/99, (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER "Proeedings of the MCEER Workshop on Ground Motion Methodologies for the Eastern United States," edited by N. Abrahamson and A. Beker, 8/11/99, (PB , A07, MF-A02). MCEER "Quindío, Colombia Earthquake of January 25, 1999: Reonnaissane Report," by A.P. Asfura and P.J. Flores, 10/4/99, (PB , A06, MF-A01). MCEER "Hystereti Models for Cyli Behavior of Deteriorating Inelasti Strutures," by M.V. Sivaselvan and A.M. Reinhorn, 11/5/99, (PB , A08, MF-A02). 117

136 MCEER "Proeedings of the 7 th U.S.- Japan Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design of Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures Against Soil Liquefation," edited by T.D. O'Rourke, J.P. Bardet and M. Hamada, 11/19/99, (PB , A99, MF-A06). MCEER "Development of Measurement Capability for Miro-Vibration Evaluations with Appliation to Chip Fabriation Failities," by G.C. Lee, Z. Liang, J.W. Song, J.D. Shen and W.C. Liu, 12/1/99, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Design and Retrofit Methodology for Building Strutures with Supplemental Energy Dissipating Systems," by G. Pekan, J.B. Mander and S.S. Chen, 12/31/99, (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER "The Marmara, Turkey Earthquake of August 17, 1999: Reonnaissane Report," edited by C. Sawthorn; with major ontributions by M. Bruneau, R. Eguhi, T. Holzer, G. Johnson, J. Mander, J. Mithell, W. Mithell, A. Papageorgiou, C. Saethorn, and G. Webb, 3/23/00, (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER "Proeedings of the MCEER Workshop for Seismi Hazard Mitigation of Health Care Failities," edited by G.C. Lee, M. Ettouney, M. Grigoriu, J. Hauer and J. Nigg, 3/29/00, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "The Chi-Chi, Taiwan Earthquake of September 21, 1999: Reonnaissane Report," edited by G.C. Lee and C.H. Loh, with major ontributions by G.C. Lee, M. Bruneau, I.G. Bukle, S.E. Chang, P.J. Flores, T.D. O'Rourke, M. Shinozuka, T.T. Soong, C-H. Loh, K-C. Chang, Z-J. Chen, J-S. Hwang, M-L. Lin, G-Y. Liu, K-C. Tsai, G.C. Yao and C-L. Yen, 4/30/00, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER "Seismi Retrofit of End-Sway Frames of Steel Dek-Truss Bridges with a Supplemental Tendon System: Experimental and Analytial Investigation," by G. Pekan, J.B. Mander and S.S. Chen, 7/1/00, (PB , A10, MF-A02). MCEER "Sliding Fragility of Unrestrained Equipment in Critial Failities," by W.H. Chong and T.T. Soong, 7/5/00, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Seismi Response of Reinfored Conrete Bridge Pier Walls in the Weak Diretion," by N. Abo-Shadi, M. Saiidi and D. Sanders, 7/17/00, (PB , A17, MF-A03). MCEER "Low-Cyle Fatigue Behavior of Longitudinal Reinforement in Reinfored Conrete Bridge Columns," by J. Brown and S.K. Kunnath, 7/23/00, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Soil Struture Interation of Bridges for Seismi Analysis," I. PoLam and H. Law, 9/25/00, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER "Proeedings of the First MCEER Workshop on Mitigation of Earthquake Disaster by Advaned Tehnologies (MEDAT-1), edited by M. Shinozuka, D.J. Inman and T.D. O'Rourke, 11/10/00, (PB , A14, MF-A03). MCEER "Development and Evaluation of Simplified Proedures for Analysis and Design of Buildings with Passive Energy Dissipation Systems, Revision 01," by O.M. Ramirez, M.C. Constantinou, C.A. Kirher, A.S. Whittaker, M.W. Johnson, J.D. Gomez and C. Chrysostomou, 11/16/01, (PB , A23, MF-A04). MCEER "Dynami Soil-Foundation-Struture Interation Analyses of Large Caissons," by C-Y. Chang, C-M. Mok, Z-L. Wang, R. Settgast, F. Waggoner, M.A. Kethum, H.M. Gonnermann and C-C. Chin, 12/30/00, (PB , A07, MF-A02). MCEER "Experimental Evaluation of Seismi Performane of Bridge Restrainers," by A.G. Vlassis, E.M. Maragakis and M. Saiid Saiidi, 12/30/00, (PB , A09, MF-A02). MCEER "Effet of Spatial Variation of Ground Motion on Highway Strutures," by M. Shinozuka, V. Saxena and G. Deodatis, 12/31/00, (PB , A13, MF-A03). MCEER "A Risk-Based Methodology for Assessing the Seismi Performane of Highway Systems," by S.D. Werner, C.E. Taylor, J.E. Moore, II, J.S. Walton and S. Cho, 12/31/00, (PB , A14, MF-A03). 118

137 MCEER Experimental Investigation of P-Delta Effets to Collapse During Earthquakes, by D. Vian and M. Bruneau, 6/25/01, (PB , A17, MF-A03). MCEER Proeedings of the Seond MCEER Workshop on Mitigation of Earthquake Disaster by Advaned Tehnologies (MEDAT-2), edited by M. Bruneau and D.J. Inman, 7/23/01, (PB , A16, MF- A03). MCEER Sensitivity Analysis of Dynami Systems Subjeted to Seismi Loads, by C. Roth and M. Grigoriu, 9/18/01, (PB , A12, MF-A03). MCEER Overoming Obstales to Implementing Earthquake Hazard Mitigation Poliies: Stage 1 Report, by D.J. Alesh and W.J. Petak, 12/17/01, (PB , A07, MF-A02). MCEER Updating Real-Time Earthquake Loss Estimates: Methods, Problems and Insights, by C.E. Taylor, S.E. Chang and R.T. Eguhi, 12/17/01, (PB , A05, MF-A01). MCEER Experimental Investigation and Retrofit of Steel Pile Foundations and Pile Bents Under Cyli Lateral Loadings, by A. Shama, J. Mander, B. Blaba and S. Chen, 12/31/01, (PB , A13, MF-A03). MCEER Assessment of Performane of Bolu Viadut in the 1999 Duze Earthquake in Turkey by P.C. Roussis, M.C. Constantinou, M. Erdik, E. Durukal and M. Dileli, 5/8/02, (PB , A08, MF-A02). MCEER Seismi Behavior of Rail Counterweight Systems of Elevators in Buildings, by M.P. Singh, Rildova and L.E. Suarez, 5/27/02. (PB , A11, MF-A03). MCEER Development of Analysis and Design Proedures for Spread Footings, by G. Mylonakis, G. Gazetas, S. Nikolaou and A. Chauney, 10/02/02, (PB , A13, MF-A03, CD-A13). MCEER Bare-Earth Algorithms for Use with SAR and LIDAR Digital Elevation Models, by C.K. Huyk, R.T. Eguhi and B. Houshmand, 10/16/02, (PB , A07, CD-A07). MCEER Review of Energy Dissipation of Compression Members in Conentrially Braed Frames, by K.Lee and M. Bruneau, 10/18/02, (PB , A10, CD-A10). MCEER Experimental Investigation of Light-Gauge Steel Plate Shear Walls for the Seismi Retrofit of Buildings by J. Berman and M. Bruneau, 5/2/03, (PB , A10, MF-A03, CD-A10). MCEER Statistial Analysis of Fragility Curves, by M. Shinozuka, M.Q. Feng, H. Kim, T. Uzawa and T. Ueda, 6/16/03, (PB , A09, CD-A09). MCEER Proeedings of the Eighth U.S.-Japan Workshop on Earthquake Resistant Design f Lifeline Failities and Countermeasures Against Liquefation, edited by M. Hamada, J.P. Bardet and T.D. O Rourke, 6/30/03, (PB , A99, CD-A99). MCEER Proeedings of the PRC-US Workshop on Seismi Analysis and Design of Speial Bridges, edited by L.C. Fan and G.C. Lee, 7/15/03, (PB , A14, CD-A14). MCEER Urban Disaster Reovery: A Framework and Simulation Model, by S.B. Miles and S.E. Chang, 7/25/03, (PB , A07, CD-A07). MCEER Behavior of Underground Piping Joints Due to Stati and Dynami Loading, by R.D. Meis, M. Maragakis and R. Siddharthan, 11/17/03, (PB , A13, MF-A03, CD-A00). MCEER Experimental Study of Seismi Isolation Systems with Emphasis on Seondary System Response and Verifiation of Auray of Dynami Response History Analysis Methods, by E. Wolff and M. Constantinou, 1/16/04 (PB , A99, MF-E08, CD-A00). MCEER Tension, Compression and Cyli Testing of Engineered Cementitious Composite Materials, by K. Kesner and S.L. Billington, 3/1/04, (PB , A08, CD-A08). 119

138 MCEER Cyli Testing of Braes Laterally Restrained by Steel Studs to Enhane Performane During Earthquakes, by O.C. Celik, J.W. Berman and M. Bruneau, 3/16/04, (PB , A13, MF-A03, CD-A00). MCEER Methodologies for Post Earthquake Building Damage Detetion Using SAR and Optial Remote Sensing: Appliation to the August 17, 1999 Marmara, Turkey Earthquake, by C.K. Huyk, B.J. Adams, S. Cho, R.T. Eguhi, B. Mansouri and B. Houshmand, 6/15/04, (PB , A10, CD-A00). MCEER Nonlinear Strutural Analysis Towards Collapse Simulation: A Dynamial Systems Approah, by M.V. Sivaselvan and A.M. Reinhorn, 6/16/04, (PB , A11, MF-A03, CD-A00). MCEER Proeedings of the Seond PRC-US Workshop on Seismi Analysis and Design of Speial Bridges, edited by G.C. Lee and L.C. Fan, 6/25/04, (PB , A16, CD-A00). MCEER Seismi Vulnerability Evaluation of Axially Loaded Steel Built-up Laed Members, by K. Lee and M. Bruneau, 6/30/04, (PB , A16, CD-A00). MCEER Evaluation of Auray of Simplified Methods of Analysis and Design of Buildings with Damping Systems for Near-Fault and for Soft-Soil Seismi Motions, by E.A. Pavlou and M.C. Constantinou, 8/16/04, (PB , A08, MF-A02, CD-A00). MCEER Assessment of Geotehnial Issues in Aute Care Failities in California, by M. Lew, T.D. O Rourke, R. Dobry and M. Koh, 9/15/04, (PB , A08, CD-A00). MCEER Sissor-Jak-Damper Energy Dissipation System, by A.N. Sigaher-Boyle and M.C. Constantinou, 12/1/04 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Retrofit of Bridge Steel Truss Piers Using a Controlled Roking Approah, by M. Pollino and M. Bruneau, 12/20/04 (PB ). MCEER Experimental and Analytial Studies of Strutures Seismially Isolated with an Uplift-Restraint Isolation System, by P.C. Roussis and M.C. Constantinou, 1/10/05 (PB ). MCEER A Versatile Experimentation Model for Study of Strutures Near Collapse Applied to Seismi Evaluation of Irregular Strutures, by D. Kusumastuti, A.M. Reinhorn and A. Rutenberg, 3/31/05 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the Third PRC-US Workshop on Seismi Analysis and Design of Speial Bridges, edited by L.C. Fan and G.C. Lee, 4/20/05, (PB ). MCEER Approahes for the Seismi Retrofit of Braed Steel Bridge Piers and Proof-of-Conept Testing of an Eentrially Braed Frame with Tubular Link, by J.W. Berman and M. Bruneau, 4/21/05 (PB ). MCEER Simulation of Strong Ground Motions for Seismi Fragility Evaluation of Nonstrutural Components in Hospitals, by A. Wanitkorkul and A. Filiatrault, 5/26/05 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Safety in California Hospitals: Assessing an Attempt to Aelerate the Replaement or Seismi Retrofit of Older Hospital Failities, by D.J. Alesh, L.A. Arendt and W.J. Petak, 6/6/05 (PB ). MCEER Development of Seismi Strengthening and Retrofit Strategies for Critial Failities Using Engineered Cementitious Composite Materials, by K. Kesner and S.L. Billington, 8/29/05 (PB ). MCEER Experimental and Analytial Studies of Base Isolation Systems for Seismi Protetion of Power Transformers, by N. Murota, M.Q. Feng and G-Y. Liu, 9/30/05 (PB ). MCEER D-BASIS-ME-MB: Computer Program for Nonlinear Dynami Analysis of Seismially Isolated Strutures, by P.C. Tsopelas, P.C. Roussis, M.C. Constantinou, R. Buhanan and A.M. Reinhorn, 10/3/05 (PB ). MCEER Steel Plate Shear Walls for Seismi Design and Retrofit of Building Strutures, by D. Vian and M. Bruneau, 12/15/05 (PB ). 120

139 MCEER The Performane-Based Design Paradigm, by M.J. Astrella and A. Whittaker, 12/15/05 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Fragility of Suspended Ceiling Systems, H. Badillo-Almaraz, A.S. Whittaker, A.M. Reinhorn and G.P. Cimellaro, 2/4/06 (PB ). MCEER Multi-Dimensional Fragility of Strutures, by G.P. Cimellaro, A.M. Reinhorn and M. Bruneau, 3/1/06 (PB , A09, MF-A02, CD A00). MCEER Built-Up Shear Links as Energy Dissipators for Seismi Protetion of Bridges, by P. Dusika, A.M. Itani and I.G. Bukle, 3/15/06 (PB ). MCEER Analytial Investigation of the Strutural Fuse Conept, by R.E. Vargas and M. Bruneau, 3/16/06 (PB ). MCEER Experimental Investigation of the Strutural Fuse Conept, by R.E. Vargas and M. Bruneau, 3/17/06 (PB ). MCEER Further Development of Tubular Eentrially Braed Frame Links for the Seismi Retrofit of Braed Steel Truss Bridge Piers, by J.W. Berman and M. Bruneau, 3/27/06 (PB ). MCEER REDARS Validation Report, by S. Cho, C.K. Huyk, S. Ghosh and R.T. Eguhi, 8/8/06 (PB ). MCEER Review of Current NDE Tehnologies for Post-Earthquake Assessment of Retrofitted Bridge Columns, by J.W. Song, Z. Liang and G.C. Lee, 8/21/06 (PB ). MCEER Liquefation Remediation in Silty Soils Using Dynami Compation and Stone Columns, by S. Thevanayagam, G.R. Martin, R. Nashed, T. Shenthan, T. Kanagalingam and N. Eemis, 8/28/06 (PB ). MCEER Coneptual Design and Experimental Investigation of Polymer Matrix Composite Infill Panels for Seismi Retrofitting, by W. Jung, M. Chiewanihakorn and A.J. Aref, 9/21/06 (PB ). MCEER A Study of the Coupled Horizontal-Vertial Behavior of Elastomeri and Lead-Rubber Seismi Isolation Bearings, by G.P. Warn and A.S. Whittaker, 9/22/06 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the Fourth PRC-US Workshop on Seismi Analysis and Design of Speial Bridges: Advaning Bridge Tehnologies in Researh, Design, Constrution and Preservation, Edited by L.C. Fan, G.C. Lee and L. Ziang, 10/12/06 (PB ). MCEER Cyli Response and Low Cyle Fatigue Charateristis of Plate Steels, by P. Dusika, A.M. Itani and I.G. Bukle, 11/1/06 06 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the Seond US-Taiwan Bridge Engineering Workshop, edited by W.P. Yen, J. Shen, J-Y. Chen and M. Wang, 11/15/06 (PB ). MCEER User Manual and Tehnial Doumentation for the REDARS TM Import Wizard, by S. Cho, S. Ghosh, C.K. Huyk and S.D. Werner, 11/30/06 (PB ). MCEER Hazard Mitigation Strategy and Monitoring Tehnologies for Urban and Infrastruture Publi Buildings: Proeedings of the China-US Workshops, edited by X.Y. Zhou, A.L. Zhang, G.C. Lee and M. Tong, 12/12/06 (PB ). MCEER Stati and Kineti Coeffiients of Frition for Rigid Bloks, by C. Kafali, S. Fathali, M. Grigoriu and A.S. Whittaker, 3/20/07 (PB ). MCEER Hazard Mitigation Investment Deision Making: Organizational Response to Legislative Mandate, by L.A. Arendt, D.J. Alesh and W.J. Petak, 4/9/07 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Behavior of Bidiretional-Resistant Dutile End Diaphragms with Unbonded Braes in Straight or Skewed Steel Bridges, by O. Celik and M. Bruneau, 4/11/07 (PB ). 121

140 MCEER Modeling Pile Behavior in Large Pile Groups Under Lateral Loading, by A.M. Dodds and G.R. Martin, 4/16/07(PB ). MCEER Experimental Investigation of Blast Performane of Seismially Resistant Conrete-Filled Steel Tube Bridge Piers, by S. Fujikura, M. Bruneau and D. Lopez-Garia, 4/20/07 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Analysis of Conventional and Isolated Liquefied Natural Gas Tanks Using Mehanial Analogs, by I.P. Christovasilis and A.S. Whittaker, 5/1/07, not available. MCEER Experimental Seismi Performane Evaluation of Isolation/Restraint Systems for Mehanial Equipment Part 1: Heavy Equipment Study, by S. Fathali and A. Filiatrault, 6/6/07 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Vulnerability of Timber Bridges and Timber Substrutures, by A.A. Sharma, J.B. Mander, I.M. Friedland and D.R. Alliok, 6/7/07 (PB ). MCEER Experimental and Analytial Study of the XY-Frition Pendulum (XY-FP) Bearing for Bridge Appliations, by C.C. Marin-Artieda, A.S. Whittaker and M.C. Constantinou, 6/7/07 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the PRC-US Earthquake Engineering Forum for Young Researhers, Edited by G.C. Lee and X.Z. Qi, 6/8/07 (PB ). MCEER Design Reommendations for Perforated Steel Plate Shear Walls, by R. Purba and M. Bruneau, 6/18/07, (PB ). MCEER Performane of Seismi Isolation Hardware Under Servie and Seismi Loading, by M.C. Constantinou, A.S. Whittaker, Y. Kalpakidis, D.M. Fenz and G.P. Warn, 8/27/07, (PB ). MCEER Experimental Evaluation of the Seismi Performane of Hospital Piping Subassemblies, by E.R. Goodwin, E. Maragakis and A.M. Itani, 9/4/07, (PB ). MCEER A Simulation Model of Urban Disaster Reovery and Resiliene: Implementation for the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, by S. Miles and S.E. Chang, 9/7/07, (PB ). MCEER Statistial and Mehanisti Fragility Analysis of Conrete Bridges, by M. Shinozuka, S. Banerjee and S-H. Kim, 9/10/07, (PB ). MCEER Three-Dimensional Modeling of Inelasti Bukling in Frame Strutures, by M. Shahter and AM. Reinhorn, 9/13/07, (PB ). MCEER Modeling of Seismi Wave Sattering on Pile Groups and Caissons, by I. Po Lam, H. Law and C.T. Yang, 9/17/07 (PB ). MCEER Bridge Foundations: Modeling Large Pile Groups and Caissons for Seismi Design, by I. Po Lam, H. Law and G.R. Martin (Coordinating Author), 12/1/07 (PB ). MCEER Priniples and Performane of Roller Seismi Isolation Bearings for Highway Bridges, by G.C. Lee, Y.C. Ou, Z. Liang, T.C. Niu and J. Song, 12/10/07 (PB ). MCEER Centrifuge Modeling of Permeability and Pinning Reinforement Effets on Pile Response to Lateral Spreading, by L.L Gonzalez-Lagos, T. Abdoun and R. Dobry, 12/10/07 (PB ). MCEER Damage to the Highway System from the Piso, Perú Earthquake of August 15, 2007, by J.S. O Connor, L. Mesa and M. Nykamp, 12/10/07, (PB ). MCEER Experimental Seismi Performane Evaluation of Isolation/Restraint Systems for Mehanial Equipment Part 2: Light Equipment Study, by S. Fathali and A. Filiatrault, 12/13/07 (PB ). MCEER Fragility Considerations in Highway Bridge Design, by M. Shinozuka, S. Banerjee and S.H. Kim, 12/14/07 (PB ). 122

141 MCEER Performane Estimates for Seismially Isolated Bridges, by G.P. Warn and A.S. Whittaker, 12/30/07 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Performane of Steel Girder Bridge Superstrutures with Conventional Cross Frames, by L.P. Carden, A.M. Itani and I.G. Bukle, 1/7/08, (PB ). MCEER Seismi Performane of Steel Girder Bridge Superstrutures with Dutile End Cross Frames with Seismi Isolators, by L.P. Carden, A.M. Itani and I.G. Bukle, 1/7/08 (PB ). MCEER Analytial and Experimental Investigation of a Controlled Roking Approah for Seismi Protetion of Bridge Steel Truss Piers, by M. Pollino and M. Bruneau, 1/21/08 (PB ). MCEER Linking Lifeline Infrastruture Performane and Community Disaster Resiliene: Models and Multi- Stakeholder Proesses, by S.E. Chang, C. Pasion, K. Tatebe and R. Ahmad, 3/3/08 (PB ). MCEER Modal Analysis of Generally Damped Linear Strutures Subjeted to Seismi Exitations, by J. Song, Y-L. Chu, Z. Liang and G.C. Lee, 3/4/08 (PB ). MCEER System Performane Under Multi-Hazard Environments, by C. Kafali and M. Grigoriu, 3/4/08 (PB ). MCEER Mehanial Behavior of Multi-Spherial Sliding Bearings, by D.M. Fenz and M.C. Constantinou, 3/6/08 (PB ). MCEER Post-Earthquake Restoration of the Los Angeles Water Supply System, by T.H.P. Tabuhi and R.A. Davidson, 3/7/08 (PB ). MCEER Fragility Analysis of Water Supply Systems, by A. Jaobson and M. Grigoriu, 3/10/08 (PB ). MCEER Experimental Investigation of Full-Sale Two-Story Steel Plate Shear Walls with Redued Beam Setion Connetions, by B. Qu, M. Bruneau, C-H. Lin and K-C. Tsai, 3/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Evaluation and Rehabilitation of Critial Components of Eletrial Power Systems, S. Ersoy, B. Feizi, A. Ashrafi and M. Ala Saadeghvaziri, 3/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Behavior and Design of Boundary Frame Members of Steel Plate Shear Walls, by B. Qu and M. Bruneau, 4/26/08. (PB ). MCEER Development and Appraisal of a Numerial Cyli Loading Protool for Quantifying Building System Performane, by A. Filiatrault, A. Wanitkorkul and M. Constantinou, 4/27/08 (PB ). MCEER Strutural and Nonstrutural Earthquake Design: The Challenge of Integrating Speialty Areas in Designing Complex, Critial Failities, by W.J. Petak and D.J. Alesh, 4/30/08 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Performane Evaluation of Water Systems, by Y. Wang and T.D. O Rourke, 5/5/08 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Response Modeling of Water Supply Systems, by P. Shi and T.D. O Rourke, 5/5/08 (PB ). MCEER Numerial and Experimental Studies of Self-Centering Post-Tensioned Steel Frames, by D. Wang and A. Filiatrault, 5/12/08 (PB ). MCEER Development, Implementation and Verifiation of Dynami Analysis Models for Multi-Spherial Sliding Bearings, by D.M. Fenz and M.C. Constantinou, 8/15/08 (PB ). MCEER Performane Assessment of Conventional and Base Isolated Nulear Power Plants for Earthquake Blast Loadings, by Y.N. Huang, A.S. Whittaker and N. Luo, 10/28/08 (PB ). 123

142 MCEER Remote Sensing for Resilient Multi-Hazard Disaster Response Volume I: Introdution to Damage Assessment Methodologies, by B.J. Adams and R.T. Eguhi, 11/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Remote Sensing for Resilient Multi-Hazard Disaster Response Volume II: Counting the Number of Collapsed Buildings Using an Objet-Oriented Analysis: Case Study of the 2003 Bam Earthquake, by L. Gusella, C.K. Huyk and B.J. Adams, 11/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Remote Sensing for Resilient Multi-Hazard Disaster Response Volume III: Multi-Sensor Image Fusion Tehniques for Robust Neighborhood-Sale Urban Damage Assessment, by B.J. Adams and A. MMillan, 11/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Remote Sensing for Resilient Multi-Hazard Disaster Response Volume IV: A Study of Multi-Temporal and Multi-Resolution SAR Imagery for Post-Katrina Flood Monitoring in New Orleans, by A. MMillan, J.G. Morley, B.J. Adams and S. Chesworth, 11/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Remote Sensing for Resilient Multi-Hazard Disaster Response Volume V: Integration of Remote Sensing Imagery and VIEWS TM Field Data for Post-Hurriane Charley Building Damage Assessment, by J.A. Womble, K. Mehta and B.J. Adams, 11/17/08 (PB ). MCEER Building Inventory Compilation for Disaster Management: Appliation of Remote Sensing and Statistial Modeling, by P. Sarabandi, A.S. Kiremidjian, R.T. Eguhi and B. J. Adams, 11/20/08 (PB ). MCEER New Experimental Capabilities and Loading Protools for Seismi Qualifiation and Fragility Assessment of Nonstrutural Systems, by R. Retamales, G. Mosqueda, A. Filiatrault and A. Reinhorn, 11/24/08 (PB ). MCEER Effets of Heating and Load History on the Behavior of Lead-Rubber Bearings, by I.V. Kalpakidis and M.C. Constantinou, 12/1/08 (PB ). MCEER Experimental and Analytial Investigation of Blast Performane of Seismially Resistant Bridge Piers, by S.Fujikura and M. Bruneau, 12/8/08 (PB ). MCEER Evolutionary Methodology for Aseismi Deision Support, by Y. Hu and G. Dargush, 12/15/08. MCEER Development of a Steel Plate Shear Wall Bridge Pier System Coneived from a Multi-Hazard Perspetive, by D. Keller and M. Bruneau, 12/19/08 (PB ). MCEER Modal Analysis of Arbitrarily Damped Three-Dimensional Linear Strutures Subjeted to Seismi Exitations, by Y.L. Chu, J. Song and G.C. Lee, 1/31/09 (PB ). MCEER Air-Blast Effets on Strutural Shapes, by G. Ballantyne, A.S. Whittaker, A.J. Aref and G.F. Dargush, 2/2/09 (PB ). MCEER Water Supply Performane During Earthquakes and Extreme Events, by A.L. Bonneau and T.D. O Rourke, 2/16/09 (PB ). MCEER Generalized Linear (Mixed) Models of Post-Earthquake Ignitions, by R.A. Davidson, 7/20/09 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Testing of a Full-Sale Two-Story Light-Frame Wood Building: NEESWood Benhmark Test, by I.P. Christovasilis, A. Filiatrault and A. Wanitkorkul, 7/22/09 (PB ). MCEER IDARC2D Version 7.0: A Program for the Inelasti Damage Analysis of Strutures, by A.M. Reinhorn, H. Roh, M. Sivaselvan, S.K. Kunnath, R.E. Valles, A. Madan, C. Li, R. Lobo and Y.J. Park, 7/28/09 (PB ). MCEER Enhanements to Hospital Resilieny: Improving Emergeny Planning for and Response to Hurrianes, by D.B. Hess and L.A. Arendt, 7/30/09 (PB ). 124

143 MCEER Assessment of Base-Isolated Nulear Strutures for Design and Beyond-Design Basis Earthquake Shaking, by Y.N. Huang, A.S. Whittaker, R.P. Kennedy and R.L. Mayes, 8/20/09 (PB ). MCEER Quantifiation of Disaster Resiliene of Health Care Failities, by G.P. Cimellaro, C. Fumo, A.M Reinhorn and M. Bruneau, 9/14/09 (PB ). MCEER Performane-Based Assessment and Design of Squat Reinfored Conrete Shear Walls, by C.K. Gule and A.S. Whittaker, 9/15/09 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the Fourth US-Taiwan Bridge Engineering Workshop, edited by W.P. Yen, J.J. Shen, T.M. Lee and R.B. Zheng, 10/27/09 (PB ). MCEER Proeedings of the Speial International Workshop on Seismi Connetion Details for Segmental Bridge Constrution, edited by W. Phillip Yen and George C. Lee, 12/21/09 (PB ). MCEER Diret Displaement Proedure for Performane-Based Seismi Design of Multistory Woodframe Strutures, by W. Pang and D. Rosowsky, 4/26/10 (PB ). MCEER Simplified Diret Displaement Design of Six-Story NEESWood Capstone Building and Pre-Test Seismi Performane Assessment, by W. Pang, D. Rosowsky, J. van de Lindt and S. Pei, 5/28/10 (PB ). MCEER Integration of Seismi Protetion Systems in Performane-Based Seismi Design of Woodframed Strutures, by J.K. Shinde and M.D. Symans, 6/18/10 (PB ). MCEER Modeling and Seismi Evaluation of Nonstrutural Components: Testing Frame for Experimental Evaluation of Suspended Ceiling Systems, by A.M. Reinhorn, K.P. Ryu and G. Maddaloni, 6/30/10 (PB ). MCEER Analytial Development and Experimental Validation of a Strutural-Fuse Bridge Pier Conept, by S. El- Bahey and M. Bruneau, 10/1/10 (PB ). MCEER A Framework for Defining and Measuring Resiliene at the Community Sale: The PEOPLES Resiliene Framework, by C.S. Renshler, A.E. Frazier, L.A. Arendt, G.P. Cimellaro, A.M. Reinhorn and M. Bruneau, 10/8/10 (PB ). MCEER Impat of Horizontal Boundary Elements Design on Seismi Behavior of Steel Plate Shear Walls, by R. Purba and M. Bruneau, 11/14/10 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Testing of a Full-Sale Mid-Rise Building: The NEESWood Capstone Test, by S. Pei, J.W. van de Lindt, S.E. Pryor, H. Shimizu, H. Isoda and D.R. Rammer, 12/1/10 (PB ). MCEER Modeling the Effets of Detonations of High Explosives to Inform Blast-Resistant Design, by P. Sherkar, A.S. Whittaker and A.J. Aref, 12/1/10 (PB ). MCEER L Aquila Earthquake of April 6, 2009 in Italy: Rebuilding a Resilient City to Withstand Multiple Hazards, by G.P. Cimellaro, I.P. Christovasilis, A.M. Reinhorn, A. De Stefano and T. Kirova, 12/29/10. MCEER Numerial and Experimental Investigation of the Seismi Response of Light-Frame Wood Strutures, by I.P. Christovasilis and A. Filiatrault, 8/8/11 (PB ). MCEER Seismi Design and Analysis of a Preast Segmental Conrete Bridge Model, by M. Anagnostopoulou, A. Filiatrault and A. Aref, 9/15/11. MCEER Proeedings of the Workshop on Improving Earthquake Response of Substation Equipment, Edited by A.M. Reinhorn, 9/19/11 (PB ). MCEER LRFD-Based Analysis and Design Proedures for Bridge Bearings and Seismi Isolators, by M.C. Constantinou, I. Kalpakidis, A. Filiatrault and R.A. Eker Lay, 9/26/

144 MCEER Experimental Seismi Evaluation, Model Parameterization, and Effets of Cold-Formed Steel-Framed Gypsum Partition Walls on the Seismi Performane of an Essential Faility, by R. Davies, R. Retamales, G. Mosqueda and A. Filiatrault, 10/12/11. MCEER Modeling and Seismi Performane Evaluation of High Voltage Transformers and Bushings, by A.M. Reinhorn, K. Oikonomou, H. Roh, A. Shiff and L. Kempner, Jr., 10/3/11. MCEER Extreme Load Combinations: A Survey of State Bridge Engineers, by G.C. Lee, Z. Liang, J.J. Shen and J.S. O Connor, 10/14/11. MCEER Simplified Analysis Proedures in Support of Performane Based Seismi Design, by Y.N. Huang and A.S. Whittaker. MCEER Seismi Protetion of Eletrial Transformer Bushing Systems by Stiffening Tehniques, by M. Koliou, A. Filiatrault, A.M. Reinhorn and N. Oliveto, 6/1/12. MCEER Post-Earthquake Bridge Inspetion Guidelines, by J.S. O Connor and S. Alampalli, 6/8/12. MCEER Integrated Design Methodology for Isolated Floor Systems in Single-Degree-of-Freedom Strutural Fuse Systems, by S. Cui, M. Bruneau and M.C. Constantinou, 6/13/12. MCEER Charaterizing the Rotational Components of Earthquake Ground Motion, by D. Basu, A.S. Whittaker and M.C. Constantinou, 6/15/12. MCEER Bayesian Fragility for Nonstrutural Systems, by C.H. Lee and M.D. Grigoriu, 9/12/12. MCEER A Numerial Model for Capturing the In-Plane Seismi Response of Interior Metal Stud Partition Walls, by R.L. Wood and T.C. Huthinson, 9/12/12. MCEER Assessment of Floor Aelerations in Yielding Buildings, by J.D. Wieser, G. Pekan, A.E. Zaghi, A.M. Itani and E. Maragakis, 10/5/12. MCEER Experimental Seismi Study of Pressurized Fire Sprinkler Piping Systems, by Y. Tian, A. Filiatrault and G. Mosqueda, 4/8/13. MCEER Enhaning Resoure Coordination for Multi-Modal Evauation Planning, by D.B. Hess, B.W. Conley and C.M. Farrell, 2/8/13. MCEER Seismi Response of Base Isolated Buildings Considering Pounding to Moat Walls, by A. Masroor and G. Mosqueda, 2/26/13. MCEER Seismi Response Control of Strutures Using a Novel Adaptive Passive Negative Stiffness Devie, by D.T.R. Pasala, A.A. Sarlis, S. Nagarajaiah, A.M. Reinhorn, M.C. Constantinou and D.P. Taylor, 6/10/13. MCEER Negative Stiffness Devie for Seismi Protetion of Strutures, by A.A. Sarlis, D.T.R. Pasala, M.C. Constantinou, A.M. Reinhorn, S. Nagarajaiah and D.P. Taylor, 6/12/13. MCEER Emilia Earthquake of May 20, 2012 in Northern Italy: Rebuilding a Resilient Community to Withstand Multiple Hazards, by G.P. Cimellaro, M. Chiriatti, A.M. Reinhorn and L. Tira, June 30, MCEER Preast Conrete Segmental Components and Systems for Aelerated Bridge Constrution in Seismi Regions, by A.J. Aref, G.C. Lee, Y.C. Ou and P. Sideris, with ontributions from K.C. Chang, S. Chen, A. Filiatrault and Y. Zhou, June 13, MCEER A Study of U.S. Bridge Failures ( ), by G.C. Lee, S.B. Mohan, C. Huang and B.N. Fard, June 15, MCEER Development of a Database Framework for Modeling Damaged Bridges, by G.C. Lee, J.C. Qi and C. Huang, June 16,

145 MCEER Model of Triple Frition Pendulum Bearing for General Geometri and Fritional Parameters and for Uplift Conditions, by A.A. Sarlis and M.C. Constantinou, July 1, MCEER Shake Table Testing of Triple Frition Pendulum Isolators under Extreme Conditions, by A.A. Sarlis, M.C. Constantinou and A.M. Reinhorn, July 2, MCEER Theoretial Framework for the Development of MH-LRFD, by G.C. Lee (oordinating author), H.A Capers, Jr., C. Huang, J.M. Kuliki, Z. Liang, T. Murphy, J.J.D. Shen, M. Shinozuka and P.W.H. Yen, July 31, MCEER Seismi Protetion of Highway Bridges with Negative Stiffness Devies, by N.K.A. Attary, M.D. Symans, S. Nagarajaiah, A.M. Reinhorn, M.C. Constantinou, A.A. Sarlis, D.T.R. Pasala, and D.P. Taylor, September 3, MCEER Simplified Seismi Collapse Capaity-Based Evaluation and Design of Frame Buildings with and without Supplemental Damping Systems, by M. Hamidia, A. Filiatrault, and A. Aref, May 19, MCEER Comprehensive Analytial Seismi Fragility of Fire Sprinkler Piping Systems, by Siavash Soroushian, Emmanuel Manos Maragakis, Arash E. Zaghi, Aliia Ehevarria, Yuan Tian and Andre Filiatrault, August 26, MCEER Hybrid Simulation of the Seismi Response of a Steel Moment Frame Building Struture through Collapse, by M. Del Carpio Ramos, G. Mosqueda and D.G. Lignos, Otober 30, MCEER Blast and Seismi Resistant Conrete-Filled Double Skin Tubes and Modified Steel Jaketed Bridge Columns, by P.P. Fouhe and M. Bruneau, June 30, MCEER Seismi Performane of Steel Plate Shear Walls Considering Various Design Approahes, by R. Purba and M. Bruneau, Otober 31, MCEER Air-Blast Effets on Civil Strutures, by Jinwon Shin, Andrew S. Whittaker, Amjad J. Aref and David Cormie, Otober 30, MCEER Seismi Performane Evaluation of Preast Girders with Field-Cast Ultra High Performane Conrete (UHPC) Connetions, by G.C. Lee, C. Huang, J. Song, and J. S. O Connor, July 31, MCEER Post-Earthquake Fire Resistane of Dutile Conrete-Filled Double-Skin Tube Columns, by Reza Imani, Gilberto Mosqueda and Mihel Bruneau, Deember 1, MCEER Cyli Inelasti Behavior of Conrete Filled Sandwih Panel Walls Subjeted to In-Plane Flexure, by Y. Alzeni and M. Bruneau, Deember 19, MCEER Analytial and Experimental Investigation of Self-Centering Steel Plate Shear Walls, by D.M. Dowden and M. Bruneau, Deember 19, MCEER Seismi Analysis of Multi story Unreinfored Masonry Buildings with Flexible Diaphragms, by J. Aleman, G. Mosqueda and A.S. Whittaker, June 12, MCEER Site Response, Soil-Struture Interation and Struture-Soil-Struture Interation for Performane Assessment of Buildings and Nulear Strutures, by C. Bolisetti and A.S. Whittaker, June 15, MCEER Stress Wave Attenuation in Solids for Mitigating Impulsive Loadings, by R. Rafiee-Dehkharghani, A.J. Aref and G. Dargush, August 15, MCEER Computational, Analytial, and Experimental Modeling of Masonry Strutures, by K.M. Dolatshahi and A.J. Aref, November 16, MCEER Property Modifiation Fators for Seismi Isolators: Design Guidane for Buildings, by W.J. MVitty and M.C. Constantinou, June 30,

146 MCEER Seismi Isolation of Nulear Power Plants using Sliding Bearings, by Manish Kumar, Andrew S. Whittaker and Mihael C. Constantinou, Deember 27, MCEER Quintuple Frition Pendulum Isolator Behavior, Modeling and Validation, by Donghun Lee and Mihael C. Constantinou, Deember 28, MCEER Seismi Isolation of Nulear Power Plants using Elastomeri Bearings, by Manish Kumar, Andrew S. Whittaker and Mihael C. Constantinou, Deember 29, MCEER Experimental, Numerial and Analytial Studies on the Seismi Response of Steel-Plate Conrete (SC) Composite Shear Walls, by Siamak Epakahi and Andrew S. Whittaker, June 15, MCEER Seismi Demand in Columns of Steel Frames, by Lisa Shrestha and Mihel Bruneau, June 17, MCEER Development and Evaluation of Proedures for Analysis and Design of Buildings with Fluidi Self- Centering Systems by Shoma Kitayama and Mihael C. Constantinou, July 21, MCEER Real Time Control of Shake Tables for Nonlinear Hystereti Systems, by Ki Pung Ryu and Andrei M. Reinhorn, Otober 22, MCEER Seismi Isolation of High Voltage Eletrial Power Transformers, by Kostis Oikonomou, Mihael C. Constantinou, Andrei M. Reinhorn and Leon Kemper, Jr., November 2, MCEER Open Spae Damping System Theory and Experimental Validation, by Erkan Polat and Mihael C. Constantinou, Deember 13, MCEER Seismi Response of Low Aspet Ratio Reinfored Conrete Walls for Buildings and Safety-Related Nulear Appliations, by Bismark N. Luna and Andrew S. Whittaker. MCEER Bukling Restrained Braes Appliations for Superstruture and Substruture Protetion in Bridges, by Xiaone Wei and Mihel Bruneau, Deember 28, MCEER Proedures and Results of Assessment of Seismi Performane of Seismially Isolated Eletrial Transformers with Due Consideration for Vertial Isolation and Vertial Ground Motion Effets, by Shoma Kitayama, Mihael C. Constantinou and Donghun Lee, Deember 31, MCEER Diagonal Tension Field Inlination Angle in Steel Plate Shear Walls, by Yushan Fu, Fangbo Wang and Mihel Bruneau, February 10, MCEER Behavior of Steel Plate Shear Walls Subjeted to Long Duration Earthquakes, by Ramla Qureshi and Mihel Bruneau, September 1, MCEER Response of Steel-plate Conrete (SC) Wall Piers to Combined In-plane and Out-of-plane Seismi Loadings, by Brian Terranova, Andrew S. Whittaker, Siamak Epakahi and Nebojsa Orbovi, July 17,

147

148 University at Buffalo, The State University of New York 133A Ketter Hall Buffalo, New York Phone: (716) Fax: (716) Web: ISSN X