臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　減震系統的設計，常應用阻尼折減係數，其定義為單自由度結構5%阻尼比反應譜值與某目標阻尼比反應譜值之比。過去已有學者研究發現在近斷層地震作用下，阻尼折減係數和結構物之自然週期與近斷層地震脈衝週期之比值(T/Tp)有關，但現行規範之阻尼折減係數僅為阻尼比及結構週期之函數，並未特別考慮遠域與近斷層地震地表加速度歷時紀錄不同之特性。
　　本研究以一座安裝非線性液態黏性阻尼器的三層樓立體抗彎鋼構架進行振動台試驗，進而驗證阻尼折減係數與T/Tp之相關性，並配合SAP2000結構程式軟體進行數值分析。測試用之鋼構架未安裝阻尼器時第一模態自然週期約1秒。試驗結果證實近斷層地震脈衝週期Tp與結構物週期之比值確實會影響阻尼器對結構反應的折減效果。對於第一模態主控之結構物，當結構物週期接近脈衝週期時，阻尼器會有較好的地震反應折減效果，最佳地震反應折減落在T/Tp介於0.7至0.9之間。

　　Energy dissipation system is about a structure installed with dampers. These dampers raise the damping ratio and increase the energy dissipation capability of structure. In seismic design code, the damping reduction factor (DRF) is used to divide the 5% damped spectral value to obtain the spectral values corresponding to various damping ratios. Under the near-fault ground motion, the DRF has been discovered that it has a relationship with the vaule of T/Tp which is the ratio of natural period of a structure to the pulse period of near-fault ground motion.
　　In order to proof the correlation between DRF and T/Tp, this study would perform shaking table tests on a three-story steel structure with supplemental nonlinear viscous dampers. The natural period of first mode of the test structure was around 1 seconds. In addition, numerical analysis used SAP2000 to compare with experimental results.
　　The results show that T/Tp is an important parameter for DRF. When the T/Tp is close to 1, the dampers are more effective in reducing responses of displacement and acceleration. The range of T/Tp between 0.7 and 0.9 presents the most effective reduction.

誌謝 ………………………………………….………………………....………….i
摘要 ………………………………...…….....………………………….............iii
ABSTRACT ………………………………….…………………………...........v
目錄 ………………………...………….…………………………….............…vii
表目錄 ……………………………………...…..………………………….........xi
圖目錄 …………………………………….…….........………………………...xv
第一章 緒論 ……………………….…….…………...............……………..1
1.1 研究背景與目的 ……………………..……………………..…………..1
1.2 研究重點及內容 ……………………..………………………..………..2
1.3 論文結構 ……………………….……........………...............…………..2
第二章 文獻回顧 ……………………….…….…………………......……..3
2.1 前言 ……………………….……...……………...............………………..3
2.2 Somerville et al. (1997) ………….……...………....……………...3
2.3 Baker (2007) …………………….……...………………....………......4
2.4 Shahi and Baker (2014) …………….……...………..…………….7
2.5 台灣耐震設計規範 ……………………….……...……….....…….…..9
2.6 劉家仁(2015) ……………………….……...…………………….......10
2.7 游豐碩(2016) ……………………….……...…………………….......11
第三章 近斷層地震歷時之挑選與縮放 ……………......….……..25
3.1 試驗規劃階段之數值分析模型 …………….……...........……..25
3.2 近斷層地震歷時之挑選 ………………….......……………….…..26
3.3 近斷層地震歷時之縮放 …………………...……………….……..28
第四章 振動台試驗規劃 ……….……...……..............………….…..37
4.1 前言 ……………………….……...…………………...........................37
4.2 空構架之介紹 ……………………….……...…..….…………….......37
4.3 含阻尼器構架之介紹 ………………………..………………….…..38
4.4 地震模擬振動台 ……………………….……...……………….……..42
4.5 試驗感測計及佈設 ……………………….…..……………….……..42
4.6 試驗程序 ……………………….……...………..........…………….…..44
第五章 試驗結果與討論 ……………………….……..………...….…..63
5.1 前言 ……………………….……...……………………….............……..63
5.2 系統識別 ……………………….……...………………....…................63
5.3 結構物之基底剪力 ……………………….……...……..………..…..64
5.4 近斷層地震脈衝週期識別 ……………………….…...……….…..65
5.5 阻尼折減因子與近斷層地震脈衝週期之關係 ………….…..66
5.6 地震頻率影響結構物主控週期判定 ……………….……….…..67
5.7 試驗結果與游豐碩(2016)阻尼折減係數建議公式之比較.68
第六章 SAP2000數值模擬 ……………………….……......….….…..89
6.1 前言 ……………………….……...……………………………..........…..89
6.2 斜撐系統提供之側向勁度 ……………………….……...….……..89
6.3 模型修正 ……………………….……...…………….............….……..90
6.4 模擬結果與試驗結果之比較 …………………......……….……..92
6.5 提升最大地表速度至30 cm/s …………….……..……….……..94
第七章 結論與建議 ……………………….………………..……....…..115
7.1 結論 ……………………….……...…………...............…………..…...115
7.2 建議 ……………………….……...……………….....................……..116
參考文獻 ……………………….……..................……………….……..…..117
附錄A. 阻尼器性能測試程序 ....………….….........……….………....121
附錄B. 阻尼器試驗時出力與位移圖..…………….……….………....133
附錄C. 阻尼器試驗時出力與速度圖 .…………....……….………....143
附錄D. 對角斜撐裝置元件設計圖 ………………...…….…………....151
附錄E. 地表及各樓層X向加速度歷時 ……………....…………….....159
附錄F. 地表及各樓層X向位移歷時 …………………………….....169
附錄G. 使用各筆地震歷時系統識別結果 ……………………….....179

1. Akkar, S., Yazgan, U., and Gülkan, P. (2005). "Drift estimates in frame buildings subjected to near-fault ground motions. " Journal of Structural Engineering, 131(7), 1014-1024.
2. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2010). "Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures." ASCE/SEI 7-10, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
3. Baker, J. W. (2007). "Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(5), 1486-1501.
4. Fu, Q., and C. Menun (2004). "Seismic-environment-based simulation of near-fault ground motions." Proc., the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 1-15.
5. Howard, J. K., Tracy, C. A., and Burns, R. G. (2005). "Comparing observed and predicted directivity in near-source ground motion." Earthquake Spectra, 21(4), 1063-1092.
6. Mavroeidis, G. P., and Papageorgiou, A. S. (2003). "A Mathematical Representation of Near-Fault Ground Motions." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93(3), 1099-1131.
7. Newmark, N. M., and Hall, W. J. (1982). Earthquake Spectra and Design, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California, USA.
8. Ramirez, O. M., Constantinou, M. C., Whittaker, A. S., Kircher, C. A., and Chrysostomou, C. Z. (2002). "Elastic and inelastic seismic response of buildings with damping systems." Earthquake Spectra, 18(3), 531-547.
9. Seleemah, A.A., and Constantinou, M.C. (1997). Investigation of Seismic Response of Buildings with Linear and Nonlinear Fluid Viscous Dampers, Report No. NCEER-97-0004, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, New York.
10. Shahi, S. K., and Baker, J. W. (2014). "An Efficient Algorithm to Identify Strong‐Velocity Pulses in Multicomponent Ground Motions." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 104(5), 2456-2466.
11. Singh, J.P. (1985). "Earthquake ground motions: Implications for design structures and reconciling structural damage." Earthquake Spectra, 1(2), 239-270.
12. Somerville, P. G. (2003). "Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse." Physics of the earth and planetary interiors, 137(1), 201-212.
13. Somerville, P. G., Smith, N. F., Graves, R. W., and Abrahamson, N. A. (1997). "Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity." Seismological Research Letters, 68(1), 199-222.
14. Spudich, P., B. S. Chiou, R. W. Graves, K. R. Collins, and Somerville, P. G. (2004). "A formulation of directivity for earthquake sources using isochrone theory." U.S. Geological. Survey. Open-File Report 2004-1268, 1-54
15. Wald, D.J. and T.H. Heaton (1994). "Spatial and temporal distribution of stip for the 1992 Landers, California earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(3), 668-691.
16. Whittaker, Andrew and Constantinou, M.C. (2000). "Fluid Viscous Dampers for Building Construction." Proc., First International Symposium on Passive Control, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, 133-142
17. 內政部營建署 (2011)，「建築物耐震設計規範及解說」，台北，台灣。
18. 李昭逸 (2003)，「含黏性阻尼器減震結構之非彈性地震反應試驗與分析」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，黃震興教授指導，台北，台灣。
19. 林沛暘、羅俊雄、游信源、吳紀宏 (2006)，「標竿鋼結構樓房震動台試驗」， 國家地震工程研究中心，研究報告NCREE-06-020，台北，台灣。
20. 洪雅惠 (2002)，「含非線性黏性阻尼器結構之減震試驗與分析」國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，黃震興教授指導，台北，台灣。
21. 黃尹男 (2001)，「使用線性黏性阻尼器建築結構之耐震試驗與分析」國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，黃震興教授指導，台北，台灣。
22. 游豐碩 (2016).，「近斷層地震對結構減震系統效益之影響研究」國立台灣大學土木工程學研究所，碩士論文，黃尹男教授指導，台北，台灣。
23. 劉家仁 (2015)，「近斷層地震對結構隔減震系統效益之影響研究:單自由度系統」國立臺灣大學土木工程學研究所，碩士論文，黃尹男教授指導，台北，台灣。
24. 劉哲瑞 (2017)，「近斷層地震之速度脈衝週期研究」國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，黃震興教授指導，台北，台灣。