
doi: 10.1002/eqe.2978
handle: 11572/286183 , 20.500.11850/256221
SummaryAn argument of engineers and researchers against the use of rocking as a seismic response modification technique is that the rocking motion of a structure is chaotic and the existing models are incapable of predicting it well. This argument is supported by the documented inability of rocking models to predict the motion of a specimen excited by a single ground motion. A statistical comparison of the experimental and the numerical responses of a rigid rocking oscillator not to a specific ground motion, but to ensembles of ground motions that have the same statistical properties, is presented. It is shown that the simple analytical model proposed by Housner in 1963 is capable of predicting the statistics of seismic response of a rigid rocking oscillator.
model validation; overturning probability; rocking; shake table experiments; uplifting structures, Model validation; Overturning probability; Rocking; Shake table experiments; Uplifting structures
model validation; overturning probability; rocking; shake table experiments; uplifting structures, Model validation; Overturning probability; Rocking; Shake table experiments; Uplifting structures
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 120 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
