Stochastic Response Analysis of Connected Buildings against Random Earthquake using SMA and Yield Damper

IJEP 42(13): 1539-1547 : Vol. 42 Issue. 13 (Conference 2022)

K. Jonas Sama, Shyam Kumar and Sourav Gur*

Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Patna – 801 106, Bihar, India


The current research focuses on the seismic response control effectiveness of SMA damper over a yield damper while linking two neighbouring structures (stiff and flexible). In this study, stochastic response analysis was carried out for a random earthquake simulated using Kanai-Tajimi power spectra. For yield/SMA damper linked structure to disconnected structure, the root mean square (RMS) floor acceleration and displacement ratios are computed as response quantities. It has been discovered that a certain amount of damper normalised strength decreases the reactions. Furthermore, SMA dampers minimise both the stiff building acceleration and the flexible building displacement, which yield dampers do not. To illustrate the robust and better control efficiency of the SMA damper over the yield damper, various building parameters (time period, frequency ratio and damping ratio) and diverse seismic loading situations (intensity and frequency) were used. This research revealed that the SMA damper decreases the RMS acceleration ratio by 33% for flexible buildings and 35% for stiff buildings when compared to the yield damper. In addition, as compared to the yield damper, the SMA damper reduces RMS displacement by 35% for flexible buildings and 32% for rigid buildings. As a result, for seismic vibration management of linked structures, SMA dampers outperform yield dampers.


Stochastic analysis, Shape memory alloys, Connected buildings, Dampers


  1. Matsagar, V.A. and R.S. Jangid. 2005. Viscoelastic damper connected to adjacent structures involving seismic isolation. J. Civil Eng. Manage., 11(4): 309-322.
  2. Bhaskararao, A.V. and R.S. Jangid. 2006. Harmonic response of adjacent structures connected with a friction damper. J. Sound. Vib., 292(3-5): 710-725.
  3. Bhaskararao, A.V. and R.S. Jangid. 2006. Seismic response of adjacent buildings connected with friction dampers. Bull. Earthquake Eng., 4(1): 43-64.
  4. Matsagar, V.A. and R.S. Jangid. 2006. Base-isolated building connected to adjacent building using viscous dampers. Bull. NZ Natl. Soc. Earthquake Eng., 39(1): 59-80.
  5. Takewaki, I. 2007. Earthquake input energy to two buildings connected by viscous dampers. J. Struct. Eng., 133(5): 620-628.
  6. Ge, D.D., et al. 2010. Seismic response analysis of damper-connected adjacent structures with stochastic parameters. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A. 11(6): 402-414.
  7. Paola, M.D., L.L. Mendola and G. Navarra. 2007. Stochastic seismic analysis of structures with non-linear viscous dampers. J. Struct. Eng., 133(10): 1475-1478.
  8. Paola, M.D. and G. Navarra. 2009. Stochastic seismic analysis of MDOF structures with non-linear viscous dampers. Struct. Control Health Monit., 16: 303-318.
  9. Patel, C.C. and R.S. Jangid. 2012. Optimum parameter of viscous damper for damped adjacent coupled system. J. Civil Eng. Sci., 1(1): 22-30.
  10. Patel, C.C. and R.S. Jangid. 2010. Seismic response of adjacent structures connected with Maxwell dampers. Asian J. Civil Eng., 11(5): 585-603.
  11. Ni, Y.Q., J.M. Ko and Z.G. Ying. 2001. Random seismic response analysis of adjacent buildings coupled with non-linear hysteretic dampers. J. Sound Vib., 246(3): 403-417.
  12. Mualla, I.H. and B. Belev. 2002. Performance of steel frames with a new friction damper device under earthquake excitation. Eng. Struct., 24(3): 365-371.
  13. Bhaskararao, A.V. and R.S. Jangid. 2006. Seismic analysis of structures connected structures with friction dampers. Eng. Struct., 28(5): 690-703.
  14. Gur, S., S.K. Mishra and K. Roy. 2016. Stochastic seismic response of building with super-elastic damper. Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 72: 642-659.
  15. Gur, S., S.K. Mishra and G.N. Frantziskonis. 2016. Thermo-mechanical strain rate-dependent behaviour of shape memory alloys as vibration dampers and comparison to conventional dampers. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., 27(9): 1250-1264.
  16. Gur, S. and G.N. Frantziskonis. 2021. Design of porous and graded NiTi smart energy absorbers considering synthetic uncertainty in parameters. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., 32(16): 1759-1780.
  17. Gur, S., Y. Xie and R. DesRoches. 2019. Seismic fragility analyses of steel building frames installed with superelastic shape memory alloy dampers: Comparison with yielding dampers. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., 30(18-19): 2670-2687.
  18. Gur, S., K. Roy and P. Singh. 2022. Seismic performance assessment of adjacent building structures connected with superelastic shape memory alloy damper and comparison with yield damper. Struct. Control Health Monit., 29(5): e2926.
  19. Wen, Y.K. 1980. Equivalent linearization for hysteretic systems under random excitation. J. Appl. Mech., 47: 150-54.
  20. Yan, X. and J. Nie. 2000. Response of SMA superelastic systems under random excitation. J. Sound Vib., 238: 893-901.
  21. Grasser, E.J. and F.A. Cozzarelli. 1991. Shape memory alloys as new materials for a seismic isolation. J. Theor. Appl. Mech., 48: 135-153.
  22. Kanai, K. 1957. Semi-empirical formula for seismic characteristics of the ground. Bull. Earth. Res. Inst. Univ. Tokyo. 35: 309-325.
  23. Tajimi, H.A. 1960. Statistical method of determining the maximum response of a building structure during an earthquake. Proceedings on 2nd World conference in earthquake engineering. 11: 781-798.