Two types of spurious damping forces potentially modeled in numerical seismic nonlinear response history analysis

TL;DR

This paper clarifies two distinct types of spurious damping forces in nonlinear seismic response history analyses, emphasizing that models avoiding one type may still produce the other, impacting analysis accuracy.

Contribution

It characterizes and differentiates two types of spurious damping forces in nonlinear seismic analysis, highlighting their implications for damping model selection.

Findings

Different damping models can avoid one type of spurious damping but not the other.

Spurious damping forces arise from nonlinear structural modifications during seismic events.

Clarifies the importance of choosing appropriate damping models in nonlinear seismic analysis.

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide practitioners with further insight into spurious damping forces that can be generated in nonlinear seismic response history analyses (RHA). The term 'spurious' is used to refer to damping forces that are not present in an elastic system and appear as nonlinearities develop: such damping forces are not necessarily intended and appear as a result of modifications in the structural properties as it yields or damages due to the seismic action. In this paper, two types of spurious damping forces are characterized. Each type has often been treated separately in the literature, but each has been qualified as 'spurious', somehow blurring their differences. Consequently, in an effort to clarify the consequences of choosing a particular viscous damping model for nonlinear RHA, this paper shows that damping models that avoid spurious damping forces of one type do not necessarily avoid damping forces of the other type.