Discussion of “Simulating Maximum and Residual Displacements of RC Structures: I. Accuracy”

Abstract

(1) Tazarv and Saiidi state that a unique “best modeling approach” is not proposed in the paper. This is correct; proposing a “best modeling approach” is not intended in the papers. The papers are aimed at investigation of the capabilities and limitations of some common beam-column element modeling strategies. Consequently, development of an ultimate modeling strategy is beyond the scope of the investigation. The authors reviewed the paper once more but could not find any statements suggesting that an approach for accurate estimation of residual displacements is provided. Tazarv and Saiidi ask why the relationship between the small cycle hysteresis response and the bias in the simulated residual displacements is presented based on the results obtained using displacement-based elements and not using force-based elements. The importance of small cycle response is presented based on the measured and simulated response histories of column “A1” tested by Hachem et al. (2003) in Figures 7 and 8. For the test unit “A1,” the maximum and residual displacements obtained from the simulations made using displacement-based and force-based element formulations are marked using “•”symbol in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. In these figures, it can be seen that the maximum and residual displacement obtained using displacement-based and force-based formulations for test unit A1 are practically the same. Therefore, it can be deduced that a very similar plot would be obtained if force-based elements were used instead of displacement-based elements. In brief, the difference would be practically irrelevant for the considered test unit. (2) Tazarv and Saiidi argue that three references which were available at the time of submission of the paper were missed. They provide references to two reports (i.e., Jeong et al. 2008, Lee 2007) and a journal paper (Lee and Billington 2010). The article by Lee and Billington appeared on May 2010 issue of the relevant journal. The submission date of our paper was 7 February 2010 (which is indicated