Constructing design spectra that accurately quantify seismic input energy is a fundamental task in energy-based seismic design. Existing time-domain empirical methods often rely on extensive or region-specific seismic data regressions, deep learning-based approaches lack physical interpretability, and frequency-domain theoretical methods face challenges in explicitly incorporating the cumulative effects of strong-motion duration ( t D ). To address these limitations, this study proposes a code-compatible, time-domain semi-analytical framework that derives elastic and plastic input energy equivalent velocity spectra ( V EI,E -spectra and V EI,P -spectra) directly from the design acceleration response spectra ( S a ) and t D. This study originally formulates harmonic time-domain steady-state solutions that decompose input energy into peak-response and time-accumulative components. Serving as the foundation, these solutions are extended to seismic scenarios via an inter-spectral mapping coefficient, C E ( t D , T g , ζ ), which links S a to input energy. Introducing a medium-to-long period attenuation index γ 1 ( t D , T g , ζ ) and categorizing t D into three types enable the proposed method to successfully establish V EI,E -spectra explicitly tailored for the Chinese Code for Seismic Design of Buildings. The V EI,E -spectra are further converted into V EI,P -spectra via regression-based conversion equations. Ground motion effects are already captured, which is why this conversion is governed solely by structural parameters—specifically the strength reduction factor ( R ), post-yield stiffness ratio ( λ ), and damping ratio ( ζ )—ultimately establishing V EI,P -spectra compatible with the Chinese code. Finally, the practicality and accuracy of the proposed V EI,E -spectra and V EI,P -spectra for the Chinese code are validated through four sets of case studies. This methodology provides a practical tool for rapidly estimating structural input energy directly from seismic codes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: