台灣與東亞、東南亞各國位處環太平洋地震帶西側，每每於間隔一段長短不等的時間之後，便得再經歷一次災難性地震的洗禮。最近十年之內令人較為印象深刻的，有1995年日本阪神大地震，與1999年台灣921集集大地震。在這兩次地震之後的重建工作中，建築專業人員面臨到了許多共同的問題。其中之一是，建築師與結構技師們，必須對災後建築物殘餘耐震能力進行評估，以便作出修復、補強或拆除重建等等的建議。然而，目前國內外較為常用的耐震診斷方法，大多僅對建築物受損程度做定性分析，少有量化的研究，同時亦無法預測遭受數次地震搖撼後之結構體殘餘耐震能力。
　　有鑑於此，本研究將以簡易的靜態推垮理論及剪力房屋假設為基礎，並且以三分之一縮尺之振動台模型試驗結果作為校訂依據，對現今最常見之低層鋼筋混凝土造建築物，提出一套實用且較一般定性分析更為準確的量化耐震評估方法。
　　本文主要內容有三部份：
　　第一部份為實驗介紹，包括儀器擺設、模型製作、試驗方法及實驗結果討論。本振動台試驗為國內RC結構模型試驗之首例，故可作為實驗設計、操作人員之參考，以節省前置規劃時間，並避免掉一些不必要的試體缺陷產生。實驗結果則作為本文理論推導之修正依據。
　　第二部份為影響耐震診斷之相關參數探討。過去結構分析者在進行耐震研究時，有時為了簡化繁瑣的計算過程，會非常主觀地忽略某些因素的影響，例如：圍束效應、扭轉效應、P- Δ效應、彎剪互制、傾覆力矩影響……等等。這些林林總總的因素，哪些對耐震診斷的影響不大可以排除不計，而哪些在被省略後會導致明顯的誤差產生，在本文中將逐項予以檢討。文末除了據此而對靜態推垮曲線法做修正，亦按各項參數之影響程度，提出可否忽略的客觀建議。
　　最後一部份為建築物殘餘耐震能力評估方法的研究。由前述改進後之靜態推垮曲線法，可以求得新建結構體之層剪力對層間變位及崩塌地表加速度三相圖。爾後再以此耐震診斷圖為基準，依據歷次所受地震事件之大小來進行構件強度與剛度之逐次折減，繼而量化各構件之受損程度以及建築物之殘餘耐震能力。經與振動台歷次激振試驗結果比對，其準確度尚稱滿意。
　　值得特別注意的是，本文中所指之地震事件，乃是把一次強地動過程視為單一事件，亦即只考慮結構體在每次地震過程中被觀測到的最大反應。此做法可以避開複雜之地震時歷分析，而達成實用化之目的，唯所得之崩塌地表加速度將僅為近似值而非精確解。

Because Taiwan and adjacent countries are located at the west Circum-Pacific Seismic Zone, disasterridden earthquakes take place repeatedly in some intervals of time. The most famous ones in recent decade are the 1995 Kobe Earthquake in Japan and the 1999 921 Chi-Chi Earthquake in Taiwan. Professionals have faced many similar problems in the reconstruction after these earthquakes. One of them is to evaluate the aseismic capacity of the damaged buildings so as to make a proper suggestion to the owners, such as to repair, to retrofit, or to rebuild it. However, most of the popular aseismic evaluation methods today estimate the damaged ratio of a building qualitatively but not quantitatively. At the same time, almost none of them could predict the residual aseicmic capacity of buildings after multi-events of earthquake.

For these reasons, this study is aimed on the development of a practical aseismic evaluating method for low-rise RC structures based on the simple static pushover theory and on the assumption of shear building mode. The evaluation results are compared to the experimental results of shaking table test of 2-story, 1/3 scale RC models.
There are three parts in this paper:

The first part is the introduction of the experiment, including the arrangement of instruments, the construction of specimens, the test procedure, and the discussion of the test results. RC models are tested on shaking table for the first time in Taiwan, so the experiment results could be a good reference for those who are interested in the same research area. Furthermore, the test results are the calibrating objectives for the theoretical study in this paper.

The second part is the study about the related parameters in aseismic assessment. For simplifying the calculating procedure, the structural analyser in the past neglected the influence of some primary parameters, such as confinement effects, torsional effects, P-Δ effects, interaction of bending moments and shear forces, and the influence of overturning moment to the structural behavior. Which parameter could be ignored or not is studied in this part. The static pushover method will be modified at the end of this part, and modifications of former questions will be made objectively according to the result of tests.

The last part of the paper is about the residual aseismic capacity of damaged buildings. Using the modified aseismic evaluation equations, one can obtain the vulnerability curves for story shear, relative story deflection, and collapse peak ground acceleration. On the basis of the vulnerability curves, we quantify the damage of each member and the aseismic capacity of a building after each event of earthquake.

Note that each strong ground motion is regarded as “an earthquake event” in this paper. Thus, only the possible maximum response is calculated in order to avoid the complicated time history analysis of an earthquake and make the evaluating method practical. As a result, the collapse peak ground acceleration obtained is an approximate value not an exact solution.

1.1 志賀敏男，〈鋼筋混凝土構造物的耐震對策－1968年十勝沖地震建築物被害調查報告〉，《1968年十勝沖地震災害調查報告》，日本建築學會，東京，1968
1.2 《現有鋼筋混凝土造建築物的耐震診斷基準與解說》，日本建築防災協會，東京，1990
1.3 《震害建築物等的被災度判定基準與修復技術指南》，日本建築防災協會，東京，1991.2
1.4 許茂雄、陳永明，〈鋼骨建築結構之動態耐震診斷〉，《中國土木水力工程學刊》，第2卷第4期，民國79年
1.5 陳俊宏，《含RC牆鋼筋混凝土建築結構之動態耐震診斷》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國80年6月
1.6 張文德，《含磚牆鋼筋混凝土建築結構之動態耐震診斷》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國80年6月
1.7 劉白梅，《鋼筋混凝土建築結構受人為災害後之耐震診斷》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國80年6月
1.8 張嘉祥、陳嘉基、王貞富，〈嘉義瑞里地震學校建築震害〉，《結構工程》，第13卷第3期，61-80頁，民國87年9月
1.9 張嘉祥、陳嘉基、呂國維、謝永宏，〈九二一集集大地震學校建築震害探討〉，《土木技術》，第27期，98-116頁，民國89年5月
1.10 郭心怡，《RC學校建築快速耐震診斷》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國89年6月
1.11 陳清泉，《建築物耐震評估作業及震害資料庫建置之研究－建築物耐震評估方法之研修與作業準則之研擬》，內政部建築研究所，台北，民國91年12月
1.12 何明錦、蔡益超、陳清泉，《鋼筋混凝土建築物耐震能力評估法及推廣》，內政部建築研究所，台北，民國88年6月
1.13 〈教育部國民中小學校園建築安全總體檢初步評估表〉，教育部，台北，民國89年
1.14 Sozen A. Mete，”The Third Alternative for Propertioning of Earthquake-Resistant Buildings in Reinforced Concrete”，International Workshop on Chi-Chi, Taiwan Earthquake of Septermber 21, 1999, NAPHM, NCREE, pp.5c-1~5c-18, 1999
1.15 FEMA，”Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards : A Handbook”，FEMA-154，Federal Emergency Management Agency，Washington,DC，1988
1.16 Young-Ji Park and Alfredo H.-S. Ang，”Mechanistic Seismic Damage Model for Reinforced Concrete”，Journal of Structural Engineering，ASCE，pp.772-739，1985.4
1.17 ”Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings”，ATC-40 Report，Applied Technology Council，Redwood City，California，1996

2.1 Clough, R.W., and Gidwani, J.，”Reinforced Concrete Frame 2: Seismic Testing and Analytical Correlation.”，Earthquake Engrg. Research Center Report No. EERC 76-15，Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif., 1976

2.2 Healey, T.J., and Sozen, M.A.，”Experimental Study of the Dynamic Response of a Ten-story Reinforced Concrete Frame With a Tall First Story.”，Structural Research Series No. 450, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, Ill., 1978
2.3 P.S. Skjarbak, B. Taskin, P.H. Kirkegaard, and S.R.K. Nielsen，”An Experimental Study of a Midbroken 2-bay, 6-storey Reinforced Concrete Frame Subject to Earthquakes.”，Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering，No.16，pp.373-384，1997
2.4 Neville, A.M.，”A General Relation for Strengths of Concrete Specimens of Different Shapes and Sizes.”，Journal of ACI 63-10，1966.10
2.5 Chang,K.，”Study on the Compressive Strength and Deformability of Concrete Column with Real Scale”，Ph.D Thesis ，Hirosima University，Japan，1997.3
2.6 Hikida, T., Tanaka, H. and Nakaji, H.，”Experimental Study Concerning the Scale Effects on the Stress-strain Models of Confined Concrete”，The annual meeting of AIJ，Tokyo，Japan，2001
2.7 L’Hermite, R.，”Idees Actuelles sur la Technologie du Beton”，Documentation Technique du Batiment et des Travaux Publics，Paris，1955
2.8 許茂雄、廖文義、杜怡萱、許士昱，《三分之一縮尺二層樓RC校舍模型振動台試驗》，國家地震工程研究中心，台北，民國91年1月

3.1 藍百圻，《既有RC沿街店舖住宅滿足功能要求之耐震補強》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國91年5月
3.2 黃國彰，《有邊界柱梁之磚牆耐震試驗與等值強版分析》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國84年6月
3.3 Soroushian, P. et al.，”Dynamic Constitutive Behavior of Concrete”，ACI Journal，Vol.83，No.2，pp.251-259，1986
3.4 Reinhardt, H.W.，”Concrete under Impact Loading, Tensile Strength and Bond”，HERON，Vol.27，No.3，48pp.，1982
3.5 Dilger, W.H. et al.，”Ductility of Plain and Confined Concrete Under Different Strain Rates”，ACI Journal，Vol.81，No.1，pp.73-81，1984
3.6 Park, R. and Pauly, P.，”Reinforced Concrete Structure”，東南書局，民國76年

4.1 Cheng-Tzu Thomas Hsu，”Analysis and Design of Square and Rectangular Columns by Equation of Failure Surface”，ACI Structural Journal，Technical paper，Title no.85-S20，pp.167-179，1988.3
4.2 Boris Bresler，”Design Criteria for Reinforced Columns under Axial Load and Biaxial Bending.”，ACI Journal，Proceedings 57，pp.481-490，Disc 1621-1638，1960.11
4.3 Maw Shyong Sheu，”A Grid Model for Prediction of the Monotonic and Hysteretic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Slab-Column Connections Transferring Moments”，Ph.D Thesis，University of Washington，Washington,DC，1976
4.4 張旭福，《鋼筋混凝土短柱補強措施之定量研究》，國立成功大學建築研究所碩士論文，台南，民國82年6月

5.1 Sashi K. Kunnath, Andrie M. Reinhorn, and Young J. Park，”Analytical Modeling of Inelastic Seismic Response of R/C Structures.”，J. of Struct. Eng.，Vol.116，No.4，pp.996-1017，1990.4
5.2 Witght, J.K., and Sozen, M.A.，”Shear Strength Decay in Reinforced Concrete Columns Subjected to Large Deformation Reversals.”，Tech. Report Struct. Res. Series No.403, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.，1973
5.3 P. Srinivasa Rao, B. Sivarama Sarma, N. Lakshmanan, and F. Stangenberg，”Damage Model for Reinforced Concrete Elements under Cyclic Loading.”，ACI Materials Journal，Technical paper，Vol.95，Iss.6，Title no.95-M66，pp.682-690，1998.11
5.4 Young Soo Chung, Christian Meyer, and Masanobu Shinozuka，”Modeling of Concrete Damage”，ACI Structural Journal，Technical paper，Vol.86，Iss.3，Title no.86-S28，pp.259-271，1989.5
5.5 Schickert, G. and Danssmann, J.，”Behavior of Concrete Stressed by High Hydrostatic Compression.”，Proceedings, International Conference on Concrete under Multiaxial Conditions，Toulouse，1984.5
5.6 Sinha, B.P., Gerstle, Kurt H., and Tulin, Leonard G.，”Stress-Strain Relations for Concrete under Cyclic Loadings.”，ACI Journal，Proceedings Vol.61，No.2，pp.195-212，1964.2
5.7 Atalay, M.B., and Penzien, J.，”The Seismic Behavior of Critical Regions of Reinforced Concrete Components as Influenced by Moment, Shear and Axial Forces.”，Report No. EERC-75-19，University of California，Berkeley，76pp.，1975.12
5.8 Hwang, T.H.，”Effects of Variation in Load History on Cyclic Response of Concrete Flexural Members.”，Ph.D Thesis，Department of Civil Engineering，University of Illinois，Urbana，1982