Correction: Fujii, K. Pushover-Based Seismic Capacity Evaluation of Uto City Hall Damaged by the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake. Buildings 2019, 9, 140

It is very unfortunate that there are some errors in the nonlinear analysis program used for this published article [1]: The subroutine of calculating the damping matrix for nonlinear time-history analyses is incorrect. Therefore, the author wishes to make the following corrections.

1.

Corrections 1: Section 3.2.

The author would like to correct the following lines:

“The damping matrix is assumed to be proportional to the initial stiffness matrix, with 5% of the first mode’s critical damping.”

To describe the damping matrix assumed in the nonlinear time-history analysis correctly, the author would like to make the following corrections.

“The damping matrix is assumed to be proportional to the tangent stiffness matrix, with 5% of the first mode’s critical damping. Note that, when its tangent stiffness is negative, non-zero dummy positive value (10⁻⁹ times smaller than the initial stiffness) is used for the calculation of the damping matrix to avoid the negative damping.”

2.

Corrections 2: Section 4.3.2. (Figures 22 and 23)

Due to the corrections of the nonlinear analysis program, the author wishes to replace these figures as follows.

Original image of Figure 22:

Revised image of Figure 22:

Original image of Figure 23:

Revised image of Figure 23:

3

Corrections 3: Section 4.3.2.

The author would like to correct the following lines:

“When λ = C_I,uni = 0.361, the median value of the peak drift at column A₁B₁, where the largest drift occurred, slightly exceeded its drift limit (R = 1/75), as shown in Figure 22. In addition, the predicted peak drift by MABPA exceeds its drift limit (R = 1/75) at column A₁B₁ and A₃B₁. While in the case of λ = C_I,bi = 0.330, the median peak drift values for all three columns were within the drift limit, as shown in Figure 23. In addition, the predicted peak drift by MABPA is very close to R = 1/75 at column A₁B₁.

Therefore, the accuracy of the evaluated seismic capacity index for this building was satisfactory. Moreover, index C_I,bi had a slightly conservative value, while the value of index C_I,uni was not conservative. Also note that the accuracy of the predicted peak drift by MABPA for this building was satisfactory.”

Due to the replacement of Figures 22 and 23, the author would like to make the following corrections.

“When λ = C_I,uni = 0.361, the mean value of the peak drift at all three columns notably exceeded its drift limit (R = 1/75), as shown in Figure 22. In addition, the predicted peak drift by MABPA exceeds its drift limit (R = 1/75) at column A₁B₁ and A₃B₁. While in the case of λ = C_I,bi = 0.330, the mean peak drift at column A₁B₁ and A₃B₁ was closer to the drift limit than the case of λ = C_I,uni = 0.361, as shown in Figure 23. In addition, the predicted peak drift by MABPA is very close to R = 1/75 at column A₁B₁.

Therefore, the accuracy of the evaluated seismic capacity index for this building was satisfactory. Moreover, index C_I,bi was better than index C_I,uni because in this building, the effect of bidirectional excitation was significant. In addition, note that the accuracy of the predicted peak drift by MABPA for this building was satisfactory.”

4

Corrections 4: Section 6.

The author would like to correct the following lines in the first conclusion:

“The results show that the accuracy of the evaluated seismic capacity index for this building was satisfactory. Moreover, index C_I,bi had a slightly conservative value, while whereas index C_I,uni did not have a conservative value.”

Due to the replacement of Figures 22 and 23 in Section 4.3.2, the author would like to make the following corrections.

“The results show that the accuracy of the evaluated seismic capacity index for this building was satisfactory. Moreover, index C_I,bi was better than index C_I,uni because in this building, the effect of bidirectional excitation was significant.”

The corresponding author apologizes for any inconvenience caused to the readers. The changes do not affect other scientific results and conclusions. The manuscript will be updated, and the original will remain available. A link to this Correction will be added.