Response modification factor of mixed structures

  • Fanaie, Nader (Department of Civil Engineering, K.N.Toosi University of Technology) ;
  • Shamlou, Shahab O. (Department of Civil Engineering, K.N.Toosi University of Technology)
  • Received : 2014.10.22
  • Accepted : 2015.06.17
  • Published : 2015.12.25


Mixed structures consist of two parts: a lower part and an upper part. The lower part is usually made of concrete while the upper part is made of steel. Analyzing these structures is complicated and code-based design of them has many associated problems. In this research, the seismic behavior of mixed structures which have reinforced concrete frames and shear walls in their lower storeys and steel frames with bracing in their upper storeys were studied. For this purpose, seventeen structures in three groups of 5, 9 and 15 storey structures with different numbers of concrete and steel storeys were designed. Static pushover analysis, linear dynamic analysis and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) using 15 earthquake records were performed by OpenSees software. Seismic parameters such as period, response modification factor and ductility factor were then obtained for the mixed (hybrid) structures using more than 4600 nonlinear dynamic analysis and used in the regression analysis for achieving proper formula. Finally, some formulas, effective in designing such structures, are presented for the mentioned parameters. According to the results obtained from this research, the response modification factor values of mixed structures are lower compared to those of steel or concrete ones with the same heights. This fact might be due to the irregularities of stiffness, mass, etc., at different heights of the structure. It should be mentioned that for the first time, the performance and seismic response of such structures were studied against real earthquake accelerations using nonlinear dynamic analysis, andresponse modification factor was obtained by IDA.


  1. Abdel Raheem, S.E. (2011), "Dynamic characteristics of hybrid tower of cable-stayed bridges", Steel Compos. Struct., Int. J., 17(6), 803-824. DOI: 10.12989/scs.2014.17.6.803
  2. ATC (1995), Structural response modification factors, ATC-19, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, USA.
  3. ATC (1995), A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-resistant design, ATC-34, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, USA.
  4. ATC (1978), Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings, ATC-3-06, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, USA.
  5. ASCE/SEI 7 (2010), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers.
  6. Asgarian, B. and Shokrgozar, H.R. (2009), "BRBF response modification factor", J. Constr. Steel Res., 65(2), 290-298. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.08.002
  7. Aste, C., Glatzl, A. and Huber, G. (2003), "Steel-Concrete mixed building technology at the ski jump tower of lnnsbruck, Austria", Steel Compos. Struct., Int. J., 3(2), 141-152. DOI:
  8. Chintanapakdee, C. and Chopra, A. (2004), "Seismic response of vertically irregular frames: response history and modal pushover analyses", J. Struct. Eng., 130(8), 1177-1185. DOI:
  9. Das, S. and Nau, J.M. (2003), "Seismic design aspects of vertically irregular reinforced concrete buildings", Earthq. Spectra, 19(3), 455-477. DOI:
  10. Fanaie, N. and Afsar Dizaj, E. (2014), "Response modification factor of the frames braced with reduced yielding segment BRB", Struct. Eng. Mech., Int. J., 50(1), 1-17. DOI:
  11. Fanaie, N. and Ezzatshoar, S. (2014), "Studying the seismic behavior of gate braced frames by incremental dynamic analysis (IDA)", J. Constr. Steel Res., 99, 111-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.04.008
  12. Fanaie, N. and Shamloo, S.H. (2012), "Studying seismic behavior of mixed structures in height", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, September.
  13. FEMA (2000), Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment Frame Buildings; Federal Emergency Management Agency Report No. 350.
  14. Iranian National Building Code (2006), Part 6, Code for Structural Loading, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran.
  15. Kang, H., Song, X., Jia, K., Zhou, Li. and Liu, P. (2013), "Numerical analyses on seismic behaviour of concrete-filled steel tube composite columns based on OpenSEES program", J. Sci. Eng. Tech., 6(5), 143-148.
  16. Lu, X., Chen, L., Zhou, Y. and Huang, Z. (2009), "Shaking table model tests on a complex high-rise building with two towers of different height connected by trusses", Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build., 18(7), 765-788. DOI: 10.1002/tal.460
  17. Lu, X., Huang, Z. and Zhou, Y. (2011), "Global seismic damage assessment of high-rise hybrid structures", Comput. Concrete, 8(3), 311-325. DOI: 10.12989/cac.2011.8.3.311
  18. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988), "Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete", J. Struct. Eng., 114(8), 1804-1826. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
  19. Masumi, A., Tasnimi, A.A. and Saatcioglu, M. (2004), "Prediction of seismic overstrength in concrete moment resisting frame using incremental static and dynamic analysis", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Paper No. 2826.
  20. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., Fenves, G.L. and Jeremic, B. (2009), "Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation User Command-Language Manual", Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Universityof California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  21. Mwafy, A.M. and Elnashai, A.S. (2002), "Calibration of force reduction factors of RC buildings", J. Earthq. Eng., 6(22), 239-227. DOI: 10.1080/13632460209350416
  22. Papageorgiou, A.V. and Gantes, C.J. (2010), "Equivalent modal damping ratios for concrete/steel mixed structures", Comput. Struct., 88(19-20), 1124 -1136. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2010.06.014
  23. Papageorgiou, A.V. and Gantes, C.J. (2011), "Equivalent uniform damping ratios for linear irregularly damped concrete/steel mixed structures", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 31(3), 418-430. DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.09.010
  24. Sivandi-Pour, A., Gerami, M. and Khodayarnezhad, D. (2014), "Equivalent modal damping ratios for non-classically damped hybrid steel concrete buildings with transitional storey", Struct. Eng. Mech., Int. J., 50(3), 383-340. DOI:
  25. Uang, C. (1991), "Establishing R (or Rw) and Cd factor for building seismic provision", Struct. Eng., 117(1), 19-28. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:1(19)
  26. Uniform Building Code (1997), International Conference of Building Officials, Whitter, CA, USA.
  27. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. (2002), "Incremental dynamic analysis", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 491-514. DOI: 10.1002/eqe.141
  28. Waugh, J.D. and Sritharan, S. (2010), "Lessons learned from seismic analysis of a seven story concrete test building", J. Earthq. Eng., 14(3), 448-469. DOI: 10.1080/13632460903206485
  29. Zheng, S.S., Li, L., Wang, W., Tao, Q.L. and Li, Z.Q. (2011), "Analytical model for the hysteretic behavior of SRC columns", Adv. Mat. Res., 243-249, 1881-1884. DOI 10.4028/

Cited by

  1. Energy Dissipation and Local, Story, and Global Ductility Reduction Factors in Steel Frames under Vibrations Produced by Earthquakes vol.2018, pp.1875-9203, 2018,
  2. Local, Story, and Global Ductility Evaluation for Complex 2D Steel Buildings: Pushover and Dynamic Analysis vol.9, pp.1, 2019,