Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Probabilistic seismic performance evaluation of non-seismic RC frame buildings

  • Maniyar, M.M. (Department of Structural Engineering, S.P.C.E.) ;
  • Khare, R.K. (Department of Civil Engineering, S.G.S. Institute of Technology & Science) ;
  • Dhakal, R.P. (Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury)
  • Received : 2009.02.05
  • Accepted : 2009.09.28
  • Published : 2009.12.20
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this paper, probabilistic seismic performance assessment of a typical non-seismic RC frame building representative of a large inventory of existing buildings in developing countries is conducted. Nonlinear time-history analyses of the sample building are performed with 20 large-magnitude medium distance ground motions scaled to different levels of intensity represented by peak ground acceleration and 5% damped elastic spectral acceleration at the first mode period of the building. The hysteretic model used in the analyses accommodates stiffness degradation, ductility-based strength decay, hysteretic energy-based strength decay and pinching due to gap opening and closing. The maximum inter story drift ratios obtained from the time-history analyses are plotted against the ground motion intensities. A method is defined for obtaining the yielding and collapse capacity of the analyzed structure using these curves. The fragility curves for yielding and collapse damage levels are developed by statistically interpreting the results of the time-history analyses. Hazard-survival curves are generated by changing the horizontal axis of the fragility curves from ground motion intensities to their annual probability of exceedance using the log-log linear ground motion hazard model. The results express at a glance the probabilities of yielding and collapse against various levels of ground motion intensities.

Keywords

References

  1. Aslani, H. and Miranda, E. (2005), "Probability based seismic response analysis", Eng. Struct., 27, 1151-1163 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.02.015
  2. ATC-40 Report (1996), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Vol. 1, 2, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California
  3. Bertero, V.V. (1977), "Strength and deformation capacities of buildings under extreme environments", Structural Engineering and Structural Mechanics, K.S. Pister, ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 211-215
  4. Bradley, B.A., Dhakal, R.P., Mander, J.B. and Li, L. (2008), "Experimental multi-level seismic performance assessment of 3D RC frame designed for damage avoidance", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 37(1), 1-20 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.741
  5. Chopra, A.K. (1995), Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ
  6. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2002), "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 561-582 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.144
  7. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2004), "Evaluation of modal and FEMA pushover analyses: Vertically 'regular' and irregular generic frames", Earthq. Spectra, 20(1), 255-271 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1647580
  8. Dhakal, R.P., Mander, J.B. and Mashiko, N. (2006), "Identification of critical ground motions for seismic performance assessment of structures", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(8), 989-1008 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.568
  9. Dhakal, R.P., Singh, S. and Mander, J.B. (2007), "Effectiveness of earthquake selection and scaling method in New Zealand", Bulletin New Zealand Soc. Earthq. Eng., 40(3), 160-171
  10. FEMA-273 (1997), "NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C
  11. FEMA-350 (2000), "Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment frame buildings", Federal Emergency Management Agency Washington, D.C
  12. FEMA-356 (2000), "Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C
  13. FEMA-440 (2005), "Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Redwood City, California
  14. Goel, R.K. and Chopra, A.K. (2005), "Extension of modal pushover analysis to compute member forces", Earthq. Spectra, 21(1), 125-139 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1851545
  15. Gupta, B. and Kunnath, S.K. (2000), "Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of structures", Earthq. Spectra, 16(2), 367-391 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586117
  16. HAZUS (1999), "Earthquake loss estimation methodology", Technical Manual, National Institute of Building Sciences for Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC
  17. Ibarra, L.F. and Krawinkler, H. (2004), "Global collapse of deteriorating MDOF systems", Proc. 13th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, Paper No. 116
  18. IS:1893 (Part 1) (2002), "Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, Part 1- General provisions and buildings", Indian Standards Institution, New Delhi
  19. IS:456 (1978), "Indian standard code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete for general building construction", Indian Standards Institution, New Delhi
  20. Jaiswal, K.S., Sinha, R. and Goyal, A. (2002), "World Housing Encyclopedia Report. Country: India. Housing type: Reinforced concrete frame building with masonry infill walls designed for gravity loads", EERI, Created on: 6/5/2002, Last Modified: 7/2/2003
  21. Kent, D.C. and Park, K.R. (1971), "Flexural members with confined concrete", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 97(ST7), 1969-1989
  22. Kircil, M.S. and Polat, Z. (2006), "Fragility analysis of mid-rise RC frame buildings", Eng. Struct., 28, 1335-1345 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.01.004
  23. Mander, J.B., Dhakal, R.P., Mashiko, N. and Solberg, K.M. (2007), "Incremental dynamic analysis applied to seismic financial risk assessment of bridges", Eng. Struct., 29(10), 2662-2672 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.12.015
  24. Murty, C.V.R., Rai, D.C., Bajpai, K.K. and Jain, S.K. (2001), "Anchorage details and joint design in seismic RC frames", Ind. Concrete J., 274-280
  25. Park, Y.J., Reinhorn, A.M. and Kunnath, S.K. (1987), "IDARC: Inelastic damage analysis of reinforced concrete frame - shear-wall structures", Technical Report NCEER-87-0008, State University of New York at Buffalo
  26. Park, Y.J., Reinhorn, A.M. and Kunnath, S.K. (2006), "IDARC-2D V6.0 computer program, Inelastic damage analysis of RC building structures", State University of New York
  27. Porter, K., Kennedy, R. and Bachman, R. (2007), "Creating fragility functions for performance based earthquake engineering", Earthq. Spectra, 23(2), 471-489 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2720892
  28. Rai, D.C., Thakkar, S.K. and Ramesh, U. (2006), "Behavior of seismic and non-seismic RC frames under cyclic loads", Ind. Concr. J., 46-52
  29. Shinozuka, M., Feng, M.Q., Lee, J. and Naganuma, T. (2000), "Statistical analysis of fragility curves", J. Eng. Mech., 126(12), 1224-1231 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:12(1224)
  30. Shome, N. (1999), "Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures", Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University
  31. Sivaselvan, M.V. and Reinhorn, A.M. (1999), ‘‘Hysteretic models for cyclic behavior of deteriorating inelastic structures", Tech. Rep. MCEER-99-0018, Multidisciplinary Ctr. for Earthquake Engrg. Res., State University of New York at Buffalo, N.Y
  32. Smyth, A., Altay, G., Deodatis, G., Erdik, M., Franco, G. and Gulkan, P. (2004), "Benefit-cost analysis for earthquake mitigation: Evaluating measures for apartment houses in Turkey", Earthq. Spectra, 20(1), 171-203 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1649937
  33. Solberg, K.M., Dhakal, R.P., Mander, J.B. and Bradley, B.A. (2008), "Rapid expected annual loss estimation methodology for structures", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 37(1), 81-101 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.746
  34. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, A.C. (2002), "Incremental dynamic analysis", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 491-514 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141

Cited by

  1. System reliability-based seismic collapse assessment of steel moment frames using incremental dynamic analysis and Bayesian probability network vol.118, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.03.057
  2. A new hybrid procedure for the definition of seismic vulnerability in Mediterranean cross-border urban areas vol.86, pp.S2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2646-9
  3. Fragility analysis of R/C frame buildings based on different types of hysteretic model vol.39, pp.6, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2011.39.6.795
  4. Nonlinear spectral design analysis of a structure for hybrid self-centring device enabled structures vol.61, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.61.6.701
  5. Study on the Effect of Extra Pole Support on Seismic Resistance for Low-Rise RC Structures vol.2019, pp.None, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4763849
  6. Seismic response of RC frames under far-field mainshock and near-fault aftershock sequences vol.72, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.72.3.395
  7. Effect of sequential earthquakes on evaluation of non-linear response of 3D RC MRFs vol.20, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2021.20.3.279
  8. Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Historical Masonry Buildings in Croatian Coastal Area vol.11, pp.13, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11135997