Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fragility analysis of R/C frame buildings based on different types of hysteretic model

  • Borekci, Muzaffer (Department of Civil Engineering, Yildiz Technical University) ;
  • Kircil, Murat S. (Department of Civil Engineering, Yildiz Technical University)
  • Received : 2010.05.31
  • Accepted : 2011.06.22
  • Published : 2011.09.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Estimation of damage probability of buildings under a future earthquake is an essential issue to ensure the seismic reliability. Fragility curves are useful tools for showing the probability of structural damage due to earthquakes as a function of ground motion indices. The purpose of this study is to compare the damage probability of R/C buildings with low and high level of strength and ductility through fragility analysis. Two different types of sample buildings have been considered which represent the building types mentioned above. The first one was designed according to TEC-2007 and the latter was designed according to TEC-1975. The pushover curves of sample buildings were obtained via pushover analyses. Using 60 ground motion records, nonlinear time-history analyses of equivalent single degree of freedom systems were performed using bilinear hysteretic model and peak-oriented hysteretic model with stiffness - strength deterioration for each scaled elastic spectral displacement. The damage measure is maximum inter-story drift ratio and each performance level considered in this study has an assumed limit value of damage measure. Discrete damage probabilities were calculated using statistical methods for each considered performance level and elastic spectral displacement. Consequently, continuous fragility curves have been constructed based on the lognormal distribution assumption. Furthermore, the effect of hysteresis model parameters on the damage probability is investigated.

Keywords

References

  1. Ayoub, A. and Chenouda, M. (2009), "Response spectra of degrading structural systems", Eng. Struct., 31(7), 1393-1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.006
  2. Bartlett, F.M. and MacGregor, J.G. (1996), "Statistical analysis of the compressive strength of concrete in structures", ACI Mater. J., 93(2), 158-168.
  3. Chenouda, M. and Ayoub, A. (2009), "Probabilistic collapse analysis of degrading Multi Degree of Freedom structures under earthquake excitation", Eng. Struct., 31(12), 2909-2921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.07.018
  4. Clough, R.W. and Johnston, S.B. (1966), "Effect of stiffness degradation on earthquake ductility requirements", Proceedeings of the Second Japan National Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
  5. Erberik, M.A. and Elnashai, S.A. (2003), "Seismic vulnerability of flat-slab structures", Technical Report DS-9 Project (Risk Assessment Modeling) Mid-America Earthquake Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  6. FEMA 440 (2005), Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures.
  7. FEMA 356 (2000), Prestandart and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings.
  8. Ibarra, L.F., Medina, R.A. and Krawinkler, H. (2005), "Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 34(12), 1489-1511. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.495
  9. Ibarra, L.F. (2002), SNAP Program User Guide.
  10. Jeong, S. and Elnashai, S.A. (2007a), "Fragility relationships for torsionally-imbalanced buildings using threedimensional damage characterization", Eng. Struct., 29(9), 2172-2182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.11.010
  11. Jeong, S. and Elnashai, S.A. (2007b), "Probabilistic fragility analysis parameterized by fundamental response quantities", Eng. Struct., 29(6), 1238-1251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.06.026
  12. Karim, K.R. and Yamazaki, F. (2003), "A simplified method of constructing fragility curves for highway bridges", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 32(10), 1603-1626. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.291
  13. Kircil, M.S. and Polat, Z. (2006), "Fragility analysis of mid-rise R/C frame buildings", Eng. Struct., 28(9), 1335-1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.01.004
  14. Krawinkler, H., Parisi, F., Ibarra, L.F., Ayoub, A. and Medina, R. (2000), "Development of a testing protocol for wood frame structures", CUREE Publication No. W-02.
  15. Kwon, O. and Elnashai, S.A. (2006), "The effect of material and ground motion on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structures", Eng. Struct., 28(2), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.07.010
  16. Mahin, S.A. and Bertero V.V. (1975), "An evaluation of some methods for predicting seismic behavior of reinforced concrete buildings", University of California at Berkeley Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. 75-5.
  17. Maniyar, M.M., Khare, R.K. and Dhabal, R.P. (2009), "Probabilistic seismic performance evaluation of nonseismic RC frame buildings", Struct. Eng. Mech., 33(6), 725-745. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2009.33.6.725
  18. NCEER (1996), "IDARC 2D Version 4.0: A computer program for the inelastic damage analysis of buildings", National Center of Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo.
  19. Otani, S. (1981), "Hysteresis model of reinforced concrete for earthquake response analysis", J. of Fac. of Eng. Univ. of Tokyo, 36(2), 407-441.
  20. PEER Strong Motion Database, http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat/.
  21. Rahnama, M. (1993), "Effect of soft soil and hysteresis model on seismic demands", PhD Thesis, Stanford University.
  22. Senel, S.M. and Kayhan, A.H. (2010), "Fragility based damage assessment in existing precast industrial buildings: A case study for Turkey", Struct. Eng. Mech., 34(1), 39-60. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2010.34.1.039
  23. Turkish Earthquake Code (2007), The Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, Turkey.
  24. Turkish Earthquake Code (1975), The Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, Turkey.

Cited by

  1. Stationary response of bilinear hysteretic system driven by Poisson white noise vol.33, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2013.03.005
  2. Seismic vulnerability assessment of confined masonry wall buildings vol.7, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.7.2.201
  3. Multivariate probabilistic seismic demand model for the bridge multidimensional fragility analysis 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-018-0414-y
  4. Seismic vulnerability assessment of confined masonry buildings based on ESDOF vol.12, pp.5, 2011, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2017.12.5.489