Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Seismic demand estimation of RC frame buildings based on simplified and nonlinear dynamic analyses

  • Borzi, B. (Eucentre, European Centre for Training and Research in Earthquake Engineering) ;
  • Vona, M. (School of Engineering, University of Basilicata) ;
  • Masi, A. (School of Engineering, University of Basilicata) ;
  • Pinho, R. (Department of Structural Mechanics, University of Pavia) ;
  • Pola, D. (Department of Structural Mechanics, University of Pavia)
  • Received : 2010.02.03
  • Accepted : 2012.03.24
  • Published : 2013.02.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Vulnerability studies on the existing building stock require that a large number of buildings is analyzed to obtain statistically significant evaluations of the seismic performance. Therefore, analytical evaluation methods need to be based on simplified methodologies of analysis which can afford the treatment of a large building population with a reasonable computational effort. Simplified Pushover-Based Earthquake Loss Assessment approach (SP-BELA), where a simplified methodology to identify the structural capacity of the building through the definition of a pushover curve is adopted, was developed on these bases. Main objective of the research work presented in this paper is to validate the simplified methodology implemented in SP-BELA against the results of more sophisticated nonlinear dynamic analyses (NLDAs). The comparison is performed for RC buildings designed only to vertical loads, representative of the "as built" in Italy and in Mediterranean countries with a building stock very similar to the Italian one. In NLDAs the non linear and degrading behaviour, typical of the structures under consideration when subjected to high seismic loads, is evaluated using models able to capture, with adequate accuracy, the non linear behaviour of RC structural elements taking into account stiffness degradation, strength deterioration, and pinching effect. Results show when simplified analyses are in good agreement with NLDAs. As a consequence, unsatisfactory results from simplified analysis are pointed out to address their current applicability limits.

Keywords

References

  1. Ambraseys, N., Smit, P., Douglas, J., Margaris, B., Sigbjornsson, R., Olafsson, S., Suhadolc, P. and Costa, G. (2004), "Internet-site for european strong-motion data", Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata, 45(3), 113-129.
  2. Borzi, B. (2006), Validazione della metodologia semplificata per l'esecuzione di analisi pushover, Research Report - European Centre for Training and Research in Earthquake Engineering (EUCENTRE), Pavia, Italia.
  3. Bolognini, D., Borzi, B. and Pinho, R. (2008), "Simplified pushover-based vulnerability analysis of traditional Italian RC precast structures", 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijin, China.
  4. Borzi, B. and Elnashai, A.S. (2000a), "Refined force reduction factor for seismic design", J. Eng. Struct., 22(10), 1244-1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00075-9
  5. Borzi, B., Calvi, G.M., Elnashai, A.S., Faccioli, E. and Bommer, J.J. (2000b), "Inelastic spectra for displacement-based seismic design", J. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 21(1), 47-61.
  6. Borzi, B. and Elnashai, A.S. (2000c), "Assessment of inelastic response of buildings using a displacement and force approach", J. Tall Build., 9(4), 251-277. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1794(200009)9:4<251::AID-TAL151>3.0.CO;2-V
  7. Borzi, B., Pinho, R. and Crowley, H. (2008a), "Simplified Pushover-Based Vulnerability Analysis for Large Scale Assessment of RC Buildings". Engineering Structures 30:3, 804-820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.05.021
  8. Borzi B., Crowley H., Pinho R., (2008b), "Simplified pushover-based earthquake loss assessment (SP-BELA) method for masonry buildings", Int. J. Arch. Herit., 2(4), 353-376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583050701828178
  9. Calvi, G.M. and Pinto, P.E. (1996), "Experimental and numerical investigations on the seismic response of bridges and recommendations for code provisions", ECOEST and PREC8, Report $N^{\circ}$ 4.
  10. CEB. (1998), "Seismic design on reinforced concrete structures for controlled inelastic response", Bulletin 240, Thomas Telford Ltd, London.
  11. CEN - Comite Europeen de Normalisation, (2003), "Eurocode 8, design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings", Pr-EN 1998-1. Final Draft.
  12. Chiauzzi, L., Masi, A., Mucciarelli, M., Vona, M., Pacor, F., Cultrera, G., Gallovič, F. and Emolo, A. (2012), "Building damage scenarios based on exploitation of Housner intensity derived from finite faults ground motion simulations", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 10(2), 517-545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9309-8
  13. Cosenza, E., Manfredi, G., Polese, M. and Verderame, G.M. (2005), "A multi-level approach to the capacity assessment of existing RC buildings", J. Earthq. Eng., 9(1), 1-22.
  14. Ghobarah, A., Aziz, T. and Abou-Elfath, H. (1999), "Softening effects on the seismic response of non ductile concrete frames", J. Earthq. Eng., 3(1), 59-81.
  15. Grunthal, G. (1998), "European macroseismic scale 1998 (EMS-98)", European Seismological Commission, sub commission on Engineering Seismology, working Group Macroseismic Scales, Conseil de l'Europe, Cahiers du Centre Europeen de Geodynamique et de Seismologie, 15, Luxembourg.
  16. Housner, G.W. (1952), "Intensity of ground motion during strong earthquakes", Second technical report, Institute of Technology, Pasedena, California.
  17. Iervolino, I., Manfredi, G., Polese, M., Verderame, G.M. and Fabbrocino, G. (2006), "Seismic risk for Italian type R.C. buildings", Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva.
  18. Kunnath, K.S., Hoffmann, G., Reinhorn, A.M. and Mander, J.B. (1995a), "Gravity load designed RC buildings - part I: seismic evaluation of existing construction", ACI Struct. J., 92(3), 343-354.
  19. Kunnath, K.S., Hoffmann, G., Reinhorn, A.M. and Mander, J.B. (1995b), "Gravity load designed RC buildings - part II: evaluation of detailing enhancements", ACI Struct. J., 92(4), 470-478.
  20. Kwon, O. and Elnashai, A. (2006), "The effect of material and ground motion uncertainty on the seismic vulnerability curves of RC structure", Eng. Struct., 28, 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.07.010
  21. Liu, A. and Park, R. (2000), "Seismic behaviour of existing moment-resisting frames with plain round reinforcing bars designed to pre 1970s codes", 12th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Auckland (New Zealand).
  22. Masi, A. (2003), "Seismic vulnerability assessment of gravity load designed R/C frames", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 1(3), 371-395. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BEEE.0000021426.31223.60
  23. Masi, A. and Vona, M. (2004), "Vulnerabilita sismica di edifici in c.a. realizzati negli anni "70", XI Convegno nazionale dell'Associazione Nazionale di Ingegneria Sismica, Genova (in Italian).
  24. Masi, A., Santarsiero, G., Verderame, G.M., Russo, G., Martinelli, E., Pauletta, M. and Cortesia, A. (2009), "Capacity models of beam-column joints: provisions of European and Italian seismic codes and possible improvements", Proc. Workshop Eurocode 8- Perspectives from the Italian Standpoint, (Cosenza E. editor), Napoli, Italy (available on line at the web site www.reluis.it).
  25. Masi, A. and Vona, M. (2009), "Estimation of the in situ concrete strength: Provisions of the European and Italian seismic codes and possible improvements", Final Conference of ReLUIS-DPC 2005-2008 Project, Naples, Available at www.reluis.it.
  26. Masi, A., Vona, M. and Mucciarelli, M. (2011), "Selection of natural and synthetic accelerograms for seismic vulnerability studies on RC Frames", J. Struct. Eng., 137(3), 367-378. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000209
  27. Nanos, N. and Elenas, A. (2006), "Seismic duration effects on the vulnerability of buildings", First European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Geneva, Switzerland.
  28. Pampanin, S., Calvi, G.M. and Moratti, M. (2002), "Seismic behaviour of R.C. beam-column joints designed for gravity loads", Twelfth European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, London, UK.
  29. Panagiotakos, T. and Fardis, M.N. (2001), "Deformation of R.C. members at yielding and ultimate", ACI Struct. J., 98(2), 135-148.
  30. Park, Y.J., Ang, A.H.S. and Wen, Y.K. (1987), "Damage limiting aseismic design of buildings", Earthq. Spectra, 3(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585416
  31. Paulay, T. and Priestley, M.J.N. (1992), "Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings", Wiley-Interscience Publication by John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
  32. Pinto, A.V. (1996), "Pseudodynamic and shaking table tests on R.C. bridges", ECOEST and PREC8, Report $N^{\circ}$ 5.
  33. Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M. and Kowalsky, M.J. (2007), "Displacement-based seismic design of structures", IUSS Press, Pavia, Italy.
  34. Puglia, R., Vona, M., Klin, P., Ladina, C., Masi, A., Priolo, E. and Silvestri, F. (2012), "Analysis of site response and building damage distribution induced by the 31 October 2002 earthquake at San Giuliano di Puglia (Italy)", Earthq. Spectra.
  35. Saatcioglu, M., Ozcebe, G. and Lee, B.C.K. (1988), "Tests of reinforced concrete columns under uniaxial and beaxial load reversals", Report of Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
  36. Saatcioglu, M. and Ozcebe, G. (1989), "Response of reinforced concrete columns to simulated seismic loading", ACI Struct. J., 86(1), 3-12.
  37. Valles, R.E., Reinhorn, A.M., Kunnath, S.K., Li, C. and Madan, A. (1996), "Idarc 2d Version 4.0: a program for the inelastic damage analysis of buildings", Technical Report NCEER 96-0010, Buffalo, N.Y.
  38. Vona, M. and Masi, A. (2004), "Resistenza sismica di telai in c.a. progettati con il Regio Decreto 2229/1939", XI Convegno nazionale dell'Associazione Nazionale di Ingegneria Sismica, Genova (in Italian).

Cited by

  1. Simplified methods for seismic assessment of existing buildings vol.10, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.6.1405
  2. Retrofitting of vulnerable RC structures by base isolation technique vol.9, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.3.603
  3. Assessment of seismic fragility curves for existing RC buildings in Algiers after the 2003 Boumerdes earthquake vol.46, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2013.46.6.791
  4. Incorporation preference for rubber-steel bearing isolation in retrofitting existing multi storied building vol.16, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2015.16.4.503
  5. Thinking about resilient cities: studying Italian earthquakes vol.169, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1680/udap.14.00007
  6. Effective stiffness in regular R/C frames subjected to seismic loads vol.9, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.3.481
  7. An Optimized Procedure to Estimate the Economic Seismic Losses of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings due to Seismic Damage vol.8, pp.10, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8100144
  8. Seismic Risk Mitigation for a Portfolio of Reinforced Concrete Frame Buildings through Optimal Allocation of a Limited Budget vol.2018, pp.1687-8094, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8184756
  9. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Existing RC Buildings Without Seismic Details. Comparison of Nonlinear Static Methods and IDA vol.10, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836801610010158
  10. Comparison of the seismic performance of existing RC buildings designed to different codes vol.14, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.14.6.505
  11. Proactive Actions Based on a Resilient Approach to Urban Seismic Risk Mitigation vol.14, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836802014010321
  12. Comparison of Different Intervention Options for Massive Seismic Upgrading of Essential Facilities vol.10, pp.7, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10070125
  13. Seismic Retrofitting Resilience-Based for Strategic RC Buildings vol.11, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030111