Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Limit states of RC structures with first floor irregularities

  • Favvata, Maria J. (Department of Civil Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace) ;
  • Naoum, Maria C. (Department of Civil Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace) ;
  • Karayannis, Chris G. (Department of Civil Engineering, Democritus University of Thrace)
  • Received : 2013.03.28
  • Accepted : 2013.08.31
  • Published : 2013.09.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The seismic performance of reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures with irregularities leading to soft first floor is studied using capacity assessment procedures. The soft first story effect is investigated for the cases: (i) slab-column connections without beams at the first floor, (ii) tall first story height and (iii) pilotis type building (open ground story). The effects of the first floor irregularity on the RC frame structure performance stages at global and local level (limit states) are investigated. Assessment based on the Capacity Spectrum Method (ATC-40) and on the Coefficient Method (FEMA 356) is also examined. Results in terms of failure modes, capacity curves, interstory drifts, ductility requirements and infills behaviour are presented. From the results it can be deduced that the global capacity of the structures is decreased due to the considered first floor morphology irregularities in comparison to the capacities of the regular structure. An increase of the demands for interstory drift is observed at the first floor level due to the considered irregularities while the open ground floor structure (pilotis type) led to even higher values of interstory drift demands at the first story. In the cases of tall first story and slab-column connections without beams soft-story mechanisms have also been observed at the first floor. Rotational criteria (EC8-part3) showed that the structure with slab-column connections without beams exhibited the most critical response.

Keywords

References

  1. Antonopoulos, T.A. and Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (2012), "Seismic evaluation and upgrading of RC buildings with weak open ground stories", Earthquakes and Structures, 3(3-4), 611-628. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.3_4.611
  2. Applied Technology Council (1996), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings (ATC-40), Redwood City, CA.
  3. Bhatt, C. and Bento, R. (2011), "Extension of the CSM-FEMA440 to plan-asymmetric real building structures", Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 40(11), 1263-1282. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1087
  4. Celarec, D., Ricci, P. and Dolsek, M. (2012), "The sensitivity of seismic response parameters to the uncertain modeling variables of masonry-infilled reinforced concrete frames", Engineering Structures, 35, 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.11.007
  5. Chintanapakdee, C. and Chopra, A.K. (2004), "Evaluation of modal pushover analysis using vertically irregular frames", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, August.
  6. Das, S. and Nau, J.M. (2003), "Seismic design aspects of vertically irregular reinforced concrete buildings", J. Earthquake Spectra, 19, 455-477. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1595650
  7. De Stefano, M. and Pintucchi, B. (2008), "A review of research on seismic behavior of irregular building structures since 2002", Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 6(2), 285-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-007-9052-3
  8. Eurocode 2 (CEN 2004), Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, EN 1992-1-1, Brussels.
  9. Eurocode 8 (CEN 2004), Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, EN 1998-1, Brussels.
  10. Eurocode 8 (CEN 2004), Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 3: Assessment and Retrofitting of buildings, (EC8-part3), EN 1998-3, Brussels.
  11. Favvata, M.J., Naoum, M.C. and Karayannis, C.G. (2012), "Seismic Evaluation of Infilled RC Structures with Nonlinear Static Analysis Procedures", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, September.
  12. Federal Emergency Management Agency (1997), NEHRP Guidelines for Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 273/274), Washington DC.
  13. Federal Emergency Management Agency (1999), Evaluation of earthquake damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings. Infilled Frames (FEMA 306), Washington DC.
  14. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000), Pre-standard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA-356), Washington DC.
  15. Kakaletsis, D. and Karayannis, C. (2009), "Experimental investigation of infilled reinforced concrete frames with openings", ACI Structural Journal, 106(2), 132-141.
  16. Karayannis, C., Favvata, M. and Kakaletsis, D. (2011), "Seismic behaviour of infilled and pilotis RC frame structures with beam-column joint degradation effect", Engineering Structures, 33(10), 2821-2831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.06.006
  17. Karayannis, C., Izzuddin, B. and Elnashai, A. (1994), "Application of adaptive analysis to reinforced concrete frames", Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 120(10), 2935-2957. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:10(2935)
  18. Karayannis, C., Kakaletsis, D. and Favvata, M. (2005), "Behaviour of bare and masonry infilled R/C frames under cyclic loading. Experiments and Analysis", Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Earthquake Resistant Engineering Structures, Skiathos, Greece, WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 81, 429-438.
  19. Kaushik, H.B., Rai, D.C. and Jain, S.K. (2006), "Code approaches to seismic design of masonry - infilled reinforced concrete frames: A state of the art review", J. Earthquake Spectra, 22(4), 961-983. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2360907
  20. Kirac, N., Dogan, M. and Ozbasaran, H. (2011), "Failure of weak-storey during earthquakes", J. Engineering Failure Analysis, 18, 572-581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2010.09.021
  21. Korkmaz, K.A., Demir, F. and Sivri, M. (2007), "Earthquake assessment of R/C Structures with masonry infill walls", Int. Journal of Science and Technology, 2(2), 155-164.
  22. Lee, H.S., Jung, D.W., Lee, K.B., Kim, H.C. and Lee, K. (2011), "Shake-table responses of a low-rise RC building model having irregularities at first story", Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 40(4), 517-539. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2011.40.4.517
  23. Mainstone, R. (1971), "On the stiffness and strengths of infilled frames", Institution of Civil Engineers Supplement IV, 57-90.
  24. Murty, C.V.R., Goel, R.K., Goyal, A., Jain, S.K., Sinha, R., Rai, D.C., Arlekar, J.N. and Metzger, R. (2002), "Reinforced concrete structures", J. Earthquake Spectra, 18(S1), 149-185. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2803911
  25. Pereira, V.G., Barros, R.C. and Cesar, M.T. (2009), "A parametric study of a R/C frame based on "pushover" analysis", Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Integrity, Reliability and Failure, Porto, Portugal, July.
  26. Prakash, V., Powell, G.H. and Campbell, S. (1993), DRAIN-2DX Base Program Description and User Guide: Version 1.10, Report No. UCB/SEMM-93/17. Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley.
  27. Repapis, C., Zeris, C. and Vintzileou, E. (2006), "Evaluation of the seismic performance of existing RC buildings II: A case study for regular and irregular buildings", J. Earthquake Engineering, 10(3), 429-452.
  28. Romao, X., Costa, A. and Delgado, R. (2004), "Seismic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames with setbacks", Proceedings of the 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, August.
  29. Tremblay, R. and Poncet, L. (2005), "Seismic performance of concentrically braced steel frames in multistory buildings with mass irregularity", J. Structural Engineering, 131(9), 1363-1375. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:9(1363)
  30. Tsonos, A.G. (1999), "Lateral load response of strengthened reinforced concrete beam-to-column joints", ACI Structural Journal, 96(1), 46-56.
  31. Tsonos, A.G. (2002), "Seismic repair of exterior R/C beam-to-column joints using two-sided and three-sided jackets", Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 13(1), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2002.13.1.017
  32. Tsonos, A.G. (2007), "Cyclic load behavior of RC beam-column subassemblages of modern structures", ACI Structural Journal, 104(4), 468-478.
  33. Tsonos, A.G. (2010), "Performance enhancement of R/C building columns and beam-column joints through shotcrete jacketing", J. Engineering Structures, 32(3), 726-740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.12.001

Cited by

  1. The effect of infill walls on the seismic behavior of boundary columns in RC frames vol.10, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.3.539
  2. Seismic Assessment of RC Building According to ATC 40, FEMA 356 and FEMA 440 vol.39, pp.11, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-014-1395-x
  3. Estimating uncertainty in limit state capacities for reinforced concrete frame structures through pushover analysis vol.10, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.1.141
  4. Effect of Soil Flexibility on Seismic Force Evaluation of RC Framed Buildings with Shear Wall: A Comparative Study of IS 1893 and EUROCODE8 vol.2014, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/493745
  5. Seismic evaluation and retrofitting of reinforced concrete buildings with base isolation systems vol.10, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.2.293
  6. A simplified procedure for Nonlinear Static analysis of masonry infilled RC frames vol.101, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.07.023
  7. Multiplication factor for open ground storey buildings–a reliability based evaluation vol.15, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-016-0322-4
  8. Performance Investigation of Existing RC Buildings with Height Irregularity using the IDA Procedure pp.1559-808X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1488777
  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. Seismic Assessment of Non-conforming Infilled RC Buildings Using IDA Procedures vol.4, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00088
  12. Combined seismic and energy upgrading of existing reinforced concrete buildings using TRM jacketing and thermal insulation vol.16, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.5.625
  13. Study on Methods to Control Interstory Deflections vol.10, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10020075
  14. Influence of infill walls on modal expansion of distribution of effective earthquake forces in RC frame structures vol.18, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.18.4.437
  15. Slope topography effect on the seismic response of mid-rise buildings considering topography-soil-structure interaction vol.20, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2021.20.2.187
  16. SSI effects on the redistribution of seismic forces in one-storey R/C buildings vol.20, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2021.20.3.261
  17. Modelling of earthquake-induced pounding between adjacent structures with a non-smooth contact dynamics method vol.241, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112426
  18. Development of limit states for seismic fragility assessment of piloti-type structures verified with observed damage data vol.251, pp.no.pb, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.113562