Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Pushover analysis of prefabricated structures with various partially fixity rates

  • Akkose, Mehmet (Department of Civil Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University) ;
  • Sunca, Fezayil (Department of Civil Engineering, Cumhuriyet University) ;
  • Turkay, Alperen (Department of Civil Engineering, Cumhuriyet University)
  • Received : 2016.11.29
  • Accepted : 2018.01.16
  • Published : 2018.01.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Prefabricated structures are constructed by bolted connections of separated members. The design and analysis of these structures are generally performed by defining fully hinges for the connection of separated members at the joint of junction. In practice, these connections are not fully hinged. Therefore, the assumption of semi-rigid connections (restrained or partially fixity) instead of fully hinge connections is a more realistic approach for bolted connections used in the prefabricated elements. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of semi-rigid connections on seismic performance of prefabricated structures. Nonlinear static analysis (pushover analysis) of a selected RC prefabricated structure is performed with SAP2000 structural analysis program by considering various partially fixity percentages for bolted connections. The target values of roof displacements obtained from the analyses according to ATC-40, FEMA-356, FEMA-440, and TEC-2007 codes are compared each other. The numerical results are given in tables and figures comparatively and discussed. The results show that the effects of semi-rigid connections should be considered in design and analysis of the prefabricated structures.

Keywords

References

  1. Arslan, M.H., Korkmaz, H.H. and Gulay, F.G. (2006), "Damage and failure pattern of prefabricated structures after major earthquakes in turkey and shortfalls of the turkish earthquake code", Eng. Fail. Anal., 13, 537-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2005.02.006
  2. ASCE 41-06 (2007), Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Washington, USA.
  3. ATC-40 (1996), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California, USA.
  4. Cavdar, O. and Bayraktar, A. (2014), "Pushover and nonlinear time history analysis evaluation of a RC building collapsed during the Van (Turkey) earthquake on october 23, 2011", Nat. Hazard., 70, 657-673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0835-3
  5. Chen, W.F. and Lui, E.M. (1991), Stability Design of Steel Frames, CRC Press Inc., Taylaor and Francis Group, Florida, USA.
  6. Deyanova, M., Pampanin, S. and Nascimbene, R. (2014), "Assessment of single-storey precast concrete industrial buildings with hinged beam-column connection with and without dowels", Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul, Turkey, August.
  7. Dogan, M., O zbasaran, H. and Gunaydin, A. (2010), "Effects of seismic loading to prefabricated connections", Anadolu Univ. J. Sci. Technol., 11, 47-58.
  8. FEMA-356 (2000), Prestandart and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, USA.
  9. FEMA-440 (2005), Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, USA.
  10. Filho, M.S., Guimaraes, M.J.R., Sahlit, C.L. and Brito, J.L.V. (2004), "Wind pressures in framed structures with semi-rigid connections", J. Brazil. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng., 26(2), 180-189.
  11. Goel, R.K. (2011), "Variability and accuracy of target displacement from nonlinear static procedures", ISRN Civil Eng., 2011, Article ID 582426, 16.
  12. Gunawardena, T., Ngo, T. and Mendis, P. (2016), "Behaviour of multi-storey prefabricated modular buildings under seismic loads", Earthq. Struct., 11(6), 1061-1076. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.6.1061
  13. Kartal, M.E. (2004), "The effect of partial fixity at nodal points on the behaviour of the truss and prefabricated structures", MSc. Dissertation, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Zonguldak, Turkey. (in Turkish)
  14. Kartal, M.E., Basaga, H.B., Bayraktar, A. and Muvafik, M. (2010), "Effects of semi-rigid connection on structural responses", Elec. J. Struct. Eng., 10, 22-35.
  15. Magliulo, G., Fabbrocino, G. and Manfredi, G. (2008), "Seismic assessment of existing precast industrial buildings using static and dynamic nonlinear analyses", Eng. Struct., 30(9), 2580-2588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.003
  16. Mander, J.B. Priestly, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988), "Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 114(8), 1804-1826. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)
  17. McGuire, W., Gallagher, R.H. and Ziemian, R.D. (1999), Matrix Structural Analysis, 2nd Edition, John Wiley & Sons Inc., USA.
  18. Monforton, G.R. and Wu, T.S. (1963), "Matrix analysis of semirigidly connected frames", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 89(ST6), 13-42.
  19. Nguyen, P. and Kim, S. (2014), "Nonlinear inelastic time-history of three-dimensional semi-rigid steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 101, 192-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.05.009
  20. Popa, V. and Cotofana, D. (2009), "Probabilistic seismic assessment of single story precast concrete buildings", Proceedings of the 11th WSEAS International Conference on Sustainability in Science Engineering, Timisoara, Romania, May.
  21. SAP2000 (2015), Structural Analysis Program, Computers and Structures Inc., Version: 17.1.1, Berkeley, California, USA.
  22. Sarkar, P., Prasad, A.M. and Menon, D. (2016), "Seismic evaluation of rc stepped building frames using improved pushover analysis", Earthq. Struct., 10(4), 913-938. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.4.913
  23. Sekulovic, M. and Salatic, R. (2001), "Nonlinear analyses of frames with flexible connections", Comput. Struct., 79, 1097-1107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(01)00004-9
  24. 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
  25. TEC-2007 (2007), Ministry of Public Works and Settlement of Republic of Turkey, Turkish Earthquake Code, Ankara, Turkey.
  26. Tehranizadeh, M., Amirmojahedi, M. and Moshref, A. (2016), "Simplified methods for seismic assessment of existing buildings", Earthq. Struct., 10(6), 1405-1428. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.10.6.1405

Cited by

  1. Three-field mixed beam-column finite element for geometric and material nonlinear analysis vol.79, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2021.79.2.211