Structural Engineering and Mechanics

  • 제73권6호
  • /
  • Pages.699-714
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1225-4568(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1598-6217(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Performance assessment of RC frame designed using force, displacement & energy based approach

  • Kumbhara, Onkar G. (Department of Applied Mechanics, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology) ;
  • Kumar, Ratnesh (Department of Applied Mechanics, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology)
  • 투고 : 2019.07.07
  • 심사 : 2019.11.12
  • 발행 : 2020.03.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Force based design (FBD) approach is prevalent in most of the national seismic design codes world over. Direct displacement based design (DDBD) and energy based design (EBD) approaches are relatively new methods of seismic design which claims to be more rational and predictive than the FBD. These three design approaches are conceptually distinct and imparts different strength, stiffness and ductility property to structural members for same plan configuration. In present study behavioural assessment of frame of six storey RC building designed using FBD, DDBD and EBD approaches has been performed. Lateral storey forces distribution, reinforcement design and results of nonlinear performance using static and dynamic methods have been compared. For the three approaches, considerable difference in lateral storey forces distribution and reinforcement design has been observed. Nonlinear pushover analysis and time history analysis results show that in FBD frame plastic deformation is concentrated in the lower storey, in EBD frame large plastic deformation is concentrated in the middle storeys though the inelastic hinges are well distributed over the height and, in DDBD frame plastic deformation is approximately uniform over the height. Overall the six storey frame designed using DDBD approach seems to be more rational than the other two methods.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adhikary, S. and Singh, Y. (2012), "Limitations of soil amplification provisions in the 2002 Indian seismic code", J. Earthq. Eng., 16(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2011.594485.
  2. Akiyama, H. (1985), Earthquake-Resistant Limit-State Design for Buildings. Japan: The University of Tokyo Press.
  3. Akiyama, H. (1988), "August. Earthquake resistant design based on the energy concept", Proceedings of the 9th WCEE, 905-910, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan.
  4. Ancheta, T.D., Darragh, R.B., Stewart, J.P., Seyhan, E., Silva, W. J., Chiou, B.S.J. and Kishida, T. (2014), "NGA-West2 database", Earthq. Spectra, 30(3), 989-1005. http://peer.berkeley.edu/ngawest2/databases/. https://doi.org/10.1193/070913EQS197M
  5. Araujo, M., Macedo, L., Marques, M. and Castro, J. M. (2016), "Code-based record selection methods for seismic performance assessment of buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 45(1), 129-148. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2620.
  6. ASCE/SEI 41-17 (2017), Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
  7. ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2016), Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
  8. ATC 19 (1995), Structural response modification factors, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California, USA.
  9. ATC 40 (1996), Seismic Evaluation and retrofit of Concrete buildings, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
  10. Bai, J., and Ou, J. (2012), "Plastic limit-state design of frame structures based on the strong-column weak-beam failure mechanism", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisboa, Portugal.
  11. Benavent-Climent, A., Pujades, L.G. and Lopez-Almansa, F. (2002), "Design energy input spectra for moderate seismicity regions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 31(5), 1151-1172. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.153.
  12. Bommer, J.J. and Acevedo, A.B. (2004), "The use of real earthquake accelerograms as input to dynamic analysis", J. Earthq. Eng., 8(1), 43-91. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246904001596.
  13. Bommer, J.J. and Ruggeri, C. (2002), "The specification of acceleration time-histories in seismic design codes", Eur. Earthq. Eng., 16(1), 3-17.
  14. Boore, D.M. (2003), "Simulation of ground-motion using the stochastic method", Pure Appl. Geophys., 160, 635-676. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00012553.
  15. Borzi, B. and Elnashai, A.S. (2000), "Refined force reduction factor for seismic design", Eng. Struct., 22(10), 1244-1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00075-9.
  16. Bradley, B.A. (2011), "Design seismic demands from seismic response analyses: a probability-based approach", Earthq. Spectra, 27(1), 213-224. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3533035.
  17. Chao, S.H., Goel, S.C. and Lee, S.S. (2007), "A seismic design lateral force distribution based on inelastic state of structures", Earthq. Spectra, 23(3), 547-569. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2753549
  18. CSI, version 20. (2017), "Integrated finite element analysis and design of structures basic analysis reference manual", Computers and Structures Inc, Berkeley (CA, USA).
  19. Dwairi, H.M., Kowalsky, M.J. and Nau, J.M. (2007), "Equivalent damping in support of direct displacement-based design", J. Earthq. Eng., 11(4), 512-530. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460601033884.
  20. Dzakic, D., Kraus, I. and Moric, D. (2012), "Direct displacement based design of regular concrete frames in compliance with Eurocode 8", Technical Gazette, 19(4), 973-982.
  21. EN 1998-1:2004, (2004), Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, Brussels: European Committee for Standardization.
  22. Fajfar, P. and Vidic, T. (1994), "Consistent inelastic design spectra: hysteretic and input energy", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 23(5), 523-537. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290230505.
  23. Fakhraddini, A. and Salajegheh, J. (2012), "Optimum automated direct displacement based design of reinforced concrete frames", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
  24. FEMA 440 (2005), Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedure, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington (DC).
  25. FEMA P695 (2009), Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington (DC).
  26. Goel, S.C., Liao, W.C., Reza Bayat, M. and Chao, S.H. (2010), "Performance-based plastic design (PBPD) method for earthquake resistant structures: an overview", Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., 19, 115-137. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.547.
  27. Gulkan, P. and Sozen, M.A. (1974), "Inelastic responses of reinforced concrete structures to earthquakes motions", ACI J. Proceedings, 71(12), 604-610.
  28. HAZUS (2006), HAZUS-MH MR1/MR2, Technical Manual, developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through agreements with the National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C.
  29. Housner, G.W. (1956), "Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes", Proceedings of the 1st World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, San Francisco.
  30. Iervolino, I. and Cornell, C.A. (2005), "Record selection for nonlinear seismic analysis of structures", Earthq. Spectra, 21(3), 685-713. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1990199
  31. Iervolino, I., Maddaloni, G. and Cosenza, E. (2008), "Eurocode 8 compliant real record sets for seismic analysis of structures", J. Earthq. Eng., 12(1), 54-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460701457173.
  32. IS 456 (2000), Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice (Fourth Revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
  33. IS 875-Part 1 (1987), Code of Practice for Design Loads (other than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures: Part 1-Dead Loads (second revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
  34. IS 875-Part 2 (1987), Code of Practice for Design Loads (other than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures: Part 2- Imposed Loads (second revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
  35. IS 1893-Part 1 (2016), Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, Part 1 general provision and buildings. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
  36. IS 13920 (2016), Ductile Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Forces -Code of Practice (First Revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
  37. Kappos, A.J. (1999), "Evaluation of behaviour factors on the basis of ductility and over-strength studies", Eng. Struct., 21(9), 823-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00050-9.
  38. Kato, B. and Akiyama, H. (1982), "Seismic design of steel buildings", J. Struct.Div., 108(8), 1709-1721. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0006013
  39. Kowalsky, M.J. (1994), "Displacement based design: A methodology for seismic design applied to RC bridge columns", M. Sc. Dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
  40. Kowalsky, M.J., Priestley, M.J. and Macrae, G.A. (1995), "Displacement-based design of RC Bridge columns in seismic regions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 24(12), 1623-1643. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290241206.
  41. Krawinkler, H., Medina, R. and Alavi, B. (2003), "Seismic drift and ductility demands and their dependence on ground motions", Eng. Struct., 25(5), 637-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00174-8.
  42. Kumar, R. and Singh, Y. (2010), "Stiffness of reinforced concrete frame members for seismic analysis", ACI Struct. J., 107(5), 607-615.
  43. Kuwamura, H. and Galambos, T. (1989), "Earthquake load for structural reliability" J. Struct. Eng., 128(8), 1046-1054. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1989)115:6(1446).
  44. Lakhade S.O., Kumar, R. and Jaiswal O.R. (2018), "Damage states of yielding and collapse for elevated water tanks supported on RC frame staging", Struct. Eng. Mech., 67(6), 587-601. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2018.67.6.587.
  45. Leelataviwat, S., Goel, S.C. and Stojadinovic, B. (1999), "Toward performance-based seismic design of structure", Earthq. Spectra, 15(3), 435-461. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586052.
  46. Loeding, S., Kowalsky, M.J. and Priestley, M.N. (1998), "Direct displacement-based design of reinforced concrete building frames", Report No. SSRP-98/08 Division of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego.
  47. Massena, B., Bento, R. and Degee, H. (2010), "Direct displacement based design of a RC frame - Case of study", Relatorio ICIST DTC, 0871-7869.
  48. Medhekar, M.S. and Kennedy, D.J.L. (2000), "Displacement-based seismic design of buildings-theory", Eng. Struct., 22(3), 201-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00092-3.
  49. Menon, D., Prasad, A.M. and Varughese, J.A. (2018), "Seismic Design Philosophy: From Force-Based to Displacement-Based Design", Adv. Indian Earthq. Eng. Seismol., 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76855-7_13.
  50. Merter, O. and Ucar, T. (2017), "Energy-based design base shear for RC frames considering global failure mechanism and reduced hysteretic behavior", Struct. Eng. Mech., 63(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.63.1.023.
  51. Moehle, J.P. (1992), "Displacement-based design of RC structures subjected to earthquakes", Earthq. Spectra, 8(3), 403-428. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585688.
  52. Moghim, F. and Saadatpour, M.M. (2008), "The applicability of Direct Displacement-Based Design in designing concrete buildings located in near-fault regions", Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
  53. Mukherjee, S. and Gupta, V.K. (2002), "Wavelet-based generation of spectrum-compatible time-histories", Soil Dynam. Earthq. Eng., 22(9-12), 799-804. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-7261(02)00101-X.
  54. Muljati I., Asisi F. and Willyanto K. (2015), "Performance of force based design versus direct displacement based design in predicting seismic demands of regular concrete special moment resisting frames", Procedia Eng., 125, 1050-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.161.
  55. NZS 1170.5:2004 (2004), Structural design actions: Part 5: Earthquake actions New Zealand. Standards New Zealand, Wellington.
  56. Pettinga, J.D. and Priestley, M.J.N. (2005), "Dynamic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames designed with direct displacement-based design", J. Earthq. Eng., 9(2), 309-330. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246905002419.
  57. Priestley, M.J.N. (2003), "Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering, revisited", The Ninth Mallet Milne Lecture; European School for Advanced Studies in Reduction of Seismic Risk, Rose School, Pavia, Italy.
  58. Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, M.C. and Kowalsky, M.J. (2007), Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. IUSS Press, Pavia.
  59. Priestley, M.J.N. and Kowalsky, M.J. (2000), "Direct displacement based seismic design of concrete buildings", Bulletin of the New Zealand society for Earthquake Engineering, 33(4), 421-444. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.33.4.421-444
  60. SEAOC (1995), Vision 2000: Performance-Based Seismic Engineering of Buildings, Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, California.
  61. Sivraj, S., Kumbhar, O. G., and Kumar, R. (2018), "Comparison of various Energy Based Approaches for Seismic Design of RC Frame Structures", International Conference on Advances in Construction Materials and Structures(ACMS-2018) IIT Roorkee, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India, March.
  62. Takeda, T, Sozen, M.A. and Nielsen, N.N. (1970), "Reinforced concrete response to simulated earthquakes", J. Struct. Div., 96(12), 2557-2573. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0002765
  63. Vidot-Vega, A.L. and Kowalsky, M.J. (2010), "Relationship between strain, curvature, and drift in reinforced concrete moment frames in support of performance-based seismic design", ACI Struct. J., 107(3), 291-299.
  64. Whittaker, A. and Rojahn, C. (1999), "Seismic response modification factors", J. Struct. Eng., 125, 438-444. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:4(438).

피인용 문헌

  1. An energy-based approach to determine the yield force coefficient of RC frame structures vol.21, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2021.21.1.037
  2. Derivation of yield force coefficient for RC frames considering energy balance and P-delta effects vol.79, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2021.79.4.429
  3. Influence of torsional irregularity on tri-directional floor response spectra used in industrial buildings vol.7, pp.1, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00639-1