Quantifying the effects of long‐duration earthquake ground motions on the financial losses of steel moment resisting frame buildings of varying design risk category

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seong‐Hoon Hwang ◽  
Sujith Mangalathu ◽  
Jong‐Su Jeon
Keyword(s):  
Ground Motions ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
Earthquake Ground Motions ◽  
Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Frame Buildings ◽  
Moment Resisting ◽  
Steel Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Financial Losses

Evaluation of the seismic level of protection afforded to steel moment resisting frame structures designed for different design philosophies

1999 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aiman Biddah ◽  
Arthur C Heidebrecht
Keyword(s):  
Collapse Mechanism ◽  
Steel Moment Resisting Frames ◽  
Design Philosophy ◽  
Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Panel Zone ◽  
Statistical Measures ◽  
Frame Buildings ◽  
Moment Resisting ◽  
Steel Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Recent Earthquakes

Steel moment resisting frames have been considered as excellent systems for resisting seismic loads. However, after recent earthquakes (e.g., Northridge, California, in 1994 and Kobe, Japan, in 1995) the confidence in this structural system was reduced as a result of various types of damage that moment resisting steel frames suffered. This paper presents the results of the evaluation of seismic level of protection afforded to steel moment resisting frame buildings designed in accordance with the National Building Code of Canada. Six- and 10-storey office buildings located in a region of intermediate seismic hazard are designed in accordance with the current Canadian code provisions. Three different design philosophies are considered, namely strong column - weak beam (SCWB), weak column - strong beam (WCSB), and strong column - weak panel zone (SCWP). The performance of these frames is evaluated dynamically by subjecting an inelastic model to an ensemble of 12 actual strong ground motion records. The model takes into account both connection flexibility and panel zone shear deformation. The results are presented in terms of response parameters determined from static pushover analyses, as well as statistical measures of the maximum response parameters determined from the inelastic dynamic analyses. The computed performance of the frames is evaluated in order to assess both the overall level of protection of the frames and the preferred design philosophy. It is concluded that a well-designed and well-detailed ductile moment resisting frame designed using either the SCWB or SCWP design philosophy can withstand ground motions of twice the design level with very little likelihood of collapse, whereas a frame designed using the WCSB approach is ill-conditioned and may develop a collapse mechanism at an excitation level well below twice the design level.Key words: seismic, ductile, steel, frame buildings, performance, design, ductility, damage, inelastic, dynamic.

scholarly journals Characterizing Ground Motions that Collapse Steel Special Moment-Resisting Frames or Make Them Unrepairable

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 813-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna H. Olsen ◽  
Thomas H. Heaton ◽  
John F. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Regression Models ◽  
Ground Motions ◽  
Spectral Acceleration ◽  
Ground Displacement ◽  
Intensity Measures ◽  
Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Frame Buildings ◽  
Moment Resisting ◽  
Equivalent Frame ◽  
Special Moment Resisting Frame

This work applies 64,765 simulated seismic ground motions to four models each of 6- or 20-story, steel special moment-resisting frame buildings. We consider two vector intensity measures and categorize the building response as “collapsed,” “unrepairable,” or “repairable.” We then propose regression models to predict the building responses from the intensity measures. The best models for “collapse” or “unrepairable” use peak ground displacement and velocity as intensity measures, and the best models predicting peak interstory drift ratio, given that the frame model is “repairable,” use spectral acceleration and epsilon ( ∊) as intensity measures. The more flexible frame is always more likely than the stiffer frame to “collapse” or be “unrepairable.” A frame with fracture-prone welds is substantially more susceptible to “collapse” or “unrepairable” damage than the equivalent frame with sound welds. The 20-story frames with fracture-prone welds are more vulnerable to P-delta instability and have a much higher probability of collapse than do any of the 6-story frames.

Seismic performance of reinforced concrete ductile moment-resisting frame buildings located in different seismic regions

1992 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 688-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. Zhu ◽  
W. K. Tso ◽  
A. C. Heidebrecht
Keyword(s):  
Reinforced Concrete ◽  
Seismic Design ◽  
Ground Motions ◽  
Base Shear ◽  
High Rise ◽  
Moment Resisting Frame ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Frame Buildings ◽  
Moment Resisting ◽  
Seismic Regions

Seismic areas in Canada are classified into three categories for three different combinations of acceleration and velocity seismic zones (Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv), and ground motions in different zonal combination areas are expected to have different frequency characteristics. The National Building Code of Canada specifies different levels of seismic design base shear for short-period buildings located in areas with different zonal combinations. The specification of seismic design base shear for long-period buildings is directly tied to zonal velocity, irrespective of seismic zonal combination. This paper evaluates the seismic performance of both high-rise long-period and low rise short-period reinforced concrete ductile moment-resisting frame buildings located in seismic regions having Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv. Two frame buildings have 10 and 18 storeys were used as structural models for high-rise buildings, while a set of four-storey buildings were used to represent low-rise buildings. All buildings were designed to the current Canadian seismic provisions and concrete material code. Three groups of earthquake records were selected as representative ground motions in the three zonal combination regions. The inelastic responses of the designed buildings to the three groups of ground motions were analyzed statistically. The results indicate that the distribution of inelastic deformations is significantly different for high-rise frame buildings situated in seismic regions with Za < Zv, Za = Zv, and Za > Zv. Inelastic deformation is concentrated in the lower storeys for high-rise buildings located in Za < Zv areas, whereas significant inelastic deformation can develop in the upper storeys for high-rise buildings situated in Za > Zv regions. The use of three different levels of seismic design base shear for short-period structures improves the consistency of ductility demands on low-rise buildings situated in the three different zonal combination regions. Despite the use of appropriate design base shears for different seismic regions, the ductility demands for these low-rise buildings are relatively high. To avoid excessive ductility demands, it is suggested that the seismic strengths for low-rise short-period buildings should not be significantly reduced from their elastic design base shears. Key words: earthquake, ground motion, seismic, design, reinforced concrete, frame buildings, beams, columns, ductility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document