Seismic collapse risk of reinforced concrete hillside buildings in Indian Himalayan belt

Author(s):  
Richa Tatoba Patil ◽  
Meera Raghunandan
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (03) ◽  
pp. 1850008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satish Bhagat ◽  
Anil C. Wijeyewickrema

In this paper, the seismic collapse probability of base-isolated reinforced concrete buildings considering pounding with a moat wall and financial loss estimation is studied. For this purpose, three-dimensional finite element models of a code-compliant 10-story base-isolated shear wall-frame (BI-SWF) building and a 10-story base-isolated moment resisting frame (BI-MRF) building are used. Results indicate that the BI-MRF building has a greater probability of collapse compared to that of the BI-SWF building, the probability of collapse in 50 years for the BI-MRF building is 1.3 times greater than that of the BI-SWF building for both no pounding and pounding cases. The probability of collapse increases when pounding is considered, which results in a smaller value of the collapse margin ratio compared to no pounding case for both the buildings. The financial losses resulting from damage to the BI-MRF and BI-SWF buildings under design earthquake (DE) and risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER) levels are calculated for the no pounding case, since there was no pounding under DE-level and very few instances of pounding under MCER-level. Calculation of financial losses due to damage to structural and nonstructural components, service equipment and downtime shows that the BI-SWF building results in larger repair costs and downtime cost compared to the BI-MRF building.


Author(s):  
Naveed Ahmad ◽  
Muhammad Rizwan ◽  
Muhammad Ashraf ◽  
Akhtar Naeem Khan ◽  
Qaisar Ali

FEMA-P695 procedure was applied for seismic collapse safety evaluation of reinforced concrete moment resisting frames with/without beam-column joint detailing common in Pakistan. The deficient frame lacks shear reinforcement in joints and uses concrete of low compressive strength. Shake-table tests were performed on 1:3 reduced scale two-story models, to understand the progressive inelastic response of chosen frames and calibrate the inelastic finite-element based models. The seismic design factors i.e. response modification coefficient, overstrength, ductility, and displacement amplification factors (R, W0, Rμ, Cd) were quantified. Response modification factor R = 7.05 was obtained for the frame with beam-column joint detailing while R = 5.30 was obtained for the deficient frame. The corresponding deflection amplification factor Cd/R was found equal to 0.82 and 1.03, respectively. A suite of design spectrum compatible accelerograms was obtained from PEER strong ground motions for incremental dynamic analysis of numerical models. Collapse fragility functions were developed using a probabilistic nonlinear dynamic reliability-based method. The collapse margin ratio (CMR) was calculated as the ratio of seismic intensity corresponding to the 50th percentile collapse probability to the seismic intensity corresponding to the MCE level ground motions. It was critically compared with the acceptable CMR (i.e. the CMR computed with reference to a seismic intensity corresponding to the 10% collapse probability instead of MCE level ground motions). Frame with shear reinforcement in beam-column joints has achieved CMR 11% higher than the acceptable thus passing the criterion. However, the deficient frame achieved CMR 29% less than the conforming frame. This confirms the efficacy of beam-column joint detailing in reducing collapse risk.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document