The research reported in this paper focuses on the assessment of the seismic performance of conventional steel moment-resisting frames (MRFs) and steel-concrete composite moment-resisting frames employing circular Concrete-Filled Steel Tube (CFST) columns. Two comparable archetypes (i.e. one steel MRF, with steel columns and steel beams; and one composite MRF, with circular CFST columns and steel beams) are designed, and used as the basis for comparison between the seismic performance associated with each typology. Both structures are designed against earthquake loads following the recommendations of Eurocode 8. The comparison of the obtained design solutions allows concluding that the amount of steel associated with the main structural members is higher for the steel-only archetype, even though the composite MRF has the higher level of lateral stiffness. This aspect is particularly relevant when one considers that a minimum level of lateral stiffness (associated with the P-Δ inter-storey drift sensitivity coefficient, θ), is imposed by the European code, which may ultimately govern the design process. The two case-studies are then numerically modelled in OpenSees, and their seismic performance is assessed through fragility assessment for a number of relevant limit states, and, finally, earthquake-induced loss estimation. In general, the results obtained clearly indicate that the composite MRF with circular CFST columns exhibits better seismic performance than the equivalent steel-only archetype. This is noticeably shown in the comparison of the fragility curves associated with the collapse limit state, which tend to show substantially higher probabilities of exceedance, at similar levels of 1st-mode spectral acceleration, for the steel-only case. Furthermore, seismic losses at several seismic intensity levels of interest tend to be higher for the steel MRF.
Seismic performance assessment of conventional steel and steel-concrete composite moment frames using CFST columns
