International journal of steel structures (국제강구조저널)

Korean Society of Steel Construction (한국강구조학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Behaviour Factor of Code-Designed Steel Moment-Resisting Frames

  • Ferraioli, Massimiliano (Department of Civil Engineering, Design, Building and Environment, Second University of Naples) ;
  • Lavino, Angelo (Department of Civil Engineering, Design, Building and Environment, Second University of Naples) ;
  • Mandara, Alberto (Department of Civil Engineering, Design, Building and Environment, Second University of Naples)
  • Received : 2013.08.26
  • Accepted : 2014.01.01
  • Published : 2014.06.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Current seismic codes are based on force-controlled design or capacity design, using the base shear concept. The most important parameter in this approach is the response modification factor, also called behaviour factor, which is used to design the structure at the ultimate limit state by taking into account its capacity to dissipate energy by means of plastic deformations. In this paper overstrength, redundancy and ductility response modification factors of steel moment resisting frames are evaluated. In order to cover a wide range of structural characteristics, 12 steel moment-resisting frames (6 regular and 6 irregular in elevation) have been designed and analysed. Both static pushover analyses and nonlinear incremental dynamic analyses have been performed. The investigation focuses on the effects of some parameters influencing the response modification factor, including the regularity, the number of spans and the number of storeys. As a conclusion, a local ductility criterion has been proposed to improve the provisions given in the Italian seismic code.

Keywords

References

  1. ATC3-06 (1978). Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  2. ATC-19 (1995). Structural response modification factors. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp. 5-32.
  3. ATC-34 (1995). A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-Resistant design. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  4. ATC-63 (2008). Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp. 6-31.
  5. Ballio, G. (1985). "ECCS approach for seismic design of steel structures against earthquakes." Proc. ECCS-IABSE Symposium, Luxemburg.
  6. Ballio, G. and Castiglioni, C. A. (1994). "An approach to the seismic design of steel structures based on cumulative damage criteria." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 23, pp. 969-986. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.4290230904
  7. Castiglioni, C. A. and Zambrano, A. (2010). "Determination of the behaviour factor of steel moment-resisting (MR) frames by a damage accumulation approach." Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 66, pp. 723-735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.11.002
  8. Como, M. and Lanni, G. (1979). Elementi di costruzioni antisismiche. Ed. Cremonese, Roma.
  9. Costa, A., Romão, X., and Sousa Oliveira, C. (2010). "A methodology for the probabilistic assessment of behaviour factors" Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 8, pp. 47-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-009-9126-5
  10. Elghazouli, Y. (2010). "Assessment of European seismic design procedures for steel framed structures." Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 8, pp. 65-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-009-9125-6
  11. EN 1998-1 (2004). Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, CEN.
  12. EN 1993-1 (2005). Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization, CEN.
  13. Fathi, M. Daneshjoo, F., and Melchers, R. E. (2006). "A method for determining the behaviour factor of momentresisting steel frames with semi-rigid connections." Engineering Structures, 28, pp. 514-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.09.006
  14. FEMA 356 (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington.
  15. FEMA 450 (2003). NEHRP Recommended Provisions and Commentary for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. Building Seismic Safety Council.
  16. Ferraioli, M. and Avossa, A. M. (2012). "Progressive collapse of seismic resistant multistorey frame buildings." Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2012, pp. 2048-2055.
  17. Genshu, T. and Yongfeng, Z. (2008). "Inelastic yielding strength demand coefficient spectra." Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 28, pp. 1004-1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.11.004
  18. Giuffre, A. and Giannini, R. (1983). La risposta non lineare delle strutture in cemento armato. Fondamenti di Ingegneria sismica, Bologna (in Italian).
  19. Italian Code NTC08 (2008). Norme tecniche per le costruzioni in zone sismiche. Ministerial Decree D.M. 14.01.08, G.U. No.9-04.02.08 (in Italian).
  20. Kappos, J. (1999). "Evaluation of behaviour factors on the basis of ductility and overstrength studies." Engineering Structures, 21, pp. 823-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00050-9
  21. Kato, B. and Akiyama, H. (1980). "Energy concentration of Multi-storey buildings" Proc. 7th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul.
  22. Krawinkler, H. and Nassar, A. A. (1992). Seismic design based on ductility and cumulative damage demands and capacities." Nonlinear seismic analysis of RC buildings, Edited by P. Fajfar and H. Krawinkler, eds. Elsevier Science, New York, pp. 23-40.
  23. Lam. N. and Wilson, J., and Hutchinson, G. (1998). "The ductility reduction factor in the seismic design of buildings." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27, pp. 749-769. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199807)27:7<749::AID-EQE761>3.0.CO;2-L
  24. Lee, L. H., Han, S. W., and Oh, Y. H. (1999). "Determination of ductility factor considering different hysteretic models." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 28, pp. 957-977. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199909)28:9<957::AID-EQE849>3.0.CO;2-K
  25. Maheri, M. R. and Akbari, R. (2003). "Seismic behaviour factor, R, for steel X-braced and knee-braced RC buildings." Engineering Structures, 25, pp. 1505-1513. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00117-2
  26. Mazzolani, F. M. and Piluso, V. (1996). Theory and design of seismic resistant steel frames. E&FN SPON.
  27. Mazzolani, F. M. and Piluso, V. (1997). "Plastic design of seismic resistant steel frames." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26(2), pp. 167-191. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199702)26:2<167::AID-EQE630>3.0.CO;2-2
  28. Miranda, E. and Bertero, V. V. (1994). "Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design." Earthquake Spectra, 10, pp. 357-379. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585778
  29. Miranda, E. (1993). "Evaluation of site-dependent inelastic seismic design spectra." Journal of Structural Engineering, 119 (5), pp. 1319-1338. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:5(1319)
  30. Montuori, R., Troisi, M., and Piluso, P. (2012). "Theory of plastic mechanism control of seismic-resistant MRFrames with Set-Backs." Open Construction and Building Technology Journal, 6, pp. 404-413. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874836801206010404
  31. Nassar, A. A. and Krawinkler, H. (1991). Seismic demands for SDOF and MDOF systems. Report No. 95, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, California, USA.
  32. Newmark, N. M. and Hall, W. J. (1973a). Seismic Design Criteria for Nuclear Reactor Facilities. Report No. 46, Building Practices for Disaster Mitigation, National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce, pp. 209-236.
  33. Newmark, N. M. and Hall, W. J. (1973b). "Procedures and criteria for earthquake resistant design." Building practice for disaster mitigation, Building science series, National Bureau of Standards, 45, pp. 94-103.
  34. Newmark, N. M. and Hall, W. J. (1982). Earthquake spectra and design. EERI Monograph Series. Oakland.
  35. Ordaz, M. and Perez-Rocha, L. E. (1998). "Estimation of strength-reduction factors for elastoplastic systems: a new approach." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27, pp. 889-901. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199809)27:9<889::AID-EQE755>3.0.CO;2-W
  36. SAP2000 (2010). Linear and nonlinear static and dynamic analysis of three-dimensional structures. Advanced Version 14.0, Analysis Ref. Manual, Computer and Structures, Berkeley, CA.
  37. SEAOC (1999). Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary. Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, CA.
  38. Uniform Building Code (1997). Uniform Building Code, Vol. 2: Structural Engineering Design Provisions. Whittier. CA.

Cited by

  1. Dynamic increase factor for pushdown analysis of seismically designed steel moment-resisting frames vol.16, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-015-0056-6
  2. Base Isolation for Seismic Retrofitting of a Multiple Building Structure: Evaluation of Equivalent Linearization Method vol.2016, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8934196
  3. An extension of an improved forced based design procedure for 3D steel structures vol.22, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2016.22.5.1115
  4. Base Isolation for Seismic Retrofitting of a Multiple Building Structure: Design, Construction, and Assessment vol.2017, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4645834
  5. Dynamic characterisation and seismic assessment of medieval masonry towers vol.86, pp.suppl2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2519-2
  6. Multi-mode pushover procedure for deformation demand estimates of steel moment-resisting frames vol.17, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-017-6022-8
  7. Earthquake Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings Using NSGA-II vol.2018, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5906279
  8. Numerical Study on Moment Resisting Frames under Monotonic and Cyclic Loads vol.763, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.763.625
  9. Evaluating the Behaviour Factor of Concentric X-Braced Steel Structures vol.763, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.763.98
  10. Seismic performance evaluation of Egyptian code-designed steel moment resisting frames vol.14, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2016.01.005
  11. A Method to Improve the Seismic Performance of Steel Moment Resisting Frames Based on Eigenfrequency Optimization vol.2019, pp.None, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8385342
  12. Seismic Performance of an Efficient Scissor-Jack-Damper Configuration vol.2020, pp.None, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2403640
  13. Behaviour Factor of Ductile Code-Designed Reinforced Concrete Frames vol.2021, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6666687
  14. Influence of the constructive features of RC existing buildings in their ductility and seismic performance vol.19, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00984-z
  15. Collapse performance assessment of steel moment frames designed to Eurocode 8 vol.126, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105445