Seismic Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frames Using Forced-Based and Energy-Based Methods

Document Type : Articles

Authors

1 Malayer University, Malayer, Iran

2 Malayer Branch, Islamic Azad University, Malayer, Iran

Abstract

One of the novel methods for design of civil engineering structures is energy based design approach. In this method, by determining the input energy and balancing between the accomplished works by the members of structures under a pre-determined mechanism, the base shear is calculated, and structures are re-designed. From the beginning of the design, selection of the appropriate mechanism and determining the target drift are the main advantages of this approach. Furthermore, compared with forced-based design method, removing the undesirable mechanisms is the superiority of this method. In this paper, reinforced concrete frames have been designed using Iranian concrete code (ABA) and energy method (weak beam-strong column). The main difference between two approaches is the calculation of base shear of structures. Unlike the force-based method, energy method does not directly use the force reduction factor (R). In this research, 4, 7 and 12-story special reinforced concrete frames have been designed using force-based and energy-based methods, and then for seismic evaluation of the frames; nonlinear static and dynamic analyses have been conducted. The results show that for designed structures using energy method, the relative displacements of the stories are uniform, and the plastic hinges have been appeared in the beams. For frames designed by energy method, whole structural capacities are participated in the earthquake energy dissipation process.

Keywords


  1. Housner, G.W (1956) Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes. Proceedings of 1st World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California, 5, 1–13.
  2. Akiyama, H. (1985) Earthquake Resistant Limit-State Design for Buildings. University of Tokyo.
  3. Uang, C.M., Bertero, V. (1988) Use of Energy as a Design Criterion in Earthquake Resistant Design. Report, Berkeley, California: Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
  4. Leelataviwat, S., Goel, S.C., Stojadinović, B. (1999) Toward performance-based seismic design of structures. Earthquake Spectra, 15(3), 435-461.
  5. Bai, J., Ou, J. (2012) Plastic limit-state design of frame structures based on the strong-column weak-beam failure mechanism. The 15th World Congress on Earthquake Engineering.
  6. Lee, S.-S., and Goel, S.C. (2001) Performance-Based Design of Steel Moment Frames Using Target Drift and Yield Mechanism. Report No. UMCEE 01-17, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  7. Dwairi, H.M., Kowalsky, M.J., Nau, J.M. (2007) Equivalent damping in support of direct displacement-based design. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 11, 512-530.
  8. FEMA (2000) Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Report No. FEMA 356, Washington, DC.
  9. FEMA (2008) Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures. FEMA 440, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC.
  10. Liao, W.-C. (2012) Performance-based plastic design of earthquake resistant reinforced concrete moment frames. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 20(3), 304-310.
  11. Paulay, T.M., Priestley, J.N. (1992) Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Buildings. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  12. Chao, S-H., Goel, S.C. Leec, S.S. (2007) A seismic design lateral force distribution based on inelastic state of structures. Earthquake Spectra, 23(3), 547-569.
  13. Lee, S.S., Goel, S.C. (2001) Performance-Based Design of Steel Moment Frames Using Target Drift and Yield Mechanism. Report No. UMCEE 01-17, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  14. Chao, S.H. and Goel, S.C. (2008) A modified equation for expected maximum shear strength of the special segment for design of special truss moment frames. AISC Engineering Journal, second quarter, 117-125.
  15. ACI Committee 318 (2008) Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete and Commentary (ACI318-08/ACI318R-08). American Concrete Institute, Detroit.
  16. CSI, ETABS v.9.7.4 User Manual. Computers & Structures Inc.
  17. Seismosoft, SeismoStruct Verification Report for version 6, website: www.seismosoft.com.
  18. Islamic Republic of Iran Management and Planning Organization (2007) Instruction for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, No. 360. Office of Deputy for Technical Affairs, Technical Criteria Codification & Earthquake Risk Reduction Affairs Bureau.
  19. PEER, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center: PEER NGA Database, University of California, Berkeley, http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga.