Performance assessment of RC frame designed using force, displacement & energy based approach

被引:7
|
作者
Kumbhar, Onkar G. [1 ]
Kumar, Ratnesh [1 ]
机构
[1] Visvesvaraya Natl Inst Technol, Dept Appl Mech, Nagpur 440010, Maharashtra, India
关键词
force based design; direct displacement based design; energy based design; target drift; seismic behavior; nonlinear analysis; SEISMIC DESIGN; RECORD SELECTION; CONCRETE FRAMES; DEMANDS; INPUT; DUCTILITY; BEHAVIOR; SPECTRA; SUPPORT; DRIFT;
D O I
10.12989/sem.2020.73.6.699
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Force based design (FBD) approach is prevalent in most of the national seismic design codes world over. Direct displacement based design (DDBD) and energy based design (EBD) approaches are relatively new methods of seismic design which claims to be more rational and predictive than the FBD. These three design approaches are conceptually distinct and imparts different strength, stiffness and ductility property to structural members for same plan configuration. In present study behavioural assessment of frame of six storey RC building designed using FBD, DDBD and EBD approaches has been performed. Lateral storey forces distribution, reinforcement design and results of nonlinear performance using static and dynamic methods have been compared. For the three approaches, considerable difference in lateral storey forces distribution and reinforcement design has been observed. Nonlinear pushover analysis and time history analysis results show that in FBD frame plastic deformation is concentrated in the lower storey, in EBD frame large plastic deformation is concentrated in the middle storeys though the inelastic hinges are well distributed over the height and, in DDBD frame plastic deformation is approximately uniform over the height. Overall the six storey frame designed using DDBD approach seems to be more rational than the other two methods.
引用
收藏
页码:699 / 714
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Studies on performance-based seismic design for RC frame structures with energy dissipation
    Sui, Jieyjing
    Niu, Ditao
    Xu, Chenming
    PROGRESS IN INDUSTRIAL AND CIVIL ENGINEERING, PTS. 1-5, 2012, 204-208 : 2662 - 2666
  • [32] Application of Endurance Time Method in Seismic Assessment of RC Frames Designed by Direct Displacement-Based Procedure
    Karimzada, Nisar Ahmad
    Shirkhani, Amir
    Aktas, Engin
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, 2024, 35 (02): : 23 - 64
  • [33] Drift, strain limits and ductility demands for RC moment frames designed with displacement-based and force-based design methods
    Vidot-Vega, Aidcer L.
    Kowalsky, Mervyn J.
    ENGINEERING STRUCTURES, 2013, 51 : 128 - 140
  • [34] Seismic loss risk assessment of RC frame structures designed according to Chinese code
    Wang, Shuhe
    Li, Ximing
    Zhang, Jubing
    EARTHQUAKES AND STRUCTURES, 2021, 20 (05) : 571 - 581
  • [35] Assessment of collapse safety margin for DDBD and FBD-designed RC frame buildings
    Alimohammadi, Dariush
    Abadi, Esmaeel Izadi Zaman
    STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND MECHANICS, 2022, 83 (02) : 229 - 244
  • [36] A detailed seismic performance assessment procedure for RC frame buildings
    Yakut, Ahmet
    Erduran, Emrah
    ADVANCES IN EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING FOR URBAN RISK REDUCTION, 2006, 66 : 135 - +
  • [37] Performance assessment of RC frame buildings with open ground storey
    Tamizharasi, G.
    Shubham, T.
    Aditya, L.
    Senthilkumar, R.
    STRUCTURES, 2023, 58
  • [38] Displacement based seismic assessment for retrofitting RC structures
    Siachos, G
    Dritsos, S
    HIGH PERFORMANCE STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS II, 2004, : 631 - 641
  • [39] Seismic Fragility of RC Wall-Frame Buildings Using the DDBD Approach for Vulnerability Assessment
    Palsanawala, Twinsy N.
    Vasanwala, Sandip A.
    Bhaiya, Vishisht
    Gondaliya, Kaushik M.
    PRACTICE PERIODICAL ON STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, 2023, 28 (04)
  • [40] A performance based approach for the seismic assessment and rehabilitation of existing RC buildings
    Paolo Negro
    Elena Mola
    Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 2017, 15 : 3349 - 3364