A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Existing Steel Moment Resisting Frame Buildings: a Critical Comparison of Engineering Demand Parameters
Recent seismic events have continued to underline the high earthquake vulnerability of existing buildings structures and the associated direct (e.g., injuries, casualties, repair cost) and indirect (e.g., downtime) losses. Therefore, there is an urgent need for advanced code standards able to effectively assess their seismic vulnerability allowing a careful evaluation of their safety. A reliable assessment is crucial for determining whether the structure performs satisfactorily or not; if it requires of measures to mitigate the effect of the earthquake loads; or the possibility of including a retrofit solution to bring up its behavior to the required levels of performance. Therefore, modern assessment standards, such as the Eurocode 8 Part 3 in Europe, and the ASCE 41 in the United States, have been developed to provide guidelines to study the performance of existing structures. These codes propose methods to gather information from the structure, to deal with the uncertainty attained to the data collecting process and to perform linear and non-linear structural analyses. The European code provides with performance requirements and compliance criteria for different limit states in a prescriptive way. In contrast, the American regulations offer suggestions on the hazard levels related to the different limit states, and provide with acceptance criteria for each of them, allowing the stakeholders to make the final decision on the desired performance level. In particular, for steel moment resisting frames, the Eurocode has requirements for certain components, and provides detailed numerical compliance criteria for beams, columns and connections, similar to those provided by the older versions of the American code. However, in some cases these criteria ignore the interaction between simultaneous effects which may lead to the overestimation of the capacity. On the other hand, the ASCE 41-06 and ASCE 41-13 provide more detailed numerical acceptance criteria based on more recent research, but their results have been ...
Existing Steel Moment Resisting Frame Buildings: a Critical Comparison of Engineering Demand Parameters
Recent seismic events have continued to underline the high earthquake vulnerability of existing buildings structures and the associated direct (e.g., injuries, casualties, repair cost) and indirect (e.g., downtime) losses. Therefore, there is an urgent need for advanced code standards able to effectively assess their seismic vulnerability allowing a careful evaluation of their safety. A reliable assessment is crucial for determining whether the structure performs satisfactorily or not; if it requires of measures to mitigate the effect of the earthquake loads; or the possibility of including a retrofit solution to bring up its behavior to the required levels of performance. Therefore, modern assessment standards, such as the Eurocode 8 Part 3 in Europe, and the ASCE 41 in the United States, have been developed to provide guidelines to study the performance of existing structures. These codes propose methods to gather information from the structure, to deal with the uncertainty attained to the data collecting process and to perform linear and non-linear structural analyses. The European code provides with performance requirements and compliance criteria for different limit states in a prescriptive way. In contrast, the American regulations offer suggestions on the hazard levels related to the different limit states, and provide with acceptance criteria for each of them, allowing the stakeholders to make the final decision on the desired performance level. In particular, for steel moment resisting frames, the Eurocode has requirements for certain components, and provides detailed numerical compliance criteria for beams, columns and connections, similar to those provided by the older versions of the American code. However, in some cases these criteria ignore the interaction between simultaneous effects which may lead to the overestimation of the capacity. On the other hand, the ASCE 41-06 and ASCE 41-13 provide more detailed numerical acceptance criteria based on more recent research, but their results have been ...
Existing Steel Moment Resisting Frame Buildings: a Critical Comparison of Engineering Demand Parameters
Gutiérrez-Urzúa, LF (author) / Freddi, F (author) / Di Sarno, L (author)
2020-09-18
In: Proceedings of the 17th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (17WCEE). World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (WCEE): Sendai, Japan. (2020)
Paper
Electronic Resource
English
DDC:
621
Progressive Collapse of Moment Resisting Steel Frame Buildings
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2005
Engineering Implication of Ground Motions on Welded Steel Moment Resisting Frame Buildings
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2007
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2009
Engineering Implications of Ground Motions on Welded Steel Moment Resisting Frame Buildings
| Springer Verlag | 2007