International journal of steel structures (국제강구조저널)

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

DOI QR Code

Proposing a Method for Robustness Index Evaluation of the Structures Based on the Risk Analysis of Main Shock and Aftershock

  • Received : 2017.09.29
  • Accepted : 2018.04.26
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Investigating remained damages from terrible earthquakes, it could be concluded that some events including explosion because of defect and failure in the building mechanical facilities or caused by gas leak, firing, aftershocks, etc., which are occurred during or a few time after the earthquake, will increase the effects of damages. In this paper, by introducing a complete risk analysis which included direct and indirect risks for earthquake (the main shock) and aftershock, the corresponding robustness index was created that called as "robustness index sequential critical events risk-based". One of the main properties of the intended robustness index is using progressive collapse percentage in its evaluation. Then, in a numerical example for a 4-storey moment resisting steel frame structure, a method is presented for obtaining all effective parameters in robustness index evaluation based on the intended risk and at last its results were reported.

Keywords

References

  1. Abdollahzadeh, G. R., & Faghihmaleki, H. (2017a). Probabilistic twohazard risk assessment of near-fault and far-fault earthquakes in a structure subjected to earthquake-induced gas explosion. Journal of Building Engineering, 13, 294-304.
  2. Abdollahzadeh, G., & Faghihmaleki, H. (2017b). Seismic-explosion risk-based robustness index of structures. International Journal of Damage Mechanics, 26(4), 523-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789516651919
  3. Abrahamson, N. A. (2000). Effects of rupture directivity on probabilistic seismic hazard analysis. In Sixth international conference on seismic zonation, Oakland, California. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
  4. Botez, M., Bredean, L., & Ioani, A. M. (2015). Improving the accuracy of progressive collapse risk assessment: Efficiency and contribution of supplementary progressive collapse resisting mechanisms. Journal of Computers and Structures, 174, 54-65.
  5. Brett, C., & Lu, Y. (2013). Assessment of robustness of structures: Current state of research. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 7(4), 356-368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0220-z
  6. Brunesi, E., Nascimbene, R., Parisi, F., & Augenti, N. (2015). Progressive collapse fragility of reinforced concrete framed structures through incremental dynamic analysis. Journal of Engineering Structures, 104, 65-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.09.024
  7. CPNI (2011). Review of international research on structural robustness and disproportionate collapse. Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI), USA.
  8. Eurocode 8. (2005). Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Brussels: Comite Europeen de Normalisation.
  9. Faghihmaleki, H., Abdollahzadeh, G. R., & Esmaili, H. (2018). A survey of hysteresis energy distribution and lateral displacement in steel buildings with CCB brace at internal and external frames. International Journal of Structural Integrity, 9(1), 38-49. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSI-03-2017-0018
  10. Fascetti, A., Kunnath, S. K., & Nistico, N. (2015). Robustness evaluation of RC frame buildings to progressive collapse. Journal of Engineering Structures, 86, 242-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.008
  11. GSA. (2013). General services administration alternate path analysis and design guidelines for progressive collapse resistance. Washington: General Services Administration (GSA).
  12. Kanno, Y., & Takewaki, I. (2006). Sequential semidefinite program for maximum robustness design of structures under load uncertainty. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 130(2), 265-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-006-9102-z
  13. Khaloo, A., Nozhati, S., Masoomi, M., & Faghihmaleki, H. (2016). Influence of earthquake record truncation on fragility curves of RC frames with different damage indices. Journal of Building Engineering, 7, 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2016.05.003
  14. Lu, D. G., Cui, S. S., Song, P. Y., Chen, Z. H., (2010). Robustness assessment for progressive collapse of framed structures using pushdown analysis method. In 4th international workshop on reliable engineering computing (REC 2010). National University of Singapore, https://doi.org/10.3850/978-981-08-5118-7-063.
  15. Nielsen, J. J. (2009). Probabilistic analysis of the robustness of earthquake resistant steel structures. Master Thesis, Faculty of Engineering and Science and Medicine, Aalborg University.
  16. Rezvani, F. H., Yousefi, A. M., & Ronagh, H. R. (2015). Effect of span length on progressive collapse behaviour of steel moment resisting frames. Journal of Structures, 3, 81-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2015.03.004
  17. Ruiz-Garcí, J., & Manriquez, J. C. N. (2011). Evaluation of drift demands in existing steel frames under as-recorded far-field and near-fault main shock-aftershock seismic sequences. Journal of Engineering Structures, 33, 621-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.11.021
  18. Sap 2000 (2015). Structural analysis program (SAP). Computers and Structures, Inc, Version 18.01, USA.
  19. SeismoSignal. (2016). Seismosoft-earthquake engineering solution software, Pavia, Italy.
  20. SIP. (2014). Major damages in the building structures due to a strong earthquake. Part of Natural Disasters, Statistical Institute of Pooyesh (SIP), Tehran, Iran, Report No. 94-489, pp. 102-158.
  21. Somerville, P. G. (2003). Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 137(1), 201-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9201(03)00015-3
  22. Somerville, P. G., Smith, N. F., Graves, R. W., & Abrahamson, N. A. (1997). Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismological Research Letters, 68(1), 199-222. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.68.1.199
  23. Sorensen, J. D. (2011). Framework for robustness assessment of timber structures. Journal of Engineering Structures, 33(2011), 3078-3092.
  24. UFC 4-023-03 (2013). Design of buildings to resist progressive collapse. Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), Including Change 2, USA.
  25. Yang, G., & Xi-la, L. (2014). Topology-based quantitative assessment of structural robustness. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University., 19(3), 257-264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12204-014-1497-3
  26. Zhai, C. H., Wen, W. P., Chen, Z. Q., Li, S., & Xie, L. L. (2013). Damage spectra for the main shock-after shock sequence-type ground motions. Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 45, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.10.001

Cited by

  1. Reliability index assessment by different methods in the concrete bridges subjected to corrosion vol.4, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/24705314.2019.1657706
  2. Progressive collapse risk and reliability of buildings encountering limited gas-pipe explosion after moderate earthquakes vol.2, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2509-6