Impact of Soil-Structure Interaction on Fragility Curves and Ductility Demands in 3D Reinforced Concrete Moment-Resisting Frames
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Earthquakes are one of the most devastative natural hazards that cannot be avoided by mankind. Hence, seismic risk mitigation procedures based on vulnerability assessment of the existing infrastructure is the only alternative to prevent the imperative socio- economic and human loss. The seismic analysis and vulnerability assessment procedures of building structures are usually carried out by ignoring the contribution of soil and foundation characteristics in the seismic response of the superstructure. The present work is primarily focused on investigating the soil structure interaction effects on the performance assessment of 4- story and 12-story building configurations with both fixed base and flexible base conditions designed as per IS 456 and IS 1893. Further, fragility analysis is performed using the Capacity Spectrum method and damage probability matrices are then developed for each damage state to describe the structural behavior. It has been observed from the results that consideration of the SSI effect has significantly altered the response characteristics of the models considered. It can also be observed that the constant ‘R’ value specified by IS 1893 for a particular RC MRF was found to be significantly less than the ‘R’ values computed for all the building configurations using NLS analysis. This necessitates the importance of dynamic characteristics of structures in estimating the load-carrying capacity, resulting in an adequate estimation of design forces leading to optimal design configurations.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Abdi H, Hejazi F, Jaafar MS, Karim IA. Evaluation of response modification factor for steel structures with soft story retrofitted by viscous damper device. Adv Struct Eng. 2016 Aug;19(8):1275–88.
Abou-Elfath H, Elhout E. Evaluating the response modification factors of RC frames designed with different geometric configurations. Int J Civ Eng. 2018 Dec;16(12):1699–711.
American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE 7-10. Reston (VA): ASCE; 2010.
Applied Technology Council. Structural response modification factors. ATC-19. Redwood City (CA): ATC; 1995.
Applied Technology Council. A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-resistant design. ATC-34. Redwood City (CA): ATC; 1995.
Barbat AH, Pujades LG, Lantada N. Seismic damage evaluation in urban areas using the capacity spectrum method: application to Barcelona. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2008 Oct;28(10–11):851–65.
Chaulagain H, Rodrigues H, Spacone E, Guragain R, Mallik R, Varum H. Response reduction factor of irregular RC buildings in Kathmandu valley. Earthq Eng Eng Vib. 2014 Sep;13:455–70. doi:10.1007/s11803-014-0255-8.
Chomchuen P, Boonyapinyo V. Seismic performance evaluation of RC bridges by IDA of single-run ESDOF and ISA. Sci Technol Asia. 2024;29(1):133–59.
Dutta SC, Bhattacharya K, Roy R. Response of low-rise buildings under seismic ground excitation incorporating soil–structure interaction. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. 2004 Dec;24(12):893–914.
Housing and Building National Research Center. Egyptian code for calculating loads and forces in structural work and masonry. ECP-201. Cairo: Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Planning; 2012.
Research Center for Housing and Construction. Egyptian code of practice for design and construction of concrete structures. ECP-203. Cairo: Ministry of Housing, Utilities and Urban Planning; 2007.
European Committee for Standardization. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance. Part 1: General rules, seismic actions, and rules for buildings. Brussels: CEN; 2004.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA 356. Washington (DC): FEMA; 2000.
Bureau of Indian Standards. IS 1893: Criteria for earthquake resistance design of structures – Part 1. New Delhi: BIS; 2016.
Kramer SL. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall International Series; 1996. p. 294–302.
Mondal A, Ghosh S, Reddy GR. Performance-based evaluation of the response reduction factor for ductile RC frames. Eng Struct. 2013 Nov;56:1808–19.
Newmark NM, Hall WJ. Earthquake spectra and design. Oakland (CA): Earthquake Engineering Research Institute; 1982.
Pitilakis D, Petridis C. Fragility curves for existing reinforced concrete buildings, including soil–structure interaction and site amplification effects. Eng Struct. 2022;269:114733.
Praveen O, Pithadiya M, Gopikrishna K. Influence of real ground motion records in performance assessment of RC buildings. Int J Eng. 2019 Dec;32(12):1745–52.
Oggu P, Gopikrishna K, Sewaiwar S. Seismic assessment of existing gravity load-designed RC framed building: a case study from Warangal, India. SN Appl Sci. 2020 May;2:1–3.
Oggu P, Gopikrishna K, Nagariya A. Seismic behavior and response reduction factors for concrete momentresisting frames. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2021;19:5643–63.
Sharifi S, Toopchi-Nezhad H. Seismic response modification factor of RC-frame structures based on limit state design. Int J Civ Eng. 2018 Sep;16(9):1185–200.
Wolf JP, Obernhuber P. Non-linear soil–structure–interaction analysis using dynamic stiffness or flexibility of soil in the time domain. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn. 1985 Mar;13(2):195–212.
