Skip to main content
Log in

Seismic Loss Estimation of Steel Special Moment Frames Designed According to Different Analysis Methods

  • Published:
International Journal of Steel Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In current seismic design standards such as ASCE/SEI 7, three seismic load analysis methods are permitted to design structures, which are equivalent lateral force (ELF) procedure, modal response spectrum analysis (RSA), and response history analysis (RHA). The aim of this study was to conduct seismic loss estimation to investigate the impact of using ELF and RSA on the seismic loss. For this purpose, 4- and 12-story regular steel special moment frames (SMFs) were repeatedly designed using ELF and RSA. The expected annual losses for 4- and 12-story SMF buildings designed using the RSA were 30% and 23% higher than those of corresponding buildings designed using the ELF. The main cause of larger seismic loss in RSA buildings was attributed to lateral stiffness less than ELF buildings. More significant damage occurred in RSA buildings during frequent earthquakes, which was main contribution on the increase in the seismic loss.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AISC. (2016a). Seismic provisions for structural steel Buildings. ANSI/ANSI 341-16. American Institute of Steel Construction.

  • AISC. (2016b). Prequalified connections for special and intermediate steel moment frames for seismic applications. ANSI/ANSI 358-16. American Institute of Steel Construction.

  • ASCE. (2017a). Minimum design loads for building and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7-16. American Society of Civil Engineers.

  • ASCE. (2017b). Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI 41-17. American Society of Civil Engineers.

  • ATC. (2010). Modeling and acceptance criteria for seismic design and analysis of tall buildings. PEER/ATC 72-1. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center/Applied Technology.

  • Bech, D., Tremayne, B., & Houston, J. (2015). Proposed changes to steel column evaluation criteria for existing buildings. In Improving the seismic performance of existing buildings and other structures 2015, pp. 255–272.

  • Burton, H. (2014). A rocking spine for enhanced seismic performance of concrete frames with infills. Doctoral dissertation, Ph. D. dissertation, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA.

  • FEMA. (2009). Quantification of building seismic performance factors. FEMA P-695. Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  • FEMA. (2018a). Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 1—Methodology. FEMA P-58-1. Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  • FEMA. (2018b). Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 3.3 - supporting electronic materials and background documentation. FEMA P-58-3. Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  • FEMA. (2018c). Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 5 - expected seismic performance of code-conforming buildings. FEMA P-58-5. Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  • Gupta, A., & Krawinkler, H. (1999). Seismic demands for performance evaluation of steel moment resisting frame structures. Rep. No. 132. Stanford University, Stanford, CA: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center.

  • Han, S. W., Moon, K. H., & Jung, J. (2014). Cyclic performance of welded unreinforced flange-welded web moment connections. Earthquake Spectra, 30, 1163–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, S. W., & Kim, N. H. (2017). Permissible parameter ranges of access hole geometries for WUF-W connections. Earthquake Spectra, 33(2), 687–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, S. H., Elkady, A., Bardaweel, S. A., & Lignos, D. G. (2015). Earthquake loss assessment of steel frame buildings designed in highly seismic regions. In Proceedings of the 5th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COMPDYN 2015). Crete Island, Greece, pp. 1496–1512.

  • Ibarra, L.F., Medina, R.A., Krawinkler, H. (2005) Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthquake engineering andstructral dynamics, 34(12) 1489–1511. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.495.

  • Kim, T., & Han, S. W. (2021). Seismic collapse performance of steel special moment frames designed using different analysis methods. Earthquake Spectra, 37(2), 988–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lignos, D. G., & Krawinkler, H. (2011). Deterioration modeling of steel components in support of collapse prediction of steel moment frames under earthquake loading. Journal of Structural Engineering, 137(11), 1291–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lignos, D. G., Hartloper, A. R., Elkady, A., Deierlein, G. G., & Hamburger, R. (2019). Proposed updates to the ASCE 41 nonlinear modeling parameters for wide-flange steel columns in support of performance-based seismic engineering. Journal of Structural Engineering, 145(9), 04019083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenna, F. (2011). OpenSees: A framework for earthquake engineering simulation. Computing in Science & Engineering, 13(4), 58–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitrani-Reiser, J. (2007). An ounce of prevention: Probabilistic loss estimation for performance-based earthquake engineering. Doctoral dissertation, California Institute of Technology.

  • Moon, K. H., Han, S. W., Lee, T. S., & Seok, S. W. (2012). Approximate MPA-based method for performing incremental dynamic analysis. Nonlinear Dynamics, 67(4), 2865–2888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NEHRP. (2010). Evaluation of the FEMA P-695 methodology for quantification of building seismic performance factors. NIST GCR 10-917-8. NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture.

  • NEHRP. (2012). Tentative framework for development of advanced seismic design criteria for new buildings. NIST GCR 12-917-20. NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture.

  • Ramirez, C. M., & Miranda, E. (2012). Significance of residual drifts in building earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 41(11), 1477–1493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, K. L., Sayani, P. J., Dao, N. D., Abraik, E., & Baez, Y. M. (2010). Comparative life-cycle analysis of conventional and base-isolated theme buildings. In 9th US National & 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, Canada.

  • Sattar, S. (2018). Evaluating the consistency between prescriptive and performance-based seismic design approaches for reinforced concrete moment frame buildings. Engineering Structures, 174, 919–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speicher, M. S., & Harris, J. L., III. (2016). Collapse prevention seismic performance assessment of new eccentrically braced frames using ASCE 41. Engineering Structures, 117, 344–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos, D., & Cornell, C. A. (2002). Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 31, 491–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zareian, F., & Medina, R. A. (2010). A practical method for proper modeling of structural damping in inelastic plane structural systems. Computers and Structures, 88, 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

It is acknowledged that the research has been supported by grants from the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020R1A2C2010548 and NRF-2021R1A6A3A01087444).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sang Whan Han.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, T., Han, S.W. Seismic Loss Estimation of Steel Special Moment Frames Designed According to Different Analysis Methods. Int J Steel Struct 22, 1623–1633 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-022-00633-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-022-00633-y

Keywords

Navigation