International Journal of Steel Structures

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 253–263 | Cite as

Cost viability of a base isolation system for the seismic protection of a steel high-rack structure

  • Vojko Kilar
  • Simon Petrovčič
  • David Koren
  • Simon Šilih
Article

Abstract

In this study the effects and costs of implementing a base isolation system for the mitigation of the seismic risk of an existing externally-braced steel frame rack structure are analysed by means of nonlinear static (pushover) analysis. Various plan asymmetric variants, with different realistic distributions of the payload mass and occupancy levels, have been investigated under two seismic intensities. The results obtained are presented as floor plan projection envelopes of the top displacements and as plastic hinge damage patterns of the superstructure. In the presented cost evaluation, the cost of the implementation of the proposed base isolation system is compared with the estimated costs of structural repairs to the damaged structural members of the superstructure, as well as with estimated expenses of the downtime period and content damage. The results have shown that base isolation is, in general, not economically feasible for lower ground motion intensities, whereas it could be of great benefit in the case of moderate and high intensities. A simple rough cost estimation study, based on the obtained plastic hinge patterns, showed that the inclusion of the downtime period costs and content damage costs might be important parameters, which — if taken into account — could make such an isolation system viable also for lower ground motion intensities. The other benefits brought by seismic isolation, such as savings on the building design costs, reductions in the threat to employees’ lives, and others, were, however, not included in the presented study. The comparison is done only for two deterministic scenarios of seismic attack, e.g. for design ground motion intensity (ag =0.175 g) and for increased intensity with ag =0.25 g indicating the Maximum Considered Earthquake level.

Keywords

rack structures base isolation cost efficiency mass eccentricity repair costs downtime costs content damage costs 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Affolter, C., Piskoty, G., Wullschleger, L., and Weisse, B. (2009). “Collapse of a high storage rack.” Engineering Failure Analysis, 16(6), pp. 1846–1855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguirre, C. (2005). “Seismic behavior of rack structures.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 61(5), pp. 607–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruneau, M., Uang, C. M., and Whittaker, A. (1998). Ductile design of steel structures. McGraw-Hill, Boston.Google Scholar
  4. CEN (2005a). Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures — Part 1-1: General structural rules, EN 1993-1-1. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.Google Scholar
  5. CEN (2005b). Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance — Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings, EN 1998-1. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.Google Scholar
  6. Cimellaro, G. P., Reinhorn, A. M., and Bruneau, M. (2010). “Framework for analytical quantification of disaster resilience.” Engineering Structures, 32(11), pp. 3639–3649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. CSI (2008). SAP2000 (v12.0.1) — Linear and nonlinear static and dynamic analysis and design of three-dimensional structures. Computer & Structures, Inc., Berkeley.Google Scholar
  8. Erberik, M. A. (2008). “Fragility-based assessment of typical mid-rise and low-rise RC buildings in Turkey.” Engineering Structures, 30(5), pp. 1360–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fajfar, P. (2000). “A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design.” Earthquake Spectra, 16(3), pp. 573–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fajfar, P., Marušić, D., and Peruš, I. (2005). “Torsional effects in the pushover-based seismic analysis of buildings.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 9(6), pp. 831–854.Google Scholar
  11. Fajfar, P. and Dolšek, M. (2012). “A practice-oriented estimation of the failure probability of building structures.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 41(3), pp. 531–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. FEM (2005). Recommendations for the design of static steel pallet racks under seismic conditions — prFEM 10.2.08. European Racking Federation, Birmingham.Google Scholar
  13. Filiatrault, A., Higgins, P. S., Wanitkorkul, A., Courtwright, J. A., and Michael, R. (2008). “Experimental seismic response of base isolated pallet-type steel storage racks.” Earthquake Spectra, 24(3), pp. 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. FIP Industriale (2012). Catalogue on SI Elastomeric Isolators (available online: http://www.fip-group.it/fip_ind_eng/prodotti.html).Google Scholar
  15. Freitas, A. M. S., Souza, F. T., and Freitas, S. R. (2010). “Analysis and behavior of steel storage drive-in racks.” Thin-Walled Structures, 48(2), pp. 110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goda, K., Lee, C. S., and Hong, H. P. (2010). “Lifecycle cost-benefit analysis of isolated buildings.” Structural Safety, 32(1), pp. 52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ICBO (1997). Uniform Building Code. International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California.Google Scholar
  18. Kang, C.-K. and Choi, B.-J. (2011). “New approach to evaluate the response modification factors for steel moment resisting frames.” International Journal of Steel Structures, 11(3), pp. 275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kilar, V. and Koren, D. (2009). “Seismic behaviour of asymmetric base isolated structures with various distributions of isolators.” Engineering Structures, 31(4), pp. 910–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kilar, V. and Koren, D. (2010). “Simplified inelastic seismic analysis of base-isolated structures using the N2 method.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 39(9), pp. 967–989.Google Scholar
  21. Koren, D. and Kilar, V. (2011). “The applicability of the N2 method to the estimation of torsional effects in asymmetric base-isolated structures.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 40(8), pp. 867–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kilar, V., Petrovčič, S., Koren, D., and Šilih, S. (2011). “Seismic analysis of an asymmetric fixed base and baseisolated high-rack steel structure.” Engineering Structures, 33(12), pp. 3471–3482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim, H.-D. and Lee, M.-J. (2010). “Analytical investigation of the P-Ä effect of middle-rise unbraced steel frames.” International Journal of Steel Structures, 10(3), pp. 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krawinkler, H. (2011). “Challenges in improving earthquake resilience through performance based earthquake engineering.” Proc. Bled4 — International Workshop on Performance-Based Seismic Engineering Vision for an Earthquake Resilient Society, Institute for Structural and Earthquake Engineering of the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
  25. Medina, R. A. and Krawinkler, H. (2005). “Evaluation of drift demands for the seismic performance assessment of frames.” Journal of Structural Engineering, 131(7), pp. 1003–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mezzi, M., Comodini, F., and Rossi, L. (2011). “A base isolation option for the full seismic protection of an existing masonry school building.” Proc. 13 th International Conf. on Civil, Structural Engineering Computing, Civil-Comp Press, Stirlingshire, Scotland.Google Scholar
  27. Petrovčič, S. and Kilar, V. (2012). “Effects of horizontal and vertical mass-asymmetric distributions on the seismic response of a high-rack steel structure.” Advances in Structural Engineering, 15(11), pp. 1977–1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rajeev, P. and Tesfamariam, S. (2012). “Seismic fragilities for reinforced concrete buildings with consideration of irregularities.” Structural Safety, 39, pp. 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rodgers, J. E. and Mahin, S. A. (2011). “Effects of connection deformation softening on behavior of steel moment frames subjected to earthquakes.” International Journal of Steel Structures, 11(1), pp. 29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sideris, P., Filiatrault, A., Leclerc, M., and Tremblay, R. (2010). “Experimental investigation on the seismic behavior of palletized merchandise in steel storage racks.” Earthquake Spectra, 26(1), pp. 209–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. SEAONC (1986). Tentative seismic isolation design requirements. Structural Engineers Association of Northern California, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
  32. Taflanidis, A. A. and Beck, J. L. (2009). “Life-cycle cost optimal design of passive dissipative devices.” Structural Safety, 31(6), pp. 508–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Steel Construction and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vojko Kilar
    • 1
  • Simon Petrovčič
    • 1
  • David Koren
    • 1
  • Simon Šilih
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.Faculty of Civil EngineeringUniversity of MariborMariborSlovenia

Personalised recommendations