Advertisement

Seismic Fragility Evaluation of Retrofitted Low-Rise RC Structures

  • Mohamed NoureldinEmail author
  • Jinkoo Kim
Conference paper
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)

Abstract

In this research, a seismic fragility evaluation is used to assess the seismic performance of low-rise RC structures retrofitted with self-centering post-tensioned pre-cast concrete (SC-PC) frame with enlarged beam-ends. The seismic performance of the retrofitted structures is verified by constructing fragility curves for the retrofitted and retrofitted structure. Thirty natural time-history earthquake records are generated based on a design response spectrum to construct the seismic fragility curves. Nonlinear time history (NLTH) analysis is used to obtain the median structural demand. Limit states are defined based on seismic guidelines to represent the median structural capacity. The relation between the demand and capacity is modeled as a lognormal cumulative density function in a closed-form equation. The results of the study show that the SC-PC frame is effective in seismic retrofitting and significantly improves the structure seismic fragility for all limit states. In addition, the results show that the most significant improvement is found for the collapse-prevention limit state where severe earthquakes are expected.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the “Basic Science Research Program” through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1B03032809).

References

  1. ACI 318R-14 (ACI): Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary. American Concrete Institute, Michigan, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  2. ASCE/SEI 41-13: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, USA (2013)Google Scholar
  3. Buchanan, A.H., Bull, D., Dhakal, R., MacRae, G., Palermo, A., Pampanin, S.: Base Isolation and Damage-Resistant Technologies for Improved Seismic Performance of Buildings, Technical Report 2011-02 for the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Building Failure Caused by the Canterbury Earthquakes. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand (2011)Google Scholar
  4. Casotto, C., Silva, V., Crowley, H., Nascimbene, R., Pinho, R.: Seismic fragility of Italian RC precast industrial structures. Eng. Struct. 94, 122–136 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.02.034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Celik, O., Sritharan, S.: An Evaluation of Seismic Design Guidelines Proposed for Precast Concrete Hybrid Frame Systems, ISU-ERI-Ames Report ERI-04425, Submitted to the Precast/Prestressed Concrete Manufacturers Association of California, Final report, Iowa State University of Science and Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  6. Chancellor, N.B., Matthew, R.E., David, A.R., Akbaş, T.: Self-centering seismic lateral force resisting systems: high performance structures for the city of tomorrow. Buildings 4(3), 520–548 (2014). Open Access Journal, ISSN 2075-5309, published online by MDPICrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cornell, C.A., Jalayer, F., Hamburger, R.O., Foutch, D.A.: Probabilistic basis for the 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency steel moment frame guidelines. J. Struct. Eng. 128(4), 526–533 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Englekirk, R.E.: Design-construction of the paramount—a 39-story precast prestressed concrete apartment building. PCI J. 47, 56–71 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FEMA P695: Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. (2009)Google Scholar
  10. Salamia, M.R., Kashanib, M.M., Goda, K.: Influence of advanced structural modeling technique, mainshock-aftershock sequences, and ground-motion types on seismic fragility of low-rise RC structures. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 117, 263–279 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.10.036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Remki, M., Kibboua, A., Benouar, D., Kehila, F.: Seismic fragility evaluation of existing RC frame and URM buildings in Algeria. Int. J. Civ. Eng. 16, 845–856 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0222-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nikbakht, E., Rashid, K., Hejazi, F., Osman, S.A.: Application of shape memory alloy bars in self-centering precast segmental columns as seismic resistance. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 11(3), 297–309 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. PEER, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center: Strong motion database, Berkeley, Calif., US (2017). https://peer.berkeley.edu/peer-strong-ground-motion-databases
  14. Kurosawa, R., Sakata, H., Qu, Z., Suyama, T.: Precast prestressed concrete frames for seismically retrofitting existing RC frames. Eng. Struct. 184, 345–354 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sap2000, ver 18: Analysis Reference Manual. Computer and Structures, Berkeley, USA (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Architectural EngineeringSungkyunkwan UniversitySuwonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations