پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 21 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 610 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,028 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 67,082,918 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 7,656,375 |
Evaluation of the Seismic Response of Single-Story RC Frames under Biaxial Earthquake Excitations | ||
| Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering | ||
| مقاله 8، دوره 8، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 19، آبان 2020، صفحه 98-108 اصل مقاله (1 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Regular Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22075/jrce.2020.19727.1379 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Maysam JalilKhani* 1؛ Mehdi Babaei2؛ Seyed Hooman Ghasemi3 | ||
| 1Engineering Faculty of Khoy, Urmia University, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bonab, Bonab, Iran | ||
| 3Department of Civil Engineering, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 16 بهمن 1398، تاریخ بازنگری: 14 اسفند 1398، تاریخ پذیرش: 19 فروردین 1399 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| This paper summarizes the lessons learned from a full-scale test on two RC frame prototypes that have recently been tested on LNEC shaking-table using four pairs of biaxial synthetic ground motion records during 15WCEE Conference (2012). The reference structures are two single-story RC frames which are geometrically identical but with different reinforcement details. The simplified inelastic models including ‘one-component’ inelastic elements with lumped plastic hinges at their ends are used to model the reference structures. The displacement demands of the RC frames are determined by using the nonlinear dynamic analyses and then compared with the exact test results for four different seismic hazards (intensities). In the initial pre-test analyses, the modeling parameters and deformation capacities for each RC element are determined using ASCE/SEI 41-13 standard. However in the post-test studies, the experimental equations developed by Panagiotakos and Fardis (2001), Haselton and Deierlein (2008) are used to obtain more accurate structural responses. A detailed comparison is carried out between the analytical results with those given by the tests. The results clearly show that there is fairly good agreement between the analytical and test results. The simplified inelastic modeling techniques are also identified accurate enough in estimating the seismic response of RC buildings under biaxial excitations. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| RC moment-resisting frame؛ Displacement demand؛ Shaking-table test؛ Nonlinear dynamic analysis؛ Biaxial excitation | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] Morales-Gonzalez, M., Vidot-Vega, AL. (2017) “Seismic response of reinforced concrete frames at different damage levels.” International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, Vol. 9, pp. 63–77. [2] Otani, S. (2002). “Nonlinear earthquake response analysis of reinforced concrete buildings.” Lecture Notes, ROSE School, University of Pavia. [3] Sousa, R., Almeida, JP., Correia, AA., Pinho, R. (2018) “Shake table blind prediction tests: contributions for improved fiber-based frame modelling.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 10.1080/13632469.2018.1466743. [4] Ibarra, LF., Medina, RA., Krawinkler, H. (2005) “Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 34, pp. 1489–1511. [5] Stratan, A., Fajfar, P., (2002) “Influence of modeling assumptions and analysis procedure on the seismic evaluation of reinforced concrete GLD frames.” IKPIR Report, Institute of Structural Engineering, Earthquake Engineering and Construction IT (IKPIR), University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. [6] Fajfar, P., Dolšek, M., Marušić, D., Stratan, A. (2006) “Pre- and post-test mathematical modeling of a plan-asymmetric reinforced concrete frame building.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 35, pp. 1359–1379. [7] Giberson, MF. (1967) “The response of nonlinear multi-story structures subjected to earthquake excitation.” EERL Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena. [8] Cuong, NH., Kim, SE., Oh, JR., (2007) “Nonlinear analysis of space steel frames using fiber hinge concept.” Engineering Structures, Vol. 29, pp. 649–657. [9] Berry, M., Parrish. M., Eberhard, M. (2004) “PEER structural performance database user’s manual.” Berkeley (CA): Pacific Engineering Research Center, University of California. [10] Panagiotakos, TB., Fardis, MN. (2001) “Deformations of reinforced concrete at yielding and ultimate.” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 98, pp. 135–147. [11] Haselton, CB., Liel, AB., Lange, ST., Deierlein, GG. (2008) “Beam-column element model calibrated for predicting flexural response leading to global collapse of RC frame buildings.” PEER Report 2007/03, Pacific Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California. [12] Lignos, DG., Krawinkler, H. (2009) “Sidesway collapse of deteriorating structural systems under seismic excitations.” Report no. TB 172. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center. Stanford University: Palo Alto (CA). [13] ACI-318, Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14). American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI, 2014. [14] Costa, A., Campos-Costa, A., Candeias, P., Guerreiro, L., Mendes, L. (2012) “15WCEE blind test challenge - design report” Proc. of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal. [15] ASCE-41, Seismic evaluation and upgrade of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-13), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Reston, VA, 2013. [16] CEN. Eurocode 8, Design of structures for earthquake resistance, (2004), Part 1: general rules seismic actions and rules for buildings. EN 1998-1, CEN, Brussels. [17] Haselton, CB., Deierlein, GG. (2007) “Assessing seismic collapse safety of modern reinforced concrete moment-frame buildings.” Report no. 156. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Stanford University: Palo Alto (CA). [18] Popov, EP., Bertero VV., Krawinkler, H. (1972) “Cyclic behavior of three RC flexural members with high shear.” Report No. EERC 72-5, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California. [19] Goulet, CA., Haselton, CB., Mitrani-Reiser, J., Beck, JL., Deierlein, GG., Porter, KA., Stewart, JP., (2007) “Evaluation of the seismic performance of a code-conforming reinforced-concrete frame building —from seismic hazard to collapse safety and economic losses.” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 36, No. 13, 1973–1997. [20] FEMA-273, NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, (1997), Building seismic safety council (BSSC), Washington (DC): Federal Emergency Management Agency. [21] Haselton, CB., Liel, AB., Deierlein, GG; Dean, BS., Chou, JH. (2011) “Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings. I: assessment of ductile moment frames.” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 137, pp. 481–491. [22] FEMA-P695, Quantification of building seismic performance factors, (2008), ATC-63 Project Report, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, USA. [23] Computers & Structures Incorporated (CSI). PERFORM 3D. Non-linear analysis and performance assessment for 3D structures, (2006), CA, USA, Berkeley. [24] Bayhan B. (2013). “Numerical simulation of shaking table tests on 3D reinforced concrete structures.” Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 48, pp. 151–171. [25] Dolšek, M., Fajfar, P., (2002) “Mathematical modeling of an infilled RC frame structure based on the results of pseudo-dynamic tests.” Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 31, pp. 1215–1230. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 955 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 296 |
||