Comparative evaluation of innovative and traditional seismic-resisting systems using the FEMA P-58 procedure

Abstract Two new innovative structural systems are investigated using the FEMA P-58 performance assessment procedure to determine the consequences (repair times, repair costs, unsafe placards and casualties) of being subjected to seismic ground shaking. These new systems were developed to display enhanced performance across multiple ground motion intensity levels. The first new system, called a Hybrid Buckling Restrained Braced System, is similar to existing BRB systems except that the core of the brace uses multiple plates, each with a different stress–strain behavior. The second new system, called a Collapse Prevention System, is designed for use in locations where the intensity of shaking under frequent earthquakes is negligible, but life-safety under rare high-intensity shaking is still a concern. These two innovative systems illustrate that the seismic resistant design philosophy should be dependent on the nature of the seismic hazard and that Performance Based Earthquake Engineering should support hazard-dependent philosophies. This paper also discusses the influence of including the lateral resistance of the gravity framing in the structural analysis models used to predict the seismic performance of traditional Steel Special Moment Resisting Frames. This modeling assumption is investigated, as the behavior of the Collapse Prevention Systems is dependent on the behavior of the gravity framing. In this work, these new systems and modeling philosophy are shown to reduce the consequence estimations, particularly the average repair costs, across pertinent intensity levels.

[1]  Akshay Gupta,et al.  Behavior of Ductile SMRFs at Various Seismic Hazard Levels , 2000 .

[2]  Bulent Akbas,et al.  Practical moment-rotation relations of steel shear tab connections , 2013 .

[3]  S. Manson.  Behavior of materials under conditions of thermal stress , 1953 .

[4]  Francisco X. Flores,et al.  Influence of the gravity framing system on the collapse performance of special steel moment frames , 2014 .

[5]  Helmut Krawinkler,et al.  Deterioration Modeling of Steel Components in Support of Collapse Prediction of Steel Moment Frames under Earthquake Loading , 2011 .

[6]  N. Null.  Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings , 2007 .

[7]  Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,et al.  Incremental dynamic analysis , 2002 .

[8]  Akira Wada,et al.  Mechanical Properties of Low Yield Point Steels , 1998 .

[9]  N. Null.  Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures , 2003 .

[10]  Finley A. Charney,et al.  Hybrid buckling-restrained braced frames , 2014 .

[11]  Finley A. Charney,et al.  Performance-Based Design in the Central and Eastern United States , 2014 .

[12]  Judy Liu,et al.  Cyclic Testing of Simple Connections Including Effects of Slab , 2000 .

[13]  Panos Tsopelas,et al.  TOGGLE-BRACE-DAMPER SEISMIC ENERGY DISSIPATION SYSTEMS , 2001 .

[14]  Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl,et al.  Moment–Rotation Parameters for Composite Shear Tab Connections , 2004 .

[15]  L. Coffin,et al.  A Study of the Effects of Cyclic Thermal Stresses on a Ductile Metal , 1954, Journal of Fluids Engineering.

[16]  Mamoru Iwata,et al.  ENERGY DISSIPATION BEHAVIOUR OF SHEAR PANELS MADE OF LOW YIELD STEEL , 1994 .