New Modelling Methodology for Seismic Design of Precast Structures and Performance Evaluation Considering Soil–Foundation System

Precast reinforced concrete (RC) structures are becoming popular in various parts of the globe due to its good quality control and less erection time as compared to monolithic RC structures. However, in Indian construction industry use of such building systems is not gaining impetus due to hesitation of structural designers concerning its seismic safety. In case of precast structure, the joints are not monolithic, and hence, the overall force distribution in the beam–column framing system will be different than that of monolithic RC frame structure. Moreover, the response will also depend on the fixity condition at the ground level. The present work proposes a new iterative process of linear analysis to determine the internal elemental forces, viz. bending moment, shear force and axial load, for precast structure. The performance of the building is assessed using nonlinear static procedure. In addition to this, the effect of soil–foundation system on monolithic and precast structure is also studied. Further, response reduction factor ‘R’ of all the considered buildings is evaluated for collapse prevention performance level. The obtained results show that the performance of precast structure gets enhanced with the reduced value of R considered for design and analysis. Moreover, it is interesting to note that for the precast structure with soil–foundation system the failure pattern follows a more realistic seismic design philosophy as compared to monolithic structure with soil–foundation system.

[1]  M. H. El Naggar,et al.  Efficient 3D nonlinear Winkler model for shallow foundations , 2009 .

[2]  Zhonghua Peng M.Asce,et al.  Experimental Study of Dynamic Progressive Collapse in Flat-Plate Buildings Subjected to an Interior Column Removal , 2018 .

[3]  J. Aznárez,et al.  Relevance of soil-pile tangential tractions for the estimation of kinematic seismic forces: Formulation and setting of a Winkler approach , 2018, Applied Mathematical Modelling.

[4]  Yalcin Mengi,et al.  A simple soil–structure interaction model , 2000 .

[5]  Gennaro Magliulo,et al.  The Emilia Earthquake: Seismic Performance of Precast Reinforced Concrete Buildings , 2014 .

[6]  M. Kaya,et al.  Analytical modeling of post-tensioned precast beam-to-column connections , 2009 .

[7]  Tatjana Isaković,et al.  Cyclic failure analysis of the beam-to-column dowel connections in precast industrial buildings , 2013 .

[8]  Habib Tabatabai,et al.  Nonlinear finite element analysis and modeling of a precast hybrid beam–column connection subjected to cyclic loads , 2010 .

[9]  John F. Stanton,et al.  An Overview of the PRESSS Five-Story Precast Test Building , 1999 .

[10]  STEFANO PAMPANIN,et al.  ANALYTICAL MODELLING OF THE SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF PRECAST CONCRETE FRAMES DESIGNED WITH DUCTILE CONNECTIONS , 2001 .

[11]  Ali Ghanbari,et al.  New mathematical model for computing natural frequencies of retaining walls considering soil–structure interaction , 2017 .

[12]  Onkar G. Kumbhar,et al.  Effect of Modeling Assumptions on Seismic Performance of RC Building , 2018, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering.

[13]  D. K. Paul,et al.  Effect of soil depth on inelastic seismic response of structures , 2014 .

[14]  Mervyn J. Kowalsky,et al.  Displacement-based seismic design of structures , 2007 .

[15]  Hakan Erdogan,et al.  Performance of precast concrete structures in October 2011 Van earthquake, Turkey , 2014 .

[16]  Ned M. Cleland,et al.  Performance of Precast Concrete Building Structures , 2012 .

[17]  M. J. Nigel Priestley,et al.  Overview of PRESSS Research Program , 1991 .

[18]  Manak Bhavan,et al.  CRITERIA FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN OF STRUCTURES , 2002 .

[19]  Hoyoung Seo,et al.  Variational approach for settlement analysis of circular plate on multilayered soil , 2019, Applied Mathematical Modelling.

[20]  Murat Dicleli,et al.  Effect of dynamic soil-bridge interaction modeling assumptions on the calculated seismic response of integral bridges , 2014 .

[21]  John X. Zhao.  Estimating kinematic interaction of raft foundations from earthquake records and its effects on structural response , 1998 .

[22]  Beatrice Belletti,et al.  Role of Soil–Structure Interaction on the Response of Precast RC Structures under Seismic Loading: Case Study , 2017 .

[23]  H. L. Wong,et al.  Response of a rigid foundation to a spatially random ground motion , 1986 .

[24]  Marianna Loli,et al.  Evaluation of seismic hazard for the assessment of historical elements at risk: description of input and selection of intensity measures , 2014, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.

[25]  Hanbin Ge,et al.  Development and Seismic Behavior of Precast Concrete Beam-to-Column Connections , 2018 .

[26]  Masahiro Shirato,et al.  A NEW NONLINEAR HYSTERETIC RULE FOR WINKLER TYPE SOIL-PILE INTERACTION SPRINGS THAT CONSIDERS LOADING PATTERN DEPENDENCY , 2006 .

[27]  Neil M. Hawkins,et al.  Performance of precast/prestressed concrete building structures during Nirthridge earthquake , 1994 .

[28]  N. Null.  Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings , 2014 .

[29]  Kunio Fukuyama,et al.  Shake-Table Test of a Full-Scale 4-Story Precast Concrete Building. II: Analytical Studies , 2017 .

[30]  Ratnesh Kumar,et al.  Estimation of response reduction factor of RC frame staging in elevated water tanks using nonlinear static procedure , 2017 .

[31]  Michael Hafner,et al.  Connections Between Precast Elements—Failure Within Connection Region , 1989 .

[32]  S. K. Ghosh,et al.  Building code provisions for precast/prestressed concrete: A brief history , 2003 .

[33]  A. M. Prasad,et al.  TRANSFER FUNCTIONS FOR RIGID RECTANGULAR FOUNDATIONS , 1997 .

[34]  Yahya C. Kurama,et al.  Seismic-Resistant Precast Concrete Structures: State of the Art , 2018 .