Title:
Seismic Analysis of RC Buildings by Modeling Floor Deformability and Infill Walls
Author(s):
Sergio Ruggieri, Francesco Porco, Domenico Raffaele, and Giuseppina Uva
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
326
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
100.1-100.10
Keywords:
existing RC buildings, rigid floor assumption, infilled frame, FE models, nonlinear static analysis
DOI:
10.14359/51711083
Date:
8/10/2018
Abstract:
In the last few years, the assessment of existing RC buildings has been a primary focus of interest within the scientific community, especially in areas characterized by high seismic hazard and presence of buildings vulnerable because of the structural design or materials’ decay.
In order to study the response of buildings under seismic actions, it is necessary to study 3D finite element (FE) models, which simulate the structural behavior. The accuracy of results depends by the initial hypotheses assumed for the numerical model, such as the rigid floor assumption, which allows reducing the Degrees of Freedoms of the structure. As shown in the literature and in modern codes, this hypothesis is not always valid, especially when buildings are characterized by irregular geometries or distribution of mass and stiffness.
The aim of the paper is to assess the influence of the rigid floor hypothesis on the accuracy of results provided by 3D FE models. This is made by an accurate modeling of the floor system and by considering the variation of the vertical resistant system (addition of RC walls) and non-structural vertical elements (infill walls). The influence of these parameters on the global response is discussed for a real case study.
Related References:
1. Eurocode 8 Earthquake resistant design of structures. Part I: General rules and rules for buildings. Eur. Prestandard prENV 1988-1-1:1994, European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Brussels Belgium
2. Fajfar P., Gaspersic P. “The N2 method for the seismic damage analysis of RC buildings”. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, V. 25, No. 1, 1996, pp. 31–46. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199601)25:1
3. Uva, G., Porco, F., Fiore, A., Mezzina, M. “The assessment of structural concretes during construction phases”. Structural Survey, V. 32, No. 3, 2014, pp. 189-208. doi: 10.1108/SS-06-2013-0023
4. Porco, F., Uva, G., Fiore, A., Mezzina, M. “Assessment of concrete degradation in existing structures: A practical procedure”. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, V. 52, No. 4, 2014, pp.701-721. DOI: 10.12989/sem.2014.52.4.701
5. Porco, F., Uva, G. “Assessment of the reliability of structural concretes during execution phases”. ECCOMAS Thematic Conference - COMPDYN 2013: 4th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Proceedings - An IACM Special Interest Conference, 2013, pp. 3837-3849.
6. Krawinkler H., Seneviratna G. D. P. K., “Pros and cons of pushover analysis for seismic performance evaluation”, Engrg. Struct., 1998; V. 20(4 – 6), pp. 452– 464. doi: 10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00092-8
7. Uva G., Porco F., Fiore A., Ruggieri S., “Effects in conventional nonlinear static analysis: evaluation of control node position”. Structures, V. 13, 2018, pp. 178-192. doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2017.12.006
8. Chopra AK, Goel RK. “A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, V. 31, 2002, pp. 561-82.
9. Chopra AK, Goel RK. “A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for unsymmetric-plan buildings.” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, V. 33, 2004, pp. 903-27.
10. Antoniou S, Pinho R. “Advantages And Limitations Of Adaptive And Non-Adaptive Force-Based Pushover Procedures”. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, V. 8, 2004, pp. 497-522.
11. Antoniou S, Pinho R. “Development And Verification Of A Displacement-Based Adaptive Pushover Procedure”. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, V. 8, 2004, pp. 643-61.
12. Fleischman R. B., Farrow K. T., “Dynamic behaviour of perimeter lateral-system structures with flexible diaphragms”. Earthquake engineering and structural dynamics, V. 30, 2001, pp. 745–763, doi: 10.1002/eqe.3
13. Khajehdehi R., Panahshahi N. “Effect of openings on in-plane structural behaviour of reinforced concrete floor slabs”, J Build Eng, V. 7, 2016, pp. 1–11
14. Pecce, M., Ceroni, F., Maddaloni, G. et al., “Assessment of the in-plane deformability of RC floors with traditional and innovative lightening elements in RC framed and wall structures”, Bull Earthquake Eng, 2017. doi:10.1007/s10518-017-0083-0
15. Tena-Colunga A., Chinchilla-Portillo K.L., Juarez-Luna G., “Assessment of the diaphragm condition for floor systems used in urban buildings”, Engineering Structures, V. 93, 2015, pp. 70–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.025
16. Saffarini H., Qudaimat M., “In-plan e floor deformations in RC structures”, Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 118, No. 11, 1992, pp. 3089- 3102, ISSN 0733-9445.Structural Engineering ASCE, 125, 25-39, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061
17. Dolce M., Lorusso V.D., Masi A., “Seismic response of building structures with flexible inelastic diaphragm”, The structural design of tall buildings, V. 3, 1994, pp. 87- 106, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1794(199706)6:2
18. Ju S. H., Lin M. C., “Comparison of building analyses assuming rigid or flexible floor”, J Struct Eng ASCE V. 125, pp. 25–39. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2000)126:2(273)
19. Kunnath S. K., Panahshahi N., Reinhorn A. M., “Seismic response of RC buildings with inelastic floor diaphragms”. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, V. 117, No. 4, 1991, pp. 1218-1237, ISSN 0733-9445.
20. Porco F., Ruggieri S., Raffaele D., “Influence of rigid floor assumption in seismic analysis of RC existing buildings”. COMPDYN 2017 - 6h ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Rhodes Island, 15-18/6.
21. Fiore, A., Porco, F., Uva, G. “Effects of the yield and ultimate strengths of the equivalent strut models on the response of existing buildings with infill panels”. International Journal of Structural Engineering, V. 6, No. 2, 2015, pp. 140-157. DOI: 10.1504/IJSTRUCTE.2015.069690
22. Aiello, M. A., Ciampoli, P. L., Fiore, A., Perrone, D., Uva, G. “Influence of infilled frames on seismic vulnerability assessment of recurrent building typologies”. Ingegneria Sismica, V. 34, No. 4, 2017, pp. 58-80.
23. Fiore, A., Porco, F. “A multiscale approach for modeling of infilled frames”. COMPDYN 2015 - 5th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2015, pp. 2611-2622.
24. Uva, G., Raffaele, D., Porco, F., Fiore, A., “On the role of equivalent strut models in the seismic assessment of infilled RC buildings”, Engineering Structures, 42, 2012, pp. 83-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.04.005
25. Porco, F., Fiore, A., Uva, G., & Raffaele, D. “The influence of infilled panels in retrofitting interventions of existing reinforced concrete buildings: A case study”. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, V. 11, No. 2, 2015, pp.162-175. 10.1080/15732479.2013.862726
26. Uva, G., Raffaele, D., Porco, F., Fiore, A., “On the role of equivalent strut models in the seismic assessment of infilled RC buildings”. Engineering Structures, 42, 2012, pp. 83-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.04.005
27. Ruggieri S., Porco F., Raffaele D., Uva G., “Rigid floor assumption in nonlinear static analysis of reinforced concrete existing buildings”. XVII convegno Anidis. Pistoia, 2017, 17-21/9.
28. Dept. Dicatech - Politechnic University of Bari, AdB Puglia; Research Project “Guidelines for the vulnerability assessment of existing buildings” (Redazione delle Linee Guida esplicative e validazione degli elaborati relative alle verifiche di vulnerabilità degli edifici scolastici in alcuni comuni della Provincia di Foggia), 2012-2015.
29. Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN. “Seismic response of infilled RC frames structures”. In: Proceedings of 11th world conference on earthquake engineering. Acapulco; 1996 Paper No. 225.
30. Stafford Smith B. “Behaviour of square infilled frames”, J Struct Div, 1966, V. 92, No. 1, pp.381–403.
31. Computer and Structures I. SAP2000, Advanced 18. Structural Analysis Program– Manual – Computer and Structures, Inc, Berkeley, California, USA, 2016.
32. Mainstone RJ. “On the stiffness and strength of infilled frames”. Proc Inst Civil Eng, Suppl (IV) – Lond 1971;Paper 7360S, pp. 57–89.
33. J.B. Mander, M.J.N. Priestley, R. Park. “Theoretical stress–strain model for confined concrete”, J Struct Engng, V. 114, No. 8, 1988, pp. 1804-1826