Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach

The brittle behavior of older non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings such as shear-axial failure in columns can cause lateral instability or gravity collapse. Hence, the attempt is to assess the collapse potential through fragility curves. Current research focuses on fragility assessment of these...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand, Mohammad Khanmohammadi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Pouyan Press 2018-01-01
Series:Computational Engineering and Physical Modeling
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jcepm.com/article_59794_b27b6dc881ae33530cd8035a31ba3317.pdf
_version_ 1818865349339119616
author Mohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand
Mohammad Khanmohammadi
author_facet Mohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand
Mohammad Khanmohammadi
author_sort Mohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand
collection DOAJ
description The brittle behavior of older non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings such as shear-axial failure in columns can cause lateral instability or gravity collapse. Hence, the attempt is to assess the collapse potential through fragility curves. Current research focuses on fragility assessment of these buildings emphasizing on shear-axial failure using two well-established methods; empirical limit state material versus ASCE/SEI 41-13 recommendations. To this aim, two 2D reinforced concrete models (3 and 5-story) according to typical detail of existing buildings in Iran were modeled using two aforementioned modeling approaches and analyzed under monotonic analysis and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). In the following, seismic fragility assessment were carried out by means of obtained results from IDA. The results of fragility curves showed that, collapse capacity of buildings modelled by ASCE/SEI 41-13 are more than empirical method and fewer cases can pass the level of safety probability of failure suggested by ASCE/SEI-41.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T10:46:08Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4ae2aacad6d347ddb5c6e749249547f3
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2588-6959
2588-6959
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T10:46:08Z
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Pouyan Press
record_format Article
series Computational Engineering and Physical Modeling
spelling doaj.art-4ae2aacad6d347ddb5c6e749249547f32022-12-21T20:25:15ZengPouyan PressComputational Engineering and Physical Modeling2588-69592588-69592018-01-0111385710.22115/cepm.2018.114549.100859794Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 ApproachMohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand0Mohammad Khanmohammadi1Unit of Strength of Materials and Structural Analysis, Department of basic sciences in engineering sciences, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, AustriaFaculty of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranThe brittle behavior of older non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings such as shear-axial failure in columns can cause lateral instability or gravity collapse. Hence, the attempt is to assess the collapse potential through fragility curves. Current research focuses on fragility assessment of these buildings emphasizing on shear-axial failure using two well-established methods; empirical limit state material versus ASCE/SEI 41-13 recommendations. To this aim, two 2D reinforced concrete models (3 and 5-story) according to typical detail of existing buildings in Iran were modeled using two aforementioned modeling approaches and analyzed under monotonic analysis and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). In the following, seismic fragility assessment were carried out by means of obtained results from IDA. The results of fragility curves showed that, collapse capacity of buildings modelled by ASCE/SEI 41-13 are more than empirical method and fewer cases can pass the level of safety probability of failure suggested by ASCE/SEI-41.http://www.jcepm.com/article_59794_b27b6dc881ae33530cd8035a31ba3317.pdfshear and axial failureslocal and global collapsenon-ductile reinforced concrete buildingsfragility curves
spellingShingle Mohammad Reza Azadi Kakavand
Mohammad Khanmohammadi
Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
Computational Engineering and Physical Modeling
shear and axial failures
local and global collapse
non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings
fragility curves
title Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
title_full Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
title_fullStr Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
title_full_unstemmed Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
title_short Seismic Fragility Assessment of Local and Global Failures in Low-rise Non-ductile Existing RC Buildings: Empirical Shear-Axial Modelling vs. ASCE/SEI 41 Approach
title_sort seismic fragility assessment of local and global failures in low rise non ductile existing rc buildings empirical shear axial modelling vs asce sei 41 approach
topic shear and axial failures
local and global collapse
non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings
fragility curves
url http://www.jcepm.com/article_59794_b27b6dc881ae33530cd8035a31ba3317.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mohammadrezaazadikakavand seismicfragilityassessmentoflocalandglobalfailuresinlowrisenonductileexistingrcbuildingsempiricalshearaxialmodellingvsascesei41approach
AT mohammadkhanmohammadi seismicfragilityassessmentoflocalandglobalfailuresinlowrisenonductileexistingrcbuildingsempiricalshearaxialmodellingvsascesei41approach