Probabilistic safety assessment of self-centering steel braced frame

Abstract

The main drawback of conventional braced frames is implicitly accepting structural damage under the design earthquake load, which leads to considerable economic losses. Controlled rocking self-centering system as a modern low-damage system is capable of minimizing the drawbacks of conventional braced frames. This paper quantifies main limit states and investigates the seismic performance of self-centering braced frame using a Probabilistic Safety Assessment procedure. Margin of safety, confidence level, and mean annual frequency of the self-centering archetypes for their main limit states, including PT yield, fuse fracture, and global collapse, are established and are compared with their acceptance criteria. Considering incorporating aleatory and epistemic uncertainties, the efficiency of the system is examined. Results of the investigation indicate that the design of low- and mid-rise self-centering archetypes could provide the adequate margin of safety against exceeding the undesirable limit-states.

Keywords

self-centering steel braced frame / mean annual frequency / safety assessment / confidence level / margin of safety

References

[1] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Seismic rehabilitation standards committee. Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI 41–10. Reston, VA, 2010

[2] International building code. Int Code Counc Inc(formerly BOCA, ICBO SBCCI). IBC ICC, Falls Church, VA, 2006, 4051: 60478–65795

[3] Wiebe L, Christopoulos C. Performance-based seismic design of controlled rocking steel braced frames. I: Methodological framework and design of base rocking joint. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2014, 141(9): 04014226

[4] Ramirez C M, Miranda E. Significance of residual drifts in building earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2012, 41(11): 1477–1493

[5] Iwashita K, Kimura H, Kasuga Y, Suzuki N. Shaking table test of a steel frame allowing uplift. J Struct Constr Eng, 2002, 1(561): 47–54

[6] Ajrab J J, Pekcan G, Mander J B. Rocking wall-frame structures with supplemental tendon systems. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2004, 130(6): 895–903

[7] Grigorian C, Grigorian M. Performance control and efficient design of rocking-wall moment frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2015, 142(2): 04015139

[8] Buchanan A, Deam B, Fragiacomo M, Pampanin S, Palermo A. Multi-storey prestressed timber buildings in New Zealand. Structural Engineering International, 2008, 18(2): 166–173

[9] Francesco S, Palermo A, Pampanin S. Quasi-static cyclic testing of two-thirds scale unbonded posttensioned rocking dissipative timber walls. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2015, 142(4): E4015005

[10] Rojas P, Ricles J M, Sause R. Seismic performance of post-tensioned steel moment resisting frames with friction devices. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2005, 4(529): 529–540

[11] Moradi S, Alam M, Milani A. Cyclic response sensitivity of post-tensioned steel connections using sequential fractional factorial design. J Struct Constr Eng, 2015, 112(1): 155–166

[12] Toranzo L A, Restrepo J I, Mander J B, Carr A J. Shake-table tests of confined-masonry rocking walls with supplementary hysteretic damping. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2009, 13(6): 882–898

[13] Eatherton M R, Hajjar J F. Large-scale cyclic and hybrid simulation testing and development of a controlled-rocking steel building system with replaceable fuses. Newmark Structural Engineering Laboratory. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010.

[14] Ma X, Krawinkler H, Deierlein G. Seismic design and behavior of self-centering braced frame with controlled rocking and energy dissipating fuses. Blume earthquake Eng. Vol. 174. Center TR, University of Stanford, 2011

[15] Latham D A, Reay A M, Pampanin S. Kilmore Street Medical Centre: Application of an Advanced Flag-Shape Steel Rocking System. In: Proceedings of the 2013 NZSEE Conf. Wellington, New Zealand, 2013

[16] Roke D, Sause R, Ricles J M, Gonner N. Design concepts for damage-free seismic-resistant self-centering steel concentrically-braced frames. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conf Earthq Eng. China, 2008

[17] Clough R W, Huckelbridge A A. Preliminary experimental study of seismic uplift of a steel frame. Report No. UCB/EERC-77–22, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, 1977

[18] Kelly J M, Tsztoo D F. Earthquake simulation testing of a stepping frame with energy-absorbing devices. Report No. EERC 77–17, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, 1977

[19] Pollino M, Bruneau M. Seismic testing of a bridge steel truss pier designed for controlled rocking. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2010, 136(12): 1523–1532

[20] Wiebe L, Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Leclerc M. Mechanisms to limit higher mode effects in a controlled rocking steel frame. 1: Concept, modelling, and low‐amplitude shake table testing. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2013, 42(7): 1053–1068

[21] Hosseini M, Fekri M, Yekrangnia M. Seismic performance of an innovative structural system having seesaw motion and columns equipped with friction dampers at base level. Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 2016, 25(16): 842–865

[22] Roke D, Sause R, Ricles J M, Seo C Y, Lee K S. Self-centering seismic-resistant steel concentrically braced frames. In: Proceedings of the 8th US National Conf Earthq Eng, San Francisco, USA, 2006

[23] Sause R, Ricles J M, Roke D A, Chancellor N B, Gonner N P. Seismic performance of a self-centering rocking concentrically-braced frame. In: Proceedings of the 9th US and 10th Canadian Conf Earthq Eng. Toronto, Canada, 2010

[24] Sause R, Ricles J M, Roke D, Seo C Y, Lee K S. Design of self-centering steel concentrically-braced frames. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Con Earthq Eng, Taipei, Taiwan, China, 2006

[25] Chancellor N B, Akbas G, Sause R, Ricles J M, Tahmasebi E, Joó A L. Evaluation of performance-based design methodology for steel self-centering braced frame. San Francisco 7th International Conf on Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas (STESSA 2012), Santiago, Chile, 2012

[26] Eatherton M, Hajjar J F, Deierlein G, Krawinkler H, Billington S, Ma X. Controlled rocking of steel-framed buildings with replaceable energy-dissipating fuses. In: Proceedings of the 14th World Conf Earthq Eng. Beijing, China, 2008.

[27] Wiebe L, Christopoulos C. Mitigation of higher mode effects in base-rocking systems by using multiple rocking sections. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2009, 13(SP1): 83–108

[28] Mar D. Design examples using mode shaping spines for frame and wall buildings. In: Proceedings of the 9th US and 10th Canadian Conf Earth Eng. Toronto, Canada, 2010

[29] Rahgozar N, Moghadam A S, Aziminejad A. Quantification of seismic performance factors for self-centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame. Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 2016, 25(14): 700–723

[30] Tahmasebi E, Sause R, Ricles J M, Chancellor N B, Akbas T. Probabilistic Collapse Performance Assessment of Self-Centering Concentrically Braced Frames. In: Proceedings of the 10th US Natl Conf Earthq Eng. Anchorage, AK, USA, 2014

[31] Ahmadi O, Ricles J M, Sause R. Seismic collapse resistance of self-centering steel moment resisting frame systems. Proc. 10th US Natl. Conf. Earthq. Eng. Anchorage, AK, USA, 2014

[32] Lin L, Naumoski N, Foo S, Saatcioglu M. Probabilistic assessment of the seismic vulnerability of reinforced concrete frame buildings in Canada. In: Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering. Beijing, China, 2008

[33] Venture S A C J, Committee G D, Venture S A C J. Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Report No. FEMA-350, 2000

[34] Jalayer F. Direct probabilistic seismic analysis: implementing non-linear dynamic assessments. Stanford University, 2003

[35] Vamvatsikos D. Derivation of new SAC/FEMA performance evaluation solutions with second‐order hazard approximation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2013, 42(8): 1171–1188

[36] Jalayer F, Cornell C A. A technical framework for probability-based demand and capacity factor (DCFD) seismic formats.” RMS, 2003

[37] Baker J W, Cornell C A. Uncertainty specification and propagation for loss estimation using FOSM method. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, 2003

[38] Yun S Y, Hamburger R O, Cornell C A, Foutch D A. Seismic performance evaluation for steel moment frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2002, 128(4): 534–545

[39] Luco N. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis, SMRF connection fractures, and near-source effects. Stanford University, 2002

[40] Eatherton M R, Ma X, Krawinkler H, Mar D, Billington S, Hajjar J F, Deierlein G G. Design concepts for controlled rocking of self-centering steel-braced frames. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2014, 140(11): 195–203

[41] Ma X, Borchers E, Pena A, Krawinkler H, Deierlein G. Design and behavior of steel shear plates with openings as energy-dissipating fuses. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Technical Report, 2010

[42] Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott M H, Fenves G L. OpenSees command language manual. Pacific Earthq Eng Res (PEER) Cent, 2006

[43] Liu J, Astaneh-Asl A. Moment-rotation parameters for composite shear tab connections. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2004, 130(9): 1371–1380

[44] Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Report no. FEMA P695. Redwood, CA, 2009

[45] Vamvatsikos D, Cornell C A. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2002, 31(3): 491–514

[46] Haselton C B. Assessing seismic collapse safety of modern reinforced concrete frame buildings. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Stanford, California: Stanford University, 2006

[47] Ibarra L F, Krawinkler H. Global collapse of frame structures under seismic excitations. Report No. 152, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA, 2005

[48] Gogus A, Wallace J W. Seismic safety evaluation of reinforced concrete walls through FEMA P695 methodology. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2015, 141(10): 4015002

[49] Lee T H, Mosalam K M. Seismic demand sensitivity of reinforced concrete shear-wall building using FOSM method. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2005, 34(14): 1719–1736

[50] Baker J W, Cornell C A. Uncertainty propagation in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Structural Safety, 2008, 30(3): 236–252

[51] Liel A B, Haselton C B, Deierlein G G, Baker J W. Incorporating modeling uncertainties in the assessment of seismic collapse risk of buildings. Structural Safety, 2009, 31(2): 197–211

[52] Ibarra L, Krawinkler H. Variance of collapse capacity of SDOF systems under earthquake excitations. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2011, 40(12): 1299–1314

[53] Baker J W. Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthquake Spectra, 2015, 31(1): 579–599

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2017 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg