RESEARCH ARTICLE

Probabilistic safety assessment of self-centering steel braced frame

  • Navid RAHGOZAR , 1 ,
  • Nima RAHGOZAR 1 ,
  • Abdolreza S. MOGHADAM 2
Expand
  • 1. Department of Structural Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
  • 2. Structural Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran

Received date: 23 Aug 2016

Accepted date: 20 Oct 2016

Published date: 08 Mar 2018

Copyright

2017 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

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.

Cite this article

Navid RAHGOZAR , Nima RAHGOZAR , Abdolreza S. MOGHADAM . Probabilistic safety assessment of self-centering steel braced frame[J]. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2018 , 12(1) : 163 -182 . DOI: 10.1007/s11709-017-0384-z

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

Outlines

/