Search

Copyright of Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture is the property of Universitatea Tehnica din Cluj-Napoca, Facultatea de Constructii and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this study the risk for progressive collapse of RC framed buildings located in seismic areas in Romania is investigated. Structures with three, six and ten stories, each in turn are designed for three distinct seismic zones: low (ag=0.08g), moderate (ag=0.16g) and high (ag=0.24g). Using the provisions provided by the GSA (2003) Guidelines, a nonlinear dynamic analysis is carried out first in order to establish the risk for progressive collapse of the models under investigation. It is shown that all the structures are not expected to fail when subjected to abnormal loading (sudden column removal). A nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis is conducted next in order to estimate with the maximum accuracy the ultimate load bearing capacity to progressive collapse of the damaged models. Based on the capacity curves provided by this procedure, it is shown that all the structures are capable of sustaining a higher load than the standard GSA loading before failure. Using these capacity curves, the influence of the seismic design on the progressive collapse resistance is quantified as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on Applied Element Method (AEM), the resistance to progressive collapse of a typical 13-story RC frame building designed according to the actual Romanian seismic code P100-1/2013 is evaluated. In order to validate the AEM approach, the experimental test performed by Yi et al. (2008) on a planar frame is modelled in the Extreme Loading® for Structures (ELS®) software. The numerical results show a good agreement with the experimental ones. Following a nonlinear dynamic analysis, recommended by the GSA (2003) Guidelines, it is found that the 13-story model is not expected to fail when a corner column is suddenly removed. Moreover, the structure is able to sustain a much higher load, about 255% of the standard GSA loading. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper estimates the influence of Romanian seismic design codes changes on the progressive collapse resistance of a typical mid-rise RC framed structure located in a high seismic area (Bucharest). The progressive collapse potential is assessed following the linear static procedure recommended by the GSA (2003) Guidelines. Three distinct models representing a 13-storey RC framed structure are designed according to the seismic design codes in use in 1992, 2006 and 2008, and detailed considering the provisions of concrete structures design codes STAS 10107/0-90 and Eurocode 2. The research results show that a mid-rise structure located in an area with ag = 0.24g does not experience risk for progressive collapse when is subjected to different "missing column" scenarios. The last 20 years of changes in the seismic design codes lead to improvements on the progressive collapse resistance of RC framed buildings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigates the risk for progressive collapse of mid-rise RC framed buildings when subjected to damage case C2, long side column removal, the most dangerous case for the structures under investigation as the previous study indicates. Four models are designed for three distinct seismic zones from Romania: high, moderate and low. The models located in moderate seismic areas are designed for two ductility classes: medium and high. The step-by-step linear static analysis procedure from GSA 2003 Guidelines is used to establish the potential for progressive collapse. The results show the beneficial influence of the seismic design on the progressive collapse resistance of buildings. In the same time, it was found that the GSA 2003 Guidelines cannot taking into account the positive effect brought by the seismic design when more ductile elements are provided in the structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]