A comparative seismic fragility analysis of a multi and single component beam-column joint models

Figures & data

Figure 1. Joint modeling schemes and constitutive material model.

Table 1. Load-deformation parameters for selected RC sub-assemblages

Backbone curve parameters
Loading direction	Parameter	Joint type
		Interior	Exterior	Knee
Upwards	ePf1	1.1	127.83	8.73
	ePd1	0.0004	0.00043	0.0043
	ePf2	2.85	337.26	23.04
	ePd2	0.00084	0.006	0.006
	ePf3	3.42	354.93	24.25
	ePd3	0.0015	0.02	0.02
	ePf4	2.74	70.94	4.85
	ePd4	0.03	0.078	0.0371
Downwards	ePf1	−1.1	−60.0801	−8.73
	ePd1	−0.0004	−0.00043	−0.0043
	ePf2	−2.85	−158.512	−23.04
	ePd2	−0.00084	−0.006	−0.006
	ePf3	−3.42	−166.817	−24.25
	ePd3	−0.0015	−0.02	−0.02
	ePf4	−2.74	−33.3418	−4.85
	ePd4	−0.0215	−0.078	−0.0371

Table 2. Pinching4 constitutive model parameters

Pinching4 Parameters
Parameter	ID	Value
Pinching4 parameters	rDispP	0.15
	rForceP	0.25
	uForceP	0
	rDispN	0.15
	rForceN	0.2
	uForceN	0
Unloading stiffness degradation parameter	gK1	1
	gK2	0
	gK3	0.01
	gK4	0
	gKLim	0.95
Reloading stiffness degradation parameter	gD1	0.2
	gD2	0
	gD3	0.15
	gD4	0
	gDLim	0.95
Strength degradation parameter	gF1	0
	gF2	0
	gF3	0.32
	gF4	0.1
	gFLim	0.25
Energy dissipation	gE	10
	dmgType	energy

Figure 2. Base shear-drift hysteretic responses of various joint models—interior case.

Figure 3. Base shear-drift hysteretic responses of various joint models—exterior case.

Figure 4. Base shear-drift hysteretic responses of various joint models—knee case.

Figure 5. One-third scaled frame.

Source: Bracci et al. (1995).

Figure 6. Roof displacement response history for various joint models.

Figure 7. Hypothetical case study RC frame.

Table 3. Statistical properties of parameters for Latin-hyper cube experimental design

Parameter	Probability distribution	Mean	Coefficient of variation
Compressive strength	Normal	27.6 MPa	0.176
Steel yield strength	Lognormal	460 MPa	0.08
Damping ratio	Lognormal	0.05	0.6

Figure 8. Probabilistic seismic demand model for various joint modeling schemes.

Figure 9. Analytical fragility functions for various joint modeling schemes.

Figure 10. Relative shift in limit state probability between joint model.

Bracci, J. , Reinhorn, A. , & Mander, J. B. (1995). Seismic resistance of reinforced concrete frame structures designed for gravity loads: Performance of structural system. ACI Structural Journal , 92 (5), 597–608.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar