Seismic Performance Evaluation of Code-compliant RC Moment-resisting Frame Buildings Subjected to Near-fault Pulse-like and Non-pulse-like Ground Motions

References

• ACI 318. 2014. Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary (ACI 318–14). Farmington (MI): American Concrete Institute (ACI).
   Google Scholar
• Alavi, B., and H. Krawinkler. 2004. Behavior of moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 33 (6): 687–706. doi: 10.1002/eqe.369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. C., and V. Bertero. 1987. Uncertainties in establishing design earthquakes. Journal of Structural Engineering 113 (8): 1709–24. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1987)113:8(1709).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Applied Technology Council (ATC). 1996. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings, volumes 1 and 2. 1(ATC–40).
   Google Scholar
• ASCE. 2010. Minimum design loads for building and other structures (ASCE/SEI 7–10). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• ASCE. 2017. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41–17). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, J. W. 2007. Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 97 (5): 1486–501. doi: 10.1785/0120060255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balazadeh-minouei, Y., A. M. Asce, S. Koboevic, and R. Tremblay. 2018. Seismic Assessment of existing steel chevron braced frames. Journal of Structural Engineering 144: 6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balazadeh-minouei, Y., S. Koboevic, and R. Tremblay. 2017. Seismic evaluation of a steel braced frame using NBCC and ASCE 41. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 135: 110–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.03.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertero, V., S. A. Mahin, and R. A. Herrera. 1978. Aseismic design implications of near fault San Fernando earthquake records. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 6: 31–42. doi: 10.1002/eqe.4290060105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bray, J. D., and A. Rodriguez-Marek. 2004. Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 24 (11): 815–28. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, G. A., and J. B. Mander. 1994. Seismic energy based fatigue damage analysis of bridge columns: Part 1 - Evaluation of seismic capacity. NCEER Technical Report No. NCEER-94-0006.
   Google Scholar
• Chopra, A. K., and C. Chintanapakdee. 2001. Comparing response of SDF systems to near-fault and far-fault earthquake motions in the context of spectral regions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 30 (12): 1769–89. doi: 10.1002/eqe.92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CSI. 2017. Structural software for building analysis and design. ETABS. Version 17 ed. Berkeley, CA: Computers and Structures, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• CTBUH, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban habitat. Illinois Institute of technology. Chicago, Illinois, USA, [Online Available]: https://www.ctbuh.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Diaferio, M., and D. Foti. 2015. Mechanical behavior of buildings subjected to impulsive motions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 14 (3): 849–62. doi: 10.1007/s10518-015-9848-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du, K., F. Cheng, J. Bai, and S. Jin. 2020. Seismic performance quantification of buckling-restrained braced RC frame structures under near-fault ground motions. Engineering Structures 211: 110447. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duan, H., M. Beth, and D. Hueste. 2012. Seismic performance of a reinforced concrete frame building in China. Engineering Structures 41: 77–89. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.03.030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emergency, F., and M. Agency. 1997. (US) BSSC, Council AT. NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Vol. 1, Rehabilitation. Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Fang, C., Q. Zhong, W. Wang, S. Hu, and C. Qiu. 2018. Peak and residual responses of steel moment-resisting and braced frames under pulse-like near-fault earthquakes. Engineering Structures 177: 579–97. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.10.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FEMA. 2000. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings (FEMA 356). Washington, DC: Council and Building Seismic Safety, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
   Google Scholar
• FEMA. 2009. Quantification of building seismic performance factors (FEMA P695). Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
   Google Scholar
• Gerami, M., and D. Abdollahzadeh. 2015. Vulnerability of steel moment-resisting frames under effects of forward directivity. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 24 (2): 97–122. doi: 10.1002/tal.1156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghobarah, A. 2004. Response of structures to near-fault ground motion. 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,Vancouver.
   Google Scholar
• Günel, M. H., and H. E. Ilgin. 2014. Tall buildings: Structural systems and aerodynamic form. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, Taylor & Francis group.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, J. F., T. H. Heaton, M. W. Halling, and D. J. Wald. 1995. Near-source ground motion and its effects on flexible buildings. Earthquake Spectra 11: 569–605. doi: 10.1193/1.1585828.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, J. L., and M. S. Speicher. 2018. Assessment of performance-based seismic design methods in ASCE 41 for new steel buildings: Special moment frames. Earthquake Spectra 34 (3): 977–99. doi: 10.1193/050117EQS079EP.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalkan, E., and S. K. Kunnath. 2006. Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings. Earthquake Spectra 22 (2): 367–90. doi: 10.1193/1.2192560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamai, R., N. Abrahamson, and R. Graves. 2014. Adding fling effects to processed ground-motion time histories. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 104 (4): 1914–29. doi: 10.1785/0120130272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazantzi, A. K., D. Vamvatsikos, and D. G. Lignos. 2014. Seismic performance of a steel moment-resisting frame subject to strength and ductility uncertainty. Engineering Structures 78: 69–77. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.06.044.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreslin, M., and P. Fajfar. 2011. The extended N2 method taking into account higher mode effects in elevation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 40 (14): 654–66. doi: 10.1002/eqe.1104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kueht, E., and M. D. Hueste. 2009. Impact of CODE REQUIREMENTS IN THE Central United States: Seismic performance assessment of a reinforced concrete building. Journal of Structural Engineering 135 (4): 404–13. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2009)135:4(404).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman, D. E., and J. P. Moehle. 2000. Seismic performance of well-confined concrete bridge columns. PEER report 1998/01. Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Lehman, D. E., J. P. Moehle, S. Mahin, A. Calderone, and L. Henry. 2004. Experimental evaluation of the seismic performance of reinforced concrete bridge columns. Journal of Structural Engineering 78: 69–77.
   Google Scholar
• Liao, W. I., C. H. Loh, and S. Wan. 2001. Earthquake responses of RC moment frames subjected to near-fault ground motions. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 10 (3): 219–29. doi: 10.1002/tal.178.
   Google Scholar
• Mander, J. B., M. J. N. Priestley, and R. Park. 1988. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 114 (8): 1804–26. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansouri, I., S. Shahbazi, J. W. Hu, and S. A. Moghaddam. 2019. Effects of pulse-like nature of forward directivity ground motions on the seismic behavior of steel moment frames. Earthquakes and Structures 17 (1): 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mashayekhi, A. H., M. Gerami, and N. Siahpolo. 2019. Assessment of higher modes effects on steel moment resisting structures under near‑fault earthquakes with forward directivity effect along strike‑parallel and strike‑normal components. International Journal of Steel Structures 19: 1543–59. doi: 10.1007/s13296-019-00229-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mavroeidis, G. P., G. Dong, and A. S. Papageorgiou. 2004. Near-fault ground motions and the response of elastic and inelastic single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 33 (9): 1023–49. doi: 10.1002/eqe.391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menegotto, M., and P. E. Pinto Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending. IABSE reports of the working commissions. 1973; 15–22.
   Google Scholar
• OpenSees. 2016. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation. Berkeley: Open source software. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Sattar, S. 2018. Evaluating the consistency between prescriptive and performance-based seismic design approaches for reinforced concrete moment frame buildings. Engineering Structures 174: 919–31. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.080.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sehhati, R., A. Rodriguez-Marek, M. ElGawady, and W. F. Cofer. 2011. Effects of near-fault ground motions and equivalent pulses on multi-story structures. Engineering Structures 33 (3): 767–79. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.11.032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somerville, P. G., N. F. Smith, R. W. Graves, and N. A. Abrahamson. 1997. Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity. Seismological Research Letters 68 (1): 199–222. doi: 10.1785/gssrl.68.1.199.
   Google Scholar
• Speicher, M. S., and J. L. Harris. 2016a. Collapse prevention seismic performance assessment of new special concentrically braced frames using ASCE 41. Engineering Structures 126: 652–66. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.07.064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speicher, M. S., and J. L. Harris. 2016b. Collapse prevention seismic performance assessment of new eccentrically braced frames using ASCE 41. Engineering Structures 117: 344–57. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.02.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speicher, M. S., and J. L. Harris. 2018. Collapse Prevention seismic performance assessment of new buckling-restrained braced frames using ASCE 41. Engineering Structures 164: 274–89. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.01.067.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, J. P., S.-J. Chiou, J. D. Bray, R. W. Graves, P. G. Somerville, and N. Abrahamson. 2001. Ground motion evaluation procedures for performance-based design. PEER report 2001/09. Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, W. T. 1988. Uniaxial compressional stress-strain relation of concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 114 (9): 2133–36. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:9(2133).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, S., J. Lai, M. J. Schoettler, and S. A. Mahin. 2017. Seismic assessment of existing tall buildings: A case study of a 35-story steel building with pre-Northridge connection. Engineering Structures 141: 624–33. doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.03.047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waugh, J. D. 2009. Nonlinear analysis of t-shaped concrete walls subjected to multi-directional loading. PhD Thesis. Iowa State University.
   Google Scholar