The soft story located in the basement of tall buildings for parking or shopping lot. Considering the limitation in architecture, these structures may be retrofitted by implementing earthquake energy dissipation such as viscous damper devices in soft story level. Nevertheless, an extensive review of related literature indicates that the effect of viscous damper on response modification factor is not considered. Therefore, this study proposed the response modification factors for steel structures furnished with viscous damper devices in soft story level and investigated the effect of implementing such devices on the response modification factor. In this research, steel structures with numerous stories were considered to evaluate the response modification factor, which was formulated based on three aspects, namely, strength, ductility, and redundancy factors. Quasi-static nonlinear analysis was performed using finite element software based on structural models equipped with damper devices installed in different locations of the parking level. No open bay is available in other floors to install the damper devices. Meanwhile, the overstrength, ductility, and response modification factors were established by conducting pushover analysis. Results of the study revealed that the response modification factors for structures equipped with damper devices are higher than those of structures without damper devices. Moreover, the value of response modification factor was affected by the number of stories and number of dampers. Considering the analytical results for different cases, the equation for determining the response modification factor for steel structures furnished by viscous damper devices in soft story level was proposed.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2002) Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings. Reston, VA: ASCE.
2.
AndalibZKafiMAKheyroddinA. (2014) Experimental investigation of the ductility and performance of steel rings constructed from plates. Journal of Constructional Steel Research103: 77–88.
3.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (1978) Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings. Report no. ATC-3-06. Redwood City, CA: ATC, pp. 45–53.
4.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (1995a) A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-resistant design. Report no. ATC-34. Redwood City, CA: ATC.
5.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (1995b) Structural response modification factors. Report no. ATC-19. Redwood City, CA: ATC.
6.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (1996) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete building. Report no. ATC-40, November. Redwood City, CA: ATC.
7.
AshourSAHansonRD (1987) Elastic seismic response of buildings with supplemental damping. Report UMCE 87-1, January. Ann Arbor, MI: Department of Civil Engineering, University of Michigan.
8.
DangHVFrançoisR (2014) Prediction of ductility factor of corroded reinforced concrete beams exposed to long term aging in chloride environment. Cement and Concrete Composites53: 136–147.
9.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1997) Guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA 273, October. Washington, DC: FEMA.
10.
FreemanSA (1992) On the correlation of code forces to earthquake demands. In: Proceedings of the 4th US-Japan workshop on the improvement of structural design and construction practices, Report ATC 15-3. Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
11.
GüneyisiEMD’AnielloMLandolfoR. (2013) A novel formulation of the flexural overstrength factor for steel beams. Journal of Constructional Steel Research90: 60–71.
12.
HabibiAChanRWKAlbermaniF (2013) Energy-based design method for seismic retrofitting with passive energy dissipation systems. Engineering Structures46: 77–86.
13.
HansonRDAikenIDNimsDK. (1993) State-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice in seismic energy dissipation. In: Proceedings of ATC-17-1 seminar on seismic isolation, passive energy dissipation, and active control, San Francisco, CA, 11–12 March, pp. 449–471. Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
14.
HejaziFJilaniSNoorzaeiJ. (2011) Effect of soft story on structural response of high rise buildings. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/17/1/012034.
15.
HejaziFNoorzaeiJJaafarMS. (2009) Earthquake analysis of reinforce concrete framed structures with added viscous damper. International Journal of Applied Science, Engineering and Technology65: 284–293.
16.
HejaziFToloueIJaafarMS (2013) Optimization of earthquake energy dissipation system by genetic algorithm. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering28: 796–810.
17.
International Building Code (IBC) (2000) International building code. In: Proceedings of the international conference of building officials, Whittier, CA, March 2000.
18.
International Building Code (IBC) (2003) International building code. In: Proceedings of the international conference of building officials, Whittier, CA, January 2003.
19.
International Building Code (IBC) (2012) International building code. In: Proceedings of the international conference of building officials, Whittier, CA, May 2012.
20.
IzadiniaMRahgozarMAMohammadrezaeiO (2012) Response modification factor for steel moment-resisting frames by different pushover analysis methods. Journal of Constructional Steel Research79: 83–90.
LinYYChangKC (2003) A study on damping reduction factor for buildings under earthquake ground motions. Journal of Structural Engineering: ASCE129(2): 206–214.
23.
MahmoudiMAbdiMG (2012) Evaluating response modification factors of TADAS frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research71: 162–170.
24.
MahmoudiMZareeM (2010) Evaluating response modification factors of concentrically braced steel frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research66: 1196–1204.
25.
MahmoudiMZareeM (2013) Determination the response modification factors of buckling restrained braced frames. Procedia Engineering54: 222–231.
26.
MahmoudiMMirzaeiAVosoughS (2013) Evaluating equivalent damping and response modification factors of frames equipped by pall friction dampers. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering1: 78–92.
27.
MirandaEBerteroVV (1994) Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design. Earthquake Spectra10(2): 357–379.
28.
MoghaddamHHajirasoulihaIDoostanA (2005) Optimum seismic design of concentrically braced steel frames: concepts and design procedures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research61: 151–166.
29.
MohebkhahAChegeniB (2014) Overstrength and rotation capacity for EBF links made of European IPE sections. Thin-Walled Structures74: 255–260.
30.
MollaioliFLiberatoreLLucchiniA (2014) Displacement damping modification factors for pulse-like and ordinary records. Engineering Structures78: 17–27.
31.
MondalASiddhartha GhoshSReddyGR (2013) Performance-based evaluation of the response reduction factor for ductile RC frames. Engineering Structures56: 1808–1819.
32.
NassarAAKrawinklerH (1991) Seismic demands for SDOF and MDOF systems. Report no. 400/J54/no. 95, June. Stanford, CA: The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, 224 pp.
33.
NEHRP (1994) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
34.
NEHRP (1997) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
35.
NEHRP (2000) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, 2000 Edition—Part 2: Commentary. Washington, DC: Building Seismic Safety Council.
36.
NewmarkNMHallWJ (1982) Earthquake Spectra and Design (EERI monograph series). Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
37.
OsteraasJDKrawinklerH (1990) Strength and ductility considerations in seismic design. Report no. 90, June. Stanford, CA: The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University.
38.
RahgozarMAHumarJL (1998) Accounting for overstrength in seismic design of steel structures. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering25: 1–15.
39.
RamirezOMConstantinouMCKircherCA. (2000) Development and evaluation of simplified procedures for analysis and design of buildings with passive energy dissipation systems. Report no. MCEER-00-0010, 8 December 2000. New York: Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER).
40.
RiddellRHidalgoPCruzE (1989) Response modification factors for earthquake resistant design of short period structures. Earthquake Spectra5(3): 571–590.
41.
SEAOC (1959) Recommended Lateral ‘Force Requirement and Commentary’. Sacramento, CA: Seismology Committee, Structural Engineers Association of California.
42.
SEAOC (1999) Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary. Sacramento, CA: Seismology Committee, Structural Engineers Association of California.
43.
Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1994) Uniform building code. In: Proceedings of the international conference of building officials, Whittier, CA, 1 July 1994, vol. 2.
44.
Uniform Building Code (UBC) (1997) Uniform building code. In: Proceedings of the international conference of building officials, Whittier, CA, April 1997, vol. 1.
45.
WilsonEL (2002) Three-Dimensional Static and Dynamic Analysis of Structures: A Physical Approach with Emphasis on Earthquake Engineering. Berkeley, CA: Computers and Structures, Inc.
46.
WuJPHansonRD (1989) Inelastic response spectra with high damping. Journal of the Structural Division: ASCE115(6): 1412–1431.
47.
ZeynalianMRonaghHR (2012) An experimental investigation on the lateral behavior of knee-braced cold-formed steel shear walls. Thin-Walled Structures51: 64–75.
48.
ZhuBFrangopolDM (2014) Effects of post-failure material behaviour on redundancy factor for design of structural components in nondeterministic systems. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering: Maintenance, Management, Life-Cycle Design and Performance. Epub ahead of print 3 September. DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2014.951864.
