This paper investigates the two-dimensional nonlinear seismic response of four 20-story reinforced-concrete special moment-resisting frames designed according to ASCE 7-10 and ACI 318-11 code provisions. Analytical models of the buildings are subjected to a set of ground motions scaled to the smooth design spectra for the design basis earthquake (DBE) and the maximum considered earthquake (MCE) for a site located in Los Angeles, California. Significant inelastic deformations of beams are observed at both hazard levels, but the deformations at the MCE level result in large inelastic tensile strains at the base of the columns. Current code provisions have been found to appreciably underestimate column axial forces and, depending on the procedure used, shear forces in columns as well. Beam growth effects were found to significantly contribute to the shear forces in the columns near the base. Methods for improving estimates of column axial and shear forces are presented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AkkarS.YazganU. and GülkanP.2005. Drift estimates in frame buildings subjected to near-fault ground motions, Journal of Structural Engineering131, 1014–1024.
2.
AlaviB. and KrawinklerH.2004. Behavior of moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics33, 687–706.
3.
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2011. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, ACI 318, Farmington Hills, MI.
4.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-10, Reston, VA.
5.
Applied Technology Council (ATC), 2005. Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures, Rep. FEMA-440, Redwood City, CA.
6.
BakerJ. W.2011. Conditional mean spectrum: tool for ground-motion selection, Journal of Structural Engineering137, 322–331.
7.
BarbosaA.2011. Simplified Vector-Valued Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis and Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis: Application to the 13-Story NEHRP Reinforced Concrete Frame-Wall Building Design Example, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego.
8.
ElwoodK. J.PampaninS. and KamW. Y.2012. NZ 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake and implications for the design of concrete structures, in Proceedings, International Symposium on Engineering Lessons Learned from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Tokyo, 1157–1158.
FenwickR. and FongA.1979. The Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beams Under Cyclic Loading. University of Auckland School of Engineering Report. No. 176, Auckland, New Zealand.
11.
FenwickR. C. and MeggetL. M.1993. Elongation and load deflection characteristics of reinforced concrete members containing plastic hinges, New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering26, 28–41, available at http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/Bulletin/Archive/26(1)0028.pdf.
12.
HallJ. F.1998. Seismic Response of Steel Frame Buildings to Near-Source Ground Motions, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics27, 1445–1464.
13.
HallJ. F.HeatonT. H.HallingM. W. and WaldD. J.1995. Near-source ground motion and its effects on flexible buildings, Earthquake Spectra11, 569–605.
14.
HaseltonC. B.GouletC. A.Mitrani-ReiserJ.BeckJ. L.DeierleinG. G.PorterK. A.StewartJ. P. and TacirogluE.2008. An Assessment to Benchmark the Seismic Performance of a Code-Conforming Reinforced Concrete Moment-Frame Building, Tech. Rep. PEER 2007/12, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
15.
HaseltonC. B.LielA. B.DeierleinG. G.DeanB. S. and ChouJ. H.2011. Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete building—Part I: Assessment of ductile moment frames, Journal of Structural Engineering137, 481–491.
16.
KimJ.StantonJ. and MacRaeG.2004. Effect of beam growth on reinforced concrete frames, Journal of Structural Engineering130, 1333–1342.
17.
KrishnanS.2007. Case studies of damage to 19-storey irregular steel moment-frame buildings under near-source ground motion, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics36, 861–885.
18.
KuntzG. L. and BrowningJ.2003. Reduction of column yielding during earthquakes for reinforced concrete frames, ACI Structural Journal100, 573–580.
19.
LiaoW.LohC. and WanS.2001. Earthquake responses of RC moment frames subjected to near-fault ground motions, The Structural Design of Tall Buildings10, 219–229.
20.
Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design Council (LATBSDC), 2011. An Alternative Procedure for Seismic Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings Located in the Los Angeles Region, Los Angeles.
21.
ManderJ. B.PriestleyM. J. N. and ParkP.1988. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering114, 1804–1826.
22.
MoehleJ. P.BozorgniaY.JayaramN.JonesP.RahnamaM.ShomeM.TunaZ.WallaceJ. A.YangT. Y. and ZareianF.2011. Case Studies of the Seismic Performance of Tall Buildings Designed by Alternative Means, Task 12 Report for the Tall Buildings Initiative. Tech. Rep. PEER 2011/05, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
23.
MoehleJ. P.HooperJ. D. and LubkeC. D.2008. Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Special Moment Frames: A Guide for Practicing Engineers. NEHRP Seismic Design Technical Brief No. 1, NIST GCR 8-917-1, NEHRP, Washington, D.C.
24.
MutoM. and KrishnanS.2011. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst: Response of tall steel buildings to the shakeoutscenario earthquake, Earthquake Spectra27, 375–398.
25.
OtaniS.1999. RC buildings damage statistics and SDF response with design seismic force, Earthquake Spectra15, 485–501.
26.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), 2012. Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSees), software, available at http://opensees.berkeley.edu/ (last accessed 31 December 2014).
27.
PengB.DhakalR. and FenwickR. C.2006. Causes of Elongation in Reinforced Concrete Beams Subjected to Cyclic Loading. Tech. Rep., University of Canterbury, Canterbury, New Zealand.
28.
PettingaJ. D. and PriestleyM. J. N.2005. Dynamic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames designed with direct displacement-based design, Journal of Earthquake Engineering9, 309–330.
29.
QiX. and PantazopoulouS. J.1991. Response of RC frame under lateral loads, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering117, 1167–1188.
30.
RestrepoJ. I.ParkR. and BuchananA.1990. Seismic Load Tests on Midspan Connections Between Precast Concrete Beams: 3rd Progress Report on the Research Project on the Seismic Performance of Precast Concrete Frames. University of Canterbury Research Report. ISSN 0110-3326, Canterbury, New Zealand.
31.
ScottB. D.ParkR. and PriestleyM. J. N.1982. Stress-strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates, ACI Journal79, 13–27.
32.
Standards New Zealand (SNZ), 2006. Concrete Structures Standard NZS3101, Wellington New Zealand.
33.
Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC), 2007. Seismic Design and Review of Tall Buildings Using Non-Prescriptive Procedures, Recommended Administrative Bulletin, SEAONC, San Francisco.
34.
TBI Guidelines Working Group, 2010. Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings, Tech. Rep. 2010/05, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley CA.
35.
TsaiK. C.HsiaoC. P. and BruneauM.2000. Overview of building damages in 921 Chi-Chi earthquake, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology2, 93–108.
36.
VisnjicT.PanagiotouM. and MoehleJ. P.2012. Numerical Seismic Response of Four 20-Story Tall Reinforced Concrete Special Moment Frames Design with Current Code Provisions. University of California Berkeley Research Report No. UCB/SEMM-2012/02, Berkeley, CA.
37.
WiebeL. and ChristopoulosC.2010. Characterizing acceleration spikes due to stiffness changes in nonlinear systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics39, 1653–1670.
38.
WillfordM.WhittakerA. and KlemencicR.2008. Recommendations for the Seismic Design of High-Rise Buildings, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), Chicago.
