Advertisement

Steel Structures in Seismic Zones

  • F. M. Mazzolani
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 420)

Abstract

Steel structures have been always considered as a suitable solution for constructions in high seismicity areas, due to the very good strength and ductility exhibited by the structural material, the high quality assurance guaranteed by the industrial production of steel shapes and plates and the reliability of connections built up both in workshop and in field (Mazzolani and Piluso, 1996). In spite of these natural advantages, researchers are concerned about the necessity that, in order to ensure ductile structural behaviour, special care must be paid mainly in conceiving dissipative zones, which have to be properly detailed, assuring stable hysteresis loops, able to dissipate the earthquake input energy with high efficiency (Bruneau et al., 1998). As a confirmation, during the recent seismic events of Northridge (Los Angeles, 17 January 1994) and Hyogoken-Nanbu (Kobe, 17 January 1995), even if the cases of collapse of steel buildings have been extremely rare, steel moment frame buildings, considered as highly ductile systems, exhibited an unexpected fragile behaviour. They presented many failures located at the beam-to-column connections, challenging the assumption of high ductility and demonstrating that the knowledge on steel moment frames is not yet complete. Hence, in order to improve constructional details and to propose new design solutions for achieving a correspondence between the design requirements and the actual structural response, the scientific community began to deepen the reasons of this poor behaviour: does it depends on the material quality, on the design concept, on the structural scheme, on the constructional details, on the code provision, or on the seismic input occurred (Mazzolani, 1998)? Most of these questions are still being analysed, but much more has been understood on the seismic behaviour of steel structures. Consequently, during the last years most of the recent knowledge has been already or is going to be introduced into the structural design provisions for seismic resistant design in all the earthquake prone Countries, giving rise to a new generation of seismic codes.

Keywords

Ground Motion Steel Structure Seismic Zone Energy Dissipation Capacity Steel Building 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AIJ (1990). Standard for Limit State Design of Steel Structures (Draft). Architectural Institute of Japan ( English version, October 1992 ).Google Scholar
  2. AISC (1997). Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.Google Scholar
  3. Akiyama H., Yamada S. (1995). Damage of steel buildings in the Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake.In Proceedings of EASEC ’95. Gold Coast, Australia.Google Scholar
  4. Bertero, V.V. (1996). The Need for Multi-Level Seismic Design Criteria. In Proceedings of the II h World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Acapulco.Google Scholar
  5. Bertero V. V., Anderson J. C., Krawinkler H. (1994). Performance of steel building structures during the Northridge Earthquake. In Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Report No. UBC/EERC-94/09,University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  6. Bertero, R.D., Bertero, V.V. and Teran-Gilmore A. (1996). Performance-Based Earthquake-Resistant Design Based on Comprehensive Design Philosophy and Energy Concept. In Proceedings of the l P h World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Acapulco.Google Scholar
  7. Bruneau M., Uang C.M. and Whittaker A. (1998). Ductile design of steel structures. McGraw-Hill. Commission of the European Communities (1994). Eurocode 8: Structures in Seismic Regions, ENV. ECCS (1988). European Recommendations for Steel Structures in Seismic Zones, doc. n. 54.Google Scholar
  8. Elnashai A. (1994). Comment on the Performance of Steel Structures in the Northridge (Southern California) Earthquake of January 1994. In New Steel Construction,Vol. 2, n. 5, October.Google Scholar
  9. Mazzolani F. M. (1988). The ECCS activity in the field of recommendations for steel seismic resistant structures. In Proceedings of the 9 1 ” World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, WCEE. Tokyo, Kyoto.Google Scholar
  10. Mazzolani, F.M. (1991a). Design of Seismic Resistant Steel Structures. In Proceedings of International Conference on Steel and Aluminium Structures,Singapore.Google Scholar
  11. Mazzolani, F.M. (1991b). The European Recommendations for Steel Structures in Seismic Areas: Principles and Design. In Proceedings of Annual Technical Session of SSRC (Structural Stability Research Council),Chicago.Google Scholar
  12. Ma77olani F. M. (1992). Background document of EUROCODE 8, chapter 3: Steel Structures. In Proceedings of the I” State ofArt Workshop COST CI,Strasbourg.Google Scholar
  13. Mazzolani F. M. (1995a). Design of seismic resistant steel structures. In Proceedings of the 10 1 ” ECEE. Vienna 1994, published by Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  14. Mazzolani F. M. (1995b). Eurocode 8 - chapter “Steel”: background and remarks. In Proceedings of 10th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, ECEE. Vienna, 1994, published by Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  15. Mazzolani, F.M. (1995c). Some simple considerations arising from Japanese presentation on the damage caused by the Hanshin earthquake. In Stability of Steel Structures (ed. M. Ivanyi), SSRC Colloquium, 21–23 September, Budapest, Akademiai Kiado, Vol. 2, 1007–1010.Google Scholar
  16. Mazzolani F. M. (1998). Design of steel structures in seismic regions: the paramount influence of connections. In Proceedings of the COST CI International Conference on “Control of the semi-rigid behaviour of civil engineering structural connections “. Liege, September 17–18.Google Scholar
  17. Mazzolani F.M. (1999a). Principles of design of seismic resistant steel structures. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Metal Structures. Ljiubljana, May 20.Google Scholar
  18. Mazzolani F.M. (1999b). Design and construction of steelworks in seismic zones. In Proceedings of the XVII C.T.A. Congress, Napoli, October 3–6.Google Scholar
  19. Mazzolani F. M. (1999c) Reliability of moment resistant connections of steel building frames in seismic areas: the first year of activity of the RECOS project. In Proceedings of the 2” d European Conference on Steel Structures EUROSTEEL. Prague, May 26–29.Google Scholar
  20. Mazzolani F.M. (1999d). Reliability of moment resistant connections of steel building frames in seismic areas. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Seismic Engineering for Tomorrow, in honor of professor Hiroshi Akiyama. Tokyo, Japan, November 26.Google Scholar
  21. Mazzolani F.M. (edr., 2000). Moment resisting connections of steel frames in seismic areas: design and reliability. Published by E & FN SPON, London, in press.Google Scholar
  22. Mazzolani, F.M., Georgescu, D., Astaneh-Asl, A. (1995a). Safety Levels in Seismic Design. In Proceedings of the I” International Workshop on “Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas” STESSA ’94, Timisora, Romania, June 1994, Mazzolani F. M., Gioncu V. editors, published by E & FN SPON an Imprint of Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  23. Mazzolani, F.M., Georgescu, D., Astaneh-Asl, A. (1995b). Remarks on behaviour of concentrically and eccentrically braced steel frames. In Proceedings of the I’“ International Workshop on “Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas” STESSA ’94, Timisora, Romania, June 1994, Mazzolani F. M., Gioncu V. editors, published by E & FN SPON an Imprint of Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  24. Mazzolani, F. M., Georgescu D., Cretu D. (1995c). On the ductility of concentrically braced frames. In Proceedings of the C.T.A (Congresso dei Tecnici dell ’Acciaio) Congress,Riva del Garda.Google Scholar
  25. Mazzolani, F.M. and Piluso, V. (1994). Manual on Design of Steel Structures in Seismic Zones. In European Convention on Constructional Steelwork, ECCS-TCl3, doc. n. 76.Google Scholar
  26. Mazzolani, F.M. and Piluso, V. (1995). Failure mode and ductility control of seismic resistant MR-frames. In Costruzioni Metalliche n. 2.Google Scholar
  27. Mazzolani, F.M. and Piluso, V. (1996). Theory and Design of Seismic Resistant Steel Frames, E & FN SPON, an Imprint of Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  28. Mazzolani, F.M., and Piluso, V. (1997). A simple approach for evaluating performance levels of momentresisting steel frames. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on “Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes”. Bled, June, published by Balkema, Rotterdam. SEAOC, Structural Engineers Association of California (1995). VISION 2000: Performance Based Seismic Engineering of Buildings.Google Scholar
  29. STESSA ’84, (1995). Proceedings of the I st International Workshop on “Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas “. Timisoara, Mazzolani F. M., Gioncu V. editors, published by E & FN SPON, an Imprint of Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  30. STESSA ’87 (1997). Proceedings of the 2 st International Workshop on “Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas”,Kyoto, Mazzolani F. M., Akiyama H. editors, 10/17, Salerno.Google Scholar
  31. UBC (1991). Uniform Building Code. In International Conference of Building Officials. Whittier, CA. UBC (1997). Uniform Building Code. In International Conference of Building Officials. Whittier, CA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. M. Mazzolani
    • 1
  1. 1.University “Federico II” of NaplesNaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations