Advertisement

Design Criteria for Seismic Resistant Steel Structures

  • V. Gioncu
Conference paper
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 420)

Abstract

The paper presents the state-of —the art in the design of the steel structures, in the light of the lessons learned from the last great earthquakes: Michoacan (1985), Loma Prieta (1989), Northridge (1994) and Kobe (1995). In the introduction, the very recent progress in the conception and design are presented, showing the challenge for future research works. The design criteria as multi-level design approaches and rigidity, stiffness and ductility demands are detailed, emphasizing the unsolved problems. New aspects for ground motion modeling, as the differences between near-source and far-source earthquakes are examined. The response of the structure to these near-source earthquake is examined, taking into account the influence of superior vibration modes. velocity and strain-rate, vertical components, etc. The final conclusions consider that now is the right moment to introduce some new provisions in the design codes, in order to fill the gap that exists between the accumulated knowledge and design codes.

Keywords

Ground Motion Design Criterion Plastic Hinge Ductility Demand Kobe Earthquake 
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. Ambraseys N.N, Free M.W. (1997): Surface-wave magnitude calibration for European region earthquakes. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, 1–22.Google Scholar
  2. Anastasiadis A., Gioncu V., Mazzolani F.M. (2000): New trends in evaluation of available ductility of steel members. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 2000, 21–24 August 2000, Montreal (manuscript).Google Scholar
  3. Aribert J.M., Grecea D. (1997): A new method to evaluate the q-factor from elastic-plastic dynamic analysis and its application to steel structures. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 97 (eds. F.M. Mazzolani and H. Akiyama), 3–8 August 1997, Kyoto, 10/17, Salerno, 382–393.Google Scholar
  4. Bachmann H., Linde P., Werik Th. (1995): Capacity design and non-linear dynamic analysis of earthquake resistant structures. In 10`h European Conference on Earthquake Engineering (ed. G. Duma), 28August-2 September 1994, Vienna, Balkema, Rotterdam, Vol. 1, 11–20.Google Scholar
  5. Bertero V.V (1996): State-of-the-art report on design criteria. In 11°i World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 23–28 June 1996, Acapulco, CD-ROM 2005.Google Scholar
  6. Bertero V.V (1997a): Codification, design and application. General report. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 97 (eds. F.M. Mazzolani and H. Akiyama), 3–8 August 1997, Kyoto, 10/17, Salerno, 189–206.Google Scholar
  7. Bertero V.V (1997b): Performance-based seismic engineering: A critical review of proposed guidelines. In Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes (eds. P. Fajfar and H. Krawinkler), 24–27 June 1997, Bled, Balkema, Rotterdam, 1–31.Google Scholar
  8. Bertz G., Smolka A. (1995): Urban earthquake potential: Economic and insurance aspects. In 101h European Conference on Earthquake Engineering (ed. G. Duma), 28August-2 September 1994, Vienna, Balkema, Rotterdam, Vol. 2, 1127–1134.Google Scholar
  9. Cosenza E. (1987): Duttilitâ globale delle strutture sismo-resistenti in accaio. PhD thesis, University of Napoli, Italy.Google Scholar
  10. El Nashai A.S., Papazoglou A.J. (1997): Procedure and spectra for analysis of RC structures subjected to strong vertical earthquakes loads. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, No I, 121–155.Google Scholar
  11. Filiatrault A. (1996): Elements de Genie Parasismique et de Calcul Dynamique des Structures. L’Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal.Google Scholar
  12. Gioncu V. (1997): Ductility demands. General report. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 97 (eds. F.M. Mazzolani and H. Akiyama), 3–8 August 1997, Kyoto, 10/17, Salerno, 279–302.Google Scholar
  13. Gioncu V. (1999): Framed structures. Ductility and seismic response. General report. In Stability and Ductility of Steel Structures, 9–11 September 1999, Timisoara, Romania.Google Scholar
  14. Gioncu V. (2000): Effect of strain-rate on the ductility of steel members. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 2000, 21–24 August 2000, Montreal (manuscript).Google Scholar
  15. Gioncu V., Petcu D. (1997): Available rotation capacity of wide-flange beams and beam-columns. Part I. Theoretical approaches. Part II. Experimental and numerical tests. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 43, No. 1–3, 161–217, 219–244.Google Scholar
  16. Hall J.F (1995a): Near-source ground motion and its effects in flexible buildings. Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 11, No 4, 569–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall J. F. (1995b): Parameters study of the response of moment-resisting steel frame buildings to near-source ground motions. Technical Report SAC 95–05, 1.1–1. 83.Google Scholar
  18. Hudson M.B., Skyers B.N., Lew M. (1996). Vertical strong motion characteristics of the Northridge earthquake. In 1lth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 23–28 June 1996, Acapulco, CD-ROM 728.Google Scholar
  19. Ifrim M. Macavei F., Demetriu S., Vlad I. (1986): Analysis of degradation process in structures during the earthquake. In 81.’ European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, 65/8–72/8.Google Scholar
  20. Iwan W.D (1995): Drift demand spectra for selected Northridge sites. Technical Report SAC 95–05, 2.1–2. 40.Google Scholar
  21. Iwan W.D. (1997): The drift demand spectrum and its application to structural design and analysis. In 11n World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 23–28 June 1996, Acapulco, CD-ROM 1116.Google Scholar
  22. Law N., Wilson J., Hutchinson G. (1996): Building ductility demands. Interplate versus intraplate earthquakes. Earthquake and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 25, 965–985.Google Scholar
  23. Maeys R.L. (1995): Interstorey drift design and damage control issues. The Structural Design of Tall Buildings, Vol. 4, 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mazzolani F.M. (1995): 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 1995, Budapest, Akademiai Kiado, Vol. 2, 1007–1010.Google Scholar
  25. Mazzolani F.M., Piluso V. (1993): Design of Steel Structures in Seismic Zones. Manual ECCS Document.Google Scholar
  26. Mazzolani F.M., Piluso V. (1996): Theory and Design of Seismic Resistant Steel Frames. E & FN Spon, London.Google Scholar
  27. Mohammadioun B. (1997): Nonlinear response of soils to horizontal and vertical bedrock: earthquake motion. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 1, 93–119.Google Scholar
  28. Naeim F. (1998): Research overview: Seismic response of structures. The structural Design of Tall Buildings, Vol. 7, 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nair R. Shankar (1995): Stiffness and serviceability issues in tall steel buildings. In Habitat and the High-rise. tradition and Innovation (eds L.S. Beedle and D. Rice), 14–19 May 1995, Amsterdam, 1171–1183.Google Scholar
  30. Papaleontiou C., Roesset J.M. (1993): Effect of vertical accelerations on the seismic response of frames. In Structural Dynamics. EYRODYN’93, Balkema, Rotterdam, 19–26.Google Scholar
  31. Shorousian P., Choi K.B. (1987): Steel mechanical properties at different strain-rate. Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 4, 863–872.Google Scholar
  32. Tirca L., Gioncu V., Mazzolani F.M. (1997): Influence of design criteria for multistorey steel MR frames. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 97 (eds. F.M. Mazzolani and H. Akiyama), 3–8 August 1997, Kyoto, 10/17, Salerno, 266–275.Google Scholar
  33. Tirca L., Gioncu V. (1999): Ductility demands for MRFs and LL-EBFs for different earthquake types. In Stability and Ductility of Steel Structures, 9–11 September 1999, Timisoara, Romania.Google Scholar
  34. Tirca L., Mateescu G., Gioncu V. (2000): Artificial ground motions for design of MRFs subjected to pulse type earthquakes. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 2000, 21–24 August 2000, Montreal (manuscript).Google Scholar
  35. Tirca L., Gioncu V. (2000): Behaviour of MRFs subjected to near-field earhquakes. In Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, STESSA 2000, 21–24 August 2000, Montreal (manuscript).Google Scholar
  36. UBC (1997): Uniform Building Code, Division V, Soil Profile Types.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Gioncu
    • 1
  1. 1.Politechnica University TimisoaraTimisoaraRomania

Personalised recommendations