Encyclopedia of Earthquake Engineering

2015 Edition
| Editors: Michael Beer, Ioannis A. Kougioumtzoglou, Edoardo Patelli, Siu-Kui Au

Strengthening Techniques: Code-Deficient Steel Buildings

  • Konstantinos Daniel TsavdaridisEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35344-4_207


Braced frames; Composite materials; Connections; Cyclic behavior; Deformation capacity; Energy dissipation; Fuses; Repair; Seismic retrofitting; Steel buildings; Strengthening techniques


The design of steel buildings is often governed by lateral wind loads and not seismic loads. Also, statistics indicate that the number of fatalities during earthquakes due to failure of all types of steel buildings is significantly less compared to other types of buildings. Consequently, much effort has been invested to seismically retrofit buildings having unreinforced masonry walls and reinforced concrete frames. However, recently steel buildings have received significant attention, while this interest mainly stems from the realization, following the 1994 Northridge earthquake, that the welded beam-to-column connections in moment-resisting frames were likely to fail in a brittle manner, prior the development of significant inelastic response, therefore negating the design intent...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. AISC 1999 LRFD (1999) Specification for structural steel buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  2. AISC 358 (2005) Specification for structural steel buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. ASCE 41–06 (2006) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers – ASCE, RestonGoogle Scholar
  4. Brockenbrough RL (2002) AISC Rehabilitation Bernam on and retrofit guide – a reference for historic shapes and specifications, Steel design guide series 15. American Institute for Steel Construction, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruneau M (2004) Seismic retrofit of steel structures. In: Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniera Sismica, VIII SNIS, TlaxcalaGoogle Scholar
  6. Buyukozturk O, Gunes O, Karaca E (2003) Progress on understanding de-bonding problems in reinforced concrete and steel members strengthened using FRP composites. Construct Build Mater 18(1):9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen SJ, Lin HY (1990) Experimental study of steel I-beam to box-column moment connection. In: 4th international conference on steel structures and space frames, Singapore, pp 41–47Google Scholar
  8. Christopoulos C, Filiatrault A, Uang CM (2002) Self-centering post-tensioned energy dissipating (PTED) steel frames for seismic regions. In: Structural systems research project report no. SSRP-2002/06, Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, p 292Google Scholar
  9. Coedova PP, Hamburger RO (2011) Steel connections: proprietary or public domain. Modern Steel Construct 51(10):24–31Google Scholar
  10. Crawford JE (2002) Retrofit methods to mitigate progressive collapse, 2002. Online: available in May 2014Google Scholar
  11. Demetriou D, Nikitas N, Tsavdaridis KD (2014) Performance of proportional-integral-derivative controllers on structures with variable damping tuned mass dampers. In: 6th World conference on structural control and monitoring, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  12. Eatherton MR, Hajjar JF, Deierlein GG, Krawinkler H, Billington S, Ma X (2008) Controlled rocking of steel-framed buildings with replaceable energy-dissipating fuses. In: The 14th World conference on earthquake engineering, Oct 12–17, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  13. Egloff O, Tremblay R, Vincent R, Dussault S (2012) Finite element analysis of ductile fuses for W-shape steel bracing members. In: 15th World conference of earthquake engineering, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  14. FEMA 274 (1997) NEHRP commentary on the guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Report no. FEMA 274. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. FEMA 351 (2000) Recommended seismic evaluation and upgrade criteria for existing welded steel moment frame buildings. Report No. FEMA 351. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. FEMA 356 (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. In: Report No. FEMA 356. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. FEMA 547 (2006) Techniques for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. Report No. FEMA 547. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Garlock M, Ricles JM, Sauce R (2004) Experimental studies on full-scale post-tensioned steel moment connections. In: 13th World conference of earthquake engineering, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  19. Ghobadi MS, Ghassemieh M, Mazroi A, Abolmaali A (2009) Seismic performance of ductile welded connections using T-stiffener. J Construct Steel Res 65:766–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hedayat A, Celikag M (2009) Post-Northridge connection with modified beam end configuration to enhance strength and ductility. J Construct Steel Res 65(7):1413–1430Google Scholar
  21. Khabit IF, Mahin SA, Pister KS (1988) Seismic behavior of concentrically braced steel frames. Report no. UCB/EERC-88/01. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  22. Kiamanesh R, Abolmaali A, Ghassemieh M (2010) The effect of stiffeners on the strain patterns of the welded connection zone. J Construct Steel Res 66(1):19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leelataviwat S, Goel SC, Stojadinovic B (1998) Drift and yield mechanism based seismic design and upgrading of steel moment frames. Research report no. UMCEE 98–29. Department of civil and environmental engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  24. Lenwari A, Thepchatri T, Albrecht P (2006) Debonding strength of steel beams strengthened with CFRP plates. J Comp Constr 10(1):69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leon RT, Yang CS (2003) Special inverted-V-braced frames with suspended zipper struts. Georgia Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  26. Marian L, Giaralis A (2014) Optimal design of a novel tuned mass-damper-inerter (TMDI) passive vibration control configuration for stochastically support-excited structural systems. Prob Eng Mech. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266892014000216
  27. Pachoumis DT, Galousis EG, Kalfas CN, Christitsa AD (2008) Reduced beam section moment connections subjected to cyclic loading: experimental analysis and FEM simulation. Eng Struct 31:216–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Plumier A (1997) The dog-bone: back to the future. Eng J 34(2):61–67Google Scholar
  29. Qingshan Y, Bo LA, Na Y (2009) Aseismic behaviors of steel moment resisting frames with opening in beam web. J Construct Steel Res 65:1323–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sarhosis V, Tsavdaridis KD, Giannopoulos I (2014) Discrete element modelling of masonry infilled steel frames with multiple window openings subjected to lateral load variations. The Open Construction and Building Technology Journal 8:93–103Google Scholar
  31. Schnerch DA (2005) Strengthening of steel structures with high module carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) materials. PhD dissertation, North Carolina State University, p 265Google Scholar
  32. Schwinger C (2014) Quality assurance for structural engineering firms. Online: available in May 2014 http://www.aisc.org/store/p-1795-quality-assurance-for-structural-engineering-firms.aspx
  33. Shen Y (2009) Seismic performance of steel moment-resisting frames with nonlinear replaceable links. Master Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of TorontoGoogle Scholar
  34. Slotboom M, Robbemont A, Habraken A, Teuffel P (2014) Safety and redundancy of adaptive buildings structures. In: Civil engineering for sustainability and resilience international conference, CESARE’14, AmmanGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith MC (2002) Synthesis of mechanical networks: the inerter. IEEE Trans Autom Contr 47(10):1648–1662MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thorburn LJ, Kulak GL, Montgomery CJ (1983) Analysis of steel plate shear walls. In: Structural engineering report no. 107. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  37. Tsavdaridis KD, D’Mello C, Huo BY (2013) Experimental and computational study of vertical shear behaviour of partially encased perforated steel beams. J Eng Struct 56:805–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tsavdaridis KD, Faghih F, Nikitas N (2014) Assessment of perforated steel beam-to-column connections subjected to cyclic loading. J Earthquake Eng 18(8):1302–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Uang CM, Yu QS, Noel SA, Gross JL (2000) Cyclic testing of steel moment connections rehabilitated with RBS or welded haunch. J Struct Eng 126(1):57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vasdravellis G, Karavasilis TL, Uy B (2013) Large-scale experimental validation of steel post-tensioned connections with web hourglass pins. J Struct Eng ASCE 139(6):1033–1042Google Scholar
  41. Vian D, Bruneau M (2004) Testing of special LYS steel plate shear walls. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, Paper no. 978Google Scholar
  42. Vincent RB (2008) Minimizing the strength of bracing connections. In: 6th international workshop connections in steel structures VI. Chicago, pp 127–141Google Scholar
  43. Yu QS, Uang CM, Gross JL (2000) Seismic rehabilitation design of steel moment connection with welded haunch. J Struct Eng ASCE 126(1):57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil EngineeringUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK