Presentation 2 Sep

Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a
Reinforced Concrete Dual System Building By

Performance-Based Seismic Design Method and
Limit State Design Method
(M.TECH PRESENTATION 2)
Presented By: Under Guidance of:
Mr Praveen Rajbhandari Dr. Prasanjit Saha
2019000041 Assistant Professor
M.Tech in Civil Engineering (Structural Engineering) Department of Civil Engineering
2 CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Objective
4. Methodology
5. Work plan and Timeline
6. Future work
Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a Reinforced Concrete Dual System Building By Performance-Based Seismic Design Method and Limit State Design Method
INTRODUCTION
3  Performance Based Seismic Design (PBSD) provides a new pattern for structural design, and
it is able to design a structure with an acceptable performance expected by the owner,
stakeholders and society.
 It allows for design that follow the purpose of design code without necessarily satisfying the
letter of the codes.
 It is outside the prescriptive code procedure and third party peer review is typically required.
 The goal of PBSD is when the building is subjected to varying level of hazard the building
performs in such a way that agreed upon acceptance criteria are satisfied.
 The designed is generally based on 1. Service level earthquake(SLE) 2. Design basis
earthquake (DBE) and 3. Maximum considered earthquake (MCE)
 The acceptance criteria are
i. Strain and Deformation Limit
ii. Drift limit
iii. Demand capacity ratio along with the strength calculation.
Contd..
4
Response Reduction factor

 It is the factor by which the base shear
induced in a structure, if it were to remain
elastic, is reduced to obtain the design shear.
 R = RS * RR * Rμ.
 where Rµ = Response reduction considering
the system ductility, RR=Redundancy factor
and RS = Response reduction considering
system over-strength.
 The overstrength factor is a measure of
base shear force at the design level, and at
yielding and ductility factor is a measure of
roof displacement at yielding and at the
specified limit. The redundancy factor
depends on the number of vertical framing Source ASCE7-10 Response Reduction Factor (base shear vs
participated in seismic resistance. displacement curve)
LITERATURE REVIEW
S.N Author/s Paper Name Journal, Year Results
5 1 Xiong M and Huang Y Novel perspective of seismic Elsevier Journals, 2019  The differences in the superstructures, seismic performance levels, and slopes indices
performance-based evaluation and have their own unique characteristics, which should be extensively investigated and
design discussed
for resilient and sustainable slope
engineering  Effective and reasonable earthquake ground motion and stochastic dynamics should be
applied in seismic stability assessments to accurately grasp the dynamic performance of
slopes from the viewpoint of seismic dynamic reliability.

 The new generation of PBSD design approaches, such as the resilience-based assessment
and design approach, should be introduced into seismic performance evaluation and
design.
Chunyu Zhang and Ying Tian Simplified performance-based optimal Elsevier Journals, 2019  Compared with the conventional strength-based design, the proposed optimal PBSD
2 seismic design of reinforced concrete leads to 30% reduction in the needed flexural strength for the beams and columns, 26%
frame buildings reduction in the cross-sectional area, and 21% reduction in the overall cost.

 It is found that drift limits are exceeded by less than 5% for occasional and rare
earthquakes, whereas plastic hinge rotation limits are satisfied under any considered
level of seismic hazard
Zhipeng Zhai, Wei Guo,, An improved performance-based Elsevier Journals, 2019  The proposed design procedure is simple and can simultaneously and effectively achieve
3 Yaozhuang Li, Zhiwu Yu, plastic design method for seismic the design of multiple performance objectives for SLE, DBE and MCE hazard level. And
Hongpeng Cao and Dan Bu resilient its effectiveness for designing seismic resilient fused high-rise building has been proved.
fused high-rise buildings
 The inter-story drift ratio of the designed EDC-MF system is less than the limitation in
the code, indicating that the designed EDCMF system has good seismic performance
against strong ground motions.

Contd..
6 S.N Author/s Paper Name Journal, Year Results
Jianze Wang, Kaoshan Seismic performance-based design and risk analysis of Elsevier Journals, 2018  The effect of MI on drift demands is minimal under small intensity earthquake
4 Dai, Yexian Yin, thermal power plant (i.e. SLE) and it becomes evident as the excitation intensity increases, particularly
Solomon Tesfamariam building with consideration of vertical and mass on the stories below the MI story.
irregularities
 The decrease in median seismic capacities caused by MI is approximately in the
range of 32–45.6%.
 The rest regular stories have elastic responses under any level of earthquake as
their shear DCR values are less than 1.0
Siamak Sattar Evaluating the consistency between prescriptive and Elsevier Journals, 2018  The findings show that ASCE 7 and ASCE 41 are not consistent with respect to
5 performance-based the expected performance of reinforced concrete special moment frames, which
seismic design approaches for reinforced concrete can potentially impact the resiliency of buildings in the same building community
moment frame buildings designed using loading, modeling, and analysis recommendations within the two
standards.

 The outcomes illustrate the need for changes to the assessment and design
standards provisions by building code developers if a consistent structural seismic
performance is desired.
Kunal P Shukla and Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a Elsevier Journals, 2017  Response Reduction Factor for IS code method and PBPD Method is 5.59 and
6 Sejal P Dalal Reinforced Concrete Building By Performance-Based 18.52 respectively
Seismic Design Method and Limit State Design Method
 Though R for IS code method is almost same as mentioned in IS code, still hinges
are developed in column as well, which suggests that Strong Column- Weak Beam
does not hold true.

 In PNPD although Ductility Factor is % still hinges are formed only at beams, so
still there is a scope of increasing ductility factor
Contd..
Shahrokh Shoeibi, New performance-based seismic design method for Elsevier Journals, 2017  In the designed prototypes with the proposed method for the earthquake with 50%
7. Mohammad Ali Kafi structures probability of exceedance in 50 years (SLE), all the structure members remain elastic.
and Majid Gholhaki with structural fuse system
 In the designed prototypes with the proposed method for the earthquake with 10%
probability of exceedance in 50 years (DBE), only the fuse members of SFS started to
yield and all SMS members remained elastic
 The displacements of the designed prototypes, under hazard levels of DBE and MCE
are lower than the target displacements

Hyo Seon Park, Jin Integrated analysis model for assessing CO2 Elsevier Journals, 2017  It was confirmed that an insignificant increase in structural material costs and CO2
8 Woo Hwang, Byung emissions, seismic performance, and costs of emissions is required to achieve the enhanced seismic performance objective when
Kwan Oh buildings through designing a mid-rise building, contrary to low-rise building design.
performance-based optimal seismic design with
sustainability  It was confirmed that these prescriptive design codes are more conservative than the
design requirements for the performance-based seismic design with respect to
performance objectives P and K, although they have seismic levels similar to the
performance objectives P and K presented by FEMA 356
Edmond V. Muho, Modal behavior factors for the performance-based Elsevier Journals, 2017  Unlike the conventional code-based approach that considers a single behavior factor q
9 Jiang Qian and seismic design of R/C value for all modes, the proposed approach with modal behavior factors qk offers a
Dimitri E. Beskos wall-frame dual systems and in filled-MRFs more rational alternative and leads to more accurate results than code based methods
without the need of final deformation checks in an iterative way

 A new performance-based seismic design method for plane R/C WFDSs and I-MRFs
using modal behavior (strength reduction)
Contd..
8 S.N Author/s
Alfredo Gonzaleza,
Paper Name
Performance-based seismic design framework for RC
Journal, Year
Elsevier Journals, 2017 
Results
Diaphragms with usual levels of web and chord reinforcement tend to develop a single
10 Enrico Spaconeb and floor diaphragms in dual systems crack at the critical region.
Roberto Nascimbenec
 Highly reinforced diaphragms, in contrast, can have much longer plastic hinge lengths,
and will develop multiple smeared cracks as the plasticity is spread over a larger ‘fan’
area, much like a wall.
R. Allahvirdizadeh, Probabilistic comparative investigation on introduced Elsevier Journals, 2017  Recorded inter-story drift values in cases which the performance was controlled by the
11 M. Khanmohammadi performance-based seismic design and assessment local criteria are generally 50–100% greater than the conventional allowable values.
and M.S. Marefat criteria
 Probability of exceeding local limits at a lateral inter-story drift equal to the acceptable
values of the regulations is mostly less than 10%. Therefore, current global thresholds
will generally control the performance of RC moment resisting frames. It may lead to
designs with same deficiencies as force-based approaches.

 It was observed that in nearly all cases the allowable maximum inter-story drift is
smaller than the experienced inter-story drift values when the local criteria controls the
performance. This statement is true even for lower or higher exceeding percentages and
all performance levels. Then, it can be concluded that the conventional inter-story drift
limits always control the performance of moment-resisting RC frames.
Mohd. Zameeruddin Review on Recent developments in the performance- Elsevier Journals, 2016  Damage variables are integrated with the performance evaluation procedure,
12 and Keshav K. Sangle based seismic performance evaluation and damage assessment can be performed in a single analysis,
design of reinforced concrete structures thus facilitating design procedures and saving time.

 The next generation PBSD (FEMA 445) procedure conveys the need to express
the performance objectives regarding the primary concerns of stakeholders (viz.,
repair cost, casualties, and downtime).Therefore, DIs must be integrated within the
performance evaluation procedure.
Contd..
Yang Lu a,⇑, Iman Performance-based seismic design of flexible-base Elsevier Journals, 2016  Using concentric, rectangular, trapezoidal, parabolic and code specified design load
13 Hajirasouliha b, Alec multi-storey buildings considering soil–structure patterns (IBC-2012 and Eurocode-8) to design flexible-base MDOF structures showed
M. Marshall interaction that the code specified load patterns are, in general, more suitable for long period
structures, whereas the trapezoidal pattern provides the best design solution for short
period flexible-base structures.

 To satisfy a target ductility demand for SSI systems with similar fixed-base fundamental
periods and structure-to-soil stiffness ratios, the total structural strength increases by
increasing the slenderness ratios, especially in the short period range
Ima Muljati, Performance of force based design versus direct Elsevier Journals, 2015  It was confirmed that an insignificant increase in structural material costs and CO2
14 Fransiscus Asisi, displacement based design in predicting seismic emissions is required to achieve the enhanced seismic performance objective when
Kevin Willyanto demands of regular concrete special designing a mid-rise building, contrary to low-rise building design.
moment resisting frames
 It was confirmed that these prescriptive design codes are more conservative than the
design requirements for the performance-based seismic design with respect to
performance objectives P and K, although they have seismic levels similar to the
performance objectives P and K presented by FEMA 356

Apurba Mondal, Performance-based evaluation of the response Elsevier Journals, 2013  Based on Performance Limit 1 (ATC-40 limits on interstorey drift ratio and member
15 Siddhartha Ghosh and reduction factor rotation capacity), the Indian standard overestimates the R factor, which leads to the
G.R. Reddy for ductile RC frames potentially dangerous underestimation of the design base shear.

 The strong-column-weak-beam criterion in design doesn’t make any major difference in
terms of R.

 The IS 1893 and the ASCE7 lateral load distributions give R almost in the same range.
However, a load distribution based on the fundamental mode shape estimates R in a
range of higher values
Contd..
Qiang Xue, Chia-Wei The draft code for performance-based seismic design Elsevier Journals, 2007  According to the case study, if the same column size has been adopted for the first
16 Wu, Cheng-Chung of buildings in Taiwan several floors, a higher reinforcement ratio assigned to the first 2 stories is helpful for
Chen and Kuo-Ching uniform distribution of system ductility
Chen
 The performance criteria associated with stiffness or displacement as suggested in the
draft code should not be used either as optimized design criteria or in a direct
displacement-based design procedure for structural systems other than moment
resisting frames.

 No specific criterion regarding economic loss is provided. The nonstructural damage is
limited by the structural drift limit.
X.-K. Zou, C.-M. Optimal seismic performance-based design of Elsevier Journals, 2005  It is demonstrated that the OC design method is able to improve automatically and
17 Chan reinforced concrete gradually a performance-based interstory drift design to attain optimal performance
buildings using nonlinear pushover analysis
 At optimum, a uniform lateral drift or ductility demand over all stories of the building
with the minimum cost is achieved

 The proposed optimization methodology provides a good basis for more
comprehensive performance-based optimization of structures as more accurate
nonlinear pushover procedures taking into account the higher mode effects are
developed and multiple levels of performance criteria and design objectives are to be
simultaneously considered.
Qiang Xue and Performance-based seismic design of structures: a Elsevier Journals, 2003  In the presented design procedure of the building, the k factor plays an important role
18 Cheng-Chung Chen direct in controlling the design strength
displacement-based approach
 The proposed design procedure, which starts from the pre-quantified performance
objectives, is transparent and straightforward to present the underlying concept of
“performance-based design”.
11
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
 The gap in the literature is that all the other researchers have design and evaluate Response
Reduction factor on reinforced building on the basis of Performance Based Seismic
Design.
 In this research, I am evaluating Response Reduction factor of a reinforced concrete dual
system building on the basis of Performance Based Seismic Design and Limit State
Design.
Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a Reinforced Concrete Dual System Building By Performance-Based Seismic Design Method and Limit State Design
Method
OBJECTIVES
12
 To evaluate Response Reduction Factor For IS code or Limit State

Design (LSD) and Performance Based Seismic Design (PBSD).
 To determine the failure pattern in PBSD.
 To study the in-plane forces developed due to irregular T-shaped

floor plan of the building.
METHODOLOGY
13 In this methodology we will analyze and evaluate :
1. A T-shaped 20-story about 73m tall Dual-RC framed building will be selected in Zone 5, and nonlinear
static analysis will be performed to find the ductility, overstrength, and response reduction factor.
2. Collection of required data. It involves various data to be taken for analysis of building.
3. Modeling building using ETABS 2018. Perform initial design and analysis to size the member.
4. Perform an analysis using Service level earthquake (SLE) to make sure that the building remains
primarily elastic. This can be done by using linear elastic response spectrum analysis.
5. Subject the building to larger earthquake like Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) using non-
linear Time history analysis to determine post yield behavior of components.
6. Compare the results to appropriate acceptance criteria like ASCE 41 guidelines.
7. Finally, the value of the response reduction factor will be found out and compared.
Contd.. Flowchart
Flow chart of Methodology
14 Review of related Literatures
Selection of suitable Model
Structural modelling using ETABS 2018
Service Level Earthquake (SLE) and Design basis Earthquake (DBE) are done
using linear elastic Response spectrum analysis while Maximum Considered
Earthquake (MCE) is done using non-linear time history analysis
Calculation of Response reduction factor “R” using IS code and Performance

based seismic design (PSBD)
Lateral load and
beam moment
Comparative Performance Evaluation

Column Moment
Failure Pattern
Conclusion and Recommendations
Fig 1.1 Flowchart of Methodology
15
Figure : 3D of T-shaped Dual System Building Figure : Plan of T-shaped Dual System Building
16 WORKPLAN
THE TASKS TO BE COMPLETED IN THIS STUDY ARE :

 TASK 1 : LITERATURE REVIEW
 TASK 2 : OBJECTIVES
 TASK 3 : METHODOLOGY
 TASK 4 : EXPERIMENT/ MODELING
 TASK 5 : COMPARISON OF RESULTS
 TASK 6 : THESIS WRITING
 TASK 7 : FINAL PRESENTATION
TIMELINE
17 Month Works
JULY LITERATURE REVIEW AND
OBJECTIVES
AUGUST AND SEP SOFTWARE LEARNING ETABS 2018
METHODOLOGY
OCT AND NOV EXPERIMENT / MODELING

DEC COMPARISON OF RESULTS
JAN FINALIZATION
FEB AND MARCH THESIS WRITING
APRIL FINAL PRESENTATION
18 Future Work
 Study the guidelines from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)P695, Applied Technology Council (ATC)-19
and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)/SEI 7-05 and IS 1893:2016 for Response Reduction calculation.
 Similarly, Guidelines for Performance Based Seismic Design (PBSD) will be studied from Advances In Performance based
Earthquake Engineering by Michael N. Fardis and Tall Building Initiative by Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research
Center
 Modelling, analyzing and designing the building using IS code.
 Similarly, analyzing the structure using Service level earthquake(SLE)and making sure that the building remains primarily
elastic. This can be done by using linear elastic response spectrum analysis.
 Subject the building to larger earthquake like maximum considered earthquake(MCE) using non linear time history
analysis to determine the post yield behavior of components. For Time History analysis ground motion data will be taken
from 2015 Nepal Earthquake having magnitude of 7.6 (source . Nepal's National Seismological Centre )
 Compare the result using appropriate acceptance criteria
 Finally comparative performance evaluation of frame structure are done.
Reference
 [1] M. Xiong and Y. Huang, “Novel perspective of seismic performance-based evaluation and design for resilient and sustainable slope engineering,” Eng. Geol., vol. 262, p. 105356, 2019, doi:
19 10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105356.
 [2] C. Zhang and Y. Tian, “Simplified performance-based optimal seismic design of reinforced concrete frame buildings,” Eng. Struct., vol. 185, no. January, pp. 15–25, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.01.108.
 [3] Z. Zhai, W. Guo, Y. Li, Z. Yu, H. Cao, and D. Bu, “An improved performance-based plastic design method for seismic resilient fused high-rise buildings,” Eng. Struct., vol. 199, no. September, p. 109650, 2019,
doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109650.
 [4] J. Wang, K. Dai, Y. Yin, and S. Tesfamariam, “Seismic performance-based design and risk analysis of thermal power plant building with consideration of vertical and mass irregularities,” Eng. Struct., vol. 164,
no. August 2017, pp. 141–154, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.03.001.
 [5] S. Sattar, “Evaluating the consistency between prescriptive and performance-based seismic design approaches for reinforced concrete moment frame buildings,” Eng. Struct., vol. 174, no. July, pp. 919–931,
2018, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.080.
 [6] K. P. Shukla and S. P. Dalal, “Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a Reinforced Cement Concrete Building Designed by Performance Based Plastic Design Method and Limit State Design Method,”
Procedia Eng., vol. 173, pp. 1854–1861, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.12.235.
 [7] S. Shoeibi, M. A. Kafi, and M. Gholhaki, “New performance-based seismic design method for structures with structural fuse system,” Eng. Struct., vol. 132, pp. 745–760, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.12.002.
 [8] H. S. Park, J. W. Hwang, and B. K. Oh, “Integrated analysis model for assessing CO2 emissions, seismic performance, and costs of buildings through performance-based optimal seismic design with
sustainability,” Energy Build., vol. 158, pp. 761–775, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.10.070.
 [9] E. V. Muho, J. Qian, and D. E. Beskos, “Modal behavior factors for the performance-based seismic design of R/C wall-frame dual systems and infilled-MRFs,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 129, no. January, p.
105572, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.02.016.
 [10] A. Gonzalez, E. Spacone, and R. Nascimbene, “Performance-based seismic design framework for RC floor diaphragms in dual systems,” Procedia Eng., vol. 199, pp. 3546–3551, 2017, doi:
10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.512.
 [11] R. Allahvirdizadeh, M. Khanmohammadi, and M. S. Marefat, “Probabilistic comparative investigation on introduced performance-based seismic design and assessment criteria,” Eng. Struct., vol. 151, pp. 206–
220, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.08.029.
 [12] M. Zameeruddin and K. K. Sangle, “Review on Recent developments in the performance-based seismic design of reinforced concrete structures,” Structures, vol. 6, pp. 119–133, 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.istruc.2016.03.001.
 [13] Y. Lu, I. Hajirasouliha, and A. M. Marshall, “Performance-based seismic design of flexible-base multi-storey buildings considering soil-structure interaction,” Eng. Struct., vol. 108, pp. 90–103, 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.11.031.
 [14] I. Muljati, F. Asisi, and K. Willyanto, “Performance of force based design versus direct displacement based design in predicting seismic demands of regular concrete special moment resisting frames,” Procedia
Eng., vol. 125, pp. 1050–1056, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.161.
 [15] A. Mondal, S. Ghosh, and G. R. Reddy, “Performance-based evaluation of the response reduction factor for ductile RC frames,” Eng. Struct., vol. 56, pp. 1808–1819, 2013, doi:
10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.07.038.
 [16] Q. Xue, C. W. Wu, C. C. Chen, and K. C. Chen, “The draft code for performance-based seismic design of buildings in Taiwan,” Eng. Struct., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1535–1547, 2008, doi:
10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.10.002.
 [17] X. K. Zou and C. M. Chan, “Optimal seismic performance-based design of reinforced concrete buildings using nonlinear pushover analysis,” Eng. Struct., vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1289–1302, 2005, doi:
10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.04.001.
 [18] Q. Xue and C. C. Chen, “Performance-based seismic design of structures: A direct displacement-based approach,” Eng. Struct., vol. 25, no. 14, pp. 1803–1813, 2003, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.08.003.
20

Presentation 2 Sep

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Presentation 2 Sep

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation of Response Reduction Factor of a

Reinforced Concrete Dual System Building By

Response Reduction factor

 To evaluate Response Reduction Factor For IS code or Limit State

 To determine the failure pattern in PBSD.

 To study the in-plane forces developed due to irregular T-shaped

6. Compare the results to appropriate acceptance criteria like ASCE 41 guidelines.

Selection of suitable Model

Structural modelling using ETABS 2018

Calculation of Response reduction factor “R” using IS code and Performance

Comparative Performance Evaluation

Fig 1.1 Flowchart of Methodology

THE TASKS TO BE COMPLETED IN THIS STUDY ARE :

OCT AND NOV EXPERIMENT / MODELING

You might also like