Application of Endurance Time Method in Seismic Assessment of RC Frames Designed by Direct Displacement-Based Procedure

Abstract

This paper addresses the Direct Displacement-Based Design (DDBD) approach of multi-story RC frame structures consistent with changes ‎to design criteria between Turkish earthquake codes of TSC-2007 and TBEC-2018. The corresponding response modification factor (R) of structures designed based on the DDBD approach is also estimated in this research. The design base shear forces of both codes are compared considering different R factors and also with that of the DDBD approach. The results showed that the DDBD approach, as per TBEC-2018, provides RC frame structures with higher R values compared to the similar approach in accordance with TSC-2007. The Endurance Time (ET) method is a time history-based procedure for seismic assessment of ‎structures ‎under intensifying dynamic excitations aided to judge their performance at various intensity levels. Since, up to now, the ET method has not been considered to evaluate the performance of the structures designed by the DDBD approach, this paper addresses this issue. The ET ‎performance curves of RC frames show that structures designed by the DDBD approach in ‎accordance with TBEC-2018 exhibit higher Interstory Drift Ratios (IDRs) values than TSC-2007 at various hazard levels.

Keywords

• Direct displacement-based design
• endurance time method
• endurance time excitation function
• interstory drift ratio
• performance curve
• pushover analysis
• response ‎modification factor

References

1. Zou, X.K., Teng, J.G., De Lorenzis, L., Xia, S.H.: Optimal performance-based design of FRP jackets for seismic retrofit of reinforced concrete frames. Compos. Part B Eng. 38, 584–597 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2006.07.016
2. FEMA-445: Next-Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design Guidelines: Program Plan for New and Existing Buildings. Prepared for Federal Emergency Management Agency: Washington, DC, USA by Applied Technology Council, August 2006 (2006)
3. FEMA-P-58-1: Seismic performance assessment of buildings: Volume 1 – Methodology. , USA (2018)
4. Kalapodis, N.A., Papagiannopoulos, G.A., Beskos, D.E.: A comparison of three performance-based seismic design methods for plane steel braced frames. Earthq. Struct. 18, 27–44 (2020). https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2020.18.1.027
5. Chopra, A.K., Goel, R.K.: Direct displacement-based design: Use of inelastic vs. Elastic design spectra. Earthq. Spectra. 17, 47–64 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586166
6. Moehle, J.P.: Displacement-Based Design of RC Structures Subjected to Earthquakes. Earthq. Spectra. 8, 403–428 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585688
7. Panagiotakos, T.B., Fardis, M.N.: A displacement-based seismic design procedure for RC buildings and comparison with EC8. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 30, 1439–1462 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.71
8. Priestley, M.J.N., Kowalsky, M.J.: Direct Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Concrete Buildings. Bull. New Zeal. Soc. Earthq. Eng. 33, 421–444 (2000). https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.33.4.421-444

9. Medhekar, M.S., Kennedy, D.J.L.: Displacement-based seismic design of buildings - application. Eng. Struct. 22, 210–221 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00093-5
10. Medhekar, M.S., Kennedy, D.J.L.: Displacement-based seismic design of buildings - theory. Eng. Struct. 22, 201–209 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00092-3
11. Priestley, M.J.N.: Myths and Fallacies in Earthquake Engineering - Conflicts between Design and Reality. Bull. New Zeal. Soc. Earthq. Eng. 26, 329–341 (1993)
12. Sullivan, T.J., Calvi, G.M., Priestley, M.J.N., Kowalsky, M.J.: The limitations and performances of different displacement based design methods. J. Earthq. Eng. 7, 201–241 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460309350478
13. Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M., Kowalsky, M.J.: Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. Pavia, ITALY, IUSS PRESS. ISBN: 978-88-6198-000-6 (2007)
14. Sullivan, T.J., Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M. reds: A Model Code for the Seismic Design of Structures. IUSS press Pavia, Italy, Pavia, ITALY (2012)
15. Pettinga, J.D., Priestley, M.J.N.: Dynamic behaviour of reinforced concrete frames designed with direct displacement-based design. J. Earthq. Eng. 9, 309–330 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363246905002419
16. Sullivan, T.J., Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M.: Direct displacement-based design of frame-wall structures. J. Earthq. Eng. 10, 91–124 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460609350630
17. Moghim, F., Saadatpour, M.M.: The applicability of Direct Displacement-Based Design in designing concrete buildings located in near-fault regions. In: The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. bl October 12-17 (2008)
18. Belleri, A.: Displacement Based Design for Precast Concrete Structures. Presented at the (2009)
19. Sullivan, T.J., Lago, A.: Towards a simplified Direct DBD procedure for the seismic design of moment resisting frames with viscous dampers. Eng. Struct. 35, 140–148 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.11.010
20. Malekpour, S., Dashti, F.: Application of the Direct Displacement Based Design Methodology for Different Types of RC Structural Systems. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 7, 135–153 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-013-0043-2
21. Pourali, N., Khosravi, H., Dehestani, M.: An investigation of P-delta effect in conventional seismic design and direct displacement-based design using elasto-plastic SDOF systems. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 17, 313–336 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0460-3
22. Sahoo, D.R., Prakash, A.: Seismic behavior of concentrically braced frames designed using direct displacement-based method. Int. J. Steel Struct. 19, 96–109 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0092-0
23. Yan, L., Gong, J.: Development of displacement profiles for direct displacement based seismic design of regular reinforced concrete frame structures. Eng. Struct. 190, 223–237 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.04.015
24. Giannakouras, P., Zeris, C.: Seismic performance of irregular RC frames designed according to the DDBD approach. Eng. Struct. 182, 427–445 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.12.058
25. Kumbhar, O.G., Kumar, R., Noroozinejad Farsangi, E.: Investigating the efficiency of DDBD approaches for RC buildings. Structures. 27, 1501–1520 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.07.015
26. Malla, N., Wijeyewickrema, A.C.: Direct displacement-based design of coupled walls with steel shear link coupling beams. Structures. 34, 2746–2764 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.09.004
27. Papagiannopoulos, G.A., Hatzigeorgiou, G.D., Beskos, D.E.: Direct Displacement-Based Design. (2021)
28. Sharma, A., Tripathi, R.K., Bhat, G.: Direct-displacement and force-based seismic assessment of RC frame structures. J. Build. Pathol. Rehabil. 7, (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-021-00160-z
29. Mohebbi, M., Noruzvand, M., Dadkhah, H., Shakeri, K.: Direct displacement-based design approach for isolated structures equipped with supplemental fluid viscous damper. J. Build. Eng. 45, (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103684
30. Kalapodis, N.A., Muho, E. V., Beskos, D.E.: Seismic design of plane steel MRFS, EBFS and BRBFS by improved direct displacement-based design method. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 153, 107111 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107111
31. Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., Sadegh, A.M.: Endurance time method for seismic analysis and design of structures. Sci. Iran. 11, 361–370 (2004)
32. Estekanchi, H.E., Mashayekhi, M., Vafai, H., Ahmadi, G., Mirfarhadi, S.A., Harati, M.: A state-of-knowledge review on the endurance time method. Structures. 27, 2288–2299 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.07.062
33. Estekanchi, H.E., Harati, M., Mashayekhi, M.R.: An investigation on the interaction of moment-resisting frames and shear walls in RC dual systems using endurance time method. Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 27, 1–16 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1489
34. Mashayekhi, M., Harati, M., Estekanchi, H.E.: Development of an alternative PSO‐based algorithm for simulation of endurance time excitation functions. Eng. Reports. 1, 1–15 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12048
35. Mashayekhi, M., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, H.: Simulation of Endurance Time Excitations via Wavelet Transform. Iran. J. Sci. Technol. - Trans. Civ. Eng. 43, 429–443 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-018-0208-y
36. Shirkhani, A., Farahmand Azar, B., Charkhtab Basim, M.: Optimum slip load of T-shaped friction dampers in steel frames by endurance time method. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build. 173, 746–760 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1680/jstbu.18.00169
37. Shirkhani, A., Farahmand Azar, B., Charkhtab Basim, M.: Evaluation of efficiency index of friction energy dissipation devices using endurance time method. Numer. Methods Civ. Eng. 5, 12–20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.52547/nmce.5.2.12
38. Hariri-Ardebili, M.A., Sattar, S., Estekanchi, H.E.: Performance-based seismic assessment of steel frames using endurance time analysis. Eng. Struct. 69, 216–234 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.03.019
39. Amouzegar, H., Riahi, H.T.: Seismic assessment of concrete frames by endurance time method. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build. 168, 578–592 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1680/stbu1400042
40. Mashayekhi, M., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., Mirfarhadi, S.A.: Simulation of Cumulative Absolute Velocity Consistent Endurance Time Excitations. J. Earthq. Eng. 25, 892–917 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1540371
41. Shirkhani, A., Mualla, I.H., Shabakhty, N., Mousavi, S.R.: Behavior of steel frames with rotational friction dampers by endurance time method. J. Constr. Steel Res. 107, 211–222 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.01.016
42. Mashayekhi, M., Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, H., Mirfarhadi, S.A.: Development of hysteretic energy compatible endurance time excitations and its application. Eng. Struct. 177, 753–769 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.09.089
43. Basim, M.C., Estekanchi, H.E.: Application of endurance time method in performance-based optimum design of structures. Struct. Saf. 56, 52–67 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.05.005
44. Riahi, H.T., Estekanchi, H.E.: Seismic assessment of steel frames with the endurance time method. J. Constr. Steel Res. 66, 780–792 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.12.001
45. Shirkhani, A., Farahmand Azar, B., Charkhtab Basim, M.: Seismic loss assessment of steel structures equipped with rotational friction dampers subjected to intensifying dynamic excitations. Eng. Struct. 238, 112233 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112233
46. TSC: Turkish Seismic Design Code : Specification for Structures to be Built in Disaster Areas. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement Government of Republic of Turkiye (2007)
47. TBEC: Turkish Building Earthquake Code. The Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD), Ankara , Turkiye. (2018)
48. TS-500: Requirements for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures. English version, publication NO.2003/1. Turkish Standards Institute, Ankara Turkiye. (2000)
49. Ersoy, U., Özcebe, G., Tankut, T.: Reinforce Concrete. METU Press. ISBN:978-605-4362-17-2, Middle East Technical University (METU), Ankara, Turkiye (2013)
50. Soyluk, A., Harmankaya, Z.Y.: The History of Development in Turkish Seismic Design Codes. Int. J. Civ. Environ. Eng. 12, 25–29 (2012)
51. Atmaca, N., Atmaca, A., Kılçık, S.: Comparison of 2018 and 2007 Turkish Earthquake Regulations. Int. J. Energy Eng. Sci. 4, 19–25 (2019)
52. Aksoylu, C., Mobark, A., Arslan, M.H., Erkan, I.H.: A comparative study on ASCE 7-16, TBEC-2018 and TEC-2007 for reinforced concrete buildings. Rev. la Constr. 19, 282–305 (2020). https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.19.2.282
53. Džaki, D., Kraus, I., Mori, D.: Direct Displacement Based Design of Regular Concrete Frames in Compliance With Eurocode 8. 19, 973–982 (2012)
54. Pettinga, J.D.: Dynamic Behaviour of Reinforced Concrete Frames Designed with Direct Displacement-Based Design, (2005)
55. Massena, B., Bento, R., Degée, H.: Direct displacement based design of a RC frame – Case of study. (2010)
56. Priestley, M.J.N., Calvi, G.M., Kowalsky, M.J.: Direct Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Structures. In: NZSEE Conference. , New Zealand, 2007 (2007)
57. Habibi, A., Gholami, R., Izadpanah, M.: Behavior factor of vertically irregular RCMRFs based on incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq. Struct. 16, 655–664 (2019). https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.6.655
58. Fayed, M.N., Nasr, N.E., Saleh, M., Ahmed, G.M.: Seismic Response Modification factors for Multi-Story R.C buildings having Flat Slab System. IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 17, 1–14 (2020). https://doi.org/10.9790/1684-1701050114
59. Hussein, M.M., Gamal, M., Attia, W.A.: Seismic response modification factor for RC-frames with non-uniform dimensions. Cogent Eng. 8, (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2021.1923363
60. Mahmoudi, M., Zaree, M.: Evaluating response modification factors of concentrically braced steel frames. J. Constr. Steel Res. 66, 1196–1204 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.04.004
61. Mohamed, A.E., Attia, W.A., El-Degwy, W.M.: Seismic Response Modification Factor of Reinforced Concrete Frames Based on Pushover Analysis. J. Archit. Environ. Struct. Eng. Res. 2, 2–10 (2019). https://doi.org/10.30564/jaeser.v2i2.818
62. Mwafy, A.M., Elnashai, A.S.: Calibration of force reduction factors of RC buildings. J. Earthq. Eng. 6, 239–273 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460209350416
63. Zahrai, S.M., Khorraminejad, A., Sedaghati, P.: Response modification factors of concrete bridges with different bearing conditions. Earthq. Struct. 16, 185–196 (2019). https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.2.185
64. Pérez, J.C.V., Loachamín, M.A.C.: Calibration of the response reduction factors used in Ecuador for steel SMRF. Bull. Int. Inst. Seismol. Earthq. Eng. 52, 22–37 (2018)
65. Sadeghi, A., Abdollahzadeh, G., Rajabnejad, H., Naseri, S.A.: Numerical analysis method for evaluating response modification factor for steel structures equipped with friction dampers. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 22, 313–330 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-020-00315-2
66. Miranda, E., Bertero, V. V.: Evaluation of Strength Reduction Factors for Earthquake-Resistant Design. Earthq. Spectra. 10, 357–379 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585778
67. ATC-19: Structural Response Modification Factors. Applied Technology Council, 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 550, Redwood City, California. (1995)
68. Estekanchi, H.E., Vafai, A., Riahi, H.T.: Endurance Time Method: From ideation to Application. In: US-Iran Seismic Workshop. bll 205–218 (2009)
69. Vamvatsikos, D., Allin Cornell, C.: Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31, 491–514 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141
70. Azarbakht, A., Dolsek, M.: Prediction of the median IDA curve by employing a limited number of ground motion records. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 36, 2401–2421 (2007). https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/eqe.740 Prediction
71. Mashayekhi, M., Harati, M., Ashoori Barmchi, M., Estekanchi, H.E.: Introducing a response-based duration metric and its correlation with structural damages. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 17, 5987–6008 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00716-y
72. Hancock, J., Bommer, J.J.: Using spectral matched records to explore the influence of strong-motion duration on inelastic structural response. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 27, 291–299 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.09.004
73. Harati, M., Mashayekhi, M., Ashoori Barmchi, M., Estekanchi, H.: Influence of Ground Motion Duration on the Structural Response at Multiple Seismic Intensity Levels. Numer. Methods Civ. Eng. 3, 10–23 (2019). https://doi.org/10.29252/nmce.3.4.10
74. Mashayekhi, M., Harati, M., Darzi, A., Estekanchi, H.E.: Incorporation of strong motion duration in incremental-based seismic assessments. Eng. Struct. 223, 111144 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111144
75. Cabanas, L., Benito, B., Herraiz, M.: An Approach To the Measurement of the Potential Structural Damage of Earthquake Ground Motions. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 26, 79–92 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199701)26:1<79::AID-EQE624>3.0.CO;2-Y
76. Reed, J.W., Kassawara, R.P.: A criterion for determining exceedance of the operating basis earthquake. Nucl. Eng. Des. 123, 387–396 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-5493(90)90259-Z
77. Campbell, K.W., Bozorgnia, Y.: A comparison of ground motion prediction equations for arias intensity and cumulative absolute velocity developed using a consistent database and functional form. Earthq. Spectra. 28, 931–941 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000067
78. Harati, M., Mashayekhi, M., Estekanchi, H.E.: Correlation of ground motion duration with its intensity metrics: A simulation based approach. J. Soft Comput. Civ. Eng. 4, 17–39 (2020). https://doi.org/10.22115/SCCE.2020.227576.1207
79. FEMA-P695: Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC (2009)
80. Estekanchi, H.E., Valamanesh, V., Vafai, A.: Application of Endurance Time method in linear seismic analysis. Eng. Struct. 29, 2551–2562 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.01.009