Strength demand issues relevant for the seismic design of moment-resisting frames

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 415-439

  Medina, Ricardo A ^a   Krawinkler, Helmut ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLUMNS (STRUCTURAL); MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SHEAR STRENGTH; STRUCTURAL DESIGN; STRUCTURAL FRAMES;

MOMENT-RESISTING FRAMES; SEISMIC DESIGN;

EARTHQUAKE RESISTANCE;

COLUMN; EARTHQUAKE; GROUND MOTION; SEISMIC DESIGN; STRENGTH;

EID: 20544472387     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.1896958     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2005. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05), Farmington Hills, MI.
2. Adam, C., and Krawinkler, H., 2003. Large displacements of elastic-plastic frames exposed to pulse-type ground motions, Proceedings of Response of Structures to Extreme Loading, Elsevier Science, CD-ROM paper, Toronto, Canada, 8 pp.
3. American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC), 2002. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341-02, Chicago, IL.
4. Bondy, K. D., 1996. A more rational approach to capacity design of seismic moment frame columns, Earthquake Spectra, 12 (3), 395-406.
5. Gupta, A., and Krawinkler, H., 1999. Seismic Demands for Performance Evaluation of Steel Moment Resisting Frame Structures, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Report No. 132, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
6. Ibarra, L., 2003. Global Collapse of Frame Structures under Seismic Excitations, Ph.D. dissertation, submitted to the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
7. International Code Council (ICC), 2003. International Building Code, Falls Church, VA.
8. Krawinkler, H., 2000. State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subjected to Earthquake Ground Shaking, prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency on behalf of SAC, Report No. FEMA-355C, Washington, D.C.
9. MacRae, G. A., 1999. Parametric Study on the Effect of Ground Motion Intensity and Dynamic Characteristics on Seismic Demands in Steel Moment-Resisting Frames, prepared for the SAC Joint Venture, Report No. SAC/BD-99/01, Washington, D.C.
10. Medina, R. A., and Krawinkler, H., 2004. Seismic Demands for Nondeteriorating Frame Structures and their Dependence on Ground Motions, PEER Report 2003/15, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
11. Nakashima, M., and Sawaizumi, S., 2000. Column-to-beam strength ratio required for ensuring beam-collapse mechanisms in earthquake responses of steel moment frames, Proceedings, 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, paper No. 1109, Auckland, New Zealand, 8 pp.
12. Nassar, A., and Krawinkler, H., 1991. Seismic Demands for SDOF and MDOF Systems, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Report No. 95, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
13. Paulay, T., 1986. A critique of the special provisions for seismic design of the building code requirements for reinforced concrete (ACI 318-83), ACI J. 83 (2), 274-283.
14. Roeder, C. W., Schneider, S. E, and Carpenter, J. E., 1993. Seismic behavior of moment-resisting steel frames: Analytical study, J. Struct. Eng. 199 (6), 1856-1884.
15. Vamvatsikos, D., and Cornell, C. A., 2002. Incremental dynamic analysis, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31 (3), 491-514.