Evaluation of structural reliability of steel frames: Interstory drift versus plastic hysteretic energy

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 661-682

  Bojórquez, Edén ^a   Terán Gilmore, Amador ^b   Ruiz, Sonia E ^c   Reyes Salazara, Alfredo ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE SINALOA   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA METROPOLITANA   (Mexico)

^c UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BUILDING CODES; HYSTERESIS; RELIABILITY; SEISMIC DESIGN; STEEL CONSTRUCTION; STRUCTURAL FRAMES;

HYSTERETIC ENERGY; INTERSTORY DRIFTS; MOMENT-RESISTING STEEL FRAMES; RELIABILITY LEVEL; RESPONSE PARAMETERS; SEISMIC DESIGN CODE; STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE; STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY;

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 80052151311     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.3609856     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Akbas, B., 1997. Energy-Based Earthquake Resistant Design of steel moment resisting frames, Ph.D. Thesis, Illinois Institute of Technology.
2. Akbas, B., Shen, J., and Hao, H., 2001. Energy approach in performance-based design of steel moment resisting frames for basic safety objective, The Structural Design of Tall Buildings 10, 193-217. (Pubitemid 32761183)
3. Alamilla, J. L., 2001. Criterios de Diseño Sísmico basados en confiabilidad para estructuras aporticadas, Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México UNAM (in Spanish).
4. Arias, A., 1970. A measure of earthquake intensity, in Seismic Design for Nuclear Power Plants, edited by R. J. Hansen, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 438-483.
5. Arroyo, D., and Ordaz, M., 2007. Hysteretic energy demands for SDOF systems subjected to narrow band earthquake ground motions: applications to the Lake Bed Zone of Mexico City, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 11, 147-165. (Pubitemid 46676595)
6. Aslani, H., and Miranda, E., 2003. Probabilistic Response Assessment for Building-Specific Loss Estimation, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, PEER 2003-03, Berkeley, California, 49 pp.
7. Baker, J. W., and Cornell, C. A., 2005. A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 34, 1193-1217. (Pubitemid 41070678)
8. Baker, J. W., and Cornell, C. A., 2008. Vector-valued intensity measures for pulse-like nearfault ground motions, Engineering Structures 30, 1048-1057. (Pubitemid 351331047)
9. Bazzurro, P., 1998. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis, Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.
10. Bojórquez, E., and Ruiz, S. E., 2004. Strength reduction factors for the valley of Mexico taking into account low cycle fatigue effects, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper 516, Vancouver Canada (CD-ROM).
11. Bojórquez, E., Ruiz S. E., and Terán-Gilmore, A., 2008. Reliability-based evaluation of steel structures using energy concepts, Engineering Structures 30, 1745-1759.
12. Bojórquez, E., Iervolino I., and Manfredi, G., 2008. Evaluating a new proxy for spectral shape to be used as an intensity measure, 2008 Seismic Engineering International Conference Commemorating the 1908 Messina and Reggio Calabria Earthquake (MERCEA'08).
13. Bojórquez, E., and Rivera, J. L., 2008. Effects of degrading models for ductility and dissipated hysteretic energy in uniform annual failure rate spectra, in 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
14. Bojórquez, E., Terán-Gilmore A., Bojórquez, J., and Ruiz, S. E., 2009. Explicit consideration of cumulative damage for seismic design of structures through ductility reduction factors, Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica (Sociedad Mexicana de Ingeniería Sísmica) 80, 31-62 (in Spanish).
15. Bojórquez, E., and Iervolino, I., 2009. Spectral shape proxies and nonlinear structural response, under review.
16. Calderoni, B., and Rinaldi, Z., 2000. Inelastic dynamic and static analysis for steel MRF seismic design: behaviour of steel structures in seismic areas, STESSA 2000, Balkema Rotterdam 2000.
17. Calderoni, B., and Rinaldi, Z., 2002. Seismic performance evaluation for steel MRF: nonlinear dynamic and static analyses, Steel and Composite Structures 2, 113-128.
18. Carr, A., 2002. RUAUMOKO: Inelastic Dynamic Analysis Program, University of Cantenbury, Department of Civil Engineering.
19. Cornell, C. A., 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 58, 1583-1606.
20. Darwin, D., and Nmai, C. K., 1985. Energy dissipation in RC beams under cyclic loading, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 112, 1829-1846.
21. Engelhardt, M. D., and Husain, A, S., 1992. Cyclic Tests on Large Scale Steel Moment Connections, Report No. PMFSEL 92-2, Phil M. Ferguson Structural Engineering Laboratory, University of Texas, Austin.
22. Esteva, L., 1967. Criterios para la construcción de espectros para disen̈o por sismo, Boletín del Instituto de Materiales y Modelos Estructurales 19, Universidad Central de Venezuela (in Spanish).
23. Fajfar, P., and Krawinkler, H., 1997. Conclusions and recommendations, in Seismic Design Methodologies for the Next Generation of Codes, A. A. Balkema.
24. Gosain, N. K., Brown, R. H., and Jirsa, J. O., 1977. Shear requirements for load reversals on RC members, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 103, 1461-1476.
25. Hancock, J., and Bommer, J. J., 2006. A state-of-knowledge review of the influence of strongmotion duration on structural damage, Earthquake Spectra 22, 827-845. (Pubitemid 44446368)
26. Huerta, B., and Reinoso, E., 2002. Espectros de energía de movimientos fuertes registrados en México, Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica, SMIS 66, 45-72 (in Spanish).
27. Housner G. W., 1956. Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes. First World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Berkeley, California 1956.
28. Popov, E, P., and Stephen, R. M., 1972. Cyclic loading of full-size steel connections, American Iron and Steel Institute, Bulletin No. 21.
29. Rodríguez, M, E., and Ariztizabal, J. C., 1999. Evaluation of a seismic damage parameter, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 28, 463-477. (Pubitemid 29276417)
30. Scribner, C. F., and Wight, J. K., 1980. Strength decay in R/C beams under load reversal, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE 106, 861-876.
31. Seed, H. B., and Sun, J. I., 1989. Implications of Site Effects in the Mexico City Earthquake of Sept. 19, 1985 for Earthquake-Resistant Design Criteria in the San Francisco Bay Area of California, Report UCB=EERC-89=03, University of California, Berkeley.
32. Shome, N., 1999. Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis of Nonlinear Structures, Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.
33. Terán-Gilmore, A., 2001. Consideraciones del uso de la energía plástica en el disen̈o sísmico, Revista de Ingeniería Sísmica 65, 81-110 (in Spanish).
34. Terán-Gilmore, A., and Jirsa, J. O., 2007. Energy demands for seismic design against low-cycle fatigue, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 36, 383-404. (Pubitemid 46380562)
35. Terán-Gilmore, A., and Bahena-Arredondo, N., 2008. Cumulative ductility spectra for seismic design of ductile structures subjected to long duration motions: Concept and theoretical background, Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12, 152-172.
36. Tothong, P., and Luco, N., 2007. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 36, 1837-1860. (Pubitemid 350054230)
37. Tsai, K. C., and Popov, E. P., 1988. Steel Beam-Column Joints in Seismic Moment Resisting Frames, Report No. EERC 88=19, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
38. Tsai, K. C., Wu, S., and Popov, E. P., 1995. Cyclic performance of steel beam-column moment joints, Engineering Structures 17, 596-602.
39. Tsai, K. C., Wu, S., and Popov, E. P., 1995. Experimental performance of seismic steel beam-column moment joints, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 121, 925-931.
40. Trifunac, M. D., and Brady, A. G., 1975. A study of the duration of strong earthquake ground motion, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 65, 581-626.