ASCE/SEI 41 assessment of reinforced concrete buildings; benchmarking nonlinear dynamic procedures with empirical damage observations

ASCE/SEI 41 is the consensus US standard for the seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. Although the performance-based engineering standard is based on decades of research and has been significantly vetted by ASCE and other committees, it is unclear how well the evaluations capture t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Earthquake spectra 2023-08, Vol.39 (3), p.1721-1754
Hauptverfasser: Cook, Dustin, Sen, Andrew, Liel, Abbie, Basnet, Tarbin, Creagh, Ariel, Koodiani, Hamid Khodadadi, Berkowitz, Russell, Ghannoum, Wassim, Hortacsu, Ayse, Kim, Insung, Lehman, Dawn, Lowes, Laura, Matamoros, Adolfo, Naeim, Farzad, Sattar, Siamak, Smith, Rob
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ASCE/SEI 41 is the consensus US standard for the seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. Although the performance-based engineering standard is based on decades of research and has been significantly vetted by ASCE and other committees, it is unclear how well the evaluations capture the seismic response of real building systems. This article examines six, primarily nonductile, reinforced concrete buildings, including four damaged in earthquakes and two experimental structures tested and damaged on shake tables, to compare the measured response and observed damage to simulated outcomes produced following ASCE/SEI 41 nonlinear dynamic procedure. The results show that the simulations are generally able to capture the story mechanism and peak transient story drift demands at the critical story (predicted values are typically within ±20% of the measured values). However, drifts at non-critical stories and floor accelerations at all stories show greater error relative to the measured responses. At the component level, the simulations, in most cases, correctly identify the location(s) of the critical component(s) and the failure mode (e.g. flexure vs shear). However, the extent of the damage is overestimated in some cases. These results form the basis for recommendations for column, beam, and wall modeling procedures that can be used to improve ASCE/SEI 41.
ISSN:8755-2930
1944-8201
DOI:10.1177/87552930231173453