A Critical Review of European and American Provisions for the Seismic Assessment of Existing Steel Moment-Resisting Frame Buildings

Code‐based record selection methods for seismic performance assessment of buildings

“…With respect to the local deformation demands, Figure depicts the mean demand‐to‐capacity ratios (DCRs), i.e. ratio between the rotation demands obtained from the analysis and the rotation capacities defined by EC8‐3 assuming a KL3 knowledge level , and their respective CoV, obtained for buildings GB and the EC8 method. The full compilation of results may be found in Araújo et al .…”

“…Recall that a building is implicitly considered to be unsafe if at least one member fails its safety verifications. Although definitive conclusions can only be extracted based on detailed seismic risk analysis, these results point out to the conservativeness of designing new buildings to EC8-1 with the control of P-Δ effects so that 0.1 < θ ≤ 0.2 and θ < 0.1 and the less stringent compliance criteria defined by EC8-3 [25]. The adoption of such designing criteria appears to have an important economic impact on the final cost of the structure.…”

13.14: Seismic assessment and strengthening of existing steel moment‐resisting frame buildings: the European EC8‐3 and current challenges

“…In Europe, the revision of part 3 of Eurocode 8 (EC8-3) [1], which is the part of the Eurocodes that specifically address this issue, has been set as a first priority and new changes are expected to be included in the new generation of Eurocodes that is to be published in 2020. Several works recently conducted by the authors [2][3][4][5][6][7] have highlighted a number of inconsistences and limitations of EC8-3 regarding the particular case of existing steel moment-resisting steel frame buildings. This paper hence aims at providing a discussion on the limitations of the current version of EC8-3, the studies that have been undertaken in order to overcome those deficiencies and future research needs.…”

“…A number of issues are addressed, ranging from the definition of the performance requirements, the applicability of the linear methods of analysis most commonly used in practice to the deformation capacity limits of steel members, the treatment of uncertainty and the advanced modelling of the behaviour of structural steel members. According to EC8-3, safety verifications shall be always conducted at the member level on the basis of plastic rotations, regardless of the method of analysis adopted [2]. A discussion on how these safety verifications could be conducted using linear methods of analysis is herein provided based on [5], alongside with the presentation of a simplified procedure proposed by the authors that allows computing estimates of plastic rotations using linear analysis [4].…”

“…A discussion on how these safety verifications could be conducted using linear methods of analysis is herein provided based on [5], alongside with the presentation of a simplified procedure proposed by the authors that allows computing estimates of plastic rotations using linear analysis [4]. Moreover, the EC8-3 deformation capacity limits of steel members seem to have been directly reproduced from ASCE41 [2,8], although the latter were derived based on experimental data available for typical American cross-section sizes. A discussion on the adequacy of current EC8-3 deformation capacity limits to steel members with European profiles is equally provided.…”