Strength‐reduction factors for the design of light nonstructural elements in buildings

Kazantzi, Athanasia K.; Miranda, Eduardo; Vamvatsikos, Dimitrios

doi:10.1002/eqe.3292

Cited by 21 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The code provisions of prEN 1998-4:2022(CEN 2022c) allow also for a dissipative design approach. Sufficient evidence for the relaxation in the imposed acceleration demands should a yielding element be inserted between a nonstructural component and the supporting system is provided in Kazantzi et al (2020bKazantzi et al ( , 2022b and Elkady et al (2022). Despite its apparent advantages though, this design approach should be used only in cases where…”

Section: Methods 3-dissipative Design Approach Per Pren 1998-4:2022mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceleration-sensitive ancillary elements in industrial facilities: alternative seismic design approaches in the new Eurocode

Kazantzi

Karaferis

Melissianos

et al. 2023

Bull Earthquake Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Eurocode 8—Part 4 approaches, per their December 2022 update, are presented for the design of acceleration-sensitive industrial ancillary components. The seismic performance of such nested and/or supported ancillary elements, namely mechanical and electrical equipment, machinery, vessels, etc. is critical for the safety and operability of an industrial facility in the aftermath of an earthquake. Of primary importance are the structural characteristics of the supporting structure and the supported component, pertaining to resonance, strength, and ductility, and whether these are known (and to what degree) during initial design and/or subsequent modifications and upgrades. Depending on the availability and reliability of information on the overall system, the Eurocode methods comprise (a) a detailed component/structure-specific design accounting for all pertinent component and building characteristics, equivalent to typical building design per Eurocode 8—Part 1–2, (b) a conservative approach where a blanket safety factor is applied when little or no such data is available, and (c) a ductile design founded on the novel concept of inserting a fuse of verified ductility and strength in the load path between the supporting structure and the ancillary element. All three methods are evaluated and compared on the basis of a case-study industrial structure, showing how an engineer can achieve economy without compromising safety under different levels of uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Methods 3-dissipative Design Approach Per Pren 1998-4:2022mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceleration-sensitive ancillary elements in industrial facilities: alternative seismic design approaches in the new Eurocode

Kazantzi

Karaferis

Melissianos

et al. 2023

Bull Earthquake Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kazantzi et al [55] evaluated strength reduction factors for NSEs idealized as single-degree-of-freedom systems (SDOFs) with a bilinear hysteretic response. The SDOF systems were subjected to recorded floor motions of buildings in California, USA.…”

Section: Ductility Factormentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic design of acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements in New Zealand: State-of-practice and recommended changes

Rashid

Dhakal²,

Sullivan³

2021

BNZSEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements not only constitute a significant portion of a building’s component inventory, but also comprise components and systems that are indispensable to the operational continuity of essential facilities. In New Zealand, Section 08 of the seismic loadings standard, NZS 1170.5: Earthquake Actions, and a dedicated standard, NZS 4219: Seismic Performance of Engineering Systems in Buildings, address the seismic design of non-structural elements. This paper scrutinizes the design provisions for acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements in NZS 1170.5 and NZS 4219, and provides an international perspective by comparing with the design provisions for non-structural elements specified in ASCE 7-16, the latest ATC approach and Eurocode 8. This is followed by a detailed discussion on the improvements required for component demand estimation, the need for design criteria that are consistent with performance objectives, definition of realistic ductility factors, and recommendations for the future way forward in the form of an improved design procedure and its application through a new seismic rating framework.

show abstract

“…Considering bilinear constitutive model with

ξ_{n}

= 3%, which is most common used in prior research investigations and seismic design. [ 33,35,37,43,45,53,54 ] This methodology has four stages to develop the

E_{P} / E_{I}

for SDOF systems without/with FVDs based on nonlinear history analyses, as follows: (1) effect of source‐to‐site distance including FEMA 695 [ 55 ] near‐field‐pulse (NF‐P), near‐field‐non‐pulse (NF‐NP), and far‐field (FF) ground motions on

E_{P} / E_{I}

with varying μ ,

ξ_{add}

and

α

; (2) effect of μ on

E_{P} / E_{I}

with varying

ξ_{add}

and

α

; (3) effect of

ξ_{add}

and

α

of FVD on

E_{P} / E_{I}

for different

μ

; and (4) proposed mathematical expressions for predicting

E_{P} / E_{I}

spectra for SDOF systems by applying nonlinear regression analyses using the mean‐plus‐ standard deviation values of

E_{P} / E_{I}

.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plastic energy evaluation of bilinear SDOF systems with fluid viscous dampers

Sebaq

Zhou

Song

et al. 2023

Structural Design Tall Build

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Current seismic practices are more concerned with dissipating a significant portion of seismic input energy than with lateral load resistance, as well as with determining seismic demands of structures using response spectra. This study aims to improve the knowledge of the plastic energy spectra ( EP) of single‐degree‐of‐freedom systems (SDOF) equipped with fluid viscous dampers (FVDs). This type of dampers is characterized by its supplemental damping ratio ξadd0.25em and velocity power α. Using nonlinear dynamic analyses, the EP and its ratio to the input energy ( EP/EI) are determined using near‐field‐pulse, near‐field‐non‐pulse and far‐field ground motions. Parametric studies are conducted to investigate the effect of ground motion types, original system features and FVD characteristics on EP/EI spectra. The results show that ground motion types have a considerable influence on the EP/EI for systems with FVDs, while they are not effective for systems without FVDs. Increasing FVD nonlinearity (decreasing α) is more effective to reduce the EP/EI under near‐field‐non‐pulse and far‐field motions than under near‐field‐pulse ground motions for structures with Tn > 1 s. The paper further developed a prediction equation for estimating EP/EI0.25emfor SDOF systems without and with FVDs, which can serve as a useful tool to analyse structural damage for energy‐based seismic design.

show abstract

Strength‐reduction factors for the design of light nonstructural elements in buildings

Cited by 21 publications

References 42 publications

Acceleration-sensitive ancillary elements in industrial facilities: alternative seismic design approaches in the new Eurocode

Acceleration-sensitive ancillary elements in industrial facilities: alternative seismic design approaches in the new Eurocode

Seismic design of acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements in New Zealand: State-of-practice and recommended changes

Plastic energy evaluation of bilinear SDOF systems with fluid viscous dampers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About