مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد طراحی لرزه ای ساختمان های ساخته شده با بتن مسلح برای زلزله – الزویر 2017

Most of the current seismic design codes for building systems claim, either explicitly or implicitly, that design of buildings’ structures based on their requirements leads to Life Safety (LS) as their minimum Performance Level (PL). This is while some buildings, designed based on the current codes’ provisions, and constructed based on high standards, under good supervision, have shown unacceptable PLs, even collapse in some recent earthquakes, particularly near-source events. Also in many cases the extent of damage in the earthquake stricken buildings has been so high, that the demolishing and reconstruction of the building have become inevitable. On this basis, it seems that the code provisions still need improvement to create sufficient confidence in the engineering community. So far, several studies have been conducted on the adequacy evaluation of seismic design codes’ provisions and requirements. Hosseini and Yaghoobi Vayeghan (2000) worked on design verification of an existing 8-story irregular steel building by both push-over and three-dimensional dynamic analyses [1]. With regard to concrete buildings Memari and colleagues (2000) conducted a seismic assessment of an existing 32-story reinforced concrete framed tube building using inelastic dynamic time-history analysis to obtain force and deformation response of the structure subjected to three ground motion records [2]. Fajfar (2000) presented a relatively simple nonlinear method for the seismic analysis of structures (the N2 method) [3]. It combines the pushover analysis of a multi‐degree‐of‐freedom model with the response spectrum analysis of an equivalent single‐degree‐of‐freedom system. Alchalabi (2000) described the application of the Japanese standard method of seismic capacity evaluation of existing reinforced concrete buildings to a hypothetical simple Syrian building, and three level evaluations were made to estimate the building’s seismic capacity [4]. Goulet and colleagues (2007) illustrated a state-of-the-art seismic performance assessment through application to a reinforced-concrete moment-frame building designed per 2003 building code provisions [5]. Virote (2008) evaluated the seismic performances of reinforced-concrete buildings by nonlinear static analysis (pushover analysis and modal pushover analysis) and nonlinear time history analysis [6]. Epackachi (2012) studied the linear and nonlinear behavior of one of the tallest RC buildings, a 56-storey structure, located in a high seismic zone in Iran [7]. Masi (2012) evaluated the seismic capacity of some structural models which represent real RC existing buildings designed to gravity loads only, through non-linear dynamic simulations [8]. Thwin (2014) carried out computer aided analysis of twelve storied reinforced-concrete rectangular shape residential building for static and dynamic approach by using ETABS software [9]. Moniri (2014) investigated the results of illustrious characteristics of near-fault ground motions on the seismic response of three reinforced concrete structures (6-Story, 10-Story and 15-Story) [10]. Finally, Yoo (2016) carried out nonlinear dynamic analysis using the PERFORM-3D for small-size pilloti-type RC buildings and assessed their seismic performance [11].