Evaluation of the Progressive Collapse of the Reinforced Concrete Frames Considering the Soil–Structure Interaction: Parametric Study Based on the Sensitivity Index
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In this essay, to investigate the progressive collapse of the reinforced concrete (RC) frames, a nonlinear static pushdown analysis was performed with column removal scenarios from the first story. At first, a numerical model was simulated and verified with the experimental model in SeismoStruct software without soil–structure interaction (SSI). Afterward, the foundation, soil, and the RC frame were modeled simultaneously in FLAC software and verified with the numerical model of the SeismoStruct software. Furthermore, the effect of SSI was studied on the progressive collapse of RC frames based on the sensitivity index (SI). The sensitivity index is defined as the ratio of the residual capacity under gravity loading of the structure by removing the column to the value of the undamaged structure. The results showed that by considering SSI, the sensitivity index decreases. Then, a parametric study of the framed structures (thickness of the foundation) and substructures (soil density, soil types, soil layers, and the soil saturation conditions) was performed to evaluate the progressive collapse-resisting capacity based on the sensitivity index. The results showed that by considering SSI, with an increase in the soil density and decrease in the groundwater level, the conditions would be better for preventing progressive collapse. It was also shown that rock and silty sands (SM), compared to other studied soil types, and SM and silty sands—silty clay with low plasticity—silty sands (SM-CL/ML-SM), compared to other studied soil layers, are better for preventing progressive collapse.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (40)
Show source-provided references
1. Adam, J. M., Parisi, F., Sagaseta, J., & Lu, X. (2018). Research and practice on progressive collapse and robustness of building structures in the 21st century. Engineering Structures, 173, 122–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.08210.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.082 ↗
2. Alshaikh, I. M. H., Abu Bakar, B. H., Alwesabi, E. A. H., & Akil, H. M. (2020). Experimental investigation of the progressive collapse of reinforced concrete structures: An overview. Structures, 25, 881–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.03.01810.1016/j.istruc.2020.03.018 ↗
3. Azimi, M., & Molaei Yeznabad, A. (2020). Swarm-based parallel control of adjacent irregular buildings considering soil–structure interaction. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks, 9, 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan902001810.3390/jsan9020018 ↗
4. Behnamfar, F., & Banizadeh, M. (2016). Effects of soil–structure interaction on distribution of seismic vulnerability in RC structures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 80, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.10.00710.1016/j.soildyn.2015.10.007 ↗
5. Cavalieri, F., Correia, A. A., Crowley, H., & Pinho, R. (2020). Dynamic soil-structure interaction models for fragility characterisation of buildings with shallow foundations. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 132, 106004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.10600410.1016/j.soildyn.2019.106004 ↗
6. Cormie, D., Mays, G., & Smith, P. (2009). Blast effects on buildings (2nd ed.). Thomas Telford Publishing.10.1680/beob2e.35218 ↗
7. Department of Defense (DoD). (2013). Unified facilities criteria (UFC 4–010-01), DoD minimum antiterrorism standards for buildings. Department of Defense.
8. Department of Defense (DoD). (2016). Unified facilities criteria (UFC 4–023-03), design of buildings to resist progressive collapse, with change 3. Department of Defense.
9. European Committee for Standardization. (2004a). EN 1992-1-1:2004a, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures—Part 1–1: General rules and rules for buildings. European Committee for Standardization.
10. European Committee for Standardization. (2004b). EN 1998-1-5:2004b, Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1–5: Specific rules for concrete buildings. European Committee for Standardization.
11. Far, H. (2019). Advanced computation methods for soil-structure interaction analysis of structures resting on soft soils. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 13, 352–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2017.135451010.1080/19386362.2017.1354510 ↗
12. Far, H., & Flint, D. (2017). Significance of using isolated footing technique for residential construction on expansive soils. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 11, 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-016-0372-810.1007/s11709-016-0372-8 ↗
13. Farahani, A., Kheyroddin, A., & Sharbatdar, M. K. (2018). Finding critical element in the progressive collapse of RC structures using sensitivity analysis. Civil Engineering Journal, 4, 3038–3057. https://doi.org/10.28991/cej-0309121910.28991/cej-03091219 ↗
14. Fathi, A., Sadeghi, A., Emami Azadi, M. R., & Hoveidaie, N. (2020). Assessing seismic behavior of a masonry historic building considering soil-foundation-structure interaction (Case study of Arge-Tabriz). International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 14, 795–810. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2019.156861510.1080/15583058.2019.1568615 ↗
15. GSA. (2013). Alternate path analysis and design guidelines for progressive collapse resistance. US General Services Administration.
16. GSA. (2016). Alternate path analysis and design guidelines for progressive collapse resistance revision 1. US General Services Administration.
17. Güllü, H., & Karabekmez, M. (2017). Effect of near-fault and far-fault earthquakes on a historical masonry mosque through 3D dynamic soil-structure interaction. Engineering Structures, 152, 465–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.09.03110.1016/j.engstruct.2017.09.031 ↗
18. Ito, T., Ohi, K., & Li, Z. (2005). A sensitivity analysis related to redundancy on framed structures subjected to vertical loads. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering: Transactions of AIJ, 70, 145–151. https://doi.org/10.3130/aijs.70.145_410.3130/aijs.70.145_4 ↗
19. Jiang, J., Zhang, Q., Li, L., Chen, W., Ye, J., & Li, G. Q. (2020). Review on quantitative measures of robustness for building structures against disproportionate collapse. International Journal of High-Rise Buildings, 9, 127–154. https://doi.org/10.21022/IJHRB.2020.9.2.12710.21022/IJHRB.2020.9.2.127 ↗
20. Kai, Q., Zhang, X. D., Fu, F., & Li, B. (2019). Progressive collapse resisting mechanisms of planar prestressed concrete frame. ACI Structural Journal, 116, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.14359/5171556710.14359/51715567 ↗
21. Karapetrou, S. T., Fotopoulou, S. D., & Pitilakis, K. D. (2015). Seismic vulnerability assessment of high-rise non-ductile RC buildings considering soil–structure interaction effects. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 73, 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.02.01610.1016/j.soildyn.2015.02.016 ↗
22. Khatibinia, M., Fadaee, M. J., Salajegheh, J., & Salajegheh, E. (2013). Seismic reliability assessment of RC structures including soil–structure interaction using wavelet weighted least squares support vector machine. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 110, 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.09.00610.1016/j.ress.2012.09.006 ↗
23. Kheyroddin, A., Sharbatdar, M. K., & Farahani, A. (2019). Effect of structural height on the location of key element in progressive collapse of RC structures. Civil Engineering Infrastructures Journal, 52, 41–58. https://doi.org/10.22059/CEIJ.2019.247588.144910.22059/CEIJ.2019.247588.1449 ↗
24. Kiakojouri, F., De Biagi, V., Chiaia, B., & Sheidaii, M. R. (2020). Progressive collapse of framed building structures: Current knowledge and future prospects. Engineering Structures, 206, 110061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.11006110.1016/j.engstruct.2019.110061 ↗
25. Kiakojouri, F., Sheidaii, M. R., De Biagi, V., & Chiaia, B. (2021). Progressive collapse of structures: A discussion on annotated nomenclature. Structures, 29, 1417–1423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.00610.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.006 ↗
26. Kutanis, M., & Elmas, M. (2001). Non-linear seismic soil-structure interaction analysis based on the substructure method in the time domain. Turkish Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences, 25, 617–626.
27. Li, S., Shan, S., Zhai, C., & Xie, L. (2016). Experimental and numerical study on progressive collapse process of RC frames with full-height infill walls. Engineering Failure Analysis, 59, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.11.02010.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.11.020 ↗
28. Lim, N. S., Tan, K., & Lee, C. (2017). Experimental studies of 3D RC substructures under exterior and corner column removal scenarios. Engineering Structures, 150, 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.07.04110.1016/j.engstruct.2017.07.041 ↗
29. Mander, J. B., Priestley, M. J. N., & Park, R. (1988). Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, 114, 1804–1826. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804) ↗
30. Marjanishvili, S. M. (2004). Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, ASCE, 18, 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2004)18:2(79)10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2004)18:2(79) ↗
31. Martinez-Rueda, J. E., & Elnashai, A. S. (1997). Confined concrete model under cyclic load. Materials and Structures, 30, 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0248638510.1007/BF02486385 ↗
32. Mourlas, C., Khabele, N., Bark, H. A., Karamitros, D., Taddei, F., Markou, G., & Papadrakakis, M. (2020). Effect of soil–structure interaction on nonlinear dynamic response of reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 20, 2041013. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021945542041013810.1142/S0219455420410138 ↗
33. Nguyen, Q. V., Fatahi, B., & Hokmabadi, A. S. (2017). Influence of size and load-bearing mechanism of piles on seismic performance of buildings considering soil-pile-structure interaction. International Journal of Geomechanics, 17, 04017007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.000086910.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000869 ↗
34. Patel, B. R., & Shah, B. J. (2017). Progressive collapse assessment of reinforced concrete frame structure with and without considering actual soil condition. Kalpa Publications in Civil Engineering, 1, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.29007/p79210.29007/p792 ↗
35. Powell, G. (2005). Progressive collapse: Case study using nonlinear analysis. Structures Congress, New York.10.1061/40753(171)216 ↗
36. Russell, J. M., Sagaseta, J., Cormie, D., & Jones, A. E. K. (2019). Historical review of prescriptive design rules for robustness after the collapse of Ronan Point. Structures, 20, 365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2019.04.01110.1016/j.istruc.2019.04.011 ↗
37. Starossek, U. (2017). Progressive collapse of structures (2nd ed.). ICE Publishing.10.1680/pcos.61682 ↗
38. Tavakoli, R., Kamgar, R., & Rahgozar, R. (2019). Seismic performance of outrigger–belt truss system considering soil–structure interaction. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, 11, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-019-0215-710.1007/s40091-019-0215-7 ↗
39. Xiao, Y., Kunnath, S., Li, F. W., Zhao, Y. B., Lew, H. S., & Bao, Y. (2015). Collapse test of three-story half-scale reinforced concrete frame building. ACI Structural Journal, 112, 429–438. https://doi.org/10.14359/5168774610.14359/51687746 ↗
40. Yi, W. J., Yi, F., & Zhou, Y. (2021). Experimental studies on progressive collapse behavior of RC frame structures: Advances and future needs. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-021-00469-610.1186/s40069-021-00469-6 ↗