Retrofitting older reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings aims to mitigate the well-established seismic vulnerabilities of these structures. However, the impact of retrofit design decisions (e.g. increases in strength, stiffness, or deformation capacity) on global performance is unclear because capacity and fragility models for retrofit structures are rare. This study quantifies the benefits of retrofitting nonductile RC moment frames in terms of global performance metrics, such as collapse rates and economic losses. In total, 27 buildings are assessed. In doing so, it subsequently identifies structural indicators, that is, strength and deformation characteristics of the retrofit system, which are most associated with improved performance. If the performance measure of interest is collapse risk and life safety, increases to either system strength or deformation capacity are important. If the performance measure of interest is expected earthquake-induced repair costs or economic losses, strength-based indicators are most effective. Some retrofits can significantly improve collapse risk without reducing economic losses.
AboutahaREngelhardtMJirsaJKregerM (1996) Retrofit of concrete columns with inadaquate lap splices by the use of rectangular steel jackets. Earthquake Spectra12(4): 693–714.
2.
ACI 318-14 (2014) Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary.
3.
ACI 318-63 (1963) Building code requirements for reinforced concrete.
4.
ASCE/SEI 41-13 (2013) Seismic evaluation and upgrade of existing buildings.
5.
ASCE/SEI 41-17 (2017) Seismic evaluation and upgrade of existing buildings.
6.
BakerJW (2011) Conditional mean spectrum: Tool for ground motion selection. Journal of Structural Engineering137(3): 322–331.
7.
BakisCEBankLCBrownVLCosenzaEDavalosJFLeskoJJMachidaARizkallaSHTriantafillouTC (2002) Fiber-reinforced polymer composites for construction—State-of-the-art review. Journal of Composites for Construction6(2): 73–87.
8.
BettJKlingerRJirsaJ (1988) Lateral load response of strengthened and repaired reinforced concrete columns. ACI Strucutral Journal85(5): 499–508.
9.
BousiasSBiskinisDFardisMSpathisA-L (2007) Strength, stiffness, and cyclic deformation capacity of concrete jacketed members. ACI Structural Journal104(5): 521–531.
10.
BousiasSSpathisA-LFardisM (2004) Seismic retrofitting of columns with lap-splices via RC jackets. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
11.
ChaliorisCThermouGPantazopoulouS (2014) Behaviour of rehabilitated RC beams with self—compacting concrete jacketing—Analytical model and test results. Construction and Building Materials55: 257–273.
12.
DhakalRMaekawaK (2002) Modeling for postyield buckled of reinforcement. Journal of Structural Engineering128(9): 1139–1147.
13.
Di SarnoLManfrediG (2010) Seismic retrofitting with buckling restrained braces: Application to an existing non-ductile RC framed building. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering20(11): 1279–1297.
14.
ElwoodKJ (2004) Modelling failures in existing reinforced concrete columns. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering31: 846–859.
15.
FakharifarMChenGDalvandAShamsabadiA (2015) Collapse vulnerability and fragility analysis of substandard RC bridges rehabilitated with different repair jackets under post-mainshock cascading events. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials9(3): 345–367.
16.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2009) Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Washington, DC: FEMA.
17.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2012) Seismic Performance: Assessment of Buildings, Volume 1—Methodology. Washington, DC: FEMA.
18.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2015) NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures Volume 1: Part 1 Provisions, Part 2 Commentary. Washington, DC: Building Seismic Safety Council.
19.
FilippouFCPopovEPBerteroVV (1983) Effects of Bond Deterioration on Hysteretic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Joints. Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley.
20.
GalanisPHMoehleJP (2015) Development of collapse indicators for risk assessment of older-type reinforced concrete buildings. Earthquake Spectra31(4): 1991–2006.
21.
HarringtonC (2016) Advancement of performance-based eathquake engineering for RC frame buildings: Application to retrofit design and consideration of vertical ground motions. PhD Dissertation, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO.
22.
HarringtonCLielAB (in press) Evaluation of seismic performance of reinforced concrete frame buildings with retrofitted columns. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002801
23.
HaseltonCBBakerJWLielABDeierleinGG (2011a) Accounting for ground motion spectral shape characteristics in structural collapse assessment through an adjustment for epsilon. Journal of Structural Engineering137(3): 332–344.
24.
HaseltonCBLielABDeierleinGGDeanBSChouJH (2011b) Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings: I. Assessment of ductile moment frames. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering137(4): 481–491.
25.
HaseltonC.BakerJ. (n.d.). The FEMA P-58 Methodology and the Seismic Performance Prediction Program (SP3). Available at: hbrisk.com/sp3 (last accessed 1 June 2019)
26.
International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) (1967) Uniform Building Code. Pasadena, CA: ICBO.
27.
JalayerFCornellCA (2009) Alternative nonlinear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments. Earthquake Engineering Andstructural Dynamics38(8): 951–972.
28.
KentDCParkR (1971) Flexural members with confined concrete. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division97(7): 1969–1990.
29.
KimIHagenG (2014) Seismic assessment and retrofit of existing RC buildings: Case studies from Degenkolb Engineers. SP-297 Seismic Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings297: 91–912.
30.
LiYElwoodKJHwangSJ (2014) Assessment of ASCE/SEI 41 concrete column provisions using shaking table tests. ACI Structural Journal297: 1–22.
31.
LielABDeierleinGG (2013) Cost-benefit evaluation of seismic risk mitigation alternatives for older concrete frame buildings. Earthquake Spectra29(4): 1391–1411.
32.
LielABHaseltonCBDeierleinGG (2011) Seismic collapse saftey of reinforced concrete buildings: II. Comparative assessment of nonductile and ductile moment frames. Journal of Strucutral Engineering137(4): 492–502.
ManderJBPriestleyNMParkR (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering114(8): 1804–1826.
35.
MoehleJPDeierleinGG (2004) A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
36.
MoehleJPHooperJDLubkeCD (2008) Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Special Moment Frames: A Guide for Practicing Engineers. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
37.
PriestleyMNSeibleFCalviGM (1996) Seismic Design and Retrofit of Bridges. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
38.
RamirezCMLielABMitrani-ReiserJHaseltonCBSpearADSteinerJDeierleinGGMirandaE (2012) Expected earthquake damage and repair costs in reinforced concrete frame buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Strucutral Dynamics41(11): 1455–1475.
39.
SattarSLielAB (2017) Collapse indicators for existing nonductile concrete frame buildings with varying column and frame characteristics. Engineering Structures152: 188–201.
40.
ScottMHHamutcuogluOM (2008) Numerically consistent regularization of force-based frame elements. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering76(10): 1612–1631.
41.
SmythAWAltayGDeodatisGErdikMFrancoGGulkanPKunreutherHLuşHMeteESeeberNYuzugulludO (2004) Probabilistic benefit-cost analysis for earthquake damage mitigation: Evaluating measures for apartment houses in Turkey. Earthquake Spectra20(1): 171–203.
42.
ThermouGEElnashaiAS (2006) Seismic retrofit schemes for RC structures and local-global consequences. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics8: 1–15.
VandorosKGDritsosSE (2006) Axial preloading effects when reinforced concrete columns are strengthened by concrete jackets. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials8: 79–92.
