This paper presents the results of a study investigating the correlation between the anticipated seismic performance of an ASCE 7 code-compliant steel building with special moment frames and its predicted performance as quantified using ASCE 41 analysis procedures and structural performance metrics. Analytical results based on component-level performances at the collapse prevention structural performance level indicate that special moment frames designed in accordance with ASCE 7, and its referenced standards, have difficulty satisfying the acceptance criteria in ASCE 41 for an existing building intended to be equivalent to a new building.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), 1989. Specification for Structural Steel Buildings: Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design, Chicago, IL.
2.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), 2010a. Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 360-10, Chicago, IL.
3.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), 2010b. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341-10, Chicago, IL.
4.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), 2010c. Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications, ANSI/AISC 358-10, Chicago, IL.
5.
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), 2011. Steel Construction Manual, 14 Ed., Chicago, IL.
6.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2007. Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-06, Reston, VA.
7.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
8.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2014. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-13, Reston, VA.
9.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2016. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-16, Reston, VA.
10.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2017. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-17, Reston, VA.
11.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 2013. A500/A500M-13 Standard Specification for Cold-Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing in Rounds and Shapes, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
12.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 2015a. A992/A992M-11 Standard Specification for Structural Steel Shapes, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
13.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 2015b. A572/A572M-15 Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Alloy Columbium-Vanadium Structural Steel, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
14.
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2010. California Code of Regulations, Part 2 – California Building Standards Code – Title 24, Sacramento, CA.
15.
Computers and Structures, Inc. (CSI), 2011a. ETABS (Version 9.7.4), software, Berkeley, CA.
16.
Computers and Structures, Inc. (CSI), 2011b. PERFORM-3D (Version 5.0), software, Berkeley, CA.
17.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 1997. NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 273, Washington, D.C.
18.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2000a. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 356, Washington, D.C.
19.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2000b. State of the Art Report on Connection Performance, FEMA 355D, Washington, D.C.
20.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2009a. NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA P-750, Washington, D.C.
21.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2009b. Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors, FEMA P695, Washington, D.C.
22.
U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), 2012. Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service, PBS-P100, Washington, D.C.
23.
HarrisJ. L.III and SpeicherM. S.2015a. Assessment of First Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design Methods for New Steel Buildings, Volume 1: Special Moment Frames, NIST TN 1863-1, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 299, https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.6028/NIST.TN.1863-1 (last accessed 22 August 2018).
24.
HarrisJ. L.III and SpeicherM. S.2015b. Assessment of First Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design Methods for New Steel Buildings, Volume 2: Special Concentrically Braced Frames, NIST TN 1863-2, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 267, https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.6028/NIST.TN.1863-2 (last accessed 22 August 2018).
25.
HarrisJ. L.III and SpeicherM. S.2015c. Assessment of First Generation Performance-Based Seismic Design Methods for New Steel Buildings, Volume 3: Eccentrically Braced Frames, NIST TN 1863-3, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 279, https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.6028/NIST.TN.1863-3 (last accessed 22 August 2018).
26.
International Code Council (ICC), 2012a. International Existing Building Code (IEBC), Washington, D.C.
27.
International Code Council (ICC), 2012b. International Building Code (IBC), Washington, D.C.
28.
KrawinklerH.1978. Shear in beam-column joints in seismic design of steel frames, AISC Engineering Journal15, 82–91.
29.
National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), 2013. National Performance-Based Design Guide for Buildings, Washington, D.C.
30.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2010. Evaluation of the FEMA P-695 Methodology for Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors, NIST GCR 10-917-8, Produced by the NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture, a partnership of the Applied Technology Council and the Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, for the NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 268, available at http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nistgcr10-917-8.pdf (last accessed 22 August 2018).
31.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2011. Standards of Seismic Safety for Existing Federally Owned and Leased Buildings: ICSSC Recommended Practice (RP) 8, NIST GCR 11-917-12, Produced by the Building Seismic Safety Council of the National Institute of Buildings Sciences for NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 39, available at http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nistgcr11-917-12.pdf (last accessed 22 August 2018).
32.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2012. Tentative Framework for Development of Advanced Seismic Design Criteria for New Buildings, NIST GCR 12-917-20, Produced by the NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture, a partnership of the Applied Technology Council and the Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering, for NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 302, available at http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nistgcr12-917-20.pdf (last accessed 22 August 2018).
33.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2017a. Implementation Guidelines for Executive Order 13717: Establishing a Federal Earthquake Risk Management Standard: ICSSC Recommended Practice (RP) 9, NIST TN 1922, Gaithersburg, MD, p. 57, http://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1922 (last accessed 22 August 2018).
34.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 2017b. Recommended Modeling Parameters and Acceptance Criteria for Nonlinear Analysis in Support of Seismic Evaluation, Retrofit, and Design – NIST GCR 17-917-45, produced by the Applied Technology Council for NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, available at https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/gcr/2017/NIST.GCR.17-917-45.pdf.
35.
OzkulaG.HarrisJ. and UangC. M.2017a. Observations from cyclic tests on deep, wide-flange beam-columns, AISC Engineering Journal54(1), 45–59.
36.
OzkulaG.HarrisJ. and UangC. M.2017b. Classifying cyclic buckling modes of steel wide-flange columns, Proceedings of the Structures Congress 2017, 6–7 April 2017, Denver, CO.
37.
SpeicherM. S. and HarrisJ. L.2016a. Collapse prevention seismic performance assessment of new eccentrically braced frames using ASCE 41, Engineering Structures117, 344–357.
38.
SpeicherM. S. and HarrisJ. L.2016b. Collapse prevention seismic performance assessment of new special concentrically braced frames using ASCE 41, Engineering Structures126, 652–666.
39.
SpeicherM. S. and HarrisJ. L.2017. ASCE/SEI 41 predicted performance of newly designed BRBFs, Paper No. 2424, in Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 9–13 January 2017, Santiago, Chile.
40.
UribeR.SattarS. and SpeicherM. S.2017. Influence of ground motion selection on the assessment of a steel special moment frame, Paper No. 2410, in Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 9–13 January 2017, Santiago, Chile.
