Physically-based collapse failure criteria in progressive collapse analyses of random-parameter multi-story RC structures subjected to column removal scenarios

IF 5.6 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Luchuan Ding , Jianbing Chen
{"title":"Physically-based collapse failure criteria in progressive collapse analyses of random-parameter multi-story RC structures subjected to column removal scenarios","authors":"Luchuan Ding ,&nbsp;Jianbing Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.119379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The definition and determination of dynamic collapse limit states for design and safety assessment of civil structures is still an open problem in the context of progressive collapse, in particular for structural reliability and robustness quantifications. Hence, this paper summarizes, compares, and evaluates three kinds of collapse failure criteria in literature for reinforced concrete (RC) multi-story frames subjected to column removal scenarios, including the displacement-based criterion, the resistance-based criterion, and the energy-based criterion. Totally, 48 deterministic cases and 480 stochastic cases for six different planar RC frames subjected to 48 different column removal scenarios are studied in the progressive collapse analyses to evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the three kinds of criteria. In the stochastic analyses, the depth of the concrete cover and the key material mechanical properties for both concrete and reinforcing steel are chosen as random inputs, where the uncertainties are observed to have great influence on the collapse limit states. The results demonstrate that the different structural designs and the uncertainties in structural parameters will lead to different collapse limit states, which are strongly linked with the specific failure modes or paths during the progressive collapse. The code-compliant seismic design can significantly improve the deformation capacity of the RC frames and allow sufficient development of load redistributions. In such cases, the empirical collapse failure criteria including both the deformation-based and the resistance-based criteria adopting an empirically prescribe deterministic threshold may fail to accurately determine the collapse limit states. None of them can be adaptive to different structures with different failure modes or paths, either too conservative or too much overestimating the performance. Conversely, the energy-based criterion adopting a physical approach rather than an empirical constant threshold is a physically-based and problem adaptive approach, which can be adaptive to different structures with different failure modes or paths according to the specific computational results. Hence, the energy-based criterion shows the best performance for determining the collapse limit states and is less affected by the different failure modes or paths.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11763,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Structures","volume":"325 ","pages":"Article 119379"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering Structures","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141029624019412","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The definition and determination of dynamic collapse limit states for design and safety assessment of civil structures is still an open problem in the context of progressive collapse, in particular for structural reliability and robustness quantifications. Hence, this paper summarizes, compares, and evaluates three kinds of collapse failure criteria in literature for reinforced concrete (RC) multi-story frames subjected to column removal scenarios, including the displacement-based criterion, the resistance-based criterion, and the energy-based criterion. Totally, 48 deterministic cases and 480 stochastic cases for six different planar RC frames subjected to 48 different column removal scenarios are studied in the progressive collapse analyses to evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the three kinds of criteria. In the stochastic analyses, the depth of the concrete cover and the key material mechanical properties for both concrete and reinforcing steel are chosen as random inputs, where the uncertainties are observed to have great influence on the collapse limit states. The results demonstrate that the different structural designs and the uncertainties in structural parameters will lead to different collapse limit states, which are strongly linked with the specific failure modes or paths during the progressive collapse. The code-compliant seismic design can significantly improve the deformation capacity of the RC frames and allow sufficient development of load redistributions. In such cases, the empirical collapse failure criteria including both the deformation-based and the resistance-based criteria adopting an empirically prescribe deterministic threshold may fail to accurately determine the collapse limit states. None of them can be adaptive to different structures with different failure modes or paths, either too conservative or too much overestimating the performance. Conversely, the energy-based criterion adopting a physical approach rather than an empirical constant threshold is a physically-based and problem adaptive approach, which can be adaptive to different structures with different failure modes or paths according to the specific computational results. Hence, the energy-based criterion shows the best performance for determining the collapse limit states and is less affected by the different failure modes or paths.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Engineering Structures
Engineering Structures 工程技术-工程:土木
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
14.50%
发文量
1385
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: Engineering Structures provides a forum for a broad blend of scientific and technical papers to reflect the evolving needs of the structural engineering and structural mechanics communities. Particularly welcome are contributions dealing with applications of structural engineering and mechanics principles in all areas of technology. The journal aspires to a broad and integrated coverage of the effects of dynamic loadings and of the modelling techniques whereby the structural response to these loadings may be computed. The scope of Engineering Structures encompasses, but is not restricted to, the following areas: infrastructure engineering; earthquake engineering; structure-fluid-soil interaction; wind engineering; fire engineering; blast engineering; structural reliability/stability; life assessment/integrity; structural health monitoring; multi-hazard engineering; structural dynamics; optimization; expert systems; experimental modelling; performance-based design; multiscale analysis; value engineering. Topics of interest include: tall buildings; innovative structures; environmentally responsive structures; bridges; stadiums; commercial and public buildings; transmission towers; television and telecommunication masts; foldable structures; cooling towers; plates and shells; suspension structures; protective structures; smart structures; nuclear reactors; dams; pressure vessels; pipelines; tunnels. Engineering Structures also publishes review articles, short communications and discussions, book reviews, and a diary on international events related to any aspect of structural engineering.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信