Buildings with Rigid Walls and Flexible Roof Diaphragms. I: Evaluation of Current U.S. Seismic Provisions

Koliou, Maria; Filiatrault, André; Kelly, Dominic J.; Lawson, John

doi:10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0001438

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, for RC buildings with walls as resisting vertical elements or for masonry buildings, the hypothesis of a rigid floor might not always be reliable, and the actual deformability of the floor should be taken in account in the study of the entire structure; the infill walls and partitions increases the transversal stiffness of the vertical elements with respect to the bare frames, making the floor effect not rigid as in framed buildings . Different numerical studies or studies based on experimental tests have evaluated the effects of flexible diaphragms on building structures, concluding that the flexible diaphragms affect the buildings in two ways: the dynamic characteristics of the buildings, such as natural frequencies, and the lateral load distributions of the seismic action to the vertical resisting elements. Therefore, many studies available in the literature have demonstrated that the infill walls significantly increase the stiffness of structures and subsequently decrease the elastic fundamental period; however, the estimation of this effect is an open problem, and less attention has been given to internal partitions, which are negligible, especially in buildings with flexible frames, such as the ones designed for gravity loads.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The structural identification of the infill walls contribution in the dynamic response of framed buildings

Angelis

Pecce

2019

Struct Control Health Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings containing unreinforced masonry infill walls are commonly used in structural systems around the world. The performance of this type of building can be significantly affected by the presence of infill walls according to their type and distribution in the plane and along the height as revealed by earthquakes. This paper presents data collection, system identification, and finite element modeling of an existing RC framed building designed for gravity loads and containing unreinforced masonry infill walls. Based on a previously carried out ambient vibration test, a three‐dimensional finite element model, comprising infill walls and partitions, was successfully updated on the basis of the global modes identified by the in situ test, pointing out the important role of the nonstructural components for this type of building. The influence of the infill walls and partitions on the vibration period was examined, introducing a comparison with simple formulations for the period calculation suggested by codes or available in the literature. The updated model has been further used to assess an approach for an approximate estimation of the story and global stiffness of the building considering the effect of the secondary elements. The dynamic test with the model updating results an efficient procedure for a complete identification of the elastic behavior of the structure.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The structural identification of the infill walls contribution in the dynamic response of framed buildings

Angelis

Pecce

2019

Struct Control Health Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The median intensity value was defined as the median 2% damped spectral acceleration at the fundamental period of the building archetype for which 50% of the earthquake motions exceed a certain limit state. The roof diaphragm drift ratio (DDR) [37,42,61] was considered in this study as the representative seismic EDP for the RWFD buildings and the limit states (for each damage state) were defined in terms of the DDR. Note that the lateral displacements at the top of the in-plane walls are negligible compared to the displacement of the…”

Section: Nonlinear Simulation Models and Structural Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Displacement Force roof diaphragm at the mid-span [37]; therefore for practical purposes, DDR is equal to the lateral building drift at the center of the roof.…”

Section: Nonlinear Simulation Models and Structural Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The physical damage to the roof diaphragm was selected based on literature documents [53] associating physical wood roof damage to damage states. The limit state values for DDR for each damage state were selected based on numerical analyses results on a large set of RWFD building archetypes [37]. The physical description and limit state values for steel storage racks were selected based on the study by Eidinger [62].…”

Section: Nonlinear Simulation Models and Structural Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies by Koliou et al. [37] showed that current US code provisions do not satisfy collapse prevention objectives for RWFD structures under maximum considered earthquake ground motions. This is mainly because design provisions are based on assumed yielding of the walls rather than yielding of the flexible roof diaphragm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of an alternative seismic design approach for rigid wall flexible wood roof diaphragm buildings through probabilistic loss estimation and disaggregation

Koliou

Lindt

Filiatrault

2016

Engineering Structures

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rigid Wall Flexible roof Diaphragm (RWFD) buildings, commonly referred to as "big-box" buildings are the most prevalent type of construction for low-rise industrial and warehouse facilities in the United States (US). These buildings usually incorporate rigid-in plane concrete tilt-up walls and flexible wood roof diaphragms, which is a commonly seen construction technique in the Western United States. Due to their vulnerability in high seismic areas (e.g. California) observed in past earthquakes, an alternative design methodology was introduced in the FEMA P1026 document to account for the response of the flexible roof diaphragm. The FEMA P1026 design approach has been validated through numerical collapse assessment studies. In this study, the Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering framework, introduced by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) center, is combined with Monte Carlo Simulation to evaluate, in a probabilistic sense, the earthquake-induced economic losses for these structures. The results are presented in terms of expected losses for two hazard intensities: Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) and Design Earthquake (DE), while loss disaggregation plots for collapse and no-collapse losses are also presented. The results demonstrate the ability of the FEMA P1026 design approach to reduce earthquake losses

show abstract

Wall‐diaphragm interactions in seismic response of building systems I: Parametric models and elastic response

Fischer

Schafer

2023

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this paper is to study the elastic seismic response of simplified building models that include considerations of the vertical lateral force resisting system (walls) and the horizontal lateral force resisting system (floor diaphragms) through parametric study. The assumption of rigid diaphragms is often used in the seismic design of buildings; however, research suggests that the diaphragm may influence the fundamental building period and the seismic building response. In this paper, a simplified model is presented for single and multi-story buildings utilizing two degrees of freedom per story for the vertical system, for example, the walls, and one degree of freedom per story for the floor diaphragm. The number of stories, the stiffness of the walls and diaphragm(s), and the mass distribution between the walls and diaphragm are varied to represent a large range of potential building compositions. Eigen analyses of the models indicate that the wall and diaphragm interact when at similar periods resulting in elongation of the overall building period. Response of elastic time-history analyses of the building models are presented in this paper where it is shown that the force demands in both the wall and diaphragm(s) are dependent on the relative stiffness of the walls and diaphragm(s), and the mass-distribution between these two systems. In the companion paper "Wall-Diaphragm Interactions in Seismic Response of Building System II: Inelastic Response and Design" the parametric building study is extending to nonlinear time-history analyses including different levels of assumed inelasticity in both the walls and diaphragm.

show abstract

Buildings with Rigid Walls and Flexible Roof Diaphragms. I: Evaluation of Current U.S. Seismic Provisions

Cited by 21 publications

References 7 publications

The structural identification of the infill walls contribution in the dynamic response of framed buildings

The structural identification of the infill walls contribution in the dynamic response of framed buildings

Evaluation of an alternative seismic design approach for rigid wall flexible wood roof diaphragm buildings through probabilistic loss estimation and disaggregation

Wall‐diaphragm interactions in seismic response of building systems I: Parametric models and elastic response

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About