Comparison of Egyptian Code 2012 with Eurocode 8-2013, IBC 2015 and UBC 1997 for seismic analysis of residential shear-walls RC buildings in Egypt

El-Kholy, Ahmed M.; Sayed, Hoda; Shaheen, Ayman A.

doi:10.1016/j.asej.2018.07.004

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(1) The first varies from 0.2 to 0.7 s, and the coding sequence is ECP-201, EBCS-8, RPA-99, GB-50011, depending on the degree of conservatism. Finally, the third interval, which starts at 2 s and shows a striking disparity of the bottom bounds of the four codes where ECP-201 conservatism outperformed the other codes, ranges from 0.7 to 2 s. This comparison of design response spectra, according to El-Kholy et al [48] may be misleading if other elements, including time T, seismic weights W, and cracking stiffness ratios, are not considered. As observed in Figure 6, the response spectrum of ECP-201 surpasses that of the other codes.…”

Section: Comparison Of Seismic Provisionsmentioning

confidence: 95%

A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes

Suliman,

2024

Advances in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evaluation of various earthquake codes, it is one of the significant challenges in the study area of earthquake engineering. However, according to the literature review, most research works have not addressed comparing Chinese and African seismic codes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify each code’s advantages by comparing assessment of the seismic efficacy of moment resistance frame reinforced concrete (MRF-RC) frames using four different codes: the Ethiopian Building Code Standard (EBCS-8), the Egyptian Code for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures (ECP-201), the Algerian Seismic Regulations (RPA-99), and the Chinese Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB-50011), the first three are the major codes used in Africa. The seismic provisions of these codes are compared and evaluated using nonlinear time-history analysis (NL-THA) and nonlinear static pushover to validate the results. These analyses are performed on four MRF-RC frame models with different heights. The results include various parameters that reflect the seismic performance of the structures. The study revealed that the Chinese code is more conservative and overestimates seismic performance compared with African codes. However, the Chinese code can be applied in African projects considering the African soil classifications, and seismic weight are adjusted to meet the African design criteria.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Seismic Provisionsmentioning

confidence: 95%

A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes

Suliman,

2024

Advances in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generally, the building industry in developing nations is not aligned with the goals of the authorities, society, and clients; therefore, these companies lag substantially behind compared to their counterparts [41]. Egypt is an exceedingly populated nation, with a population of ninety-five million and an annual growth of 2% [42]. Notwithstanding the variations in social conditions, the Egyptian building industry is severely hampered by the challenges listed above.…”

Section: Problem Originmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Assessment for Strengthening Supply Chain Resilience and Sustainability: A Comprehensive Analysis

Attia,

Uddin

2024

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisations encounter a significant challenge in the globalised business landscape, and thus mitigate risk by establishing robust supply chains (SCs) networks is required. In a rapidly changing environment, gaining a competitive edge is imperative. However, the exploration of the essential factors enabling resilient and sustainable supply chain management (RSSCM) in construction projects has been lacking. This study aims to bridge this gap by identifying the enabling factors for resilient and sustainable supply chain management (SSCM). To achieve this, a survey was conducted among Egyptian engineers, involving 32 factors derived from an extensive literature review on RSSCM. The data collected were categorised into four groups, namely Organisational Knowledge and Competence, Risk Management and Security, Collaboration and Communication, and Planning Efficiency and Timing, using brainstorming techniques. Subsequently, the data were analysed utilising a novel hybrid assessment approach that combines evaluation of alternatives and ranking, employing the compromise solution-fuzzy synthetic evaluation methodology, for the first time, offering a unique approach to assessing and prioritising these categories. The findings reveal that ‘Planning Efficiency and Timing’ emerged as the highest-performing category, whereas ‘Collaboration and Communication’ performed the worth. Furthermore, our results indicate that brainstorming enabled the grouping of the enablers into four distinct categories, providing a structured framework for understanding and organising them. The integration of MARCOS and FSE offered a robust decision-making approach, proposing a resilient and comprehensive decision-support system capable of tackling intricate real-world issues. This research outcome offers building administrators valuable insights for comparing different supply chains, considering how supply chain characteristics influence resilience and risk exposure in building SCs.

show abstract

“…The plan view of a typical storey of these buildings is presented in Figure 2. Although these buildings are non-seismically designed, they are seen to be representative of older buildings found in the seismic zones of the Egyptian territory, since the current seismic design provisions have only been enforced after the 1992 Cairo earthquake [50]. Furthermore, according to the current Egyptian design code, seismic design is not mandatory for buildings with a height up to 10 m in Zone 1 (which corresponds to a peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.1 g) and a height up to 8 m in Zone 2 (which corresponds to a PGA of 0.125 g) [18], and it is not clear if seismic design is commonly considered for other buildings.…”

Section: Characterisation Of the Selected Building Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic Fragility Functions for Non-Seismically Designed RC Structures Considering Pounding Effects

Mohamed

Romão

2021

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The proposed study develops fragility functions for non-seismically designed reinforced concrete structures considering different pounding configurations. The study addresses an existing research gap, since large-scale seismic risk assessment studies involving the seismic performance assessment of building portfolios usually do not involve fragility functions accounting for the possibility of pounding. The selected structures include configurations involving different separation distance values and exhibiting floor-to-floor pounding, floor-to-column pounding, pounding between structures with a significant height difference, and pounding between structures with a significant mass difference. The behaviour of these pounding configurations was analysed using incremental dynamic analysis and compared with that of the corresponding control cases (i.e., individual structures with no interaction with other structures). The results indicate the type of failure mechanism that contributes to the global collapse of the different configurations and the influence of the separation distance. Results highlight the main differences between the expected performance of different pounding configurations with respect to the occurrence of the failure mechanism that governs their collapse. Finally, results indicate that large-scale seismic risk assessment studies should consider fragility functions accounting for different pounding configurations when the possibility of pounding is not negligible, except in cases involving floor-to-floor pounding.

show abstract

Comparison of Egyptian Code 2012 with Eurocode 8-2013, IBC 2015 and UBC 1997 for seismic analysis of residential shear-walls RC buildings in Egypt

Cited by 12 publications

References 10 publications

A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes

A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes

Hybrid Assessment for Strengthening Supply Chain Resilience and Sustainability: A Comprehensive Analysis

Seismic Fragility Functions for Non-Seismically Designed RC Structures Considering Pounding Effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About