Param D. Gajbhiye, Nuha S. Mashaan, V. Bhaiya, R. Wankhade, S. Vishnu
{"title":"Inelastic Behavior of Steel and Composite Frame Structure Subjected to Earthquake Loading","authors":"Param D. Gajbhiye, Nuha S. Mashaan, V. Bhaiya, R. Wankhade, S. Vishnu","doi":"10.3390/applmech4030047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Steel construction is used more often these days as an alternative to the R.C.C. when lightweight, high-strength, large-span structures with a faster erection are required. Extensive studies have been conducted by researchers to study the seismic performance of reinforced concrete and steel structures, both in terms of elastic and inelastic behavior. Composite construction is also a recent advancement in the building industry with similar advantages. However, no emphasis has been given to the comparison between the inelastic behavior of steel and composite structures when subjected to lateral loads. This study compares the inelastic behavior of steel and a composite frame designed to have the same plastic moment capacity for structural members. The responses, such as the formation of hinges, story drifts, story displacements, lateral stiffness, ductility, maximum strength, energy dissipated, joint accelerations, and performance points, are compared with the aid of the building analysis and design software ETABS-18. For this, response spectrum analysis, pushover analysis, and nonlinear direct integration time history analysis have been performed on both frames. For design and analysis, international codes, such as IS 800-2007, IS 875 (Part I, II, IV), IS 1893-2002, AISC 360 (16 and 10), and FEMA 440, have been used. Part of this study also aims at comparing the response of these frames when subjected to near-field and far-field earthquakes. It can be concluded from the results that the post-yield performance of the composite frame is superior to that of the steel frame when seismically excited.","PeriodicalId":8048,"journal":{"name":"Applied Mechanics Reviews","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Mechanics Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/applmech4030047","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MECHANICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Steel construction is used more often these days as an alternative to the R.C.C. when lightweight, high-strength, large-span structures with a faster erection are required. Extensive studies have been conducted by researchers to study the seismic performance of reinforced concrete and steel structures, both in terms of elastic and inelastic behavior. Composite construction is also a recent advancement in the building industry with similar advantages. However, no emphasis has been given to the comparison between the inelastic behavior of steel and composite structures when subjected to lateral loads. This study compares the inelastic behavior of steel and a composite frame designed to have the same plastic moment capacity for structural members. The responses, such as the formation of hinges, story drifts, story displacements, lateral stiffness, ductility, maximum strength, energy dissipated, joint accelerations, and performance points, are compared with the aid of the building analysis and design software ETABS-18. For this, response spectrum analysis, pushover analysis, and nonlinear direct integration time history analysis have been performed on both frames. For design and analysis, international codes, such as IS 800-2007, IS 875 (Part I, II, IV), IS 1893-2002, AISC 360 (16 and 10), and FEMA 440, have been used. Part of this study also aims at comparing the response of these frames when subjected to near-field and far-field earthquakes. It can be concluded from the results that the post-yield performance of the composite frame is superior to that of the steel frame when seismically excited.
期刊介绍:
Applied Mechanics Reviews (AMR) is an international review journal that serves as a premier venue for dissemination of material across all subdisciplines of applied mechanics and engineering science, including fluid and solid mechanics, heat transfer, dynamics and vibration, and applications.AMR provides an archival repository for state-of-the-art and retrospective survey articles and reviews of research areas and curricular developments. The journal invites commentary on research and education policy in different countries. The journal also invites original tutorial and educational material in applied mechanics targeting non-specialist audiences, including undergraduate and K-12 students.