Earthquake-resistance predictive assessment of the frame-panel buildings KPS series on the territory of Kamchatka

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

The article presents a practical implementation of general provisions of assessment procedure for earthquake-resistance of existing RC building frames using nonlinear static Pushover Analysis (NSP). As an example, the results of calculating the closest analogue of KPS series buildings frame which were erected on the territory of Kamchatka from 1972 to 1975 is considered. The study object is a 4-storey RC frame which was tested in 1968 by a full-scale in-situ vibration experiment. Acceleration record of ew-component of the 17.08.2024 Shipunskoye Earthquake was selected as the most unfavorable for computational assessment. The record was scaled to PGA value equal to 0.35g. Assessment results based on NSP were compared with results obtained by the Nonlinear Time History Analysis (THA). For NSP computational assessment the capacity spectrum method, and for THA the Newmark mean acceleration procedure were used. Damping parameters were assigned considering of the specified in-situ experiment results. Overlaying graphs of hysteresis on Pushover curves are presented. The assessment results using NSP and THA were compared in terms of residual displacements. When a complete loss of operational properties damage level was formed in the frame discrepancy between the results is 0.5 percent; at before collapse damage level – 16 percent. The following main conclusions are formulated. The KPS series buildings frame will be able to resist such earthquake if their frame has a plasticity value of at least 3.0. With an actual service-life period of the KPS series buildings, the residual seismic resistance of the studied frame was determined to be 8.14 with fractional values of the MSK–64. The residual seismic resistance of buildings similar to the KPS series, under earthquakes similar to the Shipunskoye case one, should be simultaneously assessed using NSP and THA.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

A. V. Sosnin

Scientific-Research Laboratory of Design Outcomes Safety Estimation and Earthquake-Resistance of Building Structures (Seism.estim.lab)

Author for correspondence.
Email: seism.estim.lab@mail.ru

Engineer

Russian Federation, 13A, Lenin Street, Smolensk, 214000

References

  1. Ayzenberg Ya.M. From Sakhalin to Turkey. Some lessons of recent seismic disasters. Sejsmostojkoe Stroitel’stvo. Bezopasnost’ Sooruzhenij. 2000. No. 5, pp. 10–11. (In Russian).
  2. Kurzanov A.M. What can be expected from a next earthquake in Russia. Promyshlennoe i Grazhdanskoe Stroitel’stvo. 2012. No. 2, pp. 53–55. (In Russian). EDN: OPJTNT
  3. Uzdin A.M. What is hidden behind linear-response-spectrum theory of earthquake resistance. Sejsmostojkoe Stroitel’stvo. Bezopasnost’ Sooruzhenij. 2009. No. 2, pp. 18–22. (In Russian). EDN: QCBKJV
  4. Aptikaev F.F., New building codes: one step forward, two steps backward. Geologiya i Geofizika Yuga Rossii. 2020. Vol. 10. No. 2, pp. 71–78. (In Russian). EDN: RHWTOE. https://doi.org/10.46698/VNC.2020.50.57.005
  5. Konvisar А.M., Timoshkina E.P., Titkov N.N., Mikhailov V.O., Volkova M.S., Smirnov V.B., Chebrov D.V. The seismic rupture surface model of the August 17, 2024 Shipunski, Kamchatka, Earthquake. Vestnik of the Kamchatka Regional Association “Educational and Scientific Center.” Series: Earth Sciences. 2025. No. 1. Iss. 65, pp. 18–27. (In Russian). EDN: KVLTMH. https://doi.org/10.31431/1816-5524-2025-1-65-18-27
  6. Vikulin A.V., Drozdyuk V.N., Semenects N.V., Shirokov V.A. K zemletryaseniyu bez riska [To an Earthquake Without a Risk]. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky: SETO-ST Publ. 1997. 120 p.
  7. Sosnin A.V. Comparison of allowed damages with a purpose of calculating procedures used to design of RC moment frames loaded by seismic loads. Zhilishchnoe stroitel’stvo [Housing construction]. 2021. No. 1–2, pp. 50–80. (In Russian). EDN: JDASSP. https://doi.org/10.31659/0044-4472-2021-1-2-50-80
  8. Dzhinchvelashvili G.A., Sosnin A.V., Kolesnikov A.V. Construction of adequate design of a dynamic model structure through an identification experiment. International Journal for Computational Civil and Structural Engineering. 2013. Vol. 9. Iss. 1, pp. 59–63. (In Russian). EDN: PZEXRP
  9. Sosnin A.V. About Refinement of seismic-force-reduction factor (K1) and its coherence with the concept of seismic response modification in formulation of the spectrum method (in order of a discussion). Vestnik Grazhdanskih Inzhenerov. 2017. No. 1 (60), pp. 92–114. (In Russian). EDN: YGRWUZ
  10. Clough R.W., Penzien J. Dynamics of structures. Third edition. Berkeley (USA): Computers & Structures, Inc. 2003. 752 p.
  11. Duan L., Cooper T.R. Displacement ductility capacity of reinforced concrete columns. Concrete International. 1995. Vol. 17. No. 11, pp. 61–65.
  12. Sosnin A.V. Argumentation of a Formula for Numerical Assessment of Insufficient Earthquake Resistance of Buildings using Nonlinear Static Pushover Analysis in SAP2000. Vestnik of South Ural State University. Series: Construction and Architecture. 2023. Vol. 23 (2), pp.15–24. (In Russian). EDN: XHMTHR. https://doi.org/10.14529/build230202
  13. Sosnin A.V., Belostotsky A.M. Comparative computational assessment of a RC frame of a 4-storey building using nonlinear pushover analysis and time history analysis using the 17.08.2024 Shipunsky earthquake motion records. In Book: Dangerous natural and man-made processes in mountain regions: models, systems, technologies: collective monograph edited by V.B. Zaalishvili, V.I. Golik. Vladikavkaz: GFI VNC RAS. 2024, pp. 408–416. (In Russian). EDN: MFFMOP
  14. Jiang Q., Wang H., Feng Y., Chong X., Huang J., Liu Y. Enhancing the seismic performance of precast RC frames with cladding panels through setting U-Shaped dampers and rocking walls. Shock and Vibration. 2020. Vol. 2. Art. ID 4182094. 16 p. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4182094
  15. Kato B., Akiyama H., Suzuki H., Fukazawa Y. Dynamic collapse test of steel structural models. Proceedings of the 5-th World Conference on earthquake engineering. 1973. Vol. II. Section 4C «Dynamic Tests of Structures», pp. 1457–1460.
  16. Liu J.L., Zhu S., Xu Y.L., Zhang Y. Displacement-based design approach for highway bridges with SMA Isolators. Smart structures and systems. 2011. Vol. 8. No. 2, pp. 173–190. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2011.8.2.173

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Response spectra of acceleration records of the Shipunsky earthquake (a); processed acceleration record of the ew-component (upper figure), and the corresponding displacement record calculated by double integration (low figure) (b)

Download (491KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Graphic results of computational assessments of the frame according to NSP, obtained in SAP2000 software in ADRS-format, with SF=1 for Behavior Type «B» (a): 1 – capacity spectrum of the studied RC frame; 2 – reduce seismic demand spectrum of the selected record; 3 – locus of possible performance (target) points; 4 – location of the target point and reduce seismic demand spectrum of the component ew (b). Note. On the reduce seismic demand spectrum the circle indicates the area that within borders of the article is attributed to one characteristic feature of the specified earthquake

Download (431KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Pushover curves of a reinforced concrete frame with cladding panels, given in the article [14] (a), and graphical results of computational assessments of the studied 4-story frame got by NSP in SAP2000 software with SF=0.8 for Behavior Type B (b): 1–4 – the same as in Fig. 2; 5 – the area of expected strengthening of the frame in case of cladding panels behavior on its response under seismic loads; 6 – strengthening area of a 8-story reinforced concrete frame due to behavior of cladding panels; 7 – Pushover curve of the specified reinforced concrete frame with external cladding panels (the abscissa axis shows displacements, m; the ordinate axis shows base shear force, ×10E3 kN)

Download (329KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Graphs of displacements of the control node of computational model at SF=0.8 (upper graphs) and SF=1 (lower graph). Note. The displacements records of the frame model control node under the acceleration record are shown as solid curves; from the displacement record – as dotted curve. Horizontal dotted lines show maximum displacements of the frame model control node obtained during computational assessments using NSP; numbers indicate the displacement values in meters. On the displacement graphs, the dots mark maximum values and the corresponding counting time

Download (341KB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. Fourier amplitude spectrum of the input (thickened graph) and output signals at SF=1

Download (98KB)
Indexing metadata
7. Fig. 6. Fourier amplitude spectrum of the input (thickened graph) and output signals at SF=0.8

Download (185KB)
Indexing metadata
8. Fig. 7. Graphical comparison of the assessments results of the studied frame according Type Behavior B, obtained in SAP2000 software using NSP and THA for the ew-acceleration record at SF=0.8 (a) and SF=1 (b): pushover curve of the 4-storey reinforced concrete frame in «base shear force – horizontal displacement at roof level» format (positive branch); 2 – same as the curve 1 (reverse branch); 3 – backbone inclined line corresponding to a hysteresis stabilization zone in elastic deformations region of the frame; 4 – backbone inclined line corresponding to position of vibration stabilization zone of the frame after damage formation during the considered earthquake; 5 – target point position corresponding to a permissible damage level of the frame (indicating values of lateral displacement at top system level; and base shear force); 6 – part of hysteresis curve obtained use to NSP, corresponding to system deformations region from onset of damage formation in the frame to complete loss of its operational properties; 7 – the same as the curve 6, corresponding to stabilization of the frame oscillations relative to position of the frame residual displacements; 8 – a vertical line passing through the abscissa corresponding to residual displacements value of the frame at the end of the earthquake; 9 – a section of the Pushover curve of the frame, which could not be used in computational assessments according to the NSP due to features of the ADRS spectrum of the earthquake component

Download (252KB)
Indexing metadata
9. Fig. 8. Graphical representation of hysteresis which were presented in [15] (a) and : [16] (b)

Download (347KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2025 Advertising publishing company "STROYMATERIALY"