Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 31106
Fragility Assessment for Vertically Irregular Buildings with Soft Storey

Authors: N. Akhavan, Sh. Tavousi Tafreshi, A. Ghasemi


Seismic behavior of irregular structures through the past decades indicate that the stated buildings do not have appropriate performance. Among these subjects, the current paper has investigated the behavior of special steel moment frame with different configuration of soft storey vertically. The analyzing procedure has been evaluated with respect to incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), and numeric process was carried out by OpenSees finite element analysis package. To this end, nine 2D steel frames, with different numbers of stories and irregularity positions, which were subjected to seven pairs of ground motion records orthogonally with respect to Ibarra-Krawinkler deterioration model, have been investigated. This paper aims at evaluating the response of two-dimensional buildings incorporating soft storey which subjected to bi-directional seismic excitation. The IDAs were implemented for different stages of PGA with various ground motion records, in order to determine maximum inter-storey drift ratio. According to statistical elements and fracture range (standard deviation), the vulnerability or exceedance from above-mentioned cases has been examined. For this reason, fragility curves for different placement of soft storey in the first, middle and the last floor for 4, 8, and 16 storey buildings have been generated and compared properly.

Keywords: soft storey, incremental dynamic analysis, fragility curve, special steel moment frame

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1096


[1] Chintanapakdee C, Chopra AK. Seismic response of vertically irregular frames: response history and modal pushover analysis. Jornal of Structural Engineering 2004; 130(8):1177-1185.
[2] Al-Ali AAK, Krawinkler H. Effects of vertical irregularities on seismic behavior of building structures. Report No. 130, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1998.
[3] Valmundsson EV, Nau JM. Seismic response of building frame with vertical structural irregularities. Jornal of Structural Engineering 1997; 123(1):30-41.
[4] Lagaros ND. Life-cycle cost analysis of design practices for RC framed structures. Bull Earthq Eng 2007;5:425-42.
[5] Lagaros ND. Probabilistic fragility analysis: a tool for assessing design rules of RC buildings. Earthq Eng Vibr 2008;7(1):45-56.
[6] Rosserto T, Elnashai A. Derivation of vulnerability functions for Europian-type RC structures based on observational data. Eng Struct 2003;25(10):1241-63.
[7] Shinozuka M, Feng Q Lee J, Naganuma T. Statistical analysis of fragility curves. ASCE H Eng Mech 2000;126(12):1224-31.
[8] Celic OC, Ellingwood BR. Seismic risk assessment of gravity load designed reinforced concrete frames subjected to Mid-America ground motions. ASCE J Struct Eng 2009;135(4):414-24.
[9] Ellingwood BR, Celik OC, kinali K. Fragility assessment of building structural system in Mid America. Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 2007;36(13):1935-52.
[10] Rosserto T, Elnashai A. A new analytical procedure for the derivation of displacement-based vulnerability curves for populations of RC structures. Eng Struct 2005;27(3):397-409.
[11] ATC. Earthquake damage evaluation data for California. ATC-13 report. Redwood City, California: Applied Technology Council; 1985.
[12] FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). HAZUS-MH MR3 technical manual. Washington, DC: FEMA;2003.
[13] McKenna F, Fenves GL, Jeremic B, Scott MH. Opens system for earthquake engineering simulation; 2000.
[14] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Handbook for the seismic evaluation of buildings-a presented. In: Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA-310, Washington, DC;1998.
[15] Vam vatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Sruct Dynam 2002; 31:491-514.
[16] K. Porter. A beginner`s guide to fragility, vulnerability, and risk. 2016.