Several design codes consider the non-linear response of a building by using one of the most im-portant seismic parameters, called the response reduction factor (R). The lack of a detailed de-scription of the R factor selection creates the need for a deeper study. This paper emphasises a methodology for the selection of a proper R factor based on resilience aspects. Unsymmet-rical/irregular buildings have become the most common in recent times due to aesthetic purposes. However, because of the complexity due to the torsional effect, the selection of the R factor is even more difficult for this type of building. Therefore, a high-rise G+10-storey L-shaped building is herein considered. The building has re-entrant corners based on the structural/plan arrangement. Different R factors were used in the building design, and they were subjected to both unidirec-tional and bidirectional seismic loading scenarios. The building response with respect to various R factors (R equal to 3, 4, 5 and 6) in terms of its performance level, functionality, damage ratio and resilience was assessed at two design levels, i.e., design basic earthquake (DBE) and maxi-mum considered earthquake (MCE). The study concludes that, considering the above criteria along with the resilience aspect, a maximum R factor up to 4 can be recommended for unidirec-tional loading, whereas for bidirectional loading, the maximum recommended R factor is 3.

Accounting for Resilience in the Selection of R Factors for a RC Unsymmetrical Building / Prasanth, S.; Ghosh, G.; Gupta, P. K.; Casapulla, C.; Giresini, L.. - In: APPLIED SCIENCES. - ISSN 2076-3417. - 13(2023). [10.3390/app13031316]

Accounting for Resilience in the Selection of R Factors for a RC Unsymmetrical Building

Giresini, L.
Ultimo
2023

Abstract

Several design codes consider the non-linear response of a building by using one of the most im-portant seismic parameters, called the response reduction factor (R). The lack of a detailed de-scription of the R factor selection creates the need for a deeper study. This paper emphasises a methodology for the selection of a proper R factor based on resilience aspects. Unsymmet-rical/irregular buildings have become the most common in recent times due to aesthetic purposes. However, because of the complexity due to the torsional effect, the selection of the R factor is even more difficult for this type of building. Therefore, a high-rise G+10-storey L-shaped building is herein considered. The building has re-entrant corners based on the structural/plan arrangement. Different R factors were used in the building design, and they were subjected to both unidirec-tional and bidirectional seismic loading scenarios. The building response with respect to various R factors (R equal to 3, 4, 5 and 6) in terms of its performance level, functionality, damage ratio and resilience was assessed at two design levels, i.e., design basic earthquake (DBE) and maxi-mum considered earthquake (MCE). The study concludes that, considering the above criteria along with the resilience aspect, a maximum R factor up to 4 can be recommended for unidirec-tional loading, whereas for bidirectional loading, the maximum recommended R factor is 3.
2023
seismic resilience; building functionality; ductility demand; response reduction factor; perfor-mance level
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Accounting for Resilience in the Selection of R Factors for a RC Unsymmetrical Building / Prasanth, S.; Ghosh, G.; Gupta, P. K.; Casapulla, C.; Giresini, L.. - In: APPLIED SCIENCES. - ISSN 2076-3417. - 13(2023). [10.3390/app13031316]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Prasanth_Accounting_2023.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.81 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.81 MB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1665126
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact