- : Ms Word, Ms Word Format
- : 100 Pages
- : ₦5000
- : 1-5 Chapters
- Click to DOWNLOAD Materials
DEVELOPMENT OF FRAGILITY INFORMATION FOR BUILDING LIGHT-FRAME AND ENVELOPE SYSTEMS FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED SEISMIC DESIGN
ABSTRACT
Performance-based seismic design (PBSD) has been introduced since 1990s, and a second-generation performance-based design approach has been carried out by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) in 2000 to address the limitations in current PBSD. Thus, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a series of projects for development of the new performance-based seismic design procedure.
The objective of this study is to make contribution to the second-generation performancebased design by generating fragility data for light frame system such as structural insulated panels (SIPs), and envelope systems such as brick veneer panels and rounded corner glazing panels. These fragility data are all developed based on past experimental testing of the components.
A case study of comparing wood-frame structure and SIPs structure with and without brick veneer panels using the performance-based design approach is also presented in this study. The structural analysis and modeling of the structure is completed with the used of software SAPwood. Software PACT provided by FEMA is used for evaluating the performance (probability of exceedance of repair cost) of structures.
Table of Contents
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………………………………v
List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. vii
Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………………………….. viii
Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………….1
1.1 Background information ………………………………………………………………………………..1
1.2 Objectives ……………………………………………………………………………………………………2
1.3 Research approach ………………………………………………………………………………………..4
Chapter 2: Literature review related to testing ……………………………………………………..5
2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………….5
2.2 SIPs …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6
2.3 Brick veneer panels ……………………………………………………………………………………..14
2.4 Glass panels ……………………………………………………………………………………………….29 2.5 Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………………22
Chapter 3: Fragility function development methodology & PBD approach…………..23
3.1 Fragility function development methodology ………………………………………………….23
3.2 PBD approach …………………………………………………………………………………………….27
Chapter 4: Fragility function development for selected systems……………………………36
4.1 Structural insulated panels …………………………………………………………………………….36
4.2 Brick veneer panels………………………………………………………………………………………38
4.3 Glass panels with rounded corners …………………………………………………………………40
Chapter 5: Computer modeling and analysis ……………………………………………………….46
5.1 Shear wall modeling …………………………………………………………………………………….46
5.2 Structure analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………54
Chapter 6: PBD case study………………………………………………………………………………….64
6.1 Repair cost data……………………………………………………………………………………………65
6.2 Performance group assembly …………………………………………………………………………70 6.3 Collapse fragility development ……………………………………………………………………..72
6.4 Building performance results …………………………………………………………………………75
Chapter 7: Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………..79
7.1 Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………………….79
7.2 Limitations ………………………………………………………………………………………………….81
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….82
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
Serious damage can be inflicted on structural and nonstructural components of buildings during a seismic event. Failure of nonstructural components such as building facade can cause costly damages and injuries or casualties and is therefore a serious life safety concern. In order to better predict earthquake consequences, including repair costs and downtime, and to help engineers achieve desired performance objectives, a second generation performance-based earthquake engineering approach has been developed by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) center (FEMA, 2012a). Using this methodology as basis, the Applied Technology Council (ATC) initiated a series of projects known as ATC-58 in 2001 (FEMA, 2012a). In 2012, ATC prepared two seismic performance assessment documents for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as part of the ATC 58 projects, FEMA P-58-1 and FEMA P-58-2, which include the methodology and implementation approach for buildings (FEMA, 2012a&b). While Volume 1 of FEMA document explains the methodology used to assess building performance, Volume 2 of FEMA 58 provides detailed procedure and examples that apply the methodology to individual structural or nonstructural component.
As a document that provides the procedure to assess probable seismic performance of building components, FEMA 58 has gathered fragility data on some types of structural systems, including RC moment frames, shear walls, slab systems, masonry walls, steel moment frames, and braced frames. Some nonstructural systems, such as interior partitions, ceilings, and stairs are also covered in this report. Although this report and other relevant literatures provide some fragility function information related to certain structural and nonstructural components, there is still a large knowledge gaps on fragility data for various types of building components for use in the performance-based design (PBD) procedure. For example, Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) that are used as structural load bearing components in light-frame buildings (e.g., residential) are vulnerable to seismic related damage, yet no published fragility functions are readily available. Similarly, brick veneer wall systems that are widely used as building facade of various types of commercial and residential buildings have shown to have the potential for life-safety hazard upon failure in an earthquake event, but no attempt have been made to develop fragility functions for PBD application. Finally, although some efforts have been made to develop fragility functions for certain types of glazing systems used as curtain walls or windows (O’Brien et al., 2012), there are still several other types of glazing systems that merit such development to allow their use in the PBD process. The three mentioned systems (SIPs, Brick Veneer, and Glazing) have been studied experimentally with test results available in open literature. This study has identified the need for development of fragility function for the three selected wall and/or cladding systems. Because the application of PBD method to buildings required all the structural and nonstructural component types to be designed for a building already have fragility function available.
1.2 Objectives
While the goal of this study is to contribute to performance-based seismic design of buildings, the main objective of this study is to generate fragility data for some lightframe systems such as structural insulated panels, and envelope systems such as brick veneer wall and glazing systems. The results of this work will help supplement fragility information available in the FEMA report (FEMA, 2012) and other relevant literature. Building performance in terms of probability of repair cost for conventional wood-frame buildings with and without brick veneer walls are also developed for comparison with SIP systems under seismic event as a PBD case study.
This study initially presents a review of several past experimental test programs (including specimens and data) that were used to develop the fragility curves. The loading conditions and damage states of the specimens are included in the review. The key references related to selected test results used in this study are described in Chapter 2, which discusses the literature in detail. The fragility function development methodology and PBD approach using fragility data are described in Chapter 3, while fragility function development for selected systems is discussed in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 presents the computer modeling and analysis of SIPs and wood-frame building using SAPwood. Chapter 6 presents the PBD case study using fragility data developed, and Chapter 7 summarizes the results from this study.
The major tasks that were carried out in order to satisfy the objective are as follows:
- Gather in-plane racking test results for structural insulated panels and glazing system, and out-of-plane test results for brick veneer panels from previous experimental studies and identify damage states and demand parameters for specimens tested
- Develop fragility functions for identified damage states of SIPs, brick veneer panels and glazing systems
- As a case study, create computer modeling of a simplified wood-frame and SIPs building using SAPwood software and perform nonlinear analysis
- Evaluate and compare performance of both wood-frame and SIPs building with and without brick veneer panels using FEMA P-58 methodology
1.3 Research approach
In order to accomplish these research tasks and satisfy the stated objective, the methodology and procedure used in this study were adopted from those provided by the FEMA P-58 document (Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings). Because performing original tests was not in the scope of this study, it was necessary to identify test data on SIPs, brick veneer panels, and selected glazing systems from previous experiments and other published literature. Three racking test evaluation on SIPs including previous work done at Penn State (Terentiuk and Memari, 2012; Kermani, 2006; Mosalam et al., 2008), one out-of-plane experiments done on brick veneers that were found in literature, and some recent tests done at Penn State on glazing panels with rounded corners were chosen as the data source for this study. With these available test results, the data recorded served as engineering demand parameters (EDP) associated with relevant damage states for fragility functions. Since fragility data was developed from different testing facilities, the units were converted to keep consistency and for comparison of the results from different test set-ups. For developing fragility information, MATLAB was used to generate results in both graphic and numeric format. The PACT software package published by FEMA was used to evaluate building performance using the developed fragility data and other building information, while computer modeling and structural analysis were performed by using SAPwood software (Pei and Van de Lindt, 2010).
