Seismic reliability assessment of a non-seismic reinforced concrete framed structure designed according to ABNT NBR 6118:2014

Pereira, Eduardo Marques Vieira; Cavalcante, Gustavo Henrique Ferreira; Rodrigues, Isabela Durci; Vieira Júnior, Luiz Carlos Marcos; Siqueira, Gustavo Henrique

doi:10.1590/S1983-41952022000100010

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ORIGINAL ARTICLE • Rev. IBRACON Estrut. Mater. 15 (1) • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S1983-41952022000100010 copy

Seismic reliability assessment of a non-seismic reinforced concrete framed structure designed according to ABNT NBR 6118:2014

Avaliação da confiabilidade sísmica de um pórtico de concreto armado não sismo-resistente dimensionado de acordo com a ABNT NBR 6118:2014

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

abstract:

Due to the paucity of studies regarding the seismic assessment of buildings in Brazil, this study aims to present and discuss a seismic reliability assessment of a reinforced concrete framed structure designed according to the Brazilian standard ABNT NBR 6118:2014 without the consideration of the seismic design requirements of ABNT NBR 15421:2006. Herein, fragility functions are generated through probabilistic seismic demand analysis, and integrated with hazard curves for Northeastern Brazil to generate regional failure probability maps for three limit-states: Immediate Occupancy (IO), Life Safety (LS), and Collapse Prevention (CP). The results indicated that the building performance is adequate for IO; however, for LS and CP, an unacceptable performance is observed.

Keywords:
reinforced concrete; earthquakes; fragility functions; reliability

Determination	Distribution	Mean	Coefficient of variation	Reference
f_c (MPa)	Normal	33.01	0.15	Nogueira [³⁶36 C. G. Nogueira “Desenvolvimento de modelos mecânicos, de confiabilidade e de otimização para aplicação em estruturas de concreto armado,” Ph.D. dissertation, USP, São Carlos, SP, Brazil, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/18/18134/tde-29062010-113700/pt-br.php https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/1... ]
f_y (MPa)	Normal	576.00	0.08	Nogueira [³⁶36 C. G. Nogueira “Desenvolvimento de modelos mecânicos, de confiabilidade e de otimização para aplicação em estruturas de concreto armado,” Ph.D. dissertation, USP, São Carlos, SP, Brazil, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/18/18134/tde-29062010-113700/pt-br.php https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/1... ]
f_yw (MPa)	Normal	690.93	0.08	Nogueira [³⁶36 C. G. Nogueira “Desenvolvimento de modelos mecânicos, de confiabilidade e de otimização para aplicação em estruturas de concreto armado,” Ph.D. dissertation, USP, São Carlos, SP, Brazil, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/18/18134/tde-29062010-113700/pt-br.php https://teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/1... ]
E_s (GPa)	Normal	201.00	0.033	Mirza and MacGregor[³⁷37 S. A. Mirza and J. G. MacGregor, "Variability of mechanical properties of reinforcing bars," J. Struct. Div., vol. 105, no. 5, pp. 921–937, 1979. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0005146. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0005146... ]
ζ	Log-normal	0.042	0.76	Healey et al. [³⁸38 J. Healey, S. Wu, and M. Murga, Seismic Safety Margins Research Program (Phase I). Project IV. Structural Building Response; Structural Building Response Review, New York, USA: Ebasco Services, Inc., 1980. Acessed: May 2, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/5627242 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/56272... ]

Limit state	Description
Immediate Occupancy (IO)	No permanent drift. Structure substantially retains its original strength and stiffness. Equipment and contents are generally secure but might not operate due to mechanical failure or lack of utilities. Some cracking of facades, partitions, and ceilings. Elevators can be restarted. Fire protection operable. Continued occupancy likely.
Life Safety (LS)	Some residual strength and stiffness left in all stories. Gravity-load-bearing elements function. Building might not be economical to repair. Falling hazards, such as parapets, mitigated, but many architectural, mechanical, and electrical systems are damaged. Continued occupancy might not be likely before repair.
Collapse Prevention (CP)	Small residual stiffness and strength to resist lateral loads, but gravity load-bearing columns function. Large permanent drifts. Some exits blocked. Extensive damage to nonstructural components. Infills and parapets failed or at incipient failure. Building is near collapse in aftershocks and should not continue to be occupied.

Limit state	β (t = 1 year)	p_f (t = 1 year)	p_f (t = 50 year)
IO	2.5	0.0062	0.2666
LS	3.0	0.0013	0.0629
CP	4.0	3.167 $\cdot 10^{5}$	0.0016

IBRACON - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON), Av. Queiroz Filho, nº 1700 sala 407/408 Torre D, Villa Lobos Office Park, CEP 05319-000, São Paulo, SP - Brasil, Tel. (55 11) 3735-0202, Fax: (55 11) 3733-2190 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: arlene@ibracon.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding author: Eduardo Marques Vieira Pereira. E-mail: eduardo.marquesvp@gmail.com