Probabilistic collapse assessment of steel frame structures considering the effects of soil-structure interaction and height

Document Type : Article


School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran


This paper investigates the seismic performance of Intermediate Moment-Resisting Steel Frame structures considering the effects of height and soil-structure interaction. For this purpose, three 3D structures of 3, 6 and 9-story were designed using CSI ETABS software in accordance with ASCE7-16. Then the 2D frames of the structures were simulated by OpenSEES software and to account for the nonlinearity of the material, the plastic hinge elements were used. The 2D frames were analyzed using IDA method subjected to 22 far-field ground motion records of FEMA-P695. Finally, the fragility curves of the structures were developed. The results showed that consideration of soil-structure interaction leads to lower spectral acceleration as height increases, meaning that higher-rising structures have record-induced Sa (T1,5%) closer to Sa (Design), and with decreasing height the difference tends to increase. Exceedance probability decreases with the increase of structure’s height and soil-structure interaction consideration adapts to lower exceedance probability. Also, the investigated Intermediate Moment-Resisting Steel Frame structural models designed according to ASCE7-16 consideration showed to have acceptable seismic performance against far-field records indicating that their exceedance probability in terms of the LS and CP performance level respectively are less than 0.45 and 0.03.


  1. References

    1. Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Quantification of building seismic performance factors”, US Department of Homeland Security, FEMA (2009).
    2. Allotey, N.K. “Nonlinear soil-structure interaction in performance-based design”. ProQuest, (2008).
    3. Venture, S.J. and Guidelines Development Committee. “Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings (Vol. 350)”, Washington, DC, USA: Federal Emergency Management Agency, (2000).
    4. FEMA, B. “Pre-standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings”, (2000).
    5. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. “Incremental dynamic analysis”, Eart. Eng. & Str. Dyn., 31(3), pp.491-514 (2002).
    6. Suyehiro, K. “Engineering seismology: Notes on American lectures”, Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil Engin., 58(4), pp.1-110 (1932).
    7. Kanai, K. “Engineering seismology”, Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, (1983).
    8. Kanai, K. “A study of strong earthquake motions”, Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 36(3), pp.295-310 (1958).
    9. Biot, M.A. “Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid‐saturated porous solid. II. Higher frequency range”, The J. of the Acou. Soc. of America, 28(2), pp.179-191 (1956).
    10. Gazetas, G. and Mylonakis, G. “Seismic soil-structure interaction: new evidence and emerging issues”, Geo. Spe. Pub., 75(2), pp.1119-1174 (1998).
    11. Gazetas, G. and Apostolou, M. “March. Nonlinear soil–structure interaction: foundation uplifting and soil yielding”, In Pro. Third UJNR Workshop on Soil-Structure Interaction, pp. 29-30 (2004).
    12. Radkia, S., Rahnavard, R., Tuwair, H., et al. “October. Investigating the effects of seismic isolators on steel asymmetric structures considering soil-structure interaction”, In Str., 27, pp. 1029-1040, Elsevier (2020).
    13. Liu, S., Li, P., Zhang, W., et al. “Experimental study and numerical simulation on dynamic soil‐structure interaction under earthquake excitations”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 138, p.106333 (2020).
    14. Mashhadi, S., Asadi, A., Homaei, F., et al. “Seismic response of mid-rise steel MRFs: the role of geometrical irregularity, frequency components of near-fault records, and soil-structure interaction”, Bul. of Eart. Eng., pp.1-25 (2021).
    15. Vaseghiamiri, S., Mahsuli, M., Ghannad, M.A., et al. “Probabilistic Approach to Account for Soil-Structure Interaction in Seismic Design of Building Structures”, J. of Str. Eng., 146(9), p.04020184 (2020).
    16. Arboleda-Monsalve, L.G., Mercado, J.A., Terzic, V., et al. “Soil–structure interaction effects on seismic performance and earthquake-induced losses in tall buildings”, J. of Geo. and Geoenv. Eng., 146(5), p.04020028 (2020).
    17. Bai, J., Chen, H., Jia, J., et al. “New lateral load distribution pattern for seismic design of deteriorating shear buildings considering soil-structure interaction”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 139, p.106344 (2020).
    18. Kennedy, R.P., Cornell, C.A., Campbell, R.D., et al. “Probabilistic seismic safety study of an existing nuclear power plant”, Nuc. Eng. and Des., 59(2), pp.315-338 (1980).
    19. Kircher, C.A. and Martin, W. “Development of fragility Curve for Estimating of Earthquake Damage”, In the Work Shop on Continuing Action to Reduce losses from Earthquake, Washington, Dc: US Geological Survey (1993).
    20. Anagnos, T., Rojahn, C. and Kiremidjian, A.S. “Building fragility relationships for California”, In Proceedings of the Fifth US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, pp. 389-396 (1994).
    21. Biglari, M., Formisano, A. and Hashemi, B.H. “Empirical fragility curves of engineered steel and RC residential buildings after Mw 7.3 2017 Sarpol-e-zahab earthquake”, Bul. of Eart. Eng., 19(6), pp.2671-2689 (2021).
    22. Mohebi, B., Yazdanpanah, O., Kazemi, F., et al. “Seismic damage diagnosis in adjacent steel and RC MRFs considering pounding effects through improved wavelet-based damage-sensitive feature”, J. of Bui. Eng., 33, p.101847 (2021).
    23. Taiyari, F., Formisano, A. and Mazzolani, F.M. “Seismic behaviour assessment of steel moment resisting frames under near-field earthquakes”, Int. J. of Ste. Str., 19(5), pp.1421-1430 (2019).
    24. Yazdanpanah, O., Formisano, A., Chang, M., et al. “Fragility curves for seismic damage assessment in regular and irregular MRFs using improved wavelet-based damage index”, Measurement, 182, p.109558 (2021).
    25. Karafagka, S., Fotopoulou, S. and Pitilakis, D. “Fragility curves of non-ductile RC frame buildings on saturated soils including liquefaction effects and soil–structure interaction”, Bul. of Eart. Eng., pp.1-26 (2021).
    26. Petridis, C. and Pitilakis, D. “Fragility curve modifiers for reinforced concrete dual buildings, including nonlinear site effects and soil–structure interaction”, Eart. Spe., 36(4), pp.1930-1951 (2020).
    27. Forcellini, D. “Analytical fragility curves of shallow-founded structures subjected to Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI) effects”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 141, p.106487 (2021).
    28. Hamidia, M., Shokrollahi, N. and Nasrolahi, M. “Soil-structure interaction effects on the seismic collapse capacity of steel moment-resisting frame buildings”, In Str., Vol. 32, pp. 1331-1345, Elsevier (2021).
    29. Nasab, M.S.E., Chun, S. and Kim, J. “Soil-structure interaction effect on seismic retrofit of a soft first-story structure”, In Str., Vol. 32, pp. 1553-1564, Elsevier (2021).
    30. Shahbazi, S., Khatibinia, M., Mansouri, I., et al. “Seismic evaluation of special steel moment frames subjected to near-field earthquakes with forward directivity by considering soil-structure interaction effects”, Sci. Ira., 27(5), pp.2264-2282 (2020).
    31. Güneş, N. and Ulucan, Z.Ç. “Collapse probability of code-based design of a seismically isolated reinforced concrete building”, In Str., Vol. 33, pp. 2402-2412, Elsevier (2021).
    32. Güneş, N. “Comparison of monotonic and cyclic pushover analyses for the near-collapse point on a mid-rise reinforced concrete framed building”, Eart. and Str., 19(3), pp.189-196 (2020).
    33. Csi, C. “Analysis reference manual for SAP2000, ETABS, and SAFE”, Computers and Structures, Berkeley, California, USA (2016).
    34. American Society of Civil Engineers. “Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures”, (2017).
    35. Bazzurro, P. and Cornell, C.A. “Seismic hazard analysis of nonlinear structures. I: Methodology”, J. of Str. Eng., 120(11), pp.3320-3344 (1994).
    36. Foutch, D.A. and Yun, S.Y. “Modeling of steel moment frames for seismic loads”, J. of Con. Ste. Res., 58(5-8), pp.529-564 (2002).
    37. Ramanathan, K.N. “Next generation seismic fragility curves for California bridges incorporating the evolution in seismic design philosophy”, Georgia Institute of Technology (2012).
    38. Baker, J.W. and Allin Cornell, C. “A vector‐valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon”, Eart. Eng. & Str. Dyn., 34(10), pp.1193-1217 (2005).
    39. Gcr, N. “Soil–structure interaction for building structures”, (2012).
    40. Givens, M.J. “Dynamic soil-structure interaction of instrumented buildings and test structures”, University of California, Los Angeles (2013).
    41. Kausel, E. “Early history of soil–structure interaction”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 30(9), pp.822-832 (2010).
    42. Gajan, S., Raychowdhury, P., Hutchinson, T.C., et al. “Application and validation of practical tools for nonlinear soil-foundation interaction analysis”, Eart. Spe., 26(1), pp.111-129 (2010).
    43. Raychowdhury, P. “Nonlinear Winkler-based shallow foundation model for performance assessment of seismically loaded structures”, University of California, San Diego (2008).
    44. Allotey, N. and El Naggar, M.H. “An investigation into the Winkler modeling of the cyclic response of rigid footings”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 28(1), pp.44-57 (2008).
    45. Harden, C.W. “Numerical modeling of the nonlinear cyclic response of shallow foundations”, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (2005).
    46. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., et al. “OpenSees command language manual”, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 264, pp.137-158 (2006).
    47. Foutch, D.A. and Yun, S.Y. “Modeling of steel moment frames for seismic loads”, J. of Con. Ste. Res., 58(5-8), pp.529-564 (2002).
    48. Rajeev, P. and Tesfamariam, S. “Seismic fragilities of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames with consideration of soil structure interaction”, Soil Dyn. and Eart. Eng., 40, pp.78-86 (2012).
    49. Dutta, S.C. and Roy, R. “A critical review on idealization and modeling for interaction among soil–foundation–structure system”, Comp. & Str., 80(20-21), pp.1579-1594 (2002).
    50. Mehdizadeh, K. and Karamodin, A. “Probabilistic assessment of steel moment frames incremental collapse (ordinary, intermediate and special) under earthquake”, J. of Str. and Con. Eng., 4(3), pp.129-147 (2017).
    51. Suita, K., Yamada, S., Tada, M., et al. “Collapse experiment on 4-story steel moment frame: Part 2 detail of collapse behavior”, In Proceedings of the 14th world conference on earthquake engineering, Beijing, China, Vol. 11 (2008).
    52. Lignos, D.G., Hikino, T., Matsuoka, Y., et al. “Collapse assessment of steel moment frames based on E-Defense full-scale shake table collapse tests”, J. of Str. Eng., 139(1), pp.120-132 (2013).
    53. American Society of Civil Engineers. “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings ASCE/SEI 41-13”, (2014).
    54. Haselton, C.B., Liel, A.B., Deierlein, G.G., et al. “Seismic collapse safety of reinforced concrete buildings. I: Assessment of ductile moment frames”, J. of Str. Eng., 137(4), pp.481-491 (2011).
    55. Baker, J.W. “Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis”, Eart, Spe., 31(1), pp.579-599 (2015).