Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings: Influence of Material Type on Structural Response and Failure Modes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59733/besti.v3i3.110Keywords:
Seismic Performance Assessment, Influence of Material Type, Structural Response and Failure ModesAbstract
Seismic resilience remains a paramount concern in structural engineering, necessitating rigorous evaluations of material-specific performance under dynamic loading conditions. This study introduces a novel, data-driven comparative framework that evaluates the influence of material type—concrete, steel, composite, and timber—on the seismic response of buildings. Employing a dataset that integrates structural parameters such as displacement, stress, factor of safety, and failure modes, the research reveals distinct mechanical behaviors under seismic excitation. Results indicate that steel, despite its ductility and high stress tolerance, exhibits lower safety factors, making it prone to yielding under extreme loads. Concrete, while strong in compression, suffers from brittle shear failure. Composite materials balance strength and flexibility, exhibiting optimal behavior under seismic stress, while timber is susceptible to buckling, limiting its use in high-risk zones. The framework correlates seismic load, structural height, and deformation patterns, offering data-backed insights for seismic design codes and construction practices. This contribution aims to advance performance-based seismic design by integrating material-specific behavior into structural safety strategies.
Downloads
References
Bozorgnia, Y., & Bertero, V. V. (2004). Earthquake engineering: From engineering seismology to performance-based engineering. CRC Press.
Bruneau, M., Uang, C. M., & Whittaker, A. (1998). Ductile design of steel structures. McGraw-Hill.
Chopra, A. K. (2012). Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Pearson.
Clough, R. W., & Penzien, J. (1993). Dynamics of structures. McGraw-Hill.
Dolan, J. D., & Madsen, B. (1992). Seismic response of timber structures. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 19(1), 69-82.
Elnashai, A. S., & Di Sarno, L. (2008). Fundamentals of earthquake engineering. Wiley.
Fajfar, P. (2000). A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra, 16(3), 573-592.
FEMA. (2012). Seismic evaluation and retrofit of multi-unit wood-frame buildings with weak first stories. FEMA P-807.
Krawinkler, H., & Miranda, E. (1993). Performance-based seismic design. Earthquake Spectra, 9(3), 389-440.
Miranda, E., & Bertero, V. V. (1994). Evaluation of strength reduction factors for earthquake-resistant design. Earthquake Spectra, 10(2), 357-379.
Moehle, J. P. (2014). Seismic design of reinforced concrete buildings. McGraw-Hill.
Newmark, N. M., & Hall, W. J. (1982). Earthquake spectra and design. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
Paulay, T., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. Wiley.
Priestley, M. J. N., Calvi, G. M., & Kowalsky, M. J. (2007). Displacement-based seismic design of structures. IUSS Press.
ASCE. (2017). Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures (ASCE/SEI 7-16). American Society of Civil Engineers.
Eurocode 8. (2004). Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (EN 1998-1:2004). European Committee for Standardization.
Naeim, F. (2001). The seismic design handbook (2nd ed.). Springer.
Paulay, T. (2001). Design of ductile reinforced concrete frames for seismic resistance. Wiley.
Chopra, A. K., & Goel, R. K. (2001). Evaluation of modal and FEMA pushover analyses: Vertically irregular buildings. Earthquake Spectra, 17(3), 383-407.
Constantinou, M. C., & Symans, M. D. (1992). Seismic response of structures with supplemental damping. Structural Design of Tall Buildings, 1(2), 77-92.
ATC. (1996). Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings (ATC-40). Applied Technology Council.
