Robustness Based Structural Design: An Integrated Approach for Multi-Hazard Risk Mitigation

Abstract:

Multi-story building structures can suffer local damage or even structural collapse in case of extreme natural or man-made hazards. While all buildings are at a certain risk, some attributes can reduce the risk by reducing the vulnerability. One such attribute is the use of structural systems which can ensure that, in case of abnormal loads or failure of some elements, the collapse is prevented and the risk to occupants is reduced. Mitigation of some specific hazard can also help to reduce the risk, eg. protective barriers against impact or stand-off distance against direct effects of blast. Past experience has shown that structures that are designed according to seismic design philosophy can survive to a multiplicity of hazards. The objective of the paper is the adaptation of seismic design methodology to robust design demands of multistory frame buildings prone to multi-hazard scenarios. The hazard is modeled by removal of critical members. Nonlinear dynamic analyses are carried out in order to evaluate their robustness.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 82)
• Pages: 770-777
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.82.770
• Online since: July 2011
• Authors: Dan Dubina, Florea Dinu
• Keywords: Column Loss, Ductility, Extreme Loading, Risk, Robustness, Steel Structure

References

[1] FEMA 277: The Oklahoma City Bombing: Improving performance through multi-hazard mitigation. Federal Emergency Management Agency Mitigation Directorate (1996).

[2] DOD 2009. Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse. Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-023-03. Department of Defense.

[3] Marchand K.A. and Alfawakhiri F.: Blast and Progressive Collapse. Facts for Steel Buildings, Number 2, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Il (2004).

[4] Powell G.: Progressive Collapse: Case Studies Using Nonlinear Analysis. Proceedings of ASCE 2005 Structures Congress: Metropolis and Beyond, New York, NY, USA, April 20-24, 2005.

DOI: 10.1061/40753(171)216

[5] GSA 2003: Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects, General Services Administration (2003).

[6] D. Dubina, Muntean N., Stratan A., Grecea D. and Zaharia R.: Testing program to evaluate behaviour of dual steel connections under monotonic and cyclic loading, Proc. of 5th European Conference on Steel and Composite Structures - Eurosteel 2008, 3-5 September, Graz, Austria, 609-614 (2008).

DOI: 10.1201/9780203861592.ch62

[7] Dinu F., Dubina D. and Stratan A.: Influence of strain rate on the weld detailing behavior in MR connections, Proc. of STESSA 2003 "Behavior of steel structures in seismic areas", Naples, Italy, 9-12 June 2003, pg. 835-841 (2003).

DOI: 10.1201/9780203738290

[8] Foley C.M., Martin K. and Schneeman C.L.: Robustness in steel framing systems. Marquette university research report MU-CEEN-SE-07-01. Chicago (IL): American Institute of Steel Construction (2007).

[9] Hmburger R. and Whittaker A.: Design of Steel Structures for Blast - Related Progressive Col-lapse Resistance, Proc. of 2003 AISC and Steel Institute of New York Steel Building Symposium: Blast and Progressive Collapse Resistance, American Institute of Steel Construction (2004).

DOI: 10.1061/40700(2004)157