Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimation of seismic response parameters and capacity of irregular tunnel-form buildings

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Insufficient information about the seismic performance of tunnel-form buildings and limited relevant design codes and standards are the main barriers towards application of these systems in seismically active areas. Vertical and horizontal irregularity of typical tunnel-form buildings is another cumbersome challenge restricting the application of these systems. To address these issues, this study aims to evaluate the seismic behaviour of tunnel-form buildings with horizontal irregularity and develop appropriate design methodologies. Based on the results of 3, 5, 7 and 10-storey buildings, new response modification factors are proposed as a function of seismic demand and expected performance level. Fragility curves are also derived for various levels of intensity, and simple equations are introduced to estimate uncoupled frequency ratios. The results, in general, demonstrate the flexible torsional behaviour of irregular tunnel-form structures and their adequate seismic resistance capacity. The buildings studied herein, managed to satisfy the immediate occupancy performance requirements under design-basis earthquake, which implies that the plan regularity requirement for tunnel-form buildings in seismic codes may be too conservative. Moreover, it is concluded that using response modification factor equal to 5 can generally result in sufficient stability and adequate performance level under both design basis and maximum considered earthquake scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACI Committee 318 (2014) Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14) and commentary. American Concrete Institute

  • Allouzi R, Alkloub A (2017) New nonlinear dynamic response model of squat/slender flanged/non-flanged reinforced concrete walls. Struct Concrete 19:582–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang AHS, Tang WH (2007) Probability concepts in engineering: emphasis on applications to civil and environmental engineering, vol 1, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Annigeri S, Mittal AK (1996) Uncoupled frequency ratio in asymmetric buildings. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 25:871–881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASCE (2014) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI41-13, American Society of Civil Engineers

  • ASCE (2016) Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7-16, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia

  • ATC (1995) Structural response modification factors. ATC-19 Report, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA

  • ATC (1996) Seismic evaluation of concrete buildings, vol 1. ATC-40, Applied Technology Council, Redwood, CA

  • Balkaya C, Kalkan E (2003a) Estimation of fundamental periods of shear-wall dominant building structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 32(7):985–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balkaya C, Kalkan E (2003b) Seismic design parameters for shear-wall dominant building structures. In: 14th national congress on Earthquake Engineering, Mexico

  • Balkaya C, Kalkan E (2004a) Seismic vulnerability, behavior and design of tunnel form building structures. Eng Struct 26(14):2081–2099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balkaya C, Kalkan E (2004b) Relevance of R-factor and fundamental period for seismic design of tunnel-form building. In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada

  • Balkaya C, Yuksel SB, Derinoz O (2012) Soil–structure interaction effects on the fundamental periods of the shear-wall dominant buildings. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 21(6):416–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beheshti-Aval SB, Mohsenian V, Sadegh-Kouhestani H (2018) Seismic performance-based assessment of tunnel form buildings subjected to near- and far-fault ground motions. Asian J Civ Eng 19(1):79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berahman F, Behnamfar F (2007) Seismic fragility curves for un anchored on-grade steel storage tanks: Bayesian approach. J Earthq Eng 11:166–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BHRCP (2007) Approved technologies indirection of sub-note 2-6, paragraph “D”, Note 6. In: A step in direction of building industrialization, 1st edn. Building and Housing Research Center Press, pp 21 and 22

  • CEN (Comité Européen de Normalization) (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance-part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. EN 1998-1-1, Brussels

  • Cimellaro GP, Reinhorn AM, Bruneau M, Rutenberg A (2006) Multi-dimensional fragility of structures: formulation and evaluation. Technical Report MCEER-06-0002

  • Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI) (2015) Structural and earthquake engineering software, ETABS, extended three dimensional analysis of building systems nonlinear Version 15.2.2, Berkeley, CA, USA

  • Computers and Structures Inc. (CSI) (2016) Structural and earthquake engineering software, PERFORM-3D nonlinear analysis and performance assessment for 3D structures, Version 6.0.0, Berkeley, CA, USA

  • Fajfar P (2000) A nonlinear analysis method for performance based seismic design. Earthq Spectra 16(3):573–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fanaie N, AfsarDizaj E (2014) Response modification factor of the frames braced with reduced yielding segment BRB. Struct Eng Mech 50(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghobarah A (2004) On drift limits associated with different damage levels. International Workshop on Performance-based Seismic Design Concepts and Implementation, Bled, Slovenia

  • Goel RK, Chopra AK (1998) Period formulas for concrete shear wall buildings. J Struct Eng 124(4):426–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajirasouliha I, Pilakoutas K, Mohammadi RK (2016) Effects of uncertainties on seismic behaviour of optimum designed braced steel frames. Steel Compos Struct 20(2):317–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock J, Watson-Lamprey J, Abrahamson NA, Bommer JJ, Markatis A, McCoy E, Mendis R (2006) An improved method of matching response spectra of recorded earthquake ground motion using wavelets. J Earthq Eng 10:67–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalkan E, Yuksel SB (2007) Pros and cons of multi story RC tunnel-form (box-type) buildings. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 17(3):601–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalvati AH, Hosseini M (2008) A new methodology to evaluate the Seismic risk of electrical power substations, 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China, 12–17 October

  • Kinali K (2007) Seismic fragility assessment of steel frames in the central and eastern United States. A Ph.D. Thesis, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology

  • Klasanovic I, Kraus I, Hadzima-Nyarko Ma (2014) Dynamic properties of multistory reinforced concrete tunnel-form building—a case study in Osijek, Croatia. Forecast Engineering: Global Climate change and the challenge for built environment, Weimar, Germany

  • Lee L, Chang K, Chun Y (2000) Experimental formula for the fundamental period of RC building with shear wall dominant systems. Struct Des Tall Build 9(4):295–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lia SP, Biggs JM (1980) Inelastic response spectra for seismic building design. J Struct Div (ASCE) 106(ST6):1295–1310

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda E (1991) Seismic evaluation & upgrading of existing buildings. A Ph.D. Thesis, University of California @ Berkeley

  • Mohsenian V, Mortezaei A (2018a) Seismic reliability evaluation of tunnel form (box-type) RC structures under the accidental torsion. Struct Concrete 19:1927–1938. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201700276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohsenian V, Mortezaei A (2018b) Effect of steel coupling beam on the seismic reliability and R-factor of box-type buildings. Struct Build

  • Mwafy AM, Elnashai AS (2002) Calibration of force reduction factors of RC buildings. J Earthq Eng 6(2):239–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielson BG (2005) Analytical fragility curves for highway bridges in moderate seismic zones. A Ph.D. Thesis, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology

  • Paulay T, Binney JR (1974) Diagonally reinforced coupling beams of shear walls. Shear in reinforced concrete. ACI Spec Publ 42:579–598

    Google Scholar 

  • PEER Ground Motion Database, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. http://peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database

  • Permanent Committee for Revising the Standard 2800, Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings, 4th edn. Building and Housing Research Center, 2014, Tehran, Iran

  • Shome N, Cornell CA (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures. Reliability of Marine Structures Report No: RMS-35, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University

  • Tavafoghi A, Eshghi S (2008) Seismic behavior of tunnel form concrete building structures. In: 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 12–17 October, Beijing, China

  • Tavafoghi A, Eshghi S (2011) Evaluation of behavior factor of tunnel-form concrete building structures using Applied Technology Council 63 methodology. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 22(8):615–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tso WK, Wong CM (1995) Eurocode8 seismic torsional provision evaluation. Eur Earthq Eng 9(1):23–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 31(3):491–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker A, Hart G, Rojahn C (1999) Seismic response modification factors. J Struct Eng 125:438–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuksel SB, Kalkan E (2007) Behavior of tunnel form buildings under quasi-static cyclic lateral loading. Struct Eng Mech 27(1):99–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao ZZ, Kwan AKH, He XG (2004) Nonlinear finite element analysis of deep reinforced concrete coupling beams. Eng Struct 26(1):13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran

    Vahid Mohsenian & Ali Nikkhoo

  2. Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

    Iman Hajirasouliha

Authors
  1. Vahid Mohsenian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Nikkhoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Iman Hajirasouliha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Nikkhoo.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohsenian, V., Nikkhoo, A. & Hajirasouliha, I. Estimation of seismic response parameters and capacity of irregular tunnel-form buildings. Bull Earthquake Eng 17, 5217–5239 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00679-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00679-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation