2019Practice Periodical on Structural Design and ConstructionRequires access

Comparison of Column Removal Methods in Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Moment-Resisting Frames

Arash Naji

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

A building experiences progressive collapse when a primary structural element fails, resulting in the failure of adjoining structural elements, which in turn causes further structural failure. The final failure contains no proportionality to the primary failure. For initial damage, progressive collapse codes and regulations suggest the alternate load path method, which is a threat to independent procedure. However, considering blast loads in analysis is recommended by some researchers. This paper aims to compare various column removal procedures due to blast loads in progressive collapse analysis of reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames. First, the damaged column is identified by analyzing single structural components (columns) under various blast scenarios defined by the quantity of explosive and location of the blast center outside of the structure. To find the damaged columns, three local analyses, static, dynamic, and pressure impulse (P-I), were carried out. A global incremental dynamic analysis of the three-dimensional (3D) damaged structure is the second step of the analysis. This methodology is threat dependent. Therefore, the results are compared to the threat-independent method introduced in guidelines.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A building experiences progressive collapse when a primary structural element fails, resulting in the failure of adjoining structural elements, which in turn causes further structural failure. The final failure contains no proportionality to the primary failure. For initial damage, progressive collapse codes and regulations suggest the alternate load path method, which is a threat to independent procedure. However, considering blast loads in analysis is recommended by some researchers. This paper aims to compare various column removal procedures due to blast loads in progressive collapse analysis of reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames. First, the damaged column is identified by analyzing single structural components (columns) under various blast scenarios defined by the quantity of explosive and location of the blast center outside of the structure. To find the damaged columns, three local analyses, static, dynamic, and pressure impulse (P-I), were carried out. A global incremental dynamic analysis of the three-dimensional (3D) damaged structure is the second step of the analysis. This methodology is threat dependent. Therefore, the results are compared to the threat-independent method introduced in guidelines.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A building experiences progressive collapse when a primary structural element fails, resulting in the failure of adjoining structural elements, which in turn causes further structural failure. The final failure contains no proportionality to the primary failure. For initial damage, progressive collapse codes and regulations suggest the alternate load path method, which is a threat to independent procedure. However, considering blast loads in analysis is recommended by some researchers. This paper aims to compare various column removal procedures due to blast loads in progressive collapse analysis of reinforced concrete moment-resisting frames. First, the damaged column is identified by analyzing single structural components (columns) under various blast scenarios defined by the quantity of explosive and location of the blast center outside of the structure. To find the damaged columns, three local analyses, static, dynamic, and pressure impulse (P-I), were carried out. A global incremental dynamic analysis of the three-dimensional (3D) damaged structure is the second step of the analysis. This methodology is threat dependent. Therefore, the results are compared to the threat-independent method introduced in guidelines.

Key concepts: Progressive collapse, Structural engineering, Explosive material, Structural failure, Column (typography), Impulse (physics), Reinforced concrete, Moment (physics)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of Column Removal Methods in Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Moment-Resisting Frames — Research Paper | ScholarLens