Advanced Steel Construction

Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 64-85 (2011)



D.A. Nethercot *, P. Stylianidis, B.A. Izzuddin and A.Y. Elghazouli

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2BU, UK

*(Corresponding author: E-mail:  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. )




View Article   Export Citation: Plain Text | RIS | Endnote


Methods intended for use in the design of steel and composite building frames covering the provision of adequate robustness so as to guard against progressive collapse are in the process of moving from prescriptive to quantitative. An approach that recognises all the important complex physical phenomena, employs a realistic criterion of failure and is capable of being implemented at a variety of levels has been devised at Imperial College London. Recent further development of this method has streamlined the necessary analyses, thereby making it possible to conduct parametric studies that provide insights into the link between changes to the structure and quantitative measures of resistance to progressive collapse. This approach is used herein to examine a number of different arrangements, from which key features of behaviour are identified. It has therefore been possible to isolate those structural modifications with the greatest potential for improving robustness and, moreover, to associate quantitative measures of that improvement with each scheme.



Alternative load path, Column removal, Composite structures, Nonlinear static response, Parametric studies, Progressive collapse, Robustness, Simplified model


[1] Izzuddin, B.A., “Non-linear dynamic analysis of framed structures”, PhD Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College, University of London, 1991.

[2] Stylianidis, P., Nethercot, D.A., Izzuddin, B.A., Elghazouli, A.Y., “Progressive Collapse: Failure Criteria used in Engineering Analysis”, Structures Congress’09, Austin, Texas, 2009, pp. 1811-1820.

[3] Stylianidis, P., Nethercot, D.A., “Representation of Connection Behaviour for Progressive Collapse Response”, Int. J. Structural Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 3-4, pp. 340-360.

[4] Izzuddin, B.A., Vlassis, G.A., Elghazouli, A.Y., Nethercot, D.A., “Assessment of Progressive Collapse in Multi-storey Buildings”, Structures and Buildings, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, 2007, Vol. 160, pp. 197-205.

[5] Izzuddin, B.A., Vlassis, G.A., Elghazouli, A.Y., Nethercot, D.A., “Progressive Collapse of Multi-storey Buildings due to Sudden Column Loss – Part I: Simplified Assessment Framework”, Engineering Structures, 2008, Vol. 30, pp. 1308-1318.

[6] Vlassis, G.A., Izzuddin, B.A., Elghazouli, A.Y., Nethercot, D.A., “Progressive Collapse of Multi-storey Buildings due to Sudden Column Loss – Part II: Application”, Engineering Structures, 2008, Vol. 30, pp. 1424-1438.

[7] Del Savio, A.A., Nethercot, D.A., Vellasco, P.C.G.S., Andrade, S.A., and Martha, L.F., “Generalised Component-based Model for Beam-to-column Connections including Axial Versus Moment Interaction”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 65, pp. 1876-1895.

[8] EN 1993-1-8, Eurocode 3: “Design of Steel Structures – Part 1.8: Design of Joints”, Brussels: May 2005.

[9] EN 1994-1-1, Eurocode 4: “Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures – Part 1.1: General Rules for Buildings”, Brussels: 2004.

[10] Anderson, D., Aribert, J.M., Bode, H., Kronenburger, H.J., “Design Rotation Capacity of Composite Joints”, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 78, No. 6, pp. 25-29.

[11] General Services Administration, “Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects”, USA, 2003.