Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 932-948 (2010)
PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE OF STEEL-FRAMED
BUILDINGS: INFLUENCE OF MODELLING APPROACH
Hang Yu 1,*, Bassam A. Izzuddin 2,* and Xiao-Xiong Zha 3
1 PhD Candidate, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
2 Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
3 Professor, Department of Urban and Civil Engineering, Shenzhen Graduate School,
Harbin Institute of Technology, China
*(Corresponding author: E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. )
Received: 8 December 2009; Revised: 1 March 2010; Accepted: 2 March 2010
 View Article |
Export Citation:Plain Text | RIS | Endnote |
ABSTRACT
This paper compares the influence of several modelling approaches for progressive collapse assessment of steel-framed buildings, considering sudden column loss as a design scenario. A typical steel moment frame structure is modelled at various levels of structural idealization, including assembled beam models, grillage models and frame models with the reinforced concrete slab. Both peripheral and corner column loss scenarios are investigated, where the maximum dynamic response of the above floors is regarded as a key factor defining the structural robustness. Both nonlinear dynamic finite element analysis and a novel simplified dynamic assessment method are employed, where it is confirmed that the simplified approach has good accuracy considering various structural idealizations. The influence of the level of structural idealisation is investigated, where it is shown that grillage models using a simplified assembly procedure predict the response of a frame idealisation under sudden column loss quite well. On the other hand, the incorporation of the reinforced concrete floor slab can significantly affect the structural response to sudden column loss beyond the predictions of grillage models due to 2D slab effects. It is recommended that progressive collapse assessment of multi-storey buildings under sudden column loss is performed using the simplified dynamic assessment procedure, and that grillage models can be used as a conservative representation in the absence of detailed slab models.
KEYWORDS
Progressive collapse; modelling approach; simplified analysis method; column failure; steel frame building; pseudo-static analysis
REFERENCES
[1] GSA., “Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects”, The US General Services Administration, 2003.
[2] DoD., “Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse”, Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), 2005.
[3] ACI., “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05)”, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005.
[4] Gudmundsson, G.V. and Izzuddin, B.A., “The ‘Sudden Column Loss’ Idealisation for Disproportionate Collapse Assessment”, The Structural Engineer, 2010 (Accepted for publication).
[5] Peter Ruth, S.M., Kirk A. Marchand, P.E., and Eric B. Williamson, P.E., “Static Equivalency in Progressive Collapse Alternate Path Analysis: Reducing Conservatism While Retaining Structural Integrity”, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2006, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 349-364.
[6] Shalva Marjanishvili, P.E. and Elizabeth Agnew, “Comparison of Various Procedures for Progressive Collapse Analysis”, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp.365-374.
[7] Izzuddin, B.A., Vlassis, A.G., Elghazouli, A.Y. and Nethercot, D.A., “Progressive Collapse of Multi-Storey Buildings Due to Sudden Column Loss – Part I: Simplified Assessment Framework”, Engineering Structures, 2008, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp.1308-1318.
[8] Vlassis, A.G., Izzuddin, B.A., Elghazouli, A.Y. and Nethercot, D.A., “Progressive Collapse of Multi-Storey Buildings Due to Sudden Column Loss – Part II: Application”, Engineering Structures, 2008, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp.1424-1438.
[9] Kapil Khandelwal and Sherif EI-Tawil, “Collapse Behavior of Steel Special Moment Resisting Frame Connections”, Journal of Structural Engineering, 2007, Vol. 133, No. 5, pp.646-655.
[10] Kapil Khandelwal, Sherif EI-Tawil, Sashi K.Kunnath and Lew, H.S., “Macromodel-Based Simulation of Progressive Collapse: Steel Frame Structures”, Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, Vol. 134, No. 7, pp. 1070-1078.
[11] Fahim Sadek, Sherif EI-Tawil and Lew, H.S., “Robustness of Composite Floor Systems with Shear Connections: Modeling, Simulation, and Evaluation”, Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, Vol.134, No. 11, pp. 1717-1725.
[12] Department of Defense, “Unified Facilities Criteria, Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse”, UFC 4-023-03, Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
[13] Izzuddin, B.A. and Nethercot, D.A., “Design-Oriented Approaches for Progressive Collapse Assessment: Load-Factor vs Ductility-Centred Methods”, Structures Congress’09, Austin, Texas, 2009, Vol. 341, pp. 198-198.
[14] Izzuddin, B.A., “Mitigation of Progressive Collapse in Multi-Storey Buildings”, Journal of Advances in Structural Engineering, 2009, (Accepted for publication).
[15] Stylianidis, P.M., Nethercot D.A., Izzuddin, B.A. and Elghazouli, A.Y., “Progressive Collapse: Failure Criteria Used in Engineering Analysis”, Structures Congress’09, Austin, Texas, 2009, Vol. 341, pp. 200-200.
[16] Izzuddin, B.A., “Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Framed Structures”, PhD Thesis, Imperial College, University of London, 1991.
[17] Eurocode 3, “Design of steel structures - Part 1-8: Design of joints”, European Committee for Standardization, 2005.