A comparative research of the Piloti-type RC structure and non-Piloti-type RC structure under the nonlinear pushover analysis

  • Mo Shi School of Architecture, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Korea; HaXell Elevator Co., Ltd., Shanghai 201801, China
  • Minwoo Choi School of Architecture, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Korea
  • Yeol Choi School of Architecture, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Korea
Article ID: 1834
69 Views
Keywords: Piloti-type RC structure; nonlinear pushover analysis; seismic damage; structural simulation; SAP 2000

Abstract

With the ongoing acceleration of the urbanization process, a large portion of the population is concentrated in urban areas, leading to significant issues with living space. The increasing number of vehicles necessitates more parking space, and the phenomenon of urbanization requires new building structures that can accommodate this need. As a result, there has been a rise in Piloti-type RC (reinforced concrete) structures, particularly in the Republic of Korea. These structures utilize their open ground floors for various purposes such as parking, storage, and social spaces, adding functional diversity to buildings and receiving positive reviews for these advantages. However, the open ground floor can potentially create security vulnerabilities if not adequately secured or monitored. This was evident during the Pohang earthquake in 2017 when numerous Piloti-type RC structures sustained more severe damage than conventional RC structures. Therefore, numerous previous researchers have emphasized the importance of ensuring structural safety in Piloti-type RC structures. In this research, the structural designs under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport of the Republic of Korea were used as a basis for simulation in SAP 2000. The focus was on comparing the structural performance of a typical Piloti-type RC structure with and without the Piloti-type design using nonlinear pushover analysis. The findings of this research are expected to provide a clear understanding of the differences between Piloti-type RC structures and non-Piloti-type RC structures. Additionally, based on the specific characteristics of Piloti-type RC structural vulnerabilities identified through nonlinear pushover analysis, this research is anticipated to serve as a valuable reference for reinforcing existing Piloti-type RC structures to better resist seismic activities, thereby reducing human casualties and economic damage resulting from seismic events.

References

[1]Shin J, Choi I, Kim J. Rapid decision-making tool of Piloti-type RC building structure for seismic performance evaluation and retrofit strategy using multi-dimensional structural parameter surfaces. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2021; 151: 106978.

[2]Honda T, Omata T, Oda Y, et al. A study on characteristics of the tsunami force acting on members of piloti-type structures. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers Ser B3 (Ocean Engineering). 2021; 73(2): 96–101.

[3]Hwang KR, Lee HS. Seismic damage to RC low-rise building structures having irregularities at the ground story during the 15 November 2017 Pohang, Korea, Earthquake. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. 2018; 22(3): 103–111.

[4]Kim T, Park JH, Yu E. Seismic fragility of low-rise piloti buildings based on 2017 Pohang earthquake damage. Journal of Building Engineering. 2023; 76: 107032.

[5]Kang S, Kim B, Bae S, et al. Earthquake-induced ground deformations in the low-seismicity region: A case of the 2017 M5. 4 Pohang, South Korea, earthquake. Earthquake Spectra. 2019; 35(3): 1235–1260.

[6]Dang‐Vu H, Lee DH, Shin J, et al. Influence of shear‐axial force interaction on the seismic performance of a piloti building subjected to the 2017 earthquake in Pohang Korea. Structural Concrete. 2020; 21(1): 220–234.

[7]Kim T, Chu Y, Kim SR, et al. Seismic behavior of domestic piloti-type buildings damaged by 2017 Pohang earthquake. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea. 2018; 22(3): 161–168.

[8]Kim B, Ji Y, Kim M, et al. Building damage caused by the 2017 M5. 4 Pohang, South Korea, earthquake, and effects of ground conditions. Journal of earthquake engineering. 2022; 26(6): 3054–3072.

[9]Shi M, Xu X, Choi Y. Nonlinear Pushover Analysis of the Influences on RC Footing for the External Elevator Well. Open Journal of Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(7): 1823–1842.

[10]Bhandari M, Bharti SD, Shrimali MK, et al. Assessment of proposed lateral load patterns in pushover analysis for base-isolated frames. Engineering Structures. 2018; 175: 531–548.

[11]Shayanfar MA, Ashoory M, Bakhshpoori T, et al. Optimization of modal load pattern for pushover analysis of building structures. Structural Engineering and Mechanics. 2013; 47(1): 119–129.

[12]Jalilkhani M, Ghasemi SH, Danesh M. (2020). A multi-mode adaptive pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of RC moment-resisting frames. Engineering Structures, 213, 110528.

[13]Dorri F, Ghasemi H, Nowak A. Developing a lateral load pattern for pushover analysis of EBF system. Reliability Engineering and Resilience. 2019; 1(1): 42–54.

[14]Pierre AJ, Hidayat I. Seismic performance of reinforced concrete structures with pushover analysis. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020; 426(1): 012045.

[15]Faal HN, Poursha M. Applicability of the N2, extended N2 and modal pushover analysis methods for the seismic evaluation of base-isolated building frames with lead rubber bearings (LRBs). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 2017; 98: 84–100.

[16]Ismaeil M. Seismic capacity assessment of existing RC building by using pushover analysis. Civil Engineering Journal. 2018; 4(9): 2034–2043.

[17]Shamivand A, Akbari J, Allahyari P. An analytical formulation to extract the capacity curve of steel structures. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering. 2022; 23(7): 1183–1195.

[18]Ismaeil M, Sobaih M, Akl A. Seismic capacity assessment of existing RC buildings in the Sudan by using pushover analysis. Open Journal of Civil Engineering. 2015; 5(2): 154–174.

[19]Harris J, Speicher M. Assessment of performance-based seismic design methods in ASCE 41 for new steel buildings: Special moment frames. Earthquake Spectra. 2018; 34(3): 977–999.

[20]Sujayakumar DS, Venkatesh SV, Mithanthaya IR. The Behaviour of Hinges in Buildings Over Various Monitored Displacement-Pushover Analysis. International Journal of Emerging Engineering and Technology. 2022; 1(2): 13–18.

[21]Han SW, Lee CS, Paz Zambrana MA, et al. Calibration factor for ASCE 41–17 modeling parameters for stocky rectangular RC columns. Applied Sciences. 2019; 9(23): 5193.

[22]Choi KK, Kim JC. Seismic Capacity of RC Structures with Non-seismic Details and Standard Details for Structural Retrofit. Magazine of the Korea Concrete Institute. 2015; 27(6): 31–35.

[23]Al Mamuna A, Saatcioglu M. Analytical modeling of moderately ductile RC frame structures for seismic performance evaluation using PERFORM-3D. Earthquake Spectra. 2019; 35(2): 635–652.

[24]Masrilayanti M, Hasibuan YA, Kurniawan R, et al. Performance evaluation of high-rise apartment building using pushover analysis. In: E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences; 2023. Volume 429. p. 05024.

[25]Shah MA, Patel NK. Pushover Analysis: Recent State of Art. In: Sustainable Building Materials and Construction: Select Proceedings of ICSBMC 2021. Springer Nature; 2022. pp. 241–246.

[26]Hakim RA. Seismic assessment of RC building using pushover analysis. International journal of engineering science and technology. 2013; 1: 72–77.

[27]Eslami A, Ronagh HR. Effect of elaborate plastic hinge definition on the pushover analysis of reinforced concrete buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings. 2014; 23(4): 254–271.

[28]Damcı E, Öztorun NK, Çelik T. A plastic hinge method for static pushover analysis of 3D frame structures. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering. 2024; 25(4): 1–22.

[29]Peng WJ, Li ZA, Tao MX. Evaluation and story drift ratio limits of structures with separated gravity-and lateral-load-resisting systems using pushover analysis. Journal of Building Engineering. 2023; 76: 107223.

[30]Li J, Shan X, Deng Q. Study on the Impact of Design Factors of Piloti Forms on the Thermal Environment in Residential Quarters. Buildings. 2024; 14(5): 1303.

[31]Lee JE, Yoon YH. Influences of the residential environment on the apartment remodeling: involving the expansion of households and dwelling area. LHI Journal of Land, Housing, and Urban Affairs. 2011; 2(3): 259–268.

[32]Xi TY, Ding JH, Jin H. Study on the Influence of Piloti Arrangement on Outdoor Wind Environment in Residential Blocks in Subtropical Climate Zones. Applied Mechanics and Materials. 2017; 858: 227–233.

[33]Xia H, Sun Q, Wang S. Influence of strain rate effect on energy absorption characteristics of bio-inspired honeycomb column thin-walled structure under impact loading. Case Studies in Construction Materials. 2023; 18: e01761.

[34]Xia H, Sun Q, Wang S. FE model to define impacting resistance behavior of RC beams protected by AlSi10Mg buffer interlayer. In: Structures. Elsevier; 2023. Volume 58. p. 105329.

[35]Xia H, Fang X, Yu Q, et al. The impact protection behavior of UHPC composite structure on RC columns. Case Studies in Construction Materials. 2024; 21: e03866.

Published
2024-12-11
How to Cite
Shi, M., Choi, M., & Choi, Y. (2024). A comparative research of the Piloti-type RC structure and non-Piloti-type RC structure under the nonlinear pushover analysis. Building Engineering, 3(1), 1834. https://doi.org/10.59400/be1834
Section
Article