论文部分内容阅读
According to the Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB50011-2001), ten typical reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures, used as school classroom buildings, are designed with different seismic fortification intensities (SFIs) (SFI=6 to 8.5) and different seismic design categories (SDCs) (SDC=B and C). The collapse resistance of the frames with SDC=B and C in terms of collapse fragility curves are quantitatively evaluated and compared via incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). The results show that the collapse resistance of structures should be evaluated based on both the absolute seismic resistance and the corresponding design seismic intensity. For the frames with SFI from 6 to 7.5, because they have relatively low absolute seismic resistance, their collapse resistance is insufficient even when their corresponding SDCs are upgraded from B to C. Thus, further measures are needed to enhance these structures, and some suggestions are proposed.
According to the Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB 50011-2001), ten typical reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures, used as school classroom buildings, are designed with different seismic fortification intensities (SFIs) (SFI = 6 to 8.5) and different The results show that the SDC = B and C in terms of collapse fragility curves are quantitatively evaluated and derived via incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). For the frames with SFI from 6 to 7.5, because they have relatively low absolute seismic resistance, their collapse resistance is insufficient even when their corresponding SDCs are further from B to C. Thus, further measures are needed to enhance these structures, and some suggestions are proposed.