GRADUATE STUDENT: CUONG NGUYEN

MENTOR: Dr. RUPA PURASINGHE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AT LOS ANGELES

ABSTRACT
This study investigates the performance level of a nine-story steel frame building in an extreme event. A Linear Elastic Static Analysis Procedure based on the GSA (General Service Administration) guidelines is used as a preliminary study to determine the potential for progressive collapse of this building. The building consists of several moment resisting frames and gravity frames. A column at the first floor is removed to simulate an effect of an extreme event and the remaining structure is analyzed using the ETABS 3D structural simulation software. The structure is analyzed as per the GSA guidelines for gravity loads only. Then the structure is checked for the Demand-Capacity Ratios as per GSA and AISC provisions. It is found that the building is safe when a column from a SMF is removed but has an unsatisfactory result when the column removed is part of a gravity system.

RESULTS
According to GSAs guidelines, buildings shall be analyzed for the loss of: - A column for one floor above grade located at or near the middle of the long side of the building (see Figures 1 and 3). - A column for one floor above grade located at the corner of the building (see Figures 2). - A column for one floor above grade located at or near the middle of the short side of the building

BACKGROUND
* As defined in GSA: Progressive collapse is a situation where local failure of a primary structural component leads to the collapse of adjoining members which, in turn, leads to additional collapse. Hence, the total damage is disproportionate to the original cause. * Only a failure of a member or a relatively small portion of structures can lead to catastrophic consequences. DEFORMED SHAPE ANALYSIS RESULT

FIGURE 1: THE BUILDING WITH A COLUMN REMOVED AT THE LONG SIDE

(COLUMN IS PART OF A MOMENT FRAME)

The Ronan Point Building There are two ways to protect buildings:

The Murrah Federal Office Building DEFORMED SHAPE ANALYSIS RESULT

FIGURE 2: THE BUILDING WITH A COLUMN REMOVED AT A CORNER

(COLUMN IS PART OF A MOMENT FRAME)

1. We can reduce the possibility of happening of abnormal loads by keeping buildings under constant surveillance. 2. We can design structures to withstand those kinds of loads. The structures should be designed in such a way that even at the event of an abnormal loading, progressive collapse will not occur or at least, the potential for progressive collapse is low.

OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this research are to: - Determine the potential for progressive collapse of the building. - Recommend solutions to reduce or prevent progressive collapse if necessary. DEFORMED SHAPE ANALYSIS RESULT

FIGURE 3: THE BUILDING WITH A COLUMN REMOVED AT THE LONG SIDE

(COLUMN IS PART OF A GRAVITY FRAME)

METHODS
The method used in this research is a simplified analysis approach called the Linear Procedure developed by the GSA. This method is limited to analysis of low-to-medium-rise facilities (less than 10 stories). The method implies the use of either a static or dynamic linear-elastic finite element analysis. We use the same structural model created previously to study seismic performance of this building. The Linear Procedure, as stipulated in the GSA guidelines, is not intended for and not capable of predicting in details how the structure is going to response to the loss of a primary member such as a girder or a column or a bearing wall. However, it does help determine the potential for progressive collapse based on the Demand-Capacity Ratios (DCR) of structural members. In fact, a dynamic loading and a nonlinear response are inherent in progressive collapse, as it happens in a very short time and the failed members undergo nonlinear deformation. Therefore to understand more the performance of structures in progressive collapse, Nonlinear Procedures, albeit much more sophisticated, are better choices. A Nonlinear Procedure will be used in the next phase of this research.

CONCLUSIONS
For this building: 1. When a column is removed from a moment frame the structure is safe (DCR=0.7<1). 2. When a column is removed from a gravity frame the structure has a high potential for progressive (DCR=2.8>1). In this case, the use of the continuous beam in the moment frame at the 1st floor along the parameter of the building can be an effective solution to prevent progressive collapse.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Program area: Research-Education Interface Task number: 5.3 Principal investigator and/or faculty advisor: Dr. RUPA PURASINGHE Acknowledgements: Special thanks are due to my mentors, Dr.RUPA PURASINGHE and Engineer Fil Apanay. Also I would like to thank group members Alex Vopyan, Edgar Plazola, and Marco Ibarra who created the building model for seismic analysis.

MULTIDISCIPLINARY CENTER FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH