1.

INTRODUCTION

Robustness of a building is the characteristic which defines the structures

strength in terms of integrity and redundancy. This characteristic of a structure makes it
resistant to progressive collapse. Progressive collapse is defined as the situation where
local failure of primary structural component(s) leads to the collapse of adjoining
members, which in turn leads to additional collapse. Hence, the extent of total damage is
disproportionate to the initial damage. Another way of describing progressive collapse is
that it is a chain reaction or propagation of failures following damage to a relatively small
portion of a structure. However, the term disproportionate collapse is used when the
collapse is out of proportion to the event that triggers it. Basically, a disproportionate
collapse is always a progressive collapse but a progressive collapse is not always a
disproportionate one.
This phenomenon was first realized after the progressive as well as disproportionate
collapse of the Ronan Point apartment tower in England in 1968. The building had load
bearing walls without any structural frame. A small explosion led to the failure of a load
bearing wall which resulted in progressive collapse. WTC is another important example
of progressive collapse. Once the columns were destroyed by the plane crash, the
alternative load paths were formed through the trusses. The columns were probably near,
but not over, their ultimate load capacity. However, the fires proved fatal as the structural
steel began to lose its strength at high temperature and after sometime, a complete
structural collapse occurred.

2.IMPORTANT PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE CASES

2.1RONAN POINT APARTMENT BUILDING

The first eminent progressive collapse of a building that drew attention of engineers
and researchers was the partial collapse of the Ronan Point apartment building in England.
Ronan Point building was a high rise 22-storey residential building. It had a structure that
consisted of load bearing precast concrete walls supporting precast flat plate floor system.
The Ronan Point apartment building which was partially collapsed in May 1968 due to a gas
explosion in the corner flat on the 18th floor. This gas explosion pushed forward the exterior
bearing wall which caused the collapse of the floors above the 18 th floor. The collapse of
floors 19-22 over the 18thfloor triggered chain collapse of below floors down to ground.

Fig 2.1:Ronan Point Apartment

2

2.2 ALFRED P.MURRAH BUILDING

The progressive collapse of the Alfred P.Murrah building was the eminent event
that prompted to the second wave of interest on the progressive collapse in the civil
engineering profession. TheAlfred P.Murrah building was an office facility that belonged to
the U.S government which was constructed in Oklahama city during the 1970s. The
building had a typical rectangular plan and consisted of a 9 storey reinforced concrete
ordinary frame structure with one way floor slab system. The lateral loads on the building
were resisted by interior shear walls that encompassed the lift and stairs. The particular
feature of the Alfred P.Murrah buildings structure was the transfer girder that was located
at the third level in the exterior front face of the building. In1995 a truck bombing attack at
the front side of the building caused local collapse of one of the exterior columns at the
first floor of that building which triggered the progressive collapse.

Fig 2.2:Alfred P.Murrah Building

2.3 WORLD TRADE CENTER

The interest on the progressive collapse issue reached its zenith after the complete
progressive collapse of World Trade Center (WTC) towers. The structure of the buildings
consisted of closely spaced perimeter columns and widely spaced interior columns. In
2001, two planes attacked the main WTC towers in which the first plane hit the North
tower between the 94th and 98th floors and second plane hit the south tower between the 78 th
and 84th floors. The planes crushing into the top part of the towers resulted in sever
damages in the towers and causes local failures. It caused heavy debris loads on the
underneath floors that triggered the dominion failure that lead to the complete progressive
collapse of the towers.

Fig 2.3:World Trade Center Towers

3.Mechanism of Progressive Collapse

Any collapse in a way could be regarded as progressive collapse, but it should be of

special concern if the collapse is disproportionate to its original cause. The
disproportionality refers to the situation in which failure of one member causes a major
collapse of larger magnitude compared to initial event. It is similar to fall of cycles in a
cycle stand when the first one is pushed. This can also be compared with domino effect.
Based on different characteristic features, progressive collapse can be categorized in six
different types as described below .

1)

Pancake-type collapse: failure sequence followed in this type of collapse is;

initiating event, separation of structural components, release of potential energy and the
occurrence of impact forces. Depending on the size of the falling components, the potential
energy of falling components can far exceed the strain energy stored in the structure. The
collapse of WTC towers of New York in Sept. 2001 is example of this type of collapse
where collapse is said to be initiated by weakening of the floor joists due to fire that
resulted from the aircraft impact. The loss of structural member was limited to the few
stories but it progressively extended throughout the height of tower. The potential energy
of upper part of collapsed members converted in to kinetic energy which turned in to
impact force which was far beyond the resisting capacity of the lower floors and ultimately
resulted in to total collapse of the tower.
2)

Zipper-type collapse: this type of collapse is initiated by rupture of one cable and

propagating by overloading & rupture of adjacent cables. Example of this type of collapse
is collapse of original Tacoma Narrows Bridge. After the first hangers of that suspension
bridge snapped due to wind induced vibrations of the bridge girder, the entire girder peeled
off and fell. Impact force does not typically occur in this type of collapse, which is the case
in pancake-type collapse.

3)

Domino-type collapse: mechanism behind this type of collapse is, initial

overturning of one element, fall off that element in angular rigid-body motion around a
bottom edge,

transformation of potential energy into kinetic energy, lateral impact of the upper edge of
that
element on the side face of an adjacent element where the horizontal pushing force
transmitted by that impact is of both static and dynamic origin because of the tilting and
the motion of the impacting element, overturning of the adjacent element due to the
horizontal loading from the impacting element and collapse progression in the overturning
direction. This type of failure can occur in row of temporary scaffolding towers. In
overhead transmission line towers also, this type of collapse is common.
4)

Section-type collapse: when a member under bending moment or axial tension is

cut, the internal forces transmitted by that part are redistributed in to the remaining cross
section. The corresponding increase in stress at some locations can cause the rupture of
further cross sectional parts, and, in the same manner, a failure progression throughout the
entire cross section. This type of failure can be termed as fast fracture instead of
progressive failure.
5)

Instability-type collapse: instability of structure is characterized by small

imperfection which leads to large deformations or collapse. For example, the failure of a
bracing element due to some small triggering event can make a system unstable and result
in collapse. Another example is failure of a plate stiffener leading to local instability and
failure of the affected plate, and possibly to global collapse. Here propagating
destabilization occurs when the failure of destabilized elements leads to the failure of
stabilizing elements.
6)

Mixed-type collapse: this type of collapse can be assigned to the structure where one

or more possible failure reasons fall in to different category of progressive collapse. For
example, the partial collapse of the Murrah Federal Building (Oklahoma City) seems to
have involved features of both a pancake-type and domino-type scenario. The horizontal
forces, induced by an initial failure, that lead to overturning of other elements. This
6

horizontal tensile force could have been induced by falling components and transmitted to
other elements through continuous reinforcing bars. Another example is collapse of cablestayed bridges which fall in to category of zipper-type and instability-type failure. The
girders and towers of cable-stayed bridges are in compression. They are braced by the stay
cables. Thus, the loss of one or few cables can not only lead to unzipping, but also to
instability failure.

4.DESIGN GUIDE LINES

4.1 GENERAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES (GSA)

The purpose of these Guidelines is to:
Assist in the reduction of the potential for progressive collapse in new Federal Office
Buildings
Assist in the assessment of the potential for progressive collapse in existing
Federal Office Buildings
Assist in the development of potential upgrades to facilities if required
To meet this purpose, these Guidelines provide a threat independent methodology for
minimizing the potential for progressive collapse in the design of new and upgraded
buildings, and for assessing the potential for progressive collapse in existing buildings. It
should be noted that these Guidelines are not an explicit part of a blast design or blast
analysis, and the resulting design or analysis findings cannot be substituted for addressing
blast design or blast analysis requirements. The requirements contained herein are an
independent set of requirements for meeting the provisions of Interagency Security
Committee (ISC) Security Criteria regarding progressive collapse. The procedures presented
herein are required for the treatment of progressive collapse for U.S. General Services
Administration (GSA) facilities.
The approach described below utilizes a flow-chart methodology to determine if the facility
under consideration might be exempt from detailed consideration for progressive collapse, as
illustrated in Figure 1.1. In other words, a series of questions must be answered that identify
whether or not further progressive collapse considerations are required. This process is based
on ascertaining certain critical documentation to ensure that resources are spent wisely
regarding this issue. Critical documentation consists of identifying all of the following
information:
Building occupancy
Building category (e.g., reinforced concrete building, steel frame building, etc.)
Number of stories
Seismic zone

 Detailed description of local structural attributes [discrete beam-to-beam continuity,

connection redundancy, and connection resilience]
Description of significant global structural attributes [single point failure mechanism(s),
structural irregularities, etc.]
4.1.1 REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
All newly constructed facilities shall be designed with the intent of reducing the
potential for progressive collapse as a result of an abnormal loading event, regardless of the
required level of protection. The process presented in these Guidelines consists of an
analysis/redesign approach. This method is intended to enhance the probability that if
localized damage occurs as the result of an abnormal loading event, the structure will not
progressively collapse or be damaged to an extent disproportionate to the original cause of
the damage.
4.1.2 Design Guidance
Structural design guidelines is provided for consideration during the initial structural
design phase and prior to performing the progressive collapse analysis to minimize the
impact on the buildings final design. These Guidelines should act as a supplement to the
Interagency Security Committee (ISC) Security Design Criteria for New Federal Office
Buildings and Major Modernization Projects, which states that mitigation of progressive
collapse, be addressed in the design of new structures.
It is recommended that the following structural characteristics be considered in the initial
phases of structural design. The incorporation of these features will provide for a much more
robust structure and increase the probability of achieving a low potential for progressive
collapse when performing the analysis procedure.
Redundancy - The use of redundant lateral and vertical force resisting systems are highly
encouraged when considering progressive collapse. Redundancy tends to promote an overall
more robust structure and helps to ensure that alternate load paths are available in the case of
a structural element(s) failure. Additionally, redundancy generally provides multiple
locations for yielding to occur, which increases the probability that damage may be
constrained.

The use of detailing to provide structural continuity and ductility - It is critical that the
primary structural elements (i.e., girders and beams) be capable of spanning two full spans
(i.e., two full bays). This requires both beam-to-beam structural continuity across the
removed column, as well as the ability of both primary and secondary elements to deform
flexurally well beyond the elastic limit without experiencing structural collapse. Hence,
correct detailing of connections shall be required in the design to ensure discrete beam-tobeam continuity across a column, and to ensure connection redundancy and resilience. For
concrete structures, configuring connection reinforcing steel in structural elements (i.e.,
girder, beams and columns) such that the concrete material can behave in a ductile manner is
critical. Having the capability of achieving a ductile response is imperative when
considering an extreme redistribution of loading such as that encountered for the case of a
structural element(s) failure.
Capacity for resisting load reversals - It is recommended that both the primary and
secondary structural elements be designed such that these components are capable of
resisting load reversals for the case of a structural element(s) failure.
An example illustrating the importance of having the capability to resist load reversals
follows. Consider a reinforced concrete building designed for gravity loads only (i.e., dead
and live loads). It is possible that many of the structural members will not be able to resist
load reversals. While the columns may contain reinforcement in all faces and be capable of
exhibiting substantial capacity in all directions, the horizontal structural components (i.e.,
beams, slabs, etc.) may only contain reinforcement needed for resisting the downward
loading caused by gravity.Along the length of the beam, negative reinforcing steel (top steel)
is provided in areas where negative moments are induced by the downward loading.
Likewise, positive reinforcing steel (bottom steel) is provided in areas where positive
moments are induced by the downward loading. ACI 318 includes a provision for structural
integrity reinforcement that requires some top and bottom reinforcement to be continuous
for beams such as those shown in Figure 4.2 The amount of reinforcement that ACI 318
requires to be continuous may not be sufficient to prevent progressive collapse for
instantaneous removal of a column. It is not likely that the structural configuration illustrated
in Figure 4.1 will be capable of effectively redistributing loads when a primary support
column is removed, as shown in Figure 4.2. Not only does the unsupported span length
double, but the loss in support induces forces into the beam that were not considered in the
original design. Specifically, the region of the beam designed for resisting negative moment
10

forces is suddenly subjected to a positive moment and a substantial increase in vertical load.
Due to the reinforcement configuration, the beam has very little resistance regarding the
redistributed loading and will likely fail in a non-ductile manner, which could potentially
lead to a propagation of additional structural failures.

Fig 4.1: A sketch depicting the reinforcement scheme for a beam designed for gravity loads

11

Fig 4.2: Response of the beam shown in Figure 5.1 after the loss of primary column support,
shows the inability to protect against progressive collapse. Capacity for resisting shear
failure - It is essential that the primary structural elements maintain sufficient strength and
ductility under an abnormal loading event to preclude a shear failure such as in the case of a
structural element(s) failure. When the shear capacity is reached before the flexural capacity,
the possibility of a sudden, non-ductile failure of the element exists which could potentially
lead to a progressive collapse of the structure.
4.1.3Analysis consideration and loading criteria
The following analysis considerations shall be used in the assessment for progressive
collapse for typical structural configurations.
Typical Structural Configurations.
Facilities that have a relatively simple layout with no atypical structural configurations shall
use the following analysis scenarios:
Framed or Flat Plate Structures
1.Exterior Considerations
The following exterior analysis cases shall be considered in the procedure
(a)Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1story)
located at or near the middle of the short side of the building.
(b) Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1 story)
12

located at or near the middle of the long side of the building.

(c) Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1 story)
located at the corner of the building.
2.Interior Considerations
Facilities that have underground parking and/or uncontrolled public ground floor areas shall
use the following interior analysis case(s)
(a) Analyze for the instantaneous loss of 1 column that extends from the floor of the
underground parking area or uncontrolled public ground floor area to the next floor
(1 story). The column considered should be interior to the column lines.

4.1.5Analysis criteria
Structural collapse resulting from the instantaneous removal of a primary vertical
support shall be limited. Typically, the allowable collapse area for a building will be based
on the structural bay size. However, to account for structural configurations that have
abnormally large structural bay sizes, the collapsed region will also be limited to a
reasonably sized area. The allowable extent of collapse for the instantaneous removal of a
primary vertical support member along the exterior and within the interior of a building is
defined as follows.
Exterior Considerations
The maximum allowable extents of collapse resulting from the instantaneous removal of an
exterior primary vertical support member one floor above grade shall be confined to:
the structural bays directly associated with the instantaneously removed vertical member in
the floor level directly above the instantaneously removed vertical member.
or
. 1,800 ft2 at the floor level directly above the instantaneously removed vertical member

whichever is the smaller area

Interior Considerations

13

The allowable extents of collapse resulting from the instantaneous removal of an interior
primary vertical support member in an uncontrolled ground floor area and/or an underground
parking area for one floor level shall be confined to:
1. the structural bays directly associated with the instantaneously removed vertical member
or
2. 3,600 ft 2 at the floor level directly above the instantaneously removed vertical member
whichever is the smaller area. If there is no uncontrolled ground floor area and/or an
underground parking area present in the facility under evaluation, the internal consideration
is not required

14

4.1.6Acceptance criteria
An examination of the linear elastic analysis results shall be performed to identify the
magnitudes and distribution of potential demands on both the primary and secondary
structural elements for quantifying potential collapse areas. The magnitude and distribution
of these demands will be indicated by Demand-Capacity Ratios (DCR). These values and
approaches are based, in part, on the methodology presented in the following references:
NEHRP Commentary on the Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings
(FEMA 274). Issued by Federal Emergency Management Agency, October 1997.
Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings (FEMA 356).
Issued by Federal Emergency Management Agency, November 2000.
Interim Antiterrorism/Force Protection Construction Standards, Guidance on Structural
Requirements (Draft). Issued by Department of Defense, March 2001.
Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office Buildings
and Major Modernization Projects. U.S. General Services Administration and Applied
Research Associates, Inc. November 2000.
Acceptance criteria for the primary and secondary structural components shall be
determined as:
DCR=Qud/Qce
where,
Qud= Acting force (demand) determined in component or connection/joint (moment, axial
force, shear, and possible combined forces)
Qce= Expected ultimate, un-factored capacity of the component and/or connection/joint
(moment, axial force, shear and possible combined forces)
Using the DCR criteria of the linear elastic approach, structural elements and connections
that have DCR values that exceed the following allowable values are considered to be
severely damaged or collapsed.
15

The allowable DCR values for primary and secondary structural elements are:
DCR < 2.0 for typical structural configurations
DCR < 1.5 for atypical structural configurations
4.2 UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC)

This Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) provides the design requirements necessary
to reduce the potential of progressive collapse for new and existing facilities that
experience localized structural damage through normally unforeseeable events
For existing and new construction, the level of progressive collapse design for a structure
is correlated to the Occupancy Category (OC). The OC will either be assessed per Section
2-1.
The design requirements in this UFC were developed such that varying levels of resistance
to progressive collapse are specified, depending upon the OC as discussed in Chapter 2.
These levels of progressive collapse design employ:
Tie Forces, which prescribe a tensile force strength of the floor or roof system, to allow
the transfer of load from the damaged portion of the structure to the undamaged portion,
Alternate Path method, in which the building must bridge across a removed element, and.
Enhanced Local Resistance, in which the shear and flexural strength of the perimeter
columns and walls are increased to provide additional protection by reducing the
probability and extent of initial damage
4.2.1 Design Procedures
(a)Tie Forces
In the Tie Force approach, the building is mechanically tied together, enhancing continuity,
ductility, and development of alternate load paths. Tie forces can be provided by the
existing structural elements that have been designed using conventional design methods to
carry the standard loads imposed upon the structure. There are three horizontal ties that
must be provided: longitudinal, transverse, and peripheral. Vertical ties are required in
columns and load-bearing walls.
16

Unless the structural members (beams, girders, spandrels) and their connections can be
shown capable of carrying the required longitudinal, transverse, or peripheral tie force
magnitudes while undergoing rotations of 0.20-rad (11.3-deg), the longitudinal, transverse,
and peripheral tie forces are to be carried by the floor and roof system. Acceptable floor
and roof systems include cast-in-place concrete, composite decks, and precast concrete
floor planks with concrete topping, reinforcement, and mechanical anchorage that meet the
requirements
Minimum Structural Requirements for Tie Force application
To apply the Tie Force method, the structure must meet the requirements listed in the
following paragraphs
For framed and two-way load-bearing wall structures, the number of bays in both
directions must be four or greater. A bay is defined as the square or rectangular
floor area with boundaries demarked by vertical load-bearing elements, such as columns at
the corners or load-bearing walls along the edges.
For one-way load-bearing wall structures, the number of bays in the one-way span
direction must be four or greater. The length of the load-bearing walls (or width of the
building) must be at least 4 hw where hw is the clear story height.
Load and Resistance Factor Design for Tie Forces
Following the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach, the design tie
strength is taken as the product of the strength reduction factor, , and the nominal tie
strength Rn calculated in accordance with the requirements and assumptions of applicable
material specific codes. Include any over-strength factors provided in Chapters 5 to 7 of
ASCE 41, where these over-strength factors are referred to as factors to translate lower
bound material properties to expected strength material properties and are given in Tables
5-3 (structural steel), 6-4 (reinforced concrete), and 7-2 (masonry). For wood and coldformed steel, Chapter 8 of ASCE 41 provides default expected strength values; note that
for wood construction, a time effect factor is also included. Per the LRFD approach, the
design tie strength must be greater than or equal to the required tie strength:
Rn Ru
17

Where,
Rn = Design tie strength
= Strength reduction factor
Rn = Nominal tie strength calculated with the appropriate material specific code,
Ru = i Qi= Required tie strength
i= Load factor
Qi = Load effect
Required Tie Strength, Distribution, and Location
The required tie strength, distribution, and location for longitudinal, transverse, peripheral,
and vertical ties are defined in the following sub-sections for framed and load-bearing wall
structures. The design tie strengths are considered separately from the forces that are
typically carried by each structural element due to live load, dead load, wind load, etc. In
other words, the design tie strength of a slab, beam, column, rebar, or connection with no
other loads acting must be greater than or equal to the required tie strength. In addition,
the tie member itself, its splices and its connections only resist the calculated tensile forces.
There are no structural strength or stiffness requirements to be applied to the structural
members that are anchoring these horizontal tie forces.
Longitudinal and Transverse Ties
Use the floor and roof system to provide the required longitudinal and transverse tie
resistance. The structural members (beams, girders, spandrels, etc) may be used to provide
some or all of the required tie forces, if they and their connections can be shown capable of
carrying the total internal tie force acting over the structural member spacing while
undergoing a 0.20-rad rotation, i.e., if the required longitudinal tie force is 10-k/ft (146kN/m) and the beams are located at 10-ft (3.05-m) on center, the designer must show that
the beam can carry a tensile force of 100-k (445-kN) with rotations of 0.20-rad. Note that
longitudinal and transverse ties are not required in floors above crawlspaces if public
access control is provided.

18

Peripheral Ties

Use the floor and roof system to carry the required peripheral tie strength. The structural
members (beams, girders, spandrels, etc) may be used instead, if they can be proven
capable of carrying the peripheral tie force while undergoing a 0.20-rad rotation. Note
that peripheral ties are not required in floors above crawlspaces if public access control is
provided. For buildings with one- and two-story sections attached to a section with three or
more stories, peripheral ties shall be placed in any contiguous floors at the boundary
between the short and tall sections. Place peripheral ties within 3.3-ft (1.0-m) of the edge
of a floor or roof and provide adequate development or anchors at corners, re-entrant
corners or changes of construction. For framed buildings with perimeter beams, girders, or
spandrels, peripheral ties may not be placed parallel to these members and within the
member or within the area directly above the member, unless the member can be shown
capable of a 0.20-rad (11.3-deg) rotation. If perimeter beams, girders, or spandrels are
present, the 3.3-ft (1.0-m) shall be measured from the interior edge of the beam, girder or
spandrel.

19

Fig 4.3: Tie Forces in a Frame Structure

Vertical Ties
Use the columns and load-bearing walls to carry the required vertical tie strength. Each
column and load-bearing wall shall be tied continuously from the roof level down to the
first column- or wall-supported floor above the foundation, i.e., the vertical ties are not
required to extend to the foundation. Vertical ties shall be straight. The vertical tie must
have a design strength in tension equal to the largest vertical load received by the column
or wall from any one story, using the tributary area and the floor load wF as determined
earlier.

20

Continuity of Ties
The load path for peripheral ties must be continuous between building corners and edge of
openings. For internal longitudinal and transverse ties, the path must be continuous from
one edge to the other. However, interruptions due to courtyards, mezzanines,
elevator/stairwell cores, etc, are allowed,

when a peripheral tie is placed at the

interruption; note that peripheral ties around an opening are not required if the opening fits
between the longitudinal and transverse ties that meet the spacing requirements. Insure that
sufficient embedment or anchoring is provided to develop the strength of the peripheral
ties placed at the interruption; anchor the longitudinal and transverse ties to the peripheral
ties with seismic hooks. Along a particular load path, different structural elements may be
used to provide the required tie strength, providing that they are adequately connected.
Each column and load-bearing wall shall be tied continuously from the roof level down to
the first column- or wall-supported floor above the foundation, i.e., the vertical ties are not
required to extend to the foundation. Re-entrant corners are allowed for all types of
construction, providing that the transverse, longitudinal, and peripheral ties are adequately
developed and anchored.
(b)Alternate Path Method
This method follows the general LRFD philosophy by employing a modified version of the
ASCE 7 load factor combination for extraordinary events and resistance factors to define
design strengths. Three analysis procedures are employed: Linear Static (LSP), Nonlinear
Static (NSP) and Nonlinear Dynamic (NDP). These procedures follow the general
approach in ASCE 41 with modifications to accommodate the particular issues associated
with progressive collapse.

Alternative Rational Analysis

For the performance of the Alternate Path analysis and design, nothing in this document
shall be interpreted as preventing the use of any alternative analysis procedure that is
rational and based on fundamental principles of engineering mechanics and dynamics. For
example, simplified analytical methods employing hand calculations or spreadsheets may
21

be appropriate and more efficient for some types of buildings, such as load-bearing wall
structures.
The results of any alternative rational analyses shall meet the acceptance criteria contained.
The analyses shall include the specified locations for removal of columns and load-bearing
walls and extreme event load combination, with the load increase factors for linear static
and nonlinear static analyses, respectively. The designer shall verify that these criteria are
applicable to the alternative rational analyses. If a Linear Static approach is employed, the
requirements must be met. All projects using alternative rational analysis procedures shall
be reviewed and approved by an independent third-party engineer or by an authorized
representative of the facility owner.
Load and Resistance Factor Design for Alternate Path Method
The Alternate Path method employed in this UFC follows the general philosophy of the
standard LRFD approach but with modifications to facilitate the integration of the ASCE
41 procedures, which are not LRFD. For LRFD, the design strength is taken as the product
of the strength reduction factor and the nominal strength Rn calculated in accordance
with the requirements and assumptions of applicable material specific codes. The design
strength must be greater than or equal to the required strength:
Rn Ru
Where,
Rn = Design strength
= Strength reduction factor
Rn = Nominal strength
Ru = i Qi = Required strength
i= Load factor
Qi = Load effect
Items to note relative to the integration of the LRFD and the ASCE 41 approaches:
While ASCE 41 requires that all factors be taken as unity, this UFC requires that
strength reduction factors, , be used as specified in the appropriate material specific code,
for the action or limit state under consideration.
22

 ASCE 41 uses the term action in the way LRFD defines required strength. ASCE 41
further differentiates actions into deformation-controlled and force-controlled. These
terms are defined later.
In this UFC, the LRFD nominal strength is defined as either the expected strength
when deformation actions are being considered or the lower-bound strength for forcecontrolled actions; ASCE 41 sets all factors to 1 and therefore, the expected and lower
bound strengths are the nominal strengths in this document.
This UFC and ASCE 41 both employ the same over-strength factors to translate lower
bound material properties to expected strength material properties. The over-strength
factors are provided in ASCE 41 Tables 5-3 (structural steel), 6-4 (reinforced concrete),
and 7-2 (masonry). For wood and cold-formed steel, Chapter 8 of ASCE 41 provides
default expected strength values; note that for wood construction, a time effect factor is
also included.
For framed structures floor slab is supported by beams and girders, the analyst may use the
LLR for each beam individually or may use the same LLR for the entire structure. In the
latter case, the LLR shall be equal to the smallest LLR (greatest live load) for any beam in
the bays above the column removal location. For flat-slab structures, load-bearing wall
structures and other situations where the floor system transfers loads directly to the
columns or walls, the LLR shall be computed for, and applied to, the floor in each bay. In
all cases, the LLRs shall be based on the structural configuration before the column or
load-bearing wall section is removed.

23

Primary and Secondary Components

Designate all structural elements and components as either primary or secondary. Classify
structural elements and components that provide the capacity of the structure to resist
collapse due to removal of a vertical load-bearing element as primary. Classify all other
elements and components as secondary. For example, a steel gravity beam may be
classified as secondary if it is assumed to be pinned at both ends to girders and the designer
chooses to ignore any flexural strength at the connection; if the connection is modeled as
partially restrained and thus contributes to the resistance of collapse, it is a primary
member.
Force- and Deformation-Controlled Actions
Classify all actions as either deformation-controlled or force-controlled using the
component force versus deformation curve Note that a component might have both forceand deformation-controlled actions. Further, classification as a force- or deformationcontrolled action is not up to the discretion of the user and must follow the guidance
presented here.
Define a primary component action as deformation-controlled if it has a Type 1 curve and e
2g, or, it has a Type 2 curve and e 2g. Define a primary component action as forcecontrolled if it has a Type 1 or Type 2 curve and e < 2g, or, if it has a Type 3 curve.
Define a secondary component action as deformation-controlled if it has a Type 1 curve for
any e/g ratio or if it has a Type 2 curve and e 2g. Define a secondary component action as
force controlled if it has a Type 2 curve and e < 2g, or, if it has a Type 3 curve.

24

Fig 4.4:Force vs Deformation curve

Design Forces and Deformations

Calculate the deformation-controlled actions QUD, and force-controlled actions QUF,
accordance with the linear analysis procedure.
Component and Element Acceptance Criteria
Components and elements analyzed using the linear procedures shall satisfy the
requirements of this section. Prior to selecting component acceptance criteria, classify
components as primary or secondary, and classify actions as deformation-controlled or
force-controlled.
Deformation-Controlled Actions
For deformation-controlled actions in all primary and secondary components, check that:
m QCE QUD
Where,
QUD = Deformation-controlled action, from Linear Static model
m = Component or element demand modifier (m-factor)
= Strength reduction factor from the appropriate material specific code.
QCE = Expected strength of the component or element for deformation-controlled
actions.
25

for force-controlled actions

= Strength reduction factor from the appropriate
material specific code.
QCL, the lower-bound strength, shall be determined by considering all coexisting actions
on the component under the design loading condition by procedures specified in ASCE 41
Chapters 5 through 8. Use the appropriate resistance factor for each action, as specified in
the material specific design codes (i.e., the factors in ACI 318, the AISC Steel
Construction Manual, etc).
Secondary Elements and Components
All secondary components and elements must be checked to ensure that they meet the
acceptance criteria. Deformation-controlled actions are checked

and force-controlled

actions are checked.

Nonlinear Static Procedure
The NSP and limitations to its use are provided in the following sub-sections.
Limitations on the Use of NSP
There are no DCR or geometric irregularity limitations on the use of the NSP.
Analytical Modeling
To model, analyze, and evaluate a building, employ a three-dimensional assembly of
elements and components. Two-dimensional models are not permitted. Create one model,
as shown in Figures 3-13 and 3-14 for either framed or load-bearing wall structures,
respectively. Inclusion of secondary components in the model is optional. However, if the
secondary components are omitted, they must be checked after the analysis, against the
allowable deformation-controlled criteria (e.g., to check the connections of gravity beams
in a steel structure, compute the chord rotation and compare against the allowable plastic
rotation angle for that connection). Include the stiffness and resistance of primary
components. Note that the strength reduction factors are applied to the nonlinear strength
models of the deformation controlled components (e.g., the nominal flexural strength of a
26

beam or connection is multiplied by the appropriate factorUse the stiffness requirements

of ASCE 41 Chapters 5 through 8 to create the model. Discretize the load-deformation
response of each component along its length to identify locations of inelastic action. The
force-displacement behavior of all components shall be explicitly modeled, including
strength degradation and residual strength, if any. Model a connection explicitly if the
connection is weaker or has less ductility than the connected components, or the flexibility
of the connection results in a change in the connection forces or deformations greater than
10%.
Loads
To calculate the deformation-controlled and force-controlled actions, simultaneously apply
the following combination of gravity loads
Increased Gravity Loads for Floor Areas Above Removed Column or Wall.
Apply the following increased gravity load combination to those bays immediately
adjacent to the removed element and at all floors above the removed element.
GN = N [1.2 D + (0.5 L or 0.2 S)]
Where,
GN = Increased gravity loads for Nonlinear Static Analysis
D = Dead load including faade loads (lb/ft2 or kN/m2)
L = Live load including live load reduction per Section 3-2.3 (lb/ft2 or kN/m2)
S = Snow load (lb/ft2 or kN/m2)
N = Dynamic increase factor for calculating
deformation-controlled and force-controlled actions
for Nonlinear Static analysis; use appropriate
value for framed or load-bearing wall structures;

27

Gravity Loads for Floor Areas Away From Removed Column or Wall. Apply the following
gravity load combination to those bays not loaded with GN
G = 1.2 D + (0.5 L or 0.2 S)
Where,
G = Gravity loads
(c)Enhanced Local Resistance
Enhanced Local Resistance (ELR) is required in three cases All three cases contain the
same objective, which is to insure that a ductile failure mechanism can form when the
column or wall is loaded laterally to failure. To meet this objective, the column or wall
must not fail in shear prior to the development of the maximum flexural strength.
Two components must meet the ELR requirement: 1. The column or wall, and 2. The
connections between the end of the column or wall and the lateral supports (floor slab, base
plate, etc).
Note that design for ELR is not required if the wall or column has been designed for a
specific design basis threat, providing that the design basis threat was developed with a
risk assessment approach that was approved by the building owner, government agency or
other responsible entity.
Load and Resistance Factor Design for Enhanced Local Resistance.
The LRFD approach is used for ELR design,
Rn Ru
where Rn = Design strength
= Strength reduction factor
Rn = Nominal strength, including over-strength factors
Ru = Required strength
The design strength provided by a component is taken as the product of the strength
reduction factor and the nominal strength Rn. For ELR, all strength reduction factors
shall be 1.0. In addition, the material strengths for shear, flexure and all other actions shall
be the expected material strength (i.e., with the appropriate over-strength factor applied to
the lower bound material strength).

28

Shear Demand
The shear demand is the required shear strength (Ru) of the column or wall that is
necessary to achieve the required flexural demand of the component, i.e. at the formation
of a three hinge mechanism or similar failure mode in the component. In calculating the
shear demand, consider any effects (axial load, end conditions, etc) that may act to increase
the nominal flexural strength; in no case shall the shear demand be less than that of the
column or wall with zero axial load acting. Include any applicable material over-strength
factors. The shear demand shall be determined for the horizontal out-of-plane direction
(i.e., perpendicular to the building perimeter faade). Columns at building corners or reentrant corners shall be evaluated in both directions normal to the building perimeter
faade.
Connection Design for Rebound Reaction Forces
In some dynamic loading scenarios, the column or wall will initially be pushed into the
building and then rebound back; the connections must be designed to prevent failure
during both phases of loading. Connections at the top and bottom of the columns and walls
shall be designed for a rebound reaction force equal to 50% of the inbound value.
Conflicts Between ELR and Other Design Requirements
The ELR requirements may be satisfied in a number of ways and as the designer
desires, providing the ELR-modified design does not violate the standard building and
material-specific design codes. If there is a conflict with the ELR modifications, the
building or material-specific design code has precedence and the ELR design must be
altered.
TIE FORCE REQUIREMENTS FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE.
Apply the Tie Force requirements, for concrete frame and load-bearing wall
structural systems, mixed systems with concrete elements, and framed and load-bearing
wall systems with precast concrete floors
The strength reduction factor for properly anchored, embedded, or spliced steel
reinforcement in tension shall be taken as 0.75 (based on ACI 318 for strut and tie models).
The structural integrity requirements of ACI 318 for cast-in-place and precast concrete
construction must be satisfied, as well as the Tie Force requirements in this document. Use
29

the largest or most stringent requirement when there is overlap between ACI 318 and this
UFC.

4.3 BRITISH STANDARDS

Britains design specifications demand constructions of 5 storey and more than 5 storey
consider the effect of accidents. British Standards proposed three methods as following:
1)Tying design: Through effectively tie force provided by lateral and vertical elements
of the structure to improve the structural integrity and redundancy rate;
2)Bridging design: Requires some of the level structural components should still across
two bay spacing and do not completely lose their capacity after its support members
destroyed. Such as the partial collapse, the collapse region should not exceed 15% of the
floor area or 70m2
3)Key element design: If the remove of one component may lead to the collapse of a
wide range of structure, this component should be designed to be a key component, that is,
to ensure that the components should be able to bear additional 34kN / m of uniformly
distributed load at each direction.
4.4 INDIRECT DESIGN METHODS
Indirect design methods include:
1) Reasonable structural arrangement;
2) Whole tie system;
3) Improve structure redundancy rate, multi-load transfer path is ensured;
4) Use ductile materials and ductile structural measures to achieve ductile failure;
5) Make the load-bearing walls can withstand the horizontal load;
6) The use of floor and beams catenary effect;
7) The division of resist progressive collapse structure;
8) Additional reinforcement of considered blast load.
Comparison of several standards mentioned above:
30

 1) Value of load combination used in GSA2003 is smaller, the allowed collapse range is
larger, design of
building to resist progressive collapse simply need removed the first floor or wall and
progressive collapse
resistance of the structure has lower capacity requirements.
2) Value of load combination used in GSA2003 is smaller is larger, allowed collapse
range is smaller and must
be removed columns or walls on all floors one by one. Require a higher capability of the
structures progressive
collapse resistance.
3) In DoD2009 standard, removal position of the vertical component is the same as
DoD2005 and the others have been changed.
For the design changes of reinforced concrete frames are described in the above.
Research of progressive collapse, foreign researchers have been studying and testing for
more than 30 years. The
design method and analytical approach are constantly improved. Compared with other
standards, DoD2009 has the
following characteristics:
1) The category of buildings to resist progressive collapse and the corresponding design
methods is more
intuitive;
2) Any damage of the structure element is forbidden. Its more security, stronger and
more demanding. So design
costs is increased;
3) Fixed magnification of loading factor, dynamic magnification factor, etc required by
the components removal
method. The nonlinear and dynamic effects is considered More reasonable;
4) ASCE41-06 affords us Nonlinear Analysis factors and failure criteria that merit
attention. When analysis ofresist progressive collapse, by the vertical monotonic loading
on the beam end, not that the reciprocation loads.

5.INDIAN SCENARIO
31

India has yet not introduced any design criteria to prevent progressive

collapse even though India is prone to terrorist attack.

Engineering experts in India and abroad are now undertaking extensive

researches in progressive collapse prevention.

Eminent institutes like IITs and NITs are carrying out projects in the

progressive design.
Thank fully no major case of progressive collapse has been reported in

INDIA.

32

6.CONCLUSIONS

Progressive collapse is the spread of initial local failure from element to element
eventually resulting in the overall collapse.Losses constituted to man and material is
disproportionate and hence prevention of progressive collapse is inevitable. Various foreign
standards extended their design criteria for progressive collapse resistance. The cost of
additional reinforcement required is negligible compared to the total cost of structure. Threat
of progressive collapse demand inclusion of design criteria for prevention in Indian
Standards. It is not always feasible to design structures for absolute safety, nor is it
economical to design for abnormal events unless they have a reasonable chance of
occurrence. Alternatively, proper structural design can greatly reduce the possibility of
progressive collapse by paying due attention to structural details and material properties.

33

7.REFERENCES

[1] Hongyu Wang, Youpo Su, Qingshen Zeng, International Journal of Scientific &
Engineering Research Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013
[2]Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New Federal Office
Buildings and Major Modernization Projects June 2003 (GSA)
[3]An Engineers guide to: Concrete Buildings and Progressive Collapse Resistance
by PCA
[4]Unified Facilities Criteria(DoD,USA),Design of buildings to resist progressive
collapse.June 2013

34