Abstract
There have been changes in concepts of different countries seismic design codes. Therefore it seems useful to compare some of these seismic codes. In this study, four two-dimensional steel moment resisting frame buildings with 3, 6, 9 and 12 storey with intermediate ductility levels are designed using Iranian (Standard No. 2800), European (EC8) and Japanese (BCJ) seismic codes under identical circumstances, and performance of these structures are evaluated with FEMA-356 and ATC-40 provisions. Also, case studies are implemented according to the corresponding codes. At the end, advantages and disadvantages of these codes are discussed. Results of nonlinear static analysis indicate that yield displacement for the designed structures using three codes are close enough in different period ranges (short, moderate, long). Assessment of performance levels shows that BCJ code generally satisfies life safety performance level based on ATC-40. Standard No. 2800 doesn’t satisfy life safety performance level in general. EC8 code satisfies life safety based on both FEMA-356 and ATC-40. In addition, most of plastic hinges are within IO-LS performance range. From strength point of view, overall strength of short and middle period structures among these three codes are almost identical but differ for high rise structures with relatively long periods.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
