Abstract
Multiple earthquakes are reported in many locations around the world, recently on February 6, 2023, in Türkiye two earthquakes of magnitude 7.7 and 7.6 struck with a time interval of approximately 9 h resulted in huge destruction and collapse of structures. The lesser time interval between seismic events leads to the collapse of the structures which were damaged by the first earthquake. Most of the seismic codes do not consider the influence of multiple earthquakes, which makes the structures vulnerable to multiple earthquake phenomena. Bidirectional Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) is performed on regular (S1R) and irregular (S2I) structures that are considered to access the effects of single and multiple earthquakes. The response of the structures is accessed in terms of roof displacement, storey drift ratio, IDA curves, and fragility curves generated for the suite of eleven ground motions. Results obtained from the bidirectional IDA analysis showed the effect of multiple earthquakes is significant and also the irregular structures are of greater risk under multiple earthquakes. It is noticed that from fragility curves in comparison with regular structures irregular structures are 11.11% and 27.78% more susceptible to multiple earthquakes along X and Y-direction. For S1R and S2I when subjected to multiple earthquakes, the average increase in maximum drift ratio is 29.30% and 36.44% along the X-direction, and for multiple earthquakes along the Y-direction, it is 36.42% and 40.34%. It is preferable to avoid adding irregularity into constructed structures, incorporating multiple earthquake occurrences into modern seismic regulations is advantageous.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AFAD (2023) Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD)—Turkish Earthquake Data Center System Regulation. https://tadas.afad.gov.tr/ (Accessed 04 Apr 2023).
Wikipedia (2023) 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Turkey-Syria_earthquake#External_links
Çetin K, Ilgaç M (2023) Reconnaissance Report on February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaraş-Pazarcık (Mw = 7.7) and Elbistan (Mw = 7.6) earthquakes. Türkiye Earthq. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.15569.61283/1
Işık E et al (2023) Structural damages in masonry buildings in Adıyaman during the Kahramanmaraş (Turkiye) earthquakes (Mw 7.7 and Mw 7.6) on 06 February 2023. Eng Fail Anal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107405
Abdelnaby AE (2018) Fragility curves for RC frames subjected to Tohoku mainshock-aftershocks sequences. J Earthq Eng 22(5):902–920. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1264328
Hosseinpour F, Abdelnaby AE (2017) Fragility curves for RC frames under multiple earthquakes. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 98:222–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.04.013
Thippa PK, Tripathi RK, Bhat G (2023) Response of multiple-earthquake excitations on RC-framed buildings. Asian J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-023-00639-9
Kosarzadeh H, Poursha M (2023) Seismic evaluation of vertically irregular RC frames subjected to mainshock-aftershock sequences of near-fault and far-fault ground motions. Structures 49:1130–1156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.01.102
Işık E, Avcil F, Arkan E, Büyüksaraç A, İzol R, Topalan M (2023) Structural damage evaluation of mosques and minarets in Adıyaman due to the 06 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes. Eng Fail Anal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107345
Puppio ML, Giresini L, Doveri F, Sassu M (2019) Structural irregularity: the analysis of two reinforced concrete (r.c.) buildings. Eng Solid Mech 7(1):13–34. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.esm.2018.12.002
Hatzigeorgiou GD, Liolios AA (2010) Nonlinear behaviour of RC frames under repeated strong ground motions. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 30(10):1010–1025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.04.013
Hatzivassiliou M, Hatzigeorgiou GD (2015) Seismic sequence effects on three-dimensional reinforced concrete buildings. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 72:77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.02.005
Oggu P, Gopikrishna K (2020) Assessment of three-dimensional RC moment-resisting frames under repeated earthquakes. Structures 26:6–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.03.039
Massumi A, Sadeghi K, Ghaedi H (2021) The effects of mainshock-aftershock in successive earthquakes on the response of RC moment-resisting frames considering the influence of the vertical seismic component. Ain Shams Eng J 12(1):393–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.04.005
Oyguc R, Toros C, Abdelnaby AE (2018) Seismic behavior of irregular reinforced-concrete structures under multiple earthquake excitations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:15–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.10.002
Abdelnaby AE, Elnashai AS (2015) Numerical modeling and analysis of RC frames subjected to multiple numerical modeling and analysis of RC frames subjected to multiple earthquakes. Earthq Struct. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.9.5.957
Abdelnaby AE, Elnashai AS (2014) Performance of degrading reinforced concrete frame systems under the Tohoku and Christchurch earthquake sequences. J Earthq Eng 18(7):1009–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2014.923796
EDRI Report (2019) Earthquake Disaster Risk Index Report, p. 101 [Online]. https://ndma.gov.in/sites/default/files/PDF/Reports/EDRI_Report_final.pdf
Kaveh A, Zakian P (2014) Seismic design optimisation of RC moment frames and dual shear wall-frame structures VIA CSS algorithm. Asian J Civ Eng 15(3):435–465
Harirchian E et al (2020) A review on application of soft computing techniques for the rapid visual safety evaluation and damage classification of existing buildings. J Build Eng 43:2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102536
Repapis C, Zeris C, Vintzileou E (2006) Evaluation of the seismic performance of existing RC buildings: II. A case study for regular and irregular buildings. J Earthq Eng 10(3):429–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460609350604
Tena-Colunga A (2021) Conditions of structural irregularity. Relationships with observed earthquake damage in Mexico City in 2017. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 143:106630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106630
Mehdipanah A, Lumantarna E, Lam N (2022) Shear wall and frame dual systems featuring discontinuous load paths in frame elements in low-to-moderate seismic regions. J Earthq Eng 26(14):7408–7443. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2021.1964643
Magliulo G, Maddaloni G, Petrone C (2014) Influence of earthquake direction on the seismic response of irregular plan RC frame buildings. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 13(2):243–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-014-0227-z
Karavasilis TL, Bazeos N, Beskos DE (2008) Estimation of seismic inelastic deformation demands in plane steel MRF with vertical mass irregularities. Eng Struct 30(11):3265–3275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.05.005
Yaghmaei-Sabegh S, Panjehbashi-Aghdam P (2020) Damage assessment of adjacent fixed- and isolated-base buildings under multiple ground motions. J Earthq Eng 24(10):1501–1529. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1462274
FEMA273 (1997) NEHRP guidelines and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Earthq Spectra 16(1):1–435. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586092
Baziar MH, Rafiee F, Saeedi Azizkandi A, Lee CJ (2018) Effect of super-structure frequency on the seismic behavior of pile-raft foundation using physical modeling. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 104:196–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.09.028
Kolli SESR, Bhatt G (2023) Seismic response control of an open-ground story RC frame building using the negative stiffness device. Asian J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42107-023-00675-5
Fang C, Qiu C, Wang W, Alam MS (2023) Self-centering structures against earthquakes: a critical review. J Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2023.2166163
Amiri M, Yakhchalian M (2020) Performance of intensity measures for seismic collapse assessment of structures with vertical mass irregularity. Structures 24:728–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.01.038
Aly N, AlHamaydeh M, Galal K (2020) Quantification of the impact of detailing on the performance and cost of RC shear wall buildings in regions with high uncertainty in seismicity hazards. J Earthq Eng 24(3):421–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2018.1453406
Hu J, Liu B (2023) Estimation of the damage-based residual displacement spectrum for simple structures. J Earthq Eng 27(2):263–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2021.1999344
COSMOS (2023) Strong-Motion Virtual Data Center (VDC). https://www.strongmotioncenter.org/vdc/scripts/default.plx (Accessed 23 March 2023)
PEER (2023) Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre. Strong motion database. http://peer.berkeley.edu/ngawest2/ (Accessed 23 March 2023)
IS 1893 Part I (2016) Indian standard code of practice for criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures (sixth revision), IS 1893(Part 1):2016. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
IS 456 (2000) Plain and reinforced concrete—code of practice (fourth revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, Delhi, pp 1–114
IS 875 Part 1 (1987) IS 875-1: code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures, part 1: dead loads, vol 875. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, pp 1–37
IS 875 Part 2 (1987) IS 875 (part 2): code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures, part 2: imposed loads (second revision). Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, pp 1987
SAP2000 (2021) “CSI America”. Structural and earthquake engineering software, New York [Online]. https://www.csiamerica.com/
Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R (1988) Theorical stress–strain model for confined concrete. J Struct Eng ASCE 114(8):1804–1826
CSI (2016) SAP2000 integrated solution for structural analysis and design. Comput. Struct. Inc, p. 556
Kaveh A, Sabzi O (2012) Optimal design of reinforced concrete frames using big bang-big crunch algorithm. Int J Civ Eng 10(3):189–200
ASCE 7 (2013) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784412916
Sharma A, Tripathi RK, Bhat G (2020) Seismic assessment of RC building frames using direct-displacement-based and force-based approaches. Innov Infrastruct Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00364-1
Acknowledgements
The Ministry of Education of India and the National Technology Institute of Raipur in India provided essential assistance to the authors to perform their research.
Funding
The authors declare that they received no outside financial support to carry out the research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Each author has contributed to the current study at every level of the writing process. The data collection, analysis, and paper preparation were performed by Pavan Kumar Thippa. The direction and resources required for the investigation are provided by Dr. R K Tripathi and Dr. Govardhan Bhat. All authors have given their consent to the final version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors affirmed that there was no interest in conflict have affected the work being carried out.
Data availability
According to the writers, the data generated and assessed for the current research investigation are published in the article. The corresponding author will deliver the study’s raw data upon reasonable request.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Thippa, P.K., Tripathi, R.K. & Bhat, G. Seismic assessment of structures with mass and stiffness irregularities under multiple earthquakes. J Build Rehabil 9, 46 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-024-00398-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-024-00398-3