A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes

The evaluation of various earthquake codes, it is one of the significant challenges in the study area of earthquake engineering. However, according to the literature review, most research works have not addressed comparing Chinese and African seismic codes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Musaab Suliman, Liang Lu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-01-01
Series:Advances in Civil Engineering
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/5588833
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832546124589694976
author Musaab Suliman
Liang Lu
author_facet Musaab Suliman
Liang Lu
author_sort Musaab Suliman
collection DOAJ
description The evaluation of various earthquake codes, it is one of the significant challenges in the study area of earthquake engineering. However, according to the literature review, most research works have not addressed comparing Chinese and African seismic codes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify each code’s advantages by comparing assessment of the seismic efficacy of moment resistance frame reinforced concrete (MRF-RC) frames using four different codes: the Ethiopian Building Code Standard (EBCS-8), the Egyptian Code for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures (ECP-201), the Algerian Seismic Regulations (RPA-99), and the Chinese Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB-50011), the first three are the major codes used in Africa. The seismic provisions of these codes are compared and evaluated using nonlinear time-history analysis (NL-THA) and nonlinear static pushover to validate the results. These analyses are performed on four MRF-RC frame models with different heights. The results include various parameters that reflect the seismic performance of the structures. The study revealed that the Chinese code is more conservative and overestimates seismic performance compared with African codes. However, the Chinese code can be applied in African projects considering the African soil classifications, and seismic weight are adjusted to meet the African design criteria.
format Article
id doaj-art-3d3165d6bb774992b1ac232d28b2f7f4
institution Kabale University
issn 1687-8094
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Advances in Civil Engineering
spelling doaj-art-3d3165d6bb774992b1ac232d28b2f7f42025-02-03T07:23:43ZengWileyAdvances in Civil Engineering1687-80942024-01-01202410.1155/2024/5588833A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic CodesMusaab Suliman0Liang Lu1Department of Disaster Mitigation for StructuresDepartment of Disaster Mitigation for StructuresThe evaluation of various earthquake codes, it is one of the significant challenges in the study area of earthquake engineering. However, according to the literature review, most research works have not addressed comparing Chinese and African seismic codes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify each code’s advantages by comparing assessment of the seismic efficacy of moment resistance frame reinforced concrete (MRF-RC) frames using four different codes: the Ethiopian Building Code Standard (EBCS-8), the Egyptian Code for Design and Construction of Reinforced Concrete Structures (ECP-201), the Algerian Seismic Regulations (RPA-99), and the Chinese Code for Seismic Design of Buildings (GB-50011), the first three are the major codes used in Africa. The seismic provisions of these codes are compared and evaluated using nonlinear time-history analysis (NL-THA) and nonlinear static pushover to validate the results. These analyses are performed on four MRF-RC frame models with different heights. The results include various parameters that reflect the seismic performance of the structures. The study revealed that the Chinese code is more conservative and overestimates seismic performance compared with African codes. However, the Chinese code can be applied in African projects considering the African soil classifications, and seismic weight are adjusted to meet the African design criteria.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/5588833
spellingShingle Musaab Suliman
Liang Lu
A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
Advances in Civil Engineering
title A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
title_full A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
title_short A Comparative Study of Seismic Performance Evaluation of Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures Using Chinese and African Seismic Codes
title_sort comparative study of seismic performance evaluation of reinforced concrete frame structures using chinese and african seismic codes
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/5588833
work_keys_str_mv AT musaabsuliman acomparativestudyofseismicperformanceevaluationofreinforcedconcreteframestructuresusingchineseandafricanseismiccodes
AT lianglu acomparativestudyofseismicperformanceevaluationofreinforcedconcreteframestructuresusingchineseandafricanseismiccodes
AT musaabsuliman comparativestudyofseismicperformanceevaluationofreinforcedconcreteframestructuresusingchineseandafricanseismiccodes
AT lianglu comparativestudyofseismicperformanceevaluationofreinforcedconcreteframestructuresusingchineseandafricanseismiccodes