Evaluation of the response modification factor of RC structures constructed with bubble deck system

Since the concrete material has been eliminated from the locations situated around the middle of the cross-sections of Bubble Decks (BDs), the BD-type slabs are lighter than the traditional slabs. In the recent researches, Response Modification Factor (RMF) is generally determined for Reinforced Con...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inScientia Iranica. Transaction A, Civil engineering Vol. 27; no. 4; pp. 1699 - 1713
Main Authors Hashemi, S Sh, Sadeghi, K, Vaghefi, M, Siadat, S A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Tehran Sharif University of Technology 01.07.2020
Subjects
Concrete
Decks
Ductility
High rise buildings
Low rise buildings
Reinforced concrete
Researchers
Seismic engineering
Shear strength
Shear stress
Shear walls
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Since the concrete material has been eliminated from the locations situated around the middle of the cross-sections of Bubble Decks (BDs), the BD-type slabs are lighter than the traditional slabs. In the recent researches, Response Modification Factor (RMF) is generally determined for Reinforced Concrete (RC) structures with MomentResisting Frame (MRF) and dual systems. The dual system mainly comprises MRF with Shear Wall (MRFSW) and flat slab chiefly with BD system. In this study, evaluation of the RMF values of RC structures using BD system was the main concern. The obtained results indicated that lateral strength of buildings increased by increasing the span length to story height ratio (L/H). Besides, the variations of span length and the number of stories had more significant effects than the variation of usage category of building on the RMFs of structures. Furthermore, the effect of span length was greater than that of the number of stories in determining RMF of an MRF. Finally, amongst the buildings with dual system structures incorporating MRFSW, the low-rise building structures had an RMF equal to 5 and both the mid-rise and high-rise building structures had an RMF of 7.
DOI:10.24200/sci.2018.21050