Progressive Collapse Evaluation of Steel Structures Considering the Effects of Uncertainties and Catenary Action

Document Type : Research Article


1 Civil, Babol Noshirvani University of Technology

2 Babol Noshirvani University of Tevhnology


Various collapse modes have been observed so far in the phenomenon of progressive collapse. This study examines the collapse modes in damaged structures using pushdown analysis for two scenarios of removing interior and exterior columns. A special moment-resisting frame is selected as a structural model. The effect of catenary action is considered under three damage states including light, moderate and severe. In addition, the effect of uncertainty parameters such as yield strength, modulus of elasticity, dead and live loads are investigated on the structural responses using probabilistic analysis. The Monte Carlo simulation method is used to perform probabilistic analysis. Latin Hypercube sampling method is used to generate random realizations to achieve good accuracy. Then, a sensitivity analysis is performed. The results showed that a more precise and realistic estimation of the structural resistance and collapse modes will be achieved for the structure under progressive collapse when the effect of catenary action and uncertainties are considered. The catenary action effect is more significant when the damage in the structure increases. Also, increasing the axial force in the beams causes that the bending moment decreases in the case of moderate damage. The results of sensitivity analysis showed that the yield strength of members is the most effective parameter of uncertainty on changing the axial force demand of the interior column after removing the exterior column.


Main Subjects

  1. R. Ellingwood, D.O. Dusenberry, Building design for abnormal loads and progressive collapse, Comput.-Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., 20(3) (2005) 194-205.
  2. Buscemi, S. Marjanishvili, SDOF model for progressive collapse analysis, in: Structures Congress 2005: Metropolis and Beyond, 2005, pp. 1-12.
  3. Khandelwal, S. El-Tawil, Collapse behavior of steel special moment resisting frame connections, J. Struct. Eng., 133(5) (2007) 646-655.
  4. Kiakojouri, M. Sheidaii, V. De Biagi, B. Chiaia, Progressive collapse assessment of steel moment-resisting frames using static-and dynamic-incremental analyses, J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 34(3) (2020) 04020025.
  5. Tavakoli, M.M. Afrapoli, Robustness analysis of steel structures with various lateral load resisting systems under the seismic progressive collapse, Eng. Fail. Anal., 83 (2018) 88-101
  6. Liqiang, Y. Jihong, Risk-based robustness assessment of steel frame structures to unforeseen events, Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, (2018) 1-22.
  7. Tavakoli, F. Kiakojouri, Threat-independent column removal and fire-induced progressive collapse: Numerical study and comparison, Civ. Eng. Infrastruct., 48(1) (2015) 121-131.
  8. R. Tavakoli, F. Naghavi, A.R. Goltabar, Effect of base isolation systems on increasing the resistance of structures subjected to progressive collapse, Earthq. Struct. 9(3) (2015) 639-656.
  9. Gerasimidis, G. Deodatis, T. Kontoroupi, M. Ettouney, Loss-of-stability induced progressive collapse modes in 3D steel moment frames, Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., 11(3) (2015) 334-344.
  10. Abdollahzadeh, R. Shalikar, Retrofitting of Steel Moment-Resisting Frames under fire loading against progressive collapse, Int. J. Steel. Struct. 17(4) (2017) 1597-1611.
  11. Kim, J.-H. Park, T.-H. Lee, Sensitivity analysis of steel buildings subjected to column loss, Eng. Struct., 33(2) (2011) 421-432.
  12. Rodríguez, E. Brunesi, R. Nascimbene, Fragility and sensitivity analysis of steel frames with bolted-angle connections under progressive collapse, Eng. Struct., 228 (2021) 111508.
  13. Moradi, H. Tavakoli, G. Abdollahzadeh, Probabilistic assessment of failure time in steel frame subjected to fire load under progressive collapses scenario, Eng. Fail. Anal., 102 (2019) 136-147.
  14. Naghavi, H.R. Tavakoli, Probabilistic Prediction of Failure in Columns of a Steel Structure Under Progressive Collapse Using Response Surface and Artificial Neural Network Methods, IJST-T CIV ENG, (2021) 1-17.
  15. M. Javidan, H. Kang, D. Isobe, J. Kim, Computationally efficient framework for probabilistic collapse analysis of structures under extreme actions, Eng. Struct., 172 (2018) 440-452.
  16. Ding, X. Song, H.-T. Zhu, Probabilistic progressive collapse analysis of steel frame structures against blast loads, Eng. Struct., 147 (2017) 679-691.
  17. -C. Feng, S.-C. Xie, J. Xu, K. Qian, Robustness quantification of reinforced concrete structures subjected to progressive collapse via the probability density evolution method, Eng. Struct., 202 (2020) 109877.
  18. Jahangir, M. Bagheri, S.M.J. Delavari, Cyclic behavior assessment of steel bar hysteretic dampers using multiple nonlinear regression approach, IJST-T CIV ENG, 45(2) (2021) 1227-1251.
  19. Bagheri, A. Chahkandi, H. Jahangir, Seismic reliability analysis of RC frames rehabilitated by glass fiber-reinforced polymers, International Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(11) (2019) 1785-1797.
  20. Sadek, J.A. Main, H.S. Lew, S.D. Robert, V.P. Chiarito, S. El-Tawil, An experimental and computational study of steel moment connections under a column removal scenario, NIST Technical Note, 1669 (2010).
  21. Jin, S. El-Tawil, Evaluation of FEMA-350 seismic provisions for steel panel zones, J. Struct. Eng., 131(2) (2005) 250-258.
  22. Mazzoni, F. McKenna, M.H. Scott, G.L. Fenves, OpenSees command language manual, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center, 264 (2006).
  23. Ferraioli, A modal pushdown procedure for progressive collapse analysis of steel frame structures, J. Perform. Constr, 156 (2019) 227-241.
  24. J. Conrath, T. Krauthammer, K. Marchand, P. Mlakar, Structural Design for Physical Security: State of the Practice/Task Committee, Structural Engineering Institute, ASCE Reston, (1999).
  25. GSA, Alternate path analysis and design guidelines for progressive collapse resistance, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, 2016.
  26. S.S.R.S. Committee, Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-06), American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, (2007).
  27. Lozanovski, D. Downing, P. Tran, D. Shidid, M. Qian, P. Choong, M. Brandt, M. Leary, A Monte Carlo simulation-based approach to realistic modeling of additively manufactured lattice structures, Additive Manufacturing, 32 (2020) 101092.
  28. Ditlevsen, H.O. Madsen, Structural reliability methods, Wiley New York, 1996.
  29. M. Bartlett, R.J. Dexter, M.D. Graeser, J.J. Jelinek, B.J. Schmidt, T.V. Galambos, Updating standard shape material properties database for design and reliability, Eng. J. AISC., 40(1) (2003) 2-14.
  30. Ellingwood, Development of a probability-based load criterion for American National Standard A58: Building code requirements for minimum design loads in buildings and other structures, US Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, 1980.
  31. Kim, J. Kim, J. Park, Investigation of progressive collapse-resisting capability of steel moment frames using push-down analysis, J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 23(5) (2009) 327-335
  32. Jahangir, A. Karamodin, Structural behavior investigation based on adaptive pushover procedure, in: 10th International Congress on Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz. Iran, 2015.
  33. Pantidis, S. Gerasimidis, New Euler-type progressive collapse curves for steel moment-resisting frames: Analytical method, J. Struct. Eng., 143(9) (2017) 04017113.
  34. Asprone, F. Jalayer, A. Prota, G. Manfredi, Proposal of a probabilistic model for multi-hazard risk assessment of structures in seismic zones subjected to blast for the limit state of collapse, Struct. Saf. 32(1) (2010) 25-34.