Seismic Retrofitting of Non-Compliant RC Structures Using SMA Bracings and Modified DDBD: A Parametric Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22399/ijcesen.4011Keywords:
Seismic retrofitting,, Shape Memory Alloy bracings, Direct Displacement-Based Design, Nonlinear static pushover analysis, Nonlinear time history analysis, reinforced concrete structuresAbstract
This paper introduces a novel seismic retrofitting strategy using Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) bracings within a modified Direct Displacement-Based Design (DDBD) framework for non-compliant reinforced concrete (RC) structures. SMA bracings, characterised by superelasticity and energy dissipation, were investigated through parametric analyses considering various configurations, cross-sectional areas, and damping properties. Nonlinear static pushover and nonlinear time history analyses were performed on mid-rise (six-storey) and high-rise (nine-storey) RC buildings. Results indicated that optimal X-bracing designs—1250 mm² cross-sectional area with 0.10 damping for six-storey, and 1600 mm² with 0.15 damping for nine-storey structures—markedly enhanced seismic resilience. Improvements included increased global ductility, reduced inter-storey drifts, and better control of plastic hinge formation. Retrofitted six-storey structures achieved reductions of 94% in peak floor accelerations (PFA) and 95% in residual displacements, while nine-storey structures showed 94% and 63% reductions, respectively. Comparisons with conventional steel bracings confirmed SMA’s superior performance. SMA bracings reduced residual displacements by 70% (six-storey) and 63% (nine-storey), compared to 50% with steel. They also improved global ductility by 35% and 40%, whereas steel achieved only moderate gains. These outcomes highlight SMA bracing’s effectiveness in controlling deformations, enabling recentering, and minimizing permanent damage. Although the study was applied to real Algerian structures, findings can be generalized to RC buildings of varying heights worldwide. SMA bracings emerge as a scalable and cost-efficient solution for seismic-prone regions. Future work should address applications to steel and hybrid structures and assess SMA’s long-term performance under different seismic conditions.
References
[1] Algériennes, R.P. (2003). RPA 99/Version 2003, Cent. Natl. Rech. Apliquée En Génie Parasismique, Algiers, Alger., ,.
[2] Qian, H., Li, H., Song, G. (2016). Experimental investigations of building structure with a superelastic shape memory alloy friction damper subject to seismic loads, Smart Mater. Struct., 25(12), pp. 125026.
[3] Wang, B., Zhu, S. (2018). Seismic behavior of self-centering reinforced concrete wall enabled by superelastic shape memory alloy bars, Bull. Earthq. Eng., 16, pp. 479–502.
[4] Kari, A., Ghassemieh, M., Abolmaali, S.A. (2011). A new dual bracing system for improving the seismic behavior of steel structures, Smart Mater. Struct., 20(12), pp. 125020.
[5] Miller, D.J., Fahnestock, L.A., Eatherton, M.R. (2012). Development and experimental validation of a nickel–titanium shape memory alloy self-centering buckling-restrained brace, Eng. Struct., 40, pp. 288–98.
[6] Moradi, S., Alam, M.S., Asgarian, B. (2014). Incremental dynamic analysis of steel frames equipped with NiTi shape memory alloy braces, Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., 23(18), pp. 1406–25.
[7] Asgarian, B., Moradi, S. (2011). Seismic response of steel braced frames with shape memory alloy braces, J. Constr. Steel Res., 67(1), pp. 65–74.
[8] Ferraioli, M., Concilio, A., Molitierno, C. (2022). Seismic performance of a reinforced concrete building retrofitted with self-centering shape memory alloy braces, Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 21(3), pp. 785–809.
[9] Ferraioli, M., Lavino, A. (2018). A displacement-based design method for seismic retrofit of RC buildings using dissipative braces, Math. Probl. Eng., 2018, pp. 1–28.
[10] Miani, M. (2021). INNOVATIVE SEISMIC PROTECTION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS BY MEANS OF DISSIPATIVE AND SHAPE MEMORY ALLOY BRACES, ,.
[11] Abraik, E., Asif, I. (2023). A comparison of utilization design ratios of self-centering shape memory alloy with different brace configurations, Eng. Struct., 281, pp. 115768.
[12] Vignoli, L.L., Savi, M.A., El-Borgi, S. (2020). Nonlinear dynamics of earthquake-resistant structures using shape memory alloy composites, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., 31(5), pp. 771–87.
[13] Matari, Z., Bourdim, S.M.E.-A., Rodrigues, H., Kadri, T. (2023). Earthquake Analysis of an Old RC Minaret Retrofitting with Shape Memory Alloy, Buildings, 13(5), pp. 1121.
[14] Calvi, G.M., Priestley, M.J.N., Kowalsky, M.J. (2008). Displacement – Based Seismic Design of Structures, ,.
[15] Bergami, A.V., Nuti, C. (2013). A design procedure of dissipative braces for seismic upgrading structures, Earthquakes Struct., 4(1), pp. 85–108.
[16] Mazza, F., Vulcano, A. (2014). Equivalent viscous damping for displacement-based seismic design of hysteretic damped braces for retrofitting framed buildings, Bull. Earthq. Eng., 12, pp. 2797–819.
[17] Mazza, F. (2014). Displacement-based seismic design of hysteretic damped braces for retrofitting in-plan irregular rc framed structures, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 66, pp. 231–40.
[18] Monti, G., Rabi, R.R., Vailati, M. (2024). Direct displacement-based design of dissipative bracings for seismic retrofit of reinforced concrete buildings, J. Build. Eng., 82, pp. 108208.
[19] Alehojjat, S.B., Yakhchalian, M., Bahar, O. (2023). Approximate methods to estimate residual drift demands in steel structures with viscous dampers designed by the DDBD approach, Int. J. Steel Struct., 23(3), pp. 806–22.
[20] Standard, B. (2005). Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part, 1, pp. 1991–8.
[21] UBC. (1994). UBC 1994, International conference of Building officials, Whittier, California, vol. 63.
[22] CSI (Computers and Structures, I.. (2010). CSI analysis reference manual for SAP2000, ETABS, SAFE and CSiBridge, ,.
[23] ASCE. (2000). American Society of Civil Engineers, Fema 356 Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Building, Rehabilitation, (November),.
[24] Paulay, T., Priestley, M.J.N. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings, vol. 768, Wiley New York.
[25] Lian, M., Zhou, Y., Wang, Y., Su, M. (2024). Experimental investigation of mechanical properties of NiTi superelastic shape memory alloy cables, J. Constr. Steel Res., 214, pp. 108447.
[26] (N.d.). Modeling of Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy Elements - Technical Knowledge Base - Computers and Structures, Inc. - Technical Knowledge Base. Available at: https://wiki.csiamerica.com/display/kb/Modeling+of+Superelastic+Shape+Memory+Alloy+Elements. [accessed January 22, 2024].
[27] (N.d.). PEER Ground Motion Database - PEER Center. Available at: https://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/spectras/new?sourceDb_flag=1. [accessed April 22, 2024].
[28] (N.d.). SeismoMatch - Response Spectrum Matching - Seismosoft. Available at: https://seismosoft.com/products/seismomatch/. [accessed April 22, 2024].
[29] TahamouliRoudsari, M., Entezari, A., Hadidi, M.H., Gandomian, O. (2017). Experimental Assessment of Retrofitted RC Frames With Different Steel Braces, Structures, 11(January), pp. 206–17, Doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2017.06.003.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
