"Вестник МГСУ"

Earthquakes can be very strong and can lead to significant damages. Effect of earthquakes depend on seismic action characteristics (intensity, spectral composition, etc.), foundation soil properties in region of construction, design and construction quality. In seismically dangerous regions structural calculations the current design standards suppose the use of the coefficient K1, which takes account the non-linear work of construction material and the allowable damages of structures. Our research shows that a stiffening core fails in case of intensive earthquake if the walls are designed according to current design standards. Thus, plastic deformations do not occur and develop in the supporting elements at the beginning of the process, so the lowering coefficient K1 should be disregarded. As stiffening core is projected with account for the reduction factor K1, the existing reinforcement is not enough for standing the emerging stress and its failure happens followed by a redistribution of the stress to frame columns. The columns are also projected with account for the reduction factor K1 and are not able to take such an increase stress beyond design. There is destruction of column frame and complete collapse of the building. So seismic resistance of bearing structures is reduced several times. The approach to estimating K1 must be responsible, based on the latest scientific research, which sometimes could not be done according to the acting design standards.

An earthquake is a rapid highly nonlinear process. In effective normative documents there is a coefficient K1, which takes into account limit damage of building structures, i.e. non-linear work of building materials and structures during seismic load. Its value depends on the building constructive layout. However, because of the development of construction and new constructive solutions this coefficient should be defined according to design-basis justification. The article considers the five-storey building calculation on seismic impact by linear-spectral and direct dynamic methods. Our research shows that the coefficient K1 for this building is 0.4, which was calculated using nonlinear dynamic method. According to effective normative documents K1 is 0.25…0.3 for buildings of this type. Thus we get a lack of seismic stability of bearing structures by 1.5…2 times. In order to ensure the seismic safety of buildings and facilities, especially of unique objects, the coefficient K1 should be determined by calculations with sufficient scientific justification, particularly with the use of non-linear dynamic methods.

Introduction. Researched methods of accounting for the nonlinear operation of reinforced concrete structures on the example of an industrial structure, when exposed to an air shock wave using modern software systems based on the finite element method. The calculation of reinforced concrete construction to the impact of an air shock wave, if no increased requirements for tightness are presented to it, in accordance with current regulatory documents, must be carried out taking into account the elastic-plastic work, crack opening in the stretched zone of concrete and plastic deformations of reinforcement are allowed. Reviewed by new coupling approach to determining the dynamic loads of a shock wave, implemented in the LS-DYNA software package, which allows to take into account the effects of a long-range explosion and wave-wrapping around a structure. Materials and methods. The study of the stress-strain state of the structures was carried out using numerical simulation. For the nonlinear equivalent-static method, a step-by-step calculation algorithm is used, with gradual accumulation and distribution of stresses, implemented in the LIRA-SAPR software package. For the nonlinear dynamic method, the Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation is used using the methods of gas dynamics in the LS-DYNA software package. Results. As a result of numerical simulation, the following was done analysis of existing methods of nonlinear calculations; analysis of the existing loads during the flow of shock waves around the structure; analysis of the forces and movements in the bearing elements, as well as pictures of the destruction of concrete and reinforcement. Conclusions. According to the results of the comparison of the two approaches, conclusions are drawn about the advantages and disadvantages of the methods. Advantages of nonlinear dynamic calculation methods are noted compared to the equivalent-static ones. Use of the combined approach to the description of the shock wave front gives a reduction in time and allows us to describe the interaction of the wave with the structure with sufficient accuracy. The findings indicate the relevance of the study and provide an opportunity to move to more reasonable computational models.