Thesis 3d

Faculty of Engineering
PREDICTING PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE FOR MULTI STOREY PRECAST

CONCRETE BUILDING WITH DIFFERENT STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS
Gilbert Wong Pak Kai

(11031820)
Master of Engineering
(Civil)
2012
DECLARATION
I declare that this thesis is the result of my own research

except as cited in the references. This report has not been accepted for any master and
is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other master.
Signature:
Name: Gilbert Wong Pak Kai
Date: .
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to our parents who have never failed to give us financial and moral
support, for giving all our need during the time we developed our system and for teaching us
that even the largest task can be accomplished if it is done one step at a time.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all graceful thoughts all zillion thanks go to my parents for their continuous
support and encouragement given to me unconditionally in completing this thesis. I also want
to extend my appreciation to my thesis supervisor, Pn. Azida bt. Rashidi of the Faculty of
Engineering, who patience and effort in moulding me and my thought processes. The
completion of this thesis would not be possible without her conscientious guidance, advice
and encouragement.
Furthermore, I also like to thankful to everybody who contributed to the
accomplishment of this thesis, likes engineers, construction professionals, who generously
spent their precious time to participate in the interviews of this thesis.
Their honest
information, opinions and comments are very useful indeed. My seniors and friends, who had
provide all kinds of assistance and support, also deserved my special thanks. Without the
contribution of all those mentioned above, this work would not have been possible.
iii
ABSTRACT
Recent historic events have shown that buildings that are compliance to conventional
building codes design are not necessarily able to resist the progressive or disproportionate
collapse that generally occur due to missing, damage or collapse of structural elements. For
example, a collapse of slender and unbraced columns in a structure.
The well known
collapsed building in the world was the World Trade Center, which collapsed in September
2001 due to progressive collapse.
Hence, a three dimensional multi storey precast building with different structural
systems with missing column concept is investigated. The model building is based on the
actual building of Police Housing Flat in Stutong district, Kuching. The study is based on
linear static analyses using software Abaqus 6.11 with non linear material properties.
Two precast concrete models with different connections namely Model 1 FF (rigid
connection) and Model 2 BCPC (beam column pin connection) are analysed. Base on
General Services Administration (GSA) requirements, three missing column cases namely
Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 are applied between ground floor level and level 1 to both models.
The bending moment, shear force and deflection values or shape of the collapse
precast building for both models were obtained using Abaqus 6.11. From the Abaqus 6.11
results, each structural component of its magnitudes and distribution of potential demand of
degree of collapse is analysis to give Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR). If the DCR value of a
structural component is more than two, the component will be considered to have collapsed.
The missing column Case 1 located at the corner of the precast building gives the worst
case scenario among the three cases for both models, Model 1 and Model 2. The Model1 - FF
iv
(Case 1) gives a failure due to excess of Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR) for bending moment
for column above the missing column position at grid A/1 Level 1. Similarly, for Model 2 BCPC, it also gives a large joint displacement at missing column (Case 1) located at the
corner of precast building at grid A/1 Level 1.
Thus, it can be said that, the columns that are adjacent to the corner of a precast
building must be able to take the additional load due to missing column approach. The
beams must also be able to transfer the loading from missing column location to adjacent
columns or beams without causing large member displacement during the alternative load
path method.
ABSTRAK
Peristiwa-peristiwa bersejarah yang terkini telah menunjukkan bahawa bangunan yang

patuh kepada kod bangunan reka bentuk konvensional tidak semestinya dapat menahan
keruntuhan secara progresif atau tidak seimbang yang biasanya berlaku disebabkan oleh
kehilangan, kerosakan atau keruntuhan elemen struktur, seperti kolum dalam struktur.
Bangunan terkenal yang runtuh di dunia adalah Pusat Dagangan Dunia, yang runtuh secara
progresif pada bulan September 2001.
Dalam tesis ini, tiga dimensi pelbagai bangunan konkrit pratuang bertingkat runtuh
bertingkah laku berdasarkan konsep "kehilangan kolum" dengan sistem struktur yang berbeza
telah dianalisis.
Bangunan model adalah berdasarkan susun atur sebenar bangunan (Kompleks
Perumahan Polis) di daerah Stutong, Kuching. Kajian adalah berdasarkan analisis linear statik
menggunakan perisian Abaqus 6,11 dengan sifat bahan bukan linear.
Dua bangunan konkrit pratuang dengan sambungan yang berbeza iaitu Model 1 - FF
(sambungan tegar) dan Model 2 - BCPC (rasuk kolum sambungan pin) telah dianalisis.
Berdasarkan General Services Administrition (GSA), tiga kes "hilang kolum" pendekatan
iaitu Kes 1, Kes 2 dan Kes 3 digunakan antara tingkat bawah dan tahap 1 setiap kali bagi
kedua-dua model (Model 1 - FF dan Model 2 - BCPC) .
Corak runtuh bangunan konkrit pratuang bagi kedua-dua model telah diperolehi. Dari
keputusan Abaqus 6.11, setiap komponen struktur magnitud dan pengagihan potensi
permintaan yang ditunjukkan oleh Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR). Jika nilai DCR komponen
vi
struktur adalah lebih daripada dua, komponen tersebut akan dianggap telah runtuh. Kes 1
"kehilangan kolum" terletak di sudut bangunan pratuang memberikan senario kes terburuk
antara tiga kes bagi kedua-dua model, Model 1 dan Model 2. Model1 - FF memberikan
kegagalan yang disebabkan oleh lebihan Nisbah Kapasiti Permintaan (DCR) untuk lenturan
bagi kolum atas kedudukan lajur hilang di grid A / 1 Aras 1. Untuk 2 Model - BCPC, ia juga
memberikan satu anjakan besar bersama di ruang "kehilangan kolum" (Kes 1) yang terletak di
sudut bangunan pratuang di grid A / 1 Aras 1. Oleh itu, ia boleh dikatakan bahawa, ruangan
yang bersebelahan dengan sudut bangunan pratuang mesti berupaya untuk mengambil beban
tambahan kerana ruang "kehilangan kolum" berdekatan. Dimana ini bermaksud, rasuk juga
mesti berupaya untuk memindahkan beban daripada lokasi ruang "kehilangan kolum" ke arah
tiang bersebelahan tanpa menyebabkan anjakan anggota besar dan lebihan kapasiti ahli untuk
mengelakkan bangunan runtuh.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Content
Page
DECLARATION
DEDICATION
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iii
ABSTRACT
iv
ABSTRAK
vi
TABLE OF CONTENT
viii
LIST OF TABLES
xiii
LIST OF FIGURE
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
xviii
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction to Precast Concrete
1.2 Problem Statement
1.3 Significance of This Study
1.4 Objectives
1.5 Scope of Study
1.6 Outline of This Thesis
Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
viii
2.2 Types of Connection for Precast Concrete System
2.2.1 Rigid connection
10
2.2.2 Semi rigid beam column connection
11
2.2.3 Simple connection
11
2.3 Types of Precast Construction Systems with its connection detail
12
2.3.1 Large panel system
12
2.3.2 Precast frame system
14
2.3.3 Slab column systems with shear wall
18
2.4 Progressive Collapse: Definition and Types of Collapse
20
2.5 Structural Analysis Approaches Used in Progressive Collapse

23
Modeling
2.5.1 Alternate load path method
23
2.5.2 Specific local resistance method
24
2.6 Code and Standards
24
2.6.1 General Services Administration (GSA) progressive collapse

25
guidelines (2003)
2.6.2 Department of Defence Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) design
25
of buildings to resist progressive collapse (2010)
2.7 Types of Element and Combination Use in Structural Modeling
26
2.7.1 Beam element
26
2.7.2 Shell element
27
2.7.3 Solid element
28
2.7.4 Combination of element use in previous structural modeling
29
2.8 Conclusion
32
ix
Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
33
3.2 Verification
35
3.2.1 One and two dimension sample model verification
35
3.2.2 Three dimension sample model verification
35
3.3 Structural Model
37
3.3.1 Geometry of the model
37
3.3.2 Material properties
41
3.3.3 Loading
41
3.3.4 Beam column connection
42
3.3.5 Modeling assumptions
43
3.4 Design Code and References
43
3.5 Analysis of Three Dimensions Model for Progressive Collapse
44
3.5.1 Analysis cases
44
3.6 Acceptance criteria for structural component
47
3.7 Structural Member Capacity for Building Models
48
3.8 Conclusion
51
Chapter 4 RESULT ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction
52
4.2 Verification Samples Models Results Analysis
52
4.2.1 Validation of one dimension and two dimension models results

53
analysis
4.2.2 Validation of three dimensions model results analysis
56
4.3 Results Analysis for Model 1 FF and Model 2 - BCPC

4.3.1 Model 1 FF
59
60
4.3.1.1 Model 1 FF comparisons bending moment results for

Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 of model 1 FF with Initial
61
Shape
4.3.1.2 Model 1 FF comparisons shear force results for Case
63
1, Case 2 and Case 3 of model 1 FF with Initial Shape
4.3.1.3 General deflected shape for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3
66
for Model 1 - FF
4.3.1.4 Model 1 FF: structural members analysis
67
4.3.1.5 Discussion on Model 1 FF based on section 4.3.1.2
70
4.3.2 Model 2 BCPC
71
4.3.2.1 Model 2 BCPC comparisons bending moment results

72
for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 with Initial Shape
4.3.2.2 Model 2 BCPC comparisons shear force results for
Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 of model 1 FF with Initial
74
Shape
4.3.2.3 General deflected shape for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3
76
for Model 2 BCPC
4.3.2.4 Model 2 BCPC: structural members analysis
78
4.3.2.5 Discussion on Model 2 BCPC based on section

81
4.3.2.2
4.4 Overall Discussion
82
4.5 Conclusion
83
xi
Chapter 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction
84
5.2 Conclusion
85
5.3 Recommendations
86
89
REFERENCE
APPENDIX A SUMMARIES RESULTS FOR HAND CALCULATION,
ABAQUS 6.11 ANALYSIS DATA AND PROKON 2.5
93
ANALYSIS DATA FOR ONE DIMENSION MODEL

APPENDIX B ARCHITECT DRAWINGS
102
APPENDIX C STRUCTURAL LAYOUT
103
APPENDIX D BENDING MOMENT, SHEAR FORCE AND DEFLECTION

RESULTS FOR RIGID CONNECITON GENERATE BY
104
ABAQUS 6.11
APPENDIX E BENDING MOMENT, SHEAR FORCE AND DEFLECTION
RESULTS FOR BEAM COLUMN PIN CONNECITON
GENERATE BY ABAQUS 6.11
xii
110
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table
3.1
Units parameter use in Abaqus 6.11 model
38
3.2
Grade 40 Concrete Properties
41
3.3
Loading used in model
42
4.1
Comparison analysis results between Abaqus 6.11 and hand calculation
55
4.2
Column reaction
58
4.3
Model 1 FF:
DCR for bending moment
67
4.4
Model 1 FF:
DCR for shear force
69
4.5
Model 1 FF:
DCR for beam deflection check
70
4.6
Summaries of analysis results for Table 4.3, Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 with
difference cases
71
4.7
Model 2 BCPC:
DCR for bending moment
78
4.8
Model 2 BCPC:
DCR for shear force
79
4.9
Model 2 BCPC:
DCR for beam deflection check
80
4.10
Summaries of analysis results for Table 4.7, Table 4.8 and Table 4.9 with
difference cases
xiii
81
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure
1.1
Page
(i) Type of precast slabs, (ii) Type of precast beams, (iii) Precast column,
(iv) Precast wall panel, and (v) Precast staircase that been assemble into
position
1.2
World Trade Central collapse
1.3
Kompleks Perumahan PDRM
2.1
Effects of connection types to the moment distribution in a structure.

(Lee Ming Kai, 2004)
10
2.2
Example of large precast RC wall panel with opening
12
2.3
(i)Wet joint, and (ii) Dry joint
13
2.4
Precast frame systems with the precast beam sitting on the RC corbel and
connected to column
15
2.5
Types of beam-column joint subassembly
15
2.6
Linear element connection details: (i) Column to Column connection, (ii)

Column to beam connection, and (iii) Slab to beam connection
16
2.7
A beam column connection using post tensioning
16
2.8
Precast concrete moment resisting connections:

(i) Detail of cast-inplace in beam connection. (ii) Reinforcement detail and assembly
process of composite connection
17
2.9
Pre-stressed slab column system
18
2.10
Post-tensioned slab-column connection
19
2.11
Phase of progressive collapse, from the intact structural (left), to initial

loss of column and subsequent failure in the floor above (centre), and
failure propagating to other bays (right)
20
2.12
Collapse Sequence Events Diagram
21
2.13
(i) The devastating aftermath of a large progressive collapse of one of the

World Trade Centre towers after the attacks on September 11, 2001, (ii)
Remains of Murrah Building after blast induced progressive collapse,
and (iii) Deutsche Bank Building remains standing despite column loss
22
xiv
over multiple stories

2.14
Beam element
27
2.15
Typical shell element
28
2.16
Solid element: (i) 4 node tetrahedron, and (ii) 21-node brick element
29
2.17
Detail of full 3D model
30
2.18
Detail of model: (i) Full 3D model, and (ii) Close up connection region
31
2.19
Typical local column: (i) Reinforcement details, and (ii) Concrete model
32
3.1
Analysis process flow chat
34
3.2
Eight span of continuous beam with total length of 28m long
35
3.3
Three dimensions model layout (verification)
36
3.4
Apply load
37
3.5
Precast building 3D model layout
38
3.6
Front view
39
3.7
Real view
39
3.8
Left side view
40
3.9
Right side view
40
3.10
Floor plan
40
3.11
Stress Strain Curve for Grade 40 Concrete
41
3.12
Column removed: (i) At location A / 1 (case 1), (ii) At location A / 3

(case 2), and (iii) At location A1 / 4a (case 3)
46
4.1
Bending moment diagram and shear force diagram
54
4.2
Bending moment and shear force diagram for a horizontal beam

extracting out from model with beam column pin connection
57
4.3
Bending moment and shear force diagram for a horizontal beam

extracting out from model with rigid connection
58
4.4
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Front side
59
4.5
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Left side
60
xv
4.6
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Level 1
60
4.7
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and

Model 1 - FF (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9),
(ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1), and (iii) Corner column (grid A/1).
62
4.8

Model 1 - FF (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
62
4.9

Model 1 - FF (Case 3) at level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
63
4.10
Shear force comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1
- FF (Case 1) at level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9). (ii)
Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1). (iii) Corner column (grid A/1)
64
4.11
- FF (Case 2) at level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
65
4.12
- FF (Case 3) at level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
65
4.13
Model 1 FF (Case 1) deflection in three dimensions.
66
4.14
Model 1 FF (Case 2) deflection in three dimensions
66
4.15
Model 1 FF (Case 3) deflection in three dimensions
67
4.16
Bending moment comparison between Model 2-BCPC (Initial shape)

and Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 A/9), (ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1), and (iii) Corner column (grid
A/1).
73
Bending moment comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape)

and Model 2 - BCPC (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 A/9).
73

and Model 2 - BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a A/4a).
74
Shear force comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and

Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 A/9) and (ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
75
4.17
4.18
4.19
4.20
4.21

Model 2 - BCPC (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
75
76
xvi
Model 2 - BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).

4.22
Model 2 BCPC (Case 1) deflection in three dimensions
4.23
77
4.24
77
xvii
76
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
3D
Three Dimension
ACI
American Concrete Institute
ASCE
American Society of Civil Engineers
DCR
Demand Capacity Ratio
DL
Dead Load
DOF
Degree of Freedom
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
GSA
General Services Administration
IBS
Industrialize Building System
ISC
Interagency Security Committee
LL
Live Load
National
Institute
of
Standards
NISTIR
Technology Interagency Report
RC
Reinforcement Concrete
UFC
Unified Facilities Criteria
xviii
and
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction to Precast Concrete
The precast construction system is a system to construct the components of a building

in a controlled environment, either at site or off site, and transported, positioned and at last
assembled into construction works.
After the World War II in Europe, precast concrete construction had gained its
popularity as most European countries were facing major rebuilding task.
In Malaysia, the Ministry of Housing and Local Government of Malaysia had
introduced the precast construction system under the Industrialised Building System (IBS) in
1960. The first project that using precast construction system was along Jalan Pekeliling,
Kuala Lumpur, which comprising 7 blocks of 17 stories flat with 3000 units of low-cost flat
and 40 shops lot. The project was completed within 27 months from 1966 to 1968 and
including a casting yard at Jalan Damansara (Mohamad Kamar, 2010).
Due to its popularity and advance technologic nowadays, many people have release
the importance of using precast construction system, such as following:
Speed of construction, which is due to the ability of the casting of components for
the superstructure while foundation work is in progress and also can be cast and
erected year-round, without delays caused by harsh weather;
Aesthetic flexibility that due to the variety of textures, colours, finishes and inset
options that can be provided;
Design flexibility which is resulting from the long-span capabilities to provide

open interiors;
Durability which allows the material to show minimal wear over time and resist
impacts of all types without indicating stress;
Energy efficiency due to the materials high thermal mass. This is enhanced by
the use of insulated panels, which include an insulated core;
Environmental friendliness which can be seen in its contributions to achieving

less formwork use; and
High quality which is resulting from the quality control achieved by casting the
products in the plant.
However, the precast constructions also have some disadvantages which the engineers,
contractors and precast concrete manufactures plant must consider. These include:
Consist of heavy members due to its huge size.
Very small margin for error connection between each component.
Connections detail is hard to present in two dimensions drawings.
Need bracing during on-site erection of structure.
Skilled labour needed.
The following Figure 1.1 shows the different types of precast components.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Figure 1.1:
(iv)
(v)
(i) Type of precast slabs, (ii) Type of precast beams, (iii) Precast column, (iv)
Precast wall panel, and (v) Precast staircase that been assembling into position.
(http://www.paradigm.in/Downloads/5)%20PRECAST.pdf)
1.2
Problem Statement
In precast construction, a precast concrete building can collapse due to many factors.
Faulty design by engineers, faulty construction method by contractors, lay of building
maintenance, accident force (explosion), earthquake and collapse phenomenon cause by
gravity load due to inadequate connection. The World Trade Center collapse in September
2001 (Figure 1.2) is one of the famous progressive collapse phenomenons, which brought a
renewed interest in the subject among other federal institutions of the United States, such as
the General Services Administration (GSA) and the Department of Defence (DoD). This is
because most of the building robustness analysis is base on simplified analysis or merely give
general recommendation for the mitigation of the consequences of a structural local failure
only.
Figure 1.2:
World Trade Central collapse.
(http://www.nyc-architecture.com/GON/GON001B.htm)
1.3
Significance of This Study
In general, the term of progressive collapse can be understood as the spread of an

initial local failure from element to element resulting, eventually, in the collapse of an entire
structure or a disproportionate large part of it (ASCE 7-05, 2005). There are many factors
that can cause a building to collapse. In this study, the focus is only on the phenomenon due
to gravity load.
A building designed against progressive collapse can provide more safety to those
who use and / or live in the building. It also can minimise the loss of life when damage is
isolated to the area of initial structural element rather than letting the damage spreading
around and causing building to collapse.
Due to the high demand of construction in Malaysia and global warming, Malaysian
Construction Industry has been urged to use innovative construction technique and to shift
from traditional practice of brick and mortar to Industrialised Building System (IBS)
construction. On the other hand, the issues of sustainability and green construction have been
duly highlighted in the Construction Industry Master Plan (2005 2015) as being of
significant importance for the Malaysian construction industry (Mohamad Kamar, 2010). The
Malaysian government is also committed to addressing sustainability issues and meeting its
target and obligations in this regard. Figure 1.3 shows one of Malaysian governments
projects, the Police Housing Flat (Kompleks Perumahan PDRM) in Stutong district, Kuching,
which will be the focus of this project.
Two precast concrete systems are identified and used to model the Police Flat
concerned. The columns supporting the three storeys flat are slender and unbraced, and prone
to collapse. Hence, this study can provide significant information that may be used in future
design to prevent threat of progressive collapse due to gravity load. The result of this study
shall tell which precast concrete structural system can prevent or minimize continuous
spreading of damage after the initial triggering event has occurred.
Slender Column
Figure 1.3:
1.4
Kompleks Perumahan PDRM.
Objectives
The objectives of this thesis are listed as below:

a.
To predict progressive collapse for precast building due to missing column

concept with different systems.
b.
To identify the critical key element of the precast concrete building model, while
the building is subjected to missing element (missing column approach).
c.
To determine the building collapse potential and retrofit solution.
1.5
Scope of Study
This thesis mainly focuses on the predicting progressive collapse for multi storey
precast concrete building with different structural systems.
To simplify the study, this thesis only focuses on the precast building collapse
behaviour due to gravity load phenomenon, instead of wind pressure, seismic loading and so
on. This is because the building collapse phenomenon due to wind pressure or seismic
loading is well defined in general core of practice, such as British Standard Cores, American
Society of Civil Engineers Cores, and Euro Cores compare to collapse phenomenon due to
gravity load as mentioned in problem statement.
In this thesis, the finite element software, Abaqus 6.11 will be use as a tool for
modelling. The beam and column is analysed as wire element and the slab loading was
transferred to beam using Johansens yield line method to simulate the overall response of the
model due to missing column approach.
The multi storey precast Police Flat in Stutong district, Kuching is used as a case study
for analysis base on General Services Administration (GSA).
1.6
Outline of This Thesis
Chapter 1 explains general information about the research topics, which include the
history of precast concrete in Malaysia, the advantage and disadvantage of precast concrete
components, and different types of precast components. On the other hand, it also gives the
information about the objectives of this research and scope of study. From the problem
statement and significance of this study, it gives the information about the causes of not
having a good building collapse predicting and the reason to do the research topic.
Chapter 2 is the literature review related with the research topic which is about
predicting progressive collapse for multi storey building. The information was obtained from
journal article, conference paper, engineering textbooks and online articles.
From the
literature review, it consists of the different type of connection for precast concrete system,
type of precast construction system with its connection detail, progressive collapse definition
and types of progressive collapse.
Besides that, it also cover the structural analysis
approaches used in progressive collapse modelling, code and standard, types of element used
in structural modelling by researcher.
Chapter 3 covers the methodology flow chat of the thesis, which consists of two major
paths. The first path is the verification work on one dimension, two dimensions and three
dimensions with different connection (rigid connection and beam column pin connection), and the
second path is the actual precast building model which analysis base on actual building
configuration base on General Services Administration (GSA) guideline with difference
connection also (rigid connection and beam column pin connection).
Chapter 4 talks about the models validation results analysis and its accuracy. The
actual precast building model results analysis and discussion also will be present here.
Chapter 5 is the conclusion and recommendations of this thesis study. Effectiveness
and suitability of the proposed methodology in predicting progressive collapse for multi
storey precast concrete building with different structural systems will be concluded here and
recommendations will be suggested and proposed for further study.
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Introduction
Chapter 2 is the literature review related with the research topic which is about
predicting progressive collapse for multi storey building. The information was obtained from
journal article, conference paper, engineering textbooks and online articles.
In the Chapter 2, it consists of the different type of connection for precast concrete
system, type of precast construction system with its connection detail, progressive collapse
definition and types of progressive collapse. Besides that, it also covers the structural analysis
approaches used in progressive collapse modelling, code and standard, types of element used
in structural modelling by researchers.
2.2
Types of Connection for Precast Concrete System
In general, there are three types of connection for precast frame connection, such as
continuous (rigid) connection, semi rigid connection and simple (pin) connection. These
connections indicate the degree of moment to be transferred between members. The rigid
connection and simple connection transfer full-moment and zero-moment between members.
The degree of moment transfer for semi-rigid connection stands between rigid and simple
connection. The differences between the effects of connection types to the moment
distribution in a structure are show in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1:
Effects of connection types to the moment distribution in a structure. (Lee,

2004)
2.2.1 Rigid connection.
In general, rigid connections are used to assure sufficient stability of portal frames by
ensuring sufficient of strength capacity to resist the applied loads and to have sufficient
stiffness to limit the sideways of the structure. The rigid connections can be applied in many
paths of structural joint, such as connections between beams and columns and also between
10
slabs and walls. Hence, these connections are also able to prevent progressive collapse of
multi-storey structures (Bruggeling and Huyghe, 1991). However in most cases, connections
with fully fixed are very hard to achieve, and connections that able to resist more than 90% of
fixed end moment can be assuming as rigid connections (Alias, 2002).
2.2.2 Semi rigid beam column connection.
Semi-rigid connections have strength in between simple connections and rigid

connections. Therefore, these connections can transferring some of the moments, axial forces
and shear forces from the beam to support.
2.2.3 Simple connection.
Pinned connections transfer purely shear forces, both for (dominant) gravity and
uplifting forces. Pinned connections lend themselves to simple detailing and construction,
and may be formed in the simplest manner by element bearing. To increase bearing capacity
and reduce localized spreading, steel inserts are frequently used by anchoring plates (or rolled
structural sections) into the connecting elements. The connection is completed by surrounding
the steel inserts with cementitious grout for the fire and durability protection (Elliott, 1996).
11
2.3
Types of Precast Construction Systems with its connection detail
Depending on the load-bearing structure, precast systems can be divided into the
following categories (Takahashi, 2000):
2.3.1 Large panel system
The designation system refers to building composed of large wall and slab concrete
panel connected in vertical and horizontal direction. Normally, the precast wall panel size is
one story high and is enclosing appropriate spaces for the rooms within a building to form a
box like structural. The vertical wall panel is use to captor the vertical loading (structural
load and live load) and the horizontal panel is use to resist the lateral load (wind load and
seismic load). A large precast RC wall panel with opening is shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2:
Example of large precast RC wall panel with opening.
12
In order to connect all the panels into path, the panel connections represent the key
components in this system. Vertical joint connect the vertical faces of adjoining wall panels
and horizontal joint connect the horizontal faces of the adjoining wall and floor panels.
Depending on the construction methods, these joints can be classified as wet and dry
joint. Wet joints are constructed with cast in place concrete poured between the precast
panels with protruding reinforcing bars from the panels (dowels) are welded, looped to ensure
its continuality. However, the dry joints are constructed by bolting or welding steel plate
together with the panel fist, before cast with concrete as shown in Figure 2.3.
(i)
Figure 2.3:
(ii)
(i) Wet joint, and (ii) Dry joint. (Takahashi, 2000)
13
2.3.2 Precast frame system
The system is developed for a low rise building construction, like warehouse or
shopping complex. It can be constructed either by using linear elements or spatial beam
column subassemblies, and incorporates with cast in situ concrete. The Figure 2.4 has shown
a typical precast frame system construction where the precast beam is sitting on the RC corbel
and connected to column. The used of linear element mean the connecting face is at the face
of column beam junction, and the spatial beam column subassemblies connection is
placed away from the column face as shown in Figure 2.5.
The beam - column joints accomplished in this way are normally hinged, as show in
Figure 2.6 (ii) and special treatments are required for lateral pressure.
To ensure the continuity of the precast frame system, Takahashi, (2000) had proposed
to use the post tensioning at the joint connection for precast frame beam construction as
shown in Figure 2.7 to adjust the amount of moment at the ends of the beam by adjusting the
amount of pre-stressing. Besides that, Ertas (2011) also did some analysis and laboratory
works on ductile connections in precast concrete moment resisting frame and the type of
precast concrete moment resisting connections are show in Figure 2.8.
14
Figure 2.4:
Precast frame systems with the precast beam sitting on the RC corbel and
connected to column. (http://www.paradigm.in/Downloads/5)%20PRECAST.pdf)
Figure 2.5:
Types of beam - column joint subassembly.
15
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Figure 2.6:
Linear element connection details: (i) Column to Column connection, (ii)

Column to beam connection, (iii) Slab to beam connection.
Figure 2.7:
A beam column connection using post tensioning. (Takahashi, (2000))

16
(i)
(ii)
Figure 2.8:
Detail of cast-in-place in beam connection.
Reinforcement detail and assembly process of composite connection.

Precast concrete moment resisting connections:
(i) Detail of cast-in-place
in beam connection. (ii) Reinforcement detail and assembly process of composite connection.
(Ertas, 2011).
17
2.3.3 Slab column systems with shear wall
Consist of two systems as following:

i.
Lift slab systems with wall.

In the lift slab system, the load - bearing structure consists of precast
reinforced concrete columns and slabs only. Precast columns are usually two stories
high and all precast structural elements are assembled by means of special joints.
Reinforced concrete slabs are poured on the ground in forms, one on top of
each others. Then, precast concrete floor slabs are lifted from the ground up to the
final height by lifting cranes and moved downwards to the final position as shown in
Figure 2.9. Temporary supports are used to keep the slabs in the position until the
connection with the columns has been achieved.
Figure 2.9:
Pre - stressed slab column system.
18
ii.
Pre - stressed slab - column system

The pre - stressed slab - column system uses horizontal pre - stressing in two
orthogonal directions to achieve continuity, which the reinforced concrete floor slabs
fit the clear span between columns, and the precast concrete column elements are 1
to 3 stories high.
After erecting the slabs and columns, the columns and floor slabs are pre stressed by means of pre - stressing tendons that pass through ducts in the columns at
the floor level and along the gaps left between adjacent slabs. After pre - stressing,
the gaps between the slabs are filled with in situ concrete and the tendons then
become bonded with the spans. The following Figure 2.10 shows the installation of
tendon passing through ducts in the columns at the floor level and along the gaps left
between adjustment slabs.
Figure 2.10:
Post - tensioned slab - column connection.
19
2.4
Progressive Collapse: Definition and Types of Collapse
In general, the term of progressive collapse can be understood as the spread of an

initial local failure from element to element resulting, eventually, in the collapse of an entire
structure or a disproportionate large part of it (ASCE 7-05, 2005). It means that if a small
path of the structural element fails, it initiates a chain reaction that causes other structural
elements to fail in a domino effect, creating a larger and more destructive collapse of the
structure as shown in the following model that create by Tang (2006).
Figure 2.11:
Phase of progressive collapse, from the intact structural (left), to initial loss of
column and subsequent failure in the floor above (centre), and failure propagating to other
bays (right). (Tang, 2006)
For better understanding, the event of progressive collapse of a building is summaries
in Figure 2.12. A few types of building collapse examples are also shown in Figure 2.13.
20
Figure 2.12:
Collapse Sequence Events Diagram.
(http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/pbs/Collapse_Sequence_of_Events_Diagram.pdf)
21
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Figure 2.13:
(i) The devastating aftermath of a large progressive collapse of one of the
World Trade Center towers after the attacks on September 11, 2001, (ii) Remains of Murrah
Building after blast induced progressive collapse, and (iii) Deutsche Bank Building remains
standing despite column loss over multiple stories.
22
2.5
Structural Analysis Approaches Used in Progressive Collapse Modeling
In general, there are two types of structural analysis approaches. Those two are the
alternative load path method and specific local resistance method to design a building to resist
building collapse (Burns, 2002).
2.5.1 Alternate load path method
In this approach, the building is designed such that if any one component fails or
missing, alternate paths elements or components are available to take the extra load due to
failure component and preventing a general collapse from occurring. This approach has the
benefit of simplicity and directness. At where, it does not specify a threat or a cause for the
damaged state, and it limits the applicability to abnormal loading conditions that would cause
the stipulated level of damage. An advantage of this approach is that it promotes structural
systems with ductility, continuity, and energy absorbing properties that are desirable in
preventing progressive collapse and discourages the use of a large transfer girder that prevents
a significant number of the columns from extending to the ground floor. Besides, this method
is also consistent with the seismic design approach used in many building codes throughout
the world (NISTIR 7396, 2007).
23
2.5.2 Specific local resistance method
In case the alternate path method is not feasible, the specific local resistance method
should be use. At where the critical components or its connections that are potential subjects
to attack and that are susceptible to progressive collapse or disproportionate collapse are
provided with additional resistance and shall not fail in the most critical direction after being
subjected to a static uniform pressure or blast loading. Therefore, the key structural elements
are to be explicitly designed with sufficient strength to withstand the effects of a specific
abnormal event without suffering any damage, which will requires numerical simulation (with
non-linear dynamic analysis methods) or empirical data to demonstrate a key element's ability
to withstand a design threat (NISTIR 7396, 2007). Hence, this requires some knowledge of
the nature of potential attacks and is difficult to codify in a simple and objective way.
2.6
Code and Standards
Since the progressive collapse of the Ronan Point apartment tower in 1968, many
codes and standards have at-tempted to address this type of collapse (Nair, 2004). Two types
of design code of practices are discussed here.
24
2.6.1 General Services Administration (GSA) progressive collapse guidelines (2003)
In GSA progressive guideline, it begins with a process to determine the existing or

new building is exempt from progressive collapse considerations or not (see section 3 of GSA,
2003). At where, the exemption is based on the type and size of the structure (for in-stance,
any building more than 10 stories is non-exempt), and is unrelated to the level of threat.
Typical non-exempt buildings in steel or concrete have to be shown by analysis to be able to
tolerate removal of one column or a nice meter long of a bearing wall without collapse.
Considerable details are provided regarding the features of the analysis and the acceptance
criteria is shown in section 4 for the reinforced concrete building analysis and design, and
section 5 for the steel frame building analysis and design both for new and existing building.
2.6.2 Department of Defence Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) design of buildings to

resist progressive collapse (2010)
In Department of Defence Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) progressive guild line, it

determine the existing or new building exempt from progressive collapse consideration by
using occupancy category and design requirement as shown in Chapter 2 of UFC progressive
guideline book. The considerable details regarding the features of the analysis and the
acceptance criteria is shown in Chapter 3 of UFC progressive guideline book by employ three
design and analysis approaches; tie force, alternate path, and enhanced local resistance into
progressive collapse design requirement.
The design guideline also cover the material
properties, strength reduction factor, tie force requirement, alternative path method, ect. for
25
reinforcement concrete building, structural steel building, masonry building, wood building
and cold formed steel building.
2.7
Types of Element and Combination Use in Structural Modeling
There are three types of element and two types of combination element analysis can be
use in progressive collapse modelling and they are listed as following:
Beam element
Shell element
Solid element
Combination
o
Beam element plus shell element
Beam element plus solid element
2.7.1 Beam element
A beam element is a one-dimensional entity used to represent part or all of a structural

component that has a length much greater than its other two dimensions. When it subjected to
vertical loads and moments, it will produce vertical displacements and rotations as shown in
the following Figure 2.14.
The degrees of freedom for a beam element are a vertical
26
displacement and a rotation at each node, as opposed to only a horizontal displacement at

each node for a truss element. Sometime, engineer also call beam element as bar element or
rod element.
Figure 2.14:
Beam element.
2.7.2 Shell element
A shell element is a two dimensional element, which consist of 4 to 8 node

isoperimetric quadrilaterals or 3 to 6 node triangular elements in any 3-D orientation to
represent part or all of a structural component that has a thickness much smaller than its other
two dimensions as shown in the Figure 2.15. The element geometry is described by the nodal
point coordinates, at where each of the shell element nodes has 5 degrees of freedom (DOF) three translations and two rotations.
The translational DOF are in the global Cartesian
coordinate system, and the rotations are about two orthogonal axes on the shell surface
defined at each node.
27
Figure 2.15:
Typical shell element.
(http://download.autodesk.com/us/algor/userguides/mergedProjects/setting_up_the_analysis/n
onlinear/elements/Shell_Elements.htm)
2.7.3 Solid element
The solid element is a three dimensional extensional element, which consist of fournode tetrahedron to a 21-node brick element as shown in the Figure 2.16. For brick element,
the first 8 nodes are the corner nodes of the element; nodes 9 to 20 correspond to mid-sidenodes and node 21 is a centre node. The element geometry is described by the nodal point
coordinates, at where each of the shell element nodes has 6 degrees of freedom (DOF) - three
translations and three rotations. The translational DOF are in the global Cartesian coordinate
system, and the rotations are about three orthogonal axes on the surface defined at each node.
28
(i)
Figure 2.16:
(ii)
Solid element: (i) 4 node tetrahedron, and (ii) 21-node brick element.
(http://download.autodesk.com/us/algor/userguides/mergedProjects/setting_up_the_analysis/n
onlinear/elements/Brick_Elements.htm)
2.7.4 Combination of element use in previous structural modeling
Two types of analysis model will be present for beam plus shell element modelling
and one analysis model for beam plus solid element modelling only.
1.
Beam element plus shell element

The Mode 1 that shown in Figure 2.17 is a typical three dimensional framed
concrete building model that created by Almusallam, (2001) to determine the overall
response of the structure due to the failure of the critical columns by using LS-DYNA
software. At where, the reinforced concrete column and beam were modelled as 2
node axial beam elements with tension, compression, torsion and bending capabilities,
which consist of 16282 beam elements and the reinforced core, concrete slab and
29
facade were model by using four node quadrilateral and three node triangular shell
element with bending and membrane capabilities, which consist of 1024, 8496 and
1920 respectively. The mesh discretization of shell of the quadrilateral shell elements
varies from 1.00 to 1.53, whereas, the minimum included angle for the triangular shell
elements is more than 30 degrees and the maximum length of the side of a shell
element is taken as 1.66 m. The finite element model of the structure contains a total
of 12336 nodes leading to 73734 unrestrained degrees of freedom.
Figure 2.17:
Detail of full 3D model. (Almusallam, 2001)
The second model that shown in Figure 2.18 is a typical three dimensional steel
frame building model that create by Alashker, (2011) to determine the robustness of a
30
seismically designed steel building by using LS-DYNA also. At where, the beams and
columns were modelled using fully integrated rectangular shell elements ranging in
size from 220 to 380 mm with refined around connections to ensure that the large
strain and stress gradients in such regions are correctly captured and the floor slab is
modelled using fully integrated four-node, isotropic shell elements with an equivalent
section shell thickness of 101.5mm.
Beam element
Shell element
(i)
Figure 2.18:
(ii)
Detail of model: (i) full 3D model, (ii) Close up connection region. (Alashker,
2011)
2.
Beam element plus solid element

It is a typical local column that created by Almusallam, (2010) to assess the
performance of individual columns against blast pressures by using LS-DYNA

software. At where, the column were modelled by using hexahedron solid elements,
while the shear and longitudinal reinforcements of the columns were modelled as a
discrete component using beam elements as shown in Figure 2.19.
31
Figure 2.19:
(i)
(ii)
Typical local column: (i) Reinforcement details, and (ii) Concrete model.
(Almusallam, 2001)
2.8
Conclusion
From literature review, the types of existing frame and beam column, connection are
known. The building model of this study, Police Housing Flat can be modeled as a skeletal
structural frame with two types of beam column connections which are rigid and continuo
beam column pin connection. The missing column approach is needed to be applied in
this study analysis base on General Services Administration (GSA) guideline.
32
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
Chapter 3 covers the methodology flow chat (Figure 3.1) of the thesis, which consists of
two major paths. The first path is the verification work on one dimension, two dimensions and
three dimensions with different connections (rigid connection and beam column pin connection),
and the second path is the actual precast building models which analysis base on actual building
configuration base on GSA guideline with difference connections also (rigid connection and beam
column pin connection). In addition, it also cover the input parameters used in Abaqus 6.11,
modelling assumptions, and design code and reference that been used in the analysis.
33
Methodology
Verification work
One dimension verification
Analysis
Predicting progressive collapse for multi storey

precast building with difference structural systems
Two dimensions verification
Three dimensions verification

with Prokon 2.5
GSA
Beam column pin

connection
Fix fix / rigid connection

(Model 1 FF)
Beam column pin connection

(Model 2 BCPC)
Rigid connection
Initial shape
Initial shape
Missing column (Case 1)
Figure 3.1:
Analysis process flow chat
34
3.2
Verification
3.2.1 One and two dimension sample model verification
An eight span continuous beam of twenty eight meters are subjected to an ultimate
uniform distribution load of 24.2kNm-1 and ultimate point loads, 56kN as shown in Figure 3.2.
The continuous beam was modeled by using Abaqus 6.11 software. The moment and shear
results general by the Abaqus were compared with the hand calculation, and Prokon 6.5. The
results were summarized in Chapter 4 verification results.
Figure 3.2:
Eight span of continuous beam with total length of 28m long.
3.2.2 Three dimension sample model verification
A simple three dimension model as shown in Figure 3.3 is analysis to determine its
bending moment behavior and shear force behavior by using software Abaqus 6.11 and
Prokon 2.5. The applied loading is showing in Figure 3.4. An ultimate load of 24.2kNm-1 is
35
applying to horizontal beams; 52.5kNm-1 of ultimate load is applying to all of the middle of
the vertical beams and 26.25kNm-1 of ultimate load to the edge of the vertical beams in
vertical direction.
The connections used in the first model verification will be beam column pin
connection, where the horizontal beam will be analysed as continuous beam and vertical beam
will be analysised as simply supported beam. For second model verification, all of the joint
model will be analysis as rigid connection. The bending moment and shear force results for
horizontal beam looking at the front side at level 1 in Figure 3.3 generate from Abaqus 6.11
and Prokon 2.5 are compared and shown in Chapter 4 verification results. The column
reactions at points A, B, and C that generate by both of the software are checked with hand
calculation also, and summarise in the Chapter 4 verification results.
B
A
Joint connection
Front Side
Figure 3.3:
Three dimensions model layout (verification).
36
Figure 3.4:
3.3
Applied load
Structural Model
3.3.1 Geometry of the model
Figure 3.5 shows the three dimensions model configuration layout based on the
architect drawings as per attached in Appendix B. Figure 3.6 to Figure 3.10 have showed the
dimensions including height and width of each bay in the model.
The beam (300mm x 600mm) and column (300mm x 300mm) are created by using
beam element and the slab loading is calculated and transfer to beam by using Johansens
yield line method. The beams layout and columns position are shown in green colour and red
colour in Appendix C.
37
The unit parameter that are used for this model in Abaqus 6.11 are listed as following
in Table 3.1 as Abaqus has no units built into it, except for rotation (expressed in radians) and
angle measures (expressed in degrees). Therefore, it is user responsibility to ensure the units
chosen is self-consistent, which means that derived units of the chosen system can be expressed in
terms of the fundamental units without conversion factors. Specifying model data in inconsistent
units will give the wrong results that are not physically meaningful and cause numerical problems
during analysis.
Table 3.1:
Units parameter use in Abaqus 6.11 model.
Parameter
Length, l
Force, F
Units
Meter, m
Newton, N
To ensure the accuracy of the analysis, the element size of 100mm is used during the
analysis for the precast reinforce beam only and for the column, the element size used is
750mm. In this model, a total of 7551 number of nodes and 7470 elements have been created.
Right site
Front site
Figure 3.5:
Precast building 3D model layout.
38
Figure 3.6:
Front view
Figure 3.7:
Rear view
39
Figure 3.8:
Left side view
Figure 3.9:
Figure 3.10: Floor plan
40
Right side view
3.3.2 Material properties
The material (concrete) is assumed to be in elasticity-plastic condition at where the

stress-strain relationship for the yield stresses is dependent on the equivalent plastic strain as
shown in the Figure 3.11 and the concrete young modulus, Ec and poison ratio,
are show in
Table 3.2.
Stress Strain Curve
Yield Stress, kNmm-2
20
Figure 3.11:
15
10
5
0
0
0.001
0.002
Total Strain
0.003
0.004
Stress Strain Curve for Grade 40 Concrete. (Extracted from Prokon 2.5 frame
analysis, material database)
Table 3.2:
Concrete Strength, fcu at
28 days (Nmm-2)
40
Grade 40 Concrete Properties.
Young Modulus, Ec (kNmm-2)

BS8110-2: 1985, Table 7.2
28
Poison Ratio,
BS8110-1: 1997 clause 2.4.2.4
0.2
3.3.3 Loading
The loadings that been use in the model are summarised in the following Table 3.3.
41
Table 3.3:
Load applied in model.
Category
Loading
Concrete density:
24kNm-3
Slab self weight (150mm):
3.6kNm-2
Beam self weight (300mm x 600mm)
4.32kNm-2
Column self weight (300mm x 300mm)
2.16kNm-2
Brick density (115mm thk.):
22 kNm-3
Brick loading on slab:
2.5kNm-2
Screed:
1.0kNm-2
2kNm-2
Live load:
3.3.4 Beam column connection
Two types of beam column connection are use in predicting the progressive
collapse for multi storey precast building. Those connections are rigid connection and
beam column pin connection.
For rigid connection model (Model 1 FF (Initial Shape), Model 1 FF (Case
1), Model 1 FF (Case 2), and Model 1 FF (Case 3)), all joint connections will be
specified as fix fix connection. In Abaqus 6.11, this is achieved through the function
Beam from Model Tree, Connector Section, Connection Category, Assembled
/ Complex, Connection Type.
For beam column pin connection model (Model 2 BCPC (Initial Shape),
Model 2 BCPC (Case 1), Model 2 BCPC (Case 2), and Model 2 BCPC (Case 3)),
42
all joint connection will be specified as pin connection (except the continuous beams
and continuous columns). In Abaqus 6.11, this is achieved through the function Joint
from Model Tree, Connector Section, Basic, Translational Type.
3.3.5 Modeling assumptions
All beam having the same dimension sizes (300mm x 600mm) and same
properties.
All column having the same dimension sizes (300mm x 300mm) and same
properties.
Loading from precast slab distributed to precast beam using Johansens yield line
method.
Wind pressure has not been consider in this multi storey precast concrete model, as
the study only focus on the progressive collapse due to gravity load.
3.4
Design Code and References
The types of design code and references use in multi storey precast concrete modeling
include:
Abaqus 6.11, 2011. Analysis Users Manual. (volume 1 5)
BS 8110-1 1997 Structural use of concrete. Code of practice for design and
construction
43
BS8110-2: 1985 Structural use of concrete. Code of practice for special

circumstances
BS 6399-1:1996 Loading for buildings. Code of practice for dead and imposed
loads.
GSA 2003 Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines for New
Federal Office Buildings and Major Modernization Projects.
3.5
Analysis of Three Dimensions Model for Progressive Collapse
The analysis step in the analysis flow chat in Section 3.1 will be explained in details in
this section
3.5.1 Analysis cases
In order to the determine the building robustness using linear static analysis, the
following analysis cases will be carried out base on the General Services Administration
(GSA), 2003 design guideline Section 4.
1.
Exterior considerations
a) Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1
story) located at the corner of the building (Case 1 as shown in following
Figure 3.12 (i)).
44
b) Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1
story) located at or near the middle of the long side of the building (Case 2 as
shown in following Figure 3.12 (ii)).
2.
Interior considerations
Analyze for the instantaneous loss of a column for one floor above grade (1
story) located at interior to the perimeter column lines (Case 3 as shown in
following Figure 3.12 (iii)).
(i) At location A / 1 (case 1)
45
(ii) At location A / 3 (case 2)
(iii) At location A1 / 4a (case 3)

Figure 3.12:
Column removed: (i) At location A / 1 (case 1), (ii) At location A / 3 (case 2),
and (iii) At location A1 / 4a (case 3).
46
3.6
Acceptance criteria for structural component
Base on the linear static elastic analysis result, the magnitude and distribution of
potential of each structural member will be identified base on Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR)
as show in following Equation 1. This approach is also currently employed in FEMA 273 and
FEMA 356 using m factor for linear elastic analysis method.
To calculate the demands (QUD) in structural components determined in terms of
moments, axial forces, shear forces, etc.. The static gravity load is applied to the entire
structure, according to Equation 2. In the GSA criteria, live load is reduced to 25% of the full
design live load, admitting that the entire live load value is less probable. At the same time,
by multiplying the load combination by a factor of two is taking into account in a simplified
approach the dynamic effect that occurs when a vertical support is instantaneously removed
from the structure.
DCR
Qud
2.0
Qce
Equation 1
Where,
DCR = Demand capacity ratio
Qud = Acting force (demand) determined in component or connection / joint (moment, axial
force, shear, and possible combined forces)
Qce = Expected ultimate, un factored capacity of the component and / or connection / joint
(moment, axial force, shear and possible combined force)
If DCR 2.0, the structural component is considered to be severely damaged or collapsed for
linear elastic approach.
47
Load 2( DL 0.25LL)
Equation 2
Where,
DL = Dead Load
LL = Live Load
3.7
Structural Member Capacity for Building Models
The bending moment capacity and shear capacity of 300mm x 600mm precast
reinforce beam and 300mm x 300mm precast reinforced column are calculated below.
1.
Moment capacity of beam = 473kNm (from Model 2 BCPC [Initial Shape])
M
bd 2 f cu
473 x10 6
300 x520 2 x 40
0.146 0.156
d depth - (cover link bar 0.5 bar )

600 - (30 10 25 12.5)
520mm
k
z d 0.5 0.25
0.9
0.796d
As
M
0.95 f y z
fy = 460Nmm-2
2614mm 2
Use 4T25 & 4T16, As = 2768mm2

Assuming the steel bar is applying throughout the precast RC beam for top bar and
bottom bar.
48
2.
Composite beam section
Es
Ec
200
28
7.143
As 7.14 Ac
2768mm 2 steel area 19770mm 2 concrete cross sectoin area
2
bh 3
bh 3
Ac y )
12
12
3
300 x66
300 x600 3
2
2(
19770220 )
12
12
9
4
7.331x10 mm
I g 2(
Fix the depth = 600mm

bh 3
12
3
b600
7.331x10 9
12
b 407mm 400mm
Ig
Hence, 300mm x 600mm precast beam with 4T25 & 4T16 top and bottom is equal to 400mm
x 600mm plain concrete beam.
49
3.
Moment capacity of column
Given column reaction 1592kN , column moment = 32kNm

From BS8110 3: 1985 chart no: 40.
N 1592000
bh 300 x300
18 Nmm 2
let
100A sc
2
bh
M
3.4
From BS8110 3: 1985 chart no: 40, bh 2
M 91.9kNm 32kNm
Use 4T25,
100A sc
2.18
bh
Es
Ec
200
28
7.143
As 7.14 Ac
1964mm 2 steel area 14023mm 2 concrete cross sectoin area
3.
Shear capacity of beam = 221.7kN (from Model 1 FF [Initial Shape])

Ignore the shear link effect on composite concrete section.
50
3.8
Conclusion
For the analysis in this study, two models namely Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC
are analyzed. Model 1 FF is a skeletal structural with rigid connections. Model 2 BCPC
is a skeletal structural with continuous beam column pin connection. All structural are
modeled to be similar to actual building. Each model is analyzed using three cases of the
missing column approach which are namely Case 1, Case 2, and Case 3. Each case has its
column been remove at different location as shown in Figure 3.12.
51
Chapter 4
RESULT, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1
Introduction
Various types of verification samples (one dimension, two dimensions, and Model 1
and Model 2 are under investigation with rigid connection and beam column pin connection)
in Chapter 3 are analyzed using Abaqus 6.11 and compared with hand calculation. The
results of analyses and discussion of the verification samples are summarized in this chapter.
The results, analyses and discussions for the precast building models, namely Model
1- FF and Model 2 BCPC with different cases are summarized in this chapter. The
Conclusion and Recommendation will be discuss in Chapter 5.
4.2
Verification Samples: Results Analysis
The verification samples models (one dimension, two dimensions, and Model 1 and
Model 2 are under investigation with rigid connection and beam column pin connection)
results analysis is presented in this section.
52
4.2.1 Verification of one dimension and two dimension models results analysis
Figure 4.1 shows the comparison of bending moment and shear force analysis result
for eight span continuous beams of 28 meter, generated from Abaqus 6.11, Prokon 2.5 and
hand calculation. From the analysis, it is founded that results using Abaqus 6.11 with a
discretization mesh of 100mm gives approximate same results with the hand calculation and
Prokon 2.5 for bending moment and shear. The differences between the Abaqus 6.11, Prokon
2.5 and hand calculation are relatively small and this shows that the original calculations are
accurate and that they can be used for similar cases. The meshing grid may cause small
differences, but this should not affect the final result. A detail of hand calculations, Abaqus
6.11 data and Prokon 2.5 data are provided in Appendix A.
The other verification for simple models results like simply supported beam,
cantilever beam and two bay frame models are summarized in the Table 4.1.
53
Bending Moment, M (kNm)
Bending Moment Diagram

80.00
60.00
40.00
Abaqus 6.11
20.00
0.00
0.00
-20.00
Prokon 2.5
Hand calculation
3.50
-40.00
7.00 10.50 14.00 17.50 21.00 24.50 28.00
Distance, l (m)
(i) Bending moment diagram
Shear Force, F (kN)
Shear Force Diagram

100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
-20.000.00
-40.00
-60.00
-80.00
-100.00
Abaqus 6.11
3.50
7.00 10.50 14.00 17.50 21.00 24.50 28.00
Prokon 2.5
Hand Calculation
Distance, l (m)
(ii) Shear force diagram

Figure 4.1:
(i) Bending moment diagram and (ii) shear force diagram.
54
Table 4.1:
Comparison analysis results between Abaqus 6.11 and hand calculation.
55
4.2.2 Verification for Model 1 and Model 2 under investigation
Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3 show the bending moment and shear force comparison
results between the Abaqus 6.11 and Prokon 2.5 for a horizontal beam looking from front
view (refer to Figure 3.3) for beam column pin connection and rigid connection. Table 4.2
shows the comparison results between the Abaqus 6.11, Prokon 2.5 and hand calculation for
column reaction at point A, B, and C for beam column pin connection and rigid connection.
From the analysis, it shows that with a discretization mesh of 100mm, it is good enough for
Abaqus 6.11 to give approximate same results with the Prokon 2.5 for bending moment and
shear. The column reaction average percentage differences between the Abaqus 6.11 and
Prokon 2.5 are also relatively small and this shows that the original calculations are accurate
and that they can be used for actual analysis. The meshing grid may cause small differences,
but this should not affect the final result.
56

Bending Moment, M (kNm)
80.00
60.00
40.00
Abaqus 6.11
20.00
0.00
0.00
-20.00
Prokon 2.5
3.50
7.00
-40.00
10.50
14.00
17.50
21.00
24.50
28.00
Distance, l (m)
Shear Force Diagram
Shear Force, F (kN)
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
-50.00
Abaqus 6.11
3.50
7.00
10.50
14.00
17.50
21.00
24.50
28.00
Prokon 2.5
-100.00
-150.00
Distance, l (m)

Figure 4.2:
(i) Bending moment and (ii) shear force diagram for a horizontal beam
extracting out from model 2 with beam column pin connection (BCPC).
57
Bending moment, (kNm)

100
80
60
40
20
0
-20 0
-40
Abaqus 6.11
Prokon 2.5
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
Distance (m)

Shear Force Diagram
Shear Force, (kN)
150
100
50
Abaqus 6.11
0
-50
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
Prokon 2.5
-100
-150
Distance (m)

Figure 4.3:
(i) Bending moment and (ii) shear force diagram for a horizontal beam
extracting out from model - 1 with rigid connection (FF).
Table 4.2:
Column reaction
Model
Column
Location
(see Figure
3.3.2a)
Abaqus 6.11
Result (kN)
(refer to
Appendix B)
Prokon 2.5
Results (kN)
(refer to
Appendix B)
Hand
Calculation
(kN)
Model 2
BCPC
A
B
C
A
B
C
753.12kN
1576.02kN
1531.23kN
842.90kN
1551.41kN
1465.69kN
754.32kN
1574.31kN
1529.44kN
841.86kN
1553.68kN
1467.48kN
755kN
1570kN
1530kN
-
Model
1 FF
58
Percentage
Difference
Between Abaqus
6.11 & Prokon
2.5(%)
-0.16
0.11
0.12
0.12
-0.15
-0.12
4.3
Results Analysis for Model 1 FF and Model 2 - BCPC
The Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC of the results analysis are presented here,
which includes, DCR - moment, DCR - shear, and DCR deflection (Table 4.3 to Table 4.5
and Table 4.6 to Table 4.8). The results and analysis of the bending moment and shear force
for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 for both modes are presented and compared with Initial Shape
model to show its Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR). The Figure 4.4 to Figure 4.6 showed the
path that going to be extracted.
Figure 4.4:
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Front side.
59
Bending Moment and Shear Force

of these members for Case 1, Case
2 and Case 3 to be extracted and
compare with Initial Shape.
Figure 4.5:
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Left side.
Figure 4.6:
Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC at Level 1.
4.3.1 Model 1 FF
Model 1 FF has the beams columns joint connections to be rigid connection. The
bending stiffness of the connection is infinity and the moment along the structural members
are free to redistribute. Figure 4.7 to Figure 4.12 show the comparison bending moment and
60
shear force for each different case with Initial Shape as mention in section 4.3. Figure 4.13 to
Figure 4.15 show the general deflected shape of each case. The detailed bending moment,
shear force and deflection generated by Abaqus 6.11are present in Appendix D.
Model 1 FF comparisons bending moment results for Case 1, Case 2 and

Case 3 of model 1 FF with Initial Shape.
4.3.1.1
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model
1 - FF (Case 1) at level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
300
DCR = 0.68
Beam capacity
200
100
Model 1 - FF Case 1
0
-100
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
Model 1 - FF Initial
shape
-200
-300
Distance, (m)
(i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).

Model 1 - FF (Case 1) at level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
400
250
200
150
100
50
0
-50 0
-100
-150
Model 1 - FF (Case 1)
DCR = 0.22
Distance, (m)
(ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
61
Model 1 - FF (Initial
Shape)
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 FF (Case 1) for corner column (grid A/1).
16
14
12
DCR = 1.4
Column capacity
8
Column capacity
High, (m)
10
6
4
2
Model 1 - FF (Initial shape)
DCR = 2.0
0
-200
-100
0
-2
Moment, (kNm)
100
200
(iii) Corner column (grid A/1).

Figure 4.7:
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1
- FF (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9), (ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 A/1), and (iii) Corner column (grid A/1).
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 FF (Case 2) at level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
400
300
200
100
Model 1 - FF Case 2
0
-100
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
Model 1- FF Initial shape
-200
-300
DCR=0.7
-400
Figure 4.8:
Distance, (m)
- FF (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
62
Bending moment comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 - FF
(Case 3) at level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
400
DCR = 0.7
300
200
100
Model 1 - FF Case 3
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
Distance, (m)
Figure 4.9:
- FF (Case 3) at level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
4.3.1.2
Comparisons shear force results for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 of model 1
FF with Initial Shape.
Shear force comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 - FF
(Case 1) at level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
250
Shear force, kN
200
Beam capacity
DCR = 0.9
150
100
50
0
-50 0

3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
-100
-150
Distance, m
63
(Case 1) at level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
150
DCR = 0.5
Shear force, kN
100
50
-1
-50
-100
-150
Distance, m

(Case 1) for corner column (grid A/1)
16
14
12
High, m
10
8
6
DCR = 0.5
Series2
4
2
DCR = 0.1
0
-150
-100
-50
Shear force, kN
50
(iii) Corner column (grid A/1)

Figure 4.10:
(Case 1) at level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9). (ii) Vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
(iii) Corner column (grid A/1)
64
Shear force comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 - FF (Case
2) at level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
300
DCR = 1.1
200
100
Model 1 - FF Case 2
0
0
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
-100
-200
-300
Distance, (m)
Figure 4.11:
(Case 2) at level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
Shear force comparison between Model 1-FF (Initial shape) and Model 1 - FF (Case
3) at level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
300
DCR =1.0
Shear forve, (kN)
200
100
Model 1 - FF Case 3
0
0
-100
-200
-300
Figure 4.12:
DCR =1.1
Distance, (m)
(Case 3) at level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
65
4.3.1.3
General deflected shape for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 for Model 1 - FF
Figure 4.13:
Figure 4.14:
66
Figure 4.15:
4.3.1.4:
Model 1 FF:
structural members analysis
The Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR) on critical structural members for each case is
summarized in Table 4.3 to Table 4.5 and to be discussed in 4.3.1.5.
Table 4.3:
Model 1 FF:
DCR for bending moment.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to moment

Member
Critical
View
DCR =
Case Member
capacity,
moment,
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kNm) Qud (kNm)
Front
473
96.0
0.2
Rear
473
57.3
0.1
Initial
Left
Beam
473
144.6
0.3
shape
Right
473
144.6
0.3
Level 1
473
290.9
0.6
67
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to moment (continuo)

Member
Critical
Progressive
View
DCR =
Case Member
capacity,
moment,
collapse
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kNm) Qud (kNm)
(DCR2.0)
Front
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Rear
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Initial
Column Left
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
shape
Right
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Level 1
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Front
473
315.0
0.7
No
Rear
473
62.8
0.1
No
Left
Beam
473
199.9
0.4
No
Right
473
148.7
0.3
No
Level 1
473
315.0
0.7
No
Case 1
Front
91.8
184.9
2.0
Yes
Rear
91.8
34.6
0.4
No
Column Left
91.8
184.9
2.0
Yes
Right
91.8
34.6
0.4
No
Level 1
91.8
184.9
2.0
Yes
Front
473
338.9
0.7
No
Rear
473
57.4
0.1
No
Left
Beam
473
155.6
0.3
No
Right
473
145.4
0.3
No
Level 1
473
338.9
0.7
No
Case 2
Front
91.8
33.0
0.4
No
Rear
91.8
33.0
0.4
No
Column Left
91.8
33.0
0.4
No
Right
91.8
33.0
0.4
No
Level 1
91.8
33.0
0.4
No
Front
473
134.8
0.3
No
Rear
473
57.6
0.1
No
Left
Beam
473
146.2
0.3
No
Right
473
146.2
0.3
No
Level 1
473
333.5
0.7
No
Case 3
Front
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Rear
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Column Left
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Right
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
Level 1
91.8
32.0
0.3
No
68
Table 4.4:
Model 1 FF:
DCR for shear force.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to shear

Member
Critical
View
DCR =
Case Member
capacity,
shear Qud
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kN)
(kN)
Front
221.7
121.3
0.5
Rear
221.7
62.8
0.3
Initial
Left
Beam
221.7
111.2
0.5
shape
Right
221.7
111.2
0.5
Level 1
221.7
221.6
1.0
Front
221.7
224.4
1.0
Rear
221.7
68.8
0.3
Left
Case 1
Beam
221.7
126.6
0.6
Right
221.7
112.4
0.5
Level 1
221.7
224.4
1.0
Front
221.7
236.0
1.1
Rear
221.7
63.8
0.3
Left
Case 2
Beam
221.7
115.1
0.5
Right
221.7
111.1
0.5
Level 1
221.7
236.0
1.1
Front
221.7
134.8
0.6
Rear
221.7
57.6
0.3
Left
Case 3
Beam
221.7
146.2
0.7
Right
221.7
146.2
0.7
Level 1
221.7
333.5
1.5
69
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Table 4.5:
Model 1 FF
DCR for beam deflection.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to deflection

Span
Deflection
View Displacement
Case Member
Length limit (Qud =
location
, Qce (mm)
(mm)
Span/250)
Front
2.1 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.0 3500.0
14.0
Initial
Left
4.5 8490.0
34.0
Beam
shape
Right
4.5 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
8.4 8490.0
34.0
Front
7.4 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.0 3500.0
14.0
Left
8.8 8490.0
34.0
Case 1
Beam
Right
4.4 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
8.8 8490.0
34.0
Front
5.9 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.1 3500.0
14.0
Left
4.4 8490.0
34.0
Case 2
Beam
Right
4.4 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
10.4 8490.0
34.0
Front
2.5 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.0 3500.0
14.0
Left
4.4 8490.0
34.0
Case 3
Beam
Right
4.4 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
8.5 8490.0
34.0
4.3.1.5:
DCR =
Qce/Qud
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
Progressive
Collpase
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Discussion on Model 1 FF based on section 4.3.1.4
The following Table 4.6 shows the summaries of analysis for Table 4.3, Table 4.4 and
Table 4.5. In Model 1 FF, Case 1 is the worst case among three cases been studied on, as
the DCR bending for column had exceeded the limitation (DCR 2.0) as show in Table 4.6.
From Table 4.6, it shows that for other cases, the bending, shear and displacement DCR limit
are still within the limitation, hence, there is no progressive collapse. Throughout the analysis,
70
the structural is likely to fail in bending flexure instead of shear or joint displacement. From
Figure 4.7, it can be seen that the rigid connection is helping to redistribute the point load
above the missing column position between ground floor level and level 1 (grid A/1) to the
adjacent column through the vertical beam, horizontal beam at level 1 and the column above
the level 1.
Table 4.6:
Summaries of analysis for Table 4.3, Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 with difference
cases.
Case
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Maximum DCR
bending
Maximum DCR
shear
Maximum DCR
deflection
2.0
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
Yes
No
No
4.3.2 Model 2 BCPC
Model 2 BCPC has the beams columns joint connections to be pinned. The
bending stiffness of the connection is completely zero. Figure 4.16 to Figure 4.21 show the
comparison bending moment and shear force for each different case with Initial Shape as
mention in section 4.4. Figure 4.22 to Figure 4.24 show the general deflected shape of each
case. The detailed bending moment, shear force and deflection generated by Abaqus 6.11are
present in Appendix E.
71
Model 2 BCPC comparisons bending moment results for Case 1, Case 2

and Case 3 with Initial Shape
4.3.2.1
Bending moment comparison between Model 2-BCPC (Initial shape) and

Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
700
600
Beam capacity
DCR = 1.2
500
400
Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1)
300
Model 2 - BCPC (Initial
shape)
200
100
0
-100
3.5
10.5 14 17.5
Distance, (m)
21
24.5
28
Bending moment comparison between Model 2-BCPC (Initial shape)

and Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/1 A/1).
500
Bending moment, (kNm
400
300
200
Model 2 - BCPC (Case
1)
100
0
0
-100
-200
-300
Distance, (m)
72
Model 2 - BCPC
(Initial Shape)
Bending moment comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and

Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1 for corner column (grid A/1).
16
14
12
High, m
10
8
6

Shape)
4
2
0
-1.5
-1
-0.5
Moment, kNm
0.5
(iii) Corner column (grid A/1).

Figure 4.16:
Bending moment comparison between Model 2-BCPC (Initial shape) and
Model 2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9), (ii) Vertical beam
(grid B/1 - A/1), and (iii) Corner column (grid A/1).

400
300
200
100
Mdoel 2 - BCPC (Case 2)
0
-100 0
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
shape)
-200
-300
-400
-500
Figure 4.17:
DCR = 0.8
Beam capacity
Distance, (m)
Model 2 - BCPC (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
73

and Model 2 - BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/4a
- A/4a).
200
100
0
-100
9
-200
shape)
-300
-400
DCR = 1.0
Beam capacity
-500
-600
Figure 4.18:
Distance, (m)
Model 2 - BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
Model 2 BCPC comparisons shear force results for Case 1, Case 2 and
Case 3 with Initial Shape
4.3.2.2
Shear force comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and Model
2 - BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1 for horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
Shear Forcce, (kNm)
300
200
DCR = 1.0 Beam Capacity
100
Model 2 - BCPC Case 1
0
-100
-200
-300
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
28
DCR = 1.1 Beam Capacity

Distance, (m)
74
Model 2 -BCPC Initial

shape
Shear force comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and Model 2 BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/1 - A/1).
150
DCR = 0.5
Shear Forcce, (kNm)
100
50
0
0
-50
Model 2 - BCPC (Initiaal

shape)
-100
DCR = 0.5
-150
Distance, (m)

Figure 4.19:
Shear force comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and Model 2
- BCPC (Case 1) at Level 1: (i) Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9) and (ii) Vertical beam (grid
B/1 - A/1).
400
Shear force, (kN)
300
Beam capacity
200
DCR = 1.1
100
0
0
3.5
10.5
14
17.5
21
24.5
-100
-200
-300
Figure 4.20:
DCR = 1.1
28

shape)
Beam capacity
Distance, (m)
- BCPC (Case 2) at Level 1: Horizontal beam (grid A/1 - A/9).
75
Shear force comparison between Model 2 - BCPC (Initial shape) and Model 2 BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1 for vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
300
Beam Capacity
DCR = 1.0
Shear forve, (kN)
200
100
Model 2 -BCPC Case 3
0
0
Model 2- BCPC Initial shape
-100
-200
-300
Distance, (m)
Figure 4.21:
- BCPC (Case 3) at Level 1: Vertical beam (grid B/4a - A/4a).
4.3.2.3
General deflected shape for Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3 for Model 2- BCPC
Figure 4.22:
Model 2 BCPC (Case 1) deflection in three dimensions.
76
Figure 4.23:
Figure 4.24:
77
4.3.2.4:
Model 2 BCPC:
structural members analysis
The Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR) on critical structural members for each case is
summarized in Table 4.7 to Table 4.9 and discussed in 4.3.2.5.
Table 4.7:
Model 2 BCPC:
DCR for bending moment.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to moment

Member
Critical
View
DCR =
Case
Member
capacity,
moment,
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kNm) Qud (kNm)
Front
473
99
0.2
Rear
473
42.5
0.1
Left
473
236.5
0.5
Beam
Right
473
236.5
0.5
Level 1
473
473
1
Initial
shape
Front
91.8
0
0
Rear
91.8
0
0
91.8
0
0
Column Left
Right
91.8
0
0
Level 1
91.8
0
0
Front
473
585.9
1.2
Rear
473
38.7
0.1
Left
473
236.5
0.5
Beam
Right
473
236.5
0.5
Level 1
473
585.9
1.2
Case 1
Front
91.8
0
0
Rear
91.8
0
0
91.8
0
0
Column Left
Right
91.8
0
0
Level 1
91.8
0
0
78
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to moment (continuo)

Member
Critical
Progressive
View
capacity,
moment,
DCR =
collapse
Case
Member location Qce (kNm) Qud (kNm) Qud/Qce (DCR2.0)
Front
473
472.8
1
No
Rear
473
38.6
0.1
No
Left
473
236.5
0.5
No
Beam
Right
473
236.5
0.5
No
Level 1
473
472.8
1
No
Case 2
Front
91.8
0
0
No
Rear
91.8
0
0
No
91.8
0
0
No
Column Left
Right
91.8
0
0
No
Level 1
91.8
0
0
No
Front
473
118.1
0.2
No
Rear
473
53.4
0.1
No
Left
473
236.5
0.5
No
Beam
Right
473
236.5
0.5
No
Level 1
473
488.6
1
No
Case 3
Front
91.8
0
0
No
Rear
91.8
0
0
No
91.8
0
0
No
Column Left
Right
91.8
0
0
No
Level 1
91.8
0
0
No
Table 4.8:
Model 2 BCPC:
DCR for shear force.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to shear

Progressiv
Member
Critical
View
DCR =
e collapse
Case Member
capacity,
shear Qud
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kN)
(kN)
(DCR2.0)
Front
221.7
112.5
0.5
No
Rear
221.7
50.0
0.2
No
Initial
Left
221.7
110.1
0.5
No
Beam
shape
Right
221.7
110.1
0.5
No
Level 1
221.7
220.2
1.0
No
79
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to shear (continue)

Progressive
Member
Critical
View
DCR =
collapse
Case Member
capacity,
shear Qud
location
Qud/Qce
Qce (kN)
(kN)
(DCR2.0)
Front
221.7
234.7
1.1
No
Rear
221.7
49.5
0.2
No
Left
221.7
110.1
0.5
No
Case 1
Beam
Right
221.7
110.1
0.5
No
Level 1
221.7
234.7
1.1
No
Case 2
Beam
Case 3
Beam
Table 4.9:
Front
Rear
Left
Right
Level 1
Front
Rear
Left
Right
Level 1
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
221.7
Model 2 BCPC:
246.0
49.5
110.1
110.1
240.0
206.0
51.8
110.1
110.1
225.1
1.1
0.2
0.5
0.5
1.1
0.9
0.2
0.5
0.5
1.0
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
DCR for beam deflection.
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to deflection

Span
Deflection
View Displacement
Case
Member
Length limit (Qce =
location
, Qud (mm)
(mm)
span/250)
Front
2.1 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.1 3500.0
14.0
Initial
Left
9.9 8490.0
34.0
Beam
shape
Right
9.9 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
20 8490.0
34.0
Front
28 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.1 3500.0
14.0
Left
26.6 8490.0
34.0
Case 1
Beam
Right
9.9 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
26.6 8490.0
34.0
Front
8.1 3500.0
14.0
Rear
2.2 3500.0
14.0
Left
9.7 8490.0
34.0
Case 2
Beam
Right
9.7 8490.0
34.0
Level 1
23.2 8490.0
34.0
80
DCR =
Qud/Qce
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.6
2.0
0.2
0.8
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.7
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Section that may lead to progressive collapse due to deflection (continue)

Span
Deflection
View Displacement
DCR =
Case
Member
Length limit (Qce =
location
, Qud (mm)
Qud/Qce
(mm)
span/250)
Front
2.8 3500.0
14.0
0.2
Rear
2.2 3500.0
14.0
0.2
Left
9.9 8490.0
34.0
0.3
Case 3
Beam
Right
9.9 8490.0
34.0
0.3
Level 1
20.1 8490.0
34.0
0.6
4.3.2.5:
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
No
No
No
No
No
Discussion on Model 2 BCPC based on section 4.3.2.4
The following Table 4.10 shows the summaries of analysis for Table 4.7, Table 4.8
and Table 4.9. In Model 2 BCPC, Case 1 shows the worst case among three cases been
studied on, as the joint displacement above missing column position at level 1 (grid A/1) has
excess the limitation as show in Table 4.10. The huge joint displacement (28 millimeter) is
mainly due to the huge of column point load acting at level 1 grid A/1 due to missing column
between ground floor level and level 1 at grid A/1.
Figure 4.22 shows the huge joint
displacement at location grid 1 looking from front side of the building. From Figure 4.16, it
shows that only horizontal beam is redistribute the loading above the missing column at level
1 (grid A/1) to adjacent column (grid A/2). Vertical beam does not contribute any help in
redistribute the missing column loading. From Figure 4.16 (i), it also shows that the column
at grid A/2 has subjected to uplift force due to huge of cantilever moment. From Table 4.10,
it shows that the DCR bending, shear and displacement limit for other two cases still within
the limitation, hence, there is no progressive collapse. Throughout the analysis, the structural
is likely to fail in joint displacement.
81
Table 4.10:
Summaries of analysis for Table 4.7, Table 4.8 and Table 4.9 with difference
cases.
Case
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
4.4:
Maximum DCR
bending
Maximum DCR
shear
Maximum DCR
deflection
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
2.0
0.7
0.6
Progressive
collapse
(DCR2.0)
Yes
No
No
Overall Discussion
From the overall analysis, it can be observed that different connection (rigid, pin)
affects the value of joint displacement at joint connected to the missing column position and
overall structural bending flexure. The joint connections with rigid connection gives the least
value of DCR joint displacement (Table 4.6) while the joint with beam column pin connection
gives very high value of DCR joint displacement (Table 4.10). It also can be observed that
failure in DCR moment of structural column for rigid connection is greater than beam column
pin connection which shows zero of DCR bending in column.
Hence, the structural with rigid connections has least tendency to fail in joint
displacement but highest tendency to fail in bending flexure in structural column. And the
structural with beam column pin connection has high tendency to failure in joint displacement
but lest tendency to failure in bending flexure. So, it can be concluded that the structure is
likely either to be failed in large joint displacement (serviceability limit state failure) or to be
failed in bending flexure (ultimate limit state failure).
Thus, it is reasonable that the precast building should be designed using rigid
connections to redistribute the moment in the structural and to minimal joint displacement due
82
to loss of column with larger member size component to resist the bending flexure. A lager
member will have a higher second moment of initial and plastic modulus to help to resist the
loading. The beam column pin connection cannot be used in the precast building as it can
cause high joint displacement to collapse quicker when the building is losing a column.
4.5:
Conclusion
At the end of this study, structural frame with beam column pinned connection is most
susceptible to progressive collapse compare to rigid connection. Hence, structural frame with
rigid connection is suggested to construct the precast building of this police housing flat with
extra bending capacity for each structural member, so that, the each member can freely
redistributed the moment throughout the building.
83
Chapter 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1
Introduction
Progressive collapse can be understood as the spread of an initial local failure from
element to element resulting, eventually, in the collapse of an entire structure or a
disproportionate large part of it. A building designed against progressive collapse can provide
more safety to those who use and / or live in the building.
Due to the high demand of construction in Malaysia and global warming, Malaysian
Construction Industry has been urged to use innovative construction technique and to shift to
Industrialised Building System (IBS) construction. Hence, a three dimensional multi storey
precast building with different structural systems with missing column concept is
investigated in this project. All models (Model 1 FF and Model 2 BCPC) were analysed
with three difference cases (missing column approach) base on GSA guideline. The results
were compared to each other and discussed in Chapter 4. Thus, this chapter concludes the
objectives of this study and future prospects for improving the adopted modelling strategy are
proposed.
84
5.2
Conclusion
This study has illustrates the inherent ability of precast RC beam-column frames
design to resist progressive collapse.
Besides that, this knowledge will also provide
additional valuable information to engineers and architects involved in the selection of

structural systems for projects that require progressive collapse mitigation. While the building
investigated in this study was rather regular and simple in form, the basic analysis procedure
can also be applied to more complicated structures as well. Based on the results of the
analysis, the objective of the study will be concluded here.
From the result analysis, it can concluded that the missing column approach, Case 1
give the worse scenario compare to the other cases base on GSA guideline. For Model 1 with
rigid connection (Case 1), it gives a progressive collapse phenomenon due to excess of DCR
bending in column at grid A/1 above the missing column location between ground floor level
and level 1 (see Figure 4.9). For Model 2 with beam column pin connection (Case 1), it gives
a progressive collapse phenomenon due to large joint displacement at level 1 grid A/1 (see
Table 4.9).
The critical key element of a multi storey precast building is the column, as it acts as a
supporting member to support the structural load and the loading that introduce onto the
structural by transfer them to the ground. Failure or remove of a column from a precast
building will / may lead the precast building to collapse or disproportionally large part of it as
show in Chapter 2 Literature Review, the model analysis that created by Tang (2006) and
Chapter 4 Analysis Results. Besides that, the columns and foundation that are adjacent to the
remove column will need to take out the additional loading from the remove column and thus,
this may also over stress the columns capacity and foundations capacity that are adjacent to it.
85
Base on the General Services Administration (GSA) guideline, the building collapse
potential is base on the magnitudes and distribution of potential demands of a component. At
where, the magnitudes and distribution of potential demands will be indicated by Demand
Capacity Ratio (DCR) and is similar to the m factor approaches currently employed in
FEMA 273 and FEMA 356.
From the GSA guideline, it is advised that the beam should be design or check to
catcher two bay beams in one span as shows in Chapter 3. And the column and foundation
that are adjacent to the missing column location must be designed to take out the accident
load due to missing column to prevent progressive collapse.
Another method is to specifying the defended standoff distance between a point along
the defended perimeter and the nearest structural element base on GSA guideline or ISC
Security Design Criteria. The building defended perimeter can be build by using retaining wall,
planters, landscaping, or any method that approved by government for government building.
The reason behind it is to reduce the potential for the delivery of an explosive device into the
defended area, which will cause progressive collapse of a building.
5.3
Recommendations
Enhancing collapse resistance is the overall design goal for engineer in progressive
collapse design. This thesis has elaborated the use of the General Services Administration
(GSA) design guideline with alternative load path method to analysis a precast building
collapse behavior and to determine its robustness base on GSA. Besides that, some of the
86
suggestion also has been drawn up in the conclusion on how to improve the robustness
precast building.
After a thorough analysis of data, the following recommendations are hereby made:
1. Building collapse behavior
In short, most of the building robustness analysis is based on simplified analysis
or merely give general recommendation for the mitigation of the consequences of
a structural local failure and ignore the architecture factures in a building as they
does not help in contributing the structural loading. In fact, the building collapse
behavior analysis should cater the architecture factures during the analysis, as the
architecture factures material properties does contribute some strength on the
overall building collapse behavior.
Therefore, for further investigation the
architecture factures should be consider during a building collapse analysis.

2. Load combination
No particular directions can be given with respect to load combination. The
choice of the load combination to be applied in a progressive collapse simulation
will definitely have an influence on the degree of conservatism of the resulting
design. Since the Department of Defence guidelines prescribe 50% of the live
loads (i.e. variable loads) to be applied to the structure for the simulation, the level
of damage obtained using this strategy is higher than the one resulting from an
application of the GSA prescriptions, which includes 25% of the live loads.
Although the GSA load combination is the most often found in the current
collapse-related literature, it should be borne in mind that the Department of
Defence prescriptions are most likely to provide with more robust designs.
87
3. Strain rate effects

The strain rate effects should be taken into account in a progressive collapse
analysis and/or design, since they are responsible not only for a local strength
enhancement but also for a delocalisation of the structural damage, which could
bring to an extension of the collapse region.
4. Column bulking
Each column in the uncontrolled parking areas and / or public area of a building
will require column design to resist potential bulking for an additional story of
unsupported length due to loss of lateral support. Additional information can
refer to GSA Appendix B.
5. Progressive collapse analysis
A combination of shell element for precast slab and wall, and beam element for
precast beam and column should be used for future analysis. This is because with
the implement of combination of shell element for precast slab and wall, and
beam element for precast beam and column will give a better study for the
researcher in building progressive collapse phenomenon.
Besides that, the
researchers will not only have clear view in beam and column deformation, but
also in slab deformation for the precast building.
88
REFERENCE
Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Users Manual (2011). Volume I: Introduction, Spatial Modeling,
Execution & Output. Simulia.
Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Users Manual (2011). Volume II: Analysis. Simulia.
Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Users Manual (2011). Volume III: Materials. Simulia.
Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Users Manual (2011). Volume IV: Elements. Simulia.
Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Users Manual (2011). Volume V: Prescribed Conditions, Constraints
& Interactions. Simulia.
Alashker, Y., Li, H.H.; and EI-Tawil, S. (2011). Approximation in Progressive Collapse
Modelling. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE
Alias, H. (2002). Design of Precast Concrete in Factory Buildings. Technology University of

Malaysia: First Degree Thesis, pp. 6-12.
ASCE 7-05 (2005). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Autodesk Algor Simulation, (2009).
User's Guide Version 2010 (build 15).
http://download.autodesk.com/us/algor/userguides/mergedProjects/master/index.htm
Bruggeling, A.S.G. and Huyghe, G.F. (1991). Prefabrication with Concrete. Rotterdam,
Netherlands: A. A. Balkema Publishers, pp.148-190.
89
BS 6399-1 (1996). Loading for buildings Code of practice for dead and imposed loads.
British Standard.
BS8110 1 (1997). Structural use of concrete Part 1: Code of practice for design and
construction. British Standard.
BS8110 2 (1985).
Structural use of concrete Part 2: Code of practice for special
circumstances. British Standard.
Burns, J., Abruzzo, J., Tamaro, M. (2002). Structural Systems for Progressive Collapse
Prevention, Prevention of Progressive. pp 1 5.
Department of Defence United State of America, (2010). Design of Buildings to Resist

Progressive Collapse. Unified Facilities Criteria.
Elliot, K.S. (1996).
Multi-Storey Precast Concrete Framed Structures.
London, U.K.:
Blackwell Science Ltd., pp. 68-119.
Engineering, Structural Consultants, Geospatial (2010).
Precast Concrete Structures.
http://www.paradigm.in/Downloads/5)%20PRECAST.pdf
FEMA-273, (1997) NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
FEMA 356, (2000). Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings,
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
GSA (2003). Progressive collapse analysis and design guidelines for new federal office
buildings and major modernization projects. General Services Administration (GSA).
90
Lee, M.K. (2004).
The behaviour of pin beam column connection in precast concrete.
Technology university of Malaysia. Master thesis, pp 7 22.
Haberland, M. and Starossek, U. (2009). Progressive Collapse Nomenclature. Proceedings of

the 2009 Structures Congress, pp 1886 1895.
Mohamad,
K.K.A.
(2010).
The
History
of
IBS
Adoption
in
Malaysia.
http://ibsresearch.blogspot.com/2010/04/history-of-ibs-adoption-in-malaysia.html
Mohamad, K.A.K., Hamid, Z.Abd., Ghani, Mohd.K., Egbu, C., Arif, M. (2010).
Collaboration
Initiative on Green Construction and Sustainability through
Industrialised Buildings Systems (IBS) in the Malaysian Construction Industry.

International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology, Vol. 1
(1), pp. 119 -127.
Nair, R.S. (2004). Progressive Collapse Basics. A Rational Look at Todays Building Codes,
with an Eye on Blast-Resistant Design. Modern Steel Construction.
NISTIR 7396 (2007). Best practices for reducing the potential for progressive collapse in
buildings. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), pp 43 53.
Onur, E., Sevket, O., and Turan, O. (2006). Ductile Connections in Precast concrete moment
resisting frame. PCI journal.
Steven, M., Baldridge and Francis K.H. (2003). Preventing Progressive Collapse in Concrete
Buildings. Seismic Design Details Are the Key to Ductility and Load Transfer.
Concrete International.
91
Takahashi, S. (2000).
Technology Transfer Series 2 for Engineer.
Precast Concrete
Technology. Politeknik Shah Alam, Civil engineering Department. pp. 9 35.
Tang, M., Matthew, J., Adam, H., DiMaggio, P., and Mohammed, E. (2006). Designing for
Progressive Collapse. Structure magazine. pp 13 17.
Tarek, H.A., Elsanadedy, H.M., Abbas, H., Ngo, T., and Mendis, P. (2001). Numerical
Analysis for Progressive Collapse Potential of a Typical Framed Concrete Building.
International Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering IJCEE IJENS Vol.: 10
No: 02, pp 40 46.
92
APPENDIX A
Summaries Result for Hand Calculation, Abaqus 6.11 Analysis Data and Prokon 2.5
Analysis Data for One Dimension Model.
1.
Hand Calculation
Information:
Cantilever slab length 1000mm
Cantilever slab thickness = 150mm

Concrete Density = 24kNm-3
Hence self weight of cantilever slab = 3.6kNm-2
Screed = 1.0kNm-2
Brick wall height = 3m
Brick Wall loading(115mmthk.) = 2.5kNm-2
Beam size = 300mm x 600mm

Ignoring the self weight of beam (in this case)
Point Load, F = 56kN (From Abaqus 6.11)
Total ultimate uniform distribution load = 2(DL+0.25LL)..from GSA
93
= 2[(3.6 + 1) + 2.5(3)]
= 24.2kNm-1
Fixed End Moment:
FEM 12
wl 2
12
2
24.23.5
12
24.7 kNm
FEM 21
wl 2
12
2
24.23.5
12
24.7 kNm
FEM12 = FEM23 = FEM34 = FEM67 = FEM78 = FEM89

FEM21 = FEM32 = FEM43 = FEM76 = FEM87 = FEM98
wl 2 Pb 2 a
2
12
l
2
2
24.23.5
561.22 2.28
12
3.5 2
40.218kNm
FEM 45
FEM 56
wl 2 Pa 2 b
2
12
l
2
2
24.23.5
562.28 1.22
12
3.5 2
53.696kNm
wl 2 Pa 2 b
2
12
l
2
2
24.23.5
562.28 1.22
12
3.5 2
53.696kNm
FEM 54
FEM 65
wl 2 Pb 2 a
2
12
l
2
2
24.23.5
561.22 2.28
12
3.5 2
40.2218kNm
Distribution Factor, DF:

Support Member
1
2
3
4
5
6
12
21
23
32
34
43
45
54
56
65
Length,
m
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
Second
Moment
Inertia, m4
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
94
Distribution
Factor, k
k/k
1
0.00463
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
1
0.429
0.571
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.0108
0.01234
0.01234
0.01234
0.01234
7
8
9
67
76
78
87
89
98
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00617
0.00463
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.571
0.429
1
0.01234
0.0108
1
Moment Distribution:
Support
Member
k/k
FEM
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Moment, kNm
1
2
3
4
5
12
21
23
32
34
43
45
54
56
1.000 0.429
0.571 0.500
0.500 0.500
0.500 0.500
0.500
-24.7
24.7
-24.7
24.7
-24.7
24.7 -40.218 53.696 -53.696
24.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.76
7.76
0.00
0.00
0.00 12.35
0.00
0.00
3.88
0.00
0.00
3.88
-3.88
0.00
-5.29
-7.06
-1.94
-1.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-2.65
0.00
-0.97
-3.53
0.00
-0.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.65
0.42
0.55
1.76
1.76
0.48
0.48
0.00
0.00
0.21
1.32
0.88
0.28
0.24
0.88
0.00
0.24
-0.24
-0.21
-0.95
-1.26
-0.26
-0.26
-0.44
-0.44
0.00
0.00
0.000 32.551 -32.551 21.013 -21.013 32.415 -32.415 57.818 -57.818
Abaqus 6.11
Moment (kNm)
Prokon 2.5(kNm)
-1.61
0
Support
Member
k/k
FEM
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Carry Over
Balance
Moment, kNm
Abaqus 6.11 Moment (kNm)
Prokon 2.5 (kNm)
28.90
19.50
29.65
50.51
31.8
21.01
32.37
57.76
65
67
76
78
87
89
0.500
0.500 0.500
0.500 0.571
0.429
40.218
-24.7
24.7
-24.7
24.7
-24.7
-7.76
-7.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-3.88
0.00
0.00 -12.35
0.00
0.00
1.94
1.94
7.06
5.29
0.00
0.97
0.00
3.53
0.97
0.00
-0.48
-0.48
-1.76
-1.76
-0.55
-0.42
0.00
-0.88
-0.24
-0.28
-0.88
-1.32
0.44
0.44
0.26
0.26
1.26
0.95
32.415 -32.415 21.013 -21.013 32.551 -32.551
29.65
19.50
28.90
32.37
21.01
31.8
95
9
98
1.000
24.7
-24.70
0.00
0.00
2.65
-2.65
-0.21
0.21
0.000
-1.61
0
2.
Abaqus 6.11 Results:
Length (m)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
2.20
2.30
2.40
2.50
2.60
2.70
2.80
2.90
3.00
3.10
3.20
3.30
3.40
3.50
3.60
3.70
3.80
Abaqus 6.11
Moment (kNm) Shear force (kN)
-1.61
-32.21
-3.16
-31.00
-6.14
-28.58
-8.88
-26.16
-11.37
-23.74
-13.63
-21.32
-15.64
-18.90
-17.41
-16.48
-18.93
-14.06
-20.22
-11.64
-21.26
-9.22
-22.06
-6.80
-22.62
-4.38
-22.94
-1.96
-23.01
0.46
-22.85
2.88
-22.44
5.30
-21.79
7.72
-20.89
10.14
-19.76
12.56
-18.38
14.98
-16.76
17.40
-14.90
19.82
-12.80
22.24
-10.46
24.66
-7.87
27.08
-5.04
29.50
-1.97
31.92
1.34
34.34
4.90
36.76
8.70
39.18
12.73
41.60
17.01
44.02
21.54
46.44
26.30
48.86
28.90
3.06
26.91
-42.74
22.76
-40.32
18.85
-37.90
Length (m) Moment (kNm) Shear force (kN)

3.90
15.18
-35.48
4.00
11.75
-33.06
4.10
8.57
-30.64
4.20
5.63
-28.22
4.30
2.92
-25.80
4.40
0.47
-23.38
4.50
-1.75
-20.96
4.60
-3.73
-18.54
4.70
-5.46
-16.12
4.80
-6.95
-13.70
4.90
-8.20
-11.28
5.00
-9.21
-8.86
5.10
-9.97
-6.44
5.20
-10.50
-4.02
5.30
-10.78
-1.60
5.40
-10.82
0.82
5.50
-10.61
3.24
5.60
-10.17
5.66
5.70
-9.48
8.08
5.80
-8.55
10.50
5.90
-7.38
12.92
6.00
-5.97
15.34
6.10
-4.31
17.76
6.20
-2.42
20.18
6.30
-0.28
22.60
6.40
2.10
25.02
6.50
4.73
27.44
6.60
7.59
29.86
6.70
10.70
32.28
6.80
14.05
34.70
6.90
17.64
37.12
7.00
19.50
0.12
7.10
17.66
-36.88
7.20
14.09
-34.46
7.30
10.77
-32.04
7.40
7.68
-29.62
7.50
4.84
-27.20
7.60
2.24
-24.78
7.70
-0.11
-22.36
7.80
-2.23
-19.94
96

7.90
-4.10
-17.52
8.00
-5.74
-15.10
8.10
-7.12
-12.68
8.20
-8.27
-10.26
8.30
-9.18
-7.84
8.40
-9.84
-5.42
8.50
-10.26
-3.00
8.60
-10.44
-0.58
8.70
-10.38
1.84
8.80
-10.07
4.26
8.90
-9.53
6.68
9.00
-8.74
9.10
9.10
-7.71
11.52
9.20
-6.44
13.94
9.30
-4.92
16.36
9.40
-3.17
18.78
9.50
-1.17
21.20
9.60
1.07
23.62
9.70
3.56
26.04
9.80
6.28
28.46
9.90
9.25
30.88
10.00
12.46
33.30
10.10
15.91
35.72
10.20
19.60
38.14
10.30
23.53
40.56
10.40
27.71
42.98
10.50
29.65
-4.32
10.60
26.89
-51.63
10.70
21.89
-49.23
10.80
17.13
-46.83
10.90
12.61
-44.43
11.00
8.32
-42.03
11.09
4.28
-39.63
11.19
0.47
-37.23
11.29
-3.11
-34.83
11.39
-6.44
-32.43
11.49
-9.54
-30.03
11.59
-12.39
-27.64
11.69
-15.02
-25.24
11.79
-17.40
-22.84
11.89
-19.54
-20.44
11.99
-21.45
-18.04

12.09
-23.12
-15.64
12.19
-24.55
-13.24
12.28
-25.75
-10.84
12.38
-26.70
-8.44
12.48
-27.42
-6.04
12.58
-27.90
-3.65
12.68
-28.14
-1.25
12.78
-26.82
27.17
12.88
-22.61
55.61
12.98
-16.84
58.07
13.09
-10.81
60.53
13.19
-4.53
62.99
13.29
2.00
65.45
13.39
8.78
67.91
13.49
15.81
70.37
13.59
23.09
72.83
13.70
30.62
75.30
13.80
38.40
77.76
13.90
46.43
80.22
14.00
50.51
81.45
14.00
50.51
-81.45
14.10
46.43
-80.22
14.20
38.40
-77.76
14.31
30.62
-75.30
14.41
23.09
-72.83
14.51
15.81
-70.37
14.61
8.78
-67.91
14.71
2.00
-65.45
14.81
-4.53
-62.99
14.92
-10.81
-60.53
15.02
-16.84
-58.07
15.12
-22.61
-55.61
15.22
-26.82
-27.17
15.32
-28.14
1.25
15.42
-27.90
3.65
15.52
-27.42
6.04
15.62
-26.70
8.44
15.72
-25.75
10.84
15.81
-24.55
13.24
15.91
-23.12
15.64
16.01
-21.45
18.04
16.11
-19.54
20.44
97

16.21
-17.40
22.84
16.31
-15.02
25.24
16.41
-12.39
27.64
16.51
-9.54
30.03
16.61
-6.44
32.43
16.71
-3.11
34.83
16.81
0.47
37.23
16.91
4.28
39.63
17.00
8.32
42.03
17.10
12.61
44.43
17.20
17.13
46.83
17.30
21.89
49.23
17.40
26.89
51.63
17.50
29.65
4.32
17.60
27.71
-42.98
17.70
23.53
-40.56
17.80
19.60
-38.14
17.90
15.91
-35.72
18.00
12.46
-33.30
18.10
9.25
-30.88
18.20
6.28
-28.46
18.30
3.56
-26.04
18.40
1.07
-23.62
18.50
-1.17
-21.20
18.60
-3.17
-18.78
18.70
-4.92
-16.36
18.80
-6.44
-13.94
18.90
-7.71
-11.52
19.00
-8.74
-9.10
19.10
-9.53
-6.68
19.20
-10.07
-4.26
19.30
-10.38
-1.84
19.40
-10.44
0.58
19.50
-10.26
3.00
19.60
-9.84
5.42
19.70
-9.18
7.84
19.80
-8.27
10.26
19.90
-7.12
12.68
20.00
-5.74
15.10
20.10
-4.10
17.52
20.20
-2.23
19.94
20.30
-0.11
22.36

20.40
2.24
24.78
20.50
4.84
27.20
20.60
7.68
29.62
20.70
10.77
32.04
20.80
14.09
34.46
20.90
17.66
36.88
21.00
19.50
-0.12
21.10
17.64
-37.12
21.20
14.05
-34.70
21.30
10.70
-32.28
21.40
7.59
-29.86
21.50
4.73
-27.44
21.60
2.10
-25.02
21.70
-0.28
-22.60
21.80
-2.42
-20.18
21.90
-4.31
-17.76
22.00
-5.97
-15.34
22.10
-7.38
-12.92
22.20
-8.55
-10.50
22.30
-9.48
-8.08
22.40
-10.17
-5.66
22.50
-10.61
-3.24
22.60
-10.82
-0.82
22.70
-10.78
1.60
22.80
-10.50
4.02
22.90
-9.97
6.44
23.00
-9.21
8.86
23.10
-8.20
11.28
23.20
-6.95
13.70
23.30
-5.46
16.12
23.40
-3.73
18.54
23.50
-1.75
20.96
23.60
0.47
23.38
23.70
2.92
25.80
23.80
5.63
28.22
23.90
8.57
30.64
24.00
11.75
33.06
24.10
15.18
35.48
24.20
18.85
37.90
24.30
22.76
40.32
24.40
26.91
42.74
24.50
28.90
-3.06
98

24.60
26.30
-48.86
24.70
21.54
-46.44
24.80
17.01
-44.02
24.90
12.73
-41.60
25.00
8.70
-39.18
25.10
4.90
-36.76
25.20
1.34
-34.34
25.30
-1.97
-31.92
25.40
-5.04
-29.50
25.50
-7.87
-27.08
25.60
-10.46
-24.66
25.70
-12.80
-22.24
25.80
-14.90
-19.82
25.90
-16.76
-17.40
26.00
-18.38
-14.98
26.10
-19.76
-12.56
26.20
-20.89
-10.14
26.30
-21.79
-7.72
26.40
-22.44
-5.30
26.50
-22.85
-2.88
26.60
-23.01
-0.46
26.70
-22.94
1.96
26.80
-22.62
4.38
26.90
-22.06
6.80
27.00
-21.26
9.22
27.10
-20.22
11.64
27.20
-18.93
14.06
27.30
-17.41
16.48
27.40
-15.64
18.90
27.50
-13.63
21.32
27.60
-11.37
23.74
27.70
-8.88
26.16
27.80
-6.14
28.58
27.90
-3.16
31.00
28.00
-1.61
32.21
99
3.
Prokon 2.5 Results
Length (m)
0
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
1.25
1.5
1.75
2
2.25
2.5
2.75
3
3.25
3.5
3.5
3.75
4
4.25
4.5
4.75
5
5.25
5.5
5.75
6
6.25
6.5
6.75
7
7
7.25
7.5
7.75
8
8.25
8.5
8.75
Prokon 2.5
Moment (kNm)
0
0
-7.56
-13.61
-18.14
-21.16
-22.67
-22.67
-21.15
-18.13
-13.59
-7.53
0.03
9.11
19.7
31.8
31.8
21.2
12.11
4.53
-1.53
-6.08
-9.12
-10.65
-10.66
-9.16
-6.15
-1.63
4.41
11.95
21.01
21.01
11.99
4.49
-1.51
-5.99
-8.86
-10.42
-10.37
Shear Force (kN)

0
-33.26
-27.21
-21.16
-15.11
-9.06
-3.01
3.04
9.09
15.14
21.19
27.24
33.29
39.34
45.39
51.44
-45.44
-39.39
-33.34
-27.29
-21.24
-15.19
-9.14
-3.09
2.96
9.01
15.06
21.11
27.16
33.21
39.26
-39.09
-33.04
-26.99
-20.94
-14.89
-8.84
-2.79
3.26
Length (m)
9
9.25
9.5
9.75
10
10.25
10.5
10.5
10.75
11
11.25
11.5
11.75
12
12.25
12.5
12.75
12.78
12.78
13.03
13.28
13.53
13.78
14
14
14.25
14.5
14.75
15
15.22
15.22
15.25
15.5
15.75
16
16.25
16.5
16.75
17
100
Prokon 2.5
Moment (kNm)
-8.8
-5.72
-1.13
4.98
12.6
21.73
32.37
32.37
19.47
8.09
-1.79
-10.15
-16.99
-22.33
-26.15
-28.46
-29.26
-29.25
-29.25
-14.36
2.05
19.97
39.41
57.76
57.76
39.41
19.97
2.05
-14.36
-29.25
-29.25
-29.26
-28.46
-26.15
-22.33
-16.99
-10.15
-1.79
8.09
Shear Force (kN)

9.31
15.36
21.41
27.46
33.51
39.56
45.61
-54.67
-48.62
-42.57
-36.52
-30.47
-24.42
-18.37
-12.32
-6.27
-0.22
0.5
56.5
62.55
68.6
74.65
80.7
86.03
-86.03
-79.98
-73.93
-67.88
-61.83
-56.5
-0.5
0.22
6.27
12.32
18.37
24.42
30.47
36.52
42.57
Length (m)
17.25
17.5
17.5
17.75
18
18.25
18.5
18.75
19
19.25
19.5
19.75
20
20.25
20.5
20.75
21
21
21.25
21.5
21.75
22
22.25
22.5
Prokon 2.5
Moment (kNm)
19.47
32.37
32.37
21.73
12.6
4.98
-1.13
-5.72
-8.8
-10.37
-10.42
-8.86
-5.99
-1.51
4.49
11.99
21.01
21.01
11.95
4.41
-1.63
-6.15
-9.16
-10.66
Shear Force (kN)

48.62
54.67
-45.61
-39.56
-33.51
-27.46
-21.41
-15.36
-9.31
-3.26
2.79
8.84
14.89
20.94
26.99
33.04
39.09
-39.26
-33.21
-27.16
-21.11
-15.06
-9.01
-2.96
Length (m)
22.75
23
23.25
23.5
23.75
24
24.25
24.5
24.5
24.75
25
25.25
25.5
25.75
26
26.25
26.5
26.75
27
27.25
27.5
27.75
28
28
101
Prokon 2.5
Moment (kNm)
-10.65
-9.12
-6.08
-1.53
4.53
12.11
21.2
31.8
31.8
19.7
9.11
0.03
-7.53
-13.59
-18.13
-21.15
-22.67
-22.67
-21.16
-18.14
-13.61
-7.56
0
0
Shear Force (kN)

3.09
9.14
15.19
21.24
27.29
33.34
39.39
45.44
-51.44
-45.39
-39.34
-33.29
-27.24
-21.19
-15.14
-9.09
-3.04
3.01
9.06
15.11
21.16
27.21
33.26
0
APPENDIX B
ARCHITECT DRAWINGS
102
APPENDIX C
STRUCTURAL LAYOUT
103
APPENDIX D
BENDING MOMENT, SHEAR FORCE AND DEFLECTION RESULTS FOR RIGID

CONNECITON GENERATE BY ABAQUS 6.11
1.
General bending moment diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 1 FF (Initial shape) bending moment in three dimensions.
Model 1 FF (Case 1) bending moment in three dimensions.
104
105
2.
General shear force diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 1 FF (Initial shape) shear force in three dimensions.
Model 1 FF (Case 1) shear force in three dimensions.
106
107
3.
General deflection diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 1 FF (Initial shape) deflection in three dimensions.
Model 1 FF (Case 1) deflection in 3D.
108
109
APPENDIX E
BENDING MOMENT, SHEAR FORCE AND DEFLECTION RESULTS FOR BEAM

COLUMN PIN CONNECITON GENERATE BY ABAQUS 6.11
1.
General bending moment diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 2 BCPC (initial shape) bending moment in three dimensions.
Model 2 BCPC (Case 1) bending moment in three dimensions.
110
111
2.
General shear force diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 2 BCPC (initial shape) shear force in three dimensions.
Model 2 BCPC (Case 1) shear force in three dimensions.
112
113
3.
General deflection diagram for Initial Shape, Case 1, Case 2 and Case 3.
Model 2 BCPC (initial shape) deflection in three dimensions.
114
115

Thesis 3d

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis 3d

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Faculty of Engineering

PREDICTING PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE FOR MULTI STOREY PRECAST

Gilbert Wong Pak Kai

I declare that this thesis is the result of my own research

Name: Gilbert Wong Pak Kai

The well known

Peristiwa-peristiwa bersejarah yang terkini telah menunjukkan bahawa bangunan yang

1.2 Problem Statement

1.3 Significance of This Study

1.5 Scope of Study

1.6 Outline of This Thesis

Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.2 Types of Connection for Precast Concrete System

2.2.1 Rigid connection

2.2.2 Semi rigid beam column connection

2.2.3 Simple connection

2.3 Types of Precast Construction Systems with its connection detail

2.3.1 Large panel system

2.3.2 Precast frame system

2.3.3 Slab column systems with shear wall

2.4 Progressive Collapse: Definition and Types of Collapse

2.5 Structural Analysis Approaches Used in Progressive Collapse

2.5.2 Specific local resistance method

2.6 Code and Standards

2.6.1 General Services Administration (GSA) progressive collapse

2.7.1 Beam element

2.7.2 Shell element

2.7.3 Solid element

2.7.4 Combination of element use in previous structural modeling

3.2.1 One and two dimension sample model verification

3.2.2 Three dimension sample model verification

3.3 Structural Model

3.3.1 Geometry of the model

3.3.2 Material properties

3.3.4 Beam column connection

3.3.5 Modeling assumptions

3.4 Design Code and References

3.5 Analysis of Three Dimensions Model for Progressive Collapse

3.5.1 Analysis cases

3.6 Acceptance criteria for structural component

3.7 Structural Member Capacity for Building Models

Chapter 4 RESULT ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.2 Verification Samples Models Results Analysis

4.2.1 Validation of one dimension and two dimension models results

4.3 Results Analysis for Model 1 FF and Model 2 - BCPC

4.3.1.1 Model 1 FF comparisons bending moment results for

4.3.1.5 Discussion on Model 1 FF based on section 4.3.1.2

4.3.2 Model 2 BCPC

4.3.2.1 Model 2 BCPC comparisons bending moment results

4.3.2.5 Discussion on Model 2 BCPC based on section

Chapter 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ANALYSIS DATA FOR ONE DIMENSION MODEL

APPENDIX C STRUCTURAL LAYOUT

APPENDIX D BENDING MOMENT, SHEAR FORCE AND DEFLECTION

Units parameter use in Abaqus 6.11 model

Grade 40 Concrete Properties

Loading used in model

Comparison analysis results between Abaqus 6.11 and hand calculation

DCR for bending moment

DCR for shear force

DCR for beam deflection check

DCR for bending moment