PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE ANALYSIS OF STEEL

BUILDING WITH AND WITHOUT BRACING

SAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND

ENGINEERING RESEARCH

Guided by :- Prepared by :-
Mr. Jigar Zala Nisarg Bhavsar
160670720001
Outline Presentation
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Objective
• Scope
• Current work
• Further Work to do
• References
Introduction
What is Progressive collapse?
• The progressive collapse of structures is commenced when the
primary component(s), usually columns, is eliminated.
• Due to that the loads get transmitted to other adjoining columns
in structure.
• If these primary elements are not appropriately designed to
bear and redistribute the overloading, that portion of the
structure or the whole of the structure may collapse.
• Progressive collapse is a rare accident, but its effect on
buildings is very dangerous and costly.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
• The example of structures which were
subjected to progressive collapse are as
follows.
• In 1968, 22-storey building Ronan point
tower was subjected to gas explosion on
18th floor.
• The load bearing precast concrete plates
were damaged due to which above
structure collapse.
• The damaged building is shown in figure.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
• The other example is Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma
City, in 1995, resulted in 168 fatalities.

Figure: Alfred P Murrah building.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

• Other similar accident was

due to the collapse of twin
towers of World Trade Centre
during the suicide attacks in
New York City.
PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE DESIGN STRATEGIES

TYPE OF
APPROACHES

DIRECT INDIRECT

SPECIFIC LOCAL ALTERNATE PATH PRESCRIPTIVE

RESISTANCE METHOD DESIGN RULES
ALTERNATE PATH METHOD
• In this method probability of progressive collapse is reduce by
providing redundancy in structure.
• If one member fails, alternate load paths are available for the load that
was in that component and a general collapse does not occur.
• This approach has the benefit of simplicity and directness.
• Alternate path method is commonly recommended by the US general
service administration (GSA, 2003), especially for buildings with
maximum ten stories high.
BRACING
• Bracing is usually provided
between beams and columns to
increase their resistance against
the lateral forces and sideways
forces due to applied load .
• Type of Bracing:
1. Concentric bracing.
2. Eccentric bracing.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Paper 1: Progressive Analysis Procedure for Progressive Collapse
S.M. Marjanishvili, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (Vol. 18, No. 2, May 1, 2004.
©ASCE, ISSN 0887-3828/2004/2-79–85)
• Objective-
1) Description of progressive collapse phenomenon.
2) Review of current guidelines.
3) Evaluate and compare various analysis procedure.
• General Service Administration & Department of Defence guidelines
o For GSA guidelines loading conditions in downward direction.
For static analysis:- Load=2(DL+0.25LL) where, “2” is dynamic amplification factor.
For dynamic analysis:- Load=DL+0.25LL where, DL&LL are Dead & live load
o For DoD guidelines loading conditions.
For analysis :- Load=DL+0.5LL+0.2WL Where, DL,LL&WL are dead, live & Wind
load.
• Conclusion
• The simplest analysis methodology includes linear static and most exhaustive
procedure in non linear dynamic analysis.
Paper 2: Comparison of Various Procedures for Progressive Collapse
analysis
S.M. Marjanishvili, Elizabeth Agnew, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (Vol. 20, No.
4, November 1, 2006. ©ASCE, ISSN 0887-3828/2006/4-365–374)
• Objective- To provide clear step by step description of four increasingly complex
method.
• Model Description and Analysis-
1. Nine storey steel moment frame structure.
2. Six bays in longitudinal direction, three bays in transverse direction.
3. Analysis is carried out as threat independent.
4. Analysis is carried out by using software SAP2000.
• Demand Capacity Ratio-
DCR=Mmax / Mp Where, Mmax=Maximum moment; Mp =Ultimate moment capacity.
DCR for this study should be DCR<=3.
• Conclusion
1. The structure satisfy progressive collapse criteria as the DCR is not more than 3.
2. The dynamic amplification factor of 2 used is a good estimate for static analysis
procedures since linear static and linear dynamic analysis procedures yield
approximately the same maximum deflections.
Paper 3: U.S. General Services Administration Progressive Collapse Design
Guidelines Applied to Concrete Moment-Resisting Frame Buildings
David N. Bilow, Mahmoud Kamara, 2004 ASCE Structures Congress Nashville, Tennessee May 18-22, 2004.

• Objective- To find the progressive collapse potential of reinforced cast in place

concrete moment resisting frame building.
• Modelling and analysis-
1. Three 12 storey concrete frame building.
2. Linear static analysis of 3D model is done in ETABS.
• Column Removal Scenario-
1. Exterior middle column of long side and short side.
2. Corner column.
3. Interior column to the perimeter column lines.
• Analysis is done by using GSA criteria.
• The DCR of for column and shear satisfy the GSA criteria.
• The DCR for beams does not satisfy the criteria so it has to be redesigned.
Paper 4: Experimental and Analytical Assessment on Progressive
Collapse Potential of Two Actual Steel Frame Buildings
Brain I. Song, Halil Sezen, Kevin A. Giriunas , 2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE

• Objective- The progressive collapse performance of two existing building was

investigated through experimental testing and computational analysis.
• Experiment-
1. Ohio Union building and BLCC building were used for this experiment.
2. Each building was tested physically by removing columns.
3. 2D and 3D models of steel frame buildings were developed for analysis.
4. Linear static and Modelling in computer is done by using SAP2000 using the
GSA guidelines.
5. Strain values recorded are compared with software results.
• Conclusion-
1. The top storey were most significantly influenced by the column loss due to
small cross section and low moment of inertia.
2. Ohio union building satisfy the GSA criteria and BLCC building did not.
Paper 5: Progressive Collapse Analysis of Reinforced Concrete
Frame Structures in Linear Static Analysis Based on GSA
Zhang Peng, Chen Baoxu , © 2012 IEEE

• In this paper, the progressive collapse of reinforced frame structure is

done.
• The analysis procedure is carried out by using linear static analysis
based on GSA guidelines.
• The analysis is performed by the SAP2000 software.
• The building model is five storey RCC structure.
• The DCR was calculated for different column removal case.
• It conclude that the no collapse would occur for corner column case.
• And for other removal locations collapse would occur.
Paper 6: Linear and Nonlinear Static Analysis for Assessment of
Progressive Collapse Potential of Multi-storied Building.
Digesh D. Joshi, Paresh V. Patel and Saumil J. Tank, 2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE

• Objective- To study the demand capacity ratios of reinforced concrete frame

structure.
• Modelling and analysis
1. The building model considered for the study is 4 storey and 10 storey.
2. Symmetrical building configuration is chosen.
3. Linear and non linear static analysis is carried using GSA guidelines.
• Conclusion-
1. If single base column fails, only the those orthogonal planar frame to which
the failed column belongs share released force.
2. To prevent the collapse it should be designed and detailed with adequate level
of continuity, redundancy and ductility can develop alternate load paths.
Objective
• To study effect of progressive collapse on steel building with
and without bracing.
Scope of Work
• Preparing structural model of G+4 storey and G+7 storey steel building
using commercially available software SAP2000.
• Deciding the location for the removal of key element (column)
according to GSA guidelines and identifying most critical scenario.
• Calculate loads and perform linear static analysis according to GSA
guidelines.
• Creating different models consists of different types of bracing which
are X-type and V type bracing.
• The location of bracing would be alternate and adjacent.
• The parameters to be studied are Demand Capacity Ratio for moment,
shear and axial that is DCRmoment ,DCRshear and DCRaxial for the
structural components.
Software Validation
• The software validation is carried out by considering the example of book
“Earthquake resistant design of structure” by S.K. Duggal. The data for the problem
is as follows.
• A four storey steel office building shown in figure, is located in seismic zone III on
hard soil. The framing system of the building is moment resisting frames with brick
masonry infill panels.
• Ground floor column sections are ISHB 450@872 N/m with 12mm thick and 250 mm
wide cover plate on each flange. The remaining floors are ISHB 450@ 872 N/m.
• For beam sections ISMB 400@ 616 N/m along 7.5m intermediate beams. All other
beams are ISMB 225 @ 312 N/m
• Slab is 120mm thick RC slab on all floors Walls are of 230mm thick (unit wt.18
kN/m3)
Software Validation
• Modelling of problem in SAP2000
Software Validation

Property Software Manual Error%

Seismic weight (kN) 3517.912 3512.452 0.15
Base shear (kN) 175.896 175.62 0.15
Lateral force at each floor (Qi) (kN)
14m 58.719 58.69 0.04
10.5m 75.268 75.165 0.13
7m 33.453 33.402 0.15
3.5m 8.456 8.359 1.14
PROBLEM DEFINATION

• The model considered for the study is five and eight storey moment
frame structure with and without bracing, with five bays in the
longitudinal direction and three in three in traverse direction.
• The column removal would be done according to GSA guidelines. The
location of column removal would be:
• 1.) Centre column in longitudinal direction of building.
• 2.) Centre column in transverse direction of building.
• 3.) Corner column.
• Two type of concentric bracing would be use which are X-type and V-
type bracing. The arrangement of bracing would be in alternate
arrangement and neighbour arrangement along
• The building is considered to be in zone IV and on medium soil.
Model Data and Description

Model Configuration Model 1 (G+4) Model 2 (G+7)

Building length (m) 37.5 37.5
Building width (m) 24 24
Building Height (m) 17.5 28
Floor height (m) 3.5 3.5
Bay width in longitudinal 7.5 7.5
direction(m)
Bay width in transverse 8 8
direction (m)
Number of bays in 5 5
longitudinal direction
Number of bays in 3 3
transverse direction
Model Data and Description
• Structural Components data:
1) Thickness of Slab : 90mm
2)Beam Size : ISMB-500
3)Secondary Beam Size : ISMB-450
4) Column Size : ISHB-450-I With Plates of (400mm*32mm)on both side of flanges

• Material Properties steel sections:

1) Modulus of Elasticity: E = 210000 N/mm2

2) Poisson’s Ratio: u = 0.3
3) Weight per Unit Volume: 7.697E-05 N/mm3
4)Mass per Unit Volume: 7.849E-09 N/mm3
5)Minimum Yield Stress: 250 N/mm2
Model Data and Description

The loads which are considered for this analysis are Dead loads, Live loads &
Earthquake loads.
• The dead load include the self weight of sections and slab.
• Floor finish = 1kN/m2
• Terrace water proofing = 1kN/m2
• Wall load on periphery beams = 20.5 kN/m
• Live load on all floor except roof = 2.5 kN/m2

For Earthquake load

• Zone = IV
• Importance factor = 1
• Response reduction factor =5
• Type of soil = Medium
Modelling in SAP2000
• The models have been analysed and designed by using the software product of
CSI Corporation, called SAP2000 V19.2.1 as one of the powerful computer
programs.
• For both building beam-column connections are rigid. It means that beams are
continuous. The columns are continuous between the two story levels.
• Model of eight storey building is shown in figure below.
Modelling in SAP2000
• After the modelling the loads are defined and applied on the model and analysis
is conducted in SAP200.
• The figure shows the load patterns definition which are used in the analysis.
Modelling in SAP2000
• After the analysis of Eight storey building model the building is then designed
according to IS 800-2007 code in SAP2000 considering the load combination
from IS 1893-2002.
• Similarly, the modelling of five storey building is done and analysed. Now the
models are used for performing progressive collapse analysis.
 Modelling the Removing the
Selecting the GSA
Selecting the building according columns according
guidelines using
type of Building to IS code with to the GSA
APM based on LS
SAP2000 guidelines

Analyzing the Assigning the

If DCR for each Computing the building after amplified gravity
moment, shear, DCR for primary removing each loads to models
and axial > 2 components column separately

no
yes

Progressive
Progressive
collapse does not
collapse occurs
occurs

Flow Chart Approach to assess the Progressive Collapse

Potential
Progressive collapse analysis

• Progressive collapse analysis can be performed by using GSA (General Service

Administration) guidelines and DoD (Department of Defence)guidelines.
• For this study GSA guidelines is used for linear static analysis.
• The load combination, demand capacity ratio and location for column removal
are discussed next.
Load Combination for Progressive Collapse
Analysis

• According to GSA guidelines, the below mentioned load combination is

used for static analysis procedure.

Load = 2(1.2DL+0.25LL)

Where,
DL=Dead load
LL=Live load
2 is Dynamic Amplification Factor
Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR)

• In order to determine the susceptibility of the building to Progressive

Collapse, Demand Capacity Ratio should be calculated based on the
following equation:

DCR=Qud/Qce

Where,
Qud= Acting force (Demand) determined or computed in element
Qce = Probable ultimate capacity (Capacity) of the component
Demand Capacity Ratio (DCR)

• Referring to DCR criteria defined through linear static approach,

different elements having values less than 1.5 or 2 are considered not
collapsed.
DCR < 2.0: for typical structural configuration
DCR < 1.5: for atypical structural configuration (GSA, 2003)
• The model which is used have typical structural configuration so the
DCR < 2.
• Since the loading pattern used in this study for analysis is based on just
gravity (amplified dead and live load), computation of DCR values for
braces are neglected, DCR has been calculated only for beams and
columns.
• In this study, Demand Capacity Ratio is computed for moment, axial
force and shear.
Demand Capacity Ratio for moment (DCRmoment)

• DCR for moment is calculated based on the equation below:

DCR= Mmax/Mp
Where:
Mmax = Maximum actual (existing) moment
MP = Plastic moment

• The plastic moment can be computed by the following equation:

MP = fy * Zp
Where,
fy= Yield strength of material
Zp= Plastic modulus
Demand Capacity Ratio for Shear (DCRshear)

• DCR for shear is calculated using following equation below;

DCR=Vmax/Vp
Where,
Vmax= Maximum actual shear
Vp= plastic shear

The values for plastic shear can be calculated by the equation given in IS
800-2007 by following equation;

Vp=Av.fyw/1.732
Where,
Av=shear area and
fyw=yield strength of web material
Demand Capacity Ratio for Axial (DCRaxial)
• DCR for axial is calculated using following equation:

DCR=Axialmax/Axialp

Where:

Axialmax: Actual axial force

Axialp: Axial force causing yielding of the full cross section
Column Removal Locations
• Three representative column removal locations were considered in this analysis
example as shown in figure below:
• Removal 1 –Ground floor Long side column condition (1D).
• Removal 2 – Ground floor Short side column condition (3A).
• Removal 3 – Ground floor Corner column condition (1A).
Progressive Collapse Analysis and Calculation of
DCR for G+7 storey building without bracing.
• The model for the progressive collapse analysis is prepared according to
the data given in previous chapter and then it designed according to IS
800-2007.
• After that the column is removed according to the GSA guidelines as
mentioned above and the amplified load combination is applied to the
model.
Removal of column 1D (Long side column removal case.)

• The figure shows the location of removed column 1D and the other
figure shows the affected members (B21, B22 and B10) by the column
removal.
Behaviour of building under column removal
scenario D1
Bending moment Diagram for D1 column removal

BM for B21
Section Property for ISMB500
• Now, to compute DCRmoment from moment diagram the equation is
mention below:
DCRmoment=Mmax/Mp
• The value for Mp would be same for all the beam sections because all
the beam sections are of ISMB-500.
Mp=Zp*fy
Where, Zp=2.075E-03 m3 obtained from section properties.
fy=250N/mm2 obtained from material properties.

Therefore, the value of Mp = 518.75 kN.m .

Now with the help of Mp we can compute DCRmoment for all the affected
beams (B21, B22 and B10) at every floor. For example for B21 at first
floor;
DCRmoment=1236.6191/518.75=2.38 >2.

So, the member have high potential for progressive collapse.

DCRmoment value for long side column removal (D1)

Floor level LONG SIDE COLUMN REMOVAL (D1)

B21 B22 B10

1 2.38 2.36 1.28
2 2.34 2.32 1.37
3 2.3 2.27 1.32
4 2.27 2.24 1.3
5 2.24 2.21 1.28
6 2.22 2.19 1.26
7 2.21 2.18 1.28
8 1.68 1.66 1.08
Shear force Diagram for D1 column removal

SF for B22
• The DCRshear can be computed by the following equation:

DCRshear= Vmax/Vp
where,
For Vp=Av.fyw/1.732

Therefore Vp for ISMB500=5100*250/1.732=736.12 kN

So, for B22 of first floor the DCRshear=486.624/736.12=0.66. The value is

less than “2” there is no progressive potential.
DCRshear for long side column removal D1
Floor level DCRshear FOR LONG SIDE COLUMN REMOVAL D1

B21 B22 B10

1 0.66 0.66 0.24
2 0.65 0.65 0.27
3 0.649 0.64 0.265
4 0.642 0.636 0.261
5 0.637 0.631 0.258
6 0.632 0.627 0.254
7 0.631 0.626 0.259
8 0.38 0.375 0.22
Axial force Diagram for D1 column removal

Axial force on “1C” column

• The DCRaxial can be obtained by the equation mention below
• DCR=Axialmax/Axialp
• The value of axialp is 8040.366 kN.
• Here, all the values of DCR are less than 2 so, the progressive collapse potential is
less.
Floor level DCRaxial for long side removal
1C 1E 2C
1 0.907996 0.909714 0.807247
2 0.786173 0.787337 0.707132
3 0.665347 0.66604 0.604366
4 0.545744 0.546086 0.503326
5 0.427097 0.42719 0.402952
6 0.309207 0.309134 0.30323
7 0.191886 0.191718 0.204106
8 0.074815 0.074558 0.104706
Removal of column 3A Short side column removal
(case-2)
Behaviour of building under column A3
removal scenario
• When the A-3 Column is removed the three adjacent beams on each
floor would be affected so here the B-2, B3 and B-29 of all the floors
are affected.
• Bending moment diagram for A3 removal
 DCRmoment value for Short side column removal
(A3)
• Here, the DCR for moment values are greater than 2 so the progressive collapse
potential is high
Floor level DCRmoment VALUE FOR SHORT
SIDE COLUMN REMOVAL
B2 B3 B29
1 2.17 1.979 2.088
2 2.19 2.01 2.089
3 2.15 1.975 2.033
4 2.12 1.95 1.99
5 2.1 1.94 1.96
6 2.07 1.91 1.944
7 2.1 1.94 1.941
8 1.37 1.24 1.85
Shear force Diagram for A3 column removal
DCRshear value for short side column removal (A3)
Floor Level DCRShear for SHORT SIDE
COLUMN REMOVAL
B2 B3 B29
1 0.594 0.569 0.465
2 0.596 0.57 0.472
3 0.588 0.564 0.461
4 0.583 0.56 0.454
5 0.579 0.557 0.449
6 0.575 0.553 0.444
7 0.579 0.556 0.444
8 0.28 0.26 0.447
Axial force Diagram for A3 column removal
DCRaxial short column removal (A3)

• Here, the DCR value is less than 2 the progressive collapse potential is
less.

Floor level DCRaxial for short side removal

2A 4A 3B
1 0.913205 0.628065 0.898577
2 0.790651 0.530506 0.784763
3 0.66883 0.43354 0.670491
4 0.54805 0.336928 0.557849
5 0.428141 0.240629 0.446368
6 0.308913 0.144669 0.335847
7 0.190298 0.048391 0.226054
8 0.071517 0.724732 0.116756
Removal of column A1 Corner column removal (case-3)
Behaviour of building under column loss (A1)

• When the A-1 Column is removed the three adjacent beams on each
floor would be affected so here the B-1 and B-19 of all the floors are
affected.
Bending moment Diagram for A1 column removal
DCRmoment for removal of A1 column

• The DCRmoment values are greater than 2 so , the progressive collapse

potential is high.

Floor level DCRmoment for CORNER

COLUMN REMOVAL
B1 B19
1 2.17 2.763
2 2.27 2.765
3 2.21 2.7
4 2.18 2.66
5 2.16 2.63
6 2.14 2.611
7 2.18 2.613
8 1.34 1.99
DCRshear for removal of A1 column

Floor level DCRshear value SHORT SIDE COLUMN

REMOVAL

B2 B3 B29
1 0.594 0.569 0.465
2 0.596 0.57 0.472
3 0.588 0.564 0.461
4 0.583 0.56 0.454
5 0.579 0.557 0.449
6 0.575 0.553 0.444
7 0.579 0.556 0.444
8 0.28 0.26 0.447
DCRaxial for removal of 1A column
Floor DCRaxial for corner removal
level
1B 2A
1 0.977990927 0.928396046
2 0.848581147 0.806851703
3 0.718082734 0.682124172
4 0.589136987 0.559000299
5 0.46122577 0.436498786
6 0.334158047 0.314596997
7 0.207763552 0.193338836
8 0.08142403 0.071178974
• The Eight storey steel building model without bracing has high potential
for the progressive collapse because the value of DCRmoment is greater
than 2.
• The model is safe for DCRshear and DCRaxial.
• To reduce the progressive collapse potential of this model, X-type
bracing is provided.
• The bracing arrangement contains of alternate and neighbour position of
bracing.
• The arrangement of bracing is changed only in longitudinal direction.
• The section of the bracing provided hollow circular tube section
ISNB300H
Progressive Collapse Analysis and Calculation of
DCR for G+7 storey building with X-bracing in
Neighbour position in longitudinal direction.
Behaviour of building with bracing for column removal D1
BM for B22
 DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -1(D1)
D1 DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial
Floor B21 B22 B10 B21 B22 B10 1E 1C 2D
1 0.926 0.8658 0.6477
0.79 0.79 0.25 0.359 0.359 0.079
2
0.806 0.7499 0.56696
0.74 0.74 0.24 0.35 0.351 0.077
3
0.656 0.6066 0.486457
0.71 0.71 0.22 0.344 0.345 0.074
4
0.520 0.4795 0.406359
0.68 0.69 0.21 0.339 0.34 0.071
5
0.395 0.3636 0.3265
0.67 0.67 0.2 0.336 0.337 0.07
6
0.277 0.2554 0.2468
0.66 0.66 0.196 0.334 0.335 0.068
7
0.165 0.1521 0.1673
0.65 0.65 0.192 0.33 0.33 0.067
8
0.24 0.23 0.21 0.098 0.098 0.08 0.055 0.0516 0.0880
DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -2(A3)
3A DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial

Floor B2 B3 B29 B2 B3 B29 4A 2A 3B

1
0.88 1.12 0.89 0.359 0.404 0.247 0.503592 1.101031 0.706394
2
0.8 1.19 0.88 0.343 0.414 0.245 0.423938 0.992903 0.617285
3
0.78 1.14 0.84 0.339 0.406 0.239 0.344992 0.819738 0.52878
4
0.75 1.11 0.82 0.335 0.401 0.234 0.266419 0.658979 0.441009
5
0.74 1.09 0.8 0.332 0.397 0.231 0.188149 0.505959 0.353831
6
0.73 1.079 0.788 0.33 0.394 0.228 0.110089 0.358804 0.267129
7
0.165094 0.152163 0.167386
0.65 0.65 0.192 0.33 0.33 0.067
8
0.24 0.23 0.21 0.098 0.098 0.08 0.055356 0.051632 0.088006
DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -3(A1)
1A DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial
`Floor B1 B19 B1 B19 2A 1B
1
0.88 1.12 0.57 0.72 0.931637 0.926822
2
0.8 1.19 0.604 0.73 0.806427 0.799338
3
0.78 1.14 0.59 0.72 0.677587 0.672377
4
0.75 1.11 0.585 0.71 0.552826 0.549292
5
0.74 1.09 0.581 0.708 0.430119 0.428852
6
0.73 1.079 0.576 0.703 0.309143 0.310446
7
0.65 0.65 0.586 0.704 0.189723 0.193553
8
0.24 0.23 0.251 0.427 0.069511 0.076624
Progressive Collapse Analysis and Calculation of
DCR for Eight storey building with X-bracing in
Alternate position in longitudinal direction.
Behaviour of building with bracing for column
removal case-1 (D1)
DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -1(D1)
D1 DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial

Floor B21 B22 B10 B21 B22 B10 1E 1C 2D

1
0.91 1.07 0.39 0.38 0.413 0.10214 0.544651 1.117539 0.66745
2
0.84 1.06 0.4 0.369 0.411 0.10506 0.472659 0.987099 0.58426
3 0.50094
0.79 1.04 0.37 0.361 0.406 0.10009 0.407015 0.801004 7
4 0.41822
0.76 1.02 0.35 0.355 0.403 0.09741 0.338418 0.634102 9
5 0.33584
0.74 1 0.34 0.351 0.4 0.09514 0.266988 0.480945 4
6 0.99 0.33 0.25373
0.729 8 6 0.348 0.398 0.09336 0.193569 0.337769 8
7 0.99 0.33 0.17184
0.721 4 5 0.346 0.397 0.09296 0.118918 0.201374 7
8 0.09003
0.31 0.54 0.32 0.11 0.15 0.10008 0.043056 0.068445 8
Behaviour of building with bracing for column
removal case-2 (A3)
DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -2(A3)
A3 DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial

Floor B2 B3 B29 B2 B3 B29 4A 2A 3B

1
0.89 1.15 0.91 0.36197 0.40988 0.25092 0.4645 1.0946 0.712406
2
0.81 1.23 0.9 0.34503 0.42169 0.24962 0.4004 0.9871 0.622767
3
0.78 1.18 0.87 0.34051 0.41388 0.24348 0.3324 0.8133 0.533603
4
0.76 1.16 0.84 0.33670 0.40951 0.23888 0.2609 0.6529 0.445099
5
0.74 1.14 0.82 0.33388 0.40587 0.23520 0.1867 0.5010 0.357138
6
0.735 1.129 0.81 0.33173 0.40320 0.23238 0.1108 0.3552 0.26962
7
0.736 1.22 0.8 0.33096 0.40246 0.23078 0.0330 0.2140 0.182437
8
0.24 0.57 0.83 0.07508 0.1292 0.257411 0.5290 0.0729 0.09559
Behaviour of building with bracing for column removal
case-3 (A1)
DCRmoment, DCRshear and DCRaxial for column
removal case -2(A1)

A1 DCRmoment DCRshear DCRaxial `

`Floor B1 B19 B1 B19 2A 1B

1
0.9 0.89 0.3651 0.3799 0.670161 1.044456
2
0.88 0.81 0.3579 0.3654 0.581821 1.042984
3
0.86 0.77 0.3545 0.3583 0.49603 0.919799
4
0.84 0.74 0.3512 0.3529 0.408476 0.74593
5
0.83 0.72 0.3490 0.3489 0.319518 0.590075
6
0.81 0.71 0.3467 0.3461 0.229518 0.447191
7
0.82 0.7 0.3493 0.3451 0.138917 0.313761
8
0.24 0.28 0.0669 0.1065 0.047226 0.186829
Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (D1)
DCRm for B21 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey
model with and without bracing for column
removal (D1)
DCRm for B22 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey model with
and without bracing for column removal (D1)

DCRm for B10 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey
model with and without bracing for column
removal (A3)

DCRm for B2 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey
model with and without bracing for column
removal (A3)

DCRm for B3 for 8 floor model

5
floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey
model with and without bracing for column
removal (A3)

DCRm for B29 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey model with and
without bracing for column removal (A1)

DCRm for B1 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Eight Storey model with and
without bracing for column removal (A1)

DCRm for B19 for 8 floor model

5
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Demand capacity ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

General conclusion

• From the result it can be observed that by providing bracing the

progressive collapse potential drastically reduced because there are
several alternate load path for load transfer.
• The most critical case for the progressive collapse is when corner
column is removed.
• Similarly, 5 storey models were developed and analysed according to
the GSA guideline. The results for DCRmoment for five storey structure
are shown below .
Behaviour of building with bracing for column
removal case-1 (D1)
Behaviour of building with bracing for column
removal case-2 (A3)
Behaviour of building with bracing for column
removal case-3 (A1)
Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (D1)
DCRm for B21 for 5 floor model (Long side column removal "1D")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (D1)
DCRm for B22 for 5 floor model (Long side column removal "1D")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (D1)
DCRm for B10 for 5 floor model(Long side column removal "1D")

4
Floor

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (3A)

DCRm for B2 for 5 floor model (Short side column removal "3A")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (3A)

DCRm for B3 for 5 floor model (Short side column removal "3A")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (3A)

DCRm for B29 for 5 floor model (Short side column removal "3A")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (1A)
DCRm for B1 for 5 floor model (Corner column removal "1A")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Comparison of DCRmoment for Five Storey model
with and without bracing for column removal (1A)
DCRm for B19 for 5 floor model (Corner column removal "1A")

4
Floor

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

DCR ratio

X neighbour X alternate Frame without bracing

Further Work to Do
• Modelling and analysis of V type bracing model for five storey
and eight storey
 Time
Particular

Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Mar-18 Apr-18

Selection of Dissertation Topic

Literature Review

Learning software

Defining Problem

DP-1 Report Writing

Preparation of models using SAP2000

Results and Further Modification

DP-2 Report Writing

Completed Work Future Work

References
• 1.) H. S. Lew “Analysis Procedures for Progressive Collapse of Buildings”,
Building & Fire research laboratory, NIST, 2005.
• 2.) S. M. Marjanishvili (2004) “Progressive Analysis Procedure for Progressive
Collapse” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities (Vol. 18, No. 2,
May 1, 2004. ©ASCE, ISSN 0887-3828/2004/2-79–85)
• 3.) S. M. Marjanishvili, Elizabeth Agnew (2006) “Comparison of Various
Procedures for Progressive Collapse Analysis” Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities (Vol. 20, No. 4, November 1, 2006. ©ASCE, ISSN 0887-
3828/2006/4-365–374)
• 4.) David N. Bilow, Mahmoud Kamara (2004) “U.S. General Services
Administration Progressive Collapse Design Guidelines Applied to Concrete
Moment-Resisting Frame Buildings” 2004 ASCE Structures Congress
Nashville, Tennessee May 18-22, 2004.
• 5.) Digesh D. Joshi, Paresh V. Patel and Saumil J. Tank (2010) “Linear and
Nonlinear Static Analysis for Assessment of Progressive Collapse Potential of
Multistoried Building” 2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE
• 6.) Brain I. Song, Halil Sezen, Kevin A. Giriunas (2010) “Experimental and
Analytical Assessment on Progressive Collapse Potential of Two Actual Steel
Frame Buildings” 2010 Structures Congress © 2010 ASCE
• 7.) Zhang Peng, Chen Baoxu (2010) “Progressive Collapse Analysis of
Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures in Linear Static Analysis Based on GSA”
2013 Third International Conference on Intelligent System Design and
Engineering Applications © 2012 IEEE
• 8.) Paresh V. Patel, Rushi Parikh (2013) “Various Procedures for Progressive
Collapse Analysis of Steel Framed Buildings” The IUP Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. VI, No. 1, 2013
• 9.) Steven M. Baldridge, Francis K Humay “Preventing Progressive Collapse in
Concrete Buildings Seismic design details are the key to ductility and load
transfer”, Concrete international, November 2003, spp. 1-7.
• 10.) “Progressive Collapse Analysis and Guidelines”, GSA Guidelines, 2003.