n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nAn explosion on the elevated structures caused by terrorist activities or manmade events can induce significant deformations in the civil engineering structures. Therefore, it is necessary to review the response of the structural systems such as masonry structures, reinforced concrete building structures and reinforced concrete tunnel. In order to understand the scope for protecting such a structures and the structural behaviour under blast loading, a detailed literature review is conducted. Based on the detailed literature survey, the investigations about behavior of masonry structures and reinforced concrete building structures were initiated since 2000; however, the behavior of reinforced concrete underground tunnels was focused since the year 1990. Also, the literature reveals that the investigations on structural systems using analytical techniques are limited, in comparison to experiment and simulations. In addition to that, the response of the structural elements was predicted and the trend was calibrated and fitted logarithmically with the experimental results. Overall, the R2 value was found between 0.99 and 0.88 against reinforced concrete building structures, masonry structures as well as underground tunnels.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. Wong CW, Karamanoglu M. Modelling the response of masonry structures to gas explosions. J Loss Prev Process Industry. 1999; 12(3): 199–205.
2. Mayrhofer C. Reinforced masonry walls under blast loading. Int J Mechanical Sci. 2002; 44(6): 1067–1080.
3. Wu C, Hao H, Lu Y. Dynamic response and damage analysis of masonry structures and masonry in filled RC frames to blast ground motion. Eng Struct. 2005; 27(3): 323–333.
4. Davidson JS, Fisher JW, Hammons MI, Porter RJ, Dinan RJ. Failure mechanisms of polymer-reinforced concrete masonry walls subjected to blast. J Struct Eng. 2005; 131(8).
5. Zapata BJ, Weggel DC. Collapse study of an unreinforced masonry bearing wall building subjected to internal blast loading. J Perform Constr Facil. 2008; 22(2): 92–100.
6. Fischer K, Riedel W, Ziehm J. Full-scale validation of a blast-proof masonry wall system and assessment of coupling effects using a TDOF model. 14th Int Symposium on Interaction of the Effects of Munitions with Struct (ISIEMS). 2011.
7. Aghdamy S, Wu C, Griffith M. Simulation of retrofitted unreinforced concrete masonry unit walls under blast loading. Int J Prot Struct. 2013; 4(1): 21–44.
8. Ahmad S, Elahi A, Pervaiz H, Rahman A, Barbhuiya S. Experimental study of masonry wall exposed to blast loading. Mater Constr. 2013; 64(313): 1–11.
9. Chen L, Fang Q, Fan J, Zhang Y, Hao H, Liu J. Responses of masonry infill walls retrofitted with CFRP, steel wire mesh and laminated bars to blast loadings. Adv Struct Eng. 2016; 17(6): 817–836.
10. Li Z, Chen L, Fang Q, Hao H, Zhang Y, Chen W, Xiang H, Bao Q. Study of autoclaved aerated concrete masonry walls under vented gas explosions. Eng Struct. 2017; 141: 444–460.
11. Sielicki PW, Łodygowski T. Masonry wall behaviour under explosive loading. Eng Fail Anal. 2019; 104: 274–291.
12. Zhan Li, Li Chen, Qin Fang, Wensu Chen, Hong Hao, Rong Zhu, Kang Zheng. Experimental and numerical study on CFRP strip strengthened clay brick masonry walls subjected to vented gas explosions. Int J Impact Eng. 2019; 129: 66–79.
13. Keys RA, Clubley SK. Experimental analysis of debris distribution of masonry panels subjected to long duration blast loading. Eng Struct. 2017; 130: 229–241.
14. Keys RA, Clubley Simon K. Establishing predictive method for blast induced masonry debris distribution using experimental and numerical methods. Eng Fail Anal. 2017; 82: 82–91.
15. Hao H, Tarasov B. Experimental study of dynamic material properties of clay brick and mortar at different strain rates. Aust J Structural Eng. 2007; 8: 117e31.
16. Wei X, Stewart MG. Model validation and parametric study on the blast response of unreinforced brick masonry walls. Int J Impact Eng. 2010; 37(11): 1150–1159.
17. Draganic H, Sigmund V. Blast loading on structures. Tech Gazette. 2012; 19(3): 643–652.
18. Keys RA, Clubley SK. Modelling debris distribution of masonry panels subject to blast loads using experimental & applied element methods. In:15th International Symposium on Interaction of the Effects of Munitions with Structures, Potsdam, Germany. 2013; 1–10.
19. Luccioni BM, Ambrosini RD, Danesi RF. Analysis of building collapse under blast loads. Eng Struct. 2004; 26: 63–71.
20. Hashemi A, Mosalam KM. Transient analysis of reinforced concrete frame with and without masonry infill wall under blast. Emi J Eng Res (EJER). 2004; 9(2): 97–103.
21. Marjanishvili SM. Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse. J Perform Constr Facil, ASCE. 2004; 18(2): 79–85.
22. Baylot TB, Bevins TL. Effect of responding and failing structural components on the airblast pressures and loads on an inside of the structure. Comput Struct. 2007; 85(11–140: 891–910.
23. Wu C, Hao H. Safe scaled distance for masonry in filled RC frame structures subjected to air blast loads. J Perfor Constr Facil. 2007; 21(6): 422–431.
24. Murali M, Sujisha V. Study on the response of RC frames subjected to blast loading. Int Research J Eng and Tech. 2016; 05(8): 602–607.
25. Qian K, Li B. Effects of masonry infill wall on the performance of RC frames to resist progressive collapse. J Struct Eng. 2017; 143(9): 04017118.
26. Taromi MM, Khosravi H. The response of residents of the building and non-structural components, in contrast to explosions at ground level from the standpoint of passive defense. Civil Eng J. 2019; 5(2): 495–504.
27. Shi Y, Li ZX, Hao H. A new method for progressive collapse analysis of RC frames under blast loading. Eng Struct. 2010; 32(6): 1691–1703.
28. Jayasooriya R, Thambiratnam DP, Perera NJ, Kosse V. Blast and residual capacity analysis of reinforced concrete framed buildings. Eng Struct. 2011; 33(12): 3483–3495.
29. Gram MM, Clark AJ, Hegemier GA, Seible F. Laboratory simulation of blast loading on building and bridge structures. WIT Trans State-of-the-art in Sci and Eng. 2012; 60: 75–86.
30. Al-Salloum YA, Almusallam TH, Khawaji MY, Ngo T, Elsanadedy HM, VAbbas H. Progressive collapse analysis of RC buildings against internal blast. Adv Struct Eng. 2015; 18(12): 2181–2192.
31. Senthil K, Pelecanos L, Rupali S. Prediction of damage intensity of reinforced concrete tunnels and soil against blast loading. 10th Int Symposium on Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground, University of Cambridge, UK. 29th Jun–01st Jul 2020.
32. Senthil K, Rupali S, Singh AP. Numerical investigations on the behavior of reinforced concrete building against blast loading. Intl Conference on Theoretical and Experimental Advances in Civil Eng, SRM University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 2018b; 2.
33. Ngo T, Mendis P, Gupta A, Ramsay J. Blast loading and blast effects on structures–an overview. Elect J Struct Eng. 2007; 7(S1): 76–91.
34. Smith PD, Mays GC, Rose TA, Teo KG, Roberts BJ. Small scale models of complex geometry for blast overpressure assessment. Int J Impact Eng. 1992; 12(3): 345–360.
35. Liu H. Dynamic Analysis of Subway Structures under Blast Loading. Geotech Geological Eng. 2009; 27(6): 699–711.
36. Gui M, Chien M. Blast-resistant analysis for a tunnel passing beneath taipei songshan airport: a parametric study. Geotech Geological Eng. 2006; 24(2): 227–48.
37. Feldgun VR, Kochetkov AV, Karinski YS, Yankelevsky DZ. Internal blast loading in a buried lined tunnel. Int J Impact Eng. 2008; 35(3): 172–183.
38. Liu H. Dynamic Analysis of Subway Structures under Blast Loading. Geotech Geological Eng. 2009; 27(6): 699–711.
39. Yang Y, Xie X, Wang R. Numerical simulation of dynamic response of operating metro tunnel induced by ground explosion. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. 2010; 2(4): 373–384.
40. Chen H, Zhou J, Fan H, Jin F, Xu Y, Qiu Y, Wang P, Xie W. Dynamic responses of buried arch structure subjected to subsurface localized impulsive loading: Experimental study. Int J Imp Eng. 2014; 65: 89–101.
41. Stolz A, Ruiz-Ripoll ML. Experimental and computational a racterization of dynamic loading and structural resistance of tunnels in blast scenarios. Fire Techn. 2016; 52(5): 1595–1618.
42. Soheyli MR, Akhaveissy AH, Mirhosseini SM. Large-scale experimental and numerical study of blast acceleration created by close-in buried explosion on underground tunnel lining. Shock Vib. 2016; Article ID: 8918050.
43. Lu Y. Underground blast induced ground shock and its modelling using artificial neural network. Comp Geotechnics. 2005; 32(3): 164–178.
44. Choi S, Wang J, Munfakh G, Dwyre E. 3D nonlinear blast model analysis for underground structures. Geo Congress Geotechnical Eng in the Inf Tech Age. 2006; 1–6.
45. Buonsanti M, Leonardi G. 3-D simulation of tunnel structures under blast loading. Arch Civil Mech Eng. 2013; 13(1): 128–134.
46. Koneshwaran S, Thambiratnam DP, Gallage C. Blast response and failure analysis of a segmented buried tunnel. Struct Eng Int. 2015; 25(4): 419–431.
47. Senthil K, Pelecanos L, Rupali S. Prediction of damage intensity of reinforced concrete tunnels and soil against blast loading. 10th International Symposium on Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction in Soft Ground, University of Cambridge, UK. 29 Jun–01 Jul 2020.
48. Senthil K, Iwansh Gupta, Rupali S, Pelecanos L. A Review on influence of blast loading on structural elements and systems. International Conference on Experimentation and Progression in Engineering, Research and Technology; 2019 Nov 15–16; LPU Phagwara, Punjab, India.
49. Ousji H, Belkassem B, Louar MA, Kakogiannis D, Reymen B, Pyl L, Vantomme J. Parametric study of an explosive-driven shock tube as blastloading tool. Exp Tech. 2016; 40(4): 1307–1325.

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

International Journal of Structural Engineering and Analysis

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2456-5326[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nPrefabricated buildings are primarily prepared through the process of pre-planning and prefabrication. The advancement of the prefabricated building construction approach implies time constraints, cost efficiencies, improved structural performance, and expanded architectural insights. Prefabricated buildings become an effective replacement for traditional steel buildings in every respect further result when comparing costs, construction time, quality parameters and architectural perspective. The main objective of the current study is to compare prefabricated steel structures and conventional steel structures in all respects. A prefabricated building was designed and then a comparative analysis was carried out in relation to a conventional building with the same configuration. The main software used for the whole design and analysis part was Bentley STAAD.Pro and it was found that the prefabricated building gave more sustainable results compared to traditional steel buildings. The budget is consumed in all aspects, so the use of prefabricated buildings should be implemented, because the construction and maintenance costs of prefabricated buildings are much lower than traditional steel buildings. In this project work we compare the parametric evaluation of 120 m long and 60 m wide pre-engineered buildings (PEB) and conventional industrial halls under the influence of moving crane loads for fixed and articulated storage with STAAD.Pro.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. Firoz S, Kumar SC, Rao SK. Design concept of pre-engineered Building. Int J Eng Res Appl (IJERA). 2012;2(2):267–72.
2. Thorat AR, Patil SK. A. Study of performance of pre-engineered building of an industrial warehouse for dynamic Load. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2017;4(6):2240–6.
3. Lande PS, Kucheriya VV. Comparative study of an industrial pre-engineered Buildingwith conventional steel Building. J Civ Eng Environ Technol. 2015;2(10):77–82.
4. Dubey A, Sahare A. Main frame design of pre-engineered Building. Int Journal of Innov Eng Res Technol. 2016;3(11):12–8.
5. Meera CM. Pre-engineered building design of an industrial Warehouse. Int J Eng Sci Emerg Technol. 2013;5(2):75–82.
6. Patil SS. Analysis and design of pre-engineered building of an industrial Warehouse. Int J Curr Eng Sci Res. 2017;4(12):39–43.
7. Katkar DD, Phadtare NP. Comparative study of an industrial pre-engineered building with conventional steel Building.IntResJEngTechnol.2018;5(10):127-33.doi:10.1016/S1361-9209(98)00024-8.
8. Kiran GS, Rao AK, Kumar RP. Comparison of Design Procedures for Pre-Engineered Buildings (PEB): A Case Study. International Journal of Civil. Architectural Press, And Structural and Construction Engineering 8 (4) 2014: 480–4.
9. Kolate N, Kewate S. Economizing steel building using pre-engineered steel Sections. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2015;6(12):69–74.
10. Patra SI, D’Mello M. Analysis of pre-engineered building and conventional building using Primavera. Software. Int J Adv Res Eng Manag 3 (7). 2017:97–101.
11. Mythili TD. An overview of pre-engineered building Systems. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2017;8(4):557–63.
12. Dharmalingam G, Silambarasan G. Design and analysis of pre-engineered building with subjected to seismic loads using E-Tabs. Int J Sci Res Dev. 2017;5(4):1628–38.
13. Thorat AR, Patil SK. A study of performance of pre-engineered Building of an industrial warehouse for dynamic Load. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2017;4(6):2240–6.
14. Goswami A, Shende T. Pre-engineered building design of an industrial warehouse. Int Res J Eng Technol. 2018;5(6):1484–8.
15. Mehendale AP, Gupta AK. Assessment & maintenance of pre-engineered. Building. 2016;1(4):31–4.
16. Saleem M, Qureshi H. Design solutions for sustainable construction of pre-engineered steel buildings. Sustainability. May 28, 2018;10(6):1761. doi: 10.3390/su10061761.
17. Abrahamse W, Steg L, Vlek C, Rothengatter T. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J Environ Psychol. 2005;25(3):273–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.
18. Allison PD. Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. J Abnorm Psychol. 2003;112(4):545–57. doi: 10.1037/0021–843X.112.4.545.
19. Bamberg S, Möser G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol. 2007;27(1):14–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002.
20. Berenguer J, Corraliza JA, Martín R. Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2005;21(2):128–38. doi: 10.1027/1015–5759.21.2.128.
21. Boeije H. A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002;36(4):391–409. doi: 10.1023/A:1020909529486.
22. Brehm JM, Eisenhauer BW, Stedman RC. Environmental concern: examining the role of place meaning and place attachment. Soc Nat Resour. 2013;26(5):522–38. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2012.715726.
23. Buta N, Holland SM, Kaplanidou K. Local communities and protected areas: the mediating role of place attachment for pro-environmental civic behavior. J Outdoor Recreat Tourism, 5e6. 2014:1.e10.
24. Carrozzino-Lyon AL, McMullin SL, Parkhurst JA. Mail and web-based survey administration: a case study with recreational users of Virginia’s wildlife management areas. Hum Dimen Wildl. 2013;18(3):219–33. doi: 10.1080/10871209.2013.761298.
25. Chao Y, Lam S. Measuring Responsible Environmental Behavior: Self-Reported and Other-Reported Measures and Their Differences in Testing a Behavioral Model. Environ Behav. 2011;43(1):53–71. doi: 10.1177/0013916509350849.
26. Cooper C, Larson L, Dayer A, Stedman R, Decker D. Are wildlife recreationists conservationists? Linking hunting, birdwatching, and pro-environmental behavior. J Wildl Manag. 2015;79(3):446.e457.
27. De Young R. Changing behavior and making it stick: the conceptualization and management of conservation behavior. Environ Behav. 1993;25(3):485–505. doi: 10.1177/0013916593253003.
28. De Young R. New ways to promote pro-environmental behavior: expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. J Soc Issues. 2000;56(3):509–26. doi: 10.1111/0022–4537.00181.
29. Dono J, Webb J, Richardson B. The relationship between environmental activism, pro-environmental behaviour and social identity. J Environ Psychol. 2010;30(2):178–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.11.006.
30. Ebreo A, Vining J. How similar are recycling and waste reduction? Future orientation and reasons for reducing waste as predictors of self-reported behavior. Environ Behav. 2001;33(3):424–48. doi: 10.1177/00139160121973061.

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

International Journal of Structural Engineering and Analysis

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2456-5326[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nPresent study focusses on the behavior of reinforced concrete frames considering soil structure interaction by performing linear static and dynamic analysis. A reinforced concrete frame having G+10 storey was considered. The investigation on the behavior of RC frame is carried out by using dynamic analysis i.e., Response Spectrum method. The modeling of RC frame is carried out by using finite element-based computer program i.e., STAAD.Pro. The investigation is carryout by considering different soil profile beneath the structure such as Clay, Silt, Sand, Basalt Rock, Mudstone and Gneiss rock. Further investigation is carried out by considering above soil profile in loose and dense state. By considering all these parameter total 30 models for Static and Dynamic Conditions were created, all models were analyzed for the Seismic zone II. The Response of each RC frame with respect to others will be checked for Axial force, Shear Force, twisting moment, Bending Moment, Lateral displacement, and Base Shear. The behaviour of each RC frame with respect to others is describes with the help of graphs.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. Yang Lu, Bo Li, Feng Xiong, Qi Ge, Peng Zhao and Yang Liu (2020) ” Simple Discrete Models for Dynamic Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis: J-Engineering Structures, Volume: 206, Page No. 01–13.
2. Chandrakanth Bolisetti and Andrew S. Whittaker (2020) “Numerical Investigations of StructureSoil-Structure Interaction, J-Journl of Engineering Structures, Volume: 215, Page No. 01–16.
3. Dong Van Nguyen, Dookie Kim And Duan Duy Nguyen (2020) “Nonlinear Seismic SoilStructure Interaction Analysis of Nuclear Reactor Building Considering the Effect of Earthquake Frequency Content” J-Journals of Structure, Volume: 26, Page No. 901–914.
4. Hamza Güllü (2020) “Discussion On “Soil-Structure Interaction Analyses of Shallow-Founded Structures on A Potential-Liquefiable Soil Deposit” J-Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Volume: 139, Page No. 01–02.
5. Krishna Chaitanya, Balaji K.V.G.D, M. Pavan Kumar and B. Sudeepthi (2019) “Soil Structure Interaction Effects on RC Structures Subjected to Dynamic Loads” J-International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Volume: 09, Issue: 02, Page No. 2114–2120.
6. Mohsen Bagheri, Mehdi Ebadi Jamkhaneh And Bijan Samali (2018) “Effect of Seismic Soil– Pile–Structure Interaction on Midand High-Rise Steel Buildings Resting on A Group of Pile Foundations” J-International Journal of Geomechanics, Volume: 18, Page No. 01–27.
7. Vishwajit Anand and S.R. Satish Kumar (2018) ” Seismic Soil-Structure Interaction: A State-ofThe-Art Review ” J-structures, Volume: 16, Page No. 317–324.
8. Akshay N, And Dr. Manjunath N. Hegde (2018) “Seismic Response of Structure Considering Soil Structure Interaction for Soft Soils in Different Zones” J-International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Volume: 05, Issue: 08, Page No. 1720–1725.
9. Phani Kumar V and Saikiran K (2018) “Non-Linear Dynamic Analysis of Multistoried Reinforced Concrete Building by Considering Soil-Structure Interaction (SSI)” J-International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, Volume: 07, Issue: 07, Page No. 01–05.
10. Farid Khosravikia, Mojtaba Mahsuli and Mohammad Ali Ghannad (2018) “Soil–Structure Interaction in Seismic Design Code: Risk-Based Evaluation” J-Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Volume: 04, Issue: 04, Page No. 01–13.
11. Guillermo A. Lo´ Pez Jime´Nez, Daniel Dias and Orianne Jenck (2018) “Effect of the Soil–Pile– Structure Interaction in Seismic Analysis: Case of Liquefiable Soils” J-Acta Geotechnica,Volume: 18, Page No. 01-17.
12. IS: 1893: 2016 (Part-I) “Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures” Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi, India.
13. IS-875: 2008 “Code of Practice for Design Loads’ Bureau of Indian standards” New Delhi, India
14. IS: 456: 2000 “Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete” Bureaus of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
15. IS: 2720: 1985 (Part 1 to 41) “Code of practice for Methods of test for soils” Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi, India.
16. ACI 318-2019 “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary”

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

International Journal of Structural Engineering and Analysis

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2456-5326[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

Abstract

nThis project work presents the progressive collapse analysis of low rise mid-rise and High rise RCC building for blast load. In structure due to the spread of local damage form one part to another part or proportionately big part of the structure gets collapsed in progressive collapse. Progressive collapse analysis is performed on low rise for G+4, medium rise for G+17 and high rise for G+22 building and its validation in accordance with General Services Administration 2013 Guidelines, to check Demand Capacity Ratio of a respective structure. The response of RCC framed structure under blast and seismic loading is checked in this work. Regular framed structures of G+4, G+17, G+22 is designed and analyzed using STAAD-PRO V8i SS5. Time history analysis method is used for progressive collapse analysis. Columns are removed to initiate the progressive collapse. for blast analysis time history load is calculated as per IS 4991.Natural frequency, storey drift, base shear, vertical displacement before and after column removal are calculated and Demand Capacity ratio is checked. The obtained DCR values shows that columns are safe for low rise (DCR is 1.5), Medium rise (DCR IS 1.6) and high rise building (DCR is1.9) DCR within the acceptance criteria.n

n

n

n

Full Text

n

n

[foreach 379]n

n[/foreach]

u276e u276f

n

References

n[if 1104 equals=””]

1. Ahmed Elshaer, Hatem Mostafa, and Hamed Salem ‘Progressive Collapse Assessment of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Seismic Actions’2016
2. A. Choubey ‘Analysis of progressive collapse in RC frame structure for different blast loading’ International journal of engineering sciences & research technology (2016)
3. Chopra AK (2007), ‘Dynamics of structures—theory and application to earthquake engineering’, 3rd edn’
4. General services administration alternate path analysis & design guidelines for progressive collapse resistance October 24, 2013
5. IS: 4991-1968,’Criteria for blast resistant design of structures for explosion above ground. Bureau of Indian Standards.’
6. IS 1893:2002 (Part I), ‘Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures Part1.Bureau of Indian Standards.’
7. Michael By field Wjesundara Mudalige Colin Morison Euan Stoddart ‘A review of progressive collapse research and regulations’2014
8. Ramon Codina, Daniel Ambrosini, Fernanda de Borbona ‘Alternatives to prevent progressive collapse protecting reinforced concrete columns subjected to near field blast loading’ 2017
9. Rakshith K G1, Radhakrishna’ Collapse resistance of progressive collapse of in RCC structures’ (Nov-2013).
10. Rinsha C1, Biju Mathew 2 ‘Progressive collapse analysis of steel frame structures’ Volume: 04 Issue: 05 | May-2017
11. Rohola Rahnavarda, Faramarz Fathi Zadeh Fardb, Ali Hosseinic, Mohamed Suleim and Nonlinear analysis on progressive collapse of tall steel composite Buildings’2018
12. Yara M. Mahmoud, Maha M. Hassan, Sherif A. Mourad, Hesham S. Sayed ‘Assessment of progressive collapse of steel structures under seismic loads’ 2018
13. Y.A. Al-Salloum a, H. Abbas a, T.H. Almusallam a, T. Ngo b, P. Mendis b ‘Progressive collapse analysis of a typical RC high-rise tower’ 2018
14. Yash Jain, Dr. V.D. Patil ‘Assessment of Progressive Collapse for a Multi-Storey RC Framed Structure using Linear Static Analysis Technique’ Volume 60 Number 3-June 2018
15. Z.B. Unde, Dr. S.C. Potnis,’ Blast Analysis of Structures’ Elesevier (2013)

n[/if 1104][if 1104 not_equal=””]n

[foreach 1102]n t
1. [if 1106 equals=””], [/if 1106][if 1106 not_equal=””],[/if 1106]

n[/foreach]

n[/if 1104]

n

n

n

International Journal of Structural Engineering and Analysis

n

[if 344 not_equal=””]ISSN: 2456-5326[/if 344]

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

[if 1193 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n

[if 1181 equals=””][else][/if] 

n [/foreach]n