Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58

Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher [verfasserIn] Attia, Walid Abdel Latif

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	Progressive Collapse Alternative Load Path Nonlinear static analysis Nonlinear dynamic analysis Assessment of Seismic Behavior Pushover Analysis FEMA P-58

Anmerkung:	© The Author(s) 2023

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Journal of engineering and applied science - Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999, 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:70 ; year:2023 ; number:1 ; day:21 ; month:07

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y

Katalog-ID:	SPR052341895

Internformat


LEADER	01000naa a22002652 4500
001	SPR052341895
003	DE-627
005	20230722064811.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230722s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR052341895
035			\|a (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher \|e verfasserin \|0 (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © The Author(s) 2023
520			\|a Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions.
650		4	\|a Progressive Collapse \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Alternative Load Path \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Nonlinear static analysis \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Nonlinear dynamic analysis \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Assessment of Seismic Behavior \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Pushover Analysis \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a FEMA P-58 \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Attia, Walid Abdel Latif \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Journal of engineering and applied science \|d Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 \|g 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli \|w (DE-627)1735158240 \|w (DE-600)3041047-2 \|x 2536-9512 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:70 \|g year:2023 \|g number:1 \|g day:21 \|g month:07
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_171
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 70 \|j 2023 \|e 1 \|b 21 \|c 07

Indexfelder

author_variant	m m n m a mmnm mmnma w a l a wal wala
matchkey_str	article:25369512:2023----::fetflentvlaptdsgmtoopeetnporsieolpenrdcnte
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y doi (DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher verfasserin (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 aut Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213 Attia, Walid Abdel Latif aut Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli (DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2 2536-9512 nnns volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 70 2023 1 21 07
spelling	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y doi (DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher verfasserin (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 aut Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213 Attia, Walid Abdel Latif aut Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli (DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2 2536-9512 nnns volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 70 2023 1 21 07
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y doi (DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher verfasserin (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 aut Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213 Attia, Walid Abdel Latif aut Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli (DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2 2536-9512 nnns volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 70 2023 1 21 07
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y doi (DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher verfasserin (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 aut Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213 Attia, Walid Abdel Latif aut Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli (DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2 2536-9512 nnns volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 70 2023 1 21 07
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y doi (DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher verfasserin (orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989 aut Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213 Attia, Walid Abdel Latif aut Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli (DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2 2536-9512 nnns volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 70 2023 1 21 07
language	English
source	Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07
sourceStr	Enthalten in Journal of engineering and applied science 70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli volume:70 year:2023 number:1 day:21 month:07
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Progressive Collapse Alternative Load Path Nonlinear static analysis Nonlinear dynamic analysis Assessment of Seismic Behavior Pushover Analysis FEMA P-58
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Journal of engineering and applied science
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher @@aut@@ Attia, Walid Abdel Latif @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-07-21T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	1735158240
id	SPR052341895
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR052341895</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230722064811.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230722s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR052341895</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Progressive Collapse</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Alternative Load Path</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nonlinear static analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nonlinear dynamic analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Assessment of Seismic Behavior</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pushover Analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">FEMA P-58</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Attia, Walid Abdel Latif</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of engineering and applied science</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1735158240</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)3041047-2</subfield><subfield code="x">2536-9512</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:70</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:21</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">70</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">21</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher
spellingShingle	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher misc Progressive Collapse misc Alternative Load Path misc Nonlinear static analysis misc Nonlinear dynamic analysis misc Assessment of Seismic Behavior misc Pushover Analysis misc FEMA P-58 Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
authorStr	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)1735158240
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	2536-9512
topic_title	Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58 Progressive Collapse (dpeaa)DE-He213 Alternative Load Path (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear static analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Nonlinear dynamic analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Assessment of Seismic Behavior (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pushover Analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 FEMA P-58 (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Progressive Collapse misc Alternative Load Path misc Nonlinear static analysis misc Nonlinear dynamic analysis misc Assessment of Seismic Behavior misc Pushover Analysis misc FEMA P-58
topic_unstemmed	misc Progressive Collapse misc Alternative Load Path misc Nonlinear static analysis misc Nonlinear dynamic analysis misc Assessment of Seismic Behavior misc Pushover Analysis misc FEMA P-58
topic_browse	misc Progressive Collapse misc Alternative Load Path misc Nonlinear static analysis misc Nonlinear dynamic analysis misc Assessment of Seismic Behavior misc Pushover Analysis misc FEMA P-58
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of engineering and applied science
hierarchy_parent_id	1735158240
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of engineering and applied science
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)1735158240 (DE-600)3041047-2
title	Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR052341895 (SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e
title_full	Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
author_sort	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher
journal	Journal of engineering and applied science
journalStr	Journal of engineering and applied science
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher Attia, Walid Abdel Latif
container_volume	70
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y
normlink	(ORCID)0009-0001-3644-1989
normlink_prefix_str_mv	(orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989
title_sort	effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using fema-p58
title_auth	Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
abstract	Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. © The Author(s) 2023
abstractGer	Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. © The Author(s) 2023
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions. © The Author(s) 2023
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y
remote_bool	true
author2	Attia, Walid Abdel Latif
author2Str	Attia, Walid Abdel Latif
ppnlink	1735158240
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y
up_date	2024-07-04T02:26:00.387Z
_version_	1803613593026953216
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR052341895</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230722064811.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230722s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR052341895</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s44147-023-00248-y-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ashoub, Mahmoud Mohamed Nabil Maher</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0009-0001-3644-1989</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The alternative load path (ALP) method is an important modern design approach to prevent progressive collapse of buildings by redesigning adjacent structural elements to provide an alternative load path in case of partial collapse. This may lead to tangible changes in the mass and stiffness of the building, which means a change in the seismic behavior of the building. This shows the fact that choosing and designing an alternative load path is not an easy task. Studying the improvement in the seismic behavior of the building, whether direct or indirect, as a result of using the ALP, is the main objective of this paper. To achieve this goal, this study examined approximately 96 models, including the study of the possibility of progressive collapse occurring, whether there is or isn't an alternative path for the loads using non-linear static and dynamic analysis, as well as evaluating the study models using various seismic evaluation methods, where both the nonlinear static pushover analysis method and the FEMA-P58 method were used and compared. The study models are divided into two sections, with and without (ALP). The study models are also categorized by building height using heights of 6, 9, 12 and 15 floors. The models were also divided based on the locations of weak points in the original design that may be susceptible to damage and lead to progressive collapse, whether they are internal, side, or corner weak columns. The findings from the examined models indicate that the efficiency of (ALP) systems is more prominent in low and mid-height buildings compared to tall buildings. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the FEMA-P58 method yields similar predictions regarding building behavior as traditional seismic assessment methods like pushover analysis, but in a simplified manner that benefits non-engineers by providing clear insights into the financial and temporal aspects of different structural system solutions.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Progressive Collapse</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Alternative Load Path</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nonlinear static analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nonlinear dynamic analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Assessment of Seismic Behavior</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pushover Analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">FEMA P-58</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Attia, Walid Abdel Latif</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of engineering and applied science</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999</subfield><subfield code="g">70(2023), 1 vom: 21. Juli</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1735158240</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)3041047-2</subfield><subfield code="x">2536-9512</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:70</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:21</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s44147-023-00248-y</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">70</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">21</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3996468

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Effect of alternative load path design method on preventing progressive collapse and reducing the rehabilitation cost using FEMA-P58

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?