Comparison of the seismic performance of Reinforced Concrete-Steel (RCS) frames with steel and reinforced concrete moment frames in low, mid, and high-rise structures

This article presents a comparative analysis of seismic behavior in steel-beam reinforced concrete column (RCS) frames versus steel and reinforced concrete frames. The study evaluates the seismic response and collapse behavior of RCS frames of varying heights through nonlinear modeling. RCS, steel, and reinforced concrete special moment frames are considered in three height categories: 5, 10, and 20 stories. Two-dimensional frames are extracted from the three-dimensional structures, and nonlinear static analyses are conducted in the OpenSEES software to evaluate seismic response in post-yield regions. Incremental dynamic analysis is then performed on models, and collapse conditions are compared using fragility curves. Research findings indicate that the seismic intensity index in steel frames is 1.35 times greater than in RCS frames and 1.14 times greater than in reinforced concrete frames. As the number of stories increases, RCS frames exhibit more favorable collapse behavior compared to reinforced concrete frames. RCS frames demonstrate stable behavior and maintain capacity at high displacement levels, with uniform drift curves and lower damage levels compared to steel and reinforced concrete frames. Steel frames show superior strength and ductility, particularly in taller structures. RCS frames outperform reinforced concrete frames, displaying improved collapse behavior and higher capacity. Incremental Dynamic Analysis results confirm satisfactory collapse capacity for RCS frames. Steel frames collapse at higher intensity levels but perform better overall. RCS frames have a higher collapse capacity than reinforced concrete frames. Fragility curves show a lower likelihood of collapse for steel structures, while RCS frames perform better with an increase in the number of stories.