ABSTRACT- Earthquakes are among most destructive natural hazards, often causing widespread damage to buildings and vital infrastructure. The extent of this damage depends on various factors, one of which is the nature of fault movement. The point of initial rupture beneath the Earth’s surface is known as the hypocenter or focus. Seismic activity can be broadly divided into two categories: mainshocks and aftershocks. While the mainshock generally causes the most severe damage, aftershocks can exacerbate the situation by further compromising structures that have already been weakened, sometimes resulting in even greater overall destruction.

In this study the analysis focuses on assessing how the building performs under varying structural conditions— comparing bare frames with infill frames—The analysis also accounted for the impact of both vertical and horizontal components of ground motion. It was based on ground motion data recorded during the El Centro earthquake.This study explores the seismic behaviour of RC structures under the combined impact of mainshocks and aftershocks using analytical, numerical, and experimental approaches. The research highlights the importance of cumulative damage assessment, nonlinear dynamic analysis, and residual capacity evaluation. Findings emphasize the need for improved seismic design codes that consider aftershock effects and suggest strategies for retrofitting and enhancing the resilience of RC structures in earthquake-prone regions.

The results show that aftershocks play a key role in accelerating the development of structural damage. which was categorized into four levels: slight, moderate, extensive, and collapse. Interestingly, infill frames, although they offer increased stiffness, showed higher levels of damage compared to bare frames. Additionally, a study found that the horizontal seismic forces had a more substantial impact on the building’s integrity than vertical forces

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Massumi, K. Sadeghi, and H. Ghaedi, “The effects of mainshock-aftershock in successive earthquakes on the response of RC moment-resisting frames considering the influence of the vertical seismic component,” Ain Shams Engineering Journal,2021;12:393-405p.
2. Barbat, A., Alzate, Y.F., Beneit, L.P., & Gómez, J.E. “Probabilistic assessment of the seismic damage in reinforced concrete buildings”, Elsevier, Journal of Structures,2012;344-351p
3. Hosseinpour and A. E. Abdelnaby, “Effect of different aspects of multiple earthquakes on the nonlinear behavior of RC structures,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2017;92:706-725p.
4. Rinaldin, C. Amadio, and M. Fragiacomo, “Effects of seismic sequences on structures with hysteretic or damped dissipative behaviour,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2017;97:205–215p.
5. Potter, J. S. Becker, D. M. Johnston, and K. P. Rossiter, “An overview of the impacts of the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes,” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction,2015;14:6-14p.
6. Ruiz-García, M. V. Marín, and A. Terán-Gilmore, “Effect of seismic sequences in reinforced concrete frame buildings located in soft-soil sites,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2014;63:56-58p.
7. Ruiz-García and J. D. Aguilar, “Influence of modeling assumptions and aftershock hazard level in the seismic response of post-mainshock steel framed buildings,” Engineering Structure,2017;140:437-446p.
8. Morfidis and K. Kostinakis, “The role of masonry infills on the damage response of R/C buildings subjected to seismic sequences,” Engineering Structure,2017;131:459-476p.
9. Hatzivassiliou and G. D. Hatzigeorgiou, “Seismic sequence effects on three- dimensional reinforced concrete buildings,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2015;72:77-88p.
10. Rossetto , “FRACAS: A capacity spectrum approach for seismic fragility assessment including record-to-record variability,” Engineering Structures,2016;125:337-348p.

ABSTRACT- Earthquakes are among most destructive natural hazards, often causing widespread damage to buildings and vital infrastructure. The extent of this damage depends on various factors, one of which is the nature of fault movement. The point of initial rupture beneath the Earth’s surface is known as the hypocenter or focus. Seismic activity can be broadly divided into two categories: mainshocks and aftershocks. While the mainshock generally causes the most severe damage, aftershocks can exacerbate the situation by further compromising structures that have already been weakened, sometimes resulting in even greater overall destruction.

In this study the analysis focuses on assessing how the building performs under varying structural conditions— comparing bare frames with infill frames—The analysis also accounted for the impact of both vertical and horizontal components of ground motion. It was based on ground motion data recorded during the El Centro earthquake.This study explores the seismic behaviour of RC structures under the combined impact of mainshocks and aftershocks using analytical, numerical, and experimental approaches. The research highlights the importance of cumulative damage assessment, nonlinear dynamic analysis, and residual capacity evaluation. Findings emphasize the need for improved seismic design codes that consider aftershock effects and suggest strategies for retrofitting and enhancing the resilience of RC structures in earthquake-prone regions.

The results show that aftershocks play a key role in accelerating the development of structural damage. which was categorized into four levels: slight, moderate, extensive, and collapse. Interestingly, infill frames, although they offer increased stiffness, showed higher levels of damage compared to bare frames. Additionally, a study found that the horizontal seismic forces had a more substantial impact on the building’s integrity than vertical forces

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Massumi, K. Sadeghi, and H. Ghaedi, “The effects of mainshock-aftershock in successive earthquakes on the response of RC moment-resisting frames considering the influence of the vertical seismic component,” Ain Shams Engineering Journal,2021;12:393-405p.
2. Barbat, A., Alzate, Y.F., Beneit, L.P., & Gómez, J.E. “Probabilistic assessment of the seismic damage in reinforced concrete buildings”, Elsevier, Journal of Structures,2012;344-351p
3. Hosseinpour and A. E. Abdelnaby, “Effect of different aspects of multiple earthquakes on the nonlinear behavior of RC structures,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2017;92:706-725p.
4. Rinaldin, C. Amadio, and M. Fragiacomo, “Effects of seismic sequences on structures with hysteretic or damped dissipative behaviour,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2017;97:205–215p.
5. Potter, J. S. Becker, D. M. Johnston, and K. P. Rossiter, “An overview of the impacts of the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes,” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction,2015;14:6-14p.
6. Ruiz-García, M. V. Marín, and A. Terán-Gilmore, “Effect of seismic sequences in reinforced concrete frame buildings located in soft-soil sites,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2014;63:56-58p.
7. Ruiz-García and J. D. Aguilar, “Influence of modeling assumptions and aftershock hazard level in the seismic response of post-mainshock steel framed buildings,” Engineering Structure,2017;140:437-446p.
8. Morfidis and K. Kostinakis, “The role of masonry infills on the damage response of R/C buildings subjected to seismic sequences,” Engineering Structure,2017;131:459-476p.
9. Hatzivassiliou and G. D. Hatzigeorgiou, “Seismic sequence effects on three- dimensional reinforced concrete buildings,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering,2015;72:77-88p.
10. Rossetto , “FRACAS: A capacity spectrum approach for seismic fragility assessment including record-to-record variability,” Engineering Structures,2016;125:337-348p.