Analyzing the state of seismic consideration of architectural non-structural components (ANSCs) in design process (based on IBC)

Mahdavinejad, M; Bemanian, M; Abolvardi, G and Elhamian, S M (2012) Analyzing the state of seismic consideration of architectural non-structural components (ANSCs) in design process (based on IBC). International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 3(2), pp. 133-147. ISSN 1759-5916

Abstract

Purpose: Earthquakes are a serious threat to life; they claim many casualties and cause huge damage to people's properties. Seismic design provisions are added to building codes in response to the lessons learned from past earthquakes. However, despite all successes, many challenges are still faced and there are still deficiencies, especially in the field of architectural non-structural components (ANSCs). In spite of their significance in the seismic performance of the building, ANSCs are mostly neglected from the viewpoint of seismic design. The purpose of this paper is to explain a proper state for the seismic consideration of ANSCs in the designing and construction process. Design/methodology/approach: The key aim of this research is explaining a proper state for the seismic consideration of ANSCs in designing and construction process. For this purpose, first, their state is analyzed based on the conventional seismic design and construction process. Then, the insufficiencies of this approach are discussed through studying the consequences in the past earthquakes. Finally, based on the results obtained, the article tries to offer useful strategies to bring the potential threats of ANSCs to minimum. Findings: It is found that ANSCs are considered only in a very small part of the design and construction process. In most cases, their executed details are allocated to a minor part of the design process or left to be chosen in the last stage of construction, as finishing details. As a result, despite all code provisions and practical guidelines, we still see many damages to and from ANSCs. The paper shows that the only way that the success of ANSCs' seismic restraints can be anticipated is by considering them in all stages of the design and construction process. To achieve this goal, collaboration is needed throughout all parts of the design and construction process, namely an interactive system design. Originality/value: The paper, from the viewpoint of the design process, analyzes the seismic consideration of ANSCs, offering a new model for placing these components in a systematic design and construction process.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building codes; buildings; conventional design process; design; earthquakes; non-structural components; seismic design; seismic loading
Index terms: damages, strategy, design process, seismic design, lessons learned, building code, collaboration, construction process, methodology, interactive system, loading, design and construction, placing, earthquake
Subjects: dispute resolution, design methods, contractual arrangements, construction operations, structural engineering, concrete and cementitious materials, management, research methods, software systems, professional development, building construction, regulatory law, environmental hazards
Topics: Digital Applications, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Organizational Design, Site Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Sustainability, Procurement
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here