1. MMC
  2. All Volumes and Issues
  3. Volume 11, Number 2, 2024
  4. Mathematical modeling for assessing the seismic response of buildings in Al Hoceima

Mathematical modeling for assessing the seismic response of buildings in Al Hoceima

MMC.
2024;
Volume 11, Number 2
: pp. 512–517
https://doi.org/10.23939/mmc2024.02.512
Received: January 07, 2024
Revised: May 28, 2024
Accepted: June 19, 2024

Aaya H., Ziraoui A., Kissi B.  Mathematical modeling for assessing the seismic response of buildings in Al Hoceima.  Mathematical Modeling and Computing. Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 512–517 (2024)

Authors:
  1. H. Aaya
  2. A. Ziraoui
  3. B. Kissi
1
International University of Casablanca, LMSI; University of Hassan II, ENSAM, LISPSII
2
University of Hassan II, ENSAM, LISPSII
3
University of Hassan II, ENSAM, LISPSII

The purpose of this paper is to apply structural dynamics principles to conduct a comprehensive mathematical analysis of how buildings respond to earthquakes, with a particular focus on the dynamic behavior of a reinforced concrete structure in the city of Al Hoceima, located in the north of Morocco, which is subjected to frequent seismic activity.  Considering various parameters such as building configurations, materials, soil characteristics, and seismic conditions, we will build a mathematical model for response of structures to earthquakes and conduct numerical experiments using ETABS software on a typical building in this region with a G+2 house elevation.

ODE
seismology
earthquakes
global dynamics
earthquake problems
geological problems
  1. ATC, "Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings", ATC-40, Redwood City: Applied Technology Council (1996).
  2. FEMA, "HAZUS Earthquake loss estimation methodology", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. (1999).
  3. Fajfar P., Fischinger M.  Non-linear seismic analysis of RC buildings: Implications of a case study.  European Earthquake Engineering.  1, 31–43 (1987).
  4. Fajfar P.  Capacity spectrum method based on inelastic demand spectra.  Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics.  28 (9), 979–993 (1999).
  5. Riyad Y., Kissi B., Mrani I., Parron M. A., Dolores R. C. M.  Seismic Retrofitting: Reinforced concrete shear wall versus CFRP reinforced concrete using pushover analysis.  Journal of Materials and Engineering Structures.  3 (4), 181–195 (2016).
  6. Lee D.-G., Choi W.-H., Cheong M.-C., Kim D.-K.  Evaluation of seismic performance of multistory building structures based on the equivalent responses.  Engineering Structures.  28 (6), 837–856 (2006).
  7. Ziraoui A., Kissi B., Aaya H., Azdine I.  Techno-Economic Study of Seismic Vulnerability in Reinforced Concrete Structures by Composite Materials.  International Review of Civil Engineering (IRECE).  14 (6), 561–569 (2023).
  8. Ziraoui A., Kissi B., Aaya H., Mezriahi Y., Haimoud A.  Seismic Retrofitting: Analyzing the Effectiveness of RC Shear Walls and CFRP Reinforcement for RC Structures.  Proceedings of the Fourth Scientific Conference on Geosciences and Environmental Management (GeoME'4), Morocco 2023.  203–214 (2023).
  9. Ziraoui A., Kissi B., Aaya H.  Probabilistic Analysis of FRP Efficacy in Seismic Risk Reduction.  Forces in Mechanics.  15, 100259 (2024).
  10. Medina F., Cherkaoui T.-E.  The South-Western Alboran Earthquake Sequence of January-March 2016 and Its Associated Coulomb Stress Changes.  Open Journal of Earthquake Research.  6 (1), 35–54 (2017).
  11. Chopra A. K.  Dynamics of Structures: Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall (2012).
  12. Clough R. W., Penzien J.  Dynamics of Structures. McGraw-Hill.  NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2009).