UNIT – 5

PROGRESSIVE
COLLAPSE
What is meant by Progressive Collapse?
 The Progressive collapse is spread of an
initial local structural damage causing
partial or total collapse of structure.
 It is one of the most devastating types of
building failures, most often leading to
costly damages, multiple injuries, and
possible loss of life .
 Therefore it is necessary to study the
basic aspects of progressive collapse
from historical background, mechanism,
development of guidelines, Indian
standard code etc and check the
performance of structure.
 Cont…
 Progressive collapse is the result of a localized failure of one or two structural elements
that lead to a steady progression of load transfer that exceeds the capacity of other
surrounding elements, thus initiating the progression that leads to a total or partial collapse
of the structure.
 The progressive collapse of building structure is initiated when one or more vertical load
carrying members (typically column) are removed.
 Once a column is removed due to vehicle impact, fire, earthquake or any other man made
or natural hazards, the building's weight (gravity load) transfer to neighboring columns in
the structure. If this columns are not properly design to resist and redistribute the
additional gravity load that part of the structure fails.
 After the incident in Oklahoma Murrah building, Ronan point building and the terrorist
attacks, such as WTC (World Trade Center) in 2001, it became more important to do
assessment towards preventing the progressive collapse.
Some of the world famous structures
subjected to Progressive Collapse
1962 Ronan Point Apartment Tower Collapse
(London)
1962 Ronan Point Apartment Tower Collapse (London)
1962 Ronan Point Apartment Tower Collapse (London)
 Partial collapse of the structure killed 4 people and injured 17
 The collapse sheared off the living room portion of the apartments,
leaving the bedrooms intact with the exception of floors 17–22,
where all the fatalities occurred.
 The explosion was not significant in magnitude < 70 kPa (10 psi).
 The tower consisted of precast panels joined together without a
structural frame.
 The connections relied mostly on friction.
 The apartment tower lacked alternate load paths to redistribute forces
in the event of a partial collapse.
 Poor workmanship at the critical connections between the
panels.
1995 Murrah Federal Office Building, Oklahoma City
 1995 Murrah Federal Office Building, Oklahoma City

 The Murrah Building was a nine-story, conventionally reinforced

(nonductile), concrete structure constructed during the mid 1970s

 The truck bomb, estimated to be 1,800 kg (4,000 lb) TNT equivalent,

was centered approximately 4 m (13 ft) from one of the building

columns

 Created a paradigm that guided research and development of new

structural design guidelines

2001 (9/11) World Trade Center I, 2 and 7
 2001 (9/11) World Trade Center I, 2 and 7

 According to NIST (National Institute of Standards and

Technology):

 Progressive collapse did NOT occur in the WTC towers, for two
reasons. First, the collapse of each tower was not triggered by a local
damage or a single initiating event. Second, the structures were able to
redistribute loads from the impact and fire- damaged structural
components and subsystems to undamaged components and to keep
the building standing until a sudden, global collapse occurred.
 The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced
progressive collapse… Đaused ďy a single initiating event-the
failure of a northeast building column brought on by fire- induced
damage to the adjacent flooring system and connections.
 2007 Minnesota I-35 Bridge
 Steel deck truss bridge with little or no redundancy
 Progressively collapsed over the entire span due to gusset plate
connection failure
2007 Minnesota I-35 Bridge
Progressive Collapse & Tsunami/Hurricane/Flooding

2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami (Japan)

2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami 2005 Hurricane Katrina

Softwares used :
The following are some of the soft wares that can be
used in analysis of Progressive Collapse

 E-Tabs
 SAP 2000
 Extreme Loading Software – ELS
 Ansys
Codes and Guidelines Available For Progressive
Collapse
1. ASCE 7 “Minimum Design Loads For Buildings and Other
Structures” (2002)
2. ACI “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete”
(2005)
3. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (GSA)
“Progressive Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines” (2003

4. UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC 4-023-03) “Design

of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse” (2005)
5. EUROCODE 1 - Actions on Structures - Part 1-7: General
Actions – Accidental Actions (2006)
6. The UK Building Regulations (2010)
ASCE 7 “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures”
(2002)
 This code provides requirements to increase a building’s general integrity.
 The requirement specific to progressive collapse, given in Section 1.4 of
ASCE 7 2002, says that buildings should be designed to “sustain local
damage” and not be damaged “to an extent disproportionate to the original
local damage”.
 While no specific requirements are given, the code does suggest some design
methods in the commentary section.
 These include the alternate load path method as well as the specific local
resistance method.
 These charge sizes do not have corresponding stand-off distances defined, so
the actual blast loading is not specified.
ACI “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete”
(2005)
 This code utilizes the indirect design approach to address
progressive collapse.
 This is done by requiring specific reinforcement details to
increase the overall integrity and stability of the structure.
 These include horizontal and vertical ties throughout the
structure, continuous reinforcement in perimeter elements, a
specified amount of splicing, and connections that do not rely on
gravity.
 Since the basis of the requirements is not clear, there is no
certainty that they adequately prevent progressive collapse.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (GSA) “Progressive
Collapse Analysis and Design Guidelines” (2003)
 The GSA (2003) code contains a threat independent procedure meant
to be used in the design and analysis of new federal office buildings.
 This code is largely dependent on the analyst using the alternate load
path method to simulate the loss of structural members in different
scenarios.
 The designer must first inspect the building’s structural layout and
find each of the members that will need to be removed.
 These are, at a minimum, a column at the center of the long side, a
column at the centre of the short side, and a corner column. Any other
areas in the building that are “abnormal” will have members that will
have to be removed.
 Cont…..

 Also if the building has “uncontrolled” public floor areas, an

interior column must be removed. If the interior of the building
is considered secured, an interior column is not removed, which
contradicts the threat-independent philosophy of the code.
 A more recent revised guideline, General Services
Administration “Alternate Path Analysis & Design Guidelines
for Progressive Collapse Resistance” was issued in 2013
UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC 4-023-03) “Design of Buildings to
Resist Progressive Collapse” (2005)
 This code also approaches progressive collapse without considering a specific
threat.
 The code, as with the other codes, is not intended to eliminate the initial local
damage, but reduce the casualties after its occurrence.
 This is done by utilizing two methods previously discussed: the alternate load path
method and the tie force method.
 The prescribed usage of these two methods in the design process is dependent on
the level of protection (LOP) desired for the building by the “Project Planning
Team”.
 The LOP are broken into four categories: very low (VLLOP), low (LLOP),
medium (MLOP), and high (HLOP) with the lowest two intended to cover the
majority of buildings.
EUROCODE 1 - Actions on structures - Part 1-7: General
actions – Accidental actions (2006)
 This code provides strategies and rules for safeguarding buildings
and other civil engineering works against identifiable and
unidentifiable accidental actions.
 It defines strategies based on identified accidental actions and
strategies based on limiting the extent of localised failure.
 Its annexure provides strategies and prescriptive methods of
increasing the robustness of the structure based on the class of the
building. The specifications for horizontal ties, vertical ties, key
element design and risk assessment are discussed in this code.
THE UK BUILDING REGULATIONS (2010)
 It states: "The building shall be constructed so that in the event of an

accident the building will not suffer collapse to an extent disproportionate

to the cause".
 The revised Approved Document A uses a risk-based approach (also

followed in Eurocode 1, Part 1–74) to classify buildings according to their

height and use. The method allows the risks associated with a building to
be considered against the consequences of failure
 The UK Building Regulations has led with requirements for the avoidance

of disproportionate collapse, which were formulated in the aftermath of the

1968 Ronan Point collapse.
 These requirements include i) prescriptive ‘tying force’ provisions which

are deemed sufficient for the avoidance of disproportionate collapse, ii)

‘notional member removal’ provisions which need only be considered if the
tying force requirements could not be satisfied, and iii) ‘key element’
provisions applied to members whose notional removal causes damage
exceeding prescribed limits.
Designing to Resist Progressive Collapse
U.S. General Services
Administration

1st Ed. - 25 Jan. 2005 1st Ed. – June 2003

2nd Ed. - 14 Jul. 2009
(updated 2010) 3rd
Ed. - 2013?
 ANALYSIS OF DISPROPORIATE COLLAPSE

INDIRECT METHOD DIRECT METHOD

BASICS ON ALTERNATE
INTER SPECIFIC
STRENGTH, PATH
CONNECTION LOCAL
TIES AND DUCTILITY METHOD
RESISTANCE
DETAILING AND
CONTINUNIT
Y
NOTIONAL
KEY ELEMENT
ELEMENTAL
DESIGN
REMOVAL

NON NON
LINEAR LINEAR LINEAR LINEAR
STATIC STATIC DYNAMIC DYNAMIC
Methods Of Avoiding Disproportionate Collapse

There are, in general, three alternative approaches to designing

structures to reduce their susceptibility to disproportionate
collapse:
 Redundancy or alternate load paths
 Local Resistance
 Interconnection or continuity.
 The Tie Force Method
 In the Tie Force approach, the building is mechanically tied
together,
enhancing continuity, ductility, and development of alternate load
paths.

 Tie forces can be provided by the existing structural elements

that have been designed using conventional design methods to carry
the standard loads imposed upon the structure.
 The Tie Force Method

 There are three horizontal ties that must be provided:

longitudinal, transverse, and peripheral.
 Vertical ties are required in columns and load-bearing walls.
 Unless the structural members and their connections can be
shown capable of carrying the required tie forces while
undergoing rotations of 0.20-rad , the longitudinal,
transverse, and peripheral tie forces are to be carried by
the floor and roof system.
The Tie Force Method
The Tie Force Method
 Alternate Path Method
In the Alternate Path method, the designer must show that the structure is
capable of bridging over a removed column or section of wall and that
the resulting deformations and internal actions do not exceed the
acceptance criteria.
1. What elements to remove?
2. How to remove them (type of analysis)?
3. Acceptance criteria?
 Alternate Path Method (Removal of elements)

Beam-to-beam continuity is
assumed to be maintained
across a removed column,
i.e. remove the clear height
between lateral restraints.

For walls, remove a length

that is twice the clear story
height H. For external
corners with intersecting
walls remove a length of
wall equal to the clear story
height H in each direction.
Alternate Path Method (Removal of elements - location)

Exterior Columns Interior Columns

Remove one element at a time. For each plan location defined for
element removal, perform analyses for: 1. First story above grade 2.
Story directly below roof 3. Story at mid-height 4. Story above the
location of a column splice or change in column size
Alternate Path Method (Types of Analyses)

 Linear Static

 Non-Linear Static

 Linear Dynamic

 Non-Linear Dynamic
Column Removal Locations

 Corner column
 Middle of short side column

 Middle of long side column

 Interior middle

 Interior near edge

Alternate Path Method (Linear Static)
 Alternate Path Method (Linear Static)
Load increase factors for linear static
analysis

mLIF is the smallest m of any member connected to the one removed, m is

indirect
an measure of the nonlinear deformation capacity of the
component
Alternate Path Method (Linear Static)
Acceptance Criteria
Deformation controlled actions

Force controlled actions

 Alternate Path Method (Non-Linear Static)
Load increase factors for non-linear static analysis

θpra is the plastic rotation angle given in the acceptance criteria tables in
ASCE 41 for the particular element, component or connection; θy is the yield
rotation.
Alternate Path Method (Non-Linear Static)
Acceptance Criteria
Deformation controlled actions
Primary and secondary elements and components
shall have expected deformation capacities
greater than the maximum calculated deformation
demands.

Force controlled actions

 Alternate Path Method (Non-Linear Dynamic)
 Same modeling requirements than for the non-linear static but this time
include the element that will be removed.
 Same load combinations but NO dynamic amplification factors.
 Apply the gravity loads and lateral loads in steps to the entire model.
 After equilibrium is reached, remove the column or wall section.
 The duration for removal must be less than one tenth of the period
associated with the structural response mode for the vertical motion of
the bays above the removed column.
 The analysis shall continue until the maximum displacement is reached
or one cycle of vertical motion occurs at the column or wall section
removal location.
 Acceptance criteria is the same than for the non-linear static analyses.
 Recent and Current Research Efforts
Force redistribution, slab contribution and catenary
effects during progressive structural collapse
‘Collapse' by Fletcher Vaughan
Designing to Resist Progressive Collapse
Abnormal loads
 The initiating events that cause damage to the structure are
considered “abnormal loads”, as they are extremely rare and too
difficult to consider in design (Breen and Siess 1979, McGuire
1974).
 These events can include explosions, vehicle impact,
construction and fabrication errors, and fire.
 Although these events are rare in occurrence, the consequences
are devastating.
 Some studies have tried to quantify abnormal loadings and
progressive collapse such as a study done by Allen and Schriever
(1973), which found 495 incidents involving progressive collapse
over a 10 year period in Canada.
 This data suggests that progressive collapse incidents are fairly
common and that recording their occurrence is possible.
Event Control
 Event control methods are intended to prevent the occurrence of the

abnormal load.
 Methods employed include preventing the storage of explosives and

high quantities of gas to lower risk of explosion and placing fenders

around columns to eliminate vehicle impact (Taylor 1975, Dragosovic
1973).
 For buildings at risk of terrorist bombings, it is a common practice to

provide a stand-off perimeter that will prevent large bombs from

getting close enough to do serious damage.
 Another use of event control is a bollard, which is a rigid post or

barrier that guards vulnerable areas from vehicles, such as a pedestrian

walkway or exposed column.
 While this method can be a very inexpensive way to lower the

probability of the initiating event and therefore progressive collapse, it

still does not ensure the risk is entirely gone and is often impractical.
 As this method does not include structural details, it is out of the realm

of the structural engineer

COLLAPSE RESISTANCE IMPROVEMENT
STRATEGIES

1. Prevent the occurrence of abnormal events

2. Prevent the occurrence of an initial damage in consequence

of the occurrence of abnormal events

3. Prevent disproportionate spreading of failure in case of an

initial damage
Equivalent design loads for considering abnormal effects
 Hoisting & placing differ from those arising in their final position.
 Owing to this additional reinforcement would be required which after the
placing is finished becomes unnecessary.
 The additional stresses as well as the reinforcement required to resist them
should be eliminated.
 The methods will differ from each individual problem.
 The most simple solution for the elimination of erection stresses & surplus
reinforcement connected with the latter consists in the firm attachment of a
steel beam to the member.
 In this way the developing BM due to the dead load is bome partly by the
steel beam & the remaining part can be bome by the stanchion itself
without any additional reinforcement.
 After the beam has been hoisted by 45ᵒ, the temporary reinforcing steel
beam becomes unnecessary & can be removed.
 The same solution applied during hoisting a multi storyed frame. For
large structures the above method, owing to great length & strong
forces is no longer satisfactory & so here heavy latticed steel structures
would be necessary.
 Erection stresses developing during hoisting in column & girders of
high halls may be eliminated most suitably by post tensioning with
cables.
 During hoisting the moment developing from post tensioning counter
balances the moment arising from dead load.
 In the column not only a BM arises but also eccentric compression
which in the present case also exerts a beneficial effect.
 When the column has been hoisted the equipment used for post
tensioning has to be dismantled before placing begins.
 The same result might be achieved by a temporary post tensioning of a
shorter section of the column. This method was used for post tensioning
the column of power station at berente.
 Here the post tensioning extended only over the section affected by a
positive moment during hoisting balancing the tensional force
 The required tensioning force is provided by a hydraulic jack.
Naturally the magnitude of this force must be measured.
 Another solution for elimination of erection stresses in this case
the stanchion of a frame to be transported are braced each other.
 The frames were precast in the upright position. To save the extra
trucks for the conveying trucks, the latter were moved on the final
sail tracks of the hall.
 This arrangement leads to the development of great bracing
reduces these moments considerably.
Importance of avoidance of progressive collapse