EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 11 (2014) MATEC Web of Conferences, 11 (2014) 03001 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web of Conferences
Volume 11, 2014
International Congress on Materials & Structural Stability
Article Number 03001
Number of page(s) 6
Section Geotechnical & Environmental
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20141103001
Published online 28 April 2014
  1. Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1995a). Structural response modification factors. Rep. No. ATC-19, Redwood City, Calif. [Google Scholar]
  2. Eurocode 8: Calcul des structures pour leur résistance aux séismes - Partie 1: Règles générales, actions sismiques et règles pour les bâtiments. Réf. n° EN 1998-1:2004 F, CEN, Bruxelles, (2004). [Google Scholar]
  3. CNBC, Code National du Bâtiment – Canada 2005. Conseil National de Recherches du Canada – Institut de recherche en construction, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (2005). [Google Scholar]
  4. Règles Parasismiques Algériennes (RPA 99/VERSION 2003), Document Technique Règlementaire, D.T.R. -B.C. 2.48. [Google Scholar]
  5. Andrew Whittaker, Gary Hart, and Christopher Rojahn. Seismic Response Modification Factors. Journal of Structural Engineering, pp 438–443 (April 1999). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Freeman, S. A. On the correlation of code forces to earthquake demands. Proc., 4th US.-Japan workshop on Improvement of Build. struct. Des. and constr Practices, Applied technology Council, Redwood City, Calif (1990). [Google Scholar]
  7. Applied Technology Council (ATC). (1995b). A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-resistant design. Rep. No. ATC-34, Redwood City, Calif. [Google Scholar]
  8. Djebbar Nabil. “Contribution à l’Etude de la Performance Parasismique des Eléments Linéaires en Béton”. Thèse de Doctorat, Faculté des sciences de l’Ingénieur, Département de Génie Civil. Université Mentouri ‘Constantine’. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sang Whan Han, Oh-Sung Kwon and Li-Hyung Lee. Investigation of dynamic P – Δ effect on ductility factor. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Vol. 12, No. 3 249–266, (2001). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. B. Borzi, A.S. Elnashai. “Refined force Reduction Factors for Seismic Design”. Elsevier; Engineering Structures 22 1244–1260, (2000). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ghadir Haikal. Overview of Elastic and Inelastic Response Spectra. MS student, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, (2003). [Google Scholar]
  12. Nelson Lam, John Wilson and Graham Hutchinson. The Ductility Reduction Factor In The Seismic Design Of Buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 27, 749–769 (1998). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. N. Djebbar, B. Bousalem, N. Chikh. Notions Comportement Global – Comportement Local Dans la Performance Parasismique des Portiques en Béton ‘Etude Comparative réglementaire’, Sciences et Technologie B –N 20, Décembre, pp 63–69 (2003) [Google Scholar]
  14. FEMA-356. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C (2000). [Google Scholar]
  15. M. Mahmoudi. The relationship between overstrength and members ductility of RC moment resisting frames. Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Paper Number 026, pp. 1–8 (2003). [Google Scholar]
  16. Eurocode 8: CEN Technical Commission 250/SC8. Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures—Part 1: General rules (ENV 1998), CEN, Brussels, (1994). [Google Scholar]
  17. A.J. Kappos. Evaluation of behaviour factors on the basis of ductility and overstrength studies. Elsevier; Engineering Structures 21, 823–835 (1999). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. CNBC (1995). Code National du Bâtiment– Canada. Conseil National de Recherches du Canada– Institut de recherche en construction, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (1995). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.