This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
,
Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Montenegro , Podgorica , Montenegro
Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Montenegro , Podgorica , Montenegro
Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Montenegro , Podgorica , Montenegro
A comparative analysis was conducted on reinforced concrete frame structures designed according to the first and second generations of Eurocode 8, focusing on the DCM and the DC3 ductility classes. The results show similar global behaviour and identical seismic forces, but differ in required ductility and in the amount of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in critical regions, particularly in columns. Interstorey drift is checked for the Damage Limitation limit state in the first generation of Eurocode 8 and for the Damage Limitation and Significant Damage limit states in the second generation. Compared with DCM frames, DC3 frames exhibit a lower interstorey drift sensitivity coefficient, stricter local ductility requirements, and higher behaviour factors from pushover analysis. The DC3 ductility class requires more rigorous design and detailing rules, which may complicate its application in practice.
This study was conducted without external funding.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
