Based on the experience of past earthquakes in Eastern and Central Asian countries, these systems have been widely used and it can be concluded that their seismic performance is quite satisfactory. In terms of earthquake performance, the fact is that "bad news" is more widely known than "good news."
For example, the poor performance of the Seria 111 prefabricated frame system in the 1988 Spitak (M7.5) earthquake is well known. However, few engineers are aware of the good seismic performance (no damage) of several large buildings built at the same location; these large buildings are similar to large buildings.
Prefabricated prestressed slab systems have undergone extensive laboratory testing to predict excellent resistance under simulated seismic loads. These buildings suffered several moderate earthquakes without major damage.
Due to their large wall density and box-like structure, large (precast concrete slab), buildings are very hard and have a fairly small basic period. For example, a 9-story building in Kazakhstan has a basic period of 0.35 to 0.4 seconds. In general, large buildings performed very well in the past earthquakes of the former Soviet Union, including the 1988 Armenian earthquake and the 1976 Gazly earthquake.
However, it should be noted that large buildings in areas affected by the 1976 Gazly earthquake were not designed with seismic facilities. Most of these buildings performed well in the first earthquake (M 7.0), but more damage was observed in the second earthquake in the same year (M 7.3) because some buildings were already in the first earthquake. Weakened.
