DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Inelastic Seismic Response of Asymmetric-Plan Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Braced Frames

비정형 셀프센터링 가새골조의 비탄성 지진응답

  • Published : 2008.08.31

Abstract

A self-centering energy-dissipative(SCED) bracing system has recently been developed as a new seismic force resistant bracing system. The advantage of the SCED brace system is that, unlike other comparable advanced bracing systems that dissipate energy such as the buckling restrained brace(BRB) system, it has a self-centering capability that reduces or eliminates residual building deformations after major seismic events. In order to investigate the effects of torsion on the SCED brace and BRB systems, nonlinear time history analyses were used to compare the responses of 3D model structures with three different amounts of frame eccentricity. The results of the analysis showed that the interstory drifts of SCED braced frames are more uniform than those of BRB frames, without regard to irregularity. The residual drift and residual rotation responses tended to decrease as irregularity increased. For medium-rise structures, the drift concentration factors(DCFs) for SCED systems were lower than those for BRB frames. This means that SCED-braced frames deform in a more uniform manner with respect to building height. The effect of the torsional irregularity on the magnitude of the DCFs was small.

Keywords

self-centering system;buckling-restrained brace;irregular structure;residual deformation;drift concentration factor

References

  1. Tremblay, R., Poncet, L., Bolduc, P., Neville, R., and DeVall, R., "Testing and Design of Buckling Restrained Braces for Canadian Application," Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, Paper No. 2893, 2004
  2. Somerville, P., Smith, H., Puriyamurthala, S., and Sun. J., Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project, SAC Joint Venture, SAC/BD 97/04, 1997
  3. AISC, Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341s1-05 Including Supplement No.1, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., 2005
  4. AISC, Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/ AISC 360-05 Including Supplement No.1, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., 2005
  5. Carr, A. J., Ruaumoko Program for Inelastic Dynamic Analysis-User Manual, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand, 2005
  6. Newell, J., Uang, C. M., and Benzoni, G., Subassemblage Testing of Corebrace Buckling-restrained Braces (G series), Report No. TR-06/01, University of California, San Diego, 2006
  7. Sabellia, R., Mahin, S.A., and Chang, C., "Seismic Demands on Steel Braced Frame Buildings with Buckling-restrained Braces," Engineering Structures, Vol. 25, No. 5, 2003, pp. 655-666 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00175-X
  8. Kiggins, S. and Uang, C. M., "Reducing Residual Drift of Buckling-restrained Braced Frames as a Dual System," Engineering Structures, Vol. 28, No. 11, 2006, pp. 1525- 1532 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.10.023
  9. Tremblay, R., Lacerte, M., and Christopoulos, C., "Seismic Response of Multistory Buildings with Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Steel Braces," Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 134, No. 1, 2008, pp. 108-120 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:1(108)
  10. Black, C., Makris, N., and Aiken, I., Component Testing, Stability Analysis and Characterization of Buckling Restrained Braces, Report No. PEER-2002/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, 2002
  11. Merritt, S., Uang, C. M., and Benzoni, G., Subassemblage Testing of Corebrace Buckling-restrained Braces, Report No. TR-2003/01, University of California, San Diego, 2003
  12. Kim, J. and Choi, H., "Behavior and Design of Structures with Buckling-restrained Braces," Engineering Structures, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2004, pp. 693-706 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.09.010
  13. ASCE, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ANSI/SEI7-05 Including Supplement No.1, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006
  14. Garlock, M, Ricles, J., and Sause, R., "Experimental Studies on Full-scale Post-tensioned Steel Moment Connections," The 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, Paper No. 2514, 2004
  15. Christopoulos, C., Tremblay, R., and Kim H.J., "Development and Validation of the New Self-centering Steel Brace," The 5th International Conference on the Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Yokohama, Japan, 2006, pp. 197-203
  16. Zhu, S. and Zhang, Y., "Seismic Behaviour of Self- centering Braced Frame Buildings with Reusable Hysteretic Damping Brace," Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 36, No. 10, 2007, pp. 1329-1346 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.683
  17. SEAOC, Tentative Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Engineering, SEAOC Blue Book, Structural Engineers Association of California, 1999
  18. FEMA, Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Report FEMA-356, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 2000
  19. Christopoulos, C., Filiatrault, A., Uang, C. M., and Folz, B., "Post-tensioned Energy Dissipating Connections for Moment Resisting Steel Frames," Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 128, No. 9, 2002, pp. 1111-1120 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:9(1111)
  20. Christopoulos, C., Tremblay, R., Kim, H.J., and Lacerte, M., "Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Bracing System for the Seismic Resistance of Structures: Development and Validation," Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 134, No. 1, 2008, pp. 96-107 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:1(96)
  21. Kimura, Y., MacRae, G. A., and Roeder, C., "Column Stiffness Effects on Braced Frame Seismic Behavior," Proceedings of the 7th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, Boston, Paper No. 49, 2002