Steel and Composite Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Response modification factor of dual moment-resistant frame with buckling restrained brace (BRB)

  • Received : 2011.10.29
  • Accepted : 2013.05.26
  • Published : 2013.06.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Response modification factor is one of the seismic design parameters to consider nonlinear performance of building structures during strong earthquake, in conformity with the point that many seismic design codes led to reduce the loads. In the present paper it's tried to evaluate the response modification factors of dual moment resistant frame with buckling restrained braced (BRB). Since, the response modification factor depends on ductility and overstrength; the nonlinear static analysis, nonlinear dynamic analysis and linear dynamic analysis have been done on building models including multi-floors and different brace configurations (chevron V, invert V, diagonal and X bracing). The response modification factor for each of the BRBF dual systems has been determined separately, and the tentative value of 10.47 has been suggested for allowable stress design method. It is also included that the ductility, overstrength and response modification factors for all of the models were decreased when the height of the building was increased.

Keywords

References

  1. AISC (2005), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, American Institute of Steel Constructions, Chicago, IL, USA.
  2. Annan, C.D., Youssef, M.A. and El Naggar, M.H. (2009), "Experimental evaluation of the seismic performance of modular steel-braced frames", Eng. Struct., 31(7), 1435-1446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.024
  3. Asgarian, B. and Amirhesari, N.A. (2008), A comparison of dynamic nonlinear behavior of ordinary and buckling restrained braced frames subjected to strong ground motion", Struct. Design Tall Special Build., 17(2), 367-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.358
  4. Asgarian, B. and Shokrgozar, H.R. (2009), "BRBF response modification factor", J. Construct. Steel Res., 65(2), 290-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.08.002
  5. ATC (1995a), A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-Resistant design, ATC-34, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp. 31-36.
  6. ATC (1995b), Structural response modification factors, ATC-19, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, pp. 5-32.
  7. BHRC (2005), Iranian code of practice for seismic resistance design of buildings: Standard No. 2800, 3rd Ed., Building and Housing Research Center.
  8. Black, C., Makris, N. and Aiken, I. (2002), Component Testing, Stability Analysis and Characterization of Buckling-Restrained Braces, Report of Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, University of California.
  9. Broderick, B.M., Elghazouli, A.Y. and Goggins, J. (2008), "Earthquake testing and response analysis of concentrically-braced sub-frames", J. Construct Steel Res., 64(9), 997-1007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2007.12.014
  10. Chang, H.Y. and Chiu, C.K. (2011), "Performance assessment of buckling restrained braces", Procedia Eng., 14, 2187-2195 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.275
  11. Davaran, A. and Hoveidae, N. (2009), "Effect of mid-connection detail on the behavior of X- bracing systems", J. Construct Steel Res., 65(4), 985-990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.11.005
  12. Di Sarno, L. and Manfredi, G. (2010), "Seismic retrofitting with buckling restrained braces: Application to an existing non-ductile RC framed building", Soil Dyn. Earthq Eng., 30(11), 1279-1297 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2010.06.001
  13. DiSarno, L., Elnashai, A.S. and Nethercot, D.A. (2008), "Seismic response of stainless steel braced frames", J. Construct. Steel Res., 64(7-8), 914-925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.01.027
  14. FEMA (2000), Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of building, FEMA-356, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., MA, USA.
  15. Kalyanaraman, V., Ramachandran, B., Prasad, B.K. and Sridhara, B.N. (2003), "Analytical study of sleeved column buckling resistant braced system", In: SEAOC convention proceedings, 713-720.
  16. Kiggins, S. and Uang, C.M. (2006), "Reducing residual drift of buckling-restrained braced frames as a dual system", J. Eng. Struct., 28(11), 1525-1532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.10.023
  17. Kim, J. and Choi, H. (2005), "Response modification factors of chevron-braced frames", J. Eng. Struct., 27(2), 285-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.10.009
  18. Kim, J. and Seo, Y. (2004), "Seismic design of low-rise steel frames with buckling-restrained braces", J. Eng. Struct., 26(5), 543-551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.11.005
  19. Lee, K. and Bruneau, M. (2005), "Energy dissipation of compression members in concentrically braced frames: Review of experimental data", J. Struct. Eng., 131(4), 552-559. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:4(552)
  20. Maheri, M.R. and Akbari, R. (2003), "Seismic behavior factor, R, for steel X-braced and knee-braced RC buildings", J. Eng. Struct., 25(12), 1505-1513. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(03)00117-2
  21. Mahmoudi, M. and Zaree, M. (2010), "Evaluating response modification factors of concentrically braced steel frames", J. Construct. Steel Res., 66(10), 1196-1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.04.004
  22. Mazzolani, F.M. and Piluso, V. (1996), Theory and Design of Seismic Resistant Steel Frames, E & FN Spon, London, UK.
  23. MHUD (2009), Iranian national building code (part 10): Steel Structure Design, Tehran, Iran, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.
  24. Mitchel, D., Tremblay, R., Karacabeyli, E., Paultre, P., Saatcioglu, M. and Anderson, D. (2003), "Seismic Force Modification Factors for the proposed 2005 edition of the National Building Code of Canada", Can. J. Civil Eng., 30(2), 308-327. https://doi.org/10.1139/l02-111
  25. Moghaddam, H., Hajirasouliha, I. and Doostan, A. (2005), "Optimum seismic design of concentrically braced steel frames concepts and design procedures", J. Construct. Steel Res., 61(2), 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2004.08.002
  26. Mwafy, A.M. and Elnashai, A.S. (2002), "Calibration of force reduction factors of RC buildings", J. Earthq. Eng., 6(22), 239-273.
  27. Rahai, A.R. and Alinia, M.M. (2008), "Performance evaluation and strengthening of concrete structures with composite bracing members", J. Construct. Build. Mater., 22(10), 2100-2110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.07.020
  28. Rai, D.C. and Goel, S.C. (2003), "Seismic evaluation and upgrading of chevron braced frames", J. Construct. Steel Res., 59(8), 971-994. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-974X(03)00006-3
  29. Ravi Kumar, G., Satish Kumar, S.R. and Kalyanaraman, V. (2007), "Behavior of frames with non-buckling bracings under earthquake loading", J. Construct. Steel Res., 63(2), 254-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.04.012
  30. Sabelli, R., Mahin, S. and Chang, C. (2003), "Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces", J. Eng. Struct., 25(5), 655-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00175-X
  31. SEAOC (2001), Recommended Provision for Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames, Seismology and Structural Committee, Structural Engineers Association of Northern California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
  32. Tsai, K.C., Lai, J.W., Hwang, Y.C., Lin, S.L. and Weng, C.H. (2004a), "Research and application of buckling restrained braces in Taiwan", The 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, August, Paper No. 2179.
  33. Tsai, K.C., Weng, Y.T,. Lin, S.L. and Goel, S. (2004b), "Pseudo-dynamic test of a full-scale CFT/BRB frame, part 1: Performance based specimen design", The 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, August, Paper No. 750.
  34. Uang, C.M. (1991), "Establishing R (or Rw) and Cd factor for building seismic provision", J. Struct. Eng., 117(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:1(19)
  35. Uang C.M. and Nakashima, M. (2003), "Steel buckling-restrained frames", In: Bozorgnia, Y., Bertero, V.V. Editors, Earthquake Engineering: Recent Advances and Applications, CRC Press, publication pending, Chapter 16.

Cited by

  1. Performance-based plastic design method for steel concentric braced frames vol.7, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-015-0099-0
  2. Performance-based plastic design method of high-rise steel frames vol.19, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.21595/jve.2016.17687
  3. Hybrid Recentering Energy Dissipative Device for Seismic Protection vol.2014, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/262409
  4. Response modification factor of suspended zipper braced frames vol.18, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2015.18.1.165
  5. Structural behavior of conventional and buckling restrained braced frames subjected to near-field ground motions vol.7, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2014.7.4.553
  6. Reliability and fragility curve assessment of steel concentrically braced frames vol.20, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2015.1064481
  7. Development of the Performance Based Plastic Design for Steel Concentric Braced Frames and Evaluation by Energy Methodology vol.18, pp.10, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1260/1369-4332.18.10.1619
  8. Seismic reliability-based ductility demand evaluation for inelastic base-isolated structures with friction pendulum devices vol.46, pp.8, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2854
  9. Seismic behavior of coupled shear wall structures with various concrete and steel coupling beams vol.27, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1405
  10. Response modification factor of the frames braced with reduced yielding segment BRB vol.50, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2014.50.1.001
  11. Strength or force reduction factors for steel buildings: MDOF vs SDOF systems vol.19, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.21595/jve.2016.17124
  12. Energy demands in reinforced concrete wall piers coupled by buckling restrained braces subjected to near-fault earthquake vol.27, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.27.6.703
  13. Ductility demands and reduction factors for 3D steel structures with pinned and semi-rigid connections vol.16, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.4.469
  14. 단주효과 및 고유주기를 고려한 비내진 학교시설의 반응 수정계수 vol.23, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5000/eesk.2019.23.4.201
  15. Fragility assessment of shear walls coupled with buckling restrained braces subjected to near-field earthquakes vol.33, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2019.33.3.389
  16. Seismic response of dual structures comprised by Buckling-Restrained Braces (BRB) and RC walls vol.72, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.72.4.443
  17. Seismic Reliability-Based Design Approach for Base-Isolated Systems in Different Sites vol.12, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062400
  18. Optimum location of second outrigger in RC core walls subjected to NF earthquakes vol.38, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2021.38.6.671
  19. Optimum location of second outrigger in RC core walls subjected to NF earthquakes vol.38, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2021.38.6.671
  20. Experimental and numerical investigation on the seismic retrofit of RC frames with linked column frame systems vol.44, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102956