Structural Engineering and Mechanics

  • 제50권1호
  • /
  • Pages.1-17
  • /
  • 2014
  • /
  • 1225-4568(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1598-6217(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Response modification factor of the frames braced with reduced yielding segment BRB

  • Fanaie, Nader (Department of Civil Engineering, K.N.Toosi University of Technology) ;
  • Dizaj, Ebrahim Afsar (Department of Civil Engineering, K.N.Toosi University of Technology)
  • 투고 : 2013.06.27
  • 심사 : 2014.01.31
  • 발행 : 2014.04.10
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

In this paper, overstrength, ductility and response modification factors are calculated for frames braced with a different type of buckling restrained braces, called reduced yielding segment BRB (Buckling Restrained Brace) in which the length of its yielding part is reduced and placed in one end of the brace element in comparison with conventional BRBs. Forthermore, these factors are calculated for ordinary BRBF and the results are compared. In this regard incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) method is used for studying 17 records of the most known earthquakes happened in the world. To do that, the considered buildings have different stories and two bracing configurations: diagonal and inverted V chevron, the most ordinary configurations of BRBFs. Static pushover analysis, nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis and linear dynamic analysis have been performed using OpenSees software. Considering the results, it can be seen that, overstrength, ductility and response modification factors of this type of BRBF(Buckling Restrained Braced Frame) is greater than those of conventional types and it shows better seismic performance and also eliminates some of conventional BRBF's disadvantages such as low post-yield stiffness.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Abdollahzadeh, Gh. and Banihashemi, M.R. (2013), "Response modification factor of dual moment-resistant frame with buckling restrained brace (BRB)", Steel Compos. Struct., 14(6), 621-636. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2013.14.6.621
  2. Asgarian, B. and Shokrgozar, H.R. (2009), "BRBF response modification factor", J. Construct. Steel Res., 65, 290-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.08.002
  3. ATC (1995), A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-Resistant design, ATC-34, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  4. ATC (1995), Structural response modification factors, ATC-19, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  5. ATC (1978), Tentative provisions for the development of seismic regulations for buildings, ATC-3-06, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA.
  6. BHRC (2005), Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings, Standard No. 2800, 3rd Edition, Building and Housing Research Center.
  7. Kim, J. and Choi, H. (2004), "Response modification factors of chevron-braced frames", J. Eng. Struct., 27, 285-300.
  8. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., Fenves, G.L. and Jeremic, B. (2007), Opensees Command Language Manual.
  9. MHUD (2006), Iranian National Building Code, Part 10, steel structure design, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran.
  10. Mwafy, A.M. and Elnashai, A.S. (2002), "Calibration of force reduction factors of RC buildings", J. Earthq. Eng., 6(22), 239-73.
  11. Prinz, G.S. (2010), "Using buckling-restrained braces in eccentric configurations", Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Brigham Young University.
  12. Razavi, S.A., Shemshadian, M.E., Mirghaderi, S.R. and Ahlehagh, S. (2011), "Seismic design of buckling restrained braced frames with reduced core length", SEWC Structural Engineering World Congress, Como, April.
  13. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (2005), Approved by the AISC Committee on Specifications and issued by the AISC Board of Directors.
  14. Shemshadian, M.E., Razavi, S.A., Hosseini, A., Mirghaderi, S.R. and Khanmohammdi, M. (2011a), "An analytical study of low cycle fatigue effects in buckling restrained braces", 3rd ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Eds. Papadrakakis, M. and Fragiadakis, V., Corfu, Greece.
  15. Shemshadian, M.E., Razavi, S.A., Mirghaderi, S.R., Hosseini, A. and Khanmohammdi, M. (2011b), "The advantages of reducing the length of yielding segment in seismic performance of buckling restrained braced frames", Sixth International Conference of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering.
  16. 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)
  17. Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A. (2002), "Incremental dynamic analysis", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 491-514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.141

피인용 문헌

  1. 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
  2. Response modification factor of mixed structures vol.19, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2015.19.6.1449
  3. Probabilistic seismic demand assessment of steel frames braced with reduced yielding segment buckling restrained braces 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433217737115
  4. Effect of Inelastic Behavior on the Code-Based Seismic Lateral Force Pattern of Buckling Restrained Braced Frames vol.39, pp.12, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-014-1433-8
  5. Local, Story, and Global Ductility Evaluation for Complex 2D Steel Buildings: Pushover and Dynamic Analysis vol.9, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/app9010200
  6. Seismic Behaviour Assessment of Steel Moment Resisting Frames Under Near-Field Earthquakes pp.2093-6311, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-019-00218-2
  7. Estimation of response reduction factor of RC frame staging in elevated water tanks using nonlinear static procedure vol.62, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.62.2.209
  8. Earthquake effects on the energy demand of tall reinforced concrete walls with buckling-restrained brace outriggers vol.63, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2017.63.4.521
  9. Dynamic mix design optimization of high-performance concrete vol.29, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.29.1.067
  10. The effects of beam-column connections on behavior of buckling-restrained braced frames vol.28, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.28.3.309
  11. Computational investigation of the comparative analysis of cylindrical barns subjected to earthquake vol.28, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.28.4.439
  12. Application of ANFIS technique on performance of C and L shaped angle shear connectors vol.22, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2018.22.3.335
  13. Practical use of computational building information modeling in repairing and maintenance of hospital building- case study vol.22, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2018.22.5.575
  14. A new energy-absorbing system for seismic retrofitting of frame structures with slender braces vol.17, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-00543-7
  15. Estimation of seismic response parameters and capacity of irregular tunnel-form buildings vol.17, pp.9, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00679-0
  16. Seismic Reliability-Based Design Approach for Base-Isolated Systems in Different Sites vol.12, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062400
  17. Assessing the seismic behavior of steel moment frames equipped by elliptical brace through incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) vol.19, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-020-0572-z
  18. Global buckling prevention of reduced-core-length buckling-restrained braces: theoretical and numerical investigations vol.18, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00768-0
  19. Performance of innovative composite buckling-restrained fuse for concentrically braced frames under cyclic loading vol.36, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2020.36.2.163
  20. Prediction of total sediment load: A case study of Wadi Arbaat in eastern Sudan vol.26, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2020.26.6.781
  21. Ionic liquid coated magnetic core/shell CoFe2O4@SiO2 nanoparticles for the separation/analysis of trace gold in water sample vol.10, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/anr.2021.10.3.295
  22. Comparative Assessment of the Seismic Behavior of Reduced‐Core Length and Conventional Buckling‐Restrained Bracing Systems vol.4, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1002/cepa.1472
  23. Dynamic response of multi-story buckling-restrained braced steel frames with different β values vol.34, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.08.123
  24. Effects of cyclic strain hardening on performance of eccentrically braced frames vol.187, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106948