Earthquakes and Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Structural behavior of conventional and buckling restrained braced frames subjected to near-field ground motions

  • Received : 2014.04.14
  • Accepted : 2014.10.08
  • Published : 2014.10.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, nonlinear dynamic analyses were performed in order to evaluate and compare the structural response of different type of moment resisting frame buildings equipped with conventional braces (CBs) and buckling restrained braces (BRBs) subjected to near-field ground motions. For this, the case study frames, namely, ordinary moment-resisting frame (OMRF) and special moment-resisting frame (SMRF) having two equal bays of 6 m and a total height of 20 m were utilized. Then, CBs and BRBs were inserted in the bays of the existing frames. As a brace pattern, diagonal type with different configurations were used for the braced frame structures. For the earthquake excitation, artificial pulses equivalent to Northridge and Kobe earthquake records were taken into account. The results in terms of the inter-story drift index, global damage index, base shear, top shear, damage index, and plastification were discussed. The analysis of the results indicated a considerable improvement in the structural performance of the existing frames with the inclusion of conventional and especially buckling-restrained braces.

Keywords

References

  1. Abdollahzadeh, G. and Banihashemi, M. (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. Alavi, B. and Krawinkler, H. (2004), "Behavior of moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault ground motions", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 33(6), 687-706. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.369
  3. AISC (2005), Seismic Provisions For Structural Steel Buildings, American institute of steel construction.
  4. Asgarian, B. and Amirhesari, N.A. (2008), "Comparison of dynamic nonlinear behavior of ordinary and buckling restrained braced frames subjected to strong ground motion", Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Buil., 17(2), 367-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.358
  5. Black, C.J., Makris, N. and Aiken, I.A. (2004), "Component testing, seismic evaluation and characterization of buckling restrained braces", J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE., 130(6), 880-894. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:6(880)
  6. CSI (2009), CSI Analysis Reference Manual for SAP2000, ETABS and SAFE, Computers and Structures,Inc., Berkeley, CA, USA.
  7. Di Sarno, L. and Elnashai, A.S. (2009), "Bracing systems for seismic retrofitting of steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 65(2), 452-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.02.013
  8. FEMA-273 (1997), NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington (DC).
  9. FEMA-450 (2003), Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington (DC).
  10. Fujimoto, M., Wada, A., Saeki, E., Watanabe, A. and Hitomi, Y.A. (1988), "Study on the unbonded brace encased in buckling restraining concrete and steel tube", J. Struct. Construct. Eng.-AIJ, (34B) 249-258 [in Japanese].
  11. Ghobarah, A., Abou-Elfath, H. and Biddah, A. (1999), "Response-based damage assessment of structures",Earthquake Engng. Struct. Dyn., 28, 79-104. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199901)28:1<79::AID-EQE805>3.0.CO;2-J
  12. Gu, Q., Zona, A., Peng, Y. and Dall'Asta, A. (2014), "Effect of buckling-restrained brace model parameters on seismic structural response", J. Constr. Steel Res., 98, 100-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.02.009
  13. Guneyisi, E.M. (2012), "Seismic reliability of steel moment resisting framed buildings retrofitted with buckling restrained braces", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 41(5), 853-874. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1161
  14. Hussain, S., Benschoten, P.V., Al Satari, M., Lin, S. and Coffman Engineers Inc. (2006), "Buckling restrained braced frame (BRBF) structures: Analysis, design and approvals issues", Proceedings of the 75th SEAOC Annual Convention, Long Beach.
  15. Kim, J. and Seo, Y. (2004), "Seismic design of low-rise steel frames with buckling-restrained braces", Eng. Struct., 26(5), 543-551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2003.11.005
  16. Kim, J., Choi H. and Chung, L. (2004),"Energy-based seismic design of structures withbuckling-restrained braces", Steel Compos. Struct., 4(6), 437-452. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2004.4.6.437
  17. Kimura, K., Yoshioka, K., Takeda, T., Fukuya, Z. and Takemoto, K. (1976), "Tests on braces encased by mortar in-filled steel tubes", Summaries of technical papers of annual meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1041-1042 [in Japanese].
  18. Kumar, G.M., Kumar, S.R.S. and Kalyanaraman, V. (2007), "Behavior of frames with non-buckling bracings under earthquake loading", J. Constr. Steel Res., 63(2), 254-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.04.012
  19. Lee, K. and Bruneau M. (2005), "Energy dissipation demand of compression membersin concentrically braced frames", Steel Compos. Struct., 5(5), 345-358. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2005.5.5.345
  20. Lee, H.S., Lee, K.B., Hwang, K.R. and Cho, C.S. (2013), "Shake table responses of an RC low-rise building model strengthened with buckling restrained braces at ground story", Earthq. Struct., 5(6) 703-731. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2013.5.6.703
  21. Mahmoudi, M. and Zaree, M. (2010), "Evaluating response modification factors of concentrically braced steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 66(10), 1196-1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.04.004
  22. Martinelli, L., Mulas, M.G. and Perotti, F. (1998), "The seismic behavior of steel moment resisting frames with stiffening braces", Eng. Struct., 20(12), 1045-1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00202-2
  23. Mochizuki, S., Murata, Y., Andou, N. and Takahashi, S. (1979), "Experimental study on buckling of unbonded braces under axial forces", Summaries of technical papers of annual meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1623-1626 [in Japanese].
  24. Nagao, T., Mikuriya, K., Matsumoto, Y. and Takahashi S. (1988), "An experimental study on the elasto-plastic behavior of unbonded composite bracing", Part 1-4, Summaries of technical papers of annual meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, Structural Engineering Section (2) 1329-1336 [in Japanese].
  25. Qiang, X. (2005), "State of the art of buckling-restrained braces in Asia", J. Constr. Steel Res., 61(6), 727-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2004.11.005
  26. Park, J., Lee, J. and Kim, J. (2012) "Cyclic test of buckling restrained braces composed of square steel rods and steel tube", Steel Compos. Struct., 13(5), 423-436. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2012.13.5.423
  27. Ren, C.C., Ou, J.P. and Jia, J.F. (2008), "Fuzzy Seismic Damage Assessment of Steel Frame Structures with Buckling Restrained Braces under Near-field Ground Motions", Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, China.
  28. Rezvani, F.H. and Asgarian, B. (2012), "Element loss analysis of concentrically braced framesconsidering structural performance criteria", Steel Compos. Struct., 12(3), 231-248. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2012.12.3.231
  29. Sabelli, R., Mahin, S. and Chang, C. (2003), "Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces", Eng. Struct., 25(5), 655-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00175-X
  30. SEAOC (1999), Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, California.
  31. Somerville, P. (1998) "Development of an improved ground motion representation for near fault ground motions", Proceedings of SMIP98 Seminar on Utilization of Strong-Motion Data, Oakland, CA.
  32. Somerville, P., Smith, N., Graves, R. and Abrahamson, N. (1997), "Modification of empirical strong ground motion attenuation relations to include the amplitude and duration effects of rupture directivity", Seismol. Res. Lett., 68,180-203. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.68.1.180
  33. Tirca, L. and Tremblay, R. (2004), "Influence of building height and ground motion type on the seismic behavior of zipper concentrically braced steel frames", Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
  34. Tirca, L.D., Foti, D. and Diaferio, M. (2003), "Response of middle-rise steel frames with and without passive dampers to near-field ground motions", Eng. Struct., 25(2), 169-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00132-3
  35. Wakabayashi, M., Nakamura, T., Katagihara, A., Yogoyama, H. and Morisono, T. (1973), "Experimental study on the elastoplastic behavior of braces enclosed by precast concrete panels under horizontal cyclic loading", Summaries of technical papers of annual meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, Section 1041-1044 [in Japanese].
  36. Zhao, J., Wu, B., Li, W. and Ou, J. (2014) "Local buckling behavior of steel angle core members in buckling-restrained braces: Cyclic tests, theoretical analysis, and design recommendations", Eng. Struct., 66, 129-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.02.008

Cited by

  1. Nonlinear dynamic response of reinforced concrete building retrofitted with buckling restrained braces vol.8, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.6.1349
  2. Inelastic buckling and post-buckling behavior of gusset plate connections vol.22, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2016.22.2.411
  3. Analytical study on seismic behavior of proposed hybrid tension-only braced frames vol.26, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1310
  4. Nonlinear Behaviour of Mid-rise Steel Buildings with Gate Braced Frames vol.11, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874149501711010475
  5. Study on the effects of various mid-connections of x-brace on frame behavior vol.12, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2017.12.4.449
  6. Reinforced concrete core-walls connected by a bridge with buckling restrained braces subjected to seismic loads vol.15, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.2.203
  7. Seismic response of dual structures comprised by Buckling-Restrained Braces (BRB) and RC walls vol.72, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.72.4.443
  8. Optimum location of second outrigger in RC core walls subjected to NF earthquakes vol.38, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2021.38.6.671