Steel and Composite Structures

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fragility assessment of buckling-restrained braced frames under near-field earthquakes

  • Ghowsi, Ahmad F. (Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi) ;
  • Sahoo, Dipti R. (Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi)
  • Received : 2014.04.13
  • Accepted : 2014.12.30
  • Published : 2015.07.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study presents an analytical investigation on the seismic response of a medium-rise buckling-restrained braced frame (BRBF) under the near-fault ground motions. A seven-story BRBF is designed as per the current code provisions for five different combinations of brace configurations and beam-column connections. Two types of brace configurations (i.e., Chevron and Double-X) are considered along with a combination of the moment-resisting and the non-moment-resisting beam-to-column connections for the study frame. Nonlinear dynamic analyses are carried out for all study frames for an ensemble of forty SAC near-fault ground motions. The main parameters evaluated are the interstory and residual drift response, brace displacement ductility, and plastic hinge mechanisms. Fragility curves are developed using log-normal probability density functions for all study frames considering the interstory drift ratio and residual drift ratio as the damage parameters. The average interstory drift response of BRBFs with Double-X brace configurations significantly exceeded the allowable drift limit of 2%. The maximum displacement ductility characteristics of BRBs is efficiently utilized under the seismic loading if these braces are arranged in the Double-X configurations instead of Chevron configurations in BRBFs located in the near-fault regions. However, BRBFs with the Double-X brace configurations exhibit the higher interstory drift and residual drift response under near-fault ground motions due to the formation of plastic hinges in the columns and beams at the intermediate story levels.

Keywords

References

  1. Aiken, I.D., Mahin, S.A. and Uriz, P.R. (2002), "Large-scale testing of buckling-restrained braced frames", Proceedings of Japan Passive Control Symposium, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan.
  2. ANSI/AISC 341-05 (2005), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings; American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL, USA.
  3. ASCE/SEI 7-10 (2010), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures; American Society of Civil Engineers, VA, USA.
  4. Avci-Karatas, C., Cetinkaya, S., Demir, C., Comert, M., Gunes, B. and Celik, O.C. (2013), "Cyclic testing of a steel-core buckling restrained brace (BRB) under near-fault displacement reversals", Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Smart Monitoring, Assessment and Rehabilitation of Civil Structures (SMAR' 2013), Istanbul, Turkey, September.
  5. Baghbanijavid, Z., Jalali, A. and Yasrebinia, Y. (2010), "Seismic response of buckling-restrained braced frames under near fault ground motions", J. Appl. Sci., 10(23), 2967-2977. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2010.2967.2977
  6. Black, C.J., Makris, N. and Aiken, I.D. (2004), "Component testing, seismic evaluation and characterization of buckling-restrained braces", ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 130(6), 880-894. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:6(880)
  7. Chou, C.C., Liu, J.H. and Pham, D.H. (2012), "Steel buckling-restrained braced frames with single and dual corner gusset connections: seismic tests and analyses", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(7), 1137-1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1176
  8. CSI (2009), CSI Analysis Reference Manual for SAP 2000; Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, CA, USA.
  9. Fahnestock, L.A., Sause, R. and Ricles, J.M. (2007), "Seismic response and performance of bucklingrestrained braced frames", ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 133(9), 1195-1204. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:9(1195)
  10. FEMA 356 (2000), Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings; Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., USA.
  11. FEMA 450 (2003), NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New buildings and Other Structures; Part 1-Provisions, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., USA.
  12. Field, C. and Ko, E. (2004), "Connection performance of buckling-restrained braced frames", Paper No. 1321, Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, August.
  13. Ghowsi, A.F. and Sahoo, D.R. (2013), "Seismic performance of buckling-restrained braced frames with varying beam-column connections", Int. J. Steel Struct., 13(4), 607-621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-013-4003-0
  14. Huang, Y.C. and Tsai, K.C. (2002), Experimental Responses of Large Scale Buckling Restrained Brace Frames, Report no. CEER/R91-03; National Taiwan University, Taiwan. [In Chinese]
  15. Iwata, M., Kato, T. and Wada, A. (2003), "Performance evaluation of buckling-restrained braces in damage-controlled structures: Behavior of steel structures in seismic area", Proceedings of the 4th International Conference STESSA, Naples, Italy, June.
  16. Lin, M.L., Tsai, K.C., Hsiao, P.C. and Tsait, C.Y. (2005), "Compressive behavior of buckling restrained braces gusset connections", Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advances in Experimental Structural Engineering, Nagoya, Japan, July.
  17. Lopez, W.A. and Sabelli, R. (2004), Seismic Design of Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames, Structural Steel Education Council, Moraga, CA, USA.
  18. Merritt, S., Uang, C.M. and Benzoni, G. (2003), Subassemblage Testing of Core Brace Buckling-Restrained Braces, Report No. TR-2003/01; Department of Structural Engineering, University of California at San Diego, CA, USA.
  19. Romero, P., Revelry, L., Miller, P. and Okahashi, T. (2003), Full-Scale Testing of WC Series Buckling-Restrained Braces, Deptartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Utah, UT, USA.
  20. Sahoo, D.R. and Chao, S.-H. (2010), "Performance-based plastic design method for buckling-restrained braced frames", Eng. Struct., 32(9), 2950-2958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.05.014
  21. SEAOC (1999), Seismic Design Manual. Vol. I-Code Application Examples; Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, CA, USA.
  22. Shakib, H. and Safi, R. (2012), "Behavior evaluation of the eccentric buckling-restrained braced frames under the near-fault ground motions", Proceedings of the 15th World Conference of Earthquake Engineerng, Lisbon, Portugal, September.
  23. Somerville, P.G., Smith, M., Punyamurthula, S. and Sun, J. (1997), Development of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project, Report No. SAC/BD-97/04; SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA, USA.
  24. Tsai, K.C., Hsiaso, B.C., Lai, J.W., Chen, C.H., Lin, M.L. and Weng, Y.T. (2003a), "Pseudo-dynamic experimental response of a full-scale CFT-BRB composite frame", Proceedings of Joint NCREE/JRC Workshop on International Collaboration on Earthquake Disaster Mitigation Research, Taipei, Taiwan, November.
  25. Tsai, K.C., Loh, C.H., Hwang, Y.C. and Weng, C.S. (2003b), "Seismic retrofit of building structures with dampers in Taiwan", Proceedings of Symposium on Seismic Retrofit of Buildings and Bridges with Base Isolation and Dampers, Kyoto, Japan, January.
  26. Usami, T., Kasai, A. and Kato, M. (2003), "Behavior of buckling-restrained brace members: Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas", Proceedings of the 4th International Specialty Conference STESSA, Naples, Italy, June.
  27. Watanabe, A., Hitomi, Y., Saeki, E., Wada, A. and Fujimoto, M. (1988), "Properties of brace encased in buckling-restrained concrete and steel tube", Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, August.

Cited by

  1. 11.36: Influence of type of loading protocols and restraining parameters on cyclic response of steel BRB vol.1, pp.2-3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/cepa.365
  2. Closed-form fragility analysis of the steel moment resisting frames vol.21, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2016.21.1.093
  3. Seismic analysis of steel structure with brace configuration using topology optimization vol.21, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2016.21.3.501
  4. Performance-based evaluation of strap-braced cold-formed steel frames using incremental dynamic analysis vol.21, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2016.21.6.1369
  5. Effect of Loading History and Restraining Parameters on Cyclic Response of Steel BRBs pp.2093-6311, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0187-7
  6. Experimental study on seismic performance of L-shaped insulated concrete sandwich shear wall with a horizontal seam pp.15417794, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1551
  7. Collapse of steel cantilever roof of tribune induced by snow loads vol.23, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2017.23.3.273
  8. Mitigation of seismic drift response of braced frames using short yielding-core BRBs vol.23, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2017.23.3.285
  9. Seismic performance evaluation of buckling restrained braced frames (BRBF) using incremental nonlinear dynamic analysis method (IDA) vol.13, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2017.13.6.531
  10. The effects of beam-column connections on behavior of buckling-restrained braced frames vol.28, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2018.28.3.309
  11. Behavior of three-tube buckling-restrained brace with circumference pre-stress in core tube vol.30, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2019.30.2.081
  12. Multi-material core as self-centering mechanism for buildings incorporating BRBs vol.16, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.5.589
  13. Rapid seismic loss assessment using new probabilistic demand and consequence models vol.17, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-019-00600-9
  14. Seismic vulnerability of a non-linear building with distributed multiple tuned vibration absorbers vol.15, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2019.1602149
  15. Fragility Analysis of Infilled Reinforced Concrete Frames Subjected to Near-Field Ground Motions vol.24, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-020-1443-x
  16. Prequalification of a set of buckling restrained braces: Part II - numerical simulations vol.34, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2020.34.4.561
  17. Shaking Table Test for Evaluating the Seismic Performance of Steel Frame Retrofitted by Buckling-Restrained Braces vol.2021, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6654201
  18. Cyclic behavior of superelastic SMA cable and its application in an innovative self-centering BRB vol.30, pp.9, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-665x/ac1907
  19. Seismic performance assessment of reinforced concrete hilly buildings with open story vol.34, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.07.069
  20. Numerical Analysis of Steel Buckling-Restrained Braces with Varying Lengths, Gaps, and Stoppers vol.27, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)sc.1943-5576.0000629