Earthquakes and Structures

  • 제19권1호
  • /
  • Pages.59-77
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 2092-7614(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2092-7622(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Estimation of elastic seismic demands in TU structures using interactive relations between shear and torsion

  • Abegaz, Ruth A. (School of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, Korea University) ;
  • Lee, Han Seon (School of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, Korea University)
  • 투고 : 2020.02.19
  • 심사 : 2020.07.14
  • 발행 : 2020.07.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The code static eccentricity model for elastic torsional design of structures has two critical shortcomings: (1) the negation of the inertial torsional moment at the center of mass (CM), particularly for torsionally-unbalanced (TU) building structures, and (2) the confusion caused by the discrepancy in the definition of the design eccentricity in codes and the resistance eccentricity commonly used by engineers such as in FEMA454. To overcome these shortcomings, using the resistance eccentricity model that can accommodate the inertial torsional moment at the CM, interactive relations between shear and torsion are proposed as follows: (1) elastic responses of structures at instants of peak edge-frame drifts are given as functions of resistance eccentricity, and (2) elastic hysteretic relationships between shear and torsion in forces and deformations are bounded by ellipsoids constructed using two adjacent dominant modes. Comparison of demands estimated using these two interactive relations with those from shake-table tests of two TU building structures (a 1:5-scale five-story reinforced concrete (RC) building model and a 1:12-scale 17-story RC building model) under the service level earthquake (SLE) show that these relations match experimental results of models reasonably well. Concepts proposed in this study enable engineers to not only visualize the overall picture of torsional behavior including the relationship between shear and torsion with the range of forces and deformations, but also pinpoint easily the information about critical responses of structures such as the maximum edge-frame drifts and the corresponding shear force and torsion moment with the eccentricity.

키워드

과제정보

The research was supported by grants (NRF-2009-0078771 and NRF-2017R1D1A1B03033488) of the National Research Foundation of Korea and a Korea University Grant. The authors are grateful for these supports.

참고문헌

  1. AIK (2000), "Korean building code, KBC 2000", Architectural Institute of Korea, Seoul, Korea. (in Korean)
  2. AIK (2005), "Korean building code, KBC2005", Architectural Institute of Korea, Seoul, Korea. (in Korean)
  3. Anagnostopoulos, S.A., Kyrkos, M.T. and Stathopoulos, K.G. (2015), "Earthquake induced torsion in buildings: critical review and state of the art", Earthq. Struct., 8(2), 305-377. http://dx.doi.org/10.12989/eas.2015.8.2.305.
  4. ASCE (2010), "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures", ASCE/SEI 7-10, Ame. Soc. Civil Eng., Reston, V.A.
  5. Basu, D., Constantinou, M.C. and Whittaker, A.S. (2014), "An equivalent accidental eccentricity to account for the effects of torsional ground motion on structures", Eng. Struct., 69, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.02.038.
  6. Chandler, A.M., Correnza, J.C. and Hutchinson, G.L. (1995), "Influence of accidental eccentricity on inelastic seismic torsional effects in building", Eng. Struct., 17(3), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(94)00003-C.
  7. De la Llera, J.C. and Chopra, A.K. (1994a), "Evaluation of code accidental-torsion provisions from building records", J. Struct. Eng., 120(2), 597-616. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:2(597).
  8. De la Llera, J.C. and Chopra, A.K. (1994b), "Accidental and natural torsion in earthquake response and design of buildings", EERC Report No. UCB/EERC-94/07; University of California, Berkeley, C.A, U.S.A.
  9. De la Llera, J.C. and Chopra, A.K. (1995), "Estimation of accidental torsion effects for seismic design of buildings", J. Struct. Eng., 121(1), 102-114. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1995)121:1(102).
  10. DeBock, D.J., Liel, A.B., Haselton, C.B., Hooper, J.D. and Henige R.A. (2014), "Importance of seismic design accidental torsion requirements for building collapse capacity", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 43(6), 831-850. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2375
  11. FEMA 454 (2006), "Designing for earthquakes-a manual for architects", Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
  12. Humar, J.L. and Kumar, P. (1999), "Effect of orthogonal in plane structural elements on inelastic torsional response", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 28(10), 1071-1097. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199910)28:10.
  13. Hwang, K.R., Abegaz, R.A. and Lee, H.S. (2017), "Effects of torsional resistance by transverse frames on seismic drift demand of torsionally-unbalanced building structures", The 2017 World Congress on Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics, ASEM17, Ilsan (Seoul), Korea, August - September.
  14. KCI (2000), "Design Code for Concrete Structures", Korea Concrete Institute. (in Korean).
  15. Ko, D.W. and Lee, H.S. (2006), "Shaking table tests on a high-rise RC building model having torsional eccentricity in soft lower storeys", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(11), 1425-1451. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.590
  16. Lam, N.T., Wilson, J.L. and Lumantarna, E. (2016), "Simplified elastic design checks for torsionally balanced and unbalanced low-medium rise buildings in lower seismicity regions", Earthq. Struct., 11(5), 741-777. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2016.11.5.741,.
  17. Lee, H.S. and Hwang, K.R. (2015), "Torsion design implications from shake-table responses of an RC low-rise building model having irregularities at the ground story", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 44(6):907-927. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2492.
  18. Lee, H.S., Jung, D.W., Lee, K.B., Kim, H.C. and Lee K. (2011), "Shake-table responses of a low-rise RC building model having irregularities at first story", Struct. Eng. Mech., 40(4), 517-539. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2011.40.4.517
  19. 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.
  20. Lin, W.H., Chopra, A.K. and De la Llera, J.C. (2001), "Accidental torsion in buildings: analysis versus earthquake motions", J. Struct. Eng., 127(5), 475-481. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2001)127:5(475).
  21. Lumantarna, E., Lam, N. and Wilson, J. (2018) "Methods of analysis for buildings with uni-axial and bi-axial asymmetry in regions of lower seismicity", Earthq. Struct., 15(1), 81-95. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.15.1.081.
  22. Paulay, T. (1998), "Torsional mechanisms in ductile building systems", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 27(10), 1101-1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199810)27:10.
  23. Stathopoulos, K.G. and Anagnostopoulos, S.A. (2010), "Accidental design eccentricity: Is it important for the inelastic response of buildings of buildings to strong earthquakes?", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 30(9), 782-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2009.12.018.
  24. UBC 97 (1997), Uniform Building Code, International Council of Building Officials (ICBO), Whittier, C.A.