Steel and Composite Structures

  • 제36권4호
  • /
  • Pages.399-415
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1229-9367(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1598-6233(eISSN)
테크노프레스 (Techno-Press)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of responses of semi-rigid frames at target displacements predicted by the nonlinear static analysis

  • Sharma, Vijay (Department of Civil Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur) ;
  • Shrimali, Mahendra K. (National Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur) ;
  • Bharti, Shiv D. (National Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur) ;
  • Datt, Tushar K. (National Centre for Disaster Mitigation and Management, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur)
  • 투고 : 2020.02.03
  • 심사 : 2020.07.24
  • 발행 : 2020.08.25
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Responses of semi-rigid frames having different degrees of semi-rigidity obtained by the nonlinear static analysis (NSA) are evaluated at specific target displacements by comparing them with those obtained by the nonlinear time-history analysis (NTHA) for scaled earthquakes. The peak ground accelerations (PGA) of the earthquakes are scaled such that the obtained peak top story displacements match with the target displacements. Three different types of earthquakes are considered, namely, far-field and near-field earthquakes with directivity and fling-step effects. In order to make the study a comprehensive one, three degrees of semi-rigidity (one fully rigid and the other two semi-rigid), and two frames having different heights are considered. An ensemble of five-time histories of ground motion is included in each type of earthquake. A large number of responses are considered in the study. They include the peak top-story displacement, maximum inter-story drift ratio, peak base shear, total number of plastic hinges, and square root of sum of the squares (SRSS) of the maximum plastic hinge rotations. Results of the study indicate that the nonlinear static analysis provides a fairly good estimate of the peak values of top-story displacements, inter-story drift ratio (for shorter frame), peak base shear and number of plastic hinges; however, the SRSS of maximum plastic hinge rotations in semi-rigid frames are considerably more in the nonlinear static analysis as compared to the nonlinear time history analysis.

키워드

과제정보

The authors thankfully acknowledge the Department of Civil Engineering, MNIT Jaipur, and Quality Improvement Program (QIP) center, MNIT Jaipur, India, for providing research facilities. Sincere thanks are also to All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), New Delhi, India for providing financial support in the form of research scholarship. Authors also wish to express gratitude to Government Engineering College, Palanpur, Gujarat state, India, and Commissionerate of Technical Education, Gujarat state, India for financial support to conduct this study.

참고문헌

  1. Abdollahzadeh, G., Faghihmaleki, H. and Esmaili, H. (2016), "Comparing Hysteretic Energy and inter-story drift in steel frames with V-shaped brace under near and far fault earthquakes", Alexandria Eng. J., 57(1), 301-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2016.09.015.
  2. AISC-360, B. (2016), AISC 360-16, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
  3. Aksoylar, N.D., Elnashai, A.S. and Mahmoud, H. (2011), "The design and seismic performance of low-rise long-span frames with semi-rigid connections", J. Constr. Steel Res., 67(1), 114-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.07.001.
  4. Al-Bermani, F., Li, B., Zhu, K. and Kitipornchai, S. (1994), "Cyclic and seismic response of flexibly jointed frames", Eng. Struct., 16(4), 249-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(94)90064-7.
  5. ANSI/AISC-341 (2016), 341 Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings,
  6. Antoniou, S. and Pinho, R. (2004), "Development and verification of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure", J. Earthq. Eng., 8(05), 643-661. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13632460409350504.
  7. ASCE-41 (2017), ASCE 41-17: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings,
  8. ATC-40 (1996), Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings- Volume I, Applied Technology Council, California Seismic Safety Commission, Redwood City, California, 94065.
  9. Awkar, J. and Lui, E.M. (1999), "Seismic analysis and response of multistory semirigid frames", Eng. Struct., 21(5), 425-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00210-1.
  10. Bayat, M. and Zahrai, S.M. (2017), "Seismic performance of mid-rise steel frames with semi-rigid connections having different moment capacity", Steel Compos. Struct., 25(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2017.25.1.000.
  11. Bhandari, M., Bharti, S., Shrimali, M. and Datta, T. (2018), "Assessment of proposed lateral load patterns in pushover analysis for base-isolated frames", Eng. Struct., 175 531-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.08.080.
  12. Bracci, J.M., Kunnath, S.K. and Reinhorn, A.M. (1997), "Seismic performance and retrofit evaluation of reinforced concrete structures", J. Struct. Eng., 123(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1997)123:1(3).
  13. Brunesi, E., Nascimbene, R. and Rassati, G. (2015), "Seismic response of MRFs with partially-restrained bolted beam-to-column connections through FE analyses", J. Constr. Steel Res., 107 37-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000628.
  14. Chan, S. and Chui, P. (2000), Nonlinear static and cyclic analysis of steel frames with semi-rigid connections, Elsevier
  15. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (2002), "A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 31(3), 561-582. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.144.
  16. Diaferio, M. (2018), "Performance of seismic shear panels under near-field motions", Int. J. Eng. Technol., 7(2), 196-200. https://www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/ijet/article/view/11915/4685 https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.23.11915
  17. Diaferio, M. and Foti, D. (2016), "Mechanical behavior of buildings subjected to impulsive motions", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 14(3), 849-862. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.23.11915.
  18. Elnashai, A. and Elghazouli, A. (1994), "Seismic behaviour of semi-rigid steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 29(1-3), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-974X(94)90060-4.
  19. Erduran, E. (2008), "Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures on the estimation of torsional effects in low-rise frame buildings", Eng. Struct., 30(9), 2548-2558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.008.
  20. Eurocode 3, B.S. (2006), "Eurocode 3-Design of steel structures-", BS EN 1993-1. 1 2005.
  21. Faridmehr, I., Tahir, M.M. and Lahmer, T. (2016), "Classification system for semi-rigid beam-to-column connections", Latin Am. J. Solids \Struct., 13(11), 2152-2175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1679-78252595.
  22. Faridmehr, I., Tahir, M.M., Lahmer, T. and Osman, M.H. (2017), "Seismic Performance of Steel Frames with Semirigid Connections", J. Eng., 2017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5284247.
  23. Feizi, M.G., Mojtahedi, A. and Nourani, V. (2015), "Effect of semi-rigid connections in improvement of seismic performance of steel moment-resisting frames", Steel Compos. Struct., 19(2), 467-484. http://dx.doi.org/10.12989/scs.2015.19.2.467
  24. FEMA-355D (2001), State of the art report on connection performance,
  25. FEMA-440 (2005), "440, Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures", FEMA-440, Redwood City. 7(9), 11.
  26. FEMA-P695 (2009), Quantification of building seismic performance factors, Federal Emergency Management Agency
  27. Foti, D. (2014), "On the seismic response of protected and unprotected middle-rise steel frames in far-field and near-field areas", Shock Vib., 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/393870.
  28. Foti, D. (2014), "Response of frames seismically protected with passive systems in near-field areas", Int. J. Struct. Eng., 5(4), 326-345. http://www.inderscience.com/info/ingeneral/forthcoming.php?jcode=ijstructe https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTRUCTE.2014.065916
  29. Foti, D. (2015), "Local ground effects in near-field and far-field areas on seismically protected buildings", Soil Dynam. Earthq. Eng., 74 14-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.03.005
  30. Hasan, R., Xu, L. and Grierson, D. (2002), "Push-over analysis for performance-based seismic design", Comput. Struct., 80(31), 2483-2493. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00212-2.
  31. Hsieh, S.H. and Deierlein, G. (1991), "Nonlinear analysis of three-dimensional steel frames with semi-rigid connections", Comput. Struct., 41(5), 995-1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(91)90293-U.
  32. IS-800 (2007), General Construction in Steel-Code of Practice (Third Revision) Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  33. IS-875 (1987), Part 1: DEAD LOADS - UNIT WEIGHTS OF BUILDING MATERIALS AND STORED MATERIALS, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  34. IS-1893 (2016), Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings (Sixth Revision), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  35. Kalkan, E. and Kunnath, S.K. (2006), "Adaptive modal combination procedure for nonlinear static analysis of building structures", J. Struct. Eng. - ASCE. 132(11), 1721-1731. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:11(1721).
  36. Kalkan, E. and Kunnath, S.K. (2006), "Effects of fling step and forward directivity on seismic response of buildings", Earthq. Spectra, 22(2), 367-390. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2192560.
  37. Kalkan, E. and Kunnath, S.K. (2007), "Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of buildings", Eng. Struct., 29(3), 305-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.03.001.
  38. Krolo, P., Causevic, M. and Bulic, M. (2015), "Nonlinear seismic analysis of steel frame with semi-rigid joints", Gradjevinar. 67(6), 573-583. https://doi.org/10.14256/JCE.1139.2014
  39. Kunnath, S.K. and Kalkan, E. (2004), "Evaluation of seismic deformation demands using nonlinear procedures in multistory steel and concrete moment frames", ISET J. Earthq. Technol., 41(1), 159-181. http://home.iitk.ac.in/-vinaykg/Iset445
  40. Lemonis, M. (2018), "Steel moment resisting frames with both joint and beam dissipation zones", J. Constr. Steel Res.. 147 224-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.03.020.
  41. Liu, Y., Xu, L. and Grierson, D.E. (2008), "Compound-element modeling accounting for semi-rigid connections and member plasticity", Eng. Struct., 30(5), 1292-1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.026.
  42. Lui, E. and Lopes, A. (1997), "Dynamic analysis and response of semirigid frames", Eng. Struct., 19(8), 644-654. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(96)00143-5.
  43. Mwafy, A. and Elnashai, A. (2001), "Static pushover versus dynamic collapse analysis of RC buildings", Eng. Struct., 23(5), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00068-7.
  44. Nader, M. and Astaneh, A. (1991), "Dynamic behavior of flexible, semirigid and rigid steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 18(3), 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-974X(91)90024-U.
  45. Pirmoz, A. and Liu, M.M. (2017), "Direct displacement-based seismic design of semi-rigid steel frames", J. Constr. Steel Res., 128 201-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.08.015.
  46. Poursha, M. and Amini, M.A. (2015), "A single-run multi-mode pushover analysis to account for the effect of higher modes in estimating the seismic demands of tall buildings", Bull Earthq. Eng., https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9721-y.
  47. Reyes, J.C. and Kalkan, E. (2012), "How many records should be used in an ASCE/SEI-7 ground motion scaling procedure?", Earthq. Spectra, 28(3), 1223-1242. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000066.
  48. Roldán, R., Sullivan, T. and Della Corte, G. (2016), "Displacement-based design of steel moment resisting frames with partially-restrained beam-to-column joints", Bull. Earthq. Eng., 14(4), 1017-1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9879-6.
  49. SAP2000v21 (2019), "Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and Design", Computers and structures Inc, Berkeley, CA, USA.
  50. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M., Bharti, S. and Datta, T. (2018). "Behavior of semi-rigid frames under seismic excitations", Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, 20-22 December, 2018.
  51. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M., Bharti, S. and Datta, T. (2019), "Seismic energy dissipation in semi-rigid connected steel frames", Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Seismic Isolation, Energy Dissipation and Active Vibration Control of Structures, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
  52. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M.K., Bharti, S.D. and Datta, T.K. (2019). "Sensitivity of lateral load patterns on the performance assessment of semi-rigid frames", Proceedings of the 7th Nirma University International Conference on Engineering (NUiCONE 2019), November 21-22, 2019, Ahmedabad, India, July 3, 2020.
  53. Sharma, V., Shrimali, M.K., Bharti, S.D. and Datta, T.K. (2020), "Behavior of semi-rigid steel frames under near- and far-field earthquakes", Steel Compos.Struct., 34(5), 625-641. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2019.34.5.625
  54. Silva, A.R.D., Batelo, E.A.P., Silveira, R.A.M., Neves, F.A. and Goncalves, P.B. (2018), "On the nonlinear transient analysis of planar steel frames with semi-rigid connections: From fundamentals to algorithms and numerical studies", Latin Am. J. Solids Struct., 15(3), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-78254087.
  55. SP-6-1 (2003), "SP-6-1 Handbook for Structural Engineers -Part-1 Structural Steel Sections".

피인용 문헌

  1. Three-field mixed beam-column finite element for geometric and material nonlinear analysis vol.79, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2021.79.2.211