228 views

Uploaded by Baetu Sergiu

- Comparison of Analysis Techniques for the Seismic Evaluation of A
- Mathcad - AB Design
- The Limitations and Performances of Different Displacement Based Design Methods
- IRJET-The State of the Art on Seismic Isolation of Shear Wall Structure using Elastomeric Isolators
- Nathenson David Isaac.pdf
- ACi Manual
- A Simpflied Approach for the Seismic Analysis of Masonry Structures
- [First Author] 1995 International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts
- Seismic Load
- Han 2002
- 20020104
- Analisis Sísmico y Diseño de Cº en Sistemas de Puentes
- V15N1_art13.pdf
- Properties of Engineering Materias
- FEM DYN TH Analysis CaseStudies I
- Ens : Effective Notch Stress
- 02 Lets Get Prepared
- Design to Plan or to Make Drawings Which is Not Yet Structured
- Case Study of Performace based seismic evaluation
- TSCF_IP_004_2013_HTS

You are on page 1of 5

Mina Naeemi and Majid Bozorg

the brace was not designed for compression and thus allowed

Abstract— In order to dissipate input earthquake energy in the to buckle. Consequently, the hysteretic response of this

Moment Resisting Frame (MRF) and Concentrically Braced Frame structure will be very similar to that of CBF with pinching in

(CBF), inelastic deformation in main structural members, requires the hysteretic loops, which is not a desirable feature for

high expense to repair or replace the damaged structural parts. The

new proposed knee braced frame in which the diagonal brace provide

energy dissipation.

most of the lateral stiffness and the knee anchor that is a secondary

member, provides ductility through flexural yielding. In this case, the II. SAMPLE MODELS OF FRAMES

structural damages caused by an earthquake will be concentrated on In Fig. 1 different types of KBF systems are shown. They

these members, which can be easily replaced by reasonable cost.

are referred to as (a) K-knee braced frame (b) X-knee braced

In this investigation, using non-linear and linear static analysis of

several knee Braced Frames (KBF), the seismic behavior of this frame (c) knee braced frame with single brace and one knee

system is assessed for controlling the vulnerability of the main and element (d) knee braced frame with single brace and with two

the secondary elements. Seismic parameters and mechanism of knee elements.

plastic hinges formation of both frame types are investigated by

using the non-linear analysis.

dissipation.

Fig. 1 Different knee brace frames: (a) K-KBF, (b) X-KBF, (c) KBF

I. INTRODUCTION with single brace and 1KE, (d) KBF with single brace and 2KEs

main criteria. These structures must have adequate

strength and stiffness to control interstory drift in order that

The optimal shape of KBF is selected from the above

systems according to the elastic analysis results of them. And

prevent damage to the structural and non-structural elements the optimal angle of the knee element achieved when the

during moderate but frequent excitations. frame has the maximum stiffness, which the tangential ratio of

Under extreme seismic excitations, the structures must have (b/h)/(B/H) is nearly one, it means that the knee element

sufficient strength and ductility to prevent collapse. MRF and should be parallel to the diagonal direction of the frame, and

CBF have been used as lateral load resisting structural systems the diagonal element passes through the mid point of the knee

in steel buildings, since stiffness and ductility are generally element and the beam-column intersection, as shown in Fig. 2.

two opposing properties, neither of MRF or CBF, alone can

economically fulfill these two criteria.

Although the MRF is good for ductility and the CBF is

good for stiffness, by combining the good features of these

two systems into a hybrid system, an economical seismic- H = 3m

resistant structural system can be obtained. One such system is B = 4m

Eccentric Braced Frame (EBF) proposed by Roeder and

Popov [2].

Recently, Aristizabal Ochoa [3] has proposed an

alternative system, the Knee Braced Frame (KBF). In this

system, the knee element acts as a `ductile fuse` to prevent

collapse of the structure under extreme seismic excitations by

h

dissipating energy through flexural yielding. A diagonal brace = 0.25 → h = 0.75m

with at least one end connected to the knee element provides H

most of the elastic lateral stiffness. In this system, however, B 4 b

= = 1.33, = 1.33 → b = 1.0m

H 3 h

M. Naeemi was with Department of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Fig. 2 The selected shape and dimension of the sample frames

Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran., (e-mail: m.naeemi@dot-corp.com).

M. Bozorg, is with Engineering Department, Tarbiat Modares University,

Tehran, Iran. (Phone: 21-88876283; e-mail: majidcivil2003@yahoo.com).

In this study the framing systems with two equal side spans

4m long are braced and length of the middle span is 5m. The

976

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 50 2009

number of frame stories is selected so that investigates the for more flexible buildings with a fundamental period greater

rigid, semi-rigid, moderate and ductile structures. Therefore than one second; the analysis should be considered addressing

the frames are chosen in four levels 5-story, 10-story, 15- higher mode effects. The higher mode effects maybe

story, and 20-story. For instant, the 5-story frame is shown in determined by loading progressively applied in proportion to a

Fig. 3 mode shape other than the fundamental mode shape.

The step by step procedures are as followed:

1) Create a computer model of the structure and apply

gravity loads. It is necessary to define bilinear model

behavior for each member. (The bilinear models

which represent the plastic joint behavior of

SAP2000 defaults are used for beams and columns in

this paper and the models which relate to plastic joint

behavior of knee and diagonal elements represented

in next section.)

2) Apply lateral story forces to the structure in

proportion to the product of the mass and

fundamental mode shape.

3) Increase the lateral force level until some element (or

a group of elements) yields and revise the model

using zero (or very small) stiffness for the yielding

elements.

4) Apply new increment of lateral load to the revised

Fig. 3 An example of under-study frames structure such that other elements yields and the

structure reaches an ultimate limit, such as: reaching

III. LOADING AND DESIGN the lateral displacement of control point (roof level) a

limit state as defined follow for design earthquake:

The gravity loads include dead and live load of 600kg/m2

∆ m < 0.025h T < 0.7 sec

and 200kg/m2 respectively. To calculate the equivalent static

lateral seismic loads Refer to “(1),” assume that the behavior ∆ m < 0.020h T ≥ 0.7 sec

factor R for Knee-bracing system is 7. Where ∆ m is inelastic displacement of the control point, h

is the story height, and T is the first mode of structure.

V = C.W

5) Record the base shear and the roof-displacement so

A.B.I (1) that create the capacity curve which represents the

C=

R nonlinear behavior of structure.

Where V is the base shear, A is design base acceleration V. FORCE-DISPLACEMENT RELATION OF COMPONENTS

ratio (for very high seismic zone=0.35g), B is response factor Component behavior generally will be modeled using

of building (is depending on the basic period T), and I is the nonlinear load-deformation relations defined by a series of

importance factor of building (is depending on the building straight line segments. Fig. 4 illustrates two kinds of

performance considered 1.0 in this paper). representations which are used for computer modeling that is

All of the frames are designed according to the AISC89, created according to modeling parameters and acceptance

allowable stress design. criteria for nonlinear approach in FEMA273.

The most basic inelastic analysis method is the complete 1.4

Q/Q CE

0.8

nonlinear static analysis procedures. This method uses a series 0.6

of sequential elastic analysis, superimposed to approximate a 0.4

force-displacement capacity diagram of the overall structure.

0.2

The capacity curve is generally constructed to represent the

first mode response of the structure based on the assumption 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

that the fundamental mode of vibration is predominant (a) 0/0y

response of the structure. This is generally valid for buildings

with fundamental periods of vibration up to about one second,

977

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 50 2009

1200

2

1.5 1000

Base Shear(KN)

800

0.5

Stress

600

0

-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 400

-0.5

200

-1

-1.5 0

0 5 10 15 20 25

(b) Strain

(d) Displacem ent(cm )

Fig. 4 Load- deformation relations for (a) a knee element,

BOX180x180x10, (b) a diagonal element, 2UNP100 Fig. 5 Sample frames capacity curves, (a) 5-story, (b) 10-story,

(c) 15-story, (d) 20-story

VI. NONLINEAR ANALYSIS RESULTS

Fig. 5 illustrates the pushover nonlinear results for KBF

system in the form of force-displacement curve of sample VII. ESTIMATION OF SEISMIC PARAMETERS

frames. In order to investigate the seismic performance of sample

frames the seismic parameters such as: ductility, factor of

behavior and formation of plastic hinge can be estimated by

700 using the force-displacement curves and pushover analysis.

600

A. Ductility Effect in reducing strength factor, Rµ

Base Shear(KN)

500

Different relations are proposed to determine this factor, in

400

each relation have been attempted to use most of the seismic

300

effective components, the most comprehensive relation is

200 proposed by Miranda, whereas his proposed equation includes

100 some more effective components such as period of structure,

0

soil properties and earthquake acceleration. Based on

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Miranda’s [10] assumption Rµ is calculated as in (2)

(a) Displacement(cm)

µ −1

(2)

1200

Rµ = +1

1000

φ

1 1 ⎡ 3 ⎤

φ = 1+ exp ⎢− 3 / 2(ln T − ) 2 ⎥ For rock earth

Base Shear(KN)

800 −

10T − µT 2T ⎣ 5 ⎦

600

1 2 ⎡ 1 ⎤

φ = 1+ − exp ⎢− 2(ln T − ) 2 ⎥ For residual soil

400 12T − µT 5T ⎣ 5 ⎦

200 Tg 3Tg ⎡ T 1 2⎤

φ = 1+ − exp ⎢− 3(ln − ) ⎥ For soft soil

0 3T 4T ⎣⎢ Tg 4 ⎦⎥

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

(b) Displacement(cm)

Where µ is ductility, T is period of structure, and Tg is

900

800

dominant period of earthquake.

700 B. Over strength factor, Ω

Base Shear(KN)

600

500

400

such nonlinear static analysis can be used to calculate the Ω

300

factor related to overall yielding of structure as the collapse

200 mechanism V y , to the force in which the first plastic hinge is

100

formed in structure Vs ; therefore the Ω factor can be found

0

0 5 10 15 20 25 Refer to (3).

(c) Displacement(cm) Vy

Ω0 = (3)

Vs

978

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 50 2009

12

10

Ru value

multiplying some coefficient to consider the effect of yielding 6

stress increase by the reason of strain rate increase in an

earthquake, F1 , the difference between nominal and actual

4

Ω = Ω 0 × F1 × F2 × ...

0 5 10 15 20 25

Number of story

The factor of behavior is calculated in two states according to

the method which is used by every code to design structure.

Ru is the factor of behavior based on ultimate limit stresses VIII. THE COMPARISON OF NONLINEAR PERFORMANCE OF

and RW is the factor of behavior based on allowable limit SAMPLE FRAMES

stresses, that the relation between RW and Ru is defined by a Fig. 7 illustrates the plastic hinge formation in one of the

nonlinear analysis step for 5 and 15-story frames of KBF. By

dimensionless parameter Y = RW Ru , which is evaluated

evaluating the results of the KBF system, it can be found that,

around 1.4 to 1.7 (the UBC-97 code has proposed 1.4 for this as the lateral force increases the first plastic hinge forms in a

parameter) the seismic parameters for sample frames are knee element, so that most of the plastic hinge is concentrated

calculated in Table 1. in the knee elements, which is a secondary member of the

KBF system. Therefore most of the structural damages caused

TABLE I by an earthquake will be occurred on the knee element and

SEISMIC PARAMETERS OF KNEE BRACING SAMPLE FRAMES after earthquake the damaged members can be replaced more

Number easily and at reasonable cost.

of stories

5-Story 10- Story 15- Story 20-Story

T(sec) 0.7 1.4 2.3 3.2

V y (KN) 576.2 1013.1 828.4 957.0

Ω0 2.68 2.10 2.18 2.20

Ω 3.10 2.43 2.50 2.50

µ 3.40 2.46 2.70 2.10

φ 1.03 0.81 1.02 1.03

Rµ 3.33 2.80 2.67 2.07

Ru 10.32 6.79 6.67 5.20

Rw 14.45 9.50 9.34 7.28

From the above tables it can be found that for 5-story frame

the Ω factor obtained about 3 and that of 10 to 20-story

frames is about 2 to 2.5. The above values are compatible as

mentioned in reference [10], which is evaluated 3 for short

structures and 2 for tall structures. The displacement limitation

code limits the maximum displacement of structure, for this

reason the Rµ factor for 10 to 20-story frames is smaller than

(a)

that of 5-story frame.

Also the value of Ru versus the height of structure is plotted

in Fig. 6. As it can be found from this figure, the obtained

values of Ru for KB system is more than that of systems such

as Eccentric or Centric Braced Frames, so more ductility is

achieved as it is desired in this paper.

979

World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 50 2009

1986.

[6] Nassar A.A. and Osteraos J.D and Krawinkler H. “seismic design based

on strength and ductility demand”, Proceeding of the Earthquake

Engineering 10th worth Conference, p.5861-5866, 1992.

[7] Thambirajah Balendra, Ming-Tuck Sam, Chih-Young Liaw and Seng-

Lip Lee, “Preliminary studies into the behavior of knee braced frames

subject to seismic loading”, Eng. Struct. 1991, Vol. 13, January.

[8] Thambirajah Balendra, Ming-Tuck Sam, Chih-Young Liaw, “ Diagonal

brace with ductile knee anchor for a seismic steel frame”, Earthquake

Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 19, p. 847-858 (1990).

[9] Thambirajah Balendra, Ming-Tuck Sam, Chih-Young Liaw,

“Earthquake-resistant steel frames with energy dissipating knee

element”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 17, No. 5, p.334-343, 1995.

[10] Miranda,E. and Bertero, V.V., “Evaluation of Strength Reduction

Factors for Earthquake-Resistant Design”, Earthquake Spectra, 1994,

Vol.10, No.2, pp.357-379.

(b)

Fig. 7 Plastic hinge formation in one of nonlinear analysis

steps, for (a) 5-story and (b) 10-story frames

IX. CONCLUSION

1) In the KBF system the diagonal brace provides most of

the elastic lateral stiffness where the beams and columns

are hinge-connected. The knee elements prevent collapse

of the structure under extreme seismic excitations by

dissipating energy through flexural yielding. Since the

cost of repairing the structure is limited to replacing the

knee members only.

2) The area under the force-displacement diagram of the

KBF system shows the energy dissipating capacity.

3) According to the values of ductility effect reducing

strength factor and over strength factor calculated in

tables 1 and 2 for KBF system, it is assumed Rµ = 2.51

and Ω = 2.476 so for the ultimate limit stresses.

REFERENCES

[1] Jinkoo Kim, Youngill Seo, “Seismic design of steel structures with

buckling-restrained knee braces”, Journal of Constructional steel

research 59, p.1477-1497, July 2003.

[2] Roeder, C.W. and Popov, E. P. “Eccentrically braced steel frames for

earthquakes”, J. Structural Div., ASCE 1978, 104, 391-411.

[3] Aristizabal-Ochoa, J. D., “Disposable knee bracing: improvement in

seismic design of steel frames”, J. Structure. Engineering, ASCE, 1986,

112, (7), 1544-1552.

[4] Uang C.M, “Establishing R (or Rw) and Cd factors for building seismic

provision”, J. of Structure. Eng., VOL, 117, No.1, January.

[5] Cosenza E. and Luco A.D. Fealla C. and Mazzolani F.M “On a simple

evaluation of structural coefficients in steel structures”, 8th European

980

- Comparison of Analysis Techniques for the Seismic Evaluation of AUploaded bysancloud
- Mathcad - AB DesignUploaded byAjay Baniya
- The Limitations and Performances of Different Displacement Based Design MethodsUploaded byLekhraj Meena
- IRJET-The State of the Art on Seismic Isolation of Shear Wall Structure using Elastomeric IsolatorsUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Nathenson David Isaac.pdfUploaded bysudharsans88
- ACi ManualUploaded byrashidking
- A Simpflied Approach for the Seismic Analysis of Masonry StructuresUploaded bydmardetk
- [First Author] 1995 International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics AbstractsUploaded bySomasundaram Shanmugam
- Seismic LoadUploaded byVeenoy Dabee
- Han 2002Uploaded bymamandawe
- 20020104Uploaded byRamez Nazir
- Analisis Sísmico y Diseño de Cº en Sistemas de PuentesUploaded byCarlos Omar
- V15N1_art13.pdfUploaded byAshok Karanam
- Properties of Engineering MateriasUploaded bySriram Sastry
- FEM DYN TH Analysis CaseStudies IUploaded byRakesh7770
- Ens : Effective Notch StressUploaded bynima1977
- 02 Lets Get PreparedUploaded bysilent0ne2000
- Design to Plan or to Make Drawings Which is Not Yet StructuredUploaded byyaramouna
- Case Study of Performace based seismic evaluationUploaded byreichmany
- TSCF_IP_004_2013_HTSUploaded byxeyran
- Building 5 Karachi10StoreyOfficeBldg-CorrectedUploaded byHiren Desai
- Anbu Mechanical Properties of Dental MaterialsUploaded byAnbu Ila
- Assesment of Concrete Members Using MC2010Uploaded byMarco Figueiredo
- 2016 IJBRC Official InvitationUploaded byJohn
- treyiUploaded byKiran Koraddi
- Non-Dimensional Design Procedures for Precast Prestressed Concrete Hybrid FramesUploaded byunix0123
- JCE_66_2014_8_1_1073_ENUploaded byDave Thompson
- Low Technology Anti-Seismic System Application for Housing ReconstructionUploaded byHafiz Amirrol
- All ReportsUploaded byleonardomayer4350
- Seismic Design and Response of NPP PipingUploaded bykaruna346

- Monografía Encofrado BimUploaded byluis
- BACE Marketing Presentation FINALUploaded bycarlosfelix81
- pipeline-stress-analysis-with-caesar-II.pdfUploaded byDave M Michael
- 01-17 QCS 2014Uploaded byRaja Ahmed Hassan
- A Method of Damper Control for Corridor Ventilation and Smoke ExtractionUploaded byrasheedillikkal
- Cidb Standard Form of Contract 2000Uploaded bySzeJinTan
- MECANICA REFRIGERACIONUploaded byEduardoPulido
- pdfreportUploaded byapi-143032247
- 3D PDS modelling completion checkUploaded bychandrasekhar71
- Up Transpo NotesUploaded bykattfabon
- 11-Fire Protection SystemUploaded bybianca_torres_8
- LimeMudFiltration Brochure EnUploaded bysanooksanan
- Enviroment Project On Rain Water HarvestingUploaded byShaikh Shoeb
- Acceleration Claims on Eng and Constr ProjectsUploaded bysharfutaj
- TEMPAT SAMPAH HSSIUploaded byBudi Maryanto
- Baltus House - Studio Floor PlansUploaded byChiolo Atix
- Solution to Problem 204 Stress-Strain Diagram _ Strength of Materials ReviewUploaded byimrancenakk
- Water AppendixUploaded byLazaros Ntoanidis
- Architectural Firms 2007Uploaded byjonaviles
- BS EN 00295-4-2013Uploaded byBenediktas Dervinis
- Rinnai Owners Manual R98LSi Tankless Water HeaterUploaded byslohia
- wang shuUploaded byMaria Luciana
- Sturdy Homes Ltd. of Albuquerque New Mexico USA Introduces Affordable Tiny Steel Container Type Houses Along with Modular Customs HousesUploaded byPR.com
- MasterSeal 611 TDSUploaded byRaja Ahmed Hassan
- HYDRILL - 533Uploaded bypither_zurita
- Asco Today v7375r1Uploaded byRossy Rojas
- CSSBI-B15-17-lrUploaded byalbertoxina
- Ch17 ArchesUploaded byErnie Ernie
- Mixer Sidewinder 800Uploaded byFranklin Jose Almera Acosta
- HYD-560Uploaded byBhaskar Reddy