Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Steel Casing
Debonded Gap
Availability/Competitors
Advantages: Advantages:
• Oversized (OVS) holes allow for more erection • Same as Standard Bolted Connection listed
tolerance than single pin connection. above.
• Multiple bolts provide more connection • Significantly fewer bolts and no splice plates to
redundancy and distribute potential gusset plate install resulting in labor reduction.
inelastic bearing deformations when compared to Disadvantages:
single pin connection. • Same as Standard Bolted Connection listed
above.
Disadvantages:
• Larger gusset plates and shorter BRB yield length
when compared to a single pin connection.
• A large quantity of splice plates and bolts is
significantly more labor intensive than single pin
connection.
• Single pin reduces installation costs. When carrying out linear elastic analyses in ETABS, for
example, a non-prismatic frame element may be utilized
Disadvantages: to model a BRB fairly accurately and account for the
• Erection tolerance is very small (1/32”). length adjustments. On the other hand, performing
nonlinear inelastic analyses is not as simple. A non-
All connections meet or exceed the testing criteria of prismatic element may still be utilized, but only if
FEMA 450 and the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions. accompanied by an axial nonlinear hinge. The nonlinear
hinge location and properties can be readily assigned in
Analysis Issues ETABS. These properties could reflect the initial
stiffness, yield strength, as well as post-yield stiffness.
Modeling of conventional Concentric Braced Frames Different input values for tension and compression
(CBF) is relatively straight forward using their tabulated properties could be incorporated into the hinge element
section properties from standard section tabulations. to match the tested nonlinear behavior.
BRBF manufacturers on the other hand, have multiple
pre-tested braces with well defined behavior, design BRBF’s as Potential Yielding Dampers
strengths, and material properties. These BRB’s
normally have yield capacities that range from 100 kip BRBF’s can offer supplemental damping through stable
to 1000 kip. Incorporating such elements into the cyclic yielding of the steel core. A significant amount of
building’s computer model should be handled with energy is dissipated through this phenomenon.
some caution. Geometry, actual core yield lengths, and Considerable equivalent viscous damping can be added
connections should be accurately considered and to the structural system. This puts the BRBF’s in the
accounted for in the mathematical representation. same class as the Added Damping And Stiffness
Typical actual core yield lengths range between one (ADAS) devices.
half to two thirds of the work-point to work-point
lengths depending on the type of connection detail and Being the weakest structural elements and due to their
thus a BRB is physically shorter than its analytical stable yielding potentials, BRBF’s can also serve as
model. This fact makes the BRB significantly stiffer effective damage fuses during the Design Basis
and forces it to undergo higher strains than accounted Earthquake (DBE). Limiting and containing the
for by the design engineer. Furthermore, differences inelastic behavior in BRBF’s allows the conventional
between analytical and physical lengths are not frames to remain essentially elastic. Furthermore,
eliminated even when member offsets are automatically yielding and softening of the BRBs reduces the
assigned to centerline dimensions by the analysis effective period of the structure and thus effectively
software. Such considerable differences need to be reduces the total base shear.
accounted for in the analysis and design of BRB’s and
the connections. Proper sizing of the steel core is an important and
iterative step in designing BRBF’s, in order to attain
Different manufacturers have different connection desired performance. Too large of a core steel area may
details as described earlier. After competitive bidding is limit or even prevent brace yielding at the DBE event
considered and a vendor has been selected, final which increases the design base shear. On the other
revisions to the brace designs are required from the hand, too small of a core steel area may not provide
design engineer. Overlooking this could potentially enough stiffness and toughness for the structure which
compromise original sound designs. Furthermore, and increases the drifts. Therefore, successive iterations of
Figure 11. BRB Different Failure Types
modified stiffnesses may be needed to fine tune the connection beyond the concrete filled HSS confinement
BRBF system for optimum response. occurred in one test. In another test a brittle tear
developed in the beam flange and web propagating
To ensure stable and consistent behavior, the core steel from the gusset plate. In one test of a fully restrained
needs continuous confinement and lateral support. beam column connection the complete joint penetration
Consequently, BRBF’s cannot be spliced. Welded or weld fractured completely. Most failures were located
bolted splices of braces are not allowed in situations in supplementary elements of the BRB frame (beams
where the braces are likely to be subjected to inelastic and columns). Out-of-plane buckling of the connection
demands because that would probably result in was a direct consequence of the configuration of the
undesirable behavior leading to possible brittle fracture. BRB assembly (Figure 11 above).
Therefore, retrofit installation using long and heavy
BRBF braces in functioning buildings is likely to be Star Seismic LLC was the first to develop a proprietary
problematic. connection design that essentially eliminates this
potential problem; a centering HSS collar slides over
the end of the concrete filled HSS confinement
BRBF: Some Questions and Challenges assembly. When loaded, the centering collar restricts
buckling of the BRB connection. Star Seismic LLC has
The UC Berkeley tests illuminated a number of failures shown in a number of tests that their BRB assembly
in BRBF assemblies. Out-of-plane buckling of the does not buckle out-of-plane (Merritt, et al, 2003).
Future research is needed to determine improved design Earthquake of 1994. The existing Nordstrom Topanga
and detailing of gusset plates to avoid stress store is located approximately five miles from the
concentrations that cause fractures in adjacent beams or epicenter of the Northridge earthquake. In the owner’s
columns. Beam column rotation due to frame drift view this event illustrated the value of properly
places great demands on the gusset plate. The gusset designed and constructed structures. Immediately after
plate demands result in significant stress concentrations the 1994 earthquake the Nordstrom store experienced
on the adjacent beams and columns at the termination some relatively minor structural and non-structural
end of the gusset plate. Welding design and quality damage that was repaired in a few weeks. Whereas the
control may mitigate brittle fractures in the beams or adjacent mall structure and surrounding major retail
columns. Further gusset plate research would benefit stores had significant damage that required extensive
the performance of BRBF systems in the future. repairs lasting a number of months.
Geometric Irregularities
The recommendation of a BRBF system did not come 2. One-time LARR approval for BRB pre-
without unique challenges. Since the BRBF is not manufactured assemblies based on ICC-AC238.
recognized or defined in the 2002 Los Angeles Building
Code (LABC), which is based on the 1997 UBC, Los 3. BRBF lateral system design based on 2002
Angeles Department of Building and Safety (LADBS) LABC and FEMA 450.
considered the BRBF system as an “undefined system”.
The process of approvals involved a process called a 4. Braces shall be fabricated in a LADBS licensed
“Request for Modification.” Not only did this involve shop.
review and approval of the project-specific design
criteria by the plan review section of the LADBS, the 5. R=7.0 for proposed pinned beam/column
pre-manufactured BRB assemblies also required connections.
LADBS Engineering Research Section’s “product
approval” (LARR). Over a four month period Seismic Design Criteria
consisting of numerous meetings, letters, submittals,
emails and conversations a final “one-time” project The following seismic design criteria were determined
specific approval was obtained for this project. by a consulting geotechnical engineer:
The design criteria were developed in conformance with SE Soil Type (Soft Clay)
2003 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA 450) that was Ca = 0.36, Cv = 0.96
reviewed and approved by LADBS. Both FEMA 450 Na = 1.0, Nv = 1.0
and the 2002 LABC were the design guidelines for the Near Field: 13km from Santa Susana Fault (Type B)
structure (Note: The 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions
were still in draft form and not used for the design
criteria. However, the more strict design criteria of the ETABS Modeling Criteria & Assumptions
draft version of the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions were • LDP – Linear Dynamic Procedure
used in the design). The approach for obtaining LADBS (Response Spectrum).
approval was to clearly illustrate that a BRBF system is
essentially a CBF system without the undesirable • Use 9 modes to obtain 100% mass participation.
behavior of compression buckling. Another convincing
• Scale response spectrum to 100% CBC static base in area of steel from one size to the next. The
shear using an R = 7.0. incremental jumps in design capacity increase more
when considering slenderness and compact section
• Pinned boundary conditions at column base. requirements of conventional braces. Conventional
brace design can lead to over-designed connections,
• All diaphragms modeled as rigid. beams and columns when a slightly overstressed brace
must be changed to the next larger size. BRB design
• Roof diaphragm later hand checked as flexible. allows the designer to optimize the design without over
sizing the brace. Careful sizing of BRB braces can
• Model only lateral resisting system. result in the desirable behavior of all braces in a floor in
a given direction yielding simultaneously. On the other
• Bounded ETABS modeling to capture 3 different hand, simultaneous yielding of conventional CBF
manufacturer’s BRB properties: manufacturer’s systems is extremely difficult.
material properties & stiffness (yield length and
connection stiffness).
Maximum Adjusted Brace Force in BRB
Layout of BRB: ωβ Py = 312 to 658 kips (@ 2∆bm)
3rd to Roof: 16 BRB’s, 8 Braced Bays (2 each side) (Note: ω and β are strain hardening and compression
2nd to 3rd: 24 BRB’s, 12 Braced Bays (3 each side) over-strength factors from actual tested prototypes and
1st to 2nd: 32 BRB’s, 16 Braced Bays (4 each side) 2∆bm is the elastic brace deformation at twice the
maximum calculated inelastic drift ∆M)
Seismic Design Summary: ε = 0.7% to 1.0% (BRB core strain @ 2∆bm)
Total Building Weight: 15,180 kips Construction Issues
VBASE = 0.129 W = 1,952 kips
T1 = 0.52s (ETABS) The fabrication and erection of a BRBF system is
generally the same as conventional CBF systems. Close
coordination must be maintained between the steel
Analysis Results: Interstory Drift fabricator/erector and the BRB manufacturer. Early
∆M @ Roof = 3.7” (0.57% of Building Height) communication, correspondence and preconstruction
3rd to Roof – 0.75% meetings can minimize detailing and fabrication errors.
2nd to 3rd – 0.52% The BRB assembly cannot be modified after
1st to 2nd – 0.29% production. Therefore, all dimensions and details must
be coordinated prior to BRB production.
Final BRB Required Yield Core Areas
The BRB contract at Nordstrom Topanga was awarded
Redundancy Factor (ρ = 1.08):
to Star Seismic LLC. Star Seismic was a subcontractor
to the steel fabricator. Combining both steel fabrication
Core Steel ASTM A36 Plate and BRB vendor into one contract made the fabricator
Fy = 42 ksi verified by coupon tests responsible for the entire steel structure. There was only
3rd to Roof – 5.5 to 6.5 in2 one significant erection issue that caused some minor
2nd to 3rd – 8.3 to 10.8 in2 delays. The Star Seismic connection is a single pin with
1st to 2nd – 8.6 to 10.8 in2 a 1/32” tolerance.
One significant advantage of BRB design is the ability This tolerance is almost impossible to obtain in steel
to “fine-tune” the brace core. The core is cut from plate fabrication. Some of the gusset plates needed some
so that just about any core area or design capacity can modification to fit up the pin connection. Star Seismic
be specified. HSS or other shapes jump incrementally provided a prompt response to fit-up problems and had
reasonable and effective solutions based on previous Cost Considerations
project experience.
BRB assemblies are costlier than standard HSS or other
structural shapes. However, an R = 7.0 combined with a
higher fundamental mode period results in a reduced
design base shear when compared to OCBF and some
reduction compared to SCBF (based on the current
CBC). The base shear reduction reduces the cost of
collectors, drags, cords, diaphragms and foundations.
This project with its pile foundation benefited from
increased savings due to the BRBF system. Overall, the
bottom line cost for a BRBF system, in this case study,
was essentially the same as a conventional CBF system,
but obviously with a clear performance advantage for
the BRBF.
Conclusions
Figure 13. Typical Gusset Plate Sizes The BRBF system is an elegant and potentially cost
effective solution which avoids the poor buckling
behavior of conventional CBF systems. The system
provides superior ductility, consistent and repeatable
behavior, and has the tested capacity to sustain multiple
major seismic events without significant degradation.
The analysis and design of BRBF systems involves a
few complexities but these are not overly burdensome.
The few cautions, concerns and drawbacks with
BRBF’s listed above should not be deterrents for the
usage of these ductile braces in most projects.
Acknowledgments