國立中興大學土木工程學系

碩士學位論文

SMF與BRBF之分析暨設計實例說明

Analysis and Design of SMF and BRBF

by Using Illustrated Examples

指導教授:呂東苗 Lue, Dung-Myau

研 究 生:張智華 Chang, Chih-Hua

中 華 民 國 一 百 零 七 年 七 月
 Analysis and Design of SMF and BRBF

by Using Illustrated Examples

By
Chang, Chih-Hua

Department of Civil Engineering

College of Engineering

A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE
NATIONAL CHUNG-HSING UNIVERSITY / 2018
 致謝
本文順利完成承蒙恩師呂東苗教授悉心指導，恩師治學的態度
嚴謹與一絲不苟的認真精神讓我受益良多，在學習期間多方面給予
教導與協助，不僅僅是學術上的專業知識，亦包含為人處事的態度
及道理，學生將永遠感佩在心，在此致上學生由衷的敬意與感謝。
在撰寫論文的過程中，多次請教蕭博謙教授，老師總在百忙之
中撥出時間熱心且耐心地給予指導，學生受益良多，由衷的感謝。
口試期間承蒙徐暐亭博士、蕭博謙博士惠予寶貴的意見與觀
念，使本論文之疏漏得以匡正及更完善，在此致上最深的敬意。
研究所求學期間感謝學長姐文瑞、御妏、雅霏在研究方面給寶
貴的建議，我將銘記在心。同時感謝同窗研究所好友佳佑、巧瑜、
靖傑、邱翔、小籃、偉潔、南南、羽雯、國睿、子璿、鈺靜、子
婷、紹遠及學弟妹奕丞、馨儀給予的幫助及建議，我會懷念大家一
起打桌遊的快樂時光，在此一併致上誠摯的謝意。
最後本文獻給我親愛的家人，因為有他們的支持，成為我有力
的後盾，我才能夠順利完成學業。感謝你們，我最愛的家人

i
 摘要
建築以材料可以區分成常見的兩種，分別為鋼構建築物和鋼筋混凝土
建築物，若考慮該建築物是處在地震區上，為提升的建築物的安全性，選
用鋼構當作建築材料就顯得很重要。因為鋼構相對鋼筋混凝土這種複合材
料來說，在結構分析上是屬於可靠度較高的材料，且也是屬於可回收的材
料，在現今綠色建築環保意識下，使用鋼構建築不僅安全且環保。在設計
結構物構件上期許屬於韌性破壞而不是脆性破壞。鋼構材料本身就屬於高
韌性的材料，所以鋼構建築物自身的耐震能力就比鋼筋混凝土結構物來的
好。若在搭配消能器，也可再提升結構物的耐震能力，或是節省梁柱材
料，達到經濟效益。

在該本論文中以ETABS軟體設計與分析兩種鋼構常見的結構系統，分別
是特殊抗彎矩構架建築物 (Special Moment Frame Building, SMF Building)
和挫曲束制斜撐(位移相依型消能器)構架建築物 (Buckling Retrained
Braced Frame Building, BRBF Building)。皆為6層樓的建築物，場址設定在
美國西部洛杉磯。以美國規範ASCE及AISC進行結構物設計，過程詳細敘述
設計一棟建築物的各個步驟，包含設計地震力，豎向分配，建模，分析，
設計結構物各個構件尺寸。最後是檢核各構件，以及結構物的週期，層間
相對位移是否符合規範規定。

現行耐震設計是屬於韌性設計。即是結構物在設計地震力作用之下，
構件會進入非線性。然而因為非線性的反應是以等值線彈性方法得到的結
果，所以具有不確定性，為求結構設計面臨地震時是否會如預期發展其耐
震能力，所以必須再進行側推分析 (Pushover Analysis)。它對理解結構物行
為特徵具有很大的價值。本論文提供 ETABS 側推分析步驟，包含如何設定
塑鉸形式，以及各參數設定方式，最後則是解讀軟體分析結果

ii
 Abstract
The building materials can be divided into two common types: steel buildings
and reinforced concrete buildings. If the building is considered to be in a seismic
zone, steel material is used as construction for evaluating safety of buildings is very
important. Relative to reinforced concrete material, steel is higher reliability in
structural analysis, and it is also a recyclable material. In today’s environmental
protection consciousness gains ground, using steel structures is provided safety and
environmental protection.

In the design of structural members, it is expected to be ductile failure rather than

brittle one. Steel materials themselves are highly ductile materials, so the seismic
resistance of steel buildings is better than reinforced concrete structures. If the
structure is equipped with energy absorbers, it can improve the seismic resistance of
the structure, or reduce the use of construction materials to achieve economic benefits.

In this study, the structural systems of steel structures are designed and analyzed
with ETABS software. Two systems are employed. They are the Special Moment
Frame Building and the Buckling Retrained Braced (Hysteretic type damper) Frame
Building. Two illustrative buildings are six-story buildings which are located in the
Los Angeles, California. The structural design is based on American Specifications,
ASCE and AISC. The process describes in detail the various steps of designing a
building, including seismic forces, vertical distribution, modeling, analysis, and
designing the size of each components of the structure. Finally, checking to see if the
components, the period and story drift of structures are satisfied the Specifications.

The current seismic design is a ductility design method, which means that the
members of structure subjected to design seismic force are yielding. Because the non-
linear behavior of the ductility design method is the result of the equivalent elastic
method, it has uncertainties. In order to see if the structural design will develop its
seismic capability as expected, it is necessary to nonlinear static analysis (pushover
analysis). It has much value in understanding important behavior characteristics of
structure. This study provides steps for pushover by using ETABS, including the
method to set the plastic hinge and various parameters. Finally, the ETABS analysis
results are interpreted.

(ETABS: Extended Three-dimensional Analysis of Building Systems)

Key words: SMF (Seismic Moment Frame), BRBF (Buckling Restrained Braced
Frame)

iii
 Table of Content
致謝.................................................................................................................................i

摘要................................................................................................................................ii

Abstract ........................................................................................................................ iii

Table of Content ...........................................................................................................iv

Figure List ....................................................................................................................vii

Table List ......................................................................................................................xi

Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Preface .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.1 Special moment frame ................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 Buckling restrained braced frame .................................................................. 1

1.2 Objective ............................................................................................................... 2

Chapter 2 SMFs and BRBFs .......................................................................................... 3

2.1 Overview of special moment frames .................................................................... 3

2.1.1 Description of design concept ....................................................................... 3

2.1.2 Advantages and disadvantage of SMRF ........................................................ 3

2.2.3 Damage observations of SMF ....................................................................... 3

2.2 Overview of buckling restrained braced frames ................................................... 4

2.2.1 Description of design concept ....................................................................... 4

2.2.2 Buckling–restrained braces............................................................................ 4

2.2.3 Bracing type for BRBFs ................................................................................ 5

Chapter 3 Design Procedure for SMF ............................................................................ 6

3.1 Determined design base shear (V) and equivalent lateral force (Fx) of building. . 7

3.1.1 The basic information of the building ........................................................... 7

iv
 3.1.2 Base shear (V) ................................................................................................ 9

3.1.3 Equivalent lateral force ................................................................................ 13

3.2 Preliminary design of members in SLRF system ............................................... 14

3.2.1 Design columns in SLRF system................................................................. 16

3.2.2 Design girders in SLRF system ................................................................... 23

3.2.3 Check the moment ratio for SLRF system .................................................. 27

3.3 Design for gravity system ................................................................................... 31

3.3.1 Design columns in gravity system ............................................................... 31

3.3.2 Design girders in gravity system ................................................................. 34

3.4 Check preliminary design ................................................................................... 36

3.4.1 Structure period ........................................................................................... 36

3.4.2 Story drift limitation of design code ............................................................ 38

3.4.3 Design check with ETABS .......................................................................... 39

3.5 Reselect the sections of all member to satisfy the Specification ........................ 41

Chapter 4 Design Procedure for BRBF ....................................................................... 48

4.1 Determined design base shear (V) and equivalent lateral force(Fx) of building. 49

4.1.1 The basic information of the building ......................................................... 49

4.1.2 Base shear (V) .............................................................................................. 51

4.1.3 Vertical distribution of seismic forces ......................................................... 53

4.2 Preliminary design of members in SLRF system ............................................... 54

4.2.1 Design BRB ................................................................................................. 55

4.2.2 Design columns in SLRF system................................................................. 58

4.2.3 Design girders in LRFS system ................................................................... 62

4.3 Design for gravity system ................................................................................... 67

v
 4.3.1 Design columns in gravity frame system .................................................... 67

4.3.2 Design girders in gravity system ................................................................. 70

4.4 Check preliminary design ................................................................................... 72

4.4.1 Structure period and mode shape of first to five mode................................ 72

4.4.2 Story drift limitation of design code ............................................................ 75

4.4.3 Design check with ETABS .......................................................................... 76

4.5 Reselect the sections of all members to satisfy the Specification....................... 76

Chapter 5 Nonlinear Static Analysis – Pushover ......................................................... 79

5.1.1 Plastic hinge and location for SMF ............................................................. 79

5.1.2 Pushover curve of SMF building ................................................................. 80

5.1.3 Plastic hinges distribution for SMF ............................................................. 83

5.1.4 Platic hinge response for SMF..................................................................... 88

5.2.1 Plastic hinge and location for BRBF ........................................................... 90

5.2.2 Pushover curve of BRBF building............................................................... 91

5.2.3 Plastic hinges distribution for BRBF ........................................................... 94

5.2.4 Platic hinge response for BRBF .................................................................. 99

Chapter 6 Conclusions ............................................................................................... 102

References .................................................................................................................. 104

vi
 Figure List
Figure 2.1 SMF / Special Moment Frame ..................................................................... 3

Figure 2.2 BRB / Buckling Restrained Brace ................................................................ 4

Figure 2.3 Section A - A of BRB.................................................................................... 4

Figure 2.4 Bracing type.................................................................................................. 5

Figure 3.1 Schematic model of the SMF building ......................................................... 8

Figure 3.2 Typical plan layout of the SMF building ...................................................... 8

Figure 3.3 Risk category of building (Table 1.5-1 / ASCE7-10) ................................... 9

Figure 3.4 Importance factor (I) (Table 1.5-2 / ASCE7-10) .......................................... 9

Figure 3.5 Site coefficients from USGS. ..................................................................... 10

Figure 3.6 Design response spectrum of LA from USGS. ........................................... 10

Figure 3.7 Long-period transition period (Figure 22-12 / ASCE 7-10) ....................... 11

Figure 3.8 Response modification coefficient (Table12.2-1 / ASCE 7-10) ................. 11

Figure 3.9 Values of approximate period parameters .................................................. 12

Figure 3.10 Equivalent lateral force of base shear ....................................................... 13

Figure 3.11 Top view of the building ........................................................................... 15

Figure 3.12 Pu of columns ........................................................................................... 16

Figure 3.13 Mux (about strong axis) of columns ..................................................................... 17

Figure 3.14 Muy (about weak axis) of columns ...................................................................... 17

Figure 3.15 Pu of columns ........................................................................................... 19

Figure 3.16 Mux (about strong axis) of columns ..................................................................... 19

Figure 3.17 Muy (about strong axis) of columns ..................................................................... 20

Figure 3.19 Shear force of girders of SMF-1 ............................................................... 25

Figure 3.20 Shear force of girders of SMF-2 ............................................................... 26

Figure 3.21 M*pb ........................................................................................................... 28

vii
Figure 3.22 M*pc ........................................................................................................... 28

Figure 3.23 Column in gravity system ......................................................................... 31

Figure 3.24 Axial force of columns in Line-1.............................................................. 32

Figure 3.25 Axial force of columns in Line-4.............................................................. 33

Figure 3.26 Girders of gravity system ......................................................................... 34

Figure 3.27 Mux of column under load combination .................................................... 35

Figure 3.28 Coefficient for upper limit on calculated period ...................................... 37

Figure 3.29 Allowable story drift (ASCE 7-10 / Table 12.12-1) ................................. 38

Figure 3.30 Design check with ETABS ....................................................................... 40

Figure 3.31 SMF-1 in SLRF system ............................................................................ 42

Figure 3.32 SMF-2 in SLRF system ............................................................................ 43

Figure 3.33 SMF structure - 1st Mode shape and period.............................................. 44

Figure 3.34 SMF structure - 2nd Mode shape and period ............................................. 44

Figure 3.35 SMF structure - 3rd Mode shape and period ............................................. 45

Figure 3.36 SMF structure - 4th Mode shape and period ............................................. 45

Figure 3.37 SMF structure - 5th Mode shape and period ............................................. 46

Figure 3.38 Design check by ETABS .......................................................................... 47

Figure 4.1 Schematic model of the BRBF building ..................................................... 49

Figure 4.2 Configurations BRBs in line 1 (line 1 and line 5 are symmetric) .............. 50

Figure 4.3 Configurations BRBs in line A (line A and line E are symmetric) ............. 50

Figure 4.4 Typical plan layout of the BRBF building.................................................. 51

Figure 4.5 Response modification coefficient (Table12.2-1 / ASCE 7-10) ................. 51

Figure 4.6 Lateral force of base shear .......................................................................... 53

Figure 4.7 Axial force of BRB ..................................................................................... 56

Figure 4.8 Axial force of columns ............................................................................... 58

Figure 4.9 Beam with unbalance loads ........................................................................ 62

viii
Figure 4.10 Column of gravity system ........................................................................ 67

Figure 4.11 Axial force in Line-1 ................................................................................. 68

Figure 4.12 Axial force in Line-2 ................................................................................ 68

Figure 4.13 Girders of gravity system ......................................................................... 70

Figure 4.14 Bending moment of girders under load combination ............................... 70

Figure 4.15 BRBF structure - 1st Mode shape and period ........................................... 73

Figure 4.16 BRBF structure – 2nd Mode shape and period .......................................... 73

Figure 4.17 BRBF structure – 3rd Mode shape and period .......................................... 74

Figure 4.18 BRBF structure – 4th Mode shape and period .......................................... 74

Figure 4.19 BRBF structure – 5th Mode shape and period .......................................... 75

Figure 4.20 BRBF model design check with ETABS .................................................. 76

Figure 4.21 Members in Line-1 (line-1 and line-5 are symmetric) ............................. 77

Figure 4.22 Members in Line-A (line-A and line-F are symmetric) ............................ 78

Figure 4.23 Members in gravity system ...................................................................... 78

Figure 5.1 Plastic hinge of MRF .................................................................................. 79

Figure 5.2 MRF building - Pushover curves of diagonal direction ............................. 81

Figure 5.3 MRF building - Pushover curve in x direction ........................................... 82

Figure 5.4 MRF building - Pushover curve in y direction ........................................... 82

Figure 5.5 Pushover X - Step 3 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) .......... 83

Figure 5.6 Pushover Y - Step 3 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) .......... 84

Figure 5.7 Pushover X - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-1) .......... 84

Figure 5.8 Pushover X - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) .......... 85

Figure 5.9 Pushover Y - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-1) .......... 85

Figure 5.10 Pushover Y - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) ........ 86

Figure 5.11 Pushover X - Step 7 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) ........ 86

Figure 5.12 Pushover Y - Step 7- Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2) ......... 87
ix
Figure 5.13 Force – Displacement diagram ................................................................. 88

Figure 5.14 Pushover X - Platic hinge response of the member (SMF-2) ................... 89

Figure 5.15 Pushover Y - Platic hinge response of the member (SMF-2) ................... 89

Figure 5.16 Plastic hinge of BRBF .............................................................................. 90

Figure 5.17 BRBF building - Pushover curves of diagonal direction .......................... 93

Figure 5.18 BRBF building - Pushover curve in x direction ....................................... 93

Figure 5.19 BRBF building - Pushover curve in y direction ....................................... 94

Figure 5.20 Pushover X - Step 1 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram ....................... 95

Figure 5.21 Pushover Y - Step 1 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram ....................... 95

Figure 5.22 Pushover X - Step 2 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram ....................... 96

Figure 5.23 Pushover Y - Step 2 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram ....................... 96

Figure 5.24 Pushover X - Step 5 -Plastic hinges distribution diagram ........................ 97

Figure 5.25 Pushover Y - Step 4-Plastic hinges distribution diagram ......................... 97

Figure 5.26 Pushover X - Step 8-Plastic hinges distribution diagram ......................... 98

Figure 5.27 Pushover Y - Step 9-Plastic hinges distribution diagram ......................... 98

Figure 5.28 Pushover X – Platic hinge response of the column (first story) ............... 99

Figure 5.29 Pushover X – Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story) ................. 100

Figure 5.30 Pushover Y – Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story) ................. 100

Figure 5.31 Pushover Y – Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story) ................. 101

x
 Table List
Table 3.1 Require force of columns of SMF-1 ............................................................ 18

Table 3.2 Require force of columns of SMF-2 ............................................................ 20

Table 3.4 SMF-Shear force with ETABS and sections of girders................................ 26

Table 3.5 Sections of SMF-1........................................................................................ 29

Table 3.6 Moment ratio of SMF-1 ............................................................................... 29

Table 3.7 Sections of columns and girders .................................................................. 30

Table 3.8 Moment ratio of SMF-2 ............................................................................... 30

Table 3.9 Maximum axil force (Pu) of column. ........................................................... 32

Table 3.10 Period of 1st to 5th modes............................................................................ 37

Table 3.11 Max drift of preliminary design ................................................................. 39

Table 3.12 Stress ratio of preliminary design of SMF ................................................. 40

Table 3.13 Stress ratio of preliminary design of gravity system .................................. 40

Table 3.14 Final sections of all members ..................................................................... 42

Table 3.15 Period of 1st to 5th mode shapes ................................................................. 43

Table 3.16 Modal participating mass ratios ................................................................. 43

Table 3.17 Max drift of final design ............................................................................ 46

Table 3.18 Stress ratio of final sections ....................................................................... 47

Table 4.1 Axial force of BRB....................................................................................... 56

Table 4.2 Pu and Section of BRB ................................................................................. 58

Table 4.3 Width to thickness ratio ................................................................................ 61

Table 4.4 Maximum axil load (Pu) of column. ............................................................ 68

Table 4.5 Period of 1st to 5th modes.............................................................................. 72

Table 4.6 Max drift....................................................................................................... 75

Table 4.7 Final sections of all members and result ...................................................... 77

xi
Table 5.1 SMF building - Yielding point of pushover curve ....................................... 80

Table 5.2 MRF building - Pushover curve data in x direction ..................................... 81

Table 5.3 MRF building - Pushover curve data in y direction ..................................... 81

Table 5.4 BRBF building - Yielding point of pushover curve ..................................... 91

Table 5.5 BRBF building - Pushover curve data in x direction ................................... 92

Table 5.6 BRBF building - Pushover curve data in y direction ................................... 92

xii
 Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Preface

1.1.1 Special moment frame

Steel moment frame have been in use for more than one hundred years, but the
concept of a steel special moment frame is a relatively recent development in the
building code in 1988. Following the 1994 Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles,
engineers discovered that special moment frame structure had experienced brittle
fracture of their welded beam-to-column connections. Research conducted by the
SAC Joint Venture, published in the FEMA 350, 351, 352, 353, and 355 series of
reports, underpins current requirement for steel SMF design.

FEMA-350 [8], provides the alternative performance-based design criteria.

FEMA-351 [9], provides the method to evaluate the performance of existing steel
SMF buildings. FEMA-352 [10], provides recommendations for performing
inspections to detect damage in steel SMF (Special Moment Frame) buildings
following an earthquake. FEMA-353 [11], provides recommended specifications for
the fabrication and erection of steel moment frames for seismic applications. FEMA-
355 [12] - [17], the effect of various welding parameters on these properties, and the
effectiveness of various inspection methodologies in characterizing the quality of
welded construction.

(FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency)

1.1.2 Buckling restrained braced frame

Tremblay [21] and Krawinkler [18] present that the poor performance of bracing
structures suffered from 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Next year, Hyogo–Knabv Earth
occurred, Architectural Institute of Japan [6], Hisatoku [24] and Tremblay [22]
increased the concerns about the ultimate deformation capacity.

Tang and Goel [25] presents braces often have energy dissipation capacity or
limited ductility under cyclic load. Xie [23] made a bracing system made of a flat
metal plate with a layer of reinforced concrete by reducing the friction between them.
Kimura et al. [20] tested on braces encased by mortar-infilled steel tubes. The tube
filled with mortar showed its effectiveness against core buckling. Iwata [20]
investigated the periodic performance of some antibuckling braces available in Japan.
Three large braces were tested at the University of UC Berkeley to help design and

1
build a structure with BRB (Buckling Restrained Brace).

After a series of related studies and verifications, AISC 341 provides BRBF
(Buckling Restrained Brace Frame) design specifications. Design structures with
modify coefficient as 8. There are still many researches on BRB, such as debonding
material and connection to gusset plate.

1.2 Objective

Many countries around the world are on the seismic zone and we cannot avoid it,
including Taiwan. Under the existing analysis capabilities, it is important to choose a
steel structure with high reliability as a building material in order to ensure that the
structure design satisfies the requirements and safety. It is hoped that this will enhance
the understanding of steel structures.

This study provides a detailed design flow chart, including the SMF (Special
Moment Frame) structural system and the BRBF (Buckling Retrained Braced Frame)
structural system. The two structural systems will be chosen because the SMF is the
most common type of structures and the BRBF is also chosen because there is the
capability to produce good quality of BRB energy absorbers in Taiwan.

The study includes pushover analysis. Seismic design estimates how ductile the
structure is. Through the pushover analysis, we can evaluate whether the structure
meets the requires and goals of designer.

The objective of this study is to provide a practicing engineer a detailed analysis

and design of seismic steel structures.

2
 Chapter 2 SMFs and BRBFs

2.1 Overview of special moment frames

2.1.1 Description of design concept

SMF (Figure 2.1) designed in accordance with AISC 341-10 are expected to
provide significant inelastic deformation capacity through flexural yielding of the
SMF beams and limited yielding of column panel zones. Except where otherwise
permitted in the manual, columns shall be designed to be stronger than the fully
yielded and strain hardened beams or girders. Flexural yielding of columns at the base
is permitted.

2.1.2 Advantages and disadvantage of SMRF

Advantages of SMRF are architectural versatility and high ductility. Conversely

disadvantage is low elastic stiffness.

2.2.3 Damage observations of SMF

A large number of steel moment frame buildings suffered connection damage,

such as fracture of groove weld which is belong to brittle fracture. In order to make
sure SMF provide inelastic deformation to effectively develop ductility, the weld
quality and material are very important.

Beam
(Flexural yielding)

Column
(Flexural yielding)

Panel Zone
(Shear yielding )

Figure 2.1 SMF / Special Moment Frame

3
2.2 Overview of buckling restrained braced frames

2.2.1 Description of design concept

BRBF (Figure 2.2-2.4) designed in accordance with these provisions are

expected to provide significant inelastic deformation capacity primarily through brace
yielding in tension and compression, and it combines high stiffness with high
ductility. Beams, columns and buckling –restrained braces arranged to form a vertical
truss resist lateral earthquake force by truss action. It is expected to develop ductility
though inelastic action.

2.2.2 Buckling–restrained braces

Buckling–restrained brace contains casting and steel core. There is a debonding

material between casting and steel core to make the steel to resist entire axial force.

Casting

+
Steel Core

Figure 2.2 BRB / Buckling Restrained Brace

Steel Core

Casting
Steel Core
Steel jacket

Mortar
Debonding Material

Figure 2.3 Section A - A of BRB

4
2.2.3 Bracing type for BRBFs

(1) Single Diagonal

(2) Inverted V-Bracing

(3) V-Bracing

(4) Two Story X-Bracing

＊ No X-Bracing

(1) Single Diagonal (2) Inverted V-Bracing

(3) V-Bracing (4) Two Story X-Bracing

Figure 2.4 Bracing type

5
 Chapter 3 Design Procedure for SMF
In this Chapter, desing a SMF builing is based on ASCE 7-10 and AISC 341-10,
and the procedure is shown as below.

Design Spectrum
Equivalent Lateral
Force
Design Base Shear

ETABS Modeling

Linear Static
Analysis

Design SLRF System

Preliminary Design
Design Gravity System

Linear Static
Analysis
Check Capacity Ratio

Check Structure Period

Design Check and Mode shape

Check Story Drift

NG OK

Reselect Member Final Design

Design Flow Chart for Steel Frame with SMRF

6
3.1 Determined design base shear (V) and equivalent lateral force
(Fx) of building.

Calculate base shear of structure by Design Response Spectrum based on ASCE

7-10, and then get shear force of every story with vertical distribution method.

I , R ,Ta
Design Base Shear

Design Spectrum

ASCE 7-10
Equivalent Lateral
Force USGS

Design Flow Chart for design base shear and equivalent lateral force

3.1.1 The basic information of the building

Structure configuration is separated to two systems, SLRF system and gravity

system. Configuration of SMFs of the building are be highlighted in Figure 3.2，and
all other members are belong to gravity system.

(1) Location: Los Angle (34.0438ºN, 118.2656ºW)

(2) Site soil: D (stiff soil)
(3) Structure scale: six-story building with five bays in x axis and four
(4) bays in y axis
(5) Story height: 1st story: 13 ft., other stories: 13 ft.
(6) Length of per bay: X-direction: 20 ft.
Y-direction: 20 ft.
(7) Structure category: business building
(8) Type of structure: Steel SMRF (Special Moment Resisting Frame)
(9) Load: DL (Dead Load): 100 psf
LL (Live Load): 50 psf
EQ (Earth Quake): according to ASCE7-10

7
Figure 3.1 Schematic model of the SMF building

Figure 3.2 Typical plan layout of the SMF building

8
3.1.2 Base shear (V)

(1) Classify Risk Category (Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, Ⅳ) according to Table1.5-1 (ASCE7-10).

The structure is a business building, so the Risk Category is classified as Category
Ⅱ.

Figure 3.3 Risk category of building (Table 1.5-1 / ASCE7-10)

(2) Determine the importance factor (I).

According to Table 1.5-2 from ASCE7-10, the structure is an office building,

thus I = 1.0.

Figure 3.4 Importance factor (I) (Table 1.5-2 / ASCE7-10)

9
(3) The design response spectrum is given as below by USGS.

S D1 0.811g
T0  0.2   0.2   0.105461 (s)
S DS 1.538g
S D1 0.811g (ASCE 7-10 / Section 11.4.5)
Ts    0.527308(s)
S DS 1.538g
TL  Long  Period transition period (s)  8 (s)

(USGS: U.S. Geological Survey)

Figure 3.5 Site coefficients from USGS.

Figure 3.6 Design response spectrum of LA from USGS.

10
 Figure 3.7 Long-period transition period (Figure 22-12 / ASCE 7-10)

(4) Response modification coefficient

According to ASCE7-10, Table 12.2-1, response modification coefficient, R = 8

is obtained because of the SLRF system as SMF (Special Moment Frames).

Figure 3.8 Response modification coefficient (Table12.2-1 / ASCE 7-10)

11
(5) The approximate fundamental period of the structure Ta (s)

Ta  Ct  hnx  0.028 780.8  0.91376 (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-7)

Table 12.8-2 Values of approximate period parameters Ct and x

Figure 3.9 Values of approximate period parameters

(6) Seismic Base Shear

V  CS  W (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-1)

S DS 1.538
CS    0.19225 (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-2)
R I e  8 1

Check the requirements based on Equations as given on ASCE 7-10:

S D1
1. Cs  for T  TL
TR / I 
S D1 0.811
 CS  0.19225    0.1109
TR / I  0.913768 1
 So CS  0.1109

(ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-3)

2. Cs shall not less than CS  0.044S DS I e  0.01
(ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-4)
 0.1109  0.044  1.538  1  0.067672..........OK

3. If S1  0.6 g , CS shall not less thanCs = 0.5S1 / ( R/I e )

 0.1109  0.5 0.811/8/1  0.05068.............OK

 C S  0.1109
 W  DL  (Area of all floors)
 100 20  20  5  4  6 / 1000  4800 kips
 V  0.1109 4800  532.32 kips

12
3.1.3 Equivalent lateral force

Each structure shall be analyzed for the effects of static lateral forces applied
independently in each of two orthogonal directions. In this study, using vertical
distribution method for equivalent lateral forces induced at any level. The method
refers to Specification, ASCE 7-10, and the equations and steps is shown as below.

Fx  Cvx  V (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-11)

W x  h xk
C vx  n
(ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-12)

i 1
Wi  hik

Ta  0.5  k  1 
Wx  hxk  
 C vx  n
 Ta  2.5  k  2 

i 1
Wi  hik T  0.91376 k  1.20688 by interpolation
 a



C v1  0.0356 C v 2  0.0822 Cv 3  0.1341


C v 4  0.1898 Cv 5  0.2485 C v 6  0.3097
 F1  18.964 (kips) F2  43.776 (kips) F3  71.409 (kips)

 F4  101.051 (kips) F5  132.281 (kips) F6  164.839 (kips)

F6 = 164.839

F5 = 132.281

F4 = 101.051

F3 = 71.409

F2 = 43.776

F1 = 18.964

V = 532.32 (kips)

Figure 3.10 Equivalent lateral force of base shear

13
3.2 Preliminary design of members in SLRF system

ETABS Modeling

Linear Static Analysis Vertical Distribution Lateral Force

Pu , Mu

Preliminary Design

Column Design

Design Members in
SLRF System

Beam Design
Design Members in
Gravity System

Design Flow Chart for members of SMF in SLRF system

First modeling with ETABS, and entering parameters mentioned about on

section 3.1, including equivalent lateral force. Finished above all, the final step is
linear static analysis, which provides the force of every member. And then every
member is designed according to it.

Buildings and other structures shall be designed using the provisions of either
Section 2.3 or 2.4 of ASCE 7-10. This design case is designed using load
combinations provided by ETABS as below. Except for them, it can be entered
more combinations which you concern about.

From the results of linear static analysis, it can get controlled load
combination for every member from design check. The analysis results of
controlled load combination provide the require forces of members, the axial
force, moment and shear force. Section of columns and girders are selected based
on the require forces, and this chapter describes each designing procedure of
members one by one.
14
 Load Combinations by ETABS (2016):

DStlS1: 1.4DL
DStlS2: 1.2DL+1.6LL
DStlS3: 1.5076DL+1.0LL+1.0EQX
DStlS4: 1.5076DL+1.0LL1.0EQX
DStlS5: 1.5076DL+1.0LL+1.0EQY
DStlS6: 1.5076DL+1.0LL1.0EQY
DStlS7: 0.5924DL+1.0EQX
DStlS8: 0.5924DL1.0EQX
DStlS9: 0.5924DL+1.0EQY
DStlS10: 0.5924DL1.0EQY

In this model, there are two kinds of SMFs in SLRF system (Figure 3.11), which
are three bay SMF (named SMF-1) and one bay SMF (named SMF-2) respectively.
The numbers and configurations of SMFs are symmetric in each of two orthogonal
directions, and there are a pair of SMF-1 and SMF-2 in each direction to resist the
lateral force, shown as Figure 3.11.

Figure 3.11 Top view of the building

15
3.2.1 Design columns in SLRF system

In practice, selecting the same section of column for every three stories is much
more convenient for the purpose of design and construction, because the length of
shape steel member is about three stories high.

Tending to be conservative, the stress ratio of column of preliminary design is

estimated as 0.6. Using the method, equivalent axial load, to select sections of
columns to resist both moments and axial load.

Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu

The term m is the factor given in Table 3-2 of the second edition of the Manual
of Load and Resistance factor design published in 1994. The term u is assumed equal
to 2.

(1) SMF-1

Controlled load combination: DStlS4: 1.5076DL+1.0LL1.0EQX

Figure 3.12 Pu of columns

16
Figure 3.13 Mux (about strong axis) of columns

Figure 3.14 Muy (about weak axis) of columns

17
 Table 3.1 Require force of columns of SMF-1

SMF-1
Exterior Column Interior Column
Story Pu Mx My Pu Mx My
(kips) (kips-in) (kips-in) (kips) (kips-in) (kips-in)
1 351.954 280.178 11.652 258.818 302.263 11.358
4 160.439 133.206 22.436 127.447 169.747 22.377

φcPn (by interpolation, 2011 AISC Manual / Table 4-1)

 Exterior column of first story:
 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 451.954  280.178 1.9  11.652 1.9  2  886.35 (kips)
 Conservative  886.35/0.6 1547.616
 W14 132  c Pn  1651 (kips)
 Exterior column of fourth story:
 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 160.439  133.206 1.9  22.436 1.9  2  498.787 (kips)
 Conservative  831.312/0.6  831.312
 W14  74  c Pn  866.75 (kips)
 Interior column of first story:
 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 258.818  302.263 1.9  11.358 1.9  2  876.2781 (kips)
 Conservative  876.2781/0.6  1460.463
 W14132  c Pn  1651 (kips)
 Interior column of fourth story:
 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 127.447  169.7471.9  22.3771.9  2  535 (kips)
 Conservative  535/0.6  891.665

 W14 82  c Pn  957.4 (kips)

18
(2) SMF-2
Controlled load combination: DStlS4: 1.5076DL+1.0LL-1.0EQX

Figure 3.15 Pu of columns

Figure 3.16 Mux (about strong axis) of columns

19
 Figure 3.17 Muy (about strong axis) of columns

Table 3.2 Require force of columns of SMF-2

SMF-2
Column
Story Pu (kips) Mx (kips-in) My (kips-in)
1 504.69 302.2156 1
4 279.376 170.453 1.28

φcPn (by interpolation, 2011 AISC Manual / Table 4-1)

 Column of first story:

 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 504.69  302.216 1.9  11.9  2  1082.7 (kips)
 Conservative  1082.7/0.6  18.405
 W14 145  c Pn  1831 (kips)

20
 Column of fourth story:
 KL  8.45  m  1.9 (by interpolation method)
u 2
 Pueq  Pu  M ux m  M uy mu
 279.376  170.453 1.9  1.28  1.9  2  608.1 (kips)
 Conservative  608.1/0.6  1013.5
 W12  96  c Pn  1171 (kips)

(3) Check:

a. Width to thickness ratio

Beam and column members in SLRF system shall satisfy the requirements of
Section D1.1 for highly ductile members, unless otherwise qualified by tests.
Highly ductile member provides more stringent requirement for width to thickness
ratio to fully prevent the member from local buckling.

(AISC 314-10 / Section 9.1-38)

Figure 3.18

 hd  0.3 E Fy  7.2249
 W14  132    7.15  7.2249  seismic compact section
W14  74    6.41  7.2249  seismic compact section
W14  82    5.92  7.2249  seismic compact section
W14  145    7.11  7.2249  seismic compact section
W12  96    6.76  7.2249  seismic compact section

21
b. Stress ratio

Pr Pc  2.0  pPr  bx M rx  by M ry  1.0

 
Pr Pc  2.0 1 2 pPr  9 8 bx M rx  by M ry  1.0
(Part 6 / 2011 AISC Design Manal)
Pr = Pu (Analysis with ETABS)
(Pc by Interpolation / Table 4-1 / 2011 AISC Design Manal)
(p , bx , by by Interpolation / Table 6-1 / 2011 AISC Design Manal)

 Exterior column of first story : W14132 (SMF-1)

 Pr Pc  351.954 1651 0.213  0.2

 Pr Pc  2.0  pPr  bx M rx  by M ry  1.0
 0.614482 351.954  1.01 280.178 2.1 11.652
 0.523718 1.0  OK!

 Exterior column of fourth story : W1474(SMF-1)

 Pr Pc  160.439 866.75 0.185  0.2

 
 1 2 pPr  9 8 bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0
 1 2 1.153 160.439  9 8  1.8845 133.206  22.436
 0.523  1.0  OK!

 Interior column of first story : W14132 (SMF-1)

 Pr Pc  258.818 1651 0.157  0.2

 1 2 pPr  9 8 b x M rx  b y M ry  1.0
 1 2 0.614  258.818  9 8 1.01 302.263 2.1 11.538
 0.449  1.0  OK!
 Interior column of fourth story: W1482 (SMF-1)

 Pr Pc  127.447 957.4  0.133  0.2


 1 2 pPr  9 8 b x M rx  b y M ry  1.0 
 1 2 1.043  127.4479  9 8  1.71  169.747 5.29  22.377
 0.633  1.0  OK!

 Column of first story: W14145 (SMF-2)

 Pr Pc  504.36 1831 0.276  0.2

 Pr Pc  2.0  pPr  b x M rx  b y M ry  1.0
 0.554  504.69  0.554  302.21  1.78  1
 0.557  1.0  OK!

22
  Column of fourth story: W1296 (SMF-2)

 Pr Pc  279.376 1171  0.239  0.2

 Pr Pc  2.0  pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0
 0.838 279.376  1.61 170.453  3.51 1.28
 0.513  1.0  OK!

3.2.2 Design girders in SLRF system

Girders of SMFs resist lateral force through moment strength and flexural
yielding, so it is designed by flexure force. The maximum moment usually
appears at the both end of girder.

I estimate the stress ratio as about 0.7 for girder, which is higher than stress
ratio of column to meet strong column-weak girder. Section 3.2.1 shows the
column is selected as the same section for every three stories, so I select the same
section of girder for every three stories to coordinates with column. Get require
force, bending moment from the results of linear static analysis. (Figure 3.13 and
3.16).

Selecting compact section, which lateral buckling will not occur if the
compression flange of member is braced laterally or if twisting of the girder is
prevented at frequent intervals.

The controlled load combination of girder is DStlS4, 1.5076DL+1.0LL-

1.0EQX.

p  compact  M n  M p

E 29000
  pf  0.38  0.38  9.15 (P.16.1-49 / 2005 AISC Design Manual)
Fy 50

 b M px  M u (2011 AISC Design Manual / Table 3-2)

Standard America practice for building has been to limit service live-load
deflection to approximate 1/360 of span length. This deflection is supposedly
the largest value that ceiling joists ca deflect without cracks in underlying
plaster.

  5wL4 384EI   Span 360

23
(1) SMF-1:
w: considering of 0.25 floor area support by the girder
w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2  100  1.6  50  0.25  20 / 1000  1 k/ft
  5  1 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360
4

 I  186.2 (in 4 )
1st Story:
M u  267.307 0.7  381.867
 W16  57  I  758  186.2
 M n  394  381.867 k - in
4th Story:
M u  176.657 0.7  252.3
 W16  40  I  518  186.2
 M n  270  252.3 k - in
(2) SMF-2:
w: considering of 0.5 floor area support by the girder
w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2  100  1.6  50  0.5  20 / 1000  2 k/ft
  5  2 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360
4

 I  372.4 (in 4 )
1st Story:
M u  261.499 0.7  373.57
 W16  57  I  758  186.2
 M n  394  373.57 k - in
4th Story:
M u  180.933 0.7  258.475
 W16  40  I  518  186.2
 M n  270  258.475 k - in

Table 3.3 SMF -Maximum bending moment of girders

SMF-1 SMF-2
Story Mux (about strong axis ) (k-ft) Mux (about strong axis ) (k-ft)
1 267.307 261.499
2 238.836 239.86
3 215.75 217.197
4 176.657 180.933
5 124.75 133.652
6 67.296 76.3817

24
(3) Check:
a. Beam and column members shall satisfy the requirements of Section
D1.1 for highly ductile members.

 hd  0.3 E Fy  7.2249
 W16  57    4.98  7.2249  seismic compact section
W16  40    6.93  7.2249  seismic compact section

b. Highly ductile beam members shall have a maximum spacing of

Lb = 0.086ryE/Fy.

 W16  57  Lb  0.0861.6  29000 50 / 12  6.65 ft

W16  40  Lb  0.0861.57  29000 50 / 12  6.526 ft

 The girder is 20 ft long, so it is necessary to be braced by four beams

to satisfy the requirement of maximum spacing.

c. check shear strength of the girders

The nominal shear strength, Vn, of unstiffened or stiffened webs,
according to the limit states of shear yielding and shear buckling, is
(2011 AISC Design Manual / G2 / P.16.1-65)

Vn  0.6Fy AwCv

Controlled load combination: DStlS4: 1.5076DL+1.0LL-1.0EQX

Figure 3.19 Shear force of girders of SMF-1

25
 Figure 3.20 Shear force of girders of SMF-2

Table 3.4 SMF-Shear force with ETABS and sections of girders

SMF-1 SMF-2
Story Shear Girder Shear Girder
Force (kips) Force (kips)
1 35.479 W16 57 58.551 W16 57
2 32.847 W16 57 54.023 W16 57
3 30.024 W16 57 49.221 W16 57
4 25.413 W16  40 41.599 W16  40
5 19.107 W16  40 31.677 W16  40
6 12.865 W16  40 19.792 W16  40

W16  57  h t w  16.4 0.43  38.14  2.34 E E y  53.95

 Vn  0.6 Fy Aw Cv  0.6  50  16.4  0.715 2  0.43  302.53 kips
 v  1
  vVn  302.53  Vu  35.479  OK!

W16  40  h t w  16 0.305  52.459  2.34 E E y  53.95

 Vn  0.6 Fy Aw Cv  0.6  50  16  0.505 2  0.305  137.158 kips
 v  1
  vVn  137.1585  Vu  25.413  OK!

26
3.2.3 Check the moment ratio for SLRF system

The one of the idea for designing SMF building is that the columns should be
stronger than the girders. Girders provide flexural yielding, and they are expected to
be first cracked component when the building is severely damaged. If the column is
cracked, it will lead to the collapse of building, which does not be expected.

In Section 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, I control the stress ratio of columns and girders as 0.7
and 0.6 respectively, in order to make the moment ratio to meet the Specification
easily. In this Section, I check the moment ratio for the members designed in
Section3.2.1 and 3.2.2 by the equation shown as below, including detail process. If the
section of member is changed due to some requirements, it must be checked for
moment ratio again. It can be checked for moment ratio by “design check” with
ETABS.

The following relationship shall be satisfied beam to column connection:

M 
pc
 1.0 (AISC 341-10 / E3 / P. 9.1-34)
M 
pb

where

M *
pb  1.1Ry Fyb Z b  M uv 
(AISC 341-10 / E3 / P. 9.1-35)

M pb  M pr  Vbeam ( S h  d col 2)

M pr  1.1Ry M p
(AISC 365-16 /10.8 / P. 9.2-73)
Vbeam  Vu  21.1Ry M p  Lh  Vgravity

tcollar d 1
Sh   (tcollar  7 )
2 2 8

Vgravity  beam shear force resulting from 1.2D  f1L  0.2S (where f1 is the load) factor
determined by theapplicable building code from live loads,
but not less than 0.5, kips (N).

(AISC 365-16 /10.8 / P. 9.2-76)

27
 Plastic Hinge Location

Sh+dcol /2 Sh+dcol /2

Figure 3.21 M*pb

M *
pc   Z c Fyc  Puc / Ag 
(AISC 341-10 / E3 / P. 9.1-35)
M * pc  M pc  Vcol (dbeam / 2)


M pc  Z c Fyc  Puc / Ag 

dbeam

Figure 3.22 M*pc

28
 (1) SMF-1

Table 3.5 Sections of SMF-1

Exterior Interior
Story Column Girder Column Girder
1~3 W14 132 W16 57 W14 132 W16 57
4~6 W14  74 W16  40 W14  82 W16  40

Example for the joint at exterior column interlacing the girder of 1st story, and
others and so on.
Puc: require axial force of column is shown as Figure 3.12.

Girder  W6  57 (Ry = 1.1 / AISC 341-10 / 9.1-4)

 
 V gravity  1.2  100  0.5  50  202 2 / 2/1000  14.5 kips
 M  pb  1.1R y M p  Vbeam ( S h  d col 2)  1.1 1.1 50  105/12 

2  1.1 1.1 50  105/12/20 14.5   7.125  16.4  14.7 

 2 2 2 
 629.118 k - ft

 M *
pc   Z F
c yc  Puc / Ag 
 22450 - 286.338/38.8/12  23450 - 351.954/38.8/12
 1629.21 k - ft


M 
pc
 2.589  1  OK!
M 
pb

Table 3.6 Moment ratio of SMF-1

Joint 1st - 2nd 2nd - 3rd 3rd – 4th 4th – 5th 5th – 6th
Exterior Moment Ratio 2.58967 2.69319 2.08381 2.08675 2.20953
Columns >1.0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Interior Moment Ratio 1.36067 1.39570 1.11795 1.19258 1.23793

Columns >1.0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

29
(2) SMF-2

Table 3.7 Sections of columns and girders

Story Column Girder

1~3 W14145 W1657
4~6 W1296 W1640

Example for the joint at column interlacing the girder of 1st story, and others and
so on.
Puc: require axial force of column is shown as Figure 3.15.

Girder  W1657 (Ry = 1.1 / AISC 341-10 / 9.1-4)

 
 V gravity  1.2  100  0.5  50  202 2 / 2/1000  14.5 kips
 M  pb  1.1R y M p  Vbeam ( S h  d col 2)  1.1 1.1 50  105/12 

2  1.1 1.1 50  105/12/20 14.5   7.125  16.4  14.8 

 2 2 2 
 629.3793 k - ft

 M *
pc   Z F
c yc  Puc / Ag 
 26050 - 484.465/42.7/12  26050 - 595.69/42.7 /12
 1619.09 k - ft


M 
pc
 2.57  1  OK!
M 
pb

Table 3.8 Moment ratio of SMF-2

Joint 1st - 2nd 2nd - 3rd 3rd – 4th 4th – 5th 5th – 6th
Moment Ratio 2.57251 2.74525 2.19492 2.33043 2.53785
>1.0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

30
3.3 Design for gravity system

The Gravity system is assumed that it does not provide capability to resist the
lateral forces, and it only support the gravity loads, such as dead load, live load, snow
and so on. It means that the column is seen as axially loaded compression member
and girder is designed by flexural force cause by vertical loads. This case is only
considered about dead load and live load, so the load combination is DStlS2,
1.2DL+1.6LL.

In this model, footing of columns in gravity system are modeled as hinge end,
and both ends of girders in gravity system are modeled by release the moment at both
ends.

3.3.1 Design columns in gravity system

In this model, there are two kinds of columns in gravity system (Figure 3.23),
including exterior columns (locations: 1-A, 1-F) and interior columns (locations:3-C,
3-D, 4-B, 4-E), which support different area of floor. They are axially loaded
compression members, so design them with 2010 AISC Design Manual Table 4-1.

The axial load of columns can be analyzed with ETABS,but also caculated by
designer. Suggest do both, because it is a good way to check whether the loads which
are set in model are correct or not. The results with these two methods should be very
close. (The difference may be cause by the weight of members, because the method of
caculating by designer is not considered about it)

Figure 3.23 Column in gravity system

31
Controlled load combination: DStlS2: 1.2DL+1.6LL

Axial load  1.2DL  1.6LL  Area of floor

 
Exterior Column of 1st story: 1.2100  1.6 50 202 4  6 / 1000  120 kips

 
Exterior Column of 4th story: 1.2100  1.6 50 202 4  3 / 1000  60 kips

Interior Column of 1st story: 1.2100  1.6 50 202  6 / 1000  480 kips

Interior Column of 4th story: 1.2100  1.6 50 202  3 / 1000  240 kips

Table 3.9 Maximum axil force (Pu) of column.

Exterior Columns Interior Columns

(1-A , 1-F ) (3-C , 3-D , 4-B, 4-E)
Story Pu (kips) Pu (kips)
1 106.021 547.06
4 53.381 267.936

Figure 3.24 Axial force of columns in Line-1

32
 Figure 3.25 Axial force of columns in Line-4

Axially loaded compression members are designed by the equation, c Pn  Pu .

(1) Exterior Columns

The axial force is not very great, so I select same section for first story to sixth story.
The section of column can be changed for every three stories to get economic
benefits.
First story Pu =106.021 kips, Fourth story Pu = 53.381 kips
 Conservative  106.021/0.6 = 176.7
 KL=113=13  select W1245
 φc Pn = 370 > 106.021  OK!

(2) Interior Columns

 First story Pu = 547.06 kips
 Conservative  547.06/0.6 = 911.767
 KL=113=13  select W1296
 φc Pn = 1050 > 547.06  OK!

 Fourth story Pu = 267.936 kips

 Conservative  267.936/0.6 = 446.56
 KL=113=13  select W1253
 φc Pn = 525 > 446.56  OK!

33
3.3.2 Design girders in gravity system

Girders in gravity system are assumed as simply supported beam, and they
support gravity loads through moment strength. The design is based on flexure force,
and the maximum moment appears at the middle of girder. The design program logic
can refer to the third to fifth paragraph of Section 3.2.2.
In this model, there are two kinds of girders in gravity system, which are Girder-
1 and Girder-2 respectively. They support different area of floor, so design them for
different sections to get economic benefit. The configurations of them are shown as
Figure 3.26, which the Girder-1 are highlighted with red color, and Girder-2 are
highlighted with green color.
Above all, before selecting section for girders, some information should be
known first, such as the limit value I (moment of inertia) of section, which is to meet
the requirement of deflection. Width to thickness ratio, which is satisfy the
requirement of compact section. With these information, it is much more clear for
selecting section for girder.

Controlled load combination: DStlS2: 1.2DL+1.6LL

  5wL4 384EI  Span 360

Girder-1: support a quarter area of floor (Red)

Girder-2: support a half area of floor (Green)
(Area of floor = 202 ft2)

Figure 3.26 Girders of gravity system

34
 Figure 3.27 Mux of column under load combination
(1) Girder-1:
w: considering of 0.25 floor area support by the girder
w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2100  1.6 50  0.25  20 / 1000  1 k/ft

  5  1 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360

4

 I  186.2 (in 4 )

M u  29.92 0.7  42.74 kips

  b M px  M u
 W10  68
 I x  384  186.2
  b M px  320  42.74 kips

(2) Girder-2:
w: considering of 0.5 floor area support by the girder
w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2100  1.6 50  0.5  20 / 1000  2 k/ft

  5  2 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360

4

 I  372.4 (in 4 )

35
M u  37.86 0.7  49.8 kips
  b M px  M u
 W10  68
 I x  384  372.4
  b M px  320  49.8 kips

(3) Check:
a. Width to Thickness Ratio

   p  0.38 E Fy  9.15
 W10  68    6.58  9.15  compact section

b. Lateral Buckling

Lb  L p

 W1068  Lp = 9.15 ft
The girder is 20-feet long, so it is necessary to be braced by two beams to satisfy
the requirement of Lb.

3.4 Check preliminary design

Sections 3.2 and 3.3 have completed the preliminary design for all members of
structure, and then set the section of members in the model to do linear static analysis
again. According to static analysis results of preliminary design, check it with three
major requirements which are structure period, story drift, and capacity ratio.

These checks provide information for designer to understand the characteristic of

structure, which is too strong or soft. It will influence the designer how to revise and
reselect sections to satisfy the requirements of Specification and user.

3.4.1 Structure period

In this model, the number of mode is assumed at least two times to the number of
floors, and the summation of mass participation factor should be over 90%. From
linear static analysis, we can get mode shapes and period of modes. There is different
contribution of every mode to structure, which is known from mass participation
factor, and select the primary mode of structure. The greater value of mass
participation of the mode, the higher contribution to structure, which indicates it is
primary mode. The period of primary mode is seen as the fundamental period, T.

36
 The fundamental period, T, shall not exceed the product of the coefficient for
upper limit on calculated period (Cu) and the approximate fundamental period, Ta. The
base shear is based on the Ta, so the fundamental period, T, must be controlled within
a certain range of values. The error of T and Ta is greater, and the design base shear is
less accurate, which is overestimated or underestimated. If the design base shear is
underestimated, the design is not conservative.
The fundamental period of the structure, Ta is 0.91376 (s). From the analysis
results shown as Table 3.10, the period of first mode and second mode, which are
primary modes in the diagonal directions, are too long. The method to decrease the
value of T is selecting larger area of section or deep section of columns and girders.

T  Cu  Ta
 S D1  0.811  0.4
 Cu  1.4
 1.4  Ta  1.279264 (s)

Figure 3.28 Coefficient for upper limit on calculated period

Table 3.10 Period of 1st to 5th modes

Mode shape T (s) T  Cu  Ta

1 1.712 No
2 1.705 No
3 1.258 Yes
4 0.586 Yes
5 0.583 Yes

37
3.4.2 Story drift limitation of design code

Checking the story drift is to prevent non structure members from being cracked
with the little earthquake force. If non structure member is cracked, it will reduce the
usability and safety. Only if the story drift of every story is similar, there is no soft
layer.

SMF is provided with large the story drift, so using deeper section of girders is a
good way to inhibit excessive drift. Pay attention to the unit of story drift is inch or
radius from software. The steps of out putting and the value of allowable story drift
are shown as below.

From the result (Table 3.11), the maximum story drift by analysis doesn’t meet
the requirement of Specification. It indicates the stiffness of building is maybe not
greater enough.

ETABS →Display →Show Table →Analysis →Result→ Displacement →Story Drift

 Design Check For Story Drift
 ASCE7 - 10 / T able12.12- 1 Allowable Story Drift
 Risk Category  0.02hsx
I e   x 1 0.02
  ANA   xe    0.003636 (rad)
Cd 5.5

Table 12.12-1 Allowable Story Drift, Δaa,b

Figure 3.29 Allowable story drift (ASCE 7-10 / Table 12.12-1)

38
 Table 3.11 Max drift of preliminary design

Story δANA Max drift(rad)  ANA   xe

6 0.003054 YES
5 0.005306 NO
4 0.00667 NO
3 0.00594 NO
2 0.006068 NO
1 0.004616 NO

3.4.3 Design check with ETABS

Design check with ETABS is a good aid which provides two important
information, stress ratio and moment ratio. Section 3.2, the stress ratio and moment
ratio of preliminary design are checked with calculating by designer based on
Specification. This Section will check it again with ETABS, because require forces of
the members are reassigned primarily according to the stiffness of members. The
stress ratio of preliminary design is shown as Table 3.12.

Design is a repeated operation. Designer can use this checking method to

confirm whether the components are in compliance with the Specification and
requires of designer or not. If the results of check do not meet the require, it can get
reason from design check, and according to it to make adjustments and improvements
to the design.

The result of design check of structural preliminary design is shown as Figure

3.30. From the design check, the member which is presented with red color indicates
that the members do not satisfy the requirements of Specification or the capacity ratio
is close to 1.0 or over 1.0. The details of steel stress design check with ETABS shows
that the reason why the member do not meet the Specification. The Figure 3.30 shows
that there are members presented red, because they are mistaken as SLRF with
ETABS, but actually they are the members satisfy the requirement. The stress ratio of
members is shown as Figure 3.12 and Figure 3.13.

39
 Table 3.12 Stress ratio of preliminary design of SMF

SLRF System
SMF-1 SMF-2
Story Exterior Column Interior Column Beam Column Beam
1-3 0.55 0.477 0.58 0.718 0.733
4-6 0.53 0.51 0.56 0.558 0.671

Table 3.13 Stress ratio of preliminary design of gravity system

Gravity System
Section Stress Ratio
Column W12  45 0.329
W12  96 0.499
W14  68 0.383
Beam W10  68 0.096

Figure 3.30 Design check with ETABS

40
3.5 Reselect the sections of all member to satisfy the Specification

According to the results of Section 3.4, appropriately changing size of

members to satisfy the Specification can get final section of all members.

The component sizes of SMF is based on the required force from lateral
force. From preliminary design, it obviously indicates the component sizes is
controlled by story drift and fundamental period, but not require force. It means
that SMF building must be over designed for members. In the process of
reselecting section, if the new section is used for replacing original, it should be
checked again with three steps, design check, story drift and fundamental period.
In order to meet the requirements, the operation of reselecting will be repeated
again and again. My point of adjustment methods are as follows.

The period of the primary mode is too long, and it is often accompanied
with the problem that the story drift is too large. The solution is to increase the
stiffness of the SMF by magnifying the section of the girder and column. SMF
mainly resists lateral forces through bending moments, so the use of components
with deeper sections can effectively improve the problem. Reducing the story
drift will have a significant effect on the use of girders with deeper sections than
on columns with larger sections or deeper sections.

The process of adjustment pays attention to the coordination between

girders and columns. The control of the stress ratio of each component is similar
in design. Can not only reselect section of girder because of it is provided with
significant reducing of story drift, or it will lead to strong girder. Because of the
excessive enlargement of the girder size, it is necessary to enlarge the column
size to satisfy the moment ratio. As a result, it reduces the economic benefit. I
design section of member primary through the stress ratio rather than the
moment ratio. If the column member should be replaced with larger section to
meet the moment ratio, I would think if the girder is too strong. I see moment
ratio as a warning of strong girder.

If story drift cannot be reduced through the above method, then it may
return to the configuration of SMF. Consider whether the number of spans of the
SMF is insufficient or not, because if the number of spans is insufficient, it may
result in the design for strong columns and girders to meet requirements shown
in Section 3.4. The strength of components is greatly over the require force,
which is the uneconomic design. The final section of every member is shown in
Table 3.14 and Figure 3.31-3.32, and the checking results are shown as below.

41
 Table 3.14 Final sections of all members

SLRF system (Seismic Lateral Resisting Frame system)

SMF-1 SMF-2
story Exterior Interior Girder Column Girder
Column Column
1~3 W18106 W24103 W2150 W24229 W2797
4~6 W1871 W2476 W1850 W24103 W2476

Gravity frame system

story Exterior Columns Interior Columns Girder
(1-A , 1-F ) (3-C , 3-D , 4-B, 4-E)
1~3 W1245 W1296 W1068
4~6 W1245 W1253 W1068

Figure 3.31 SMF-1 in SLRF system

42
 Figure 3.32 SMF-2 in SLRF system

(1) Resulting structure period and mode shape of first to fifth mode

Table 3.15 Period of 1st to 5th mode shapes

Mode Period T (s) T  Cu  Ta

1 1.241 Yes
2 1.218 Yes
3 0.944 Yes
4 0.42 Yes
5 0.41 Yes

Table 3.16 Modal participating mass ratios

Mode UX UY UZ
1 0 0.7884 0
2 0.7927 0 0
3 0.0001 0 0
4 0 0.1277 0
5 0.1251 0 0

43
Figure 3.33 SMF structure - 1st Mode shape and period

Figure 3.34 SMF structure - 2nd Mode shape and period

44
Figure 3.35 SMF structure - 3rd Mode shape and period

Figure 3.36 SMF structure - 4th Mode shape and period

45
 Figure 3.37 SMF structure - 5th Mode shape and period

(2) Check if the specifications of the drift limitation of design code

Table 3.17 Max drift of final design

Story δANA Max drift(rad)  ANA   xe

6 0.00188 Yes
5 0.00292 Yes
4 0.003586 Yes
3 0.003352 Yes
2 0.003346 Yes
1 0.002192 Yes

(3) Stress ratio

Using Design Check with ETABS, the DCRs of all members are all less
than 0.7. From the result of Design Check with ETABS, it indicated the members
lighted red color is not seismic compact for highly ductile members. Actually
they belong to gravity system, so they do not need to satisfy the requirement of
SMF.

46
 Table 3.18 Stress ratio of final sections

SLRF System
SMF-1 SMF-2
Story Exterior Column Interior Column Girder Column Girder
1-3 0.46 0.487 0.458 0.527 0.553
4-6 0.499 0.411 0.429 0.546 0.53

Figure 3.38 Design check by ETABS

47
 Chapter 4 Design Procedure for BRBF
In this Chapter, desing a BRBF builing is based on ASCE 7-10 and AISC 341-10,
and the procedure is shown as below.

Design Spectrum
Equivalent Lateral
Force
Design Base Shear

Design SLRF System

Preliminary Design
Design Gravity System

ETABS
Modeling

Linear Static
Analysis

Check Capacity Ratio

Check Structure Period

Design Check
and mode shape

NG OK Check Structure
Drift

Final Design

Design Flow Chart for Steel Frame with BRBF

48
4.1 Determined design base shear (V) and equivalent lateral force(Fx)
of building.

Calculate base shear of structure by Design Response Spectrum based on

Specification, and then get shear force of every story with vertical distribution
method.

4.1.1 The basic information of the building

Structure configuration is separated to two systems, SLRF system and gravity

system. I design external structure of building as SLRS system, and internal structure
of building as gravity system respectively.
 Type of structure: Steel BRBF (Steel Buckling Restrained Brace Frame)
 Location: Los Angle (34.0438ºN, 118.2656ºW)
 Site soil: D (stiff soil)
 Structure scale: six-story building with five bays in x axis and four bays in
y axis
 Story height: 1st story: 13ft, other stories: 13 ft
 Length of per bay: X-direction: 20 ft.
Y-direction: 20 ft.
 Structure category: business building
 Load: DL (Dead Load): 100 psf
LL (Live Load): 50 psf
EQ (Earth Quake): according to ASCE7-10

Figure 4.1 Schematic model of the BRBF building

49
Figure 4.2 Configurations BRBs in line 1 (line 1 and line 5 are symmetric)

Figure 4.3 Configurations BRBs in line A (line A and line E are symmetric)

50
 Figure 4.4 Typical plan layout of the BRBF building

4.1.2 Base shear (V)

(1), (2) and (3) can be refer to section 3.1.2

(4) According to Table 12.2-1 from ASCE 7-10, response modification

coefficient, R = 8 is obtained because of using the bracing system of BRBF
(Buckling-restrained brace frame).

Figure 4.5 Response modification coefficient (Table12.2-1 / ASCE 7-10)

51
 (5) The fundamental period of the structure T (s)

T  Ta  Ct  hnx  0.03  780.75  0.78739 (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8)

(Ct and x refer from Figure 3.9)

(6) Seismic Base Shear

V  Cs  W (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-1)

S DS 1.538
CS    0.19225 (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-2)
R I e  8 1

Check the requirements based on Equations as given on ASCE 7-10:

S D1
(1) C s  for T  TL (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-3)
TR / I 
S D1 0.811
 C s  0.2403    0.128748
TR / I  0.78739 8 1
 So C s  0.128748

(2) Cs shall not less than CS  0.044S DS  I e  0.01 (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-4)

 0.128748  0.044  1.538  1  0.06767...........................................OK

(3) If S1  0.6 g , Cs shall not less than Cs = 0.5S1 / ( R/I e )

 0.128748  0.5  0.811/ 8/1  0.5068.............................................OK

V  Cs  W (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-1)

 C s  0.128748
 W  DL  ( Area of all floor)
 100  20  20  5  4  6 / 1000  4800 kips
 V  0.128748 4800  617.99 kips

52
4.1.3 Vertical distribution of seismic forces

Each structure shall be analyzed for the effects of static lateral forces applied
independently in each of two orthogonal directions.

Fx  Cvx  V (ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-11)

W x  h xk
C vx  n
(ASCE 7-10 / Eq.12.8-12)

i 1
Wi  hik

Ta  0.78739 by interpolatiopn  k  1.1437

W x  hxk  
 C vx    Ta  0.5  k  1  
n
 
W  h
i 1
i i
k 
  Ta  2.5  k  2 



C v1  0.039 C v 2  0.0861 C v 3  0.1369


C v 4  0.1902 C v 5  0.2455 C v 6  0.3024

 F1  24.08 (kips) F2  53.20 (kips) F3  84.58 (kips)


 F4  117.54 (kips) F5  151.9 (kips) F6  186.88 (kips)

F6 = 186.88

F5 = 151.9

F4 = 117.54

F3 = 84.58

F2 = 53.20

F1 = 24.08

V = 617.99 (kips)

Figure 4.6 Lateral force of base shear

53
4.2 Preliminary design of members in SLRF system

BRBF reacts similar like as truss, and the BRB and column are axially force
member. It is divided into two parts, which are members with resistance to lateral
forces, BRB and members with no resistance to lateral forces, column and girders.
The require force of every member is designed according to AISC 341-10, but not
though the linear static analysis with ETABS. Asc of BRB is determined selected in
accordance with lateral force, and then select sections of the girders and columns in
accordance with Asc of BRB.

SLRF System

BRB Column & Girder

Lateral Force Force

Axial Force of Brace Section

Asc

Design Flow Chart for SLRF with BRBF

54
4.2.1 Design BRB

BRBF designed provide significant inelastic deformation capacity primarily

through brace yielding in tension and compression. Therefore, using the low-yield
steel material as steel core of BRB makes it more easily start to dissipating energy.
Except for yielding in compression and tension, the hysteresis loop of BRB is very
full. Its reaction to earthquake is highly stable before fatigue fracture. Material of steel
core shall be selected according to requirement of every structure.

BRB shall not be considered as member resisting gravity force. Axial force of
BRB is only determined by the lateral forces, and the design procedure is as shown
below. Step (1), The shear force of the Nth floor is obtained by adding the lateral
forces of each floor above the Nth floor (Figure 4.7). The axial force of BRBs is
obtained by shear force, which is seen as require axial force. Step (2), the design axil
strength of BRB shall be not smaller than require axial force obtained in step (1). The
steel core area of the BRB should be determined by the design axil strength.

The configuration and number of BRBs will affect the steel core area of the
BRB, such as Single Diagonal, Inverted V, and so on. Depending on each case,
selecting the configuration that most effectively exerts resistance against lateral
forces, and satisfy the requirement of designer.

(1) Design axil strength

In this design, there are two spans of BRBF in each side of building, and the
type of BRB is inverted V (Figure 4.2-4.3). The lateral force in one direction is
applied on two sides of structure. Consider single side of structure in one
direction, so the BRBFs in one side resists a half of shear force. In the other way,
consider both side of structure in one direction, the shear force does not need to be
divided by two. The result of these two method will be the same.

Shear forceVx  Fx  Fx1  .....Ftop

Require Axial force Pux  Vx 2 N sin

(x: story top: top story N: numbers of BRB of one story in every side)

55
 θ = 37.56859˚
F6 = 186.88 (kips)
θ Pu6=F6/2/4sinθ
F5 = 151.71 (kips)
Pu5=(F6+F5)/2/4sinθ
F4 = 117.54 (kips)
Pu4=(F6+F5+F4)/2/4sinθ
F3 = 84.58 (kips)
Pu3=(F6+F5+F4+F3)/2/4sinθ
F2 = 53.20 (kips)
Pu2=(F6+F5+F4+F3+F2)/2/4sinθ
F1 = 25.08 (kips)
Pu1=(F6+F5+F4+F3+F2+F1)/2/4sinθ
A A
1 2 3 4 5

Figure 4.7 Axial force of BRB

Table 4.1 Axial force of BRB

Brace Pu (kips)
st
1 story 126.69738
2nd story 121.76123
rd
3 story 110.85497
th
4 story 93.514071
5th story 69.417015
th
6 story 38.314181

(2) Design Asc

Steel core shall be design to resist entire axial force in the brace. The design axial
strength, φPysc in tension and compression, in accordance with the limit state of
yielding, shall be determined as follows:

Pysc  Fysc Asc (Eq. F4-1 / P. 9.1-1 / AISC 341-10)

Each BRB Pu    Pysc   0.9

56
In preliminary design, it requires some assumptions for some parameter.

Steel core:
Fysc = 36 ksi
ω = strain hardening adjustment factor = 1.2
β = compression hardening adjustment factor = 1.15

Effect stiffness of BRB is shown as following equation, and the elastic modulus of
BRB should be multiplied 1.3 in the model with ETABS.
E   Acore
K eff  1.3  K core 
L

Require axial force  Design axial strenth

1st story

 Pu    Pysc  126.697  0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  3.91  Select Asc  4 ( in )
2

2 nd story

 Pu    Pysc  121.761  0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  3.75  Select Asc  3.8 ( in 2 )

3 rd story

 Pu    Pysc  110.855 0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  3.42  Select Asc  3.5 ( in 2 )

4 th story

 Pu    Pysc  93.514  0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  2.88  Select Asc  3 ( in 2 )

5 th story

 Pu    Pysc  69.417  0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  2.14  Select Asc  2.2 ( in 2 )

6 th story

 Pu    Pysc  38.314  0.9  Fysc  Asc Fysc  36 ksi 
 Asc  1.18  Select Asc  1.2 ( in ) 2

57
 Table 4.2 Pu and Section of BRB

Story Pu (kips) Asc (in2) φPysc (kips)

1 126.69738 4.0 129.6
2 121.76123 3.8 123.12
3 110.85497 3.5 113.4
4 93.514071 3 97.2
5 69.417015 2.2 71.28
6 38.314181 1.2 38.88

4.2.2 Design columns in SLRF system

The require axial force, Pu of columns in BRBF shall be determine by adjusted

brace strength in compression and tension, but not in accordance of load force. The
columns of BRBF should be satisfy the requirement of highly ductile member.

The adjusted brace strength in compression shall be Ry Pysc

The adjusted brace strength in tension shall be R y Pysc

(F4-2a / AISC 341-10)

θ = 37.56859˚
Column required axial force
F6
θ
F5 (1) Exterior Column
F4

F3

F2 (2) Interior Column

F1

A A
1 2 3 4 5

Figure 4.8 Axial force of columns

58
 Generally, selecting the same section for three stories is much more convenient
to design and operation.

Pu   c Pn ( c  0.9) (Table 4-1 / 2011 AISC Design Manual)

  1.2 ,   1.15 (F4.2a / AISC 341-10)

(1) Exterior column

1.2  0.2S D  0.5L   R P

DS y ysc cos

 1st, 2nd and 3rd stories

 Consider column 1st story (compression controls)

 1.2  0.2S D  0.5L  R P

DS y ysc cos

 column axial compression = 1020.12 kips

 Conservative  1020.12/0.6 = 1700.20 kips
 Try W14145
 φc Pn = 1720 kips > 1700.20  OK!
 4th, 5th and 6th stories
 Consider column 4th story (compression controls)

 1.2  0.2S D  0.5L  R P

DS y ysc cos

 column axial compression = 411.737 kips

 Conservative  411.737/0.6 = 686.229 kips
 Try W1474
 φc Pn = 734 kips > 868.229  OK!

(2) Interior column

1.2  0.2S D  0.5L   R P

DS y ysc cos    Ry Pysc cos 

 1st, 2nd and 3rd stories

 Consider column 1st story (compression controls)

 1.2  0.2S D  0.5L   R P

DS y ysc cosθ   R P y ysc cosθ

 column axial compression = 316.46 kips

 Conservative  316.46/0.6 = 575.43 kips
 Try W1468
 φc Pn = 670 kips > 575.43  OK!
(W1461,φc Pn =599, but not compact section)

59
  4th, 5th and 6th stories

 Consider column 4th story (compression controls)

 1.2  0.2S D  0.5L R P

DS y ysc cos  R P
y ysc cosθ

 column axial compression =237.106 kips

 Conservative  237.106/0.7=395.177 kips
 Try W1453
 φc Pn = 433 kips > 395.177  OK!

(3) Check

a. Stress Ratio

Pr Pc  2.0  pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

 
Pr Pc  2.0 1 2 pPr  9 8 bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

(Part 6 / 2005 AISC Design Manal)

Pc  c pn (Pc by Interpolation / Table 4-1 / 2011 AISC Design Manal)

p, bx, by from Table 6-1, AISC Design Manual

 Exterior column

W14145
 Pr = 1020.12 , Pc = 1720
 Pr/Pc = 1020.12/1720 = 0.93 > 0.2

 pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

 0.583103 1020.12 0  0  0.594  1.0  OK!

W1474
 Pr = 411.737 , Pc = 734
 Pr/Pc = 411.737/734 = 0.56 > 0.2

 pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

 1.36 103  411.737  0  0  0.559  1.0  OK!

60
  Interior column

W1468
 Pr = 316.46 , Pc = 670
 Pr/Pc = 316.46/670 = 0.47 > 0.2

 pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

 1.49 103  316.46 0  0  0.47  1.0  OK!

W1453
 Pr = 237.106 , Pc = 433
 Pr/Pc = 237.106/433 = 0.547 > 0.2

 pPr  bx M rx  b y M ry  1.0

 2.31103  237.106  0  0  0.547  1.0  OK!

b. Column member shall satisfy the requirement of Section D1.1 for highly
ductile member. (Table D1.1 / AISC 341-10)
(b and t are from Table1-1 of 2011 AISC Design Manual)

b t  0.3 E Fy  7.2249

Table 4.3 Width to thickness ratio

Section b/t
W14 145 7.11
W14  74 6.41
W14  68 6.97
W14  53 6.11

＊ Every sections of columns are seismic compact section.

61
4.2.3 Design girders in LRFS system

The require strength of girders intersected by braces shall be divided into two
cases for analysis. Case one is that the girder is design by unbalance loads, and case
two is that the building is static without earthquake. The girder shall be designed to
satisfy the requirements for highly ductile members, and it should be at least braced
with one lateral beam because of inverted -V-type brace frame.

w  1.2  0.5S DS D  0.5L

θ=37.56859˚
F6
θ

W
F5

F4

F3

F2

F1
P
A A
1 2 3 4 5
L = length of space
Figure 4.9 Beam with unbalance loads

(1) Case one: unbalance loads

62
 W

1. Uniform Load based on load combination in the applicable code

w  1.2  0.5S DS D  0.5L   L 2

 w  1.2  0.5 1.538  100  0.5  50  20 4 / 1000  1.1095 k/ft

2. Maximum Moment

P  brace strengthin compression - brace strengthin tension  cos


 P  R y Pysc  R y Pysc  cos 

 P1  30.82 kips P2  29.27 kips


 P   P3  26.87 kips P4  23.11 kips
 P  16.95 kips P6  9.24
 5 kips

 M (1story)  98.61 k - ft
M (2 story)  90.90 k - ft
M (3story)  79.35 k - ft
M (4 story)  60.09 k - ft
M (5 story)  29.27 k - ft
M (6 story)  18.87 k - ft

63
(2) Case two: static

M (story)  M  wL2 18
 M (1story)  M (2 story)  M (3story)  M (4 story)  M (5 story)  M (6 story)
 M  wL2 18  24.65 k - ft

(3) Select section

1. 1st floor Mu=98.81 k-ft

4th floor Mu=79.35 k-ft

2. Limit service live-load deflection

  1.0743wL4 EI  Span 360

w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2100  1.6 50  0.25  20 / 1000  1 k/ft

  5  1 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360

4

 I  106.68 (in 4 )

3. 1st to 3rd floors

M u  79.35
 98.81 0.7  141.157
 M n  M u
 W8  40     p  compact  M n  M p
 I x  146  106.68
  b M px  149  141.157

64
 4th to 6th floors
M u  79.35
 79.35 0.7  113.357
 M n  M u
 W8  40     p  compact  M n  M p
 I x  146  106.68
  b M px  149  113.357

4. Check

a. Beam members shall satisfy the requirements of Section D1.1 for highly
ductile members. (AISC314-10 / Section 9.1-67)

b t  0.3 E Fy  7.2249

 W8  40    7.21  9.15

b. Girders shall be braced to satisfy the requirement for moderately ductile

members, and it is at least lateral braced for one beam at the intersection of
inverted -V- braces.
Lb = 0.17ry E/Fy.
 W8  40
 Lb  0.17  2.04  29000 50 / 12  16.76 ft
 Girder is 20-ft long, so it should be braced by one beam to satisfy the Lb.

c. Check shear strength of the girders

The nominal shear strength, Vn, of unstiffened or stiffened webs, according to the
limit states of shear yielding and shear buckling, is

Vn  0.6Fy AwCv (AISC Manual / G2 / P.16.1-65)

65
 (1) Unbalance Loads (2) Static
W W

1st to 3rd floors

V1  P 2  Pmax  P1  P2  30.82kips
 30.82 2  15.41 kips

V2  WL 3  1.1095 20 3  7.39
 V1 controlls

W8  40  h t w  8.25 0.36  22.91  2.34 E E y  53.95

 Vn  0.6 Fy Aw C v  0.6  50  8.25  0.56  2  0.36  1  77 kips

 v  1
  vVn  77  Vu  15.41 kips  OK!

4th to 6th floors

V1  P 2  Pmax  P3  26.87 kips
 26.87 2  13.435 kips

V2  WL 3  1.1095 20 3  7.39
 V1 controlls
 vVn  77  Vu  13.435 kips  OK!

66
4.3 Design for gravity system

This Section refer to Section 3.3.

4.3.1 Design columns in gravity frame system

According to the area of floor which the column supports, columns can be
divided to three kinds which are shown as below, and the location of columns is
illustrated in Figure 4.10.

Column-1: A-1, A-5, F-1, F-5 (red)

Column-2: E-1, E-5 (green)
Column-3: Column inside of building (blue)

Analyze force with controlled load combination: DStlS2: 1.2DL+1.6LL, and the
linear static analysis result is shown as Fig 4.11-4.12, Table 4.4.

Figure 4.10 Column of gravity system

67
 Figure 4.11 Axial force in Line-1

Figure 4.12 Axial force in Line-2

Table 4.4 Maximum axil load (Pu) of column.

Column-1 Column-2 Column-3

Story Pu (kips) Pu (kips) Pu (kips)
1 103.635 232.709 584.579
4 51.771 116.071 285.404

68
(1) Columns-1
Because the require axial force is not great, so I select the same section of column for
first to sixth story. It can be selected a section for every three story for economic
benefit.

c Pn  Pu

First story Pu = 103.635 kips, Fourth story Pu = 51.771 kips

 Conservative  103.635/0.7  148.05
 KL  113  13  select W12 45
  c Pn  370  1148.05  OK!

(2) Columns-2

 First story Pu =232.709 kips

 Conservative  232.709/0.7  332.44
 KL  113  13  select W12 50
 c Pn  443  332.44  OK!
 Fourth story Pu =116.071 kips
 Conservative  116.071/0.7  165.815

 KL  113  13  select W12 45

 c Pn  370  193.45  OK!

(3) Columns-3

 First story Pu =584.579 kips

 Conservative  584.579/0.7  835.112
 KL  113  13  select W12 96
 c Pn  1050  835.112  OK!

 Fourth story Pu =285.404 kips

 Conservative  285.404/0.7  407.72
 KL  113  13  select W12 53
  c Pn  525  407.72  OK!

69
4.3.2 Design girders in gravity system

According to the area of floor which the girder supports, it can be divided to two
kinds which are shown as below, and the configuration is illustrated in Figure 4.13.

Girder-1: support a quarter area of floor (Red)

Girder-2: support a half area of floor (Green) (Area of floor = 202 ft2)
Controlled load combination: DStlS2: 1.2DL+1.6LL

Figure 4.13 Girders of gravity system

Figure 4.14 Bending moment of girders under load combination

70
(1) Girder-1:

w: considering of 0.25 floor area support by the girder

w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2100  1.6 50  0.25  20 / 1000  1 k/ft

  5  1 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360

4

 I  186.2 (in 4 )

M u  27.118
 27.118 0.7  38.74
 M n  M u
 W10  39     p  compact  M n  M p
 I x  209  186.2
  b M px  176  38.74

(2) Girder-2:

w: considering of 0.5 floor area support by the girder

w  1.2DL  1.6LL  1.2100  1.6 50  0.5  20 / 1000  2 k/ft

  5  2 12  20  12 384 29000 I  20  12 360

4

 I  372.4 (in 4 )

M u  32.55
 27.118 0.7  46.5
 M n  M u
 W10  68     p  compact  M n  M p
 I x  394  372.4
 b M px  320  46.5

71
4.4 Check preliminary design

According to the results of linear static analysis of preliminary design, check

three major points as below. Details refer to Section 3.4。

4.4.1 Structure period and mode shape of first to five mode

The fundamental period, T, shall not exceed the product of the coefficient for
upper limit on calculated period (Cu) and the approximate fundamental period, Ta. The
fundamental period of the structure, Ta = 0.78739 (s)

(Refer to Figure 3.33)

T  Cu  Ta
 S D1  0.811  0.4
 Cu  1.4
 1.4  Ta  1.102346 (s)

A structure contains several mode shape, which contribute different ratio. The
structure designed in this section is a six-story building, which is belong to low-rise
building. It indicates the ratio of contribution of low-rise modes shape is much
more than high-rise modes. The structure period and mode shape is shown as Table
4.5, and Figure 4.15 to Figure 4.19.

Table 4.5 Period of 1st to 5th modes

Mode shape T (s) T  Cu  Ta

1 0.983 Yes
2 0.956 Yes
3 0.595 Yes
4 0.368 Yes
5 0.352 Yes

72
Figure 4.15 BRBF structure - 1st Mode shape and period

Figure 4.16 BRBF structure – 2nd Mode shape and period

73
Figure 4.17 BRBF structure – 3rd Mode shape and period

Figure 4.18 BRBF structure – 4th Mode shape and period

74
 Figure 4.19 BRBF structure – 5th Mode shape and period

4.4.2 Story drift limitation of design code

 Design Check For Story Drift

 ASCE7 - 10/ T able12.12- 1 Allowable Story Drift
 Risk Category  2  0.02hxx
I e   x 1 0.02
  ANA   xe    0.004 (rad)
Cd 5.5

(Figure 3.38)

Table 4.6 Max drift

Story δANA Max drift (rad)  ANA   xe

6 0.001584 YES
5 0.002334 YES
4 0.002254 YES
3 0.002403 YES
2 0.002338 YES
1 0.001927 YES

75
 4.4.3 Design check with ETABS

BRB cannot be checked through Design check with ETABS, because BRBs are
design in accordance with limit state of yielding, and the columns and girders are
determined by adjusted brace strength.

Figure 4.20 BRBF model design check with ETABS

4.5 Reselect the sections of all members to satisfy the Specification

According to the results of Section 4.4, appropriately changing size of members

to satisfy the Specification can get final section of all members. Structure behavior of
BRBF Building is primarily controlled by BRB. If the structure period of primary
mode is too long or the story drift is too large, it can be improved by the BRB.
Elevating stiffness of structure can be through enlarging Asc of BRB or increasing the
numbers of BRB.

If Asc needs to be multiplied several times to shorten the period, it easily causes
the structure too strong. In this situation, suggest to increase the numbers of BRB.
Enlarging Asc should adjust section of girders and columns simultaneously, because it
may increase require force of them. This shows that comprehensive consideration is
very important. There is no absolute answer for adjustment method, because it
depends on the requirements of design.
76
 For this design example, using Asc which is equal to value of the require from
lateral force and can get story drift and period of structure which satisfy the
Specification. Complete the above design, and then select BRB which is tested for the
structure. After selecting BRB, it needs to be designed and checked again according
Section 4.2 to 4.4. This study doesn’t use the BRB which is tested. The final design
for section of members is shown as Table 4.7 and Figure 4.21 to 4.23.

Table 4.7 Final sections of all members and result

BRBs of SLRF
Story Asc(in2) Story Asc(in2)
1 4 4 3
2 3.8 5 2.2
3 3.5 6 1.2

Columns & Girders of SLRF

Story Exterior Column Interior Column Girder
1~3 W14145 W1468 W840
4~6 W1474 W1453 W840

Columns & Girders of Gravity System

Story Column-1 Column-2 Column-3 Girder-1 Girder-2
1~3 W1245 W1250 W1296 W1039 W1068
4~6 W1245 W1245 W1253 W1039 W1068

Figure 4.21 Members in Line-1 (line-1 and line-5 are symmetric)

77
Figure 4.22 Members in Line-A (line-A and line-F are symmetric)

Figure 4.23 Members in gravity system

78
 Chapter 5 Nonlinear Static Analysis – Pushover
The nonlinear static analysis has much value in under understanding important
behavior characteristic. The value of nonlinear static analysis is in the fact that this
procedure permits inspection of structural response. It is a simple tool to identify
critical regions of a structural system in which the potential for significant strength or
stiffness discontinuities is high.

Because the models are a newly designed building, of which the members are in
perfect condition, using the default hinge provided by ETABS is fine. If the old
building uses the default hinge provided by ETABS, it will overestimate the resistance
to earthquake of the building, which is not a conservative analysis result. The plastic
hinges are only set in the part of the SLRF system of the building, because the
components of gravity system are not expected to be yielding.

5.1.1 Plastic hinge and location for SMF

(1) Column: P-M-M

Location: at the both end, about of 0.05 length of column
(2) Girder: M3
Location: at the both end, about of 0.05 length of girder
(3) Panel Zone: V3 (This design don’t include panel zone, so not considering the
destructive mode)

0.05L1 ( L1 = length of beam )

0.05L2 ( L2 = length of column )

Hinge: M3 Hinge: P-M-M

Figure 5.1 Plastic hinge of MRF

79
5.1.2 Pushover curve of SMF building

This Section is going to evaluate the behavior of the SMF Building design in
Chapter 3 through pushover analysis with ETABS. The pushover curves of two
orthogonal directions should be very close, because the configuration of SMFs in the
building is symmetric in orthogonal directions. The error of pushover curves of two
orthogonal directions is from the columns of gravity system and the SMF. Highly
symmetric of the building is much more stable.

The result of pushover analysis is shown as Table 5.2-5.3 and Figure5.3-5.4. The
maximum value of base shear force of pushover curve in x direction is 3369.385 kips,
and displacement of top floor is 18.57 inch, approximately 0.0198 radius. The
maximum value of base shear force of pushover curve in y direction is 3243.221 kips,
and displacement of top floor is 18.59 inch, approximately 0.0198 radius.

Normally, the ETABS stops from analyzing, when there is member has cracked.
Though the normal condition is so, it is depended on the capability of converge with
ETABS, and the pushover analysis may stop, when there is no member cracked.

The design base shear force is obtained by reducing the seismic force by a
certain multiple. Therefore, it is hoped that the maximum value of base shear force
equal to seismic force, which is the most economical design. Usually, the maximum
value of base shear force is usually 2 to 3 times to the design base shear. In this design
case, the maximum value of base shear force is about 6.3 times to design base shear.
From the pushover curve, this design is very conservative, and it indicates that the
design is not the most economic.

Yielding point of pushover curve is shown as Table5.1. The value of base shear
of yielding point should approximately equal to design base shear, but the result of
this design is not. The base shear of yielding point is about 3 to 4 times to the design
base shear, which indicates the structure is with high stiffness.

Table 5.1 SMF building - Yielding point of pushover curve

Pushover X Pushover Y
Dy (in) 9.125 7.516
Vy (kip) 1939.85 1553.33
Dy: yielding displacement
Vy: yielding base shear
Pushover X: pushover analysis in x direction
Pushover Y: pushover analysis in y direction

80
 Base Shear VS. Monitored Displacement
4000

Base Shear , kip 3500

3000
2500
2000 Pushover X
1500 Pushover Y
1000 Design base shear
500
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Monitored Displacement, in

Figure 5.2 MRF building - Pushover curves of diagonal direction

Table 5.2 MRF building - Pushover curve data in x direction

Step Displacement (in.) Base shear (kips)

0 0 0
1 3.1199157769928436 663.20313046499928
2 6.2399157769928433 1326.4062609299986
3 9.1337398347877041 1941.532278283998
4 12.36252336613753 2537.5915024492233
5 15.680562455177444 2996.0241121745939
6 18.572888794477112 3369.3853213910884
7 15.050166716603803 2599.5459583366155

Table 5.3 MRF building - Pushover curve data in y direction

Step Displacement (in.) Base shear (kips)

0 0 0
1 3.0963861698605393 639.89349416657183
2 6.21638616986054 1279.7869883331437
3 9.2047591684425552 1892.6845652356055
4 12.345837800292159 2455.5672376401717
5 15.87762603179134 2918.8121562094657
6 18.596241424164582 3243.2210659481434
7 14.806174160846174 2436.0391192496759

81
Figure 5.3 MRF building - Pushover curve in x direction

Figure 5.4 MRF building - Pushover curve in y direction

82
5.1.3 Plastic hinges distribution for SMF

From the pushover curve, it shows the base shear and the displacement of top
floor of yielding point. According to the plastic hinges distribution diagram, it is
known which component first generates the plastic hinge, which means it is yielding.

SMF is expected that the girder yielding earlier than column, because the
structure is designed based on strong column – weak girder. Step 3 - Plastic hinges
distribution (SDR=0.98% radius) of SMF-2 (Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6) shows that the
hinge of girder of first floor is yielding first. Components of SMFs are all expected to
be yielding, which means they all participate in dissipating seismic energy instead of
depending on some components, which means that there is no obvious weak story of
structure. Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution (SDR=1.7% radius) (Figure 5.7 to Figure
5.10) shows that most of hinges turn green, when no one is cracked, which is good.

Pushover X - Step 7 - Plastic hinges distribution of SMF-2 (Figure 5.11) show

that there is no plastic hinge which turns purple or red, when the pushover analysis
stops. Pushover Y - Step 7 - Plastic hinges distribution of SMF-2 (Figure 5.12) shows
that the plastic hinge of footing of column turns purple, and then the pushover
analysis stops, which means the structure is going to collapse.

Figure 5.5 Pushover X - Step 3 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

83
Figure 5.6 Pushover Y - Step 3 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

Figure 5.7 Pushover X - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-1)

84
Figure 5.8 Pushover X - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

Figure 5.9 Pushover Y - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-1)

85
Figure 5.10 Pushover Y - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

Figure 5.11 Pushover X - Step 7 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

86
Figure 5.12 Pushover Y - Step 7- Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SMF-2)

87
5.1.4 Platic hinge response for SMF

The Figure 5.13 shows the plastic hinge behavior, and the curve means the
relationship between strength and displacement of component. Point B is yielding
strength, and point C is ultimate strength. When the force is over point C, the strength
of component reduces quickly, and the ability of component for resisting lateral force
is unreliable. Point E is the maximum deformation of component, and the component
is cracked, which is without ability for affording loads.

Force

IO: Immediate Occupancy

CP C
LS LS: Life Safety
IO
CP: Collapse Prevention
B

D E

A Displacememnt

Figure 5.13 Force – Displacement diagram

Which component leads pushover analysis to stop is obtained from the plastic
hinges distribution diagram in previous Section. In this Section, I especially discuss
the plastic hinge response of the components in x and y direction respectively.
Pushover analysis in x direction shows the column of first story (location: (2, D)) is
the member leads the analysis stop, and the plastic hinge response (Figure 5.14)
shows the development of curve is over point C, which means the ability of
component for resisting lateral force is unreliable. Pushover analysis in y direction
shows the column of first story (location: (3, B)) is the member leads the analysis
stop, and the plastic hinge response (Figure 5.15) shows that the development of curve
is over point and closing to point E.

88
Figure 5.14 Pushover X - Platic hinge response of the member (SMF-2)

Figure 5.15 Pushover Y - Platic hinge response of the member (SMF-2)

89
5.2.1 Plastic hinge and location for BRBF

BRBF building primarily resists lateral force by BRB, and it is expected to be

yielding, so setting plastic hinge for BRB is necessary. Columns of SLRF system are
designed to resist axial force from BRB, so it should be considered that it may be
yielding too.

(1) Column: P-M-M

Location: at the both end, about of 0.05 length of column
(2) BRB: P (Axial hinge)
Location: at the middle of BRB

0.05L2 ( L2 = length of column )

0.5L3

0.5L ( L3 = length of BRB )

0.5L

Hinge: P-M-M Hinge: P

Figure 5.16 Plastic hinge of BRBF

90
5.2.2 Pushover curve of BRBF building

Refer to Section 5.1.2, this Section is going to evaluate the behavior of the BRBF
Building design in Chapter 4 through pushover analysis with ETABS. The pushover
curves of two orthogonal directions (Figure 5.17) should be very close, because the
configuration of BFBFs in the building is symmetric in orthogonal directions. The
error of pushover curves of two orthogonal directions is maybe caused from the
columns of gravity system. From the result, it indicates the contribution of column in
gravity system to resist lateral force cannot be ignored. And the good way to improve
it is using High-speed steel for the column, whose values of inertia in orthogonal
directions is the same.

The result of pushover analysis is shown as Table 5.5-5.6 and Figure5.17-5.19.

The maximum value of base shear force of pushover curve in x direction is 3014.233
kips, and displacement of top floor is 32.2 inch, approximately 0.0344 radius. The
maximum value of base shear force of pushover curve in y direction is 2590 kips, and
displacement of top floor is 34.84 inch, approximately 0.0372 radius.

In this design case, the maximum value of base shear force of pushover X and
pushover Y is about 4.8 times to design base shear and 4.2 times to design base shear.

Yielding point of pushover curve is shown as Table5.4. The value of base shear
of yielding point should approximately equal to design base shear, and the result of
this design is so. The design base shear is 618 kips, and the error of design baes shear
force and the base of yielding point is about 23%.

Table 5.4 BRBF building - Yielding point of pushover curve

Pushover X Pushover Y
Dy (in) 2.20 2.165
Vy (kip) 763.752 700.689

Dy: yielding displacement

Vy: yielding base shear
Pushover X: pushover analysis in x direction
Pushover Y: pushover analysis in y direction

91
Table 5.5 BRBF building - Pushover curve data in x direction

Step Displacement (in) Base Shear (kips)

0 0 0
1 1.987153 688.504
2 2.668076 809.5392
3 9.946378 1459.903
4 14.67992 1833.179
5 23.23073 2417.255
6 28.30392 2756.483
7 32.20181 3014.233
8 29.69187 2427.028

Table 5.6 BRBF building - Pushover curve data in y direction

Step Displacement (in) Base Shear (kips)

0 0 0
1 1.99045158 644.1737
2 2.29857013 711.4165
3 9.17542644 1218.446
4 13.8554264 1498.21
5 18.8147185 1787.254
6 26.0142797 2152.878
7 30.7731502 2391.02
8 34.8470686 2590.836
9 30.5626126 1313.64

92
 Base Shear VS. Monitored Displacement
3500

3000

2500
Base Shear , kip

2000
Pushover X
1500 Pushover Y
Design Base Shear
1000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Monitored Displacement, in

Figure 5.17 BRBF building - Pushover curves of diagonal direction

Figure 5.18 BRBF building - Pushover curve in x direction

93
 Figure 5.19 BRBF building - Pushover curve in y direction

5.2.3 Plastic hinges distribution for BRBF

Refer to Section 5.1.3. BRBF. BRBF provide significant inelastic deformation

capacity primarily through brace yielding in tension and compression. Step 1 - Plastic
hinges distribution diagram (SDR=0.21% radius) (Figure 5.20 and Figure 5.21) shows
that the hinge of BRB is yielding first, and then Step 2 - Plastic hinges distribution
diagram (SDR=0.244% radius) (Figure 5.22 and Figure 5.23) shows that the most of
BRBs are yielding. Pushover X - Step 5 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram
(SDR=2.48% radius) (Figure 5.24) shows that the most plastic hinges of BRBs turn
blue, and the plastic hinges of footing turn green, which is yielding at this moment.
Pushover Y - Step 4 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SDR=1.48% radius) (Figure
5.25) shows that the most plastic hinges of BRBs turn blue, which means the behavior
of plastic hinge is reach C-D (Figure 5.13).

Pushover X - Step 8 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram (SDR=3.17% radius)

(Figure 5.26) shows that the plastic hinges of footing turn purple, which means the
behavior of plastic hinge reach D-E (Figure 5.13), and the component loss the ability
for resisting lateral force. Pushover Y - Step 9 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram
(SDR=3.26% radius) (Figure 5.27) shows most of BRBs turn blue, and the plastic
hinge of footing turn green.
94
Figure 5.20 Pushover X - Step 1 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram

Figure 5.21 Pushover Y - Step 1 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram

95
Figure 5.22 Pushover X - Step 2 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram

Figure 5.23 Pushover Y - Step 2 - Plastic hinges distribution diagram

96
Figure 5.24 Pushover X - Step 5 -Plastic hinges distribution diagram

Figure 5.25 Pushover Y - Step 4-Plastic hinges distribution diagram

97
Figure 5.26 Pushover X - Step 8-Plastic hinges distribution diagram

Figure 5.27 Pushover Y - Step 9-Plastic hinges distribution diagram

98
5.2.4 Platic hinge response for BRBF

Refer to Section 5.1.4. Figure 5.26 shows which coponent is cracked to lead the
pushover X nanlysis to stop. The plastic hinge behavior of footing is shown as Figure
5.28, which indicates it reach point E, and the component is completely cracked. For
example, plastic hinge behavior of BRB in first story is shown as Figure 5.29, which
shows it reach LS (Figure 5.13).

Pushover Y analysis (Figure 5.27) shows there is no plastic hinge of component

turn purple. Checking every member for plastic behavior, for example footing and
BRB in first story. The plastic hinge behavior of footing is shown as Figure 5.31,
which is reach point C. The plastic hinge behavior of BRB in first story is shown as
Figure 5.32, which is over LS.

Figure 5.28 Pushover X - Platic hinge response of the column (first story)

99
Figure 5.29 Pushover X - Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story)

Figure 5.30 Pushover Y - Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story)

100
Figure 5.31 Pushover Y -Platic hinge response of the BRB (first story)

101
 Chapter 6 Conclusions
Design is a tedious and delicate work, and the process is through adjusting
members again and again to achieve the best design for designer. Because there is
different design purpose in the mind of each designer, the same case may be designed
a completely different design for members and configurations. Just specify your own
design concept and ensure that the design fully meets the Specifications.

1. SMF building

From the stress ratio, it is known that the method, equivalent axial load, can
accurately transform the moment into axial force, which is good for preliminary
design of SMF.

If the sections of columns and girders are selected for exactly meeting the require
force, it will lead the story drift is too large, which accompanied with the long
structural period. In order to decrease the story drift and shorten the structure period,
using deep section for them is necessary. Especially, there is more obvious effect to
decrease the story drift by using deep section for girder instead of column.

Using deep section for girder and column may not completely reducing the story
drift to meet the Specification, so appropriately enlarging the section for them is
unavoidable. The stress ratio of girder should not be smaller than column, which can
be strong-column and weak-girder.

The girder and column is not only controlled by stress ratio but also moment ratio.
In order to decrease the story drift, using deep section or enlarging section of girder
all may make the section of column should be enlarged. If the section of column is
enlarged several times to require section because of moment ratio, it will lead to
greatly over-design the structure and reduce the economic efficiency. Therefore, the
coordination between girders and columns of SMFs is very important.

The result of nonlinear static analysis indicates the structure is very strong, and it
is probably caused by configuration of SMF, which cannot provide more girders in
SLRF system.

2. BRBFs building

The primary control of BRBF to resisting lateral forces is BRB. If the structure
period of preliminary design is too long, or if the story drift is too large, adjusting the
Asc of the BRB is effective method. However, engineer cannot enlarge the Asc

102
indefinitely, because it is also considered that the required axial force of the column
increases simultaneously. Enlarging Asc is effective, but is not the most economical
method.

If the Asc of RBB should be greatly enlarged to increase the stiffness, the type
and configuration of BRBFs is maybe not best. Trying to change the type of BRBs or
increase the number of bays of BRBF may can make the structure more easily to meet
the Specification. If the design axial force of BRB is equal to the require axial force,
and the structural period and story drift can satisfy the requirements of Specification,
the design is appropriate and relatively economical.

From this model, the design axial force of BRBs equal to require force, and the
results of the pushover analysis indicates it is appropriate and relatively economical,
because the yielding base shear is close to the design base shear, which is the theory
of seismic design.

3. From the nonlinear static analysis, it shows that the plastic hinge of footing of
structure are yielding, and it is even cracked at the end of pushover analysis. The
geometric deformation of structure makes it so.

4. Suggestion of further study

Provide a structure with dual frame system, which contains both SMF and BRB,
because the BRB has a good effect in decrease the story drift, and SMF provide more
space for structure. Considering about their advantages, the structure is designed for
more economical and safety.

Comparing the total steel weight of these two structures can tell which the
structure system is much more economical in cost.

103
 References
1. American Institute of Steel Construction 341-10 (2010), Seismic Provision for
Structural Steel Building
2. American Institute of Steel Construction 358-16 (2016), Prequalified Connections
for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications
3. American Institute of Steel Construction 360-10 (2010), Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings
4. American Institute of Steel Construction (2011), Manual of Steel Construction,
Load and Resistance Factor Design, AISC, Chicago, Illinois.
5. American Society of Civil Engineers 7-10 (2010), Minimum Design Loads for
Buildings and Other Structures.
6. Architectural Institute of Japan, Steel Committee of Kinki Branch,
Reconnaissance report on damage to steel building structures observed from the
1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu (Hanshin/Awaji) earthquake, AIJ, Tokyo, May 1995.
7. Computational Methods in Earthquake Engineering Volume 2, 2012.
8. FEMA-350 – Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-
Frame Buildings.
9. FEMA-351 – Recommended Seismic Evaluation and Upgrade Criteria for
Existing Welded Steel Moment-Frame Buildings.
10. FEMA-352 – Recommended Post Earthquake Evaluation and Repair Criteria for
Welded Steel Moment-Frame Buildings.
11. FEMA-353 – Recommended Specifications and Quality Assurance Guidelines for
Steel Moment-Frame Construction for Seismic Applications.
12. FEMA-355A – State of the Art Report on Base Metals and Fracture.
13. FEMA-355B – State of the Art Report on Welding and Inspection.
14. FEMA-355C – State of the Art Report on Systems Performance of Steel Moment
Frames Subject to Earthquake Ground Shaking.
15. FEMA-355D – State of the Art Report on Connection Performance.
16. FEMA-355E – State of the Art Report on Past Performance of Steel Moment-
Frame Buildings in Earthquakes.
17. FEMA-355F – State of the Art Report on Performance Prediction and Evaluation
of Steel Moment-Frame Buildings.
18. Helmut Krawinkler “Northridge earthquake of January 17, 1994: reconnaissance
report, Vol. 2–steel buildings”. Earthquake Spectra, 11, Suppl. C, Jan. 1996.
19. Kazuhiro Kimura, “Tests on braces encased by mortar in filled steel tubes”,
summaries of technical papers of annual meeting. Architectural Institute of Japan,
1967.
104
20. Mamoru Iwata and Takashi Kato, “Buckling-restrained braces as hysteretic
dampers, Behavior of steel structures in seismic areas: STESSA 2000”, Balkema,
2000.
21. Robert Tremblay, André Filiatrault, Peter Timler, and Michel Bruneau,
“Performance of steel structures during the 1994 Northridge earthquake”,
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1995.
22. Robert Tremblay, André Filiatrault, Michel Bruneau, Masayoshi Nakashima,
Helmut Prion, and Ron DeVall, “Seismic design of steel buildings: lessons from
the 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake”, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
1996.
23. Qiang Xie, “State of the art of buckling-restrained braces in Asia”, Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 61, 2005.
24. Toshiharu Hisatoku, “Reanalysis and repair of a high-rise steel building damaged
by the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu earthquake. Proceedings”, 64th Annual
Convention, Structural Engineers Association of California, Structural Engineers
Assn. of California, Sacramento, CA, 1995, pp. 21-40.
25. Xiaodong Tang, and Subhash C. Goel, “A fracture criterion for tubular bracing
members and its application to inelastic dynamic analysis of braced Engineering”,
9WCEE Organizing Committee, Japan Association for Earthquake Disaster
Prevention, Tokyo, Vol. IV, 1989.

105