DDBD of CBFs with

tension-yielding braces
(ANNEX 5.1 of DBD12)
 Total storey drift capacity of a CBF?
If it is assumed that the peak storey
drift occurs at the ground storey,
the drift capacity can be obtained:
D D
abr
Lbr dbr Note that this conservatively
hs ignores the effect of column
dbr = Lbrebr deformations on the drift capacity.
abr
D = Lbrebr/cos(abr)

q = D/hs hs = Lbrsin(abr) q = ebr/sin(abr) cos(abr)

2e LS
2sin(a) cos(a) = sin(2a) q c ,CBF =
sin 2a br
 Elastic Deformation / Yield Drift of CBF?
There are two main components
to elastic deformation in a
standard CBF:
- Axial deformations of braces
- Axial deformations of columns Storey drift component due to braces

Storey drift component due to

column axial defms
abr Care required!
Which column
subject to
Hence, approximate æ ey H e kcolse y öcompression?
D y = 2 H e çç + ÷÷
expression for yield disp: è sin 2a br Lb ø
 Column deformation component?
The yield drift of CBFs is computed with a
“kcols” parameter that accounts for the axial D = 2 H æç
ey H e kcolse y ö
y eç + ÷÷
deformations of the columns. This factor is è sin 2a br Lb ø
defined as:
A typical value of kcols
might be 0.25 because
the column section size
is set considering
buckling capacity
together with capacity
design actions.
In other words, kcols.ey represents the average column strain (due to
DBD forces – not capacity design actions).
As such, the vertical displacement due to column axial deformations
is being computed as the average strain times the height.
This vertical displacement is then divided by half the bay length
(Lb/2) to give an equivalent yield drift, which, multiplied by the
effective height gives the yield displacement.
 Design Displacement Profile for CBFs
For standard CBFs (with tension yielding
braces) the design displacement profile
will be affected by brace deformations Hn
(shear defm shape) and column axial
deformations (cantilever defm shape). h1
In addition, the brace deformation
components will be influenced by:
- the strength distribution (inelastic
displaced shape) Minimum of non-structural
- the brace slenderness distribution drift limit and CBF drift
(post-buckling displaced shape) limit, qCBF.

To maintain a simplified procedure, the same displaced

shape expression proposed for MRFs is indicated in DBD12
for CBFs (with tension yielding braces):
(results from Salawdeh 2012 suggest
it is good for design)
Hysteretic behaviour of CBFs?
Given the significant differences in resistance in compression and
tension, the hysteretic shape of braces subject to cyclic axial loads
is non-symmetric with limited energy dissipation.

Note that because of the non-symmetric response, braces in CBFs must

always be arranged so that there is an equal (approximately) area of
braces in tension in the positive and negative directions respectively.
Equivalent Viscous Damping of CBFs

Based on research by
Wijesundara (2010) and
Fort et al. (2011)

Brace slenderness becomes

a key design parameter
…and since EVD
relatively insensitive to
ductility for m>2 (and note
that this is associated
with tensile ductility
demand on brace) the
design process can be
simplified!
 Yield displacement of CBFs
For standard CBFs (with tension yielding braces) the
system yield displacement is estimated simply by
multiplying the yield drift by the effective height

Approximate expression for æ ey hi kcolse y ö

q y = 2çç + ÷÷
yield drift: è sin 2a br Lb ø

System yield displacement:

With the yield displacement, design displacement, effective

mass, ductility and damping known, required base shear can
then be obtained as per standard DDBD approach.