Assessing Seismic Performance of the Elliptic Braced Moment Resisting Frame through Pushover Method

Document Type : Regular Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Civil Engineering, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Sharif University, Tehran, Iran

4 Associate Professor, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The seismic performance of elliptic braced moment resisting frame (ELBRF) is assessed here and is found that the structural behavior is improved and is of free of architectural space. The demand for seismic performance of ELBRF is estimated through conventional pushover methods of 3, 5, 7, and 10-story ELBRF frames and they are compared with special moment resisting frames (SMRF) and X-Braced CBF and Inverted V-Braced CBF concentrically braced frames. The effective parameters in the seismic design of structures, like the ductility, overstrength and response modification factors are evaluated. The response modification factor for ELBRF in the design by ultimate limit state and allowable stress methods is proposed as 10 and 14.4, respectively. Finally, the process of forming plastic hinges in ELBRF is assessed and it is found that an increase in height makes the plastic hinges to be transmitted to the upper stories, allowing the structure to collapse at higher stories.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] Krawinkler H, Seneviratna G. (1998). Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering structures, 20: 452-464.
[2] Shoeibi S,  Kafi M.A, MajidGholhaki. New performance-based seismic design method for structures with structural fuse system. Engineering Structures 132 (2017) 745–760.
[3] Dipti R. Sahoo, Shih-Ho Chao. Performance-based plastic design method for buckling-restrained braced frames, Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 2950–2958.
[4] Zhifeng Liu, Sez Atamturktur, C. Hsein Juang. Performance based robust design optimization of steel moment resisting frames, Journal of Constructional Steel Research 89 (2013) 165–174.
[5] H. Moghaddam, I. Hajirasouliha. An investigation on the accuracy of pushover analysis for estimating the seismic deformation of braced steel frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62, 2006: 343–351.
[6] N. Fanaie, S. Ezzatshoar, Studying the seismic behavior of gate braced frames by incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), Journal of Constructional Steel Research 99 (2014) 111–120.
[7] Ehsan Fereshtehnejad. E, Mehdi Banazadeh, Abdollah Shafieezadeh. System reliability-based seismic collapse assessment of steel moment frames using incremental dynamic analysis and Bayesian probability network. Engineering Structures 118; 2016: 274–286.
[8] Djamal Yahmi, Taïeb Branci, Abdelhamid Bouchaïr, Eric Fournely. Evaluation of behaviour factors of steel moment-resisting frames using standard pushover method, Volume 199, 2017, Pages 397-403.
[9] Longo A., Montuori R., Piluso V. Plastic design of seismic resistant V-braced frames. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 12, Issue 8, 2008, p. 1246-1266.
[10] Ghasemi J.H, Haghollahi A, Moghaddam H, Sarvghad Moghadam A.R. Study of the seismic performance of steel frames in the elliptic bracing. JVE International LTD. Journal of Vibroengineering. Aug 2016, vol. 18, Issue 5. ISSN 1392-8716.
 [11] BHRC. Iranian code of practice for seismic resistance design of buildings: standard no. 2800. 4rd ed. Building and Housing Research Center; 2013.
[12] MHUD. Iranian National Building Code, part 10, steel structure design. Tehran (Iran): Ministry of Housing and Urban Development; 2013.
[13] FEMA 356, American Society of Civil Engineers. Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Washington (DC): Federal Emergency Management Agency; 2000.
[14] Saravanan M, Arul Jayachandran S, Marimuthu V, Prabha P. Advanced analysis of cyclic behaviour of plane steel frames with semi-rigid connections. Steel and Composite Structures, Vol. 9, Issue 4, 2009, p. 381-395.
[15] Chou C. C., Tsai K. C., Wang Y. Y., Jao C. K. Seismic rehabilitation performance of steel side plate moment connections. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 39, 2010, p. 23-44.
[16] Hsu H. L., Tsao J. W. Flexural–torsional performance of thin-walled steel hollow box columns subjected to a cyclic eccentric load. Thin-Walled Structures, Vol. 45, Issue 2, 2007, p. 149-158.
[17] Sh.Hosseinzadeh, B.Mohebi. Seismic evaluation of all-steel buckling restrained braces using finite element analysis, Volume 119, March 2016, Pages 76-84.
[18] Yoo JH, Lehman DE, Roeder CW. Influence of connection design parameters on the seismic performance of braced frames. J Constr Steel Res 2008;64(6):607–23.
[19] FEMA 273. NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency; 1997.
[20] Krawinkler H, Seneviratna GDPK. Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation. Engineering Structures 1998;20(4–6):452–64.
[21] Gupta B, Kunnath SK. Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of structures. Earthquake Spectra 2000;16(2): 367–92.
[22] Chopra AK, Goel R. A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2002;31: 561–82.
[23] Anil K. Chopra and Rakesh K. Goel. Evaluation of Modal and FEMA Pushover Analyses: SAC Buildings. Journal of Earthquake Spectra, Volume 20, No. 1, pages 225–254, February 2004.
[24] Uang CM. Establishing R or (Rw) and Cd factor building seismic provision. J Struct Eng. 1991; 117 (1):19–28.
[25] Uniform building code. Whitter, California: International Conference of Building Officials; 1997.
[26] Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL, Jeremic B. Opensees command language manual; 2013.
[27] Ibarra, L. F., and Krawinkler, H. (2005). “Global collapse of frame structures under seismic excitations,” Technical Report 152, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. [electronic version: https://blume.stanford.edu/tech report].
[28] Yun SY, Hamburger RO, Cornell CA, Foutch DA. Seismic performance for steel moment frames. ASCE J Struct Eng 2002;128(4).
[29] Krawinkler H. State of art report on systems performance of moment resisting steel frames subject to earthquake ground shaking. SAC report no. 355C. Washington (DC): FEMA; 2000.
[30] Ibarra, L.F., Medina, R.A., and Krawinkler, H., 2005, “Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration,” International Journal for Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 34, No.12, pp. 1489-1511.
[31] FEMAP-695. Quantification of seismic performance factors. FEMAP-695 Report, prepared by the Applied Technology Councilfor the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency, Washington, DC;2009.
[32] Lignos, D. G., and Krawinkler, H. (2011). “Deterioration Modeling of Steel Beams and Columns in Support to Collapse Prediction of Steel Moment Frames,” ASCE, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 137 (11), 1291-1302.
[33] Lignos, D.G., and Krawinkler, H., 2007, “A database in support of modeling of component deterioration for collapse prediction of steel frame structures,” ASCE Structures Congress, Long Beach, California.
[34] Ibarra LF, Medina RA, Krawinkler H. Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and stiffness deterioration. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 2005;34(12):1489–511.
[35] Lignos, D.G., Sidesway collapse of deteriorating structural systems under seismic excitations, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 2008.
[36] Lignos, D. G., and Krawinkler, H. Dimitrios G. “Deterioration Modeling of Steel Components in Support of Collapse Prediction of Steel Moment Frames under Earthquake Loadin,” Journal of Structural Engineering, 2011, 137(11): 1291-1302.
[37] Ali Pourgharibshahi, Touraj Taghikhany. Reliability-based assessment of deteriorating steel moment resisting frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 71, 2012: 219–230.
[38] PEER/ATC-72-1. Modeling and Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Design and Analysis of Tall Buildings, 2010.
[39] D.G. Lignos, H. Krawinkler and F. Zareian. Modeling of component deterioration for collapse prediction of steel moment frames. Conference: STESSA August 2009: Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, At Lehigh University, Pennsylvania, USA, Volume: 1.
[40] Junwon Seo, Jong Wan Hu and Burte Davaajamts. Seismic Performance Evaluation of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Frame Structure with Shear Walls. Journal of sustainability. October 2015, vol. 7, Issue 5. ISSN 2071-1050.

Files

Cited by

History

  • Receive Date: 08 November 2017
  • Revise Date: 08 January 2018
  • Accept Date: 05 February 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics