Effect of Wind Loading Pattern on Shear Lag Phenomenon in Framed-Tube Building

Document Type : Regular Paper

Authors

1 Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU), Varanasi, India

2 M. Tech. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU), Varanasi, India

3 Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT (BHU), Varanasi, India

Abstract

High-rise tubular buildings experience the shear lag phenomenon due to wind load. This phenomenon results in tension in upper storey columns that may adversely affect building stability. Shear lag varies with many factors such as building layout, outer peripheral columns spacing, and load applied to the building. Therefore, it is essential to accurately analyze the shear lag phenomenon by considering these factors, especially, with due emphasize on the pattern of the applied wind loading. This paper attempts to study the effect of wind loading pattern on the shear lag phenomenon. Six load cases are taken from American and Canadian codes to analyze the wind load effects on a 40-storeyed tubular building. The results indicate that axial force distribution changes significantly with change in the loading patterns of the building. A difference in axial force distribution is observed between torsional and non-torsional load cases. Axial force in columns in the case of uniform loading is more significant as compared to partial loading cases. Due to loading on half of the face, axial force distribution becomes unsymmetrical, and a minimum axial force in corner columns is observed. Also, notable differences can be seen in the axial force distribution of load cases having both direction loadings compared to single direction loadings. Axial force distributions in cases of both face loading are unsymmetrical for the central column.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1]     Kuzmanović BO, Graham HJ. Shear Lag in Box Girders. J Struct Div 1981;107:1701–12. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0005777.
[2]     Lee SC, Yoo CH, Yoon DY. Analysis of Shear Lag Anomaly in Box Girders. J Struct Eng 2002;128:1379–86. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:11(1379).
[3]     Rovňák M, Ďuricová A. Discussion of “Analysis of Shear Lag Anomaly in Box Girders” by S. C. Lee, C. H. Yoo, and D. Y. Yoon. J Struct Eng 2004;130:1860–1. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:11(1860).
[4]     ZHOU S. Shear lag analysis of box girders. Eng Mech 2008;25:204–8.
[5]     Foutch DA, Chang PC. A Shear Lag Anomaly. J Struct Div 1982;108:1653–8. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0005995.
[6]     Singh GJ, Mandal S, Kumar R, Kumar V. Simplified Analysis of Negative Shear Lag in Laminated Composite Cantilever Beam. J Aerosp Eng 2020;33. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0001100.
[7]     Singh Y, Nagpal AK. Negative Shear Lag in Framed‐Tube Buildings. J Struct Eng 1994;120:3105–21. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:11(3105).
[8]     Rovňák M, Rovňáková L. Discussion: Negative Shear Lag in Framed-Tube Buildings. J Struct Eng 1996;122:711–3. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1996)122:6(711).
[9]     Khan FR, Amin NR. Analysis and design of framed tube structures for tall concrete buildings. Spec Publ 1972;36:39–60.
[10]   Coull A, Bose B. Simplified analysis of frame-tube structures. J Struct Div 1975;101:2223–40.
[11]   Haji‐Kazemi H, Company M. Exact method of analysis of shear lag in framed tube structures. Struct Des Tall Build 2002;11:375–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.208.
[12]   Mahjoub R, Rahgozar R, Saffari H. Simple method for analysis of tube frame by consideration of negative shear lag. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 2011;5:309–16.
[13]   Leonard J. Investigation of shear lag effect in high-rise buildings with diagrid system 2007.
[14]   Kim J, Lee Y. Seismic performance evaluation of diagrid system buildings. Struct Des Tall Spec Build 2012;21:736–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.643.
[15]   Zahiri-Hashemi R, Kheyroddin A, Farhadi B. Effective number of mega-bracing, in order to minimize shear lag. Struct Eng Mech 2013;48:173–93. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2013.48.2.173.
[16]   Mazinani I, Jumaat MZ, Ismail Z, Chao OZ. Comparison of shear lag in structural steel building with framed tube and braced tube. Struct Eng Mech 2014;49:297–309. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2014.49.3.297.
[17]   Gaur H, Goliya RK. Mitigating shear lag in tall buildings. Int J Adv Struct Eng 2015;7:269–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-015-0098-1.
[18]   Shi Q, Zhang F. Simplified calculation of shear lag effect for high-rise diagrid tube structures. J Build Eng 2019;22:486–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.01.009.
[19]   Mashhadiali N, Molaei F, Siavoshi H. Investigation of shear lag effect in tall tube-type buildings. Structures 2021;34:4204–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.10.035.
[20]   Hafner I, Vlašić A, Kišiček T, Renić T. Parametric Analysis of the Shear Lag Effect in Tube Structural Systems of Tall Buildings. Appl Sci 2020;11:278. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11010278.
[21]   Moghadasi M, Taeepoor S, Rahimian Koloor SS, Petrů M. The Effect of Lateral Load Type on Shear Lag of Concrete Tubular Structures with Different Plan Geometries. Crystals 2020;10:897. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst10100897.
[22]   Hoseini Vaez SR, Naderpour H, Kheyroddin A. The Effect of RC Core on Rehabilitation of Tubular Structures. J Rehabil Civ Eng 2014;2:63–74.
[23]   Tabiee M, Abdoos H, Khaloo A. Concurrent effects of the shear-lag and warping torsion on the performance of non-rectangular RC shear walls. Arch Civ Mech Eng 2023;23:138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43452-023-00663-1.
[24]   Li J, Wang T, Li F, You Y, Kong Z. Experimental and numerical study on the shear lag behavior of l-shaped double-steel-plate composite shear wall. Structures 2023;47:1729–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.11.103.
[25]   Kumari S, Singh A, Mandal S. Effect of Terrain Category, Aspect Ratio and Number of Storeys on the Shear Lag Phenomenon in RCC Framed Tube Structures, 2022, p. 163–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04793-0_12.
[26]   Isyumov N, Poole M. Wind induced torque on square and rectangular building shapes. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 1983;13:183–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(83)90140-X.
[27]   Tallin A, Ellingwood B. Serviceability Limit States: Wind Induced Vibrations. J Struct Eng 1984;110:2424–37. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1984)110:10(2424).
[28]   Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784415788.
[29]   Commission C, Codes F. National Building Code of Canada Volume 1. vol. 1. 2020.
[30]   Tc CEN. Eurocode 1 : Actions on structures — General actions — Part 1-4 : Wind actions Contents. Communities 2004;4:1–148.
[31]   Standards B of I. Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other Than Earthquake) for Buildings and Structures - Part 3: Wind Loads 2015.
[32]   Singh GJ, Mandal S, Kumar R. Investigation on Shear Lag Phenomenon in RCC Framed Tube Structures. I-Manager’s J Struct Eng 2015;4:18–25. https://doi.org/10.26634/jste.4.3.3727.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 13 October 2022
  • Revise Date: 06 June 2023
  • Accept Date: 05 July 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics