Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seismic Performance Comparison of Moderately Ductile and Conventional Construction Steel Concentrically Braced Frames

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conference 2022 (CSCE 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 348))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 462 Accesses

Abstract

Steel concentrically braced frames (CBFs) are widely used as a seismic force resisting system (SFRS) in Canada because of their efficiency in resisting seismic loads. Several different approaches can be taken to design CBFs according to the Canadian Steel Design Standard CSA S16:19. These approaches range from moderately ductile (Type MD) CBFs, which require special detailing considerations and limits on local and member slenderness to promote the intended ductile response, to conventional construction (Type CC), which requires higher seismic design forces but has more relaxed detailing requirements. While these construction types have been defined in CSA S16:19 for many years, few studies have compared the seismic performance of frames designed using these different sets of requirements. To address this research gap, this paper compares designs for the same archetype structure using both Type MD and Type CC CBFs. Both frame types are designed according to CSA S16:19 and subsequently modelled using the advanced earthquake simulation software OpenSees. Thereafter, the models are subjected to a multiple stripe analysis (MSA) using a set of ground motions prescribed in FEMA P-695, to assess their seismic performance. A close look at the inter-storey drift time history during a typical ground motion record reveals the sequential occurrence of the different damage states, while the statistics of the inter-storey drift ratio demonstrates that the Type CC design leads to more variable performance. Finally, storey-by-storey fragility curves are developed for both construction types to compare the seismic performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ANSI/AISC 341-16 (2016) Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

  2. ASCE/SEI 7-22 (2022) Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baker JW (2015) Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis. Earthq Spectra 31(1):579–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ballard R (2015) Impact of connection type on performance of non-seismic concentrically braced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bradley CR, Fahnestock LA, Hines EM, Sizemore JG (2017) Full-scale cyclic testing of low-ductility concentrically braced frames. J Struct Eng 143(6):04017029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Castonguay PX (2009) Seismic performance of concentrically braced steel frame of the conventional construction catagory. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of a Master’s degree in applied sciences, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Ecole Polytechnique De Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  7. CSA S16:19 (2019) Design of steel structures. Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Ont., Canada

    Google Scholar 

  8. Elkady A, Lignos DG (2015) Effect of gravity framing on the overstrength and collapse capacity of the steel frame building with perimeter special moment frames. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 44:1289–1307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. FEMA P-695 (2009) Quantification of building seismic performance factors. Prepared by Applied Technology Council. Prepared for Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Google Scholar 

  10. Herman D (2007) Further improvements on and understanding of special concentrically braced frame systems. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hsiao PC, Lehman DE, Berman JW, Roeder CW, Powell J (2014) Seismic vulnerability of older braced frames. J Perform Constr Facil 28(1):108–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hsiao PC, Lehman DE, Roeder CW (2012) Improved analytical model for special concentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel Res 73:80–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hsiao PC, Lehman DE, Roeder CW (2013) A model to simulate special concentrically braced frames beyond brace fracture. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 42:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnson MM (2014) Seismic evaluation of bolted connections in non-seismic concentrically braced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson SM (2005) Improved seismic performance of special concentrically braced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kotulka BA (2007) Analysis for a design guide on gusset plates used in special concentrically braced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lehman DE, Roeder CW, Herman D, Johnson S, Kotulka B (2008) Improved seismic performance of gusset plate connections. J Struct Eng 134(6):890–901

    Google Scholar 

  18. Liu J, Astaneh-Asl A (2004) Moment-rotational parameters for composite shear tab connections. J Struct Eng 130(9):1371–1380

    Google Scholar 

  19. McKenna FT (1997) Object-oriented finite element programming framework for analysis, algorithm and parallel computing. Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  20. NBC (2015) National building code of Canada. National Research Council of Canada. Canadian Commision on Building and Fire Codes

    Google Scholar 

  21. Powell JA (2009) Evaluation of special concentrically braced frames for improved seismic performance and constructability. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  22. Roeder CW, Lumpkin EJ, Lehman DE (2011) A balanced design procedure for special concentrically braced frame connections. J Constr Steel Res 67(11):1760–1772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rudman A, Tremblay R, Rogers CA (2021) Conventional I-shape brace member bolted connections under seismic loading: laboratory study. J Constr Steel Res 184

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sen AD, Roeder CW, Lehman DE, Berman JW (2019) Nonlinear modeling of concentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel Res 157:103–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sen AD, Sloat D, Ballard R, Johnson MM, Roeder CW, Lehman DE, Berman JW (2016) Experimental evaluation of the seismic vulnerability of braces and connections in older concentrically braced frames. J Struct Eng 142(9):04016052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sizemore JG, Fahnestock LA, Hines EM, Bradley CR (2017) Parametric study of low-ductility concentrically braced frames under cyclic static loading. J Struct Eng 143(6):04017032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sloat D (2014) Evaluation and retrofit of non-capacity designed braced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  28. Swatosh MA (2016) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concentrically btraced frames. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Science, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Washington

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wang C, Tremblay R, Rogers CA (2021) Component-based model for bolted brace connections in conventional concentrically braced frames. Eng Struct 247

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of this study from Discovery Grant funding provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

    Anirban Kundu, Lydell Wiebe & Georgios P. Balomenos

Authors
  1. Anirban Kundu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lydell Wiebe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Georgios P. Balomenos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anirban Kundu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Rishi Gupta

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Min Sun

  3. Department of Earthquake Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Svetlana Brzev

  4. The University of British Columbia-Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC, Canada

    M. Shahria Alam

  5. University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada

    Kelvin Tsun Wai Ng

  6. Environmental Engineering Program, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada

    Jianbing Li

  7. The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada

    Ashraf El Damatty

  8. Department of Civil Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Clark Lim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Canadian Society for Civil Engineering

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kundu, A., Wiebe, L., Balomenos, G.P. (2023). Seismic Performance Comparison of Moderately Ductile and Conventional Construction Steel Concentrically Braced Frames. In: Gupta, R., et al. Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conference 2022. CSCE 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 348. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34159-5_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34159-5_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-34158-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-34159-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation