Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 255–268 | Cite as

Ductility demands on buckling-restrained braced frames under earthquake loading

  • Larry A. Fahnestock
  • Richard Sause
  • James M. Ricles
  • Le-Wu Lu
Article

Abstract

Accurate estimates of ductility demands on buckling-restrained braced frames (BRBFs) are crucial to performance-based design of BRBFs. An analytical study on the seismic behavior of BRBFs has been conducted at the ATLSS Center, Lehigh University to prepare for an upcoming experimental program. The analysis program DRAIN-2DX was used to model a one-bay, four-story prototype BRBF including material and geometric nonlinearities. The buckling-restrained brace (BRB) model incorporates both isotropic and kinematic hardening. Nonlinear static pushover and time-history analyses were performed on the prototype BRBF. Performance objectives for the BRBs were defined and used to evaluate the time-history analysis results. Particular emphasis was placed on global ductility demands and ductility demands on the BRBs. These demands were compared with anticipated ductility capacities. The analysis results, along with results from similar previous studies, are used to evaluate the BRBF design provisions that have been recommended for codification in the United States. The results show that BRB maximum ductility demands can be as high as 20 to 25. These demands significantly exceed those anticipated by the BRBF recommended provisions. Results from the static pushover and time-history analyses are used to demonstrate why the ductility demands exceed those anticipated by the recommended provisions. The BRB qualification testing protocol contained in the BRBF recommended provisions is shown to be inadequate because it requires only a maximum ductility demand of at most 7.5. Modifications to the testing protocol are recommended.

Keywords

buildings buckling-restrained braced frames buckling-restrained braces structural response seismic response ductility demand seismic codes and standards 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Institute of Steel Construction (2001), Manual of Steel Construction — Load and Resistance Factor Design, 3rd Edition.Google Scholar
  2. American Institute of Steel Construction (2002), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.Google Scholar
  3. American Institute of Steel Construction/Structural Engineers Association of California (2001), Recommended Provisions for Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames, (draft).Google Scholar
  4. Black CJ, Makris N and Aiken ID (2002), “Component Testing, Stability Analysis and Characterization of Buckling Restrained ‘Unbonded’ Braces,” Technical Report PEER 2002/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  5. Clark P, Kasai K, Aiken ID and Kimura I (2000), “Evaluation of Design Methodologies for Structures Incorporating Steel Unbonded Braces for Energy Dissipation,” Proceedings of the 12 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Upper Hut, New Zealand, Paper No. 2240.Google Scholar
  6. Fahnestock LA, Ricles JM and Sause R (2004), “Refined Inelastic Truss Bar Element (Type 01) with Isotropic Hardening for DRAIN-2DX, Element Description and User Guide,” ATLSS Report in preparation, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.Google Scholar
  7. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000a), NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part 1 - Provisions, FEMA 368, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  8. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000b), NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part 2 - Commentary, FEMA 369, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  9. Garlock M (2002), “Full Scale Testing, Seismic Analysis, and Design of Post-Tensioned Seismically Resistant Connections for Steel Frames,” Ph.D. dissertation, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.Google Scholar
  10. International Code Council (2000), International Building Code, Falls Church, VA.Google Scholar
  11. Iwata M, Kato T and Wada A (2003), “Performance Evaluation of Buckling-Restrained Braces in Damage-Controlled Structures,” Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Proceedings of the 4 th International Conference STESSA 2003, Mazzolani, F. (ed.), Naples, Italy, June 9–12, pp. 37–43.Google Scholar
  12. Iwata M, Kato T and Wada A (2000), “Buckling-Restrained Braces as Hysteretic Dampers,” Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Proceedings of the 3 rd International Conference STESSA 2000, Mazzolani, F., and Tremblay, R. (ed.), Montreal, Canada, August 21–24, pp. 33–38.Google Scholar
  13. Lopez W, Gwie D, Saunders M and Lauck T (2002), “Lessons Learned from Large-Scale Tests of Unbonded Braced Frame Subassemblage,” Proceedings, SEAOC 71 st Annual Convention.Google Scholar
  14. Merritt S, Uang CM and Benzoni G (2003a), “Subassemblage Testing of CoreBrace Buckling-Restrained Braces,” Structural Systems Research Project, Report No. TR-2003/01, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
  15. Merritt S, Uang CM and Benzoni G (2003b), “Subassemblage Testing of Star Seismic Buckling-Restrained Braces,” Structural Systems Research Project, Report No. TR-2003/04, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
  16. Newmark NM and Hall WJ (1982), Earthquake Spectra and Design, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, El Cerrito, CA.Google Scholar
  17. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (2000), “Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Strong Motion Database,” http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat/.Google Scholar
  18. Prakash V, Powell GH and Campbell S (1993), “DRAIN-2DX Base Program Description and User Guide — Version 1.10,” Report No. UCB/SEMM-93/17 and 18, Structural Engineering Mechanics and Materials, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  19. Ricles JM and Popov EP (1994), “Inelastic Link Element for EBF Seismic Analysis,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 120 (2): 441–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rojas P (2003), “Seismic Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Post-Tensioned Friction Damped Connections for Steel Moment Resisting Frames,” Ph.D. dissertation, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.Google Scholar
  21. Sabelli R (2001), “Research on Improving the Design and Analysis of Earthquake-Resistant Steel Braced Frames,” The 2000 NEHRP Professional Fellowship Report, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA.Google Scholar
  22. Sabelli R and Aiken I (2003), “Development of Building Code Provisions for Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames,” Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Proceedings of the 4 th International Conference STESSA 2003, Mazzolani, F. (ed.), Naples, Italy, June 9–12, pp. 813–818.Google Scholar
  23. Somerville P, Smith N, Punyamurthula S and Sun J (1997), “Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project,” SAC Background Document SAC/BD-97/04, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Tremblay R, Degrange G and Blouin J (1999), “Seismic Rehabilitation of a Four-Storey Building with a Stiffened Bracing System,” Proceedings, 8 th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  25. Tsai KC, Loh CH, Hwang YC and Weng CS (2003), “Seismic Retrofit of Building Structures with Dampers in Taiwan,” Symposium of Seismic Retrofit of Buildings and Bridges with Base Isolation and Dampers, Kyoto University, Japan.Google Scholar
  26. Uang CM (1991), “Establishing R (or Rw) and Cd Factors for Building Seismic Provisions,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 117(1): 19–28.Google Scholar
  27. Uang CM and Maarouf A (1994), “Deflection Amplification Factor for Seismic Design Provisions,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 120(8): 2423–2436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Usami T, Kasai A and Kato M (2003), “Behavior of Buckling-Restrained Brace Members,” Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Proceedings of the 4 th International Conference STESSA 2003, Mazzolani, F. (ed.), Naples, Italy, June 9–12, pp. 211–216.Google Scholar
  29. Watanabe A, Hitomi Y, Saeki E, Wada A and Fujimoto M (1988), “Properties of Brace Encased in Buckling-Restraining Concrete and Steel Tube,” Proceedings of the 9 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Larry A. Fahnestock
    • 1
  • Richard Sause
    • 1
  • James M. Ricles
    • 1
  • Le-Wu Lu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, ATLSS CenterLehigh UniversityBethlehemUSA

Personalised recommendations