Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantification study for roof truss subjected to near-fault ground motions

  • Technical paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effects of vertical seismic excitations have a considerable destructive potential for long-span structures, particularly for near-field earthquakes. A quantification analysis is carried out in this paper to describe the response of a 25-m long trapezoidal truss frame with a height of 9 m under Vertical Ground Motion (VGM) with the help of eight near-field seismic excitations. Linear analysis of earthquake load combinations, including VGMs, has been conducted. The VGMs are leading the design of the long-span roof truss rather than the wind load. The time history analysis is therefore performed for horizontal ground acceleration and horizontal plus vertical acceleration using SAP 2000. For this analysis, eight near-field earthquake ground motion records consisting of four with pulse and four without pulse from the PEER NGA database, consistent with the ATC-63 requirements, are selected. The response of the structure is observed in different parameters such as the axial force of the column, the vertical displacement of the ends of the roof truss and the edge of the truss, the axial load of the bottom truss, and the base moment. This work quantifies the effect of vertical seismic excitations on a long-span industrial trapezoidal truss and demonstrates the need for a time history study of the VGM component.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shrestha B (2009) Vertical ground motions and its effect on engineering structures: a state-of-the-art-review. Int Semin Hazard Manag Sustain Develop Kathmandu Nepal. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2863.6165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. ATC 63 (2007) Recommended methodology for quantification of building system performance and response parameters - 75% interim draft report. Redwood: Applied Technology Council

  3. Hosseini M, Nezamabadi MF (2004) A study on the effect of vertical ground acceleration on the seismic response of steel buildings. Proceedings of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, No. 2377

  4. Sadeghvaziri MA, Foutch DA (1991) Dynamic behaviour of R/C highway bridges under the combined effect of horizontal and vertical earthquake motions. J Earthq Eng Struct Dynam 20:535–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hosseini M, Tavoosi TS (1999) Seismic response of a multi-span highway R/C bridge to simultaneous horizontal and vertical ground motion. Proceedings of the 39th Scientific Week of Syria, Damascus, Syria

  6. Kim SJ, Holub CJ, Elnashai AS (2011) Analytical assessment of the effect of vertical earthquake motion on RC bridge piers. ASCE J Struct Eng 137:252–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rahai A, Arezoumandi M (2008) Effect of vertical motion of earthquake on RC bridge pier. The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing

  8. Hatamizadeh MH, Nikghalb AA, Kazem H (2015) The effect of vertical component of earthquake on the long span frames. J Novel Appl Sci 4:963–966

    Google Scholar 

  9. Xiang Y, Luo Y, Huang Q, Shen Z (2017) Vertical ductility demand and residual displacement of roof-type steel structures subjected to vertical earthquake ground motions. Soil Dynam Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.06.043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahiwale DD, Khartode RR (2020) Evaluation seismic response for soft storey building retrofitted with infill, steel bracing and shear wall. J Struct Technol 5:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ahiwale DD, Khartode RR, Raut KV (2020) Seismic response for RC frames on sloping ground using pushover analysis. J Struct Eng Manag 7:36–46

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ahiwale D, Dewarde A, Narule G, Khartode R (2020) Seismic response assessment of steel frame step-back building for different fluid viscous damper. J Seybold Rep 15:1969–1983

    Google Scholar 

  13. Morkhade SG, Gupta LM (2015) Experimental study and rotational capacity of steel beams with web openings. Int J Civ Struct Eng 6:58–69

    Google Scholar 

  14. Morkhade SG, Baswaraj SM, Nayak CB (2019) Comparative study of effect of web openings on the strength capacities of steel beam with trapezoidally corrugated web. Asian J Civ Eng 20:1089–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Morkhade SG, Kshirsagar M, Dange R, Patil A (2019) Analytical study of effect of web opening on flexural behaviour of hybrid beams. Asian J Civ Eng 20:537–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Morkhade SG, Lokhande RS, Gund UD, Divate AB, Deosarkar SS, Chavan MU (2020) Structural behaviour of castellated steel beams with reinforced web openings. Asian J Civ Eng 21:1067–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Raut KV, Morkhade SG, Khartode RR, Ahiwale DD (2020) Experimental study on flexural behavior of light steel hollow flange beam with various stiffening arrangements. Innov Infrastruct Sol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00345-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaveh A, Mahdavi VR (2014) Colliding bodies optimization method for optimum design of truss structures with continuous variables. Adv Eng Softw. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2014.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2009) A particle swarm ant colony optimization for truss structures with discrete variable. J Constr Steel Res 65:1558–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2009) Size optimization of space trusses using big bang–big crunch algorithm. Comput Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2009.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) A discrete big bang–big crunch algorithm for optimal design of skeletal structures. Asian J Civ Eng 11:103–122

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ruiz D, Sarria A (2004) Response of large span steel frames subjected to horizontal and vertical seismic motions. Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B. C. Canada

  23. Taniguchi Y (2013) Ultimate seismic resistance capacity for long span lattice structures under vertical ground motions. J Struct. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/679859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang Y, Lan T (1984) Analysis of space frames under vertical earthquake loads. IABSE Congress Report Twelfth Congress, Vancouver, BC. https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-12117

  25. IS 1893 Part-1 (2016) Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. General provision and buildings, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  26. IS 1893 Part-4 (2015) Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Industrial structures including stack-like structures, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  27. IS 875 Part-3 (1987) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and structures: wind loads. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  28. IS 800 (2007) Code of practice for general construction in steel. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chopra AK (1995) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, University of California at Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  30. CSI version 19 (2018) Integrated finite element analysis and design of structures basic analysis reference manual. Computers and Structures Inc, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bentley (2011) STAAD Pro & STAAD foundation software. http://www.staadpro.com STAAD.ProV8i

  32. ASCE/SEI 7–05 (2006) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers

  33. Najafi LH, Tehranizadeh M (2015) Ground motion selection and scaling in practice. Period Polytech Civ Eng 59:233–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (2005) PEER Ground Motion https://peer.berkeley.edu/nga. Accessed 20 December 2019

  35. ASCE/SEI 41–13 (2013) Seismic evaluation and upgrade of existing buildings. Reston: American Society of Civil Engineers

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. VPKBIET Baramati, SPPU, Pune, 413133, India

    Dhiraj Ahiwale, Prajkta Shaha, Chittaranjan Nayak, Rushikesh Khartode & Samadhan Morkhade

  2. CSIR-Structural Engineering Research Centre, Chennai, 600113, India

    Kamatchi Palaniyandi

Authors
  1. Dhiraj Ahiwale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prajkta Shaha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kamatchi Palaniyandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chittaranjan Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rushikesh Khartode
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Samadhan Morkhade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dhiraj Ahiwale.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The corresponding authors claim on behalf of all authors that no conflict of interest exists.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahiwale, D., Shaha, P., Palaniyandi, K. et al. Quantification study for roof truss subjected to near-fault ground motions. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 118 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00478-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00478-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation