Ductility Through Structural Configuration and Local Detailing

Chapter

Abstract

The conventional approach requires that structures can passively resist seismic loading through a combination of redundancy, strength, deformability, and energy absorption. In an earthquake prone area, a ductile structural system with minimal weight is preferred and is often the governing design principle.

Keywords

Plastic Hinge Seismic Loading Energy Dissipation Capacity Gusset Plate Shear Link 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Sabelli R, Roeder CW, Hajjar JF (2013) NEHRP seismic design technical Brief No. 8 seismic design of steel special systems—a guide for practicing engineers. National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of CommerceGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO 19902 (2007) Petroleum and natural gas industries—fixed steel offshore structuresGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bachmann H (2003) Seismic conceptual design of buildings: basic principles for engineers, architects, building owners, and authorities. Swiss Federal Office for Water and Geology and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, BWG, BernGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moon K, Connor JJ, Fernandez JE (2007) Diagrid structural systems for tall buildings: characteristics and methodology for preliminary design. Struct Design Tall Spec 16:205–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carroll C, Duan X, Gibbons C, Lawson R, Lee A, Luong A, Mcgowan R, Pope C (2006) China Central Television Headquarters: structural design. Steel Struct 6:387–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    American Institute of Steel Construction (2011) Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sahin C (2014) Seismic retrofitting of existing structures. Portland State University, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    EN 1998-1-1, European Committee for Standardization (2004) Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildingsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sandelin C, Budajev E (2014) The stabilization of high-rise buildings. Uppsala University, ISRN UTH-INGUTB-EX-B-2013/38-SEGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Severin P, Sekic H (2012) Jämförelse och utvärdering för stabiliserande väggar av armerad betong i höga hus (in Swedish). Royal Institute of Technology, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pall AS, Pall R (1996) Friction-dampers for seismic control of buildings: a Canadian experience. In: 11th world conference on earthquake engineeringGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosso A, Almeida JP, Beyer K (2016) Stability of thin reinforced concrete walls under cyclic loads: state-of-the-art and new experimental findings. Bull Earthq Eng 14(2):455–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Popov EP, Engerlhardt MD (1988) Seismic eccentrically braced frames. Constr Steel ResGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Azmoodeh BM (2011) Optimum seismic retrofitting technique for buildings. J Civil Eng Environ Syst 28(1):61–74MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Libby JR (1981) Eccentrically braced frame construction: a case history. Eng J, AISCGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Merovich AT, Nicoletti JP, Hartle E (1982) Eccentric bracing in tall buildings, ASCE 108, No. 9Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mekonnen Y (2015) Comparative evaluation of concentrically bracing system for lateral loads on medium rise steel building structures. Addis Ababa University, Addis AbabaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wada A (2005) Damage-controlled structures for strong earthquake. In: Ninth world seminar on seismic isolation, energy dissipation and active vibration control of structures, Kobe, JapanGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    FEMA 350 (2000) Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kaufmann EJ, Fisher JW, DiJulio RM, Gross JL (1997) Failure analysis of welded steel moment frames damaged in the Northridge earthquake. National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Technology Administration, US Department of Commerce, Springfield VA, 22161Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hamburger RO, Scawthorn C (2006) Seismic design of buildings. In: Chen WF, Lui EM (eds) Earthquake engineering for structural design. Taylor & Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    FEMA-267 (2014) Interim guidelines evaluation, repair, modification, and design of welded steel moment frame structuresGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Williams M (2004) Seismic performance of dissipative devices. In: Japan-Europe workshop on seismic risk, BristolGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Halterman A, Aschheim M (2000) Analytical studies of shear-yielding moment-resistant steel frame. In: Proceedings of 12th world conference on earthquake engineering, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Flesch R (2012) Earthquake engineering: mechanical devices for energy dissipation versus capacity design, Arsenal ResearchGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aker SolutionsBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations