Advertisement

Structural Responses: Multi-storey Building Frames

Chapter
  • 291 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter extends to multi-degree-of-freedom (MDOF) systems and aims to demonstrate in more detail the effectiveness of various self-centring solutions in controlling the residual deformation and other critical responses of multi-storey building frames. Two major types of self-centring steel structures, namely self-centring braced frames and self-centring moment resisting frames (MRFs), are presented. The considered self-centring braced frames are in fact generic buildings with braces exhibiting idealised flag-shaped hysteretic behaviour, where the influences of a spectrum of brace parameters on the peak and residual responses of the buildings are examined. The self-centring MRFs are those with specifically designed beam-to-column connections employing SMA ring springs. Other commonly used structural forms, such as conventional MRFs and BRB frames, are also analysed for comparison purpose. Both far-field and pulse-like near-fault earthquakes are considered in this chapter.

References

  1. ABAQUS (2012) 6.12 analysis user’s manual. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Providence, RIGoogle Scholar
  2. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2010) Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. ASCE/SEI 7-10, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews BM, Fahnestock LA, Song J (2009) Ductility capacity models for buckling-restrained braces. J Constr Steel Res 65(8–9):1712–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Christopoulos C, Pampanin S, Priestley MJN (2003) Performance-based seismic response of frame structures including residual deformations—part I: single-degree of freedom system. J Earthq Eng 7(1):97–118Google Scholar
  5. Dimopoulos AI, Karavasilis TL, Vasdravellis G, Uy B (2013) Seismic design, modelling and assessment of self-centering steel frames using post-tensioned connections with web hourglass shape pins. B Earthq Eng 11(5):1797–1816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eatherton MR, Hajjar JF (2011) Residual drifts of self-centering systems including effects of ambient building resistance. Earthq Spectra 27(3):719–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Erochko J, Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Choi H (2011) Residual drift response of SMRFs and BRB frames in steel buildings designed according to ASCE 7-05. J Struct Eng-ASCE 137(5):589–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. European Committee for Standardization (CEN) (2004) EN 1998-1, Eurocode 8: design of structures for earthquake resistance—part 1: general rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. Belgium, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  9. Fang C, Zhong QM, Wang W, Hu SL, Qiu CX (2018a) Peak and residual responses of steel moment-resisting and braced frames under pulse-like near-fault earthquakes. Eng Struct 177:579–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fang C, Wang W, Ricles J, Yang X, Zhong QM, Sause R, Chen YY (2018b) Application of an innovative SMA ring spring system for self-centering steel frames subject to seismic conditions. J Struct Eng-ASCE 144(8):04018114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2012) Seismic performance assessment of buildings, volume 1—methodology. FEMA P-58-1, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for FEMA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta A, Krawinkler H (1999) Seismic demands for performance evaluation of steel moment resisting frame structures, Report No. 132. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  13. Hsiao PC, Lehman DE, Roeder CW (2013) Evaluation of the response modification coefficient and collapse potential of special concentrically braced frames. Earthq Eng Struct D 42(10):1547–1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karavasilis TL, Seo CY (2011) Seismic structural and non-structural performance evaluation of highly damped self-centering and conventional systems. Eng Struct 33(8):2248–2258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kari A, Ghassemieh M, Abolmaali SA (2011) A new dual bracing system for improvingthe seismic behavior of steel structures. Smart Mater Struct 20(12):125020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. MacRae GA, Kawashima K (1997) Post-earthquake residual displacements of bilinear oscillators. Earthq Eng Struct D 26(7):701–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH, Fenves GL (2006) Open system for earthquake engineering simulation (OpenSees), OpenSees Command Language Manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  18. Nguyen AH, Chintanapakdee C, Hayashikawa T (2010) Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of BRBF buildings. J Constr Steel Res 66(8–9):1118–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. NIST (2015) Seismic design of steel buckling-restrained braced frames—a guide for practicing engineers, GCR 15-917-34, NEHRP seismic design technical brief no. 11. Produced by the Applied Technology Council and the Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  20. Özhendekci D, Özhendekci N (2012) Seismic performance of steel special moment resisting frames with different span arrangements. J Constr Steel Res 72:51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qiu CX, Zhu SY (2016) High-mode effects on seismic performance of multi-story self-centering braced steel frames. J Constr Steel Res 119:133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ray-Chaudhuri S, Hutchinson TC (2011) Effect of nonlinearity of frame buildings on peak horizontal floor acceleration. J Earthq Eng 15(1):124–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ruiz-Garcia J, Miranda E (2006a) Evaluation of residual drift demands in regular multi-story frames for performance-based seismic assessment. Earthq Eng Struct D 35(13):1609–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ruiz-Garcia J, Miranda E (2006b) Residual displacement ratios for assessment of existing structures. Earthq Eng Struct D 35(3):315–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sabelli R, Mahin SA, Chang C (2003) Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces. Eng Struct 25(5):655–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Silwal B, Ozbulut OE, Michael RJ (2016) Seismic collapse evaluation of steel moment resisting frames with superelastic viscous damper. J Constr Steel Res 126:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Somerville PG (2003) Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse. Phys Earth Planet In 137(1–4):201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tremblay R, Lacerte M, Christopoulos C (2008) Seismic response of multistory buildings with self-centering energy dissipative steel braces. J Struct Eng-ASCE 134(1):108–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tongji UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations