Structural Engineering and Mechanics

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of modeling assumptions on the seismic behavior of steel buildings with perimeter moment frames

  • Received : 2010.06.25
  • Accepted : 2011.12.13
  • Published : 2012.01.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Several issues regarding the structural idealization of steel buildings with perimeter moment resisting steel frames (MRSFs) and interior gravity frames (GFs) are studied. Results indicate that the contribution of GFs to the lateral structural resistance may be significant. The contribution increases when the stiffness of the connection of the GFs is considered and is larger for inelastic than for elastic behavior. The interstory shears generally increase when the connections stiffness is taken into account. Resultant stresses at some base columns of MRSFs also increase in some cases but to a lesser degree. For columns of the GFs, however, the increment is significant. Results also indicate that modeling the building as planes frames may result in larger interstory shears and displacements and resultant stresses than those obtained from the more realistic 3-D formulation. These differences may be much larger when semi-rigid (SR) connections are considered. The conservativism is more for resultant stresses. The differences observed in the behaviour of each structural representation are mainly due to a) the elements that contribute to strength and stiffness and b) the dynamics characteristics of each structural representation. It is concluded that, if the structural system under consideration is used, the three-dimensional model should be used in seismic analysis, the GFs should be considered as part of the lateral resistance system, and the stiffness of the connections should be included in the design of the GFs. Otherwise, the capacity of gravity frames may be overestimated while that of MRSFs may be underestimated.

Keywords

References

  1. BOCA (1993), 12th Edition Building Officials & Code Administration International Inc., National Building Code.
  2. Chen, W.F., Goto, Y. and Richard Liew, J.Y. (1996), Stability Designs of Semi-Rigid Frames, John Wiley and Sons.
  3. Chang, H.Y., Lin, Jay C.C., Lin, K.C., and Chen J.Y. (2009), "Role of accidental torsion in seismic reliability assessment for steel buildings", Steel Compos. Struct., 9(5), 457-471. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2009.9.5.457
  4. Colson, A. (1991), "Theoretical Modeling of Semi-rigid Connections Behavior", J. Constr. Steel Res., 19, 213- 224. https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-974X(91)90045-3
  5. El-Salti, M.K. (1992), "Design of frames with partially restrained connections", PhD Thesis, Depart. Civ. Eng. Eng. Mech., University of Arizona, USA.
  6. Foutch, A. and Yun S.Y. (2002), "Modeling of steel moment frames for seismic loads", J. Constr. Steel Res., 58, 529-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-974X(01)00078-5
  7. FEMA (2000), "State of the art report on systems performance of steel moment frames subjected to earthquake ground shaking", SAC Steel Project, Report FEMA 355C, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
  8. Gao, L. and Haldar, A. (1995), "Nonlinear seismic response of space structures with PR connections", Int. J. Micro. Civil Eng., 10, 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.1995.tb00383.x
  9. Krishnan, S., Ji, C., Komatitsch, D. and Tromp, J. (2006), "Performance of two 18-storey steel moment-frame building in southern California during two large simulated San Andres Earthquakes", Earthq. Spectra, 22(4), 1035-1061. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2360698
  10. Kazantzi, A.K., Righiniotis T.D. and Chryssanthopoulos, M.K. (2008), "Fragility and hazard analysis of a welded steel moment resisting frame", J. Earthq. Eng., 12, 596-615. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460701512993
  11. Liao, K.W., Wen Y.K., and Foutch D.A. (2007), "Evaluation of 3D steel moment frames under earthquake excitations. I: modeling", J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 133(3), 462-470. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:3(462)
  12. Liu, J. and Astaneh-Asl, A. (2000), "Cyclic tests on simple connections including effects of the slab", Report SAC/BD-00/03, SAC Joint Venture.
  13. Lee, K. and Foutch, D.A. (2001), "Performance evaluation of new steel frame buildings for seismic loads", Earthq. Eng. Struct. D., 31(3), 653-670.
  14. Lee, K. and Foutch, D.A. (2006), "Seismic evaluation of steel moment frames buildings designed using different R-Values", J. Struct. Eng. Divi., ASCE, 132(9), 1461-1472. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:9(1461)
  15. Mehrabian, A., Haldar, A. and Reyes-Salazar, A. (2005), "Seismic response analysis of steel frames with postnorthridge connections", Steel Compos. Struct., 5(4), 271-287. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2005.5.4.271
  16. Rentschler, G.P., Chen, W.F., and Driscoll, G.C. ( 1980), "Tests of beam-to-column web moment connections", J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(5),1005-1022.
  17. Reyes-Salazar, A., Velazquez-Dimas, J.I., and López-Barraza, A. (2001), "Respuesta Sísmica Inelástica de Marcos de Acero Resistentes a Momento con Conexiones Rígidas y Semi-rígidas", Revista de Ingenieria Sismica de la Sociedad Mexicana de Ingenieria Sismica A.C., 64, 45-68.
  18. Reyes-Salazar, A. (1997), "Inelastic seismic response and ductility evaluation of steel frames with fully, partially restrained and composite connections", PhD Thesis, Dept. Civ. Eng. Eng. Mech., University of Arizona, USA.
  19. Reyes-Salazar A. and Haldar, A. (1999), "Nonlinear seismic response of steel structures with semi-rigid and composite connections", J. Constr. Steel Res., 51, 37-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0143-974X(99)00005-X
  20. Reyes-Salazar, A. and Haldar, A. (2000), "Dissipation of energy in steel frames with PR connections", Struct. Eng. Mech., 9(3), 241-256. https://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2000.9.3.241
  21. Reyes-Salazar, A. and Haldar, A. (2001a), "Energy dissipation at PR frames under seismic loading", J, Struct. Eng. ASCE, 127(5), 588-593. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2001)127:5(588)
  22. Reyes-Salazar, A. and Haldar, A. (2001b), "Seismic response and energy dissipation in partially restrained and fully restrained steel frames: an analytical study", Steel Compos. Struct., 1(4), 459-480. https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2001.1.4.459
  23. Richard, R.M. (1993), "Moment-rotation curves for partially restrained connections", PRCONN, RMR Design Group, Tucson, Arizona.
  24. UBC (1994), "Structural engineering design provisions", Uniform Building Code, Volume 2, International Conference of Building Officials.

Cited by

  1. Seismic behavior of special moment-resisting frames with energy dissipating devices under near source ground motions vol.16, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2014.16.5.533
  2. Free Vibrations of Beam System Structures with Elastic Boundary Conditions and an Internal Elastic Hinge vol.2013, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/624658
  3. Seismic induced damageability evaluation of steel buildings: a Fuzzy-TOPSIS method vol.3, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2012.3.5.695
  4. Nonlinear P-Δ analysis of steel frames with semi-rigid connections vol.14, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.12989/scs.2013.14.1.001
  5. Ductility demands and reduction factors for 3D steel structures with pinned and semi-rigid connections vol.16, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2019.16.4.469