Browse > Article

Evaluation of Seismic Performance Factors of Diagrid Structural System  

Kim, Kyoung-Hwan (고려대학교 대학원 건축사회환경공학부)
Ju, Young-Kyu (고려대학교 건축사회환경공학부)
Kim, Sang-Dae (고려대학교 건축사회환경공학부)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Steel Construction / v.22, no.3, 2010 , pp. 229-239 More about this Journal
Abstract
As a new structural system, the diagrid system resists both gravity and lateral loads with diagonal columns. In current seismic design provisions, however, the response modification factor for a new structural system is not provided yet. ATC-63 provides a new methodology for defining various seismic performance factors, including the response modification factor. ATC-63 includes the collapse margin ratio in modifying the response modification factor, which can vary with many structural systems. In this paper, a non-linear static analysis and a dynamic analysis were conducted for four different diagrid models with 4-to 36-story heights. From these analyses, the response modification factor of the diagrid system was evaluated.
Keywords
diagrid system; seismic performance factors; nonlinear analysis; increment dynamic analysis(IDA); median collapse; collapse margin ratio; ATC-63(Draft);
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 ASCE (2006a) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. ASCE Standard ASCE/SE 7-05. Including Supplement No. 1. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
2 AISC (2005) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Building. ANSI/AISC 341-05. American Institute for Steel Construction, Chicago, Illinois.
3 주영규, 김경환(2008) 다이아그리드 구조 시스템의 최근 동향. 대한건축학회지, 대한건축학회, 제52권, 제4호, pp.72-76.
4 Kim, J.S., Kim. Y.S., and Lho, S. H. (2008). Structural Scematic Design of a Tall Building in Asan using the Diagrid System. CTBUH 8th World Congress, Dubai, pp.433-440.
5 Vamvatisikos D, Cornell C.A. (2000) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 31, pp. 491-514.
6 Rahimian, A., Eilon. Y. (2006) New York's Hearst Towers. STRUCTURE magazine, pp.25-23.
7 Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (2008) Methodology to determine R-values for steel Diagrid magazine framed systems. Project Report.
8 MIDAS IT (2008) MIDAS MODS GENw., General Structure Design System for Windows. MIDAS IT, Korea.
9 Moon, K. S. (2007) Diagrid Structural Systems for Tall Buildings: Characteristics & Methodology for Preliminary Design. The Structural Design of Tall & Special Buildings, Vol. 16. pp.205-230.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 PEER (2006) PEER NGA Database, Pacific Earth-quake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California.
11 ATC (1995) Structural Response Modification Factors. Report No. ATC-19. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California.
12 FEMA (2004a) NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. FEMA 450-1/2003 Edition. Part 1: Provisions, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
13 FEMA (2004b) NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. FEMA 450-2/2003 Edition. Part 2: Provisions, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
14 Bertero, V.V. (1986). Evaluation of Response Reduction Factors Recommened by ATC and SEAOC. Proc. the Third U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Charleston, North Carolina.
15 CSI (2006) PERFORM-3D, Nonlinear Analysis and Performance Assessement for 3D Structures-User Guided, Computers & Structures Inc., Berkeley, CA.
16 ATC (2008) Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors, 90% Draft report, Report No. ATC-63. prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
17 ATC (1996) A critical review of current approaches to earthquake-resistant design. Report No. ATC-34, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City. California.
18 ASCE (2006b) Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Building. ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 41-06. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.