Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5000/EESK.2012.16.5.033

A Study on the Static Eccentricities of Buildings Designed by Different Design Eccentricities  

Lee, Kwang-Ho (인하대학교 건축학부)
Jeong, Seoung-Hoon (인하대학교 건축학부)
Publication Information
Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea / v.16, no.5, 2012 , pp. 33-40 More about this Journal
Abstract
To reduce the vulnerability of torsional irregular buildings caused by seismic loads, the torsional amplification factor was introduced by the seismic code. This factor has been applied differently in a variety of seismic codes. In this study, the final static eccentricity, and the lateral and torsional stiffness ratios of buildings designed with different design eccentricities were compared. The increment of the torsional amplification factor resulted in a decrement of the final static eccentricity of the building. However, after reaching the maximum value of this factor, the final static eccentricity of the building increased again. The final static eccentricity of the building designed by multiplying the sum of the inherent and accidental eccentricity by the torsional amplification factor was zero or had a minus value, depending to the position of the vertical element.
Keywords
Torsional amplification factor; Torsional imbalanced buildings; Design eccentricity; The final static Eccentricity; Seismic code;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, Report FEMA 450, Washington D.C., 90, 2003.
2 ASCE/SEI 7-05, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, 214; 130, 2006.
3 대한건축학회, 건축구조설계기준, 대한건축학회, 121, 2006.
4 대한건축학회, 건축구조설계기준, 대한건축학회, 106, 2009.
5 ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, 80-92, 2010.
6 Stefano, M. D. and Rutenberg, A., "A comparison of the present SEAOC/UBC torsional provisions with the old ones," Engineering Structures, V.19, No.8, 655-664, 1997.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 이명규, 조소훈, "모드 해석을 이용한 등가 지진하중에서의 설계편심," 대한토목학회논문집 A, 제22권, 제6-A호, 1259- 1269, 2002.
8 홍성걸, 하태휴, "평면비정형 벽식 구조물의 비탄성 설계변위 산정," 대한건축학회 논문집 구조계, 제23권, 제2호, 51-58, 2007
9 International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, California, USA, 1988.
10 Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP recommended Seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures, Report FEMA P-750, Washington D.C., 130, 2009.
11 Structural Engineers Association of California, Recommended lateral force requirements and commentary, San Francisco, 1999.
12 International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, California, USA, 1991.
13 International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, California, USA, 1994.
14 International Conference of Building Officials, Uniform Building Code, California, USA, 2-15, 1997.
15 Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP guidelines for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, Report FEMA 273, Washington D.C., 3-2, 1997.
16 Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, Report FEMA 302, Washington D.C., 66, 1997.
17 Structural Engineers Association of California, Recommended lateral force requirements and commentary, San Francisco, 13; 112; 121, 1999.
18 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, Report FEMA 356, Washington D.C., 3-3, 2000.
19 Federal Emergency Management Agency, NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, Report FEMA 368, Washington D.C., 76, 2000.
20 ASCE/SEI 7-02, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, 148, 2002.