• Earthquakes and Structures
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.469-485
• /
• 2019

A numerical investigation regarding local (${\mu}_L$) and story (${\mu}_S$) ductility demand evaluation of steel buildings with perimeter moment resisting frames (PMRF) and interior gravity frames (IGF), is conducted in this study. The interior connections are modeled, firstly as perfectly pinned (PP), and then as semi-rigid (SR). Three models used in the SAC steel project, representing steel buildings of low-, mid-, and high-rise, are considered. The story ductility reduction factor ($R_{{\mu}S}$) as well as the ratio ($Q_{GL}$) of $R_{{\mu}S}$ to ${\mu}_L$ are calculated. ${\mu}_L$ and ${\mu}_S$, and consequently structural damage, at the PMRF are significant reduced when the usually neglected effect of SR connections is considered; average reductions larger than 40% are observed implying that the behavior of the models with SR connections is superior and that the ductility detailing of the PMRF doesn't need to be so stringent when SR connections are considered. $R_{{\mu}S}$ is approximately constant through height for low-rise buildings, but for the others it tends to increase with the story number contradicting the same proportion reduction assumed in the Equivalent Static Lateral Method (ESLM). It is implicitly assumed in IBC Code that the overall ductility reduction factor for ductile moment resisting frames is about 4; the results of this study show that this value is non-conservative for low-rise buildings but conservative for mid- and high-rise buildings implying that the ESLM fails evaluating the inelastic interstory demands. If local ductility capacity is stated as the basis for design, a value of 0.4 for $Q_{GL}$ seems to be reasonable for low- and medium-rise buildings.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.30 no.10
• /
• pp.1210-1219
• /
• 2001

Introduction : The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety, pullout strength and radiographic characteristics of unicortical and bicortical screws of cervical facet within cadaveric specimens and evaluate the influence of level of training on the positioning of these screws. Methods : Twenty-one cadavers, mean 78.9 years of age, underwent bilateral placement of 3.5mm AO lateral mass screw from C3-C6(n=168) using a slight variation of the Magerl technique. Intraoperative imaging was not used. The right side(unicortical) utilized only 14mm screws(effective length of 11mm) while on the left side to determine the length of the screw after the ventral cortex had been drilled. Three spine surgeons(attending, fellow, chief resident) with varying levels of spine training performed the procedure on seven cadavers each. All spines were harvested and lateral radiographs were taken. Individual cervical vertebrae were carefully dissected and then axial radiographs were taken. The screws were evaluated clinically and radiographically for their safety. Screws were graded clinically for their safety with respect to the spinal cord, facet joint, nerve root and vertebral artery. The grades consisted of the following categories : "satisfactory", "at risk" and "direct injury". Each screw was also graded according to its zone placement. Screw position was quantified by measuring a sagittal angle from the lateral radiograph and an axial angle from the axial radiograph. Pull-out force was determined for all screws using a material testing machine. Results : Dissection revealed that fifteen screws on the left side actually had only unicortical and not bicortical purchase as intended. The majority of screws(92.8%) were satisfactory in terms of safety. There were no injuries to the spinal cord. On the right side(unicortical), 98.9% of the screws were "satisfactory" and on the left side(bicortical) 68.1% were "satisfactory". There was a 5.8% incidence of direct arterial injury and a 17.4% incidence of direct nerve root injury with the bicortical screws. There were no "direct injuries" with the unicortical screws for the nerve root or vertebral artery. The unicortical screws had a 21.4% incidence of direct injury of the facet joint, while the bicortical screws had a 21.7% incidence. The majority of "direct injury" of bicortical screws were placed by the surgeon with the least experience. The performance of the resident surgeon was significantly different from the attending or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the nerve root and vertebral artery. The attending's performance was significantly better than the resident or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the facet joint. There was no relationship between the safety of a screw and its zone placement. The axial deviation angle measured $23.5{\pm}6.6$ degrees and $19.8{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The resident surgeon had a significantly lower angle than the attending or fellow(p<0.05). The sagittal angle measured $66.3{\pm}7.0$ degrees and $62.3{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The attending had a significantly lower sagittal angle than the fellow or resident(p<0.05). Thirty-three screws that entered the facet joint were tested for pull-out strength but excluded from the data because they were not lateral mass screws per-se and had deviated substantially from the intended final trajectory. The mean pull-out force for all screws was $542.9{\pm}296.6N$. There was no statistically significant difference between the pull-out force for unicortical($519.9{\pm}286.9N$) and bicortical($565.2{\pm}306N$) screws. There was no significant difference in pull-out strengths with respect to zone placement. Conclusion : It is our belief that the risk associated with bicortical purchase mandates formal spine training if it is to be done safely and accurately. Unicortical screws are safer regardless of level of training. It is apparent that 14mm lateral mass screws placed in a supero-lateral trajectory in the adult cervical spine provide an equivalent strength with a much lower risk of injury than the longer bicortical screws placed in a similar orientation.