Design Concepts for Controlled Rocking of Self-Centering Steel-Braced Frames

Eatherton, Matthew R.; Ma, Xing; Krawinkler, Helmut; Mar, David; Billington, Sarah L.; Hajjar, Jerome F.; Deierlein, Gregory G.

doi:10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0001047

Cited by 164 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eatherton et al . () presented a limit state methodology for design of the self‐centering controlled rocking system as a procedure shown in Figure . The main objective of the design methodology is to prevent the undesirable limit states of archetypes under given seismic intensities.…”

Section: Design Of Archetypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Once the components of archetypes are initially designed, it is required to control the system behavior in order to ensure full self‐centering and proper energy dissipation capacity of the archetype. For this purpose, the adjusted self‐centering (SC * ), uplift (UL) and energy dissipation ( β ) ratios are compared with the limiting values of 1 and 0.25, as follows (Eatherton et al ., ):

S C^{*} = \frac{M_{italicup}}{M_{f s y}} = \frac{true \sum A ((), \frac{F_{p t i}}{2} + P_{D}) + K_{f s} \times R D R_{target}}{true \sum V_{f p} ((), A + B)} \geq 1

U L = \frac{true \sum F_{p t i} + true \sum P_{D e}}{true \sum V_{f p}} \geq 1

β = \frac{M_{italicflag}}{M_{y}} ≅ \frac{M_{f s y}}{M_{y}} = \frac{true \sum V_{f p} ((), A + B)}{M_{y}} \geq 0.25

where M up and M y are uplift moment and yield moment of the system, respectively, and M fsy and K fs are the yield moment and initial stiffness of fuse. Table shows the measured values of SC * and UL ratios for all the designed archetypes.…”

Section: Design Of Archetypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantification of seismic performance factors for self‐centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame

Rahgozar

Moghadam

Aziminejad

2016

Structural Design Tall Build

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYModern self-centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame (SC-CR SCBF) is capable of reducing structural damage compared with conventional buildings following an earthquake. This investigation quantifies three seismic performance factors, including over-strength factor (Ω 0 ), period-based ductility (μ T ) and response modification coefficient (R), for low-and mid-rise SC-CR SCBFs. Nonlinear static analysis is conducted to derive Ω 0 and μ T factors for 12 SC-CR archetypes. Validity of trial R coefficient is also evaluated using a collapse-based assessment procedure by comparing adjusted collapse margin ratios with the established acceptance criteria. Results indicate that the Ω 0 and μ T factors are in the range of 1.39 to 2.29 and 12.25 to 29.0, respectively, and R of 8 is proposed for design of SC-CR archetypes. A reliability study is also performed to examine the effects of modeling and ground motion parameters on the safety margin of designed SC-CR archetypes with the proposed R value. Results indicate that the design of mid-rise space archetypes in high-seismicity regions with the R coefficient of 8 is more reliable than that of the low-rise perimeter ones in low-seismicity regions.

show abstract

Section: Design Of Archetypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

S C^{*} = \frac{M_{italicup}}{M_{f s y}} = \frac{true \sum A ((), \frac{F_{p t i}}{2} + P_{D}) + K_{f s} \times R D R_{target}}{true \sum V_{f p} ((), A + B)} \geq 1

U L = \frac{true \sum F_{p t i} + true \sum P_{D e}}{true \sum V_{f p}} \geq 1

β = \frac{M_{italicflag}}{M_{y}} ≅ \frac{M_{f s y}}{M_{y}} = \frac{true \sum V_{f p} ((), A + B)}{M_{y}} \geq 0.25

Section: Design Of Archetypesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of seismic performance factors for self‐centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame

Rahgozar

Moghadam

Aziminejad

2016

Structural Design Tall Build

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, Makris and Vassiliou , Antonellis and Panagiotou , Makris ). It should be stated that the concept of free rocking is different from the concept of controlled rocking of post‐tensioned moment resisting frame and shear wall systems described in and references therein. Controlled rocking structures uplift and rock, but utilize post‐tensioning cables and special‐purpose energy dissipation elements installed at the rocking connections to reduce lateral displacements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analytical model of a deformable cantilever structure rocking on a rigid surface: development and verification

Vassiliou¹,

Truniger²,

Stojadinović³

2015

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThis paper extends previously developed models to account for the influence of the column and the foundation masses on the behavior of top-heavy deformable elastic cantilever columns rocking on a rigid support surface. Several models for energy dissipation at impact are examined and compared. A novel Vertical Velocity Energy Loss model is introduced. Rocking uplift and overturning spectra for the deformable elastic cantilever model excited by sinusoidal ground motions are constructed. The effects of non-dimensional model parameter variations on the rocking spectra and the overturning stability of the model are presented. It is shown that the remarkable overturning stability of dynamically excited large cantilever columns is not jeopardized by their deformability.

show abstract

“…Multiple sources of energy dissipation have been studied for post-tensioned rocking steel braced frames, including yielding steel elements [60,[71][72][73], friction bearings [11,74], and viscous damping elements [73].…”

Section: Post-tensioned Rocking Steel Braced Framesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Main structural elements can then be designed to remain nominally elastic (undamaged) for this peak base overturning moment. Energy dissipation is achieved through the implementation of replaceable fuse elements (e.g., [60]), viscous dampers (e.g., [42,43]), or through friction (e.g., [11]). The following subsections further categorize and describe rocking systems as post-tensioned precast concrete shear walls, rocking steel frames, and vertically post-tensioned rocking steel frames.…”

Section: Rocking Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Centering Seismic Lateral Force Resisting Systems: High Performance Structures for the City of Tomorrow

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Structures designed in accordance with even the most modern buildings codes are expected to sustain damage during a severe earthquake; however; these structures are expected to protect the lives of the occupants. Damage to the structure can require expensive repairs; significant business downtime; and in some cases building demolition. If damage occurs to many structures within a city or region; the regional and national economy may be severely disrupted. To address these shortcomings with current seismic lateral force resisting systems and to work towards more resilient; sustainable cities; a new class of seismic lateral force resisting systems that sustains little or no damage under severe earthquakes has been developed. These new seismic lateral force resisting systems reduce or prevent structural damage to nonreplaceable structural elements by softening the structural response elastically through gap opening mechanisms. To dissipate seismic energy; friction elements or replaceable yielding energy dissipation elements are also included. Post-tensioning is often used as a part of these systems to return the structure to a plumb; upright position (self-center) after the earthquake has passed. This paper summarizes the state-of-the art for self-centering seismic lateral force resisting systems and outlines current research challenges for these systems. OPEN ACCESSBuildings 2014, 4 521

show abstract

Design Concepts for Controlled Rocking of Self-Centering Steel-Braced Frames

Cited by 164 publications

References 17 publications

Quantification of seismic performance factors for self‐centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame

Quantification of seismic performance factors for self‐centering controlled rocking special concentrically braced frame

An analytical model of a deformable cantilever structure rocking on a rigid surface: development and verification

Self-Centering Seismic Lateral Force Resisting Systems: High Performance Structures for the City of Tomorrow

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About