Response modification factor of dual moment-resistant frame with buckling restrained brace (BRB)

Abdollahzadeh, Gholamreza; Banihashemi, M. R.

doi:10.12989/scs.2013.14.6.621

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the inelastic response of the yielding superstructure (Figure ), characterized by a single degree of freedom with a perfectly elastoplastic behavior and assumed as the equivalent model representative of multi‐story building frames , the corresponding strength reduction factor or behavior factor, hereinafter denoted as q , is related only to the ductility‐dependent component and can be defined as:

q = \frac{f_{s, e l}}{f_{y}} = \frac{u_{s, e l}}{u_{y}}

where f s , el and u s , el are, respectively, the minimum yield strength and yield deformation required for the superstructure to remain elastic during a ground motion, or the peak response values for the corresponding linear system. Note that the abovementioned behaviour factor q is different from the one provided by because it does not explicitly consider the overstrength factor because the overstrength capacities are taken into account in the perfectly elastoplastic system assumed as equivalent model of the inelastic behavior of real multi‐story building frames .…”

Section: Inelastic Model Of a Base‐isolated Structure With Fpsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic reliability‐based ductility demand evaluation for inelastic base‐isolated structures with friction pendulum devices

Castaldo

Palazzo

Ferrentino

2016

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The aim of this work is to propose seismic reliability‐based relationships between the strength reduction factors and the displacement ductility demand of nonlinear structural systems equipped with friction pendulum isolators (FPS) depending on the structural properties. The isolated structures are described by employing an equivalent 2dof model characterized by a perfectly elastoplastic rule to account for the inelastic response of the superstructure, whereas, the FPS behavior is described by a velocity‐dependent model. An extensive parametric study is carried out encompassing a wide range of elastic and inelastic building properties, different seismic intensity levels and considering the friction coefficient as a random variable. Defined a set of natural seismic records and scaled to the seismic intensity corresponding to life safety limit state for L'Aquila site (Italy) according to NTC08, the inelastic characteristics of the superstructures are designed as the ratio between the average elastic responses and increasing strength reduction factors. Incremental dynamic analyses (IDAs) are developed to evaluate the seismic fragility curves of both the inelastic superstructure and the isolation level assuming different values of the corresponding limit states. Integrating the fragility curves with the seismic hazard curves related to L'Aquila site (Italy), the reliability curves of the equivalent inelastic base‐isolated structural systems, with a design life of 50 years, are derived proposing seismic reliability‐based regression expressions between the displacement ductility demand and the strength reduction factors for the superstructure as well as seismic reliability‐based design (SRBD) abacuses useful to define the FPS properties. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

q = \frac{f_{s, e l}}{f_{y}} = \frac{u_{s, e l}}{u_{y}}

Section: Inelastic Model Of a Base‐isolated Structure With Fpsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic reliability‐based ductility demand evaluation for inelastic base‐isolated structures with friction pendulum devices

Castaldo

Palazzo

Ferrentino

2016

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[25] and dual moment resisting frames with buckling restrained braces in ref. [26]. On the other hand, Ω 0 increases with the number of story levels.…”

Section: Response Modification and Overstrength Factorsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Considerations on the Pushover Analysis of Multi-Story Steel Plate Shear Wall Structures

Gholipour

Alinia

2016

Period. Polytech. Civil Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIn the past three decades, the steel plate shear wall (SPSW) configuration has been widely used as a lateral load resisting system in the regions of high seismicity. A typical SPSW consists of infill steel plates connected to the beams, known as the horizontal boundary elements (HBE); and to the columns, as the vertical boundary elements (VBE). All HBE-VBE connections are of moment resisting type.Many numerical researches have been and are being carried out to study the behavior of SPSW systems via the four available methods of analysis. Two methods are linear, known as Linear Static Procedure (LSP) and Linear Dynamic Procedure (LDP); and two methods are nonlinear, known as Nonlinear Static Procedure (NSP) and Nonlinear Dynamic Procedure (NDP). The linear procedures are appropriate when the expected level of nonlinearity is low. In the SPSW system, the material nonlinearity is considerable as infill plates yield extensively. Therefore, nonlinear methods are proper tools to study the seismic behavior of such system. The nonlinear dynamic procedure, also known as the nonlinear time history analysis, is deemed to be the most accurate method; but it is complex, expensive and time consuming, especially when there are a large number of elements involved. On the other hand, the nonlinear static procedure, known as the pushover analysis, is a more convenient available method to the structural engineers; and is favored by practicing engineers. The nonlinear pushover analysis accounts for both geometric and material nonlinearities in buildings subjected to seismic loads. It also allows the tracing of the sequence of yielding and failure of members, as well as the progress of overall capacity of structures. On the other hand, prior to a cyclic test or analysis, pushover analyses are performed to predict the maximum strength and deformations of structures in order to develop a suitable loading history, evaluate the needs for instrumentation, establish the range of load and deformation measurements, and reduce the risk of unexpected behavior during experiments [1].In addition to the above mentioned applications, the pushover analysis has two further use in SPSW structures. According to the specifications of AISC-341 [2], Comm. F5., 3. Analysis,

show abstract

“…Mazzolani and Piluso [24] addressed various theoretical procedures to compute the q-factor, such as the maximum plastic deformation approach and the energy approach. The formulation of the q-factor proposed by ATC-34 [15] is the most used currently [9,11,25]. It is expressed as the product of three parameters that significantly influence the seismic response of structures.…”

Section: Methodology For Computation Of Behaviour Factormentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Behaviour Factor of Medium Ductile SMRF Structures

Yahmi

Branci

Bouchaïr

et al. 2017

Period. Polytech. Civil Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In seismic codes, the capacity of structures is calculated using capacity design procedure based on the concept of base shear. The critical parameter in this procedure is the behaviour factor (q-factor), which allows designing the structures at the ultimate limit state accounting for their ductility and reserve strength. In this paper, the q-factor is evaluated for medium ductile steel moment-resisting frames (SMRF) using pushover analysis. The influence of specific parameters, such as the stories number, the "Column/Beam" capacity and the local response of structural members, is studied. The results show that the most important parameter that affects the q-factor is the local response of first-storey columns, while the "Column/ Beam" capacity has a less effect on this factor. Furthermore, it is observed that the q-factor value assigned to the studied frames in Eurocode-8 is systematically underestimated for low-rise frame, while the use of this value for high-rise frame is potentially unsafe.

show abstract

Response modification factor of dual moment-resistant frame with buckling restrained brace (BRB)

Cited by 27 publications

References 21 publications

Seismic reliability‐based ductility demand evaluation for inelastic base‐isolated structures with friction pendulum devices

Seismic reliability‐based ductility demand evaluation for inelastic base‐isolated structures with friction pendulum devices

Considerations on the Pushover Analysis of Multi-Story Steel Plate Shear Wall Structures

Evaluating the Behaviour Factor of Medium Ductile SMRF Structures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About