Evaluating the effects of using BRB Brace in steel buildings in order to achieve IO level

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 1- Department of Civil Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Civil Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Department of Civil Engineering,, Parand branch, Islamic Azad University, Parand, Iran

Abstract

The main direction of this research is the effect of using buckling buckle in steel buildings in order to achieve the IO level. The validation has been done by using Abaqus software. After validating the 3D simulation of the BRB braces, its parametric study is performed and the sensitivity of the buckling buckle brace is performed. The modeling phase in 2D bracing space and seismic analysis (history-time) of braced frames was performed under different acceleration mapping records. The parameters of this research are the opening member-radius dimensions, geometric shape of the member, type of brace, The effects of the number of floors and the length of the opening in the frame with BRB brace. The results are presented based on pushover diagrams and time-history and relative drift of stories. The results showed that the parameter that has the most impact on the hardness and ductility index is the cross-sectional area and the parameter that has the most impact on the strength index is the cross-sectional geometry. By changing the cross-sectional geometry from the circle to the square of the BRBF brace, relative percentage reduction in stiffness, strength and ductility were obtained 2%, 16% and 10%, respectively. By changing the type of brace from CBF to BRBF, the relative percentage of increase in stiffness was between 30 to 62%, the relative percentage of increase in strength was between 63 to 69% and the relative percentage of increase in ductility was between 12 to 30%. The amount of drift roof in the analysis of time history under different earthquakes, in BRB 4, 8 and 12 floors in the range of 1.19 to 1.51 times has been achieved. Hardness and ultimate strength and ductility indices decreased with increasing opening, decreased with increasing cross section and decreased with increasing height.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  • Clark, P., Aiken I. D., Ko, E., Kasai, K., and Kimura I. (1999). “Design procedures for buildings incorporating hysteretic damping devices”, Proceedings of the 68th Annual Convention of the Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, CA.
  • Whittaker, A. S., Uang, C.-M., and Bertero, V. V. (1987). “Earthquake Simulation Tests and Associated Studies of a 0.3-Scale Model of a Six-Story Eccentrically Braced Steel Structure”, Report No. UCB/EERC-87/02, Earthquake Eng. Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
  • Gupta, A., and Krawinkler, H. (2000a). “Estimation of Seismic Drift Demands for Frame Structures”, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., Vol. 29, No. 9, pp. 1287–1305.
  • Gupta, A., and Krawinkler, H. (2000b). “Dynamic P−Δ Effects for Flexible Inelastic Steel Structures”, ASCE Journal of Struct. Eng., Vol. 126, No. 1, pp. 145–154.
  • Marino, E. M., and Nakashima, M. (2006). “Seismic Performance and New Design Procedure for Chevron-Braced Frames”, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 433–452.
  • Chen, C.-H., Lai, J. W., and Mahin, S. A., (2008). “Seismic Performance Assessment of Concentrically Braced Steel Frame Buildings”, Paper No. 05-05-0158, Proc. 14th World on Earthquake Eng., Beijing, China.
  • MacRae, G. A., Kimura, Y., and Roeder, C. (2004). “Effect of Column Stiffness on Braced Frame Seismic Behavior”, ASCE J. Struct. Eng., Vol. 130, No. 3, pp. 381–391.
  • Karavasilis, T. L., Bazeos, N., and Beskos, D. E. (2007). “Estimation of Seismic Drift and Ductility Demands in Planar Regular X-Braced Steel Frames”, Earthquake Eng. Struct. , Vol. 36, No. 15, pp. 2273–2289.
  • Tremblay, R., Lacerte, M., and Christopoulos, C. (2008). “Seismic Response of Multi-Story Buildings with Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Steel Braces”, ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 134, No. 1, pp. 108–120.
  • Krawinkler, H., and Zareian, F. (2007). “Prediction of Collapse—How Realistic and Practical Is It, and What Can We Learn From It?”, Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build., Vol. 16, pp. 633–653.
  • Tremblay, R., and Poncet, L. (2004). “Improving the seismic stability of concentrically braced steel frames”, Proceedings 2004 SSRC Annual Technical Session & Meeting, pp. 19-38, Long Beach, CA.
  • McCormick, J., Aburano, H., Ikenaga, M., and Nakashima, M. (2008). “Permissible residual deformation levels for building structures considering both safety and human elements”, Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, Paper 05-06-0071.
  • Sabelli, R. (2001). “Research on improving the design and analysis of earthquake-resistant steel braced frames”, The 2000 NEHRP Professional Fellowship Rep., Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, Calif.
  • Fahnestock, L. A., Sause, R., and Ricles, J. M. (2006). “Analytical and large-scale experimental studies of earthquake resistant buckling-restrained braced frame systems”, ATLSS Rep. 06-01, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
  • Atlayan, O. (2013). “Hybrid steel frames”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.
  • Atlayan, O., and Charney, F. (2014). “Hybrid buckling-restrained braced frames”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, May, pp. 95-105.
  • Kiggins, S., and Uang, C. M. (2006). “Reducing residual drift of buckling-restrained braced frames as a dual system”, Engineering Structures, 28, pp. 1525-1532.
  • Ariyaratana, C. A., and Fahnestock, L. A. (2011). “Evaluation of buckling-restrained braced frame seismic performance considering reserve strength”, Engineering Structures, 33, pp. 77-89.
  • Maley T. et al. (2010). “Development of a Displacement-Based Design Method for Steel Dual Systems with Buckling-Restrained Braces and Moment-Resisting Frames”, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 14:1, 106-140.
  • MacRae, G. A., Kimura, Y., and Roeder, C. (2004). “Effect of Column Stiffness on Braced Frame Seismic Behavior”, ASCE J. Struct. Eng., Vol. 130, No. 3, pp. 381–391.
  • Ji X, Kato M, Wang T, Hitaka T, and Nakashima M. (2009). “Effect of gravity columns on mitigation of drift concentration for braced frames”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65, 2148–56.
  • Shen, J., Seker, O., Sutchiewcharn, N. and Akbas, B., 2016. “Cyclic behavior of buckling-controlled braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research”, 121, pp.110-125.
  • Takeuchi et al (2008). “Estimation of Cumulative Deformation Capacity of Buckling-Restrained Braces”, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 134, No. 5, May 1, 2008.
  • استاندارد ۲۸۰۰. ویرایش چهارم. ۱۳۹۴. " آیین نامه طراحی ساختمان ها در برابر زلزله"\ مبحث دهم مقررات ملی ساختمان. ویرایش چهارم. ۱۳۹۲. "آیین نامه طراحی سازه های فولادی".
  • Tan Q, Wu B, Shi P, Xu G, Wang Z, Sun J, Lehman DE. “Experimental Performance of a Full-Scale Spatial RC Frame with Buckling-Restrained Braces Subjected to Bidirectional Loading”, Journal of Structural Engineering. 2021 Mar 1;147(3):04020352.
  • Song YS, Guo T, Wang JS, Xuan WH, Chen YZ. “Seismic Fragility Evaluation of SCCB-Enhanced RC Frame Structures”, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities. 2020 Aug 1;34(4):04020051.
  • Guerrero H, Teran-Gilmore A, Zamora E, Escobar JA, Gómez R. “Hybrid Simulation Tests of a Soft Storey Frame Building Upgraded with a Buckling-Restrained Brace (BRB)”. EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES. 2020 May 18.
  • Panjiyar R, Ghowsi AF, Sahoo DR. “Numerical study on effect of stiffeners on the Gusset-plates using buckling restrained braced frame”, Materials Today: Proceedings. 2020 Jun 4.
  • Xu Y, Guan H, Karampour H, Loo YC, Zhou X. “Experimental Study of a Prefabricated Steel Frame System with Buckling-Restrained Braces”, InEASEC16 2021 (pp. 1479-1489). Springer, Singapore.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 April 2021
  • Revise Date: 07 October 2021
  • Accept Date: 09 November 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics