Seismic Assesment of Different Types of Eccentrically Braced Frames

IJIRST – International International Journal for Innovative Innovative Research in Science & Technology| Volume 3 | Issue 04 | September 2016 ISSN (online): 2349-6010

Seismic Performance Assessment of Different Types of Eccentric Braced Systems Sreeshma. K. K M. Tech. Student Department of Civil Engineering FISAT, Kerala, India- 683577

Nincy Jose Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering FISAT, Kerala, India- 683577

Abstract Steel structures are exhibit ductile behaviour when subjected to transient lateral loading, caused by wind or earthquake action. Steel bracings are lateral load resisting system used in seismic region. In eccentrically braced frames, a distance is either created between the two ends of the bracing members, or between the bracing member and the column, or between the bracing member and the beam. The created distance is called link. The main function of the link is to provide a weak section in the frame which provides plastic deformation capacity and the energy released by the earthquake. EBF configuration configuration is similar to traditional braced frames with the exception that at least one end of each brace must be eccentrically connected to the frame. The energy dissipation is achieved through the yielding of a beam segment called the link, while the other frame members, including outer beam segments, braces, braces, and columns, should should remain essentially essentially elastic. Present Present study deals with eccentrically eccentrically braced frames frames with short link. Assess the performance performance of different types of eccentrically eccentrically braced frames by performing seismic seismic analysis over the structure. The variation of performance with change in link length, height of the building was also considered in this study. Keywords: Eccentrically Braced Frames, Plastic Deformation, Seismic Analysis

_____________________________________________________________ _______________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________ I.

INTRODUCTION

Steel structures are widespread; they exhibit ductile behavior when subjected to lateral loading, caused by wind or earthquake action. There are three main types of frames in steel structures, Moment frames, truss moment frames, and braced frames. Braced frames are of two types-concentrically braced frames (CBF) and eccentrically braced frames (EBF). The concentric bracings increase the lateral stiffness of the frame and they usually decrease the lateral drift. Ho wever, increase in the stiffness may attract a larger inertia force induced due to earthquake. Further, while the bracings decrease the shear forces and bending moments in columns and they they increase increase the axial compression in the columns to which which they are connected. Eccentrically braced frames frames (EBFs) are relatively a new lateral force resisting system developed to resist seismic events in a suitable manner. Eccentric bracings minimize the lateral stiffness of the system and improve the energy dissipation capacity. The energy dissipation is achieved through the yielding of a beam segment called the link and the other frame members, including outer beam segments, braces, and columns, should stay essentially elastic. The main function of link is to provide a weak section in the frame which provides plastic deformation deformation capacity and dissipate the energy released by the earthquake. earthquake. EBF systems with shear yielding yielding links are stable and exhibit more ductility than in the case of EBF systems with flexural yielding links, since internal shear force is constant along the length of the link. This present study concentrated on eccentrically braced frames with shear links. The performance of different types eccentrically braced frames is evaluated and it compared with concentric and normal steel building. Linear static, linear dynamic and nonnon - linear static analysis were performed over the structure and its performance are evaluated based on storey displacement, storey drift, time period, ductility and energy dissipation. It is also evaluate the frame performance with with two different heights and with different shear link link lengths by conducting same seismic analysis. analysis. II. LITERATURE REVIEW

Significant researches were carried out on seismic behaviour of eccentrically braced frames and a few published works on seismic response steel framed structures are reviewed in this section. Muthumani K studied the seismic performance of steel moment resisting frames with eccentric braces. It has been observed that the performances of building 6 storeys, 9 storey and 15 storey with eccentric configuration has minimum displacement. SandaKoboevic et al studied the global seismic response of 3and 8-story eccentrically braced frames (EBFs), designed for western and eastern North American locations. Different models did not consistently predict either the magnitude of maximum deformation deformation or their location over the height of structure, and large record-to-record variations were observed when examining 84th percentile results. M. A. Musmar investigated the effect of link on eccentrically braced frames. The study incorporated applying lateral loading to several types of eccentrically loaded frames. All eccentric frames in this study exhibit lateral stiffness close to that of concentrically braced frames and demonstrate ductility similar to that of the Moment Frame hence EBFs are efficient laterally stiff framing systems with significant energy dissipation capability to accommodate large seismic and wind forces.

All rights reserved by www.ijirst.org

123

Seismic Performance Assessment of Different Types of Eccentric Braced Systems (IJIRST/ Volume 3 / Issue 04/ 023)

III. MODELING IN ETAB

Modeling and analysis of the tank is performed in ETAB 2015. Two group of models were modeled in ETAB 2015.One group consist of 6 number of 6 storey models and another group consist of 6 number of 10 storey models. Each group consist of four types of steel eccentric braced frames such as inverted- v braced frame, diagonally braced frame, Chevron braced frame(V braced frames), Zipper type frame, one concentrically-x braced frame and one normal moment resisting frame. Concentric x configuration was chosen because various studies show that among different types of concentric configuration concentric x configuration show better performance. The geometric details and the section details of the building are provided in table. 1 and 2 respectively. Table – 1 1 Geometric Details of the building Type of building Plan area of building No bays in X direction No bays in in Y direction direction Number of stories stories Bay width Total height Storey height

Steel 24x18 5 3 10 and 6 6m 30m(10 storey),18m(6 storey),18m(6 storey) 3m

Table - 2 Section Properties Column Beam and links links Bracing

ISWB350 ISHB350 ISB 91.5X91.5X5.4,ISN 91.5X91.5X5.4,ISNB250H B250H

Fig. 1: ETAB model of MRF and V-type EBF

Fig. 2: ETAB model of inverted V-type EBF and Diagonal EBF IV. LOADS CONSIDERED IN THE STUDY

The loads applied on building consist of dead load, live load, wind load and earthquake load .It is assumed that building is situated in Kerala that means in moderate seismic region and is a commercial steel building. So loads are considered from


124


conditions corresponding IS: 875-1987 and IS: 1893(Part 1)-2002.The gravity loads such as super dead load, live load applied on structures are 2 KN/m 2 ,3 KN/m2 respectively and dead loads acting on a structure structure will calculate the software software itself. V. ANALYSIS RESULTS

Static Analysis The top storey displacement and structural weight are taken as parameter from this analysis. Top storey displacement and structural weight of CBF, EBF and MRF are studied and compared. Also the top storey displacement and structural weight of four different types of EBF such as vtype, inverted v type, d-type and z type also studied and compared. The results obtained for 10 storey models are given below in figure 3,4,5,6.The results for 6 storey also same as that of 10 storey.

Fig. 3: Storey displacement for CBF,EBF,MRF(10 storey)

Fig. 4: Storey displacement for four types of EBF (10 storey)

Comparison of the structural weight of 10 storied and 6 storied CBF, EBF and MRF are shown in below table 3.It is observed that structural structural weight of EBF is in between CBF and and MRF. The structural weight weight of V-TYPE is higher than than other configuration. configuration. Table – 3 3 Structural weight (kN) TYPE MRF V-type EBF Inverted V-type V-type EBF D-type EBF Z-type EBF CBF

10 storey 10545.3 10830.25 10814 10758 10828 11018

6 storey 6381.7 6581 6574 6528 6580 6714

Response Spectrum Analysis Analysis

The results of response spectrum analysis are shown in following graph. The storey displacement, storey drifts and time period were taken as parameter for this analysis.

Fig. 5: Storey displacement for CBF, EBF, MRF (10 storey)


125


Fig. 6: Storey displacement displacement for four types of EBF (6 storey)

Fig. 7: Time period for CBF, EBF, MRF Push Over Analysis

The results of pushover analysis are shown in the following table. The hinge formation at the final step of push is also depicted. The push is provided in the x-direction. The ductility and energy dissipation of building can be calculated from the push over curves. The area under pushover curves gives the energy dissipated by the building. The area under push over curve is high means the building have high energy dissipation capacity during earthquake . Table – 4 4 Ductility and energy dissipation for 10 storey Model MRF V- TYPE EBF IV-TYPE EBF Z-TYPE EBF D-TYPE EBF CBF

Ductility 8.03 2.35 2.19 4.06 2.16 1.27

Energy Dissipation Dissipation (Kn-M) 4846 2269 2187.6 2554.5 2383.5 1807

Table - 5 Ductility and energy dissipation for 10 storey Model MRF V- TYPE EBF IV-TYPE EBF Z-TYPE EBF D-TYPE EBF CBF

Ductility 7 2.54 2.1 4.94 2.5 1.52

Energy Dissipation Dissipation (Kn-M) 2735 1142 1091 1579 1207.5 773.5

VI. CONCLUSIONS

The three dimensional analysis done in ETABS 2015 provided approving results in the form of acceptable control of parameters. The results showed that MRF have the lowest lateral strength and lateral stiffness and high deformation capacity. Building braced either eccentrically eccentrically or concentrically concentrically the lateral lateral load resisting capacity capacity of the building building improved. The performance of EBF is in between CBF and MRF. The displacement, drift, structural structural weight, time period, energy dissipation, ductility ductility all shows that EBF is improvement over both CBF and MRF and also there is no variation in performance of EBF with the height. The decrease in time period of the building can be used as means to evaluate the behavior of the building during a seismic event. T he decrease in time period of the building is due to increase in building stiffness that is facilitated by providing either CBF or EBF. But EBF shows less time period than CBF. Push over curves gives good result about energy dissipation and ductility. The energy dissipation will vary with height, building with 10 storey have high energy dissipation than 6 storey. The displacement, drift, ductility, energy dissipation, dissipation, time period are maximum maximum for Z-type as compared to other other three types, Z-type showed the better better performance, so so it is the best best configuration.


126


REFERENCES [1]

Xue Ming Han, P.Eng., P.E, “Eccentrically braced frame design for moderate seismic regions”, The 14 th World Conference on Ea rthquake Engineering

October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

M. A. Musmar“,Effect of link on eccentrically braced frames”, Journal of Engineering Sciences, Assiut University, January 2012 SandaKoboevic, Jonathan Rozon, and Robert Tremblay, “SeismicPerformance of Low -to-Moderate Height Eccentrically Braced Steel Frames Designed for North Americ American Seismic Conditions”, American Society of Civil Engineer2012. ArdeshirDaneshmand,BehrokhHosseiniHashemi,“Performance of intermediate and long links in eccentrically braced frames”, Journa l of Constructional Steel Research 70 (2012) 167 – 176, 176, sciencedirect Boaco, P.P. Rossi, “Seismic behavior of eccent rically braced frames”, Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 664674, science direct. M. N. Chimeh& P. Homami, “Efficiency of bracing systems for seismic rehabilitation of steel structures”,15 WCEE 2012 25 GülYiğitsoy,CemTopkaya, “Stability of beam in eccentrically braced frame”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research 96 (2014) 14 – 25 M. Naghipour, N. Javadi, A. “Investigation of RBS Connection Ductility in Eccentrically Braced Frame,Procedia Engineering 1 4 (2011) Mazen Ali Musmar, “Effect of link dimension on D type eccentric steel frames”,American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sci ence ,2013 Ramya A, Muthumani K, Nafeez Ahmed L, “Performance of eccentrically braced frames under the action of lateral load”,IJRET:


127

Seismic Assesment of Different Types of Eccentrically Braced Frames

Recommend Documents