Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 367-389 (2009)
SEISMIC RELIABILITY OF CHEVRON BRACED FRAMES
WITH INNOVATIVE CONCEPT OF BRACING MEMBERS
A. Longo, R. Montuori and V. Piluso *
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno
via Ponte Don Melillo, Fisciano, 84084, Italy
*(Corresponding author: E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)
Received: 31 December 2007; Revised: 22 July 2008; Accepted: 28 July 2008
 View Article |
Export Citation:Plain Text | RIS | Endnote |
ABSTRACT
According to the most modern trend, performance-based seismic design is aimed at the evaluation of the seismic performance of structures in terms of mean annual frequency of exceeding a threshold level of damage, i.e. a limit state. A procedure for performance-based seismic assessment is herein briefly summarised and applied to concentrically “V” braced steel frames, designed according to different criteria. In particular, two design approaches are examined. The first one corresponds to the provisions suggested by Eurocode 8, while the second approach, proposed by the authors, is based on a rigorous application of the capacity design criteria aiming at the control of the failure mode. In addition in this work a new conception of bracing members is developed and applied with reference to V-braced frames designed according to the methodology proposed by the authors. It is well known that aiming at the safeguard of brace connections, Eurocode 8 provides a limitation to the brace slenderness. The drawback of this limitation is the oversizing of brace diagonals at the upper storeys, which prevents the development of a collapse mechanism of global type. This is the starting design issue for the conception of new bracing members. In fact, by introducing in the brace members a zone characterized by a reduction of the cross sectional area (Reduced Section Solution), it is possible to calibrate the yield strength leaving substantially unchanged the slenderness, so that the limits provided for the normalized slenderness can be still satisfied without brace oversizing. The aim of this work is to focus on the seismic performance of V-braced frames designed according to both Eurocode provisions and the proposed methodology. For the structures dimensioned according to the proposed criteria, the Reduction Section Solution is also applied with the aim to safeguard the connection without increasing the structural weight. Finally, a probabilistic approach based on the combination of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), probabilistic seismic demand analysis (PSDA) and probabilistic seismic capacity analysis (PSCA) is applied aiming to investigate the seismic performance of the designed structures. It is pointed out how the proposed design method leads to a very important improvement of the seismic performances with a negligible increase of the overall building cost.
KEYWORDS
Seismic reliability; concentrically braced frames; seismic hazard; probabilistic seismic demand Analysis; structural capacity
REFERENCES
[1] Longo, A., Montuori, R., Piluso, V., “Plastic Design of Seismic Resistant V-Braced Frames,” 4rd European Conference on Steel Structures, Maastricht, 2005a.
[2] Longo, A., Montuori, R., Piluso, V., “Failure Mode Control of X-Braced Frames under Seismic Actions”, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2008a, Vol. 12, pp. 728-759.
[3] Longo, A., Montuori, R. and Piluso, V. “Influence of Design Criteria on Seismic Reliability of X-Braced Frames”, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2008b, Vol. 12, pp. 406-431.
[4] CEN, prEN 1998–Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings, 2003a.
[5] Longo, A., Montuori, R., Piluso, V., “An Innovative Conception For Bracing Members: The Reduced Brace Section Solution”, 4rd European Conference on Steel Structures, Maastricht, 2005b.
[6] Giugliano, M.T., Longo, A., Montuori, R. and Piluso, V., “Controventi Innovativi del tipo RSS: Regole di Progetto ed Affidabilità Sismica”, Ingegneria Sismica, 2007, Vol. 3, ISSN: 0393-1420, pp. 7 — 24.
[7] Georgescu, D., Toma, C. and Gosa, O., “Post-Critical Behaviour of ‘K’ Braced Frames”, Journal Construct Steel Research, 1992, Vol. 21, pp 115-133.
[8] UNI EN 10002/1: Steel material, Tensile Test, 1992.
[9] Skuber, P., Beg, D. and Sinur, F. “Experimental Analysis of DC90 Energy Absorber Device” PROHITECH - WP7 Internal Report, 2006. http://www.fgg.uni-lj.si/kmk/PROHITECH/wp7_files/WP7-DC90.pdf
[10] Skuber, P. and Beg, D., “DC90 Energy Absorber Device”– PROHITECH - WP8 Internal Report, http://www.fgg.uni-lj.si/kmk/PROHITECH/WP8-DC90.pdf, 2008.
[11] CEN, prENV 1993-1-1 – Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures. Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, Comité Européen de Normalisation, July 2003b.
[12] Jalayer, F. and Cornell, C.A., “A Technical Framework for Probability-Based Demand and Capacity Factor Design (DCFD)”, Seismic Formats, PEER Report 2003/06, 2003.
[13] Giovenale, P., “Valutazione del Rischio Sismico di Strutture:Ccaratterizzazione dell’azione e tecniche di analisi”, PhD Thesis, Supervisor: Ciampoli, M., University of Roma, 2002.
[14] CEN, prEN 1998-2. Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance. Part 2: Bridges, 2003c.
[15] Longo, A., Montuori, R. and Piluso, V., “Seismic Reliability of V-Braced Frames: Influence of Different Design Approaches”, Stessa 2006, 5th International Conference on Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Yokohama, Japan, 14-17 August. Rotterdam:Balkema, 2006.
[16] Creèmer, C., Anamaterous, G., Monti, G. and Pinto, P.E., “Seismic Risk Assessment on an R.C. Bridge – Effect of Asynchronous Input Motions” – Saferr Mid –Term Review – ISPA, 2002.
[17] Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER Strong Motion Database, http://peer.berkeley.edu/smcat.
[18] Tremblay, R., “Inelastic Seismic Response of Steel Bracing Members”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Elsevier, 2002, Vol. 58, pp. 665-701.
[19] Maison, B.F., "PC-ANSR, A Computer Program for Nonlinear Structural Analysis", University of California (Berkeley) - http://nisee.berkeley.edu/software/pcansr, 1992.
[20] Ikeda, K. and Mahin, S.A., “A Refined Physical Theory Model for Predicting the Seismic Behaviour of Braced Frames”, Report UMEE 77R3, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Michigan, 1984.
[21] Vamvatsikos, D. and Cornell, C.A., “Incremental Dynamic Analysis”, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 2002, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 491-514.
[22] Shome, N., Cornell, C.A. and Asce, M., “Structural Seismic Demand Analysis: Consideration of Collapse” 8th ASCE Specially Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability, 2000.
[23] FEMA 273, “Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of buildings”, Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1997.
[24] FEMA 350, “Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for Steel Moment-Frames Buildings”, Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2000.
[25] CEN, EN 1990–Eurocode – Basis of Structural Design, Comité Européen de Normalisation, 2001.
[26] Longo, A, Montuori, R. and Piluso, V., “Plastic Design of Seismic Resistant V-Braced Frames”, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2008c, 12:8,1246 — 1266.