Remarks on Seismic Design Rules of EC8 for Inverted-V CBFs

Abstract:

Chevron concentrically braced frames (C-CBFs) are expected to provide limited ductility in the framework of Eurocode 8: differently from North American codes, lower values of behavior factors are recommended by EN 1998 for C-CBFs than for other concentric bracing configurations (namely diagonal and cross bracings). The research presented in this paper is aimed at revising the design rules and requirements provided for by EN 1998-1 for C-CBFs in order to improve the ductility and the dissipative capacity of this structural system. The proposed design criteria are validated by means of nonlinear dynamic analyses performed on a study case. The results confirm the effectiveness of developed design procedure.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 763)
• Pages: 1147-1154
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.763.1147
• Online since: February 2018
• Authors: Silvia Costanzo, Mario D'Aniello*, Raffaele Landolfo, Attilio de Martino
• Keywords: Behaviour Factor, Chevron Bracings, Concentrically Braced Frames, Design Criteria, Ductility, Seismic Design

References

[1] American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC). (2016). Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. ANSI/AISC Standard 341-16. AISC, Chicago, Illinois.

DOI: 10.1201/b11248-16

[2] CSA. 2014. Design of Steel Structures, CSA-S16-14, Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, ON.

[3] EN 1998-1-1. Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings. CEN; (2005).

DOI: 10.3403/03244372

[4] I.F. Khatib, S.A. Mahin, K.S. Pister. Seismic behavior of concentrically braced steel frames. Report UCB/EERC-88/01, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA. (1988).

[5] R. Tremblay, N. Robert. Seismic design of low- and medium-rise chevron braced steel frames. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 27: 1192–1206. (2000).

DOI: 10.1139/l00-061

[6] R. Tremblay, N. Robert. Seismic performance of low- and medium-rise chevron braced steel frames. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 28: 699-714. (2001).

DOI: 10.1139/l01-038

[7] J. Kim, H. Choi. Response modification factor of Chevron-Braced Frames. Engineering Structures, 27: 285-300. (2005).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.10.009

[8] T. Fukuta, I. Nishiyama , H. Yamanouchi , B. Kato. Seismic performance of steel frames with inverted V braces. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 115(8): 2016- 2028. (1989).

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(1989)115:8(2016)

[9] J. Shen, R. Wen, B. Akbas, B. Doran, E. Uckan. Seismic demand on brace-intersected beams in two-story X-braced frames. Engineering Structures, 76: 295-312 (2014).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.07.022

[10] J. Shen, R. Wen, B. Akbas. Mechanisms in Two-story X-braced Frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 106: 258-277. (2015).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.12.014

[11] M. D'Aniello, S. Costanzo, R. Landolfo. The influence of beam stiffness on seismic response of chevron concentric bracings. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 112, p.305–324, (2015).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.05.021

[12] S. Costanzo, M. D'Aniello, R. Landolfo. Critical review of seismic design criteria for chevron concentrically braced frames: the role of the brace-intercepted beam. Ingegneria Sismica: International Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 33, Issue 1-2, pp.72-89, (2015).

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.06.001

[13] S. Costanzo, M. D'Aniello, R. Landolfo. Seismic design criteria for chevron CBFs: European vs North American codes (part-1), Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2017; 135: 83–96; DOI: http: /dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. jcsr. 2017. 04. 018.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.04.018

[14] S. Costanzo, R. Landolfo. Concentrically braced frames: European vs. North-American seismic design provisions. The Open Civil Engineering Journal 2017; 11, (Suppl 1: M11) 453-463.

DOI: 10.2174/1874149501711010453

[15] S. Costanzo, M. D'Aniello, R. Landolfo. Seismic design criteria for chevron CBFs: Proposals for the next EC8 (part-2), Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2017; 138: 17–37; DOI: http: /dx. doi. org/10. 1016/j. jcsr. 2017. 06. 028.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.06.028

[16] E. M. Marino, M. Nakashima. Seismic performance and new procedure for chevron braced frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 35, 422-452 (2006).

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.539

[17] E. Marino. A unified approach for the design of high ductility steel frames with concentric braces in the framework of Eurocode 8. Earthquake Engineering & Structural dynamics 43: 97-118. (2014).

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2334

[18] M. Bosco, A. Ghersi, E.M. Marino, P.P. Rossi. A capacity design procedure for columns of steel structures with diagonals braces. Open Construction and Building Technology Journal 8, 196-207. (2014).

DOI: 10.2174/1874836801408010196

[19] P. P Rossi, G. Quaceci. A design procedure for suspended zipper-braced frames in the framework of Eurocode 8. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. Published on-line. DOI: 10. 1002/eqe. 2889. (2017).

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2889

[20] M. Bosco, G. Brandonisio, E.M. Marino, E. Mele, A. De Luca A. Ω* method: An alternative to Eurocode 8 procedure for seismic design of X-CBFs. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 134: 135–147. (2017).

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.03.014

[21] A. Longo, R. Montuori, V. Piluso. Plastic design of seismic Resistant V-Braced frames. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 12(8): 1246-1266 (2008).

DOI: 10.1080/13632460802211867

[22] A. Longo, R. Montuori, V. Piluso. Seismic reliability of V-braced frames: Influence of design methodologies. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 38, 1587-1608 (2009).

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.919

[23] M.T. Giugliano, A. Longo. R. Montuori, V. Piluso. Seismic reliability of traditional and innovative concentrically braced frames. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 40(13): 1455-1474. (2011).

DOI: 10.1002/eqe.1098

[24] R-Landolfo (Ed. ). Assessment of EC8 provisions for seismic design of steel structures. Technical Committee 13 – Seismic Design, No 131/2013. ECCS – European Convention for Constructional Steelwork; (2013).

[25] R. Landolfo. The activities of the ECCS-TC13 seismic committee: bridging the gap between research and standards. Proc. of 8th International Conference on Behavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas, Shanghai, China, July 1-3. (2015).

[26] EN 1993: 1-1, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. CEN; (2005).

[27] S. Akka, M.A. Sandıkkaya , M. Şenyurt, A Azari Sisi., Ay B.Ö., P. Traversa, J. Douglas, F. Cotton, L. Luzi, B. Hernandez, S. Gode, Reference database for seismic groundmotion in Europe (RESORCE) Bulletin of earthquake engineering 12 (1) (2014).

DOI: 10.1007/s10518-013-9506-8

[28] L.A. Fülöp Selection of earthquake records for the parametric analysis, Research report VTT-R-03238-10, VTT, Espoo. (2010).

[29] Seismosoft SeismoStruct - A computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis of framed structures. Available from URL: www. seismosoft. com. (2011).

[30] M. Menegotto, P. Pinto. Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behaviour of elements under combined normal force and bending, Symposium on the Resistance and UltimatDeformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads. (1973).

[31] M. D'Aniello, G. La Manna Ambrosino, F. Portioli, R. Landolfo. Modelling aspects of the seismic response of steel concentric braced frames Steel & Composite Structures, An International Journal 15(5): 539-566 (2013).

DOI: 10.12989/scs.2013.15.5.539

[32] M. D'Aniello, G. La Manna Ambrosino, F. Portioli, R. Landolfo. The influence of out-of-straightness imperfection in Physical-Theory models of bracing members on seismic performance assessment of concentric braced structures. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 24(3), 176-197, (2015).

DOI: 10.1002/tal.1160