Advance Researches in Civil Engineering

Advance Researches in Civil Engineering

Evaluation and Comparison of the Seismic Performance of Modern Concentrically Braces in the Near-Fault Zone

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Masoud Mahdavi 1
Bamdad Aghababaei Mornani 2
1 PhD Student, Civil Engineering Department, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran. Iran
2 Faculty of Civil Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
10.30469/arce.2024.449948.1072
Abstract
Passive control is one of the most common methods to improve seismic performance of the structure. Types of concentrically braces, such as Cross, Knee, and Reverse V, are the most common systems used in steel structures. Choosing the right bracing system for the structure and increasing its efficiency will increase the performance level of the structure. The importance of the bracing system in the near-fault zone is very important, considering the magnitude of the earthquake. Therefore, in the current research, 5-story steel structures with X, Knee, Inverted V and Rhombus bracing systems has been modeled with SAP2000 software. The steel structures were subjected to the Kobe earthquake for 10 seconds, in the near-fault zone, with the modal time history dynamic analysis method. Nine seismic parameters including Story Displacement, Acceleration, Modal Damping Energy, Base Shear, Shear Force in Beam, Bending Moment in Beam, Shear Force in Column and Axial Force in Column were investigated. The results showed that the X bracing system has the best performance in all parameters, except for axial and shear force in the column. Also, the KBF brace has the weakest performance in all parameters. The average value of the nine parameters in the superior bracing system and the weaker bracing system (KBF) is equal to 98.56%.
Keywords
Concentrically Brace
Seismic Performance
Software Modeling
Near-Fault Zone
Kobe Earthquake
1- Behnamfar, F., Ahmadi, A., Anaraki, A.M.G., and Mazrouei, V., 2023, Performance evaluation of concentrically braced frames equipped with pure bending yielding damper, Structures, 58:105650. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105650.
2- Khademi, M., Tehranizadeh, M., Shirkhani, A., and Hajirasouliha, I., 2023, Earthquake-induced loss assessment of steel dual concentrically braced structures subjected to near-field ground motions, Structures, 51, 1123–39. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.03.105.
3- Dursun, S.E., and Topkaya, C., 2023, Development of H-shaped hysteretic dampers for steel concentrically braced frames, Soil Dynamic Earthquake Engineering, 166, 107758. doi.:10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.107758.
4- Tan, Z., Zhong, W., Meng, B., Zheng, Y., Duan, S., Qu, Z., 2022, Numerical evaluation on collapse-resistant performance of steel-braced concentric frames, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 193, 107268. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107268.
5- Corte, G.D., and Cantisani, G., 2023, FEM Analysis of Steel Eccentric Braces for Seismic Retrofitting, Procedia Structure Integria, 44, 472–489. doi:10.1016/j.prostr.2023.01.062.
6- Mojarad, M., Daei, M., 2023, Effect of brace failure as capacity-based design component on the EBF collapse safety, Structures, 56, 104969. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.104969.
7- Kalapodis, N.A., Muho, E.V., and Beskos, D.E., 2022, Seismic design of plane steel MRFS, EBFS and BRBFS by improved direct displacement-based design method, Soil Dynamic Earthquake Engineering, 153, 107111. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107111.
8- Thongchom, C., Mirzai, N.M., Chang, B., and Ghamari, A., 2022, Improving the CBF brace’s behavior using I-shaped dampers, numerical and experimental study, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 197, 107482. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107482.
9- Montuori, R., Nastri, E., Piluso, V., and Todisco, P., 2023, The effect of the gravity column in the seismic design of steel CBFs, Structures, 57, 105229. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105229.
10- Dong, Z.Q., Li, G., and Xu, S.T., 2022, Seismic retrofitting design method for steel CBFs based on the energy-ductility model, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 199, 107608. doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107608.
11- Bomben, L., Fasan, M., and Amadio, C., 2023, Assessment of the effect of seismic sequences on steel X-CBF for industrial buildings, Procedia Structure Integria, 44, 99–106. doi:10.1016/j.prostr.2023.01.014.
12- Ghamari, A., Alzeebaree, R., Thongchom, C., 2023, Developing an innovative stiffened shear damper for concentrically braced frames, Structures, 50, 734–744. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.02.079.
13- Souri, O., and Mofid, M., 2022, Seismic evaluation of concentrically braced steel frames equipped with yielding elements and BRBs, 100853. doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100853.
14- Gharebaghi, S.A., Ebad, M., and Fanaie, N., 2023, Investigating the seismic performance of MRF-CBF dual systems under the effects of staged construction, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 207, 107956. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.107956.
15- Bosco, M., 2023, Influence of uncertainties on the seismic performance assessment of chevron braced frames, Engineering Structure, 294, 116594. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.116594.
16- Shen, J., Akbas, B., Seker, P., Momenzadeh, S., and Faytarouni, M., 2017, Seismic performance of concentrically braced frames with and without brace buckling, Engineering Structure, 141, 461–81. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.03.043.
17- Zheng, L., Dou, S., Zhang, C., Wang, W., Ge, H., and Ma, L., 2023, Seismic performance of different chevron braced frames, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 200, 107680. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107680.
18- Mokhtari, M., and Imanpour, A., 2023, Proposed seismic design parameters for the moment-resisting knee-braced frame system, Engineering Structure, 276, 115318. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115318.
19- Qiu, C., Jiang, T., Liu, J., and Du, X., 2022, Seismic performance of knee-braced frames equipped with NiTi BRBs, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 197, 107480. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107480.
20- Zheng, L., Dou, S., Tang, S., Ge, H., Wen, W., and Zhang, J., 2024, Seismic performance of improved multistorey X-braced steel frames, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 212, 108306. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2023.108306.
21- Soleimani, R., and Hamidi, H., 2021, Improved Substitute-Frame (ISF) model for seismic response of steel-MRF with vertical irregularities, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 186, 106918. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106918.
22- Roostaeyan, E., Rasoul Mirghaderi, S., Ghazizadeh, S., and Zahrai, S.M., 2020, Through gusset connection for two-story X-braced frames, a numerical study, Structures, 27, 285–296. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2020.05.025.
23- Zarrineghbal, A., Zafarani, H., and Rahimian, M., 2021, Towards an Iranian national risk-targeted model for seismic hazard mapping, Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, 141, 106495. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106495.
24- Moghaddam, H., Sanagar Darbani, M., Sadrara, A., and Hajirasouliha, I., 2024, Recommendation of new design spectra for Iran using modified Newmark method, Soil Dynamic and Earthquake Engineering, 176, 108332. doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108332.
25- Mansouri, S., 2017, Interpretation of Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of building (standard No. 2800, 4th edition).
26- Benli, B., and Celik, I., 2023, Surface Modification and Analysis of St37 Steel with Al2O3-TiO2, ZrO2, and Cr2O3 Ceramic Coatings: Structural, Mechanical, and Tribological Properties, Tribologt International, 191, 109183. doi:10.1016/j.triboint.2023.109183.
27- Chen, W.F., and Kim, S.E., 1998, Design of Steel Structures with LRFD Using Advanced Analysis. In: Usami T, Itoh YBT-S and D of SS (SDSS’97), Oxford: Pergamon, 153–166. doi:10.1016/B978-008043320-2/50015-0.
28- Esper, P., and Tachibana, E., 1998, Lessons from the Kobe earthquake. Geol Soc London, Enginering Geology Special Publications, 15, 105–16. doi:10.1144/GSL.ENG.1998.015.01.11.
29- Han, P.P., Kim, B., 2019, Experimental verification of methods for converting acceleration data in high-rise buildings into displacement data by shaking table test, Application Science, 9, 1653. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9081653.
30- O’Reilly, G.J., and Goggins, J., Experimental testing of a self-centring concentrically braced steel frame, Engineering Structure, 238, 111521. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111521.
31- Seker, O., 2022, Seismic response of dual concentrically braced steel frames with various bracing configurations, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 188, 107057. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.107057.
32- Nassani, D.E., Hussein, A., and Mohammed, A., 2017, Comparative Response Assessment of Steel Frames With Different Bracing Systems Under Seismic Effect, Structures, 11. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2017.06.006.
33- Bradley, C.R., Fahnestock, L.A., and Hines, E.M., 2021, Dual system design for a low-ductility concentrically braced frame with a reserve moment frame, Structures, 34, 3315–3328. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2021.09.009.
34- Faytarouni, M., Shen, J., Seker, O., Akbas, B., 2019, Evaluation of brace fracture models in seismic analysis of concentrically braced frames, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 162, 105709. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105709.
35- Zhou, Z., Ke, K., Chen, Y., and,Yam, M.C.H., 2022, High strength steel frames with curved knee braces: Performance-based damage-control design framework, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 196, 107392. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107392.
36- Li, S., Xu, T., Li, X., Liang, G., and Xi, H., 2023, Elastic stiffness and bearing mechanism of eccentrically braced steel frames, Structures, 55, 818–833. doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2023.06.065.
37- Shen, J., Wen, R., and Akbas, B., 2014, Mechanisms in two-story X-braced frames, Journal of Construction Steel Research, 106, 258–277. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.12.014.
Advance Researches in Civil Engineering
Volume 6, Issue 1
Winter 2024
Pages 1-17