Inelastic seismic response of code‐designed multistorey frame buildings with regular asymmetry

Based on an asymmetric multistorey frame building model, this paper investigates the influence of a building's higher vibration modes on its inelastic torsional response and evaluates the adequacy of the provisions of current seismic building codes and the modal analysis procedure in accounting for increased ductility demand in frames situated at or near the stiff edge of such buildings. It is concluded that the influence of higher vibration modes on the response of the upper-storey columns of stiff-edge frames increases significantly with the building's fundamental uncoupled lateral period and the magnitude of the stiffness eccentricity. The application of the equivalent static torsional provisions of certain building codes may lead to non-conservative estimates of the peak ductility demand, particularly for structures with large stiffness eccentricity. In these cases, the critical elements are vulnerable to excessive additional ductility demand and, hence, may be subject to significantly more severe structural damage than in corresponding symmetric buildings. It is found that regularly asymmetric buildings excited well into the inelastic range may not be conservatively designed using linear elastic modal analysis theory. Particular caution is required when applying this method to the design of stiff-edge frame elements in highly asymmetric structures.

[1]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Elastic Earthquake Analysis of a Class of Torsionally Coupled Buildings , 1977 .

[2]  W. K. Tso,et al.  Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions I: Ductility demand , 1992 .

[3]  R. Go´mez,et al.  The Mexico Earthquake of September 19, 1985—Complementary Technical Norms for Earthquake Resistant Design, 1987 Edition , 1988 .

[4]  A. M. Chandler,et al.  Evaluation of factors influencing the inelastic seismic performance of torsionally asymmetric buildings , 1991 .

[5]  前田 潤滋 Low Speed Aerodynamics Laboratory National Research Council of Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canda K1A 0R6 , 1990 .

[6]  Jack P. Moehle,et al.  Seismic Response and Design of Setback Buildings , 1990 .

[7]  W. K. Tso,et al.  Eccentricity in irregular multistory buildings , 1986 .

[8]  A. M. Chandler,et al.  Definitions of static eccentricity for design of asymmetric shear buildings , 1993 .

[9]  Luis Esteva,et al.  Earthquake engineering research and practice in Mexico after the 1985 earthquakes , 1987 .

[10]  W. K. Tso,et al.  Lateral strength distribution specification to limit additional inelastic deformation of torsionally unbalanced structures , 1992 .

[11]  Avigdor Rutenberg,et al.  Inelastic seismic response of code designed single storey asymmetric structures , 1992 .

[12]  T. Paulay,et al.  Reinforced Concrete Structures , 1975 .

[13]  Anil K. Chopra,et al.  Evaluation of Torsional Provisions in Seismic Codes , 1991 .

[14]  W. K. Tso,et al.  Design of torsionally unbalanced structural systems based on code provisions II: Strength distribution , 1992 .

[15]  A. M. Chandler,et al.  A modified static procedure for the design of torsionally unbalanced multistorey frame buildings , 1993 .

[16]  W. K. Tso,et al.  STATIC ECCENTRICITY CONCEPT FOR TORSIONAL MOMENT ESTIMATIONS , 1990 .