Stiffness-Based Design for Mitigation of Residual Displacements of Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames

AbstractBuckling-restrained braced frames (BRBFs) are often used as primary seismic force resisting systems to achieve the desired seismic performance of building frames. However, significant residual displacements of these systems may cause concerns on their postearthquake performance, especially under long duration earthquakes and strong aftershocks. Although backup moment frames (MFs) along with the BRBFs, referred to as dual systems, can be used to mitigate their residual interstory drifts, there is no design criterion on how to determine the section sizes in the MF for this purpose. In the research reported in this paper, a simple mitigation technique was developed, which relies on a stiffness-based design in which the residual interstory drifts can be effectively controlled by increasing the elastic story stiffness using column sections with a higher moment of inertia. Nonlinear time-history analyses were carried out on low-to-high rise BRBFs for a set of 20 design basis earthquake (DBE) level groun...

[1]  Larry Alan Fahnestock,et al.  Evaluation of buckling-restrained braced frame seismic performance considering reserve strength , 2011 .

[2]  Jon D. Magnusson Earthquake-Resisting Dual Systems and the 25% Rule , 1997 .

[3]  Chia-Ming Uang,et al.  Reducing residual drift of buckling-restrained braced frames as a dual system , 2006 .

[4]  Didier Pettinga,et al.  Effectiveness of simple approaches in mitigating residual deformations in buildings , 2007 .

[5]  Constantin Christopoulos,et al.  Seismic Response of Multistory Buildings with Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Steel Braces , 2008 .

[6]  Dipti Ranjan Sahoo,et al.  Seismic performance of buckling-restrained braced frames with varying beam-column connections , 2013 .

[7]  Larry Alan Fahnestock,et al.  Buckling-restrained braced frame connection performance , 2010 .

[8]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces , 2003 .

[9]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Experimental Evaluation of a Large-Scale Buckling-Restrained Braced Frame , 2007 .

[10]  Eduardo Miranda,et al.  Evaluation of residual drift demands in regular multi‐storey frames for performance‐based seismic assessment , 2006 .

[11]  Cynthia J Duncan,et al.  The AISC 2010 Specification and the 14th Edition Steel Construction Manual , 2011 .

[12]  Johnny Sun,et al.  Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project , 1997 .

[13]  Paul W. Richards,et al.  Seismic Column Demands in Ductile Braced Frames , 2009 .

[14]  Masanobu ShinozukaPrincipal Investigator Earthquake Engineering Research Center , 2014 .

[15]  Yoshihiro Kimura,et al.  Effect of Column Stiffness on Braced Frame Seismic Behavior , 2004 .

[16]  Hyunhoon Choi,et al.  Residual Drift Response of SMRFs and BRB Frames in Steel Buildings Designed according to ASCE 7-05 , 2011 .

[17]  Masayoshi Nakashima,et al.  Effect of gravity columns on mitigation of drift concentration for braced frames , 2009 .

[18]  Dipti Ranjan Sahoo,et al.  PERFORMANCE-BASED PLASTIC DESIGN METHOD FOR BUCKLING RESTRAINED BRACED FRAMES , 2010 .