Peak and residual responses of steel moment-resisting and braced frames under pulse-like near-fault earthquakes

Abstract This paper presents the behaviour of steel moment resisting and braced frames under pulse-like near-fault earthquakes. The key properties for characterizing near-fault ground motions with forward directivity and fling step effects are discussed, and the influence of varying brace properties on the key engineering demand parameters such as maximum inter-storey drift (MID), residual inter-storey drift (RID) and peak absolute floor acceleration (PA) is revealed. Among other findings, it is shown that the structural responses are related to spectral accelerations, PGV/PGA ratios, and the pulse period of near-fault ground motions. The moment resisting and self-centring braced frames (MRFs and SC-BRBFs) generally have comparable MID levels, while the buckling-restrained braced frames (BRBFs) tend to exhibit lower MIDs. Increasing the post-yield stiffness of the braces decreases the MID response. The SC-BRBFs generally have mean residual drifts less than 0.2% under all the considered ground motions. However, much larger RIDs are induced for the MRFs/BRBFs under the near-fault ground motions, suggesting that these structures may not be economically repairable after the earthquakes. From a non-structural performance point of view, the SC-BRBFs show much higher PA levels compared with the other structures. A good balance among the MID, RID, and PA responses can be achieved when “partial” SC-BRBs are used. To facilitate performance-based design, RID prediction models are finally proposed which enable an effective evaluation of the relationship between MID and RID.

[1]  Angus C.C. Lam,et al.  Feasibility study of shape memory alloy ring spring systems for self-centring seismic resisting devices , 2015 .

[2]  Zhen Zhou,et al.  Experimental Investigation of the Hysteretic Performance of Dual-Tube Self-Centering Buckling-Restrained Braces with Composite Tendons , 2015 .

[3]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Dimensional response analysis of yielding structures with first‐mode dominated response , 2006 .

[4]  F. Mazza,et al.  Base-isolation systems for the seismic retrofitting of r.c. framed buildings with soft-storey subjected to near-fault earthquakes , 2018, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering.

[5]  Matthew R. Eatherton,et al.  Computational study of self‐centering buckling‐restrained braced frame seismic performance , 2014 .

[6]  P. Somerville Magnitude scaling of the near fault rupture directivity pulse , 2003 .

[7]  Chin-Hsiung Loh,et al.  Effects of hysteretic model on seismic demands: consideration of near‐fault ground motions , 2002 .

[8]  Minjuan He,et al.  Hysteretic Performance of Self-Centering Glulam Beam-to-Column Connections , 2018 .

[9]  Angus C.C. Lam,et al.  Numerical study and practical design of beam-to-column connections with shape memory alloys , 2015 .

[10]  Songye Zhu,et al.  Shake table test and numerical study of self‐centering steel frame with SMA braces , 2017 .

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

[12]  Andre Filiatrault,et al.  Seismic response of self‐centring hysteretic SDOF systems , 2002 .

[13]  Theodore L. Karavasilis,et al.  Seismic structural and non-structural performance evaluation of highly damped self-centering and conventional systems , 2011 .

[14]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Self-Centering Energy Dissipative Bracing System for the Seismic Resistance of Structures: Development and Validation , 2008 .

[15]  Francesc Pozo Montero,et al.  An isolation device for near-fault ground motions , 2013 .

[16]  Jian Zhang,et al.  Dimensional Analysis of Inelastic Structures with Negative Stiffness and Supplemental Damping Devices , 2017 .

[17]  Matthew R. Eatherton,et al.  Development and experimental validation of a nickel–titanium shape memory alloy self-centering buckling-restrained brace , 2012 .

[18]  Dimitrios Vamvatsikos,et al.  The Hysteretic Energy as a Performance Measure in Analytical Studies , 2018 .

[19]  Michael C.H. Yam,et al.  Tests on superelastic Ni–Ti SMA bars under cyclic tension and direct-shear: towards practical recentring connections , 2015 .

[20]  Tsung-Han Wu,et al.  Seismic design and tests of a full-scale one-story one-bay steel frame with a dual-core self-centering brace , 2016 .

[21]  Matthew R. Eatherton,et al.  Residual Drifts of Self-Centering Systems Including Effects of Ambient Building Resistance , 2011 .

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

[23]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Seismic Response and Performance of Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames , 2007 .

[24]  Behrouz Asgarian,et al.  Incremental dynamic analysis of steel frames equipped with NiTi shape memory alloy braces , 2014 .

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

[26]  Osman E. Ozbulut,et al.  Seismic collapse evaluation of steel moment resisting frames with superelastic viscous damper , 2016 .

[27]  M. J. Nigel Priestley,et al.  Myths and fallacies in earthquake engineering , 1993 .

[28]  Samit Ray-Chaudhuri,et al.  Effect of Nonlinearity of Frame Buildings on Peak Horizontal Floor Acceleration , 2011 .

[29]  Michalis Fragiadakis,et al.  Influence of modeling parameters on the response of degrading systems to near-field ground motions , 2013 .

[30]  Chung-Che Chou,et al.  Subassemblage tests and finite element analyses of sandwiched buckling-restrained braces , 2010 .

[31]  Babak Alavi,et al.  Strengthening of moment‐resisting frame structures against near‐fault ground motion effects , 2004 .

[32]  Canxing Qiu,et al.  High-mode effects on seismic performance of multi-story self-centering braced steel frames , 2016 .

[33]  Robert Tremblay,et al.  Seismic testing and performance of buckling- restrained bracing systems , 2006 .

[34]  Wei Wang,et al.  Self-centring behaviour of steel and steel-concrete composite connections equipped with NiTi SMA bolts , 2017 .

[35]  Chung-Che Chou,et al.  Steel braced frames with dual-core SCBs and sandwiched BRBs: Mechanics, modeling and seismic demands , 2014 .

[36]  Nicos Makris,et al.  Dimensional Response Analysis of Multistory Regular Steel MRF Subjected to Pulselike Earthquake Ground Motions , 2010 .

[37]  N. Null Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures , 2003 .

[38]  Wei Wang,et al.  Large size superelastic SMA bars: heat treatment strategy, mechanical property and seismic application , 2016 .

[39]  Mehdi Ghassemieh,et al.  A new dual bracing system for improving the seismic behavior of steel structures , 2011 .

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

[41]  G. MacRae,et al.  POST‐EARTHQUAKE RESIDUAL DISPLACEMENTS OF BILINEAR OSCILLATORS , 1997 .

[42]  Reyhaneh Eskandari,et al.  Seismic performance of steel mega braced frames equipped with shape‐memory alloy braces under near‐fault earthquakes , 2016 .

[43]  Toru Takeuchi,et al.  LOCAL BUCKLING RESTRAINT CONDITION FOR CORE PLATES IN BUCKLING RESTRAINED BRACES , 2010 .

[44]  James M. Ricles,et al.  Innovative use of a shape memory alloy ring spring system for self-centering connections , 2017 .

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

[46]  Jorge Ruiz-García,et al.  Evaluation of drift demands in existing steel frames under as-recorded far-field and near-fault mainshock–aftershock seismic sequences , 2011 .

[47]  J. McCormick,et al.  PERMISSIBLE RESIDUAL DEFORMATION LEVELS FOR BUILDING STRUCTURES CONSIDERING BOTH SAFETY AND HUMAN ELEMENTS , 2008 .

[48]  George P. Mavroeidis,et al.  A Mathematical Representation of Near-Fault Ground Motions , 2003 .

[49]  Wei Wang,et al.  Self-Centering Beam-to-Column Connections with Combined Superelastic SMA Bolts and Steel Angles , 2017 .

[50]  J. Bray,et al.  Characterization of forward-directivity ground motions in the near-fault region , 2004 .

[51]  Murat Dicleli,et al.  Effect of near‐fault ground motion and damper characteristics on the seismic performance of chevron braced steel frames , 2007 .

[52]  A. Y. Elghazouli,et al.  Cyclic testing and numerical modelling of carbon steel and stainless steel tubular bracing members , 2010 .

[53]  Vinay K. Gupta,et al.  Near-fault fling-step ground motions: Characteristics and simulation , 2017 .

[54]  Mohsen Gerami,et al.  Vulnerability of steel moment‐resisting frames under effects of forward directivity , 2015 .

[55]  Xiao-Yi Zhou,et al.  Superelastic SMA Belleville washers for seismic resisting applications: experimental study and modelling strategy , 2016 .

[56]  Michael C.H. Yam,et al.  Cyclic performance of extended end-plate connections equipped with shape memory alloy bolts , 2014 .

[57]  Andrés Alonso-Rodríguez,et al.  Assessment of building behavior under near-fault pulse-like ground motions through simplified models , 2015 .

[58]  Carmine Galasso,et al.  Collapse risk and residual drift performance of steel buildings using post-tensioned MRFs and viscous dampers in near-fault regions , 2016, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.