ارائه مدل بهینه طراحی قاب‌های خمشی فولادی مقاوم در برابر زلزله برای بار انفجار سطحی

نوع مقاله : Articles

نویسندگان

1 گروه مهندسی عمران، دانشکده فنی و مهندسی، دانشگاه صنعتی خاتم‌الانبیاء بهبهان، بهبهان، ایران

2 مرکز تحقیقات توسعه مدیریت، تهران، ایران

چکیده

ساخت سازه‌های مقاوم در برابر بارهای انفجاری و ارتعاش شدید بسیار ضروری می‌باشد. سازه‌ها آسیب‌پذیری‌های گوناگونی در برابر بارهای وارده دارند. یکی از موارد آسیب‌پذیری سازه‌ها در برابر انفجار، عدم طراحی صحیح سیستم‌های سازه‌ای آنها می‌باشد. در این پژوهش به ارائه مدل بهینه طراحی سیستم سازه‌های قاب خمشی فولادی در برابر انفجار به روش طراحی بر اساس عملکرد پرداخته شده است. بدین‌منظور ابتدا قاب‌های دو بعدی 4، 5، 6، 7 و 8 طبقه تحت بارگذاری لرزه‌ای برای سطوح عملکرد IO، LS و CP بر اساس آیین‌نامه FEMA356 طراحی گردیده‌اند، سپس قاب‌های مذکور به‌عنوان طرح اولیه تحت بار انفجاری و بر اساس ملاحظات آیین‌نامه UFC3-340-02 و برای سطوح عملکرد فوق‌الذکر باز طراحی گردیدند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد سازه‌های طراحی شده در برابر بارهای لرزه‌ای، رفتار مناسبی در برابر بارهای انفجاری از خود نشان نمی‌دهند و به‌منظور تأمین سطوح عملکرد قاب‌ها در برابر بار انفجاری لازم است از مقاطع قوی‌تری استفاده گردد. همچنین در این تحقیق مشاهده گردید با افزایش تعداد طبقات قاب‌ها، مقادیر پارامترهای سازه‌ای قاب‌ها در برابر بار لرزه‌ای و انفجار همگرا می‌شوند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Optimized Model Design of Earthquake Resistant Bending Frames for Surface Blast Load

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahbobeh Mirzaie AliAbadi 1
  • Mahdi Mirzaie AliAbadai 2
1 Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Behbahan Khatam Alanbia University of Technology, Behbahan, Iran
2 Development Research Center, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The construction of resistant structures against blast loads and vibration is essential. Structures are vulnerable to the external loads in different areas.
The initial purpose of designing against blast loads include life safety and the prevention of progressive, collapse based on economic considerations. Structures with these qualities are of great importance and should be protected against explosion.

Structures with sensitive and expensive equipment. 
Structures with long-term guidance role.
Structures that cause disruption when they are destroyed.

The clear understanding of any occurrence and its consequences are required in order to provide an assessment. The literature review of designing steel frame structures against explosion is evaluated in the next part.
Bogosian et al. [1] have modeled the blast load (300-1000 kips) on a structure, and in their result, there is a graph that shows the relation between the chance of occurring an event with weight and the distance of explosive materials.
Liew [2] have modeled a five floors steel frame against blast and fire loads. The study on the columns of the structure has shown that local inelastic buckling in critical sections will occur in high strain rates.
Izadifar et al. [3] have evaluated the effects of ductility on the behavior of steel frames against explosion. The graph of force against displacement has been drawn and the parameters of ductility has been studied. 
An eight-floor steel frame, which has been designed for service load (live and dead load) was evaluated under explosion by Urgessa and Arciszewski [4]. The results of the research show that the joints with side plates exhibit a better behavior than the conventional joints when blasting. They also behave more efficiently than conventional joints because of the use of these joints to move the plastic hinge into the beam. By comparing the behavior of similar joints with differences in the thickness of the bonding sheet, it was shown that doubling the thickness of the bonding sheet reduces the in-plane displacement.
Inappropriate design is the main reason for the vulnerability of these structures. The optimal model for performance-based design of steel framework structures resistant to explosion is provided in this study.
For the purpose of the study, the authors assessed the three performance levels of IO, LS, and CP. The intended system for structures is the steel bending frame. In the first step, the structures are designed against seismic load for three levels of performance. In the second step, the structures were redesigned against the blast load. In order to investigate the behavior of structures, the following parameters were investigated.
 Weight of structural materials used
Assessment of the designed frames has shown that the weight of structural materials consumed by the specimens against seismic load is less than the weight of structural materials consumed against the blast load.
 Examine the horizontal displacement of the roofs of the floors
According to the results, the horizontal displacement values of the roofs in the frames are lower than the seismic load compared to the explosive load.
Check the absolute acceleration of the roofs of the frames
The results show that in designing the frames against the seismic and explosive loads, the absolute acceleration of the roofs is reduced from IO to CP level. Also with respect to the amount of explosive and its distance to the frames and the amount of seismic load, it is observed that as the number of floors increases, the absolute acceleration of the roof of the frames is closer to each other under seismic load and explosive load.
References

Bogosian, D.D., Dunn, B.W., and Chrostowski, J.D. (1991) Blast analysis of complex structures using physics-based fast-running models. Computers and Structures72(1), 81-92.
Liew, J.Y.R. (2008) Survivability of steel frame structures subject to blast and fire. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 64, 854-866.
Izadifar, R.A. and Maheri, M.R. (2010) Ductility effects on the behavior of steel structures under blast loading. International Journal of Science and Technology. Transaction B: Engineering. 34(B1), 49-62.
Urgessa, G.S. and Arciszewski, T. (2011) Blast response comparison of multiple steel frame connections. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 47(7), 668-675.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Structural System Steel Bending Frame
  • explosion
  • Performance based design
  • Optimal Model
  • Operational Performance
  • Seismic Load
  1. Bogosian, D.D., Dunn, B.W., Chrostowski, J.D. (1991) Blast analysis of complex structures using physics-based fast-running models. Computers & Structures, 72(1), 81-92.
  2. Liew, J.Y.R. (2008) Survivability of steel frame structures subject to blast and fire. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 64, 854-866.
  3. Izadifar, R.A., Maheri, M.R. (2010) Ductility effects on the behavior of steel structures under blast loading. International Journal of Science and Technology. Transaction B: Engineering. 34(B1), 49-62.
  4. Heidarpour, A., Bradford, M. (2011) Beam–column element for non-linear dynamic analysis of steel members subjected to blast loading. Engineering Structures, 33(4), 1259-1266.
  5. Urgessa, G.S., Arciszewski, T. (2011) Blast response comparison of multiple steel frame connections. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 47(7), 668-675.
  6. Nassr, A., Razaqpur, A., Tait, M., Campidelli, M., Foo, S. (2012) Single and multi degree of freedom analysis of steel beams under blast loading. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 242, 63-77.
  7. Forni, D., Chiaia, B., Cadoni, E. (2017) Blast eï‌€ects on steel columns under ï‌re conditions. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 136, 1–10.
  8. Hassanvand, P., Rasoul Abadi, M.H., Moghadam, A.S., Hosseini, M. (2016) Comparison of designing simple steel frame & coaxial brace systems by contrast of blast, using two methods of load & resistance coefficients & performance surfaces. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, 3(3), 112-127 (in Persian).
  9. Building and Housing Research Center (2017) Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistance Design of Buildings: Standard No 2800. 3rd Edition (in Persian).
  10. Iranian Code of loads on the building. National Building Regulations No. 6 (2016) (in Persian).
  11. FEMA356 (2000) Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency.
  12. UFC (2014) Unified facilities criteria. Structures to resist the effects of accidental explosions, Superseding Army TM 5-1300, 5 December.
  13. Computers and Structures Inc. (2011) CSI Analysis Reference Manual For SAP2000, ETABS, SAFE. Berkeley, California.
  14. Dusenberry, D. (2010) Handbook for Blast-Resistant Design of Buildings. John Wiley & Sons, INC.