Investigating Progressive Collapse in High-Rise Dual Special Steel Moment-Resisting Frames and Buckling-Restrained Braces

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Department of Arts and Architecture, West Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Structural Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In the recent decades designing buildings against progressive collapse has been subjected to growing attention. In progressive collapse, the failure of one single structural member is transmitted to other members resulting in collapse of the entire load-resisting system of the building. Progressive collapse in buildings can be triggered by diverse factors such as accidental gas blast, impact between vehicles and one of the columns, etc. It is, thus, of great importance to design a building to withstand such catastrophic collapse. In this manner, in the design process, the building is subjected to different failure scenarios of single elements, e.g. a column, and investigate whether the failure spread to the remaining parts of the structure. While a substantial effort has been devoted to design earthquake-resilient structures based on the current seismic codes and state-of-the-art researches in earthquake engineering, still further studies are required to investigate the resistance of structures against progressive collapse.
In this research the progressive collapse of dual special steel moment-resisting frames and buckling-restrained braces, as an earthquake-resilient structural system for high-rise buildings, has been numerically investigated considering several failure scenarios. Buckling-restrained braces have been considered to provide appropriate seismic performance due to fair tensile and compressive behavior as well as almost symmetrical hysteresis response. In the performed numerical analyses, progressive collapse in four high-rise residential and commercial 20-story buildings with dual special steel moment-resisting frames and buckling-restrained braces with different configuration, such as (combined V-Inverted V) and (V) located in the corner and edge bays is studied, regarding different failure scenarios. The above-mentioned scenarios include the removal of a corner or edge column in the first or fifteenth floor, as well as the removal of two edge columns of the braced bays in the first or fifteenth floor. The numerical models were verified against existing published experimental and numerical results before being applied to the analytical cases. This is achieved by comparing the results reproduced by the numerical tool to the previously published results regarding both cyclic analysis, at the sub-assembly level, and time-history analysis, at the structural level.
The adopted numerical models were based on Finite Element (FE) simulation of the structures taking into account both material and geometric nonlinearities. The Inelastic force-based plastic hinge frame element type in SeismoStruct software was used to model beam and column elements, while Inelastic force-based frame element type elements was implemented to model the nonlinear behavior along the buckling-restrained braces. Each of the bracing elements consisted of three parts, including: a middle part to simulate the core as well as transition and elastic segments of bracings, and two end parts with large stiffness to simulate the panel zone and gusset plates. Rayleigh damping was also selected to model the damping in time-history analyses of the progressive collapse process. The performance criteria for all the members and connections were selected according to ASCE/SEI 41-17.
Based on the obtained results, the peak vertical deflection of the top node of the removed column was approximated to be as large as 6.5 cm, and collapse was observed in one of the numerical models (commercial building contains X-bracing in the corner bays).
The dual structure with X-bracing in the corner bays represents the weakest performance, while the best performance was related to the case of V-bracing in the edge bays, and the V-bracing in the corner bays and X-bracing in the edge bays have shown similar behaviors. In addition, in all the single column removal scenarios, the peak value of deflection in the cases in which the column removal was not located at the bracing bays was significantly greater, approximately 1.5 to 3 times larger, compared to those of column removals in the bracing bays.

Keywords

References

1.    Kaewkulchai, G. and Williamsin, E.B. (2003) Dynamic behavior of planar frames during progressive collapse. 16th ASCE Engineering Mechanics Conference. University of Washington, Seattle.
2.    Fu, F. (2009) Progressive collapse analysis of high-rise building with 3-D finite element modeling method. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65(5), 1269-1278.
3.    Khandelwal, K., El-Tawil, S., and Sadek, F. (2009) Progressive collapse analysis of seismically designed steel braced frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65(3), 699-708.
4.    Kim, J. and Lee, Y.H. (2010) Progressive collapse resisting capacity of tube‐type structures. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 19(7), 761-777.
5.    GSA (2013) Alternate Path Analysis & Design Guidelines for Progressive Collapse Resistance. General Services Administration, Washington, D.C.
6.    Kim, J., Lee, Y., and Choi, H. (2011) Progressive collapse resisting capacity of braced frames. The structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 20(2), 257-270.
7.    Mashhadiali, N. and Kheyroddin, A. (2013) Progressive collapse assessment of new hexagrid structural system for tall buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 23(12), 947-961.
8.    Fu, F. (2014) Assessment of the progressive collapse potential in tall buildings with 3D FE method. Structures Congress 2014, ASCE, Boston, Massachusetts, 847-856.
9.    Rezvani, F. and Yousefi, A. (2015) Effect of span length on progressive collapse behaviour of steel moment resisting frames. Structures, 3, 81-89.
10.    Rezvani, F. and Ali Mohammad, M. (2017) Effect of Inverted-V Bracing on Retrofitting Against Progressive Collapse of Steel Moment Resisting Frames. International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(3), 1103-1113.
11.    Faghihmaleki, H., Nejati, F. and Masoomi, H. (2017) Evaluation of Progressive Collapse in Steel Moment Frame with Different Braces. Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 11(2), 280-289.
12.    BHRC (2007) Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistance Design of Buildings: Standard No. 2800 (4th Edition). Building and Housing Research Center (in Persian).
13.    Moradkhani, M. (2019) Progressive Collapse of Dual Steel Moment-Resisting Frames with Buckling-Restrained Braces. M.Sc. Thesis, West Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University (in Persian).
14.    BS 5950-1-2000 (2001) Structural Use of Steelwork in Buildings, Part 1: Code of Practice for Design-Rolled and Welded Sections. British Standards Institution, London, UK.
15.    ASCE/SEI 41-17 (2017) Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE, Reston, VA 20191.
16.    SeismoSoft (2016) SeismoStruct, a computer program for static and dynamic non-linear analysis of framed structures [Online]. Available: www.seismosoft.com [2017, January 15].
17.    Hosseini, A. and Hassanipour, A. (2015) Numerical modeling of BRB frame systems with and without concrete. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST), 2(8), 2309-2314.
18.    Bagerzadeh Karimi, M.R., Lotfollahi-Yaghin, M.A., Mehdi Nejad, R., and Sadeghi, V. (2015) Seismic behavior of steel structure with buckling restrained braces. Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 9(4), 480-488.  
19.    Zaruma, O. (2017) Seismic Stability of Buckling Restrained Braced Frames. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
20.    Lopez, W.A., Gwie, D.S., Lauck, T.W., and Saunders, M. (2004) Structural design and experimental verification of a buckling-restrained braced frame system. Engineering Journal, 41(4), 177-186.             
21.    Menegotto, M. and Pinto, P.E. (1973) Method of analysis for cyclically loaded R.C. plane frames including changes in geometry and non-elastic behaviour of elements under combined normal force and bending. Symposium on the Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads, International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, 15-22.
22.    Orkun, Y. and Serkan, B. (2018) Seismic performance of post-northridge welded connections. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures, 15(2), 1-18.
23.    Ibarra, L.F. and Krawinkler, H. (2005) Global Collapse of Frame Structures under Seismic Excitations. Report No. 152, The John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, California.
Bulletin of Earthquake Science and Engineering
Volume 7, Issue 3 - Serial Number 24
November 2020
Pages 151-168

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 July 2019
  • Accept Date: 18 April 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics