Assessment of Nonlinear Seismic Behavior of Diagrid Structures with Different Skeletal Configuration under Strong Pulse-Type Ground Motions

Document Type : Articles

Authors

1 M.Sc. Graduate, Earthquake Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

2 M.Sc. Graduate, Structural Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Engineering, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In recent years, structural systems with diagrid skeletons comprising modular configurations have attracted lots of attention due to having structurally efficient system and architecturally aesthetic advantages. In this study, the seismic performance parameters of steel diagrid systems have been evaluated through conducting nonlinear time history analyses subjected to near-field earthquakes. The main subject of this study is to assess the effect of incidence angle of near-fault records containing forward directivity on the seismic behavior of steel diagrid systems. Following this purpose, three 20-story diagrid studied structures with different diagonal angles of 56°, 64° and 76°, having the same sizes and skeletal configurations were designed. Furthermore, a set of notified incidence angles with respect to the main axis including 0, 15, 30 and 45 degrees have also been applied to all the studied structures.
It should be noted that the significant characteristics of strong ground motions are the frequency content, effective duration of strong motions and peak ground motion parameters, i.e. PGV, PGA and PGD as well as corresponding response spectra. According to the aforementioned characteristics, an ensemble of strong earthquake records was selected. The selected ground motions include the main shock of the 1978 Tabas earthquake (Iran, Mw=7.3), the Bam record due to the 2003 Bam earthquake (Iran, Mw = 6.6) as well as two other powerful records entitled Rinaldi Receiving Station (RRS), and Sylmar Olive View (SYL) accelerograms related to the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Mw = 6.7) in California. It is worth mentioning that all the selected ground motions are categorized as strong near-fault records containing forward directivity effects. The specific characteristics of near-fault records containing forward directivity effects are the existence of long-period pulses.
These pulses are the evident result of the effects that manifest due to the occurrence of forward directivity process. The forward directivity process causes the induced fault rupture propagation to move toward the site. It usually happens when a velocity of rupture propagation is appropriately close to the earthquake shear wave velocity.
In this research, a number of engineering demand parameters (EDP) i.e. drift ratio, rotation of joints and plastic hinges nonlinear domain have been computed and assessed through conducting nonlinear time history analyses (NTHA). It is demonstrated that maximum seismic response parameters for all the studied structures do not occur necessarily along the main skeletal axes. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult to define the specific structural behavior trends subjected to a nominated critical incidence angle which can be imposed to earthquake records. It is noticeable that the numerical trends in the structural response parameters would change remarkably under the influence of the different frequency content of earthquake records, as well as the probable non-uniform variation for the EDPs and the diagrid skeletal patterns.
The results of this research indicate that the influences of incidence angle of ground motions on the structural seismic performance have different trends which evidently include mingle effects on the nonlinear rotation of joints as well as a complicated distribution for the lateral drift parameter. Moreover, it was obtained that the embossed structural skin containing the triangular modules with the diagonal angle of 56 degrees has relatively the lowest seismic demands subjected to strong near-field earthquake records.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Moon, K.S., Connor, J.J., and Fernandez, J.E. (2007) Diagrid structural systems for tall buildings: characteristics and methodology for preliminary design. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 16(2), 205–230, DOI:10.1002/tal.311.
  2. Montuori, G.M., Mele, E., Brandonisio, G., and De Luca, A. (2014) Geometrical patterns for diagrid buildings: Exploring alternative design strategies from the structural point of view. Engineering Structures, 71, 112–127.
  3. Moon, K.S. (2008) Sustainable structural engineering strategies for tall buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 17(5), 895-914, DOI: 10.1002/tal.475.
  4. Kim, J. and Lee, Y.H. (2012) Seismic performance evaluation of diagrid system buildings. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 21(12), 867-878.
  5. Mele, E., Toreno, M., Brandonisio, G., and De Luca, A. (2012) Diagrid structures for tall buildings: case studies and design considerations. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, DOI: 10.1002/tal.1029.

 

  1. Moon, K.S. (2008) Optimal grid geometry of diagrid structures for tall buildings. Architectural Science Review, 51(3), 239-251, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3763/asre.2008.5129.
  2. Kim, Y.J., Jung, I.Y., Ju, Y.K., Park S.J., and Kim, S.D. (2011) Cyclic behavior of diagrid nodes with H-section braces. Journal of Structural Engineering ASCE, 136(9), 1111-1122.
  3. Lacidogna, G., Scaramozzino, D., and Carpinteri, A. (2020) Influence of the geometrical shape on the structural behavior of diagrid tall buildings under lateral and torque actions. Developments in the Built Environment (Elsevier), 2, DOI:10.1016/j.dibe. 2020.100009.
  4. Heshmati, M., Khatami, A., Shakib, H. (2020) Seismic performance assessment of tubular diagrid structures with varying angles in tall steel buildings. Structures, 25, 113-126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. istruc.2020.02.030.
  5. Lachanas, C.G. and Vamvatsikos, D. (2021) Model type effects on the estimates seismic response of a 20-story steel moment resisting frame. Structural Engineering, ASCE, 147(6), https://doi.org/10. 1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0003010.
  6. Asadi, E. and Adeli, H. (2018) Seismic performance factors for low‐to mid-rise steel diagrid structural systems. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, DOI: 10.1002/tal.1505.
  7. Sadeghi, S. and Rofooei, F.R. (2018) Quantification of the seismic performance factors for steel diagrid structures. Constructional Steel Research, 146, 155-168.
  8. Asadi, E., Li, Y., and Heo, Y. (2018) Seismic performance assessment and loss estimation of steel diagrid structures. Engineering Structures, 144(10), DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002164.
  9. Mohsenian, V., Padashpour, S., and Hajirasouliha, I. (2020) Seismic reliability analysis and estimation of multilevel response modification factor for steel diagrid structural systems. Journal of Building Engineering, DOI:10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101168.
  10. Mashhadiali, N. and Kheyroddin, A. (2019) Quantification of the seismic performance factors of steel hexagrid structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 157, 82-92.
  11. Lopez, O.A. and Torres, R. (1997) The critical angle of seismic incidence and structural response. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 26, 881-894.
  12. MacRae, G.A. and Mattheis, J. (2000) Three-dimensional steel building response to near-fault motions. Journal of Structural Engireeng, 126(1), 117-126.
  13. Rigato, A.B. and Medina, R.A. (2007) Influence of angle of incidence on seismic demands for inelastic single-story structures subjected to bi-directional ground motions. Engineering Structures, 29, 2593-2601.
  14. Jamdar, M. (2019) Evaluation of Variations of Seismic Demands of Diagrid Structures in Near-Fault Zones with an Emphasis of Geometric Configuration. M.Sc. Thesis, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran (in Persian).
  15. The Iranian National Building Code (2014) Design Loads for Buildings - Issue 6, Tehran, Iran.
  16. The Iranian National Building Code (2014) Steel Structures - Issue 10, Tehran, Iran.
  17. Standard No. 2800 (2014) Iranian code of practice for seismic resistant design of buildings, Tehran, Iran.
  18. FEMA 356 (1998) Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Federal Emergency Management.
  19. FEMA 440 (2005) Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures. Applied Technology Council (ATC-55 Project).
  20. CSI (2010) SAP2000, Analysis Reference Manual, Berkeley, California.
  21. Kermani, E., Jafarian, Y., and Baziar, M.H. (2009) New predictive models for the vmax/amax ratio of strong ground motions using genetic programming. International Journal of Civil Engineering, Springer, 7(4), 236-247.
  22. Bradley, B.A., Pettinga, D., Baker, J.W., and Fraser, J. (2017) Guidance on the utilization of earthquake-induced ground motion simulations in engineering practice. Earthquake Spectra, EERI, 33(3), https://doi.org/10.1193/ 120216EQS219EP.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 May 2020
  • Revise Date: 30 July 2021
  • Accept Date: 31 August 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics