YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Structural Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Structural Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Evaluation of Methods of Design for Strongback Braced Frames

    Source: Journal of Structural Engineering:;2024:;Volume ( 150 ):;issue: 011::page 04024160-1
    Author:
    Peter C. Talley
    ,
    Mark D. Denavit
    ,
    Nicholas E. Wierschem
    DOI: 10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-13403
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: Strongback braced frames (SBFs) are a relatively new structural system intended to reduce structural damage during seismic events and improve resilience. SBFs combine buckling-restrained braces, which provide the primary lateral resistance and energy dissipation, with a stiff elastic spine to distribute demands across the height of the structure and prevent the formation of weak- and soft-story mechanisms. Designing the spine is challenging, as higher mode effects and partial nonlinear mechanisms have been shown to be significant. These effects, and their interaction, are not fully accounted for by standardized design methods. It is also unclear how stiff and strong the spine must be in order to achieve the desired behaviors. There are proposed procedures for designing SBFs; however, they have not been broadly evaluated, and they have not been compared. This work evaluates two proposed design procedures, the simplified modal pushover analysis (SMPA) and generalized modified modal superposition (GMMS), with a “control” procedure based on current standardized capacity design procedures. A total of nine frames were designed for three buildings using the three procedures. Nonlinear response history analyses were performed to evaluate the differences in behavior resulting from the different design methods. To determine the effect of the strength and stiffness of the strongback, the yield strength and elastic modulus of the strongback members were varied and the analyses repeated. The results of this work show that the GMMS and SMPA design procedures are generally well-calibrated and provide benefits over current standardized procedures in several ways: collapse performance is improved, and yielding in the strongback and residual drifts is reduced. The GMMS procedure results in larger members, but provides similar outcomes to the more-complicated-to-implement SMPA. The insights from this work will assist engineers when implementing these design methods and support the codification of strongback braced frames in design standards.
    • Download: (1.259Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Evaluation of Methods of Design for Strongback Braced Frames

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4298225
    Collections
    • Journal of Structural Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorPeter C. Talley
    contributor authorMark D. Denavit
    contributor authorNicholas E. Wierschem
    date accessioned2024-12-24T10:03:44Z
    date available2024-12-24T10:03:44Z
    date copyright11/1/2024 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2024
    identifier otherJSENDH.STENG-13403.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4298225
    description abstractStrongback braced frames (SBFs) are a relatively new structural system intended to reduce structural damage during seismic events and improve resilience. SBFs combine buckling-restrained braces, which provide the primary lateral resistance and energy dissipation, with a stiff elastic spine to distribute demands across the height of the structure and prevent the formation of weak- and soft-story mechanisms. Designing the spine is challenging, as higher mode effects and partial nonlinear mechanisms have been shown to be significant. These effects, and their interaction, are not fully accounted for by standardized design methods. It is also unclear how stiff and strong the spine must be in order to achieve the desired behaviors. There are proposed procedures for designing SBFs; however, they have not been broadly evaluated, and they have not been compared. This work evaluates two proposed design procedures, the simplified modal pushover analysis (SMPA) and generalized modified modal superposition (GMMS), with a “control” procedure based on current standardized capacity design procedures. A total of nine frames were designed for three buildings using the three procedures. Nonlinear response history analyses were performed to evaluate the differences in behavior resulting from the different design methods. To determine the effect of the strength and stiffness of the strongback, the yield strength and elastic modulus of the strongback members were varied and the analyses repeated. The results of this work show that the GMMS and SMPA design procedures are generally well-calibrated and provide benefits over current standardized procedures in several ways: collapse performance is improved, and yielding in the strongback and residual drifts is reduced. The GMMS procedure results in larger members, but provides similar outcomes to the more-complicated-to-implement SMPA. The insights from this work will assist engineers when implementing these design methods and support the codification of strongback braced frames in design standards.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleEvaluation of Methods of Design for Strongback Braced Frames
    typeJournal Article
    journal volume150
    journal issue11
    journal titleJournal of Structural Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-13403
    journal fristpage04024160-1
    journal lastpage04024160-15
    page15
    treeJournal of Structural Engineering:;2024:;Volume ( 150 ):;issue: 011
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian