0% found this document useful (0 votes)
29 views2 pages

Poster SafeerSahoo

Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
29 views2 pages

Poster SafeerSahoo

Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/235789030

SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF STEEL FRAME STRUCTURES WITH HYBRID


CONCENTRICALLY BRACE SYSTEMS

Conference Paper · February 2013

CITATIONS READS

3 514

2 authors:

Muhamed Safeer Pandikkadavath Dipti Ranjan Sahoo


National Institute of Technology Calicut Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
33 PUBLICATIONS 193 CITATIONS 226 PUBLICATIONS 2,759 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhamed Safeer Pandikkadavath on 02 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF STEEL FRAME
STRUCTURES WITH HYBRID CONCENTRICALLY
BRACE SYSTEMS
Muhamed S. Pandikkadavath and Dipti Ranjan Sahoo
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India.
ABSTRACT BRACE MODELLING
2 3000
This study investigates the effectiveness of a special hybrid BRBF-CBF-HINGE PROPERTY
1.5
bracing system for the improved seismic performance of steel 2000
1

Force/Yield Force

Axial Force (kN)


framed structures in which conventional buckling-type brace 0.5
1000

and buckling-restrained brace (BRB) sections are connected in 0 0

series to constitute a hybrid brace. The conventional brace acts -0.5


-1000
-1
as the supporting element to the BRB element and increases BRBF -2000
-1.5 BRBF
the lateral stiffness of the frame to control the overall drift CBF
-2 -3000
response. An extensive nonlinear static and dynamic analysis -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10
Displacement/Yield Displacement Axial Deformation (m)
is carried out on a 6-story braced frame with chevron braces
using SAP2000 software. The main parameters investigated PUSHOVER ANALYSIS
are: hinge mechanism, interstory drift response, lateral 7000

strength, and residual drift response. 6000

[email protected] m
Base Shear (kN)
INTRODUCTION 5000
ALL BRACES YIELDED

4000 COLUMN HINGING

• The asymmetric hysteretic behaviour of conventional


3000
concentrically braced frames (CBFs) limits their energy
2000
energy dissipation capacity. BRBF
1000 CBF

5.50 m
• The main disadvantage of buckling-restrained braced frames 0
HBF

(BRBFs) are cost effectiveness and the reduced lateral 0 1 2 3 4 5


Roof Drift (%) Yielding Plastic hinging

stiffness leading to the larger residual drift.


TIME-HISTORY ANALYSIS
• A brace system with competent stiffness as that of a 6 6
DBE MCE
conventional brace and having a sustained repeatable
5 5
inelastic displacement capacity equivalent to BRB can give
out a robust structure enriched with advantages of both CBF 4 4
Story

and BRBF. Story


3 3

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
2 BRBF 2 BRBF
CBF CBF
HBF
• To control the excessive post-earthquake residual drift (as 1 1
HBF

0 1 2 3 0 2 4 6
observed in case of BRBFs), Maximum ISDR (%) Maximum ISDR (%)
6 6
• To avoid the brace fracture (as observed in CBFs) in the DBE MCE

event of earthquakes, 5 5

• To enhance the energy dissipation potential of the braced 4 4


Story

Story

frame similar to the BRBFs


3 3

DETAILS OF STUDY FRAME 2 BRBF 2 BRBF


CBF CBF
HBF HBF
1 1
• A 6-story braced frame 0.00 0.25 0.50 0 1 2
of width 9.15 m and Maximum RDR (%) Maximum RDR (%)

23.35 m.
HSS section
[email protected] m

CONCLUSIONS
• All beam-to-column • Both interstory and residual drift response of braced frame is
connections are rigid significantly reduced in HBF as compared to BRBF.
BRB

except the top story. • The drift response of HBF is nearly same as that of the CBF.
• the plastic hinging in columns and brace fracture, as
5.50 m

• Yield stress of buckling-


type and BRB portion is (CBF) (BRBF) (HBF) observed in CBF, is completely eliminated in case of HBF.
248 MPa and 317 MPa. • The HBF can facilitate the easy replacement of the
• Length of BRB portion = 1/3rd
yielded/damaged BRB portion of the hybrid brace in the post-
of total hybrid brace length earthquake restoration work.

Paper No. RRS DIS-114, International Conference on Rehabilitation and Restoration of Structures, February 13-16, 2013, IIT Madras, Chennai, India
View publication stats

You might also like