برآورد عملکرد قاب‌‌های مهاربندی واگرا با تیرهای پیوند قائم جفت تحت خرابی پیش‌رونده

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه عمران، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، استهبان، ایران

2 گروه عمران، دانشکده فنی و مهندسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

در این مقاله عملکرد قاب‌‌های مهاربندی واگرا با تیر پیوند قائم در برابر خرابی پیش‌رونده بر اساس دستورالعمل GSA و روش مسیر جایگزین بررسی شده است. بدین منظور سه قاب 5، 10 و 15 طبقه مورد بررسی قرار گرفته‌‌اند که عملکرد آن‌‌ها به روش تحلیل دینامیکی غیرخطی با نرم‌‌افزار SAP2000 برآورد گردید. با حذف ستون میانی در قاب‌‌های موردمطالعه، برای هر سه قاب، مشاهده شد که جابجایی‌‌ها منظم و عملکرد مناسبی را در خرابی پیش‌رونده دارند. اما با حذف ستون گوشه در قاب پنج طبقه فروریزش رخ داد و برای قاب 10 طبقه نیز افزایش حدود 3 برابری جابجایی کف طبقات مشاهده شد. اما برای قاب 15 طبقه رفتار قاب تحت خرابی پیش‌رونده بسیار مناسب بود. در واقع حذف ستون گوشه در قاب‌‌ها نسبت به حذف ستون میانی، حالت بحرانی‌‌تری را به وجود می‌‌آورد. در سناریوی حذف ستون میانی در قاب 5 طبقه، حداکثر جابجایی قائم در طبقه آخر برابر 9/21 سانتی‌‌متر، در قاب 10 طبقه برابر 6/37 سانتی‌‌متر و در قاب 15 طبقه برابر 4/25 سانتی‌‌متر به دست آمد. جهت مقایسه، در سناریوی حذف ستون گوشه در قاب 5 طبقه، حداکثر جابجایی قائم در طبقه آخر به علت فروریزش نامشخص، در قاب 10 طبقه برابر 21/88 سانتی‌‌متر و در قاب 15 طبقه برابر7/65 سانتی‌‌متر به دست آمد. نتایج نشان داد که با افزایش ارتفاع سیستم سازه‌‌ای، رفتار آن در برابر خرابی پیش‌رونده بهبود می‌‌یابد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Eccentrically Braced Steel Frames with Double Vertical Link Beam under Progressive Collapse

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamed Alimadadi 1
  • Seyed Shahab Emamzadeh 2
1 Faculty of Civil Engineering, Estahban University
2 Civil Engineering Department, Kharazmi University. Tehran
چکیده [English]

In this article, the performance of Eccentrically Braced Frames with Vertical Shear Links against progressive collapse has been investigated based on GSA guidelines and the alternative path method. For this purpose, three frames of 5, 10, and 15 floors have been investigated, and their performance was estimated by the method of nonlinear dynamic analysis with SAP2000 software. By removing the middle column for all three frames, it was observed that the displacements are regular and perform well in progressive collapse. However, with the removal of the corner column, the five-story frame collapsed, and for the 10-story frame, an increase of about 3 times the floor displacement was observed. But for the 15-story frame, the behavior of the frame under progressive collapse is very suitable. The removal of the corner column in the frames creates a more critical condition than the removal of the middle column. In the scenario of removing the middle column, the maximum vertical displacement on the last floor of the 5-story frame was equal to 9.21cm, in the 10-story frame it was equal to 6.37cm and in the 15-story frame, it was equal to 4.25cm. For comparison, in the scenario of removing the corner column, the maximum vertical displacement obtained on the last floor of the 5-story frame was unknown due to collapse, and in the 10-story frame it was equal to 21.88cm and in the 15-story frame, it was equal to 7.65cm. Results show that as structure height increases, system behavior will improve against progressive collapse.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Progressive Collapse
  • alternative path method
  • MRF-EBF dual systems
  • vertical link beam
  • GSA code

مراجع

  1. GSA, Alternate Path Analysis & Design Guidelines for Progressive Collapse Resistance, United States General Services Administration, US Washington, DC (2013).
  2. Pekelnicky, C. Poland, ASCE 41-13: Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings,  SESOC 2012 Convention, (2012).
  3. Aldo, K. Marchand, M. Diaz, Alternate path method in progressive collapse analysis: Variation of dynamic and nonlinear load increase factors, Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction17.4 (2012) 152-160.
  4. Gomelskaya, Dynamic amplification factor for moment resisting frames in progressive collapse, Thesis: M. Eng., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, (2014).
  5. Muhmoudi, T. Teimoori, H. Kozani, Presenting displacement-based nonlinear static analysis method to calculate structural response against progressive collapse. International Journal of Civil Engineering, 13(4) (2015) 478-485.
  6. McKay, M. Gomez, K. Marchand, Non-Linear Dynamic Alternate Path Analysis for Progressive Collapse: Detailed Procedures Using UFC 4-023-03 (Revised July 2009). Reported by Protection Engineering Consultants: Castle Hills, TX, USA, (2010).
  7. B. Adnan, I. Faridmehr, B. Faramanbordar, R. Hodjati, M. Gharehzadeh Shirazi, A.B.A. Rahman, Assessment the Behavior of Seismic Designed Steel Moment Frames Subjected to Progressive Collapse, Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 7.10 (2014) 2135-2144.
  8. Fehling, W. Pauli, J.G. Bouwkamp, Use of vertical shear-links in eccentrically braced frames, Earthquake Engineering, 10th World Conference, Balkema, Rotterdam, (1992) 4475.
  9. M. Zahrai, Behavior of Vertical Link Beam in Steel Structures. Building & Housing Research Center, BHRC Publication No. R-515, (2009). (In Persian).
  10. Montuori, E. Nastri, V. Piluso, Influence of the bracing scheme on seismic performances of MRF-EBF dual systems, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 132 (2017) 179-190.
  11. Rahnavard, A. Hassanipour, M. Suleiman, A. Mokhtari, Evaluation on eccentrically braced frame with single and double shear panels, Journal of Building Engineering, 10 (2017) 13-25.
  12. G. Vetr, A. Ghamari, J. Bouwkamp, Investigating the nonlinear behavior of Eccentrically Braced Frame with vertical shear links (V-EBF), Journal of Building Engineering, 10 (2017) 47-59.
  13. Hoveidae, B. Habibi Pourzare,  Comparison of Progressive Collapse Capacity of Steel Moment Resisting Frames and Dual Systems with Buckling Retrained Braces. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering. 7(4) (2019) 37-56.
  14. Musavi, M. Sheidaii, Comparison of seismic and gravity progressive collapse in dual systems with special steel moment-resisting frames and braces. Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering 109(54).4 (2023) 161-151.
  15. Tian, K. Lin, L. Zhang, X. Lu, H. Xue, Novel seismic–progressive collapse resilient super-tall building system, Journal of Building Engineering, Volume 41, (2021).
  16. Y. Liu, W.H. Qin, Z.D. Xu, Z. Xi, Z. Zhang, Investigation on the progressive collapse resistance of three-dimensional concrete frame structures reinforced by steel-FRP composite bar, Journal of Building Engineering, Volume 59,(2022).
  17. Ravichandra, T. Nagapurna Chandan, Progressive collapse of irregular RC building, Materials Today: Proceedings, 62(12), Part 12, (2022), 6768-6775.
  18. Kumar, S. Lavendra, T. Raghavendra, Progressive collapse resistance of reinforced concrete frame structures subjected to column removal scenario, Materials Today: Proceedings, Volume 61, Part 2,(2022), 264-274.
  19. Y Kong, B. Yang, M. Elchalakani, K. Chen, L.M. Ren, Progressive collapse resistance of 3D composite floor system subjected to internal column removal: Experiment and numerical simulation, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Volume 172, (2020).
  20. Design and Construction of Steel Structures. Tehran: Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Iranian National Building Code, Part 10. (2013). (In Persian).
  21. ANSI, A., AISC 341-16, Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings, American Institute of Steel Construction. Inc.: Chicago, IL, (2016).
  22. D. Engelhardt, E.P. Popov, Experimental performance of long links in eccentrically braced frames, J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 118(11) (1992) 3067-3088.
  23. American Institute of Steel Construction, AISC 2002, Load and resistance factor design, Manual
    of Steel Construction,     (2002).
  24. G. Boukamp, M.G. Vetr, Design of Eccentrically Braced test frame with vertical shear
    link, Proceedings of the 2nd Int. Con. On Earthquake Resistant Construction and Design, Berlin, June (1994).
  25. United facilities criteria design of buildings to resist progressive collapse (UFC 4-023-03). Washington (DC): Department of Defense; (2009).
  26. GSA, Progressive collapse analysis and design guidelines for new federal office buildings and Major modernization projects. The U.S. General-Services-Administration, (2003).
  27. Instruction for Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (92/131010). (In Persian)
  28. Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Tentative Commentary, Seismology Committee, Structural Engineers Association of California, (1998).
  29. International building code (2003). IBC2003, Whitier, California.
  30. Iranian National Building Code. Applied Loads on Buildings. Part 6. Tehran, Iran: Ministry of Roads & Urban Development; (2019). (In Persian)
  31. Code IS. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings 2800. 4th ed. Tehran, Iran: Ministry of Roads & Urban Development; (2014). (In Persian)
نشریه مهندسی عمران امیرکبیر
دوره 55، شماره 6
شهریور 1402
صفحه 1195-1218

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار