Steel Buildings

in
Seismic Area

Prof. A. Plumier
Oslo, 7th November 2007
 Introduction
Constructional steel ductile : εu = 15 % min
often εu > 25 % concrete, εu = 0,35 %

fu strain hardening : fu / fy ≥ 1,1

=> plastic analysis
fy

εu
Steel σ-ε diagram

Steel well adapted to seismic zones :

high energy dissipation
numerous possible plastic local mechanisms
good behaviour generally observed after earthquake

Behaviour can be bad: Northridge 1994

Kobe 1995
 The many local dissipative mechanisms
possible in steel structures

● Plastic tension

Dissipative diagonals

● Plastic compression low slenderness λ < 0,2

● Plate / beam in plastic bending : a matter of slenderness of walls

 Local dissipative mechanisms

● Plate / beam in plastic bending : a matter of slenderness of walls :

Relation q Ù class of section

Ex: class 1 → stable plastic rotations > 35 mrad
→ required in DCH Moment Resisting Frames q>4

Influence of axial force N on resisting moment

→ NEd/Npl,Rd ≤ 0,3 in columns of MRF
 Local dissipative mechanisms

● Plastic shear of a plate

→ Vwp , Rd = h t f y / 3
Vwp , Rd = h t f y / 3

pannel h x t
→ Vwp , Rd = h t f y
after the 1st cycle

Diagram V-γ of column web panel

 Local dissipative mechanisms

● Bolt bearing deformation - ovalisation of holes

● Friction between plates in connections prestressed by bolts

→ high strength prestressed bolts grade 8.8 ou 10.9 prescribed by EC8
Also prevents shocks in dynamic situation
Remark : category B of bolted joints with bolts in shear (under service load)
and surface preparation class B ( alcali-zinc paint on prepared surface)
allowed (slippage in connection allowed)

● Plastic deformation of connections

 Local non dissipative mechanisms

● Early crack in a zone made of low ductility material

→ requirements on steel grade

toughness and weldability at service temperature
→ HS bolts not ductile in tension

● Localisation of plastic deformations in a narrow zone

=> « fragile » behaviour not material, just apparent
care on design details in particular connections

● Local / lateral / overall buckling

 LOCAL MECHANISMS
DISSIPATIVE NON DISSIPATIVE

Compression or tension yielding Failure of bolt in tension

V

V
Yielding in shear

M
Plastic deformations in narrow zone
Plastic hinge exhaust available material ductility

F M

Ovalization of hole Local buckling (elastic)

Local Dissipative mechanism

F
F
Slippage with friction

M M

Plastic bending or shear of components

of the connection
Required steel characteristics

● Classical constructional steel

● Charpy toughness: absorbed energy min 27J (at t°usage)
● Distribution yield stresses and toughness such that :
dissipatives zones at intended places
yielding at those places before the other zones leave the elastic range
Design Reality

Weak Beam Strong Column

fymax ≤ fydesign Not respected !

Bolt or weld failure !

Correspondance between reality & hypothesis is required

Required steel characteristics
Conditions on fy of dissipative zones
to achieve fymax, real ≤ fydesign
to have a correct reference in capacity design
3 possibilities

a) Compute considering that in dissipative zones: fy,max = 1,1 γov fy

γov material overstrength factor fy : nominal
γ ov = fy,real / fy
European rolled sections: γ ov = 1,25
Ex: S235, γov = 1,25 => fy,max = 323 N/mm2
an upper value fy,max is specified for dissipative zones

b) Do design, based on a single nominal yield strength fy

for dissipative & non dissipative zones
Use nominal fy for dissipative zones, with specified fy,max
Use higher nominal fy for non dissipative zones and connections
Ex: S235 dissipative zones, with fy,max = 355 N/mm2
S355 non dissipative zones

c) fy,max of dissipative zones is measured

is the value used in design => γ0v = 1
 Moment resisting frames or MRF’s
● Local dissipative mechanisms → plastic hinges
● Plastic hinges in beams => global mechanism
NEd low => max resistant moment:
● Dissipative zones in columns → at the base
→ at the top, upper storey
● MRF flexible by nature
→ design often governed by drift limitations under service earthquake
by P – ∆ check at ULS

● DCM q = 4 DCH q = 5 αu / α1 Max: q = 6,5

αu and α1 : obtained by a pushover analysis
α1 → 1st plastic hinge formed
αu → global plastic mechanism
Eurocode 8 provides reference values of αu and α1
 Moment resisting frames

● « Inverted pendulum » type

DCM q = 2
DCH q = 2 αu / α1 Max: q = 2,2

Only accepted if λ ≤ 1,5 θ ≤ 0,20

 Frames with concentric bracings
● Resist horizontal forces by bar submitted to axial forces
● Stiff structures by nature
● Numerous types Different energy dissipation capability
● Best: types which are stable even if bars in compression are removed
→ dissipative because bars in plastic tension = stable plastic mechanism

X braced frames
q=4
in DCM ou DCH

● If diagonals in compression necessary for stability => less dissipative

lower q

V bracings
inverted V
q = 2 in DCM
q = 2,5 in DCH

● K bracings: non dissipative

Forbidden in seismic zones→ q ≤ 1,5
 Frames with eccentric bracings or EBF’s
● Resistance to horizontal forces by:
elements essentially submitted to axial forces with bending and shear

● Combine stiffness and dissipativity

● Eccentricities = > NEd < NRd (tension or compression)

=> plastic zones in bending or shear

● Energy dissipated in « seismic links»

● DCM q = 4 DCH q = 5 αu / α1 Max: q = 6

 Compared behaviour of different types

Moment resisting frame

Inverted V concentric bracing

X concentric bracing
 Moment resisting frames
combined with concentric bracings

● Design with a unique q

● DCM q = 4 DCH q = 4 αu / α1 Max: q = 4,8

● Horizontal forces distributed between MRF and bracing

according to relative stiffness ( if diaphragms effective)
 Frames with concrete core or walls
Frames with infills
● Concrete core or walls are the primary structure
are checked as reinforced concrete.
Steel structures « secondary structure» take < 15% seismic action

● Moment resisting frames combined with infills

Concrete infills not connected, but in contact with frame q =2
Concrete infills connected => composite, see Section 7 of EC8
Concrete infills isolated from the frame => MRF DCM q = 4
DCH q = 5 αu / α1
Max: q = 6,5

Frames with concrete core or walls

Moment resisting frame
combined with infills
 Behaviour factors q in EC8
TYPE of STRUCTURE Ductility Class
DCM DCH
Moment resisting frame 4 5 αu / α1
Frame with concentric bracings
diagonal type 4 4
V type 2 2,5
Frame with eccentric bracings 4 5 αu / α1

Inverted pendulum 2 2 αu / α1
Structures with reinforced concrete core / walls
Moment resisting frame + concentric bracings 4 4 αu / α1

Concrete infills not connected in contact with 2 2

frame
Concrete infills connected => composite
Concrete infills isolated from the frame
4 5 αu / α1
 Choosing a behaviour factors q of EC8

Choice of q starting design:

● q values in the table = allowed maximum

But q can be chosen smaller

● Often seismic ULS resistance does not condition the design

What decide are:
limits of deformations under « service earthquake SLS »
limits imposed by ● P – ∆ effect ds = q x de
● deflections of floors under gravity loading

● Choosing a high q can be: useless more iterations

costly class 1 sections
 Design criteria common
to all types of steel frames
● Criteria applicable to the primary structure

● Criteria for local ductility:

Free choice: local dissipative zones can be
=> in structural elements
=> in connections But effectiveness to demonstrate
Semi-rigid - partial strength connections:
OK if: - adequate rotation capacity <=>global deformations
- members framing into connections are stable
- effect of connections deformations on drift analysed

● Plastic deformation capacity of elements (compression, bending)

=> limitation of b/tf or c/tf => classes of sections of Eurocode 3

Ductility Class Behaviour factor q Cross Sectional Class

DCH q>4 class 1 b
DCM 2≤ q ≤4 class 2 tf
DCM 1,5 ≤ q ≤ 2 class 3 tw
d
DCL q ≤ 1,5 class 1, 2, 3, 4
 Design criteria common
to all types of steel frames

● Avoid localisation of plastic strains in narrow zones

required for dissipative connections
required for connections adjacent to dissipative zones
=> do design reducing risk of fabrication defects
high residual stresses

● Non dissipative connections are overstrength designed

Rd ≥ 1,1 γov Rfy Rfy : plastic capacity of connected bar

=> Non dissipative connections are:

▲ not computed for the action effect from the analysis
▲ designed to transmit safely Rfy
 Design criteria common
to all types of steel frames

● Non dissipative connections (overstrength design)

Full penetration butt welds are considered as overstrength design if:
preparation of joint (groove, machining) well designed, well made
weld material overstrength to base material
equal toughness

● Bolted dissipative / non dissipative connections

Bolts: Rd,shear,bolt = 1,2 x Rd,bearing resistance
R d,bearing resistance of at least one of the connected wall or assembling plate

Catégory B and C for bolted connections in shear

Prestressed connections
to avoid destructive shocks
not to resist by friction
 Design of connections
to avoid localisation of plastic strains
● fu / fy >1 to propagate plasticity steel hardens while yielding
=> yielded sections more resistant than adjacent sections
=> yielding propagates
(steel to EN 10025: fu / fy ≥1,40)
● Bars in tension
A fy / γM0 < Anet fu / γM2
Condition of EC3 meaning:
Ultime strength of section with holes > Plastic resistance of section without holes

Influence of design on ductility

 Design of connections to avoid
localisation of plastic strains

Example
Design a) Lya = 10 mm εy, max = 2,38 %
⇒ ∆ l = 0,0238.10 = 0, 238 mm
θ = 0,238 / (400/2) = 1,2 mrad <<< 25 mrad

Design b) Lyb = 400 mm εy, max = 2,38 %

⇒ ∆ l = 9,52 mm
θ = 9,52 / (400/2) = 47,6 mrad >> 35 mrad
Conclusions

■ Plastic zone length ≈ hsection

is required for effective hinge
■ Adequate εy,max and fu / fy needed
■ greater beam depth => less rotation capacity
 Moment resisting frames
Design criteria : « weak beams / strong columns » or WBSC D

∑M Rc ≥ 1,3∑ M Rb
→ plastic hinges in columns
at basis: compatibilty in global mechanism
top of upper storey ψ

Beams
● Mpl,Rd ≥ MEd
● Resistance and plastic rotation capacity not affected by compression
and shear

N Ed VEd
≤ 0,15 et ≤ 0,5
N pl , Rd V pl , Rd

● Safe for lateral buckling => may mean

 Moment resisting frames
Checks of beams for shear resistance

VEd = VEd,G + VEd,M

VEd,G due to non seismic actions
VEd,M due to Mpl,Rd,A et Mpl,Rd,B

VEd,M = (Mpl,Rd,A + Mpl,Rd,B ) / L

signs ≠ at ends A et B => VEd,M = 2 Mpl,Rd / L

VEd can be >> Vanalysis

 Moment resisting frames
Redistribution of moments in beams
● Under Gravity + Earthquake max action effects MEd + and - can be quite ≠

● Mpl,Rd ≥ MEd applies to greater MEd

● EC3 allows limited redistribution of moments => reduction of overstrength

M Ed
Modified reference line

M Ed,left before M Ed,left after redistribution

redistribution M Ed,right after redistribution
M Ed,right before redistribution
Original reference line

M Ed,G
M Ed,E

M pl,Rd,left M pl,Rd,right

V Ed,M
 Moment resisting frames : columns
● N Ed = N Ed,G + 1,1γ ov ΩN Ed,E index G Gravity loads
index E Seismic action effects
M Ed = M Ed,G + 1,1γ ov ΩM Ed,E
VEd = VEd,G + 1,1γ ov ΩVEd,E

VEd
● Shear in columns : ≤ 0,5
V pl , Rd

● Shear resistance of thepanel zone of the column

→ Vwp,Ed design shear in web panel
V wp , Ed
→ Vwp,Rd resistance in shear of web panel ≤ 1, 0
V wp , Rd

● Slender webs : Vwp,Ed < Vwp,Rb resistance to buckling

● Vwp,Ed is always high >> due to diagram with + and - Mpl,RD at beam ends
 Moment resisting frames : column web panels

M Sd,sup

Columnd panel zone V wp,Ed

tf
M Pl,Rd,left
h
d left h M Pl,Rd,right tf
tf,left V wp,Ed
tf,right
dc
Seismic action effect
In column web panel

M Sd,inf

Vwp,Ed = Mpl,Rd, left / (dleft – 2tf,left) + Mpl,Rd, right / (dright – 2tf,right) + VEd, column
 Moment resisting frames : column web panels
If plastic moments are developed at a distance D from column flange,
Mpl,Rd replaced by MSd

MSd,left = M pl,Rd, left + VEd,M,left x D

MSd,right = Mpl,Rd,right + VEd,M,right x D

Often: Vwp,Ed > Vwp,Rd

=> « doubler » plates
welded on web or placed // to web
welds ≥ plate shear resistance

2 possibilities to increase the panel resistance in shear

 Moment resisting frames : columns web panels

Remarks

● Condition Vwp,Ed ≤ Vwp,Rd reflects

that limited plastic shear deformations are accepted
● To compute Vwp,Rd , one considers fy / √3
but after a 1st cycle, fy is effective, which reduce risk of important deformations
2 reasons: damaging effect of local kinks
global mechanism ?

Local kinks in column flanges result from shear

deformations of the web panel and can cause high strains
and cracks in welds
 Moment resisting frames :
beam column connections
● Dissipatives zones can be in beams or in connections
Same local ductility requirement:
θp = δ / 0,5L > 35 mrad DCH
> 25 mrad DCM (q > 2)

θp : plastic rotation capacity

under cyclic loading up to θp
strength degradation < 20%
stiffness degradation < 20%

● Connection design condition

● if dissipative zones are in beams => MRd,connection ≥ ±1,1 γov Mpl,Rd,beam
VRd,connection ≥ VEd = VEd,G + 1,1γ ov ΩVEd,E
● if dissipative connections
=> capacity design refers to connection plastic resistance
 Moment resisting frames :
beam column connections
● If beam flanges are welded to the column flanges
and beam web is welded to a shear tab welded to the column flange
● the flange butt welds transmit Mpl,flanges
● the web welds transmit Mpl,web + shear VEd

MRd,connection ≥ 1,1 γov Mpl,Rd,beam

Mpl,flanges = bf tf fy (d+ tf )
Mpl,web = tw d2 fy / 4

MRd,web,connection ≥ 1,1 γov Mpl,web = 1,1 γov tw d2 fy / 4

=> shear tab stronger than the web

=> Top and bottom welds on shear tab required
in addition to web fillet welds for shear
 Moment resisting frames :
beam column connections in beam span

● Design moment in section CC results from capacity design

The « fuses » are in A and B: MA = MB = Mpl,Rd
MC,M results from the diagram
 Moment resisting frames
Design of beam column connections
2 Design options on position of plastic hinge
■ in section adjacent to column flange
■ some distance away from column flange
Northridge (1994) => low confidence in welded connections
in particular simply welded

=> 2 strategies to move plastic hinge away from column

strengthening of connection weakening of beam

(developed in ULg, Plumier, 1990)
Weakening option much used in USA:
RBS « Reduced Beam Section » or « dogbone »
 Moment resisting frames
Design of beam column connections
Weakening of beams.
How possible without loosing?

It is not necessary top use bigger sections because:

▲ Reductions of section are very local, small influence on stiffness

on P – ∆, on frame periods and on action effects

▲ Dimensions of beams and columns often decided by stiffness

=> frames have high overstrength
=> loosing some ultimate resistance is no problem

Design example: IPE500 beams

Mpl,Rd = 778,9 kNm > MEd = 591,4 kNm , overstrength 778/591 = 1,31
Shear resistance : Vu =2825 kN without RBS
Vu =2074 kN with RBS
Vu = 2074 kN >> FEd = 586 kN design base shear

RBS: economical option because: reduce design moments in connections

provide similar safety
 Moment resisting frames
Design of beam column connections
● Design recommandations for connections → not in EC8
● National Annex to EC8. FEMA2000, CISC2000, AISC2000, Guide AFPS2005
Connection Types and corresponding ductility classes
Maximum
Connection Type Ductility Class allowed
Europe US
Beam flanges welded, beam web bolted to DCL * OMF*
a shear tab welded to column flange. Fig. 34
Beam flanges welded, beam web welded to DCH SMF
a shear tab welded to column flange. Fig. 31
Beam flanges bolted, beam web bolted to a DCH SMF
shear tab welded to column flange. Fig. 35
Unstiffened end plate welded to beam and DCH SMF
bolted to column flange by 4 rows of bolts. Fig.36
Stiffened end plate welded to beam and DCH SMF
bolted to column flange by 8 rows of bolts. Fig. 37
Reduced beam section. Beam flanges welded, beam web DCH SMF
welded to shear tab welded to column flange. Fig.38
Reduced beam section. Unstiffened end plate welded to DCH SMF
beam and bolted to column flange by 4 rows of bolts.
Same as Fig.36, but with reduced flange sections.
*May be considered for DCM (equivalent to IMF) in some countries
 Moment resisting frames
Design of beam column connections

Beam flanges welded, beam Beam flanges bolted; beam web bolted to shear tab welded to
web bolted to shear tab column flange.
welded to column flange Above: with bolted flange plates. Below: with double split T
connection.
DCL low ductility DCM -DCH
 Moment resisting frames
Design of beam column connections

Unstiffened end plate welded to beam and bolted

to column flange by 4 rows of bolts
Stiffened end plate welded to beam and bolted
DCM -DCH to column flange by 8 rows of bolts
DCM -DCH
 Moment resisting frames
Design of Reduced Beam Sections

Weld access hole details in FEMA 350

Design criteria
¾ 0,5b ≤ a ≤ 0,75b
0,65h ≤ s ≤ 0,85h
b: flange width h: beam depth
¾ 0,2b ≤ c ≤ 0,25b
« Dogbone » or RBS Reduced beam section. ¾ be = b – 2c = reduced flange width
Beam flanges welded, beam web welded to shear tab
welded to column flange DCM -DCH
 Moment resisting frames
Design of Reduced Beam Sections
● Plastic hinge formed at distance x= a + s/2 from column flange
=> MEd,connection = Mpl,Rd,RBS + VEd,E x

If MRd,connection ≥ 1,1 γov MEd,connection => OK

If critical section at column axis (weak column panel), M to consider:

MEd,column = Mpl,Rd,RBS + VEd,E x’ x’ = X + hc/2

● Check for shear:

VRd,connection ≥ VEd = VEd,G + 1,1γ ov ΩVEd,E

Calculation of design moment and shear in the connection in presence of a RBS

 Frames with concentric bracings:
peculiarities in behaviour
■ Elastic range:
compression and tension diagonals contibute equally to stiffness and resistance

■ 1st buckling:
degradation
in behaviour of compression diagonal

Behaviour evoluion with cycles

EC8: 2 different design approach

● X bracings: tension diagonals only
● V or Λ bracings: compression and tension diagonals

New solutions to avoid problems with analysis

● dissipative connections with Rfy < Rbuckling,diagonals
● special design of diagonals (Buckling Restrained Bracings -BRB)
 Objective & criteria of dissipative design
of frames with concentric bracings
● Global plastic mechanism with diagonals or their connection as dissipative zones.
No buckling or yielding of beams and columns.

a) Global plastic mechanism

the design objective for frames
with X bracings.

b) Storey mechanism
prevented by the resistance
homogenisation condition
for the diagonals.
A+ − A− c)Buckling of columns
≤ 0, 05 Prevented by capacity design
A+ − A−

a) b) c)

● Diagonals should have similar force-displacement characteristics in both directions

● Condition of homogeneity of diagonal sections overstrength Ωi = Npl,Rdi/NEdi
● Symetry of bracings at each level:
A+ et A- , area of projections of sections of diagonals comply with
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings
● Standard analysis:
only tension diagonals participate in structural resistance
Gravity loading Beams and columns in the model No diagonal
Seismic action Beams and columns + tension diagonals in the model

F2

N Ed,E2
F1

N Ed,G3 N Ed,E3
N Ed,E1

● Considering compression diagonals in the analysis ?

Allowed, but require model for diagonals + non linear analysis
static (“pushover”) or dynamic
Considering pre and post buckling resistances of diagonals
under cyclic elasto-plastic action effects
1 diagonal in plastic tension
1 diagonal in compression with post buckling strength:
why not 0,3 Npl,Rd indicated in EC8 for compression diagonal of V bracings ?
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings.
Design of diagonals
● Npl,Rd ≥ NEd,E

● 1,3 < λ ≤ 2,0 no limit for structures up to 2 levels

Why?
Design does not include the compression diagonals. Reality does.

Max initial resistance Vini of structure up to 1st buckling of diagonals should be:
Vini ≤ Vpl,Rd Vpl,Rd from analysis with tension diagonal only
If NRd,flambement > 0,5 Npl,Rd => Vini ≥ Vpl,Rd => possible failure of beams and columns
capacity designed to Vpl,Rd
Condition λ ≥ 1,3 correspond to χ = 0,47 at most
avoid too high action effects in beams/columns
during 1st buckling of diagonals

Condition λ ≤ 2,0 to avoid dynamic shocks in tension reloading after

compression
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings.
Design of diagonals
● If diagonals decoupled
→ 1 condition only on diagonals slendernesss λ ≤ 2,0
→ risk that Vini > Vpl,Rd does not exist and λ ≥ 1,3 not necessary
→ consider in columns and beams design the situation « 1st buckling »

Bracing in which the pair of

λ diagonals of each X brace
are decoupled.

● To obtain a global plastic mechanism: homogeneity of Ωi = Npl,Rd,i / NEd,Ei

Ωmax ≤ 1,25 Ωmin
=> progressive reduction of sections of diagonals from bottom to top
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings.
Connections.
● Capacity design of connections: Rd ≥ 1,1 γov Rfy = 1,1 γov NplRd =1,1Ω NEd
● Bolted connections: strengthening always required (refering to static)
=> welded plates, angles

1,1 γovN pl,Rd

b c
Comparison between a ‘classical’ connection design (a) and a connection that is
‘capacity designed’ relative to the diagonal plastic resistance (b or c).
● Dissipative (semi-rigid, partial strength) connections: allowed
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings.
Design of beams and columns
● Capacity design refering to the plastic resistance of diagonals
or their connections if dissipative: N
pl, Rd ( M Ed ) ≥ N Ed, G + 1,1γ ov Ω . N Ed, E

F2
Definition of design action
effects in non dissipative
N Ed,E2 elements: beams and columns
F1

N Ed,G3 N Ed,E3
N Ed,E1

Diagonals Design forces in column 3

Ω1 = Npl,Rd,1 / NEd,1
N Ed 3 = N Ed ,G 3 + 1,1γ ov ΩN Ed , E 3
Ω2= Npl,Rd,2 / NEd,2
N pl , Rd 3 ≥ N Ed 3
Ω = min (Ω1, Ω2)
 Analysis of frames with concentric X bracings.
Design of beams and columns
Debate on Ω : Ωmax or Ωmin ?

1,1 Ωmin → reasonable estimate of a Ωaverage in a population

of Ω’s between Ωmin and 1,25 Ωmin

This capacity design ignores the post buckling resistance of compression diagonals
N pl ,Rd (M Ed ) ≥ NEd ,G +1,1γ ov (1 + γ pb )ΩNEd ,E = NEd ,G + 1,43γ ovΩNEd ,E
avec γpb = 0,3

A direct design of diagonals

considering a post buckling resistance of compression diagonals is possible
→ sections such: (1 + γ pb ) N pl , Rd ≥ N Ed , E
allowed in EC8 EN1998:2004
 Analysis of frames with concentric V or Λ bracings
● Standard model Only beams and columns in the model for gravity loads
Compression & tension diagonals in resistance to seismic action
=> q = 2 DCM q = 2,5 DCH
● Design criteria Diagonals in tension : Npl,Rd ≥ NEd
in compression: Nb,Rd ≥ NEd
Homogeneity of section overstrength Ωi = Npl,Rd,i / NEd,Ei of diagonals
Ω = min Ωi Ωmax ≤ 1,25 Ωmin
● Beams and columns N pl,Rd ( M Ed ) ≥ N Ed,G + 1,1γ ov Ω .N Ed,E
Beams resist non-seismic actions:
■ without considering the intermediate support given by the diagonals
■ considering the unbalanced vertical seismic action effect applied to the beam
by the braces after buckling of the compression diagonal, calculated using:
Npl,Rd for the brace in tension γpb Npl,Rd for the brace in compression γpb = 0,3

F1

N pl,Rd 0,3 N pl,Rd

 Frames with eccentric bracings
● Analysis
All bars in the model Avoid problems with cyclic behaviour of diagonals
Dissipative « seismic links » horizontal or vertical
Non dissipative the rest capacity designed to resistance of links
● Advantages Stiff + dissipative q=6
Possibly connections of 3 bars, not 4 => easier
Diagonals: contribute to carry gravity loads
● 3 categories short links dissipate energy by yielding in shear
long links dissipate energy by yielding in bending
intermediate links... bending and shear
● Design condition of links e e e
VEd ≤ Vp,link or MEd ≤ Mp,link

e
Vp,link = ( fy /√3) tw (d- tf )
Mp,link = fy b tf (d- tf )

Examples of frames with eccentric bracing.

e = length of seismic link
 Depending on the frame typology,
the shear and bending moment diagrams
in the link are symmetrical or not

link
link

M Moment M and
V
Shear V in link
link V

Eccentric braces in which Eccentric braces in which

the shear and bending moment diagrams the shear and bending moment diagrams
in the link are unsymmetrical. in the link are symmetrical.
 Frames with eccentric bracings
● The plastic mechanism depends on the frame type
the length of the seismic link
● Energy dissipation in shear: WV = Vp,link θp e
in bending: WM = 2Mp,link θp
● Limit between short and long? WV = WM => e = 2 Mp,link / Vp,link
EC8
if e < es = 1,6 Mp,link / Vp,link → pure shear
if e > eL = 3 Mp,link / Vp,link → pure bending
In between → M-V interaction

F2

p WV = Vp,link θp e
p
F1 e
M pl
pst e

p WM = 2Mp,link θp

L e
 Frames with eccentric bracings
Long links with unsymmetrical bending moments diagram
1 plastic hinge, not 2
WM = Mp,link θp WV = Vp,link θp e
limit length between long & short : e = Mp,link / Vp,link

link

es = 0,8 Mp,link / Vp,link

eL = 1,5 Mp,link / Vp,link

M V
link
 Frames with eccentric bracings
● Mp,link or Vp,link include V-N ou V-M interaction

0,5
V p ,link ,r = V p ,link ⎡⎣1 − ( N Ed / N pl , Rd )² ⎤⎦
M p ,link ,r = M p ,link ⎡⎣1 − ( N Ed / N pl , Rd )² ⎤⎦

● Homogeneity of links overstrength

Ωi = 1,5 Vp,link,i / VEd,i short links

Ωi = 1,5 Mp,link / MEd,i long links
1,5: because high deformations=> high strain hardening
Ωmax ≤ 1,25 Ωmin

● Beams, columns, diagonals and connections

Capacity designed relative to the real strengths of the seismic links

NRd (MEd ,VEd ) ≥ NEd,G + 1,1 γov Ω NEd,E
Ed ≥ Ed,G + 1,1 γov Ωi Ed,E
 Frames with eccentric bracings

Stiffeners at links

■ Short links
Plastic shear on complete length
=> stiffeners

ls = e = link length

■ Long links Hinge length stiffened

 Frames with eccentric bracings
Selecting a type
■ Short links Stiffer structure
Plastic deformation are in shear of the web:
high ductility, no welds,
lateral buckling minor problem
■ Long links More flexible frame
Plastic hinges → flange buckling & lateral buckling

■ Architecture relative to openings

■ Structural considerations : ■ keeping Ωi = Rpl,Rd,i / Ed,i constant over height

requires progresive reduction of sections
Horizontal links problems
Vertical links in Λ bracings: less problems
■ there are frame typologies which forces
the seismic links to yield ≈ simultaneously

Typology of eccentric bracing

in which seismic links yield simultaneously
 Control of design and execution

■ Real structure should correspond to design

■ Indicate on fabrication and construction drawings…

quality of bolts grades, weld requirements, steel grades of elements,
max yield stress fy,max of dissipative zones

■ Check materials, bolts tightening, welds…

■ Real fy should not be ≥10% fy,max indicated on drawings for disipative zones
Dissipative connections in frames with concentric bracing.
Interest

● Can be designed to have connection resistance < diagonal buckling strength

=> Analytical difficulties avoided
all members in the model for simple analysis.
all the results of the analysis may be used directly
no distinct rules for X, V or decoupled braces

● Provide additional stiffness in comparison to ‘tension diagonal only’ model

compensates for the additional flexibility of semi-rigid connections

● Can be ‘standardised’ components with calibrated strength, obviating the problems

of diagonal overstrength in the design of beams and columns =>γov = 1,0

● After an earthquake, easy replacement of deformed components of connections

● Higher q =6
Dissipative connections
in frames with concentric bracings
■ Design condition:
Deformation capacity of connections allows global deformation of the structure
Dissipative diagonals: low ε in all length l provide high dl = ε x l
Dissipative connections: dl to be realised in the connection

■ dl = dr / cos α cos α = l / (l² + h²)1/2

dr interstorey drift dr = q x dre

■ Example
dr / h = 3,5% ; l = 6 m ; h = 3 m
cos α = 0,894 ; dr = 0,105 ; dl = 117 mm

Dissipative diagonals: ε = 1,7%

Deformed bracing
Dissipative connections:
required deformation capacity: 117 /2 = 58,5 mm

=> Special design 2001 ULg, INERD Project, 2 design: « pin connection »
« U connection »
Frames with concentric bracings and dissipative connections

Pin connection

X bracing with U connections

Pin connection in cyclic tests

Design Criteria
for frames with X, V or Λ concentric bracings
and dissipative connections for the diagonals.
■ Resistance Rpl,Rd of the dissipative connections: Rpl,Rd ≥ NEd

■ Resistance Nb,Rd of the diagonals

capacity design to the dissipative connections resistance:
Nb,Rd > Rpl,Rd ≥ NEd

■ Homogenisation of the dissipative connections overstrengths over

the height of the building: Ωi = Rpl,Rd,i / NEd,i
Ωmax ≤ 1,25 Ωmin Ω = Ωmin
■ With a controlled production of standard connections, Rpl,Rd is known γov = 1.0

Resistance in tension Npl,Rd or in compression Nb,Rd of the non dissipative elements

(beams and columns):
Npl,Rd or N b,Rd ( M Ed ) ≥ N Ed,G + 1,1γ ov Ω.N Ed,E

No specific requirements for frames with X, V or Λ bracing.

Buckling restrained braces
Principle:
The active section of the diagonal is placed into a tube which prevents its buckling
A mortal fill makes the link between tube and active section
The tube is not submitted to action effects else than buckling prevention
BRB ou « Buckling Restrained Braces »
Connection of columns to foundations in MRF’s.

Moment Resisting Frames: a plastic hinge at the columns base

=> Transfer of high bending moments
■ Classical design base plate anchor bolts
Difficulties: thick plates large butt welds big bolts
Experience poor behaviour
anchorages broken under the concrete surface.
■ Better option
Placing the column in a pocket formed in the concrete
None of the components of a ‘classical’ connection is needed
Bending moment equilibrated by two horizontal compression forces FHI and FHS
N
M

V
F HS

F HI
Connection of columns to foundations in MRF’s.
Another option

Provide a horizontal beam => reduce tension in anchorage bolts

due to enlarged base
 Position of earthquake resistant frames
Best design depends on project constraints => no absolute rule

But design with EQ primary resistant structure in the façade offers advantages
■ Interior frames can use hinge connections
■ Best resistance to torsion
■ Concentrate EQ resistant structure in only 4 planes
■ Facade are submitted to lower gravity loads than interior frames
■ Those 4 planes are connected to underground perimeter walls

Facade structure can be MRF

Concentric brace frame
Eccentric brace frame

Derrick type of structure