2001•Canadian Journal of Civil EngineeringRequires access

Seismic performance of low- and medium-rise chevron braced steel frames

Robert Tremblay, Nathalie Robert

Open publisher page 74 citations

Abstract

This paper describes the seismic behaviour of chevron steel braced frames for 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-storey steel building structures. Two different design approaches were considered: one that corresponds to current CSA-S16.1 seismic provisions for braced frames with nominal ductility with an R factor of 2.0, and one in which the beams are sized to develop a fraction of the yield tension capacity of the bracing members. In this second approach, an R factor of 3.0 was used for determining the seismic loads and chevron bracing with stronger beams capable of developing 100%, 80%, and 60% of the brace yield load were examined. The results show that current S16.1 provisions for chevron braced frames may lead to systems that are prone to dynamic instability for 4-storey and taller structures. Chevron bracing with stronger beams exhibits a more stable inelastic response and can be used for structures up to 8 storeys in height. For 2- and 4-storey buildings, chevron braced frames with beams designed to develop only 60% of the brace yield resistance can be used. The analyses also show that the force demand in brace connections, beams, and columns as determined from capacity design provisions agree well with that anticipated under strong ground motions.Key words: earthquakes, seismic design, steel, structures, braced frames, bracing members, beams, columns, connections.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper describes the seismic behaviour of chevron steel braced frames for 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-storey steel building structures. Two different design approaches were considered: one that corresponds to current CSA-S16.1 seismic provisions for braced frames with nominal ductility with an R factor of 2.0, and one in which the beams are sized to develop a fraction of the yield tension capacity of the bracing members. In this second approach, an R factor of 3.0 was used for determining the seismic loads and chevron bracing with stronger beams capable of developing 100%, 80%, and 60% of the brace yield load were examined. The results show that current S16.1 provisions for chevron braced frames may lead to systems that are prone to dynamic instability for 4-storey and taller structures. Chevron bracing with stronger beams exhibits a more stable inelastic response and can be used for structures up to 8 storeys in height. For 2- and 4-storey buildings, chevron braced frames with beams designed to develop only 60% of the brace yield resistance can be used. The analyses also show that the force demand in brace connections, beams, and columns as determined from capacity design provisions agree well with that anticipated under strong ground motions.Key words: earthquakes, seismic design, steel, structures, braced frames, bracing members, beams, columns, connections.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 74 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper describes the seismic behaviour of chevron steel braced frames for 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-storey steel building structures. Two different design approaches were considered: one that corresponds to current CSA-S16.1 seismic provisions for braced frames with nominal ductility with an R factor of 2.0, and one in which the beams are sized to develop a fraction of the yield tension capacity of the bracing members. In this second approach, an R factor of 3.0 was used for determining the seismic loads and chevron bracing with stronger beams capable of developing 100%, 80%, and 60% of the brace yield load were examined. The results show that current S16.1 provisions for chevron braced frames may lead to systems that are prone to dynamic instability for 4-storey and taller structures. Chevron bracing with stronger beams exhibits a more stable inelastic response and can be used for structures up to 8 storeys in height. For 2- and 4-storey buildings, chevron braced frames with beams designed to develop only 60% of the brace yield resistance can be used. The analyses also show that the force demand in brace connections, beams, and columns as determined from capacity design provisions agree well with that anticipated under strong ground motions.Key words: earthquakes, seismic design, steel, structures, braced frames, bracing members, beams, columns, connections.

Key concepts: Chevron (anatomy), Bracing, Brace, Braced frame, Structural engineering, Ductility (Earth science), Yield (engineering), Steel frame

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Seismic performance of low- and medium-rise chevron braced steel frames — Research Paper | ScholarLens