پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 8 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 439 |
| تعداد مقالات | 5,658 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 7,724,416 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 6,358,878 |
ارزیابی دقت تحلیل استاتیکی غیرخطی بهنگام شونده براساس جابجایی در مقایسه با روش FEMA356 در برآورد تقاضاهای لرزهای قابهای خمشی فولادی با نامنظمی هندسی در ارتفاع | ||
| نشریه مهندسی عمران امیرکبیر | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 52، شماره 1، فروردین 1399، صفحه 3-20 اصل مقاله (1.11 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22060/ceej.2018.14491.5671 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مجتبی کریمی خرمی1؛ محمودرضا بنان1؛ اشکان شریفی زروانی* 2 | ||
| 1بخش مهندسی راه، ساختمان و محیط زیست، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران | ||
| 2گروه مهندسی عمران، دانشکدهی فنی و مهندسی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| در نتیجه تمایل حرفه مهندسی سازه برای حرکت به سمت طراحی بر اساس عملکرد، برآورد تقاضاهای لرز هایِ سازه، اهمیت تازه ای بدست آورده است. از این رو در سال های اخیر، روشهای تحلیل استاتیکی غیرخطیِ معادلِ متعددی برای تخمین نیازهای لرزه ای سازه ها ارائه شده است؛ اما تعدادِ پژوهشهایی که توسط پژوهشگران مستقل برای بررسی دقت و کفایت این روش ها رهبری شده، بسیار اندک است. بنابراین هدایت پژوهشهایی جامع برای شناسایی محدودیتها و کاستی های احتمالی این روشها و مقایسه کارآیی آن ها نسبت به یکدیگر، ضروری است. در این مقاله، دقت یک روش پیشرفته تحلیل استاتیکی غیرخطی معادل در مقایسه با روش شناخته شده FEMA356 در برآورد تقاضاهای لرزهای قابهای خمشی فولادی کوتاه مرتبه با نامنظمی هندسی در ارتفاع، مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفته است. روش مذکور، تحلیل استاتیکی غیرخطی بهنگام شونده براساس جابه جایی ترکیب شده با روش طیف ظرفیت FEMA440 است؛ که به اختصار روش CSM-DAP نامیده میشود. روش های – CSM DAP و FEMA356 بر روی یک نمونه آماری متشکل از 44 قاب خمشی 5 طبقه که تحت اثر 14 شتابنگاشت زلزله دور از گسل قرار گرفتهاند، اعمال شده و نتایج حاصل از آن ها با نتایج حاصل از تحلیل دینامیکی غیرخطی به عنوان جواب صحیح، مقایسه گردیده است. این نمونه آماری، دامنه گسترده ای از نامنظمی هندسی در ارتفاع را برای سازه های کوتاه مرتبه پوشش میدهد. پاسخهای لرزهایِ مورد بررسی در این پژوهش، جابه جایی بام، دریفت نسبی طبقه و برش پایه میباشند. نظر به حجم محاسبات روش CSM-DAP و نتایج این پژوهش مشاهده شد که برای قابهای کوتاه مرتبه، این روش مزیت چندانی نسبت به روش FEMA356 برای برآورد تقاضاهای لرزهای ندارد . | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| تحلیل استاتیکی غیر خطی بهنگام شونده براساس جابجایی؛ روش طیف ظرفیت FEMA440؛ تحلیل استاتیکی غیر خطی FEMA356؛ نامنظمی هندسی در ارتفاع؛ نیازهای لرزهای | ||
| موضوعات | ||
| تحلیل خطی و غیر خطی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Accuracy Investigation of CSM-DAP Method in Comparison with FEMA356 Method for Estimating Seismic Demands of Steel Moment Resisting Frames with Geometric Irregularity in Elevation | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Mojtaba Karimi1؛ Mahmoud-Reza Banan1؛ Ashkan Sharifi2 | ||
| 1Civil and Environmental Engineering Dept., Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Civil Engineering, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Estimating seismic demands of structures has acquired renewed importance as a result of recent interests in performance-based seismic design. Consequently, in recent years, different equivalent nonlinear static analysis procedures have been developed to estimate structural seismic demands. However, just a few studies have been conducted to examine the accuracy and adequacy of these developed methods. Thus, it is necessary to conduct thorough investigations of these methods’ limitations, possible shortcomings, and their performance. In this paper, the accuracy of the CSM-DAP method in comparison with the FEMA356 method was evaluated for estimating seismic demands of low- rise steel moment resisting frames with geometric irregularity in elevation. The CSM-DAP method is an equivalent displacement-based adaptive nonlinear static analysis method combined with the FEMA440 capacity spectrum method. The CSM-DAP and FEMA356 methods were used to analyze 44 five-story moment-resisting frames subjected to 14 far-field earthquake ground motions and their results were compared with the results of nonlinear dynamic analyses. The selected sample includes a wide range of geometric irregularities in elevation for low-rise structures. The estimated demand responses were namely roof displacement, inter-story drift ratio, and base shear. This study showed that considering the CSM-DAP computational effort, this method did not present significant advantages with respect to the FEMA356 method at least for low-rise structures with geometric irregularity in elevation. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Equivalent Displacement-Based Adaptive Nonlinear Static Analysis, Capacity Spectrum Method of FEMA440, FEMA356 Nonlinear Static Analysis Method, Geometric Irregularity in Elevation, Seismic Demands | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] Permanent Committee for Revising Standard No. 360, Instruction for the seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings, Office of Deputy for Strategic Supervision, Department of Technical Affairs, Iran, 2014. [2] ASCE, ASCE/SEI 41-13: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston,Virginia, 2014. [3] ASCE, FEMA 356: Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Building, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington, D.C., 2000. [4] Applied Technology Council (ATC), FEMA 440: Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington, D.C., 2005. [5] Applied Technology Council (ATC), ATC-40: Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Redwood City, California, 1996. [6] H. Krawinkler, G.D.P.K. Seneviratna, Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation, Engineering Structures, 20 (1998) 452464. [7] P. Fajfar, A nonlinear analysis method for performancebased seismic design, Earthquake Spectra, 16 (2000) 573-592. [8] A. Gupta, H. Krawinkler, Estimation of seismic drift demands for frame structures, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 29 (2000) 1287-1305. [9] E. Kalkan, S.K. Kunnath, Assessment of current nonlinear static procedures for seismic evaluation of buildings, Engineering Structures, 29 (2007) 305-316. [10] V.K. Papanikolaou, A.S. Elnashai, Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis I: methodology, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 9 (2005) 923-941. [11] V.K. Papanikolaou, A.S. Elnashai, J.F. Pareja, Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis II: comparative results, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 10 (2006) 127-151. [12] R. Pinho, M. Marques, R. Monteiro, C. Casarotti, R. Delgado, Evaluation of Nonlinear Static Procedures in the Assessment of Building Frames, Earthquake Spectra, 29 (2013) 1459-1476. [13] R. Allahvirdizadeh, Y. Gholipour, Reliability evaluation of predicted structural performances using nonlinear static analysis, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 15 (2017) 2129-2148. [14] S.D. Akkar, A. Metin, Assessment of Improved Nonlinear Static Procedures in FEMA-440, Journal of Structural Engineering, 133 (2007) 1237-1246. [15] A. Momtahen, M.-r. Banan, M.-r. Banan, Evaluation of Fema440 Equivalent Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis for Irregular Steel Moment Resisting Frames, 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing, 2008. [16] N. Alirahimi Kashkooli, M.-R. Banan, Effect of frame irregularity on accuracy of modal equivalent nonlinear static seismic analysis, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 17 (2013) 1064-1072. [17] T.S. Jan, M.W. Liu, Y.C. Kao, An upper-bound pushover analysis procedure for estimating the seismic demands of high-rise buildings, Engineering Structures, 26 (2004) 117-128. [18] S.-P. Kim, Y.C. Kurama, An alternative pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic displacement demands, Engineering Structures, 30 (2008) 3793-3807. [19] M. Poursha, M.A. Amini, A single-run multi-mode pushover analysis to account for the effect of higher modes in estimating the seismic demands of tall buildings, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 13 (2015) 2347-2365. [20] A. Esfahanian, A.A. Aghakouchak, A Single-Run Dynamic-Based Approach for Pushover Analysis of Structures Subjected to Near-Fault Pulse-Like Ground Motions, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, (2017) 1-25. [21] A.Y. Rahmani, N. Bourahla, R. Bento, M. Badaoui, An improved upper-bound pushover procedure for seismic assessment of high-rise moment resisting steel frames, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16 (2018) 315-339. [22] A.K. Chopra, R.K. Goel, A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 31 (2002) 561-582. [23] A.K. Chopra, R.K. Goel, A modal pushover analysis procedure to estimate seismic demands for unsymmetric-plan buildings, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 33 (2004) 903-927. [24] M. Poursha, F. Khoshnoudian, A.S. Moghadam, A consecutive modal pushover procedure for estimating the seismic demands of tall buildings, Engineering Structures, 31 (2009) 591-599. [25] M. Poursha, F. Khoshnoudian, A.S. Moghadam, A consecutive modal pushover procedure for nonlinear static analysis of one-way unsymmetric-plan tall building structures, Engineering Structures, 33 (2011) 2417-2434. [26] J.C. Reyes, A.K. Chopra, Three dimensional modal pushover analysis of buildings subjected to two components of ground motion, including its evaluation for tall buildings, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 40 (2011) 789-806. [27] M. Poursha, F. Khoshnoudian, A.S. Moghadam, The extended consecutive modal pushover procedure for estimating the seismic demands of two-way unsymmetricplan tall buildings under influence of two horizontal components of ground motions, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 63 (2014) 162-173. [28] M. Poursha, E.T. Samarin, The modified and extended upper-bound (UB) pushover method for the multi-mode pushover analysis of unsymmetricplan tall buildings, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 71 (2015) 114-127. [29] M.A. Amini, M. Poursha, A non-adaptive displacement-based pushover procedure for the nonlinear static analysis of tall building frames, Engineering Structures, 126 (2016) 586-597. [30] M.R. Mirjalili, F.R. Rofooei, The modified dynamicbased pushover analysis of steel moment resisting frames, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 26 (2017) e1378. [31] M.H. Vafaee, H. Saffari, A modal shear-based pushover procedure for estimating the seismic demands of tall building structures, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 92 (2017) 95-108. [32] S. Antoniou, R. Pinho, Advantages and limitations of adaptive and non-adaptive force-based pushover procedures, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 8 (2004) 497-522. [33] S. Antoniou, R. Pinho, Development and verification of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 8 (2004) 643-661. [34] K. Shakeri, M.A. Shayanfar, T. Kabeyasawa, A story shear-based adaptive pushover procedure for estimating seismic demands of buildings, Engineering Structures, 32 (2010) 174-183. [35] K. Shakeri, K. Tarbali, M. Mohebbi, An adaptive modal pushover procedure for asymmetric-plan buildings, Engineering Structures, 36 (2012) 160-172. [36] C. Bhatt, R. Bento, The Extended Adaptive Capacity Spectrum Method for the Seismic Assessment of Plan-Asymmetric Buildings, Earthquake Spectra, 30 (2014) 683-703. [37] C. Casarotti, R. Pinho, An adaptive capacity spectrum method for assessment of bridges subjected to earthquake action, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 5 (2007) 377-390. [38] B. Gupta, S.K. Kunnath, Adaptive Spectra-Based Pushover Procedure for Seismic Evaluation of Structures, Earthquake Spectra, 16 (2000) 367-392. [39] R. Abbasnia, A.T. Davoudi, M.M. Maddah, An adaptive pushover procedure based on effective modal mass combination rule, Engineering Structures, 52 (2013) 654-666. [40] R. Abbasnia, A. Tajik Davoudi, M.M. Maddah, An Improved Displacement-Based Adaptive Pushover Procedure for the Analysis of Frame Buildings, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 18 (2014) 987-1008. [41] R. Abbasnia, A. Tajik Davoudi, M.M. Maddah, An improved displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure based on factor modal combination rule, Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, .142-322 )4102( 31 [42] J.-Z. Zhang, J. Jiang, G.-Q. Li, An improved consecutive modal pushover procedure for estimating seismic demands of multi-storey framed buildings, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 26 (2017) 1-16. [43] Seismosoft, SeismoStruct - A computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis of framed structures: ver. 2016, Pavia, 2016. [44] OpenSEES Team, Open System for earthquake engineering simulation: ver. 2.5.0, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research center, University of California, Berkeley, 2017. [45] C.A. Guerra, F.M. Mazzolani, V. Piluso, On the seismic behaviour of irregular steel frames, 9th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Moscow, 1990. [46] F.M. Mazzolani, V. Piluso, Theory and Design of Seismic Fesistant Steel Frames, First ed., E & FN Spon, London, 1996. [47] Permanent Committee for Revising Standard No. 2800, Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings, 4 ed., Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center, Tehran, 2015. [48] M. Karimi, Evaluation of Equivalent Nonlinear Static Analysis for Irregular Steel Moment Resisting Frames using Capacity Spectrum Method with DisplacementBased Adaptive Pushover Analysis, M.Sc. Thesis, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran, 2010. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 988 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,131 |
||