7-Civil - Ijcseierd - Comparative - S. P. Dalal

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ELASTIC DESIGN AND
PERFORMANCE BASED PLASTIC DESIGN METHOD FOR A STEEL

MOMENT RESISTING FRAME
1
SEJAL P. DALAL,
2
ANDEEP A. VASANWALA

&
2
ATUL K. DESAI
1
Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department SVIT, Vasad, Gujarat, India
2,2
Associate Professor Applied Mechanics Department, SVNIT, Surat, Gujarat, India

ABSTRACT
Presented in this paper is the comparative evaluation of Performance Based Plastic Design
(PBPD) method Elastic Design (ED) method in terms of lateral force distribution, design, strength and
economy. For this, a steel moment resisting frame is first designed using the Elastic Design method and
then using the Performance Based Plastic Design Method. The Lateral forces in the Elastic Design
method are calculated using the Elastic Design Spectra and all the structural members are designed as
elastic beam-columns based on Limit State Design Philosophy. The Lateral forces in the Performance
Based Plastic Design Method are calculated using the inelastic spectral acceleration which is obtained by
applying proper reduction factors. Results prove the superiority of the PBPD method over the Elastic
Design method in terms of safety and overall economy.
KEYWORDS: Elastic Design Method, Performance Based Plastic Design Method, Target and Yield
Mechanism.
INTRODUCTION
When struck by severe ground motions, the structures designed by elastic design procedures
have been found to undergo inelastic deformations in a somewhat uncontrolled manner. The inelastic
activity, which may include severe yielding and buckling of structural members and connections, can be
unevenly and widely distributed in the structure. This may result in a rather undesirable and
unpredictable response, sometimes total collapse, or difficult and costly repair work at best. While the
elastic design practice has served the profession rather well in the past, societal demands are pushing the
practice to achieving higher levels of performance, safety and economy, including life-cycle costs. For
the practice to move in that direction, design factors, such as determination of appropriate design lateral
forces and member strength hierarchy, selection of desirable yield mechanism, structure strength and
drift, etc., for specified hazard levels should become part of the design process right from the start.
One such method known as the PBPD method for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures,
which accounts for inelastic structural behavior directly, has been developed by Goel et al, 2001. The
PBPD method is a displacement based method in which a predetermined failure pattern is used at certain
International Journal of Civil, Structural,
Environmental and Infrastructure Engineering
Research and Development (IJCSEIERD)
ISSN 2249-6866
Vol.2, Issue 3, Sep 2012 76-97
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.,

77 Comparative Evaluation of Elastic Design and Performance Based
Plastic Design Method for A Steel Moment Resisting Frame

points of a structure based on strong column weak beam concept. Results of extensive inelastic static
and dynamic analyses have proven the validity of the method. The method has been successfully applied
to steel Moment Frame (Goel et al , 2008,2010 ), Eccentrically Braced Frame (Chao and Goel, 2006a) ,
Composite buckling restrained braced frame (Dasgupta,2004),Concentrically Braced Frame (Chao and
Goel, 2006b) and Special Truss Moment Frame (Goel and Chao, 2008). In all cases, the frames
developed the desired strong columnweak beam yield mechanisms as intended, and the storey
drifts/ductility demands were well within the selected design values, thus meeting the selected
performance objectives. An excellent literature review of the method has been done by Dalal et al
(2010).
The PBPD method is a direct design method that uses pre-selected target drift and yield
mechanisms as key performance objectives that determine the degree and distribution of expected
structural damage. It is based on the formulations derived from the capacity-spectrum method using
NewmarkHall (1982) reduction factors for the inelastic demand spectrum. The design base shear for a
specified hazard level is calculated by equating the work needed to push the structure monotonically up
to the target drift to the energy required by an equivalent Elasto Plastic Single Degree of Freedom system
to achieve the same state. Plastic design is performed to detail the frame members and connections in
order to achieve the intended yield mechanism and behavior.
The current Indian Standard code (IS800:2007) uses the limit state procedure (which is a force
based design) for design of steel structures to ensure a good earthquake resistant design which at times
may fail in case of a severe earthquake as it is based on elastic analysis. The dead and imposed loads are
calculated using IS875, (parts I to V) and the seismic loads are calculated using IS1893:2002 based on
Elastic Design Spectrum. A steel moment resisting frame has been designed using the PBPD method in
accordance with the IS 800: 2007 code by Dalal et al (2011) in which the cross sections of beams have
been reduced at certain pre defined locations so that it forms the weak link during an earthquake and
plastic hinges are formed. The steel moment resisting frame as shown in figure 1 has the parameters
given in the Table 1and is subjected to dead load and imposed load as given in Table 2.The gravity and
the seismic load calculations are shown in Section 1.1 and distributed as shown in figure 2.

Sejal P. Dalal, Andeep A. Vasanwala

& Atul K. Desai 78

Figure 1: Plan and Elevation of the Steel moment Resisting Frame


Table 1:Design Parameters

Type of structure 4-Storey Steel Moment Frame.
Number of stories 4
Bays in X direction 6 bays at 9 m
Bays in Y direction 4 bays at 9 m
Floor height 4 m for all floors and 4.25 m for first floor
Building Height 16.25 m
Materials Structural steel with f
y
= 250 N/mm
2

Floor Seismic Weight for Roof 9720 KN
Floor Seismic Weight for Level
4
9331 KN
3
9429 KN
3
9525 KN
Seismic zone factor, Z Zone 4
Soil Profile Type Type 2 Medium
Importance factor, I 1
T 0.939 sec

Table 2:Design Loads

Typical Roof Level 4 Level 3 Level 2
Dead Load
(KN/m
2
)
4 4.5 4.5 4.5
Live Load
(KN/m
2
)
1 2.5 2.5 2.5
Mass Seismic
Load(KN/m
2
)
5 4.8 4.85 4.9
Dead Load due
to exterior
Curtain Wall
(KN/m)
3.75 ( 3 m Wall height) 4.5 ( 4 m
Wall
height)
4.5 ( 4 m
Wall height)
5 ( 4.25 m Wall
height)

Calculation Of Gravity Loads And Seismic Loads

1. Floor Seismic Dead Weight (full structure)
Roof = (5 x 54 x 36) = 9720 KN
Level 4 = (4.8 x 54 x 36) = 9331 KN
Level 3 = (4.85 x 54 x 36) = 9429 KN
Level 2 = (4.9 x 54 x 36) = 9525 KN

& Atul K. Desai 80

Full structure = 38005 KN
2. Beam Load Calculation (for exterior moment frame)
The exterior beams take the dead load from 4.8 meter of slab (which accounts for 0.3 meter of overhang.
The live load is calculated based on a 4.5 meter tributary width only.
Uniformly distributed loads on the exterior beams:
1. Roof
From slab (dead load) = 4 x 4.8 = 19.2 KN/m
From exterior curtain wall (dead load) = 3.75 KN/m
From slab (live load) = 1 x 4.5 = 4.5 KN/m
Total Load Combination w
3
(Clause 3.5.1 IS 800: 2007) = 1.4 DL + 0.35 LL = 1.4 x (19.2
+3.75) + 0.35 x 4.5 34 KN/m
2. Level 4 and 3
From slab (dead load) = 4.5 x 4.8 = 21.6 KN/m
From exterior curtain wall (dead load) = 4.5 KN/m
From slab (live load) = 2.5 x 4.5 = 11.25 KN/m
2
(Clause 3.5.1 IS 800: 2007) = 1.4 DL + 0.35 LL = 1.4 x (21.6 +4.5)
+ 0.35 x 11.25 40 KN/m
3. Level 2
From slab (dead load) = 4.5 x 4.8 = 21.6 KN/m
From exterior curtain wall (dead load) = 5 KN/m
From slab (live load) = 2.5 x 4.5 = 11.25 KN/m
1
(Clause 3.5.1 IS 800: 2007) = 1.4 DL + 0.35 LL = 1.4 x (21.6 +5) +
0.35 x 11.25 41 KN/m
3. Concentrated Load at Column Lines (values for one exterior moment frame)
4. Roof
Dead load (exterior column lines) = 4.8 x 1.56 x 4 + 2 x 4.8 x 3.75 x 1.2 = 73 KN
Live load (exterior column lines) = 4.5 x 1.2 x 1 = 5.4 KN
Dead load (interior column lines) = 0 + 9 x 3.75 x 1.2 = 40.5 KN
Live load (interior column lines) = 0 = 0 KN
Total Load Combination (Clause 3.5.1 IS 800: 2007) = 1.4 DL + 0.35 LL
L
5
(roof) = 1.4 (73) + 0.35(5.4) = 104 KN
L
6
(roof) = 1.4 (40.5) + 0.35(0) = 56.7 KN
5. Level 4 and 3
Dead load (exterior column lines) = 4.8 x 1.56 x 4.25 + 2 x 4.8 x 4 x 1.2 = 78 KN
Live load (exterior column lines) = 4.5 x 1.2 x 2.5 = 13.5 KN
Dead load (interior column lines) = 0 x 9 x 4 x 1.2 = 43.2 KN

Live load (interior column lines) = 0 =0 KN
L
3
(level 3, 4) = 1.4(78) + 0.35(13.5) = 114 KN
L
4
(level 3, 4) = 1.4(43.2)+ 0.35(0) =60.48 KN
6. Level 2
Dead load (exterior column lines) =4.8 x 1.56 x 4.25 + 2 x 4.8 x4.25 x 1.2 = 80 KN
Live load (exterior column lines) =4.5 x 1.2 x 2.5 = 13.5 KN
Dead load (interior column lines) =0 x 9 x 4.25 x 1.2 = 46 KN
Live load (interior column lines)=0 =0 KN
L
1
(level 2) = 1.4 (80) + 0.35(13.5) = 114 KN
L
2
(level 2) = 1.4 (46) + 0.35(0) = 64.4 KN

DESIGN OF THE MOMENT RESISTING FRAME USING ELASTIC DESIGN
METHOD
The linear static procedure has been a traditional structural analysis method for earthquake
resistant design but it does not represent the nonlinear behavior of the dynamic response of a structure
caused by an earthquake ground motion. In the current Indian Standard Seismic design practice (IS1893-
2000), we first obtain design base shear from code-specified spectral acceleration assuming the structures
to behave elastically (which depends on the soil factors and the time period of the structure), and
reducing it by force reduction factor, R, depending upon available ductility of the structural system. The
design forces are also adjusted for the importance of specific structures by using an occupancy
importance factor, I. The step by step procedure of the elastic design of this frame is shown in the
following section.


& Atul K. Desai 82

Figure 2 : Distribution of gravity forces.

Step 1 : Calculation of Design Parameters
Based on the IS1893-2002, this frame is found having seismic design parameters as shown in Table 3
Table 3 : The seismic parameters of the frame as per IS1893-2002

Natural time Period "T" 0.939 seconds
Soil Type II
Elastic Spectral Acceleration " S
a
/ g" 1.448
Importance Factor "I" 1
Zone Factor " Z" 0.36
Response Reduction Factor "R" 5
Total Seismic Weight of the Building
"W" 38005
Step 2 : Calculation of design seismic base shear and lateral forces on each floor.
The total design lateral force or design seismic base shear ( V
b
) along any principal direction shall be
determined by the following expression
v
b
= A
h
W Equation 1

v
b
= u.uS2 - S8uuS = 1981 KN
where
A
h
=
Z I S
a
2 R g
= u.uS2 Equation 2
This Base shear V
b
is distributed along the height of the Building as follows:
Q
I
= v
b

W

h
2
W
]
n
]=1

h
]
2
Equation 3
Where
V
b
= Base shear
A
h
= Design Horizontal Seismic Coefficient
W = Total seismic weight of the structure
Z = Zone factor
I = Importance factor
R = Response reduction factor
Sa/g = Average response acceleration coefficient
Q
i
= Design lateral force at floor i
W
i
= Seismic weight of floor i
h
i
= Height of floor i measured from base
n = Number of storeys in the building is the number of levels at which the masses are located.

Table 4 : Lateral force Distribution in floors

Roof
Level
4
Level
3 Level 2

Sum
Seismic Weight of floor i "W
i
" 9720 9331 9429 9525 38005
Design Lateral Force at Level i
"Q
i
" 1063.63 580.25 265.94 71.3 1981.1

Step 3: Static Analysis of the frame
The moment resisting frame was applied the above lateral forces along with gravity loads as
shown in figure 2 and static analysis was carried out. Based on the obtained values of axial force, shear
force and bending moment, all the structural members of this frame were designed using the elastic
design approach. As all the beams and columns have all the three components viz. shear, axial and
moment, they all need to be designed as beam-columns. The step by step procedure of design of the
structural members is shown in succeeding sections.

& Atul K. Desai 84

Step 4: Design Compressive Stress for axially loaded compression members (Member buckling
resistance in compression)
The buckling resistance in compression (or the Compressive Load Capacity) of all the members
should be less than the maximum value of axial force experienced by the member. Common hot rolled
members used for carrying axial compression usually fail by flexural buckling. The buckling strength of
these members is affected by residual stresses, initial bow and accidental eccentricities of load. To
account for all these factors, the strength of members subjected to axial compression is dependent on
Imperfection Factor "" defined by buckling class a, b, c or d as given in table 7 of IS800-2007 code
(Clause 7.1.2.1). To calculate buckling resistance in compression of members, following procedure
should be implemented.
=
_
I
y
[
KL
2
E
Equation 4
= u.S|1 +( -u.2) +
2
] Equation 5

=
1
j+(
2
-)
0.S
[
Equation 6
f
cd
=
I
y
mo
Equation 7
N
d
= f
cd
A

Where
= Non Dimensional Effective Slenderness ratio
KL/r = Effective slenderness ratio
= Stress Reduction factor for different buckling class, slenderness ratio and yield stress
f
cd
= Design Compressive Strength
A = Effective Sectional Area
N
d
= Design Compressive Load Capacity
Step 5 Safety against Shear
The Shear strength of all the members should be less than the maximum value of shear force.
This design shear resistance " V
n
" of members shall be calculated using Clause 6.4
v
n
=
d
secton
t
veb
I
y
3
Equation 8

v
d
=
V
n
mo
Equation 9
Where
V
n
= shear resistance
d
section
= depth of the section
t
web
= thickness of web
V
d
= shear strength
Step 6 Safety against Flexure
To ensure safety of members against flexure, it is important that the flexural strength of members is
less than the maximum value of bending moment. The flexural strength of members can be calculated
using clause 8.2.There are two cases to be kept in mind while calculating the flexural strength
(i) When the factored shear force is less than 0.6 times Shear Resistance V
d

(ii) When the factored shear force is more than 0.6 times Shear Resistance V
d

(i)If, the factored shear force is less than 0.6 times the shear capacity then,
Design Flexural Strength shall be calculated as
N
d
=
Z
e
I
y
mo
Equation 10
Where
M
d
= Design Flexural Strength
Z
e
= Elastic Section Modulii of the section
(ii)If, the factored shear force is more than 0.6 times the shear capacity then, Clause 9.2.2 should be
satisfied. The Design Flexural Strength is dependent on whether the section is compact or semi compact.
When the ratio of width to thickness of flange is less than 15.7, the section is compact otherwise it is
semi compact.
(a)Section is semi compact
N
d Ior shcar
=
Z
e
I
y
mo
Equation 11
Where
M
d for shear
= Design moment capacity of section considering high shear force effect
(b) Section is Plastic or compact
N
d Ior shcar
= N
d cIastIc
-
shcar
(N
d cIastIc
- N
I pIastIc
) 1.2
Z
e
I
y
mo
Equation 12

& Atul K. Desai 86

N
d cIastIc
=
Z
e
I
y
mo
Equation 13
N
I pIastIc
=
Z
Iastc
I
y
mo
Equation 14
Where
M
d for shear
=Design moment capacity of the whole section considering high shear force effect
M
d elastic
=Design moment capacity of the whole section disregarding high shear force effect
M
d plastic
=Plastic Design strength of the area of the cross section excluding the shear area considering
partial safety factor
Where
shcar
= _
2v
v
d
- 1]
2

Step 7 Check for Combined effects
The members subjected to combined effect of axial force, shear force and bending moment need
to satisfy the following equation
N
N
d
+
M
y
M
ndy
1.u Equation 15
Where
N = Factored applied axial force
N
d
= Design Strength in Tension obtained as A
g
f
y
/mo
A
g
= Gross Cross Sectional Area
M
y
= Factored applied moments
M
dy
=Design reduced flexural strength obtained as
b
Z
p
f
y
mo

Step 8 Resistance to lateral torsional buckling
As the frame undergoes seismic forces, it is important to check its resistance to lateral torsional
buckling as per clause 8.2.2.1. The bending Moment capacity of the section against torsional effects "M
t
"
should be less than the maximum bending moment coming on the section. To calculate " M
t
" ,following
steps should be followed
f
cr b
=
1.1
2
E
(L
LT
r
y
)
2
_1 +
1
20
[
L
LT
r
y
h
I
t
I

2
_
0.5
Equation 16
LT
= _
I
y
I
c b
Equation 17
LT
= u.S|1 +
LT
(
LT
- u.2) +
LT
2
] Equation 18

LT
=
1
_
LT
+|
LT
2
-
LT
2
]
0.S
_
1.u Equation 19
f
bd
=
LT
f
y

mo
Equation 20
N
t
=
Z
p
f
bd
Equation 21
Where
L
LT
= 0.9 L= Effective length for lateral torsional buckling
h
f

= centre to centre distance between flanges
t
f
= thickness of flanges
f
cr,b
= Extreme fibre bending compressive stress

LT
=Non dimensional slenderness ratio

LT
=the imperfection parameter =0.49 for welded section and 0.21 for rolled section
LT
= Bending stress reduction factor for lateral torsion buckling
f
bd
= Design bending compressive strength
M
t
= Bending Moment Capacity for torsional effects
Step 9 Check with Interaction Formula (should be less than 1)
Ratio of moments (negative /positive) "
y
"
Member resistance to combined bending and axial compression
K
y
= 1 + (
y
- u.2)
N
N
cd y
1 + u.8
N
N
cd y
Equation 22
C
my
= u.6 + u.4
y
u.4 Equation 23
N
N
cd y
+ K
y
C
my
M
M
d
1.u Equation 24
C
my
= Equivalent uniform moment factor ( as per clause 9.3.2.2 and table 18 of IS 800-2007)
The details of member sections thus obtained by the above mentioned steps of Elastic Design method as
done in the current design practice is briefed in Table 5.


& Atul K. Desai 88

Table 5 : The Design Sections obtained when the frame is designed by Elastic Design method
Sr. No. Level Section
Section
Modulus
(cm
3
)
Weight
( kg/m)
Beams
1 Roof ISMB600 with 320 x 32 mm cover plates 8930 313
2
Level
4
ISMB600 with 320 x 32 mm cover plates 8930 313
3
Level
3
4
Level
2
Exterior Columns
1 Roof ISWB600 3539 133.7
2
Level
4
ISWB600A with 400 x 16 mm cover plates 7502 245.6
3
Level
3
4
Level
2
Interior Columns
1 Roof ISMB600 with 320 x 32 mm cover plates 8930 313
2
Level
4
3
Level
3
4
Level
2

DESIGN OF THE MOMENT RESISTING FRAME USING THE PBPD METHOD
In this section, the steel moment frame building is designed using the Performance Based
Plastic Design Methodology in accordance with the IS 800:2007 code. The PBPD method is a direct
design method where drift and yield mechanism, e.g. strong columnweak beam condition, are built in
the design process from the very start.
The design base shear for a specified hazard is calculated based on the reduction factors
Rproposed by Newmark (1982). Also, a new distribution of lateral design forces is used that is based
on relative distribution of maximum storey shears consistent with inelastic dynamic response results
(Chao et al., 2007). Plastic design is then performed to detail the frame members and connections in
order to achieve the intended yield mechanism and behavior. Thus, determination of design base shear,

lateral force distribution and plastic design are three main components of the PBPD method, which will
be discussed in the following sections. The step by step procedure of the design of the steel moment
resisting frame using the PBPD method is as follows
Step 1 : Calculate gravity loading and Seismic loading for the structure W.
Step 2 :Select an appropriate vertical distribution of forces based on the mode shapes obtained from
Modal Analysis.(usually mode shape 1 is chosen

Table 6 :The seismic Parameters of the frame for PBPD method
Seismic zone factor, Z 0.36
Soil Profile Type Type 2 Medium
Importance factor, I 1
S
a IncIastIc
0.64 g
T 0.939 sec
Yield drift ratio
y
1 %
Target drift ratio
u
2 %
Inelastic drift ratio
p
=
u
-
y
1%
Ductility factor
s
=
u
6
y

2.0
Reduction Factor due to Ductility R 2.0
Energy Modification Factor 0.75
0.942
Design Base shear V
b
8321 KN
Actual base shear for each floor 1040 KN


& Atul K. Desai 90

Step 3 : Select a desired Target Yield Mechanism for design earthquake hazard.

Figure 3 : The Target Yield Mechanism for the structure.

Step 4 : Calculate the shear distribution factor
i
of each floor.
I
= _
w
]
h
]
n
]=1
w
n
h
n
]
0.75T
-0.2
Equation 25
where
p
= The rotation at the plastic hinge [
p
= [
L
L

p
]
L'= The distance between the two plastic hinges of the beam = 0.8375L
i
= Shear distribution factor at level i
w
j
= seismic weight at level j
h
j
= height of level j from base
w
n
= seismic weight at the top level
h
n
= height of roof level from base
T = fundamental time period
Step 5 : Calculate .
o = ( ([
-[
+1
)
1
) _

=1
]
0.75
-0.2
[
Equation 26
p
p
p

Mpc
p
L'
L
p
p
p

Mpc
p
L'
L
p
p
p

Mpc
p
L'
L
p
p p
Mpc
p
L'
L

Step 6 : Calculate Story shear V
=
-+_
2
+

2
2
Equation 27
Step 7 : Calculate the Lateral force F
n
of Roof Floor.
=

(
-
1
)
Equation 28
Step 8 : Calculate the Lateral force Fi of each level.
([
- [
+1
) Equation 29
Where
F
n
=Lateral Force at roof level ( n
th
level )
F
i
=Lateral Force at i
th
level
Step 9 : Calculate the required beam moment capacity Mu at each level
H
u
= [
H
pb
= [
- 2M
=1
2 [
L
L
,
=1
Equation 30
where
H
pc
=
1.1
1
4

M
pc
= required plastic moment of columns in the first story of the 1-bay model (V' =V/No. of bays)
M
pb
= required moment strengths at the top floor level
i
M
pb
= required moment strengths at level i.
Step 10: Calculate the design beam moment Mdesign by applying proper factors
M
design
= 1.1 M
u
/0.75 Equation 31
Step 11 : Calculate the section modulus Zp required.
Z
p
= M
design
/ f
y
Equation 32
Step 12 : Design of Beams using the Reduced Beam Section (RBS).
Select RBS dimensions a, b, and c (figure 4) subject to the following limits:
u.Sb
]
o u.7Sb
]

u.6SJ
b
b u.8SJ
b

u.1b
]
c u.2Sb
]

Where b
f
= width of beam flange

& Atul K. Desai 92

d
b
= depth of beam section
Z
RBS
= plastic section modulus at center of the reduced beam section,
Z
p
= plastic section modulus for full beam cross-section,
t
f
= thickness of beam flange.
a = distance from face of column to start of RBS cut
b = length of RBS cut
c = depth of cut at the center RBS section at the center of reduced beam section.
Step 13 : Check the compactness of the RBS
Z
RB
= Z
p
-2ct
]
(J
b
- t
]
) Equation 33
The ratio of Z
RBS
/Z
p
should be near to the assumption 0.75
The Moment Capacity M
RBS
of this RBS beam is calculated as
H
RB
=
z
RBS
]
j
mc
Equation 34
Step 14 : Checking the Moments and Shears of the beams
Checking Shear
Compute the probable maximum moment at the center of the RBS, M
prRBS
:
M
prRBS
= C
pr
R
y
f
y
Z
RBS
Equation 35
R
y
= ratio of the expected yield stress to the specified minimum yield stress (=1.1)
C
pr
= factor to account for the peak connection strength, including strain hardening, local restraint,
additional reinforcement, and other connection condition (=1.15)
RB
=
2M
rRBS
L
+
(udI)L
2
Equation 36
RB
=
2H
pRB
I
-
(uJl)I
2

V
RBS
= Probable Positive Shear Force at center of RBS
V'
RBS
= Probable Negative Shear Force at center of RBS
This shear V
RBS
or V'
RBS
should be less than V
n
as per the Clause 8.4.1 IS 800:2007
v
n
=
A
v
I
y
3
=
ht
v
I
y
3
=
d
b
t
v
I
y
3
Equation 37
Where
V
n
= nominal plastic shear resistance of section

Figure 4: The details of the Reduced Beam Section
CHECKING MOMENTS
Compute the probable maximum moment, M
fcRBS
at the face of the column. If it is larger than
the expected moment capacity of the beam section at that location, the beam section will need to be
further reduced. The expected moment at the face of the column is computed as follows:


& Atul K. Desai 94

N
IcRBS
= N
prRBS
+ v
RBS
S
h
and Equation 38
N
IcRBS
= N
prRBS
+ v
RBS
S
h

The moment carrying capacity of the section is given by Clause 8.2.1.2 IS 800 : 2007
N
p
=
Z
p
f
y
mo

Where
b
=1.0 for plastic and compact sections
mo
= Partial safety factor = 1.0
S
h
=The distance from a column face to the center of RBS cut = a + b/2
This M
fcRBS
should not exceed M
p
.
Step 15: Calculation of Design Axial Force and Moments for the Exterior and Interior Columns
Exterior Column Tree
F
L
=
j (M
RE5
)
n
=1
[+j ](V
RE5
)[S
h
+
d
c
2

n
=1
[+|M
c
]

n
=1
Equation 39
Where
I
=
(
I
-
I+1
)
(
I
-
I+1
)
n
I1

F
L
= sum of lateral forces in columns
Interior Column Tree
F
L
=
j2 (M
RE5
)
n
=1
[+j ](V
RE5
+V
RE5
)[S
h
+
d
c
2

n
=1
[+|2M
c
]

n
=1
Equation 40
Step 16: Design of Exterior and Interior Columns
N
N
d
+
M
y
M
ndy
1.u Equation 41
Where
pi
= The rotation at the plastic hinge
L'= The distance between the two plastic hinges of the beam = 0.8375L
f
y
= tensile strength of steel
F
L
= sum of lateral forces in columns


S
h
=The distance from a column face to the center of RBS cut = a + b/2
N = Factored applied axial force = (V rbs + V' rbs + Point load + load from upper floor)
N
d
= Design Strength in Tension obtained as A
g
f
y
/mo
A
g
= Gross Cross Sectional Area
M
y
= Factored applied moments = [(V
rbs
+ V'
rbs
)( S
h
+ d
c
/ 2 ) +2 M
prbs
]
M
ndy
=Design reduced flexural strength obtained as
b
Z
p
f
y
mo

The details of member sections thus obtained by the above mentioned steps of PBPD method are briefed
in Table 6.
Table 6 : The Design Sections obtained when the frame is designed by PBPD method

Sr.
No.
Level Section
Section
Modulus (cm
3
)
Weight
( kg/m)
Beams
1 Roof
ISWB600 B
and RBS at 400 mm from column face
with a = 150 mm b = 500 mm c = 40 mm
Z
p
= 4341
Z
RBS
= 3252
145
2 Level 4
ISWB600 A with 400 x 10 mm cover plates
with a = 150 mm b = 500 mm c = 40 mm
Z
p
= 6426
Z
RBS
= 4863
197
3 Level 3
ISMB600 with 320 x 20 mm cover plates
with a = 150 mm b = 500 mm c = 40 mm
Z
p
= 7478
Z
RBS
= 4963
223
4 Level 2
ISMB600 with 320 x 25 mm cover plates
with a = 150 mm b = 500 mm c = 40 mm
Z
p
= 8510
Z
RBS
= 5526
248
Exterior Columns
1 Roof ISWB600 A with 400 x 10 mm cover plates 6130 207
2 Level 4 ISWB600 A with 400 x 20 mm cover plates 8420 270
Interior Columns
1 Roof ISWB600 A with 400 x 25 mm cover plates 10591 302


& Atul K. Desai 96

CONCLUSIONS
1. In the Elastic Design method as all the structural members (i.e. both beams and columns) have
all the three components viz. shear, axial and moment, they are all designed as beam-columns.
The design is simple and hassle free.Whereas in the PBPD method, the beams are provided with
hinges (weak links) at predetermined points. The beams are to be designed for flexure and
shear. In addition these, weak links are also to be designed separately and checked. This makes
the design lengthy.
2. The failure pattern and failure points in the PBPD method are predetermined and fixed prior to
the design whereas in the elastic design method, the failure can occur anywhere in the structure.
3. For the same values of dead and live load, the values of shear force, axial force and bending
moment in the PBPD and elastic design frame is totally different. This is probably due to the
variation in lateral force. Also, there is 35 % decrease in weight of beams, 17 % increase in
weight of exterior columns and 33 % increase in weight of interior columns of PBPD method as
compared to Elastic Design method. Hence, it could be seen that the strong column weak
beam concept is satisfied in PBPD method.
4. The overall cost of the structure remains same because in the PBPD method, even if the
reduction in weights due to RBS is not considered, still the overall weight of the structure is just
15% higher than Elastic Design Method. This fact can make the PBPD method more acceptable
and admirable to designers.
REFERENCES
1. Chao S H, Goel S C, Lee S S (2007) : A seismic design lateral force distribution based on
inelastic state of structures, Earthquake Spectra 23: 3, 547569.
2. Chao S H, Goel S C. (2006a) : Performance-based design of eccentrically braced frames using
target drift and yield mechanism, AISC Engineering Journal Third quarter: 173200.
3. Chao S H, Goel S C. (2006b): A seismic design method for steel concentric braced frames
(CBF) for enhanced performance. In Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, 1213 October, Paper No. 227
4. Chao S H, Goel S C. (2008): Performance-based plastic design of seismic resistant special
truss moment frames, AISC Engineering Journal Second quarter: 127150.
5. Dalal S P , Vasanwala S A , Desai A K : (2011) , Performance based Plastic Design of
Structure : A Review in International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering , Volume
1 No. 4 -2011 , pp 795-803.
6. Dalal S P , Vasanwala S A , Desai A K : (2012) , Applying Performance based Plastic
Design method to steel moment resisting frame in accordance with the Indian Standard Code
in International Journal of Engineering and Technology , Volume 2 No.3 March 2012 , pp
409-418, IJET publications, United Kingdom.

7. Dasgupta P, Goel SC, Parra-Montesinos G. (2004): Performance-based seismic design and
behavior of a composite buckling restrained braced frame (BRBF). In Proceedings of
Thirteenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, 16 August
2004, Paper No. 497
8. IS-1893:2000: Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures.
9. IS-800:2007: General Construction in Steel Code of Practice.
10. IS-875 Parts I to V: Indian Standard Code of Practice for design loads other than earthquake)
for buildings and structures.
11. Lee S S, Goel S C. (2001): Performance-Based design of steel moment frames using target
drift and yield mechanism. Research Report no. UMCEE 01-17, Dept. of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
12. Newmark N M, Hall WJ. (1982): Earthquake Spectra and Design, Engineering Monographs
on Earthquake Criteria, Structural Design, and Strong Motion Records, Vol 3, Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

7-Civil - Ijcseierd - Comparative - S. P. Dalal

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

7-Civil - Ijcseierd - Comparative - S. P. Dalal

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ELASTIC DESIGN AND

PERFORMANCE BASED PLASTIC DESIGN METHOD FOR A STEEL

S-ar putea să vă placă și