Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Mario DAniello
European Erasmus Mundus Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards and Catastrophic Events
520121-1-2011-1-CZ-ERA MUNDUS-EMMC
List of Tutorials
1. Design and verification of a steel moment
resisting frame
2. Design and verification of a steel concentric
braced frame
3. Assignment: Design and verification of a steel
eccentric braced frame
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
31
5
Normative
references
Actions
24
Materials
2.5 2.5
X Bracings
V Bracings
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Direction X
Direction Y
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
This implies practical problems because steel products are not usually
provided for an upper bound yield stress.
Actions
where fy is the nominal yield strength specified for the steel grade and
gov is a coefficient based on a statistic characterization of steel
products.
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
c) the actual yield strength fy,act of the steel of each dissipative zone is
determined from measurements and the overstrength factor is
computed for each dissipative zone as gov,act = fy,act / fy , fy being the
nominal yield strength of the steel of dissipative zones.
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
In general at design stage the actual yield stress of the material is not
known a-priori. So the case a) is the more general.
Hence, in this exercise we use it.
Materials
Grade
fy
(N/mm2)
ft
(N/mm2)
S235
235
360
S355
355
510
Actions
gM
gov
E
(N/mm2)
gM0 = 1.00
gM1 = 1.00
gM2 = 1.25
1.00
210000
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
10
Introduction
Building
description
Gk (kN/m2)
Qk (kN/m2)
2.00
0.50
1.00 (Snow)
4.00
Normative
references
Storey slab
4.20
Materials
Roof slab
3.60
Actions
Stairs
Claddings
1.68
2.00
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
11
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Seismic action
A reference peak ground acceleration equal to agR = 0.25g (being g
the gravity acceleration), a type C soil and a type 1 spectral shape
have been assumed.
The design response spectrum is then obtained starting from the
elastic spectrum using the following equations
Materials
0 T TB
Actions
TB T TC
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
T
Sd T ag S 1
TB
2.5
S d T ag S
q
2.5
1
q
TC T TD
2.5 TC
ag S
q T
Sd T
a
g
T TD
2.5 TC TD
ag S
q T 2
Sd T
a
g
(3.2)
12
Introduction
Building
description
Seismic action
Elastic and design response spectra
8
Actions
6
2
S e, S d (m/s )
Materials
Elastic spectrum
Normative
references
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.00
1.00
1.50
2.00
T (s)
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
q 4 for X-CBFs
q 2.5 for inverted V-CBFs
13
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Combination of actions
In case of buildings the seismic action should be combined with
permanent and variable loads as follows:
k,i
2i
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.80
14
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Masses
In accordance with EN 1998-1 3.2.4 (2)P, the inertial effects in the
seismic design situation have to be evaluated by taking into account
the presence of the masses corresponding to the following
combination of permanent and variable gravity loads:
Gk,i " " E,i Qk,i
where E,i 2i is the combination coefficient for variable action i,
which takes into account the likelihood of the loads Qk,i to be not
present over the entire structure during the earthquake, as well as a
reduced participation in the motion of the structure due to a non-rigid
connection with the structure.
2i
Ei
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.80
0.50
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.15
0.30
0.20
0.40
15
Introduction
Building
description
Normative
references
Materials
Actions
Storey
Gk
(kN)
Qk
(kN)
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
3195,63
3990,72
4087,66
4106,70
4187,79
4261,26
1326,00
1608,00
1608,00
1608,00
1608,00
1608,00
Seismic Weight
(kN)
(kN/m2)
3519.03
4.73
4196.23
5.64
4276.87
5.75
4283.01
5.76
4353.15
5.85
4411.33
5.93
Seismic Mass
(kN s2/m)
358.72
427.75
435.97
436.60
443.75
449.68
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
16
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Damage
limitation
24
6
6
Plan location
of CBFs and
structural
regularity
Basic
principles of
conceptual
design
2.5 2.5
X Bracings
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
V Bracings
Plan location
of CBFs and
structural
regularity
Damage
limitation
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
19
Regularity in elevation
Plan location
of CBFs and
structural
regularity
building.
Damage
limitation
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
22
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Modelling assumptions:
for the gravity load designed parts of the frame (beamtocolumns connections, column bases) have been assumed as
perfectly pinned, but columns are considered continuous
through each floor beam.
Masses are considered as lumped into a selected master-joint
at each floor, because the floor diaphragms may be taken as
rigid in their planes
The models of X-CBFs and inverted V-CBFs need different
assumption for the braced part.
23
1 0.6
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
Seismic action
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for X-CBFs
Le
Seismic
resistant
system
G
x
where:
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
x
Le
24
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for X-CBFs
Seismic action
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
x
1 1.2
Le
Le
Seismic
resistant
system
G
x
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
25
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
26
Ptot d r
Vtot h
where:
Ptot is the total vertical load, including the load tributary to gravity
framing, at and above the storey considered in the seismic design
situation;
Vtot is seismic shear at the storey under consideration;
h is the storey height;
dr is the design inter-storey drift, given by the product of elastic interstorey drift from analysis and the behaviour factor q (i.e. de q).
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
27
1
Differently from MRFs, for CBFs it is common that the storey stability
coefficient is < 0.1, owing to the large lateral stiffness of this type of
structural scheme.
Hence, CBFs are generally insensitive to P-Delta effects
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
28
X-CBFs
According to EN 1998-1 6.7.2(2)P, in case of X-CBFs the structural
model shall include the tension braces only, unless a non-linear
analysis is carried out. Then, the generic braced bay is ideally
composed by a single brace (i.e. the diagonal in tension).
Generally speaking, in order to make tension alternatively developing in
all the braces at any storey, two models must be developed, one with
the braces tilted in one direction and another with the braces tilted in
the opposite direction
Gk i 2iQki
Gk i 2iQki
FEd ,i
FEd ,i
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
a)
b)
29
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
X-CBFs
the diagonal braces have to be designed and placed in such a way
that, under seismic action reversals, the structure exhibits similar lateral
load-deflection response in opposite directions at each storey
A A
A A
0.05
-
where A+ and A- are the areas of the vertical projections of the crosssections of the tension diagonals (Fig. 4.6) when the horizontal seismic
actions have a positive or negative direction, respectively
30
X-CBFs
The diagonal braces have also to be designed in such a way
that the yield resistance Npl,Rd of their gross cross-section is
such that Npl,Rd NEd, where NEd is calculated from the elastic
model illustrated in Fig. 4.5 (Section 4.4.2).
1.3 2.0
being
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
31
X-CBFs
the restraint effect of the diagonal in tension has been taken into
account in the calculation of the geometrical slenderness of Xdiagonal braces. This effect halves the brace in-plane buckling
length, while it is taken as inefficient for out-of-plane buckling
Hence, the geometrical in-plane slenderness is calculated
considering the half brace length, while the out-of-plane ones
considering the entire brace length
Lb Lb
Lb Lb
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Out-of-plane buckling
In-plane buckling
32
X-CBFs
In order to force the formation of a global mechanism, which
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for X-CBFs
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
33
X-CBFs
Once has been calculated, the design check of a beamcolumn member of the frame is based on Equation
N pl ,Rd (M Ed ) N Ed ,G 1.1 g ov N Ed ,E
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
34
X-CBFs
In the numerical model, floors are usually simulated by means of
rigid diaphragms. In such a way the relative in-plane
deformations are eliminated and the numerical model gives null
beam axial forces.
it is possible to calculate the beam axial forces by simple hand
calculations:
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
35
Inverted V-CBFs
Differently from the case of X bracings, Eurocode 8 states that
the model should be developed considering both tension and
compression diagonals
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
36
Inverted V-CBFs
Differently from X-CBFs, in frame with inverted-V bracing
compression diagonals should be designed for the compression
resistance in accordance to EN 1993:1-1 (EN 1998-1 6.7.3(6)).
N pl ,Rd N Ed
where is the buckling reduction factor (EN 1993:1-1 6.3.1.2
(1)) and NEd,i is the required strength
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
37
Inverted V-CBFs
Differently from the case of X-CBFs, the code does not impose
a lower bound limit for the non-dimensional slenderness , while
the upper bound limit ( 2 ) is retained.
However, it should be noted that, differently from the case of XCBFs, the design forces NEd,i are calculated with the model
where both the diagonal braces are taken into account
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
38
Inverted V-CBFs
Vertical component of the force transmitted by the tension and compression braces :
Calculation
F
models and Ed,i+1
code
requirements
for X-CBFs
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted
V-CBFs
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Gk qi=F
2iQki
ii/L
Npl,Rd,(i+1)
pl,Rd,i
Npl,Rd,i
FEd,i
i
L
0.3Npl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i
Npl,Rd,i
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)
0.3Npl,Rd,i
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)cosi+1)
0.3N-0.3N
i)(L/4)
pl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i)(sen
M(N
=(N-pl,Rd,i
i)(L/4)
Ed,E
pl,Rd,i)(sen
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)+qiL/2
VEd,E
Ed,E=(Npl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i-0.3N pl,Rd,i)(sen i)/2
VVEd,E
=(Npl,Rd,i
-0.3Npl,Rd,i
)(senii)/2
)/2
Ed,E=(N
pl,Rd,i-0.3N
pl,Rd,i)(sen
Shear force
diagram
Static balance of horizontal forces: Fi = (1+0.3)(N
cos(i+1) - Npl,Rd,icosi)
pl,Rd,(i+1)
Shear force diagram
Static balance of horizontal forces: FEd,i = (1+0.3)(Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1) - Npl,Rd,icosi)
F
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Ed,i+1
39
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)cosi+1
0.3N-0.3N
i)(L/4
pl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i)(sen
M(N
=(N-pl,Rd,i
i
Ed,E
pl,Rd,i)(sen
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)+qiL/2
Structural
analysis
and calculation
models
Bending moment
diagram
L
Axial force diagram
)(sen )
VEd,E
Ed,E=(Npl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i-0.3Npl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i)(senii)
Inverted
V-CBFs
VEd,E
Ed,E=(Npl,Rd,i
pl,Rd,i-0.3Npl,Rd,i)(seni)/2
General
features
=(N
-0.3N
Shear force
diagram
Static balance of horizontal forces: Fi = (1+0.3)(N
cos(i+1) - Npl,Rd,icosi)
pl,Rd,(i+1)
Shear force diagram
Static balance of horizontal forces: FEd,i = (1+0.3)(Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1) - Npl,Rd,icosi)
Calculation
F
Ed,i+1
models and
qi=Fi/L
code
requirements
for X-CBFs
Npl,Rd,(i+1)
FEd,i
Calculation
models and
code
requirements
for inverted i
V-CBFs
Npl,Rd,i
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)
L
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)
0.3Npl,Rd,i
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)cosi+1)
Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1)+qiL/2
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
40
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
a)
b)
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
41
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
42
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
43
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
44
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
45
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
d/t
.502
(mm)
114.3
121
121
121
133
159
(mm)
4
6.3
8
10
10
10
28.58
19.21
15.13
12.10
13.30
15.90
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
46
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
The circular hollow sections are suitable to satisfy both the slenderness
limits (1.3 < 2.0) and the requirement of minimizing the variation
among the diagonals of the overstrength ratio i, whose maximum
value (max) must not differ from the minimum one (min) by more than
25%. .
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Brace cross
section
Storey
(d x t)
(mm x
mm)
VI
114.3x4
V
121x6.3
IV
121x8
III
121x10
II
133x10
I
159x10
178.10
171.08
173.22
176.29
159.31
136.57
1.90
1.82
1.85
1.88
1.70
1.45
Npl,Rd
NEd
(kN)
(kN)
326.65
533.45
667.40
820.15
907.10
1099.80
180.65
325.70
430.74
517.46
576.19
650.07
i = Npl,Rd
NEd
1.81
1.64
1.55
1.58
1.57
1.69
i min (x 100)
min
16.70
5.71
0.00
2.29
1.61
9.19
47
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Verification of beams
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
48
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Verification of beams
Storey Section
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
NRd
(kN)
NEd,G
(kN)
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360 2580.85 0.00
IPE 360
IPE 360
IPE 360
NEd,E
(kN)
156.05
281.34
372.07
446.98
497.72
540.90
NEd =
Storey NEd,G NEd,E NEd,G+1.1govNEd,E
(kN) (kN)
(kN)
VI
78.02
132.98
V
218.70
372.74
IV
326.71
556.83
0.00
III
409.53
697.99
II
472.35
805.06
I
510.16
869.51
NEd=NEd,G+1.1govNEd,E
(kN)
265.96
479.51
634.15
761.82
848.29
921.90
MEd=
MEd,G MEd,E MEd,G+1.1govMEd,E
(kNm) (kNm)
(kNm)
64.28
64.28
86.27
86.27
86.27
86.27
0.00
86.27
86.27
86.27
86.27
86.27
86.27
NRd
NEd
9.70
5.38
4.07
3.39
3.04
2.80
MN,Rd
(kNm)
361.75
361.75
355.97
331.14
312.31
300.98
MRd
MEd
5.63
4.19
4.13
3.84
3.62
3.49
49
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Verification of columns
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 240 B
HE 240 B
HE 240 B
HE 240 B
HE 240 B
HE 240 B
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Z
X
(a)
(b)
(b)
(a)
50
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Verification of columns
Axial strength checks for columns in + X direction
column type a
Storey Section
A
2
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
(mm )
4530
4530
10600
10600
19960
19960
0.59
0.59
0.75
0.75
0.77
0.71
VI HE180A 4530
V HE180A 4530
IV HE240B 10600
III HE240B 10600
II HE240M 19960
I HE240M 19960
0.59
0.59
0.75
0.75
0.77
0.71
VI HE180A
V HE180A
IV HE240B
III HE240B
II HE240M
I HE240M
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
Npl,Rd
NEd,G
NEd,E
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
1608.15 103.77
0.00
1608.15 237.62
91.03
3763.00 372.52 253.90
3763.00 507.15 465.92
7085.80 646.06 716.86
7085.80 786.00 994.39
column type b
1608.15 92.33
91.03
1608.15 214.20 253.90
3763.00 338.31 465.92
3763.00 461.08 716.86
7085.80 586.39 994.39
7085.80 710.44 1341.94
NEd=
NEd,G+1.1govNEd,E Npl,Rd
(kN)
NEd
103.77
9.12
392.76
2.41
805.26
3.52
1301.24
2.18
1867.85
2.94
2480.80
2.03
247.47
646.94
1132.41
1682.87
2281.19
2997.59
3.82
1.46
2.50
1.68
2.40
1.68
51
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Similarly to the X-bracing, for the inverted-V braces circular hollow
sections and S235 steel grade are used. The adopted brace cross
sections belong to class 1
P- effects
Storey
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
d/t
.502
(mm)
127
193.7
244.5
244.5
273
323.9
(mm)
6.3
8
8
10
10
10
20.16
24.21
30.56
24.45
27.30
32.39
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
52
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Because of the presence of vertical loads and the different
deformations of columns, the brace axial force is slightly different for
braces D1 and D2
P- effects
X-CBFs
D1
D2 D2
D1
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
53
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Inverted V-CBFs
Inverted V-braces (D1 members) design checks in tension
Storey
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
Brace cross
section (d x t)
(mm x mm)
127x6.3
193.7x8
244.5x8
244.5x10
273x10
323.9x10
Npl,Rd
NEd, D1
(kN)
561.65
1097.45
1395.90
1722.55
1941.10
2317.10
(kN)
245.60
461.96
622.87
756.68
843.92
986.84
i =
Npl,Rd
i
(x 100)
NEd d,D1
2.29
2.38
2.24
2.28
2.30
2.35
2.04
6.00
0.00
1.58
2.63
4.77
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
54
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Inverted V-braces (D1 members) design checks in compression
Storey
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
Brace cross
section (d x t)
(mm x mm)
127x6.3
193.7x8
244.5x8
244.5x10
273x10
323.9x10
Nb,Rd
(kN)
NEd, D1
(kN)
Nb,Rd
NEd,D1
107.94
70.15
55.07
55.53
49.51
45.05
1.15
0.75
0.59
0.59
0.53
0.48
0.56
0.82
0.89
0.89
0.92
0.93
315.86
904.70
1249.31
1538.50
1777.16
2155.83
245.60
461.96
622.87
756.68
843.92
986.84
1.29
1.96
2.01
2.03
2.11
2.18
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
55
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of beams
HE 320 B
HE 320 B
P- effects
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
X-CBFs
HE 360 M
HE 360 M
Inverted VCBFs
HE 450 M
HE 450 M
Connections
HE 500 M
HE 500 M
HPE 550 M
HPE 550 M
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
56
Verifications
Inverted V-CBFs
Numerical
Verification of beams
models andStatic balance
of horizontal forces: Fi = (1+0.3)(Npl,Rd,(i+1)cos(i+1) - Npl,Rd,icosi)
dynamic
Axial forces due to the seismic effects in beams of inverted-V CBFs
properties FEd,i+1
qi=Fi/L
Npl,Rd,(i+1)
P- effects
FEd,i
Npl,Rd,i
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
NA
i
L
Connections
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
0.3Npl,Rd,i
NC
ND
NB
Storey
Damage
limitation
0.3Npl,Rd,(i+1)
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
Npl,Rd
(kN)
561.65
1097.45
1395.90
1722.55
1941.10
2317.10
qi
(kN/m)
79.209
75.563
42.090
46.067
30.822
27.473
NA
(kN)
0.00
365.58
714.33
908.59
1121.21
1263.46
NB
(kN)
237.63
592.27
840.60
1046.79
1213.67
1345.88
NC
(kN)
237.63
336.36
340.57
410.78
428.83
461.46
ND
(kN)
0.00
109.67
214.30
272.58
336.36
379.04
57
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of beams
P- effects
Storey
Section
A
2
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
HE320 B
HE320 M
HE360 M
HE450 M
HE500 M
HE550 M
(mm )
16130
31200
31880
33540
34430
35440
Npl,Rd
(kN)
5726.15
11076.00
11317.40
11906.70
12222.65
12581.20
NEd,G
(kN)
0.00
NEd,E = NA
(kN)
475.25
928.63
1181.17
1457.57
1642.50
1807.34
NEd =
NEd,G +NEd,E
(kN)
475.25
928.63
1181.17
1457.57
1642.50
1807.34
Npl,Rd
NEd
12.05
11.93
9.58
8.17
7.44
6.96
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
58
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of beams
Section
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
HE320 B
HE320 M
HE360 M
HE450 M
HE500 M
HE550 M
NEd
(kN)
475.25
928.63
1181.17
1457.57
1642.50
1807.34
MEd,G
(kNm)
41.90
58.13
58.35
58.62
59.24
61.28
MEd,E
(kNm)
447.83
875.05
1113.02
1373.48
1547.74
1946.36
MEd
(kNm)
489.73
933.19
1171.38
1432.10
1606.98
2007.64
MRd
(kNm)
762.90
1574.43
1771.10
2247.51
2518.37
2816.22
MRd
MEd
1.56
1.69
1.51
1.57
1.57
1.40
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
59
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of beams
Section
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
HE320B
HE320M
HE360M
HE450M
HE500M
HE550M
A
(mm2)
16130
31200
31880
33540
34430
35440
Av
(mm2)
5172.75
9450.00
10240.00
11980.00
12950.00
13960.00
Vpl,Rd
(kN)
1060.20
1943.01
2098.78
2455.41
2654.22
2861.23
VEd,G
(kN)
27.93
38.75
38.90
38.08
39.49
40.62
VEd,E
(kN)
149.28
291.69
371.01
457.83
515.91
648.79
VEd
(kN)
177.21
330.44
409.91
496.90
555.41
689.41
Vpl,Rd
VEd
5.98
5.88
5.12
4.94
4.78
4.15
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
60
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of columns
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 180 A
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 240 M
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
HE 320 M
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
61
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
Inverted V-CBFs
Verification of columns
Storey
Section
A
2
P- effects
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
HE180A
HE180A
HE240M
HE240M
HE320M
HE320M
(mm )
4530
4530
19960
19960
31200
31200
0.59
0.59
0.77
0.77
0.85
0.81
Npl,Rd
(kN)
1608.15
1608.15
7085.80
7085.80
11076.00
11076.00
NEd,G
(kN)
94.72
225.44
384.77
534.95
694.41
847.88
NEd,E
(kN)
0.00
182.06
527.24
984.00
1535.70
2139.46
NEd= NEd,G+1.1govNEd,E
(kN)
94.72
674.27
1684.50
2960.71
4480.22
6122.07
Npl,Rd
NEd
9.99
1.40
3.26
1.85
2.10
1.46
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
62
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
Connections
Connections have to satisfy the requirements given in EN 1998-1 6.5.5.
In particular, the following connection overstrength criterion must be
applied:
Rd 1.1 ov Rfy
X-CBFs
Inverted VCBFs
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
63
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
Beams
Columns
max= 0.54%
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
a)
0.04m
64
Verifications
Numerical
models and
dynamic
properties
P- effects
max= 0.54%
Beams
max= 0.54%
Columns
Connections
Damage
limitation
European Erasmus Mundus
Master Course
Sustainable Constructions
under Natural Hazards
and Catastrophic Events
b)
65
Thank you
for your attention
http://steel.fsv.cvut.cz/suscos