Vol.12, No.

3 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION September, 2013

Earthq Eng & Eng Vib (2013) 12: 463-472 DOI: 10.1007/s11803-013-0186-9

Seismic analysis of diagrid structural frames with

shear-link fuse devices

Nasim S. Moghaddasi B.† and Yunfeng Zhang‡

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA

Abstract: This paper presents a new concept for enhancing the seismic ductility and damping capacity of diagrid
structural frames by using shear-link fuse devices and its seismic performance is assessed through nonlinear static and
dynamic analysis. The architectural elegancy of the diagrid structure attributed to its triangular leaning member configuration
and high structural redundancy make this system a desirable choice for tall building design. However, forming a stable
energy dissipation mechanism in diagrid framing remains to be investigated to expand its use in regions with high seismicity.
To address this issue, a diagrid framing design is proposed here which provides a competitive design option in highly
seismic regions through its increased ductility and improved energy dissipation capacity provided by replaceable shear links
interconnecting the diagonal members at their ends.The structural characteristics and seismic behavior (capacity, stiffness,
energy dissipation, ductility) of the diagrid structural frame are demonstrated with a 21-story building diagrid frame subjected
to nonlinear static and dynamic analysis. The findings from the nonlinear time history analysis verify that satisfactory seismic
performance can be achieved by the proposed diagrid frame subjected to design basis earthquakes in California. In particular,
one appealing feature of the proposed diagrid building is its reduced residual displacement after strong earthquakes.

Keywords: diagrid structure; nonlinear analysis; seismic behavior; shear link; steel structure

1 Introduction system offers a good structural performance under

A diagrid structureis a type of structural system
consisting of diagonal grids connected through horizontal
rings which create an elegant and redundant structure
that is especially efficient for high-rise buildings. A
diagrid structure is different from braced frame systems,
since diagonals as main structural elements participate in
carrying gravity load in addition to carrying lateral load
due to their triangulated configuration, which eliminates
the need forvertical columns. The column free structure
of a diagrid system offers several advantages such as high
architectural flexibility and elegancy, and enormous day
lighting due to its large free facade surface. Buildings
with diagrid structural systems constructed in recent
years include the 40-story Swiss Re Tower in London
and the 46-story Heart Tower in New York; both are
iconic landmarks because of their masterpiece design.
Free-form buildings such as the Phare Tower also use a
diagrid framing system for their exterior framing system
due to its architectural flexibility.
In addition to its aesthetic advantages, the diagrid
Correspondence to: Yunfeng Zhang, Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, College
Park, MD 20742, USA
Tel: (301) 405-1955
E-mail: zyf@umd.edu
†
Engineer; ‡Associate Professor
Received July 30, 2012; Accepted June 20, 2013
lateral loads because the axial action of the diagonals
control the story shear deformations in addition to
providing high bending rigidity and redundancy. A
diagonal member in a diagrid structure is a substitution
for both column and brace in regular braced frames
with a uniformly distributed angular configuration.
This creates an inherently highly redundant structural
network that allows multiple load paths (Rahimian and
Eilon, 2007), making the system safer under extreme
stress conditions and incidents such as blast removal
of one or a few diagonals. In the study performed
by Kim and Lee (2009), the progressive collapse
of 34- and 56-story diagrid structures did not occur
before removal of more than the 11% of the diagonals.
Through proper design, the diagrid system performs
better than a regular framed tube structure in shear lag
and lateral deformation (Leonard, 2007). The greater
lateral stiffness of a diagrid structure makes it less
prone to the vortex-induced lock-in condition in the
across-wind direction, since a higher wind velocity
is required to cause a lock-in condition for buildings
with higher fundamental frequency (Moon et al.,
2007).
The diagrid system has been used mostly for high-
rise buildings and the importance of the lateral force
resisting system increases with the building height (e.g.,
Teng et al., 2011). Despite the many advantages of a
diagrid framing system, conventional diagrid structures
464 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION
have limited capacity for energy dissipation and
ductility. The stiffness of a diagrid structure is typically
higher than other conventional structural systems;
however, the diagrid structure remains elastic only up to
a certain deformation level and after that the diagonals
start yielding, thus leading to damage of the primary
structural elements (i.e., diagonals that also carry gravity
load). It is very expensive and intricate to repair and
replace these primary structural elements and it would
also interrupt the serviceability of the building during
repair. Furthermore, it is quite difficult to fabricate the
intersection nodes of the diagrid system due to their
complex combination of various diagonal members and
beams (Kim et al., 2011; Li et al., 2011).
In this paper, a new configuration of a diagrid
structural system with replaceable shear-link fuse
devices is proposed in which the energy dissipation
is achieved in dedicated fuse elements to enhance its
ductility and damping capacity. This diagrid framing
system not only accommodates the architectural
flexibility but also provides an efficient lateral force
resisting structural system which is easy to construct and
repair after strong earthquake shaking. In the following
sections of the paper, the details about this diagrid
system are presented and the seismic performance of a
21-story diagrid framewith fuse devices is investigated
through both nonlinear static and dynamic analysis.
2 Diagrid frame with fuse device
2.1 Concept
Structural systems with high energy dissipation
capacity, ductile behavior and without premature
structural failure are desired for seismically active
areas. The diagrid structure shown in Fig. 1(a) has
characteristics that provide these features.The structure
is comprised of modules, each of which includes several
stories (e.g., every three stories in Fig. 1). In the diagrid
structure, shear links are placed at the top of each module,
connecting the ends of the diagonals. Meanwhile, shear
links can also take large axial force (Kasai and Popov,
1986). The shear links that are located at the outer most
Vol.12
sides of the building are referred to as side shear links
and the rest of the links are referred to as interior shear
links, as shown in Fig. 1(b). The diagrid takes advantage
of diagonal elements as the primary load carrying
members while utilizing shear links as seismic fuse
elements for stable energy dissipation. The diagonals at
the top and bottom of every module are connected to a
link element to which they transfer the shear forces and
axial forces. Figure 2(c) shows a schematic of the shear
link connection to the diagonals and beams.
The seismic design philosophy is based on keeping
the structure elastic or slightly inelastic during minor
to moderate earthquakes and preventing them from
collapse during strong earthquakes. The diagrid system
features relatively large lateral stiffness due to its
angular configuration as well as high energy dissipation
capacity enabled by its shear links. Its lateral stiffness
limits displacements during minor and moderate
earthquakes, while the inelastic deformation of the shear
links accommodates the required ductility and energy
dissipation under strong earthquakes. The shear links
thus limit the force transferred to the primary structural
members such as diagonals and prevents them from
entering into the plastic phase. The stiffness and strength
of the diagrid structure can be controlled and tuned by
464 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION
have limited capacity for energy dissipation and
ductility. The stiffness of a diagrid structure is typically
higher than other conventional structural systems;
however, the diagrid structure remains elastic only up to
a certain deformation level and after that the diagonals
start yielding, thus leading to damage of the primary
structural elements (i.e., diagonals that also carry gravity
load). It is very expensive and intricate to repair and
replace these primary structural elements and it would
also interrupt the serviceability of the building during
repair. Furthermore, it is quite difficult to fabricate the
intersection nodes of the diagrid system due to their
complex combination of various diagonal members and
beams (Kim et al., 2011; Li et al., 2011).
In this paper, a new configuration of a diagrid
structural system with replaceable shear-link fuse
devices is proposed in which the energy dissipation
is achieved in dedicated fuse elements to enhance its
ductility and damping capacity. This diagrid framing
system not only accommodates the architectural
flexibility but also provides an efficient lateral force
resisting structural system which is easy to construct and
repair after strong earthquake shaking. In the following
sections of the paper, the details about this diagrid
system are presented and the seismic performance of a
21-story diagrid framewith fuse devices is investigated
through both nonlinear static and dynamic analysis.
2 Diagrid frame with fuse device
2.1 Concept
Structural systems with high energy dissipation
capacity, ductile behavior and without premature
structural failure are desired for seismically active
areas. The diagrid structure shown in Fig. 1(a) has
characteristics that provide these features.The structure
is comprised of modules, each of which includes several
stories (e.g., every three stories in Fig. 1). In the diagrid
structure, shear links are placed at the top of each module,
connecting the ends of the diagonals. Meanwhile, shear
links can also take large axial force (Kasai and Popov,
1986). The shear links that are located at the outer most
Vol.12
sides of the building are referred to as side shear links
and the rest of the links are referred to as interior shear
links, as shown in Fig. 1(b). The diagrid takes advantage
of diagonal elements as the primary load carrying
members while utilizing shear links as seismic fuse
elements for stable energy dissipation. The diagonals at
the top and bottom of every module are connected to a
link element to which they transfer the shear forces and
axial forces. Figure 2(c) shows a schematic of the shear
link connection to the diagonals and beams.
The seismic design philosophy is based on keeping
the structure elastic or slightly inelastic during minor
to moderate earthquakes and preventing them from
collapse during strong earthquakes. The diagrid system
features relatively large lateral stiffness due to its
angular configuration as well as high energy dissipation
capacity enabled by its shear links. Its lateral stiffness
limits displacements during minor and moderate
earthquakes, while the inelastic deformation of the shear
links accommodates the required ductility and energy
dissipation under strong earthquakes. The shear links
thus limit the force transferred to the primary structural
members such as diagonals and prevents them from
entering into the plastic phase. The stiffness and strength
of the diagrid structure can be controlled and tuned by
No.3 Nasim S. Moghaddasi B. et al.: Seismic analysis of diagrid structural frames with shear-link fuse devices
proper design of the shear links.
The cyclic shear yielding of a link element is an
excellent energy dissipation mechanism since the link
can undergo large inelastic deformations before failure
occurs. If the flange and web local buckling are prevented
in a link element through appropriate stiffeners, the
failure of the link ultimately occurs by material rupture
in the web or flange depending on type of link. Shear
is the dominant failure mode in short links (known as
shear links) while higher moment is developed in the
long links, making flexure the dominant failure mode. In
shear links, yielding occurs over a large segment of the
web and is followed by a cyclic diagonal field (Taranath,
1997). After the web yielding, the load is carried by the
tension field, resulting in fat hysteresis loops indicating
good energy dissipation. In the proposed diagrid system,
the link fuse devices are designed with a short length to
behave as shear link,which effectively dissipate energy
once the loads from each load path of the diagonals are
transferred to them.
In addition to enhanced structural performance
under strong earthquakes, the diagrid structure has
several other advantages. The shear links do not fail
before experiencing large deformations and replaceable
links with end plate connections are easy to change after
failure (Mansour et al., 2008). By using the replaceable
links, inspection and replacement of the damaged links
following a major earthquake is easy and quick, thus
significantly minimizing the disruption time of the
structure. Furthermore, using shear links reduces the
complexity of joining the four diagonals concurrently in
the diagrid system.
2.2 Design criteria
Shear links should be designed and checked
according to the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341-05 (AISC, 2005). As per
AISC seismic provisions (2005), the length of shear
links, e, must be below the following limit
1.6M p
e≤ (1)
Vp
The plastic shear and moment capacity of a link, Mp
and Vp, are determined from the following equations
(ANSI/AISC 341-05):
Vp = 0.6 Aweb y
M p = Z y
where σy is the yield strength of the shear link material
and Aweb and Z are the web cross sectional area of the
link and plastic modulus of the link cross section,
respectively. To limit the local buckling, the link cross
section should meet the seismically compact cross
section requirements. The flanges should be continuously
connected to the web and the width-thickness ratios of
the flanges should be less than the limiting value, λps
465
(ANSI/AISC 341-05):
bf E
<ps = 0.38 (4)
tf y
In the above equation, E is the Young’s modulus of
the link material. The inelastic deformation capacity
of the shear links, defined as the link rotation angle in
codes, is limited to 0.08 radians for shear yielding links.
Lateral bracing are required at both the top and bottom
link flanges at the ends of the link. The effect of axial
force on the link’s shear capacity needs to be considered
if (AISC, 2005):
Pu
>0.15 (5)
Py
where Pu is the required axial strength and Py= σyAg
is the nominal axial strength of the link (Ag is the total
cross-sectional area of the link).
The diagonals and beams are subjected to large axial
forces and bending moments generated by the yielded
link. It is essential that all structural elements other
than the links remain elastic. The diagonals should be
designed to be strong enough to make the links behave
like fuses in the system,which allows them to yield and
dissipate energy. Beams with large cross sections are
required in the diagrid frame so that they remain elastic
under the large forces transferred from the shear links.
2.3 Case study
Nonlinear analysis of a prototype diagrid building
under a design basis earthquake is required to assess
the seismic performance of the proposed system. It
was decided that a high-rise building with modules
encompassing three stories would be an appropriate
prototype, which is similar to those in the Hearst Tower
in New York (Rahimian and Eilon, 2007). Therefore,
a 3×3 bay, 21-story diagrid building comprised of
seven modules with a square plan was designed for an
imaginary location inthe Los Angeles, California region.
Figure 2 shows the elevation and plan of the case study
building. The typical story height of 3.65 m resulted in
a total height of 77-m for the building. According to the
study performed by Moon et al. (2007), the slope of 65
to 75 degrees is the most efficient slope for diagonals
to resist lateral forces in buildings with an aspect ratio
(height of the building divided by its width) of 2 to 7.
(2)
This range of optimal diagonals angle of the diagrid
structure can be used as a reasonable basis for design of
(3) the case study diagrid building. It was desired that the
case study building have an aspect ratio larger than 2;
therefore, the diagonals in this case study are designed
to have an inclination angle of 72 degrees, resulting in
an aspect ratio of 2.9. All the shear links were selected
to be 1.0 m long.
In the preliminary seismic design of the 21-story
prototype diagrid building, the equivalent static lateral
force procedure of ASCE/SEI 7-10 was employed, based
466 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION
on a design response spectrum corresponding to a hazard
of 10% probability of exceedance in a 50 year period for
the Van Nuys, California area. A Site Class D (stiff soil)
and a seismic design category of D was assigned to the
prototype diagrid building with an importance factor of
1.0. The design spectral accelerations at 0.2 and 1.0 s,
SDS and SD1, were 1.16 and 0.64 g, respectively. The
seismic weight of the 21-story diagrid building was
122,000 kN. The seismic weight for a typical floor was
5780 kN, based on 6.7 kN/m2 for the floors and 1.44 kN/m2
for the facade. The seismic weight for the roof was 6450 kN,
considering 670 kN for roof top equipment. The
floor mass distribution along the building height was
considered to be uniform. Since there is no available
number for the response modification factor, R, for a
diagrid framing system and in ASCE/SEI 7-10, the
R value of 7 is recommended for steel eccentrically
braced frames as the closest structural system to the
proposed system of this study, a conservative response
modification factor of 6 was used.
It was found that for the 21-story diagrid building,
the side links of the 1st, 3rd and 5th modules experience
high axial forces. These side links are only connected
to the diagonals at one side and hence the horizontal
resultant force of the diagonals is directly transferred
to the shear link. For these shear links, the area of the
flanges were increased to decrease the axial force ratio
without changing the shear capacity of the links, which
is affected only by the web area and not the flange.
Table 1 shows the size and capacity of the diagonals
and beams of the 21-story diagrid building and the plastic
shear capacity of the shear links. All beams, diagonals
and shear links are hot-rolled steel W sections made
with structural steel of 345 MPa minimum specified
yield strength. It is assumed that appropriate full-depth
web stiffeners are used in the links to prevent local web
buckling. The detail of the stiffener configurations and
dimensions would be designed similar to typical shear
link design in eccentrically braced frames and is beyond
the scope of this study. In the modules with three shear
links, the side shear links were intentionally assigned
lower shear capacity than the interior links, since shear
force at the interior link is much larger; in doing so,
their different shear strengths enables them to start
plastic deformation and thus energy dissipation almost
simultaneously. This can be illustrated by considering
Table 1 Size and capacity of structural members of 21-story diagrid building with fuse devices
Diagonal
Story Size Axial design Size
(cross sectional strength, (cross sectional
area, cm2) φPn (kN) area, cm2)
1-6 W33×354 (654) 20818 W40×503 (935)
7-12 W33×263 (484) 15513 W40×397 (742)
13-18 W24×162 (258) 9548 W40×397 (742)
19-21 W24×131 (226) 7707 W36×256 (458)
Vol.12
the diagrid structure as a vertical cantilever beam which
has the maximum shear stress at its neutral axis. Under
lateral loading, the center line of the diagrid frame acts
like the neutral axis of a cantilever beam and has the
highest shear stresses. The shear links at the first and
second modules are designed with higher shear capacity
compared to the links at higher modules to reduce the
residual displacement of the structure under earthquake
loading, since they undergo larger plastic deformations.
At the roof level,the diagrid buildingis not exposed to
many shear forces and hence the interior shear link at
the last module has a lower capacity when compared to
those at the lower modules.
3 Analytical modeling of diagrid framing
system with fuse devices
A two-dimensional model of the case study building
was developed in this study using the computer program
OpenSees (McKenna, 1997). Accurate modeling of the
diagrid structure and specifically the shear links are very
critical to the seismic performance evaluation since the
inelastic deformation of the diagrid structure is confined
to these shear yielding links while other members are
supposed to remain linear elastic during design level
earthquakes. A special element that simulates the real
behavior of the links was developed in OpenSees for
this study.
3.1 Shear link model
In short links, shear is the dominating force, which is
mainly carried by the web and small bending moments
that also develop at the ends of the link. In the model
presented by Ramadan and Ghobarah (1995), which
is adapted from the model originally developed by
Ricles and Popov (1987), one elastic beam-column
element and two shear hinges at the ends to capture
the inelastic behavior were used to represent the shear
link element and the moment that developed in the
shear link is neglected. In this study, the shear link is
modeled using three elements: a beam element in the
middle, which accounts for elastic axial, bending and
shear deformations and yielding in bending; and two
zero length elements at two ends of the shear link, which
Plastic shear capacity of
Beam
the link, Vp (kN)
Moment Design Shear design
strength, strength, Interior Side
φMn (kN.m) φVn (kN)
11741 8630 7518 5370
9152 6672 6513 3256
9152 6672 6513 3256
5288 4804 3256 3256
No.3 Nasim S. Moghaddasi B. et al.: Seismic analysis of diagrid structural frames with shear-link fuse devices
account for yielding in shear.
The middle beam used in the link modelis an
OpenSees element called “beam with hinges”. This
element comprisesthree parts: two hinges at the ends
and a linear-elastic region in the middle (see Fig. 3(a)).
The plastic hinging is localized at the element ends
through those two hinges defined by assigning each
with a prescribed M-θ relation to account for yielding
in bending. These lumped plasticity parts (i.e., moment
hinges) have zero length and bilinear material (Mazzoni
et al., 2009) with yield strength equal to the nominal
moments strength of each shear link in order to represent
the flexural behavior of the links. The moment developed
in the shear links are supposed to be lower than their
moment capacity since the links are shear critical, which
is ensured by recording the moment-rotation response of
the moment hinges during the analysis.
The shear link behavior observed in the experimental
test can be divided into three distinct phases: the elastic
behavior up to the shear force of V1; plastic phase before
significant local buckling at V2; and the degradation phase
which is usually short and occurs when the link rotation is
larger than the link inelastic capacity resulting in failure
of the link by rupture of the web section (Okazaki et al.,
2006). The short links with tight web stiffener spacing
are not prone to local buckling and do not experience
degradation (Richards and Uang, 2005). Based on the
assumption of proper full-depth web stiffeners for shear
links, the shear deformation corresponding to the link
rotation of 0.08 rad, which is the value specified in the
code (AISC 2005) for shear link rotation limitation, is
implemented into the link force-displacement model as
Moment hinges
Elastic beam
Shear hinge springs
(a) Model schematics
Force
1.5 Vp K4=0.002K1
1.3 Vp K3=0.015K1
1.1 Vp K2=0.030K1
K1=2GAweb/e K=0
K1–K2
K=0 Parallel springs
K=0
K2–K3
K3–K4 K4
δ1 δ2 δ3 δ4 Deformation
G is shear modulus of the link material
(b) Combined behavior of parallel springs used to model shear hinge
Fig. 3 Shear link element
467
the ultimate link deformation capacity.
The measured value of V1 in the test results of
Okazaki et al. (2005) was typically equal to or somewhat
larger than its nominal value (based on nominal
dimensions and nominal yield strength). Based on the
described experimental results, the piecewise linear
model proposed by Richards (2004) was used to model
the links shear behavior. The force-deformation relation
of this model is shown in Fig. 3(b) with the following
values for shear forces:
V1 = 1.1 Vp (6)
V2 = 1.3 Vp (7)
V3 = 1.5 Vp (8)
Four parallel springs with isotropic bilinear behavior
were used to model the shear hinges at both ends of the
link element as shown in Fig. 3(a). Elastic-perfectly-
plastic material was used to model the hysteretic
behavior of four springs connected in parallel, which are
represented with zero-length elements at the ends of the
link to simulate the piecewise-linear shear behavior of
the shear link.
The accuracy of the shear link model and its
parameters was verified by the experimental data from
the study of Hjelmstad and Popov (1983) and Okazaki
and Englehardt (2007) on shear links.
3.2 Elements, materials and mass
With the shear link model established, the 21-story
diagridframe was modeled as a two-dimensional planar
structure in one direction (considering the symmetry
of the case study building) in the OpenSees software
as shown in Fig. 4. Nonlinear beam-column elements
with inelastic fiber sections were used to model all the
beams. The diagonal members, which are intended to
carry the load only through axial action, are modeled
with truss elements. The diagonals at the first story were
considered fixed at their base.
Material behavior for all elements, including diagonals,
beams and shear links, was modeled using the Giuffre-
Menegotto-Pinto model (Menegotto and Pinto, 1973)
with isotropic strain hardening of 2%, Young’s modulus
of 200 GPa, and yield strength of 345 MPa (50 ksi)
(i.e., Steel02 material in OpenSees).
Floor masses were lumped into the beam end nodes
at each floor level (see Fig. 4(b)). In the planar structural
model in OpenSees, half of the total seismic mass was
assigned to the planar frame due to symmetry of the
building plan. A lean-on column along the height of
the structure and pinned at its base, consisting of 21
elastic beam-column elements, was used in the model
to account for the P-Delta effect. The column has the
attributes of half of the gravity columns of the diagrid
building. The column was connected to the beams of
the frame at each floor by axially rigid truss elements
468 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12

Floor number
Frame tributary Gravity columns
garvity loads loads

Rigid link
Lumped masses
Rotational spring
with very small
stiffness
P-Delta column Fig. 5 First three mode shapes of the 21-story diagrid
(a) Whole frame building with fuse devices
Rigid link
expected performance of the structure. A pushover
Lumped masses analysis of the 21-story diagridframe was performed
to identify its nonlinear static response. The inverted
Rotational triangular vertical load pattern was used to distribute
spring with
the base shear along the height of the building in
very small
stiffness pushover analysis according to the first mode shape of
the building.
P-Delta column The lateral loads were applied as lumped forces
(b) Close-up view
at the left most exterior nodes at each floor level. The
Fig. 4 OpenSees model of the 21-story diagrid frame loads were increased monotonically until the horizontal
displacement at the middle node of the roof reached the
drift ratio of 3%.
to transfer the inertia force. The zero-length rotational
The roof drift ratio (roof displacement divided by
springs with very small stiffness were used in lean-on
total height of the building) vs. the normalized base
column connections to prevent introducing significant
shear response also known as pushover curve, recorded
moment in the column. The tributary gravity load share
during the nonlinear static analysis shown in Fig. 6. The
of the frame including deal and live loads were applied
force-displacement result of pushover analysis of the
at each floor. Half of the load on all gravity columns of
diagrid frame is a piecewise linear curve labeled with
the building was also assigned to the lean-on column.
Points Y1, Y2, Y3 and Y4 in Fig. 6 to show the sequence of
The damping effect in time history analysis was
the plastic deformation development in the shear links.
considered through Rayleigh damping. As a typical
It is seen that the slope of the post yield branch of the
value for steel buildings, a 2% damping ratio for the first
and third modal frequencies of the diagrid building was Diagrid building with fuse devices
used for the OpenSees model. The stiffness proportional 0.15
Conventional diagrid
damping was applied only to the frame elements, since Y4: Deformation of L3* to L6>0.08 radian
for accurate analysis, no stiffness damping should be 13% of diagonals yielded
first yielding of diagonals

considered for the lean-on column and highly rigid truss Y3: Deformation of L3 to L6>δ3
Normalized base shear (V/W)

First diago-
elements that link the frame and lean-on column (Zareian 0.10
nal yielded Deformation of L1, L2>δ2
Y2: Deformation of L3 to L6>δ2
and Medina, 2010). The first three vibration periods of Deformation of L1, L2, L7>δ1

the 21-story diagrid building with fuse devices were Y1: Deformation of L3* to L6>δ1**

2.48, 0.8 and 0.46 s, respectively, and the corresponding

first three mode shapes are shown in Fig. 5. 0.05
Inverted triangular
lateral seismic force for
pushover analysis
4 Seismic analysis of diagrid frame Li: Links at ith module
*

δi: Deformation of the link according to Fig. 5

**
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
4.1 Nonlinear static analysis Roof drift ratio (%)

Nonlinear static analysis may not be accurate for Fig. 6 Pushover curve of 21-story conventional diagrid
tall buildings, but it provides a helpful insight into the building and diagrid building with fuse devices
No.3 Nasim S. Moghaddasi B. et al.: Seismic analysis of diagrid structural frames with shear-link fuse devices 469

pushover curve changes as the shear links enter different
phases of their inelastic force-displacement relations
previously shown in Fig. 3(b). During the analysis, the
base shear increases linearly until the roof drift ratio
reaches about 0.63% and the base shear ratio reaches
0.087% (Point Y1 in Fig. 6). The web shear yielding of
the shear links of the 3rd to 6th diagrid modules (L3, L4,
L5 and L6) start at 0.63% of the roof drift ratio. At roof
drift ratio of 0.93% (Point Y2) and 1.58% (Point Y3),
the deformation of these shear links exceeds δ2 and δ3,
respectively, which correspond to the end of the first and
second post-yield branch of the link’s force-deformation
curve (see Fig. 3(b)). The web shear yielding of the
links at the 1st, 2nd and 7th modules also start at a roof
drift ratio of 0.93%. At the roof drift ratio of 1.58%, the
deformation of shear links at the 1st and 2nd modules
exceeds δ2. It can be seen that inelastic deformation of
the shear links is distributed throughout the height of the
diagrid structure.
All the diagonals and beams remain elastic during
pushover analysis up to the roof drift ratio of 2.1%
(Point Y4 in Fig. 6). At around this point, first yielding of
the diagonals also occurred.
The pushover curve of a 21-story conventional
diagrid building designed to have similar stiffness to the
studied 21-story diagrid building with shear links, is also
presented in Fig. 6. The first three vibration periods of
this conventional diagrid building were 2.3, 0.64 and 0.37
seconds. The elastic behavior was observed prior to the
roof drift ratio of 0.74%. At this stage, the first diagonal
with largest compression load yielded. A fast increase
in the number of yielded diagonals was observed as the
roof drift ratio increased; as the roof drift ratio reached
1%, about 13% of all the diagonals had already yielded
and the analysis was stopped. This comparison shows
that in conventional diagrid buildings, the diagonals as
main load carrying elements of the system are the first to
fail once the seismic force surpasses the elastic capacity
of the building; meanwhile, in the diagrid buildings with
fuse devices, the energy dissipation mechanism of the
shear links ensures that the diagonals remain elastic.
4.2 Nonlinear time history analysis
The performance of a structural system under strong
earthquakes can be evaluated by comparing the nonlinear
time history analysis results of the key engineering
demand parameters (EDPs) with code specified values
and those that are generally accepted in practice. For this
purpose, nonlinear time history analysis of the 21-story
diagrid structure with fuse devices was performed under
a suite of 14 strong earthquake records, which were
originally developed by Somerville et al. (1997) for
the Los Angeles, California region with a probability of
exceedance of 10% in 50 years. These scaled earthquake
records correspond to the design basis earthquake of the
downtown Los Angeles area. Details of these earthquake
records are listed in Table 2. The Newmark average-
acceleration (γ=1/2, β=1/4) time-step integration method
with Newton initial stiffness interaction was used to solve
the dynamic differential equations. The time interval for
all time history analyses was set to be 0.02 s.
The results of important EDPs are presented in this
section. Since it is not possible to present the detailed
results from all the time history analyses, LA18 is
chosen as a representative case for the nonlinear time
history analysis and some of its detailed time history
results are presented here. In the results presented in this
section, the ‘peak’ result refers to the highest absolute
value of the specified parameter (e.g., drift ratio, etc.)
recorded during the time history analysis. The "ensemble
average" refers to the mathematical average value of the

Table 2 Earthquake records used for time history analysis

Distance to
Earthquake Duration PGA
Record epicenter
magnitude (s) (g)
(km)
LA01 Imperial Valley, 1940, El Centro 6.9 10 53.48 0.46
LA02 Imperial Valley, 1940, El Centro 6.9 10 53.48 0.68
LA07 Landers, 1992, Barstow 7.3 36 79.98 0.42
LA08 Landers, 1992, Barstow 7.3 36 79.98 0.43
LA09 Landers, 1992, Yermo 7.3 25 79.98 0.60
LA10 Landers, 1992, Yermo 7.3 25 79.98 0.36
LA11 Loma Prieta, 1989, Gilroy 7.0 12 39.98 0.67
LA12 Loma Prieta, 1989, Gilroy 7.0 12 39.98 0.97
LA13 Northridge, 1994, Newhall 6.7 6.7 59.98 0.68
LA14 Northridge, 1994, Newhall 6.7 6.7 59.98 0.66
LA17 Northridge, 1994, Sylmar 6.7 6.4 59.98 0.57
LA18 Northridge, 1994, Sylmar 6.7 6.4 59.98 0.82
LA19 North Palm Springs, 1986 6.0 6.7 59.98 1.02
LA20 North Palm Springs, 1986 6.0 6.7 59.98 0.97
470 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION Vol.12

results obtained from 14 time history analyses, which
is shown in some figures with the dark circles that are
connected with a line.
Figure 7 shows the displacement time histories of the
roof, 12th and 3rd floor of the diagrid building subjected
to the LA18 ground motion and it can be seen that the
value of residual displacements are fairly small. Figure 8
shows the maximum roof drift ratio and residual roof drift
ratio of the building for each earthquake. The ensemble
average value of the peak roof drift ratio is 0.58% and
the maximum roof drift ratio of 0.77% occurred under
LA20. The lateral deflection of the diagrid building
is generally contributed by two main components: (i)
axial deformation of the diagonals and beams, and (ii)
deformation of the link elements. Because the diagonals
and also the beams are designed to remain elastic, their
deflection contribution is below their elastic elongation
even after the shear yielding of the link. Consequently,
the diagrid frame has a comparable lateral stiffness to a
conventional diagrid system. It is seen from Fig. 8 that
relatively low peak roof drift ratio values were obtained
for the diagrid frame under all seismic records.
The ensemble average value of the residual drift
ratio is 0.04%. The residual drift ratios of up to 0.5% are
considered feasible for post-earthquake repair and even
the maximum residual drift ratio that occurred under the
LA01 ground motion with avalue of 0.11% is well below
this limit. The small residual deformation signifies a re-
centering ability of the proposed diagrid building, which
is a very desirable feature after strong earthquake events
for the benefit of preserving the building operation. This
can be explained by the fact that no inelastic action
Floor displacement (cm)
the 21-story diagrid building under 14 ground motions.
The values of the interstory drift ratio are higher at the
end of each module where the shear links are located.
The distribution of the ensemble average interstory drift
ratios is shown in Fig. 9 with dark circles connected by a
line with the maximum ensemble average interstory drift
ratio of 1.4% at the 16th story. The maximum interstory
drift ratio happened under LA17 at the 16th story, with
a value of about 2%. Based on Section 16.2.4.3 of
ASCE/SEI 7-10, the interstory drift ratio value should
be lower than 2.5% if the nonlinear time-history analysis
is performed. The maximum ensemble average value for
the residual interstory ratio was 0.2% at the 16th story.
The length and capacity of the links are controlling
factors to maintain displacement performance goals and
the stiffness and deformation of the building can be
tuned by appropriate link design. Figure 10(a) shows the
maximum rotation demands of the links at each module
under different ground motions. The link rotation angle
is defined as the vertical displacement between two ends
of the link normalized by the link length. The ensemble
average of the peak link rotations under 14 earthquake
records are shown with connected dark circles. The
maximum ensemble average of the peak links rotation
is 0.0225 radians at the links of the 9th floor. The
maximum rotation of 0.037 radians occurred at the 1st

occurs at the diagonals and beams of the diagrid building

during the earthquakes and only shear links undergo
plastic deformations. Therefore, after the earthquake,
the main structural elements almost regain the original
shape of the building due to the angular configuration
of the primary structural members in the lateral force
resisting system.
The interstory drift ratio is an important parameter for
structural performance measurement, since it relates to Time (s)
the damage in both structural and nonstructural elements. Fig. 7 Displacement time history of the selected floors subjected
Figure 9 shows the peak interstory drift ratio values of to LA18 earthquake record

1.0
Maximum drift
0.9
Residual drift
0.8
Roof drift ratio (%)

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
LA01 LA02 LA07 LA08 LA09 LA10 LA11 LA12 LA13 LA14 LA17 LA18 LA19 LA20
Earthquake record
Fig. 8 Maximum roof drift ratio and residual roof drift ratio under 14 earthquake records
 No.3 Nasim S. Moghaddasi B. et al.: Seismic analysis of diagrid structural frames with shear-link fuse devices 471

module under the LA20 ground motion.

21 Figure 10(b) shows the hysteresis loops of the side
and middle shear links at the 3rd floor under the LA20
18 ground motion, which have the largest link rotation
LA01
demand among all other links under 14 earthquake
15 LA02 records. The fat hysteresis loops of the shear links
LA07 indicate the large amount of energy dissipated by
LA08
shear links that are distributed along the height of the
Story number

12 LA09
LA10 building.
LA11 The average maximum base shear ratio of the
9 LA12 building is around 0.26. The maximum and minimum
LA13
LA14 base shear ratio of 0.42 and 0.19 occurred under LA12
6
LA17 and LA07, respectively. For high-rise building structures
LA18 with long fundamental periods, higher modes may
3 LA19
LA20 dominate the response of the structure. The pushover
Average analysis is solely based on the fundamental mode and
00 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 hence may not be precise in predicting the behavior of
Peak inter-story drift ratio (%) the building if higher modes also contribute to a large
Fig. 9 Distribution of peak interstory drift ratio under extent. The second and third periods of the diagrid
14 earthquake records building are 0.8 and 0.46 s, respectively, which fall
within the prevalent frequency range of most earthquake
ground motions. Therefore, the prominent effect of
21 higher modes (particularly the 2nd mode) results in
greater base shear for the nonlinear time history analysis
18 compared to nonlinear static analysis.
LA01
15 LA02
LA07 5 Conclusions
LA08
Floor number

12 LA09
LA10 A diagrid structural frame with shear-link fuse
9
LA11 devices is presented herein, which have a favorable
LA12
LA13
ductility and energy dissipation capacity as a seismic
LA14 lateral force resisting system. A diagrid system has
6
LA17 high elastic stiffness due to its triangular configuration
LA18
LA19
and axial action ofthe principal diagonal elements in
3
LA20 the diagrid structure. This is observed in a case study
Average involving both nonlinear static and time history analysis
00 10 20 30 40 of a 21-story steel diagrid building frame.
Peak link rotation (10-3 rad) The nonlinear time history analysis of a 21-story
(a) diagrid system with shear links as fuse devices is
10 performed with an ensemble of 14 earthquake records
scaled to the design basis earthquake (i.e., with 10%
5 probability of exceedance in 50 years) in the Los
Angeles, California region. The findings from the
nonlinear time history analysis verify that satisfactory
Shear force (103 kN)

0
seismic performance can be achieved by the diagrid
frames under strong earthquakes. The diagrid structure
-5 retains the elasticity of the diagonal and beams, and
effectively dissipates energy through a web shear yielding
-10 Left link mechanism associated with the links. In particular, one
Center link appealing feature of the proposed system is its reduced
-15
Right link residual displacement after strong earthquakes. The low
-40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 response values of 0.58% and 0.04% were observed
Link rotation (10-3 rad) for the ensemble averages of maximum drift ratio and
(b) residual drift ratio at the roof level, respectively. The
Fig. 10 (a) Distribution of peak rotation demand of shear links ensemble average of maximum interstory drift ratio
under 14 earthquake records; (b) Hysteresis loops of observed along the height of the diagrid building was
the shear links at the 3rd floor under LA20 1.4%. The small roof residual drifts associated with
the diagrid frame arebelieved to be due to the ‘pull-
472 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING VIBRATION
back’ effect from the inclined diagonal elements, which
remain elastic during earthquakes.
Based on the presented analysis results, it is
concluded that a diagrid framing system with shear links
as fuse devices provides a promising seismic resistant
structural system. Furthermore, during design basis
earthquakes, damage can be confined to the shear links,
which are easy to replace and hence ease of reparability
is another advantage of the system.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the University of
Maryland for providing partial financial support for this
research project. However, the opinions and conclusions
expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.
References
AISC (2005), “Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings,” ANSI/AISC 341-05, Chicago, IL.
ASCE (2010), “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings
and Other Structures,” ASCE/SEI 7-10/ANSI, Reston,
Va.
Hjelmstad KD and Popov EP (1983), “Cyclic Behavior
and Design of Link Beams,” J. Struct. Eng., ASCE,
109(10): 2387–2403.
Kasai K and Popov EP (1986), “General Behavior of WF
Steel Shear Link Beams,” Struct. Eng., ASCE, 112(2):
362–382.
Kim J and Lee YH (2009), “Progressive Collapse
Resisting Capacity of Tube-type Structures,” The
Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 10:
1002/tal.512.
Kim YJ, Jung IY, Ju Y-K, Park SJ and Kim SD (2011),
“Cyclic Behavior of Diagrid Nodes with H-section
Braces,” J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 136(9): 1111–1122.
Leonard J (2007), “Investigation of Shear Lag Effect in
High-rise Buildings with Diagrid System,” M.Sc. Thesis,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Li L, Zhao X and Ke K (2011), “Static Behavior of Planar
Intersecting CFST Connection in Diagrid Structure,”
Frontiers of Architecture and Civil Engineering in
China, 5(3): 355–365.
Mansour N, Shen Y, Christopoulos C and Tremblay
R(2008), “Seismic Design of EBF Steel Frames Using
Replaceable Nonlinear Links,” Proc. 14th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing,
China.
Mazzoni S, McKenna F, Scott MH and Fenves GL
(2009), The Open System for Earthquake Engineering
Simulation (OpenSEES) User Command-Language
Manual, Pacific Earthquake Eng. Research Center, Univ.
Calif., Berkeley, CA, (http://opensees.berkeley.edu).
Vol.12
McKenna FT(1997), “Object-oriented Finite Element
Programming: Frameworks for Analysis, Algorithms
and Parallel Computing,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of
California, Berkeley, CA, United States, 1997.
Menegotto M and Pinto PE (1973), “Method of Analysis
of Cyclically Loaded RC Plane Frames Including
Changes in Geometry and Non-elastic Behavior of
Elements under Normal Force and Bending, Preliminary
Report,” IABSE, Vol. 13, pp. 15–22.
Moon K-S, Connor JJ and Fernandez JE (2007), “Diagrid
Structural Systems for Tall Buildings: Characteristics
and Methodology for Preliminary Design,” The
Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 16:
205–230.
Okazaki T, Arce G, Ryu H-C and Engelhardt MD (2005),
“Experimental Study of Local Buckling, Overstrength,
and Fracture of Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames,”
J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 131(10): 1526–1535.
Okazaki T and Engelhardt MD (2007), “Cyclic Loading
Behavior of EBF Links Constructed of ASTM A992
steel,” J. of Construction Steel Research., 63: 751–765.
Okazaki T, Engelhardt MD, Nakashima M and Suita K
(2006), “Experimental Performance of Link-to-column
Connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames,” J. Struct.
Eng., ASCE, 132(8): 1201–1211.
Rahimian A and Eilon Y (2007), “Something Old,
Something New,” Modern Steel Construction, AISC,
April 2007.
Ramadan T and Ghobarah A (1995), “Analytical
Model for Shear-link Behavior,” J. Struct. Eng., ASCE,
121(11): 1574–1580.
Richards PW (2004), “Cyclic Stability and Capacity
Design of Steel Eccentrically Braced Frames,” Doctoral
dissertation, Univ. of California, San Diego.
Richards PW and Uang C-M (2005), “Effect of Flange
Width Thickness Ratio on Eccentrically Braced Frame
Link Cyclic Rotation Capacity,” J. Struct. Eng., ASCE,
131(10): 1546–1552.
Ricles JM and Popov EP (1987), “Dynamic Analysis
of Seismically Resistant Eccentrically Braced Frames,”
Rep. No.VCBIEERC-87107,Earthquake Engrg. Res.
Ctr., Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
Somerville P, Smith N, Punyamurthula S and Sun J
(1997), “Development of Ground Motion Time Histories
for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project,” SAC/BD-
97/04, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
Taranath B (1997), Steel, Concrete, & Composite Design
of Tall Buildings, McGraw-Hill, Second Edition.
Teng J, Guo W, Rong B and Li Z (2011), “Seismic
Performance Research of High-rise Diagrid Tube-core
Tube Structures,” Advanced Materials Research, 163–
167, 2005–2012.
Zareian F and Medina RA (2010), “A Practical Method
for Proper Modeling of Structural Damping in Inelastic
Plane Structural Systems,” Computers & Structures,
88(1-2): 45–53.