Experimental evaluation of composite and non‐composite columns and braces in special concentrically braced frames

IF 1.8 3区工程技术 Q3 CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings Pub Date : 2022-12-29 DOI:10.1002/tal.2002

S. Ebrahimi, S. R. Mirghaderi, S. M. Zahrai

{"title":"Experimental evaluation of composite and non‐composite columns and braces in special concentrically braced frames","authors":"S. Ebrahimi, S. R. Mirghaderi, S. M. Zahrai","doi":"10.1002/tal.2002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hollow structural section (HSS) and concrete‐filled tube (CFT) cross‐sections have been widely employed in the columns and braces of special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs). Square‐HSS cross‐section widely used in multistory frames is filled with concrete and converted to square‐CFT cross‐section to enhance the behavior of this cross‐section. However, some investigations indicated that circular‐HSS cross‐section filled with concrete (circular‐CFT) showed better behavior in comparison with square‐CFT cross‐section due to more uniform and larger concrete confinement in circular‐CFT cross‐section. The current study was experimentally undertaken to evaluate (1) the seismic performance and the global and local hysteresis responses of HSS and CFT members with various cross‐section shapes from initial elastic range to collapse in the system level of multistory SCBFs, (2) the behavioral differences between square cross‐section and circular cross‐section, and (3) the behavioral differences between HSS cross‐sections and CFT cross‐sections employed in the columns and braces of SCBFs. Four full‐scale one‐bay, two‐story SCBFs with four various cross‐sections, namely, square‐HSS, circular‐HSS, square‐CFT, and circular‐CFT, for columns and braces were subjected to cyclic lateral loading. Evaluating base shear–roof drift hysteretic loops of SCBF specimens demonstrated that SCBF specimens with CFT columns and braces (CFT‐SCBFs) experienced respectively around 107%, 58%, 28%, and 152% higher stiffness, post‐yielding and post‐buckling strengths, ductility, and energy dissipation capacity than SCBF specimens with HSS columns and braces (HSS‐SCBF). In addition, the experimental observations indicated that CFT braces experienced local buckling initiation, crack initiation, and fracture at respectively 2.22, 2.35, and 2.32 times of roof drifts of those exhibited by HSS braces. Moreover, assessing braces with various cross‐sections indicated that CFT braces showed an increase in compression strength, post‐buckling strength, compression axial deformation, and out‐of‐plane buckling approximately by 83%, 152%, 127%, and 100%, respectively, in comparison with HSS braces. Finally, square‐HSS/CFT braces sustained rupture propagation better than circular‐HSS/CFT braces.","PeriodicalId":49470,"journal":{"name":"Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.2002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Hollow structural section (HSS) and concrete‐filled tube (CFT) cross‐sections have been widely employed in the columns and braces of special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs). Square‐HSS cross‐section widely used in multistory frames is filled with concrete and converted to square‐CFT cross‐section to enhance the behavior of this cross‐section. However, some investigations indicated that circular‐HSS cross‐section filled with concrete (circular‐CFT) showed better behavior in comparison with square‐CFT cross‐section due to more uniform and larger concrete confinement in circular‐CFT cross‐section. The current study was experimentally undertaken to evaluate (1) the seismic performance and the global and local hysteresis responses of HSS and CFT members with various cross‐section shapes from initial elastic range to collapse in the system level of multistory SCBFs, (2) the behavioral differences between square cross‐section and circular cross‐section, and (3) the behavioral differences between HSS cross‐sections and CFT cross‐sections employed in the columns and braces of SCBFs. Four full‐scale one‐bay, two‐story SCBFs with four various cross‐sections, namely, square‐HSS, circular‐HSS, square‐CFT, and circular‐CFT, for columns and braces were subjected to cyclic lateral loading. Evaluating base shear–roof drift hysteretic loops of SCBF specimens demonstrated that SCBF specimens with CFT columns and braces (CFT‐SCBFs) experienced respectively around 107%, 58%, 28%, and 152% higher stiffness, post‐yielding and post‐buckling strengths, ductility, and energy dissipation capacity than SCBF specimens with HSS columns and braces (HSS‐SCBF). In addition, the experimental observations indicated that CFT braces experienced local buckling initiation, crack initiation, and fracture at respectively 2.22, 2.35, and 2.32 times of roof drifts of those exhibited by HSS braces. Moreover, assessing braces with various cross‐sections indicated that CFT braces showed an increase in compression strength, post‐buckling strength, compression axial deformation, and out‐of‐plane buckling approximately by 83%, 152%, 127%, and 100%, respectively, in comparison with HSS braces. Finally, square‐HSS/CFT braces sustained rupture propagation better than circular‐HSS/CFT braces.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

特殊同心支撑框架中复合和非复合柱和支撑的试验评估

空心结构截面（HSS）和混凝土填充管（CFT）截面已广泛用于特殊同心支撑框架（SCBF）的柱和支撑。在多层框架中广泛使用的方形HSS横截面用混凝土填充，并转换为方形CFT横截面，以增强该横截面的性能。然而，一些调查表明，与方形混凝土截面相比，填充混凝土的圆形高速钢截面（圆形混凝土截面）表现出更好的性能，因为圆形混凝土截面中的混凝土约束更均匀、更大。目前的研究是通过实验来评估（1）在多层SCBF的系统水平上，从初始弹性范围到倒塌，具有不同截面形状的HSS和CFT构件的抗震性能以及全局和局部滞后响应；（2）方形截面和圆形截面之间的行为差异，以及（3）SCBF的柱和支撑中使用的HSS横截面和CFT横截面之间的行为差异。四个全尺寸单开间双层SCBF，具有四个不同的横截面，即方形HSS、圆形HSS、方形CFT和圆形CFT，用于柱和支撑，承受循环横向荷载。评估SCBF试件的基底剪切-屋顶漂移滞回环表明，具有CFT柱和支撑（CFT-SCBF）的SCBF试品的刚度、后屈服和后屈曲强度、延展性和能量耗散能力分别比具有HSS柱和支撑的SCBF试样高107%、58%、28%和152%。此外，实验观察表明，CFT支架经历了局部屈曲萌生、裂纹萌生和断裂，分别是HSS支架的2.22倍、2.35倍和2.32倍。此外，评估具有不同横截面的支架表明，与HSS支架相比，CFT支架的压缩强度、屈曲后强度、压缩轴向变形和平面外屈曲分别增加了约83%、152%、127%和100%。最后，方形-HSS/CFT支架比圆形-HSS/CPT支架更好地承受断裂扩展。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 工程技术-工程：土木

CiteScore

5.30

自引率

4.20%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings provides structural engineers and contractors with a detailed written presentation of innovative structural engineering and construction practices for tall and special buildings. It also presents applied research on new materials or analysis methods that can directly benefit structural engineers involved in the design of tall and special buildings. The editor''s policy is to maintain a reasonable balance between papers from design engineers and from research workers so that the Journal will be useful to both groups. The problems in this field and their solutions are international in character and require a knowledge of several traditional disciplines and the Journal will reflect this. The main subject of the Journal is the structural design and construction of tall and special buildings. The basic definition of a tall building, in the context of the Journal audience, is a structure that is equal to or greater than 50 meters (165 feet) in height, or 14 stories or greater. A special building is one with unique architectural or structural characteristics. However, manuscripts dealing with chimneys, water towers, silos, cooling towers, and pools will generally not be considered for review. The journal will present papers on new innovative structural systems, materials and methods of analysis.