Response of Semirigid Steel Frames to Cyclic and Earthquake Loads
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 124, Issue 8
Abstract
This paper presents the experimental results from a large research project dealing with the seismic behavior of semirigid steel frames. The investigation focuses on the performance of steel frames with semirigid connections comprised of top, seat, and web angles in comparison with fully rigid alternatives. The experimental program includes monotonic, cyclic, and pseudodynamic tests. Results from eight tests on two-story frames are discussed, and the effects of connection stiffness and capacity on frame response are assessed. In addition, a comparison between the behavior of frames with bolted semirigid and fully welded rigid connections is carried out under realistic seismic loading conditions. It is shown that the type of the bolted connection used in this study exhibits sufficient ductility and stable hysteretic behavior and that connection yielding is a viable alternative to the weak-beam strong-column design. It is also indicated that with appropriate design and careful consideration of the dynamic characteristics of semirigid frames, adequate response to earthquake loads may be achieved, even in areas of high seismicity.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bernuzzi, C., Zandonini, R., and Zanon, P. (1992). “Semirigid steel connections under cyclic loads.”Proc., of the first world conference on constructional steel design, 375–384.
2.
Bertero, V. V., Anderson, J. C., and Krawinkler, H. (1994). “Performance of steel building structures during the Northridge earthquake.”Rep. No. UCB/EERC-94/04, Envir. Engrg. Res. Council, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
3.
Bjorhovde, R., Colson, A., and Brozetti, J.(1990). “Classification system for beam-to-column connections.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 116, 3059–3076.
4.
Danesh-Ashtiani, F. A. (1996). “Seismic performance of steel frames with semi-rigid connections,” PhD thesis, Imperial College of Science, Technol. and Medicine, Univ. of London, London, England.
5.
Elnashai, A. S., Danesh-Ashtiani, F., and Elghazouli, A. Y. (1996). “Experimental and analytical investigation into the seismic behaviour of semi-rigid steel frames.”Res. Rep. No. ESEE 96/7, Engrg. Seismology and Earthquake Engrg. Sec., Imperial College.
6.
Elnashai, A. S., and Elghazouli, A. Y. (1994). “Seismic behaviour of semi-rigid steel frames.”J. Constr. Steel Res., 29(1–3), 149–174.
7.
Eurocode 3. (1992). “Design of steel structures. Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings.” Commission of Eur. Communities, Eur. Committee for Standardisation, Brussels, Belgium.
8.
Eurocode 8. (1994). “Structures in seismic regions. Part 1.1: General rules and rules for buildings.” Commission of Eur. Communities, Eur. Committee for Standardisation, Brussels, Belgium.
9.
“Hyogen-ken Nanbu earthquake preliminary reconnaissance report.” (1994). EERI Rep. No. 95-04, Earthquake Engrg. Res. Inst., 116.
10.
Kishi, N., Chen, W. F., Matsouka, K. G., and Nomachi, S. G. (1988). “Moment-rotation relation of top and seat angle with double web angle connections.”Connections in steel structures, behaviour strength and design, Bjorhovde et al., eds., Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, England, 121–134.
11.
Leon, R. T., and Shin, K. J. (1995). “Performance of semi-rigid frames, restructuring: America and beyond.”Proc., Struct. Congr. XIII, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 1020–1035.
12.
Load and resistance factor design specification for structural steel buildings. (1993). Am. Inst. of Steel Constr., Chicago, Ill.
13.
Nader, M. N., and Astenah, A. (1992). “Seismic behavior and design of semi-rigid steel frames.”Rep. No. UCB/EERC-92/06, Envir. Engrg. Res. Council, Univ. of California, Berkleley, Calif.
14.
NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings. (1994). Nat. Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, Building Seismic Safety Council, Washington D.C.
15.
Nethercot, D. A., and Zandonini, R. (1989). “Methods of prediction of joint behaviour: Beam-to-column connections. Structural connections, stability and strength, R. Narayanan, ed., Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, England, 23–62.
16.
Popov, E. P., Tsai, K. C., and Engelhardt, M. D.(1989). “On seismic steel joints and connections.”Engrg. Struct., 11(3), 148–162.
17.
Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. (1992). Am. Inst. of Steel Constr., Chicago, Ill.
18.
Takanashi, K., Elnashai, A. S., Elghazouli, A. Y., and Ohi, K. (1993). “Earthquake behaviour of steel and composite frames.”Res. Rep. No. ESEE 93/3, Joint report by Inst. of Industrial Sci., Tokyo, Japan and Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Imperial College, Univ. of London, London, England.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 124 • Issue 8 • August 1998
Pages: 857 - 867
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Aug 1, 1998
Published in print: Aug 1998
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.