Seismic Response of Diagrid Systems: Ductility Concerns in Low- to Midrise Structures
Publication: Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction
Volume 26, Issue 4
Abstract
Diagrid structures recently have evolved as novel solutions for the design of tall buildings with unique geometrical layouts. The aesthetic value and flexibility in accommodating distinctive geometrical constraints make diagrids an attractive solution for many innovative structural designs. In diagrid structural systems, most often the diagonal bracings act as both primary gravity load resisting and lateral load–resisting elements. Another defining feature associated with this system is its reduced ductility, especially for shear-dominant systems with lower diagonal angles. Typically characterized by less structural redundancy and a nonductile postyield response, the design of diagrid structures in high seismic zones should be treated with caution. There could be a false sense that a structural system which is proven to be efficient for high-rise buildings could safely satisfy the requirements for low- to midrise structures. The increasing demand for free-form geometrical layouts could result in instinctive and incautious selection of these structural systems for low- to midrise buildings because of their effectiveness in high rise structures. However, under high levels of axial compression (typically associated with high seismicity), the diagonal members could be subjected to buckling, and the limited redundancy in the structural configuration significantly could affect the global postyield response of the structural system. Hence, this paper examined a case in which a diagrid structural system was used for the concept design of a multistory commercial structure in a high seismic zone, and the inefficacy associated with the seismic behavior of the system was addressed successfully by adopting two different methodologies, with buckling-resistant braces (BRBs) as the diagonal elements in the first approach and yielding connectors (YCs) as fuse elements in the second approach. Both solutions performed well in terms of improving the postyield response of the system. However, the use of yield connectors could be particularly effective in shear-dominant diagrid systems with lower diagonal angles due to the postyield hardening response in compression demonstrated by the connector elements.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential in nature and may be only provided with restrictions (specifically, detailed drawings and OpenSees models of case study building). The restrictions include written consent from the disclosing party that the receiving party will not make use of, disseminate, disclose, or in any way circulate any confidential information of the disclosing party which is supplied, except as explicitly permitted in writing.
References
Alborzi, M., H. Tahghighi, and A. Azarbakht. 2019. “Numerical comparison on the efficiency of conventional and hybrid buckling-restrained braces for seismic protection of short-to-mid-rise steel buildings.” Int. J. Adv. Struct. Eng. 11 (4): 439–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40091-019-00244-8.
Asadi, E., and H. Adeli. 2018. “Seismic performance factors for low- to mid-rise steel diagrid structural systems.” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 27 (15): e1505. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1505.
Asadi, E., Y. Li, and Y. Heo. 2018. “Seismic performance assessment and loss estimation of steel diagrid structures.” J. Struct. Eng. 144 (10): 04018179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002164.
Avci-Karatas, C., O. C. Celik, and S. O. Eruslu. 2019. “Modeling of buckling restrained braces (BRBs) using full-scale experimental data.” J. Civ. Eng. 23 (10): 4431–4444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-019-2430-y.
Baker, W., C. Besjak, M. Sakisian, P. Lee, and C.-S. Doo. 2010. Proposed methodology to determine seismic performance factors for steel diagrid framed systems. Tokyo: Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat.
Celik, O. C., E. Yuksel, C. Avci-Karatas, A. Bal, T. Gokce, Z. Bago, and G. Koller. 2015. “Component testing of steel-core buckling restrained braces (BRBs) with pinned end connections.” In Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Advances in Steel Structures (ICASS-2015). Lisbon, Portugal: Univ. of Lisbon.
CSI (Computers & Structures, Inc). 2016. CSI analysis reference manual for SAP2000. Berkeley, CA: CSI.
Ebadi Jamkhaneh, M., A. Homaioon Ebrahimi, and M. Shokri Amiri. 2018. “Seismic performance of steel-braced frames with an all-steel buckling restrained brace.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 23 (3): 04018016. https://doi.org/10.1061/%28ASCE%29SC.1943-5576.0000381.
Fahnestock, L. A., J. Ricles, and R. Sause. 2007. “Experimental evaluation of a large-scale buckling-restrained braced frame.” J. Struct. Eng. 133 (9): 1205–1214. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2007)133:9(1205).
Filippou, F. C., E. P. Popov, and V. V. Bertero. 1983. Effects of bond deterioration on hysteretic behavior of reinforced concrete joints. Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Gilmore, A. T., S. Roeslin, A. Q. Ramírez, E. C. Hipolito, and J. O. González. 2017. “Displacement-based preliminary design of diagrid systems.” In Vol. 4 of Proc., 16th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering. Santiago, Chile: Chilean Association on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering.
Gray, M. 2021. “Cast fuse braces: Design and implementation.” In Encyclopedia of earthquake engineering. Berlin: Springer.
Gray, M., C. Christopoulos, and J. Packer. 2014. “Cast steel yielding brace system for concentrically braced frames: Concept development and experimental validations.” J. Struct. Eng. 140 (4):04013095. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000910.
Heshmati, M., A. Khatami, and H. Shakib. 2020. “Seismic performance assessment of tubular diagrid structures with varying angles in tall steel buildings.” Structures 25 (Jun): 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.02.030.
Jia, M., D. Lu, L. Guo, and L. Sun. 2014. “Experimental research and cyclic behavior of buckling-restrained braced composite frame.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 95 (Apr): 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.11.021.
Kersting, R. A., L. A. Fahnestock, and W. A. Lopez. 2015. Seismic design of steel buckling-restrained braced frames—A guide for practicing engineers. Gaithersburg, MD: NIST.
Kim, J., and Y.-H. Lee. 2012. “Seismic performance evaluation of diagrid system buildings.” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 21 (10): 736–749. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.643.
Lee, J., J. Kong, and J. Kim. 2018. “Seismic performance evaluation of steel diagrid buildings.” Int. J. Steel Struct. 18 (3): 1035–1047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0044-8.
Lopez, W. A., and R. Sabelli. 2004. Seismic design of buckling-restrained braced frames. Moraga, CA: Structural Steel Educational Council.
Mazzoni, S., F. McKenna, M. H. Scott, and G. L. Fenves. 2006. OpenSees command language manual. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California.
McKenna, F., G. L. Fenves, and M. H. Scott. 2000. Open system for earthquake engineering simulation. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California.
Milana, G., P. Olmati, K. Gkoumas, and F. Bontempi. 2015. “Ultimate capacity of diagrid systems for tall buildings in nominal configuration and damaged state.” Period. Polytech., Civ. Eng. 59 (3): 381–391. https://doi.org/10.3311/PPci.7795.
Moghaddam, H. A. 2000. “Seismic behaviour of space structures.” Int. J. Space Struct. 15 (2): 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1260/0266351001495026.
Montuori, G. M., E. Mele, G. Brandonisio, and A. De Luca. 2014. “Design criteria for diagrid tall buildings: Stiffness versus strength.” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build. 23 (5): 1294–1314. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.1144.
Moon, K.-S., J. J. Connor, and J. E. Fernandez. 2007. “Diagrid structural systems for tall buildings: Characteristics and methodology for preliminary design.” Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 16 (Aug): 205–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.311.
Palmer, K. D., A. S. Christopulos, D. E. Lehman, and C. W. Roeder. 2014. “Experimental evaluation of cyclically loaded, large-scale, planar and 3-D buckling-restrained braced frames.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 101 (Oct): 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.06.008.
Rofooei, F. R., and A. Seyedkazemi. 2020. “Evaluation of the seismic performance factors for steel diagrid structural systems using FEMA P-695 and ATC-19 procedures.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 18 (Aug): 4873–4910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00876-2.
Sabelli, R., S. A. Mahin, and C. Chang. 2003. “Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces.” Eng. Struct. 25 (Aug): 655–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(02)00175-X.
Sabelli, R., W. Pottebaum, C. Brazier, and W. Lopez. 2005. “Design of a buckling-restrained braced frame utilizing 2005 seismic standards.” Struct. Congr. 2005 (7): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1061/40753(171)181.
Sadeghi, S., and F. R. Rofooei. 2019. “Improving the seismic performance of diagrid structures using buckling restrained braces.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 166 (Mar): 105905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105905.
Seyedkazemi, A., and F. R. Rofooei. 2019. “Comparison of static pushover analysis and IDA-based probabilistic methods in assessing the seismic performance factors of diagrid structures.” Sci. Iran. 28 (1): 124–137. https://doi.org/10.24200/sci.2019.51555.2250.
Sohrabi-Haghighat, M., and P. Ashtari. 2019. “Evaluation of seismic performance factors for high-rise steel structures with diagrid system.” KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 23 (11): 4718–4726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-019-1546-4.
Uriz, P., and S. A. Mahin. 2008. Towards earthquake-resistant design of concentrically braced steel-frame structures. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Wigle, V. R., and L. A. Fahnestock. 2010. “Buckling-restrained braced frame connection performance.” J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (1): 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.07.014.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Sep 10, 2020
Accepted: Apr 9, 2021
Published online: Jul 15, 2021
Published in print: Nov 1, 2021
Discussion open until: Dec 15, 2021
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.