Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 2

allowable stress design Related Abstracts

2 Seismic Vulnerability of Structures Designed in Accordance with the Allowable Stress Design and Load Resistant Factor Design Methods

Authors: Mohammadreza Vafaei, Sophia C. Alih, Amirali Moradi

Abstract:

The method selected for the design of structures not only can affect their seismic vulnerability but also can affect their construction cost. For the design of steel structures, two distinct methods have been introduced by existing codes, namely allowable stress design (ASD) and load resistant factor design (LRFD). This study investigates the effect of using the aforementioned design methods on the seismic vulnerability and construction cost of steel structures. Specifically, a 20-story building equipped with special moment resisting frame and an eccentrically braced system was selected for this study. The building was designed for three different intensities of peak ground acceleration including 0.2 g, 0.25 g, and 0.3 g using the ASD and LRFD methods. The required sizes of beams, columns, and braces were obtained using response spectrum analysis. Then, the designed frames were subjected to nine natural earthquake records which were scaled to the designed response spectrum. For each frame, the base shear, story shears, and inter-story drifts were calculated and then were compared. Results indicated that the LRFD method led to a more economical design for the frames. In addition, the LRFD method resulted in lower base shears and larger inter-story drifts when compared with the ASD method. It was concluded that the application of the LRFD method not only reduced the weights of structural elements but also provided a higher safety margin against seismic actions when compared with the ASD method.

Keywords: Steel structures, Seismic Vulnerability, nonlinear time history analysis, allowable stress design, load resistant factor design

Procedia PDF Downloads 147
1 Comparison of Allowable Stress Method and Time History Response Analysis for Seismic Design of Buildings

Authors: Naohiro Nakamura, Sayuri Inoue, Tsubasa Hamada

Abstract:

The seismic design method of buildings is classified into two types: static design and dynamic design. The static design is a design method that exerts static force as seismic force and is a relatively simple design method created based on the experience of seismic motion in the past 100 years. At present, static design is used for most of the Japanese buildings. Dynamic design mainly refers to the time history response analysis. It is a comparatively difficult design method that input the earthquake motion assumed in the building model and examine the response. Currently, it is only used for skyscrapers and specific buildings. In the present design standard in Japan, it is good to use either the design method of the static design and the dynamic design in the medium and high-rise buildings. However, when actually designing middle and high-rise buildings by two kinds of design methods, the relatively simple static design method satisfies the criteria, but in the case of a little difficult dynamic design method, the criterion isn't often satisfied. This is because the dynamic design method was built with the intention of designing super high-rise buildings. In short, higher safety is required as compared with general buildings, and criteria become stricter. The authors consider applying the dynamic design method to general buildings designed by the static design method so far. The reason is that application of the dynamic design method is reasonable for buildings that are out of the conventional standard structural form such as emphasizing design. For the purpose, it is important to compare the design results when the criteria of both design methods are arranged side by side. In this study, we performed time history response analysis to medium-rise buildings that were actually designed with allowable stress method. Quantitative comparison between static design and dynamic design was conducted, and characteristics of both design methods were examined.

Keywords: Buildings, Seismic Design, allowable stress design, time history response analysis, Japanese seismic code

Procedia PDF Downloads 34