TB Lecture10 Braced Frame Structures
TB Lecture10 Braced Frame Structures
RHU-CIVE519
Dr. Zaher Abou Saleh
Bracing a structural frame is one of the most effective ways of
resisting horizontal loads. Bracing joins the columns with the
girders and beams. This diagonal tie system transforms a tall
building into an equivalent vertical cantilevered truss system. The
braces and the girders act as the web of the vertical cantilever truss,
whilst the columns act as the chords.
A fully triangulated brace such as (b) means that the girders do not have to carry lateral loads, and
the floor framing can be light, efficient and repetitive throughout the height of the building.
Non-concentric (also known as eccentric) braces are ideal for seismic areas, because they provide
ductile behavior. Under normal lateral loads the brace is elastic, and reduced the building drift;
under overload the short link (f, g, k and l) in the beam between the brace connection and the
column becomes a fuse and intentionally deforms plastically in shear.
These one-story high K-braces are being used to stiffen the inner bents in a new office building.
Several examples of single and multi-story bracing at the 23-story Memorial Sloan-Kettering Hospital,
New York. A/E design by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM), Chicago, NY, and Zimmer Gunsul
Frasca (ZGF), Portland, OR.
C
T C
The path of horizontal shear through braced web members is shown above. In the single diagonal
shown in (a) the brace is in axial compression (which shortens), thus placing the beams in tension
(which lengthen), thus giving rise to a shear deformation of the bent. In the double diagonal (b) the
forces in the braces at the joints are in equilibrium, thus relieving the girder of lateral loads. In the
K-brace (c) half of each girder is in compression and the other half in tension. The knee-brace in (d)
has placed the end parts of the girder in compression and tension, resulting in a double curvature
bending. Reversing the direction of the lateral load will reverse the stress in all these bents.
C C C
diagonals not
connected.
The path of gravity loading as the compressive forces shorten the vertical members down through a
bent is shown above. As the columns in (a) and (b) shorten, the single and double diagonals are
subjected to compression. At (c), where the diagonals are not connected, the end of the girder is not
stiffly restrained by the columns bending rigidity. Therefore, the girder can not provide the
horizontal restraint that the diagonals need to develop a force. As a consequence, the diagonals will
not attract significant gravity load forces. In the K-brace at (d) the vertical restraint from the
flexural stiffness of the beam is not large. As in case (c), the diagonals experience only negligible
gravity load forces.
(a) Flexural deflection; (b) shear deflection; (c) Combined deflection.
Under lateral loads, a braced tall building behaves like a vertical cantilever truss. The columns are the
chords, that carry the external load moment, in tension on the windward side and in compression on
the lee side. The braces and girders serve as web members, to carry the horizontal shear. The chord
columns cause the structure to have a flexural deflection (a), with zero slope at the bottom and
maximum at top. The web member deformations cause a shear deflection (b) with maximum at the
bottom and zero at the top. The sum of these two deflections is shown in (c). The actual shape will
depend on the relative magnitudes of these competing forces.
For common single bay braced bents, the lateral loads cause a maximum tension at the base of the
windward column of the braced bay. The more slender the bay, the larger is the tensile force. This
tension is partly or wholly offset by the dead load of the building. For buildings with a height-to-
width ratio greater than about 10, the tensile (uplift) forces may be too large to be offset by the dead
load. When designing a multi-bay bent building, the placement of the bracing in a staggered
arrangement will provide much smaller column axial loads caused by the lateral loading.
Methods of Hand-analysis
Most structural engineers place complete reliance on computer software to obtain the forces and
deflections of a structure. The software of choice is usually a frame analysis program (for example,
ETABS, ROBOT, STAAT, TEKLA, etc.). Experienced engineers however, aspire to a higher and
intuitive understanding of their structures behavior. For those few, a knowledge of the methods
developed for hand calculations is essential to confirm the correctness of their computer models and
their softwares beautifully colored output.
Member force analysis.
An analysis of the forces in a statically determinate triangulated braced bent can be performed
through the method of sections. In the figure above, the single diagonal braced panel is subjected to
the external shear force Qi on the left, at story i. Also, it is subjected to external moments Mi and Mi-1
at floor levels i and i-1 respectively. To preserve simplicity for the hand calculation, the frame is
assumed to be pin jointed, as shown, so that the members carry axial loads only. The forces in the
members can now be found from equilibrium conditions of the free body above the section X-X.
In more complex braced bents, such as the story-height knee-braced bent shown above the analysis is
still simple,
Drift analysis.
The contribution to the total drift comes from two components: the axial deformation of the
columns contribute to the flexural mode, and the deformation of the diagonals and girders
contribute to the shear mode. In low rise buildings, the shear mode displacements are dominant,
whereas in high rise buildings the higher axial forces on the columns cause the flexural mode to be
dominant. For example, in a panel with a single diagonal brace, and a building height-to-width
ratio of 8 (for example, the WTC was 1456/209 = 7), the total drift may be 70% due to flexure and
30% due to shear.
The inter-story drift (lateral drift from one story to the next) is often the limiting drift criterion. In a
braced structure, inter-story drift is largest at the top of the building, because it is strongly
influenced by the flexural component, which may contribute 95% of the top story drift. The great
advantage of hand calculating the inter-story drift is that it permits the recognition of which
individual members may need to be increased in size to reduce the total drift, or the inter-story
drift.
The virtual work drift analysis is simply a method of introducing a virtual or dummy horizontal
load at each level. The resulting unit drift is used as a factor to multiply the actual horizontal
loads. The formula for the horizontal deflection at any level is,
The first summation refers to all the members subjected to axial loading, and the second summation
refers to only those members subjected to bending.
Figure (a) at left is used to find the resulting forces and moments at each level N due to the horizontal
load. A force analysis is performed to determine the axial load Pj in each member j, and the bending
moment Mxj at point x. The second step is to then subject the structure to a unit imaginary or
dummy horizontal load at each level of interest, N in this case (figure b) whose drift is required,
yielding the axial force pjN and moment mjN at section x. The virtual work method is exact (closed
form) and can be easily tabulated.
In lieu of the virtual work method an approximate drift analysis can be performed using the moment-
area method to obtain the flexural drift component, and apply a shear deflection formula to obtain
the shear drift component. A detailed member force analysis is not required; only the external
moment and total shear force at each level are required. Figure (a) shows a simplified braced frame
15-story building, under wind loading. In figure (b) is the external load moment diagram, and (c) is
the M/EI diagram. An example of how to use this method follows.
In the approximate analysis, the second moment of inertia of area I of the column sectional areas
about their common centroid is calculated; for the lower region of the braced bent, these are,
An example of drift calculations for a braced
frame 15-story building.
3. Add the story drifts due to shear up to stories 5, 10 and 15 and record in column 4. The total shear drift at floor
5,
5 = 0.0125 + 0.0117 + 0.0109 + 0.0100 + 0.0091 = 0.054 ft
Finally, the total drift is the sum of the flexural and shear drifts at that level. At the top, story 15,
15 = 15f + 15s = 0.380 + 0.126 = 0.506 ft (or 0.506/150 = 1/300 which is not acceptable)
An ETABS analysis yields a 15 = 0.477 ft, or a difference of only 6% with respect to the hand calculation.
The figure at the above left, shows the relative contributions of the columns, diagonals and girders deformations
to the drift of the 15 story building. The diagonal braces have a large influence in the lower levels, and the column
axial deformations tend to dominate the drift at the higher levels, and dominate the total drift curve. The figure
above right, shows the relative contribution of the columns, diagonal braces and the girders to the story drifts. In
the upper part of the structure, the axial deformations of the columns dominate the story drifts even more than
they do the total drift.
The Mercantile Tower in Saint Louis, Missouri, is
a 35 story building using multi-story K-bracing.
The gravity loads are shared between the core and the outer
frame. In the outer frame, lateral loads are transferred from the
minor columns to the mast columns via the diagonals. At the
base of the tower, the entire shear is transferred back to the core
and down into the foundation. The moment from wind is carried
mainly by the mast columns and the legs in the faces normal to
the wind, and partly by the core.
The John Hancock Building in Chicago is 100 stories in
height, 1,127 feet tall, and finished in 1970. It combines
two major structural concepts: the tube and bracing.
The large growth of urban densities in the 1960s and 1970s encouraged the renaissance
in skyscraper construction across the US. One of the most renowned engineers of that
time was Dr. Khan, who combined innovative engineering with an ability to create
collaboratively. Dr. Khan received his BS in civil engineering from the University of
Dacca, Bangladesh. He won a Fullbright Scholarship to study at the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he earned two master degrees and a doctorate in
structural engineering. He joined the Chicago-based firm of Skidmore, Owings and
Merrill (SOM) and rose to the position of Chief Engineer. With SOM, he recognized
that the then-current high-rise structural systems didnt address the scale of modern
needs. He therefore developed a number of innovative concepts that made skyscrapers
more affordable, such as (1) the shear-wall frame interaction system, (2) the frame-tube
structure, (3) the tube-in-the-tube structure, and (4) the concept behind the John
Hancock Center, the trussed-tube structure. He worked closely with SOMs Chief Design
Architect, Bruce J. Graham, to create the graceful form of the Hancock Center. After
the Hancock Tower, Dr. Khan served as the structural engineer for the Sears Tower,
finished in 1974. The central design features of the Hancock Tower are that the steel
columns and spandrel beams are concentrated at the perimeter. Five diagonal braces
(X-bracing) on the exterior walls provide both structural and aesthetic functions. The
braces are connected to the exterior columns. This design resulted in a savings of 50%
of the structural steel compared to traditional framed structures. The tower tapers
towards the top from a ground plan of 40,000 sf, to only 18,000 sf at the summit. This
taper assists in providing stability to the tower. The towers 384,000 kip weight sits upon
drilled shafts that extend 191 feet deep into bedrock; probably one of Chicagos deepest
foundations. The tower has 100-stories, with a height of 1,127 feet, but measures 1,476
feet at the top of the antenna. It is a mixed-use building with residential apartments,
offices, a hotel, restaurants, an ice rink and its own post office.
The Hearst Tower in New York, 2001.