Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

???steel EBF's for single story buildings???

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
     Although I am grateful for your responses, I was interested in 
     applicability of EBF's vs concentricity braced frames such as ordinary 
     chevron bracing. Obviously, while EBF requires more 
     engineering/detailing, they exhibit greater ductility when resisting 
     lateral loads. The question is: is this system useful for lower 
     seismic zones as well as higher ones? Is it economically feasible to 
     use for single story application?
     
     I am also wondering if UBC would like us to apply both chevron brace 
     and EBF requirements when dealing with EBF's and their connections, or 
     only EBF criteria will suffice. I remember in an AISC seminar a few 
     years back they have sometimes made reference to this kind of frame as 
     chevron braces. I plan to contact ICBO on this subject, but value your 
     opinion greatly as well.
     
     Thanks again,
     
     Ghassem Khosrownia.
     
     BTW, please don't change the subject of this message as it helps me 
     track it down in my in-box. Thanks.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Seismic/Non-Seismic design
Author:  James_F_Fulton(--nospam--at)rohmhaas.com at Internet
Date:    9/3/97 1:22 PM


     I am interested in this topic also for one and two story industrial 
     buildings and chemical process structures that could extend as much as 
     5 or 6 stories high.  We typically design these as x-braced frames 
     with simply suppported girder-to-column connections. Most of our 
     designs are in non-seismic areas (Texas), but what about this type of 
     structure for other seismic zones ? What are the drawbacks ? This type 
     of steel construction seems to be much more economical to design and 
     construct than moment frames or even eccentrically braced simple 
     frames.
     
     
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Seismic/Non-Seismic design
Author:  seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org at Internet 
Date:    9/2/97 9:38 PM
     
     
     
On 2 Sep 1997, Ghassem Khosrownia wrote:
>      Besides being fun to design and detail, is it worth (economically) to 
>      incorporate in seismic zone 2, 3, or even 4? Anyone has any
>      experiences to share on single story industrial type application?
     
We did some investigations for a typical commerical structure. 
(2-1/2 stories, length about 100 m and width about 40 m).  Our 
finding was that for this structure, highest seismic zone 
provisions will increase the structural cost by only about 7-8% 
compared to non-seismic design.  However, as you can imagine,
the analysis and design cost (that you incur) will be significantly 
higher for seismic design.  I do not expect the single storey 
industrial building to show significantly different figures.
     
By the way, for highest seismic zone, about 40% of the members 
had to be designed for load combination including seismic, while 
for the remaining, the dead + live load continued to be critical.
     
I will also be interested in knowing of other people's experience 
on this issue.
     
Ravi Sinha
     
     
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
Ravi Sinha, Ph.D.               email: rsinha(--nospam--at)gemini.civil.iitb.ernet.in 
Assistant Professor                    rsinha(--nospam--at)civil.iitb.ernet.in
Department of Civil Engineering        Phone: (91-22)-578-2545 Ext. 7336 
IIT, Powai, Bombay - 400 076, India    Fax: (91-22)-578-3480, 578-3557