Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ir g
y
p
Hybrid Solutions for TalloBuildings
C
H
U
B
T
C
Matthew J. Esther
Farshad Berahman
BSc MSc PhD
S i St
Senior
Structural
t lE
Engineer
i
Atkins Worldwide
t
h
ir g
y
United Kingdom
11,100
Employees
North America
680
Europe
870
p
o2,500
E
Employees
l
Employees
H
U
Employees
Asia Pacific
1,000
Employees
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
Turkey
ABU DHABI
SHARJAH
DUBAI
DUBAI METRO
REGIONAL
F&G
KUWAIT 4
Egypt
406
290
879
186
52
224
BAHRAIN 285
India
QATAR 123
H
U
OMAN 190
p
o
INDIA 204
B
T
Africa
Philippines 75
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
Steve Harrison
Associate Director
Robert D Scott
Associate
H
U
p
o
Ranjith Chandunni
Associate
Min-Hah Chun
Associate
B
T
Matthew J. Esther
Associate
Andrey Danchev
Associate
Farshad Berahman
Senior Engineer
Karsten Veith
Structural Engineer
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
BWTC Bahrain
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Architecture
Civil & Structural Engineering
MEP Engineering, Sustainable Design
Construction Supervision
Environmental Design
Wind Direction
Wind Impact
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
Wind Speed
B ildi F
Building
Form
Existing
Technology
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
H
U
B
T
ir g
y
p
o
t
h
ir g
y
p
Introduction tooHybrid
C
Mega Frames
Mega-Frames
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
Trump
p Tower &C
Hotel,, Dubai
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Lateral displacement of
the core walls uncoupled
t
h
Shear Comparison
ir g
y
250
p
o
200
Heiight
150
H
U
100
B
T
50
Shear
10000 20000
30000 40000
External Load
story shear in walls
Resultant Shear in Truss
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
Adjustments C
&o
Phasing
H
U
B
T
C
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
69.5 mm
H
U
B
T
63 4 mm
63.4
Vertical Movement
64.7 mm
55.3 mm
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Oi i lP
Original
Position
iti
Fi l P
Final
Position
iti With
Withoutt Adj
Adjustment
t
t
Adjustments
Two Parts
p
o
ir g
y
t
h
C
Column Shortening
H
U
Movement of
Transfer Structure
B
T
C
t
h
g
i
r
Column shortening to be overcome
by
y
p
adjusting the length of columns
o
C
incrementally with height
H
Continuous jacking of columns during the
U
constructionB
stage
T
C
Options Recommended
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
C
Building Movement
H
& Monitoring
g
U
B
T
42.8
61.7
ir g
y
104.5
209.70
48.5 57.4
105.9
191.70
p
o
53.1
53.9
107.0
173.70
48.5 56.3
104.7
155.70
42.6
54.5
H
U
37 7
37.7
32.0
B
T
26.6
43.7
36.9
21.2 29.0
14.720.7
49 7
49.7
97.1
134.10
87 3
87.3
116.10
75.7
96.60
63.5
78.60
50.1
60.60
35.4
41.10
Floors
8.512.3 20.7
23.10
C and E
Shrinkage
1.8
2.9
4.7
0.0
0
Total
20
40
60
80
5.10
100
t
h
120
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Trump Tower
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
Icon Hotel,C
, Dubai
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
Key Facts
ir g
y
p
o
42 storey
y wheel
Total built up area
110,000 sqm
H
U
B
T
t
h
160
m
ir g
y
96m
165m
Sky
y Lift
8th level-Mechanical
Floor
H
U
Elevation
B
T
p
o
78m
10.8m
13.2 m
4 3m
4.3m
Plan
Lift cores
Atrium
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Th areas with
The
ith high
hi h shear
h
stresses:
t
1.
2
2.
3.
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
Permanent
Composite Trusses
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
G
Gravity
it Load
L d Path
P th
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
Deformation
has bending
configuration
g
and story drift
increase with
height
H
U
B
T
ir g
y
p
o
Icon Hotel
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
We used high-strength
steels to avoid carrying
load.
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
T1 = 4.3 Sec
T2 = 3.3 Sec
T3 = 3.0 Sec
ir g
y
Geotechnical Study
Liquefaction Analysis
Soil Improvement
Seismic Hazard Study
Wind Tunnel Study
Pile Raft Settlement Analysis
Floor vibration analysis
Connections Detail Design
Long Term Effect (Column Shortening)
Performance Based Seismic Evaluation
t
h
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
I t story
Inter
t
drift
d ift less
l
than
th H/1000
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
ICON HOTEL
MIDAS M
Model
d l
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
ICON HOTEL
Icon Hotel
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
ICON HOTEL
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Lander
Coupling beams
behave nonlinearly
Concrete compression
strain earthquake
0.0016
1992
1992-scaled
scaled
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T
Conclusions
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
e o a ce based des
design
g p
provides
o des valuable
a uab e information
o a o for
o
Performance
the seismic design of geometrically complex structures which
H
U
B
T
t
h
ir g
y
p
o
H
U
B
T