Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lecture #21
L. A. Prieto-Portar - 2008
Outline:
1) Approaches to Analysis.
- Preliminary Analyses
- Intermediate and Final Analysis
2) Assumptions.
- Materials
- Participating Components
- Floor Slabs
- Negligible Stiffnesses
- Negligible Deformations
- Cracking
3) High-Rise Behaviour.
4) Modelling for Approximate Analyses.
- Approximate Representation of Bents
- Approximate Modelling of Slabs
- Modelling for Continuum Analyses
5) Modelling for Accurate Analysis.
- Plane Frames
- Plane Shear Walls
- 3-D Frame and Wall Structures
- P- Effects
- The Assembled Model
6) Reduction Techniques.
- Symmetry and Anti-symmetry
- 2-D Models of Non-twisting Structures
- 2-D Models of Structures That Translate and Twist
- Lumping
- Wide-Column Deep-Beam Analogies.
Preliminary Analysis:
The analyses for early stages of design are used to:
- Compare the performance of alternative proposals for the structure.
- Determine the deflections and major member forces in a chosen structure so as to allow
it to be properly proportioned.
Formation of the model should be rapid and produce results that are dependable
approximations.
The simplifications adopted in making a preliminary model include:
- Approximation of members, such as assuming a simple cantilever to represent a
complex bent.
- Simplification of the loading, such as assuming a uniform load across the height of the
building.
Even with the gross approximations made in simplifying the structure and the
loading, it is generally expected that a preliminary analysis should give results for
deflections and main member forces within 15% of that from an accurate analysis.
A tall building is in essence a vertical cantilever subjected to axial loading by gravity and to
transverse loading by wind and seismic.
The loading starts as gravity upon the slabs (or plates) through tributary areas, and are
transferred horizontally to the vertical columns and walls down to the foundations.
Horizontal loads are applied at each floor level, with a shear force, a moment and a torque.
They have a maximum value at the base of the building.
The resistance of the structure to external moments is provided by the flexure of the vertical
elements and by their axial action acting like the chords of a vertical truss. The trusss
web are the girders, slabs and bracing, that provide the shear connections. The stiffer the
web, the larger the proportion of the external moment carried by axial forces in the vertical
members. In turn, this creates a stiffer and more efficient structure.
The horizontal shear at any level is resisted by shear in the vertical members, and by the
horizontal component of the axial force in the diagonal bracing at that level.
Torsion is also resisted in the vertical members by the horizontal components of the axial force
in any diagonal bracing. Although ignored in the preliminary phase, stairways and service
shafts also help resist shear and warping torque forces.
A buildings resistance to bending and torsion is influenced by the vertical shearing action
between the connected orthogonal bents and walls.
When the FEM software is resident in the companys (or universitys) server, keep the
processing at your computers hard drive. This eliminates the problems of dealing with the
servers firewall, which will slow down, or make impossible, the processing of the building.
2.
Turn off the anti-virus feature (use the small icon on the lower right of the screen) in order
to prevent the anti-virus from checking each output file of the FEM software (eg. ETABS
generates around 150 separate files each time the RUN option is used).
3.
Upgrade the video card, to help the graphical model run faster.
4.
Reduce the size of the mesh by one of the techniques described in this lecture.
5.
Instead of running with the dual screen setup, use a full screen window with only one view.
For example, use only the plan view, and not the 3-D view.
6.
In the view options, uncheck the SHOW EDGES option and use the FILL option.
7.
8.
Reduce the MODES SHAPES in the Dynamic Analysis option to only 6 (instead of heuristic
of choosing 1/3 of the number of stories (for example, a 40-story bldg would use 14 mode
shapes).
A multi-bay rigid frame (left figure) is accurately modeled by the equivalent single-bay rigid frame on
its right.
The criteria for equivalence are that the racking shear rigidities GA, are defined by the column and beam
flexural inertias, the sum of the column inertias Ii, and the overall flexural inertia Is, as defined by the
column sectional areas (where G = E / 2(1+); for concrete =0.2, therefore G = 0.42 E). These
parameters at each level are the same in the equivalent single-bay frame as they are in the multi-bay
frame.
Rigid-frame bents and braced frame bents can also be represented in a very approximate way by an
equivalent single column models seen at left.
In the equivalent column model, the shear area of the analogous column is assigned to provide the
same shear rigidity GA as the racking shear rigidity GA of the bent. The flexural inertia of the
equivalent column is assigned to have the same value as the inertia of the column areas about their
common centroidal axis in the braced or the rigid frame.
The single curvature flexure of the equivalent columns is neglected, since it typically has a minor
influence on the frames overall behavior.
In structures where a shear wall has beams connecting to it in-plane, causing it to interact
vertically and horizontally with another shear wall, the wall can be modeled by an analogous
wide column. This equivalent wide column is placed at the walls centroidal axis, and is
assigned to have the walls inertia and axial area. In addition, it has rigid arms that join the
column to the connecting beams at each framing level. In this model the rotations and the
vertical displacements at the edges of the wall are transferred to the connecting beams.
In the case of non-planar assemblies of shear walls, for example, elevator cores, that have lateral
deflections but not rotation, these can be modeled by a single column (figure at extreme right) located at
the shear center of the section, and assigned to have the principal second moments of area of the core
section.
If the closed box shear walls (figure at center) also rotate, the single column should in addition be
assigned the torsional constant J of the core.
Modeling open core structures that translate horizontally and also rotate require a slightly more complex
solution, such as the two-column representation on the right that gives an approximate solution of all the
bending and torsional properties of the complex assembly.
In-Plane Effects. Slab are usually assumed to act as a rigid diaphragm to distribute the
horizontal loads to the vertical elements, and hold the buildings plan shape as the structure
translates horizontally and rotates. The slab then serves to constrain the horizontal
displacements of the vertical components of each floor to be related to the horizontal two
displacements and rotation of the slab. For the slab at top, the in-plane rigidity of the slab can be
represented at each floor by a horizontal frame of rigid beams joining the vertical elements.
Transverse Bending Effects. For flat plates and shear walls coupled by slabs, the
transverse bending stiffness of the plates and slabs are part of the lateral loadresisting system. This is similar to the function of the girders of a rigid frame, or the
in-plane rigidity of the slabs to hold the plan shape of the building.
In these structures, modeling the bending action of a slab between in-line columns or
walls can be represented by a connecting beam of equivalent flexural stiffness. This
model will result in the correct horizontal deflections, and forces in the vertical
members, but is gives only the concentrated moments and shears applied to the slabs.
Certain reductions in the size or complexity of the model might be acceptable, such
as:
-If the structure and loading are symmetrical, a 3-D analysis of a half-structure model, or
even a 2-D analysis of a fully interactive 2-D model would be acceptable.
- If repetitive regions up the height of a structure can be simplified by a lumping
technique would be acceptable.
Beam element.
Truss element.
Plane Frames.
A plane rigid frame shown here is the most
common model, with both beams and
columns using the same beam FE element.
Shear deformations of the members are
normally neglected except for beams with
span-to-depth ratios of less than 5. The
output includes vertical and horizontal
displacements, and the plane rotations of the
nodes. Also, each members axial force,
shear force and bending moments.
Shear walls, at left, a membrane element model, and at right, the equivalent analogous frame model.
Plane Shear Walls.
Tall and slender shear walls can still be accurately modeled with the techniques already discussed for
the preliminary analysis. However, shear walls with openings, or not slender, are best modeled using the
assembly of plane-stress membrane elements shown in the left figure. The output includes the horizontal
and vertical displacements of the nodes, and the vertical and horizontal direct stresses and shear stresses
at either the corners or the mid-sides of the element.
An alternative is an equivalent beam elements frame, shown at the right, that gives the same result with
only an error of about 2% compared to the membrane elements.
Membrane elements.
Other shear walls, such as the non-rectangular shear walls shown on the left can be modeled
using quadrilateral elements. The mesh can be refined in regions where stress changes are
expected. A common rule in FEM is that elements must be roughly proportioned equally in all
directions. If not, poor convergence will provide unstable solutions.
A special case is shown on the right figure, when shear walls are modeled with membrane
elements, and are connected with in-plane beams. Since membrane elements do not have a degree
of freedom to represent an in-plane rotation of their corners, a beam element connected to a node
of the membrane is in essence effectively connected only by a hinge at that point. A remedy is to
add a fictitious, flexurally rigid, auxiliary beam to the edge wall element. Therefore, the rotation
of the shear wall, as defined by the relative transverse displacements of the ends of the auxiliary
beam, and a moment, are transferred to the external beam.
(a) Open-section shear-wall assembly; (b) partially-enclosed shear wall; (c) non-planar walls connected by beams.
Three-dimensioned assemblies of shear walls, such as shown above, are the most important major
lateral load resisting component of a tall building. The left assembly is a multi-branch open
sectional shape; the middle is a closed section, and the right, is a beam-connected sectional shape.
All the 3-D shear wall shapes shown in the previous slide have in common the principal
actions of the individual walls, which are in-plane shear and flexure, and the principal
interaction of the walls of the assembly is the vertical shear along the joints. Therefore,
the plane stress membrane element is the most suitable choice for modeling 3-D shear
walls as shown in the left and center figures. These elements can be very large; in fact,
story-height and wall-width seem to give acceptably accurate results.
However, plane stress elements alone are not enough for 3-D work because they lack the
transverse stiffness necessary at orthogonal wall connections to allow a stiffness matrix
analysis. A horizontal frame of fictitious, rigid auxiliary beams are added to each nodal
level (left). In-plane walls are connected with auxiliary beams (center) to transfer the
moments. Alternatively, shell elements could be used.
Slide 28 is an alternative model, where the in-plane connected shear walls have their
connecting beams represented by story-height membrane elements with a vertical
shearing stiffness equal to the vertical-displacement stiffness of the represented beam.
Note that auxiliary beams are still used.
P-Delta Effects.
The second-order translational P-Delta effects of gravity loading can be included in a computer
analysis by adding to the first-order 2-D model a fictitious shear column with a negative stiffness
(see figure on left). The shear column is connected to the model by rigid links at the framing
levels. The column is issued a negative shear area to simulate the lateral softening of the structure
due to gravity loading. The column is assumed to be rigid in flexure. An alternative scheme is
shown at right, by using a flexural column with its rotation restrained at the framing levels and
its inertia assigned a negative value. The column is specified to be rigid in shear. The resulting
deflections and member forces in the model then include the P-Delta effects of gravity loading. In
a full 3-D analysis of an asymmetric building, the P-Delta of twisting must be considered. A
similar fictitious negative stiffness column can be used, following the discussion above.
Reduction Techniques
- Symmetry and anti-symmetry
- 2-D non-twisting
- 2-D twisting
- Lumping
- Wide-Column and Deep-Beam Analogies
Extremely complex structures may be so large that processing becomes impracticable. There are
some techniques of simplification, called reduction methods, that are used by structural designers
in order to simplify the model without an appreciable loss of accuracy. Some are discussed here.
A structure that is symmetric in plan about a horizontal axis perpendicular to the axis of
horizontal loading (left figure), behaves anti-symmetrically about the axis of symmetry. In
this case, only the half of the structure, to one side of the axis of symmetry, and subjected to
loads of half value needs to be analyzed. The ends of the cut members are constrained on
the line of symmetry to represent their connection to the omitted anti-symmetrically
behaving other half of the structure. They are constrained against vertical displacements, but
are free to rotate in the vertical plane parallel to the direction of loading. The values of the
results apply anti-symmetrically to the omitted half-structure.
Structures that consist of an orthogonal system of connected bents (as shown in the
figure of the previous slide), which are symmetrically located about the axis of
horizontal loading can be modeled by an extension of the method discussed on the
previous slide.
Again, by taking a half-structure, and observing that bents have negligible stiffness
perpendicular to their plane, the structures shear resistance in the direction of
loading is provided by bents AB and CD, as they displace horizontally in their
planes parallel to the direction of loading. Bents AE and BF are perpendicular to
the loading, and do not displace horizontally in their planes, but intersect vertically
with bents AB and CD along their lines of connection A, B, C and D.
This vertical interaction causes the perpendicular bents to act as flanges to the
parallel bent webs as part of the structures overall flexural action.
Consider the figure in the upper left, representing a structure that is a planasymmetric system of orthogonal bents that are stiff in their planes but have zero
transverse and torsional stiffness. To find an equivalent 2-D model, first select an
arbitrary origin O. Bents AB and CD are parallel to, and at distances x1 and x2 from
the Y-axis, while orthogonal bents AC and BD are parallel to, and at y1 and y2 from
the X-axis. Now form the 2-D model by assembling all the bents in the same plane
with the X-direction bents in one group and the Y-direction bents in the other (figure
on right side). To make the viewed faces of the bents consistent with the location of
the origin as specified above, the bents are displayed looking negatively along the X
and Y axes respectively (that is, A to the left of B in bent AB, and C to the left of A in
bent CA). A more detailed explanation of this complex model will follow in a future
lecture.
Lumping.
Lumping means the combination of several of a structures similar components
(or assemblies of components) into an equivalent single component, in order to
reduce the size of the model for analysis. The resulting forces in the equivalent
component (or assembly) are subsequently distributed to give the forces in the
original components. An example of lateral lumping is shown in the figure below,
for a non-twisting (symmetrical) structure that consists of two shear walls and
three identical rigid frames. The walls can be lumped laterally into a single wall
with twice the inertia of an individual wall, and the frames lumped into a single
frame with member properties three times those of an individual frame. The
lumped wall and frame can then be assembled as a planar model and analyzed
very easily.
(a) Coupled walls with repetitive bents; (b) Equivalent lumped beam model; (c) equivalent membrane element
reduced model.
Lumping is typically used for the vertical lumping of tall multistory coupled-wall structures,
provided the story heights and the beam sizes are repetitive (as shown above). These structures can
be simplified by vertically combining groups of three or five beams into single beams placed at the
middle beam location, and assigning to them the lumped properties of inertia and shear area. The
bottom one or two beams and the top one or two beams are not touched because of their greater
importance. When lumping beams that connect shear walls, the sectional properties of the
membrane elements, or the analogous wide columns, representing the walls would be the same in
the lumped model as in the non-lumped model, because of the predominantly single-curvature
behavior of the walls.
In rigid-frame buildings with deep beams (left figure, for example, the World Trade Center
towers) the stiffening effect of the deep beam depth on the columns can be represented by rigid
vertical arms (center figure), and applied to the model through a rigid-end member option.
Alternatively, the rigid-end column can be replaced in the model by a uniform full-height column
between the beam axes (right figure) with modified stiffness properties to allow for the deep
beam effect.
A frame that combines both wide columns and deep beams (left figure) such as a reinforced concrete
frame tube (eg. Petronas Towers), or in steel (eg. Taipei 101), can be represented either by an analogous
wide-column deep-beam frame (center figure) or more simply, by a frame of equivalent full length
beams and columns with appropriately increased stiffness (right figure).
References.
1) Tall Building Structures, Smith B.S. and Coull A., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York,
1991.
2) ETABS 3-D Analysis of Building systems, Computer and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, CA,
2001.
3) Stafford Smith B., Cruvellier M., Planar Modeling Techniques for Asymmetric Building
Systems, Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers, part 2, 89, March 1990.
4) Macleod I.A., Structural Analysis of Wall Systems, Structural Engineer 55, 1977.
Wild Carnations.