You are on page 1of 15

A simple mathematical model for approximate analysis of tall buildings

Reza Rahgozar
a,
*
, Ali Reza Ahmadi
b
, Yasser Shari
c,
*
a
Civil Engineering Department, University of Kerman, Kerman, P.O. Box 76169-133, Iran
b
Civil and Mechanical Engineering, International Center of High Technology, Mahan, P.O. Box 76315-117, Iran
c
Civil Engineering Department, University of Rafsanjan, Iran
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 27 July 2008
Received in revised form 2 November 2009
Accepted 6 November 2009
Available online 15 November 2009
Keywords:
Tall buildings
Frame tube
Shear core
Belt truss
Shear lag
a b s t r a c t
The focus of this article is to present a new and simple mathematical model that may be
used to determine the optimum location of a belt truss reinforcing system on tall buildings
such that the displacements due to lateral loadings would generate the least amounts of
stress and strain in buildings structural members. The effect of belt truss and shear core
on framed tube is modeled as a concentrated moment applied at belt truss location, this
moment acts in a direction opposite to rotation created by lateral loads. The axial deforma-
tion functions for ange and web of the frames are considered to be cubic and quadratic
functions respectively; developing their stress relations and minimizing the total potential
energy of the structure with respect to the lateral deection, rotation of the plane section,
and unknown coefcients of shear lag, the mathematical model is developed. The proposed
model shows a good understanding of structural behavior; easy to use, yet reasonably
accurate and suitable for quick evaluations during the preliminary design stage which
requires less time. Numerical examples are given to demonstrate the ease of application
and accuracy of the proposed modeled.
2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In structures built at the beginning of 20th century, structural members were assumed to carry primarily the gravity
loads. Today, due to advancements in structural designs/systems and high-strength materials, building weight is greatly re-
duced and slenderness has increased, which has necessitated the consideration of lateral loads such as wind and earthquake
in the design process. Lateral forces resulting from wind and seismic activities are now dominant in design considerations.
Lateral displacement of such buildings must be strictly controlled, not only for occupants comfort, and safety, but also to
control secondary structural effects. Currently, there are many structural systems such as rigid frame, braced frame and
shear-walled frame, frame-tube, braced-tube, bundled-tube and outrigger systems that can be used to enhance the lateral
resistance in tall buildings [1].
In contrast to vertical loading, lateral load effects on a building increase exponentially with increase in its height. During
the last four decades engineers have developed several new framing schemes for tall buildings in order to minimize the
material used. In general, frame tube structures are widely accepted as an economical system in high rise buildings over
a wide range of building heights [119]. In its basic form, the system consists of closely spaced exterior columns along
the periphery interconnected by deep spandrel beams at each oor. This produces a system of rigidly connected jointed
orthogonal frame panels forming a rectangular tube which acts as a cantilevered hollow box according to the classical beam
theory (Fig. 1). The overturning moment of lateral loads is resisted by axial stresses in the columns of the four framed panels,
whereas the shearing forces generated by the lateral loads are resisted by in-plane bending of beams and columns of two
0307-904X/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apm.2009.11.009
* Corresponding authors. Tel./fax: +98 341 3220054.
E-mail addresses: rahgozar@mail.uk.ac.ir (R. Rahgozar), iran.mahan@gmail.com (A.R. Ahmadi), yasser_shari@yahoo.com (Y. Shari).
Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Mathematical Modelling
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ apm
side frames. If the frame members are very rigid, then axial stresses in columns generated by the overturning moment may
be calculated using the common assumption as plane sections remain plane. Flexural and shear exibilities of frame mem-
bers, complicate the basic beam bending action of the framed tube cause of the shear lag phenomenon which has the effect
of increasing axial stress in corner columns and decreasing the axial stress in the inner columns while reducing lateral stiff-
ness of the structure.
A number of simplied analysis methods have been developed. Khan and Amin [2] suggested that for very preliminary
design purposes, the shear lag effects may be approximated by treating the framed tube structure as a pair of equivalent
channels each with an effective ange width of not more than half the width of the web panel or more than 10% of the build-
ing height. Chan et al. [3] proposed to evaluate shear lag effects in cantilevered structures with solid shear walls as web pan-
els and rigidly jointed beam-column frames as ange panels by assuming the distribution of axial displacements across the
width of ange panels to be of either parabolic or hyperbolic cosine shape. Coull and Bose [4] and Coull and Ahmed [5] devel-
oped an orthotropic membrane analogy of transforming the framework panels into equivalent orthotropic membranes each
with elastic properties so chosen to represent the axial and shear behavior of the actual framework. Khan and Stafford Smith
[6] have also developed an orthotropic membrane analogy for simplied analysis of framework panels by using nite ele-
ment analysis to determine the equivalent elastic properties of the membranes. Subsequently, Ha et al. (1987) further devel-
oped the orthotropic membrane analogy to include shear deformation of frame members and deformation of beam-column
joints in the derivation of equivalent elastic properties. Their membrane analogy is more rened than others and hence it is
more accurate.
As an innovative and efcient structural system, the outrigger system comprises of a central core, including either braced
frames or shear walls, with horizontal outrigger trusses or girders connecting the core to external columns as shown in
Figs. 2 and 3. Furthermore, in most cases, external columns are interconnected by an exterior belt girder. The outriggers
and belt girder should be at least one and often two stories deep to realize adequate stiffness. Thus, they are generally posi-
tioned at plant levels to reduce the obstruction they create. Thus the 42-storey-high, First Wisconsin Center, with its steel
structure (Fig. 4) in Milwaukee, the 88 storey-high Jin Mao Building with its composite structure in Shanghai, and the tallest
building in the world, the 101-storey-high Taipei building with its composite structure are excellent examples of this system
[8].
When a tall building is subjected to lateral forces, tie-down action of the belt truss restrains bending of the shear core by
introducing a point of inection in its deection curve. This reversal in curvature reduces the lateral movement at the top.
The belt trusses function as horizontal fascia stiffeners and engage the exterior columns, which are not directly connected to
the outrigger belt truss. If a building is to have one or more oors devoted to mechanical equipment, rather than lease space,
large belt or outrigger trusses can be placed in the perimeter, one storey in height [1,9].
In this paper a simple mathematical model for calculation of stresses in columns of combined framed tube, shear core,
and belt truss system is presented. The belt truss and shear core are considered as a bending spring with constant rotational
stiffness which acts as concentrated moment at its positioned level (Fig. 5). Stress distributions in ange-frame and
Fig. 1. Orthotropic membrane tube and distribution of axial stresses in framed tube.
2438 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
web-frame systems are assumed to be cubic and quadratic functions respectively as shown in Fig. 1. Here total potential en-
ergy minimized to derive equations that predict structural deformation. It can be noted that for a given system the magni-
tude of benecial effect of tying down the exterior columns to the core is a function of two distinct characteristics, the
stiffness of the equivalent spring and the magnitude of the rotation of cantilever at the spring location due to external loads.
The stiffness of the equivalent spring, for example, is at a minimum when located at the top and a maximum when at the
bottom. The stain energy that can be stored in the spring is a function of stiffness and the rotation of the cantilever at its
location. The rotation of the free cantilever for the loading varies from a maximum value at the top to zero at the base. There-
fore, from the point of view of spring stiffness alone it is desirable to locate the belt truss at the base, whereas from a con-
sideration of rotation, the converse is true. It is obvious that the optimum location is somewhere between. For the sake of
simplicity, a closed form solution to obtain the optimum location for belt truss can be derived using principles of calculus;
compatibility equation for rotation at the belt truss is formed, then the optimum location of belt truss can be obtained by
Fig. 2. Schematic plan of combined system.
Fig. 3. Outriggers system.
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2439
differentiating deection equation and set to zero. Details of the minimization process for obtaining rotations and lateral dis-
placements are explained in Sections 2 and 3. Here the building is modeled as a cantilever beam with a spring at a distance
where belt truss is located. All results obtained are compared with those obtained using SAP 2000 software so to investigate
efciency and accuracy of the proposed analytical procedure.
Fig. 4. First Wisconsin Center Milwaukee, USA
Fig. 5. Behavior of shear core and belt truss system.
2440 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
2. Simulating for outrigger system (framed tube, shear core and belt truss)
In this section a simple mathematical model which can predict stress distribution and displacement prole for a com-
bined system of framed tube, shear core, and belt truss is presented. Kwan [14] has proposed a model for analysis of framed
tube structures. In his model a number of assumptions are made in describing the frame tube system using equivalent ortho-
tropic plates. He developed relationships for stress analysis and calculation of the systems stiffness. Work of Kwan [14] was
a useful introduction to research on the combined of frame tube, shear core, and belt truss system. In this research, a new
model for analysis of the outrigger system is presented based on the followings assumptions:
(a) Floor slabs are considered to be rigid diaphragms.
(b) Distribution of axial deformation in ange and web are according to be cubic and quadratic functions respectively.
(c) The effect of belt truss and shear core on framed tube structure is modeled as a concentrated moment applied at belt
truss location, this moment acts in a direction opposite to rotation created by lateral loads.
(d) Stress concentrations occurring at the location of belt truss are neglected.
(e) Spacing of beams and columns are uniform throughout the building height.
(f) All beams and columns are uniform along the building height.
(g) Core is fully xed at the base.
Using above assumptions, frame tube is modeled similar to a beam with a box cross section. Let the axial displacements in
the ange and web panels, denoted respectively by W
f
and W
w
, be approximated by the following equations, [14]
W
f
/a 1 b b
y
b
_ _
2
_ _
; 1
W
w
/a 1 a
x
a
a
x
a
_ _
3
_ _
; 2
where / is the rotation of the plane section joining the four corners of the tubular structure which initially lie on the same
horizontal plane; a and b are dimensionless shear lag coefcients representing the degrees of shear lag in the web and ange
panels respectively, 2b and 2a are the width of ange and web panel dimensions and x and y are coordinates of any point
along the height of structure (Fig. 1).
The axial strains in the ange, e
f
and web, e
w
of the panels are given by Kwan [14] can be expressed by the following
equations:
e
f

@W
f
@z
; e
w

@W
w
@z
: 3
Similarly the shear strains in the ange, c
yz
and web, c
xz
panels are given, respectively by Kwan [14]
c
yz

@W
f
@y
; c
xz

@u
@z

@W
w
@x
: 4
Utilizing these equations, the strain energy can be calculated by the following relation proposed by Kwan [14]:
P
e

_
H
0
_
b
b
t
f
E
f
e
2
f
G
f
c
2
yz
dydz
_
H
0
_
a
a
t
w
E
w
e
2
w
G
w
c
2
xz
dxdz
_
H
0
2E
m
A
k
e
2
k
dz: 5
In Eq. (5), E
f
, G
f
, E
w
and G
w
are modulus of elasticity and equivalent shear modulus of ange and web frames respectively, E
m
is modulus f elasticity of four corner columns, A
k
is the cross sectional area of each corner columns, e
k
is the axial strain of
each corner columns, t
f
and t
w
are equivalent thickness for ange and web frames and H is height of the frame. The potential
energy due to concentrated, homogenous and triangle distributed loads is calculated by using the following equations
respectively [14]:
P
p
PuH; 6
P
p

_
H
0
Uuz; 7
P
p

_
H
0
T
z
H
uz: 8
In Eqs. (6)(8), uz is the lateral displacement of structure at height z from the base of building, and P, U and T, are concen-
trated load, intensity of homogenous distributed load, intensity of triangle load, respectively. Also the potential energy due
to the concentrated moment, Kh
c
created by the action of belt truss and shear core on the frame tube can be expressed as:
P
p
Kh
2
c
; 9
where K is the rotational stiffness of belt truss and h
c
is the rotation of frame at level of belt truss respectively.
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2441
The total potential energy is just the sum of the potential energy of the applied force and the strain energy of the struc-
ture. Having obtained the expression for the total potential energy, the governing differential equation can be the be derived
by minimizing the total potential energy with respect to /, u and shear lag coefcients yields four differential equations with
partial derivatives of rst and second order. Minimization of the total potential energy with respect to / yields the governing
equation for /, which may be interpreted as the moment equilibrium equation and expressed in the following form:
M EI
@/
@Z
; 10
where EI effective bending stiffness of the tubular structure and Mis the overturning moment of the lateral load at position
z. This equation is not easy to solve because EI varies with the height and is dependent on other unknowns. Nevertheless, if
the effect of the variation on EI with height on the bending rotation / is assumed negligible, then / can be evaluated by
direct integration as follows:
/
1
EI
_
z
0
Mdz 11
Likewise, minimization of the total potential energy with respect to u yields the following governing equation for u:
S 4G
w
t
w
a@u=@z /; 12
where S is the shear at a section with position z. This is actually the horizontal shear equilibrium equation. From this equa-
tion, u can be determined by direct integration as follows:
u
_
z
0
S
4G
w
t
w
a
/
_ _
dz: 13
Replacing parameters / and u in the potential energy relation and using the relations proposed by Kwan [14] for a and b as
multi terms functions with unknown coefcients of a
1
, a
2
, b
1
and b
2
a a
1
1
z
H
_ _
2
a
2
2
z
H
_ _

z
H
_ _
2
_ _
; 14
b b
1
1
z
H
_ _
2
b
2
2
z
H
_ _

z
H
_ _
2
_ _
: 15
Minimizing the total potential energy and applying boundary conditions that at the top of the structure, the axial stresses
are equal to zero, which leads to da=dz 0 and db=dz 0 at z = H, it can be shown that the polynomial functions for a and b
can each be expressed in terms of only unknown coefcients. The parameters a
1
, a
2
, b
1
and b
2
in Eqs. (14) and (15) for con-
centrated, homogenous and triangle distributed have been given by Kwan [14]. In this paper the same notations are used for
concentrated moments due to the belt truss, these parameters are calculated as follows:
a
1

358B
1
3n
w
B
2

21n
2
w
B
5
40n
w
B
4
160B
1
; 16
a
2

358B
1
3n
w
B
3

21n
2
w
B
5
40n
w
B
4
160B
1
; 17
b
1

1556B
1
5n
f
B
2

5n
2
f
B
5
40n
f
B
4
672B
1
; 18
b
2

1556B
1
5n
f
B
3

5n
2
f
B
5
40n
f
B
4
672B
1
: 19
In Eqs. (16)(19), the coefcients n
w
, n
f
, B
1
, B
2
, B
3
, B
4
and B
5
are as follows:
n
w

G
w
C
2
E
w
a
2
; n
f

G
f
C
2
E
f
b
2
; 20
B
1
6C
2
15CH 10H
2
B
2
12C
2
49CH 42H
2
B
3
12C
2
49CH 70H
2
35H
3
=C
B
4
108C
2
273CH 182H
2
B
5
48C
2
140CH 105H
2
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
; 21
where C is the distance of belt truss from the base of structure.
Hence, the displacement of ange and web frames can be calculated from Eqs. (1), (2), (14), and (15), differentiating these
equations and multiplying the results by equivalent modulus of elasticity for each panel, the related equations of axial stress
distribution are derived as follows:
2442 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
r
z

f
E
f
d/
dz
a 1 b b
y
b
_ _
2
_ _
; 22
r
z

w
E
w
d/
dz
a 1 a
x
a
a
x
a
_ _
3
_ _
: 23
In Eqs. (22) and (23), r
z

f
and r
z

w
are axial stresses in ange and web frames without the effect of belt truss respectively
r
Bz

f
E
f
d/
dz
a 1 b b
y
b
_ _
2
_ _
E
f
Kh
c
EI
0
a 1 b
M
b
M
y
b
_ _
2
_ _
; 24
r
Bz

w
E
w
d/
dz
a 1 a
x
a
a
x
a
_ _
3
_ _
E
w
Kh
c
EI
0
a 1 a
M

x
a
a
M
x
a
_ _
3
_ _
: 25
The axial stresses in ange, r
Bz

f
and web, r
B
Z

w
frames with the effect of belt truss are given by Eqs. (24) and (25).
Where a
M
and b
M
are shear lag coefcients of web and ange panels and EI
0
is the equivalent bending stiffness of concen-
trated moment created by belt truss and shear core. At upper level of the structure, / is not zero and effect of this parameter
must be considered for axial stress distribution. However, the terms related to / in comparison to the terms forming Eqs.
(22)(25) are negligible in a primary analysis [14].
In the combined system axial stresses which are expressed by Eqs. (24) and (25) are dependent on the unknown param-
eter d/=dz. Thus, by replacing the axial stresses of frame tube, before superimposing the Eqs. (22) and (23), in moment equi-
librium of the structure equation (26), the amount of d/=dz M=EI is determined
M EI
d/
dz

_
a
a
2t
w
r
z

w
xdx
_
b
b
2t
f
r
z

f
ady 4A
k
r
k
a: 26
In Eq. (26) r
k
is the axial stress of each corner columns in the frame tube system. By equating EId/=dz with external
moments created by the three types of loading: considered here, the equivalent bending stiffness of EI can be calculated
using Eq. (27) and EI
0
for concentrated moment using Eq. (28), i.e.
EI
4
3
E
w
t
w
a
3
1
2
5
a
_ _
4E
f
t
f
a
2
b 1
2
3
b
_ _
4E
m
A
k
a
2
; 27
EI
0

4
3
E
w
t
w
a
3
1
2
5
a
M
_ _
4E
f
t
f
a
2
b 1
2
3
b
M
_ _
4E
m
A
k
a
2
: 28
The equivalent stiffness of the twisting spring which includes the effect of belt truss on frame tube is calculated by mul-
tiplying the columns cross sectional area of ange frame by distance between the two frames and subtracting EI
0
=C as
follows:
K
2a
2
E
f
2C
1
2b
s
_ _
A
c

EI
0
C
; 29
where 2a is distance between ange frames, s is column spacing and A
c
is the sum of columns cross sectional areas of ange
frame. Thus, the rotation of combined system (h), at belt truss level for concentrated (P), homogenous (U) and triangle load
distribution (T), can be calculated from the following equations:
h
Cp

EI
0
EI
0
KC
P
EI
HC
C
2
2
_ _

P
4G
w
t
w
a
_ _
; 30
h
C
d

EI
0
EI
0
KC
U
EI
1
2
H
2
C
1
2
HC
2

1
6
C
3
_ _

U
4G
w
t
w
a
H C
_ _
; 31
h
Ct

EI
0
EI
0
KC
T
EI
1
3
H
2
C
1
4
HC
2

1
24
C
4
H
_ _

T
4G
w
t
w
a
C
2

C
2
2H
_ _ _ _
: 32
3. Lateral displacement of combined system
The lateral displacement, u of the system can be evaluated by rst, substituting the of values EI and EI
0
from Eqs. (27)
and (28) into Eq. (11), then the result substituted into Eq. (13), lateral displacement of the structure subjected to concen-
trated, homogenous and triangle distributed loading and concentrated moment are determined. For calculating the lateral
displacement of combined system (u), it has been assumed that EI and EI
0
are constant along the height and are equal
in measure to the base dimension of the structure. Displacement of combined systemcan be estimated at a distance of z from
the base of the structure subjected to the following loads:
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2443
Concentrated loading:
u
P
EI
1
2
Hz
2

1
6
z
3
_ _

P
4G
w
t
w
a
z
Kh
Cp
z
2
2EI
0
for z < C; 33
u
P
EI
1
2
Hz
2

1
6
z
3
_ _

P
4G
w
t
w
a
z
Kh
Cp
z
2
2EI
0

Kh
Cp
C
2EI
0
z C for z PC: 34
Homogenous distributed loading:
u
U
EI
1
4
H
2
z
2

1
6
Hz
3

1
24
z
4
_ _

U
4G
w
t
w
a
Hz
1
2
z
2
_ _

Kh
C
d
z
2
2EI
0
for z < C; 35
u
U
EI
H
2
z
2
4

Hz
3
6

z
4
24
_ _

U
4G
w
t
w
a
Hz
z
2
2
_ _

Kh
C
d
2EI
0
z
2
Cz C for z PC: 36
Triangle distributed loading:
u
T
EI
1
6
H
2
z
2

1
12
Hz
3

1
120
z
5
H
_ _

T
4G
w
t
w
a
Hz
2

1
6
z
3
H
_ _

Kh
Ct
z
2
2EI
0
for z < C; 37
u
T
EI
H
2
z
2
6

Hz
3
12

z
5
120H
_ _

T
4G
w
t
w
a
Hz
2

z
3
6H
_ _

Kh
C
t
2EI
0
z
2
Cz C for z PC: 38
4. Examples and comparisons with computer analysis
Numerical examples are given to demonstrate the ease of application and accuracy of the proposed approximate method.
Two types of high-rise buildings such as 45 and 55 storey buildings subjected to homogenous distributed load are investi-
Fig. 6. Model of numerical example.
2444 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
gated as shown in Fig. 6. The following specications are used in numerical examples for each of the buildings: plan dimen-
sion of building = 30 35 m (length of web panel of frame tube = 30 m; length of ange panel of frame tube = 35 m); storey
height = 3 m; column spacing = 2.5 m; thickness of shear core panels = 250 mm; cross-sectional area of beams and col-
umns = 57,500 mm
4
; width of beams and columns = 600 mm; beams and columns moments of inertia = 3,174,000,000 mm
4
;
modulus of elasticity = 204,000 MPa; shear modulus of elasticity = 78,420 MPa and Poisson ratio = 0.25.
Fig. 7. Displacement of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 8. Displacement of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
Fig. 9. Displacement of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2445
All structures have been analyzed and the results of displacement and axial stresses in ange and web of each building
subjected to homogenous distributed loading from proposed approximate method are compared with the results of SAP
2000 software. After verifying the results, optimum location for the belt truss is obtained by satisfying the objectives of
decreasing displacement and smoothing axial stress in frame tube.
Fig. 10. Stress distribution in web of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 11. Stress distribution in web of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
Fig. 12. Stress distribution in web of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
2446 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
Variation in belt position for a 45 and 55 storey buildings, stress distribution and the maximumdisplacements are studied
here. Displacement, stress distribution in ange and web frames for a combined system of 45 stories are shown in Figs. 715
and 55 stories in Figs. 1624. As shown in Figs. 79, 1618, when the belt truss reaches 1/6 of frames height, the displace-
ments at highest level of building reach a minimum amount. Comparison of the results between SAP 2000 [20] and the
Fig. 13. Stress distribution in ange of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 14. Stress distribution in ange of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
Fig. 15. Stress distribution in ange of 45 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2447
proposed approximate method when belt truss is located at various locations of building height are listed in Tables 1 and 2. It
can be seen that for 45 and 55 storey building when the belt truss is located at H/6 height from the base, the proposed
approximate method overestimates the maximum axial stress by 7.5% and 7% and underestimates the maximum lateral dis-
placement by 1.2% and 1.5% respectively. The results show that the percentage of error is low and acceptable. The main
sources of errors between the proposed approximate method and SAP 2000 are as follows:
Fig. 16. Displacement of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 17. Displacement of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
Fig. 18. Displacement of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
2448 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
(1) All closely spaced perimeter columns tied at each oor level by deep spandrel beams considered to form a tubular
structure, this approximation is modied to behaves as an orthotropic membranes so that the difference in response
along the width and height are taken into account.
Fig. 19. Stress distribution in web of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 21. Stress distribution in web of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
Fig. 20. Stress distribution in web of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2449
Fig. 22. Stress distribution in ange of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/6).
Fig. 23. Stress distribution in ange of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = H/2).
Fig. 24. Stress distribution in ange of 55 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading (B.L. = 3H/4).
Table 1
Comparison of the results between sap and the proposed approximate method for a 45 storey building subjected to homogeneous distributed loading.
Position of belt truss from
the base of building
Percentage of error in displacement
at the top of building
Percentage of error in corner
columns of ange panel
H
6
1.2 7.5
H
2
2 8.6
3H
4
3 10
2450 R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451
(2) The order of interpolant selected in approximating the axial displacement in ange and web panels of the frame tube.
(3) Equivalencing the elastic properties of the frame tube, modeled as plate and shear core, and belt truss with a simple
rotational spring.
5. Conclusions
A simple hand calculations method for approximate analysis of framed tube, shear core and belt truss systems in high rise
buildings subjected to lateral loads such as wind and earthquake was proposed. In this paper, a primary non-continuous
structure with a set of simple assumptions is modeled as a continuous structure with orthotropic plates. In the proposed
method, the distribution of axial deections in each panels of ange or web are considered independently. Closed form solu-
tions are obtained, from which the effects of various parameters on the overall structural behavior can be readily evaluated.
So, the shear lag in each panel of ange and web of the frame are calculated separately. It is revealed that for 45 and 55 storey
building when the belt truss is located at H/6 height from the base, the proposed approximate method overestimates the
maximum axial stress by 7.5% and 7% and underestimates the maximum lateral displacement by 1.2% and 1.5% respectively.
The main sources of errors are explained in Section 4. The proposed model shows a good understanding of structural behav-
ior; easy to use, yet reasonably accurate and suitable for quick evaluations during the preliminary design stage which re-
quires less time. Numerical examples demonstrate the ease of application and accuracy of the proposed modeled which
is applicable to a combined system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss over a wide range of building heights.
References
[1] M. Halis Gunel, H. Emer Ilgin, A proposal for the classication of structural systems of tall buildings, J. Build. Environ. (42) (2007) 667675.
[2] F.R. Khan, N.R. Amin, Analysis and design of frame tube structures for tall concrete buildings, J. Struct. Eng. 51 (3) (1973) 8592.
[3] P.C.K. Chan, W.K. Tso, A.C. Heidebrecht, Effects of normal frame on shear walls, Build. Sci. (9) (1974) 197209.
[4] A. Coull, B. Bose, Simplied analysis of frame tube structures, J. Struct. Div. (101) (1975) 22232240.
[5] A. Coull, K. Ahmed, Deection of framed-tube structures, J. Struct. Div. (104) (1978) 857862.
[6] F.R. Khan, B. Stafford Smith, A simple method of analysis for deection and stresses in wall-frame structures, J. Build. Environ. (11) (1976) 6978.
[7] K.H. Ha, P. Fazio, O. Moselhi, Orthotropic membrane for tall building analysis, J. Struct. Div., ASCE 104 (9) (1978) 14951505.
[8] D.C.K. Poon, S. Shieh, L.M. Joseph, C. Chang, Structural design of Taipei 101, The Worlds tallest building, in: Proceedings of the CTBUH2004, Seoul
Conference, Seoul, South Korea, 2008, pp. 271278.
[9] Gabriella Tarjn, Lszl P. Kollr, Approximate analysis of building structures with identical stories subjected to earthquakes, Int. J. Solids Struct. (41)
(2004) 14111433.
[10] H. Saffari, R. Rahgozar, R. Mahjoob, Simple method for analysis of tube frame, in: Sixth International Conference on Civil Engineering, Isfahan
University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran, 2003, pp. 198204.
[11] P. Kaviani, R. Rahgozar, H. Saffari, Approximate analysis of tall buildings using sandwich beam models with variable cross-section, J. Struct. Design Tall
Special Build. (17) (2008) 401418.
[12] B.S. Taranath, Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1988.
[13] S. Smith, A. Coull, Tall Building Structures, McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1996.
[14] A.K.H. Kwan, Simple method for approximate analysis of framed-tube structures, J. Struct. Eng., ASCE (120) (1994) 12211239.
[15] A. Coull, N. Subedi, Framed-tube structures for high rise buildings, J. Struct. Div. 97 (ST8) (1971) 20972105.
[16] J.J. Connor, C.C. Pouangare, Simple model for design of framed tube structures, J. Struct. Eng., ASCE (117) (1991) 36233644.
[17] A.K.H. Kwan, Shear lag in shear core walls, J. Struct. Eng., ASCE (122) (1996) 10971104.
[18] K. Lee, Y. Loo, Simple analysis of framed-tube structures with multiple internal tubes, J. Struct. Eng., ASCE (127) (2001) 450460.
[19] A. Coul, B. Bose, Discussion of simplied analysis of frame-tube structures, J. Struct. Div., ASCE (103) (1977) 297299.
[20] SAP 2000, Computers and Structures, Berkeley, California, USA.
Table 2
Comparison of the results between sap and the proposed approximate method for a 55 storey building subjected to homogeneous distributed loading.
Position of belt truss
from the base of building
Percentage of error in displacement
at the top of building
Percentage of error in corner
columns of ange panel
H
6
1.5 7
H
2
2.4 8.5
3H
4
3 9.5
R. Rahgozar et al. / Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (2010) 24372451 2451