Comparison between a Traditionally Retrofitted Industrial Building and an Alternative Solution Using BRBs

Alejandro Mora; Jorge Nazal

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.763.1025

Paper Titles

Footfall Induced Vibration Response of a Base-Isolated Steel Building
p.992

Base Isolation Design of Steel Structures on Soft Soil
p.1002

Spectral Analysis and Experimental Validation of a Low-Damage Hybrid Dissipater
p.1007

Application of Buckling-Restrained Braces in the Seismic Design of a Thermal Power Plant in China
p.1017

Comparison between a Traditionally Retrofitted Industrial Building and an Alternative Solution Using BRBs
p.1025

The Design of an Iconic 40-Storey Steel Composite Office Tower in Indonesia with a High Seismic Performance Level
p.1033

The Use of TPMC for Designing MRFs Equipped with FREEDAM Connections: A Case Study
p.1041

Design Development of a Four-Story Strongback Braced Frame
p.1050

Metal Shear Panels for Seismic Upgrading of RC Buildings: A Case Study
p.1058

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vol. 763Comparison between a Traditionally Retrofitted...

Comparison between a Traditionally Retrofitted Industrial Building and an Alternative Solution Using BRBs

Abstract:

Seismic retrofit of industrial buildings usually consists of traditional strengthening methods such as the addition or replacement of braces and welding of plates. This implies that the seismic force is maintained, or in some cases, increased due to stiffening. Consequently, a large amount of steel is needed to satisfy the code requirements. However, the use of buckling restrained braces (BRBs) as an alternative to the traditional retrofit increases the dissipation of energy and, as a result, a reduction of the seismic force is expected. This may produce in some cases a reduction of the steel required to obtain an appropriate performance of the building. In addition, the use of BRBs concentrates the dissipation in specific locations, then the behavior of the building is more predictable. In this research, an actual traditionally retrofitted industrial building is analyzed, and a quantification of the benefits of using BRBs instead of traditional methods is made. The comparison between both solutions is based on costs and seismic performance.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volume 763)

Pages:

1025-1032

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.763.1025

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

February 2018

Authors:

Alejandro Mora*, Jorge Nazal

Keywords:

Buckling-Restrained Braces, Cost, Ductility, Industrial Buildings, Retrofit

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) (2016). Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 341-16, AISC, Chicago, IL.

DOI: 10.1201/b11248-16

Google Scholar

[2] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2016). Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures., ASCE/SEI Standard 7-16, ASCE, Reston, Va.

DOI: 10.1061/9780784415788.bm

Google Scholar

[3] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) (2016). Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, ANSI/AISC 360-16, AISC, Chicago, IL.

DOI: 10.1201/b11248-16

Google Scholar

[4] W. Lopez, R. Sabelli, Seismic Design of Buckling-Restrained Braced Frames, Structural Steel Educational Council, (2004).

Google Scholar

[5] P.C. Jennings, G.W. Housner. Simulated Earthquake Motions, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, (1968).

Google Scholar

[6] Instituto Nacional de Normalizacion (INN) (2013). Analisis y diseño de edificios con aislacion sismica, NCh2745-2013, INN, Santiago, CH.

Google Scholar