Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Branco, J.M.
Data de Publicação: 2011
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/5817
Resumo: Some of the properties sought in seismic design of buildings are also considered fundamental to guarantee structural robustness. Moreover, some key concepts are common to both seismic and robustness design. In fact, both analyses consider events with a very small probability of occurrence, and consequently, a significant level of damage is admissible. As very rare events,in both cases, the actions are extremely hard to quantify. The acceptance of limited damage requires a system based analysis of structures, rather than an element by element methodology, as employed for other load cases. As for robustness analysis, in seismic design the main objective is to guarantee that the structure survives an earthquake, without extensive damage. In the case of seismic design, this is achieved by guaranteeing the dissipation of energy through plastic hinges distributed in the structure. For this to be possible, some key properties must be assured, in particular ductility and redundancy. The same properties could be fundamental in robustness design, as a structure can only sustain significant damage if capable of distributing stresses to parts of the structure unaffected by the triggering event. Timber is often used for primary load‐bearing elements in single storey long‐span structures for public buildings and arenas, where severe consequences can be expected if one or more of the primary load bearing elements fail. The structural system used for these structures consists of main frames, secondary elements and bracing elements. The main frame, composed by columns and beams, can be seen as key elements in the system and should be designed with high safety against failure and under strict quality control. The main frames may sometimes be designed with moment resisting joints between columns and beams. Scenarios, where one or more of these key elements, fail should be considered at least for high consequence buildings. Two alternative strategies may be applied: isolation of collapsing sections and, provision of alternate load paths [1]. The first one is relatively straightforward to provide by deliberately designing the secondary structural system less strong and stiff. Alternatively, the secondary structural system and the bracing system can be design so that loss of capacity in the main frame does not lead to the collapse. A case study has been selected aiming to assess the consequences of these two different strategies, in particular, under seismic loads.
id RCAP_7ddfa729267883857332bda5c096afec
oai_identifier_str oai:run.unl.pt:10362/5817
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Robustness of timber structures in seismic areasRobustnessTimberSome of the properties sought in seismic design of buildings are also considered fundamental to guarantee structural robustness. Moreover, some key concepts are common to both seismic and robustness design. In fact, both analyses consider events with a very small probability of occurrence, and consequently, a significant level of damage is admissible. As very rare events,in both cases, the actions are extremely hard to quantify. The acceptance of limited damage requires a system based analysis of structures, rather than an element by element methodology, as employed for other load cases. As for robustness analysis, in seismic design the main objective is to guarantee that the structure survives an earthquake, without extensive damage. In the case of seismic design, this is achieved by guaranteeing the dissipation of energy through plastic hinges distributed in the structure. For this to be possible, some key properties must be assured, in particular ductility and redundancy. The same properties could be fundamental in robustness design, as a structure can only sustain significant damage if capable of distributing stresses to parts of the structure unaffected by the triggering event. Timber is often used for primary load‐bearing elements in single storey long‐span structures for public buildings and arenas, where severe consequences can be expected if one or more of the primary load bearing elements fail. The structural system used for these structures consists of main frames, secondary elements and bracing elements. The main frame, composed by columns and beams, can be seen as key elements in the system and should be designed with high safety against failure and under strict quality control. The main frames may sometimes be designed with moment resisting joints between columns and beams. Scenarios, where one or more of these key elements, fail should be considered at least for high consequence buildings. Two alternative strategies may be applied: isolation of collapsing sections and, provision of alternate load paths [1]. The first one is relatively straightforward to provide by deliberately designing the secondary structural system less strong and stiff. Alternatively, the secondary structural system and the bracing system can be design so that loss of capacity in the main frame does not lead to the collapse. A case study has been selected aiming to assess the consequences of these two different strategies, in particular, under seismic loads.Neves, L.C.RUNBranco, J.M.2011-06-20T09:58:53Z2011-06-202011-06-20T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10362/5817enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-03-11T03:36:43Zoai:run.unl.pt:10362/5817Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T03:16:34.541728Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
title Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
spellingShingle Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
Branco, J.M.
Robustness
Timber
title_short Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
title_full Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
title_fullStr Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
title_full_unstemmed Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
title_sort Robustness of timber structures in seismic areas
author Branco, J.M.
author_facet Branco, J.M.
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Neves, L.C.
RUN
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Branco, J.M.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Robustness
Timber
topic Robustness
Timber
description Some of the properties sought in seismic design of buildings are also considered fundamental to guarantee structural robustness. Moreover, some key concepts are common to both seismic and robustness design. In fact, both analyses consider events with a very small probability of occurrence, and consequently, a significant level of damage is admissible. As very rare events,in both cases, the actions are extremely hard to quantify. The acceptance of limited damage requires a system based analysis of structures, rather than an element by element methodology, as employed for other load cases. As for robustness analysis, in seismic design the main objective is to guarantee that the structure survives an earthquake, without extensive damage. In the case of seismic design, this is achieved by guaranteeing the dissipation of energy through plastic hinges distributed in the structure. For this to be possible, some key properties must be assured, in particular ductility and redundancy. The same properties could be fundamental in robustness design, as a structure can only sustain significant damage if capable of distributing stresses to parts of the structure unaffected by the triggering event. Timber is often used for primary load‐bearing elements in single storey long‐span structures for public buildings and arenas, where severe consequences can be expected if one or more of the primary load bearing elements fail. The structural system used for these structures consists of main frames, secondary elements and bracing elements. The main frame, composed by columns and beams, can be seen as key elements in the system and should be designed with high safety against failure and under strict quality control. The main frames may sometimes be designed with moment resisting joints between columns and beams. Scenarios, where one or more of these key elements, fail should be considered at least for high consequence buildings. Two alternative strategies may be applied: isolation of collapsing sections and, provision of alternate load paths [1]. The first one is relatively straightforward to provide by deliberately designing the secondary structural system less strong and stiff. Alternatively, the secondary structural system and the bracing system can be design so that loss of capacity in the main frame does not lead to the collapse. A case study has been selected aiming to assess the consequences of these two different strategies, in particular, under seismic loads.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-06-20T09:58:53Z
2011-06-20
2011-06-20T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10362/5817
url http://hdl.handle.net/10362/5817
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799137814896443392