what are the conditions to check the interstoy drift using CSI
etab, Should we consider a cracked section For V.E.
(modifiers: 0.35 Ig) and we check it (with U.L.S), bilal zakiTechnical Project Manager at Lebgulf
Flag as Promotion Flag as Job Flag as Inappropriate Unlike Like (4) Comment (10) Share Share this discussion
Unfollow Follow May 27, 2013 Close viewer Comments Christos Doussis, Kiran Kumar K.L and 2 others like this 10 comments
bilal bilal zaki Technical Project Manager at Lebgulf or we should check it using S.L.S. without cracked section (modifiers 0.7*Ig). o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o May 27, 2013
Nikolaos K. Nikolaos K. Gkogkos Structural Engineer, MSc It depends on the code you are implementing. There are codes that set up a higher requirement for a ULS drift - for instance NZS1170.5 requires 2.5% drift limitation however I am not so sure if this limit corresponds to the MCE (T=2475, 2% in 50 years)that refers to collapse prevention or the LS (T=975, 5% in 50 years) considering an IL3 structure - while there are other codes that require a quite strict drift limit for frequent events of lower magnitude. Other than that, the use of cracked section properties is for sure. o Unlike Like (1) o Flag as inappropriate o 12 months ago SIGMUND B. likes this
bilal bilal zaki Technical Project Manager at Lebgulf its better to explain more,
let's check with ubc code, with a static model (no dynamic analysis (spec x and spex y )).
as per UBC code 97 the inelastic story drift .
1630.9.1 Determination of delta S. A static, elastic analysis of the lateral force-resisting system shall be prepared using the design seismic forces from Section 1630.2.1. Alternatively, dynamic analysis may be performed in accordance with Section 1631. Where Allowable Stress Design is used and where drift is being computed, the load combinations of Section 1612.2 shall be used. The mathematical model shall comply with Section 1630.1.2. The resulting deformations, denoted as S, shall be determined at all critical locations in the structure. Calculated drift shall include translational and torsional deflections.
there for, if we want to go with elastic behavior that's mean uncracked section with a modifiers 0.7*Ig, is applicable. and we check the interstory drift calculated by etab with the SLS combination as per UBC code, when we want to for to design we need to redo the calculation and check if the shear wall are cracked , that's mean update the stiffness modifiers to 0.35, so the building is less rigid then before,
Does this assumption is logical ! ! !
awaiting the reply ! ! o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 12 months ago
Nikolaos K. Nikolaos K. Gkogkos Structural Engineer, MSc By memory, it is the degradation of stiffness of the walls ONLY you are talking about - this is where 0.7 or 0.35 refers to. You are allowed to use 0.7 if and only if you can provide evidence from the analysis process and for the worst case scenario of combinations of actions, tensile stresses on the wall DO NOT exceed a value related to the rapture strength of the concrete. Alternatively, you can externally run a M- diagram for the critical wall section and "read" the level of degradation. o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 12 months ago
SIGMUND SIGMUND BATUCAN SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD It's logical to use .7Ig for for columns & .35Ig for beams as per ACI 318 08 to calculate interstorey drift. o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago
SIGMUND SIGMUND BATUCAN SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD For walls in flexure, I think .25Ig is recommended also as per ACI 318 08. o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago
Jos Luis Jos Luis Campos Andrade Ingeniero Estructural We use 50%I for beams and 100% Ig for Colums in Costa Rica. we campare drifts betwen stories with limits dependig on the kind of structure we are analysing. o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago
SIGMUND SIGMUND BATUCAN SENIOR ENGINEER at ABSTEL GLYDE LTD Here in NZ we use Ig but interstory deflection is limited to 2.5%, in which case, suitable ductility is used. o Unlike Like o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago
Muneeb Muneeb Badar Senior Project Engineer at AIT Consulting, Asian Institute of Technology Yes the stiffness factors above mentioned are correct , 0.35 for beam, 0.7 for column,0.7 for shear wall and 0.25 for slab. But for Seismic drift we use cracked section but for wind drift we use gross section to check the drift o Unlike Like (1) o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago Ahmed A. likes this
Nikolaos K. Nikolaos K. Gkogkos Structural Engineer, MSc The 0.7 degradation (uncracked section properties) for shear walls is valid IF AND ONLY IF it is verified by the analysis process that the maximum tension stresseses acting on the shear walls do not exceed the maximum allowed bending tensile stress of concrete. For structural systems resisting earthquake actions, this is certainly not the case - a M- diagram can verify easily the level of stiffness degradation expected for a wall section under a certain combinationj of actions (N,M) . So, the use of the 0.35 value for wall cracked section properties is more likely to be used. o Unlike Like (2) o Flag as inappropriate o 11 months ago Kiran Kumar K., Muneeb Badar like this