Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

Seismic analysis of the world’s tallest building

Hong Fan a,b , Q.S. Li a,∗ , Alex Y. Tuan c , Lihua Xu d
a
Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
b
China Nuclear Power Design Company, Shenzhen 518026, China
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Tam Kang University, Taipei, Taiwan
d
School of Civil Engineering, Wuhan University, Hubei Wuhan 430072, China

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: Taipei 101 (officially known as the Taipei Financial Center) with 101 stories and 508 m height, located in
Received 13 March 2008 Taipei where earthquakes and strong typhoons are common occurrences, is currently the tallest building
Accepted 8 October 2008 in the world. The great height of the building, the special geographic and environmental conditions, not
surprisingly, presented one of the greatest challenges for structural engineers. In particular, its dynamic
Keywords: performance under earthquake or wind actions requires intensive research. The structure of the building
Super-tall building
is a mega-frame system composed of concrete filled steel tube (CFT) columns, steel brace core and belt
Mega-frame structure
Finite element modeling
trusses which are combined to resist vertical and lateral loads. In this study, a shaking table test was
Seismic analysis conducted to determine the constitutive relationships and finite element types for the CFT columns
Dynamics response and steel members for establishing the finite element (FE) model of the tall building. Then, the seismic
Shaking table test responses of the super-tall building were numerically investigated. An earthquake spectrum generated for
Taipei Basin was adopted to calculate the lateral displacements and distributions of interior column forces.
Furthermore, time-history analyses of elastic and inelastic seismic response were carried out using scaled
accelerograms representing earthquake events with return periods of 50-year, 100-year, and 950-year,
respectively. The computational results indicate that the super-tall building with the mega-frame system
possesses substantial reserve strength, and the high-rise structure would satisfy the design requirements
under severe seismic events. The output of this study is expected to be of considerable interest and
practical use to professionals and researchers involved in the design of super-tall buildings.
© 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Owing to the growing use of high-strength materials and ad-
vanced construction techniques, building structures have become
more and more flexible and taller. The increasing height of modern
tall buildings posed a series of challenges for structural engineers.
In the design of such a tall building, the structural system must
meet three major requirements: strength, rigidity, and stability [1].
As is well known, the strength requirement is the dominant factor
in the design of low-rise structures. However, as building height
increases, the rigidity and stability requirements become more im-
portant, and they are often the dominant factors in the structural
design. Especially under lateral loads, interior forces are quite vari-
able and increase rapidly with increases in height, and lateral de-
flection may vary as the fourth power of the height of a building [2],
and structural dynamic behavior is thus one of the most important
design considerations in the design of a modern tall building.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 27844677; fax: +852 27887612.
E-mail address: bcqsli@cityu.edu.hk (Q.S. Li).
0143-974X/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2008.10.005
Taipei 101, rising 508 m above the city of Taipei, earns the title
of the tallest building in the world. Its dynamic responses due
to wind, earthquake and other extraordinary loads are of great
concern. As Taiwan is located in one of the most active seismic
regions in the world, this super-tall building may be susceptible
to damage caused by strong earthquakes. These features make a
detailed study on the structural performance of the world’s highest
tall building under earthquake excitations of particular importance
and necessity.
Numerous investigations on seismic behavior of tall buildings
have been carried out in the past; in particular shaking table tests
play an important role in earthquake-resistant design of structures,
analysis of seismic responses and failure mechanisms [3–5]. On
the other hand, the finite element method (FEM) is a powerful
tool for structural analysis of tall buildings. Fan and Long [6]
adopted spline elements in the analysis of tall buildings. In their
method, the element displacements are interpolated with spline
functions and accurate results could be achieved with lower-order
functions and a few degrees of freedom. Takebatake et al. [7]
presented a simplified analytical method for the preliminary
design of doubly symmetric single and double frame-tubes in
high-rise structures by replacing a tube with an equivalent rod,
 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215 1207

with consideration of the effect of bending, transverse shear

deformation, shear-lag and torsion. Li et al. [8,9] proposed finite
segment approaches for estimating the dynamic characteristics
of tall buildings. Recently, Li and Wu [10] established seven 3-
D FE models for a 78-story super-tall building, and numerical
results of the structural dynamic characteristics were compared
with their field measurements to identify the FEM modeling
errors for the purpose of updating the FEM models. Ventura
and Schuster [11] presented a numerical study on estimation of
dynamic characteristic of a 30-storey RC building. A reduced-
order continuum model was proposed by Chajes et al. [12] to
conduct dynamic analysis of a 47-storey steel-framed building
and correlate the numerical results with those from measured
responses during an earthquake. Pan et al. [13] and Brownjohn
et al. [14] presented numerical studies on dynamic responses of
the tallest building in Singapore with correlation with their field
measurements. Qi et al. [15] employed the finite element method
to study the seismic performance of a tall building and their results
illustrated that the building is likely to perform satisfactorily under
severe seismic events. Rahimian and Romero [16] established a
finite element model to study the seismic response of the tallest
building in Mexico City by time-history analysis and spectral
method. These investigations indicated that numerical simulation
is an effective tool to determine the dynamic characteristics and
seismic responses of tall buildings. However, literature review
reveals that comprehensive research studies on seismic effects on
a super-tall building (building height > 500 m) have rarely been
reported in the literature. So, a detailed analysis is presented in Fig. 1. Elevation view of Taipei 101.
this paper to investigate the dynamic characteristics and seismic
responses of the super-tall building. The objective of this study is
to investigate the seismic effects on the world’s tallest building
in order to provide valuable information for the design and
construction of other similar structures in the future.

2. The structural system of Taipei 101

Taipei 101, a 508-m high office tower, is located at the east

district of downtown Taipei City, and the elevation view of the
building is shown in Fig. 1. The structure is symmetrical with a
62.4 m by 62.4 m square footprint [17]. Two sloping rectangular
mega-columns with a maximum cross-sectional dimension of
2400 mm × 3000 mm, are positioned one at each side of the
building extending to the 90th floor, and finally the cross-sectional
dimension of the mega-column is reduced to 1600 mm × 2000 mm.
All perimeter columns are sloping from the ground floor to 25th
floor, and the sloping angle is 4.4. The core columns are square
and rectangular concrete-filled steel tubes (CFT). The compressive
strength of the concrete is 70 MPa, which provide extra stiffness
and strength to the steel tubes, from bottom of the basement
to the 62nd floor. The section of the core columns reduce from
1200 mm × 1200 mm to 900 mm × 900 mm, which are smaller
than the mega-column. The composite metal deck-slabs built at
each floor are 135 mm thick, however, those at mechanical floors
are 200 mm thick. The primary girders are composed of H-steel
beams with moment-resisting connections at the beam-column
joints. Dog-bone connections are also provided at locations where
ductility is required while beams are pinned to the primary girders,
as shown in Fig. 2.
Belt-trusses, one or two-stories high, are placed every 8-story
interval at the perimeter frame, and the brace core is connected
to mega-columns via belt-trusses consisting of in-floor braces and
vertical trusses. The locations of the belt-trusses in the 8th floor
are shown in Fig. 3 [17]. When the space of the column is 10.5 m,
the shape of the steel braces are ‘‘V’’ or reverse ‘‘V’’, and when
the space is 6 m, the shape of steel braces are acclivitous braces
Fig. 4 presents an elevation view and the locations of the belt-
trusses in axes M9 and P1 [17]. The belt-trusses and mega-columns
Fig. 2. Sketch of the dog-bone connection.
help to stabilize the building core in the same way that the brace
core helps to balance the perimeter frame. This mega-frame design
maximizes the spaces inside the building and carries perimeter
gravity loads at selected columns. The bracing, outriggers, and
belts that link the columns would also redistribute loads if some
members are damaged by unforeseen circumstances. The structure
is a dual system: the external structure is composed of the mega-
columns and external columns providing the lateral rigidity to the
seismic and wind loads, and the internal structure, also designated
as substructures, provides the utilizable space and allows for
significant amount of energy dissipation. Belt trusses composed of
a transfer floor system are placed at every eighth or tenth floor,
so the interior columns only carry the gravity loads from a limited
number of floors. As a result, their sizes are substantially smaller
than those in a conventional structural system, in which they
would rise from foundation level to the building top.
A FE model was established in this study based on the design
drawings of the super-tall building. The dead loads for building
elements were determined by a commercial FE program ANSYS
10.0 [18] and the design live loads were calculated according to
the data found from the design documents [17].
1208 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215
Fig. 3. Plan of belt-trusses in the 8th floor.
Fig. 4. Elevation and the location of the belt-trusses.
3. Structural analysis
3.1. Finite element modeling
With rapid development in computer technology and compu-
tational mechanics algorithms, three-dimensional finite element
Fig. 5. Stress condition for steel and concrete in a CFT column under axial
compression.
analysis has become a routine design tool of tall buildings. Four
kinds of elements are employed in establishing the FE model of
Taipei 101 structure: 3-D beam elements, suitable for nonlin-
ear large rotations and large strains, are employed to model the
columns and beams. Link elements are used to model the brace.
Mass elements are employed to model the live loads and non-
structural components. The floors are modeled with shell ele-
ments. The connection between the structure and its foundation
is treated to be fixed.
3.2. Constitutive relationships of rectangular CFT columns
Concrete-filled steel tube (CFT) columns are widely used due
to their good earthquake resistant behavior such as improved
strength and high ductility capacity. When a short CFT column
is under an axial load, as shown in Fig. 4(b), there is a basic
assumption that steel and concrete have the same longitudinal
strain ε3 , then the hoop stains of steel ε1s and concrete ε1c can be
calculated by:
ε1s = µs ε3 , ε1c = µc ε3 (1)
where µs , µc are the Poisson’s ratio of steel and concrete,
respectively.
Generally, at low stress conditions, concrete has a lower value
of Poisson’s ratio than steel, which may result in occurrence of
separation between the two materials in a CFT column. At high
compressive stresses, internal micro-cracking in concrete causes
it to swell. Its outwards movement is restrained by steel, and the
strength of concrete is increased due to this lateral restraint. Thus
the concrete and steel are stressed triaxially, as shown in Fig. 5(a).
Zhong [19,20] proposed a unified theory to model CFT columns
based on extensive experimental and FE analysis results of CFT
columns under axial loading. According to the theory, a CFT column
is regarded as a new composite column or material instead of
separate components of concrete and steel. The properties of the
composite column depend on those of steel and concrete and
their dimensions (e.g., tube diameter and steel wall thickness). The
ultimate strength and other property parameters of a CFT column
can then be determined based on the mechanical and geometrical
properties of the composite material. The following formulas for
rectangular CFT columns are adopted in this study based on the
unified theory [19,20]:
 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215
(a) Stress–strain curve for a concrete-filled steel tube.
Fig. 6. Schematic graph of material constitutive relationships.
The yield strength of the composite column is
fscy = (1.212 + Bξ + C ξ 2 )fck
where, B and C are coefficients. They depend on the cross-section
geometry. For a rectangular cross-section, one has:
B = 0.1381(fy /235) + 0.7646,
C = −0.0727(fck /20) + 0.2016,
where ξ is the confining factor which is expressed as
fy A s
ξ=
fck Ac
in which fy , fck , As and Ac are the yield strength of steel, the
unconfined strength of concrete and the areas of steel and concrete
components in the column, respectively.
The elastic modulus Esc of the composite column can be
expressed as
Esc = fscp /εscp
where fscp , εscp are the proportional stress and strain of the
composite column, respectively.
For a rectangular CFT column, one has
fscp = [0.192(fy /235) + 0.488] fscy
εscp = 0.67fy / Es .
The tangent module of the composite column can be calculated as
(fscy − σ̄ )σ̄
Esct = Esc
(fscy − fscp )fscp
where σ̄ = N /Asc , N is the axial load on the column and Asc is the
total area of the column section.
The hardening modulus of the composite column can be
determined by
0
Esc = 400ξ − 150.
In this paper, the load–deformation (stress–strain) relation of
a CFT column was determined based on experimental measure-
ments from CFT columns under axial compressions [19], which
was simplified as a tri-linear stress–strain model including pro-
portional, yield and hardening stages, as shown in Fig. 6(a). The
tangent module is substituted by the module of a straight line
connected the proportional point and the yield point. According to
Eqs. (2)–(5) and (7), the related parameters for a CFT column can
thus be determined.
For structural analysis of the steel beams and brace members
in Taipei 101 building, a bilinear stress–strain curve with 2% post-
yield hardening (see Fig. 6(b)) was adopted to model the inelastic
behavior of these structural members, with Young’s modulus of
420 MPa and Poisson’s ratio of 0.3, respectively. Von Mises yield
criterion with kinematic hardening rule was employed in the
numerical analysis.
1209
(b) Stress–strain curve for steel.
(2)
(3)
Fig. 7. Test structure.
(4)
(5) 3.3. Verification of the constitutive relationships of CFT columns
For verification of the adequacy of the constitutive relationships
of CFT columns and steel members discussed above as well as
(6) the selected finite element types for modeling the structural
members of Taipei 101 structural system, a shaking table test
and the associated FEM analysis were conducted in this study for
a frame structure model composed of rectangular CFT columns
and steel members by comparing the numerical results with the
experimental data. The test model and its finite element model are
shown in Fig. 7 and 8, respectively.
(7)
The scaled model was tested on the shaking table adopting
three representative earthquake records as inputs: (1) An artificial
seismic accelerogram (made according to the design code of
China [21]); (2) El-Centro earthquake record; and (3) Tianjin
earthquake record. The peak ground accelerations (PGA) in the
three accelerogams were scaled to 0.05g and 0.1g to represent
the design earthquake actions with intensity 6 and 7 degree as
stipulated in the design code of China [21], respectively. The design
code [21] classifies regions of different seismicity in terms of
seismic intensity which is usually regarded to be an equivalent of
peak ground acceleration. Table 1 shows the relationship between
the seismic intensity and peak ground acceleration [21]. Each
accelerogram duration was reduced to 1/5 of its original duration
according to the scale factor listed in Table 2.
Table 3 lists the first four natural frequencies of the model
obtained from the test and the numerical analysis of the FE model.
Furthermore, acceleration dynamic amplification factors of the
1210 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215

modeling strategies presented above in the establishment of the

FE model of Taipei 101 structural system.

4. Dynamic characteristics of the super-tall building

A three-dimensional FE model of Taipei 101 structural system

was established for numerical analysis of the super-tall building,
as shown in Fig. 10, based on the constitutive relationships for
rectangular CFT columns and steel members as well as the selected
finite element types which were verified above. The FE model
of the super-tall building contains 20 532 beam elements, 24 048
shell elements, and 3496 link elements. In addition to the main
structural elements, non-structural components were modeled
with mass elements. Fig. 11 shows the first six mode shapes of
the FE model including two for translational motions in each
horizontal direction and two for torsional motions about the
vertical axis. Modes 1 and 2 are the translational modes in x and
y directions, respectively. Mode 3 is the fundamental torsional
mode. The fundamental periods of the building are 6.21 s. in the
Fig. 8. FE model.
x direction, 6.19 s in the y direction, and 3.62 s in torsion. The
modal participation coefficient for each mode [22] is defined as
[Ei ][M][uj ]
ηji = T , which shows the modes that contribute most
Table 1 [uj ] [M][uj ]
Relation between the seismic intensity and horizontal peak ground accelera- to the dynamic response, where [M ] is the mass matrices, [u] is
tion [20]. the vibration mode vector of the structure, and [E ] is the uniform
Seismic intensity (degree) Horizontal peak ground acceleration (g) matrix. The model participation ratio in every direction for each
ηic
6 0.05 mode is defined as ϕic = P ηjc
(c = x, y, z), while the cumulative
j=1
7 0.1 Pi
mc
modal participation mass ratios is defined as ψic = Pn mjc (c =
8 0.2 j=1

9 0.4 t =1 t
x, y, z), where m is the effective mass participating the dynamic
response of each mode. Table 4 shows the modal participation
Table 2 ratios and the cumulative modal participation mass ratios of the
The similarity relationship between the model and the prototype structure.
first 30 modes. The vibration modal participation ratios for the first
Physical parameters Scale factors Ratio (model/prototype) two modes in the x and y directions reach 1. Such ratios for other
Length Sl 1/5 modes decrease as the mode number increases. The cumulative
Density Sρ 1.0 modal participation mass ratios for the first 30 modes reach 1 in
Elastic modulus SE 1.0
the horizontal directions. Therefore, it was decided to use the first
Strain Sε 1.0
1
− 12 30 modes in the response spectrum analysis of the tall building,
Time St = Sl Sρ2 SE 1/5
−1 1
which will be described below.
Frequency Sf = Sl−1 Sρ 2 SE2 5
Displacement Su = Sl 1/5
Acceleration Sa = Sl /St2 5 5. Response spectrum analysis

For earthquake-resistant designs, a structure should meet

Table 3
performance requirements at two different levels, depending
Natural frequencies of the scaled mode obtained by the shaking table test and the
numerical analysis. upon the magnitude of earthquake actions. The first level of
performance essentially requires structural response in the elastic
Mode 1 2 3 4
range without significant structural damage under a moderate
Test (Hz) 17.48 26.68 40.00 72.50 earthquake action, and the second level of performance requires
FE analysis (Hz) 16.50 29.43 54.44 58.14
Differences (%) −5.61 10.27 36.1 −19.8
that the structure does not collapse under a severe earthquake
event with rare occurrence. Taipei 101 is located in the Taipei
Basin, where there are deep and soft soil deposits with a
structural model under seismic excitation with PGA of 0.1g, which long predominant period. According to the Taiwanese Building
were determined by the test and the numerical computation, are Technology Standards (BTS) [23], the building site is in a region
shown in Fig. 9. of moderate seismicity. A response spectrum, originally developed
It is shown in Table 3 that the fundamental natural frequencies by the National Taiwan University and other research institutions
of the model obtained from the test and the numerical analysis for the design of Taipei 101, has been modified based on the
agree fairly well. It is observed from Fig. 9 that the two sets of response spectra stipulated in the local seismic code (BST), as
the results of acceleration dynamic amplification factors under shown in Fig. 12 [17]. The first 30 translational–torsional coupling
the three earthquake records were also in good agreement. It is modes were used to calculate the seismic response of the super-tall
thus expected that the constitutive relationships for rectangular building by the Complete Quadratic Combination (CQC) method on
CFT columns and steel members as well as the selected finite the basis of the response spectrum analysis. The damping ratio of
element types for modeling these structural components are the high-rise structure was assumed to be 5% for all the 30 modes,
adequate, since the numerical results match the experimental data and the seismic responses in the two orthogonal directions were
reasonably well. Hence, it was decided to adopt the numerical calculated accordingly.
 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215 1211

Table 4
Modal participation ratios and participation mass ratios.
Mode Period (s) Model participation ratio Cumulative participation mass ratio
x direction y direction x direction y direction

1 6.21 0.000704 1 2.70E-07 0.544991

2 6.19 1 0.000692 0.545056 0.544991
3 3.62 0.000002 0.000359 0.545056 0.544991
4 2.52 0.001392 0.775207 0.545057 0.872428
5 2.47 0.778882 0.001382 0.875625 0.872429
6 1.65 0.000383 0.420086 0.875625 0.968316
7 1.64 0.414047 0.000395 0.96938 0.968317
8 1.42 0.000099 0.000007 0.96938 0.968317
9 1.41 0.000036 0.000004 0.96938 0.968317
10 1.37 0.000007 0.000002 0.96938 0.968317
11 1.166 0.000044 0.132226 0.96938 0.985225
12 1.161 0.000087 0.000133 0.96938 0.985225
13 0.929 0.12753 0.000053 0.985388 0.985225
14 0.922 0.000068 0.000704 0.985388 0.985225
15 0.898 0.000011 0.075824 0.985388 0.991897
16 0.740 0.07398 0.000019 0.991815 0.991897
17 0.733 0.000006 0 0.991815 0.991897
18 0.632 0.000015 0.056465 0.991815 0.995977
19 0.624 0.054531 0.000022 0.995633 0.995977
20 0.576 0.000006 0.000006 0.995633 0.995977
21 0.557 0.000003 0.000001 0.995633 0.995977
22 0.532 0.000003 0.000001 0.995633 0.995977
23 0.489 0.023607 0.000021 0.996521 0.995977
24 0.394 0.000018 0.025123 0.996521 0.996983
25 0.379 0.000077 0.042725 0.996521 0.999993
26 0.299 0.04295 0.000079 0.999566 0.999993
27 0.285 0.000006 0.000007 0.999566 0.999993
28 0.244 0.001874 0.000001 0.999572 0.999993
29 0.235 0.000001 0.002004 0.999572 1
30 0.153 0.015782 0.000006 1 1

(a) Experimental results. (b) Numerical results.

Fig. 9. Dynamic amplification factors from the test and numerical analysis.

5.1. Displacement analysis

The results of the response spectrum analysis indicate that
the deformations in the x direction are approximately equal to
those in the y direction (see Fig. 13). This can be attributed to
the symmetric structural system and shape. The maximum inter-
story drift ratios in the x direction and y direction are 1/281.7 and
1/261.1, respectively, both under the criteria stipulated in the local
design code (BST). Thus, the structure can be regarded to satisfy
the first level performance requirement. Due to the two outrigger
trusses forming a cell at every eight or ten stories, the inter-story
drift ratio of each cell is in the shape of an arc, as shown in Fig. 14.
The drift ratios are small in the top and bottom stories and large
in the middle inter-stories. Such an outrigger truss functions like a
ring, which controls the lateral structural deformation. The storey
Fig. 10. Finite element model.
displacement curves take the shape of a deforming cantilever and
are relatively smooth without obvious inflexions, which imply that
the distribution of equivalent rigidities along the height of the
structure is well proportioned.
5.2. Interior force analysis
Three representative columns were selected to analyze the
interior forces in order to study the structural deformation
mechanisms. The selected columns are the exterior corner column
1212 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215

Fig. 11. Mode shapes of the first six modes obtained from numerical analysis.

Fig. 13. Lateral deformation curves.

Fig. 12. Design response spectrum.

C9, exterior side column C1, and interior corner column C5, as
shown in Fig. 3.
It can be seen from Fig. 15 that the axial force is the dominant
interior force in each column and other interior forces are relatively
small. The mega-frame is a dual system, where the steel frames
are composed of the mega-columns and perimeter columns along
each sloping face of the building, working in parallel with the
braced core which is the secondary resistant system. Therefore,
the exterior side column C1 carries the heaviest vertical loads on
its huge section. Since the structure is symmetrical, the torsional
moment in each column is small. C9 and C1 are sloping below the
27th floor, and the torsional moments are great in some lower
floors. Abrupt increases in shear forces and bending moment in
these columns are observed near the outrigger belts, especially
near the 26th floor and 27th floor. This is because the stiffness
of the outrigger belt is generally much larger than that between
adjoining stories. Consequently, there tends to be a weak story near
an outrigger belt. This issue should be adequately dealt with in
earthquake-resistant design of outrigger-braced tall buildings.
5.3. Material efficiency index
Material efficiency index (MEI) is usually used to estimate the
efficiency of concrete-filled steel tubular columns, which is defined
as the ratio of average axial stress to the maximum principal
stress, MEI = σn /σmax × 100%. Values of the MEI of the three
representative columns are listed in Table 5 and discussed below.
The exterior corner column C9 and exterior side column C1, as
shown as Fig. 3, are the main load-resistant components, and the
values of MEI of the two columns are above 80%. Due to a large
cross-section, a mega-column provides stiffness to resist lateral
forces and reduce lateral deformation. Due to efficient utilization of
Fig. 14. Inter-story drift ratios curves.
materials, a mega-frame provides lateral load resistance to prevent
instability of the global structure under compressive loads and
moments (i.e., p–∆ effect).
As shown in Fig. 16, the MEI curves are wavy with disconti-
nuities near the outrigger belts. Since the outrigger belts transfer
large lateral forces to the columns under lateral loading, the flex-
ural deformations of the columns are increased and the percent-
age of bending stress are also increased, leading to a reduction of
MEI.
6. Time history analysis
The response spectrum analysis conducted previously only
considered the maximum amplitude of seismic effect, but dynamic
analysis in the time domain can provide more information for
earthquake-resistant design of structures. The latter approach
consists of a step-by-step direct integration in which the time
domain is discretized into a large number of small increments,
and for each time interval the equations of motion are solved
to obtain the structural responses such as displacements. Four
recorded accelerograms were selected as inputs in the present
 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215 1213

(a) Axial force. (b) Shear force.

(c) Bending-moment. (d) Torsional-moment.

Fig. 15. Interior forces of the columns.

Table 5
MEI of the columns.
Floor C1 C5 C9 Floor C1 C5 C9 Floor C1 C5 C9

1 0.81 0.59 0.65 31 0.90 0.45 61 0.82 0.37

2 0.84 0.21 0.72 32 0.95 0.65 62 0.91 0.58
3 0.90 0.30 0.84 33 0.97 0.70 63 0.97 0.79
4 0.94 0.43 0.89 34 0.90 0.45 64 0.98 0.84
5 0.98 0.67 0.95 35 0.87 0.32 65 0.99 0.88
6 0.99 0.76 0.95 36 0.77 0.22 66 0.95 0.67
7 0.98 0.63 0.82 37 0.82 0.27 67 0.90 0.34
8 0.98 0.68 0.98 38 0.85 0.38 68 0.86 0.33
9 0.95 0.41 0.78 39 0.91 0.51 69 0.93 0.51
10 0.95 0.42 0.87 40 0.96 0.73 70 0.96 0.70
11 0.96 0.48 0.94 41 0.96 0.69 71 0.97 0.75
12 0.98 0.61 0.96 42 0.88 0.47 72 0.98 0.77
13 0.99 0.71 0.96 43 0.85 0.34 73 0.98 0.74
14 0.97 0.56 0.95 44 0.75 0.24 74 0.95 0.45
15 0.96 0.43 0.92 45 0.81 0.31 75 0.88 0.11
16 0.95 0.37 0.87 46 0.85 0.43 76 0.79 0.13
17 0.95 0.39 0.79 47 0.91 0.57 77 0.92 0.34
18 0.97 0.59 0.96 48 0.97 0.78 78 0.97 0.76
19 0.96 0.50 0.81 49 0.95 0.70 79 0.98 0.75
20 0.96 0.53 0.88 50 0.87 0.49 80 0.98 0.65
21 0.98 0.63 0.92 51 0.83 0.32 81 0.97 0.41
22 0.97 0.57 0.92 52 0.73 0.23 82 0.93 0.23
23 0.94 0.42 0.91 53 0.79 0.30 83 0.86 0.15
24 0.93 0.35 0.87 54 0.84 0.43 84 0.67 0.07
25 0.91 0.33 0.65 55 0.91 0.56 85 0.90 0.27
26 0.92 0.44 0.60 56 0.96 0.75 86 0.93 0.55
27 0.78 0.21 57 0.95 0.70 87 0.93 0.38
28 0.81 0.29 58 0.86 0.46 88 0.92 0.26
29 0.85 0.35 59 0.81 0.30 89 0.91 0.49
30 0.99 0.59 60 0.72 0.23 90 0.84 0.55

time-history analysis: the El-Centro (N-S ), Taft (E-W ), Chi-Chi and
Taiwan1115. Each accelerogram is composed of two horizontal and
one vertical components of ground acceleration excitation. For
each accelerogram, the magnitude of the ground acceleration was
scaled. The scaled ground accelerations used in the present analysis
have the peak ground accelerations of 70 gal, 195 gal and 390
gal, representing an earthquake event with 50-year, 100-year and
950-year return period, respectively.
The maximum lateral displacement and inter-story drift ratio
of the structure under the four recorded accelerograms are listed
in Table 6. It is illustrated that the structure still remains elastic
after the action of the earthquake excitation with 50-year return
1214 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215
Table 6
Maximum displacement and inter-story drift radio.
Earthquake action Maximum displacement/mm
x y
50-yr return period 286 357
100-yr return period 697 851
950-yr return period 1127 1320
Fig. 16. MEI of the columns.
Fig. 17. Displacement envelope curves for Taiwan1115 record.
period and satisfies the first lever performance requirement. It is
also revealed that the structure deforms plastically under seismic
action with a 950-year return period; however, the maximum
inter-story drift ratio is 1/119, which is less than the corresponding
criteria (1/70) stipulated in the local design code (BTS) [23].
Fig. 17 shows the curves of the displacement envelope in the y
direction under the excitation of Taiwan1115 record with different
return periods, it is noted that under the seismic action with
70 gal peak ground acceleration, the deformation curve is smooth
without inflexions, similar to a deforming cantilever, indicating
that the structure remains in an elastic stage. When the peak
ground acceleration is increased to 390 gal, the curve has an
inflexion, which implies that some structural components have
deformed plastically. The curves of the displacement envelope
in the y direction subjected to the four accelerograms with a
950-year return period are shown in Fig. 18 and the seismic
responses of the lateral displacement at the top storey are shown
in Fig. 19. Since the spectral compositions of the four earthquake
records are different, there are differences in the curves of time-
history responses of the lateral displacements. However, it is
observed from Fig. 18 that the curves of the displacement envelope
have a similar shape, showing that the mega-frame has a shear
deformation mode.
Fig. 20 plots the dynamic amplification factors for the case of
earthquake events with a 50-year return period and a 950-year
∆/H Maximum inter-story drift ratio
x y x y
1/1491 1/1196 1/656 1/525
1/613 1/502 1/224 1/182
1/379 1/324 1/136 1/119
Fig. 18. Displacement envelope curves for the four records with 950-year return
period.
return period. The dynamic magnification factors of the middle
floors are close to 1, which suggest that the equivalent rigidities
along the height of the structure is distributed well proportionally.
Since the base of the finite element model was assumed to be rigid,
there is a discontinuity between the first floor and the ground. The
floor area from the storeys 91st to 101st is smaller than that of a
standard floor, so the rigidities of these floors are smaller, resulting
in larger dynamic amplification factors.
7. Conclusions
A detailed study on the dynamic characteristics and seismic
responses of Taipei 101, the world’s tallest building, was presented
in this paper. The constitutive relationships for rectangular CFT
columns were established based on the unified theory, and then
were verified through comparison between the shaking table test
data and numerical analysis results. A 3-D finite element model
of Taipei 101 structure was established based on the verified
constitutive relationships for the rectangular CFT columns and
selected finite element types for the structural members. The
seismic analysis results of the super-tall building indicated that the
structural system, with belt trusses at every eighth or tenth story,
provides equal stiffness along the height of the building, which
can decrease the lateral deformation efficiently. Meanwhile, for
such a mega-frame structural system with a central braced core
connected to perimeter columns on each building face, the total
dead and live loads at every floor are transferred to the sloping
exterior columns, thereby the structural capacity to withstand
lateral loading is enhanced. The results of this research also
showed that Taipei 101 has relatively high earthquake resistance
and could guarantee the structural safety under a seismic action
with a moderate seismic fortification, as stipulated in the local
seismic design code. However, it was revealed that there are abrupt
changes in the shear force in the columns near the floors with
outrigger belts. This issue should be adequately dealt with in the
earthquake-resistant design of high-rise structures of this type.
 H. Fan et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 65 (2009) 1206–1215
Fig. 19. Time-history responses of the top storey lateral displacement for the four records with a 950-year return period.
(a) The results with a 50-year (b) The results with a 950-year
return period. return period.
Fig. 20. Dynamic magnification factors.
Acknowledgement
The work described in this paper was fully supported by a
grant from the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, China (Project No: CityU 116906).
Appendix
The tested model with 0.58 m storey height is a 1/5 scale model
of a 5-storey steel frame. The cross-sections of the columns are
60 mm × 60 mm × 2 mm, and the cross-sections of I-shape steel
beams are 40 mm × 60 mm × 2 mm × 2 mm. The steel tube columns
were filled with concrete, and the concrete compressive strength
is 40 MPa. Braces were used in the perimeter bays parallel with the
direction of earthquake excitation. The model, instrumented with
an accelerometer and a displacement-meter at the basement and
each floor, was bolted to the shaking table (shown in Fig. 6).
References
[1] Bungale ST. Structural analysis and design of tall building. New York: The
William Byrd Press; 1988.
1215
[2] Li GQ, Li QS. Theory and its application of time-dependent reliability of
engineering structures. Beijing: Science Press; 2001.
[3] Li QS, Li ZN, Li GQ, Meng JF, Tang J. Experimental and numerical seismic
investigations of the Three Gorges Dam. Engineering Structures 2005;27:
501–13.
[4] Lv XL, Zou Y, Lu WS. Shaking table model test on Shanghai World Financial
Center Tower. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2007;36:
439–47.
[5] Ou JP, Long X, Li QS, Xiao YQ. Vibration control of steel jacket offshore platform
structures with damping isolation systems. Engineering Structures 2007;29:
1525–38.
[6] Fan Z, Long Y. Linear analysis of tall buildings using spline elements.
Engineering Structures 1991;13:27–33.
[7] Takabatake H, Takesako R, Kobayashi M. Simplified analysis of doubly
symmetric tube structures. Structural Design of Tall Buildings 1995;4:137–53.
[8] Li QS, Cao H, Li GQ. Analysis of free vibrations of tall buildings. Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 1994;120(9):1861–76.
[9] Li QS, Cao H, Li GQ. Static and dynamic analysis of straight bars with variable
cross-section. Computers and Structures 1994;59:1185–91.
[10] Li QS, Wu JR. Correlation of dynamic characteristics of a super tall building
from full-scale measurements and numerical analysis with various finite
element models. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2004;33:
1311–36.
[11] Ventura CE, Schuster ND. Structural dynamic properties of a reinforced
concrete high-rise building during construction. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering 1996;23:950–72.
[12] Chajes MJ, Zhang L, Kirby JT. Dynamic analysis of tall building using reduced-
order continuum model. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1996;122:
1284–91.
[13] Pan TC, Brownjohn JMW, You XT. Correlating measured and simulated
dynamic responses of a tall building to long-distance earthquakes. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2004;33:611–32.
[14] Brownjohn JMW, Pan TC, Deng XY. Correlating dynamic characteristics from
field measurements and numerical analysis of a high-rise building. Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics 2000;29:523–43.
[15] Qi X, Chang KL, Tsai KC. Seismic design of eccentrically braced space frame.
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1997;74(11):977–85.
[16] Rahimian A, Romero EM. The tallest building in Mexico city Torre Mayor
Mexico city, Mexico. In: Proceedings of the second international conference
on advances in steel structures. 1999. p. 755–73.
[17] Research Institute of Building & Construction. Report on the structural design
scheme of Taipei 101. Evengreen Consulting Engineering, Inc., Taipei; 2003.
[18] Guide of Operation and Meshing for ANSYS. The ANSYS Company; 2002.
[19] Zhong ST. Concrete-filled steel tubular structure. Beijing: Tsinghua University
Press; 2003.
[20] Design code for concrete filled steel tubes (DL/T5085-1999). Beijing: Electric
Power Publishing House; 1999.
[21] China Ministry of Construction. Code for seismic design of buildings
(GB50011-2001). Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press; 2003.
[22] Clough WR, Penzien J. Dynamics of structures. New York: McGraw Hill; 1993.
[23] Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of China. Building Technology
Standards. Construction Bureau. Taipei.