×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

(OP)
Hello, all

I am designing chevron braced frame in one story tilt-up building.
And zipper column should be needed by unbalanced vertical force.
But spreadsheet attached shows Qb = 0 because this is one story building(= top story).

I just wonder if I do not need zipper column by spreadsheet or if I am missing something.

On AISC 341-05, there is no 13.4a exception but I am not sure about this.

My company purchaced this sheets. And Danial T. Li who made those says there is 13.4a exception and he believe that program does not have any problems.

Please have a time to reivew this and teach me.

Thank you all in advance.

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

I haven't the faintest idea of what you are talking about.  What is a zipper column?  Maybe other forum members can clarify what you are concerned about, but I have no idea.

BA

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

I don't believe there's any explicit exception to the unbalanced force provision.  I think you still need to either provide a zipper column or design the beam for the unbalanced force.

BAretired, a zipper column is an extra column at the center of a chevron brace.  It helps with the collapse mechanism that occurs when the compression leg of the chevron brace buckles and all of the force in the tension leg is dumped into the beam.  You either have to design the beam for this large force or add the zipper column.

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Options:
1) Don't design it as a SCBF.  The requirements for the beam force goes down with an OBF.  

2) Design the beam for that extra load.  This is a real load that this beam can see.  

What happens is that the compression brace buckles and then the tension brace is the only thing left to resist the lateral load.  Any tension in the brace that is cannot be balanced out by the buckled compression brace ends up pulling down on that beam!  

That is the reasoning behind the code provision.  I've seen some cool pictures of chevron failures and it happens exactly as described.   

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Had to websearch "SCBF", I hate these acronyms that didn't exist before I retired.

"a zipper column is an extra column at the center of a chevron brace.  It helps with the collapse mechanism that occurs when the compression leg of the chevron brace buckles and all of the force in the tension leg is dumped into the beam.  You either have to design the beam for this large force or add the zipper column." Why is the compression leg buckling? If this is a sudden failure condition, don't make it the weakest link.

 

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Wouldn't it be better to add bracing along the compression brace and/or make the original members bigger. Adding a column adds a footing and a lot of extra juice.

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

Could you possibly design this structure using R=3?  The design would then become much easier to perform.

The only benefit I could see by trying to design this using a higher R is to reduce the base shear of the building (which must be pretty high if you are using tilt up panel).
 

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

paddingtongreen,

SCBF stands for "Sacred Cat of Burma Fanciers".  Here is a link to their web page:

http://www.scbf.com/

BA

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

whats the dimensions of your building?

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

(OP)
It is 1164' x 400' with 40' high. And there are (2)-two bays frames in middle at transverse direction.

RE: Unbalaced vertical force on SCBF

I transcribe my entry in the AISC forum question:

In p. 234 of Ductile design of Steel Structures
Bruneau, Uang, Whittaker
McGraw Hill 1998

you see that a chevron shape with a bottom central equilibrating zipper is not labeled ZIP but STG (Strut to ground). There is exposed that as per one study by Khatib, ZIP bracings, that have not the zipper strut at the bottom level perform better against earthquake (p.236), so that must be the reason.

Also I examine a copy of AISC 341 recently downloaded and I don't see anything about in the code first section itself, yet

Fig. C-I-13.3. (a) Two-story X-braced frame; (b) "zipper-column" with inverted-V bracing

at the commentary to 13.1 has a ZIP frame without the bottom zipper.

In commentary to 13.4a says

"The adverse effect of this unbalanced load can be mitigated by using bracing configurations, such as V- and inverted-V-braces in alternate stories creating an X-configuration over two story modules, or by using a "zipper column" with Vor inverted-V bracing (Khatib, Mahin and Pister, 1988). See Figure C-I-13.3."

So that's it. AISC reckons the superior behaviour of the ZIP configuration without the zipper strut at bottom level.

That the Li sheet contemplates everything well I have not formed opinion about, since I have not entered the issue, nor have fresh in my mind now these matters; but it is clear that the preferred configuration at bottom level is without strut zipper out of better performance.  

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources