An Approximate Analysis of Combined System of Framed Tube, Shear Core and Belt Truss in High-Rise Buildings

THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL AND SPECIAL BUILDINGS
Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 18, 607–624 (2009)

Published online 20 February 2009 in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/tal.503
AN APPROXIMATE ANALYSIS OF COMBINED SYSTEM OF

FRAMED TUBE, SHEAR CORE AND BELT TRUSS IN HIGH-
RISE BUILDINGS
REZA RAHGOZAR* AND YASSER SHARIFI

Civil Engineering Department, University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran
SUMMARY
In this paper a mathematical model for the combined system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss is developed
with the objective of determining the optimum location of belt truss along the height of the building. The effect
of belt truss and shear core on a framed tube is considered as a concentrated moment at the belt truss location.
This concentrated moment acts in a direction opposite to rotation due to lateral loads. The axial deformation
functions for web and flange of the frames are considered to be quadratic and cubic functions, respectively;
developing their stress relations and minimizing the total potential energy of the structure with respect to the
lateral deflection (u), rotation of the plane section (f) and unknown coefficients of shear lag (a1, a2, b1 and b2),
the mathematical model is developed. This model yields the displacement, axial stress distribution and bending
stiffness as a function of the height of the combined system. The range application and validity of the proposed
model is demonstrated by several numerical examples (30-, 40- and 50-storey buildings). The effects of belt truss
position on lateral displacement and stress distribution are investigated and the optimum location for belt truss
is obtained. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
1. INTRODUCTION
High-rise buildings are generally offices or residential structures and in some instances they include
parking garages. As the height of buildings increases with no corresponding increase in width or depth,
lateral forces resulting from wind and seismic effects become the dominant design consideration.
Lateral displacement of the building must be strictly controlled, both for occupants’ comfort and to
control secondary structural effects. In the last four decades, engineers have developed several new
framing schemes for tall buildings in order to minimize the materials used. In general, framed tube
structures are widely accepted as an economical system for high-rise buildings over a wide range of
building heights (Coull and Subedi, 1971; Coull and Bose, 1975; Coull and Ahmed, 1978; Taranath,
1988; Connor and Pouangare, 1991; Kwan, 1994; Smith and Coull, 1996; Kwan, 1996; Lee and Loo,
2001; Saffari et al., 2003; Tarjan and Kollar, 2004). In its basic form, the system consists of closely
spaced exterior columns along the periphery interconnected by deep spandrel beams at each floor.
This produces a system of rigidly connected jointed orthogonal frame panels forming a rectangular
tube, which acts as a cantilevered hollow box according to classical beam theory.
A relatively new concept that has evolved within the past two decades is the technique of using a
belt truss on a braced core combined with exterior columns. In this system, columns are tied to the
belt trusses. Therefore, in addition to the traditional function of supporting gravity loads, the columns
* Correspondence to: Reza Rahgozar, Civil Engineering Department, University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran. E-mail: rahgozar@
mail.uk.ac.ir
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

608 R. RAHGOZAR AND Y. SHARIFI
restrain the lateral movement of the building. When the building is subjected to lateral forces, tie-down
action of the belt truss restrains bending of the shear core by introducing a point of inflection in its
deflection curve. This reversal in curvature reduces the lateral movement at the top. The belt trusses
function as horizontal fascia stiffeners and engage the exterior columns, which are not directly con-
nected to the outrigger belt truss. If a building is to have one or more floors devoted to mechanical
equipment, rather than lease space, large belt or outrigger trusses can be placed in the perimeter, one
storey in height (Taranath, 1988; Smith and Coull, 1996).
A large number of approximate and exact methods have been carried out to investigate the behav-
iour, deflection, vibration and modification of the stress distribution in framed tube system subjected
to the lateral loads using different models (Coull and Subedi, 1971; Coull and Bose, 1975; Coull and
Ahmed, 1978; Connor and Pouangare, 1991; Kwan, 1994; Kwan, 1996; Lee and Loo, 2001; Saffari
et al., 2003; Tarjan and Kollar, 2004; Kaviani et al., 2008). In another study, a rigid shear core has
been added to the system of framed tube in order to decrease shear lag phenomena and lateral dis-
placement (Lee and Loo, 2001).
In this paper a simple mathematical model for calculation of stresses in columns of combined framed
tube, shear core and belt truss system is presented. The belt truss and shear core are considered as
bending spring with constant rotational stiffness which acts as concentrated moment at its positioning
level. The stress distributions in flange-frame and web-frame systems are assumed to be cubic and
quadratic functions, respectively (Coull and Ahmed, 1978). Then the total potential energy has been
minimized to drive equations for predicting structural deformation. All results of the structure are then
compared with analysis using SAP 2000 (Computers and Structures, Berkeley, California, USA)
software; efficiency and exactness of the proposed model is investigated.
2. BEHAVIOUR OF COMBINED FRAMED TUBE, SHEAR CORE AND BELT TRUSS

Framed tube structures are one of the most efficient systems in high-rise buildings for carrying lateral
loads. Analyses of such structures usually demand considerable amount of time and effort because of
the existence of a large number of members and joints. In these frames, shear lag phenomena decrease
the lateral stiffness and also create a non-uniform stress distribution in columns. The cantilevered
bending action of framed tubes produces tensile and compressive stresses on opposite faces of the
tube. The flexibility in frames causes deflections arising from shear loads. The effect of shear deflec-
tion in the tube leads to nonlinear distribution of axial stress in web and flange frames. This pheno-
menon is known as shear lag. Axial stress distribution in columns of a framed tube is shown in
Figure 1.
The occurrence of shear lag has long been recognized in hollow box girders as well as in tubular
buildings. In tubular buildings, flexibility of spandrel beams produces a shear lag with the effect of
increasing the axial stresses in the corner columns and of reducing them in the columns towards the
centre of the orthogonal frame panels.
Computational methods such as finite elements can be utilized to predict the behaviour of such
structures; however, the three-dimensional nature of this problem demands not only a large amount
of computer recourses but also human resources, which are error prone. In more simplified models,
the shear core of a structure is considered as a cantilever beam which resists the lateral loads. It has
been pointed out that when the stiffness is constant along the core’s height, maximum displacement
at the top of the cantilever beam subjected to concentrated, uniform and triangular load distribution
can be calculated from ∆p = PH3/3EI, ∆u = WH4 /8EI and ∆T = 11WH4/120EI equations, respectively.
As the core’s height increases, lateral displacement will increase and core stiffness will decrease
considerably. In order to decrease lateral displacement, a belt truss is used to connect the arms to the
shear core. It should be noted that for a given building, the benefit of tying down the exterior columns
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 18, 607–624 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
COMBINED SYSTEM IN HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS 609
Figure 1. Axial stress distribution in framed tube
to the core is a function of two distinct characteristics, namely, stiffness of the equivalent spring and
rotation of the cantilever at the spring’s location. Belt truss in this system reacts similar to a bending
spring in the cantilever beam. The position of the belt and members specification can reduce the lateral
displacement and modify the stress distribution in the columns of the framed tube considerably.
A closed form solution for the optimum belt truss location can be derived utilizing the principles
of calculus. By writing the compatibility equation for rotation at X, which is the location of the belt
truss measured from the top, deflection at the top of the structure can be obtained. The optimum loca-
tion of the belt truss is where the deflection is at its maximum. This is obtained by differentiating
the deflection equation with respect to X and equating to zero. Here the building is modelled as a
cantilever beam with a spring at a distance X from the top, where belt truss is located as shown in
Figure 2. The optimum location obtained for three types of lateral loadings such as concentrated,
uniform and triangular distribution are xp = 0·334H, xu = 0·455H and xT = 0·429H, respectively.
3. SIMULATING FOR COMBINED SYSTEM OF FRAMED TUBE,

SHEAR CORE AND BELT TRUSS
In this section, a simple mathematical model to predict stress distribution and displacement profile for
a combined system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss is presented. Kwan has proposed a model
for analysis of framed tube structures (Figure 1). In his model, a number of assumptions are made in
describing the framed tube system using equivalent orthotropic plates. He developed relations for
stress analysis and calculation of the system’s stiffness. The work of Kwan was a useful introduction
to research on the combined system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss. In this article, using and
applying the following assumptions, a new model for the combined system is presented as shown in
Figures 3 and 4
(a) The floor slabs in the structure are considered to be rigid diaphragms within their own planes.
(b) The axial deformation functions in web and flange of the frames are considered to be quadratic
and cubic functions, respectively.
(c) The effect of belt truss and shear core on a framed tube structure is considered as a concentrated
moment at the belt truss location which acts in a direction opposite to rotation due to lateral
loads.
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Figure 2. Behaviour of shear core and belt truss system
Figure 3. Schematic plan of combined system
(d) The spacing of the beams and columns are uniform throughout the building’s height.
(e) Both beams and columns are uniform throughout the building’s height.
(f ) The core is fully fixed at the base.
Using the above assumptions, a framed tube is modelled similar to a beam with a box’s cross section
in such a way that distribution of axial deflection in web (Ww) and flange (Wf) are given by Equations
(1) and (2):
()
3
 x x 
Ww = φ a (1 − α ) + α  (1)
 a a 
()
2
 y 
W f = φ a (1 − β ) + β  (2)
 b 
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Figure 4. Diagram model of multi-storey structure
where f is the axial rotation which passes through the diagonals of the intersection of rectangular
diaphragms located at the bottom of the structure; a and b are coefficients of shear lag in web and
flange frames, 2b and 2a are the equivalent dimensions of the box section; and y and x are coordinates
of a point along the height of structure (Figure 5).
The axial and shear strains in the web and flange of the system are expressed by the following
equations:
∂Ww
εz = (3)
∂z
∂W f
ε z′ = (4)
∂z
∂u ∂Ww
γ xz = + (5)
∂z ∂x
∂Ww
γ yz = (6)
∂y
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Figure 5. Equated orthotropic membrane
In Equations (3) to (6), ez and e ′z are axial strains in the web and flange, g xz and g yz are shear strains
in web and flange, respectively. Utilizing these equations, the strain energy of the framed tube is
calculated as follows:
∏ =∫ ∫
H a H b
t w ( Ew ε z 2 + Gw γ xz 2 ) dxdz + ∫ ∫ t f ( E f ε z′ 2 + G f γ yz 2 ) dydz (7)
e 0 −a 0 −b
In Equation (7), Ew, Gw, Ef and Gf are moduli of elasticity and equivalent shear moduli of web
and flange frames, respectively, tw and tf are equivalent thickness for web and flange frames and
H is height of the frame. The potential energy due to concentrated, uniformly and triangularly
distributed loads and concentrated moment Kqc is calculated by using the following equations,
respectively:
∏ p
= − Pu ( H ) (8)
∏
H
p
= − ∫ Uu ( z ) (9)
0
z
∏
H
p
= −∫ T u (z) (10)
0 H
∏ p
= Kθ c 2 (11)
In Equations (8) to (11), u(z) is the lateral displacement of a structure at height z from the base, and
P, U, T, K and qC are the concentrated load, intensity of uniformly distributed load, intensity of trian-
gular load, rotational stiffness of belt truss and rotation of frame at level of belt truss, respectively.
Minimization of a structure’s total potential energy with respect to f, u and shear lag coefficients
yields four differential equations with partial derivatives of first and second order. Instead of solving
DOI: 10.1002/tal
a system of partial differential equations, we can assume a constant (EI) and substitute for f the fol-
lowing equation:
1 z
φ=
EI ∫
0
Mdz (12)
Here, M is the measure of moment at position z. The parameter u can also be calculated from the
following equation:
u=∫  − φ  dz
z S
(13)
0  4G t a 
w w
where S is the shear at a section with position z. Replacing parameters f and u in the potential energy
relation and using a and b as multi-term functions with unknown coefficients of a1, a2, b1 and b2.
( Hz ) + α 2 ( Hz ) − ( Hz ) 
2 2
α = α1 1 − 2 (14)
( ) ( ) ( ) 
2 2
z  z z
β = β1 1 − + β2 2 − (15)
H  H H
Minimizing the total potential energy and applying boundary conditions, the parameters a1, a2, b1
and b2 in Equations (14) to (15) for concentrated, uniform and triangular lateral load distributions have
been given by Kwan (1994). In this paper the same notations are used for concentrated moments due
to the belt truss, these parameters are calculated as follows:
35 [8 B1 − 3nw B2 ]
α1 = (16)
21nw B5 + 40 nw B4 + 160 B1
2
35 [8 B1 − 3nw B3 ]
α2 = (17)
21nw B5 + 40 nw B4 + 160 B1
2
15 [56 B1 − 5n f B2 ]
β1 = (18)
5n f B5 + 40 n f B4 + 672 B1
2
15 [56 B1 + 5n f B3 ]
β2 = (19)
5n f B5 + 40 n f B4 + 672 B1
2
In Equations (16) to (19), the coefficients nw, nf B1, B2, B3, B4 and B5 are as follows:
Gw C 2 Gf C2
nw = , n f = (20)
Ew a 2 E f b2
 B1 = 6C − 15CH + 10 H
2 2

 B2 = 12C 2 − 49CH + 42 H 2 
 B = −12C 2 + 49CH − 70 H 2 + 35 H 3 C  (21)
 3 
 B4 = 108C − 273CH + 182 H
2 2

 B5 = 48C 2 − 140CH + 105 H 2 
where C is the distance of belt truss from the base of the structure.
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Hence, the displacement of web and flange frames can be calculated from Equations (1), (2),
(14) and (15); differentiating these equations and multiplying the results by equivalent modulus
of elasticity for each panel, we derive the related equations of axial stress distribution as
follows:
()
dφ 
3
x x 
σ z = Ew a (1 − α ) + α
dz  a 
(22)
a
a  1− β + β ( ) 
dφ 
2
x 
σ′ = E z f ( ) (23)
dz  b 
a  1−α + α f ( )  − E ()
dφ  Kθ
3 3
x x   x x 
σ Sz = E w ( ) a  1−α c
( ) + αM
a  (24)
w M
dz  a a  EI ′  ( ) a
dφ 
()
Kθ c 
()
2 2
x  y 
σ S′z = E f a (1 − β ) + β − Ef a (1 − β M ) + β M
dz  b   (25)
′
( EI )  b 
In Equations (22) and (23), sz and s ′z are axial stresses in web and flange frames without the
effect of belt truss, respectively. In Equations (24) and (25), sSz, s ′Sz are axial stresses in web
and flange frames with the effect of belt truss, where aM, bM are shear lag coefficients of web
and flange frames, respectively, when the combined frame system is subjected to a concen-
trated moment. At the upper level of the structure, f is not zero and the effect of this parameter
must be considered for axial stress distribution. However, the terms related to f in comparison
to the terms forming Equations (22) to (25) are negligible in a primary analysis (Kwan,
1994).
Axial stresses in the combined system, which are expressed by Equations (24) and (25), are depen-
dent on the unknown parameter df/dz. Thus, by replacing the axial stresses of the framed tube, before
superimposing Equations (22) and (23), in moment equilibrium of the structure (Equation (26)), the
amount of df/dz = M/EI is determined.
dφ a b
EI = M = ∫ 2t wσ z xdx + ∫ 2t f σ z′ ady + 4 Ak σ k a (26)
dz − a − b
where Ak and sk are the cross-sectional area and axial stress of each corner columns in the framed
tube system, respectively. By equating EI(df/dz) with external moments created by the three types of
loading considered here, the equivalent bending stiffness of (EI) can be calculated using Equation (27)
and (EI)′ for concentrated moment using Equation (28).
EI =
4
3 ( ) 2
( ) 2
Ew t w a 3 1 − α + 4 E f t f a 2 b 1 − β + 4 Em Ak a 2
5 3
(27)
EI ′ = E t a (1 − α ) + 4 E t a b (1 − β ) + 4 E A a
4 2 2
( ) w w
3
M f f
2
M m k
2 (28)
3 5 3
Here, Em is the modulus of elasticity for the four corner columns. Furthermore, the equivalent stiff-
ness of the twisting spring, which includes the effect of belt truss on framed tube, is calculated by
DOI: 10.1002/tal
multiplying the columns cross-sectional area of flange frame by the distance between the two frames
and subtracting (EI)′/C as follows:
(2 a ) E f
(1 + 2sb ) A − EIC )′
2
(
K= c (29)
2C
In Equation (29), s is column spacing and Ac is the sum of columns cross-sectional areas of flange
frame. Thus, the rotation of combined system (q), at belt truss level for concentrated (P), uniformly
distributed (U) and triangular load distribution (T) can be calculated from the following equations:
( EI )′ 2
 P  HC − C  + P 
θC p =    (30)
( EI )′ + KC  EI 2  4Gw t w a 
θ Cd =
( EI )′
( EI )′ + KC  EI 2
(
 U 1 H 2 C − 1 HC 2 + 1 C 3 + U ( H − C )
 2 6 4Gw t w a  ) (31)
( EI )′
 T  1 H 2 C 1 HC 2 1 C 
4
T 2
C C 
θ Ct =    − +  +  −  (32)
( EI )′ + KC  EI 3 4 24 H  4Gw t w a  2 2 H  
4. LATERAL DISPLACEMENT OF COMBINED SYSTEM OF FRAMED TUBE,

SHEAR CORE AND BELT TRUSS
Substituting (EI) and (EI)′ from Equations (27) and (28) into Equation (12), then the result substituted
into Equation (13), lateral displacement of the structure subjected to concentrated, uniform and trian-
gular distribution loading and concentrated moment are determined. For calculating the lateral dis-
placement of combined system (u), it has been assumed that (EI) and (EI)′ are constant along the
height and are equal in measure to the base dimension of the structure. Displacement of combined
system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss can be estimated at a distance of z from the base of
the structure subjected to the following loads:
Concentrated loading:
u=
EI 2 (
P 1 2 1 3
Hz − z +
6
P
4Gw t w a
z−)Kθ C p z 2
2 ( EI )′
for z < C (33)
u=
EI 2 (
P 1 2 1 3
Hz − z +
6
P
4Gw t w a
z− )
Kθ C p z 2 Kθ C p C
−
2 ( EI )′ 2 ( EI )′
( z − C ) forr z ≥ C (34)
Uniformly distributed loading:
u=
EI 4 (
U 1 2 2 1 3 1 4
H z − Hz +
6 24
z +
U
4Gw t w a
1
Hz − z 2 −
2 )
Kθ Cd z 2
2 ( EI )′
( ) for z < C (35)
U  H 2 z 2 Hz 3 z 4  U  z2 Kθ Cd
u=  − + +  Hz −  − ( z 2 − C ( z − C )) for z ≥ C (36)
EI 4 6 24  4Gw t w a  2  ′
2 ( EI )
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Triangular distributed loading:
 Hz − 1 z  − KθCt z
2
T 1 2 2 1 1 z5  T 3
u=  H z − Hz +
3
 +   for z < C (37)
EI 6 12 120 H 4Gw t w a 2 6 H 2 ( EI )′
T  H 2 z 2 Hz 3 z5   Hz − z  − KθCt
3
T
u=  − +  +   ( z 2 − C ( z − C )) for z ≥ C (38)
EI 6 12 120 H 4Gw t w a 2 6 H  2 ( EI )′
5. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
To illustrate the application of the proposed method, several numerical examples such as 30-, 40- and
50-storey buildings are investigated for combined system of framed tube, shear core and belt truss as
shown in Figures 3 and 4.
The following specifications are used in numerical examples of all three types of multi-storey build-
ings: storey height = 3 m; column spacing = 2·5 m; plan dimension of the building 30 × 35 m (length
of web panel of framed tube = 30 m; length of flange panel of framed tube = 35 m); thickness of shear
core panels = 25 cm; cross-sectional area of beams and columns = 575 cm2; width of beams and
columns = 60 cm; beams and columns moments of inertia = 317 400 cm4; Poisson ratio = 0·25;
modulus of elasticity = 2 039 000 kg/cm2 and shear modulus of elasticity = 784 200 kg/cm2.
All structures are analysed and the results of displacement and axial stresses from the proposed
method are compared with the results of SAP 2000 software. After verifying the results, optimized
position of the belt with the objective of decreasing displacement based on variation in belt truss posi-
tion along the height of the structure is obtained.
Displacement, stress distribution in flange and web frames for a combined system of 30 stories is
shown in Figures 6–8. Belt truss is located at 3/4 of the building’s height. It can be seen that the
maximum error for displacements is 8·5%; however, at the highest level, this amount is less than 1%.
Furthermore, the stress ratio at the point of maximum stress shows an error percentage of less than
4%.
Displacement, stress distribution in flange and web frames for a combined system of 40 stories is
shown in Figures 9–11. Belt truss position is at 1/2 of the building’s height. It can be seen from these
100
Approx. Analysis
80 SAP 2000
Height (m)
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Displacement (cm)
Figure 6. Displacement of 30 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading

(Belt Location (B.L.) = 3H/4)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
300
Approx. Analysis
Axial stress at the bottom

of the structure (kg/cm )
250 SAP 2000
2
200
150
100
50
0
0 5 10 15
Length of flange frame (m)
Figure 7. Stress distribution in the flange of 30 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous distributed
loading (B.L = 3H/4)
300
Approx. Analysis
Axial stress at the botttom
250
2
SAP2000
200
150
100
50
0
0 5 10 15
Length of web frame (m)
Figure 8. Stress distribution in the web of 30 stories combine system subjected to homogeneous distributed
140
Approx. Analysis
120 SAP 2000
100
Height (m)
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8
Displacement (cm)

(B.L = H/2)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
500
Axial stress at the bottom of

Approx. Analysis
the structure (kg/cm )

400 SAP 2000
2
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
Figure 10. Stress distribution in the flange of 40 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous
distributed loading (B.L = H/2)
500
Axial stress at the bottom of
Approx. Analysis
the structure (kg/cm )
400
2
SAP 2000
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20
Figure 11. Stress distribution in the web of 40 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous distributed
loading (B.L = H/2)
figures that the measurement of displacement at the highest stories had very small errors in stresses
at the point of maximum stress. Variation in belt position for a 40-storey building, stress distribution
and maximum displacements are studied precisely. As shown in Figures 12–19, when the belt truss
reaches 1/6 of the frame’s height, the displacement at the highest level of the building reaches a
minimum amount, and it is also the same for shear lag in the web and flange frames.
The variation in belt truss position and its effect on axial stress and displacement at the highest
level of structure in a 50-storey building are shown in Figures 20–25. As it is clear in these figures,
the best position for the belt truss is approximately at 1/6 of the building’s height. In all examples,
the output results are compared with results obtained from SAP 2000 software program. The results
show that the percentage of error is low and acceptable.
6. CONCLUSIONS
Framed tube, shear core and belt truss systems in high-rise buildings are one of the most suitable
systems for resisting lateral loads such as wind and earthquake. In this system, the resistant moment
DOI: 10.1002/tal
120
Approx. Analysis
100 SAP 2000
80
Height (m)
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Displacement (cm)
(B.L = 3H/4)
500
Approx. Analysis
2
400 SAP 2000
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
distributed loading (B.L = 3H/4)
500
Approx. Analysis
450
2
400 SAP 2000

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 5 10 15
DOI: 10.1002/tal
140
Approx. Analysis
120
SAP 2000
100
Height (m)
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Displacement (cm)
Figure 15. Displacement of 40 stories combined system subjected to triangle distributed loading (B.L = H/6)
600
Approx. Analysis
500
2
SAP 2000
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
Figure 16. Stress distribution in the flange of 40 stories combined system subjected to triangle distributed
loading (B.L = H/6)
600
Approx. Analysis
2
500
SAP 2000
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20
Figure 17. Stress distribution in the web of 40 stories combined system subjected to triangle distributed
loading (B.L = H/6)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
140
Approx. Analysis
120
100 SAP 2000
Height (m)
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Displacement (m)
Figure 18. Displacement of 40 stories combined system subjected to triangle distributed loading (B.L = H/2)
600
Approx. Analysis
2
500
SAP 2000
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
Figure 19. Stress distribution in the flange of 40 stories combined system subjected to triangle distributed
loading (B.L = H/2)
160
Approx. Analysis
140
SAP 2000
120
100
Height (m)
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Displacement (cm)
(B.L = H/6)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
700
Approx. Analysis

600

2
SAP 2000
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
700
SAP 2000
600
2
Approx. Analysis
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
loading (B.L = H/6)
160
Approx. Analysis
140
120 SAP 2000
Height (m)
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Displacement (cm)
(B.L = H/2)
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Axial stress at the bottom of the

700
Approx. Analysis
600
SAP 2000
structure (kg/cm )
500
2
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15
700
Approx. Analysis
2
600
SAP 2000
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20
loading (B.L = H/2)
and bending stiffness increase while lateral displacement of the structure decreases. In this paper, a
primary non-continuous structure with a set of simple assumptions is modelled as a continuous struc-
ture with orthotropic plates. In the proposed method, the distribution of axial deflections in each panel
of the web or flange are considered independently. So, shear lag in each panel of the web and flange
of the frame is calculated separately. Approximate analysis of combined system of framed tube, shear
core and belt truss shows a good understanding of structural behaviour, and it requires less time for
primary analysis of the structure. Numerical examples show that, the results obtained from approxi-
mate analysis of a combined system are useful and suitable for primary design of structures. Analysis
of results shows that, the best position for belt truss to control the maximum displacement is in a range
of 1/4 to 1/6 of the structure’s height.
REFERENCES
Connor JJ, Pouangare CC. 1991. Simple model for design of framed tube structures. Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, ASCE 117: 3623–3644.
DOI: 10.1002/tal
Coull A, Ahmed K. 1978. Deflection of framed-tube structures. Journal of Structural Division 104: 857–862.
Coull A, Bose B. 1975. Simplified analysis of frame tube structures. Journal of Structural Division 101: 2223–
2240.
Coull A, Subedi N. 1971. Framed-tube structures for high rise buildings. Journal of Structural Division 97:
2097–2105.
Kaviani P, Rahgozar R, Saffari H. 2008. Approximate analysis of tall buildings using sandwich beam models
with variable cross-section. Journal of Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 17: 401–418.
Kwan AKH. 1994. Simple method for approximate analysis of framed-tube structures. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 120: 1221–1239.
Kwan AKH. 1996. Shear lag in shear core walls. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 122: 1097–1104.
Lee K, Loo Y. 2001. Simple analysis of framed-tube structures with multiple internal tubes. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 127: 450–460.
Saffari H, Rahgozar R, Mahjoob R. 2003. Simple method for analysis of tube frame. Sixth International Confer-
ence on Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran; 198–204.
Smith S, Coull A 1996. Tall Building Structures. McGraw Hill Book Company: New York.
Taranath BS. 1988. Structural Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings. McGraw Hill Book Company: New
York.
Tarjan G, Kollar LP. 2004. Approximate analysis of building structures with identical stories subjected to earth-
quakes. International Journal of Solids and Structures 41: 1411–1433.
DOI: 10.1002/tal

An Approximate Analysis of Combined System of Framed Tube, Shear Core and Belt Truss in High-Rise Buildings

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

An Approximate Analysis of Combined System of Framed Tube, Shear Core and Belt Truss in High-Rise Buildings

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL AND SPECIAL BUILDINGS

Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 18, 607–624 (2009)

AN APPROXIMATE ANALYSIS OF COMBINED SYSTEM OF

REZA RAHGOZAR* AND YASSER SHARIFI

Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

2. BEHAVIOUR OF COMBINED FRAMED TUBE, SHEAR CORE AND BELT TRUSS

Figure 1. Axial stress distribution in framed tube

3. SIMULATING FOR COMBINED SYSTEM OF FRAMED TUBE,

Figure 2. Behaviour of shear core and belt truss system

Figure 3. Schematic plan of combined system

Figure 4. Diagram model of multi-storey structure

Figure 5. Equated orthotropic membrane

4. LATERAL DISPLACEMENT OF COMBINED SYSTEM OF FRAMED TUBE,

Uniformly distributed loading:

Triangular distributed loading:

Figure 6. Displacement of 30 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading

Axial stress at the bottom

Figure 9. Displacement of 40 stories combined system subjected to homogeneous distributed loading

Axial stress at the bottom of

the structure (kg/cm )

Length of web frame (m)

400 SAP 2000

400 SAP 2000

Length of web frame (m)

Axial stress at the bottom

of the structure (kg/cm )

Axial stress at the bottom of the

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen