THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OPTALLAND SPECIAL BUILDINGS

Srruct. De.rign Tall Spec. Build. U , 335-350 (2003}

 Published online 10 July 2003 in Wiley lnterscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOl: 10.1002/tal226

 ANALYSIS OF HIGH-RISE BRACED FRAMES


WITH OUTRIGGERS

 J. C. D. HOENDERKAMP* AND M . C. M. BAKKER

Depanment of Arr:hitectun and Building. Eindhoven University of Technology. Eindhoven, The Netherlands


 SUMMARY
A graphical method of analysis for the preliminary design of tall building structures comprising braced frames
 with outrigger trusses subjected to horizontal loading is presented. For this method of analysis it is necessary to
determine five stifnesses for the uniform structure: bending and racking shear stiffnesses of the braced frame and
outriggers in addition to a stiffness parameter representing the axial lengthening and shortening of the exterior

columns. The analysis allows a simple procedure for obtaining the optimum location of the outrigger up the height
of the structure and a rapid assessment of the impact of the outrigger on the behaviour of the high-rise strucrure.
 It is concluded that all five stiffnesses should be included in the preliminary analysis of a proposed tall building
structure as the reductions in horizontal detlections and bending moments of the braced frame are intluenced by
 all stiffness parameters. Copyright @ 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

 I. INTRODUCTION

 A braced frame with ouriggers is shown in Figure 1 together with its deflected shape resulting from
lateral loading. The structure comprises a central!y located braced frame with a particular bracing
 system which is connected to two equal-length outriggers. The bracing system of these outriggers may
have a different configuration. The behaviour of such a steel structure is similar to that of a concrete
 wall with outriggers. The deflected shapes of the vertical and horizontal members show the stiffening
effect of the outriggers. The columns in the fayade of the structure resist further rotation of the out-
 riggers. The induced compression and tension forces in these columns create a large resisting moment
to the applied horizontal loading.
 In the analysis of outrigger-braced walls it has been shown (Stafford Smith and Salim, 1981; Stafford
Smith and Coull, 1991) that the horizontal deflection behaviour of the concrete wall can be represented
 by a single bending stiffness parameter, thereby assuming that the deformations in the concrete wall due
to shear forces can be neglected. It wa~ further a~sumed that the outriggers consisted of prismatic
 members which were rigidly connected to the wall and pin connected to the exterior columns and could
thus be represented by a single bending stiffness parameter. In the analysis the columns were also
 assumed to be pin connected to the foundation. With throe stiffness parameters representing the wall,
outriggers and the columns it was possible to combine them in a single dimensionless parameter which
 allowed a rapid graphical procedure to detennine the optimum location of the outriggers up the height
of the structure in order to cause the largest reduction in horizontal deflection at the top of the structure.
 This method forms the base for the suggested analysis of braced frames with outriggers.


• Correspondence to: J. C. D. Hoenderkamp, Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Architecture and Building,
 PO Box 513, Route 7, 5600MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands. E-mail: j.c.d.hoenderkamp@bwk.tue.nl

 
Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received August 2002
 Accepted September 2002
 336 1. C. D. HOE!NOERKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER



X



+b

b b l
1
 l
Jf
~
)

'
 Figure I. Braced frame with outriggers


1n the structure in Figure R the outriggers are shown as storey height trusses. The assumed in-plane
 rigidity of the floor strucrures will cause identical rotations in the braced frame and fayade columns
at outrigger level. ll is taken that the riggers are attached to the braced frame and exterior columns
 only, thereby allowing double curvature in the outriggers to take place. The forced double curvature
will increase its flexural stiffness. The horizontal and vertical trus..->es cannot be accurately represented
 by a single stiffness parameter. The deflected shape of a truss is not a function of bending only as a
result of axial strain in the columns but will allow additional deformations due to strain in the diago-
 nal members, i.e. racking. ll ha~ been shown (Hoenderkamp and Snijder, 2000) that the racking shear
deformations and double curvature in the outriggers can quite easily be included in the existing method
 of analysis.ll also allows the usc of the existing design graphs without additional curves. The method
was further developed (Hoendcrkarnp and Suijder, 2002) to include braced frames with fa<;:ade riggers.
 Braced frames with outriggers increases the complication of the analysis as the outriggers are forced
to deflect with the braced frame which will be subject to bending and racking shear defonnations. The

a~sumption for concrete walls in which the shear deformations have been neglected, i.e. plane sec-

 tions remain plane, does not hold for braced frames. The simple wide column behaviour applied to
concrete walls cannot be assumed for trusses.

2. BRACED FRAME

The rotations in the braced frame at outrigger level due to uniformly distributed lateral loading w are,
 for bending resulting from axial strain in the columns


(I)

where H is the total height of the structure, x is the distance measured from the top to midheight of
 the outrigger and the bending stiffness of the braced frame is
 Cq>yri£la 0 2003 John Wiley & Sons. Ltd  Stnu:t. Desljm Tall Spec. Build. 12. 335-350 (2003)


 HlGH-RISE BRACED FRAMES WITH OUTRJGGERS 337

 ~-----1
I I
 r:, 1p, 1r, P, X


'-+~";..~· lt:K
I
I
r, Fr I
1
J··+'--7-~---~tJ
Fr 1
1
F, I
I
H

 1 bm.ccd I
fr'.unc



b .. c b
 'I 'I

Figure 2. Free body diagam~




(2)

where A . is the cross-sectional area of the column of the braced frame and c is its width. The rota-
 tion due to axial strain in the diagonals is


9,,;w --~
GA, (3)


 in which GA, is a tenn expressing the racking shear stiffness of the braced frame. For several types
of bracing systems the racking shear stiffness is given in Appendix A.
 The rotations in the braced frame due to the restraining moment are obtained by splitting up this
action as shown in Figure 2, where the outriggers have been separated from the braced frame for

clarity. The restraining moment in the structure due to outrigger action is the product of the axial force
 in the exterior columns and the distance between them:

 M, =F. x(2b+c) = F. xU (4)

e
 in which F. is the restraining force in the exterior columns, is !he distance from the exterior column
to the centre line of the braced frame and b is the length of the flexible outrigger measured from the
fa9ade column to !he outrigger-braced frame interface. 
The full restraining moment M, will cause a reverse rotation due to bending in the braced frame
which is given by 


(5)

Considering the free body diagram of a single outrigger, then

F. xh=F, xh (6)

Copyright c 2003 John Wiley & Sons. lld. Strod. De,tign Tall Spec. Build. 12, 33.>-350 (2003)

 338 J. C. D. HOBNDBRKAMP AND M_ C. M. BAKKER 

 where F, represents the complementary shear forces in the outriggers and h is the vertical dimension
of the outrigger. The free body diagam in the centre of Figure 2 allows an expression for the restrain-
 ing moment on the braced frame to be written as

 M , = M,"'+M ,"'= F, xc+2F,. Xh (7)

 The racking shear rotation in the braced frame due to the restraining moment is the result of the hor-
izontal force component from Equation (7) only, i.e.



e·~:F.-- - hGA.
M,'/l (8)

The vertical force component of the .restraining moment will not induce racking shear deformations.
 Substituting Equations (6) and (7) into Equation (4) will lead to an expression for the effective restrain-
ing moment causing a reverse rotation doe to strain in the diagonals of the braced frame at outrigger
 level:

 (9)


where a dimensionless parameter

(.
rx= - (10)
 b

 The rotation due to the horizontal restraining forces F, can now be written a~ follows:


(LI)

11te total rotation of the braced frame at outrigger level then becomes

w(H3 - x1 ) +--
wx _ ___;__:__.:_
M, (H- x) M,
 e, --'--~

6£1, GA, El, haGA,

(12)

 3. OUTRIGGERS

 A single outrigger comprising five braced segments is shown in Figure 3(a). The bending rotation in
the two outriggers of the structure due to restraining forces F, is indicated in Figure 3(b) and can be
 expressed as follows:

 _ ZF..h M,b
0 (13)
•'I>;F.- 'L(12EI./b) 24o:EI.

where EI. is the bending stiffness of the outrigger, which is determined by

(14)
 
Copyright 0 1003 John Wiley & So.,, Ltd. Stru<'. De.tig n Tall Sf"'<:. Build. 12, 335-350 (2003)

  HlGH-RJSB BRACED FRAMES WITH OUTRlGGBRS 339

--~-!-


 ~· ·~ b (a)

 F,/2
+-'-



(c)

 Figure 3. Outrigger bending and shear deformations


where A b is the cross-sectional area of the top and bottom chords of the rigger.

The restraining forces F, will cause axial strain in the diagonals, resulting in the deformed shape of
the outrigger as shown in Figure 3(c). The rotation of the riggers is given by

2F,h M,
 8 '"F. = /UXJA, (15)
haGA.


where GA. is an expression for the total racking shear stiffness of the two outriggers.
Jt bas been shown earlier (Hoenderkamp and Snijder, 2000) that the racking shear stiffness of a

rigger, GA. , is the sum of the individual racking shear stiffnesscs of all the bracing segments in that
rigger.
 So for the outrigger structure

 (16)


where s represents the total number of segments in the two outriggers and GA1 is the racking shear
stiffness of a single segment of width a. For several types of bracing systems the racking shear stiff-

ness is given in Appendix A.
The
 column shortening and lengthening in the braced frame due to horizontal loading will cause
rigid body rotations of the outriggers as shown in Figure 4. This reverse rotation is given by

8r;rb;.t -- - (jr.b:w - -
b -
c8,:b:••
2b ( 17)



Substituting Equation (I) into Equation (17) yields


(18)
 
Olpyright C 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. De.tign Th/1 Sp<c. Built!. 11, 335-3$0 (2003)

 340 J. C. D. HOENDERKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER


 w

 H

 Figure 4. Rigid body rotation of outriggers


There will be an additional rigid body rotation of the outriggers due to the restraining moment M,
 which causes axial strain in the braced frame columns. ln this case the braced frame will deflect in
the opposite direction as shown in Figure 4 and the rigid body rotation of the outriggers will now be

in the clockwise direction:

_ 01 -p;Mr _ c8,-p;Mr
8 nb;Mr - b - 2b (19)


 Substituting Equation (5) into Equation ( 19) yields

 8r;rl>;Mr -- {M,(H - x)}_£_ (20)

Ef, 2b

A third rigid body rotation of the outriggers is the result of shortening and lengthening of the exterior
 columns due to restraining forces F•. The outrigger rotation can be defined as the colwnn change in
length divided by the length of the outrigger. This leads to

F;,(H - x)
 Br;c;F.. (21)
bEA.,
 where A . is the cross-sectional area of the exterior column.
Defining an overall bending stiffness parameter for the exterior column structure to be

(22)


 and substituting Equation (4) into Equation (21) will yield the following expression:

 M, (H - x)a
(23)
EI.

The total rotation of the outriggers becomes
 
Copyrigl-< 0 1003 John Wiley & S<>r>S, Ltd. Slnu:l. Design Tall Spec. Build. U . 335-350 (2003)

  HIGH-RISE BRACED FRAMES WITH OlJTRIGGERS 341

 M,b M, w(H
3
- x3 )[f...£.}+{w(H- x)lf...£..}+M, (H- x)a
(1, = 12aEI, + haGA, { (24)
6El, f\.2b El, Jl2b EI.


 4. HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION
The
 compatibility equation for rotation at the interface of one outrigger and the braced frame on the
centre line of the outriggers can simply be s tated as

= e, e, (25)

substituting for both rotations and simplifying yields



By introduci.ng two characteristic structurdl parameters

(27)



and

1 { b 1 1 } (28)
 Sh = a 2 24Elo + hGAo + hGA,

an expression for the restraining moment can be obtained as follows:


M = { w(H - x
, 6El,
3 3
) wx
+--
aGA,
H H
( H- x)Sv + H Sh
} (29)

The horizontal deflection at the top of the structure can now easily be computed with the following

equation:

M,
(30)
 aGA,


where the first two terms on the right-hand side represent the 'free' horizontal deflections of the braced
frame at the top due to bending and racking shear as a direct result of laterdl loading. The third term
is a combination of laterdl deflection at outrigger level caused by reverse bending due to M, and the
additional deflection above the outrigger due to rotation at outrigger level. The last term represents a

horizontal deflection in the braced frame over a single-storey height at outrigger level.

5. OPTIMUM LOCATION OF OUTIUGGERS

It is interesting to find out at what level the outriggers s hould be placed in order to have a maximum
impact
 on the lateraldeflection behaviour of the s tructure. The deflection reduction of the braced frame
is represented by the last two terms on the right-hand side in Equation (30):

Copyright 0 2.003 John Wiley & Sons, Ud. Struct Dc.<ign Tall Sft«C. Build. 12, 33S-3SO (2003)
 342 J. C. D. HOBNDERKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER


(31)

The reduction can be maximized by differentiating it w.r.t. x, setting it equal to zero and solving for
 x . TI1isyield~ the following expression:


(32)


 in which a characteristic structural parameter for the braced frame has been set as follows:


(33)

and for the entire structure the following dimensionless parameter is introduced:


 (34)


Setting a dimensionless location parameter for the outriggers as

- X
x= - (35)
 H

 leads to the following simplified differential equation:


d:x
3
-d [{ 1- x_2 - x_ 3 +x_ 5 + 2+6x - 8x +-
(/3H )2
12.x
-
(f3H)4
x 1
1- X +CO
}] =0 (36)

 which includes a characteristic dimensionless parameter for the braced frame:

 raGA:
f3H = H1~ (37)
~ EJ,

Differentiating Equation (36) w.r.t. x allows a graphical presentation as shown in Figure 5, of the
 optimum locations for the outriggers as a function of two dimensionless characteristic parameters, ro
and f3H, for a braced frame structure with outriggers.



6. ACCURACY

Approximations exist in simplifying the horizontal and vertical trussed structures into s imple pris-
 matic beam members acting at their neutral axes to make them suitable for a rapid graphical method
of analysis.
 ln a beam rotations can vary continuously along its length, whereas in a truss rotations are constant
in a braced segment. ln Appendix B it is shown that the accuracy of the model improves by calcnlat-
 
C<Jpyrighl o 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. SlnlL•. Design Tall Spec Bul7d. 12, 335- 350 (2003)

  I{[GH-RISB BRACED FRAMBS wn'H OUTRlGGBRS 343

 0_2

 0.3
I
~
 0
c:
-~
 £! 0.4
~
Q)


a:"'"'
 0.5

 0.6
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
 Values of (.()

 Figure 5. Optimum location of outriggers


ing the rotations in the truss at the bottom of the outrigger (H - x - h/2) and adding the rotations in
the outrigger separately (Van Lier, 2000) instead of at level (H - x). Unfortunately, this results in more
complicated formulae and makes the method of analysis unsuitable for graphical solutions.

The Limited number of segments into which an outrigger is divided can be an additional source of
error. The bending moments which are carried by the axial forces in the chords have to be constant
in a segment. Appendix C gives factors allowing an adjustment to be made to the flexural stiffness of
the outrigger in order to compensate for this segmental behaviour of the actual structure.

Table l shows the configurations of three structures that have been used to find out what the dif-
ferences are in horizontal deflection at the top of the structure between the proposed simplified method

of analysis and a computer matrix method of analysis. Structure 2 was used a~ the basic model for an
error
 analysis with the following 2properties: braced frame A. = 3-40 x IQ-2 m\ A .. = 8·0 x J0·3 m 2;
horizontal trusses, A b =2·0 x 10- m2 , A dr =8-0 x I0·3 m2 and exterior col umns, A .= 2·0 x 1Q-2 m 2•
2 2 8 2
The cross-sections of the members were independently varied between 2·0 x 10- m and 8-0 x 10 m •
This caused a variation in characteristic parameters a~ follows: 0·05 ~ liJ ~ 0-95 and 12 ~ {JH ~ 1000.

The results showed that maximum errors of 4% occurred with extreme values for the sectional areas
of the braced frame members: for diagonals to approach the maximum set value and for columns to

approach the rninimwu set value.


Thble I. Structures for error analysis
 Height of Width of Length of Location Number of
structure braced frame outrigger outrij!ger segments

I 57·6m 8-0m IO·Sm 23·4m 6/12
2 72-0m 7·2m 7·2m 30·6m 418

3 93·6m 7·2m 1·2m 37-8m 4/8

 
Copyrigh< 0 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Lld. Stru<'- Design Tall Spec. Build. 12, 33>-350 (2003)

 344 J. C. D. HOEND'BRKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER

 7. EXAMPLE
The structural floor plan of a 29-storcy, 87 m high building in Figure 6 shows the arrangement of four

identical one-bay X- braced frames. each containing horizontal trusses on both sides. Each truss is 9
m long, has a single storey height of 3m and comprises five X-braced segments. The building is sub-

jected to a uniformly distributed lateral load of 1·6 k.N/m1. The clastic modulus of steel E = 2· 1 x
 JQI'k.N/m2 • For the braced f·rame columns, A,= J ·043 X 1()1 m2 and diagonals, A"'= 1·78 x 10-1 m~.
=
For the horizontal trusses: top and bottom chords, A b 1·78 x t0-1 m2 ; diagonals A .., 9·726 x =
 I0-3 m2 and for the exterior columns A .= 3·12 x J0-1 m2.
The structural parameters for one outrigger-braced frame are obtained as follows. The nexural stiff-
 ness a.~sociatcd with the columns of the braced frame are given by Equation (2):

 EA c2 2·1X 108 X 1·043 X JO-l X 9 2

El, = - ·- = 8.87 1X 108 k.Nm 1
2 2

The racking shear stiffness can be obtained from Equation (A. 1):


 GA, = 2a: h EAt,

d

The flexural stiffness of the outrigger structure is given by Equation ( 14):



The racking shear stiffness is the swn for I 0 segments. Equation (A. I ) yields



The global second moment of area of the exterior columns can be obtained from Equation (22):



Ooe-bay bmced frames willl outriggers
 ~
1¥' i \ "'a.
 9m

 ~ I

9m
 ~ I

9m


 9m 9m 9m 9m 9m


Figure 6. Struclural
 tloor plan

Olpyrighl Q 1003 John Wiley & Snns. Ltd. Strua. Design 'Tbll Sf= BmUI. ll. 335-350 (2003)

 HIGH-RISE BRACBD FRAMES WITH OUTRIGGERS
 345


The dimensionless parameter a in Equation (I 0) yields


 a=!:._= 13·5 = 1·5

b 9

The characteristic parameters S, and S1, are given by Equations (27) and (28):

H H 87 87 I
s,.= - + - 3
+ 1·345 xi0-' 0<Nmr
 El, El, 8-871X 10 2-388 X 109
' l {b 1 1}
 .SA =a 2 24El0 + hGA, + hGA,

 l { 9 1 I } 9 551 -•
= 1·5'2 24x 1·673x 107 + 3x 9-272x 106 + 3x2-128x 106 = ' x J0-8(J<Nm)

The characteristic non-dimensional parameters for the structure can now be obtained from Equations
(34) and (37):

(J) = S,, = 9-551 X 10-a _ _
0 710
 S,, 1·345 X 10-7
r-----

fJH = H~aGA, =87 1·5x2·128x!Oc. = 5-218
El, 8·871 X 103

From the diagram in Figure 5 it can now quite easily be determined that the optimum location of
the outrigger will be at x/H = 0-32. Locating the outrigger at a mid-storey level nearest to the theo-
retical optimum location, i.e. 28-5m from the top, and using Equation (29) yields the restraining
moment:


 M ={w(H3 - x3) +~H H }

' 6EI, aGA, fl (H - x)S. + HSh
 18(87 3 - 28·53 ) 18x28 5 H 87 }
{
= 6 x8-870 x10 + 1·5 x2-128 x 10 fl(87 -28-5) x 1-345 x 10 7 + 87 x9-551
8 6 x 10-a

4
= l.2419x 10 kNm

This is an 18-2% reduction in the bending moment for the braced frame. The reduction occurs between

outrigger level and the base of the structure. Jt is not the maximum possible moment reduction for the
frame; this will occur with the outrigger at a lower position.

The horizontal deflections and reductions at the top of the structure are given by Equation (30):

 wH' wH 2 M, (H 2 - x 2 ) M,
y..., = - - + - -
8EI, 2GA, 2E/, aGA,

18x87 4
18x872 l-242 x 10 4 (872 -2:8-52 ) 1·242 x1o•
= +----~
8x 2·1 x 108 x 8-870x 108 2 x2-128 x 10 6 2 X 8-870 X 103 l-5x2-128xl06

= 0-1 453+0-0320- 0-0473 - 0-0039 = 0·1261m

Copyright C 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Lui. S ITUd. De.tign Tall Spec. Build. 12, 33>-350 (2003)

 346 J. C. D. HOENDERKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER

Table 2. Structural perfom1ance

Flexible GA. = ~ GA. = El, = ~ GA, = ~

% y""' % M""" % y, % M.,"d % y"d % M""" % y"" % M""•
 x = 1·5m 25·3 14·4 27·2 15·5 28·6 16·3 4 1·4 20·7
(25·5) ( 14·5) (27·5) (15-7) (28·8) ( 16·4) (41·6) (20·9)
 x = 43·5m 26·7 19·8 29·6 21·9 31·8 23·5 46· 1 30·7
(27·0) (20·0) (30·5) (22·0) (32·6) (2J.6) (46·6) (3f.l)
(J) 0·7 10 ().591 0·518 0·192

1M 5-218 5·2 18 5·218 00

x•in m 28·5 28·5 28·5 31·5

 Optimum 28·9 18·2 31-6 19·9 33·5 2 1·2 48·6 27·9
(29·1 ) (18·4) (31·9) (20·1) (33·8) (2!4) (48·9) (28·2)


 The total reduction in horizontal deflection is thus 28·9%. For the bending and racking shear compo-
nent~ of the lateral defom1ation separately these are 32·6% and 12·2% respectively.
 The values in Table 2 give percentage reductions of lateral deflections at the top of the structure
and of bending moments in the braced frame. This is done for three locatio ns of the outrigger: mid-

height of top storey, x = 1·5 m; mid-height of the building, x = 43·5m and at the optimum location,
 x.,., which is defined as the location for which the deflection reduction has a maximum value. It should
be noted that the moment reduction here is not an optimum. The percentages in brackets give values
 obtained from computer stiffness matrix analyses.
Applying the rigorous method of analysis given in Appendix B leads to the following results: M,
 = 1·2476 x IO"kNm andy"'~'= 0·1453 + 0·0320 - 0·0475- 0·0039 = 0·1259m. The differences are
less than 0·5%.
 In the column marked 'Flexible' all five stiffnesses have been given finite values. ln the third column
the racking shear stiffness of the outriggers has been given an infinite value, the other four stiffncsses
 remaining unchanged. Similar reasoning has beeo applied to columns 4 and 5. The results show that
increasing the stiffmesses of the outrigger yields larger reductions for the horizontal deflection and
 bending moments in the braced frames. The suggestion that a horizontal truss be represented by an
element with infinite stiffnesse.<;, i.e. GA., = El, = oo, would lead to overestimating deflection and
 moment reductions. The results in column 5 are for a swcture where the diagonals of the vertical
truss have been given an infinite stiffness. This allows full wide-column action to take place in this
 truss, thereby markedly improving the effectiveness of the outriggers.
The range of the values for ro between 0·5 18 and 0·71 0 combined with a value of 5· 128 for fJH will

yield different optimum locations for the outriggers. Since the horizontal trusses can only be posi-
tioned at mid-storey levels, it turned out in this particular example to be at the same location for the

three structures.
 The influence on the lateral deflectiou of the correction factor suggested. in Table 3 of Appendix C
was for these examples less than 0·1 %.

8. CONCLUS IONS

11te behaviour of a braced frame with outrigger trusses subject to lateral loading is similar to a con-
 crete wall with outrigger beams. lt requires additional stiffness parameters representing the racking
shear behaviour of the braced frame and outrigger trusses.
 The structural properties can be represented by two flexural parameters: S,, representing the strains
in the vertical members and S1, for the strains in the horizontal and diagonal members.
 
Ccpyrigl't ID 2003 Jolul Wiley & Sons, Lttl. Stm 1. Design Tall Spec. Built! t2, 335-350 (2003)

  HIGH-RJSB BRACED FRAMES WITH OUTRIGGERS 347

The
 simplified structure yields two characteristic non-dimensional parameters, tiJ and fJH, which
can be used in a diagram to detennine the optimum level of the ol!ltrigger structure.

The reductions in horizontal deflections and bending moments of the braced frame are influenced
by ail five stiffness parameters. It is therefore suggested that all stiffnesscs be included in the prelim-
 analysis of a proposed taU building structure.
inary
For structures with practical dimensions for its sections the maximum expected error is 2%. The

braced frame structure with outrigger trusses can be a very good Uatcral load-rcsistil\g element for a
high-rise structure.


 APPENDIX A
Racking Shear Stijfnesses of Bracing Systems

Figure 7 shows several types of bracing that can be used in the vertical and horizontal trusses of the

structure. The racking shear stiffnesses of these bracing systems are gi vcn for a standard segment with
a length a and a height h. AJJ connections are taken to be pinned with exceptions forK- and knee-

bracing where the braces are pin cormected at the top to continuous beams of length a. lt should be
noted that the vertical members do not have any in£Juence 011 the racking shear stiff11ess of the segment.

The racking shear stiffues..~ for an X-braced segment as shown in Figure 7(a) is given by

(A.l)

where Ad is the cross-sectionail area of the diagonal and d represents its length.

The racking shear stiffness of the K-braced scgme11t in Figure 7{b) is

a~h£
GA,.K= l ~ (A.2)
 ' 2d a
- +- -
A.t 4~



h


 --,~l"c---"'a---.41"'--(a)


 h


a (c)
+----"-----,+-

Figure 7. Truss bracings
 
Ccpyrigh< C 2003 John Wiley & Sons. lui. Struct. De.tign Ta/1-S;pec: Brn1d. 12. 335-350 (2003)

 348 J. C. D. HOENDERKAMP AND M. C. M. BA.KKER

 in which Ab is the cross-sectional. area of the horizontal member. Bracing systems with a single diag-
onal, N-bracing, as shown in Figurre 7(c) have the following racking sllear stiffness:

(A.3)



The racking shear stiffness of a full-height knee-braced segment as indicated in Figure 7(d) can be

expressed as

(A.4)



in which m is the horizontal distance between column and chord connections to bracing, e is the hor-
 izontal distance between tops of knee-braces and lb indicates the second moment of area for the hor-
izontal member.



APPENDIXB
 Rigorous Method of An.alysis

 For a more accurate analysis it is necessary first to determine the rotation in the truss at the bottom
of the outrigger level and adding the rotation in the outrigger separately. Equation (5) thus becomes

e _
M, (H - x - h/ 2) h 2 F, hcP. M,(H - x - h/ 4)
 •t>••tr - EI, 2EI, 4EI, = (B. I)

This adjusted rotation must now also be substituted into Equation ( 19), which repre._o;enL~ the rigid body
 rotation of the outrigger. Solving the new compatibi1ity equation for rotation yields the following
expression for the restraining moment:

(B.2)


 Tite deflection at the top of the structure becomes


M, (B.3)
 aGA,


APPENDIXC

Bending Stiffness of Outrigger

ln the method of analysis the outrigger is treated as a prismatic member when calculating the rota-
tions due to bending in the strucrure. Figure 8 shows a prismatic beam subjected to end moments M.
 
Copyright 0 2003 John Wiley & Son.<, Ltd. SITilt:L Design Th/1 Spec. Build. 12, 335-350 (2003)

 HlGH-RlSE BRACED FRAMES WITH OUTRIGGERS 349

M
 M M
Er.

c;.---EJ,--2! M
r---"7"::;..._-....J
A b B
£1.
 (prismatic member)

b

. EJ, .



(r%1%J5
A B
b
 (truSS)

 Figure 8. Outrigger rotations


The reduced bending moment area of the conjugate beam yields end rotations

Mb
() pm"b =-- (C. I)
 6EI.


where the bending stiffness of a single outrigger is given by Equation (14). The above equation for
rotation is an approximation of the rotation of the outrigger. Tilis is due to the fact that the bending

moment in the outrigger, resulting from the normal forces iu the chords, cannot vary linearly over the
length of the outrigger.
A more accurate formula to calculate the rotation of the outrigger can be found by using the con-
jugate beam method. This is illustrated for a truss with only two X-braced segments in Figure 8.
 each segment the bending moment carried by the axial forces in the chords can be obtained by
For
pa~sing a section through the point of intersection of the diagonals and considering equilibrium of the

resulting free bodies. The bending moments are constant over the length of the segment. The rotation
from
 the newly obtained reduced moment area over the length of the truss then can be expressed as

 () _ Mb
(C.2)
=• -8EI.

It can be concluded that for au outrigger with only two X-braced segments Equation (C. I) results in

a 33% overestimation of the rotation of the outrigger.
The accuracy of the prediction of the rotation by Equation (C.l) can be improved by adjusting the

bending stiffness of the outrigger as follows:

 (C.3)
where
 r is a correction factor which can be detennined from the ratio between the angle of rotation
as calculated with Equation (C. I) and the angle of rotation detennined with the conjugate beam

method. Table 3 gives an overview of thus determined correction factors for an ourigger with a varying
number of X-braced segments.
 
C<lpyright 0 2003 John Wiley & Sons, lAd. Struct. Design Tall SJKC. Build. 12, 33.)...350 (2003)

 350 J. C. D. HOENDERKAMP AND M. C. M. BAKKER

Table 3. Correction factors for x-braced outrigger bending stiffness

Number segments L 2 3 4 5 6
Factory 1·333 1·125 1·067 1·042 Hl29

The accuracy of the approximation in Equation (C.I) increases with an increasing number of seg-
ments in the outrigger as the correction factor decreases rapidly with the number of segments.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors wish to record their appreciation of S. van Lier for her coJltributions lo this project.

REFERENCES

Hoenderkamp JCD, Snijder HH. 2000. Simplified analysis of fa~de rigger braced high-rise srructures. Srruc-
htral Design of Tall Buildings 9 : 309-319.
Roenderkamp JCD, Snijder HR. 2003. Preliminary analysis of higb-rise braced frames with fa~de riggers.
Joumal of Strucntral Engineering, ASCE 129{5): 640-647.
Stafford Smith B. Salim 1. 1981. Parameter study of outrigger-braced tall buildin.g srructures. Journal of rhe
Struchtral Division, ASCE 107(10): 2001-2013.
Stafford Smith B, Coull A. 1991. Tall Building Structltrcs. Wiley: New York.
Van Lier S. 2000. Outrigger braced truss. Repon No. TUE-BC0-0012. Department of Architecture and Build-
ing, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.

Glpyrighl C 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Stnv..t . Desig n Tall Spec. Build. 12, 335-350 (2003)