Effect of Brace Locations and Accidental Eccentricity on the Response of Asymmetric Structures

Document Type : Structural Earthquake Engineering


International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES)


The first objective of this paper is to consider asymmetric location of braces in steel structures. For this purpose, eccentricity effect of the center of stiffness toward the center of mass and the torsion caused by that is considered. For that, a building, which has been constructed in the past, is investigated by changing the arrangement of braces and the amount of steel consumption, as an important economic indicator, is considered in each items. Then the displacement parameter, which is the suitable criterion for detection of structural damages, was evaluated. Finally, changes of base shear toward eccentricity are examined. It is shown that with closing the center of mass and stiffness and reducing the eccentricity using the appropriate location of braces, how much base shear and structure weight (steel consumption) is reduced. Then, the sensitivity of the asymmetric structure under torsion to analysis type is investigated. For this purpose, two types of analysis included pseudo-static and dynamic spectral analysis are studied. As well, in the second objective, the effect of considering the accidental eccentricity is evaluated in designing phase of buildings. For this purpose, two asymmetric structures in plan are designed with and without considering the accidental eccentricity (ea) equal to 5%. Whereas according to Iranian Seismic Code No. 2800, considering ea is not necessary for the structures. These structures are analyzed by nonlinear time history and results indicate that ea can reduce the response of structure considerably.


  1. Lucchini, A., Monti, G., and Kunnath, S. (2009) Seismic behavior of single-story asymmetric-plan buildings under uniaxial excitation. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 38(9), 1053-1070.
  2. Chopra, A.K. and Goel, R.K. (1991) Evaluation of torsional provisions in seismic codes. Journal of Structural Engineering, 117(12), 3762-3782.
  3. Dusicka, P., Davidson, B.J., and Ventura, C.E. (2000) Investigation into the significance of strength characteristics in inelastic torsional seismic response. 12th World Conference on Ear thquake Engineer ing, Auckland, New Zealand.
  4. Irvine, H. and Kountouris, G. (1980) Peak ductility demands in simple torsionally unbalanced building models subjected to earthquake ground excitation. Proceedings of 7th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey.
  5. Tso, W. and Sadek, A. (1985) Inelastic seismic response of simple eccentric structures. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 13(2), 255-269.
  6. Wolff, E.D., Ipek, C., Constantinou, M.C., and Morillas, L. (2014) Torsional response of seismically isolated structures revisited. Engineering Structures, 59, 462-468.
  7. Chandler, A. and Duan, X. (1993) A modified static procedure for the design of torsionally unbalanced multistorey frame buildings. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 22(5), 447-462.
  8. Poursha, M., Khoshnoudian, F., and Moghadam, A. (2014) The extended consecutive modal pushover procedure for estimating the seismic demands of two-way unsymmetric-plan tall buildings under influence of two horizontal components of ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 63, 162-173.
  9. Tarbali, K. and Shakeri, K. (2014) Story shear and torsional moment-based pushover procedure for asymmetric-plan buildings using an adaptive capacity spectrum method. Engineering Structures, 79, 32-44.
  10. Takewaki, I., Conte, J.P., Mahin, S.A., and Pister, K.S. (1991) Probabilistic multi-objective optimal design of seismic-resistant braced steel frames using ARMA models. Computers and Structures, 41(4), 687-707.
  11. Erduran, E. and Ryan, K.L. (2011) Effects of torsion on the behavior of peripheral steel-braced frame systems. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 40(5), 491-507.
  12. Vetr, M.G., et al. (2011) Experimental Study of the Effect of Bracing Pattern in the Lateral Load Bearing Capacity of Concentrically Braced Steel Frames. 7117th Research Project, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
  13. Kameshki, E. and Saka, M. (2001) Genetic algorithm based optimum bracing design of nonswaying tall plane frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 57(10), 1081-1097.
  14. Vetr, M.G. (2015) Ductility Improvement of Concentr ically Braced Frames Through Using LY Steel and Aluminum Alloys in Bracing Members. 7152nd research project, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
  15. Vetr, M.G. (2010) Seismic Behavior, Analysis and Design of Character ization of New Ductile CBF (D-CBF) by Experimental Study. Research Project, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES): Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
  16. Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design of Buildings. Standard No. 2800, 4th Edition. Building and Housing Research Center, (2014).
  17. Riddell, R. and Santa-Maria, H. (1999) Inelastic response of one-storey asymmetric-plan systems subjected to bi-directional earthquake motions. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 28(3), 273-285.
  18. Habibullah, A. (2013) ETABS-Three Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems, Users Manual . Computers and Structures Inc., Berkeley, California.
  19. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., and Fenves, G.L. (2006) Opensees Command Language Manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research (PEER) Center.
  20. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER). NGA-West2 on-line groundmotion database tool, Peer ground motion database, Berkeley, USA.