Design and Detailing of Ordinary Concentric Brace Frame (OCBF) and Special Concentric Brace Frame (SCBF) for

Earthquake loads as per IS 800:2007 By: Ramesh Kumar Surana (M. Tech., IPMA-D) In this write up an attempt is made to clarify the application of the IS 800:2007 code requirements using questionnaire format. The questions come in mind while reading the code and after referring AISC 341-05 and conference Proceedings of AISC and as a design engineer prospective this write up is prepared. 1. What is the philosophy behind the structure design for earthquake forces? Ans: Actual Earthquake forces are very high compare to what we consider for the design of structure. Because the uncertain nature of earthquake and frequency of occurring during the life span of the structure we engineers take the benefit of the structural material property and design an economical structure. The main objective to design the structure is to prevent collapse in the extreme earthquake likely to occur at a building site. Please note that the objective is not to limit the damage of the structure or to maintain the function of the structure or to provide easy repair to reuse the structure. The Prime objective is to save the life of people by preventing the collapse of structure. 2. What is the structural material property which helps us to prevent the collapse? Ans: Ductility is the property of structural steel, which allow engineer to go for the yielding stage of member. Ductility is the ability to sustain large inelastic deformations without significant loss in strength. 3. Why is ductility important? Ans: Ductility permits redistribution of internal stresses and forces, Increases strength of members, connections and structures, permits structure to survive severe earthquake loading and provides warning of failure. Ductility increases the load capacity and makes the structure robust. 4. How do we achieve ductile response in steel structure? Ans: The member should be design with ductile limit state i.e. gross section yielding of the tension member. The Brittle limit state (e.g. Net section fracture of tension member, Block shear fracture of tension member, Net section fracture of gusset plate, Block shear fracture of gusset plate, Bolt shear failure, and plate bearing failure in double angles or gusset) must be avoided. Buckling of member is also non-ductile. Ductile members must be the weakest in the load path of the system. Avoid high strength steel in ductile members and use cross section with low d/t ratio. 5. What is the difference between Ordinary concentric brace frame (OCBF) and Special concentric brace frame (SCBF)? Ans: SCBF is the same in configuration as OCBF but there is a very big difference in the design philosophy. Braces in SCBF are required to have gross-section tensile yielding as their governing limit state so that they will yield in a ductile manner. Local connection failure modes such as block shear rupture must be precluded. Since the stringent design and detailing requirements for SCBF are expected to produce more reliable performance when subjected to high energy demands imposed by severe earthquakes, building codes have reduced the design load level below that required for OCBF.

1 of 2

As opposed to the ductility approach for the SCBF, the design basis for the OCBF is primarily based on strength and more emphasis has been placed on increasing brace strength and stiffness, primarily through the use of higher design loads ( R=4.5) in order to minimize inelastic demand. The provisions require braces with greater stiffness (lower kl/r ratios) and greater strength (lower system R factor and 80% reduction of design strength). 6. Why in IS 800:2007 earthquake load factor 2.5 is considered in clause 12.2.3 and what are the implications? Ans: As we know the actual earthquake forces are higher than the designed forces so code has taken the amplification of seismic load to ensure that brittle failure not occur during the earthquake and increase the load factor for specific members which might go for brittle failure. Further explain as below: In Clause 12.5.1.1, 12.11.3.3, to ensure the columns remain intact and do not buckle and lead to progressive collapse of the structure, columns should be designed for the amplified earthquake forces. In clause 12.7.3.1 and 12.7.3.2, amplified earthquake forces are used for the connection design of the OCBF to ensure that connections do not fail. But it is in the lower limit of the forces in connections and to ensure that connections are designed for the amplified forces. But if the member capacity (1.2 fy Ag) is lower than the amplified forces then minimum forces need to consider for the design of connections. 7. What is the difference in design of connections for OCBF and SCBF? Ans: In OCBF bracing connections are designed for forces corresponding to the expected brace strength, the maximum force that the system can develop, or the amplified seismic load so as to delay the connection limit state. Net section fracture of the member is to be included with connection limit states and designed for the amplified seismic load. The connections in SCBF's must be stronger than the yielding members. Even though the requirements are slightly less, the actual connections will be larger in the OCBF because of the larger forces in the stronger, stiffer braces. 8. What is meaning of Maximum force that can be transferred to the brace by the system? Ans: The connection design force to be limited by the maximum force that the system can transfer to the connection. Depending on the specific situation(s), there are a number of ways one can determine the maximum force transferred to the connection. They include (1) Perform a pushover analysis to determine the forces acting on the connections when the maximum frame capacity (leading to an imminent collapse mechanism) is reached. (2) Determine how much force can be resisted before causing uplift of a spread footing (note that the foundation design forces are not required to resist more than the code base shear level). (3) Perform a suite of inelastic time history analyses and envelop the connection demands. Calculating the maximum connection force by one of the three methods noted above is not a common practice on design projects.

2 of 2