土木工程外文翻译外文文献英文文献高层建筑

Rigid-Frame Systems

In the design of architectural buildings , rigid-frame systems for resisting vertical and lateral loads have long been accepted as an important and standard means for designing building . They are employed for low-and medium means for designing buildings . They are employed for low- and medium up to high-rise building perhaps 70 or 100 stories high . When compared to shear-wall systems , these rigid frames both within and at the outside of a buildings . They also make use of the stiffness in beams and columns that are required for the buildings in any case , but the columns are made stronger when rigidly connected to resist the lateral as well as vertical forces though frame bending .

Frequently , rigid frames will not be as stiff as shear-wall construction , and therefore may produce excessive deflections for the more slender high-rise buildings designs . But because of this flexibility , they are often considered as being more ductile and thus less susceptible to catastrophic earthquake failure when compared with ( some ) shear-wall designs . For example , if over stressing occurs at certain portions of a steel rigid frame ( i.e.,near the joint ) , ductility will allow the structure as a whole to deflect a little more , but it will by no means collapse even under a much larger force than expected on the structure . For this reason , rigid-frame construction is considered by some to be a “best”seismic-resisting type for high-rise steel buildings . On the other hand ,it is also unlikely that a well-designed share-wall system would collapse.

In the case of concrete rigid frames ,there is a divergence of opinion . It true that if a concrete rigid frame is designed in the conventional manner , without special care to produce higher ductility , it will not be able to withstand a catastrophic earthquake that can produce forces several times lerger than the code design earthquake forces . therefore , some believe that it may not have additional capacity possessed by steel rigid frames . But modern research and experience has indicated that concrete frames can be designed to be ductile , when sufficient stirrups and joinery reinforcement are designed in to the frame . Modern buildings codes have specifications for the so-called ductile concrete frames . However , at present , these codes often require excessive reinforcement at certain points in the frame so as to cause congestion and result

in construction difficulties 。Even so , concrete frame design can be both effective and economical 。

Of course , it is also possible to combine rigid-frame construction with shear-wall systems in one buildings ，For example , the buildings geometry may be such that rigid frames can be used in one direction while shear walls may be used in the other direction。

Structural Systems to resist lateral loads

Omitting some concepts that are related strictly to the materials of construction, the most commonly used structural systems used in high-rise buildings can be categorized as follows:

1.Moment-resisting frames.

2.Braced frames, including eccentrically braced frames. 3.Shear walls, including steel plate shear walls. 4.Tube-in-tube structures. 5.Tube-in-tube structures. 6.Core-interactive structures. 7.Cellular or bundled-tube systems.

Particularly with the recent trend toward more complex forms, but in response also to the need for increased stiffness to resist the forces from wind and earthquake, most high-rise buildings have structural systems built up of combinations of frames, braced bents, shear walls, and related systems. Further, for the taller buildings, the majorities are composed of interactive elements in three-dimensional arrays.

The method of combining these elements is the very essence of the design process for high-rise buildings. These combinations need evolve in response to environmental, functional, and cost considerations so as to provide efficient structures that provoke the architectural development to new heights. This is not to say that imaginative structural design can create great architecture. To the contrary, many examples of fine architecture have been created with only moderate support from the structural engineer, while only fine structure, not great architecture, can be developed without the genius and the leadership of a talented architect. In any event, the best of both is needed to formulate a truly extraordinary design of a high-rise building.

Perhaps the most commonly used system in low-to medium-rise buildings, the moment-resisting frame, is characterized by linear horizontal and vertical members connected essentially rigidly at their joints. Such frames are used as a stand-alone system or in combination with other systems so as to provide the needed resistance to horizontal loads. In the taller of high-rise buildings, the system is likely to be found inappropriate for a stand-alone system, this because of the difficulty in mobilizing sufficient stiffness under lateral forces.

The braced frame, intrinsically stiffer than the moment –resisting frame, finds also greater application to higher-rise buildings. The system is characterized by linear horizontal, vertical, and diagonal members, connected simply or rigidly at their joints. It is used commonly in conjunction with other systems for taller buildings and as a stand-alone system in low-to medium-rise buildings.

While the use of structural steel in braced frames is common, concrete frames are more likely to be of the larger-scale variety.

Of special interest in areas of high seismicity is the use of the eccentric braced frame. Again, analysis can be by STRESS, STRUDL, or any one of a series of two –or three dimensional analysis computer programs. And again, center-to-center dimensions are used commonly in the preliminary analysis.

The shear wall is yet another step forward along a progression of ever-stiffer structural systems. The system is characterized by relatively thin, generally (but not always) concrete elements that provide both structural strength and separation between building functions.

In high-rise buildings, shear wall systems tend to have a relatively high aspect ratio, that is, their height tends to be large compared to their width. Lacking tension in the foundation system, any structural element is limited in its ability to resist overturning moment by the width of the system and by the gravity load supported by the element. Limited to a narrow overturning, One obvious use of the system, which does have the needed width, is in the exterior walls of building, where the requirement for windows is kept small.

Structural steel shear walls, generally stiffened against buckling by a concrete overlay, have found application where shear loads are high. The system, intrinsically more economical than

steel bracing, is particularly effective in carrying shear loads down through the taller floors in the areas immediately above grade. The sys tem has the further advantage of having high ductility a feature of particular importance in areas of high seismicity.

The analysis of shear wall systems is made complex because of the inevitable presence of large openings through these walls. Preliminary analysis can be by truss-analogy, by the finite element method, or by making use of a proprietary computer program designed to consider the interaction, or coupling, of shear walls.

Framed or Braced Tubes

The concept of the framed or braced or braced tube erupted into the technology with the IBM Building in Pittsburgh, but was followed immediately with the twin 110-story towers of the World Trade Center, New York and a number of other buildings .The system is characterized by three –dimensional frames, braced frames, or shear walls, forming a closed surface more or less cylindrical in nature, but of nearly any plan configuration. Because those columns that resist lateral forces are placed as far as possible from the cancroids of the system, the overall moment of inertia is increased and stiffness is very high.

The analysis of tubular structures is done using three-dimensional concepts, or by two- dimensional analogy, where possible, whichever method is used, it must be capable of accounting for the effects of shear lag.

The presence of shear lag, detected first in aircraft structures, is a serious limitation in the stiffness of framed tubes. The concept has limited recent applications of framed tubes to the shear of 60 stories. Designers have developed various techniques for reducing the effects of shear lag, most noticeably the use of belt trusses. This system finds application in buildings perhaps 40stories and higher. However, except for possible aesthetic considerations, belt trusses interfere with nearly every building function associated with the outside wall; the trusses are placed often at mechanical floors, mush to the disapproval of the designers of the mechanical systems. Nevertheless, as a cost-effective structural system, the belt truss works well and will likely find continued approval from designers. Numerous studies have sought to optimize the location of these trusses, with the optimum location very dependent on the number of trusses

provided. Experience would indicate, however, that the location of these trusses is provided by the optimization of mechanical systems and by aesthetic considerations, as the economics of the structural system is not highly sensitive to belt truss location.

The tubular framing system mobilizes every column in the exterior wall in resisting over-turning and shearing forces. The term?tube-in-tube?is largely self-explanatory in that a second ring of columns, the ring surrounding the central service core of the building, is used as an inner framed or braced tube. The purpose of the second tube is to increase resistance to over turning and to increase lateral stiffness. The tubes need not be of the same character; that is, one tube could be framed, while the other could be braced.

In considering this system, is important to understand clearly the difference between the shear and the flexural components of deflection, the terms being taken from beam analogy. In a framed tube, the shear component of deflection is associated with the bending deformation of columns and girders (i.e, the webs of the framed tube) while the flexural component is associated with the axial shortening and lengthening of columns (i.e, the flanges of the framed tube). In a braced tube, the shear component of deflection is associated with the axial deformation of diagonals while the flexural component of deflection is associated with the axial shortening and lengthening of columns.

Following beam analogy, if plane surfaces remain plane (i.e, the floor slabs),then axial stresses in the columns of the outer tube, being farther form the neutral axis, will be substantially larger than the axial stresses in the inner tube. However, in the tube-in-tube design, when optimized, the axial stresses in the inner ring of columns may be as high, or even higher, than the axial stresses in the outer ring. This seeming anomaly is associated with differences in the shearing component of stiffness between the two systems. This is easiest to under-stand where the inner tube is conceived as a braced (i.e, shear-stiff) tube while the outer tube is conceived as a framed (i.e, shear-flexible) tube.

高层建筑

前沿