A COMPARISON BETWEEN SEISMIC BEHAVIOR AND ECONOMY OF STEEL SHEAR WALLS WITH COMMON LATERAL BEARING SYSTEMS IN STEEL STRUCTURES

With regard to the benefits and drawbacks of all lateral load resisting systems, using the most appropriate, according to building conditions, can maximize the capacity of the structure. Concentric braced frames (CBF), eccentric braced frames (EBF), intermediate moment frames, and pin connection frames, as well as steel shear walls, are standard systems in designing steel buildings. Seismic behavior and the economy of the design are two fundamental factors for selecting an appropriate lateral load resisting system. In this research, 3-bay frames of 4, 8 and 12-stories, with a braced middle bay, have been designed using Iranian seismic code (standard No. 2800) by the equivalent static approach.
PERFORM 4.0.2 has been used to evaluate the seismic function of structures. Therefore, the frames designed by PERFORM have been modeled and evaluated with nonlinear static analysis. Considering the capacity curve and the target displacement in various limit states of the structures, frames with steel shear walls give the best seismic behavior (in terms of stiness, ductility and energy eciency), whereas frames with CBF give the least desirable results (especially with less ductility compared to other systems). Due to the high magnitude welding needed for frames, the frames designed by EBF and steel shear walls are the best and worst economical designs, respectively In view of the economy of the project, as well as its seismic behavior, steel shear walls are the best selection for 12 story buildings. EBF is recommended in 4 and 8 story buildings, while CBF and moment frames are satisfactory in 4 story buildings.