Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회논문집)

Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea (한국지진공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Seismic Performance Evaluation of Moment-Resisting Frames Having WUF-W Connections With Weak Panel Zones

약패널존이 적용된 WUF-W 접합부를 갖는 모멘트 골조의 내진 성능 평가

  • Hwang, Guem Taek (Department of Architecture and Engineering, Hanyang University) ;
  • Cho, EunSeon (Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University) ;
  • Hong, Minguk (Department of Architecture and Engineering, Hanyang University) ;
  • Han, Sang Whan (Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University)
  • 황금택 (한양대학교 건축공학과) ;
  • 조은선 (한양대학교 건축공학과) ;
  • 홍민국 (한양대학교 건축공학과) ;
  • 한상환 (한양대학교 건축공학과)
  • Received : 2025.07.17
  • Accepted : 2025.09.16
  • Published : 2025.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Current seismic design provisions prohibit the use of a weak panel zone from using special moment frame (SMF) connections due to concerns that large deformations in these zones may lead to brittle connection failures. However, several experimental studies have demonstrated that moment connections with weak panel zones can exhibit adequate ductility and energy dissipation capacity for SMF connections. This study aims to investigate the impact of weak panel zones on the seismic performance of SMFs utilizing welded unreinforced flange-welded web (WUF-W) connections, as outlined in AISC 358-22. The analysis will consider both four-story and twelve-story SMFs. Each frame will be modeled with either strong or weak panel zones. The findings indicate that SMFs with weak panel zones demonstrate greater ductility and collapse strength compared to their counterparts with strong panel zones.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 논문은 행정안전부 과제(B0080901000971)로 수행됨.

References

  1. AISC 358-22. Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction; c2022.
  2. Krawinkler H. Shear in beam-column joints in seismic design of steel frames. Eng J. 1978; 15(3):82-91. https://doi.org/10.62913/engj.v15i3.318
  3. El-Tawil S, Vidarsson E, Mikesell T, Kunnath SK. Inelastic behavior and design of steel panel zones. J Struct Eng. 1999;125(2): 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:2(183)
  4. AISC 341-22. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction; c2022.
  5. AISC 360-22. Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction; c2022.
  6. Skiadopoulos A, Lignos DG. Seismic demands of steel moment resisting frames with inelastic beam‐to‐column web panel zones. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. 2022;51(7): 1591-1609. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.v51.7
  7. Yang Q, Ban H. Balanced design philosophy of superior highperformance steel cover-plated beam-to-column joints. Thin-Walled Structures. 2023;184:110470.
  8. Engelhardt MD, Fry G, Jones S, Venti M, Holliday S. Behavior and design of radius cut reduced beam section connections. Rep. No. SAC/BD-00, 17; c2000.
  9. Lee D, Cotton SC, Dexter RJ, Hajjar JF, Ye Y, Ojard SD. Column Stiffener Detailing and Panel Zone Behavior of Steel Moment Frame Connections, University of Minnesota; c2002.
  10. Lee D, Cotton SC, Hajjar JF, Dexter RJ, Ye Y. Cyclic behavior of steel moment-resisting connections reinforced by alternative column stiffener details I. Engineering Journal. 2005;42(4): 189-214. https://doi.org/10.62913/engj.v42i4.863
  11. Lee D, Cotton SC, Hajjar JF, Dexter RJ, Ye Y. Cyclic behavior of steel moment-resisting connections reinforced by alternative column stiffener details II. Engineering Journal. 2005;42(4):215-238. https://doi.org/10.62913/engj.v42i4.862
  12. Shin S, Engelhardt MD. Experimental study on panel zone behavior in steel moment resisting frames. In Proc., 7th Int. Symp. on Steel Structures. Jeju, Korea: Korean Society of Steel Construction; c2013.
  13. Rahiminia F, Namba H. Joint panel in steel moment connections, Part 1: Experimental tests results. J Constr Steel Res. 2010;89: 272-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.07.002
  14. Han SW, Moon KH, Jung J. Cyclic performance of welded unreinforced flange-welded web moment connections. Earthquake Spectra. 2014; 30(4):1663-1681. https://doi.org/10.1193/080212EQS250M
  15. Han SW, Kim NH, Cho SW. Prediction of cyclic behavior of WUF-W connections with various weld access hole configurations using nonlinear FEA. Int J Steel Struct. 2016;16:1197-1208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-016-0057-0
  16. Shin S. Experimental and analytical investigation of panel zone behavior in steel moment frames. Doctoral dissertation; c2017.
  17. Reynolds M, Uang CM. Economical weld details and design for continuity and doubler plates in steel special moment frames. J Struct Eng. 2022;148(1):04021246. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0003203
  18. Tapia-Hernández E, Santiago-Flores A, Guerrero-Bobadilla H. Performance of seismic steel beam–column moment joints. Bull Earthquake Eng. 2022;20(12):6741-6761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01456-2
  19. Skiadopoulos A, Lignos DG, Arita M, Hiroshima S. Full-Scale Experiments of Cyclically Loaded Welded Moment Connections with Highly Dissipative Panel Zones and Simplified Weld Details. J Struct Eng. 2023;149(12):04023167. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSENDH.STENG-12128
  20. ASCE 7-16. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; c2017.
  21. Lee U, Cho E, Han SW. Development of Drift-Based Fragility Functions for WUF-W Moment Connection. J Earthq Eng Soc Korea. 2024;28(6):373-380. https://doi.org/10.5000/EESK.
  22. NIST GCR 10-917-8. Evaluation of the FEMA P695 Methodology for Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology; c2017.
  23. FEMA P695. Quantification of Buildings Seismic Performance Factors. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency; c2009.
  24. Computers and Structures Inc. ETABS v18.1.0. software. Available from: http://www.csiamerica.com/
  25. McKenna F. OpenSees: A Framework for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. Comput Sci Eng. 2011 Jul;13(4):58-66. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2011.66
  26. Ibarra LF, Medina RA, Krawinkler H. Hysteretic Models That Incorporate Strength and Stiffness Deterioration. Earthq Eng Struct D. 2005 Oct;34(12):1489-1511. https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1096-9845
  27. Lignos DG, Krainkler H. Deterioration Modeling of Steel Components in Support of Collapse Prediction of Steel Moment Frames under Earthquake Loading. J. Struct. Eng. 2011 Nov;137(11):129-1302. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000376
  28. Bech D, Tremayne B, Houston J. Proposed Changes to Steel Column Evaluation Criteria for Extisting Buildings. In Improving the Seismic Performance of Existing Buildings and Other Structures 2015. 2015:255-272.
  29. Zareian F, Medina RA. A practical method for proper modeling of structural damping in inelastic plane structural systems. Comput. Struct. 2010 Jan;88(1-2):45-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2009.08.001
  30. ATC 72-1. Modeling and Aceeptance Criteria for Seismic Design and Analysis of Tall Buildings. Redwood, CA: Applied Technology Council; c2010.
  31. Gupta A, Krawinkler H. Seismic Demands for the Performance Evaluation of Steel Moment Resisting Frame Structures. Rep. No. 132. Stanford, CA: John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Research Center; c1999.
  32. Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA. Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 2002 Mar;31(3):491-514. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.v31:3
  33. Ha SJ, Han SW. A Method for Selecting Ground Motions that Considers Target Response Spectrum Mean and Variance as Well as Correlation Structure. J Earthq Eng. 2016;20(8):1263–1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2016.1138162
  34. ASCE 7-22 Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; c2022.