بررسی پاسخ انواع نیاز انرژی در سازه های بلند متصل شده با پلخرپایی کمانش تاب تحت اثر زلزله

ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻧﻤﻮدن دو ﺑﺮج ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﯾﮏ ﭘﻞ ﻣﯿﺎﻧﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﯾﮑﯽ از راﻫﮑﺎرﻫﺎی ﮐﻨﺘﺮل ﺟﺎﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﯾﯽ و ﻫﻢ ﭼﻨﯿﻦ اﺳﺘﻬﻼک اﻧﺮژی ﺑﻪ ﺣﺴﺎب آﯾﺪ. اﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ اﻧﻮاع ﻧﯿﺎزﻫﺎی اﻧﺮژی در ﺳﺎزه ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻤﺎن ﻫﺎﯾﯽ ﻣﯽ ﭘﺮدازد ﮐﻪ در آﻧﻬﺎ دو ﻫﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺘﻦ ﻣﺴﻠﺢ ﺑﺎ ارﺗﻔﺎع ﯾﮑﺴﺎن ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﯾﮏ ﭘﻞ ﺧﺮﭘﺎﯾﯽ ﺑﻪ ﯾﮑﺪﯾﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺷﺪه اﻧﺪ. ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺧﺮﭘﺎی ﭘﻞ از اﻟﻤﺎن ﻫﺎی ﮐﻤﺎﻧﺶ ﺗﺎب ﺗﺸﮑﯿﻞ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد. در اﺑﺘﺪا اﯾﻦ ﺳﺎزه ﺑﺎ ﺑﮑﺎرﮔﯿﺮی روش ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ ﻃﯿﻔﯽ ﻃﺒﻖ آﯾﯿﻦ ﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﻫﺎی ﻣﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﻃﺮاﺣﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد و در اداﻣﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻬﯿﻪ ﻣﺪل ﻏﯿﺮﺧﻄﯽ ﺳﺎزه در ﻧﺮم اﻓﺰار perform-3d و اﻧﺠﺎم ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ ﺗﺎرﯾﺨﭽﻪ زﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﺤﺖ اﺛﺮ زﻟﺰﻟﻪ ﻫﺎی دور و ﻧﺰدﯾﮏ اﻧﺮژی ورودی، اﻧﺮژی ﺟﻨﺒﺸﯽ، اﻧﺮژی ﻣﯿﺮاﯾﯽ و اﻧﺮژی ﻏﯿﺮاﻻﺳﺘﯿﮏ ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ، و ﻣﺸﺎرﮐﺖ دﯾﻮار و ﭘﻞ در اﺗﻼف اﻧﺮژی ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد. دو روﯾﮑﺮد ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﯾﮕﺎﻧﻪ و ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﮔﺴﺘﺮده ﺑﺮای ﻫﺴﺘﻪ در ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد. در روﯾﮑﺮد ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﯾﮕﺎﻧﻪ، ﻓﻘﻂ در ﭘﺎی ﻫﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺘﻦ ﻣﺴﻠﺢ اﺟﺎزه ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﭘﻼﺳﺘﯿﮏ داده ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد و ﺑﻘﯿﻪ ﻧﻮاﺣﯽ ﻫﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺘﻦ ﻣﺴﻠﺢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮرت اﻻﺳﺘﯿﮏ ﻣﺪل ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد و ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ ﺗﺎرﯾﺨﭽﻪ زﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻏﯿﺮﺧﻄﯽ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد. در روﯾﮑﺮد ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﮔﺴﺘﺮده، ﮐﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﯿﺖ ﮔﺴﺘﺮش ﭘﻼﺳﺘﯿﺴﯿﺘﻪ را دارد. ﺑﻄﻮر ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ در روﯾﮑﺮد ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﮔﺴﺘﺮده، ﺳﻬﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ ﺣﺪود 48 درﺻﺪ و ﺳﻬﻢ ﭘﻞ ﺑﺎ اﻋﻀﺎی ﮐﻤﺎﻧﺶ ﺗﺎب ﺣﺪود 52 درﺻﺪ از اﻧﺮژی ﻏﯿﺮاﻻﺳﺘﯿﮏ ﺗﺤﺖ ﮐﻞ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﻫﺎی اﻋﻤﺎل ﺷﺪه را ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮد و اﯾﻦ اﻋﺪاد در روﯾﮑﺮد ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﯾﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﯿﺐ ﺣﺪود 34 و 66 درﺻﺪ اﺳﺖ.

Investigating the types of energy in the connected structures with the buckling resistant bridge

In The efficiency of the RC core system for buildings that are taller than 35 to 40 story is modestly reduced. In these structures, connecting two towers with an intermediate bridge can be considered as one of the solutions for controlling displacement and also energy dissipation. This paper examines the types of energy needs in a highrise building of 40 and 60 floors, each of which combines two reinforced concrete core of the same height with a truss bridge. The trusses of the bridge are made by buckling resistant elements. Initially, this structure is designed using the spectral analysis method according to the valid regulations. Then, by constructing a nonlinear model of the structure in the PERFORM3D software and performing a time history analysis under the influence of near and far fault ground motions, kinetic energy, inpute energy, damping energy, and nonelastic energy are studied, and the contribution of the wall and bridge is studied in energy dissipation. Single plastic hinge and extended plastic hinge approaches are considered for the core. In a . single plastic hinge approach, only a plastic joint is allowed at the bottom of the RC core, and the rest of the RC core regions are modeled elastically, and nonlinear time histories analysis is done. In an extended plastic hinge approach, the entire core has the ability to expand plasticity. On average, extended plastic hinge approach approach, the core share is about 48%, and the share of the bridge with buckling resistant members is about 52% of nonelastic energy under the total records applied, and these values are 34% and 66% in the single plastic hinge approach. The trusses of the bridge are made by buckling resistant elements. Initially, this structure is designed using the spectral analysis method according to the valid regulations. Then, by constructing a nonlinear model of the structure in the PERFORM3D software and performing a time history analysis under the influence of near and far fault ground motions, kinetic energy, inpute energy, damping energy, and nonelastic energy are studied, and the contribution of the wall and bridge is studied in energy dissipation. Single plastic hinge and extended plastic hinge approaches are considered for the core. In a . single plastic hinge approach, only a plastic joint is allowed at the bottom of the RC core, and the rest of the RC core regions are modeled elastically, and nonlinear time histories analysis is done. In an extended plastic hinge approach, the entire core has the ability to expand plasticity. On average, extended plastic hinge approach approach, the core share is about 48%, and the share of the bridge with buckling resistant members is about 52% of nonelastic energy under the total records applied, and these values are 34% and 66% in the single plastic hinge approach. In an extended plastic hinge approach, the entire core has the ability to expand plasticity. On average, extended plastic hinge approach approach, the core share is about 48%, and the share of the bridge with buckling resistant members is about 52% of nonelastic energy under the total records applied, and these values are 34% and 66% in the single plastic hinge approach.