195

Design and seismic behaviour of taller

eccentrically braced frames
Sanda Koboevic and Simona Olivia David

Abstract: This paper describes a study of the seismic behaviour of taller eccentrically braced frames (EBFs). Chevron-
type EBFs with shear-critical links are designed for 14-, 20-, and 25-storey buildings in Montreal and Vancouver. For
each location the importance of different design criteria is discussed and an appropriate design sequence is proposed. It
was found that ductility requirements did not control design. For Vancouver, buildings member selection was mostly influ-
enced by the inelastic inter-storey drift requirements whereas for Montreal ensuring the global frame stability was critical.
The seismic response of these frames to the sets of earthquake records calibrated to match design spectra is described. The
seismic performance for Vancouver frames was found to be adequate, except that in the upper storeys the inelastic link de-
formations and shear forces exceeded values anticipated in design. For the Montreal structures, all global and local re-
sponse indicators remained well below the design limits.
Key words: seismic design, design norms, nonlinear analysis, dynamic response, steel structures, eccentrically braced
frames.
Résumé : Cet article décrit une étude du comportement sismique des cadres à contreventement excentrique de grande hau-
teur (CCE). Les CCE de type chevron avec poutres de liaison qui plastifie en cisaillement ont été conçus pour des bâti-
ments de 14, 20 et 25 étages situés à Montréal et Vancouver. Pour chaque emplacement, l’importance des différents
critères de conception est discutée et une séquence de conception appropriée est proposée. Il a été découvert que les exi-
gences de ductilité ne contrôlaient pas la conception. Pour les bâtiments de Vancouver, l’exigence relatives au déplacement
inter-étages inélastiques gouvernaient la conception du cadre, tandis ce que pour Montréal, il était critique d’assurer la sta-
bilité globale du cadre. La réponse sismique de ces cadres aux ensembles des accelerogrames étalonnés de manière à cor-
respondre aux spectres de calcul est décrite. Le comportement sismique des cadres de Vancouver s’est révélé adéquat, sauf
dans les étages supérieurs, où des déformations inélastiques et les efforts de cisaillement des liens de poutre dépassaient
les valeurs anticipées par le calcul. Quant aux structures de Montréal, tous les indicateurs de réponse générale et locale de-
meuraient bien en deçà des limites de conception.
Mots-clés : conception sismique, normes de conception, analyse non linéaire, réponse dynamique, structures d’acier, cadres
à contreventement excentrique.

Introduction with short links is preferred to promote shear yielding and

Eccentrically braced frames (EBFs) are characterized by a
favourable combination of high ductility, stiffness, and
strength and represent an effective and economical tradi-
tional steel framing system for seismic applications. The en-
ergy dissipation is achieved through the yielding of a beam
segment called the link, while the other frame members, in-
cluding outer beam segments, braces, and columns should
remain essentially elastic. The chevron-type configuration
Received 6 March 2009. Revision accepted 8 September 2009.
Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at cjce.nrc.ca on
16 February 2010.
S. Koboevic1 and S.O. David.2 Department of Civil, Geological
and Mining Engineering, École Polytechnique de Montreal,
P.O. Box 6079, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, QC H3C 3A7,
Canada.
Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be
received by the Editor until 30 June 2010.
1Corresponding author (e-mail: sanda.koboevic@polymtl.ca).
2Presentaddress: Genivar, 1600 boulevard René-Lévesque O.,
Montreal, QC H3H 1P9, Canada.
to avoid the beam-to-column connection in the link region.
Previous studies investigating the seismic response of
lower-to-medium height EBFs, showed that for western
North American locations with higher seismicity, it was pos-
sible to select frame members with high stress ratios for all
design requirements. However, the desired frame behaviour
was not fully achieved (Richards and Uang 2006; Chao and
Goel 2005; Koboevic 2000; Koboevic and Redwood 1997;
Popov et al. 1992). For all but short EBFs, the energy dissi-
pation was concentrated in the upper and the bottom storey
links, leading to the shear forces and deformations that ex-
ceeded the values anticipated in design. Columns, braces,
and outer beam segments also showed some inelastic behav-
iour. Due to the increased importance of deflections under
lateral load, design of taller EBFs is likely to be governed
by stiffness and global structural stability criteria. Wind or
gravity loads may determine design in zones of low to mod-
erate seismicity. The higher modes of vibrations will also
contribute more significantly to seismic response. As a re-
sult, taller EBFs will be differently proportioned compared
with shorter EBFs and a different seismic response is likely
to occur.
More scientific data on the behaviour of taller EBFs, for

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 37: 195–208 (2010) doi:10.1139/L09-131 Published by NRC Research Press
196
western and eastern North American seismic conditions, is
required to establish the extent to which current design pro-
cedures achieve desired behaviour and how building height
influences the seismic response. Unlike other traditional
steel framing systems, no limitations on the height of EBFs
are currently defined in Canadian norms. The EBFs are also
the only traditional steel seismic-resisting system for which
the explicit verification of ductility is required at the design
stage. Design estimates of inelastic shear rotations of links
heavily depend on appropriate prediction of inelastic dis-
placements, which are difficult to determine from the elastic
frame deformations within the force-based framework of
seismic design.
The objective of this study is to investigate the specifics
of design and seismic response of taller EBFs and thereby
validate current Canadian design procedures. Six chevron-
type EBFs with shear-critical links were designed for 14-,
20-, and 25-storey buildings in Montreal and Vancouver,
representing typical eastern and western Canadian seismic
conditions. The impact of different requirements on the final
design is quantified by the increase in structural mass, so
that the most appropriate design sequence for different
frame heights and design locations can be proposed. Seismic
response of the frames is studied using nonlinear time–
history analysis for 20 ground motions selected for Vancou-
ver and 10 for Montreal, scaled to match the design spectra.
Local and global indicators of inelastic frame behaviour are
presented and the difference in seismic demand for struc-
tures designed for eastern and western Canada is discussed.
Building design
Design procedure
Canadian seismic design requirements for EBFs are speci-
fied in the 2005 National building code of Canada (NBCC)
(NRCC 2005) and the steel design standard CAN/CSA S16-
01, including its first supplement S1651-05 (CSA 2005).
The design process incorporates capacity design principles.
Initially, link section with adequate length, class of the sec-
tion, and the factored shear resistance, Vr, are selected to re-
sist the factored loads. For short, centrally placed links that
yield in shear and have zero axial load, Vr = fVp, where Vp
is a plastic shear resistance of the link (Vp = 0.55wdFy),
where w is web thickness, d is depth of section, and Fy is
specified minimum yield strength. To avoid concentration
of yielding in only a few storeys, Popov et al. (1992) sug-
gested to select links with the strength-to-demand ratios as
uniform as possible over the height of the frame.
Following a capacity design approach, design forces for
the other frame members are calculated using the amplified
nominal link resistance: 1.3RyVp for the outer beams, braces,
and top tier columns and 1.15 RyVp for the columns else-
where where Ry is the ratio of probable to nominal yield
stress (Ry = 1.1) and Vp is the plastic shear resistance of the
link. Link inelastic shear rotations, g, are obtained from in-
elastic drift estimates considering a rigid-plastic mechanism
(Fig. 1) and compared with the design limit of 0.08 rad. The
commentary to S16.01 (CSA 2005) recommends eliminating
the portion of the interstorey drift attributable to axial defor-
mations of columns due to the overturning effect (chord
drift) in these calculations. Although the chord drift can con-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010
Fig. 1. Rigid-plastic collapse mechanism for chevron-type eccentri-
cally braced frame.
tribute significantly to inter-storey drift in the upper storeys
of taller EBFs, it does not affect the link rotations when a
rigid-plastic deformation mechanism is assumed.
The initial design is checked for strength, stiffness, and
global stability requirements for all relevant load combina-
tions including P-D effects and the member sizes are modi-
fied until a satisfactory design is obtained. The limits for
seismic drift are specified in NBCC 2005 (NRCC 2005) as
a function of seismic risk coefficient, IE. For structures of
normal risk the limit is set to 2.5% of storey height, hs.
P-D effects are accounted for using factor U2:
 
SCf Rd Df
½1 U2 ¼ 1 þ
SVf h
where SCf is the sum of factored axial compressive loads
for all columns in the storey, SVf is the sum of factored
seismic loads above the storey, Rd is the force modification
factor related to ductility, Df is the relative first-order lateral
displacement of the storey due to seismic loads and hsis the
storey height. Structural stiffness should be provided such
that U2 does not exceed 1.4.
To minimize the number of iterations and in view of the
importance of deflections in design of taller structure, the
following design sequence was adopted in this study: (i) se-
lect links for factored seismic loads; (ii) select other frame
members based on the strength demand for all relevant load
combinations including gravity loads, notional loads, wind,
and seismic loads; (iii) verify seismic drift requirements;
(iv) calculate global stability factor, U2, and compare with
the upper limit of 1.4; (v) adjust design forces to account
for P-D effects; (vi) verify strength, stiffness, and stability
for increased forces; (vii) conduct verification of beams, col-
umns, and braces for forces induced by links (capacity de-
sign); and (viii) verify link inelastic rotations.
Design of the 14-, 20-, and 25-storey eccentrically braced
frames
Six buildings braced in the two orthogonal directions by
Published by NRC Research Press
Koboevic and David
chevron-type EBFs with shear-critical links were examined
in this study. Three different heights were considered (14,
20, and 25 storeys), as well as two Canadian locations,
Montreal, Quebec, and Vancouver, British Columbia. Class
C site conditions were assumed. The typical floor plan for
all buildings and the elevation of the 14-storey frame are
shown in Fig. 2. The width of the braced bay is 9 m for all
frames and the total heights are 52.6, 74.8, and 93.3 m for
the 14-, 20-, and 25-storey frames, respectively. The links
of 0.8 m were selected for all frames as a parametric study
showed that it would be difficult to meet inelastic shear ro-
tations limits if shorter links were used. A moment-resistant
connection was assumed between braces and beams (Rozon
2009), so that the redistribution of the moment between the
two elements could take place. All other connections were
considered as pinned. Columns were assumed continuous
and tiered into two-storey segments.
The design vertical loads were adopted from Han (1998)
and the wind loading was determined in accordance with
NBCC 2005 (NRCC 2005). Detailed calculation can be
found in David (2009). The seismic base shear was calcu-
lated according to NBCC 2005 (NRCC 2005):
SðTa ÞMv IE W
½2 V¼
Rd Ro
where Ta is the empirical structural period (Ta = 0.025hn, hn
being a total height of the structure); S(Ta) is the spectral ac-
celeration at design period based on probability of excee-
dance of 2% in 50 years and modified by site coefficients
Fa, the acceleration-based site coefficient and Fv, the velo-
city-based site coefficient, to reflect soil conditions; Mv is
the factor accounting for the increase in base shear due to
higher mode effect; IE is the seismic risk coefficient; W is
the seismic weight; Rd is the ductility-related force modifi-
cation factor and Ro is the overstrength-related force modifi-
cation factor. In this study, IE = 1.0, Rd = 4.0; Ro = 1.5; Fa =
Fv = 1.0, Sa(0.2)/Sa(2.0) = 5.53 and 14.38 for Vancouver and
Montreal, respectively, resulting in Mv = 1.0 and 1.5. The
base shear V, calculated using eq. [2], need not exceed 2/3
the value of V with Ta = 0.2 s, and must be greater than the
value obtained with Ta = 2.0s. The summary of base shear
calculated is given in Table 1. Note that in all cases studied,
the maximum augmented empirical period (2Ta) permitted
by NBCC 2005, was larger than 2.0 s. Consequently, design
base shears were limited to the minimum values prescribed
by NBCC 2005 (NRCC 2005). The subsequent modal analy-
sis showed that the fundamental periods of the final designs
(T) were greater than those assumed during the design pro-
cess.
Links sections were selected from W shapes. In most
cases, the design was governed by gravity or wind load
combinations. The difference in demand imposed by gravity
or wind loads and seismic loads was more pronounced for
the frames in Montreal. For typical storeys, the average
value of link inelastic shear resistance-to-demand ratio, a,
was approximately equal to 1.3 for Vancouver. For Mon-
treal, a varied from 1.9 to 1.5 when increasing the building
height from 14 to 25 storeys. To obtain Class 1 section and
(or) a link yielding exclusively in shear, link sections with
much higher overstrength had to be selected in the top
storey. For the two design locations, the largest value of a
197
observed was for the 14-storey frames. In Vancouver, the
resistance-to-demand ratio was approximately equal to 2.0,
whereas the top link for the building in Montreal was 4.5
times stronger than required for seismic loads.
The results show that, with the exception of the top stor-
eys, it was possible to achieve a uniform distribution of
resistance-to-demand ratio for taller EBFs. However, it was
not possible to maintain this ratio close to one due to the
other design criteria. This was particularly the case for the
eastern Canadian location, where a much smaller ductility
demand could be anticipated. This higher overstrength of
the main ductile element (link) could have negative conse-
quences in the capacity design process, increasing the design
forces for other frame members. The results of subsequent
design steps indicated, however, that this was not a major
concern as the ductility requirement did not govern the se-
lection of other frame members.
Braces were designed as beam–columns. Class 1 or 2 sec-
tions were selected; HSS for the 14-storey frames and W
(wide flange sections) sections for the 20- and 25-storey
frames. The effective length factor for in-plane action, kx,
was taken as 1.0, as the restraint would be reduced follow-
ing yielding of the beam. For out-of-plane action, ky = 0.9
was assumed relying on the lateral bracing provided at the
link ends. Columns were chosen from Class 1 or 2 W,
WWF (welded wide flange sections), and plain square sec-
tions (Ste). Columns were assumed laterally unsupported be-
tween the floors and effective length factors, kx and ky were
taken equal to 1.0.
Design optimization was done automatically on the basis
of minimal structural weight. For strength design, the critical
load combinations were different for the eastern and western
Canadian locations. For frames in Montreal as well as the
bottom storey members in the Vancouver frames, wind and
gravity load combinations dominated the design. For the top
storeys in the Vancouver frames, seismic forces were critical
for the design of outer beam segments and braces, whereas
the maximum forces in the columns were induced by gravity
or seismic load combinations. Stiffness verifications were
dominated by seismic drifts for Vancouver frames, and
wind drifts in Montreal. Seismic deflections corresponded
to the minimum seismic base shear Vmin. Global stability re-
quirements were much more difficult to meet for Montreal
frames. Although P-D effects were considered in initial link
design, local modifications of the some link sections was
still required. Columns and braces underwent more signifi-
cant modifications. For all frames studied, the largest inter-
storey drifts were observed in the upper half of the frames
as a result of axial deformations in columns. Therefore, in-
creasing the bottom column cross sections provided the
most efficient way drift control, combined with local in-
crease of the brace sections.
Capacity design requirements did not impose any signifi-
cant increase of member sizes in any of the frames studied.
The computed inelastic link rotations, g, for all links were
below the 0.08 rad CSA-S16 (CSA 2005) limit. Note that the
chord drift was eliminated from the elastic displacement used
to calculate g (Fig. 1), as recommended in the commentary to
CAN/CSA-S16. This was achieved by restraining the axial
deformations of the columns. Complementary analysis
showed that had the chord drift not been eliminated, the de-
Published by NRC Research Press
198 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010

Fig. 2. Typical floor plan and frame elevation view of studied buildings. EBF, eccentrically braced frame.
Height 52.60 m e = 0.80 m Level 14

1 2 3 4 5 6 Level 13

A Level 12

Level 11

Level 10

B Level 9

13 @ 3.70 m
Level 8
EBF

4 @ 9.00 = 36.00m
Level 7
9.00m

EBF
Central Core
EBF
C Level 6
9.00 x 15.00
Level 5
EBF
Level 4
9.00m

D Level 3

Level 2

e
Level 1

4.50m
E
9.00m
5@9.00 = 45.00m
14 Storey

Table 1. Summary of seismic design base shear calculations.

14-storey EBF 20-storey EBF 25-storey EBF

VCR14 MTL14 VCR20 MTL20 VCR25 MTL25
Seismic weight W (kN) 104 915 105 255 152 249 152 589 191 694 192 034
Design period 2Ta (s) 2.63 2.63 3.74 3.74 4.67 4.67
Design base shear (kN) 2973 1263 4314 1831 5432 2305
Note: EBF, eccentrically braced frame; VCR, Vancouver; MTL, Montreal.

sign estimates of g would have exceeded the design limit and
thus the g limit would have had an important impact on the
design.
Table 2 summarizes steel tonnage obtained after strength,
stiffness, and stability verifications. In spite of a significant
difference in seismic loads between the two locations
studied, the weight of the frames with equal height was vir-
tually the same. For the frames in Vancouver, the inter-
storey drift limit had the greatest impact on steel tonnage
whereas maintaining global stability was critical in Mon-
treal. Final section selection is given in Tables 3 and 4 for
Vancouver and Montreal, respectively.
All designs were performed using the lateral seismic loads
distribution obtained from the equivalent static force
method. Base shear was reduced by 20% as permitted by
NBCC 2005 (NRCC 2005) and accidental torsion was in-
cluded (7%). To investigate the impact of the seismic load
distribution on the final design, all six structures were rede-
signed using the load profiles obtained from the response
spectrum analysis. The response spectrum analysis was
done for structures shown in Tables 3 and 4. The seismic
load distribution obtained for the 14-storey frame in Van-
couver (VCR14, T = 3.36 s, see Table 3, where T is funda-
mental structural period obtained from dynamic analysis.) is
shown in Fig. 3. The equivalent static load profile is also il-
lustrated. The two profiles differ significantly, clearly indi-
cating the important contribution of the higher modes.
Once the seismic load profiles were defined, frames were
designed following the procedure previously described. The
resulting structures had a very similar tonnage compared
with structures for which equivalent static load profile was
considered for seismic loads, with the most significant dif-
ference (9%) observed for the 20-storey frame in Vancou-
ver. Hence, in spite of the significant differences in seismic
load profiles, the final designs obtained were virtually the
same because the design of most of the elements was not
controlled by seismic loads. For simplicity, it was therefore
decided to proceed to the nonlinear time history analysis
with the designs obtained using the equivalent static force
method.
Dynamic analysis
Modelling for dynamic analysis
Nonlinear time–history analyses were conducted using the
computer program ANSR-1 (Mondkar and Powell 1975),
which includes the special link element developed by Rides
and Popov (1994). The element consists of an elastic beam
with plastic hinges concentrated at its ends that can yield
both in shear and in flexure. Both isotropic and kinematic
strain-hardening can be modelled. Each hinge is divided
into three sub-hinges with inelastic behaviour both in shear
and in flexure. The interaction between moment and shear
in inelastic range was not considered, and the axial deforma-

Published by NRC Research Press

Koboevic and David
Table 2. Structural mass obtained in different design phases.
Structural mass (tonnes)
14-storey EBF
Design phase VCR14
Strength 34.4
Stiffness (D£0.025hs) 50.9
Stability (U2£1.4) 64.1
Note: EBF, eccentrically braced frame; VCR, Vancouver; MTL, Montreal.
tions were neglected. The parameters of the link element
were calibrated using the approach described by Rozon
(2009) based on test results by Okazaki et al. (2005).
Other frame members were modelled using standard
beam–columns elements. Limited yielding of outer beam
segment was considered acceptable in design as long as the
brace and the outer beam segment together can sustain the
total link end moment in combination with the axial forces
introduced by yielded and strain-hardened links. Thus in-
elastic beam–columns elements representing the cross sec-
tion yielding under combined bending moment and axial
force were used to model the outer beams segments. Braces
and columns were modelled using elastic beam–column ele-
ments and their elastic demand was subsequently examined
by tracing the time–history of bending moment-axial force
interactions.
Following the recommendations of Rides and Popov
(1994), who demonstrated that the viscous damping assigned
to the links may lead to unrealistically high brace and col-
umn axial forces due to high link end velocities, nonpropor-
tional damping was specified where only mass-proportional
viscous damping was attributed to the links. Rayleigh damp-
ing based on 3% of the critical damping was assigned to the
other frame members. The damping coefficients are calcu-
lated based on the first and third vibration modes. Masses
were concentrated on column lines and P-D effects were
represented by fictitious pin-connected columns carrying the
part of the tributary seismic weight not assigned directly to
the frame columns.
For each design location, an ensemble of acceleration re-
cords was defined and scaled so that the compatibility with
design spectra is achieved. For Vancouver, ten historical ac-
celeration records from the PEER (2009) database were se-
lected based on magnitude–distance (M–R) scenarios that
dominate the seismic hazard. Five selected records are rep-
resentative of short-distance and five of long-distance
events. In addition, ten synthetic records from the ground
motion database proposed by Tremblay and Atkinson
(2001) were considered to account for the fact that the se-
lected historical recordings, typical for California, may dif-
fer from those anticipated in Vancouver. For Montreal, ten
artificial records from the same source were used due to the
lack of appropriate historical records, typically rich in high
frequencies. For each historical record, the scaling was done
using the hybrid method (Rozon 2009) in which the inten-
sities of the ground motion spectrum of each record and the
design spectrum were matched over the range of periods de-
termined on the basis of the best visual fit between the two
spectra. For the short-distance events spectral matching was
done over the short periods. The minimum length of period
199
20-storey EBF 25-storey EBF
MTL14 VCR20 MTL20 VCR25 MTL25
32.0 83.7 70.8 161.9 115.7
36.2 191.7 106.5 417.6 210.1
63.5 237.3 214.6 514.5 493.1
range was fixed to 0.7 s and the portions of the spectra for
periods less than 0.5 s were not considered. For long-dis-
tance events, compatibility was sought over the minimum
range of 1.5 s for periods larger than 1 s. A more detailed
presentation of the procedure as well as the ranges of peri-
ods selected for individual records can be found in Rozon
(2009). Historical records selected for Vancouver and the
scaling factors employed are listed in Table 5. The resulting
median and 84th percentile response spectra obtained for the
whole groups of records selected for Vancouver are shown
in Fig. 4. Median spectra obtained separately for historical
and artificial records as well as NBCC design spectra are
also illustrated. In subsequent analyses, the statistics of the
results were computed for the whole set of records selected
for each design location, but the values obtained for differ-
ent subsets (artificial, historical, short distance, long dis-
tance) were also examined to trace the possible differences
that a specific group of earthquakes can have on the frame
response.
Structural responses
The results presented pay particular attention to the loca-
tion of inelastic activity, the maximum shear forces and de-
formations induced in the links, the response of the other
frame members, and the maximum total inter-storey drifts.
The relationship between the maximum inter-storey drifts
and the maximum inelastic shear rotations is also examined.
For each aceleration record, peak values of the response pa-
rameters were found at every storey and the 50th and 84th
percentile values were calculated for each ground motion
ensemble. Design predictions were evaluated on the basis of
the median results. The 84th percentile results are com-
mented to illustrate dispersion. Different responses to syn-
thetic and historical records or to short and long-distance
events of a given ensemble are also reported when observed.
Response of the links
The results describing the link response are summarized
in Fig. 5. The normalized link shear forces, obtained by di-
viding the maximum link shear force values by the probable
shear strength of the links (VpRy), allow a direct comparison
with the amplification factors specified in CAN/CSA S16-
01. The g values shown represent the maximum inelastic ro-
tation of links, either positive or negative. The sum of the
absolute maximum negative and absolute maximum positive
rotation was also calculated. This response parameter, re-
ferred to as the maximum range of inelastic shear rotation
max grange (Kasai and Popov 1986), is useful to detect the
situations where the largest link rotation happens predomi-
nantly in one direction while the rotation in the other direc-
tion is very small.
Published by NRC Research Press
 200

Table 3. Summary of final designs: Vancouver (frames VCR14, VCR20 and VCR25, G40.21.350W).
VCR14 (T = 2.86 s) VCR20 (T = 3.37 s) VCR25 (T = 3.79 s)
Storey Beams Braces Columns Beams Braces Columns Beams Braces Columns
25 W 25058 W 310253 W 360101
24 W 31052 W 310253
23 W 31074 W 310253 W 360262
22 W 36079 W 310202
21 W 41074 W 310202 W 360592
20 W 25058 W 310107 W 36079 W 46082 W 310202
19 W 25058 W 310129 W 46089 W 310202
18 W 31067 W 310129 W 360287 W 46097 W 310202 Ste 450450
17 W 36072 W 310129 W 530101 W 310202
16 W 41067 W 310129 W 530109 W 310202
15 W 41074 W 310129 W 360463 W 610113 W 310202 Ste 550550
14 W 20042 HSS2542549.5 W 20059 W 46082 W 310129 W 610113 W 360196
13 W 20052 HSS30530513 W 46089 W 310118 W 610125 W 360196
12 W 25058 HSS30530513 W 310143 W 53092 W 310118 Ste 400400 W 610140 W 360196 Ste 650650
11 W 31067 HSS30530513 W 530101 W 310129 W 610140 W 360196
10 W 36072 HSS30530513 W 460235 W 530109 W 310143 W 610140 W 360196
9 W 36079 HSS30530513 W 530109 W 310143 Ste 450450 W 610153 W 360196 Ste 650650
8 W 41074 HSS30530513 WWF 450308 W 610113 W 310143 W 610153 W 360179
7 W 46068 HSS30530513 W 610113 W 310143 W 610153 W 360179
6 W 41085 HSS30530513 WWF 500456 W 610125 W 310158 Ste 550550 W 610195 W 360179 Ste 700700
5 W 46089 HSS30530513 W 610125 W 310158 W 610195 W 360179
4 W 53074 HSS35630513 WWF 600 W 610140 W 310179 W 610195 W 360179
3 W 53085 HSS35630513 W 610140 W 310179 Ste 550550 W 610195 W 360179 Ste 700700
2 W 530101 HSS30530513 WWF650739 W 610140 W 310179 W 610195 W 360179
1 W 610113 HSS30530513 W 610153 W 310179 W 610241 W 360196

Published by NRC Research Press

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010
 Koboevic and David

Table 4. Summary of final designs: Montreal (frames MTL14, MTL20 and MTL25 G40.21.350W).
MTL14 (T = 2.98 s) MTL20 (T = 3.55 s) MTL25 (T = 3.93 s)
Storey Beams Braces Columns Beams Braces Columns Beams Braces Columns
25 W 25058 W 310253 W 360101
24 W 31052 W 310253
23 W 31074 W 310253 W 360262
22 W 36079 W 310202
21 W 41074 W 310202 W 360592
20 W 25058 W 310107 W 36079 W 46082 W 310202
19 W 25058 W 310129 W 46089 W 310202
18 W 31067 W 310129 W 360287 W 46097 W 310202 Ste 450450
17 W 36072 W 310129 W 530101 W 310202
16 W 41067 W 310129 W 530109 W 310202
15 W 41074 W 310129 W 360463 W 610113 W 310202 Ste 550550
14 W 20042 HSS2542549.5 W 20059 W 46082 W 310129 W 610113 W 360196
13 W 20052 HSS30530513 W 46089 W 310118 W 610125 W 360196
12 W 25058 HSS30530513 W 310143 W 53092 W 310118 Ste 400400 W 610140 W 360196 Ste 650650
11 W 31067 HSS30530513 W 530101 W 310129 W 610140 W 360196
10 W 36072 HSS30530513 W 460235 W 530109 W 310143 W 610140 W 360196
9 W 36079 HSS30530513 W 530109 W 310143 Ste 450450 W 610153 W 360196 Ste 650650
8 W 41074 HSS30530513 WWF 450308 W 610113 W 310143 W 610153 W 360179
7 W 46068 HSS30530513 W 610113 W 310143 W 610153 W 360179
6 W 41085 HSS30530513 WWF 500456 W 610125 W 310158 Ste 550550 W 610195 W 360179 Ste 700700
5 W 46089 HSS30530513 W 610125 W 310158 W 610195 W 360179
4 W 53074 HSS35630513 WWF 600551 W 610140 W 310179 W 610195 W 360179
3 W 53085 HSS35630513 W 610140 W 310179 Ste 550550 W 610195 W 360179 Ste 700700
2 W 530101 HSS30530513 WWF650739 W 610140 W 310179 W 610195 W 360179
1 W 610113 HSS30530513 W 610153 W 310179 W 610241 W 360196

Published by NRC Research Press

201
202 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010

Fig. 3. Spectral and equivalent static seismic load profile (Van- ditions could result in more economical designs that would
couver, VCR14). still exhibit satisfactory seismic response.
14 Results obtained for inelastic shear rotations, g, further
13
confirmed the nonuniform participation of links in energy
dissipation. For Vancouver frames, the highest values of g
12 were in general observed in the upper storeys, but the first
11 storey link of VCR20 structure also developed high rota-
10 tions. The code limit was exceeded only in two storeys of
the 14-storey frame Vancouver reaching the maximum value
9 of 0.10. However, the median value of the maximum grange
Storey

8 was below the limit of 0.16 rad. Note that tests performed
7 by Okazaki et al. (2005) showed that links can reach inelas-
tic rotation of 0.11 rad without stiffness and strength degra-
6 Spectral force profile dation. The 84th results are much higher and show a greater
5 variability indicating that the deformations of links were
Equivalent static loads much more sensitive to a particular ground motion than the
4
shear forces. For VCR14 frame, for instance, the 84th per-
3 centile values were almost twice the code limit in the upper
2 five storeys of the frame.
1 For Montreal frames, only upper storey links developed
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 inelastic rotations. The median and 84th percentile values of
g were well below the values anticipated in design reaching
Force (kN)
a maximum of 0.037 rad.
For Vancouver, all but the top storey links with largest re- Response of other frame members
sistance-to-demand ratio yielded. The energy dissipation was Current design procedures aim to achieve elastic response
not uniform as anticipated in design affecting mostly the of frame members other than the links under strong earth-
upper storeys and few bottom storeys. This type of response quake motions. In this study, limited yielding of the outer
was also observed for eight-storey frames (Rozon 2009) and beam segments was accepted in the design, anticipating a
can be partially attributed to the influence of higher modes. low ductility demand imposed on these elements. The analy-
The abrupt change of lateral storey stiffness which occurs ses showed some inelastic behaviour only in the outer beams
upon link yielding also contributes to this behaviour. In the of the 14-storey frame in Vancouver under some of the re-
bottom storey of the VCR14 and the VCR20 structure as cords considered. The yielding took place in the lower stor-
well as in the upper five storeys of all frames, normalized eys and was not related to the occurrence of the maximum
link shear forces exceeded the value of 1.3 anticipated in link rotations. The computed plastic rotations were generally
CSA-S16-01, reaching the maximum of 1.56 for the VCR14 less than 0.02 rad. Only one artificial record and one histor-
structure and 1.5 for the VCR20 and VCR25 frames. This ical record induced higher outer beam inelastic rotation
magnitude of strain-hardening is consistent with the experi- (0.03 rad) in one storey. In view of these results and the
mental observations reported by Okazaki et al. (2005). The benefits of relaxing the elastic response requirements for
84th percentile values show the similar trend with slightly beams in capacity design, allowing limited yielding in these
increased magnitudes. In spite of the fact that maximum elements in the design process appears to be justified and
link forces were under-predicted for some links, in view of could be incorporated in design norms.
the results obtained for the other frame members it does not The response of braces and columns was examined by
seem justified to increase the amplification factors applied tracing the time history of the bending moment and axial
on nominal link shear resistance to determine capacity de- force interaction to evaluate seismic demand. Because stron-
sign forces for these elements. ger sections than those required by capacity design were se-
In Montreal, many links in the middle and bottom por- lected, an elastic response of those elements was anticipated.
tions of the frames remained elastic. The maximum link Nevertheless, limited yielding or instability of the braces
shear forces have a similar profile to that observed in the was predicted in the bottom storeys of all the frames in Van-
Vancouver frames, but their magnitudes are smaller. Only couver. For the VCR20 structure, nonelastic response was
in one link in the MTL20 and MTL25 frames was the 84th also predicted for some braces in the middle storeys. This
percentile value of link shear force about 5% higher than the occurred infrequently, one to three times during the time–
design value. These results could have been anticipated in history, with a total duration of less than 1.0 s. No yielding
view of high link resistance-to-demand ratios obtained in or instability was predicted in any brace of three Montreal
these structures during design. The study of the eight-storey frames. Rozon (2009) investigated the impact of brace yield-
eccentrically braced frame (EBF) conducted by Rozon ing or flexural buckling on global structural response for
(2009) reports similar findings for Montreal. Although the four- and eight-storey EBFs and showed analytically that
study included only one type of EBF, the results clearly in- such behaviour, if limited in duration and extent, did not ad-
dicate that the seismic demand is much smaller in Eastern versely affect seismic behaviour.
Canada. Adapting design procedures to reflect better the dif- For columns, limited nonelastic response was predicted
ferences between eastern and western Canadian seismic con- only for the 14-storey structure in Vancouver for six out of

Published by NRC Research Press

Koboevic and David 203

Table 5. Summary of historical earthquake records selected for Vancouver and scaling factors (SF).

Event M R (km) Station Direction PHA(g) PHV(m/s) SF

V11 17 Jan. 1994 Northridge 6.7 44 Castaic, Old Ridge Rd 908 0.568 0.518 0.60
V12 17 Jan 1994 Northridge 6.7 30 Santa Monica City Hall 3608 0.369 0.251 1.21
V13 17 Jan 1994 Northridge 6.7 34 Los Angeles Baldwin Hills 3608 0.167 0.176 2.00
V14 24 Apr 1984 Morgan Hill 6.2 37 Gilroy Array #4, San Ysidro School 2708 0.224 0.193 1.63
V15 17 Jan 1994 Northridge 6.7 26 Pacific Palisades-Sunset 2808 0.197 0.149 2.55
V16 25 Apr 1992 Cape Mendocino 7.0 52 Eureka - Myrtle & West 908 0.178 0.283 1.13
V17 18 Oct 1989 Loma Prieta 7.0 54 Stanford Univ. 3608 0.287 0.280 1.27
V18 18Oct 1989 Loma Prieta 7.0 100 Presidio 908 0.200 0.340 1.55
V19 13 Apr 1949 West.Wash. 7.1 76 Olympia, Test Lab 868 0.280 0.170 1.45
V20 28 June 1992 Landers 7.3 93 Barstow 908 0.135 0.258 1.89

the twenty ground motions in one or two storeys. This be-
haviour was of short duration with the exception of one re-
cord for which yielding was predicted for approximately
10 s. Note that the highest inelastic link rotations were ob-
served under the same earthquake and at the same location
in the building. Plastic hinges in columns, occurring in loca-
tions other than the lower ends of the columns in the first
storey, are not desirable as they can lead to formation of
soft storey when combined with the plastic hinge formation
in the corresponding link. However, because the yielding
observed in the analysis is small and generally of short du-
ration it is not clear if it would be detrimental to the global
frame response. Experimental validations are thus needed
before any general conclusions can be made.
Median and 84th percentile values of axial forces in col-
umns obtained from nonlinear time–history analysis were
lower than those anticipated in the capacity design phase. In
comparison to median results, design predictions were about
20% lower for all Vancouver frames and for the top five
storeys for all Montreal frames. In the other storeys of the
Montreal frames, the design values were almost twice the
median value. This result could be anticipated in view of
nonuniform inelastic activity observed in links, and the fact
that many links responded elastically which is contrary to
the behaviour anticipated in the design process. Although
the design estimates of column axial forces introduced by
yielding links are somewhat conservative, the modification
of design procedure however does not seem necessary be-
cause the design of columns in taller EBFs is unlikely to be
governed by capacity design.
Median values of column bending moments obtained for
Vancouver frames reflected very well the design predictions.
The 84th percentile results exceeded those assumed in de-
sign reaching the maximum value of 0.5 Mp for the 14-
storey structure. For the Montreal frames, both median and
84th percentile bending moments in the columns were lower
than anticipated in design, reaching 0.15 Mp, where Mp is
the plastic moment of resistance, at the top storeys and only
0.01 to 0.05 Mp in the other storeys. These results are also
consistent with the observed inelastic activity in the links.
Inter-storey drifts
The results obtained for total inter-storey drifts are sum-
marized in Table 6. For the 14-storey frame in Vancouver,
the design predictions under spectral and equivalent static
load distributions are also included. The inter-storey drifts
follow the vertical distribution of inelastic link rotations,
with higher values observed in the upper storeys. Design
predictions, obtained from elastic values on basis of equal-
displacement principles (D = RoRdDe) were found to be
overly conservative and to poorly match the vertical distri-
bution predicted by the nonlinear time–history analysis. The
Vancouver structures experienced larger drifts than the
Montreal structures, but all median values were less than ap-
proximately half the NBCC drift limit of 0.025hs. The drifts
obtained for Montreal were three to four times smaller than
the NBCC limit. For the VCR14 and VCR25 structures, drift
response was more sensitive to a particular subgroup of se-
lected records regarding location, magnitude, and vertical
distribution. The individual records also introduced very
high peak drifts in a few upper storeys of the two frames,
exceeding the code limit by as much as 70%.
Relationship between inter-storey drifts and inelastic link
rotations
In design, estimates of the inelastic link rotations are cal-
culated as a function of the inelastic inter-storey drifts, Din,
and the frame geometry, assuming a rigid-plastic frame be-
haviour (Fig. 1). The drift Din is estimated from the elastic
inter-storey yield drift induced by the factored seismic loads,
De. This relationship between elastic and inelastic drifts is
based on the equal displacement principle, assuming that
significant inelastic link rotation only initiates when the
storey shear reaches the design value amplified by the over-
strength (RoV). The comparison of the total inter-storey yield
drifts obtained from the analyses and the inelastic inter-
storey yield drifts predicted in design reveals a poor match.
It is of interest, however, to see if the assumed relationships
between g and D based on rigid-plastic behaviour holds
when peak inelastic rotations and peak inter-storey yield
drifts are reached in nonlinear time–history analyses.
For all structures studied, the peak link rotations g and the
peak total inter-storey drifts D were determined at every
storey for each acceleration record. A strong correlation is
obtained between the two parameters: the maximum values
of g and D occurred at the same location and at the same
time. These findings confirmed the physical relationship be-
tween the two parameters. For each frame studied, pairs of
results were plotted and linear relationships were defined
for each frame separately. Data obtained for Vancouver ex-
cluded the top-storey links, which generally exhibited much
smaller inelastic rotations due to the exceptionally high
overstrength (the maximum 84th percentile link rotation
value observed in those beams is 0.004 rad). Similarly, for

Published by NRC Research Press

204
Fig. 4. Design spectrum for Vancouver and acceleration response spectra of scaled ground motion records.
the Montreal structures, top storey links were excluded from
the data set, as well as all the other links for which rotations
smaller than 0.005 rad were observed. Figure 6 plots the re-
sults obtained for the VCR20 structure. Similar results were
obtained for the other two Vancouver frames. From the en-
tire data set obtained for the three Vancouver structures, the
following equation can be written:
½3 D=hs ¼ 0:10g þ 0:0033
where D is the total inter-storey drift, hs is the storey height
and g is inelastic link rotation. The first constant in eq. [3] is
close to the ratio of the link length, e, over the bay width, L,
used in this study (0.089). Substituting this value in eq. [2]
and expressing g as a function of D leads to:
½4 g ¼ ðL=eÞðD=hs  0:0033Þ
Figure 7 compares the link inelastic rotations obtained
from nonlinear time–history analysis to the values predicted
using eq. [4]. The solid line represents perfect prediction.
The proposed equation gives satisfactory and conservative
results for the majority of cases. This relationship is consis-
tent with the assumption of a rigid-plastic deformation
mechanism with an inter-storey drift index at a yield of
0.33%. When applying the same procedure to the three
Montreal frames, the same expression was found with an in-
ter-storey drift index at a yield of 0.24%. These values com-
pare well with those reported in other studies. For instance,
using the results from the pushover analysis, Chao and Goel
(2005) reported inter-storey drifts at a yield of 0.375% and
0.5% for a three and a ten-storey EBF with the links at-
tached to the columns, respectively. For chevron-type three
and eight-storey EBFs designed for Vancouver and Mon-
treal, Rozon (2009) obtained an inter-storey drift index at
yield equal to 0.26%.
Conclusions
The seismic responses of the 14-, 20-, and 25-storey
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010
frames designed for Montreal and Vancouver have been ex-
amined under the action of selected acceleration records
scaled to match the design spectra. The results reported in
this study were for chevron-type EBFs and they relate to
the behaviour of the bare steel frame. The contribution of
the concrete floor slabs to the frames’ rigidity and resistance
has not been considered.
For different design phases, the increase in steel tonnage
was recorded to define the critical design criteria and iden-
tify the most appropriate design sequence. For all structures
studied, the link sections were selected on the bases of load
combinations including gravity or wind loads. This led to
significant link overstrength, particularly in the upper stor-
eys of the frames. This overstrength did not affect nega-
tively the design as ductility requirements did not control
design, but it did influence the response observed in nonlin-
ear time–history analysis. For Vancouver frames, the most
important increase in steel tonnage originated from the com-
pliance with inter-storey drift limits whereas global frame
stability was critical for the Montreal EBFs. In spite of the
large differences in seismic design base shears, the final
steel tonnages required at both locations were almost identi-
cal for a given frame height.
Design predictions were validated using the median re-
sults obtained from nonlinear time–history analysis. The
analysis clearly indicated very different demands imposed
on the frames designed for eastern and western Canadian
sites. Energy dissipation was not uniform over the height of
the frame although the strength-to-demand ratio of the links
was fairly uniform with the exception of top storey links. In
general, more important yielding was observed in the upper
storey and in the bottom storey links. For the Vancouver
frames, maximum inelastic link shear forces exceeded the
values anticipated in the design in the upper storeys. The
magnitude of strain-hardening obtained in the analysis was
consistent with the observations reported in the literature,
with forces reaching up to 1.56RyVp. In Montreal, the antici-
pated design overload was not reached. A much greater link
Published by NRC Research Press
Koboevic and David 205

Fig. 5. Maximum normalized link shear forces and inelastic shear rotations g: (a) 14-storey frames (VCR14 and MTL14), (b) 20-storey
frames (VCR20 and MTL20), and (c) 25-storey frames (VCR25 and MTL25). VCR, Vancouver; MTL, Montreal.
(a)
14 14

13 VCR14 13
median
12 12
VCR14 84th
11 percentile 11
MTL14
10 median 10

9 MTL14 84th 9
percentile
VCR14

Storey
Storey

8 CSA-S16 8
median
limit
7 7
VCR14 84th
6 6 percentile
MTL14 median
5 5

4 4 MTL14 84th
3 percentile
3
CSA-S16 limit
2 2

1 1
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

Vmax / V p Inelastic link rotation, γ (rad)

(b)
20 20
19 19
CSA-S16 limit
18 18
17 17
VCR20
16 16
median
15 15 VCR20 median
14 VCR20 84th 14
percentile
13 13
MTL20 VCR20 84th
12 12 percentile
Storey
Storey

11 median 11
10 MTL84th 10 MTL20 median
9 percentile 9
8 8 MTL20 84th
7 7 percentile
6 6
CSA-S16 limit
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Vmax/Vp Inelastic link rotation, γ (rad)

(c)
25 25
24 CSA-S16 limit 24
23 23
22 22
21 VCR25 median 21
20 20
19 VCR25 84th 19
18 percentile 18
17 MTL25 median 17
16 16 CSA-S16 limit
15 MTL25 84th 15
Storey
Storey

14 percentile 14
13 VCR25 median
13
12 12
11 11 VCR25 84th
10 10
9 percentile
9
8 8 MTL25 median
7 7
6 6
5 5 MTL25 84th
4 4 percentile
3 3
2 2
1 1
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1. 2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

Vmax/Vp Inelastic link rotation, γ (rad)

Published by NRC Research Press

206 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010

Table 6. Total inter-storey drifts (% hs).

14-storey EBF 20-storey EBF 25-storey EBF

VCR14 MTL14 VCR20 MTL20 VCR25 MTL25
Storey 50th Spectral Equiv.stat 50th Spectral Equiv.stat. 50th 50th 50th 50th
25 0.4 0.3
24 0.6 0.4
23 0.8 0.5
22 0.8 0.5
21 0.8 0.4
20 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.3
19 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.2
18 0.9 0.5 0.9 0.2
17 0.9 0.4 0.9 0.2
16 1.0 0.3 0.8 0.2
15 1.1 0.3 0.6 0.2
14 0.5 2.1 2.5 0.4 1.1 2.1 1.0 0.3 0.6 0.2
13 1.3 2.4 2.5 0.5 1.4 2.3 0.8 0.2 0.6 0.2
12 1.3 2.4 2.5 0.5 1.4 2.2 0.7 0.2 0.5 0.2
11 1.2 2.3 2.4 0.5 1.3 2.1 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.2
10 1.1 2.4 2.4 0.4 1.3 2.1 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.2
9 1.1 2.3 2.3 0.3 1.2 2.0 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2
8 0.8 2.2 2.3 0.3 1.1 1.9 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2
7 0.8 2.2 2.2 0.2 1.1 1.7 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.1
6 0.7 2.0 2.0 0.2 1.1 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.1
5 0.7 1.9 1.8 0.2 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.1
4 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.2 1.0 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.1
3 0.6 1.7 1.5 0.2 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2
2 0.6 1.5 1.2 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.1
1 0.6 1.4 0.9 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.5 0.2
Note: NBCC design limit for seismic inter-storey drift 2.5% hs.

Fig. 6. Relationship between computed total inter-storey drift and inelastic link rotations (VCR20 frame).

inelastic shear rotation demand was obtained in Vancouver
compared with Montreal. This was anticipated in view of
the high link overstrength present in the Montreal structures.
In Vancouver frames, the code limit of 0.08 rad was ex-
ceeded only by a small marigin and in limited number of
storeys. However, 84th percentile results significantly sur-
passed design limits, showing that some acceleration records
may impose particularly high demand inelastic demand on
links.
As anticipated, the response of the other frame members
remained generally elastic. Yielding of the outer beam seg-
ments, which was predicted in design, only occurred in the
Vancouver frames and was very limited. This behaviour did
not have a detrimental impact on the frame response, indi-

Published by NRC Research Press

Koboevic and David
Fig. 7. Predicted versus computed link inelastic shear rotations.
cating that strict avoidance of inelastic activity in this ele-
ment is not essential for satisfactory frame performance. Re-
laxing this design requirement would most likely benefit low
and medium-height EBFs as the design of the outer beam
segments in the taller frames was generally governed by
other design criteria. Limited inelastic action was observed
in the braces in the lower storeys of the Vancouver frames.
Previous analytical studies suggest that such behaviour
would not adversely impact global frame response. For the
same structure, some column yielding of very short duration
was also observed. The impact of such behaviour on global
structural response is not known and would require further
analytical and experimental validation. The use of higher de-
sign bending moments and axial loads for the top tier col-
umns compared with the rest of the structure in capacity
design was found appropriate and the values specified in
the CSA-S16 standard adequate. It would seem however
more appropriate to explicitly define the design values of
bending moments as a function of the plastic moment resist-
ance, Mp.
Design procedures overpredicted the maximum seismic
drifts and failed to represent their vertical distribution. This
is a shortcoming of the forced-based design procedure that
can have important consequences for taller structures where
deflection criterion often governs design. Current design
methods to estimate inelastic link rotations could not be vali-
dated on the basis of the nonlinear dynamic time–history
analysis results. Whereas the assumption of a rigid-plastic
collapse mechanism to relate inter-storey drifts and inelastic
link rotations was found appropriate, the prediction of the in-
elastic displacements from elastic displacement based on the
equal-displacement approach was not. Further studies are
needed to develop a more reliable method to predict inelastic
displacements. The method should also account for the con-
tribution of the chord drifts to horizontal displacements.
In view of the overall satisfactory behaviour of the frames
studied, it does not seem necessary to limit the height of
EBFs for seismic applications at the sites examined. How-
ever, the study revealed that the system becomes less effi-
207
cient as the height is increased and the choice of another
structural system may be more appropriate.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Steel Structures Educa-
tion Foundation of Canada and the Natural Science and En-
gineering Research Council of Canada. The authors
acknowledge the contribution of Prof. J. Ricles from Lehigh
University in providing the software for link modelling. The
contributions of Prof. Robert Tremblay and M.Sc. student
Jonathan Rozon from Ecole Polytechnique of Montreal for
issues regarding the calibration of link elements, scaling of
the earthquake records, and study of the g-D relationship
are also acknowledged.
References
Chao, S.-H., and Goel, S. 2005. Performance-based seismic design
of eccentrically braced frames using target drift and yield me-
chanism as performance criteria. Report UMCEE-05-05. Univer-
sity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
CSA. 2005. Limit states design of steel structures, including CSA-
S16S1-05 Supplement No. 1. CAN/CSA-S16–01. Canadian
Standards Association, Willowdale, Ont.
David, S.O. 2009. Seismic analysis and design of taller eccentri-
cally braced frames. M.Sc. thesis, Department of Civil, Geologi-
cal and Mining Engineering, École Polytechnique de Montreal,
Montreal, Que.
Han, X.M. 1998. Design and behaviour of eccentrically braced
frames in moderate seismic zones. M.Sc. thesis, Department of
Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics, Montreal, Que.
Kasai, K., and Popov, E.P. 1986. A study of seismically resistant
eccentrically braced frames. UCB/EERC-86/01. University of
California, Berkeley, Calif.
Koboevic, S. 2000. An approach to seismic design of eccentrically
braced frames. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering
and Applied Mechanics, McGill University, Montreal, Que.
Koboevic, S., and Redwood, R. 1997. Design and seismic response
of shear critical eccentrically braced frames. Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering, 24(5): 761–771. doi:10.1139/cjce-24-5-761.
Mondkar, D.P., and Powell, G.H. 1975. ANSR-1 general purpose
Published by NRC Research Press
208 Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 37, 2010

program for analysis of nonlinear structural response. Report hn total height of structure
EERC 75-37. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College hs storey height
of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Calif. IE seismic risk coefficient
NRCC. 2005. National building code of Canada 2005. 12th ed. Na- kx effective length factor for in-plane action
ky effective length factor for out-of plane action
tional Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ont.
L bay width
Okazaki, T., Arce, G., Ryu, H., and Engelhardt, M. 2005. Experi- Mp plastic moment resistance
mental study of local buckling, overstrength, and fracture of Mv factor to account for increase in base shear due to
links in eccentrically braced frames. Journal of Structural Engi- higher mode effect
neering, 131(10): 1526–1535. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- Rd ductility-related force modification factor
9445(2005)131:10(1526). Ro overstrength-related force modification fa factor
PEER. 2009. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center Ry ratio of the probable to nominal yield stress
Strong Motion Database (online) Available from http://peer. S(Ta) design spectral acceleration
berkeley.edu. T fundamental structural period obtained from dy-
Popov, E.P., Ricles, J.M., and Kasai, K. 1992. Methodology for op- namic analysis
timum EBF link design. Report No. UCB/EERC-92/13. Univer- Ta empirical structural period
sity of California, Berkeley, Calif. U2 amplification factor to account for second-order ef-
Richards, P.W., and Uang, C.-M. 2006. Testing protocol for short fects of gravity loads acting on the laterally dis-
links in eccentrically braced frames. Journal of Structural placed storey
Engineering, 132(8): 1183–1191. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733- V seismic design base shear
9445(2006)132:8(1183). Vmin minimum seismic base shear
Rides, J.M., and Popov, E.P. 1994. Inelastic link element for EBF Vp plastic shear resistance of the link
seismic analysis. Journal of Structural Engineering, 120(2): 441– Vr factored shear resistance of the link
463. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:2(441). W seismic weight
w web thickness
Rozon, J. 2009. Étude du comportement global des cadres à contre-
a ratio of link shear resistance-to-seismic shear force
ventement excentrique de faible et moyenne hauteur. M.Sc. the-
demand
sis, Department of Civil, Geological and Mining Engineering, g inelastic shear rotation of the link
École Polytechnique de Montreal, Montreal, Que. grange sum of the absolute values of maximum positive
Tremblay, R., and Atkinson, G.M. 2001. Comparative study of the and maximum negative inelastic shear rotations of
inelastic seismic demand of eastern and western sites. Earth- the link
quake Spectra, 17(2): 333–358. doi:10.1193/1.1586178. D peak total inter-storey drift obtained from non-lin-
ear analysis
List of symbols Din design estimate of inelastic inter-storey drift
(Din=3De)
d depth of the section De elastic drift for factored design seismic loading
e link length f resistance factor
Fa acceleration-based site coefficient q storey drift angle
Fv velocity-based site coefficient
Fy specified minimum yield stress

Published by NRC Research Press