Dynamic coefficient of modular buildings during seismic load

DOI: 10.37153/2618-9283-2022-4-23-33

Authors:  
Rubric:     Theoretical and experimental studies   
Key words: Modular buildings, seismic load, coefficient of dynamic, structural period
Annotation:

Modular buildings are currently a topical area of research. Erection of modular buildings in hard-to-reach areas needs special attention to the consideration of seismic loads. There are not many studies on the work of modular buildings on dynamic impacts in the Russian Federation.

The paper studies the influence of the parameters of modular buildings to the coefficients of dynamic during seismic action. Study of the influence of the elements flexibility on the coefficient of dynamic, an analytical formula for determining the period of natural oscillations was used. This formula was obtained for modular buildings with corner supported columns, rigid intramodular and pin intermodular connections. Based on the boundary values of the moments of inertia of the columns, at which the dynamic coefficient decreases, an assessment of real design solutions was made for various ratios of the moments of inertia of crossbars and columns of one-, two- and three-story modular buildings. The dimensions of the modules are set to be 3×6×3(h) m, the dead load on a floor is 100 kg/m² and 150 kg/m².

It was found almost all considered design solutions for modular buildings have a dynamic coefficient is 2,5 even for three-story buildings if there is ground categories III and IV. Dynamic coefficient decreases for some two-story buildings if there is ground categories I and II. Dynamic coefficient of one-story buildings is 2,5 for any ground categories. The ratio less than 1 of the moments of inertia of the crossbar and the column is the worst case of design in terms of seismic load.

Used Books:

1.      Bad’in G.M., Sychev S.A. Analysis an error of the installation and operation of prefabricated structures. Modern problems of science and education. 2015, V. 2–1. URL: https://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=21019 (date: 01.08.2022)

2.      Iskhodzhanova G.R. Prospects for the use of block-modular structures of buildings for high altitude conditions. Vestnik KRSU. 2013, V.7, pp. 151–155. [In Russian]

3.      Muksinov R.M., Semenov V.S., Akbaraliev R.Sh. Seismic-safe, prefabricated and mobile buildings for the life support of the population in emergency situations. Vestnik KRSU. 2012, V. 7, pp. 110–114. [In Russian]

4.      Timoshchenko A.A., Kuprava L.R., Moskalev M.B., Charnik D.G. Features of the construction of modular buildings in high latitudes. Vestnik studencheskogo nauchnogo obshchestva. 2018, V. 2, pp. 154–156. [In Russian]

5.      Vashpanov K.S. Seismic resistance of modular buildings. Cherepovets State University Bulletin. 2012, V. 4, pp. 7–11. [In Russian]

6.      Granovsky A. V., Smirnov V. A., Fedorov M. V. et al. To the assessment of seismic resistance of buildings made using the volume-modular technology of the company “KNAUF”. Industrial and Civil Engineering. 2020, V. 2, pp. 34–39. Doi: 10.33622/0869-7019.2020.02.34-39 [In Russian]

7.      Annan C.D., Youssef M.A., El-Naggar M.H. Experimental evaluation of the seismic performance of modular steel-braced frames. Engineering Structures. 2009, V. 31, pp. 1435–1446. Doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.024

8.      Annan C.D., Youssef M.A., El-Naggar M.H. Seismic overstrength in braced frames of modular steel buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2009, V. 13, pp. 1–21. Doi: 10.1080/13632460802212576

9.      Annan C.D., Youssef M.A., El-Naggar M.H. Seismic vulnerability assessment of modular steel buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2009, V. 13, pp. 1065–1088. Doi: 10.1080/13632460902933881

10. Shi F., Wang H., Zong L., Ding Y., Su J. Seismic behavior of high-rise modular steel constructions with various module layouts. Journal of Building Engineering. 2020, V. 31, 101396. Doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101396

11. Lacey A.W., Chen W., Hao H., Bi K. Effect of inter-module connection stiffness on structural response of a modular steel building subjected to wind and earthquake load. Engineering Structures. 2020, V. 213, pp. 110628. Doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110628

12. Lacey A.W., Chen W., Hao H., Bi K. Numerical study of the structural response to wind loading: modular building case study. 13th International Conference on Steel, Space and Composite Structures 31 January – 2 February 2018, Perth, Australia. 2018, 1025

13. Lacey A.W., Chen W., Hao H., Bi K. Structural Response of Modular Buildings – An Overview. Journal of Building Engineering. 2018, V. 23, pp. 45–56. Doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.12.008

14. Alembagheri M., Sharafi P., Rashidi M., Bigdeli A., Farajian M. Natural dynamic characteristics of volumetric steel modules with gypsum sheathed LSF walls: Experimental study. Structures. 2021, V. 33, pp. 272–282. Doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.04.068

15. Shirokov V.S., Gordeeva T.E., Bocharov A.Yu. Analytic method of structural analysis of modular buildings. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2020, V. 775, 012148. Doi:10.1088/1757-899X/775/1/012148     [In Russian]

16. Shirokov V.S., Kholopov I.S., Solovjev A.V. Determination of the frequency of natural vibrations of a modular building. Procedia Engineering. 2016, V. 153, pp. 655–661. Doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.218 [In Russian]

17. Shirokov V., Soloviev A., Gordeeva T. Determining internal forces in modular building elements under action wind load. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2018, V. 196, 02010. Doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819602010 [In Russian]

18. Cho B.-H., Lee J.-S., Kim H., Kim D.-J. Structural performance of a new blind-bolted frame modular beam-column connection under lateral loading. Applied Sciences. 2019, V. 9, 1929. Doi.org/10.3390/app9091929

19. Khan K., Yan J.-B. Numerical studies on the seismic behaviour of a prefabricated multi-storey modular steel building with new-type bolted joints. Advanced Steel Construction. 2021, V. 17, pp. 1–9. Doi:10.18057/IJASC.2021.17.1.1

20. Choi K.-S., Kim H.-J. An Analytical Study on Rotational Capacity of Beam-Column Joints in Unit Modular Frames. International Journal of Civil, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering. 2015, V. 9, pp. 83–86. Doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1098106

21. Ma R., Xia J., Chang H., Xu B., Zhang L. Experimental and numerical investigation of mechanical properties on novel modular connections with superimposed beams. Engineering Structures. 2021, V. 232, 111858. Doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.111858

22. Wang Y., Xia J., Ma R., Xu B., Wang T. Experimental study on the flexural behavior of an innovative modular steel building connection with installed bolts in the columns. Applied Science. 2019, V. 9, 3468. Doi:10.3390/app9173468

23. Deng E.-F., Zong L., Ding Y., Dai X.-M., Lou., Chen Y. Monotonic and cyclic response of bolted connections with welded cover plate for modular steel construction. Engineering Structures. 2018, V. 167, pp. 407–419. Doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.04.028

24. Lee S., Park J., Kwak E., Shon S., Kang C., Choi H. Verification of the seismic performance of a rigidly connected modular system depending on the shape and size of the ceiling bracket. Materials. 2017, V. 10 (3), 263. Doi.org/10.3390/ma10030263

25. Lee S., Park J., Shon S., Kang C. Seismic performance evaluation of the ceiling-bracket-type modular joint with various bracket parameters. Journal of Constructional Steel Research. 2018, V. 150, P. 298–325. Doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.08.008

26. Shirokov V.S., Kholopov I.S., Solovev A.V. Design of a modular building assembled from block boxes. Traditions and innovations in construction and architecture. Construction. Digest of articles. Samara, 2015, pp. 84–89. [In Russian]