Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
..:#:
..;F
..
'
Structural syst.erns
for ~ a l l ~ u i l d i n g s
Sponsors
Europrofilc Tecom. Luxembourg
Gcorge A. Fuller Co.. New York
T.R. Hnmrah & Yeung Sdn. Bhd.. Sclangor
HL-Technik A.G.. Munich
Hong Kong Lnnd Group Lld.. Hong Kong
Kone Elevators. Helsinki
John A. Mnnin & Aaroc.. Inc.. L o r Angelcr
Ahmad Mohnrrom. Cairo
Walter P. Moore & Associates. Inc.. Hourton
Nippon Slcel. Tokyo
Otis E l e w l o r Co.. Forminglan
O v e A m p Pmnerrhip. London
P D M Strocnl Inc.. Slockton
Leslie E. R o b c m o n Associatea. New York
Snmrung Engineering Br Conrtruction Co. Lrd..Seoul
Snud Consult, Riyadh
Schindlcr Elevntor Corp.. Morrislown
Siecor Corporntion. Hickory
Tukenako Corporation, Tokyo
Tishmon Conslruction Corporarion of N c w York, New York
Tiihman Speyer Properties. Ncw York
W c i r k o p i & Pickwonh. N e w York
Wing T a i Conrtmction &Engineering. Hong Kong
Wong & Ouynng (HK) Lld.. Hong Kong
Donor5
American Bridge Co.. Pittsburgh
American Iron and Slcel Institute.
\Vushington, D.C.
W.R. Grncc & Comp;my. Cambridge
Hnscko Corporaion. Tokyo
T h c Herrick Corp.. Pleasnnton
Hollundsche Belon Mnnlschappij BV,
Rijswijk
Hong Kong Housing Autl~orily.Hong Kong
lffland Kivvnvgh Waterbury. P.C.. New York
L i m ConsulU~tts.Inc.. Cambridge
Meinhnrdt Auslrnlin Pty. Ltd.. Melbourne
Mclnhnrdl (HK) Ltd.. Hong Kong
Mucrer Rutledge Consulting Engincen.
N e w York
Oboynshi Corpomtion. T o k y o
O T E P In~crnntional.SA. Mndrid
Charles Ponkow Builders. Inc.. Alwdenn
Projcst S A Emprecndimentos e Servicos
Tecnlcos. Rin d c Jnncim
P S M Inlernnllonnl. Chicago
Skilling Ward Megnurson B n r b h i r c Inc..
Senltlc
Tooley & Company. L a s Angcles
Nobih Yourref and Arrocinlcr. Los Angelcs
C o n t r i b u t i n g Pnrtlclponlr
Advnnccd Slructuml Concrplr. Danvcr
Advicrburnu Voor Bouwwchnick BV. Amhcm
Amcrirnn lwti~uteof Slecl Con.uu~Lion. Chicago
Anglo Amcricnn Pmpcny Scrviccr (Ply1 Lld.. lohnn"&burg
Archituaml Scrviccr Dcpl.. Hong Kong
Alelici D'Architcctum, dc Genvnl, Genvnl
~uslnlinnlnstitulc olSlccl Conrwcdon, hlllronr Poinl
B.C.V. . Pmnctti
Miiono
~ S.r.1..
~
~
w.S. Bcllowr conrtriction Corp.. Hourton
Aificd Bcncrch & Co.. Chicngo
Balro dc lrnovclr Err Sno Poulo. S.A.. Sno Poulo
Bomhont & W a d Pty. Lld.. Spring Hill
~
~ ~ n y cWind
ur
Tunnci
~ Labornlory
d
~(U. Wcrrcm Ontnriol. London
Bovir ~ i m i l i London
.
Bnndow & Johulon ArrociaLcr. Lor Angclcr
Bmokc Hillier Porker. Hong Kong
Buildings & Dan. S.A. Bwsrclr
CBM Engincm Inc.. Houston
Ccrmo* Pcerkn Pacnen. Inc.. Fon Coilinr
CblA A r h i t u ~& Enginecn. Sari luon
Conrfnction Conwlung Lbonlor). Dallor
Cmnr Fuhicu Door Cu.. Lnkc Bluff
Cmnc & Arloriolcr Ply. Lld. Sydnr)
Da(11 Lugdon & Evcnll. London
DeSimonc. Ch~plin& Dohr)n Inc. Kc. York
D O ~ Arlrlnc ~ ~ g l n r r~nn~r scatllc
~. .
Fujilnva lohns~non1 A s ~ o c i l r rCnlcagn
.
Cunrndgc l i n l t n s k D n r ) Ply Ltd. Sldnc)
Holn.5 Lundhcrg U'nrhlcr Inlcmolion~l.Nc* YvrA
1io)ok;i~xAr$ocialcr. Lo, Anerlcr
I l r ~ l l l ~Buildtng$
)
lnlrrn:l8vnll In:. F ~ i d r i
l l ~ l t m ~O~ h m
. & Klsrlboum. lnc S 81, F i a n r 8 ~ ~ o
lnlrrnaliond lmn k Slrrl Imlilutc. Brulrcl$
Irwin Iohnrlon nnd Ponncn. Sydncy
Infoc~er.S.A. Rio delnoeim
I.A. loner Conruuction Co., Charlotic
Kcsting Mnnn Iemigan RoacL. Lor Angclcr
KPFF Conrulting Engineen. Scuulc
Lcnd Lwre Dcrign Gmup Lld.. Sydncy
~ n n i&
n Bmvo, inc.. Honolulu
Monin.Middirhrook & Louic. Snn Fmncirco
Enriquc Mmincr-Romcm. S.A.. Mexico
Mitchell McForlane Brrnlnoli & Paonen Inll. LId..
Honk Kong
Miuubirhi Erwlc Co..Ltd.. Tokyo
Moh nnd Arrociau. inc..Tnipci
Morrc Diesel Inlcmorionrl. Ncw York
Mvlriplci ConrWclions (NSWI Pfy. Lid.. Sydncy
Nihoasckkci. U.S.A., Ltd., Lor Angclcr
NiWIcn Sckkci. Ltd.. Tokyo
Norman Dirncy & Young. Brirhonc
Pacific Adnr Dcvclopmenl Corp.. Lor Angclcr
PcddlcThorp Aururlin Ply. Lld.. Brirhnnc
PorkTowrr Gmup. New Yo*
Ccror Pclii & Asrociolu. Ncw York
Pcrkinr & Will. Chicngo
Rnhulnn Zain Arrociacr. Kuolo LumDur
RFB Consulting Arrhilcnr, lohunnuhurp
Rnrrnunrrrr G m r ~ m mCons Engrr.. PC. llru York
E- m~,
r n Rod, & Sons lnd. lnc.. New Yoik
Rovon Woll8~mrD l r t r l & lruin 1C. Gurlph
ScpllotSaio rcmnding (Sdnl Bhd, K ~ o l oLumpur
scrrrn S m : m r Gimi5 dc Encrnhon~S A . Rlo dc
lnncim
Scvcmd Asrociacr Conr. Engn.. New York
SOBRENCO. S.A.. Rio dr Inncim
south Africnn lnrtiatc of Srccl Conslrucdon. Johmncrbvrg
stccl Rcinlorrcmcnt lnrlilulc of Aurlrnlio. Sydncy
STS Conrultnnu Lrd.. Nonhbmok
Studio Find. Nova E Coslcilnni. Milnno
Tnyior Thornson Whining Ply Lld. St. Lconordr
B.A. Vrvnroulu & Asrociacr. Athenr
VlPAC Encinrcn & Sricndru Lid. hlclhovmc
Worgon Cbpmon Pmnrrr. S)uncy
Wndl~nl.crA?ro:irlrl. Nrw Yorl
wond~.,d.cl,dc Con~.lurn,. ~ r rYolk
.
CONTRIBUTORS
I.D. Berzrretf~
Joseph Bicnls
Brian Coviil
P.H. D a y o ~ ~ ~ n r ~ s a
Eiji Frrk!ria~ro
him B, Ki1,rzister
Rpscard M. I;o~~,aicz)k
Owerr bJanin
Il'iliion! Afuibortnie
Sciichi Ml,ra?lrofsll
% Okoshi
AR,r~adRolrirnian
Tltonras Scararrgeiio
Roben Si,m
Richard Ton!asefri
A. )'atnohi
Editorial Group
McGtaw-Hill, Inc.
D.C. Auckland Bogoti
Lisbon London Madrid MexicoClty Milan
Montreal New Delhi San Juan Singapore
sydney Tokyo Toronto
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS
This Monognph uar prepxed h j Commillcc 3 (Slmctuml Syrtcm5)of ihc Council onToll Buitdlngr
and Urban Hnbitnt nr p ~ onf the Tali Building, and Urban Environment Series. Thc edtlonll gmup
$bas R)szxd hf. Kowatcz)k, chairman; Rohen Sinn, ricc-chnirmln; and hlox B. Kiimister, editor.
Foreword
COMMllTEE MEMBERS
Hcrben F. Adigun. Mir M. Ali. Luis Guillermo Aycardi. Prnbodh V. Bnnavnlkur. Bob A. Bcckner.
Charles L. Bcckncr. George E. Brandow. John F. Bmtchie, Robcn J. Bmngmber. Yu D. Bychenkov. Peter W. Chen. Ching-Chum Chcm. Pave1 Cirek. Andrew Dnvidr. John DeBremoekcr,
Dirk Dickc. Robcn 0. Disque. Richard Dziewolnki. Ehun Fang. Alexander W. Founleh. James G.
Forbes. Roben I. Hanren. Roben D. Hnnsen. Toshihnm Hisatoku. Arne Johnson. Michael Kavyrchine. Mnn B. Kiimirler (editor). GcnF. Konig. Ryszwd M. KowaIczyk (chairman). Juraj Korak.
Monsieur G. Lacombe. Siegfried Liphardl. Miguel A. Mneiar-Rendon. Owen Mnrrin. Jaime Mnson. N. G. Mutkov. Gerardo G. Mayor. Leonard R Middleton. Jaime Munoz-Duquc. Jacques
Nasser. Anthony F. Nnrretta. Fujio Nirhikown. Alexis Ortapenko. Z. Powlowski. M. V. Parokhin.
Peter Y. S. Pun. Wcmer Quoscbnnh. Govidan Rahulan. Anthony Fracis Roper. Sntwant S. Rihai.
Leslie E. Robenson. Wolfgang Schurilcr. Duiliu Sfintesco. Robert Sinn (vice-chairman). Ramiro
A. Sofronie. A. G. Sokolov. Euuro Suzuki. Bungaie S. Tnranalh. A. R. Tonkley. Kenneth W. Wan.
Morden S. Yollcr. Nobih F. G. Yourrcf. Stefan Zucrek.
GROUP LEADERS
The committee on Structural Systems is part of GroupSC of the Council, "Systems and Concepts."
The leaders are:
lamer G. Forbes. Chairman
Joseph P. Coluco, Vice-Chairman
Henry J. Cownn. Editor
This volume is o n e of a series o f Monographs prepared under the aegis o f the Council
on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, a series that is aimed a t documenting the state of
the art o f the planning, design, conslruction, and operation of tall buildings as well as
their interaction with the urban environmenL
T h e present series is built upon an original set of five Monographs published by the
American Society of Civil Engineers, as follows:
Preface
Although tall buildings are generally considered to be a product of the modem indusuialized world. inherent human desire to build skyward is nearly as old as human civilizntion. The ancient ovramids of Giza in Eevot, the Mavan temdes in Tikal. Guatain lndia arcjust a-fiw erampl& eternaily benring witness to
mala, and the Kuwb
this instincL Skyscrapers in thc modcrn sense began to appear over a century ago; however, it was nnly after World War I1 that rapid urbani'ration and population growth created the need for the conswction of tall buildings.
T h e dominant impact of Llll buildings on urban landscapes has tended to invite contrnvenv. o~ticularl; in cities with older historic structuris. The skvscraoer silhouette
has transformed andshaped the skylines of many cities, thercby creGing ;he most cbrracteristic and symbolic lrstaments to thc cities' wealth and their inhabitants' collecti!,e
...
The ordinary observer recognizes the tall building primarily with respect to its exterior architectural enclosure. This is nnly natural, as when we consider the great pyramids of
-~ Eevot
-, our overridine imaee is bf their characteristic sharre. It is o d v re&ntlv
that we have begun to realize the creativity and colossal effnn expended by these ancient people to erect these swcmres in the desert at that time. So it is with the modem
skvscrao;r.
The overall soatial form as well as the intricate deWiline
,
- of the claddine svstems are crucial in defining the architectural expression and in placing the tower within
the overall urban environment. The aim of this Monograph, however, is to have a look
under the outer covering of the building to reveal the stiuctural skeleton as well as to
provide historical knowledge documenting the design and construction techniques used
to realize these monuments in today's world.
This Monoeraoh is therefore dedicated to the structural systems for tall buildings:
their evo~utinn~anh
historical development as well as the variety of solutions engendered
to allow the tower to be realized safely andcfliciently. As in the pas!, new nchievoments
.in material science.. comouter-aided desien. and construction technology
-. have opened
paths toward more sophisticated and elcgant swcturnl syslems for wll buildings. The
rwctuml system organization chosen for a p d c u l a r project determines the fundamen[at oropcnies of the aver;lll buiidinc. the behavior under imposed loads, its safety, and
oftin mav,have a drnmatic imoact on the architectural design.
- The intent of this volume
is lo demonstrate the chmcteristic features of many outstanding syslem form5 while
documenting the faclors leading lo their selection for projects aclually realized.
The swctural systems for high-rise buildings are constantly evolving and at no time
can be described as a completed whole. Every month new buildings are being designed
and created, new projects conceived, and new schemes applied. Nevcnheless, we hope
it is worthwhile to present the current state of the M while being aware that progress in
svstems develooment is oneoine.
The planning for thts Monograph began soon after the decision u,nc made by the
Council to expand the chapters of the original Monograph into separate volumes. The
concept of a volume based-on a survey of some of the most innovative examples of tall
building swctural systems conuibuted by leading engineers and design firms of the
~~~
- -
~.
xiv
Preface
profession was conceived during the committee workship in Hong Kong in 1990. It was
only after estnblishina the editorial lendershir, for the work that the volume began to
takc form, will1 tlte scope and content of the book finallred. At this time a buildinf data
form wns prepared for collecting thc most essential inform3tion concerning the structural design of the buildings included herdin. The surveys were initiated and the re.
s ~ o n s e cs o m ~ i l e dbv Max filmister. This material reoresen& the core of the comoleled
dook and the.vast mijority of the work. Bob Sinn then'assembled all of the "looseknds"
of the compilation in the summer of 1993 in order to finish the completed volume in
time for publication.
The ~ o n o g r a as
~ ha uhole is a product of extensive lenmtr,ork. Sincere thanks go to
all ofthc conuibutors who offered their valuablc time to share thew cxperirncc with the
readers. It Is around this information that the cnurc uork is construc[ed. W e hope that
the information included may be presented lo a broad professional audience. This exchange of information is one of the tenets of the Council and is in fact a condition for
progress in the design of tall buildings.
Supporting information for Chapter 5 from Drs. B. 1. Vickery. 1. D. Holmes. and
J. C. K. Cheung is gratefully acknowledged, as is the Australian Research Grants Commission for its suppon of the fundamental research.
As mentioned, we are aware that everyday Progress is made in the field of structurnl
engineering for high-rise buildings. Thc comn~itlceis already thinking about expmdlng
and updating this \,olume. \\'c urge all readers lo enrich and complement thia rrrrrk by
writing the Council or ioining the commitke.
~ i n ~ ~wcl lwould
~ . like lochpress our appruui;!lion to Dr. Lynn Beedle, ulto encouraged us to prepare this work and \rho ad\,ised and aupponed tltc efiori. \\'e dudicall: this
book to him.
Robert Sirm
Vice-Cltoimmn
Mar B. Kilmisrer
Editor
Contents
1. Introduction
1.1. Condensed Rererenccs/Bibliography
Contents
Core nnd Outrigger Systems
Project Daeriptions
Cityspire
Chifley Tower
One Liberly Place
17 Smle Sueel
Figuema at Wilrhlm
Four Allen Center
Tmmp Tower
Woterfmnt Place
Two Pmdentinl Plnw
1999 Bmadwvy
CilibnnkPloro
4.4. Tubulorsyslemr
P r o j s l Descriptions: Frnmed Tuber
Amoco Building
181 West Madiron Sueet
AT&T Corpamte Cenler
Georgia Pacific
450 Lexington Avenue
Mcllon Bank
Sumitorno Life Insumnce Building
Dewcy SquoreTou'er
Monon international
Nations Bank Coipante Center
Bvnk One Center
Cenml Ploro
Hopewcll Ccnuc
Project Descriptions: T-cd
Tuber
F m l Inlemationol Building
Onteric Center
John Hancock Ccnter
780 Third Avenue
Holel de las h e r
PI'ojffL Dereriptions: Bundled Tuber
Sears Tower
Rinlto Building
N6E Building
Cnmegie Hall Tower
Allied BonkPloro
45. Hybrid Systems
PmjeclDiscriptions
Ovcrreos Union Bonk Cenler
Citicorp Ccnrer
CcnTmrusl Center
Columbia Seafirst Center
First Bnnk Place
Two Union Squorc
Fist Intersmte World Center
Hong Kong Bank Headqumers
4.6. Condensed ReierencesiBibliogmphy
4.3.
5. Special Topics
5.1.
Condensed RcfemnccdBibliognphy
Contents
6.4.
A~hiEhilecedTendencies
Slructural Tendencies
Other Tendencies
Project Descriptions
Miglin-Beiller Tower
Deurbom Ccnter
Bnnkof thc SouthwertTowcr
Shimiru Super High Rise
Condensed RclerenceslBibliogmphy
Contributors
Building lndex
Name lndex
Subject lndex
Structural Systems
for Tall Buildings
Introduction
Smctural system for tall buildings have undergone a dramatic evolution throughout
the orevious decade and into the 1990s. Developments in structural system form and
orgnnirntion h m e historically been realized as a rcsponse to as well as an impclus
toward emerging architectural uends in high-rise building design. At thc time of publication of the initial Council Monograph Tnll Building Systems and Concepts in 1980.
international style and modernist high-rise designs, chanclerized by prismalic, repctilive verticnl geometries and flat-topped roofs, were predominant (Council on Tnll
Buildings. Group SC 1980). The devclopmcnt of Lhc prototype tubular systems for lnll
buildings was indeed predicated upon an ovcrall building form of constnnt or
smoothly varying profile. A representative office building project from the period is
shown in R g . 1.1. The rigid discipline of the cxterior rower form has since becn
rcplaccd in many cases by the highly articulated vcnical modulations of rhc building
envclopc characleristic of eclrclic postmodern. deconslructivist, and nrohistorical
high-risrexpressions (Rg. 1.2). This general disconlinuily and erosion of thc cxterior
facade has led to a new generation of tall building struclural systems that respond lo
the more flexible and idiosyncratic requirements of an increasingly varied architectural aesthetic. Innovntive swctural systems involving megaframes, interior superdiagonally braced h m e s , hybrid steel and high-strength concrete core and outrigger
systems, artificially damped structures, and spine structures nre among the compositions which represent a step in the development of structural systems for high-rise
buildings. This Monograph seeks to further the plncement of some of the most exciting and unique forms for today's tall building structures into the overall tall building
system hierarchy.
One of the fundamental goals of the Council has been to continualiy develop a tall
buildings dambase. The members of Committee SC-3, Structural Systems, decided
that rather than being a collection of papers or a general survey of tall building structural systems, the Monogmph would be organized with respect to such a database-type
format of structural and .
oroiect
. information on actual buildine-.oroiecu. The committee thererore requested detailed informarion from engineers in Lhe profession, regarding the structural design of some: of the most innovative high-rise projecrq throughout
the world. An enthusiastic resoonse from the s l ~ ~ c t u r eneineerine
nl
communirvoro..
vided very spucific engineering informntion such as wind nnd seismic Iondingz.
dynamic propenics. materials, and systems for a wide range of intcrnalional high-rise
oroiecls, both comoleted and in o&oosal staee. which i r e comoiled in this single
&k. These compr;hensive data &e [he p r i m 5 focus of this ~ o n n ~ r n pand
h should
Introduction
[Chap. 1
Chap. 11
b e of interest and value to practicing engineers and architects as well as other tall
building enthusiasts.
This Monograph is organized into six chapters. A general introduction to the classification of tall building structural systems is found in Chapter 2. The section begins
to define the parameters and characteristics for which tall building systems are evaluated. Tall building floor systems arc discussed in Chapter 3, which includes recent
..
Fic. 1.1 Ouolicr Onb Tuwcr. Chicuco.. Illinois.. Comnleted 1984. I.C c ~ ~ , n r sSkirln,oru
~~:
O w i n"~ r&
fierrill.)
Introduction
[Chap. 1
: , , .,
1'
. ,.
;.!
. ,..
Classification of
Tall Building
Structural Systems
$$:$$8%1. k
'.
Material
Steel
Concrcte
Composite
Gravity load resisting systems
Floor framing (beams, slabs)
Columns
.
.
[Chap. 2
Chap. 21
and load transfer. These levels are further broken down into subgroups and discrete
systems (Fig. 2.2). This format allows for the consistent and specific identification
and documentation of tall buildings and their systems. the overriding goal being to
achieve a comprehensive worldwide survey of the performonce of buildings in the
hieh-rise
=~~~ environment
-~ . While any cataloging scheme must address the preeminent focus on lateral load
resislance, the load-carrying function of the tall building subsystems is rarely independent. The most efficient high-rise systems fully engage vertical gravity load resisting
elements in the lateral load subsystem in order lo reduce the overall structural premium for resisting lateral loads. Some degree of independence is generally recognized
between thefloor fmnzing sjsrr,t!s and the loferal load rerisring qsrenzs, although the
integration of these subassemblies into the overall structural organization is crucial.
Trusses
Foundations
Lateral load resisting systems
Walls
Frames
Trusses
Diaphragms
Type and magnitude of lateral loads
~~~
Wind
Seismic
Strcngth and serviceability rcquirements
Drift
Acceleration
Ductility
LEVEL A
Framing
systems
LEVEL B
In 1984 the Council attempted to develop a rigorous methodology for the cataloging of tall buildings with respect to their structural systems (Falconer nnd Beedle.
1984). The classification scheme involves four distinct levels of framing-oriented
division: primary Framing system, bracing subsystem. floor framing, and configuration
framing
subsystems
(XX)
Building
configuration
and load
transfer
(XX YY 2)
Elevation
TYPE I
TYPE 11
I I
TYPE Ill
1)
TYPE IV
Fig. 2.2
[Chap. 2
1
I
Tall Building
Floor Systems
-.
~~
~~~
~~
10
[Chap. 3
floor systems is a rolled or built-up steel beam connected to a formed steel deck and
concrete
slab. The metal deck tvnicallv
- - ~
-. . roans
. unshored between steel members while
also providing a uorking platlonn for steel erection. The met31 deck slab may be orienled parallel or perpendicular lo the compo>ite beam span and may ilself be either
comoosite or noncomnosilr (form deck).
. F i-~ u r c3 ? shows a typical
.. office building
floor that is framed in composite steel beams.
~~
Sect. 3.11
11
In composite beam design. h e stress distribution at working loads across the comnosite section is shown schematicallv in Fie. 3.3. As the tor,
. flanee of h e steel section is
normally quite near h e neutral axis and consequently lightly stressed, a number of builtup or hybrid composite beam schemes have been formulated in an attempt to use the
structural steel material more efficiently (Fig. 3.4). Hybrid beams fabricated from
ASTM A36 grade top flange steel and 345-MPn (50-hi)-yield bonom flange steel have
been used. Also, built-up composire beam schemes or tnpered flange beams are possible.
In all of these cases. however. the increased fabrication costs must be evaluated which
lend lo offset the rclalivt: malerial efficiency. In addition. a rcl3tively wide and thickgauge top flange must be provided for proprr and rffr.cli$,e shex slud isslallalion.
A n"smat& comnosik steel beam h& two fundamental disadvantapes
- over other
types of composite floor framing types. ( I ) The mcmbcr !nus1 bc designed for the
maximum bending momenl near midspan and thus is oRcn undcrs!rrs,ud near h e sup-
COMPOSITE BEAM
FlAT
wm
MFFlrRElNFORCW
CONCRETESLAB
COMPOSEBEAM
W m MEFALOECK
A N 0 CONCRETESLAB
C O M P O S E BEAM
wrm METAL DECK
A N 0 CONCRETE SLAB
(RIBS PEAPENDICUldR~
(RIBS PABALLEL)
WORKING
LOADS
ULTIMATE
LOAD
I
Tall Building Floor Systems
12
[Chap. 3
pons, and (2) building-serviccs ductwork and piptng must pass beneath the beam, or
the beam must be provided with web penc~rattons(normally reinforced with plates or
ancles leadinc to hirher fabricatton costs) to allow access for this csui~ment
For this
.
reason, a number of composite girder forms allowing the free passage af mechanical,
ducts and related services through the depth of the girder have been developed. They'
include tapered and dapped girders, castellated beams, and stub girder systems (Fig.
3.5). As the tapered girders are completely fabricated from plate elemenls or cut from
rolled shapes, these composite members are frequently hybrid, with the top flange
designed in lower-strength steel. Applications of tapered composite girders to office
building construction are limited since the main mechanical duct loop normally runs
through the center of the lease span rather than at each end. The castellated composite
beam is formed from a single rolled wide-flange steel beam cut and then reassembled
by welding with the resulting increased depth and hexagonal openings. These members are available in standard shapes by serial size and are quite common in the United
Kingdom and the rest of Europe. Use in the United Stales is limited due to the
increased fabrication cost and the fact that the standard castellated openings are not
large enough to accommodate the large mechanical ductwork common in modern
high-rise, large floor plate building construction common in the United States. The
stub girder system involves the use of short sections of beam welded to the top flange
of a continuous, heavier bottom girder member. Continuous transverse secondary
beams and ducts pass through the openings formed by the beam stubs. This system has
been used in many building projects, but generally requires a shored design with consequent construction cost premiums.
:>,i;~
j ,. ,:,: . ~
Sect. 3.11
13
-.
Preeneinccred
nronrictnrv oncn-web lloor ioists. ioisl -rirders. and fabricated noor
=
trusses are viable composite memhcrs when combined with a concrete noor slab. The
advanta~esof an opetl-wcb nour framing 5ystcm include increnscd spannabilily and
stiffnus;due to 1he.decocr s~ructuralden& =ncl case in nccomrnodatine- electrical conduit. plumbing pipes. and heating and air-condilioninp ductwork. Open web systems
do, however. carry :I picmiuln for itreprunling thc many. rcla~ivelyihin, components of
~
............................................................
1
bc:;'TAPERED
;~
.-,
.
;
.-.,
C5ZJ
-J?C:
....
.. - L..
HYBRID
C0MPOSITEBEb.M
..
BUILT-UP
COMPOSm BEAM
..
....
. . <:. .;-,. 1
a??+-'.
V--=d
6C",I~~~~TE
TAPERED
DAPPED
>.
"
CASTELLATED
Lf4-Z
ROLLED
..........
I I <. I
TAPERED FLANOE
COMPOSITEBEAM
BUILT-UP HYBRID
COMPOSm BEAM
'
t
.
-.*
. . .,. . . . . .
SYSTEM
14
[Chap. 3
the member. Open-web steel joists have been used in composite action with flat-soffit
concrete slabs and metal deck slabs supporting concrete fill with and without sheer
conhectors. The desien for these svstems is orimarilv based on manufacturers' test
d313 , I s ~~p'n-~veb
steel jotbtb and joist girders nornlally are \paced relatively clusaly.
rile full polenrial lor composite elilc~cncyis not rcalircd as conlpared to o1hr.r cunlporite floo; systems. Composite design does provide quantifiableadvantages over "oncomoositc desien for oocn-web floor ioisls such as increased stiffness
-and~ducdlitv.
Ruill-up labricatcd compo\ilu nonr trusses cumbinc m ~ t u r ~ ciilcicncy
al
io rclnlively long-span 3pplicntions svtlh rn;lxinlom flea~h~lity
fnr iscorporaung huildinz-ser\,ic<r dusluork and .oioina
. into tilu cellinr!- caritv. The urufill: of the truss lorm alluhi,
for large mechanical air ducts as well as other piping and electrical lines to pass
through the openings formcd by the lriangularization of the web mcmbcrs. The
increased depth of the comuosite truss svslcm over a standard rolled-shaoe comnosite
beam system with building-scrvices dictwork and piping passing bclbw the'beam
results in maximum material eificicncy and high flexural stilfness. Generally, composite floor trusses are considcrcd economically viable lor floor spans in excess of
about 9 m (30 it). A iurtltcr requirement Tor noor truss systems is that the Framing Inyout be uniform. resuldng in relatively few truss types, which can be readily built in the
fabrication shop using a jig. Otherwise the high lcvcl of fabrication inherent in the
floor truss assemblage Lends to ofissct the relative material eliicicncy. For this reason,
composite floor truss systems are particularly nttractive in high-rise uiiice building
applications where large open lcnsc spans are required and noor configurations arc
generally repetitive over the ltcight of the building. Figure 3.6 shows an example of a
project utilizing composite noor trusses as part of an o\,erall mixed steel and concrete
building irante.
Anv trianaulated oocn-web form can be used lo define the reometrv o f t h e fabricated noor truss: however. the Warren w s s , with or without web verticals, is the one
utilized most often (Fig. 3.7). Thc Warren truss without vcrdcals provides n maximum
open-web area to acco&modate ducta,ork and piping. Vertical wdb membcrs added to
the Warren truss or a Pratt truss geometry may be utilized when the unbraccd length
of the compression chord is critical. Often a Vierendeel panel in thc low-shenr zone
near the center of the span is incornorated into the truss confiruration to accommodate
the main air-handling mechanical buct loop in office building applications. The spacing of the web members should bc chosen such that the free passage of ductwork and
piping
. - .is not inhibited while maintaining a reasonable c o m o ~ c s s i o ntop-chord
unbraced lensth. On the other hand. the nnlle
=~~of the web diaeonalr should be made
relatively sha~lowto reduce the number of members and associated joint \\-elding. This
must be balanced by the fact that shallower web members result in loneer
- unbraced
lengths and higher member axial forces, often requiring connection gusset plates.
thereby increasing iabrication costs and decreasing the clear area for ductwork and
piping. A panel spacing of roughly two to three limes the truss depth is a good rule of
thumb for orienting web diagonals. The floor truss configuration should be detailed
such that any significant point loads are applied at truss panel points. A vertical web
member may be introduced into the truss girder geometry Lo transfer these imposed
shear loads into the truss svstcm.
A variety o i chord and web member cross sections may be utilized in building,up
the floor truss geometry (sec Fig. 3.8). Chord mcmbers may be wide-flangc
- T or single-angle sections to allow easy, direct connection of web mcmbers without gusset
plates. Rectangular tubes o r double-angle s e ~ t i o n sare less commonly used chord
members as they require gusset-plated connections. Web members are most often Ts
o r single- or double-ancle sections welded directly Lo the chord T or angle stem.
althouih tube sections lhive been used. The composiie floor truss system is &mpleted
through the direct connection of the top chord flange to the concrete floor sl-b by
Sect. 3.21
15
shear connectors. The most common floor system in building construction is a comoosite metal deck and concrete slab chosen based on fire seoaration and acoustical
requiremenu spanning between composite floor trusses. The floor trusses are normally
spaced such that the metal deck slab sonns as the concrete form between the trusses
without requiring any additional shoring.
~~
~~
L~~~
EXTEA1OR STEEL
GR4VITI COLUMNS
AIIb SPANDRELS
COUPOS~
16
[Chap. 3
General Considerations
High-rise oftice buildings usually have long-span floors to achieve the desirable column-free space, and the spans are usually noncontinuous between the core and the
facade. To achieve long spans and still maintain acceptable deflections requires a deep
floor system in steel or reinforced concrete. However, by adopting prestressed postmumm
WARREN TRUSS
I
1
I
Sect. 3.21
17
'
tensioned concrete beams it is possible to achicve a shallow floor structure and still
m~intainaccepwble deflections witl~ourthe need for expensive prrcamhering.
Hirlt-risc residential buildin~susunllv do nor require lona spans because columnfree s b c e is not a selling point;the tenant or buyer ices the spice already subdivided
by walls, which effectively hide the columns. Hence continuous spans can be
achieved. Unlike office buildings, residential buildings do not as a rule have suspended ceilings-the ceiling may be just a sprayed h~gh-buildcoating on the slab soffit or a plasterboard ceilina on battens fixed to tbe slab soffit. Flat-plate floors are
therefore required and deflection control is an imponant design consideration. Where
the columns form a reasonably regular grid, prestressing can be very effective in minimizing the slab thickness while at the same time controlling deflections.
~ l f h o u g hit is customary to use posttensioning for prestressed concrete high-rise
buildings, precast pretensioned concrete can be used and has been employed in some
buildines described in this Monomph (Luth Building: Mnrriott Hotel, New York; Tai
Mahal hotell. The maior disadvaitaee of nrecast oretensioned concrete floor beams or
slabs is the cranage required to lift the heavy uniu along with the field-welded connections required for stability and diaphragm
. - action. Precast prelensioned floor members
are usually tied together by and made composite with a thin cast-in-place topping slab.
Floor posttensioned systems use either 12.7- or 15.2-mm (0.5- or 0.6-in.) highstreneth
steel strand formed into tendons. The tendons can be either "unbonded,"
"
where individual strands are greased and sheathed in plastic, or "bonded," where
groups of four or five strands are placed inside flat metal ducts that are filled with
Eement eroul after strcssina. On a worldwide basis, bonded systems are preferred in
high-rise buildings becausithey have demonstrated better long-term du&bility than
unbonded systems. Although unbonded systems used today have improved corrosion
resistance compared to earlier systems, there is still a large number of older buildings
that exhibit corrosion problems in their unbonded tendons. Another reason that
bonded posttensioned systems nre preferred is that cutting tendons for renovations or
demolition is both simpler and safer when the tendons are bonded to the concrete.
Nevenheless, care musibe exercised as it is by no means unknown for tendons specified to be grouted to have had this vital operation omitted. In this aspect. good quality
control is essential. Figure 3.9 illustrates a typical posttensioned floor using unbonded
tendons, whereas Figs. 3.10 and 3.11 illustrate the construction of a typical posttensioned floor using bonded tendons.
The most common posttensioned systems are:
- .
PPR =
.--!
&A,&,
+
CHOilOB
WEB MEMBERS
hubl~lnglem
IL.%
ri,n
Fig.3.8
Ree?.TUk
IL
%.
IZX
R L U b
,,-Tub.
. .
whereA r-f"2 is the cross section area of orestressed steel multiolied bv its vield shenath
and A,J 8 ) is the cross section are3 of normal rcinforccd sleel multiplied by its yisld
stress A useful starling point in d:tarm!ning the amount uf prcstrcss rzqi~ircdis lo proride culficicnt prestress lo lh313ncc oboul 15% of the self-weight of the nnor blrUclllrLI.
i
;
i
,:
:
18
[Chap. 3
Untensioncd steel is then added to satisfy the ultimate limit state. (This will often result
in a PPR of about 0.6.) Deflections and shear capacity must also be checked:
The span-to-depth ratio of a single-span noncontinuous floor beam will be about
25; for a continuous beam it will be about 28 and for a flat-plate beam about 45 for an
internal span and 40 for an end span.
I/
Sect. 3.21
l9
In high-rise buildings it is preferable to avoid running floor beams into heavily
reinforced perimeter columns for two reasons:
1. There are difficulties in accommodating tendon anchorages, which compete far
space with the column reinforcement.
2. Frame action developed between the beams and columns causes the design bending
moment between floors to vary as the fram~sresist lateral load, thereby diminishing
the number of identical floors that can be designed, delailed. and conswcted.
Instead of being directly supponed by columns, the floor beams should be supported
by the spandrel beams.
Prestressing anchorages can be on the outside of the building (requiring external
access). at a step in the soffit of the beams [see Riverside Centre and Bourke Place
(Figs. 3.15. 3.30, and 3.33)], or in a pocket at the lop of the floor. Top-of-floor pockets have the disadvantage that they usually cause local vnrialions in the flatness o i the
floor and rough patches, which may need to be ground flush.
Bccause posttensioning causes axial shortening of the prestressed member, it is
necessary to consider the effects of axial reslraint, that is, the effects of stiff columns
GROUTING
SRESSING
~ i g3.11
.
.:~.
..3)>
~:?*
20
[Chap. 3
'2
and walls. Such restraint has two potential effects: it can overstress the co!umns or
walls in bending and shear, and it can reduce the amount of prestress in the floor.
Fortunately the stiff core of a high-rise building is usually fairly central so that the
axial shortening of the floor can be generally in a direction toward the core. This
means that the perimeter columns move inward, but because they move by the same
amount from story to story, no significant permanent bending stresser occur except in ...,
the first story abuus a nonprestressed,floor, which is often the ground floor. As this*:'
,lev is usually higher than a typical ,tory. the flexibility of rhc columns is greater and
1111: induced bdndinp mo~nents[nay be easily accommodated. Horvevsr. the loss of prcstress in thc floor may necessitate some additional t~nte~~sioned
reinforcement.
Posttensioned concrete floors will usually result in economics in the total construction
cost because of the following:
Less concrete used because of shallower floor Structure (Fig. 3.16)
Less load on columns and footings
Shallower structural depth, resulting in rcduced story height (Fig. 3.17)
,, .~
no drop panels
1 Multispan,flat plate,
l r o panels
~
21
The last item can be very significant as any height reduction translates directly into
savings in all vertical structural, architectural, and building-services elements.
The construction will proceed wilh the same speed as a normal reinforced concrete
floor, with four-day floor-to-floor construction cycles being achieved regularly on
high-rise office buildings with posttensioned floors (Fig. 3.18). Three-day cycles can
easily,..be achieved using an additional set of forms and higher strength concretes to
shorteb posttensioning time.
A major cost variable in posuensioned floors is the leneth of the tendons. Short
tendons ;re relativsly expen\c\,e compared lo long tendons. &re 3.1'1 shows tltc cost
trend for tendons ranging front 10 to 60 m (33 to 200 it). Tlte relntively high cost of
short tendons rssults from fixcd-cost components such as setup costs, asohorapcj, and
lcndon stressing being prorated over lesser a m o ~ n t sof itrand. Tlte influence of strmd
"retli~tglosses" is also greater with ruv shun strands, thus incrc3sing the area of tendon required. Nevertheless, even though most tendons in a high-rise building floor
will be only around 10 to 15 m (33 to 50 it), the system is economical because of savings in floor depth, and it is desirable because of control of deflections and the lack of
need for precambering. For grouted tendons. the optimum economical size has been
round to be the four- or five-strand tendon in a flat duct because the anchorages are
compact and readily accommodated within normal building members and because
stressing is carried out with a lightjack easily handled by one person.
~
2 Economics of Posttensioning
..
.
Sect. 3.21
22
[Chap. 3
Ssct. 3.21
Comparing the cost of bonded and unbonded tendons will generally show the
unbonded system as being slightly cheaper. This is because unbonded posttensioning
usually requires less strand due to lower friction and greater available drape. Unbonded
strand also does not need grouting with its costs of time and labor. As a floor using
unbonded strand will require more reinforcement than a bonded system due to lower
ultimate flexural strength and code requiremcnls, the combined cost of the strand and
untensioned reinforcement will be almost the same as that for bonded systems.
The cost of a posttensioned system is funher affected by the building floor geometry and irregularities. For example:
The higher the perimeter-to-area ratio, the higher the normal reinforcement content
since reinforcement in the perimeter can be a significant percentage of the lolal.
Angled perimeters increase reinlorcement and make anchorage pockets larger and
more difficult lo form.
Inlernal stressing from the floor surface increases costs due to the provision of the
wedge-shaped stressing pockes and increased amounts of reinforcement.
Slab steps and penetrations will increase posttensioning costs if they decrease the
length of tendons.
23
[Chap. 3
S e c t 3.21
One of the main drawbacks of posttensioned systems is the difficulty of dealing with
stressed strands and tendons during structure modifications or demolition. Although
.,..
modifications are more difficult, some procedures have been developed to make this
.,.:
process easier.
,~-r..;.,., :.:,?$ .
!y::'J.-c:
--2.
-~ . .
Small penetrations required to meet changes lo plumbing or similar requirernenls
are the most common of a11 modiiications that are made to the floor system. The size
'
!
of lhcse penetrations is typically from 50 to 250 mm (2 lo 10 in.) in~dinmeter.As a
posrlenrioned floor relies on the posttcnsioncd tendons for IS strcnglh, it is prufrrablc
to avoid cuttine, the tendons whcn drilling through the floor for the new penetrat~on.
Finding the tendons in a floor to permil the localbn of penetrations without damaging
any tendons is a very simple procedure that is carried out with the aid of an electronic
tendon locater. Tendons are accurately located using this system withon1 any need to
remove floor coverings or ceilings.
1
1
+
Full access for Finishing Trades
Concrete
Reinf
Bl3.C.
+ P.T.
R P.T.
25
26
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
If a large penetration through a floor cannot be located within the slab area but
must intersect a primary support beam, then substantial strengthening of adjacent
beams will usually be necessary.
Whcn culling openings into floors built using unbondcd postlensioned tendons the
procedures used for bonded posttensioned tendons cannot bc applied. The preferred
procedure that has been developed to permit controlled cuttinf of unbondcd strands is
to use a special detensioning jack. The jack grips the strand and the strand is then cut.
with the force in the strands being released slowly. New anchorages are then installed
at each side of the new opening and the strands restressed.
Extensive experience has been gained in demolition procedures for posllensioncd
floors, and some general comments can be made. In bonded systems the procedures
for demolition are the same as for reinforced concrete. The individual strands will not
dislodge at stressing anchorages. In unbonded systems the strand capacity is lost over
its entire length when cut; therefore the floor will require backpropping during demolition. The individual cut strands will dislodge at stressing anchorages, but will move
generally less than 450 mm (18 in.). However, precautions should al!i~ays be taken in
case the strands move more than this.
27
,,. .
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Melbourne Central
Melbourne, Australia
...:,
.,
...I,
<..
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of compleIion
He~ghtfrom street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Bullding use
Frame maanal
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflcction
Design fundamental per~od
Design accelcrat~on
Dcs~gndamping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Concrete strength
Core
Shear walls
Thickness at ground flool
Melbourne Central comprises a 57-level office tower of 60,000 m' (646,000 fl') (net
rentable) and a large retail development of a funher 60.000 m' (Fig. 3.20). The overall
dimensions of !he tower are 43.72 by 43.72 m (143 by 143 ft). The tower is 21 1 m
(692 ft) above street level and 225 m (738 ft) above the core raR. The facade is a glass
and aluminum curtain wall.
28
[Chap. 3
Project Descriptions
.. ,,
29
".
The lower floors consist of steel b u m s spanning from the core to the facade wi
composite concrete slab. supported on stoctural steel decking, spanning brtwecn
steel beams (Fig. 3.21). The steel beams are generally at 3-m 1 10-it) centers. and
typical beam is a 530UBB2 (21UB55). Tlie structural steel decking is I mm (0.04
thick, unpropped.
The column spacing at the facade is 6 m (20 ft). A perimeter beam is required to
carry the intermediate floor beams. This is a 900-mrn-deep by 300-mm-wide (36- by
12-in.), prccasl concrete beam. Although this is precast concrete, it is erected in the
same way as a sleel beam and as part of the steel frame. The use of precast concrete
simplifies the fire rating of the slructure at the perimeter where access is difficult. It
. also provides the 900-mm (36-in.)-deep fire barrier between floors required by the
building regulations. The fixings for the curtain wall are cast into lhis beam, resulting
in reliable and accurate positioning.
The floor-to-floor height is 3875 mm (12 ft 8.5 in.) for the typical floors. The
floor-to-ceiling height is 2900 rnm (9 ft 6 in.), which allows for a future access floor
of 200 mm (8 in.) in height, to be installed by a tenant, providing a minimum 7700mm 18-it 10-in.) occuoied soace.
~ i wind
v resistance~- stricture for this buildine" consists of the core cantileverine.
from lhe lootin: in combinslion w i l l 1 3 nominal conlribulion from the filcndc rtruclurr.
oi ihd column 2nd nrecnst bcnm. This ru,ulls in the fac3de structure cnrqing approximately 10% of the wind load on the building, and, more importantly, it convibutes
gig.3.11
LOW-rircfloor
LE-L14 hl~lbourneCcnlml.
30
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
significantly to the sway serviceability perromance. The remainder of the wind load
is carried by the core element.
The central-services core to the building is reinforced concrete from the footings to
the roof. All the internal walls are 200 mm (8 in.) thick. This thickness remains
unchanged over the full height of the building. The 200-mm (8-in.) internal wall thickness is h e optimum to achieve load-carrying capacity, minimal slenderness effects, and
conslructability. The external walls vary from 600 and 550 mm (24 and 22 in.) thick at
the bottom of the buildine to 250 mm (10 in.) thick at the buildine too. Concrete
strengths in the core walls &y from 70 td 30 h&a (10.000 to 4300 psijat 9'0 days.
The columns are a composite of reinforced concrete with a 310UC137 steel column.
These steel columns are erected as part o f the steel frame. Subseuuentlv thev arc
i the
encased within the reinforccd concrete column and oermit erection
- ~ n
~
-~
- - sirel
~ - -frame
I0 floors J x a d ofconcrc.le cnc3semcn1 ( R E 3 22). This conccpl, in comb!nolion wilh
~ h crtci'l noor b u ~ n ~and
s rlructural aleel d:cking. pcrmils bun-fit in^ from 111c~ d v a ~ l tares of steel construction while at the same time minimizine the ouantitv of the relalively cxpun<ive material tl~atis sleel. This is iund3menlal lo 3 coniporile steel ind
concrele buildine of this lype. where lhu advnnljges uf rctnforc~.dconcrels 2nd sled
are both incornorated into ihe strucmre.
The footings to the tower are foundcd in moderately weathered mudstone having a
bearing capacity of 2000 Wa (20 tonlit'). The depth of the excavation and the basement i; such thnl the footines
- at the west end of the tower arc foundcd near the too of
this material. The footing lo the core is a 3.2-m (10-it 6-in.)-thick reinforced concrete
raft. This extends approximately 2 m (6 ft 6 in.) past the outside face of the core wall.
~
- .
MELEOURNE CENTRAL
TLOm TO FLOOR OlllENYOl6
--
PRCFLOR~UTED C~GE-'
i
l
r ~ ~ nrrm
~ n firm
i
P ~ E F ~ O ~ I C A T ECSE
O
LIR
am
R)l,ilOll
O U ~ L D EMI."
~ ELECT m wut~eci
T l t i ~ CAGE m nllil STEEL CDLUNII
ARD LIFI ltim PJIIIIDII-!YITH
STEEL CO.UI4N
-t~n,io L ~ G A r~ lU~~ o
~EL
32
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
Tvnical
. floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Concrete slrenrlh
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Concrete strength
The Luth Headquarters Building is a 38-level office building in Kuala Lumpur (Fig.
3.23). Of the 38 levels. 37 are at or above ground and comprise 7 levels of parking
garage, 2 mechanical-plant levels, and 28 levels of office space.
All floors are circular and contain a circular central core. However, in elevation the
building is most unusual in that the facade is not vertical but formed from several
solids of revolution. The facade of the lowest 22 levels is described by one circular
Fig. 3.23
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
36
L 3 5
Fig. 3.27
V
Fig. 3.25 Tgpieul midrire noor plan; Luth Hcndquorters Building.
slrands
\4$12
500 4
Project Descriptions
:.,7
.. .
.,...,,:
...
3.'1, .
Fig. 318
Riverside Center
Brisbane, Australia
Architect
Struclunl engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of fevels below ground
Building use
Frame mnterial
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type ofslructure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spncing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Concrete slrength
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Concrete strength
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
125 SLAB
XII SLAB
POCKETS IN
CORE WALL
Fig. 3.29
I
I
PRESTRESSING T E N D O N S ~
DUCTS
4"-
,LO,,
I
I
42
..
-.
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
Bourke Place
Melbourne, Australia
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflcction
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation condttions
F o ~ t i n gtype
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slabs
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Concrete strength
Core
Thlchness at ground floor
Concrete svength
The Bourke Place project includes a lower structure with 5 4 floors above Bourke
Street in the city of Melbourne (Fig. 3.31). On top of the concrete tower is a steelframed, aluminum-clad cone roof reaching another four stories and a communications
tower rising to approximately 255 m (837 ft) above the street. Alongside the tower
there are an 8-storv, narkine raraee (four
of which are below eround) and olazas with
,
rood and retail areas. The total leasable floor space in the office tower is approximately 60,500 m' (651.200 ft').
The tower structure consists of a slip-formed reinforced concrete core, posttensioned concrete band beams, and a reinforced concrete perimeter frame (Figs. 3.32
. --
..
44
[Chap. 3
Project Descriptions
45
and 3.33). The core structure is approximately 20 m (66 ft) square at the base. Most
internal walls are 200 mm (8 in.) thick. with some 150 mm (6 in.). and remain constant for the full height of the structure. The external wails vary from primarily 400
mm (16 in.) thick at the base. using 60-MPa (8500-psi) concrete. to 200 mm (8 in.) lor
the top 15 slories, requiring only 25-MPa (3500-psi) concrete [40 MPa (5500 psi) was
used for pumpability.]
The use of high-strength 60-MPa (8500-psi) concrete allowed the wail thicknesses
to be minimized. It wns estimated that the loss of floor space for thicker walls, if40-
?OR
ivn,oxn ,m
"liiiillilC DiiYI*i
46
MPa (5500-psi) concrete was used, represented an effective extra ovcmll capitalized
cost to the client of approximately $;100,000 (Australian) per floor.
Two substantial core shape changes occur up in the tower as elevator shafts that
service the lower levels become redundant. The location of these shaoe changes and
the changes in wall thickness were positioned sufficiently high up in the tower to
ensure that the cote aould be off the construction crilical path in order to avoid any
time delays. The design of the slip form incorporated the facility to reduce the wall
thickness and to "drop off' these portions. Cost comparisons during the design dcvelopment phase indicated that slip forming was the most cost-efiicient method of construction, and the Bourke Place core was the largest single slip-formed core ever constructcd in Austmlia. The core conrtruction set an Australian record in Novemhcr
1989 lor pumping concrelc to 2 10131 risc of236 m (77.1 it).
A t the tilne of dcs~gn,building rcgulations lor fire prolcc~innrequired 1h3t spandrel
benms he a1 least 900 lllln (36 in ) d~wp.11 ulas recoQnized that. In cunjunction with
the columns, lllese beams svould therslore m?ke some contnbu~ionlo the oucrall resist2nce lo brnd In3d5 on lhc slnlcturc. Tnr h e ~ m sucr? designed for l l ~ cdead and livc
load requircmcnts: then their capacity to resist additional wind load was assessed. This
amounkd to approximately 7.5% ofthe total wind load on the structure, meaning that
the core need only be designed for 92.5% rather than the full wind load. The "core and
partial-frame" approach represented significanl cost savings to the client.
A 125-mm (5-in.) normally reinforced concrete slab spans between 10.8-m (35.4it)-long band beams at typically 4.6-rn (15-it) centers. The band beams radiate out
from the core and are typically 400 mm (16 in.) deep, but are notchcd at each end to
275 mm (1 1 in.). The notches wcrc introduced to accommodate primary mechanical
ducts, and they enable the total floor-lo-floor height to be minimized. This represents
savings to the client as the overall height of the building can be reduced without
aflectine, the number of Floors.
The band beams are posttensioned from underneath, utilizing the vertical face of
the notches. This separates the posttensioning contractors from the "work hce."
allo!vine- stressine
- to be carried but indeoendent of scaffold erection on the newlv
poured floor. nnd it r l i m i ~ ~ a ihc
~ e sn<<dTor reccsssd pockets in the flour surlace.
T11c b~ildcrused three seu oll;!ble fonns which "lclpfrog~ud"up tllc structure and
dit,idcd the floor into four pours of appruxirnatcly 350 rn' (3800 it'), with 111s intenriun or pouring one qulidr~n~
wcry dzy. To sssist in mli~ntninlng his &day cycle, column xnd bean^ reinforccn~~.nt
cages \tJcre stmdardiz2d u,here possiblc and prefabrib
c;11cd.
Tllc floor! ~ V C Tc11~~kcd
~
10 CnsUrL: 111.11~lnderllle lll~slf a v ~ r ~ c~r~umsliinces
bl~
110
hack propping trould be necessary. Typically, Floor cyclcs of apprurimatuly -I lo 5
working dnys were acllieved
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 3
CentralPlaza One
Brisbane, Australia
Architect
Suuctural engineer
Year of completion
Height from sveet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Concrete streneth
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Concrete strength
Central Plaza One is currently Brisbane's tallest building with a total of48 levels and
has a total height of approximately 174 m (571 ft) above sveet level (Flg. 3.34).
The building features a four-story avium with an internal running stream and landscaping at the ground-floor level. and a four-level basement garage. A distinctive roof
line with a lifting, slewing telescopic building maintenance unit forming the top 2.5 m
(8 ft) of the roof structure makes the building unique among modem high-rise buildings in Australia. The tower houses three plant rooms at levels 4.26. and 41.
A six-story office block adjacent to the main tower has banking facilities at the
ground-floor level and shares the common basement structure with the tower. ThlS
"hank annex" incorporntes an additional plant room nt level 5.
The tower structure comprises a reinforced concrete core and frame with posttensioned floors and is founded on rock approximately 13 m (43 it) below street level.
Design requirements were as follows:
Column-free office space requiring floors to span 10 m (33 ft) from perimeter
beams to central core
Floors to be designed to allow for maximum flexibility in locating penetrations for
services
Floor edgr beams to be designed and detatled to allow for variations at corners to
range from 6-m (20-11') cantilevers to fully truncated corners
A minimum number uf minimum-size columns up through t l ~ catrium and above
togerhcr with the assurance that accclerat~onsdue to wind-rxcitcd oscillations be
within acceptable human response lirnitotions
j
$
!
. Preliminary analysis of the building using a simplified annlyticnl model indicated
I
II
1
Project Descriptions
'
that the tower would be wind-sensitive and accelerations could be excessive. The simplified model comprised the central core as a cantilever linked to the outer frames,
with axially stiff linkages representing the floors. the entire assemblage being considered as a plane frame. Having gained considerable insight into the behavior of the
structure from the preliminary analysis, the tube-in-tube structural system was chosen
for resistance to lateral wind loads.
During the preliminary design stage a l:400 aeroelastic model was being developed and tested in a wind tunnel to d e t e d n e and minimize wind pressures by varying
the dvnamic earnmeters. Considerable analytical work was carried out to tune the
*truckre
The stiffness and mass of various structural components were
~- aera~lasticallv.
-~
adjusted nnd readj~rstcdin this process to minimize !he aeroelastic forces.
Once the slructurai form was finalized. a rigorous three-dimensional tobc-in-tubc
.~n~lvclq
carried out. This was necessarv toensure that disolacements and acceler,-.- was
-~
ations under \vind 1o;ading were brlou acceptable Ie\,cls. In lhc analysis for core-frame
interaction. the structure \\,as propped at the ground floor :,nd ;!I each of the basemrnt
levclc
qo hat lateral loads could be transferrid out to the site oerimeler walls throueh
..
.diaphragm action of the floor slabs. Propping of the structure'at the ground floor a i d
basements avoided the problem of having Lo deal with large momens at the core fooling and also served to convol deflectioniand accelerations of the building under wind
load. Of particular importance was the cross-wind response of the building, which
produced a resulting ntoment 1.6 times the along-wind response.
The cenval core occupies a space approximately 16 m (52.5 ft) square in the center
of the building and is, in reality, two cores with an elevator foyer space between. The
two cores are linked together via floor slabs and beams, and in addition, by large
diaphragms in the atrium and plant rooms. The atrium diaphragms were found to be
particularly effective in reducing deflections by giving the building an exceptionally
high point of rotation approximately 45 m (148 ft) above street level.
The central core is a multiccll reinforced concrete structure with wall thicknesses
varying from 200 to 600 mm (8 to 24 in.). Reinforcement ratios vary from about 1%
in the lower parts of the building to 0.5% at the top. The core was designed globally
for biaxial bending and axial load using the program FAILSAFE. In this program a
particular section of the core is defined as an assembly of square elements within a
system of coordinates, and the quantity and location of steel is also defined within the
coordinate system. The program outputs a failure surface for axial load versus
moment.
A detailed dcsiyn of the core at licodcrs. coupling bu.lrns. xnd dii~phr~gnlb
\+.IS Carried our using decp-hmm liicury, hear-fricuon theory, and cun\,r.ntion~lrdinC0rci.d
concrete theory, as appropriate for the element under consideration.
Basement floors u.ere designed as conventional reinforced concrete flat slabs.
except that two special effects required particular attention in the design and detailing
of reinforcements, namely. (1) transfer of wind loads out of the core to the basement
walls. and ( 2 ) differential settlement betwccn the core, maiar columns, and basement
columnr. Pcrticulx :!ttention rrar paid to detailing the r~inforcunlentrat thc core-Sl:lh
joints, both on lhc dm\r!ng board :!nd on rltc during cnnstruction.
~
50
[Chap. 3
The ground-floor slab was designed in reinforced concrete, incorpomting an extensive beam system. At this level the wind-propping loads were considerably higher
than in the basement slabs, and in addition the slab was designed to support a 10-Wa
(200-psO conswction live load to allow for scaffolding up to support level 4 plantroom slab over the atn'ltrn
The ground-floor slab is a multilevel slab with sloping and stepped purtions, and in
the nonheast comer it contained large openings. Special bands of heavy reinforcing
steel were required around the perimeler to vansfer wind loads into perimeter walls. A
diagonal band of heavy steel from the core to the northwest corner of the site was
required lo ensure a load path to compensate for the large penetrations ofthe nonheast
corner.
Tower floors were designed as posuensioned flat plates spanning approximately 10
m (33 ft) from the spandrel beams to the cenval core. Typical floor slabs are 275 mm
(I I in.) thick and are stressed with tendons in bands of six, each tendon comprising
five 12.7-mm (0.5-in.)-diameter supergrade strands in 90-mm (3.5-in.)-wide ducts.
The banded tendon arrangement provides maximum flexibility of floor layout for the
positioning of penebations for services and internal stairs in the tenancy design stage.
The flat-plate soffit was important in allowing the builder to speed up the formwork placing and in achieving the specified cycle times. Posttensioning also meant
minlmum passive reinforcement, another feature to assist thc builder.
Finite-elemcnt analysis of the floor slab indicated the existence of high shear
slresses near the comers of the core. This was dealt with by installing some shcar stccl
locally in the slab near each corner of the core. Spandrel beams n8ercgenerally reinforced concrete, except for the longer cantilever bcams at the comers of the building,
which were posttensioned to minimize deflections.
~
Lateral Load
Resisting Systems
-,
.<.
-'
Two fundamental loteral force resisting systcms are the braced frame (also kno\\'n as
shear truss or vcrtical truss) and the momcnl rcsisting frame (moment frame or rigid
frame). Thesc systems evolved during the beginning of high-rise construction in the
twentieth century. Braced framcs and momcnl resisting frames are normally organized as planar assemblies in orthogonal directions to create ~ l a n a rframcs or a tube
frame system. Thc two systems may be used together as an overall interactive SySlem.
thereby
their individual applications to taller buildings. Both systems arc
commonly used today as effective means of resisting lateral forces in high-rise construction ior buildings of up to 40 or 50 stories.
1,
!.,
I '?
I
1
1 Braced Frames
Braced framcs arc cantilevered vertical trusses resisting lateral loads primarily through
the mial stiffness of the frame members. Axial shortening and elongallon of the column
memben under lateral loading accounts for 80 to 90% of the overall system deformation lor slender truss systcms. The effecriveness of the system, as characterized by a
h i ~ ratio
h
01stiffness to material quantity, is recognized lor multistory buildings in the
low- to midhcight range.
Braced frame geometries are grouped, based on their ductility characlcristics. as
either concentric braced frames (CBF) or eccentric braced frames (EBF). In CBFs the
axcs of all mcmbcrs intersect at a point such that the member forces are axial. CBFs
have a great amount ofstiffncss but low ductility. Thus in areas of low seismic acr~vil)~.
wllcre high ductility is not essential, CBFs arc the lirst choice or engineers for lalcral
load resistance. EBFs. on the other band. utilize axis offsets to introduce flexure ,and
shcar into the frame, which lowers the stiffness-to-weight ratio but increases ducttl~ty.
The CBF can take the lorm of an X. Pmtt, diagonal, K.or V, as sho$\,n in Fig. 4. I .
The X bracings exhibit hizhcr lateral stiffness-to-\lzeigl~tr ~ l i o sin comparison to K OrV
bracings. Ho\ree\'er, the X bracings crcnte a short circuil in the column gravity load
52
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.11
lransfer path as they absorb a ponion of the column load in proportion to their stiffness.
This creates additional forccs in both diagonal and horizontal members of X-bracing
svstems which need to be considered in svstem derivn
-..=..
To accommodate door and other openings, EBFs are commonly used, a s shown in
Fig. 4.2. The shear and flexural action caused by the axis offset in Ule link beam improves
ductility. Higher ductility through inelastic shear or bending action of the link beam
make it a desirable lateral system in areas of high seismic activity. Ductility is measured
by a well-behaved hysteresis loop and achieved through proper connection and member
design such that all modes of instabilities and brittle failures are eliminated.
Braced frames are most often made from structural steel because of ease of construction. Depending on the diagonal force, length, required stiffness, and clearances.
the diagonal member in structural steel can be made of double angles, channels, tees.
tubes, o r wide-flange shapes. Besides performance. the shape of the diagonal is often
based on connection considerations. Examples of typical braced frame connections are
depicted in Fig. 4.3.
Vertical trusses are often located in the elevator and service core areas of high-rise
buildings, where frame diagonals may be enclosed within permanent walls. Braced
frames can be joined to form closed section cells, which logetherare effective in resisting torsional forces. These cells may be bundled to take advantage of additional stiffness and provide a systematic means of dropping off the cclls at the upper levels of a
4
:. ..
.......
:. ...
...
j..
PRATT
BRACING
.~.
,
.,
/........
,..
X-BRACING
3;.
DIAGONAL
BRACING
lourr where laleral forces are reduced. The strength and stillness of the lruss syslcm is
thus sensitive lo the lootprtnt of ihe core area and the arrangement 01the clcvators.
When ihe slenderness ratio of a core truss (the ratio of truss height lo le2rt u,idth) Increases. the o,,emll overturning cffecl manifests il5:If in ~ncrcascdaxid dclorn~ntion
and uolifr forces of chord columns. While truss chord members may rr3dily be drsigned
forces, net foundation uplift forces are generally &desirable. A design
be lo spread Lhe chords as far apart as possible while diverting gravity
load to these chords to Drevent or reduce the net tensile force.
As slenderness increases. the a i a l drformalions of lllc chord columns o f a truss system become more critical in controlling the sway of the slructurc. Increasing the r l ~ l f nrss and strsnath of lhe chord members in proponion lo the work done by those members will prov%e an effective way to minimiz; sway. The bracing system between the
chords can be designed to transfer the gravity loads of any intermediate chord columns
to the boundary chord columns. As a result the intermediate chord columns could be
eliminated or minimized in size and the efficiency of the boundary chords maximized.
To further reduce the steel tonnage and cost of the structure, composite steel and concrete chord columns may be utilized. Using concrete in chord columns will most likely
provide a lower unit price for strength and axial stiffness.
Thc moment resisting frame consists 01horizontal and vertical members rigidly connected together in a planar grid form which resists lateral loads primarily through the
flexural stiffness of the members. Typical deformations of tha moment resisting frame
system under lateral load are indicated in Fig. 4.4. A point of contraflcxure is normally
located near the midheight of the columns and midspan of the besms. The lateral deformation of the frame is due partly to the frame racking, which might be called shear
sway, and partly to column shortening. The shear-sway camponen1 constitutes approximately 80 to 90% of the overall lateral deformation of the frame. The remaining portion of deformation is due to column shortening (cantilever component or so-called
chord drift).
>lomen1 rcs~.ting lramrs h ~ v advantages
e
in high-ri5e conslruclion due lo their flexibility in nrchitsclural planning. A moment reslbling frarnr. may he placed in o r around
tltc core, on the exterior. or throughout the interior o f the building with nlinimll con5traint on the olannineu module. ~ h frame
;
mav be architecturallv. exposed
to express the
.
gridlike nature oflhs structure. The sp3cing of lhs column: in n moment resisting frame
c ~ match
n
!hat required fur -grnvity lraming. In lac1 ths stecl u e ~ g h prenlium
t
for iatual
frame resistance decreases with increasing gravity londs on the frame
~~~
~~
K BRACING
KNEE
BRACING
V BRACING
Fig. 4.1
Concentric br;lrcd
rromc rorms.
53
54
sect. 4.11
[Chap.
. ..
(b)
~ i ~ , 4~3
...
~
~ ~ ~ ~
n ~dttniis.
~ it i ( no) CBF.
~
n
[b)~
EBF. (Codinued)
l
(a)
Fig. 4.3
rig,
4.4
~~~~~t rwirting
behavior.
58
[Chap. 4
volves a transfer of shear forces from the top to the bottom of the building. Figure 4.7
shows the truss and frame deflections if each resisted the full wind shear. The distrihution of wind shear between lruss and frame can also be noted. Frame-truss interacting
systems have a wide range of application to buildings of up to 40 stories in heieht.
In general, core trusses are combined with moment frames located on the building
perimeter,where the column spacing and the member proportions of the frame may be
appropriately manipulated. Optimum efficiency is obtained when gravity-designed
columns are used as buss chords without increasing them for wind forces. These are
then combined with gravity-designed exterior columns and spandrel beams with rigid
SEMIRIGID
BOLTED CONNECTION
IJ3~
,
...
sect.
4.7,
connections. If the lateral stiffness of the system is adequate, this then would ~ r o d u c e
an oplimal design. If additional stiffness is required. the decision of whether to Increase
the core or the frame members depends on the relative efficiency of the two components. The frame beam spans, story heighls, and core uuss depth are key parametcrs.
Tension or uplift conditions may limit the possibility of increasing chord columns.
P
v:
RIGID FIELD
WELDED CONNECTION
DEFLECTION
>
FRAME SHEM
RIGID CONNECTION
SHOP WELDEDIFIELD BOLTED
WITH COVER PLATES
RIGID CONNECTION
SHOP WELDEDIFIELD BOLTED
WITH END PLATES
59
SHEAR
~ i g 4.7
.
~mmc-trussinlemeting rsrlcm.
60
[Chap. 4
61
,.
Sect. 4.11
,ir.
together u,ill~the rigid frames. The di3gOIIal members of eccentric K-bmccd framcs do no!
intercect
.
......-- at the cenkr of the beam. Thus yielding 1 the center of the beams will occur before braces buckle, ensuring ductility and allor;ing for adjustment of the f m e ductility
~.
(Figs. 4.9 to 4.11). This hor, been confnned, both experimentally and theoretically.
Ductility and strength are ensured by using acomposite beam for the 24-m (78.9-in.)
office floor spans. This also minimizes vibration disturbance due to people walking, as
was confirmed through a composite beam mock-up test
Precast concrete panels faced with granite are used as cladding material, providing a
solid appearance to the building (Fig. 4.12). The panel fixings were designed so that
during an earthquake, the panels can follow the building deformations without damage
or risk of dislodgement. This was checked using a two-story two-span full-scale model.
.I..
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
'
L.?
Sanwa Bank
Tokyo, Japan
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acccleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of swcturc
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ~ o u n floor
d
Spacing
Material
Core
111designing the Saniva Bank bullding for carlitquakc and \bind loads (Fig. 4 8 ) , it was decided to place ccce~llricK-br3c:d frnmea al npproprio~clucntions such !hat [hey uill act
62
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.11
"7
Fig. 4.8
~k:!
Sect. 4.11
[Chap. 4
i
i
u,m
t* %%%%%%%%%%
bb
'b
Fig. 4.10 Fmme~arL;Snnwn Bank.
Fig. 4.11
65
PLAN
I
\
vibration
,,,,r
',/
"
I..
.I
<;I
4,., - I
,, ..;.,-..,.-....E . - - 2 .-.,< T. .....!?.L::i;
;.., -2
:*
:"
*.>'
,'I.
"
,.
C
,.i
:'
,;
,:i
,.$"
SECTION
(4
Fig. 4.12
67
68
[Chap. 4
ACT Tower
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material.
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Dcsign damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Sire at ground floor
Spacing
Corc
Architect
Sect. 4.11
The dynamic annllsis war performed using the mean and the standard dc\'iarion as
well as the power spectruln of the ovrnurning moment and the torsional moment cocicienls obiined inthe wind force test
i The building response specva are obtained by combining the wind spectra (for the x,
y, and 8 directions) and the magnification factors versus frequency curve. As the building cross section is ellipsoidal, special consideration was given to getting the maximum
response values used in the design in the x, g, and E directions. The dynamic stability
and the possibility of galloping were also checked.
Strong winds can occur several times a year, causing uncomfortable building mqtion. In order to avoid this problem, a damping systcm has been installed to reduce the acceleration in they direction.
The building site is located in a very active seismic area. The largest eanhquakes in
this zone to dare were of magnitude 8. A special seismic analysis was performed using
the data of the three largest earthquakes that have originated in this area in order to
model the earlhquake waves and the maximum possible accelerations for the ACT
Towcr site. These 3 earthquake waves were 416 gallsec (550 mmlsec) (Ansei Tohka
earthquake); 150 gallsec (320 mmlsec) (Nohbi earthquake): and 332 gallsec (850
mmlscc) (Tohnankai earthquake).
Braced frames were used lo increase the stiffness of the ACT Tower (Fig. 4.13) and to
achieve an optimum structural system (Figs. 4.14 to 4.16). Three u.ind-tunnel tesls were
performed:
Fig. 4.13
70
[Chap. 4
72
Sect. 4.11
[Chap. 4
73
Ti%-
I!
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
F n m e material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceieration
Ii
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Tllr typical floor pi2n of the Kobe Ponopix Holcl (Fig. 4.17) is .an oval, rncnsuring 7j.5
m (24.4 Ir) in the earl-weal dirccrion and 13.5 rn (4.4 fr) in the north-soutl~dirucrion IFlp.
Fig.1.16
4.18). Above the fifrh floor of the high-rise p m . strength and ductility are provided hy
74
[Chap. 4
using a reinforced concrete rigid frame. The fifth and lower floors, which have a larger
story height. have a composite structure of shear walls and rigid frames made of steel
encased in reinforced concrete (Fig. 4.19).
The site is part of about 500 ha (1200 acres) of artificially reclaimed ground. which
has been filled over a oeriod of 10 years, starting in 1965. Before building construction
commenced, the site Was preloaded. theoretically completing settlemen~ofthe former
12-m (40-it)-thick sea-bottom clay layer. Because the building weigh1 is about 100.000
Ik
Sect. 4.11
tonnes (1 10.000 tons), a basement withgood foundation load balance was possible, with
the weight of h e excavated soil being designed to exceed the weight of the building.
Piles of about40-m (130-11) length were used. The building is supponed by using the
diluvial layer as the bearing stratum. In pile design, pile groups were used wherever possible to cope with unmeasured ncgative friction. Structural safety was confirmed by performing a seismic response analysis of the building-pilc-bearing stratum composite
form against horizontnl seismic loads.
The floor plan has an unusual form, so various wind tunnel tests were performed to
investigate such factors as the wind force coelficicnt. the wind pressure coefficient, nmbienl wind velocity, and the dynamic stability against wind. In everything from the
structure itself to cladding matcrinls, external doors and windoms, and ground-lcvel
wind velocity, wind tunnel test rcsulls were used to ensure adequate safety and serviceability.
75
8:;:
77
-?,..
.*+.
ah
* ,.
j..,,
18,
&(
Architect
Swctural engineer
41 :Year of completion
I $&
Height from street to roof
@
.,g~,
Number of stories
~.~.
*.~.
:*.:
Number of levels below ground
,
,:
I,S
'A, :
:I:
&~
.?,.
73,'
Building use
Frame material
.:.
.,:
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
...
2:.
<-
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground level
Spacing
Material
Core
78
[Chap. 4
This hotel was constructcd over a railway station, which had been designed and constructed by another firm up to the fourth floor 10 years earlier (Fig. 4.20). An expansion
of about the same extent was planned even in the original design, but there existed limitations with regard to theallowable stress of the already constructed parts, including the
piles. While over the course of I0 years structural codes had been modified, mal;ing it
more difficult to expand buildings constructed before the code changes, the design tech-
Sect. 4.11
niques for high-rise buildings had not fundamentally changed, so the strength ofthc already constructed parts was for the most pan adequate. However, there was n planning
regulation change in that guest rooms must now have balconies, and it was necessary to
comply with the desires of a desiener. which chaneed the plans considerablv.
?hi increased weight due to balconies was handled by changing the spciific gravity
of the concrete irom an original 1.8 lo 1.65. In the original design, slanted columns had
ranged from the sixth to the twentieth floors, which was due to changes in thc spans of
t h e k o ~ e and
r lower floors. and the desiener wanted to reduce thisnnee to dctwecn
llourr 9 m d I?. Tu Improxc the ~.nruingreduction in h~lidlngrigidlly, the s n c 01 tile
c x ~ c n l dcolumns ~ 3 incrcarcd.
s
Thir supprcsrcd ihc overall hcnding deformation, and
at the same lime the inner coiumns were effectively used as shear columns. External
columns are larce boxed members. so in the lencth direction the oerimeter irame is used
to rcsirt 111 01 ihe horironnl loading (Figs. 4 21 and I.??).
To facilit3te conrtruclion, bnlconics were dcsigncd in ihc L shops uilh 3 length of
10.5 m 134 it 5 in.). Pn:.lr~.swd cuncr2ls. oniv 90 mm 0 . 5 in1 thick. u a i used lo inioimize the weight.
A composite floor, fire rated for 2 hours, was used in the typical guest room. The
deck has to be of the linked beam type (which covers at least two beam spans). In unit
bath areas, which had to be partially dropped, ordinary slabs using a flat deck were employed.
..
79
:g+
.$
+J:
.$I
Ssct 4.11
i7.5.
~..=
I *..
ji
Architect
*",
'S.
.:
-.:
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design Fundamental period
Design velocity
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of shucture
Foundntion conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Matenal
81
w:
*.
~ j <
*.
.
Slab
Columns
Size at pound floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Material
1
I
82
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.11
This 252-m (827-it)-high building stands on reclaimed land in the Osaka Nanko (soulh
port) area (Fig. 4.231. As a consequence, the design of the foundation structure and the
resistance to wind were painstakingly invesligated.
A lypical high-rise floor is 36 by 70 m (1 18 by 230 it), and the building has an ex4.24 and 4.25).
tremely slender form where the ratio of shorl side lo heieht
- is 1:7 (Fies.
.
Beiuw lhc sevenlh flonr, colu~nnsard trnesiendd lo tltc perimeter, iormiltg a supenruss
fr3nlc in order lu slrenglllen lile rusistnnce to !r'~ndand uanhquakcr. and !$idcly distribute nxiill forces of the high-rise building o\cr tht ground. Titis forms n ' h ~ r r "for [he
tower, which is integrated with the undeirground slructure.
Wind is a more dominant laleral load for this building than earthquakes. The wind
load for the design, including vibration assessment, was determined from the rcsull.; of
wind tunnel testing. The testing investigated instabilities as well as accelerations likely
to affect the comfort of occupants, unstable vibration due to wind, and habitability during swaying of the building duc lo wind forces.
As the site is anilicially reclaimed land, and settlement due to canh filling is not
complete. the cast-in-place steel-pipe concrele piles used are coated with asphall to reduce friction with the surrounding ground. The bearing stratum is a diluvial sand)
gravel layer around 60 rn (197 it) below ground level.
Fig. 4.24
Sect. 4.11
85
Slab
Columns
Sire at ground floor
'
Spacing
Material
Core
I....
0
I . . - I . . ! . - ! . . - !
0
9B
m
C = 0.085
Perimeter framed tube \\,it11 diagonally
braced core
Alternating gravel and diluvial clay strata
Raft
3.84 m (12 ft 7 in.)
9.45 m (31 ft)
600 mm (24 in.)
3 m (9 ft 10 in.)
.
Steel. grade 400 MPa (58 ksi) above 1st
floor, concrete-encased structural steel 1 st
floor and below
160-mm (6.25-in.) concrctc on metal deck
700 by 700 mm (27.5 by 27.5 in.)
3 m (9 ft 10 in.)
Steel, grade 490 MPn (70 ksi)
Strucmral steel with prestressing-bar diagonal bracing
86
Sect. 4.11
[Chap. 4
during an earthqualie. To achieve this objective, the tube-in-tube structure was adopted
for this building.
For the braced frames using prestressing steel bars, F13T steel bars serve as diagonal braces (Fig. 4.29). These braces have a wide elastic range and thus can resist the
maximum seismic forces within the elastic region. This enables the overall struchlre to
act in a bending failure mode, thereby securing stable recovery characteristics. In this
way the structure is designed to be effective from an aseismic viewpoint.
!
1 $3!
Ir
g:
si,.,,
<!::
:?
*x:
i?s.j.
Perimeter frame
Fig. 4.27
Fig. 4.26
J,,~~,,.
Braced
frame
87
Ln
Perimeter
.
frame\
[Chap. 4
Sect 4.11
89
Braced
/frame
1 3 6 . 9 0 0 ]
Fig. 4.18
Typiutl rtructurnl noor plan: Kobe Commerce, industry nnd Trndc Center.
Fig. 4.29 Specimen of brnced frnme wing prcstruing bars; Kobe Commerce, Industry and
Trade Center.
90
[Chap. 4
Architect
S t ~ c t u nengineer
l
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of SlNcture
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Core
IE
S e c t 4.11
2
Hotel
Steel
2 kPa (40 psO
36 mlsec (80 mph)
300 mm (12 in.), 100-yr return
5 sec
20 mg peak. 10-yr return
I% serviceability; 2% ultimate
Not applicable
Braced and rigid frsmes
Rock, 4-lvlPa (40-tonlft') capecity
Spread footings
3.05 m ( I 0 h)
8.53 m (28 ft)
460 mm (I8 in.)
3.05 m ( I 0 ft)
Steel, grade 250 MPa (36 ksi)
Precast concrete. 300 mm (12 in.) thick
610- by 610-mm (24- by 24-in.) built-up I
shape from 90- to 203-mm (3.5- to 8-in.)
plates, grade 30- to 35-MPa (4200 to 5000
psi) steel
Reinforced concrete beam and column
frame with 13 columns in a circle
Facing Times Square on a block front between 45th and 46th Streets. the new 167.000m' (1.8 million ft') hotel rises 50 stories above the street (Fig. 4.30). The two sheer fin
walls along the two side streets contrast sharply with the stepped and skylit facade facing Broadway. It is surmounted by a projecting, rotating cocktail lounge seven storics
above the ground, actually the lobby level of the hotel. Above are five-story packages
of hotel rooms that are stepped back and forth between the tin rraallslike a giant's ladder. The first six floors of the building contain public facilities, including a 1500-seat
theater, a ballroom, exhibition and meeting rooms, and revail space.
Fig. 4.30
hlnrriott hlnrqnir Hetcl, New York, undcr construction. (Pl!aro b),Jennreier Leby.)
91
92
[Chap. 4
A circular concrete core, wilh 12 Tivoli lighted elevators and four enclosed elevators, rises from the street level through the public levels, breaking free at the lobby level,
into a spectacular 35-story atrium (Fig. 4.31). I1 terminates at a multilevel rotating
rooftop restaurant Skylights on the east facade, between the five-story packages of hotel rooms, bring daylight into the atrium, shining down onto the hotel lobby. The 3 5
guest room floors,. wilh 1876 rooms, are disposed in rectangular bands around the
atrium. From the guest floor corridors, with their projecting planters presenting an image of the hanging gardens of Babylon, one can look down at the parklike lobby surrounded by colorful restaurants.
As a structure, the building is equally unique, consisting of a steel-framed structure
surrounding the slip-formed concrete core. Between the two I I-m (36-it)-deep fins, a
34-m (1 12-it) clear span is framed using girders below the lobby and five-story Vieren-
Sect. 4.11
93
I.
2.
3.
4.
~~~~
Since the planks are an inherent part of the stability of the structure, p l a n k were
placed, grouted, and welded in sequence with the erection of the stccl irame. A rapidsetting, nonshrink grout with high early strength was specified for the grouting o f t h e
joints between ulanks. These ioinls. which have shear kevs with castellations.. have been
-~~
ihuirn hg cp&itncnt tu proCldu adequate shenr strcng;h for diaphragm action with n
grnut strength of 17 >!Pa (2500 psi). Fur this project. a design strength of 35 hlPn (5000
psi1 w:!s spec~liudto prnvidc higher carly strcngth and 2 magin ofs;tf<ty lor the ultremc
ueather condition5 to bc encountered during the construction cycle. Sinc? nu topping is
uacd, dixphragm action rdllrs solely un the ~nrcgrit)of th~.j o ~ n t2nd thc anchor.
~
Pig.4.31 Elcvntar core rises 180 m (600 10 through ntriurn to r~volvingrc;tnuronls: hlnrrintt
hlurquis Hotel.
deel frames for the packages of hotel rooms. These hotel room oackares were oririnallv
conceivrd to,be supponed by slerl trusses. The Vierendeel irames nor only climinatcd
rhc trusses, but being tied into the s~de-wingvenical fr3mcr. pro\.ide stiifnes in the
north-south direction. Stmctumlly. the building is a U with coiumns 8.5 m (28 it) on
center along the thrcu sides, with the closure pro\*idcd by the 31-01 ( 1 12-fi)-\pan V~rren.deel frames. The two sides of the buildingmd the back are rigid iramcs above the lobby
and arc vuased hctween lobbv and round floor. To urovidc the reuuircd 131~ra1stiffness
in the iront, the vierendeel;, combined with a ÷d vertical frame on the two
sides, form superframes. In order to avoid the added columns at the ground level, the
columns placed 6 m (20 fl) from the nonh or south side are. in fact. nosts with vertical
slip joint5 at midhe~glttbetuecn floors.
At the hack of the building, along column line I?, a single irantc. cross hrsced bclow the lobhv. oro\,ides the stiffness in the north-south dirxrion. Sincc the -eroun
of
~ - ~-~r
three superfr&nLs in the front (at column lines 3.4, and 5 ) have substantially different
stiffness, a process of fine-tuning wns undertaken to match deflections betwccn the
packet of superframes and the single frame as closely as possible. The purpose of this
exercise was to avoid torsion in the building. In this connection it should be noted that
even if the two were perfectly matched, a 5% eccentricity is required by the Uniform
Building Code (UBC) between the centroids of mass and rigidity. This has the effect of
requiring a 10% increase in shear carried by the diaphragm above that, resulting from
lateral wind iorces.
Below the lobbv.. the floor construction is conventional metal deck and concrete fill.
For the guest room floors, this construction was originally specified. However, since a
ceiling is required and since spans for the metal deck are limited, necessitating more
beams, an alternative, using long-span precaslconcrete plank without topping, wus chosen, based on economic considerations. Not only did this result in a reduction in the
number of steel beams, but it also eliminated a hung ceiling since the underside of the
plank is a finished surface. The more than 93.000 mz (I million it2) of plank used makes
this a most dramatic application of plank floors in a high-rise building. As a result ofthe
innovative use of both the Vierendeel msses and the concrete floor plank (which are
only. mar~inallv
.heavier than the orieinal metal deck and concrete solution)... the steel
structure with less thon 117 kglm' (?4 psO is extremely efficient and economical.
The planks. a p m from providing normal \enicaI load-carrying capacity. arc required tu provide the d ~ a p h r a ~ rrsisuncc,
rn
transicrring all lateral force5 to the vcnical
\rind irorncs. Becnuse of the height of the building and the unujual configomtiun, this
implied special rcquircmel~tsfor the plank Bas~cally.the plank l~tusldo rhe fi~llowrng:
94
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design wind load deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Truss span
Truss depth
Truss spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
P~O
40 d s e c (90 mph)
254 mm (10 in.)
3.0 sec
1.8 mg rms, l-yr return period
1% scrviceabiiity
C = 0.037; K = I .O (did not govern design)
Staggered steel trusses and braced steel
core transverse, rigid perimeter frame longitudinal direction
27 m (90 ft) of loose sand and thin organic
strata over dense sand
355-mm (14-in.)-diameter steel-shell driven
cast-in-place concrete piles. 1500-ki-4 (165ton) capacity
2.69 m (8 ft 10 in.)
20.7 m (68 ft)
2.69 m (6 ft 10 in.)
9.14 m (30 ft)
Structural steel
S e c t 4.11
95
When the developer wanted a 1200-room high-rise luxury hotel right on the exposed
oceanfront, a prime concern ofthe designers was occupant comfort. Building sway and
acceleration had to be minimized.
Preliminary analyses and cost studies were made of four basic structural systems:
Steel staggered truss with concrete floors
Concrete frames with shear core and other shcar walls
Concrete-fnmcd lube with concrete shear core
Steel-framed tube with shear core
1.00
1.25
1.10
1.40
The stagg~.rr.dtruss fr~mingsyrlcm rvas dcvr.1npr.d Ry a U S . Steel-spunsured rcs23rch learn n o r l i n g 21 hl.1.T. i f , the inid-1960s. Its hilsic ~ I C ~ I C I I is
I thc \ I U T ) - ~ U L . ~I ~ U I I
which spans the full width of the buildine at alternate floors on each coiumnlinc. ilcncc
the floor spans from the top chord of one truss to thc bottom chord of adjacent trusses
so that each truss is iondcd on both the lop and the bottom chords and is laterally fully
restrained.
Because all &
eravitv .load is suooorted at the oerimeter of the buildine. the tvholc of
th? huild~nga d i ~ l c3n
~ t hi. ~ I I O ~ I ~ I L10
L rdsist
.~
ovcrturnlng eff~.cls.
Lxcral iorc~.sare transmitted from floor to flour d0u.n the building via the llonr dlaohraems and I N S S web members. The oerimeter columns c a m onlv-axial load in the
transverse direction and can therefore have their strong axis oriented longitudinally to
form part of a longitudinal rigid frame.
The layout of the Taj Mahal Hotel (Fig. 4.32) with a central double-loaded corriddr
suited the staggered truss arrangement as it allowed the provision of a Viercndeel panel
midspan, where the shear is least, for the corridor.
With the structural svstem selected. a wind tunnel studv rvas canied out to determine
atruculnl forces, d)n:trnic bch:,\,ior, c1;ldding pressures, 2nd cnr,irnnnicst31 eifccts s1
ground level. Frdm this. the design l;ltcr:,l looding, building driit, 2nd acceleration ncrr.
established.
Because this is a tall buildine for a staeeered truss svstem. the shears in the floors
were an important design consideration. The 200-mm (8-in.)-thick slnbs comprise precast pretensioned concrete plank tapered on their top surface from 127 mm (5 in.) thick
midspan to 76 mm (3 in.) thick each end, where they are supponed on top of the 254-mm
(IO-in.) -!vide flange steel truss chord, and a cast-in-place topping. The shear connection
between floors and trusses is achieved by stud shear connectors (Figs. 4.33 and 4.34).
Because of functional and architeclural requirements, the staggered truss systcm
could not be used at all locations. As a consequence, two other systems were used, a
core frame and an end frame. The core framc consists of a truss system with n truss at
every floor. but with n vertical stiffness to match the staggered trusses. The truss at
every level !\,as required to carry shears from lateral loading without reliance on the
floor diaphragm which, at this location, is heavily penetrated by service openings.
..
. .
uu
96
[Chap. 4
The three-bay end frame comprises a diagonally braced center bay and outer bays of
rigid framing connected to large perimeter columns. This frame is 13.7 m (45 ft) wide
compared to the 20.7-m (68-ft) width of the typical frames (Fig. 4.35).
Wind shears are transferred to the foundations by embedding the bottom chords of
the lowest trusses in large concrete-gnde beams. On the lines where the lowest truss
Sect. 4.11
97
:..i'
gi
was one story above the footings, a diagonal brace was provided at the columns to transfer the load to a steel beam embedded in the footing, similar to the adjacent truss hot(g:
._.
tom chord. A pile cap at a typical staggered truss bay is 7.6 m (25 ft) square and 2.9
,. , ,
4
. ,
(8 fi) deep, supported on 36 piles.
,
..:.Both structural steel and concretespandrel beams wereconsidered. with the lnnerh.ino
selectcd as they best suild architectud and fire-nting rquiremenk. lllc
mrn (48- by 12-in.) beam rigidly connwtedtothc largrrxtcriorcolumns nnd the small ....
I .*;.
height created a f n m e easily capable of resistine. the lon~itudinalwind forces . r~.:;
fab&alor cut the 44- and 57~mm~diameter(+l4
&d 818) reinforcing b m and uclded them
lo sael Trectians h o l d for bolting nt each end before delivering thcm lo the Prucalcr
~....
h . ,,,~
~~.
;
finished beams included a shear key and reinforcement for connection to thislabs.
.,:,. , .
.@:,
I
I
--.
.;$;
.,..
,-.,,.
.
...
,.->.,
-21
<.,%I
,..**
1"
Elg. 4 3 2 Toj hfnhnl Hotel,AtlnnUe City, New Jcmey.
Section
98
[Chap. 4
It
Sect. 4.11
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
\Piles (typical)
INTERIOR
STAGGEREDTRUSS BENT
CORE FRAME
END FRAME
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Matenal
Fig. 4.35
Kajima Design
Kajima Design
1990
118 m (387 ft)
27
3
Office, retail space, parking
Steel
0.79 kPa (16.4 psf)
35 d s e c (78 mph) a1 10-m height
Seismic conlrol
3.31 sec longitudinal; 3.95 sec transverse
4 mg peak, 5-yr return
2%
Base shear coefficient 0.08
hloment resisting frnmc
Fine sand
Cast-in-olace concrete oile: 22-m (72-ft)
length, 5.4-m (7.9-ft) djameter, wiih 4-4
(13-ft) bell
3.9 m (12 ft 9 in.)
21 m (69 ft)
900 mm (36 in:)
6.75 m (22 ft)
Steel, grade SM 490, 483-MPa (70 ksi)
tensile strength and below
155-mm (6.1-in.) lightweight concrete
slab on cormgated deck
500 by 500 mm (20 by 20 in.)
10.8, 21 m (35, 69 ft)
Steel. grade SM 490
Tlic Tokyo hlcrine building i s n 27-story officl: building locatcd in the Osaka burinsrr
park district bring develuprd just cast of Osaka Castlc. Japan (Fig. 4.36). The burld~ng
urovide~about 69.000 m' (743.000
11'1 of arca for offices. ret~il.and ,n~rkina.Cun.
.
struciion was completed in 1990. i\rchitccturaily the buildins a.as conceived to fir into
tht c~~viroo~nentof
thc Osaka business p3rk and ro runect the imagl: ofthc cl~ent.Tokyo
Marine. As the base of operations in western Japan for Tokyo ~ & n e the
, building tvis
Sect. 4.11
designed to have high-tech capabilities, to reflect ils prestige appropriately by its external appearance. and also to be attractive to tenants as office space.
The building has a rectangular plan to fit into the site surrounded by two high-rise
buildings on the longer sides. The exterior facade, exposing columns and beams outside
the building, brings to mind the simple lines of traditional Japanese wood-frame details
and gives a clear identity as well (Fig. 4.37). The lateral force resisting system of the
102
Sect. 4.11
[Chap. 4
~~~
~~~~
I
' FRAMED
COLUMN
103
The structure was planned with an unusually long main span of 21 m (70 ft) across
the full building width. In such cases the vertical component of an earthquake can have
a significant effect on the beam slresses. This was investigated by modeling a typical
bay as a two-dimensional frame. Dynamic analysis was carried out using the time history of four earthquake records, inputting their lateral and vertical components simultaneously. As a preliminary step, the modes of vibration of the structure were obtained,
from which it was found that the fifth mode was the first mode in the vertical direction
nnd involved axial tension nnd compression in the columns, with all the beams vihrating together. Only at higher modes did the beam vibration become more complex.
The analysis was carried out at two levels of earthquake input. The following were
the results.
building consists of the framed columns interconnected with long-span beams [10.8,21m ( 7 0 4 ) spans]. This allows for an open public urea at the plaza level of the building
and column-free space across the width of the building with a 2.7-m (9-ft) ceiling height
on the office floors.
The building is framed in slrucluml steel (Fig. 4.38). Each frame column consists of
four vertical membcn joined by short 12.7-m (9-ft)-span] beams to create a three-dirnen~ional
~swcture. The combination of the short beams in between the framed column
cicnlcntr and the long-span bcamr cre:ttes unusual static charoclerisrics: migrntiun of
column loads. the shorn-span beams being loaded more lightly in bending than the longswan beams. and an unusunl failure-hinge mechanism for extreme xismic events.
m 3 mpiium-rise buildine.
under relatively
-~
..
-. short-sean beams yield at their SuppoN
low loading levels due 10a conccntmtion of bending stiffness. Houevcr, in this case the
effect of axial deformation; of the frame columns was the dominant mode of behavior.
An incremcntallv increasine static analysis on an elastic-plastic model C'pushover"
analysis) was c a k e d out to obr3in the sceleton cun,cs for story shear. From this analysis thc formntion of plastic hinges at the supportsof the long-span beams. with the shornspan burns remaining claslic even at high eanhquake le!,cls, was notablc.
~~
104
[Chap. 4
Architect
S m c n t n l engineer
Y e x of completion
Height fmm slreet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frnme material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design fundamental period
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of smcture
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Material
Kajima Design
Kajima Design
1992
105 m (344 A)
33
1
106
:@f
j
ig&a.
[Chap. 4
COMB DAMPER
4.11
107
columns are installed in each typical story. The seismic response of the building is re.
duced by the hysteresis damping effect due to the yielding of the steel plates.
The seismic design criteria for two levels of design earthquake were established as
follows:
On typical floors, steel plates with honeycomh-shaped openings are installed in the
central corridor connecting to the cross girders (Fig. 4.42). Post columns extending from
the midspan of upper- and lower-story girders are spliced at midstory using these
damper plates, connected by high-strength bolts through gusset plates. Thus the story
shear drift is concentrated in the damper plates. Sixteen units of damper plates and post
WALL WITH hONEY-
Sect.
1. Severe earrhquake: The stresses in all slructural members must be less than the
allowable values and the story drift must be less than 11200.
2. Worsr earrhquake: Even if the structural members exceed allowable limits, excessive large plastic deformation should not he caused and the story drift must be
less than 11100.
COMPRESSIVE DESIGN
STRENGTH OF COhCRETE
Referring Lo the preliminary earthquake response resulls in considcrntion of the hvslrresis steel dlmper, the slory shear coufficienls 3rc dcltrm~ncdThe design a ind sbc;!rs
arc nbnul56Sn of the seismic valucs. In order to secure tbc 111tirn;llustrung11 olthu structural lrame, it U 3 S cst;~bli~hed
that th~.m r y shunr cap;,city
.
. rrould hc 1.5 times !hat of
the design earthquake shear forces. The uldmate hcnding and shear strength of the
columns was designed to he at least 1.25 times greater than that of the girder, so that
yielding to bending in the girders precedes yield in the columns: hut at the tops of the
columns, in the lop story and at the bottom of lhc first story, thc bending yield in the
columns is considered.
From the earthquake responses of the structure to both severe and worst-case events
it was assured that the final desien
- of the moment resistine frame structure was complclsly s3t1sf~ctog.
rvilh respuct tu the design criteria. hlnrco\cr, "ring the huncycor~lb
sICL.I plates 35 hysleresi dampcrr. not only a well-bilanced structurs hut also s2vints i n
the volume of reinforced concrete may hc realized.
Fig. 4.40
Sect. 4.21
I&
$%
I";
i!.
.,:
I '
I '
I100
600
SHAPE OF HONEYCOMB DAMPER PLATE
1001
0
0
"
BEAM
'
.
Shear walls have been the most common structural systems used in the past for smbiiir
ina- building- structures aeainst horizontal forces caused bv wind or earthsuakes. With the
advcnt oircinforced concrete, shear wall systems have become widely uscd to stabilize efficiently even the tallest building slructures. In the last 10 yc-rs, concrete tcchnology has
nd\,anccd lo a point where concrete streneths of over 130 hlPa (19.000 psi) arc achievable
in the field. T k s has led to the design o f the proposed 610-m (2000:itj Miglin-Beitler
Tower in Chicago (which would become the world's tallest building), relying heavily on
a shear wall svslem of verv-hieh-slreneth concrete to resist horizontal forces.
A common shear w d l ; y s t ~ mused-for tall office buildings groups shear walls around
service cores, elevator shafts, and stairwclls to form a stiff box-type structure, such as for
the Melbourne Cenlrnl building in Auslralia (Chapter 3.2). In this example the need to
enclose and lire-protect 21 passengerelevators, service elevators. two stainvells. lobbies,
and service risers created the framework for a niff concrete box-type shear wall system.
In contrast with oftice buildings, high-rise residential buildings have less demand for
elevators, lobbies, and services, and hence do not usually have large stiff concrete shear
wall boxes to resist horizontal forces. A more common system will incorporate a small
box structure around a smaller number of elevators and stairwells, and include discrete
shear walls between apartments.
In both shear wnll systems noted, the walls are designed lo canulever from the foundation level. To deslen
- shear walls -need around service cores. the bcndine.- shcar, and
!<,arpingstroses duc to !\ ind or cmhqoake lo3ds arc combined eith slr:sses due to pmvll)
loldc. Indi\,idunl wdl, within thc box system can then hc designed as unit-length u,alls spannine either noor to flour or bctu,ccn return walls. Reinforcrmcnt is proponioncd as iollon,:
HONEYCOMB
..
..
..
..,.~ . .
b
; > ,'
. i.
I
1
L600-l
MAIN
REBAR 10-032
HOOP D13-a100
..
1. Minimum shrinkage restraint reinforcement where the wall stresses are low,
which can be for a subsmntinl ponion of the shear wall.
2. Tensile reinforcement for areas where tension stresses occur in walls when wind
~ ~ l islresses
f1
exceed eravitv. stresses.
3. Compressive reiniorccmcnt with conlinumunt ties u hcre high cumpressi\,e forces
rcquir: that ualls b~.des~pnedas c o l ~ m n sIndividual
.
shcnr walls, say at the edge
of a tall huildinp. are dcsiknrd either 3s blade walls or as coluo~nsrer~sling
- shcar
and bending as required. -
110
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.21
$&
.g
1:
,g;.:
'#:
p',
#;:
.s,
@.
g!
. -
111
Project Descriptions
Metropolitan Tower
New York, N.Y., USA
Architect
'r.*;
n.
c:'
~
.&
.*.
,I::
,p
"i;
:l
..
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from streel lo roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lalcral deflection
Design fundamenlal period
Design accclererion
Dcsign damping
Earthquake loading
Type ofslmclure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beams
Beam depth
Slab
Material
Columns
Material
Core
Material
Sect. 4.21
..
The uooer condominium tower contains 246 luxurv apartments tolaline 39.300 mz
(423.000 ft'). The lower commcrci~lbase has 21.000~"(2?5.000 ft') of;ental office
space and 460 m' (5000 it2) for relail rental. The lotal project amuunls lo 60.600 m'
(653.000 11') and required approximately 23.000 m' (30,000 yd') of concrete and 3300
tonnus (366-3 tons) of reinforcing steel. To keep an efficient column grid on tlte commcrcia1 floors, a double-height reinforced concrete mechanical floor was crcned at the nineteenth floor to allow thetransfer of loads from the triangular plan ofthe building's upper
tower to its L-shaped base (Fig. 4.440). In effect this was a new foundation for the triangular tower, accomplished by using an exlmordlnaiy volume of concrete, an unusually
dense mass of reinforcing stvel. and bcams up to 4 m (13 it) deeq. Thesc transfer girdcrs
ucre c a t in two stages. the bottom 600 to 900 mm (2 to 3 it) belng cast first to s e n c as
suooort for the remainder of the concrete in the second placemenL
The depth ofthe meandering shear wall (the main btmctura~support ofthe triangular footprint) is about 21 m (70 ft) (Fig. 4.446). 0:the three available faces. the west
face was a lot-line face. and therefore obloce to accommodate the elevator shafts for the
high-rise structure. It was recognized, and later verified in a wind tunnel tcst, that the
structure would support larger wind forces acting perpendicular to the hypotenuse of the
trianele.
Vnncx rhedding, u,hich ~lsuallypruduces larger forces ironsverse tn ths wind dirdclion, did not matcriallzc for this structure bscausc of its triangul:lr foulpnnt. Shear walls
then migrate from the west lot line, meandering alongside the apartment lobby and corridors, to the hypotenuse side ofthc triangle, where additional columns were engaged
via Vierendeel action of the spandrel beams. Other frame elements. 508-mm (20-in.)deeo soandrel beams alone the .oerioherv
. . and 216-mm (8.5-in.) slabs at the interior of
the structure, were needed to help counter large torsional loads since it was impossible
to minimize torsional forces for all possible wind directions. This slender lower was
somewhat stiffened bv a wider bascbelow the eiehteenth floor. However, part of the
shear tva11 and nlany of the columns bad to bc transferred utilir~ngdsep concrets girders nt this levcl. These deep girders w r r . utilized. via outrigger action, lo ungxgc nddltional supports to help d i v e s hold-down loads for the shear wall and to equalize the
strain in the supports.
The flat slab floors are supported by a hybrid building frame of columns and shear
walls. in purt because of the developer's desire to leave the perimeter as column-free as
possible.'~n the triangular tower. \\;ind on the long side of ;he triangle governs the dcsign, so the shear walls were placed at right angles to that face of the building, meanderine alone partition lines in a horseshoe shape to the opposite side o f t h e tower and
hackio theidne side of the trianele.
Scveml factors contributed to the decision to use concrete rather than steel. Thesc included the easier modeling oishapes. the ability to make last-minute changes, and the
knowledre that a lareer miss reduces vibration and the .perception
. of motion. The choice
ofconcrute raflucls ths needs ofthe u\tremi.ly ?all slel~dsrstruclurc S\ray ofthe huilding
u a s an impnnanl uunccm. In high-nsc hu~ld~ngs
i t may range from 11500 tn 1/600 of the
buildine hcieht in a lUU-\u~rwind (tl13t is. thc slronwst uind lhilt inns bi. :~aticipatcJlo
occur a 160-"car oeridd). When comoarine buildiks of structural steel and reinforced
concrele having similar stiffnesses and movcmenlr. the perceived motion in the concrete
building will be less bccausc the larger mass of the concrclc structure slows do\isn its
swayini motions, that is, the period isincreased and the accclcration reduced.
In the Metropolitan Tower the typical slab floor thickness of 216 mni (8.5 in.) of
stone concretc is important in achieving the mass of t h e building. Nevertheless, the
huildine was designed with provisions lo support
- o f a pcndulum-type
.. dnmper
. . the \vcieht
should it be needed. Using thrcc nccclcrometers, field measurements wcrc tekcn when
the structure reached its fifty-fourth floor and, latcron, at its sirty-sixth floor (at the last
~
..
..
in
FIR. 4.43
hlclrupulilun T u ~ e rNPW
,
York. (Coi,ncr). o~RobenRarmm~nsrcrA.~rucl
112
113
Sect. 4.21
115
possible date, allowing time for a "galno go" decision with regard to the installation of
a damper), indicating that adamper was not needed. Theexlra cost to the owner resulted
orovidine a double desien
from
- lavout,
. with and wilhout lhe damper. No materials, except those nrcded to support the damper's weight on the footings 2nd columnr. were octually expended in the svucturz. This suucture can accommodate a future damper, if
found necessarv durine its service liir, with some nunor modifications and rerouting of
some mechanical pipes.
Slab formwork was cycled by the "preshoring" method commonly used in New York
(Grossman, 1990). The first 18 stories, larger in floor area, were completed at the rate
of about 4 to 5 days per story. In the triangular tower, two floors per week was typical
progress, with columns and shear walls cast on Mondays and Thursdays and floors on
Tuesdays and Fridays. Near the top of the tower, work speeded up to 2 days per story.
The concrete framewas topped out on October 2. 1985
~
(4
Fig. 4.44 hlctrnpulllnn Tuscr. to1 L-sllupcd borc. ( b ) hleundrringshcor ,,,,11.
114
[Chap. 4
Shearwail Systems
entire wsses were encased in concrete. The ballrooms, kivhen, and mechanical spaces
are located between the 14.9-111 (49-ft)-high trusses. The system is efficient and economical and solved the problems associated with constructing over a landmark.
The hotel superstructure is a reinforced concrete flat-plate system with a 8.5- by 8.5m (28- by 28-it) column grid and was built on a Zday cycle. Wind is resisted by shear
walls ns well as moment f n m e acdon of slab strips and columns. The total weight of the
reinforcing steel used for the concrcte tower was only 36.7 kglm- (7.5 pSO.
IO\V
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story hrigllt
Columns
Core
Material
1568 Brondway is the site ofthe Embassy Suites Hotel in the Times Square district of
New York Cily (Fig. 1.45). I t is built over the historic Palace Theatre, a landmark dating
back to 1919. Bccausc of the theater's landmark status, New York City would not permit
any disturbance to tbc theater by the new hotel. It was therefore necessary to suppon this
46-story. 146-m (480-TI)-tallbuilding by building e "bridge" over the theeter [Fig. 1.46).
The transfer was accomplished with a hybrid composite steel and concrete structure
consisting oftn,o 40-m (1.X-f11-lung compnsile trusses and steel cross trusses. Four superculun~ns.two on either side ofthe theater, come down to ground to suppon the structure. Thcsc columns n'erc built up out to thick grsde 350-hIPa (50-ksi) steel plates and
n'eigh up tu 6000 kg/m (4000 lhlfl). The truss menlhers were dcsi~nedto bc light enough
to pern~iterection on an estremcly diflicuit site. To give them the necessary stiffness, the
Sect.
4.21
119
Architect
Swctural engineer
Year of completion
Height From sueet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beams
Beam depth
Columns
Fig. 4.46
Core
Material
This cylindrical 48.4-m (I 59-Ft)-diameter mixed construction office lower, loca!ed in the
center of Singapore, has an area of more than 132,000 m' (1.42 million h') (FIE.4:-17).
Although the Singapore wind climate is relatively benign, avoidance of resonsnt vlbration caused by wind-induced vortex shedding conlrolled the required latcral stlffness Of
the tower. This required setting the first vibralion mode period at no more than 5.6 set.
120
[Chap. 4
The architect and owner wanted to have little or no visible StNCtUre obstructing the
360" panoramic swcep u l the \vinduu,s at each floor. The simple jet elegnnl structural
solution was lo cantiicvsr evcry floor from an inner cylindrical wall enclosing tile clc1,3101and service core. This required radial beams ubich cantliever I 1 6 m (38 h) from
the 24.95-m (81.8-ft)-outside-diameter reinforced concrele core wall. Each cantilever
girder is welded to a steel erection column embedded in the core wall (Fig. 4.48). The
cantilevers on successive floors are connected at their outer ends by 25- by 100-mm (1by 4-in.) steel ties, hidden in the curtain wall, which reduce relative vertical deflections
I
3
$;,:
@j
T
:@
.,..
...
Sect. 4.21
of adiacent floors. A stiff continuous nerimeter rine truss at each floor minimizes relalive deflcc[ions of adjacent cantilevers on the same floor pruduced hy any unrvrn live
loading. This w s s plus the rrnical tier also provide some redundancy in the unlikely
event of a cantileve; failing.
All gravity load and all the wind loads are resisted by the concrele core wall. For
. strength alone, the core wall would have been a constant thickness almost to ground
.level, bur in order to meet the building period limitation, it was necessaq to thicken the
wall from its typical 1.0-m (3.3-fl) dimension lo 1.2 m (4 ft) and then 1.65 m (5.4 ft) helow the sixteenth floor. A concrete core wall was selected in lieu of an all-steel diago-
.>fS,''
$:q
:
b
Fig. 4.47 Singuporc Treasury Dullding. Singnpurc. ICounerj olT11ileSr.libi,n r\.~saciorion.)
122
[Chap. 4
nally braced "wall" for reasons of economy. The core is spanned by two plate girders.
~ h h c o r ewall has four doorway openings on each floor. The headers over these openings consist of rigid steel Vierendeel girders, which allow duct work to pass lhrough
(Fig. 1.19).
Structural steel floor framing was used to facilitate a modular electrified underfloor
steel deck, including trench headers, and to make the long cantilevers quite stiff. Typical live-load deflection at the end of the cantilever was less than 25 mm ( I in.). Girders
were cambered to countcnct dead-load deflection. Web openings were provided in the
cantilevers for ducts and nines. T o vcrifv the dcsirn and fabrication oualitv, and reassure
theowner that deflections would not be excessive, a full-size prolotype cantilever girder
welded to a two-story steel column was tested at the steel fabricator's laboratory in
laoan. Thc test was ouite successful and verified the accuracv of the structural analvsis
within a few percent This ,&aslhc first significallt slcel-iromed building lo bs built In
Sing;.purr.. m the ICSI u.ns also hulpful in pruviding arsurnncc to the huilding ullisials
of the competence ofthe design and steel construction team.
Because of the somewhat unusual s t ~ c l u r a framinr
l
&svslem.
. the concrete core wall
WAS designed conscn,alivcly lo rusisl porciblc, slthuugh very unlikely, p;.tlurn lise l o x incr i n srhicb scrersl cons~.cutirefloors had live lnods i n ccrlain quxlraols and no li\c
load in others. The result of such loadinr oatterns was to induce throueh-thickness bending stresses in the wall due to these asymmetrical forces. The core wall was anslyzcd
using detailed finite-element analyses. and reinforcing stcel was provided to resist !he
in-plane and through-thickness forces and bending moments due to gravity loads with
and without wind loads.
..
-.
M
Fig. 4.49 Framing perspective; Singopare Trensury Bullding.
123
124
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthqunkc loading
Type of strucmrc
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Sire at ground floor
Column spacing
h4atcrial
Core
Wall thickness at ground floor
Matcrial
'
This 50-story 96.600-m' (1,040,000-TI') office torver is located at the southwest corner
of Wacker Drive and Clark Street (Fig. 4.50). It is a classically styled addition to the
Chici~noskyline on North \\'ackcr Drive. which is graced by several outstnnding architectural and structural originals.
126
[Chap. 4
The building. which is rectangular in shape. 50.29 by 42.67 m (165 by 140 ft) with
4.57-m (15-R) reentrant angles at the four corners, is the first high-rise tower designed
by the Spanish architect, Ricardo Bofill. It was designed in collabontion with the
Chicago architectural firm of DeStefano and Partners.
The framing system is a central concrete core surrounded by a structural steel h m e
with a composite floor deck (Fig. 4.51). The core, which is extremely slender [ I 5 5 5 by
27.45 m (51 by 90 ft) with a height-to-width ratio greater than 13:1] incorporates all the
mechanical, electrical, and verticnl transportation amenities. The column-free floor
spans allow for a very flexible 13.72-m (45-ft)-wide tenant soace.
Another outstanding feature in the building is its magnificent entrance lobby, which
extends from the ground to the fiflh floor, with a completely unobstructed space of
50.29 by 13.72 m (165 by 45 it). 13.72 m (45 it) high.
Sect. 4.21
127
Casselden Place
Melbourne, Australia
Architect
S I N C I U Iengineer
~~
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frome material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design iundemenlal period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical noor
Story height
Bcam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground noor
Material
Core
Material
Fig. 4.51 hlidrise noor framing plnn, l l d to 36th floors; 77 Wesl Wneker Drive.
Shearwall Systems
128
[Chap. 4
If
S e c t 4.21
story basement rclnxed the overburden pressure on the tunnels. (2) To prevent heaving
of the tunnels, 26 30-tonne (33-Ion) vertical anchors were inslalled to Lie the tunnels
t
were reimposed, there anchors are permanent.
down. In the areas where only l i ~ h loads
but where heavy loads are imposed by the new struch~re,temporary anchor; only were
used. In addition, piling was used in some areas to provide load transfer to below the
level of the tunnels in the event of ground movement
The mosl inluresting pan of the c~nstructionis the columns construction. Thts method
is the firs1 of i n type in Austrnlia. with only a small number of buildtngs knnwn lo b:
constructed using- similar methods anywhere in the world. The tube columns are erected
in two-slory lifrc, wilh (he bare steel able ro suppon up to six stories of construction. Concrete is p ~ m p e dinto the b;lse ofthe lube, and up as man) as six slories at a lime. No 1%
bmtinn of the concrele is required. Conncll \'fagner ha.. dcveluped design methods for
this tjpc of column. including lltc use of thin-walled lubes. No codified mclhod for rhe
design of thin-walled concrete-filled lubes is av~ilableanywhere in the world.
This
form of construction orovides a column for a steel-fmmine-svstem
~~. at a cost
equal to that of a reinforced concrete column. The cost of the columns has been a major
stumbling block in the economies of steel-framed buildings, with the penalty for using
all-steel columns on a building such as this as high as 3% of the total building valuemillions of dollars on projccls of this size. This solution benefils from the economy of
concrete. with the simple concrele placement method -giving the system constructabilily
lhal ir couivalent lo that of a full sicel column.
'llie cure and columns on llic project use concrete olup lo 70 hlPa (10.000 psi). T ~ L
culuinns arc considcr:d to bc an ideal u.3). raluring br~h-slrcnglhroncrele of good curc confines the concrete, enhancing ability, which is being placed inside btube. ~ h tube
ing the ductilily of the high-strength materials.
~
Fig. 4-52
1
\
!i
\f
~.
130
[Chap. 4
Twin 21
Osaka, Japan
Architect
Smctural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
hlatcrial
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Sect. 4.21
spaced at 3.2-m (10-ft 6-in.) inten,nls, connected by the floor slabr to the slucl-fmnlcd
core. This suucture is eflicient in resisting horizontnl 2nd torsional deformations due to
earthquakes and wind.
Below the sixlh floor the building smcture consiss of steel frames encased in reinforced concrete, and rigidity is provided by reinforced concrete shear walls around the
core. The majority of the horizontal force is borne by these shear walls (Fig. 4.54).
Had the tower building columns been continued down through the low-rise section
at 3.2-m (10-ft 6-in.) centers, space utilization would have been adversely affected.
Hence the 3.2-m (10-ft 6-in.) spans are increased to 12.4-m (40-8 8-in.).soans bv,onestory-high concrelc-encased ste.el transfer beams at the fifth-ljoor level, thereby pro\,iding for shops and showrooms in the lou,rr floors of the building.
The uind load response due to the tuin towers bcinr in close proxim~tv*,as checked
using wind tunnel testing and the results were reflectea in the design.
The atrium of the low-rise pnrt is surrounded by the low-rise parts of the two towers
and the gallery building (four stories wilh an L-shaped floor plan). It is composed of a
large space [about 47 by 47 m (156 by 156 ft)] nod is covered by alarge steel-pipe space
buss roof suucture.
There are large forces on the roof due to the uplift of the wind blowing between the
twin towers and the down wash off the buildings.These factors were evaluated by wind
tunnel testing.
The atrium roof trusses are supported on slide bearings, which can absorb horizontal deformations of the high-rise part during an earthquake. Stoppers are provided to
prevent uplift under upward wind loading.
270
C = 0.10
Twin 21 comprises t\vo identical 38-story office towers with sbaps and showroom.; on
the lowcr floors (Fig. 4.53). The perimeter frames above the sixth floor have columns
131
[Chap. 4
S e c t 4.21
133
:q
5'
Majestic Building
,@i,
.@/:
E
.
,
Architect
Structural engineer
.
.:,:Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Fig. 4.54
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground level
Spacing
Material
Core
Thickness at ground level
Material
1991
116 m (380 ft)
29
3
Office
Concrete
3.5 kPa (70 ps0
50 d s e c (112 mph)
2.9 sec
10 mg peak, I-yr return period .
1% serviceability (wind). 5% EQ
C, = 0.0132
Core and perimeter frame
Weathered rock over rock
Pads and 1.8-m (6-ft)-diameter bored piles
3.7 m (14 ft 2 in.)
12 m (39 f t 4 in.)
750 mm (29.5 in.)
10 m (32 ft 10 in.)
365 mm (14 in.) Dycore
1400-mm (55-in.)-diameter
10 m (32 ft 10 in.)
Concrete. 50 MPa (7100 psi)
400 and 600 mm (16 and 24 in.)
Concrete, 50 MPa (7100 psi) max
The Majestic Building (Fig. 4.55) comprises 32 levels tolnling 42,000 m' (452.000 it').
including four levels of parking garage, extensive retail, arcade, and public plaza areas.
a fitness center with a 33- by 4.5-m (1 10- by 15-ft) swimming pool, a crkche, an art
gallery. and approximately 24.000 m' (258.000 it2) of office space.
Wind engineering played a major part in determining the building shape, podium
features, and strucmre of the building. Three separate wind tunnel studies were undertaken to investigate environmental wind effects, cladding pressures, as well as overturning moments and acceleration levels. Following completion, further studies of the
I,
...
134
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.21
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.21
137
Architect
S l ~ c t ~ rengineer
al
" Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type ofstructurc
Foundalion conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slabs
Columns
Size to ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Material
,$#
..:,.,
:.s::.
!stt
This all-concrete building achieved impressive conslruction times (Fig. 4.57). The entire 50-level concrete core was complclcd in 14 months, using a jump-form system.
Typical cycle times for the core averaged 4 % days per floor.
ID
'w:
[Chap. 4
.*
Se.
4.21
Shearwall Systems
with three 15.2-mm (0.6-in.) strands was tensioned from the opposite end. The bands
were top-sucssed. Grinding in b ~ c kof the surface ofthe anchorage pockcs was no1 nrcessary because access flooring is being provided throuphout the tower
One hundred percent of the prestrr5s force was appiisd to cach tendon u hen the concrcte had reached a strength of 22 hlPa (3 100 psi). Using a high early-strength concrete
e of
mix, this uas achieved on lhc second d3y after the pour. This, togeli~erwith d ~ use
two sets of table forms, alloued floor-to-noor cycles of three d3ys lo be achieved.
The tendons arrive on site prefabricated with suands already threaded into the ducts.
The connection to the corc is ;imply and posili!,cly affected b; Ihe use of 600-mm (24in.)-long 20-mm (0.75-in.) bars which wrap around the vertical rcinforcrme~~t
in the
core wall. The prrimeter spandrel beams are 775 mm (30.5 in.) deep by 350 mm (14 in.)
wide, spanningup to 9 m 730 ft). Reinforcement cages for these biams were fabricated
on construction decks on the podium roof and craned directly into position. Loose bars
were added at column locations to provide continuity.
The main enlrance to the building is a dramatic three-story-high entry auium. The
nerimcter of this alrium is elass on exoosed architectural steelwork fabricated from 250by 250-mm (10- by IO-in.)-square hollow sections. This steciuork IS hunp from 3 2200mm by 950.mm (86- by 37-in.) posrtensi~ncdcnntiicvcr ring beam at lcvel 3, giving the
imnression of a glass cube susnendrd in midair. The rinc beam is clad !r ith 200-mm 18in.)-thick polished precast panels used as formwork.
The e n y space is further enhanced by the termination of one of the tower columns
above the lobby level. The column load is 24,000 kN (2640 Ions). This is achieved using slage-stressed 3950- by 1000-mm (155- by 39-in.) posttensioned beams, each spanning 18 m (59 ft) in a cruciform la you^ The beams hove eight and six tendons, respectivelv. with 19 12.5-mm (0.5-in.)-diameter strands in each tendon. The beams are
stressed in three stages as load from the tower is progressively applied, achieving essentially flat beams throughout the construction phase.
The tower floor band beams. typically 400 mm (16 in.) deep. are notched to 275 mm
(11 in.) thick at the core to allow the major mechanical ring duct to encroach into the
structural depth, thereby reducing the floor-to-floor height.
The band beams were designed as ~Ktially
and are offset from the
- prestressed
.
columns. A typical beam has three tendons. Two tendons, each with four 15.2-mm (0.6in.)-diameter strands, were stressed from the external end of the beam. A single tendon
140
4.3
IChap.4
Whilc outriggers have only brcn incorporated into high-risc buildings nithin the last 25
veors. the o u v i g ~ e as
r a structural rlcmenl has a much longer Itistn~y.The great sailing
;hias
.~
-- to help resist the wind forces in their
r - of the oastand nresent have used outriggers
sails, making the adoption'of tall and slendcr mas& porsible. In high-rise buildings lllc
corc can be related to the marl of the ship, with rhe oulripger acting like the spreadrrj
and the cxterior columns like the stavs or shrouds. The typical
of a core and
.. oreanization
oulriggcr system is picturcd in Frg. 4.58. Just as in sailing ihipb. there outriggers serve
10 reduce the oven urn in^ moment in the core that would otherwise acl as a pure cantilever.
...- - .and- to transfer th; reduced moment to columns outside the core bv
. way. o f a lensiun-comprcssion couple, uhich takes ad\,antage of thc incrcascd momenl arm betu.cen
these columns. In addition lo reducing the size of lhe marl. [lie presence of uutri:pers
n l ~ serves
n
where the mast is sreoned to th? keel beam
-~ to
~- reduce the critical conn~ction
In high-rise buildings this same bench1 is re3liz~dby a reduc~ionof !be hare core oterturning moments and the associaled reduction in potential core uplill forces. Tlic same
overtuLing moment which is taken through a couple between the windward stay and the
mast to the pretensioned ties in sailing ships, is transferred to gravity-loaded precompressed columns in the high-rise building.
The structural elegance and efficiency of outriggers are well rooted in history. The
outriggers have also becoine key elements in the efficient and economic design of highrise buildings.
~~
~~~
..
141
Why Outriggers?
~~
Sect. 4.31
Modem high-rise buildings frequently incorporate central elevator cores along with
generous column-free floor space between the core and the cxterior support columns.
While this results
-~ ~~-in greater functional eficiencv.. it also effectivelv disconnects the two
major SWcNral elements available to resist the critical overturning forces present in a
.?';"Hieh-rise building.
. - of the interior core and the perimeler frame reduces
- This uncoupling
the overall rerislance of llte StNClUre lo the ovenurning forces lo the sum of llte indepcndcnt resisrances of the individual rlrmcnrs. The incorporation of outriggers in this
Same svstem couales these two comonnents and enhances the system's abilihl lo resist
overturning forces dmmatically.
For buildings of up to 35 lo 40 stories, reinforced concrete shear wall or steelbraced cores have been effectivelv utilized as the sole lateral load resisting- svstem.
.
These iystems are very effective in resisting the forces and associated deformations
linearly with Lhe builddue lo shear racking- since their resistance vnries approximately
~.
ineu heieht. However. the resistance that core svstems alone arovide to the overlurninecomponent of drift decreases approximately with the cube of the height. so that such
core syslems become progressively more inefficient as the height of the building increases. In addition toatiifness limitations. a core svstem alonican also -eenerate excessi\u uplift forces in the core structure along with prohibitively high ovenurning
forces in the building's foundation system. With !he sysrem's inability lo take adv;~nngr. oftlie overall building depth, designing for lhe resulting uplifl forces can be problematic.
In reinforced concrete cores, excessive or impractical wall elements where large net
tension forces exist can negate the inherent efficiency of concrete in compression resistance. In steel cores. large and costly field-bolted or -welded tension splices greatly reduce steel efficiency and the ease of fabrication and erection.
In the foundation system, these uplift forces can lead to the need for the following:
~~~~
~~~~
2 Outrigger Benefits
For many bnildines.
- the answer to the problems and restrictions of core-onlv or tnbulvr
struclures is the incorporation of one or rnorc lcvcla of oulriggers. Typical oulrigger organization consisls of linking the core o f a high-rise building to h e exterior columns on
one or morc huildins faces with lruss or wall elements (Fig. 4.59). The outrierer
-- sys.
tems may be iormcdin any combination of steel, concrere;or composite conswction.
When properly and efficiently utilized, outriggers can provide the following structural
and functional benefits to a building's overall design:
142
.
.
.
[Chap. 4
Core overturning
Sect. 4 31
IF
143
lion. In cure-;!lone and tuhuiar systcms. IIIL'SC columns which ;my siglliiicnltl gr;!vit! load nrs either not incorporntcd or ~nderutiiized:In aomc c3ser. oulrigsur s)stems
can elficicntl\ lncomorate almost e\crv. :rs\,ily
- . column tnto !he laieral load rrsisrinc
system, leading to significant economies.
$,
9.
.,.
Outrigger Drawbacks
The most significant drawback wilh the use of outrigger systems is their potcntiai interference with occupiable and rentable space. This obstacle can be minimized or in some
cases eliminated by incorporation of any of the following approaches:
Locating outriggers in mechanical and inlerslitinl levels
Locating outriggers in the naluml sloping lines of the building profile
Incorporating multilevel single diagonal outriggcrs to minimizc the member's interference on any single ievcl
Skewing and offsetting outriggers in order to mesh with the functional layout of the
floor space
Fig. 4.60
I'hiludelphlu.
144
[Chap. 4
Aitolllcr potential drawback is the impact tile nutrigger isstallation cnn have un the
crcctiun pruccss. As a typical building rrcction prouceda. the repelitlve nature of thc
structurai framinr and th~reduetionin member sizes generally result in a learning curve
which can speedbe process along. The incorporatioiof an outrigger at intermediate or
uppcr levels can, if not approached propqrly, have a negative impact on the erection
process. Several steps can be taken to mtnimtze this possibility.
.
.
Provide clear and concise erection guidelines in the contract documents so that the
erector can anticipate the constraints and limitations that the installation will impose.
If possible, avoid outrigger locations or design constmints that will require "backlncking" in the consvuction process to install or connect the outrigger. The incorporation of
intermediate outriccers
-- in concrete construction orlarcc
- variations in dead-load column
suesses bctuccn the core and the exterior can in some cases result in the nccd to "backunck." Such a need can be minimized if issues such >%creep and differential shoncning are carefully studied during the design process to minimize their impact.
Avoid adding additional outrigger levels for borderline force or deflection control.
Outriggers provide diminishing returns for each additional level added. Incorporate
outriggers in less optimal numbers or locations when doing so will haven significant
positive impact on the overall construction cosls.
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
g,
-
,,
Cityspire
N e w York, N.Y., USA
,;
ATehitect
Svuclural engineer
Year of completion
Height fromstreet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Mnximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of swcture
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
..
Story height
Beam span, spacing
Beam depth
Slab
Thickness
Columns
Material
Core
Mumhv
. .Jahn
Robert Rosenwasscr Associates
1987
248 m (814 ft)
75
2
Office and residential
Concrete
2.5 and 2 W a (50 and 40 psO
47 mlsec (105 mph), 100-yr return
HI500
5.5,5.4 sec horizont;U; 2 sec torsion
15 mg peak. 10-yr return
1 2 % serviceability; 2 2 % ultimate
Not applicable
Shear walls with outriggers at transfer levels and interior diagonals in olfice levels
Rock. 4-MPa (40-ton/ft2) capacity
Spread footings
3.5 m (1 l ft 6 in.) office; 2.85. 2.95. 3.05
m (9 ft 4 in., 9 ft 8 in.. 10 ft) residential
Vary
508 mm (20 in.) at perimeter
Flat slab
216 mm (8.5 in.) office; 241,267,305 mm
(9.5, 10.5, 12 in.) residential
Size and spacing vary
56 MPa (8000 psi)
Concrete walls of varying thickness
CitySpire. 156 West 561h Street, displaced Metropolitan Tower as the tallest concrete
structure in New York CitySoncrctc placement reached to 244 m (800 it) and aluminum-dome fins extended the height to 248 m (814 ft) above grade. When completed
in 1987, it was the second fallestconcrete structure in the world (Fig. 4.61). With a 1O:l
ratio, it is the tallest, most slender structure (concrete or steel) in the world today.
CitySpire has about 77.100 m2 (830.000 it') of floor space and required 33,000 m3
(43,000 yd3) of concrete and 4300 tonnes (4700 tons) of rcinforcing bars for its 77 construction levels (including mechanical and below-grade levels).
S e c t 4.31
[Chap. 4
;g:
&?:
Floors
6M9
&jj
.,:..
,@
.*,,
Si,
(a)
Floors
2645
-:;
,
(c)
fl:
?g;
5
!a
.-+
'8.
r:
1!
,~,:
.a..
,I..
;
a:
,.a.
:*,:
4f
J"
>If
".-L1.
%,I
f>L?r&
,
'**
i
x*':
"i,
Floors
47-61
(4
Fig. 4.62 Floor plans; CitySpim.
.:ST
-@,
3,
?db3
:t$q
;L.L
,rb:
-~.
gY
:
r
7L.
Office
(4
Fig. 4.62 Floor plnm; CilySpire (Conrinurdl
149
150
[Chap. 4
Chifley Tower
Sydney, Australia
Architect
Structural engineer
Year o f completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below grol~ n d
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing typc
Typical noor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Columns
Material
Chiflcy To\+,erhas been designed to house financial service organizations. Wiring needs
were met by raised "computer" flooring, by generous riser closets, and by the open nalure of a steel-framed core. (Less accessible concrete cores are most commonly used in
Austmlia.) Steel rraming was also used to speed erection and occupancy (Fig. 4.63).
Its 90,000-m' (969.000-ft') tower rises from a 32.000-m' (345.000-11') full-site
"podium." The building has a highly articulnted facade \+pithnonparallel sides, setbacks
at different levels on different elevations, and a mix of flat, gently curved, and circular
Sect. 4.31
151
faces. This desicn serves to define and enclose Chiflev Souare. reflect the street uerid..
maximize the
views ofharbor, park and ocean 1; the'north and east, break up the
bulk ofthe tower, and enliven the Sydney skyline.
The numerous setbacks, the variety of facade geometries, and the desire for open
views made a framed-tube shuctural solution impractical. A braced core would avoid
involvement with the facade, but the tapered nature of the tower floor plans redulted in
an inverted T-shape core plan (stepping back to an L at level 31) whose limited width
would require unreasonably large columns to contra1 deflection (Fig. 4.64). To control
deflections more efficiently, outriggers (or heavy trusses) link the core to perimeter
columns at levels 5.29-30, and 42 (top) in the east-west direction and at levels 5 and 42
in the north-south direction. The middle east-west outriggers also serve as transfer
trusses for a setback.
Sect. 4.31
[Chap. 4
The irregular building shape, irregular core geometry, and involvement of outriggers
reouired analvzine and desienine- the wind system structure by means of a complete
three-dimensional computer model since no planes of symmetry exist and three-dimensional interaction was critical.
A oackaee of analvsis-and-desicn
- p.r o-g m s was developed for this projecL An interactive deflection control routine determined "optimal" member areas to meet drift
criteria by usinc virtual work establishing relative efficiencies of members, resizing the
most
...--~
effiiient
~~members to meet deflection limits, and reanalyzing. A "final" analysis
with optimal areas used precise loadings. Another analysis in;estigated dead loads ap'olied to the incomolete structure under consmction.
A load combin;tion program look the member-force results of lllcse runs and appllcd
forccs following an "overluming wind envelope" using directionalily from wind tunnel
Icsts, sclected maximum and minimum wind forces for each member. and used combinations of the load cases lo dclermine maximum design forces for cnch mcmber. Wind
allouablc suers incrrascs (force reductions) were included.
A member selection program used the "optimal" arcas. Ihe design forces, and a table
of acceplahlc member sizes lo select a uial member size, with an arcathilt was near "uplimal," in order to check the load capacity in accordancc with the Auslralian stecl code
AS 1250-198I.The loop was thcn repratcd with a larger trial size if necessary. Memhrr
selection marks were piotted on diagrams of the core bracing for ease of use. Member
forces were also plotted in various ways to aid in the design of connections.
It is inlerestine to note that ofice dead load plus reduced live load is about 20 lo 25%
g lonnage figures lo Asshigher in ~ u s t m < nthan in U.S. practice, so u ~ ~ p o l a l i nU.S.
tralinn projects could be m~sleadingunless faclorcd up. Australian practicc also affecled
the conslruction delails. Available hot-rolled member sizes me more limiled lhan i n the
United Stntes. For floor bcams this mcant using a hunvicr size than onc might athcrwisc
choose. As a result floors have a higher-than-minimum load capacily. For girders, builtun sections were common. Also, since tl~eavailable plate is 100 mm (4 in.) thick or less.
&e largest column sections use flanges and web of doubled and tripled plates.
Chifley Tower includes a tuned mass damper (TMD) in the original consmction lo
keep building movement below objectionable levels. Its help is not considered in the
wind response for strength. The TMD mass is 400 tonnes (440 tons) of steel plate. suspended from eight 11-m (36-ft)-long cables anchored at level 46. Its period is adjusted
by a tuning frame, which slides along the cables to vary their active length. Damping is
provided by eight hydraulic cylinders which push fluid through a control valve and a
heat exchanger in a closed circuit Movement is permitted in any lateral direction
(NSEW), but torsion is restricted by an antiyaw yoke. The TMD is anticipated to increase damping from 1 to 2.5% and to decrease 5-yr acceleration from 0.03 to 0.02 g.
,!$.'!.?$:'
153
. -
154
Sect. 4.31
Architect
Structural engtnccr
Year of completion
Height from street lo roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Murphy Jahn
Thornton-Tomasctti Engineers
1988
288 m (945 it)
61
I
Office
Structural stcci-braced core with superdiagonal oulri:gcrs
2.5 kPa (50 psi)
3 1 mlscc (70 mph)
HI450
5.5 sec
15 111gpcak, 10-yr return
I to 2%
Nol applicable
Braccd slccl core linked by steel girders to
cxlerior columns
Rock. 4-hlPa (40-tonlf~') capacity
Caissons
3.81 m (12 rt 6 in.)
13.4 m (44 rt)
530 mm (21 in.)
3.05 m ( I 0 rt)
Steel, grade 350 MPa (50 kst)
63-mm ( 3 - i n . ) concrete over 76-mm (3in.) metal deck
W350 by 384 (W350 by 257) built up to
2788 kglm (1870 lb/ft)
6.1. 13.4.21.3 m(20.44.70ft)
Linked braced frame with nutriggcrs
Steel, grade 250-hlPa (36-ksi) hracing.
grade 300-MPa (43-ksi) and 350-h,lPa
(50-ksi) beams and columns
One Liberty Place at 288 m (945 11) is located on a prime block ofdowntorvn Philadelphia (Fig. 4.65). The orlice floors range from 2230 m' (24.000 ft') in the lo\ver portions
to 120 ni' (1300 it') at tllc pcak. The 61-story tower contains o\,er 120,000 m' (1.3 million ft') of floor area.
155
156
[Chap. 4
Structural steel framing was chosen for its flexibility and high strength-in particular, its ability to transmit large tensile and compressive forces efficiently while keeping
the size of the members to a minimum. Built-up wide-flange sections were used for ail
outrigger diagonals and core and outrigger columns due to the large forces and required
thickness ofthe plates. Their use also facilitnted fabrication and erection.
The typical floor framing consisU of composile W2I ASThl A-572 gmde 50 stecl
beams spanning 13.4 m (44 it) from the building core to the cxterior face. As a result,
thc cntire lease space within thc tower is column-free (Fig. 1.66). The structural slab is
compuscd of a 76-mm (3-in.) composile decking with 64-mm (2.5-in.) stone concrete
topping. Floor beams were cambered lo compensate for dead-load deflection under wet
concrete placement.
The selected lateral load resisting system is a superdiagonal outrigger scheme composed of a 21.3- by 21.3-111 (70- by 7041) braced core coupled with six four-stom diaea. buildnal oulriggers at each face of the core located at three points over the hcight of the
ing. The system works in a similar manner lo the mast of a sailboat, with the bncud core
acting as the most and the outrigger superdi~gonnlsand vcnicolr forming the spre.lder
~
--
Sect. 4.31
157
and shroud system. After various studies utilizing in-house optimization computer programs, three sets of eight outriggers were found to be the most efficient solution.
Although simplified models showed that they would be the most effective if spaced
at equal intervals, optimization programs showed that these outriggers could further reduce wind-induced drift without addins additional steel by simply modifying their spacink o>erthel~cight
of the building. ~ l t k a l ethe
l ~ design warc~mpletedwith thr outside
ends of tllc supcrdiagonnls placed at floors 20, 37, and 51. The outrigger supcrdiagonsls
are connected'at theexteri& of the building to vertical outrigger columns.
To reduce uplift forces on comer core Folumns and the ;itrigger columns it was desirable to concentrate most of the building's dead load on these columns. This was accomplished by introducing exterior transfer Wsses at floors 6,21, and 37, which span
between the outrigger columns within the exterior face and thus funnel dead load, into
the outrigger columns to compensate for uplift dueto wind pressure. Uplift in the extenor outrigger columns was totally eliminated with this approach. The uplift on the corner core columns was reduced to 5800 kN (1,300,000 lb).
In developing the superdiagonal outrigger system, an intensive effort between the
building's architects, interior planners, and developer was undertaken to determine that
the presence of diagonal outriggers penetrating down through certain lease space at
eight locations on 12 floors would not interfere with theefficient layout of the space. Interior planners made various layouts for full-floor and partial-floor tenants and concluded that the presence of the inclined superdiagonal columns would not hinder the real
estate leaseability of these spaces.
Wind forces were generated using prevailing codes and also utilizing a force-balance
wind tunnel lest undertaken by CermakPeterka of Fort Collins, Colorado. It was determined that average wind pressures on the building varied between 0.25 kPa (5 psO at
the bottom lo 2.9 kPa (58 psf) at the top. Both planar nnd three-dimensional static and
dynamic analyses were performed for combinations of gravity and lateral loads. The period of the building was determined to be 5.5 sec.
The lateral load resisting system was initially designed using a purely ailowable
strcss criterion. During the optimization effort, members were increased in size, which
contributed to increasing the building's internal stiffness. As stiffness was increased,
the acceptable limits of building drifl (Hi450) and acceleration (15 mg) were met. In addition, because of the vertical compatibility between ouuigger columns ald core
columns created by the outriggers, analyses were required to determine the gravtty load
magnitude in the lateral load resisting system. This nnalysis was performed in steps lo
properly model the actual building erection and loading sequences.
Utilization of the optimization program vimmed on estimated 9.8 kgim"2 psf) from
the wind-resisting system, a savings of some 15% by weight. More imporlnnt were the
savings gained by eliminating cntire components such as two interior bracing lines
above the twentieth floor, which greatly simplified design and consuuclion.
I
I
I
, ,,
$
'i
158
[Chap. 4
17 State Street
New York, N. Y., USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Bnsic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamenlal period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Typc of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing typc
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Spacing
Material
Core
17 State Street is a 44-story office tower located ncross from Battery Park at the tip of
Manhattan (Fig. 4.67). To maximize the unobstructed views of the Statue of Liberty and
the New York harbor, the architects chose a quarter-circle floor plan of 1160 m' (12,500
ft') (Fig. 4.68). Although the perimeter of the plan is symmetric, the core of the tower is
offset to optimize the arrangement of rental floor space. The first level is 10 m (33 ft)
above grade, and typical floors are 3.66 m ( I 2 ft) high.
Sect.
4.31
Core and
Outrigger Systems
159
160
[Chap. 4
Wind tunnel testing predicted that the wind coming off the harbor would produce
loads 40% higher than those required by the New York City building code.
The structural system consists of bundled braced core tubes coupled to perimeter
moment frames by means of an outrigger hat truss. The three core tubes are braced with
X, diagonal, and inverted V members, as dictilted by core functional requirements. Core
Sect. 4.31
161
columns consist of W350 (WI1) series rolled shapes in the upper ponion of the building and built-up membcrs below. Pcrimeler moment f m e s have W6lO (W24) series
coiumns. rolled and built uo.
a . soaced at 5.7 m (18 h 8 in.). The nerimeter hame; do not
form a tube, as architectural notches at the comers of the quarter-circle prevent effective economicd transfer of vertical shear forces around the corners. The hat truss is a
three-dimensional outrigger two stories high, with diagonals sloping downward from
the core to the perimeter.
At the first level. which rises I 0 m 133 ft) above the sidewalk the ~erimelercolumns
and spandrel beam; are encased in cincreie to provide additiooal siffness for the tall
story. Below the ground-floor level, the cores are also encased to add stiffness. Footings
consist of concrete oiers lo 6-MPa 160-ton/h2) bedrock and end-bearinr steel oiles.
Eight columns are Gchorcd for uplif;with postiensioned threadbur rock Gchors.'
~~~
162
IChap. 4
Sect. 4.31
163
Figueroa a t Wilshire
Los Angeles, California, USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral dcflcction
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Found~tionconditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Material
Core
Albert C. Martin
CBM Engineers. Inc.
1990
218.5 m (717 ft)
53
4
Office
All stccl
2.5 kPa (50 psO
3 1 mlscc (70 mph)
380 mm (15 in.), 100-yr rclurn
6.5 scc
17 mg pcnk, 10-yr return
I% scn2iceability;7% ultimate
Magnitude 8.3 from San Andrcas fault
Braced corc "spine" with outrigger ductile
frame
Shnle, 750-kPa (15,000-psn capacity
Spread footings
3.96 m (13 ft)
18.3 to 10.7 m (60 to 35 ft)
914 to406 mm (36 to 16 in.)
3.05 m (10 it)
133-mm (5.25-in.) lightweight concrete
on SO-mm (?-in.) melal deck
1067 by 1067 mm (42 by 1 2 in.), cruciform shape nl 18.3-m (60-ft) centers
Stcei. grade A572.350 MPe (50 ksi)
Braced steel, grade A572
This 218.5-mm (717-ft)-tall 53-story office torvcr is located in downtown Los Angcles
(Fig. 4.69). Tltc floor plan of the tower is 45.7 m ( I 5 0 It) square, exhibiting notches and
multiple step backs as it rises above the plaza ( F i g 4.701. The square ton8erplan offers
internal spacc appropriate to banking and law firms. The granite-clad building has a
three-story-tail stepped grccn-colored glass crown, wi~ichis lit from within at night and
makes a distinct mark on the Los Angeles skyline. Turo six-story ntriums, botit rectangular in plan, which rise like glass and steel staircases, arc attached to two of the building's corners at 45' angles. Tile plaza of the tower at the corner of Figucron at Wilshire
is articulated by fountains and a 12-m (40-it)-high sculplure.
Fig. 4.69 Figucroo nl Wilrhirc, Lor Angels, Cnltiarnio. (Co~rrresyojCBnf Engiriccrr. Inlc 1
164
..
[Chap. 4
the
conceot
of n saine
As onnosed to conventional nerimeter ductile tubular frames.
~~~~,
~~~~- ~~r~
- r ~
structure is used for [his tower. The spine, the unintempled ponion of this lower, consists of a 17.4- by 20.4-mm (57- by 67-h) concentrically braced core linked to perimrler columns by aductile frame of outrigger beams. The 'pine in this case has three components (Fig. 4.71):
~~
~~
Sect. 4.31
~
. - .
~~~
$ SYMM.
OUTRIGGER
Fig. 1.70
165
Fig. 4.71
[Chap. 4
Office
Steel
2.5 kPa (50 psf)
41 mlsec (92 mph)
H/400,50-yr return
4.03 sec
Not applicable
Braced steel core with outriggers to steel
perimeter lramed tube
Deep still clay
Continuous mat
3.96 m (13 11)
12.2 m (40 ft)
4.57 m (15 ft)
610 and 915 mm (24 and 36 in.)
Steel, grade 250 MPa (36 h i )
82-mm (3.25-in.) light!vcight concrete on
76-mm (3-in.) steel deck
915 by 280 mm (36 by l l in.)
4.57 m (15 ft)
Steel, grade 250 MPa (36 ksi)
Braced steel frame, grade 250 hlPa (36 ksi)
The Four Allen Center building rises 50 stories above grade and extends two stories below (Fig. 4.72). The elongated plan, combined with the slenderness of the tower, yields
an illusion of exceptional height when viewed from street level. The 133.800 m' (1.44
million it') ollice building is connected to parking and retail facilities by an air-conditioned pedestrian tunnel and an overhead pedestrian bridge. Figure 4.73 shows the typical floor freming plan, and Fig. 4.74 illusvales the building section of a typical floor.
The geometry of the slender airloil shape is susceptible lo dynamic oscillation in hurricane-speed winds, thereby establishing a complex and challenging series of structural
frame and foundation problems. Wind tunnel tests of an aeroelastic model of the building were recommended and coordinated by the structural engineers. The testing resulted
167
168
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.31
tiebacks nomaily required, thus enhancing economy and shortening the schedule for
the basement and foundation construction.
The structural develooment. svslem
- were facilitated by devel. anaivsis. and desisn
oping a compmhcnsive series of computer analjses and design progmms. The automated analysis and d e s i ~ nprocessing ofall elements in the wind-rrsistun~system of the
buiidine
sbucture resulted-in sienifiiant
savincs in material costs. and enabled the en-- u
gineen to complele the design and drawings in a short4-month schedule.
Advanced methods were also employed
control during construe.
. . to assure quality
lion. in pmicular. Ihe project set new slandards of assurance regarding the Gghtness of
high-suength bolls. Uilnsonic cxtmsomelers were usrd lo measure bolt lightness accu~atelyfor the first time on a commercial projecL
The 45.7- by 91.4- by 2.6-m (150- by 300- by 8.5-ft) mat foundation containing
11,127 m3 (13.308 yd" of concrete was poured in just over 19 hours. This was made
nossible bv. usine-a svstem
by concrete pumps.
. of belt convevors su~olemenlcd
..
Thc structural stcel was crccled by fabriculing the exterio;lrcc cuiumns. <he vertical
core trusses, and the uce beams in modules to reduce [he number of pieces lo handle and
fieid connections to comdete. The ail-steel smcture was erected at a rate of one cornplele noor every 2 % day;. n t e project was completc 6 months ahead ofihe planned fasttrack design and construction completion date, with the first lcnanl mo\'ed in jusl 15
months afler construction of the foundation began.
The project received the following awards:
~
J!Q!
ED -
"
I.. I % _
"'3"B-
F p . 4.74
[Chap. 4
Sect 4.31
Trump Tower
New York, New Vork, USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height irom sLreel to rooi
Number of stories
Number of le\'els below ground
Building use
Framc material
Typical noor live load
Basic wind \,elocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamenVal period
Design accelcretion
Dcsien damping
Eanltqunkc loading
Type of structure
Foundalion conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
hlatcrial
Core
Trump Tower is n multiuse building occupying a prime site on 5th Avenuc in New York
City. T h i o u ~ the
h purchase of the air rights for adjacent sites and irom bonuses awarded
for the provision of public atncnities, a plot ratio (building floor arcJ lo site area) o f 2 1
was achieved, making this a very slender building.
A perimeter tube lateral load resisting sysleln was unacceptable due to the impact o i
closely spaced columns on the views from the condominiums and on t l ~ cshop fronts at
street level. Also, structural steel was rejecled due lo the lead lime required Tor supply
to the site. The adopted all-concrete solution u!ilized concrcte shear !\,ails for l;~leral
load resistance and deep concrete lransier girderr to chon%cthe structural column grid
(Fig. 4.75).
172
Sect. 4.31
[Chap. 4
Through the 38 condominium levcls, loads are carried by 52 concrete columns and
concrete u d i s around the service corc. At moflcvei, twin oulrigger beams 6 m (20 11) high
and 450 mm (18 in.) thick link the corc with perimeter columns on two opposite sides to
reduce
Extended core walls do this iob in the other direelion
~ - - latekdisolaczment.
~ Below the twentieth floor a system of lransler girders 7.3 m (24 it) high and 450 to
600 mm ( I 8 to 24 in.) thick allows for the 52 columns to reduce to only 8 columns
through the 13 office levels. The transfer girders nlso act as outrigger beams to further
control lateral displacement. The girders are pierced by many openings for doors, pipes,
and ducls.
Another transfer system comprising an inclined-column A frame was introduced between the eleventh and seventh n o o n lo allow mother two columns to be removed in
order to open up the atrium, which rises seven levels through the retail floors at the base
of the buildine.
The 1087-m' (I 1.700-it2) rcsidcntial floors wcrr poured on a ?-day c)cle. n ~ 56c
and 49-hlPa (8000- and 7000-psi) concrete for the columns contained a superplasticizer
to increase workabilitv. for .
vlacine- around dense reinforcement. Tieht manGement of
concrete delieerics uas requ~rcdto ensirre that high-strength concrete %,asavsilablc at
the right time for placement in s l ~ b over
s
and around columns.
?
@;
173
Waterfront Place
Brfsbane, Australia
;.5'
Architect
...,
Stmctuml engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stones
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical noor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Typc of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical noor
story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Thickness at ground floor
Material
Waterfront Place is a 42-level reinforced concrete framed office tower, located at tile
rivcr edke of Brisbane's central business district on a 15,000-m' (160,000-flZ)site (Fig.
4.76). A steel-level plaza provides access to the river edge for the public, whereas bclow and abow river level there is parking for 500 cars. River cdge boardwalks connect
174
[Chap. 4
S e c t 4.31
175
ncifhboring developmenis with thl: p1311. ilnd mooring is pro!,ldedon the a;1ierfroot for
plc~surr.craft,tour boats, and ferries.
The 42-level tower provides 36 office floors, three plant-room floors, a ground-floor
foyer, and two basements. The configuration of a typical floor provides 12 m (40 ft) of
column-free space between core and glass line, with four cantilevered bay windows on
both the east and west facades, effeclively contributing 10 "corner" windows on each
floor (Fig. 4.77).
High-rise buildings taller than approximately 35 stories may not be structurally cconomical if the core alone is used to resist wind loads. This is particularly thc case for a
building rectangular in plan loaded about its weak axis. Such was the case with Waterfront Place, which has 40 levels above plaza level.
Wind tunnel model testing was undertaken, and the results indicated that it would be
impractical to use the core to fully withstand wind forces. Wall thicknesses and reinforcement quantities would be excessive, as would be the sway of the building in the
east-west direction.
Instead the design concept was changed to that of a core-perimeter interaction structural system where the core "tube" is connected to the exterior columns at specific locntions, in this case at the plant room at levels 26 and 27 (Fig. 4.78). At these levels, four
stilC"wind beams" cantilevering from the core are connected to perimeter transfer beams
between three columns on each lace ofthe building. This induces participation ofthe axial capacity of the exterior columns in resisting wind-induced loading (Fig. 4.79).
The core is used to resist all horizontal shear, but vertical shear resistance is transferred from the core to the exterior columns, thereby utilizing the total overturning capacity of the SINClUre.
Y__I
176
Sect. 4.31
[Chap. 4
177
Research indicated that the most effective location for the wind beams was at the top
levels of the tower. However, this was impractical due lo the stepped profile of the topmost three plant levels (levels 37, 38, and 39) and the marketing potential of tenancy
29 to 36. As a consequence the wind beams were placed at levels 26 and 27. two
.
' levels
floors containine mechanical rooms and ofice space.
This loca~ion~hri~htcned
the possibility of diifcrentiai axial shoncning between the
reinforced concrele core and the colu~nns.A ,lee1 joint was developed to link thc outrieeer beams with the fransfer beams at the columns lo allow controlled slippage
.. - as Lhe
dilfcreniial movement occurred.
Thc use of the cantiicvcring wind beam syslem introduced some architeclural and
siructural cncinecrine dcsirn challenecs. In order to rcrist the 820-tonne (180.000-lbl
l o ~ dappiied;o thc end ofcach wind hiam. the h e m s had lo be t u o stories high and 900
mm (36 in.) thick and prefenbly without any penetrationr. To have no pcncvations
would have meant the ldss of o f f i e soace: th&efore laree
were made in these
- ooenines
.
beams. This precluded the use of conventional beam design theory for these beams.
Consequently the beams were desipned using "strut and tie" theory. Concrete of 55MPn ff800-osil streneth and ties cinsistine i f 45 36-mm f 1.4-in.1-diamcler bars were
required to ;ra;mit
&! working load of 86 tonnes (1 80,000 lb) per beam.
The noor slabs at levels 26 and 28. which are locally 420 mm (16.5 in.) thick. participate in the wind-beam action by working as flanges for the wind beams. The force
paths in the wind beams and the floor slabs arc shown in Figs. 4.79.4.80, and 4.81.
Differential venical shrinkaee betureen core and ~erimetcrcolumns at level 26 subsequent to construction of the entire building was caiculated. Consvuclion history, material propenies, and in-service loads were used in this calculation.
CORE
--
WALLS
- -
WIND BEAMS
COLUMN LOAD
SPECIAL
JOINT
Fig. 4.78
- -_ - _A *
.
TOWER AND P L A Z A
E A S T WEST SECTION
Tower nnd plnm wt-wstserlian: Waterfront Place.
+L-LrL
FIG. 4.79
trnnrmlttcd througtlnnorLanungc";
Wnlcrrronl Plncc.
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.31
179
The wind beams are extremely stiff. Design load deflection was calculated to be only
2 mm (0.08 in.). Unless some means of allowing movement between wind beam and
columns was found, the wind beams would have attempted to support the 15 stories
above level 26 and several stories below. This it could not do, and s w c t u n l failure
would have resulted. A sliding friction joint between wind beams and the column transfer beams was developed. This is shown in Fig. 4.82. The joint is in effect a multiple
clutch with the slip load determined by the clamping force provided by the through bolts.
Tests were canied out at the Queensland University of Technology to determine the
co-efficient of friction between the brake-pad material and the stainless-steel plates.
Size, clamping force. and loading rate effects were investigated. Typical load-slip
graphs are shown in Fig. 4.83. Eoch joint is fitted with four strain gauges to monitor
stresses in the plates and hence the load being transferred through thePclutch." This allows the clamping force to be adjusted to slip at the required design load. When the
clamping force is finally adjusted, it will not require any fudher adjustment in its life.
A typicnl plot ofstress versus time for one of the joints is shown in Fig. 4.84.
Fig. 4.81
SlruUtic truss-rorec
dcmn:
Il'ulurlronl t'larc.
180
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.31
I81
75% of maximum
Slip (mm)
Section
9
Slip (rnrn)
Fig. 1.83
T I M E (WEEKS1
rig.4.82
Fig. 4.81
[Chap.
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design ncceleration
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground noor
Fig. 4.85 Tno Prudcnlinl Plaza. Clxicngu. Illinois. ICoirnen ojCBAl E , r ~ t n ~ . ~i,,c
rr
184
[Chap. 4
cst bxcment is locatrd nt elev3lion -6.477 m (-21 fi 3 in.) CCD (Chicago Cily dntom).
The lobb) ofthe building is locatrd at elevation T 10.668 m ( 7 3 5 ft 0 in.) CCD. Levels 4.5.38, nnd 39 are used for mecltmical equipment, and level59 for siorace of uindow-washing equipment Level 58 is the last office floor. Levels above 59 are mcchnnical floors.
The building- is rectannular at lhe lower levels. 37.4 bv 40.4 m (122 ft 6 in. bv 132 ft
8 in.), but becomes square at the fifty-ninth floor due lo a series of rcrb3ck on the nonh
:and south faces. Above lhr. fifty-ninth floor. lhr building sti\nq tapering to form a "cone
held." which is torrrred bv a 25-m (82-11)architectural soirc. The 10" rlcvniion of the
spire is 304.8 m ( i i 0 0 f t j c c (~~ i g1.86).
.
The lateral stiffness in each direction is mainly provided by the four shear walls located in lhe core of the buildine. Their deoth is 13.8 m (45 ft 4 in.). The flanees are 838
rnm (33 in.) thick a d the wzb; are 610 aid 380 mm ( i 4 and 15 /n.) thick Tor the intenor and extcrinr ualls. rcspeclively. The south shear wall drops off nt level 27 where&$
the nonlt w11l drorrs off at leiel 40. Tile middle ualls conlinue 111 !he wav lo floor 59.
The flanges of wails arc connected together in the north-south direction by k86-mm (27in.)-deep link beams.
The columns at the east and west faces are soaced at 6.1-m (20-ft)
centers.. whereas
.
on the north and south laces they arc spaced at 9.15 m (30 11). The typical extrnor column sire vJries from 8'10 by 1140 mnl (35 hy 35 in.) at the lo\ver floors to 600 h\ 600
mm (24 bv 24 in.) e the ton floor;. A maximum concrete streneth of 84 MPe 11$.000
psi) u'as used for columns and shear walls at the lower floors. The concrete strength was
reduced to 42 MPa (6000 psi) at the upper floors.
The floor beams have clear snan 3 aooroximarelv I 2 m (40
. ft). from the oerimetcr
columns to the shear r\,311 cure. Typical floor bcam size is 965 mm (38 in.) by 610 lrlm
(24 in.) deep. Floor framing consists of a 150-mm (6-in)-thick norrn>l-weightconcrelc
sllb u,ith o clear span of 5 13 in (16 f l I0 in.) be1ncr.n rhc noor beams. spaced st 6 I m
(20 ft) centcr5. In addillon tu carrying the gmvity load. rbe floor beams carry some 01
the wind shear frum the shear ivalls to the outside columns. At the fortieth and 111cfillynineth floors the core is tied to the outside columns at two locations with the helo, of oilrigger ivnlls to control the wnd drift and reduce Ihe overturning monlent in thu core
shear walls The beams are 5.03 m (16 f16 in.) deep (in other words. a full nory high)
butwcci~floors 39 and 10 ind 1.68 m (5 11 5 in.). deep. ar floor 59.
The foundation system consists of straight shaft caissons up to 3 m (10 ft) in diameter. These caissons rest on the bedrock, which is about 30 m (100 fr) below the existing
ground level. The allowable bearing capacity of this rock is 19 MPa (200 tonlft'). To
fully utilize this capacity, 56-MPa (8000-psi) concrete was used in caissons. In the parkinggange adjacent to the main tower, belled caissons were used. These caissons extend
to hardpan about 21 m (70 ft) below existing grade. The allowable bearing capacity for
this hardpan is about 3.4 MPa (36 todft').
+1!22'-6'+
- .
..
-.
:%
C
m:
at
LON
Fig. 4.86
186
[Chap. 4
7999 Broadway
Denver, Colorado, USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral dctlcction
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Footing type
Typicnl floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground level
Spacing
Core
Material
S e c t 4.31
formed core. The perimeter frames act with the core to resist lateral loads and effects
due to the eccentric form of the building.
Footings comprise cast-in-place caissons founded in claystone and sandstone some
I5 m (50 ft) below grade. A single caisson supports each column, and caissons at a minimum spacing of three caisson diametem are distributed around the core. The design end
bearing pressure was 3350 kPa (70,000 psO, and skin friction in the rock was 335 W a
(7000 psf).
3.81 m ( I 2 ft 6 in.)
9.14m (30 it)
406 mm (16 in.)
3.43 m (I l ft 3 in.)
83-mm (3.25-in.) lightweight concrete on
50-mm (2411.) metal deck
W350 by 1088 kglm (W14 by 730)
4.57 m (15 ft)
Shear walls 610 mm (24 in.) thick at
ground floor
Concrete, 42 to 28 MPa (6000 to 4000 psi)
1999 Broadway is an unusual 43-story office building built on a triangular site. The
presence of an historic church on pan of the site resulted in the plan of the office building having the shape of an arrowhead which wraps around the church, creating from it
a piece of sculpture on the plaza (Fig. 4.87).
The facade comprises alternating bands of limestone and green reflective glass and
a concave cunain wall having seven angled facets around and above the church. The
building has been raised 15 m (50 ft) above ground on 22 limestone-clad columns to create views ofthe church from within.
The slroclurc cunsists of^ rr.inforccd concrde curvicc core. stccl perimeter columns.
and stcci flnor b s m s and g~rdcrsco~nposilewith tile rlah. At Ic\r.lr 3 10 5 and 29 lo 31.
two-story-high outrigger trusses between core and perimeter columns reduce thc lateral
deflection. Girders are connected to plates field-welded to cast-in plates in the slip-
.-.
[Chap. 4
Citibank Plaza
Hong Kong
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum laleral deflection
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story heighr
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Material
The four-level basement of Citibank Plma (Fig. 4.88) was formed using top-down construction techniques. Stability \vas achieved with the internal cores acting in combination with the perimeter columns, using outriggers at two levels (Fig. 4.89). Part o f t h e
building is seated above a major entryway to a neighboring development. To achieve
this, the perimeter columns rake outrvnrd along one face of the building over a one-story
height (Fig. 4.90). The resulting lateral forces were resistcd by a prestressed beam system tied back to the internal cores. prestressing being applied in stages as construction
progressed.
hg. 4.88
Cllibank
190
Sect. 4.31
7B.&
Fig. 4.89 Fioorplnn; Citibnnk Plnrs.
Pig. 4.90
191
192
4.4
7
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
Sect 4.41
TUBULAR SYSTEMS
Historical Perspective
The development of the initial generation o f tubular systems for tall buildings can be
t..
r...
n r ~ dto
.
.- the concurrent evolution o f reinforced concrete construction followine World
War 11. Prior to the early 1960s. reinforced concrete was utilized primarily for low-rise
construction of only a few stories i n height. Ti~esrbuildin~swere chancterized by planar Viercndeel beak and column arraneemcnts with wid;soacines
between membcrs.
The basic ~ncfficieacyof the frame wcleln for rsioforc:d concrete buildings or more
t1r~11
ahnut I5 slnrlcs rusulttd in m:,ober proportinns or prohthit~te.ire and rlruclur;~l
material cost or~miums.and thus such svitcms were economicallv inviable. Concrete
shear uall systems arr;lnged i \ ~ t b i111s
~ t huilding int~.riurc o ~ l be
d utilirud. b.11 lhcy uerr.
oftc~tof insul'licicnt sire for aliifne,~and rcsil;,ncs ;lgain%torcrturnlng. Thi, Icd tu lhr.
dcvclonment ofstructur~lsvstems with a hirhcrdcrrcc orcfficicncv toward lateral load
rci\t.lncs lor 1311~.rh~ildings.The nntlon n i i fully t h r ~ u ~ d i m c n ~ i oiruclur;~l
naI
sjrlum
utiliz~ncth~.cnlir~.build:nc inertin lo rcrirl l s l ~ . r loads
~i
b:wn lo cmcrec ;I[ lhls time.
Thc main ,orooonent
o f thi;desien trcnd was Fszlur Khan. who svstem~icallv
,
,oursucd
a logical evolution of tali building structural systems. The pervssivc international-style
approach 10 archilecture a1 the lime included lergcr open spaces with longer spans, a
well-oraanized core. and a clcarlv ocrceotiblc interior-exterior column grid. Wilhin this
;~rui~iteclur:tl
2nd ecnnnmic clinl:!lc. Ihc fr-1111cdIuhi. h).\tcin i n rd IIIOICL.~
c~lncrct: i : t l l
hi. \c:n ;lr bull) ;I n;~ttlr-l2nJ 3,) innur:.l!\u ~ : ~ ~ I O ~ in
I I tidl
I S Ib.tilcling
II
<yhtL.nl,
~~~~
. -
,.
svsiem costs. Exterior columns mav eliminate the need for intermediate vcrtical mullion
elcntunls of ti>cuur1;lin \$:dl 133~11311) ur 1.)1311g. A iIrUClUr.lli51 ?Xpr~:isinnfur tile e \ l ~ ridr envelope msy hc lull? rc;~liz~.J
b! <\pnslng IIIC~.xldrinrtuhul;,r mernb~.~;,IIIUS
dclinong >hexil1,>r.~!-r31Jen~.str:,li~~~>.
TI,< ~ L i l l d n !!L~i l l l i).st?rn 15 1hc.n infilled i,etre~.n
the coi&~ and spandrel beams. with II resultino reduction i n claddine cost. An eariv
* exampie o f such a iubuiar b u i l d i n in rcinforccd~oncreteis shown i n Fig. 4.91.
The behavior ofrrarnrd tubes under Interel load is indicated in Fig. 4.92, which shows
the distribution o f axial forces i n the exterior columns. The more the distribution is similar to that o f a fully rigid box cantilevered at the base, the more efficient the system will
be. For the case o f a solid-\$,all tube. [he distribution of axial forces would be expected to
bc uniform over the windn.nrd and Iccivard \tSsllsand linear over the sidcrvnlls. As the
tubular walls are punched, creating the beam-column frame, shear frame deformations
Fig. 4.91
193
~ d ~ r ~r o
a a~ o
n e s ~ s r ~ nhysrems
g
[Chap. 4
Sect 4.41
Tubular Systems
ore introduced duc lo sltear;lnd flcxurc i n the tubular mumbcrs as u u l l as routtons 01thc
ntcmber loin&. This rcdtlccs the eilecti\e stlffnrss Of lbe systeln as a cantilever. The extent to which h e actual axial load distribution i n the tube columns dcoartr;- from the
~. idesl
is rcnndd the ",hear lag effect." I n behavioral terms. the forces i n the colurnns toaard lltu
lniddls u i t h e flange frnmus lq behind those nearer the conter and are tltua less than fully
ulllized. Limiting the shear lag ellect is essential fnr oplimal de\.elopmen~o f the :ubulnr
system. A rc3son;1blr. objcctit,e is l o strivc toward a1 least 7% effiricncy sucll [hat the
cantilever component in llte oterall rystcln deflection ondsr u i n d load dnminatus.
Thc 1r;tmed tubu i n structural slsel rsquirus wcldinp oftlte heam-column join1 tu du!clop rigidity and continuily. Tllc ~ o n n 3 t i o n ofahric~tcd
f
1rr.u elemenlr, rrltcre all welding is p:rformcd i n llte shop i n a horizonwl position, has made the alrsl-frame tuhe s ~ $ .
tem more practical and efficienl, as shown i n Fie. 4.93. The trees are then erected-bv
~,
bolting the ipandrcl bcotn* togelher ak Inidspan near thc pnint o f innrxion.
The column spacing i n steel-fmntrd tubular buildings lnust be ~.ralualcdto b~l;tnce
llte nerds for higher cantilever dfiicicauy throuph clorcr anactnkr rvitll increased F ~ h r i cation costs. The use ordeeper, built-up sectioni versus roiled G m b c r s is also a matter
o f cost-effectiveness. A survey o f steel quantities for completed tubular buildings is
s l ~ o w nin Fig. 4.94. The buildings range from 40 to 110 stories. and column spacings
generally range from 3 to 4.5 m (10 to 15 ft) on center, with spacings as close as I m
(3.28 ft) i n the case of the 110-slory World Tradc Center twin towers. New York (fig.
4.95). These towers are examples whereby the structuralist notion o f a punched wall
tube with extremely close exterior columns is architeclurally exploited to express visually the inherent venicality o f the high-rise building.
~.
Fig. 4.93
Cantilever
componenl
Shear frame
component
Elevation
Sway
Dlslribullon w l h w
shear lag
Actual axial stress
shear lag
Wind lorce
Fg.4.92
HEIGHT (in)
Vlg. 4.94
195
196
3
,\, ihc tubular concept; were being dcreloprd in ihr 19605, il became Jppdrent that
thcrr was a cenain building height n n g e for which the framed tube could be elficlenll)
adaoled. For rrry 1311 buildings. lhe dense grid of beam and column members has a d t =id;d impact onihe facade aGhitecture. The need lo control shear lag and improve the
Tubular Systems
[Chap. 4
I.,
~.
Lateral Load Resisting Systems
Sect. 4.41
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
The bundled tubc concept allows for wider column spacings in the lubulu walls lhan
w o ~ ~ ibr
d oossible with unlv lhc eatrrior framed lube form. 11 is his sp3cine uhicll
rnnkes it possible to place inierior frame lines withoul setiousiy c ~ m ~ r o ~ i s i n g ~ i n l e r i o r
space planning. In principle, any closed-form shapemay be used to create the bundled
form (see Fig. 4.102). The ability to modulate the cells vertically can create a powerful
vocabulary for a variety of dynnmic shapes. The bundled lube principle therefore offers
great latitude in the architecturnl plnnning of a very la11 building.
*.?;s.::!:s
.,2
ENDCHANNEL
TRUSSEDTUQE
MOMENT RESISTING
FRAME OR
FRAMED TUBE
-COLUMN
AXIAL LOADS
DUE TO WIND
CASE (A1
::: s..
0
114
PLANS
ttttttt
Fig. 4.98 Trurrcd tubc, grurity loud rrdlrlribstion.
TUBE
TYPE
EXT. TUBE
EXT.
SIZE
69m x 69m
46m r 4 8 m
HIW
6.65
9.60
0c0101
0.61
0.75
EXT. TUBE
BUNOLEO TUBE
23m x 23m
19.00
0.66
6.65
0.78
69m x 6 9 m
202
Sect. 4.41
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
,03
COMPRESSIVE
STRESS
Amoco Building
Chicago, Nlinois, USA
Architect
STRESS
(a1
FRAIAING PLAN
1:ig. 4.101
Ibl
Uundlrd
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Truss span
Truss depth
Truss spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Spacing
Material
Core
/, ,!j
Swctural engineer
Yenr of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frnme material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design wind load deflection
Earthquake loading
Type of svucture
Foundation conditions
MASTER GRID
OF COLUMNS
AT BASE
The innovative structural concept applied to this 342-m (1 123-ft)-high building resulted
from the desire to achieve an efficient, simple to erect structure utilizing a perimeter
tube whose behavior would closelv anoroximate that o i a oure cantilever (Fie.
4.103).
.
The lubc compriaca uolulnns uf V-rhaped kcel plaw 3nd du:p ubxnnul.shapud bcnlplat: spandrel bcams shop-fabncalcd Inlo 3-stor) Irccs. Tb:r< arc 64 sucll columns ;,t 3-
..
f&'
204
Sect. 4.41
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
205
i:
:
i.
m (10-11) centers around the perimeter, plus solid steel plate walls to the reentrant corners. The free inner edges of the columns are stiffened by heavy angle sections. Connections between spandrel beams comprise simple high-strength bolted joinL5, whereas column splices are welded at lower stories and bolted or welded at upper stories.
The floors are generally supported by 13.7-111 (45-11)-span trusses at 3-m ( 10-ft) centers. Trusses at successive floors attach to alternate sides of a column to effectively cre-
Fig. 4.103
::
ate a concentric load in the vlane of the wall. At the buildine corners the shorter-soan
diagonal girder and attached'beams are wide-flange sections. ?he 4000 essentially identical lrusses and the comer beams were mass-produced in an assembly line.
r
irom thin steel olate .;oread
Economv was achieved bv creatine a ~ e r i m e l c frame
!,.,.i,over as much of the facade as was architecturally acceptable and by maximizing the
;?:?'number of geometrically identical elements. The arraneement
also negated the need for
sublramine
- for the exterior curtain wall.
The space within the V-shaped columns was used Tor air s h a h and hot and chilled
water pipes for the perimeter zone. The interior zones were s u e ~ l i e dfrom vertical shafts
in the bore
The building contains45.900 lonnes (50.506 tons) ofsteel,ofwhich 37% is in beams
and trusses and 63% in columns and reentrant corner wnlls.The r\reieht ofsteel amounts
- .
'
. -.
Sect. 4 41
181 West Madison Street
Chicago, Illinois, USA
Archilcct
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from streel to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame malcrial
Typical floor live load
Bnsic wind selocily
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundemenla1 pcriod
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of slructure
Foundation condiiions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Benm span
Benm spacing
Benm depth
Slab
Columns
Spacing
blalcrial
Core
Thickness a1 ground floor
The I 81 West Madison Sbcet lowe r is a 50-story office building located at Madison and
Wells Streets in [he Chicago Loog1 (Fig. 4.104). It is a point lower, with multiple setbacks and a distinctive cro\r8nthat recalls the sculpturally expressive skyscrapers of the
1920s. This is also n tower for the 1990s. It is clearly organized as a square floor plen
with n center square concrelc core and column-free office space (Fig. 4.105).
Fig. 4.104
208
[Chap. 4
181 West Madison is the tallest combination core building in Chicago. The central
concrete core is surrounded bv a sWctuml steel frame and a com~ositefloor svstem.
The squa~ccore is 50 stories tA11. for a totnl height of 207 m (680 fi).
rile core and columns a the base of ihc building are rupponed by cnissons and gradc
heams. Of the cnissons in the uroiecC 25% existed. Transfer-crade beams between new
and existing cnissons were uskd io take the tower's wind an; gravity loads. The foundation wall on the east side of 181 West Madison required underpinning as it is a common wall with its neighbor, 10 South LaSalle StreeL
Interior spans of 13.1 m (13 ft) ailowa column-free interior space for maximum user
flexibility. The many setbacks at the top of the building require all the perimeter
columns to be fransferred several times. In addition, the columns on either side of the
@?
sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
loading dock at ground level are also transferred to increase clearance for trucks. E
stcel is less than 59 kg/m2 (12 psO.
lobby. Clad in warm white, grey, and green marble, the lobby's
;.?&$
I
-+
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig. 4.105 8th to 14118 noor rramine pian;
210
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
270 m (886 R)
Number o f stories
61
Building use
Oflicc
Frame material
6.5 sec
Design acceleration
Dcsign damping
I to l.5<> aurrice;lhility
Not applicable
Earthquake looding
Type o f structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story lheigltt
Truss span
14.6 m (48 i t )
Truss depth
Truss spacing
Illaterial
Slah
Columns
Size at ground lloor
Spacing
ivlnterial
Cure
Tlte ATSlT Cnrporatc Center (Fig. 4.106) consists o f a 61-story uflicu to\i,cr \\,it11
rentable areas o f fluor plates ranging front 3250 m2 (35.000 1'1') on the lowest floors to
. .
Fig. 4.1116
216
[Chap. 4
I#
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
TYPICAL HIGH-.RISE M O R
TYPICAL LOW.RISE. F L W R
Fig. 4.lllY
Fig. 4.108
[Chap. 4
222'-0"
Fig. 4.illl
Fig. 4.111
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year 01completion
Heighl from street to roof
Number 01stories
Number 01lc\pelsbelow ground
Building use
Framc malerial
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
hlaximum lateral dencclion
Design lundnmental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Typc of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical noor
SIOVheight
Bcnm span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Malerial
Slab
Columns
Spacing
Material
Core
Tubular Systems
terference wilh train clearances. The key to the structural solution was the use of a
egacolumn syslem. The megacolumn system lonns the "legs of a table," which carries
e tower's gravity and wind loads within the existing building's shell (Fig. 4.113).
Tlte megacolu~il~~s
are placed 24.4 m (80 11) apart in the north-south direction and
1.8 m (170 11) apart in the east-west direction. Two are 6.1 by 7.6 m (20 by 25 ft) in
p an. and two are 6.1 by 2.6 m (20 by 8.5 11). The plan sizes were governed by the avail-
3.81 m(12116in.)
13.4 m (44 fi)
460 mm (18 in.)
3.05 m (10 11)
Stccl. grade 350 MPa (50 ksi)
64-mm (2.5-in.) concrete over 76-mm (3in.) metal deck
6.1 m (20 11)
Steel. grade 350 hlPa (50 ksi)
Braced steel. grade 350 hlPa (50 ksi)
Placing n high-rise tower abo\'e a landmark post olfice structure which sits dirrclly
above a mnjor urban rail line is a highly formidable task, which requires an unusual and
innovalive engineering concept. The 450 Lexington Avenue building (Fig. 4.112) is
such o project and posed many challenges to lhe designers and conlractors.
Thc existing landmark post ollice sits directly over the railroad tracks leading into
New York City's Grand CcnIr.nl Station. The congested system of tracks made it impossible to bring t l ~ e54 totr'er columns down to the loundation. In addition, the track
layouts ~otellyprecluded the placcnlenl of a conventional a,ind resisting system due lo
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
223
able space bcrween tracks. The megacolumns arc solid reinforced concrete as they rise
from tltc foundation through tlie train area. At the first floor. theu are comnosed of a
steel-fr3mud iruhs stru:tdre t01:111) enc3scd in cu,!crets. ~ . i t t Jioicrtrinn\
)
:i. ~UIL.U.
R ' i ~ n rtu the third-flour - u ~ c c t. h ~ m
. e e : t ~ ~ I ~ conne:t
~ n t ~ s to rnas\trc 76-11] 25.11,tall trusses. The trusses estcnd in both the nonh-south and east-rvcsl directions and connect all four megacolumns. Tlie resulting megaframe systcm was referred to as the
"table ton."
I t wa; the table top which picked up all the tower's columns and transferred their
load to the mcgacolumns and to 13 strategically located con\'entional steel columns.
The 12 intermediate columns reduce the truss spans bet\\,een llte megacolumns and aid
i n thc sunnon
o f zrauitv loads. Ultimatclv it was this frame which transferred all the
,,
nind I t v ~ Jillid
r gr3$it! Iu~JI to llle f o ~ n d ~ l i u n s .
I l r e tlu\~hilityn l \IL.L.Imxdc i t the choice m3teri~1for 111~'luaer illttl lhc hdlk u f the
merasustem. However. the concrete encasement added the needed mass and stiffness.
tween the adiucent train tracks iormcd concrcle wall columns. Composed o f 55-MPa
(6000-psi)
these walls supported the intcrmcdiate columns o f thc mega truss
system above. Utilizing concrctc meant that the construction could proceed while the
existing building above !\,as still in plnce.
Tlie towcr.5 structural svstcm is cornnosed o f a oerimetcr tube of columns naced at
6.1-m (20-it) ccntcrs. The colunins arc W36s and W30s for maximum efficiency. The
four corners of the pcrimotcr tube arc reiniorccd wilh a vertical Vierendeel truss. \tshich
stirfens the tube sienificuntlv. Inside the corc t\\,o vertical trusses are locrttcd. \\,hich rise
concrete.
226
[Chap. 4
As tall buildings become more slender, the dynamic behavior of thc building bccomes
more critical. The results of the wind tunnel tests showed that the Mellon Bank lower
(Fig. 4.1 15) had a vortex shedding problem with the cross-wind structural response being 50% larger than the response due to the code wind forces.
A comoarison of various ootions for sliffeninr
- and damninr" the svucmrc rvas studled and tl~ecusts ofuach method were estimolcd. I t ass C O I I C I U ~ L . ~11101111s
L ~ S of:!
S
cornposits struclural systsm would bc most eco~tomicnl.Conwqucntly a concrr.lc.uncared
Tubular Systems
.
,
1.%',
?:'
perimeter column system coupled with s composite steel pnd concrete supertruss wrrs
utilized. Figure 4.1 I6 shows the resultin% floor plan.
The concrete encasemenl of the steel structure provided the needed damping, stiffness, and additional strength. The cost analysis performed by the construction manager
proved that the composite system resulted in a more economicnl structure lhan an allstccl building. Thc inter3ction of stcul nnd concrclc and their bchwior under the dcslgil
loads were studied utilizing a detailed finite.elemunt nnalysis.
The building's lateral system is formed by the comoosite nerimeter columns soaccd
7.95 m (9 11 B h.)on ccnlfr, forming a pcri&eler l u b C [ ~ i gi.117).
.
Typical composite
column xhemes ulili7.c the slecl columns sol:ly fnr erection purposes, uith the bulk of
thc v~.rticaIload carried by the concrete. In this slruclure, restrictions in the overall sire
of the columns required the use of a truly shared composite system, with the concrete
encasement and the steel columns each c a w i n g significant portions of the vertical load.
Fig..
...
:::.,
.*,
.,>A. - ,
,.,
.
.. .
.,i?..
.,.
227
Tubular Systems
Sect. 4.41
- ..
229
Comolicatine the nroiect was that none of the 52 columns in the tower continued directly to the ground. Instead, all of the perimeter columns are either sloped o r picked up
bv msses. The sloped column system enabled the transfer of columns into new positions, allowing for the enlargement of the lower floor plates while still maintaining col,:.u.mn-free
2.
.
lease space.
.*..
- I , Depending on the architectural constraints, groups of columns slope at different
floors. The sloped columns always form a symmevical system, whereby sloped
columns on opposite sides of the floor balance out the overturning forces resulting from
the slope. In numerous cases, columns are terminated upon pick-up tmsses, which are
also sloped to link up with their repositioned supporting columns.
A unique sloped column system occurs between the tenth and thirteenth floors,
where the four inside comer columns are supported by an A-frame. Each A-frame generates significant lateral forces, which are all balanced out by again balancing one corner against the opposite corner. The floor diaphragm, being the link between all
columns, plays a kcy role in transferring these balancing forces across the floor. The
mosi critical diaphragms arc the fifth- and sixth-floor diaphragms where, in addition to
supporting most of the sloped columns, the lateral wind forces are transferred from the
nerimctcr
to the core vertical w s s .
r
With some slopcd columns generating 7000 liN (450.000 lb) in lateral force, the designer chosc lo place a 13.4-111 (a-ft)-deep steel horizontal truss within the floor dian-hraam. ~hese'trusses helo transfer the bind forces to the core while passing the
~~r~~~~
sloped column forccs around the core to the opposite sloped column.
At the core a vertical supertruss extends from the foundation up to the sixth floor.
The supertruss is constructch of steel wide-flange shapes, with the four comer columns
encased in 3000- by 3000- by 600-mm (10- by IO- by 7-ft)-thick L-shaped concrete
shear walls, thereby forming a composite steel nnd concrete supenruss. The supenruss
is divided into two parts, a large 13.7-111 (45-ft)-high truss between.levcls 6 and 3, and
a single X truss on each face of the core, extending from the third level down to the
foundation.
The transfer of latcral loads out of the oerimeter and into the core at the sixth floor
forntr an optimum conibin3tinn 01 the core and perimdtcr 1stur:il system,. Triinjfcmng
the wind lateral force\ to the core ;it ilie r i ~ i hflour results in zero uplilt forccs upon the
foundations.
I-+&&+..
Fig. 4.117
Eurl and
!
230
{Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
. S a d . 4.41
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from strcet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at 2d floor
Spacing
Moterial
Core
3.5 m (1 I ft 6 in.)
9.9 m (32 ft 6 in.)
700 mm (27.5 in.)
2.5 m (8 f t 2 in.)
Steel, grade 400 MPa (58 ksi)
150-mm (6-in.) concrete on metal deck
400 by 300 mm (16 by 12 in.)
2.5 m (8 ft 2 in.)
Steel, grade 190 MPa (70 ksi)
Steel frame
The main structural system of this building is a nearly square tube structure, which employs a peripheral frame in an integrated fashion (Fig. 4.1 IS). In appearance, tile tube
structure has no directionality. The peripheral hearing walls of the l'irst and second
floors support the upper structure a ~ i dhave a large arcli-shaped opening. The axial
forces of the external columns of the upper tube structure are transferred by the nrcli-
Fig. 4.118
232
Tubular Systems
[Chap. 4
shaped bearing walls of the first and second floors to the L-shaped wall columns at the
four comers and thence to the foundations via bearing walls below grade.
The arch-shaped bearing walls of the first and second floors are of reinforced concrete construction with internal steel msses (Fig. 4.119). The embedded steel structure
is designed to remain elastic for long-term vertical loads and for short-term horizontal
loads. The bearing walls were modeled as flat plates and analyzed by finite-element
analysis. (The steel msses were taken into consideration.) Analysis of the earthquake
response was performed using a rnultimass model, which combined the upper tube
struchlre with the arch-shaped bearing walls of the fust and second floors. For accelerations of 3500 mmlsec2 (1 1.5 ftlsec2) during a large ennhquake. the arch-shaped bearing walls remain within the allowable elastic stress range. The primary natural period in
the vertical direction (considering vertical rigidity of the arch-shaped bearing walls) is
0.179 sec, so there was almost no response from the arch-shaped bearing walls due to
venical earthquake motions.
The typical floors (Fig. 4.120) are supported by 700-mm (27.5-in.)-deep trusses at
2.5-m (8-ft 2-in.) centers spanning 9.9 m (32 R 6 in.). The spnces between the truss web
members allow for the passage of ducts and pipes. The truss top chord is connected via
stud shear connectors to the concrete slab. The increase in stiffness results in a frequency of vibration of h e floor in excess of 9 Hz.
Fig. 4.119
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical noor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typicnl floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
. .. ......
Fig. 4.1ZU Txpicul structurui flour pins; Sunnitunls Lilc lniurdnru Uuilding.
After having examined many alternative systems, project designers at Weidlinger Associates concluded that a steel structure with a rigid frame around the perimeter was
most economical for this 46-story building and would resolve the requirements for integrating the structure with the curtain wall (Fig. 4.121). Ressstance to wind and seismic forces is provided by the framed tubc forming the tower's penmeter. To economize
Tubular Systsms
[Chap. 4
on field work, particularly field welding, spandrel units consist of trees with columns
and welded eirder stubs. Field connections of the girders at the centerlinc between
cnlumnr are golted shear connections.
Spandrel girders on lyptcal floors arc gcncrally 1143 mm (-15 in.) deep. \.:lr).ing irom
a minimum or900 mm (39 in.) at the lop oiihe building lo 1245 mnl (49 in.) a! lllc boltom. Columns are built-up members 760 mm (30 in.) deep along the building face. except where rollcd sections are used above the thirty-third floor. Perimeter columns arc
~
arranged to provide open comers, that is, the ladder section always ends with a beam
stub at the comer. This scheme avoided the complication of three-dimensional corner
columns with welded stubs eoina in two directions as well as the hiaxial bending problem of a comer column. since ail of the structure's lateral stiifness is proridednr~ound
the penmcter. nil interior bean-lo-beam connccliuns arc o i l h e simple sllcar type.
A varietv of steels is used throuehout
- the struclure. Exterior columns and inlerior
~:&floor framing are of A-36 steel, girders and interior columns are A-572 grade 50, and
built-up interior columns are g n d e 42. High-strength steels were chosen where the desien w& eovemed bv streneth considerations. Where the desien
aovemcd
- is .primarily. .
b) dcfor~nalioncriteria. as for drturiur columns, lower-strength l e e i s ware oscd.
The lower has o slructural dcpth u i 36.57 m (120 it) ulth a height-lo-depth ratio of
almost5:I. This.. couoled with its unusual shaoe.. sueeested the useof a windtunnel test
!o verify both the magnitude and the local variations of wind forces. The wind tunnel
test results very closely matched the overall forces required under the Massachusetts
code. Local hoi soots here found to exist oarticularlv a t the intersection between the
tower and the atrium.
The analysis of the suucture for lateral forces yielded information useful for future
oroiects.
It is well known that the effect oishear deformation becomes mnenified with an
a
increase in the depth-to-span ratio of the beam. Since in a frame such as this, the depthto-span ratio is on the order of 15. shear delormations contribute a large part of the total
lateral deformation of the swcture. Soecificallv. in this case it was found that the lateral
deflection due to drift of the buildingLan be aGibuted in roughly equal parts to:
. --
[Chap. 4
Morton International
Chicago. Illinois, USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design wind load deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acccleration
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Sect 4.41
Tubular Systems
239
The 36-story structure has typical floor spans of 12.6 m (41 ft 6 in.). but spans varying from 19.8 lo 21.3 m (65 to 70 it) were required to span the railroad tracks. This was
achieved with n series of 6-story-deep Vierendeel frames consisting of two 3.05-m (10ft)-deep plate girders, one at level 2 and one at level 8, connected by fully welded vertical and horizontal members. For a building of this height, a braced core would have
been the obvious means of resisting wind loads. However, in lhis case the railroad tracks
240
Tubular Systems
[Chap. 4
made this impossible and instead, a perimeter framed tube with columns at 4.57 m (15
ft) was adopted. The columns and spnndrel beams were shop-fabricated into 2-storyhigh "ladders" with site-bolted web plate connections at midspan of the beams. This design saved 1360 tonnes (1500 tons) of steel compared to an original design with perimeter columns at 9-m (30-fl) centen.
The 13-storv structure presented major challenges, which were overcome by three
separate transfer structures and unusual construction rrquirrmcnts. Street-level concrete
transfer beams 2.3 m (7 ft 6 in.) deep nt 9-m (30-it) centers span the mcks lo allow a
regular and efficient column setout above.
T h e recond transfer
svstem occurs above the roof to the southern end of the build~~~~~~-~
ing, where no footings were able to be provided in the tnck zone. Trusses with major
members built uo from six 100- by 600-mm (4- by 24-in.) plates suspend one side of the
--..-...-.
n l e third transfer system occurs between levels 2 and 4 and serves to redirect two
rows of upper columns into one row located to avoid the tracks. The entire vrnical structure above these transfer frames u a s erected to the roof lcvel, and the roof top trusses
were erected cantilevering bcyond the floors belon. This section of thc bullding was
erected 90 rnm (3.5 in.) out of plumb to dlow for the sway induced when the cantilewred section was erected and partially loaded.
With the roof top trusscs erected, perimeter columns wrre suspended ham the free
ends of the trusses.and the floors were erected in a conventional manner from the boltom up. To equalize dcfl:ctions and minimize difrcrentinl movement, a load-distributing longiludinal truss mas installed at level 8 between the suspcndcd columns.'lhis truss
served 3 dual purpose in that it was also designed lo redistribute the column load to adjacrnt columns should aroof-top truss fail. The roof-top trusrrs were providcd u,ith sufficicnt capacity to allow them to cnrry t h ~ additional
s
load.
This challeneine
proicct
- -.
- received an nwnrd for Most Innovative Design of 1990 from
the Structural Engineers Association of Illinois
'
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Spacing
Material
The Nations Bank Corporate Center is a 60-story. 256-m (840-fl) tall building in the
central business district of Charlotte. North Carolina (Fig. 4.123). The building is the
tallest in the southeastern United States and will dominate Charlotte's skyline into the
2151 century. From a heavy stone base, the building rises with curved sides and progressive setbacks culminating in a crown of silver rods symbolizing Charlotte's nickname, "The Queen City." The exterior surface materials arc rcddish and beige granite
242
[Chap. 4
and mirrored reflective glass; the granite piers narrowing at each setback. The building
will serve as the corporate headquarters for Nations Bank.
A number of different feasible structural schemes were analyzed before Nations
Bank and the developer
selected an economical concrete frame. A reinforced
. together
concrd~cframe U 3 S ssl~ctcdbec3use it met both thc intricate geumetric rcquiremsnt, 01
thr. arcl~~tucr
;~ndthe d-munds of the detcloper for economy Sh3llow posttensioricd
concrete floors were used to span the 14.6-m (48-ft) lease depths and to achieve the desired 3.9-m (12.5-ft) floor-lo-floor heights.
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
243
The smctural system selection followed an intensive four-phase scheme development process. This process has been used successfully in swctural system selection for
many other high-rise projects. The purpose of the structural scheme selection process is
not only limited to finding the most economical structural system. but to finding the system that best resoonds to the overall buildine eoals. Nonswctural oorameters such as
impact on lc~sing,column sizes and locations, shcar wall drop-offs, construction duration, floor-to-floor heights, fire nling and intcgrntion wilh mechanical systems arc also
considered. The entire-team oaiicio&d in theselection orocess
Thr. srleclcd all.concrcte scheme consists of a reit~forcudconcrele perimclrr lube
struculre witl~calum~is
spaced on6.1 rn (20 ft)centers.Thc perimeter lrwnr utilizes normal weleht concrele with slrenclhs rancinc from 41.300 lo 55,000 Wa (6000 lo 8000
psi). ~h;external tube was selected because it was the most efficient late& load resisting system. The tube also proved to be an economical method of dealing with the many
setbacks and column transfers imposed by the building architecture. The floor system
consists of a 117-mm 14.5-in.)-thicklichtweieht concrete slab soannine to 457-mm (18in.)-deep post-lension;d beams. The pasttenzoned beams are spaced 3 m (10 ft) =enters and span as much as 14.6 m (48 it). The 14.6-111 span provides column-free lease
soacc from the core to lheperimeter.The shallow structural devth allowed the low floorto-floor height resulting in additional savings in skin cost. ~ i ~ h t w e i gfloor
h t concrete
was selected to minimize the building weight and to achieve Charlotte's unusual reouirements for 3-hr fire separation. A normal weirht
- concrete slab would have needed
lo be I50 mm (6 in.) tltick in order lo proiidc tlie Err. separation, substantially incrcasing not only the b~ildlngwcighl but also ths floor-lo-floor hcight.
All lateral loads are resisted hv the external frame. The floor framinn- and core
columns 3re sized for gravity loads. Lateral load niumcnls imposed by compatibility uf
deformation uilh the cxtcrior frame were found lo bc ~nsignificanl.The corc columns
were shaped to be wall-like Column sires ranecd from 0.6 by 5.5 m (2 by 18 it) at the
lower le&l to 600 by 900 mm (24 R by 35 in.i at the top of the building;~hewalllike
colunm shapes integrated very well with the building core.
u
on
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Architect
Stmctural engineer
Year of completion
Height from skeet to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical noor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design damping
Eanhquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
.'
Tubular Systems
The engineering for the 148,000 m' (1.6 million ft') project is as complex as the architecture. Extensive value engineering studies were done during design development to
analyze six floor framing systems and four wind framing systems. Design information for
each was provided to the general conuactor, who in turn smdied scheduling and prices.
All four wind schemes were variations of the perimeter tube. For the early compar:alive design studies, Dallas building code wind forces were used. The selected scheme
Footing type
design allowable
Typical noor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Columns
Spocing
Material
Bank Onc Ccnlcr is a postmodern to!\'er compictc rvith a monumental arched entry and
curved roo[ line (Fig. 4.12-1). The 60-story oflice tower also Ins an atrium banking hail
in its 6-story podium, semicircular arched roofs at the t\\,ent)'-sixth floor and quartercircle i,aulted skylights at the fiftieth, where the shope changes from rectangular to cruciform. On top is a cross vaulted arch clad in copper and pmnite.
1 :!.
Fig.J.124
246
[Chap. 4
has punched concrete walls at the building corners with infills of composite columns
and steel spandrels; floors have a composite steel heam framing system.
The building's nrchitecture requires a number of geometric changes as the stmctural
frame rises above the below-grade levels. The cruciform shape above level 50 created
two major structural problems. First, the perimeter tube had to be broken, leaving only
two-dimensional rigid frames on each building facade. To control frame distortions under wind loading, two-story X-braced frames were added in the core. This required
strenathened
diaphragm
.
- floors to allow the transfer of wind shear forces from the
irames to the pcrimetsr lube system btlou. Second, comer columns at the rccnuant corncrs of the cruciform hod lo be transferred lo provide culumn-free lease space bclow
Icvel 50. Story-deep Vicrendccl trusses spanning 13.7 m (45 it) move these gravity column loads 10tltc perinieter wind frame and to the cure. Because of the relationship bet!\e:n corc and perimeter columns. lhr trusses ltad lo be supponed nt the corc by twoslury Vicrcndecl lrusscs spanning 8.5 m (28 it) to the building corc columns.
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Central Plaza
Hong Kong
Architect
Smctural engineer
Year of completion
Height from sweet to8 roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design acceleration
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Benm span
Beam depth
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
Material
When completed in 1992, Central Plaza was the tallest reinforced concrete building in
the \vorld (Fig. 4.125). The site is typical of a recently reclaimed area with sound
bedrock lying between 25 and 40 m (80 and 130 ft) below ground level. This is overlain
by decomposed rock and marine deposits, with the lop 10 to 15 m (33 to 1 9 ft) being of
fill material. A permitted bearing pressure of 5.0 MPa (56 ton/ft2) is allowed on sound
rock. The maximum water table rises to about 2 m (6.5 fl) below ground level.
248
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
Sect. 4.41
Wind loading is the major design criterion in Hong Kong, which is situated in an -&
fluenccd by typhoons. TheHong Kong code of practice for wind effects is bared on amend:,
hourly wind speed nf 44.3 d s e c (99 mph). 3-sec gusls of 70.5 m/Sec (158 mph), and give$r,
,.
rise to a l a t e d design pressure of 4.1 kPa (82 psO at 200 m (656 h),above pound level.
11 was clear from the outset that a multilevel basement of mnxlmum noor area
be required. The design of a diaphragm wall. extending around the whole slte perimeter,
i:f<z?md consmcted down to and grouted to rock, was completed in the firs1 week aher the site
waz acquired. This enabled construction to commence 3 months later (Fig. 4.1260 to c).
:!$!id,
1
7
STRUCTURE
Fig. 4.125 Ccnlrol Plnzu. Hung Kong. (Cotarrery of O w Anlp und Pnrrncrs.)
Fig. 4.126n
..,'
, ,.
...
~ % .
'.
-.:
,~.,..
~..
250
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
An initial planning assessmcnl had indicated that up to four levels ofbasement could
be required and the design produced catered for this. By the lime construction commenced, it had been decided that only three levels would be necessary, and the construction drawings were amended accordingly.
The diaphragm wall design allowed for the basement to be constructed by the lopdown method. This provided three fundamcnlai advantages:
TRANSFER PLATE
A- A
B-B
Fig. 4.126b Centrnl Piuro. Slruclurui rterl rehcmc.
KEY PLAN
251
1
I
I
254
[Chap. 4
(1 11 ft 10 in.). The core hns an arrangement similar to that of the steel scheme and, just
above the lower base, it carries a .~.~ r o x i m a t e 10%
l v of the total wind shear.
Thc tnwcr b.asr slrtlcturc edge transfcr beam is 5.5 m ( I 8 it) deep by 2.8 m ( 9 i t ? in.)
u,ids around the pc"nletcr. This allnws 3llernatc 2olumnr to be dropped from the fac;!dc.
thereby upunirlg up ihc public srca at ground lcvel. The incrmsed column rpacinc, together with the elimination ofspandrei beams in thc tower base, results in tl;e external
frame no longer being able to carry the wind loads acting on the building. Over the
height of the lower base. the core transfers all of the wind shears to the foundations. A
I-m (39-in.)-thick slab at the underside of the transfer beam transfers the total wind
shcar from the cxternal fmme at the inner core below.
The uind s h c x is taken out from lhc core ot the louert bosctncnt leucl, whcre it is
transftrrcd lo thc punmetcr diaphragm u,nlls. In ordcr to rcducr large s h c a rc\.ersals in
the core !rails in lhc bnsumcnt and nl the top of the tower basc lu,cl. thc floor slobs 2nd
beams arc separated horizontally from the core wnlls at the ground floor, basement levels 1 and 2. and the fifth and sixth floors. To comolete the dramatic imoact ofthir
building, the tower top incorporntcs a mast, which will be constructed of S l ~ c t u r a steel
l
tubes
with diameters of up to 2 m (6 ft 6 in.).
The performance of tnll building structures in the strong typhoon wind climate is of
particular importance. Not only must the structure be able ;isis1 the loads in general.
and the cladding system and ic; fixings resist higher local loads, but the building must
also perform dynamically in an acceptable manner such that predicted movements lie
within acceptable standards of occupant comfort criteria. T o ensure that all aspects of
the building's performance in strong winds will be acceptable, a detailed wind tunnel
study was carried out by Professor Alan Davenpon in the Boundary-Layer WindTunncl at the University of Western Ontario.
When complelcd, this project became the tallest reinforced concrete building structure in the world. For such a tall building it is not appropriate to adopt the strength of
tbl
Fig. 4.127
J4
Tubular Systems
Sect. 4.41
255
materials commonly used for normal buildings in Hong Kong. In ordcr to reduce the
size of the vertical structure it was decided to use high-strength concrete 128-day cube
strength of 60 MPa (8500 psi)]. This is the first private-sector development in Hong
Kong for which approval has been granted by the Hong Kong building authority forthe
use of such a material. Considerable research took olace into materials and mix design.
and man) t r i i s were ~3rrir.dOJI, includtng mock-ups of the large-diamcler columns to
check on icmperaturc uffccls. As n result ofthis, cooling was introduced into the major
pours.
The use of hirher strcnrths was considered. but it was decided against
- it since it was
conidtrcd by the dt\,r.lopment team thlt the material chosen could bc produced without difficult) front matcri=ls readily wailsblc in llong Kong.
256
Sect. 4.41
[Chap. 4
Tubular Systems
Hopewell Centre
Hong Kong
Architect
Structural engineer
Yevr of completion
Height from street to I O O ~
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical noor live load
Maximum lateral deflection
Design acceleration
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Bcam span
Bcam dcpth
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Material
1980
216 m (708 ft)
64
1
Offices above parking and commercial
podium
Rcinrorced concrete
3 kPa (63 psfl
150 mm (5.9 in.). 50-yrrctum period wind
16 mg peak. 2-yr return period
Not applicable
Pcrimctcr tube and inlcrnul core
Srrund granitc very close to cround level
Pad footings an rock
3.35 m ( l l . 0 f t )
12.3 m (40 It)
686-mm (27-in.) reinrorccd concrete
100-mm (5.9-in.) reinforced concrete
1A5 by 1.22 m (4.75 by 40 fi)
3m(10ft)
Concrete, cube strength 40 Nlmm' (5800
.psi)
Shear walls. 762 mm (30 in.) thick at basc;
circular in plan
Concrete, cube strcngth 40 Nlmm' (5800
psi)
The I-lopervell Centre is situated on a steeply sloping site, one entrance being at ground
floor and asecond main entrance to the rear of the building at the seventeenth floor (Fig.
1.128). The tower itself is rounded on pad footings at levels varying between the underside o r the basement and the third noor. Stability is principally providcd by thc
perimeter tube structure rormcd by 48 columns at a spacing o r 3 m (10 ft), linked by
1670-mm (66-in.)-deep spandrel beams at each floor levcl. Some assistance is also provided by the internal corc. Shears nre transferred to the foundations at the third-noor
level through a 157-mm (19-in.)-thick noor slab (Fig. 4.129). The entire verdcal structure was constructed using slip-formin techniques. The main office floors use a radial
h u m and slab system and were formed using fiberglass molds (Fig. 4.130). Uring these
techniques, construction progressed at a rate of 4 days a floor.
>.
(.
i
.~,:.
!.+
24.
xi
Fig. 4.128 Hoperell Ccntrc, Hong Kong. (Colmcry o/Ol,e Antp nnd Porrnrrrl
Tubular Systems
Sect. 4.41
2 2 4 m rndiul
1
i
260
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Architect
Slructural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Numbcr of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor
load
Basic wind velocity
M a i m u m lateral deflection
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundalion conditions
Footing type
Typical noor
Story heigbt
Beam span
Bcnm depth
Beam spocing
Slab
Columns
Size 31 ground noor
Spacing
hlatcrial
56
2
office
Struclural steel
2.5 kPa (50 psn
31 mlscc (70 mph)
Hl500.50-yr rcturn period
Not applicable
Trussed tube
Limestone. 4.3-hlPa (-IO-ton/ft2) capacity
Spread footings
The 56-story First Internnlionnl Building with a Ihcighl of 2 17 m (71-1 i t ) lhas 176.500 m'
(1.9 million TI') of space (Fig. 4.131). There are an adjacent 13-story scli-perk gerngr
and a 10-station drive-up banking facility. Tendcm clcv;~torsllandle the venical movement of building occupants during peak traffic pcriods. Each of the 2-1 passenger clevator shafts has two elcvalar cabs, mountcd one on top of the other and moving on a single set of cables.
Thc exicriar dimensions of the onice tou.er arc 5 5 by 55 m ( 1 8 1 by 181 it). The sxterior column spacing is 7.62 rn (25 ft). Thcrc is n column-free span irom the core to the
exterior columns of 1 2 2 7 nt (10 ii 3 in.).
The design incorporalcs the trussed lube struclural syslcni in the exterior frame, utilizing large X braces, each covering 28 floors. two lo a side. Because nftlte usc of large
X-bracing clcmcnts on the four exterior \valls to resist lateral wind forces plus some
261
i
E
Lateral Load Resisting Systems
262
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
eravitv. loads.
-
_I
7 spaces at
25'4" = 175'4''
-3
~~~
~~
~~
~~~
-.
..
263
264
[Chap. 4
.I
-k
3'4''
Ic
S e c t 4.41
Onterie Center
Chicago, Illinois, USA
.!,?i!:
A'&hitect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from w e e l to roof
Number of slories
Number oflevcls below ground
Building use
Frnme material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Emhquake loading
Typc of structure
Foundation conditions
Fooling type
Typical floor
Story height
Slab
9
'n
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
7
6114"
Seclion-builluo oirder
Fig. 4.133 Tspirnl fmming pian and built-up girders; First lnlcrnntionnl Building.
Tubular Systems
265
Onterie Center is n mixed-use 58-slory building near the Lake Michigan shoreline in
downtown Chicago (Fig. 4.134). The building has a total area of 85.000 m' (920.000
it'), which is divided into five distinct areas by function. On the ground floor is lhc main
public lobby and 1860 m' (20.000 ft') of commercial space. The single-level basement
and the four floors above the lobby are a parking garage. Floors 6 to 10, at the tapering
base, provide ofiice space grouped around two interior atriums. The sky lobby at level
2 includcr a health club, swimming pool, hospitality room, and mechanical equipment
space. The remaining floors 12 to 58 consist of593 one-, two., and thrcc-bedroom aparlments (Fig. 4.135).
Because mixed-usc buildings need flexibility of core layout and column spacing, it
was desiiable lo utilize only the exterior frame for thc resisiancc of lateral loads. In ihe
266
[Chap. 4
t,
y
,
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
267
3
'
i),
j
;'
Onterie Center tower all of the lateral forces are resisted by closely spaced reinforced
concrete exterior columns and spandrel beams. Additional lateral stiffness and structural efficiency were achieved by infilling window spaces with concrete in a diagonal
pattern. These panels act not only as diagonal braces but a shear panels as well.
The diagonal effect of the shear panels tends to even out the gravity load on the
columns and also to reduce shear lag in the tube frame under wind loading. The entire
lateral load is thus resisted by two diagonally braced channels, located one at each end
of the tower structure. Interior columns carry gravity loads only. The absence of a lateral load resisting core wall system allows a maximum of flexibility in planning interior
space and eliminates the problem ofdiifercndal axial shortening.
Threc-dimensional computer modcling was used to analyze both gravity and wind
load cases.
Pcrimctcr columns arc 480 by 510 mm (19 by 20 in.) at 1.68-m (5-ft 6-in.) centers.
The510-mm (20-in.)-thick infill panels contain diagonal reinforcing bars as well as horizontal and vcrtical bars. The concrete strength for the exarior frames and interior
columns varies from 5 2 to 28 MPa (7500 to 4000 psi). The floors me flat slabs with
thicknesses of 178 mm (7 in.) for apanmcnts and 216 mm (8.5 in.) for commercial
floors, using 35-MPa (5000-psi) concrete. Interior columns are spaced at 6.71-111 (22-it)
centers. The external structural mcmhcrs are insulated lo minimize differential-temperalurc indurud dcfonnations bctu,cen purimctrr and inlcrnsl culumns.
The d~3gon;llshear panels used in the Otllcnc Center pruducc 2 high I c \ d ofstractural efficiincv and create a distinctive architectural appearance. A similar systcm has
been used on 780 Third Avenue. New York (see Fig. i . i 3 7 ) .
270
[Chap. 4
.
-
~~
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Core
office
Concrete
2.5 kPa (50 psfl
New York City code. 1 to 1.5 kPa (70 LO
30 psO
180 mm (7 in.) at design load
4.8 sec E-W: 2 sec N-S
12 mg peak. IO-yr return period
I 4a serviceability; 2% ultimate
Not applicable
Diagonally braced cxterior tube
~ o c k4. - ~ (40-ton/ft2)
~ a
capacity
Spread iootings
3.5 m (I1 ft 6 in.)
380 mm (15 in.) deep
380-mm (15-in.)-deep one-way joist and
two-way waffle slab
Concrete. 31 and 28 MPa (4500 and 4000
psi)
1220 by 610 mm (48 by 24 in.) at ground
noor
Concrete, 41. 34. 28 MPa (6000. 5000,
4000 psi)
Concrete walls and columns: concrete
strength ns columns
The trend toward very high-rise construction in concrete has received a big boost due to
the adaptation of the first diagonally braced tube system to concrete swclures. The fifst
of its kind is the 50-story office building located at 780 Third Avenue,
York ( F I ~
4,137). which was completed in March, 1983. Its very slender aspect ratto of over 8:l IS
what suited it to this design approach.
e 46,500 m2 (500,000 it') of office space. Its struclural
The building contains ~ l 0 s to
system is a hybrid, utilizing thrce varied systems-a truss, a tube, and, to a minor extent, frame and sheor wall interaction of its remaining structural componenls. All SYS-
fiew
272
[Chap. 4
[ems interact to provide gravity and latenl load-carrying capacity at an efficiency not
previously available. This hybrid system appears to rcmove any practical heigllt limit
from design in reinforced concrete (Fig. 4.138).
The "concrete tube" consists of closely spaced perimeter columns which are connected at each floor level by spandrel beams. In addition, thc tube is braccd by a diagonal pattern of rectangular panels, in place of window openings, betwecn adjacent
columns and girders.
S e c t 4.41
Tubular Systems
.-
273
274
[Chap. 4
were not exceeded. The cladding design requirements were, however, upgraded on the
basis of the wind tunnel test results. The projected 10-yew return maximum acccleralions of 12 mg registered well within the occepled industry limits for office structurcs.
Results from B e analyses performed for 780 Third Avenue that are of particular interest are those that indicate increased cracking and reduction in the effects of shear lag
by the bracing on the column forces of an unbrnced tube structure.
Results of sensitivity studies and the influence of the panels on lateral sdffness are
illusmated by the deflection curves in Fig. 4.139. Evidently cmcking in floor members
is very detrimental to the stiffness of unbraced tube structures (curvcs I and 11). but of
only secondary importance in braced tubes (curves 111 and IV). The stiffening effect of
the brncing is demonsvnted both in the reduced sway and in the modified-mode shape
of the deflection curve (curve I versus curve Ill). The unbmced lube deflccts in a wallframe configuration, with concnvity downwind in the lower pan, concavity upwind in
the upper part, and a point of contraflexure at about two-thirds of the height. The braced
tube deflects in a more strongly flexural shape with a much higher point of contraflexure. The component of Lhe mbe's deflection due to racking shear of the columns and
Tubular Systems
S e c t 4.41
275
spandrels was, lherefore, reduced significantly by the bracing. This is further supported
bv the small increasein the overall deflection when the spandrel stiffncsses are asigned
.
t i e large (50%) reduction to account for cracking.
The deflection curve for the braced suucture with cracked bcams shows an increase
in drift of 4% at the top, and a minimum increase of approximately 7% at about midheight. The maximum drift per story, however, which occurs in the middle region of the
building, was hardly affected.
The small influence on the overall lateral stiffness of the braced structure of a 50%
va~iationin the moment of inenia of ihc spandrel beams indicates that their flexural
stiffness, and therefore their depth, in the braced tube strucmre are of secondary importance. Their primary rolc is to nct as ties or struts in developing the axial forces in the
intermediate columns.
Figure 4.140 indicates ihc placement of the panel reinforcing. The column and spandrel bcam reinforcing was extended through the panel, which was also reinforced with
lieht orthoronal reinforcements to minimize ihc size of accidental cracks. Collector reinforcing. suppicmunliog litc rpandrcl rcinforccmcnts, war added to i i ~ clop and buttom
of the panel tu ;lugmcnt the lcnrile ruquiir.munts at the intcr,uctions Splicer an the m ~ i n
rw~odrelrcinforu:mcsts aerc slaggurtd
tu providc for lcnsilc forccr in the .p:!n~lrcl
-beams.
The construction of the concrete structure, from first footing to roof level, took 13
months to complctc. Thc building required 16.000 m' (21.000 yd') of concrete and 21 SO
tonncs (2400 tons) of reinforcing bars. A 3-day construction cycle was easily maintaincd for the typical floors (a Z d a y cycle would have been possiblc with ovcrtimc).
L
Direction ol
force in
diagonals
Spandrel
reinfc.
Collector
reinfc.
Column
reinfc.
Diagonal
reinfc.
Collector
reinfc.
IV
111
II
--
Spandrel
reinfc.
Fig. 4.139
Dclleclionr olrlructurc.
Fig. 4.140
276
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of complclion
Height from street lo roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical noor live load
Basic wind vclocily
Maximum lateral dcflcction
Design fundemcntal period
Design acceleration
Design dantping
Earthquake l o ~ d i n g
Type of structure
Foundation condilions
Footing type
Typical noor
Story height
Bcam span
Bcom depth
Beam spocing
hlateri;~l
Slab
Colun~ns
Sizc st ground floor
Spacing
hlolcriol
Corc
The Motel dc las ilrtcs tower is the ,must prominent par1 of n multiusc cornplcx in
S e c t 4.41
Tubular Systems
277
278
[Chap. 4
luc3tcd along Barcelona harbor, overlooking the hlcditcrranetln Sea, and u a s colnpielcd
in time for the 1992 So~ltmerOlgmpic G m e r The Hole1 d r 13s Ancr- i.;- o:tn
-..of:$"
-. - n,.p,.
all plan to provide new infrastructure and private development of individual building
parcels in the Olympic Village area. The lower is envisioned as one of the focal points
in the reawakening of Barcelona as a major European capital.
..- .-.
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
279
Continuing a long tradition at Skidmore Owings and Memll. thc uchiteclural form.
crnression. and aniculalion of the tower a 2 all bascd on thc beauty and esrccnce of the
expused, pninled stmclurol stecl fume. The archi~ecturnllyexposed X-braced framer located on the building periphery nrr organized on a Cslory [I?-m (39-R)] module. These
frames form a fully three-dimenrianol iystern resisling nll wind and seismic 1atcr.xl
forces
as abortion o f t h e tower siavitv.load. o st he Full building inertia is uti. ~ .nr--well
~ ~
lized, n very eifici'ent lalcnl load resisting system is obmincd, with very lillle stecl
abort that requircd lo resist the toucr gravity load.
ueight
From thr: archileclural point of view. a clear articulationof the cxtcrior slmclurc was
desired. which is charactcnzed by the crisr, aro~ortionsof steel I b e a m , columns, and
hilf-an
.,. members.
~-~ . as well as the honest exbressfon of thc connectins ioints. both bolted
2nd ucldr.d.The cxtenor cunnin wail is set back 1.5 m (5 It) from the pcrimrler. thereby
nrovidins n c l e u architsctural expression of the exposed X-braced slcrl frame. An open.
; e b l i k e ; ~ c ~ r e allowing the play of daylight through the frame, much desired by the
architcctural design team; was-bainncedbythe need for robusmess and slructurnl integrity, particularly at the memberjoinls. Exterior frame members were chosen on the
basis of erectabilily, connection detailing, nccessibility for slcel painting and future
maintenance, and visual considerations related to the architectural aesthetic.
The issues of corrosion and fire protection were addressed in engineering the exterior exposed steel fmme. Corrosion protection for the exposed steel members is providcd by a durable fluorocarbon paint system designed for long life under the coastal
marine environment, consisting of a shop-applied primer, undercoat, and finish coat.
with a sccond finish cont applied in the field after erection of the stecl frame. The nonfireproofed exterior structure was anolyzed using the latest slate-of-the-art fire engineering mcthods developed in Europe and the United States. Analytical methods to determine the steel lempcrnturcs as well as the charncler and nature of n number of
hypothetical design fire events were stndied. High-tempernNre structural analysis of the
entire huildine frame comaleted the fire eneineerins
- desipn.
A simple, straightforu,nrd architcctural cornpoiition expressing thc inhercnt function
of the Slruclural frame, thl: Hole1 de Ins Ancs loner represents n prominent !\or),comhinine architccmre and ,uuctur~lrngincuring, marking a major intcm3Uonnl cclubration in Barcelona during the summerbf 1992.
-.
280
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of complelion
Height from street lo roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamcnlal period
Design accclcration
Design damping
Earthquokc loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Truss span
Truss dcplh
Truss spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
The Sears Torvcr is the world's lellcsl office building with a height o f 4 4 3 m (1454 it)
above ground (Fig. 4.143). It conloins 362,000 m' (3.9 million it') of oflice space in 109
slorics.
The setbacks in tile facade result from reducing floor areas required by tenancy considerations. Sears. Roebuck and Company required large floors for their opcrotions,
whereas smaller floors were best for rcnlal purposes. The adopted bundled tube concepl
282
'
[Chap. 4
~~~~~~~~
Sect 4.41
..
b
"7
I1
21/2"
'ul
r-
Li5
..
283
Tubular Systems
ScorJ Tower.
284
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
Rialto Building
Mdbourne, Australia
>,.'.,
Architect
.....
.. . ,
. .
Structural engineer
Ycar of compiction
Hcight from sUcel to roof
Number of storles
Number of levels below 101
Building use
Frame nlatcrial
~ y ~ i cfloor
a l live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental pcriod
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of strucmrc
F ~ R4.144
.
Srnrs l'cmrr. ~ C ~ ~ n r i r , , , ~ d ]
Foundalion conditions
Fooling type
:-,, .
g;
?t:
,?I;
,.*a
2.
..?.
rt
:,z
s!.
.<
,.,:
L.
.-
"~:
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Bcam spdcjng
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
htaterial
Core
hlatcrial
A number of structural systems for the Rialto Building (Fig. 4.145) were initially investigatcd and a reinforced concrete swctural system was finally adopted, with speed
of construction being a prime consideration in the dcvclopment of formu,ark and reinforcement dctails
:>,
.2,:
;.
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
The external frame or coluntns and beams, urhile being designed for the direct dead
and live loads aoolicable. acts as an external tube i n resirtine lateral load. Althoueh the
plan shap: i r uns)t~t~aetricaI
3ad tltc colutons arc 5 m (16.4 i t ) apart. ;lnaly$is 01 lhu i n ~ d
tmnsfer ardund the uurners indicated re>runxblc thrce-din1:nsiunal action. l h l : corner
beams connecting the end columns are most oecessary for Lhis action. The tube effect
also provides forsome latcrnl distribution of load from thc more heavily loadcd columns
(Fig. 4.146).
Thc service cores, being the major elements i n the structure, were the subject o f a
number o f detailed considerationr. No sizable penerrations or rebates were permitted i n
the main walls. Sizine ofthe walls was not oolv for Iondine considerations. but !v\'as the
suhjcct ofrhrinkngc 2nd 2rr.r.p usti~natiun~
2nd r~.fiocmcntfor buildlng pcrfornlsncr.. F i n d checking afthc intcrnctillc corcl rind r.\tr.rn;jl frames u.2~cxried out using n tl>r~.i..
dimcnrionxl l i n i t u - ~ I ~ . , l ~on:~l)sis.
snt
Design u i n J 102ds i n th? b.ulding wcrc calculated ~ ~ i mctcorological
n g
d313 3s13ilz~hlc.Thc huil~lingi r of S L C ~3 beigttt, rile. 2nd s l e e d ~ r ~ ~
that
~ aths
s diifr.rcnt : ~ p p r u ~ c h
tclocitiu* 2nd wind dcrcctiurl, nurr qignilicant ~n the dciig~t.\ \ ' i d tunncl tsats dutr.rmlncd design prcssurds 10, hoth the iruilding ;and the facade. Frntn thc north, elst. and
rvrrt. terrain category 4 (1.36 applicable. ~ l t i l c[ram th~.south, with Port Phillip R3g bein^ 3 k m (?,
. mi) distnnt. tcrrain~cnteeorv
- . I was considered above level 30
Tlic i;,icr>l projcctirm of thc h ~ ~ l d i n being
g,
s.ynmctric31. inducer 3 $rind fnrcc un
n.ll >luj!s cnnfc,rrn a1111lhs c ~ n l e ruf J t i f i n ~ s rTi16
.
pr,r1111dlr.r
thc s t r ~ c l t ! rt~h ~ t
bcnms and cores have bccn modilied to align thc ta,o centroids as closely as possible at
all lcvels: homevcr, a section of tllc building between levels 24 and 40 is subject to a
twisting force. Thc calculnted drift at the top of the tower undcr maximum design wind
forces and incorporatina this twisting i s 230 m m (9 in.).
A major consideration addressed and rcrolved early i n the design phase was the aspect o f shrinksge and creep o f lhc concrete structure. Most buildings of [his size r\,orldu,ide are steel framed and not subicct to these tvocs
of mo\~emeots.
,,
.An nsaussmeol i,i111~1C I :xnd
~ shritlkagl: U
VL.~ICII
I
ulemcnls in llic prujecl $$asc:lrr i ~ out
d i ~ r ~ h i use
n g uf rurcar:lt dht3 i l v ~ i l btcurnlhe
l~
United Srille~.USL~~LLI?~~:C
\;$Iucs derived for material properties and predictions wilh regard to weather and building
orouram. a comouter .oroeram
was deselooed taking
=
= into account member size. concrete
str~.ttgth,r:inforcr.m~.nt ratio, age ;I 1o:iding. I~umidtty,loldittg condit~uns.and cre:p and
sIirink3g~.d~velopm~.nt.
I t N ~ anticip:~tr.d
S
th;it thc total nonelartic .~hon~.nisg
oithe 65storv to& would be on order of 1% to 200 mm (6 to 8 in.). Provided allowances are
~itsdei n tlte atlachntest of non-ln~d-bu3rinb
ciements such its l ~ frt~ i l atid
s the faode, the
magnitude u f l h i r nnnvlastic dsform;~tiottis ttot i i g n ~ i l c i n t .HU\I~\L.I,
cliff~r~.nccs
i n tltc
msnilude uf ihnnkage ;md crsup inirltirt :1 1x11 concrete structure 15 3 ntajur .ulljcct n f
concern, and this is p&ticularly rclc~,anti n the case o f the Rialto towers.
Lone-term differential shortenine bcr~veenthe central core and nerimelcr columns at
the top of a typical tower building can be readily catered for as the distances between
thcsc elements are usually large. Thc combined shrinkage and creep lo be expected after construclion of the upper levels o f the Rialto lO\\.er5 indicntcd differential rnlucs of
10mm (%
. .. in.). i n thecase o f towerB and 1 1 m m (%
. . in.). i n thecascofto\verA.Thc mini m ~ nsp:~ns
l
i n ~ n l l ~r c~9.7~ 01
d ( 3 2 11) 2nd 7.0 i n (23 it), r-sp:cli\ely. I-lot\c\r.r. o * tun d r i \ 2nd B furm a n intugr~tr.ditruclurc. 3 differr.nti:~l\i~lul:un the urdcr of 38 inn1 (1.5
in.) could he -.\PL.CIC~ bct~ee11
>di;lc~.nlc ~ l u t ~ l ill
n r I~.!el -41 (IoNL.~
B rnnfj ~ U L . 10 effects o f the addiiional I 7 levels o f k w e r A. The distance between these columns is only
.I111 (13 ft). ;~ndclcnrlg ru;h inotcntcnt, u:tn~tut hu tolr.r3tsd in a ~ o n s t c ~ ~ cu ti ti t~l inr !lalore. Jointing oflltc t u ~ c r se l r not 3ccepli~hlc.2nd tlte ~rovisiortnfi!.'h:lt"xt this l e \ ~ 1
was unsuitnblc to Lhe architecture, as !,,ell as inducing a long-term out-of-plumb ofthe
top o f tower A.
..
287
288
[Chap. 4
S e c t 4.41
Tubular Systems
289
The solulion arriied at uas to "play a cunfidcnce lnck" on lo!rer 5,nlabng lhe
structure '.bcliwc" it is 17 slorics Inllur. Prcrtrcrsing cohles are provided from lcvel I
to level 38 and stage stressed as tower A conslrucdonproceeds. Thereby nll columns below level 38 are subject to the same loadings at the same time, and therefore elastic and
nonelnstic shortening values are relatively consistent for the lifetime of Ule building
(Fig. 4.147).
Fig. 4.147
290
Tubular Systems
N6E Building
Shinjuku-Ku, Tokyo, Japan
Architect
Strucmnl engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number o r stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocily
hlavimum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Eanhrluakc lr~ading
Type or structure
Foundation conditions
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Size at ground level
Spacing
Core
The plan dimensions of the N6E Building ore 92 by 39.2 m (302 by 128 it), which is
quite large (Fig. 4.148). The core location caused eccentricities that could not be rcduced using shcar \raallsor bracing systems, so the bundled tube r).stcm was adopted to
ochicve a symmetric structure and lo avoid torsional problems (Fig. 4.1491. This mas
done at the expense of reduced span lengths and incicased numbers ofcolumns.
The building response was estimated using ail available data as well as the alongwind and cross-wind power spectra end cospectra, which vary with the building heighL
Ail cslculetions were donc forl: J. and lorsional directions.
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
293
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height of street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundalion conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span and spacing
Beam depth
Slab
Columns
Material
Core
At 230.7 m (757 11) in h?iphr. Camepie IJall Tosser ia the iccond 1:~llestconcrcle rlruclure in N r u York Cily and thssighth tollssl in the wnrld ludly (Fig. 1.150). With a 15.2nl (50-TI)-ulde~nnnllTdce and 1 2?.9-m (75-r1)-wide south race. which olfsc.1~lu a 15.2m (50-it) face above the forty-second floor, this 62-story SlNClUrc is the most slender
habitable building of this height ever constructed (Fig. 4.151). The structure occupies the
narrow site bctween the five-story Russian Ten Room and the 100-yeor-old Cornegie
Music Hull. The structure's nrchitect. Cesar Pelli Associates, dictated the structural
scheme by "sculpting" the structure to complement the existing music hall. The double
(side-by-side) tube structural system that resulted rvss actually defined by filling in all
the available spaces bctmeen the desired windows with concrete. This resulted in nonuniformity in column size and spacing.
I
i!
Fig. 4.i5U
[Chap. 4
296
The nonuniformity in the size o f the columns at a level was also extended venicolly
as
-~offseu
-~~~~- and larecr or
-~ smaller window sizes dictated relocation or alteredcolumn sizes.
Often Viercndcel nction u,as nerdcd to terrninntc venical eletncnls at vlrious locations
without the benefit of trnnlfer girders. This occurred on the nonh and south walls and
above the fortv-second floorrif the south half of the west wall, which spans over the
enlareed haze: Vicrendcel action was also reauired direcllv above lhe ihroueh-block
plrjags at the ground floor and at sevcral othcr localions.
A center u r b (perforated by lobby egress requirements), common to ihc1u.o side-byside tubes. w m needed to heln Ule north- and soulh-wall columns to efficienllv connect
l
the C ~ S I nDngc. wall to l c w&t flange wall with minimum shmr lag. A ~ l e r c n d e ecolumn (skipping alternate floors to minimize the lobby obstructions) u,as introduced to rcducc the clear span u f ihc center wcb. This Vicrcnducl column i s the only intcrior culumn i n the stru;ture. which othewisc s u. .o o o ~dl rrnvitv loads b v thhexterior tube
uolutttns and t h ~~. . I e v a l n r c o rwi!lls.
~
The large c l x r spms o f 9.1 m (31 it) and more bc1,vccn the elevator core and tlic u c r t wall wcrc spanned wllh 230-mm (9-in.) slabs nnd
shnlluu beams ,157 mm (18 in.) deep. This f r a n l i n ~for gravity loads proved to be [nore
economical than one-way ioisu; o r w a f f l e slab coislruction bccausi i t orovided more
mdss to rcsist uplift forct~s?rolnwtnd loads and to reduce bullding acccl~rations.I t also
pro\idcd c x t n height to accommodate mcchanic:,l systems so that with 3 lutal slog.
height 013.66 m ( I ? it). 3 ceiltng height o f 2.7 m (9 i t ) uas maintained.
TIISdouhlc tuhc design relics hcavily on 760-mm (30-in)-deep spandrel beams to
tnpage 211 tltc vcntcnl suppuns to rcsist thc rxind actio~iand to equalize the SI~L.SSCS due
to gravity l o ~ d si n all suppons rugardlcss ofthcir smr. The tube's venical rttcmhers vari t d bstr\,cen l R O and 2590 mm (19 and 102 in.) i n length (parallel lo tltc cxtcrior) and
included a solid concrete wall behind the service core &a to the cast. The structural design cnnsidcrcd hoth the relasation duc to long-tcrm crccp and 5hrinkagc ofthe concrew
mumbur, dnd the instnntaneous demands ofthe wind iurcer.
Ennugh gmvity loads % v ~ . r:lassmbled
r.
to clitninatc the possibility of tension duc to
wind in the vertical supporn and to ict the gravitational loads anchor the structure. A
few rock anchors at the west end o f t h c center web were added to enhance the vbilitv
of
< -~
the web l o cngspc llie flanges cv6.n under larger lateral loods than dicvatcd by the Nerr
York City cndc or the wind tunnul ru,ults.
'lllc prelintinary design considered both steel and concrete. Conuol ofthe ourceotion
of motion w i t h o u i a u x i l ~ mmeans such as damoers was found to be nttainableonlv
-- - ,with
--..
tit: concrete allerrtalivc because of ihs larger damping 2nd weight of a concrete stmclure. H u ~ c v L . ~1S. a prt~iluliun.because o f its extreme slendcmcss. the stlucturc was dssigned to accommodate a pendulum-type damper. Field meaurements, after the structure was topped out, indicated that dcsign predictions were accurate and n damper was
not needed. The anticipated accelerations, projected from these load mcnsurcments.
should not exceed 20 m g for the 10-year return pcriod.
Concrete was pumped i n to the full height o f the structure. Concrete strength i n the
columns did not exceed 58 MPa (8400 psi) because the use of silica fume i n New York
City was still questionable at the time the structure was designed. For this and other
slender structures, stiffness, weight. and damping are the important parameters diclating the slructurc's behavior. The design for acceptable perception o f motion oRen ovcrrides othcr more mundane design requirements such 3s strength and stability.This aruclure together with its earlier slender siblings (Metropolitan Tower. Cityspire, and the
Concordia Hotel) ore prototypes of the future mcgastructures of the neat generation o f
I d 1 SLIUCLUres.
-~-
~~
Sect. 4.41
[Chap. 4
Architect
.Y.*::.:,h
Stru=tuml engineer
Year o f completion
Height from sueet to roof
1983
296 m (972 it)
Number of stories
71
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
OlEce
Not available
Design acceleration
Not available
Design damping
I% serviccnbility
Earthquake loading
Not applicable
Type o i structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical noor
~~
Bcam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Spacing
Material
'
i
.
Story height
Beam span
Material
1:~.
~-:
Stmctural steel
2.5 W a (50 psO
Unavailable [force = 196 k N l m (13,400
Iblft) for 100-yr rclurnl
H/500. 100-yr return
. .
297
Tubular Systems
core
%..
3.22
:I<
?!:
,:2.
:$
.*.,
4:
;?2
~:&:
&?.
*P~
Allied Bank Plazn was designed to relate strongly to the buildinps around it. Situated on
a site which is essentially the center oldowntown Houston, the building has a major tmpact on the western iacadc ofthe city; which is the most dominant view of its skylinc.
In form and mnterials, a design was sought which would be distinctive but would Scr\pC
298
[Chap. 4
to complement and tie together its surroundings. A form that tnovcd and flowed was felt
to be nppropriatc, one that wns sort and sheer rather tltan 1t;lrd and opaque like the granite and steel rectnnnulnr buildines around it (Fie. 4.1521.
The resulting semicurved lower was uchievcd by juxtaposing two quarter-cylindcr
shafis (Fig. 4.153). The 71-story tower is sheathed in dttrk green rcflccdve glass, chosen for its sheer quality and rcsponsivencss to light. Tite combination o r p l a n s and
curves in the building's design will allow a cconrtant intcrplay of sunlight un its surface.
Sect. 4.41
Tubular Systems
299
Givine" the buildine a human scale was another imoonant asoect or the desianer's intcnlions. Unlike many recent buildings, which are sheathed in reflective glass and appear
only as a huge mass. the swcture of the Allied Bank Plaza is subtly cxprcssed with venical&d horizonml mullions. A formal o o m l on theeastsideoflhe b$ldi"eorovides asense
of cnlr).. Slncc h5rc or the public u n e r r the tun~~el-cotittccted
dounloun buildings st the
underground lcrel. Allied Bank PICA o l r ~ r st l i ~olily entnnce directly from the SU~L.Iand
combines the tunnel with M open-air plaza, including landscaping and a fountain.
A bundled tube frame is the ~ r i m a r vlnrcral svstem for the 71-storv 296-111 1972-ftl1211 186.OUU.m' I? mtliton 11') .iilisd 63nk lorie;. The shape is forme> by luo'quanr;circlcs placcd ~nus)mmctricall! bout thc m ~ d d l ctuhulir line. Tiis colun~nsp~cing5brc
1.57 m ( l j it) \kith the usuil tres-l)pe construction. Thc systcm ilso uses irvo v~micll
trusses in the core, which are connccied to the exterior tube by outrigger and belt wsses.
Sienificant imorovemenl in tubular behavior is obtained bccause o r the oarticioation of
the INSSeS. This sysrcm, thcrcrorc, embodies elements from the framed tube, bundlcd
tube, and truss rystcme with bcit and ouvigger trusses. The truss system provides another
transverse frame linkage in the curvilinear part to improw its shear lngchnrnctciisticn.
The structurai system for the Allied Bank Plaza towcr was sclcctcd after study of
both steel and composite systems. Tite system permitted a substontially reduced cons w c t i o n time. The tower's form and slcndcrness arc a radical departure from past rcctnngularbuildings of this height. yet the inherent rigidity or the bundled tube system dcveiooed for the tower limited stccl w c i ~ h to
t 128 ke/m2 126.2 nsn.
b
-.
cant reductions in design wind pressure belorr' that experienced by square or rectangular rorms. The tower is founded on a 2.9-m 19-ft 6-in.)-thick mat roundation aooroximalely 20 m (65 ft) below grade, which pc;mits utilization of four lowcr lcdels for
necessary retail, mechanical, and parking lunctions.
300
[Chap. 4
4 ~ 5 HYBRID SYSTEMS
Tall buildings hdve been lraditionllly designed lo n l o k use of 3 rlnglc type uf Inlcr~l
In3d resisting system-inttially s ~ m p l cmoment resisting frames 2nd then shcar wall
s\,rtcms and frimed rubes. Until ~ h radvent
.
of economical, c3sy-lo-use. high-capacit)
cbmouter hardware and software. structural svstems had to be amenable to hand calcuI;ttioc or cumpuler a n ; ~ l y s ~usit~g
s
limitcd-c:tpacity nlach~nts.Notvnda).~computcr capacil) l s nu1 ;an issue, and decisions on slructural syilcms art made on 1h~'basisof1h:ir
r.ficcts on the xppcdrance and funclioning of the building and on its cnnaln~ctahil~ty.
This is not to sieeest that on,*l/~i,in~
musl still be aware of
. " is nc&otable-lhe e&ineer
111,: pi1p~II5
ofcrc3ting ;~bruptdiscnntimriticr in building sliffncrs. the Ions-tcrm cffecls
nf dilf:rcntial ixi31 siloncninp. and other side effccl, of using mired systems and multiple materials.
as
Bank Center in SinAn excellent examnle of a hvbrid svslcm is the O ~ ~ e r s eUnion
gdporc. Here :.b r x t d stcvl fr:,n:c rvas used b:causc ofils lightnos. lnng sp:inniog ihd.
)I!, small metnbcr aizss, absence of crccp shancning. and. combined with ioncrcle
a h e ~ tralla.
r
for iL\ r c r \ cost.r.fficicnt contribution to l>ltral stiffn~ss.
Another tvoe
of hibrid svslem "
eaininr! oooulsritv is the concrete-filled steel lube
,
column, u.berc lhe r.rcct3bility of n str.ci framr: is 111iinlaincd.but the c o s l . ~ f f c c l i ~3 ,~- c
i;! In-d uapacily ufhiglt-rlrcnpth concrete is u ~ e dThe stecl tube pruvidcs cunfincmcnt
lo the concrelc much more eificiently than normal reinforcement does, and it is on the
extreme outside. where il is most effective. Of course fire orolcction must bc considered. If the slecl tube is considered ns sacrificinl in a fire, then inlernal reinforcement
sufficient for the reduced loading normnlly prescribed for the fire limit state must be
provided. If external fire protection is provided, lhcn internal reinforcemcnt may not be
needed. If concrete can be oumocd into the column from ihc base of each Dour. then a
number ofstorics can be concreted at one time and vibration of the concrele is not necessary. Examples of such a system are Cnsscidcn Place. Melbourne, and Two Union
Square. Seattle.
The rrends of modem architecture sometimes force the structural engineer away
from convention in a search for a struclure that will nccommodale ocsthctic and functional demands while meeting struclurnl requiremen*. The result may be a structure
which on one face of the building is of a different type than the other faces, as in Georeia Pacific. Atlanta. or a S I N C ~ U ~ ;with a number of quite different clemenls formine i s
Lateral load resisling frame, an exccllenl example being First Bank Place. ~ i n n e a ~ o l i s .
Here the engineer has provided a braced steci core connected via outilggcr beams to
large high-strength concrete perimeter columns, incorporating cast-in fieelwork lo aid
erection and connection. Although this systcm provides in-plane stiffness. its lack of
torsional stiffness required that additional measures be lakcn. which rcsultcd in one buv
oi tr.ruu.ll cxterior hr:lcinp 2nd ;i iturnher ui l:vcl. of pcriln~.lr.r\'lerc,dr.cl 'b..oJ.iges."-pr.rl~aps unc of lhr h~.rtcaamplcs of the an uf$~ructuralcngin~'rring.
Wilh t l r adtctll of high-r~renglhcottcrcle [uuncrclc ;1buv~'50>!PAor (70UU psi,] 113,
come ihe era of the "sipcrcolumn." where the stiflncss and damping cnpabjlities of
larre concrete elements are combined with the liehiness and conslructabilitv of stecl
li:unus. I-l~gI~-r~rungtlt
uortcmte. \$hen 11 irlclrrdu, silicz fumc ;mi 3 high-rarrge ivu:<r r d du:x ~sopr.rpl;~*lic~rer).
exhihits signifir;tntlg lnsrer c r q and shrinh~ge;!nd l a ihcr~.iurc ~nursreadily accu,nntndnl~.din 3 1h)bri~lfrsme. 'Thc rel:itivc clic:!pncss of hi$strength concrete together with the facl that large members do not require large cranes
(or any cranngc at all ifpumped) mcans that thc columns can be economically designed
lor stifiness rather than for strength.
& &
-. .
. .
Hybrid Systems
Sect. 4.51
301
The Intcrtirst Plaza in Dallas (not described in this Monograph) uses supercoiumns
in conjuncrion with an almost conventionai steel frame, and the Columbia Seafirsl Ccnler in Scatllc incorporates very large supercolumns connected by slecl diagonal members.~?a braced steel core. Another example, although never built, is the Bank oTt11c
Sou*\t.est tower in Houston. Hcrc eight giant concrete columns form the chords of four
vcrtiFi\ steel megawsses.
The orcvious cxamnles sueaest that hvbrid slructures are likelv to bc the rule rather
I I I ; ~the exccplion for'luture r e g 1x11 buildings, a hsther lo crest; scccplahle dynaloic
~ l ~ i ~ r ~ c I ~ ~orr i10
s t ilccun~~nodatc
ics
thc cu,npie\ .Il:tp~.s dtm3ndvd by modern ;!rchilccture. Hybrid structures are not somcthlng be tackled by the novice cnginccr armed
with a oarveriul microcornouter and a structural nnalvsis software 'oackaee. as a sound
knowicdgc and undcrstanding of material behavior (such as ductility, damping, creep.
and shrinkage), which is not included in analysis and design packages and mostly no1
codified. is essential and construclabilitv must bc a oarallel consideradon. However.
\vithour hybrid structural systems many of our modern tall buildings may n e w 1 have
heen bull1 in their presenl form.
..
302
[Chap. 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Overseas Union Bank Center
Singapore
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building usc
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic \\find velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamentnl period
Design damping
Earthquakc loading
Type ofstructure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Benm depth
Beam spacing
h'lalerial
Slnh
Columns
Sire at ground floor
Spacing
htoterinl
Core
Thickness at ground floot
htalerinl
The Oversear Union Bank Ccnler (Fig. 4.154) is a prestige state-of-the-art dei,elopmcnt
designed to house the bonk's lleed oflicc and provide renval office, commciciul, and
304
[Chap. 4
Hybrid Systems
Sect 4.51
parking space in Raffles Plnce. Singapore. The high-rise section is conceived as two visually scumate triangle towers (although structumlly~.
integral) facinp. each other on the
hvooienure.
A service core and a w i a n i ~ ecolumn in one comer oroAde suooort for the
,
higher tuwcr. The loner tower is supponcd on n smaller triangular colutnn and no Lshaped column. The slructurc has hei~ht-to.widthratios of 10:l on the south cluvxion
and 8:l on the north elevntion. he hirh-rise structure ~rovidescolumn-free soace
throuehout its full heieht above nround 6. i r . 4.155).
The high-nsr slruclurc is framed using high-jicld structural steel. The princip,l
rolumnr we fabricated box columns framing the cieratur ,hafts and flanged T si12pea IU
conform to the wall lines and minimize encroachment into the elevator shaft arca:
Simply supponed stt.el w s r r s 950 mm (37.5 in.) dccp spaced at4.32-01(14-it) ceoters in an cast-west direc1i.w support the large column-free areas. These trusser xrc dcsigned to act compositely with the concrete floor system.
The floor system consists of areinforced concrete slab composite with a 63-mm (2.5in.)-deep ribbed steel deck. The concrete slab is a total of 150 mm (6 in.) thick in order
to maintain a sufficient concrete thickness, after reticulation of services. for the rcquircd
fire separation between levcls. Fire protection of the s s e l frame is provided by liphtweirht mineral fiber (Firs. 4.156 and 4.157).
The high-rise structu& is supported on h total of seven caissons ranging in depth
from 96 to I10 m (315 to 360 ft) and in diameter from 5 to 6 m (16.4 to 19.7 ft). Thc
caissons are belled at their bxse and carny Lheir load in end bearine on solid rack
Development of the most efficient siucmrai system is the essintial prerequisite to
optimization of the design. The choice of ryslcm drsmatically affects the quality of the
material required in the design.
The family ofstructural systems based on the tubular concept has provided the types
most widely used to date for high-rise and ultra-high-rise structures. However, it has become necessary to seek new structural systems lo respond to changes which have taken
place over the last decade, including the very strong influence on high-rise buildings of
evolving architectural forms with many large open arens which extend through m;ltiple
floor heiehts.
'The d'ecision to use structural strcl in lieu oiru~niorccdcuncrelc for thc?SO-m (91%
(1)-hlph O U B tou'cr e a s dicta1c.d by ruuctural consideralions rxhcr t h ~ necnnunlics
(Fig. 4.158). The following are the principal f3ctors that dcturmincd the ndoptiun o i
structural steel in lieu of concrete.
..
LEVEL
FLOOR
RISE
LOW
RlSE
FLOO"
ELEVATION
~ 1 64.155
.
~ ~ ~ r npiln~ gnnod
r elcmlion; Ovcrscns Union Bunk Ccnlcr.
306
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
307
The composition of the structure is one where lhe stcel frame provides the skelcton
ofthe structural system, with the bracing and reinforced concrete walled zones acting to
increase the rigidity of the building (Fig. 4.159).
The individual elemena (steel frnme and concrele walls) nre both capnblc of functioning independently in the trnnsfer of vertical loads from the top lo the foundations.
However, as elements used in conjunction. h e concrete provides restrain1 to the slecl.
allowing the steel frame to be fully stressed as an isolaed component.
Control of dilferential creep between concrete and smctural steel was investigated
extensively, taking into considcrntion axial shonening of the 5 t ~ ~ l u rslcel
a l columns.
the construction program, and the bracing of the steel smcrure during erection. The
likely stresses in the concrete elements and thc steelwork were considered in both the
short term and the long term. The analysis indicated that the oplimum was for the concrete clemcnls lo follow behind the steelwork by approximately four lo five lcvels. The
maximum allowable differential was the concrctc elemcnls lagging 24 levels behind the
steelwork. The final optimized solution for the OUB structure is a mixed-frame hybrid
structure, providing an effective SlNClUrc utilizing the hest properties of slccl and concrete to achieve the minimum cost.
SERVICES ACCESS
LIGHTWEIGHT FIREPROOFING
Fig. J.156
Fig. 4.157
308
[Chap. 4
Sect 4.51
Hybrid Systems
TYPICAL BRACED
FRAME
TYPICAL
-R.C. SHEAR
WALL
PLANT F:LOOR
TRUSS
Fig. 4.l5Y
fig. 4.158
I'rinlurysl,cur $ ~ usyslcrn;
ll
01.errcus Uniun nonh Cunlrr.
[Chap. 4
Citicorp Center
New York, N.Y., USA
Architect
Slructuml engineer
Year of completion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Fmmc material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slabs
Columns
Material
Core
Materiol
This 60-story tower contains an area of 102,200 m' (1.1 million it') of the project total
' (1.8 million ft'). The 47.8-m (157-ft) square lower has a dramatic and
of 167.200 m
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
312
S e c t 4.51
[Chap. 4
~
,
Fig. 4.161
Eic~.utiun;Cilicorp Ccntcr.
313
half of the tower gravity load down to the four base "legs," one centered on eoch side.
The
..- svslem.
- ,~ . because it rcoeals a n each face o f t h c tower. is also very cflicienl in resistiug wind lorcus, hoth shcar and ovcrlurning, slnce il forms a cumpieke brncsd lubc. A
ncal rtructural touch rvar the omission of the corncr columns at Ihc floor just bduw lllc
main a i a ~ o n a inlcrsection
l
uith thr corner cvrry. cichl
- storics. This was to avoid accumulating gravity load in the corncr columns and gives unobstructed corncr views as a
bonus.
An 8.8-m (29-it)-deep perimeter truss on top of each of the legs carries the gravity
lnadr ofthe
lowest seven floors to the center lees. The wind shear is transferred through
the tenth-floor diaphragm at the top chord level of this truss over lo the diagonally
bnced elevator core, which carries it down to the foundation. Wind overturning forces
continue from the superstructure mast columns through the legs to the foundation.
The
office floors arc framed with convendonal steel beams, with a light.. - tvoical
,,
weight concrete slab on clcctrificd undcrfloor slcei deck (Fig. 4 162). Thc core has morns~~~-cunncctcd
lr3mus in nrdcr lo provide a syrtsm to delivcr floor-by-noor wind
lorccs lo the h r ~ c c dtube .
pancl .
poine occurrin~
-cvcry.lounh story. and lo allow $honer
unbraced lengths ofthc main compression members.
allow no columns of the office tower to pass through its facilities, and it required that a
new church building be designed and constructed in that comer with its own distinct
identity. This last requirement led the architect to place the first office floor more than
46 m (150 fl) above the streeL
The most direct and economical way lo achieve the 23-m (76-it) comer cantilevers
on each face of the typical tower floor was to provide a steel-hmed braced tube with a
system of columns and dingonnls in compression, channeling the building's gravity
loads into a 1.5-m (5-ft)-wide "mast" column in the center of each tower face [Fie.
u
4.161). The main dingonnls repeal in eight-story modules. The compression diagonals
are restrained by horizontal tcnsion ties at four-story intervals. This system brings one-
Hybrid Systems
314
[Chap. 4
The wind tunnel study for the tower, conducted by the University of Western Ontario. Canada, indicated rhat persons on upper floors ofthe tower t ~ ~ o u experience
ld
uncomfortably high lateral sway accelcrations in wind storms. In order to reduce nccclcrations to acceptable levels there were only t\vo possible approaches: add a great den1 of
mass and latcral stiffness withour increasing the natural vibralion period, or add to thc
building's natural damping. The first approoch would lrave cost about 55 million.
whcrsas the second approach \vould lhavc required increasing the building's damping
from about 1 to 4% and designing and constructing the \r,orld's firs! tuned mass da~npcr
(TbID) of anywhere near lhis size. Tllc second approach was adopled at a final cost of
less than one-third of the first approach. The inilial step was to convince thc arcl~itect
and owner; then the slruc1ur;ll cngincer hod to find a \\,a). to actually do it. Fortunately.
LeMcssurier Associalcs u r r c able lo cnlisl the technical assislance of Prof. Alan Davenport of the University of Westcrn Ontario. Prof. David \Vnrnmley of M.I.T., and tllc
firm of MTS Systems Corporation of Minncilpnlis. The lauer firm provided the detnilcd
mechnnicsl. clectricnl. and cuntrol system design and also constructed the TMD systcm.
with the assistance of HRH Conslruclion or New York. the general contractor. The
TblD is located an a dcdicalcd floor at 242 m (793 it) above grade, near the top of the
towcr. for maximum cff~crivcncss.The Citicarp tower was dcsigned from the beginning
to have the ThlD system. The system used includes a moving 373-tonne (4 In-ion) concrete-mass block tl~atslider binxially in the norlh-south and cast-wcst directions nn
pressurized oil hearings on polished stecl plates. Tlic m a r is conneclcd to the building
structure ria long t c c l boom struts, prcssurircd oitmgcn springs, and hydraulic scrvrl
aclualors. The lateral atiffncss of the spring elements makes thc systcln inlo 21 clasrical
passive spring-mass rystcsi. \\'hich basically is tuned to the same frcqucncy as thc tower
and acts as a vibration absorbcr lo effectively incre:~scthe building's energy absorption.
or damping. The TAlD reduced accelcrations lrom wind-induced motion by 40 to 505b.
11 is designed solely to increase occupant comfort. The building is dcsigncd for
and strength as if the ThlD were not there. The TMD syslcm has pcrformcd very well
since its installation and has weathered many wind storms and cvcn a hurricane.
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
315
CenTrust Tower
Miami, Florida, USA
Architect
Structural engineer
Year of completion
Heighr from rtreel to roo1
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acccleralion
Design damping
Earthquakc loading
Type of stmclurc
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floot
Material
Core
Material
Ovedooking Biscayne Bay. the 48-story CenTmsl Tower adds a unique shape to the
skyline of downtown Miami (Fig. 4.163). Thc building consists of a 37-story-tall office
tower set on lop of a block square 11-story ~ a r l t i n ggaroge. A quarter-circle in plan, the
office tower's arc steps back three times as it rises up.The 90 comer of the quarter-circle is chamfered to create an additional 25.9-111 (85-it)-wide face of the building. The
garage also serves Miami's convention center and has a people mover station on its
fourth floor. On top of the garage, the building carries a large landscaped area, including a refleclion pool
316
[Chap. 4
The building is conslructcd in reinforced concrete. Floor framing consists of 520mm (20.5-in.)-deep pan j0iSls. spanning up lo 10.7 m (35 11) and supporied on 11.6-m
(48-it)-long haunchcd girders. Ocplh ofthc haunched girdcrs varies from 520 mm (20.5
in.) in the middle to 813 mm (32 in.] at tllc ends.
Thc three 4.6-m (15-11) Slcp backs at the circular face of the building are locolcd at
floors 20.31. and 46, as shown in Fig. 4.161. Con\,entional girders are used to transfer
the columns at floor46, but at floors 20 and 31 an unusual one-floor-dccp brackcl is employed to transfer each column. A normal marc of transfer girders would have rcsulled
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
317
in a loss of lease space at both of thcse floors. The location of transfer columns and
brackets at the twentieth floor is indicaled in Fig. 4.165, and a typical one-stded brackel
from the perimeter column is shown in Fig. 4.166.The gravity column loads at the twentieth floor range between 13.300 and 17.800 irN (1550 and 2000 tons).
UidSr column load the bracket requires lateral bracing, which is provided in the form
of wall sltear panels between floors 1 9 and 20. Where a wall shear panel aligns with the
bracket, compression and tension chord forccs are directly anchored in tllese wall pnnels. Such tension chords at floors 19 and 3 0 are prestressed with an effective force of
t,
318
IChap. 4
11.136 IiN (1250 tons). For the other brackets. these chord forces are transferred to the
wall panels via floor plates acting as in-plane diaphragms.
The floor slab over pan joislj is increased from 114-mm (4.5-in.) normal thickness
to 190 mm (7.5 in.) at floors 19. 20.30. and 31 to provide required strength and stiffness for the in-plane diaphragm forces.
A partial framed tube at the perimeter of the tower and minimal shear walls in the
core are provided for the lateral load resistance, causing least interruption in the flow of
traffic in the garage and a minimum loss of parking spaces. Shear walls are transferred
1.
Hybrid Systems
Sect. 4.51
319
tu culun~ns11 the lcnth fluor 01 the fsr;ige lo iacilit3tc tr.lilic flos\,. 'The p~r~i;~l
lr:!mud
~ u h cir c ~ r r l e dthrough thc giir~gci~nddesigncd lo resist the cntire 131~131loads in th~.
carnac ;IS rrcll. The nnrual fran>:d t ~ h cconsirts of 1%" ~ I ~ ~ n n ~ I - rsrB
i t l~np~(~lith
.~~d
rnlt~mn.;st
~
.
. 4 6 - n 115'-ft)
, centers linked bv frames alone
- lhe circular arc and the chamfered face. with the columns spaced at 8.6 m (28 f t 3 in.).
Columns in thc garage are 1067 by 1880 mm (42 by 74 in.) rectangular and 1372 to
1067 mm (54 to 42 in.) in diamctcr round. Columns in the totver vary from 1067-mm
(42-in.) diamctcr at lower floors to 761-mm (30-in.) diameter at the top. Spandrel bcams
nv. -.
016, ......
rnm 176
in the
tower., but varv in dcoth at the -carace
- floors from 1372
,--in
....,1 decn
---r .~~
~~~mm (54 in.) at the three stmight sides to 813 k m (3- in.) along the circular arc due to
headroom requirements. Concrete strength in columns and spandrel bcams rnngcs from
49 lo 28 MPa (7000 lo 4000 p i ) , but is keptat 28 MPa(4000 psi) for the remaining floor
framing.
The lower is supponcd on a 2.1- to 2.44-111 (7- to 8-ft)-thick mat foundation bearing on
350-mm (14-in.) squore precast piles. G a n g c columns are founded on spread footings.
b
~~~
.~
~
~~
Elevation
Ftg.4.166
320
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year ofcomplction
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Framc material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Dcsign acceleration
Dcsign damping
Earthquake loading
Type of slruclurs
Typical floor
Story height
Slab
Columns
Hybrid Systems
sect. 4.51
321
framing for the p l a n , arcade, and parking levels is a 114-mm (4.5-in.) concrcle slab
o\,er 76-mm (3-in.) metal deck. Abot,e the plaza letel, the floor framing is 50-mm (2in.) concrete slab over 50-~nrn(?-in.) dcck. All stecl floor bcnms arccomposite with the
concrete slabs.
Th'e'skyscraper conlains 135,415 m2 (1,457.561 ft2) of office space and six belowp d e levels of parking for 536 cars with an area of 29,670 m' (319.368 fs). Public
3.5 m (I l ft 6 in.)
50-mm P i n . ) concrete on 50-mm (2-in.)
steel deck
3 major columns. 2.44 by 3.66 m (8 by 12
it) at ground floor
Concrete, 66 MPa (9500 psi)
Braced-stcel rigid fmme with arches up to
I I stories tall transferring load to composite columns
This innovative skyscraper has just 73.24 kplm' (14.97 psO of structural stccl and three
c o m ~ o s i t ecolumns o l ultra-high-streneth concrete. It uses both materials in their most
efficir.nl manner. TILL.btulding is cumplelelg 1r:lm:d i n strurlur~lrlucl. \\'lnd and ~.nrtIlqllak~.loi!d* arc r~..i(t:d h! it ~ t r t ~ c t u~rI ~C Cl I innnlcnt r~.slstinghnc~.di r ~ m c a, l u c l ~I.,
triangular in shape and locatcd in the interior core.
Exterior windows are unobstructed. Compositestructural steel and concrete columns
are located at the vcrticcs of the triangular core to carry a large portion of the vertical
loads. reduce wind swny, and resist seismic forces. At thc base of the structure, tllcse
composite concrete columns are 2.44 by 3.66 m (8 by 12 it) in dimension. The concrete
strength is 66 MPa (9500 psi). The sway of the building is limited to Hl600. The floor
~ i g .4.167
.:
322
:
I
[Chap. 4
arcas consist of a lobby levcl containing an area of 1825 m' (19,641 it2); four
shopping levels with a total area of 13.948 m' (150.135 ft'). featuring retail and c o i mercial space; n multilevel shopping arcade which is open 24 hours a day; a multilevel
landscaped plaza surrounding the entire office tower; as well as an underground pedes.
trian tunnel connecting the building to another office building across the street.
Columbia Center's excavation was the deepest ever undcrtakcn in Seattle. It reached
37 m (121 ft) below Fifth Avenue and 21 m (70 ft) below Fourth Avenue. Complicating
the task was the requirement to protect an existing five-story office building at the
Fourth and Columbia comer of the building. The shoring wall was constructed by
drilling 12-11?(4-it) holcs at 4 m (13 ft) on ccnter to at leas14.3 m 114
the hn?,~ ft)
..,hplnw
-tom ofthe excavation. These holes were fillcd with lean concrete and n pair of 350-mm
(14-in.) wide-flange steel soldier pilcs. Tiebacks wcrc placed in the normal manner between the pair of vertical soldier piles. 150- and 200-mm (6- and 8-in.1 wood lanvinn
was used lo support the earth bcrween the pair of soldiers piles spaced 4 h (13 it) a p a n
The building structure design underwent thc scrutiny ofextcnsivc testing i n n wind tunnel at lhc University of Wcstern Ontario, Canada, for both static and aeroclostic loading. The acroelastic tests mcasured the twist, sway, base shear, and acceleration of the
building. They showed that thc building performed very well in the wind. but revealed
that the accelerndon o f t h c building in a major windstorm might bc felt by a portion of
the occupants. Viscoelvstic dampers to absorb wind energy were added to thc moment
resisting braced frame to eliminate this possibility of uncomfortable acccleration.
--.-
S e c t 4.51
Hybrid Systems
323
Architect
Smctunl engineer
Year of completion
,:
,'
:
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Benm span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Material
Core
intcgral buildings which form First Bonk P1:lcc (Fig. J I 6 8 ) . The laver is crowned w t h
a 13.7-1" (45-ft)-lti~h
ctrculnr grid of stscl uhich c~ntiluwra6 m (?U fl) out rrom a \.<Itical plane nnd cokcals coolkg towers and antennas. At the second floor (the Minneapolis shyway level) the tower connects to buildings on adjacent blocks via two
bridges. One of Ulese bridges is a classic tied arch, which is braced from buckling by an
inverted pony w s s . Adjacent and connected to the tower is the 68-m (224-it)-tall 14story atrium building so called because of the six-story 27-m (89-8)-diameter atrium at
Z!?
i.
$7
a::,
...
i.'
!:.
?
1'
:
,
Hybrid Systems
sect. 4.51
its base. One-fourth of the pcrimetcr of this atrium is a glass wall supported by Vierendcel pipe trusses. Some 12 m (40 R ) above the atrium flooris centered an 18.6-m (61-it)diameter ring beam which supports the columns of the l c n e space Floors above the
atrium. Filling up the remainder of the L-shaped site is an 18-story 84-m (776-ft)-la11
"park; building, which overlooks Hennepin County Government Center Park. Underneith"i~lkeperk building, atrium. and tower is a three-level 450-car basement parking
garage. The First Bank Place complcx has 130.000 m' (1.4 million f$) of floor space
(Fig. 1.1691.
Thc backbone ofthc First Bank Place tower is n cruciform-shapcd spine anchored by
steel and concrete composite supercolumns, which are linked to one another with a vcrtical shear membrane formed by steel bracing in the core of the building and o!tr!gger
bcams beyond the core moment-connected into the supercolumns. Charactcr~stlcof
spine structures. Ihcse supercolumns extend unintcrmpled the full height of the building. They vary in cross-sectional area along their length from 7 m' (75 ft') at thc base lo
4.6 m' (50 11') at the top.
Torsional s~abilitylor the tower is provided at the perimeter ofthe building by a dun1
system 01unsymmetrical diagonal bracing and Viercndeel bandages. The single dingonal pcrimetcr braces extend from the third floor to the forty-fifth floor in six-stoq-high
56th
326
[Chap. 4
sections. Spandrel beams moment-connected through these diagonals, along with the
supercolumns, restrain the tendency of these unsymmetrical bmcings lo deflect horizontally under gravity loads. The three-story-deep Vierendeel girder bandages, which
are provided at floors 1215.24-27. and 4215. restrain the wamine.
-. which would othc w k e occur in the open scc;ion composed of the cruciform spine and pcrimcter bmccs.
n t u i e bandagss t r i p l ~lbc lower's tori~onalstiffnuss and incrense i b lateral stiffness by
36%. In addition, the bnndaees are used to Vansfer gravity loads to supercolumns and
comer columns. thus increasine
- the efiiciencv of thebuildine's o v e m m i n e resistance.
Other Vicrrndeslr u e lared in llrc building to cllminalc transfer girders and increisc
the building's loreral stiffi~ess.A 12-story Vicrendccl spms along 3n crtcnor h c e of lhe
building between a supercolumn and n comer column. transferring a column which supports 28 floors of load. Above the fortv-fifth floor of the tower there is a nine-slorv-tall
circular Vlurendccl girder which frames inta supcrcolutnns. lhu curved ~ i c r s n d c c noi
l
only incrcxus the 1;ltcral and lorsionitl stiffness uf ihe lap of the building, bul olso ;!Ilotvs l l circular-shaped
~ ~
ponion o r the buildlng to sir alup rlte squsrc s h p c below \ri\bout extending additional columns down through the leas; space.
The structural system was chosen over a ~ G m e t ebracid
r
fmme or a moment fmme
to achicve a column-free exterior facade f& thc building. The presence of composite
concrete columns cnhanced the ovenurning resistance of the building and achieved
overall economy for the structure.
A572 grade 5 0 steel was used for columns and beams that were controllcd bv
5trcngrh crllerii. 2nd A 3 6 3td:I s.;ts used for inlemller, c~lntrnllcdby .Itfincrs uritr.ri:t.
Thc sl~pr.rcolumi~s
ultl17.r.d69- and 55.XlPa (IU.UOO- :tnd hO(lU-PSI)iuncrclc 'The rlc:l
col~lllnh3s~.pl%lesb u r on the lop of ihe concrctr. hassment girapc columns. !\l!~ch SUP.
port the posttensioned flat-plate garage floors. Special analGis was performed to as=&lain the effects of restraint on the posttensioned slabs due lo the presence of large concrete columns supporting the lower loads and perimeter basement walls. All building
columns sit on individual footings which bear on rock.
Three-story-tall Vierendeel bandages were provided along line CC' and also along
E'D' (Fig. 4.170). The strategically placed bandages not only provided essentially column-Free exterior spans along face CC, but also improved the torsional resistance of the
building dramatically, with optimum use of the S ~ N C ~ U ~steel.
I I ~ The perimeter circular
Vicrcndeel above the forty-fifth floor provided both lateral and torsional resistance to
the entire frame.
T l ~ uloa.cr b>sclnr.nt floors a r r c Jcs~&ncd
as poitisnrioncd cuncrute flst-plate floorr.
The pu>ticnsimcd conslnc~iun\gas csrunti31 lu control cracking in nuur sli~bsbecause
of the cold, snowy winters af Minneapolis.
The building was analyzed in a three-dimensional finite-element computcr model lor
tlic following loading condirions:
BRACE
I
CRUClFORM SPINE
BRACE
CIRCULAR VIERENDEEL
ABOVE 45TH FLOOR
12 STORIES
VIERENDEEL FRAME
1. Sequenlially applied dead load consistent with the consuuction sequence of ihc
building
2. Live load
3. Three-directional (.T,,: and 0) wind loads dynamically determined from wind tunnel study with appropriate combinations
4. Creep and shrinkage of concrete columns
5. Temperature gradients and differential temperature on concrete columns
During the design, the members were checked for 99 load combinations.
In Ille ;onrlrllcuon I C ~ L C I I C ? . t h ~~. n t i l ~ ~ ~concr?le
i i t e colu!~ln 1\15 xlLd\v~d10 (3g 12
lloorr hr.hinJ cr;clr.d rirl:tor~l rlcel ind six flours bshinJ 111~.concrtt~.dsl;!bs no nts13l
(4
(c)
Fis. 4.170 Fir9 Itunk Ptuce. ( a )Structural rystcm. ( b l Estcrnul hmcing. (c) \\'firping-rcstrui~~lrle
perimutcr bundi~gcr.
328
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
329
produced internory in-plane diaphragm stresscs. The associated floor diaphragms were
nnolyzed lor in-plane shear and reinforced accordingly.
building wns dso analyzed for the reduction in column and diaphragm stiffnesses due to cncliing of the concrete and the uncenainty of the effective modulus of
elasticity.
6x displacement (inch)
wind in X-direclion
Fig. 4,172 Lnternl dtrplncemcnt; Firrl Bunk Plncc.
330
[Chap. 4
Architect
Structural engineer
Year o r completion
Height rrom street to roor
Number orslories
Number of le\,cls bclor\, ground
Building use
Frante malcrial
Typical floor livc load
Basic wind vclocity
hlaximum laleral deilcction
Design fundamental pcriod
Design ncccleralion
Design damping
Earthquakc loading
NBBl
Skilling Ward hl;~enussonBarkshire. Inc.
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
331
points, an extension of an important urban park, and a nciv network of pathways for [he
adjoining neighborhoods. I& cxccplional design has won widespread architectural
praise and public popularity and received the Grand Award Tor Engineering Exccllcnce
from the American Consulting Engineers Council in 1990.
1990
220 m (720 11)
56
4
Office. rct;~il
Steel a,itlt uumpositc c u l u n ~ n s
2.5 kPa (50 p s n
34 mlscc ( 7 5 mph)
312 mrn (12.3 in.). IOU-yr ruturn
6 scc
?U lnlg p ~ i l k .10-yr return
?.l"rllO-yr return including damping dcviccs: 2 . 0 ~ ~ 1 1 0 0 - yrcturn
r
ignoring dnrnping dc\iccs
Z = 0.75. C = 0.03. K = 0.8
Two Union Square building proridrd the construction industry wilb many new concepts, materials, and techniques (Fig. 4.173). By locoling the c;!rthqu:~ke and wind resistinr elements in thc interior core walls. tllc architect lrad Trcedom that cuntributcd lu
its design. Two Union Souarc rcorcscnts n union oT busincss and communitv. I[ corn-
level plaza with large opcn spaces, relail shops, and restaurants.
The desirn team was raced with a number o r uniaue challenres bv this comnlca
lic s ~ a c e ill
s the base of rhc tower. Particularly challenoinp was tlte constrnint-filled site.
which included existinr structures on two sides. an aciiviinterstale rrccwav. adiacent. a
cily ;I,C?I oter I I ~ Ub;~se.ind UIIJ~.~
the tusicr. :,nd r c q . ~ i r u n ~ ~lor
. n ~2 rconlp.c\ u ~ c irc lure !tit11 c ~ c L .~<:~tdri!ll.
~.
2nd 13rp~.h~111Jcrs
513ir .tupping thr.3u.h lhc pl:,,:~.
Among thc many technical nccomplisltments that incrcascd pcrTorm:!ncc. shortened
construction time. and reduced ~tructuralcosts from $28 to SIE million arc the most advanced application of a composite system, the lirst to utilize stccl pipes filled with a
n,orld-record-brcaking lhigh-slrcngth 131-hlPe (19.000-psi) concrctc, the most efficient
~,iscoelasticdampers-to control building movcmcnt, and unequaled crtcrior column
eoecinrs o r u o to I 4 m 146 Trl. niavidine s\\'eenino vic!vs o r the citv and Puret Sound.
and sited in a seismicufi\~a c t i w area (arismic zone 3), thc d e s i ~ n~ r o r i d c dnc\v techneeded parking Tor downtown shoppers. a respite i n n busy do\\,ntori,n nrca, scenic viem-
Alo~nirrrrrn~ ~ r l -
332
[Chap. 4
Sect. 4.51
..Architect
Structural engineer
Year of complclion
Height from street to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Slab
Columns
Spacing
:.6-
Hybrid Systems
The structural system lor the toueeris an a11 steel dual system comprising an intcracfive braced core and a perimeter ductile moment frame. Thc braced core. ancllorcd at its
corners by stccl box columns, is 23.5 m (73.8 11) square. Tllc box colurnns weighing U
m : ~ r i m > nf
~ m6308 kalm (-1320 lblftl at !he base carry a maximum design gravity laed a f
100,QQP.kN ( I 1.000ionsl. TWO-st& chevron bracis free span each of four sides of the
corc.ln'order to achieve an efficient lateral load resisting structural ireme. flours frcc
~ n : mun to 16.76 m (55 it). looding the interior corc and the perimeter framc columns.
...~~
~
. .
resisting fremc.
The slructure is dcsigncd to remain csscntially elastic lor an snticipnled masimsm
crcdiblc cunhquakc of magnitude 8.3 on thc Richter scalc at the nearby Sari Andrcas
4.04 m 0 3 it 3 in.)
16.76 m (55 it)
610 mm (24 in.)
4 m ( 1 3 it)
133- or 159-mm (5.25- or 6.25-in.) lightweight concrete on metal deck
1067- by 610-mm (42- by Win.) W F section. g a d c 350 MPa (50 h i )
6.1 lo 7.6 m (20 to 25 ft)
Bnced steel; column size at ground floor
1230 mm (48 in.) square. 6308 kglm
(4230 Iblft)
Called a signature building for the city of Lor Angeles, the granite clad, 75-story building with its scrrotcdfacadc(Fig.4.174)riscs 310.3 m(1018 it) above street level. It contains about 130.000 m') (1.4 million 11') of office space. At present. it is thc tallest building in seismic zone 4 or its equivalent in the \vorld.
The base of the rower is embellished by Spanish steps \rpithwater runnels, fountains
and landscaped areas. These steps arc seismically isolated from the tower structure and
bridge ihe elevational difference of approximately I5 m (50 fi) in the surrounding nrea
along the north to south axis ofthe taa,cr.
333
i
334
[Chap. 4
f a ~ l t.?.p;!rt
from ;inal!.ling the struct.lre for a con!'?ntion31 5 pur;unt d ~ t n p c dr e h ~ n n > e
spcctnml fur the n~sxinttlrncrcdihlc earthquake, 111s f ~ ~ l l o w i nspscial
g
analysis otld dr..
sign features usereintroduced.
1. Since two-story chevron bracing was used for the lirst time i n the seismic region,
redundancy i n the gravity structural load path was examined for an accidenrsl
buckling
.of n diaeonal.
?. The atructtlral rncmbtrh, buth hr.s!nr and columrl~.n u r c ttc>tonly designed for the
grnund ,110ticu1i!lun: t h ~ttgn
. ortltugunal principal 3,es u f t l v strucutrs, but ; ~ l r u
ncre chccked lur the dtrcctinnal m:trima due to umnidiruution31 s ~ . i s m ~
motion
c
3. Time history analysis was conducted primarily to detcmine maximum interslory
drift and the absolute maxima for the horizontal acceleration at floors. The maximum intcrstory drift was used i n the design ofthe curtain wall, whereas the acceleration data wns used for the dcsign of floor-mounted equipment such as clcvator machincs and \\,aler Lanks. Timc history anal\ssis wns nlso conducted for
vsruc31 3 c c c I ~ . r ~ t i ~B?sidcs
n.
cr~.:lting o\~.r~urrlin"UII?ct~~
:!I 111st ~ i l n ~fl,,,,~..
r~.~
an :~ntplifiuatinno l ~ ~ . r t ~nccclcr:,tiur~
ull
uuuld lund tu ;L plunying hilure in t h ~ .
tr;lnsfer gird^.^;. ThC 2llalylib $135 ~<5ellli31
IU
pcccl~dc\uch 3 ilil.~,~.mode.
4. I n order to establish a load deflection curve and global ductility limit.., a monotonically increasing symmctric nonlinear lateral load analysis !\,as conducted.
~ pc:~klhori,.0nt:11 :I;;cI.
5. 1hc critcriun fur !61ttd t~tutiuns.25 set :!I:trunnd 2 3 r i i fur
eralloo during 3 otlce i n IU )cdrs N ind aturm. Tnc I:~tcr:ll n~o.lc<01 s thr:ltiun u ere
~ d j ~ a t ci nda ~ i ? not
, unly to :tcltie\r. tI1c c~ccup.~lt
uomlr,rt :I[ tllc t ~ l n,lc;unlud
noor for the 10 year wind storm. but which r\;ould not incrcasc thc'latcrai rcsponse lo seismic motion.
Sixtccn critical ioints i n the braced frame were mcchanicallv stre.; rclie\,cd
hv
- - .~
.
. itl;inn ttw
L c u n ~ r dT110,npsun !ihratiag method o f rtrsrs cclief. Spe:iiil nclding L~ICI
t~.stirlg
cudurs, n c r c ust;lbl~jhr.dfor ;tll sruldcd connsctionr.
The structure is ioullded on shale rock u,itlt :ln ;1llnn3blu load btxrisg rapJclt! o l
7?0 ~ P(7J5 tonslft?). Thc corr. u l the structure i s sopported on a 3.1 m (1 1 5 i t ) th,ck
COIIUIL.IL.
mat. and i! p~.riiiIcterrung fuoling is used fur th~.~ U Crr311te.
~IIU
~
Sect. 4.51
Hybrid Systems
335
Foster Associates
Ove A m p and Panners
Year o f completion
Height from street to roof
1985
I 8 0 m (590 ft)
Number o f stories
Number o f levels below ground
45
4
Building use
Office, banking
Svuclural steel frame; composite stcel
and concrete floors
5 kPa (104 psfJ with some local increases
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Design fundamental period
Design acceleration
Design damping
I% serviceability
Earthquakc loading
Typc of structure
Not applicable
Steel mast joined by suspension trusses
acting i n p o n d frame action
Foundation conditions
Loose fill over marine deposits and dccomposed granite bedrock: granite
bedrock up to 40 m (131 ft) below ground
Machine- and hand-dug caissons to rock
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Steel, grade 50
Core
None
The 20-m (65-ft)-deep basement o f the Hongkong Bank (Fig. 4.175) was constructed
using a perimeter diaphragm wall and top-down construction techniques. The superstructure is constructed using structural steel and composite steel floors. Stability is provided by masts, linked at five levels by trusses, the complete system acting as a fi\'elevel unbraced sway frame. Each mast comprises four tubular steel columns linked by
horizontnl bos-section beams to create a Vierendeel system (Figs. 4.176 and 4.177).
[Chap. 4
Hybrid Systems
Sect. 4.51
180m
Vierendeel mast
Hangers
Two
n o r y deep
suspension
-dl!#EHla 1
BANK
Fig.4.176
338
[Chap. 4
.4.6mL
i.
1.
Sect. 4.61
Condensed ReferencesIBibliography
339
10.8m
5
2
-7...*
Special Topics
~~~
Special Topics
342
IChap. 5
mechanisms really are thc same. hut the broad-band nature of the cross-wind oressure
fluctuations normilly associated with buildings is due to both the effects of fuibulence
nnd the intermittent reattachment of the separated shear layers onto the streamwise faccs
of the building. Typical along-wind and cross'wind response m c c s and spectra are given
in Fir. 5.1. which illustnter the resmnsc characteristics described.
L:ttr.r in rhts ;r.ctiun ;~n;~l)ticill
mcthuds will be gi\cn to pcrmlt prediction o i the
along-wind and cross-wind r~spnnscs.HouL.\.L.~.
10 permil soms further duscriptiun of
titc fluctu:~tingcon~poncntsthat are in~portnntto ~un.~ceabili[y
and olumnte limit-atatc
considerations, it is helpful to refer to a diagrammatic reprcscntation of the along-wind
and cross-wind forcinr soectra. as is nrcsented in Fie. 5.2.
T2I1 huildtngs typically b3vc serr1ce3bility 2nd ullimate I1m1t.st3teoperating value,
o1r;ducr.d r.~.louit)in ihc range o f ? to 10 Fnr ea3lnple. a 3UU-m (98.1-it)-high hullding
with a u,idth b of 50 m (164 II) 2nd fir.[-mode f r c ~
. u e n.c s!I ui0.15 Hz tnicl~thave scrvicenbility and ultimotc limit-slate design mean wind speeds a1 the top o i t h e building
-.
Sect. 5.11
343
height of 26 and 45 mlsec (85.3 and 147.6 fdsec), respectively, which gives, for Serviceabilily.
With reference to Fig. 5.2 it can be seen that buildings operating in the low reducedvelocity range arc not likely to have occupancy comfort problems. At higher operattng
along-wind
Fig. 5.2
7: I'h/nlr
= 10.
346
Special Topics
[Chap. 5
Plots of the acceleration criterion are given ns a function of frequency in Fig. 5.3 for
a period of 10 min of maximum wind in a return period of R years. The period of I 0 min
has been used both to fit in with the original curves of lrwin and of I S 0 6897, and because it is typical of n period of maximum response in areas dominated by thunderstorm
activity and where mean design wind speeds tend to be worked backward artificially
from peak wind-speed data. For regions where the maximum response may occur
through longer periods, such as I hour, the maximum hourly mean wind speed will he
less than the maximum 10-min mean wind speed, and the value of T i n Eqs. 5.5 and 5.8
would increase to 3600 sec.
At the design stage estimates of the response of a building are required to determine serviceability nccelcration levels, equivalent static uitimale limil-slate base moments, and
momcnt and shear force distributions. These estimales may be obtained analytically,
from wind tunnel measurements, or from a combination oflhe two. The wind tunnel derivation of lhesc design data will be givcn elsewhere in this Monograph series. For this
347
section, a dcscriplion of ihc snalyticsi approaches will be givcn, aibcit heavily cmpirically supported in places.
r ta p p m ~ c ~l ~~O I I L . : I L0)
. ~ D ~ V S I I ~(19611
O T I and
;llnnp-IIT,,d R r p o n r c . 'I.he ~ ~laclur
Vickcr). (1966. 1969) prosides tlle simpl~.slmc:tns of esiintalin: tllc llunf-wind resoonrc o i $: buildins sod the tqoivalcni riatic i o ~ dlo pruducd illc pe3k rslponrc. V?rsions of this approach have been developed in a number of the \vorld's wind-loading
codes. In particular, the Australian code AS1 170.2-1989 has a version in which nll tile
parameters arc given in equation form.
As ihe gust factor approach is in such gcncral use, there is no need to develop it here.
nnrticuiarlv as it rcleies io the determination of ullimate limit-state design data. However. so that comparisons may be m a d ~bmwcen along-wind and cross-wind serviccability acccleralions, it will bc of help lo develop the along-wind equations here. The
evaluation of i i ~ ealong-wind response is divided into background and resonant response
components. The background, or qunsi-stcady, response is at random and rclaiivciy low
frcqnencics. It is !he narrow-band rcsonanl response component. which generates the
majority of the ulo?g-wind acceleration at thc lop of s building. Using ihe gust factor
npproach, ihc peak acceleraiion at the top o f a building for rcsonnncc in a fundamental
beading modcmay be obtained from
~~
3 Determination of Response
Sect 5.11
~-
p?z
forO.06cncl.O
01
ix
.-C
0
O.~<R~IO
-_..
- ...-.
.
....-...-.
..
-.
... ..
....
return period
10 year
.
.
1
-rn lo
0,
(U
D
0
.-N
.horizontal acceleration
0.5
5 year
0.05
0.5
I
0.1
,,*,I
1.0
frequency n
, Hz
I:,
p
Cmss-IVi,ld Response. One of the simplcsi ways of evaluating the cross-wind response, involving all ihe important parametcis in the process of resonant response lo
wake excitation, is to use a mode-generalized force spectrum approach proposed by
Special Topics
348
[Chap. 5
Suunders and Melbourne (1975). Tltc mclhod makes usc nf mcasurcd cross-wind dirplacement spectra to g i v e n mode-gcnemlizcd forcc rpcctrum (for the firs1 mode) n l
Sect. 5.11
349
Holmes (1987). where k is lhe mode-sltape posver crponent from Lllc rcprescntalion o r
the lundamcnlal modc shape by $,!, = ( ~ l h ) ~ .
, .,
't:
*:
4 Parameter Sensitivity
Tlicre arc sevcrnl steps lo csn~niningparamcler sensitivity. First it is important to
demonstntc that along-svind response is n relatively ntinor problem compared lo crosswind response. Second it has to be shown that mode shape is important and that it is here
that tlte slructural systcm can piny a significant part. Third !he real problem of crosswind rcsponsc lias to be demonstrated along with its attendant parameter sensitivity.
square seclion,
chamlered or
rounded corners
15.13)
Then in terms 01this forcc spectrum coefficient the standard devintion of acceleration
becomes
p7$7/z
Ti=-
.I,,,
(5.14)
and thc pcak acceleration at the top o f t h e building due to cross-wind rcsponsc is given by
.. - .
350
Special Topics
[Chap. 5
Il'orI.cdExo,nplc.
The simplest way lo introduce a study or the relative significance
of the response t)'pe and the \'arious parameters is by means o f a worked example. For
this purpose considcr a lall building for a rclurn pcrind of I year lor rvhicl~
Ir = 300 m
Sect. 5.11
2. Cmsr-~vindl.e.rl?ol!se.
C,, = 0.00 15
= --
(0.76 i0.25I.)
4 pf'
= 0.14 mlsec'
p, = 200 kglm'
(r,/
l'),,
Peak accelcrntion at the top of the building due to cross-wind resonant response for
a cantilever mode shape. u,ltcre I. = 1.5,
b=rl=50m
l',=
, 26 mlscc
351
= 0.I?
= 14.3 m g
rcduccd velocity.
46
= 0.15 Hz
I,
-
1'" =
pcc~hfactor ( I 0 oiin).
6
I'
= 3.47
It is noted h a t the acceleration criterion for occupancy comfort for the l-ycar rculrn
period and iirst-mode frequency o f 0 . 1 5 l - 1 ~for I 0 min is ublained from
iI
Gust
~ J C ~ Ofor
I
resonant co~iiponcnt.
I 4 = 0.6 - plf,:bh'
2
= 1.095 X 10'' N-m
Inertial basr-hending moment lor a linear mode for unit displacement at the top,
I
(?nrr,,)'
3
= 13.32 X lo9 N-m
dl, = - p$rll!'
Peak nccclcrotion at the top of the building due to along-wind resonant response for
a linear rnodc.
Forthis worked example tltc along-wind acceleration is \$-ell inside this criterion, but
the cross-wind accclcration, even with a lincnr mode, is abo\,c this criterion.
I. Along ivind i,erst,r cro.ss wind. In Fig. 5.2 it $$,asshown diagrammalically why the
cross-wind
dominate the oroblem or occuoancv. comfort, but thc
~
~
~~ nccelcrations
\\,orked example sho\vs tltot even for a reduced velocity of 3.17 the along-wind acc c l e n d o n is about 3 0 % of the cross-wind acceleration (3.9 versus 11.8 ms).
2. ,+lode shnpe. Adjustments of the mode shape in order to get nearer a linear mode
shape, by using structural systems such as k bracing at Zome levels to gel facade
columns to contribute morc to resisting motion, can make n signilicant difference.
In the worked example, going from a cantilever mode shnpe. I. = 1.5, to a linear
mods shnpe, I. = 1.0, redrrccd the peak accelerntion by 10% (from 14.3 to 12.8 mg).
For
- a buildine on a reducina core or tube svstem. onlv with I. = 2.0, for example,
tlx p?n:!lty rslat!vc to ii I i n c ; ~~ ~ m d\II:L~LO
c
i 3 ;trutu~J5'i.
3. Duntpi,ty. Thr. urors-bind a:cclur~tion !s apprd\lm3tcl! III\L.~\L.I! JC~L.II.IIIII
c)n
the snu;lrc roul u l thc d ~ n .t l l -i n I~t .is 3ppruxiut31~.
~U;:IU,C
th~.rl:is 2 d ~ n ~ p i uc- ~. n l r i ..
bution from nerodvnamic damoinc.
- which is normallv ~ o s i l i v eand which then rcJuzc, the r ~ r u r i ~d;lnlpinn
r~l
Jcp~'aduo;c In this nurLr.d ? \ ~ m p l e .if tllu huild~ng
Ih;id <; rutninrcr.d rullircw ,truut.~r;il *!rtim :lnd d:lml>inpii~*~.~riceahiltl:
I-.!.r.ls 111
= 0.015. the urtlrr-wind pcak : . C C C ~ C ~ ~ I L Uf .I1I ~2 1111::.r fnllldc 1s~111l.l~ L . L . U I I I - .
..
Special Topics
352
[Chap. 5
which would bring the acceleration lo willtin the occupancy comfort criterion of
11.8 mg.
4. Frcqeency,
.
. 6ttildirrx de!>sirv, beizhr and esidrb, and .olrrrtfonr~rlmne. The dcocndr.ncc u l cm.s-wind .1ccclur3lic1nun p;lramstcrh a h ~ c bdlr.cl ircqucr~cy:~tldmodal
m x s is quit: c n m p l c ~and has bcen ~liacusredand er3luatr.d in somu dutail h) \!elb n ~ r n c2nd Ch~.ung(19881 Thc cun~pliu:lliunis mxinlv c n u c d hv !he i3c1 thxt C..
is very sensitive to planlorm shape and reduced velociiy, as shown i n Fig. 5.4, anla
anything which impacts on frequency similarly allecls rcduccd velocity on C,, Examples orthc sensitivity 01cross-wind acceleration lo building height, sspcct ratio,
and planform shapc wcrc given i n Melbourne and Cheung (1988) and arc rcproduced here as Fig. 5.5. From this study the overall conclusions with respect to parameter sensitivity errccts on cross-wind nccclcrations wcre as lollows:
o. The accelcr;llion is not, ss onc might inluilivcly think, dcpcndcn~dircclly on
height or aspect ratio hld, but rather on buildinc- .platform size. lndirecllv, hciaht
is imnlscd hecausc the wind rl>:?d is 3 (UIICI~OII 111It~.igbt.HCIIUCrcI;t!\~.Iy .IL.~dcr lhuildings will h3vc Itifher 3cculerslirnr III~I
SC,U>I hllilcl:ny\, h u tllu
~ importan1 p.ranlr.l:rr
bcrc 51Lt2plilr"rm >iruand 3 r c r ~ gd-n\it).-ill
~.
olller srurdr, ms*-
Sect 5.21
353
y>
in
1-
-----
--
5 Conclusions
The excitation mechanisms \\,lliclt csusc the most pcrccplible motions i n tall buildings
havc bccn dcscribcd. nnd il has bcen shown tIt;i~ thc cross-wind rcsponsc i s (he domin:mt cnusc o f motion ocrccotion nroblclns
a pirameler scnsiliaity discussion, wilh worked examples, has been presented to give a
desiener some indication 01how lo avoid lhinh
" acccleration levels i n loll buildings, and
so avoid the need for auxiliary dnmping systems. In particular il was shown that very
tall buildings arc not necessarily the most sensiliue i n terms of occupancy comfort, but
that souareTsham-cornered. hieh-aspccl-ratio
tall buildincs are likely to have accclera- .
tion p;oblems an.d that thcsc can be avoidcd by using p l a k r m shapes with cul corners
approaching n circular shape. tapering with height. increased mass, and structural systems which straighten up the first-mode shapc.
b
+=recommended
criterion
354
Special Topics
[Chap. 5
The level of safety offered to the occupants of a building in the cvent of a fire is a
complex function of numerous factors, including:
I. The likely chnmctcristics of the fire
2. Thc likely behavior o f t h e occupants (whcthcr they are alert or asleep, their reactions)
3. T h e likely pcrformnnce ofcompartmcntation with respect to rcsvicting the movcmcnt of smoke and flames
4. The likely pcrformonce of early \\wning systems (if any) in notifying the occupants
5. The performance o f t h e sprinkler system ond smokc control systems (if any)
6. The response of thc firc brigade
All o i thcsc factors arc probabilistic by naturc and functions of time. Time is of the
utmost imporlancc in designing buildings for firc safcty-it being important thnt succcssful egress be achic\,cd bciorc conditions become untcneble in the fire compartment.
A systematic approach to dcsigning buildings for fire mfety needs lo take into account
all ofthcse factors from a probabilistic approach and lo recognize the importance oftime.
In contmst to such an approach, tllc regulatory rcquircmcnts with respect to fire
safcty that have evol\~edin many countries gcncrnlly represent an ad hoc and unsyslcmatic approach to designing buildings for fire safcty. Buildings arc rcquircd to be dcsigned such that the structural mcmbrrs possess a ccrlain fire rcsistancc as dctcrmincd
in accordance with the standard fire test-a test that generally bcnrs littlc relationship to
real fires and takes no account o f t h e time for fire dc\,elopmcnt :!nd sprcnd. But it is a
useful tcst in that it allows the fire rcsistancc of clcmcnts of construction to be n t c d on
n relative basis. Littlc account is taken of the types ofacti\,itics taking place within the
building, and generally little provision is made for the reduction of fire resistance requircmcnts due to the presence of other components of the fire safety system such as
sprinklers, smokc detectors, and more cflicicnt egress provisions.
However, it is likely that in msny silustions the application of a systematic approach
to assessing the fire saiety of buildings will allow a substantial reduction in the level of
the fire resistance required for membcrs-without resulting in any decrease in fire
saiety. T h e purpose of this section is lo consider how the structural form of buildings
may be influenced by the need to design for fire safety. For a thorough consideration of
19921.
fire snictv in tall buildinrs. scc Fire Sofen,
, . irr Trill Btrildin~s
,. (CTBUH.
.
r11 the outist i t nr.r.d. to hc $l:,ted t l ~ ct o ~ i c r ? I ~ - i r ; t ~buildings
ll~d
src. rc13tiv~Iy111121f ? c t ~ . by
d r:qt#irr.m~.nlsfor <trucl~.r;llnl:nlbi.rr lo lr~\r.
;! l c \ s l of fire rurist3nce. This is
because the fire rcsistancc ofconcrcte members is usually relatively easily achieved by
selectinn an aooronriatc levcl of cover La the reinforcement and a minimum size of
mr.nlhr.r. I'or alcel rtruct.,r:,. oo the alhsr lh2nd, rcr~siremcntsfor rttembcrs to h a w
hi:h?r lc\r.ls ol'fir: re\ist:ln;r. guncr;ill! I I ~ c ;~! l~i i I~It ~ C , ~ ~I SI II~ *I , be
~ prutc;tc I o,ith fireprotective coverings such as sprayed insulation materials or board protection. and this
can result in substnntiallv increased costs for thc stccl frame. It follows therefore that it
3s unl! in the c ; uf ~.,~ecl-fr:.mr.d h u i l J i n p ti1:11 thcrr. ;!r: rc;.l henelits tu be p i n e d by
rr.11.luing o r diimin~tingl l x nedd for firi. prol<clioo ur 1I1crlruuu1r;rl fr:rnle. As Ibcngar
(1992) has smtcd.
.. .
Sect. 5.21
355
cilcrior ollhc hulldings ior lntcral lo3d reriatoncc. Utrlqus $1slcnrr rurh nr ihc brncrd lube
of the John Hanmck Center. Chirqo. the framed tube o i the \\'orld Tnde Ccnlcr. New
York, nnd ihc bundled l ~ b ryslrmuf
r
the S c ~ r rTowur.Chic3go. hmceval\ud. Y c l ~ n111 df
there clrcr ihc c r l r r n ~ membcrr
l
hld lo he fircpmoied nud clld cvcn iho~glnromc stnlrturd reprrren!urion on iltc focsdcr hlr been ochicvcd.
In the following, det,elop,nsnts nri5ing from the n w d to design buildings for firc
wlety cconumically and ihc cffcct n i t h i s on the chuice oistructurnl aystsm and iortn o i
member consuuclion are reviewed. These developments vnry from innovative ways for
desienine steel members to achieve the snecified levels of standard fire resistance as
given in the building regulations, to designing mcmbcrs Tor "real" fire rcennrios, t o a ntional engineering approach to designing for fire safely which lakes into account all
components of the firc safety system
- -
ll'oter-Filled Alember~. Around 4 0 buildings (IISI. 1993) have been constructed with
tubular columns filled with walcr and with an appropriately designed circulation system
to ensure that local overheating of the column does not occur and thnt there is a sufficient supply of water to absorb the energy nssociatcd with the required level of fire resismncc. A detailed design method has been available for many years (Bond. 19751. The
64-storv U.S. Steel Cornomtion headauarters in Pittsbureh incornorales watcr-filled extcnorcolumos and is onc of thc tollcst buildings in rhc world uhcrc this ryitum lhns been
oscd fur providing the requircd fire rcslstancc for the columns. \\';it<r cooling is inosl
suitable for columns, although with the addition of water pumps to provide adequate circulation. the melhod can be used for tubular beams. F o r tall buildinss
- the columns must
b e divided into zones to limit the buildup of pressure within the column. In general, it
is true to say that the use of water filling to achieve the required standard of fire resistance for members has potential when exposed tubular steelwork is rcquircd from an architectural viewpoinl
Columns of &fired Concrete ond Steel. The range of composite steel and concrete
columns shown in Fig. 5.6 has also been used widely to provide an allcrnative t o steel
columns coated with fire-nrotective coatines. Both the encased I sections and the concri.1s.fillr.d tubular sr.ctiunr offer significant ad\antazus nit11 resptut to rapid cnnrtruc(ton. Tubulnr columns o f l l r g ~cross s:ctiun h i \ < hr.~.nused ior t.1i1 buildings (hlcFJmn.
1990; \Vsr.tt 2nd Bcnnrus. 1987: Watson and 0'Brir.n. 1990) ( r t e Fig. 5 7 ) The locn.
lion of r~inforcementin these members sometimes "resents difficulties. and the use o l
t~nrcinlorceduuncrcte is nftdn porsiblr., dcpcnding nn thr. ~ t o c L ~ n ~uf. s tilt
r cnlu!nn. llir
l e w l o f lu;tJ ;,pplicd lo t h ~cnlumn.
'
2nd the ccccntnclly ol' load. Tlw J e s i g l of ntl\ud
concrete and steel members for firc resistance is the subject of numerous publications
(O'Mengheretal.. 1993: British Steel. 1992; Kruppa et al.. 1990; ECCS. 1988: CTBUH.
1992).
Firc-Resistant Steels.
356
Special Topics
[Chap. 5
Sect. 5.21
various steel companies, particularly rrom Japan. These slecls give somewhat superior
mechanical properties under elevsred ternpenlure conditions compared with convcntional steels, although use of these steels w i l l not rcmorc the necessity Tor a firc-protective coating-a lesser thiclkness or fire protection w i l l need lo bc applied and ihc
steels are generally more cxpcnsivc than conventional steels.
reinforcement
Fig. 5.7
Bstween Fiangss
(Arbed Column)
357
Special Topics
358
[Chap. 5
Sect. 5.21
condttions given n certain lr\,el of \'entilation and fire load (Pcttcrsson el al.. 1976).
Through .uch testing it has been recognized that under cenain conditions, it is pos~ible
lo reducc (or cvcn cli~ninnte)tile lcvrl of firc protsction rcquirud for slructural members.
It has been shown C a w and O'Brien. 1981:
Kr.~pp;l, 1981) thdt the locntion of sleelwork beyond or at the facode of the building. or
such that it is p m l y bhiuldcd from flames which ma). come frnm thc uindows i l l tltc
event of a fire. will under certain ventilation conditions result in temperatures that are
not sufficientlv hieh to reouire fire ~rotectionof the steelwork. ~em~oeratures
cxncri~.nucd31 (or hcyond) the facade are generally considerably lower than those within the
fire cotnpanmrnt. This fact has bccn dcmonstr~tcdby muanr of fire tcsu in compnnmenu where h e fire load has been generally represented by wood cribs and thc fire
compartments have various degrees of vcntilntion.
This aooroach has rcSulted in the use of unorotected external steelwork in numcrous
bu!ldings such 3s Bush Lunc Houac. Lundun (lZig.5.9) (Brorzstti r.1 nl.. 1983). uhurc
thc S I L . L . I ~ O forming
~~
the external lit tic^. is of relat!vcly s r n ~ lcross
l
sr.ctiun 2nd cuulud
by water.
The Hotel de Ins Anes tower in Bnrcclona. Spain (Fig. 5.101, is a very recent example of the use of unprotected external stcelwok (lycngar, 1992). In this cnse the outer
columns and the lateral bracing system arc located outside the building facade. Calculations were perlormed using the mcthod given by Law and O'Bricn (1981). assuming
n git~cnlire load in a hotel compartment and a reprcscntalivc Icvcl of ventilation. The
calculated temperatures for the external steelwork wcre confirmed by mcnns of a lire
Blriidinrs
o~ tviflt External Steelwork
~~~
..
Fig. 5.9
20
40
60
80
Time (min)
Special Topics
Sect. 5.21
361
lesL 11 is clear that In this case the regulatory authorities were prcparcd to acccpt t l ~ i sap.
proach in licu of all members having to achieve the higher level o f l i r c rcsislancc re.
q u k d by [he regulations.
Similar calculalions havc bccn uscd in Japan (Sakumoto e t al., 1992) lor high-rise
buildings to permit the use of unprolecled "fire-resistnnt" steel al lhc lacsde.
Pnrki11i,,6 Gnrnges. The firc load and vcntilalion conditions associated with parking
garages are well known. Opcn-deck parking garages ore generally dclined a s buildings
that havc at least two onnosite sides onen lo nt least 50%. Firc lesls involvinc cars in
nrovidcd the structurul members are at least o l a ccrtein size-snd this size is n ~ c wilh
l
prlctical scctions uscd in parking gers~ger-lhc temperatures achieved will not lead to
off-loading of lhc ~ l ~ c l u r members.
ol
Thus mullislory st~.ul parking gacrges wilhuut
firc protccliun cladding arc pcrmiltcd in muny countries o r ihc world.
Tcsts have bccn conduclcd on closcd ourkin:- -rarancs
- nnd thnsc ryhich arc waniallv
open but do not comply \t*ith thc prcccding delinition ol' opcn dc~.k(Bennclts ct al..
1989). Thc lcsts sho~vcdt l ~ a lhe
t fire tcmpcrelurcs in partially open parking geragcs can
bc equivalent to those lhst would be expcricnccd in a clrrscd gsiregc. which in turn arc
l ~ i e l ~th;m
e r those lhar a,ill he acliiet,ed in onen-deck romars. In Auslralia. Ibr r;lr:trcs
- ing g : ~ r u g ~ w ~ i usprolcctcd
tlh
slruclurai slecl.
dfixircd-Occrrpnng. flrrildi~~gs. The n l a t l o
~ l~mircd-ncuupuncy hsildings i h no\$,considcrcd. hlullislory buildings oltcn incorporate stories \ahich under ihu huilding rcgol;~.
il
hichcr lcvui of
stories. For eramplc, in many countries where isolalcd open-deck parking psrnge!, are
nermittcd to hc constructed in unnrotected slecl. Ibis \vould not be ncrmittcd i f t h e onenwhere numerous buildings havc now bccn permitted Lo hc constructed with unproteclrd
steel parking levels below srlorics ofofficcr and shops. Figures 5.11 and 5. I? shogr, osc
such crumple, where {our le\,els of open-deck parking garage constructed from nnntireprooled stcclr\.ork sre locatcd below I?, stories of office accon~rnudation.
E.s.vcnlir?l nrrd A'or~csso~liol~llcmbers. Buildin. codes usunllv rcuuirc
:ill
members
been succrsfully argued in o number of situations. For csample. the building shnwn in
Fig. 5.13 is a high-rise building incorporating large-dian~cler cuncrctc-lillcd l u h e .
conlpositc concrete floors. and a reinforced concrclc scrricc s113f1. Exlcrn:tl trusrcr
spanning hctwccn thc calumns \\,ere provided to ensure adcrluntc lalcral load rchist:lnc~
under design ultimnlc wind forccs and adrquate lelcral stiffness endcr scrvicc wind
loads. The architecl required the estcrnztl b r ; ~ c i nlo~ hc o f c r n o s e d stcclivork. yet u~rdcr
argued on thc basis that in thc cslrcmc cvcnt ol' fire. thc prc*cncc ol'thc br;wing \vus not
364
Special Topics
IChap. 5
Sect. 5.21
365
A...
n illustration of the benefits that mav be achiewd by the approach described is if.
lu$trated try a relsarch program undcrt3ken to in\.esIip;llc nplior~sar5o:i;lted N 11h111~'rciurbi*t!!nc6tt uf n . I i - $ l u ~building.
.
Thc building. shown in Fig. 5.14. incorpural+ :r
braced str.ci cors and ciosuly r l ~ x c dcxterior s1:r.l column* uhich cnmbinl: tvith stecl
spandrel beams to form an cirekor tube structure. The K-braced core is connected to the
exleribr tube by means of transfer trusses at the lop and midheight of the building. Bell
rrusscs extending around the perimeter of the building are located at the top, midhcighl.
and bottom of thc building. All of these steel members are fire protected by means of
concrete encasement, which in the case of the exterior columns, is further encapsulaled
~
366
Special Topics
[Chap. 5
by 51ur.l plxe. In addition. thr. corc is sep~r:tt~.dfrom tile re51 of thc ares ofr.;ich $lor?. b!
mjsunry <rallr.Thc floor b c ~ m ;r~ n dcumpusill: noor sl3bs ore protecttd \rich a s b s s t ~ 5 .
hascd fire prateclion mntcri;il ;rs is the inside s u r i ~ c eof the fitcndc lbe3n1s.
The sprinkler system in the buildine- does notcomnlv
. .wilh currenl code renuiremcnts
for sprinkler hczd spacing or ua1r.r deliwry rdtcr. hlorcovcr. !to sprinklers arc lucnlcd
in thr ceiltng .,pact, as is required for cununt construction.
lllc pr0pohr.d rclurbishmcn~of the huilding required lhc rsmoeal uf;irbestnr-bared
fire prolectiod material from the beams w h i c h s u. n ~ o nthe floor slabs and from the soffit u? lhc c o n l p ~ s i l cnnor slabs. For the refurbished bullding tu mr.r.1 1h2 dcctncd-tuco!oplg requirtmc-nts of lhc regul:!lions, il rvould [squire respraying of (he bu:lms and
t
floor sl:tb suffit, alteration of the sprinkler syslcm lo c l ~ a n g ~it .frum nn c ~ l r j l i c l ~h~,.ard system Lo an ordinary hazard ivslem. i n d the fittineof snrinklcrs in the-ccilins
spacer. In contr:tst. the bullding nwner prupuscd Ikll the refurhished bu~ldlngretain tlie
c r ~ s t i n gaprinklcr llcnds snd that thc slabs and floor I,i.-ms rcmnin unprutcctcd. Thc rsIi3b1lit! of thr. sprinkler s)ste,n a a s further improved by 111sinclusion of 8dJiteun:.l
monitored vslvcs and a system lo cnablc weekly checking of the presence of water in
the sprinkler .pipes
. at every noor.
A! 111~.rc.quesl oltlau bulldlng uwncr, a series o f fire t?sts and ii risk ilssessn~en~
wcrt
undenakr.n. The risk assessmr.nt sr;!r conduct~.d by sgslemalic~llymodcling tlts events
thnl mi:ht fullun the nccJrrcn.'i. ur ;1 fire i n the bullding. 2nd by usinp 3 hlonte C;~rlu
simulntion lo cvaluntc the probobilitv of outcomes which would lead to dcaths arnane the
uc:up3nts o f l h c hullding. 'Thr: r i ~ ks~.,r.ssmunlrr.-r carried itut fur lwo (con:-ptu;!lj \ i ~ ost~ons-tlli. bdllding dcaignud lu s311s1y 311 of the rnitlitnt~ll~
IL.qUIremctll5 0111~1:C J T ~ U I I I
budding rr.gulalions: 3nd 1111. p r o p u s ~ dr ~ . f u r h ~ ~ hbuildinp
r.d
Ir du<crabcd. E;!clt uf the
modcls of the buildinc a c c u r n ~ e l ~ a c c o u n t efor
d the lavout of the buildinr and thc suba)rlerns 3nd compnnsnts u i t l ~ cfire silfcly syste~n.\litn! uf IIIL. d:13 011 fir^. E I U N I ~2nd
1ltvr.lnpmunt. 5rnuk~.mnv?ntcnl. ;!nd :~lnrrncues rr.quirr.,l fur Ilk: risk 35vrwl:nt camu
frum 3n urtenairr. lest p r o g r ~ n t(lhulnas ct 11.. 19923) iit which four fire le,l* sssru cunducted in a test building specially constructed lo simulate part of the protolype building.
The results o r t h e risk assessment showed that the risk to life safety in both buildings
is low, but that the refurbished building is substantially safer than that salisfying the
minimum requircmcnts of the regulntions. On the basis of these findings the building
has been refurbished such that the existing sprinklers remain and no fire protection is
applied
. . to the steel beams or floor slabs.
Further testing and r~.rc=rcltis hcing unden;lkcn to provide thc b ~ r i slor ;i more g a t eralirud n p p r n x h to dulcrminitlg thc lcvsl oifirr. r3fcty offcrcd bv a huildinc b ~ w ntl
d
a rational consideration of the factors described earlier. Clearlv ruch an anoroach has
the potential to oficr subal~ntinlf l e \ ~ b i l ~ tnilh
y reipdct I" slmclural lorn,. ;l\ ~ h influc
:ncr ol;,ll campnncnts u i t h e tire snfctg s!stem cart be t;lhcn into account.
..
Sect. 5.31
Condensed Referencee/Bibliography
367
..
~~~~
5-c
A look at the future not only concludes this study of slate-of-the-an sWctures but also
-.
ooens the door for another monoeranh in this series. The subiect of unbuilt ~
. r o.i c c t sand
futurs syslcms. a rich mix of \isiunary project* from around lhc norld, hls fascinsung
poluntl=l for furthcr chplorallon and prcscntation in 2 rcpir;tle volume.
Thls fi1131 chapt~.rsill semc as 3 brief summap o f u hcrl: !;!I1 build~ng,)slcms sccm
to bc headed in the near. rather than distant. futurk. Several oroicct dcs&intions are appendud 10 chis sccuon, which illuilr=tc aamc nf thcrc principd icndcoc~si.The projculs
dcmonslralc lhc rich divcrrity ol ayalcms now an\ail:,hlc lo d:signcrs. They irL. ;!I1 recently designed unbuilt projects, utilizing systems discussed in earlier chapters,
. .
The rcasuns ll1111these building> rtnl;iin unhuilt range from chxnglng cconnmic condition,. as in thc c;tss ofthe Hank of ihc SoutBu,esi, lo pro~cctsihdt au,ail h m c i n y in a
slow m;lrkcl. such as the Sllimizu Suncr Hiah Rise. In addition lo lhcir unbuilt ht3tUs.
the", also share some features that i~lubuatcl&dencics in tall buildioc desien. These includr ;~rchilectur;tl,slrucluml. as ucll 3s othur lcodcncies lhai point to ihc fulure.
Before discussing lhe fcatures nflhcsl: tutvsrs. 11 is uorlh munlioning une \isionnry
projccl, of ihe type that might appear in a future monograph, as suggested. It has some
feamres common la the other schemes presented in this chapter, extrapolated to a height
significantly taller. Willinm LeMessurier has proposed a half-mile-high tower [850 m
(2789 R)]. the Erewhon Center (Fig. 6.1) (Architectural Record, 1985). With a floor
plan approximately the size of the Sears Tower or the World Trade Center it has usable
floorarcas proven in existing tall buildings. The structunl systems for this tall building
have more in common with the unbuilt projects of this chapter than the current record
holders. The use of massive high-strength concrete columns on the exterior, cast composite with the structural steel frame, utilize the cost-effective strength and stiffness of
concrete in compression. Bracing is employed both as a lateral resistance system and 3s
a rravitv load transfer system to allow all load-bcarjne columns to pnrticipalc in the lateml rcs(s11ncL. f o r n p l i i u m cfIiciency.Thc result Is a;ury rigid 1oir.r nil11 3 10-acc P C riod uf\lhr.~lion,ulilizing convcn~ion;tluonrtructlun i:chniq.te~.
~
~~
- -
ki
ii
Sect. 6.21
37 1
Structural Tendencies
- -.
372
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 6
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
The use of braced frames or shear walls, in lieu of moment resistant frames, is also
evident. Thcsc systems are inherently more stiff, and therefore more economical in
achieving drift and acceleration limits. Bracing and walls sre locally more limiting than
framed tubes, particularly when bracinapcnemtes
the insrior volume. But bracinn and
..
core ivallc also upun up other opportunities for flexibility An e ~ a m p l uof this is the e r .
tsrior wall oihraccd lor\r.rs. $rhcrc column* nn). be njuch sn~allr.rb a n llte massive sections required for framed tubes
;\nuther 3d\,anccmunt in the pcrlormsncc nltnll buildings is thc usc ofdamping ,),Itmi. Activc dilmping r)alums u,er: lir.4 uscd in llte rulrolil of Boston's klancock building. 35 llcll :IS i l l orifinil design fc3lure in Sen York'r Cilicom Ccnlcr. Thc World
Trade Center was one ofthe first to use pnssi\,e damping systems..~heuse of these systems is becoming more common now, and indeed the Shimizu tower proposes an active
damping system (HMD). The improvement in analyticsl tools, namely, more powerful
computers at affordable prices, has made some of these aduancements possible. And
i m p r ~ \ ~ c m e nint stesting facilities, both shaking tables and wind tunnels, have also aided
the undcrslanding and usefulness of these systcms. Base isolation systems for earthquake motion, as well as tuned mass dalnpcrs for the control of wind nloucmcnts, arc
now common dcsign consideretions. Other systems, such as active control of building
structures with advanced microprocessors, are also being tested, and increasing use
could be anticipated in the future.
Finally therc is mo\,cmcnt toward greater inlegration in thc design and construction
process through information systems. Consideration of construction methods and syrterns, including prefabrication, modulnr construction. and robotics. is cllanging the traditional project delivery systems. Information systems for monitoring quality assurance
during construction as well ns monitoring the long-term performance of buildings are
also on the horizon, with the integration of mechanical. wnical lransportation and
maintenance systems.
373
Miglin-Beitler Tower
Chicago,
:?.
Illinois, USA
Architect
Svuctural engineer
Year of completion
Height from strcct to rool
Number of storics
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Foundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
374
Core
[Chap. 6
I. A 19- by 19-m (62.5- by 62.5-11) concrete core with walls of varying thickness.
Theintcriorcross walls of the corc arc gencmlly not penetrated with openings. This contributes significantly to the lateral stiffness.
2. Eight cascin-place concrctc fin columns located on the faces of the building, which
extend up to 6 m (20 it) beyond the42.6- by 42.6-m (110- by 140-it) lonar footprint.
3. Eielit link beams canncctinc the four corners of the core lo the eieht
fin columns
u
31 e\c.ry llonr. 'These reinforced concrclc b:nm< arc hxunchud at both ends for incrcn,ed
s t i f f r l : ~:~nd
~ rr..l.l;r.d in dcpth 31 m i d r p ~ nto allow fctr p35b3fc 01 mcchnnacill ~ L I C I S .
Linking.the fin columns and cure cnoblur thc full uidtli uf thc h ~ l l d i -n etu act i n r e r w ine lsteral forces. In addition to link benms at each floor. sets of two-stam-dcco outriegcr walls 3rc lucntud at Ievcls Ib, 56. m d 91. Thtac outrigger aallr <nlvauce the invractiorl betrracn ertcrlor fin culumns and the corc.
4. A conventional structural steel composite floor system with 460-mm (18-in.).
deep rolled steel beams suaced at approrimatelv
3 m I10
..
. ft). on center. A slab of 76-mm
( 3 - ~ n . ) - d r .l-mm
s ~ (20-g;;uge) c o n u g l u d mctni deck 2nd 89 mm (3.5 in ) ofslnne cunir:le tupplne ipJtli betrvecn 111sbcarns. Tne ile:l floor syr1L.mia rupporttd h> the m>tin-place concrete elements.
5 . Exterior steel Vierendeel trusses consisting of the horizontal spandrels and two
vertical columns at each of the 18.6-m (61-it)-wide faces on the four sides of the building between the fin columns. To eliminate stresses produced by creep and shrinkage
hlrains in the concrete fin columns, theverticals in 1heVirrendeel arc provided with vertical slip connections. This has the added benefit of channeling all of the gravity loads
on each of thc building faces out lo the fin columns to help eliminate uplift forces on the
foundations.
Exterior steel Vicrendecl trusses are used to pick up each of thc four cantilevered
corners of thc buildinn. Corner columns are eliminated. n r o v i d i n ~for comer offices
\%itllondisturh:d tisa,s. Coone:tlon* herncen the stc:l Visrendeel iru*.us 2nd 1111: r u n ;r:w fin c o l ~ , n n \:!re typi:311! itmple shr.:~rc<lnncclionl ahich minimirc co\ts 2nd expedilc erection.
6. A 183-nt (600-it)-lall steel-framed lo\r'er st the top of the building. This braced
frame is to house observation levels, window washing, mechanical equipment rooms,
and an ossortmcnt of broadcasting equipment.
~~
376
[Chap. 6
A cruciform tube structure provides a safe, elegant, efficient, and consmctible solution to h e challenge of designing the world's tallest building, the Miglin-Beitler Tower.
The proposed s w c t u n l solution combines the erection speed of concrete construction,
the flexibility for future change and the efficiency for horizontal spans of a steel floor
system, and the superior dynamic acceleration response of a composite latenl load resisting slluctunl system.
Project Descriptions
Dearborn Center
Chicago, Illinois, USA
'
Ar$$ilect
Stnicturul engineer
Year of completion
Height from smeel to roof
Number of stories
Number of levels below ground
Building use
Frame material
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lnternl deflection
Design fundamenlnl period
Design nccelenlion
Design damping
Earthquake loading
Type of smcture
Foundation conditions
Fooling type
Typical floor
Story height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
Material
Slab
Columns
Size at ground floor
Spacing
Material
Core
The project will consist of an equivalent 85-story oflicc tower with a total overall gross
enclosed area of approximately 246,000 m' (2.6 million ftz) of which approximately
227,000 mz (2.4 million ft') is above gnde (Fig. 6.4).
The first five floors will cover an area approximately equivalent lo the site and will
contain approximately 9270 mz (98,000 ft') of retail syucc on the ground floor. con-
378
[Chap. 6
Project Descriptions
379
course level, and second floor (Fig. 6.5). The omce lower will be located at the west end
of the site. Figure 6.6 shows the outrigger tmss system used.
There will be three below-grade levels. The concourse level contains relail rcntnl
space plus mecbanicnl, clcctrical, and building services arcas. The second and third
lower lcvels will bc devoted primarily lo parking for 237 cars. but will also contain the
main incoming electric and telephone services, employee facilities, and tenant areas.
A multilevel relail galleria will extend from thc concourse lcvcl up through the second floor and will interconnect with the Dearbom Street and State Street subway slalions at the concourse level. The retail levels will be linked by cscalalors within a slcylighted, stepped atrium space. Two additional pairs of escalators will connect the first.
second, and fourth floors at the clcvalor core. Offices spaces on the third, founh, and
fifih floors !+-ill open into the atrium.
380
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 6
381
Architect
..;Structurdl engineer
Year of completion
Hcighl from street lo roof
Number of slories
Number 01levels below ground
Building use
Frame rnalerinl
Typical floor live load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral deflection
Design fundamcnral period
Design ncceleration
Design damping
Shear wall
Earthquake loading
Type of structure
Foundation condilions
Fooling type
++
Fig. 6.6 Outrigger truss; Dcnrborn Ccnler.
Typical floor
S l o q height
Beam span
Beam depth
Beam spacing
hlatcrial
Slab
Columns
The tapered form of titis mixed-construction 372-m (1222-11)-high towcr. its pcakcd
sculptured crown, and the slender spire to top it of1 recall the dramatic upward-reaching
382
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 6
skyscrapers of rhc 1930s (Fig. 6.7). The architects were chosen as a rcsull of a design
competilion l ~ r l dby the dcvclopcr. Unforlunately the Texas oil-based recession made it
necessary to cancel the project after completion of the design developmenL Thc towcr
contained an area of over 204.400 m' (2.2 million ft').At ground level and below there
were
and oarkine in addition lo a erand lobby. mace.
-.-.retail soace
. The towcr was set diagonally an its downtown Houston site.
The tower was square wit11 sllnped corners to provide more officcs with comer windows. and tapered from 5 5 to 46 m (180 to 150 ft) square at lhc cighliclh noor. It rcsled
on only cigh; large concrete columns, which diminished in cross &ion from the lop of
the
hmmdatinn
mat to floor 80 (Fin. 6.8).
~...
..
The overall slruclural slenderness mlio oftllc tower was 8.0. based on 390 ml48.7 m
(1279 ftl160 ft), the ratio of t l ~ clo\ver ltcigllt above the lop of the mat to the horizontal
dimension center to center of the columns at that level.
The severe Houston wind climotc. the liieh slenderness ratio orlhc tou,cr. and its nar~~~
. -
and stiffness, with the lenst cost premium over that rcquircd for gravity loads nnd minimal interference with architectural lavoul. Thc main structural frames were four stccl
s u p c r ~ r ~ s ta.n
c ~ . in c3cil ilir~ction.ahicll a m ? (tic c n t h~ilding
~
luxd n ~ tot tbc concr?I~.coIun~n\.The ,.lp:rlruuc\ h:,d Ji:lcon;!ls III :. cl,c\ron P : I I I ~ T I I 21 n i l t ~ - * ~ oi,>tcrry
tnls, uith 11~r;ront;lltlr., n t 1 l 1 ~lo.trtll ~ n rliuth
d
>tory ufe3ch. TIIL.d i : ~ n o n ~~l sn l y;I"pcnred outsidc the central service corc fur four stories out of each nine-story modu.lc
(Fig. 6.9).
The entire nonrspncc outside the corc was olher\r,ise column-free, with conventional
composite stcel beates spanning from the corc to a pcrin~ctcrstccl girder. The 24.4-m
(SO-ill-wide core w a s bridccd bv a eair of Vierendcel trusses. Thc cieht high-strennth
cause of vortex shedding, thc tower would have excessive wind forces nnd lateral accelerations unless its vibration ncriod \r,as limited lo above 7 sec. a lour value for so kill
3 i1ru;tJrc Esun .d tltot pcrtod. ths tuner nccup:~ntsaoulJ L'\p?rlcnc: t n l~r s q ~ c n dir.
t
conlfurl ir.m uin,l-iod~ur.dnl.,tlun .A sp~'c!alsh#d\ N : I ~ madr: to assera the :.ntount u l
ndditiunnl d;lmpinfi 1h3t illr. i . ~ o ~ ~ d : ~ t ~ o n - m i~nt~- e~rn: i~It l oSIOUIJ
n
provld? (i,pproxi.
..
matelv 0.3%). In order LO reduce accelcralions to acceotable levels. a tuned mass damner
$!,tern. of 3 lype vmil:lr lo t11a1iltrt311<d in .Us$\ York'\ Citicnrp Center. wns to be Inc:.tud III lllc craiun o f t l ~ torvcr
c
:I[ 352 6 111 ( I 157 it) ; ~ b n s e
graund. The mass block s n s
lo have o weight of about 386 tonnes (425tons) and was designed to increase the towcr
effective damping to at lenst 3.5%.
Fig. 1.7
llourton. Tcus.
'
386
[Chap. 6
Architect
Structural engineer
Year or carnplclion
Height from street to roof
Numbcr of stories
Numbcr of levels bclow fruund
Building use
Frame ~natcrial
Typical floor lit'c load
Basic wind velocity
Maximum lateral dcflcction
Design fundamental period
Dcsifn accslrration
Design datnping
E;irthquake loslding
Typ? of rtructurc
Fuundation conditions
Footing type
Typical floor
Stury height
Bcnm span
Bcom depth
Beam spacing
hlatcrial
Slab
Columns
Size ot ground floot
Spacing
hlatcrinl
Sllimizu Corporation
Shimizu Corporation
Proposal
550 rn (1804 11)
121
6
Hotel, officcs, retail shops. balls. parking
Stccl reinforced cnncrctc
1.8. 3 kPu (36. 60 psf)
45.5 mlscc (I02 mph)
Hi300 (Ievcl I loading; Hi200 (Icvcl 2
loading)
6.0 scc
5 rng peak. I-yr return
0.6% ser\,iccability: 2% ultimolc
Sciscnic rcrpansc rztctor (1.05
Trussud tube nlegastructurc
160 m (525 rt) a f send
Combination ofcontinuous \r,:!lls and pretensioned high-strength concrctr (PHC)
piles
Project Descriptions
367
The SSH building is 550 rn (1801 it) tall with 121 stories above ground and six stories
underground (Fig. 6.10). This design project was intended to confirm the feasibility of
consmcting such a tall building in the earthquake- and typhoon-prone counvy of Japan
by the end of this century based on the technologies available today ot Shimizu.
The SSH building rvns designed as a complex consisting of hotels, offices, and
shops. The building areais 44.000 m
' (474,000 f?) for a plot area of 90.000 m' (969.000
ft2). The total space of the SSH building is 754,000 m' (8.1 16,800 it2) and is divided into
three zones along the height. A zone was designed to be squeezed through the top and
388
Project Descriptions
[Chap. 6
rotated by 45' against the lower zone. The bottom zone, zone 1, consisls of 43 stories
with an average floor space of about 6200 m' (66,700 ft'). The middle zone. zone 2. consists of 37 stories with an average floor space o f 4 8 0 0 rn' (51.700 it2). The top zone.
zone 3. consists of 36 stories with an nveroee floor space of 2000 m'(21.500 it2). Zones
2 2nd 3 h a w qky lobb~esat thetr lowesl levcls. n t e sky lobbies are tlte lohhirs for shuttle clesnmrr. They arc also dc\ignrd tin mucl the rcqlliremunt for cvacu~lionarea, in thc
evcnt of fire.
The critical desien loads for the SSH buildine were the seismic and wind loads. The
rdsponsc apectra lor far-field eanhqitakes u.it11 largc magniludes sxpscltd in tlic Tokyu
area appenr lo hare clsar p s x k around 8 a c c Considering !hew spcctrsl peaks. 3 m q a structke svstem with a truss-tube mechanism was employcd lo i c e p the SSH buildinr
stiff
enoudh to have a fundamental natural oeriod o f a b o u i 6 sec. Thi; s h o r t ~ e r i o dhelor
-~~~~
avoid a lock-in vibrall?n resulting from the \'onex shedding in serer* uindr.
The sltore o f T o k ) o Bay co~nprisessort suil srmlo. To ovcrcolne the roft soil conditions, special attention hasbccn paid to the foundation ryslem. The proposed foundvtion
svstem consists of a circular cvlindrical wall of a diameter of 162 m 1531 it) with oiler
ind diaphragm rvalls inside. T'he thickness of the cylindrical outer will is 4.'0 m (1'3 ft)
in the upper portion. It reaches e depth of74.5 m (244 ft). This unique foundation system a ~ ~ dthis
i s supcrtall building t o be built on such soft soil
Srnrctttrol Sjrron. A! tile sliu on the shore o l tht Tok)n Rny nrea. apeutral compoocnls of ohnut8 scc m3) hc pronouni~dill ths rcsponsL. spcctrn f o r i ~ r - f i e l ?2nltq~:ihci
d
uilh large n~agnitudcs.Thcrciorc IIIC n;itural period o i 8 iec shduld bc a\oldsd for the
SSH lhuildir~g.Hosrever. B ~ I I I :ft~ndilmtntnln:lturnl psrind is hct lo be lnngur than R w c .
;I lock-in tihriltion due lo strong wind may bccoms a big issuc.
Two strategies werc eslablished to overcome these problems. The first strategy was
to achieve a fundamental natural ~ e r i o dofsienificantlv
less than 8 sec. The tareet natural period was set at 6 sec. The second strategy was to select the configurntion of the
building to minimize the wind loads, especially for the purpose of avoiding a lock-in
vibration.
For the first strategy. the structural system selected is a megastructure with a truss
tube with steel columns filled with hieh-sueneth concrete. This svsrem achieves enoueh
=
sliffn~.s, for tile SSH hullding to have n first n;itural period olappro.\i~nately6 scc.
For the second str3tcgy. the optimum configurntion for the SSH building was suught
u a i n ~wind lunnul c\ocri~nr.nts.Tllrce rvsolutioos r\.ers a.p.~ l ~ lo
u dthe bulldinc. Th: first
resoiution was to cui the corners off the building so that the floor plan wouid become
closer lo a round shape. The second was to reduce the plan wea in the upper zones. The
third was to rotate each building zone by 15" with respect to the zone below. This combination effectively broadened the power spectra of wind loads so that lock-in vibration
should bc unlikely to occur (Fig. 6.1 1). A perspective of the strnclural frame is shown
in Fie.
- 6.12.
Thc soil 21 tile hullding silt i, urpdci3lly suft. To 3rsurs muugh c3pxity undsr Illis
snil uundition. ;I spcci:ll ioendation syatum has hcen ~~mplo)cd.'I'lic
unique asp<ct ~ . i t l l ~ .
foundation is a continuous circular cylindrical wall system which cresies animproved
bearing stress distribution and reduces construction cost compared to a conucntional
system. The continuous ouler \\,all reaches 74.5 m (221 ft) deep. The foundation has a
mat slab 5.0 m (16 i t 4 in.) thick bctwecn -23.5 and -28.5 m (-77 and -93.5 it). From
the mat slab to the end of the continuous rr.all, piles and diaphragm walls mere used to
strengthen the soil contained in the continuous wall. This foundation of a circular cylindrical shape is considered lo be rigid enough as a whole.
The lhickness o f t l ~ econtinuous wall is 4.0 m (13 ft) down to -28.5 m (-93.5 it).
Beyond that depth, the lhickness of the !rsall is kepl at 3.2 m (10 ft 6 in.) to tllc bottom.
D e s i ~ nCrirerio. The design criteria for the SSH building against enrthquake and wind
loads are as follows:
1. Under leilel I loods. The stresses of the slructural main frames should be smaller
than the allowable stress. In principle, no uplift is allowed Tor the foundation.
9
2. Under level 2 loads. The stresses of the smctural main frames should be below
the level thnt can be considered to be elastic as a wholc. In addition, no harmful
residual deformation due to the foundation movement should be allowed.
Level 1 loads are those that are likely to be experienced by the building during the
service pcriod. Level 2 loads are those that can be considered to be the maximum credible loads at the building site.
389
"
1st Zone (olflce) typical-lloor plan
Sect. 6.41
Condensed References/Bibliography
391
I n addition to these design criteria, the discomfort of the tiuilding's occupants due lo
the vibration was assessed for wind and earihauake loads ex~ecledl o occur once evew
w a r . F n ~ r11)hrid mnss dampers , l i h l D ~ )$<ill
be installed ;,I the lop of lo2 SSH building. Tnc weight ofeoch H 5 i D i s abuut?00 1onne5 (??.I
Ions). T u o HhlDs n f 100 tonncs
( II ? Inns) h:nu :~lr~.ady
been inrl;lllcd ill ;I j 0 - s l 0 0 bu~ldlngin 0s3L=. J a p ~ n .
Fig. 6.12
Current Questions,
Problems, and
Research Needs
I . What are the structural systems and building data Tor other significant high-rise
buildings in Europe. South America, and Africa?
2. What is the appropriate way to classify tall building laternl load resisting syslaced within the classification
tems? How are innovative and evolvine- systems
.
schun,s stlch lhnl cataloging and data cullcctiott oTstructur3l syslcnls can be continuously upd3tcd ;lnd oT urc to the pr~crlcinrcnginctr!
3. How are structural schemes tailorcd to local geographic condilions to produce
economical desirns?
I. Should lhcrc be a proiu.wun;~lc o n s e t ~ s rufardii~g
~s
the auccpt;~h~l~t)
df lall huilding structures wit11 rcspcct to wniccnbilit) iswe? such as later:ll drllt. nnru vibration, occupant cornfori, and noor levelness?
5. What oossible structural forms for extra buildine suauorl
auvcd
. towcrs
. . such as .
arc possible for ultra-1211 high-rise buildings'! Whnt arc tllc sociulugical, pl;lnning. and inlnintcnmcc implicatinnr lor soch buildings'! Whal h)slellls are unvisioned for the nert gcncmtion of tall buildings over 600 m (2000 TI) i n hcigllt'!
6. What unique problems are enconnlered when exposing lall building slructural
Trnmes on the building perimeter? What are the solutions?
7. What are the structural systems Tor the future in arcas of high seismicity?
Nomenclature
GLOSSARY
A36.
Structurul rleel with yield strength of 250 MPP (36.000 pri). per ASTM svmdrrd.
Strucarol steel with yield rtrength of 350 hlPo (50.000 psi). per ASTM stunRate of chongc i n vclocity
us u building su%~ys
due to wind or crnhquakr foiccs.
Bay window.
Beam link.
Bent. Plant frnmcworli of bcnm or truss members that support a floor or roof ilnd llle columns
that support there members.
Braced frame. Usually u fnme which derives is rtnbilily primarily from 1NSS raian. h l o i t elcrncnu hove pinned ends and do no^ dcvelop bcnding resistance. (Thcsc f n m e i usually develop
minor bcnding farces.)
Building standard.
irlnwd luhcs "re >n;o?r.d or lrt.:~.tled loBundled lube. Slruclural s)slem in nhicn rira;hlr.l
~ e ~ l l rn
u r t h sorilmnn
~ ~
u.all$ U
-IIIIII~LIO.IT
I
! ~ h ?:re
i C U I I I O : ~ C ~ $!!to 18ngle \\:II1. IIICTC~!
f~ri8ng
cnmnr~zbll#!r
.
I n :t h,nJI;.I
I.,h:.
~ndi\~J~:rl
- - r~~
. ~ ~ tnf rtrc\\es 31 ihc inleridsc uf \a:h c o n l i n ~ ~ utuhc,.
tube elemenlr may be ierminutcd a1 any nppropriste lcvcl
~~
Castellated beam. Bcvm fubricoted by culling Lhrough the web a f the hcsm with a profile burning machine, reporating (he two halves, moving one half along the other until the "tceth" o f the
cu.tellationr
and lack weldinr'the two hal$,cstoecthcr. Deeo "enelration Wcldinr is then
~
~coincide.
~
urcd to wcld both sidcs o f the \s,eb.
..
Center length.
lar members.
Central-services core. Zone o f a high-rise building. often located cenlriilly in plan. where elcmtars. svairs, toilets, and ien.iccs shofts arc loc~lcd.Core may be cnclascd by co,lcrcle m r l l i or
eiecl framer with lightwcighl cladding.
396
Glossary
Nomenclature
In!,cned V i n appearance.
Chevron.
Code. Building code, o legal document providing design crilerin far buildings in a paniculvr
jurisdiction.
coefficient of variation. Rolio o f the rtvndard drvindon to the meno of n n n d o m variable.
Concentrically braced frame. Frome i n which rcsislvnce l o lilteral load or frame instability ia
provided by diagonal K o r other auxiliary system ofbncing.
Core. Ponion o i n building lhvl includes elevaton, sloin, mrchvnical rhafl, and toilets, oflcn
centmlly located.
Creep. Slow limc-depcndcnl change in dimcnrionr of concrete undcr il sustained loiid, primarily
i n thc dirccdon i n whicl> !he load iicL5: u dimcnsionlesr qurntity having u n i u o f strain.
Dirsiporion o f energy for dynamic lauding.
Damping.
Dapped girders. Girders (or bcbms) h w i n g u notch ul one or both ends in the underside to accommodate u corbel support within the girder depth or to crcrle additional rpnce for air ducts m d
h e like.
Doubler.
Ductility.
Eccentrically braced frame. Fiiamc i n which the ccntcriinc\ o f bracer air offset lrom !he paints
ofintrrscctinn o f l h r crnturlinrs of bcami and columns.
Environmental loads.
Facade.
..
Load combinations.
Load effects.
Momcntr, shcuis, and vxiul forcer i n u membcr dce l o loads or other actions.
Load factors.
Longitudinal.
M a x i m u m l o a d lultimate load). Plvsric limit load 'or rlability limit load. ur defincd: also manimum load-currying capocity of u rmcture under test.
Medium-rise building.
mngc of 10 to ZO stories.
Shear wall following m i r r r g u l x line i n plan. (No1 u rectilinear asMultistory building ncithcr punicularly high nor low: usuillly i n the
Modulartubas. Condguoua framed tubular struaurnl aysremr which % togcthcr to form u complete bundlcd tube structure.
M o m e n t resisting frame. lnlcgivted syslcm o f r m c t u m l elemcnu porrrrring cantinuily and
hence capable o f resisting bending forcer. (Thcse fnmcr uruuily develop minor u i o l forcer.)
Factor o f safety.
Limit-state derign. Design process thal involver identification of all potential modes olfailure
(limit rtnter) and mainlnining an nccepxable level of safety ogvinst their occurrence. Thc safely
level is usually erlubiished on n probabilistic bnsir.
.* ,
i o a d end resistance factor design. Design method i n which, a1 n chosen l i m i t swte, loo* effeels and resistances are sepnntcly multipiicd by factors ihal uccount for h c inherent uncenainlies
i n the determinudon o f these quuntilier.
Drift.
A c ~ u i i weight
l
o f rlrucluml clumcna. (This is a gmrity lodd.1
Dead load.
Differential.
397
alrers i l i u m e d i n derign (stress foctor orrarcty): or ratio ofthc ultimntc loud, momcnl. or slrcvr o f
a structur;,l mrmbcr to thc ss'orking loild. moment, or shcar, respectively, assumed in design (load
fuccor o f rarely).
Failure. Condition where o limit itute is reached. This mzy or may not i n ~ o i r ecollupsc ar other
cvtvrtraphic occurrences.
Neoprene. Synthetic rubber boring physical prapenier closely resembling those o f n a r u n l rubbcr bur not requiring sulfur for vulcmizution. I t is made by polymerizing chloroprcncs. and the Intter is produced f i o m vcctylene and hydrogen chloride.
Fin.
Node.
Flange m o m e n t connection.
o f the column.
Floor area ratio IFARI. Spccilicd ratio o f permissible floor space l o lot arc*. in which the inducemenl l o reduce lot coverage is sn impoiiant componml. Thc bidsic ratio is frequently inodilicd
by providing "bonus" or "prcn~ium" floor npiacc for rucl, aspects as ilrcadcs. \rlb;icks. und plrziiq.
Also called ldor mr;,~.
Framed tube.
*##,
H a t truss.
lbli.18
111 11*
iw
1111.
N o m i n a l l o a d effect. Calculated using a nominal load. The nominnl load frequently is defined
with rcierence to u probability level; for cxnmplc, 50-gmr mean rccunence intcwal wind speed
ured i n cnlculuting wind load.
Nominal resistance. Calculated using nominal material and crass-iectionul propcnies nnd u mtionnlly developed f o m u l n b a e d an on unalydc~landlor expcrimcntnl model o f limit-swte behavior.
Outrigger. Stifirtructurul m r r work extending from core to perimeter or any point to distribute
column loads betwccn them.
Outstanding.
P-delta effect.
members.
Probabilistic design.
checking procrrr.
Probability distribution. Marhematical law UIm describes the prohubility that a random vrriable w i l l vssumeccmin valuer: either ilcumulotivedistribudon function (cdfl or aprobability dcnrity iuncdon ir used.
Probability o f failure.
Abbreviations
Nomenclature
398
Probability of survival.
Rack. To deform o rrclangle in shcvrby dispiilcingonc sidc latcmlly relalive to theopposite ride.
Rmistance. Maximum loud-c~nyingcapacity ns defined by a limit nille.
Resistance factor. Panial safety factor ro nccount far the probability ofunderrtrength of mulerials or arucruml mrmbcrs.
Seismic. Penvining to cunhquukes.
Shearstud. Short mild-steel rod with flattened head, wcldcd to a steel mcmbcr. to tmnsfcrsheor
force brtu,cen steel and runounding concrete.
Skewed. Not parallel or perpcndiculur.
Slab-typs high-rise building. Building in theshvpc ofo vcnicvl slnbsrvnding on the ground on
i u ahon dimcniion.
Spandrel. Bcnm spanning between columns on the erlerior of u building.
Spandrel beam. Floor-lcucl berm in thc face of a building, urunlly iupponing the edges of the
floor slabs.
Staggered truss system. S l n c l ~ i a lr)rlecr, for .l b~ildingn ~ l hu!tbrir:d fr3mcr in "nu ulrcc.
lion and fr.ui8cr bnced ill the other direr!inu hy s\c u i stor).-duep in,...:,
rucgcrco in lar3tinn 31
lltcrnjtc fnrnrr on C\L.TY ~ l h ~nnor
. r of 1 1 8 ~b.!ilding.
Stocky. Hcuvy and thick, compored of clemcnls u'ith low width-lo-thickncrs ratios.
Stressed skin. Masriul used for strength and stiifnerr in its own dune, as in u membnnc
Stub girder. Vicrendcel floor girder comprising the concrete floor as thc top chord, u wideflange beam or column section os lhe bottom chord, with the chords connected by the floor bevmr
end shon lengxhs of the floor beam (stubs1 fired in line with the bottom chord.
Table forms. Prefubricated beam and slab fonwork complete with venical props.
399
C,
d
E
= depth of building
= longitudinal turbulence spectrum; = 0.47Nl(2+fl)"6
= peak factor; for normally disvibuted process. =
= gust factor for resonant component. = g 2 ( r r ~ f i ~ e
= height of building
I
[ I - (nln,)']'
+ 4(2(nln,)'
= modal mass
= mean base overturning moment; for a square building, can be upproxi-
M,
= inertial bnse bending moment for unit displacement nt top of building; for
nt
N
"0
Tiebacks. Mechanical devices for rupponing sheeting, consisting of porttenrioncd rods ertmding to anchor points in the soil surrounding the cxcnvution or to rack.
Transverse. Direction of b e rhoncr plan dimenrion.
= size factor; =
(1
+ 3.5n,hlVh)(l + 4n,bl&)
Trussed tube system. Tubular system for tall buildings in which larernl iorces are resirled by
tmBs uclion.
= period under consideration, seconds: usually 600 sec for acceleration criteria
= hourly mean wind speed a t height h
Tubs. Struclure with continuous perimeter fmme designed to act in a manner similar lo lhut of o
hollow cylinder.
Tune. Adjurtcorefully.
Nominally 356-mm (I-l-in.)-deep steel scction n'irh wide nungc or wide I shapc.
Web moment connection. Moment connection in which beam is connected to web of column.
SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS
ACI
AISC
ASCE
ASTM
CBF
CCD
CTBUH
P
p,
= air density
= building density
EBF
ECCS
uL
Nomenclature
h
S
gal
hp
hr
Imp
8".
K
kg
kgf
kip
km
kN
a
kW
Ib
Ibf
I
MI
MPn
m
mi
ml
mm
MN
N
OL
Po
psf
psi
'R
rcc
slug
\V
yd
kilowan
pound
pound force
pound mars
meg&jojoule
megnpurcvl
mcler
mile
milliliter
millimelcr
meganewton
ncwlon
ounce
pnscvl
pounds per square foot
pounds per squnrc inch
degree Rankine
second
14.594 kg
WBll
yard
AISC. 1983
MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION. Americidn lnrtilurc of Stccl Conslmclion. Chicago. Ill..
2d Q u o n ~ r
AISC. 1987
ONE LIBERTY PLACE-EFFICIENCY AND ELEGANCE IN THE CRADLE OF HISTORY.
blodent Slecl Co!8rrrucrion, no. 2. pp. 9-14.
AISC. 1991
THE WORLD'S TALLEST BUILDING-THE MIGLIN-BEITLER TOWER, blodern Steel
Cnnrrrncrion.. Aururr.
Archiiecarul Record. 1985
WILLIAM LEMESSURIER'S SUPER-TALL STRUCTURES. Arcl~irecrr,rrtl Rcrord. JunuurylFcbruary.
Archltec1ure. 1988
EXPLORING COMPOSITE STRUCTURES. Arcbiruclirre, March
Archilcclure. 1988
TWO UNION SQUARE, ilrcl~ilccivrc,hlsrch
Architeclurr, 1990
HlGH STRENGTH. Arcltirrcn,rc. October,
Architec~ureand Urbanirm. 1991
TWO UNION SOUARE. Arcbiiecn,re and Urbanirnr. Fcbruarv,
ASCE, 1986
COMPUTER CUTS TOWER STEEL. Ciuil Engbzreriag, March
ASCE. 1990
AUSSIE STEEL. Civil Enri,rcerinr.
". Dcccmber.
ASCE. 1991
BUILDING AIMS TO BE WORLD'S TALLEST AT 1.999 FT..Ci!,il Er~ginrering,March.
Asrefpour-Dezfuly, M.. Huguor, 8. A.. and Browrigg. A.. 1990
FIRE RESISTANT HlGH STRENGTH LOW ALLOY STEELS, bloreriolr Sciertcr o,rd Tecltn o l o ~ svol.
, 6. December.
AurlrnlioPorl Publ.. 1988
CHIFLEY SQUARE ON THE MOVE STRUCTURES. no. VBP 88 I0
Beck. V.. 1991
FIRE SAFETY SYSTEMS DESIGN USING RISK ASSESShlENT MODELS-DEVELOPMENTS lh'AUSTRALIA. Fire Sojrr). Scinice, Proceedings of ihc 3d lnternnlionul Symposium. Elsevier.
Bennclu.1. D.. Almand. K. H..TBomas. 1. R.. Pioe. 0.1.. and Lewins. R. R.. 1989
FIRE IN CARPARKS. BHP Melbourne Rcscarch Labomtorier. Auslralia. Repun
MRLIPS691851005. Aueurr.
*
Bcnnelts, I. D.. Proe. D. I.. Lewlns. R. R.. andThomas, I. R.. 1985
OPEN-DECK CARPARK FIRETESTS. BHPMelbournc Rcscarrh Luboratarier. Australi:l. Repon hIRUPS691851001.
Bond. G. V. L.. 1975
FIRE AND STEEL CONSTRUCTION: WATER COOLED HOLLO\V COLUMNS. Cortrrroilo.
".
-.
-.
Contributors
.1~, ,
The following is n lisl of those who have contributed their time and effort to mnke this
volume possible. The names, affiliations, cities, and countries of each contributor are
given.
Inn D. Bennelts, BHP Melbourne Laboratories, hlelhournc. Ausrralia
Joseph Burns, LeMessuncr Consultants. Inc., Chicago. Ili!nois. USA
Brian Cnvill. VSL Prcstrcssin~(Aust) Pt). Ltd.. Sydncy, Austmlia
Joseuh
.
~ n e i i e e r s .~ o u i t o n~. e n n sUSA
.
- - - - = - ~P. ~- o l a c o CBM
Henry J. ~ o w a n , ' ~ n i v e r s i i osydney,
f
syd"ey. ~ " s t r a l i n
P. H. Dnyawansa BHP Melbourne Laboratories. Melbourne, Australia
James G. Forbes, Irwin Johnston and Partners. Sydney. Ausmiia
Eiji Fukuzawa, Kajima Design. Tokyo, Japan
Max B. Kilmister, Connell Wagner Consulting Engineers. Brisbane. Australia
R y s n r d M. Kownlczyk, Department of Civil Engineering. University of Beira Interior.
Covilha. Porngal (former: Bialyslok University of Technology, Biaiyslak, Poland)
Owen Martin, Connell Wagner Rnnkine and Hill. Sydney. Australin
William Melbourne, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Monash University.
Melbourne, Australia
Seiichi Murnmatsu, Kajima Design, Tokyo, Japan
T. Okoshi, Nihon Sekkei, Tokyo. Jnpnn
Ahmad Rahimian, The Office of hwin G. Cantor, New York, New York, USA
Thomas Scarangello, Thomton-Tomasetti Engineers, New York, New York. USA
Robert Sinn, Skidmore Owings and Menill, Chicago. Illinois. USA
Richard Tomasetti, Thornton-Tomasetti Engineers. New York. New York. USA
A. Ynmaki, Nihon Sekkei, Tokyo, Jnpnn
~
Buildina Index
B8rcelonn. Spain:
Hatcl de 13s Aner. 276.277. 278. 279. 358.
360
Boston. Mnrachurenr. United States:
Dewey SquvreTower. 3 5 , 2 3 6 , 2 3 7
lohn Huncock Building. 372
Brirbane. Auruulia:
Ccnuvl One P l m . 47.48.19.50
NBCTowcr. 3
I81 \Vest hlvdison Streel. 206.207.208.209
OneNonh Franklin. 15
Onterir Ccnter, 265.266.267
Quukcr Onls Tower. 2
Sears Tower. 202,280,181,182-284,355,
369
77 West Wacker Drive, 124,125, 126
337.338
Bcnkofthe SoulhwestTower.369.371.381.
382,383,384,385
Four Allen Cunter. 166,167.168. 169
Two Shell Plau. 197
Kamogawa, lapan:
Kvmogvwt GnndTowcr. 104,105. 106. 107
ng Index
Kobe. Jupm:
Kobe Commerce, Industry 8. Tnde Center.
85.86.87-89
Kobe Ponopiu Hotel. 73. 71.75.76
Kunlu Lumpur. Malaysia:
Luth Building. 17.32.33.34-37
London. Englmd:
Bush h e House. 358.359
Lor Angeles. California United Stoles:
Figucroa nt Wilrhire. 162. !63. 16-4. 165
First Interrule World Center. 313,333,334
Mclhournc. Aurtmlin:
Bourkc Place. 19.23.24.U. 45.46. 109
Cassulden Place. 117.128. 129.300
Mclboume Ccnlnl. 27.28.29-31. 109
140 William Succt. 365
Rialto Building. 285.286. 287-289
624 Bouike Slrect. 362, 363
Telecom Coiporute Building. 137.138. 139
Miami, Florida. United Stotei:
06aynma. lupun:
Sumitomo L ~ r eInrumcc Building. 230, 231.
232-234
Osaka. Japan:
Lcvin21. 130.131. 132
Nunkoi Soulh Tower Hotel. 77. 78.79. 80
Tokyo Mnnne Building. 99.100, 101-103
World Trddc Center. 81.82.83.81
Perth. Auruulia:
Fonert Ccmc.357
Philadelphia. Pennrylvmio. United Slates:
hlcllon Bunk. 225.226.217-229
One Libeny Place. 140. 154.155. 5.56, 157
1650 Market Street. 143
CenTruslTomer.315.316.317-319
Name lndex
-.
Tokyo. lapw:
N6E Building. 290,291. 292
Shimizu Super High Rise. 369,371,386,387,
388-390
Name lndex
Name Index
Ranhill Bcrsckutu. 32
Reed 119711.341-346
Roarn$on. Lellle E.. ondArrucijlc$, 196. 199
Ko:co Design P0nr.n. I h8
Rorenthnl. Steve. 236
Roienwusser. RobeR Asrocintes P. C.. I 11.
112.145.116.271.272.293
Roth. Emery. nod Sons. 158,310
Rudeman. J m r r . Office of, 310
415
Subject Index
'
bnlcony weight, 79
b u d beams, 138
h m s o l u m n join4 194
beam joint. 37
benmz.eomporile. 9
belled Enissons. 212.213
bolted joints. high-strength. 2M
hx-1vm SVUEIUR.109
boredrhenr wall rynemr. llO
braced core spine. 162
braced fnme. 4.51.52.68. 73. 87.89.90.372
connections. 52
braced oerimeter tube..310
bncedrteel core. 154.3W. 320
wilh ouuiggcs. 150. 166
brnced steel frame. 3W
braced rleel SlrucNrC. 94
building code. 245. 353
building density. 352.353
building drib 157
..
418
Subject Index
Subject I n d e x
concme:
choiceof, 113
core. 373.377
with outriggers. 186. I88
care tube. 206
encaTcments. 227
stcel fnmes. 230
high-smngh. 44,285.330.371
high-suenglh columns. 320
perimeter fnmcs. 285
porttenrioned. 19
precast pretensioncd. 17
schcmc. 251
ahcvrcorc. 124. 170
slab. 10
rpvndrcl beams. 97
tube. 272.293
(See also reinforced concrete)
connections. 57.110.282
dewilr. 54.55
typcr. 58
conrtruction:
cycle. 275
time. 137.256.330
continuous walls. 386
core:
diagonally bnced. 85.297
fnmc. 95.98
K-bnccd. 365
m d outrigger systems. 14G144.369
and perimeter fnmr. 133
umsverscly bnced. 81
trinngulw. 320
(Sce olro shcw care)
core-alone system, 143
carmrion pmtection. 279,351
costs. 330
coupled shear walls. III
c m h wollr. 223
creep. 147.287.304
crosr-wind force specuu. 313,348,349
crosi-wind responic. 49.311.342.345.347.
319.351
facade:
onhitecture. 196
dingonulimdon. 198
geomelrier;. 152
snwtoolh. 219
fin walk. 90
finite elcmen, nndyrir. 50
fire. 353.354
fire compmments. 356.358.361
fire pmtmtion. 4. 103.279.353-367
pmteclivc coatings. 355
fire mgulnlory requirements. 354
fire rcsirwnce. 354.355
fire safety design, 362
fire tests. 358.366
firepmafed rtructunl rtecl. 212
firer. time-tempcnture curve. 358
noor diaphngmr. 329
floor fnminr. 7. 1l
plan. 168.208.299.376
floor plans (drawings), ?9.36.41,45.63.73.
75.79.83.88.107.121.132.148.
149.
quarter-circle. 158
floor plae. I ?
floar wction. 36
floor slab. 9.318
floorryrlems, 2. 304
composite, 9
p m m r e d and porttenrioned, 15-26
~OOE:
circulx. 32
long-spm. 16
open-web. 13
plank 93
footing plan.35
formwockrynemr. 1 10
foundation. 82.304.319.388
rynem. 141
f m e - t m r r intcncling syrtems. 57.59
f m c d tubesystem. 192
fnmcr:
conccnuic bnced. 51
419
fnmes (Con!.):
deformolion. 55
diagonally bmced. 1
ductile moment, 333
cccenuic bmccd. 51.53
elevntion. 71.72
perimeter diagonally bmced. 265
perimeter moment. 158. 160
perimeter rigid moment, 130
perimeter steel. 124. I 8 6
rigid. 60.61.74.77.81.90
rigid perimeter. 94
X-bnccd. 279
fnmcu,ork. M. 76.80.84.87.98. 233.278
rnming plan. 123.218.224.227.264.273.283.
305.379
frequency. 352.353
rriction tests, I81
furniture. 356
luture systems. 369-372
gallcriu. 379
geotcchnicnl conrultanl. 34
gnrity-designed columns. 58
g n r i t y load. 5.56. 122, 200.270.312. 333
gust factor. 347
hnnging gwdenr. 92
high-ruenglh concrete. 1.44. 110. 127. 172.
Z55.3W. 330.371
high-suenglh bolted joints. 204
hollow corr plank;. 134
honeycomb dnmper plate. 108
honeycomb dnmper wall. 104.106.107
hurricane. 314
hybrid perimeter tube.214
hybrid steel. I
hybrid immure. 116.271.272.307.308
hybrid systems. 4.3W302.369
jerk. 344
joist girdcrr. 13. 14
jump-form system. 137
Subject Index
420
massing. 371
mart. 335
marlcolumn. 312
materinlr. 5
meandering shear wall. 113. 1I 4
mcchvnical ducu. I 2
mega ponvl fnmcs. 276
mc~xolumn
Eyslcm. 221.222
mcgustructurc. 223.296
megumrres. 301
mctul deck. 9. 10
mixed conswction. 119
mixed-use. 265.268
made-generalized forcc sprcwm. 348.349
mode shape. 349.351
modemist style. I
modes o f vibration. 103
moment frame. 73
moment-resisting frame. 4,5.51.53.55-58.99.
I01
moving farmwork ryrlemr. lI 0
mulliure complex. 276
neohistoricvl style. I
ourriggen (Canr.):
rupenlingonds. 156-157
systems. 1.4. 146144. 186.188. 369
mires, 297.380
wollr. 374
ovenuming moment, 140. 142
p m e t e r w n s i t i v i t y . 349
parking ganger. fire conditions. 361
ponial fnmed lube. 319
peak occelcntion. 345,348,350,351
pedmrrian bridge, I 6 6
pcdesrrion tunnel. 166
perceived motion. 113
pcmrptible motions. 353
perimeter h d a g c r . 327
pcrimetcr column loyout, 317
pcrimeler concrete columnr. 373
~crimeterdiveonullv bmced frame. 265
Subject Index
pmject descriptions, 27-50.66108
302-338
fnmed lubes. 203-259
lrusscd Nber 266299
111-139.
nilmod b a c k . 220.238
nilwoyrmtion. 78
nliingcalumnr. 191
reclnimcd nren. 82.247
reinforced concrete:
comtruction. 192
cam. I41
fmmc;. 57
rmctuml system. 285
reinforcement dewilr. 31
residentid buildings. 17. I W
rigid box. 192. 198.
rigid fnme. 60.61.74.77.81.90
rigid perimeter fmme, 94
ring bcom. 139
risk ;rrscssmenl. 363.366
'
.
Subject I n d e x
422
time h k ~ r unolysis,
y
334.
'
.1
;
r
@bmced lube, 274