Ryerson University

Department of Civil Engineering

CV 8314

Analysis, Design and Construction of Tall Building

Analysis of Tubular High rise Structures

Introduction Tubular structures
Shear lag Effect
Existing Analysis Methods of Framed tubes
Approximate methods of calculating axial stress and deflection at
various levels
Computer based Analysis
Analysis of Design Problems
Assignment

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Tubular Structures
The flamed tube system is widely
accepted as an economic solution
for tall building structures over a
wide range of building heights (Khan
1967, 1985; Wong et al. 1981;
Spires and Arora 1990).
In its basic form, the system consists of
closely spaced perimeter columns
tied at each floor level by deep
spandrel beams to form a tubular
structure, Fig.
It is compatible with the traditional
architectural arrangements for
windows and has the advantage that
as the perimeter configuration is
used to form the structure, the whole
width of the building is utilized to
resist the overturning moment due
to lateral load.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 1
 Framed Tube System

• If the facade shear frame is made stronger by closer spacing of

columns and larger member proportions and if such frames are
continuous at corners, the overall frame is transformed into a
cantilever Framed Tube fixed at the ground. The effectiveness of the
cantilever depends on the minimization of the part of the sway
deflection due to the shear frame. One basic objective is to reduce this
component to less thanK.M.
25% of the
Anwar total
Hossain, sway
PhD, PEngso that the predominant
deformation is that of a cantilever (Figure).

Framed Tube System

WTC • Obviously the
most efficient
tube would be
a square plan
(WTC and
Sears) or a
circular plan
(Petronas).

• This structural
form is suitable
for both steel
and reinforced
concrete, from
heights of 45
The Prudential Building in
The first framed tube building: formed to 110 stories.
by vertical steel columns 14”x14”spaced Chicago: efficient use of
at 22”on center. Each side was 210 feet a framed tube structural
wide. Columns are tied with spandrel system
beams at each floor level. K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 2
 Framed Tube System
• This form is the most
significant modern
development in tall
buildings, although it
needs improvement,
because the flanges
tend to suffer from
shear lag.
• This shear lag is due
to the mid-face
flange columns being
less stressed than
the corner columns,
and therefore not
contributing as fully
as they could in the
flange action.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Framed Tube System

Petronas towers

RC central cores with perimeter

columns, both towers have 88 stories
(96 floors), sky bridges on the 41st
Each tower (452 m high) is a and 42nd floors, completed in 1997.
tapering cylinder with 16K.M.
columns
Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 3
 Framed Tube System
• Suitable for reinforced concrete and
steel construction and has been
used for building ranging from 40 to
more than 100 stories.
• Depending on the height and
dimensions of the building, exterior
columns spacing should be in order
of 1.5 m to 4.5 m on center
maximum.
• Spandrel beam depths for normal
office or residential occupancy
application are typically 600 mm to
1200 mm.
• Frame tube in structural steel
requires welding of the beam-
column joint to develop rigidity and
continuity.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Bundled tube system

• The natural evolution was the use
of several tubes bundled together
“like tied sticks”.
• A bundled group of tubes
provides greater strength that a
single tube.
• These bundled tubes were first
tried by Fazlur Khan in Chicago,
when the Sears tower was
finished in 1974.
• The new internal webs greatly
reduce the effect of shear lag in
the flanges.
• Therefore, the column stresses
are more evenly distributed than
in a single tube structure. The
bundled tubes thus provide a
much larger lateral stiffness.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 4
 Bundled tube/Modular tube system

In the Sears Tower, the Bundled Tube is composed

of 22.86 m square modules, and nine modules are
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng Sears tower
lumped together to form the total system,

Diagonalized Tube/Trussed Tube/Braced Tube

• The efficiency of the framed
tube structures can be
improved by adding diagonal
bracing to the faces. This
results in greater heights, and
greater spacing between the
perimeter columns.
• The first steel braced-tube
was Chicago’s 97-story John
Hancock building, shown at
right, finished in 1969.
• A reinforced concrete
structure finished in 1985.

John Hancock Centre,

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng
Chicago (1969): 100 storey

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 5
 Diagonalized Tube/Trussed Tube/Braced Tube
• The steel tube has the bracing External braces
traverse the faces of the rigid frame.
• In RC, bracing is formed by a
diagonal pattern of concrete window-
size panels, poured integrally with
frame.
• Because the diagonals of a braced
tube are connected to the columns at
each inter-section, they virtually
eliminate the effects of shear lag in
both the flange and the web frames.
• As a result, the structure behaves
under lateral loads more like a braced
frame, greatly diminishing the
bending in members of the frames.
• Columns may have greater spacing,
allowing for much greater windows
than with a conventional tube.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

John Hancock building

Structural action and shear lag effects

Under lateral load, a framed tube
acts primarily like a
cantilevered box beam.
The overturning moment of the
lateral load is resisted by axial
stresses in the columns of the
four frame panels, whereas
the shear from the lateral load
is resisted by in-plane bending
of the beams and columns of
the two side flames.
If the flame members are very
rigid, then the axial stresses in
the columns due to the
overturning moment may be
determined by the normal
"plane sections remain plane"
assumption. Axial stress distribution
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng
in square hollow tube

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 6
 Structural action and shear lag effects
General axial stress
distribution in columns
resulting from lateral load
in various tube structures

Rectangular Triangular

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEngCircular

Structural action and shear lag effects

Columns placed transverse to

the wind direction function as
compression and tension
flanges of a box beam, while
frames parallel to the wind
direction function as webs.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 7
 Structural action and shear lag effects

A perfect tube for a tall

building behaves as a true
cantilever, resisting all the
lateral forces in the exterior
walls.
Shear stress distribution
The closest structure to a
perfect tube is one that
consists of a system of
perimeter walls without any
discontinuities.
Distortion of flange element
caused by shear stresses

In comparison to the plan dimensions of the

building, the dimension for the wall is relatively
small.
Cantilever tube subjected
to lateral loads Because of this characteristic, the structure
has a tendency to behave like a thin-wailed
beam.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Structural action and shear lag effects

In a thin-walled beam the

shear stresses and strains
are much larger than
those in a solid beam and
often result in large
Shear stress distribution shearing deformations
with a significant effect on
the distribution of bending
stresses.

Distortion of flange element

caused by shear stresses
Because of the resulting large shear strains, the
usual assumption used in engineers bending
theory “plane sections before bending remain as
Cantilever tube subjected plane sections after bending over the entire cross
to lateral loads section known as the Bernoulli hypothesis” is
violated.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 8
 Structural action and
shear lag effects

However, in thin-walled
structures the large shearing
strains cause the plane of the
Shear stress distribution section to distort.

For the hollow box structure,

the element E on the flange
Distortion of flange element face distorts as shown in Fig.
caused by shear stresses
The final outcome due
to the cumulative effect
of distortion of all such
elements is that under
lateral Ioad, the
originally flat plane of
Cantilever tube
the cross section
subjected
distorts as shown in
to lateral loads
Fig.
“Shear lag Effcet”
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Structural action and shear lag effects

• As a result of the flexural
and shear flexibilities of the
flame members, the basic
beam bending action of the
flamed tube is complicated
by the "shear lag"
phenomenon which has the
effects of :
– increasing the axial
stresses in the corner
columns and decreasing
those in the inner
columns as illustrated in
Fig. and
– reducing the lateral
stiffness of the structure.
Shear lag could also produce
warping of the floor slabs
and consequently
deformations of the
secondary structures.
Stress distribution and
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng shear lag effects

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 9
 Existing Analysis Methods Framed tubes
• Framed tubes, which are essentially
three-dimensional space-frame
structures, can be analyzed by most
existing space-frame analysis
programs.
• However, as the out-of-plane
deformations of the frame panels are
insignificant and the interactions
between the web and flange panels
consist mainly of vertical shear forces,
– a simpler and in fact better
alternative is to analyze the three
dimensional system as an
equivalent plane frame by
neglecting the out-of-plane actions
and using various forms of
fictitious frame elements to effect
the vertical shear transfer at the
panel junctions (Coull and Subedi
1971; Khan and Amin 1973).
• This could substantially reduce the
amounts of data and computation
required. K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Existing Analysis Methods Framed tubes

• While computer programs can be used to
numerically analyze the framed tube structures,
they cannot substitute theoretical analysis methods
which may offer better understanding of the
structural system.
• Furthermore, in view of the wide applications of
such system, there is an obvious need for a
simplified analysis method that can be used during
the preliminary design stage to give an initial
assessment of the structural behavior and in the
final design stage for manual checking of the
computer analysis results.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 10
 Existing Analysis Methods of Framed Tubes
A number of simplified analysis methods have been developed.
– Khan and Amin (1973): suggested that for very
preliminary design purposes, the shear lag effects may be
approximately allowed for by treating the framed tube
structure as a pair of equivalent channels each with an
effective flange width of not more than half the width of the
web panel or more than 10% of the building height.
– Chan et al. (1974): proposed to evaluate the shear lag
effects in cantilevered box structures with solid shear walls
as web panels and rigidly jointed beam-column frames as
flange panels by assuming the distribution of axial
displacements across the width of the flange panels to
be of either parabolic or hyperbolic cosine shape.
Although the structures studied by them were not really
framed tube structures, their methodology of allowing for
shear lag in the flange panels should also be applicable to
framed tube structures.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Existing Analysis Methods Framed tubes

– Coull and Bose (1975, 1976) &Coull and Ahmed (1978):
developed an orthotropic membrane analogy of transforming
the framework panels into equivalent orthotropic membranes
each with elastic properties so chosen to represent the axial
and shear behavior of the actual framework. They analyzed
the equivalent membrane tubes by assuming the bending
stress distributions to be cubic and parabolic in the web
and flange panels respectively and using energy formulation
to derive the governing differential equations.
– Khan and Stafford Smith (1976): developed an orthotropic
membrane analogy for simplified analysis of framework panels
by using finite element analysis to determine the equivalent
elastic properties of the membranes. Although their membrane
analogy was applied only to plane frames, it is actually also
applicable to framed tube structures.
– Ha et al. (1978): developed the orthotropic membrane
analogy to include the shear deformations of the frame
members and the deformations of the beam-column joints in
the derivation of the equivalent elastic properties. Their
membrane analogy is more refined than the others and should
thus be more accurate.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 11
 Existing Analysis Methods Framed tubes
• Method discussed in this lecture –
(Kwan 1994; Hossain KMA 2001):
– The methodology of modeling the framework panels as
equivalent orthotropic membranes (so that the framed tubes
can be analyzed as continuous structures) is followed.
– There are two factors that can affect the accuracy of this
membrane analogy method:
• equivalent elastic properties for the membranes; and
• method of analyzing the equivalent membrane structures.
– This method is simple to use and yet reasonably accurate.
– This method proposed (unlike previous methods),
independent distributions of axial displacements for the web
and flange panels.
• Thus the shear lag in each panel is individually allowed for - this is
more reasonable because the shear lag in one panel is obviously
more related to the properties of that particular panel rather than those
of other panels.
• This method also lead to simpler formulas for the evaluation of the
shear lag effects.K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Structural Modeling Kwan and Hossain Method

The framed tube structure shown in Fig.
can be considered to be composed of:
– two web panels parallel to the
direction of the lateral load;
– two flange panels normal to the
direction of the lateral load; and
– four discrete columns at the corners.

Flange
panel

Corner
columns

Web
panel

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 12
 Kwan and Hossain Method

Structural Modeling

These structural components

are interconnected to each
other along the panel joints
and connected to the floor
slabs at each floor level.
The high in-plane stiffness of
the floor slabs will restrict any
tendency for the panels to
deform out-of-plane and it may
therefore, be assumed that the
out-of-plane actions are
insignificant compared to the
primary in-plane actions.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Kwan and Hossain Method

Structural Modeling
• If the sizes and spacings of the
frame members are assumed
uniform, as is usually the case in
practice, then each framework panel
may be replaced by an equivalent
uniform orthotropic membrane.
• Methods for determining the
equivalent membrane properties will
be presented in the subsequent
presentation.
• This method is less sophisticated
than the original Ha et al.'s method
and is thus simpler to apply.
• On the other hand, since the shear
deformations of the frame members
are taken into account, it is more
accurate than Coull and Bose's
method.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 13
 Kwan and Hossain Method
Mathematical Formulation
Shear lag occurs in both the web and flange
panels and as a result, the distributions of axial
stresses are no longer linear in the web panels or
uniform in the flange panels.

To take into account the shear lag effects in the

flange panels, Chan et al. (1974) allowed
variations of the axial displacements across the
width of the flange panels in the forms of either
parabolic or hyperbolic cosine distributions.

Coull and Bose (1975, 1976), on the other hand,

took into account not only the shear lag effects in
the flange panels but also the shear lag effects in
the web panels. In their analysis method, the
distributions of the axial stresses are assumed to
be cubic in the web panels and parabolic in
the flange panels.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Membrane Analogy (Hossain)

• This method uses independent distributions for the axial
displacements in the web and flange panels.
– The axial displacement distributions are assumed to be
cubic in the web panels and parabolic in the flange
panels, and the principle of minimum total potential
energy is employed for the formulation.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 14
 Membrane Analogy (Hossain)
Consider the analogous membrane tube
structure in Fig.
Due to shear lag, plane sections will no
longer remain plane after the structure
is loaded.
Let the axial displacements in the web
and flange panels, denoted
respectively by w and w', be
approximated by the following
equations:

which give cubic and parabolic distributions of

axial displacements in the web and flange
panels, respectively.
Orthotropic Membrane Tube
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng
Analogy

Distribution of axial displacement in web

Φ is the rotation of the plane section

joining the four corners of the tubular
structure which initially lie on the same
horizontal plane,
α and β are dimensionless shear lag
coefficients representing the degrees of
shear lag in the web and flange panels, Distribution of axial displacement in flange
respectively. K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 15
 Membrane Analogy
The axial strains in the web and flange panels are given,
respectively, by the following expressions:

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Strain energy of the framed tube

Flange Web
panel panel

(Web contribution)

(Flange contribution)

(Column contribution)

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 16
 Strain energy of the framed tube

Flange Web
panel panel

H = height of the structure

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Potential energy of the applied load

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 17
 Membrane Analogy (Hossain)

The total potential energy

=
Potential energy of the applied force
+
Strain energy of the structures

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Membrane Analogy (Hossain)

Rotation = dv/dz
EId2v/dz2 = M/EI

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 18
 Membrane Analogy

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Membrane Analogy
Although the values of α and β can be evaluated by solving governing
equations. The method of analysis is simplified by approximating
both α and β as polynomial functions expressed in terms of a
certain number of unknown coefficients to be solved.
Limiting the polynomial to quadratic order and applying the boundary
condition that at the top of the structure, the axial stresses are equal
to zero, which leads to

It is shown that the polynomial function for α and β can be expressed

in terms of only two unknown coefficients as follows:

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 19
 Membrane Analogy (Hossain)

The results are given in Table 1, in which the relative shear stiffness parameters
mw and mf are defined by:

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Formulas for α and β for different load cases

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 20
 Effects of various parameters on shear leg
Shear leg coefficients plotted against relative shear
stiffness parameters for each load case

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Effects of various parameters on shear leg

Shear leg coefficients plotted against relative shear stiffness
parameters for each load case

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 21
 Membrane Analogy

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Stresses and deflection

Axial Stresses
Having determined the shear lag coefficients α and β and hence the
distributions of the axial displacements, the axial stresses in the web
and flange panels can be evaluated by first differentiating the axial
displacements with respect to z as per Eqs. (3)-(4), and then
multiplying the axial strains so determined by their respectively
Young's moduli.
The expressions thus obtained for the axial stresses generally consist of
two terms, one proportional to dΦ/dz and the other proportional to Φ.
At the base of the structure, where the axial stresses are most critical, Φ is
equal to zero and the expressions for the axial stresses would be
reduced to

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 22
 Axial Stresses

• At levels above the base, however, Φ would be nonzero and strictly

speaking, the terms proportional to Φ should be included.
• However, it has been found that the contributions of the terms
proportional to Φ are generally small compared to the terms given
by Eqs. (19)-(20), particularly at the lower part of the structure and
thus, if high accuracy is not required, the above equations may also
be applied to evaluate the axial stresses throughout the height of the
building.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Axial Stresses

The axial stresses given by the above equations are dependent on

dΦ/dz, which is still an unknown quantity to be determined.
Substituting the foregoing equations for the axial stresses into the
following moment equilibrium equation:

Putting the value of dΦ/dz so obtained back into Eqs. (19)-(20), the
axial stresses can be expressed directly in terms of the overturning
moment.
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 23
 Lateral deflection
The lateral deflection u of the structure can be evaluated by first
substituting the value of EI into (Eq. 12) to solve for Φ, and then
putting the value of Φ thus obtained into (Eq. 14) to solve for u.

Since the value of EI varies with height, the resulting expressions for Φ
and u are rather complicated.
As most of the bending deformations occur near the base and the exact
values of EI near the top do not really affect the values of Φ and u very
much, the variation of EI with height may be neglected and the value
of EI at all height taken as its value at the base.
This is equivalent to assuming that the structure behaves like a
cantilevered beam with a constant bending stiffness of El.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Lateral deflection
• After such simplifications, the formulas for the lateral deflection u
become as follows.
Load case : Point load at top

Load case 2: Uniform load

Load case 3: Triangular load

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 24
 Calculation of elastic properties of orthotropic membrane

• A typical frame
segment bounded by
the centers of the
adjacent frame
members, constitute a
basic unit of the frame
and may be modeled
as a solid membrane
spanning the same
area (shown by dotted
lines in Fig. ) provided
the elastic properties
of the membrane are
so chosen to represent
the axial and shear
behavior of the actual
framework.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Calculation of elastic properties of orthotropic mambrane

The method for

evaluating the
equivalent properties
of the membrane is
presented.
This method is
applicable to both the
web and flange
panels and thus in the
following, they are not
distinguished from
each other.

Membrane analogy for basic frame unit

When it is necessary, the corresponding properties may be denoted with

a subscript ‘w’ to signify their belonging to a web panel, or with a
subscript ‘f’ to signify their belonging
K.M. to a
Anwar Hossain, flange
PhD, PEng panel.

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 25
 Calculation of elastic properties of orthotropic membrane
• Axial Stiffness:
– Under the action of vertical axial forces, the load-deformation
relationships for both the frame unit and the equivalent
membrane will be equal if:
• Est = EmAc

where E = equivalent elastic modulus of the

membrane; t = thickness of the membrane;
Em = elastic modulus of the construction
material; and Ac = sectional area of the
column.

It is normal practice to fix the value of t such

that the area of the membrane is equal to the
sectional area of the column (i.e. st = Ac) and
so that the axial stress in the column and that
in the membrane are equal.
In such a case: t = Ac/s and E = Em
s = centre to centre distance between column in tubular structures
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Calculation of elastic properties

of orthotropic membrane

• Shear Stiffness:
– Consider now the case
of the frame unit subject
to a lateral force Q, Fig.
– The lateral deflection
may be computed as the
sum of that due to
bending Δb and due to
shear Δs.
– The bending deflection
Δb is given by:

(26) Basic frame unit under lateral

shear force
where Ib and Ic = momentsK.M.
of inertia of the beam and column, respectively.
Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 26
 Calculation of elastic properties
of orthotropic membrane

• Shear Stiffness:
– The shear deflection
Δs is given by:

(27)
in which
Asb and Asc = effective shear areas
of the beam and column
respectively;

Gm = shear modulus of the

material.
Basic frame unit under lateral
shear force

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Calculation of elastic properties of orthotropic membrane

• Equating the total lateral deflection of the frame unit to the shear
deflection of the membrane, the following equation is obtained:

where G = equivalent shear

modulus of the membrane.

From this equation, the value of G is

derived as:

(28)

in which Δb/Q and Δs/Q are as given by (26) and (27), respectively.

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 27
 EXAMPLE PROBLEM AND COMPARISONS WITH
COMPUTER ANALYSIS
• A high-rise 40-story reinforced
concrete framed tube structure, as
shown in Fig. is to be analyzed.
• All the beam and column members are
of sizes 0.8 m x 0.8 m.
• The height of each story is h = 3.0 m
and the center-to-center spacings of
the columns are 2.5 m.
• The Young's and shear moduli of the
material are 20 GPa and 8.0 GPa,
respectively.
• A uniformly distributed lateral load of
120 kN/m is applied to the structure.
• Determine:
– Axial stress at the base and mid-height
of the tubular building
– Lateral deflection along the height of
the building

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Problem description

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 28
 Calculation of elastic properties of equivalent
membrane elements
• Modulus of elasticity of material
Ew = Ef = Em = 20GPa =20 x 109N/m2 = 20 x 106 kN/m2

Web (Web and flange columns as well as

Flange
beams have same material properties)

• Calculation of thickness of membrane element (t):

t = tw = tf = Ac/s = 0.8 x 0.8/2.5 =0.256 m Ac = sectional area of

column = 0.8 x 0.8 m2

• Calculation of G = Gw = Gf
(Equivalent shear modulus of membrane elements)

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Calculation of elastic properties of equivalent membrane elements

• Calculation of lateral deflection due bending(Δb): Eq. 26:

0.8 x0.8 3
I c= I b = = 0.0341m 4
12

=
(3 − 0 .8 ) 3 ⎛ 3 ⎞
+⎜
(2 .5 − 0 .8 )
2 2

⎟
12 x 20 x10 x 0 . 0341 ⎝ 2 . 5 ⎠ 12 x 20 x10 6 x 0 . 0341
6

= 1 . 8096 x10 − 6
Calculation of lateral deflection due to shear (Δs): Eq. 27:

Using total cross-

(3 − 0 .8 ) ⎛ 3 ⎞ (2 . 5 − 0 . 8 )
2 2
= +⎜ ⎟ sectional area of the
⎝ 2 . 5 ⎠ 8 x10 x 0 . 8
6 2 6 2
8 x10 x 0 . 8 beam and column
= 0 . 9078 x10 − 6
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 29
 Calculation of elastic properties of equivalent membrane elements

Calculation of lateral deflection due to shear (Δs): Eq. 27:

Using total cross-

(3 − 0 .8 ) ⎛ 3 ⎞ (2 . 5 − 0 . 8 )
2 2
= +⎜ ⎟ sectional area of the
⎝ 2 . 5 ⎠ 8 x10 x 0 . 8
6 2 6 2
8 x10 x 0 . 8 beam and column
= 0 . 9078 x10 − 6

But Asb and Asc are shear area

Considering, Shear area = 0.66Ac = 0.Ab = 0.66 (0.8 x 0.8) m2

Δs
= 1.375 x10 − 6
Q

We shall use this value in the subsequent calculations

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Calculation of elastic properties of equivalent membrane elements

Equivalent shear modulus of membrane elements (Eq. 28)
h
G = Gw = G f = st
Δb Δs
+
Q Q
3
= 2 . 5 x 0 . 256 = 1 . 44 GPa
1 . 8096 x 10 − 6 + 1 . 375 x 10 −6

Calculation of relative shear stiffness parameter of the web and flange panels

G w H 2 1.44 x120 2
mw = = = 4.611 Eq. 17
Ewa 20 x15 2
Gf H 2 1.44 x120 2
mf = = = 3.388 Eq. 18
E f b2 20 x17.5 2

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 30
 Calculation of shear leg coefficients and EI
For uniformly
Calculation of shear lag coefficients (α and β): Table 1 distributed load
2.57mw + 1.12 2.57 x 4.611 + 1.12
α1 = = = 0.366
m 2 w + 2.94mw + 0.64 4.6112 + 2.94x4.611 + 0.64
7.22m f + 14.15
β1 = = 0.624
m 2
f + 12.35m f + 11.32
Using equations from Table 1: α 2 = 0.035; β 2 = 0.223
( )
2 ⎡ z ⎛ z ⎞2 ⎤
α = α 1 1 − z h + α 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.366 (at the base z = 0) Assuming
⎣⎢ h ⎝ h ⎠ ⎦⎥ Ak =0 (no corner
( 2
) ⎡ z ⎛ z ⎞2 ⎤
β = β 1 1 − z h + β 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.624 (at the base z =0) columns in the
⎢⎣ h ⎝ h ⎠ ⎥⎦ equivalent membrane
=0
Calculation of EI
4 2 2
EI = Ewt w a 3 (1 − α ) + 4 E f t f a 2b(1 − β ) + 4 Em Ak a 2
3 3 3
4 2 2
= 20 x10 x0.256 x15 (1 − x0.366) + 4 x 20 x106 x0.256 x152 x17.5(1 − x0.624)
6 3

3 3 3
= 66760.704 x10 kNm
6 2

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Determination of axial stress in the web

dφ M
= Moment at base, M = wH2/2 =120x1202/2 = 864000 kNm
dz EI
W =Wind load = 120 kN/m
Determination of axial stress at web (σz-web) at the
base
dφ ⎡ ⎛x⎞ ⎤
3

σ z − web = E w a⎢ 1 − α
x
(
+ α⎜ ⎟ ⎥ )
dz ⎣⎢ a ⎝ a ⎠ ⎦⎥
⎡ ⎛ x⎞ ⎤
3

x15⎢(1 − 0.366) + 0.366⎜ ⎟ ⎥

864000 x
= 20 x10 6 x
⎝ 15 ⎠ ⎦⎥
6
66760.704 x10 ⎣⎢ 15
= 164.11x + 0.42086 x 3
σ x=0−centre = 0
σ x=a=+15 = 164.11(15) + 0.42086(15) 3 = 3882.1kN / m2 = 3.88MPa
σ x=−a=−15 = −3.88MPa

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 31
 Determination of axial stress in the web
Determination of axial stress at web (σz-web) at the base
σ z − web = 164.11x + 0.42086 x 3
σ x=0−centre = 0
σ x=a=+15 = 164.11(15) + 0.42086(15)3 = 3882.1kN / m2 = 3.88MPa
σ x=−a=−15 = −3.88MPa

Tension
Compression

-15

+15

Centre line
Axial stress distribution at theHossain,
K.M. Anwar base (web)
PhD, PEng

Determination of axial stress (σz-web) at the mid-height (H/2 or h/2)

Calculation of shear lag coefficients (α and β): Table 1
α1 = 0.366; β1 = 0.624 α 2 = 0.035; β 2 = 0.223 For uniformly
distributed load

( ) ⎡ z ⎛z⎞ ⎤
2
2
α = α 1 1 − z h + α 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.118 (at the mid-height z = h/2)
⎣⎢ h ⎝ h ⎠ ⎦⎥

( ) ⎡ z ⎛z⎞ ⎤
2
2
β = β 1 1 − z h + β 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.323 (at mid-height z =h/2)
⎢⎣ h ⎝ h ⎠ ⎥⎦
Assuming
Ak =0 (no corner
columns in the
equivalent membrane
=0
Calculation of EI
4 2 2
EI = Ewt w a 3 (1 − α ) + 4 E f t f a 2b(1 − β ) + 4 Em Ak a 2
3 3 3
4 2 2
= 20 x106 x0.256 x153 (1 − X 0.118) + 4 x 20 x106 x0.256 x152 x17.5(1 − x0.323)
3 5 3
= 85227.52 x106 kNm 2
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 32
 dφ M Moment at mid-height, M = wH2/8 =120x1202/8 = 216000 kNm
=
dz EI

dφ ⎡ ⎛ x⎞ ⎤
3

a ⎢(1 − α ) + α ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
x
σ z − web = Ew
dz ⎣⎢ a ⎝ a ⎠ ⎦⎥
⎡ ⎛ x⎞ ⎤
3

x15⎢(1 − 0.118) + 0.118⎜ ⎟ ⎥

216000 x
= 20 x
66760.70 ⎣⎢ 15 ⎝ 15 ⎠ ⎦⎥
= 53.05 x + 0.0338 x 3
Using constant EI
σ x=0−centre = 0
σ x=a=+15 = 53.05(15) + 0.0338(15)3 = 909.8kN / m2 = 0.91MPa
σ x=−a=−15 = −0.91MPa

Determination of axial stress in the web

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Determination of axial stress in the web

dφ M Moment at mid-height, M = wH2/8 =120x1202/8 = 216000 kNm
=
dz EI
Using variable EI

dφ ⎡ ⎛ x⎞ ⎤
3

a ⎢(1 − α ) + α ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
x
σ z − web = Ew
dz ⎣⎢ a ⎝ a ⎠ ⎦⎥
⎡ ⎛ x⎞ ⎤
3

x15⎢(1 − 0.118) + 0.118⎜ ⎟ ⎥

216000 x
= 20 x
85227.52 ⎣⎢ 15 ⎝ 15 ⎠ ⎦⎥
= 41.56 x + 0.0265 x 3

σ x=0−centre = 0
σ x=a=+15 = 41.56(15) + 0.0265(15)3 = 712.84kN / m2 = 0.713MPa
σ x=−a=−15 = −0.713MPa

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 33
 Determination of axial stress in the web
Determination of axial stress at web (σz-web) at mid-height (H/2)
Using constant EI as at the base
Tension

0.91
MPa
0.91 MPa

Centre line

Axial stress distribution at mid-height (web)

Using variable EI

0.71
MPa
0.71 MPa
Centre line
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Determination of axial stress in the flange

Determination of axial stress at flange (σz-flange) at the base

( ) ⎡ z ⎛z⎞ ⎤
2
2
β = β 1 1 − z h + β 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.624 (at the base z =0)
⎢⎣ h ⎝ h ⎠ ⎥⎦
EI = 66760.704 x106 kNm 2
dφ ⎡ ⎛ y⎞ ⎤
2

σ ' z − flange = E f a ⎢(1 − β ) + β ⎜ ⎟ ⎥

dz ⎣⎢ ⎝ b ⎠ ⎦⎥
⎡ ⎛ y ⎞ ⎤
2

= 20 x106 x
864000
x15 ⎢ (1 − 0 .624 ) + 0 .624⎜ ⎟ ⎥
66760.704 x10 6 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 17.5 ⎠ ⎦⎥
= 1459.83 + 7.91 y 2

σ y =0−centre = 1459.83kN / m2 = 1.46MPa

σ y =b=+17.5 = 1459.83 + 7.91(17.5)2 = 3882.52kN / m2 = 3.88MPa
σ y =−b=−17.5 = 3.88MPa
1.46
MPa
3.88 3.88
MPa MPa
K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng
Tension: Windward flange

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 34
 Determination of axial stress at flange (σz-flange) at the mid-height

Moment at mid-height, M = 216000 kNm

( 2
) ⎡ z ⎛ z ⎞ 2 ⎤ = 0.323 (at mid-height
β = β 1 1 − z h + β 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ z =h/2)
h ⎝h⎠⎣⎢ ⎦⎥
EI = 66760.704 x10 kNm 6 2
Using constant EI

dφ ⎡ ⎛ y⎞ ⎤
2
dφ M
a ⎢(1 − β ) + β ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
=
σ ' z − flange = E f dz EI
dz ⎣⎢ ⎝ b ⎠ ⎦⎥
⎡ ⎛ y ⎞ ⎤
2

= 20 x10 6 x
216000
x15 ⎢ (1 − 0. 323 ) + 0. 323⎜ ⎟ ⎥
66760 x10 6 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 17.5 ⎠ ⎥⎦
= 657.12 + 1.0237 y 2

σ y=0−centre = 657.12kN / m2 = 0.66MPa

σ y=b=+17.5 = 657.12 + 1.0237(17.5)2 = 970kN / m2 = 0.97MPa
σ y=−b=−17.5 = −0.97MPa

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Determination of axial stress at flange (σz-flange) at the mid-height

Moment at mid-height, M = 216000 kNm

( 2
) ⎡ z ⎛ z ⎞ 2 ⎤ = 0.323 (at mid-height
β = β 1 1 − z h + β 2 ⎢2 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ z =h/2)
h ⎝h⎠⎣⎢ ⎦⎥
EI = 85227.52 x106 kNm 2 Using Variable EI

dφ ⎡ ⎤
2
dφ M
⎛ y⎞
a ⎢(1 − β ) + β ⎜ ⎟
=
σ ' z − flange = E f ⎥ dz EI
dz ⎢⎣ ⎝b⎠ ⎥⎦
⎡ ⎛ y ⎞ ⎤
2

= 20 x106 x
216000
x15 ⎢ (1 − 0 . 323) + 0 . 323⎜ ⎟ ⎥
85227.52 x106 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 17.5 ⎠ ⎥⎦
= 514.74 + 0.8019 y 2
σ y =0−centre = 514.74kN / m2 = 0.51MPa
σ y =b=+17.5 = 514.74 + 0.80194(17.5)2 = 760.33kN / m2 = 0.760MPa
σ y =−b=−17.5 = −0.760MPa

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 35
 Axial stress distribution at the base and mid-
height (Assuming constant EI)

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

Axial stress distribution at the base and mid-

height (Assuming variable EI)
Shear leg

K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 36
 Calculation of lateral deflection of the tubular tall building

Height (m) Lateral deflection (U), m

140 z Membrane Computer
0 0.000 0.000
120
10 0.007 0.006
100 20 0.015 0.013
Height (m)

80 30 0.023 0.020

60 40 0.032 0.028
50 0.042 0.037
40
Membrane analogy 60 0.053 0.047
20 70 0.066 0.058
Computer frame analysis
0 80 0.079 0.070
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 90 0.094 0.083
Lateral deflection (m) 100 0.110 0.097
110 0.128 0.113
13% over-prediction compared with
Computer analysis K.M. Anwar Hossain, PhD,120
PEng 0.147 0.130

K.Nm Anwar Hossain, PhD, PEng;

Ryerson University 37