Comparison of structural responses for tall buildings with varying twisting rates and core wall configurations

Ali H.  Omar; İzzettin Alhalil; Muhammet Fethi Gullu

doi:10.7764/RDLC.24.3.533

Authors

Ali H. Omar Department of Highway and Bridge Engineering, Erbil Polytechnic University, Erbil (Iraq)
İzzettin Alhalil Department of Civil Engineering, Harran University, Şanlıurfa (Turkey)
Muhammet Fethi Gullu Department of Civil Engineering, Harran University, Şanlıurfa (Turkey)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7764/RDLC.24.3.533

Keywords:

Tall building, twisting rate, wind load, seismic performance, optimization.

Abstract

This study aims to compare the structural responses of tall buildings (TBs) with different twisting rates and core wall configurations to investigate their effect under various loading conditions. The study examines three groups of TBs with varying core wall layouts: hexagonal shape for group A, circular shape for group B, and square shape for group C. Three models were constructed for each group, with twisting angles of 0°, 90°, and 180°. The study initially compares the nine different models’ natural periods of vibration and modal mass participation ratios. The towers’ wind and seismic responses for each model under wind, response spectrum (RS), and nonlinear time history (NTH) analysis are also presented. The wind, RS, and NTH analysis outcomes regarding the structural system (natural periods, drift ratios, story shear forces, and overturning moments) and members (shear forces and bending moments on columns and walls) have been compared. Finally, a multiple-criteria decision-making algorithm was used to determine the optimum model based on the investigated responses. The findings indicate that the core wall layout has a more significant influence on the response of TBs than the twisting rate. Specifically, a building with a hexagonal core wall system and 0-degree twist is identified as the optimal configuration. Although its effects are less significant than seismic forces, wind analysis reveals that twisting in buildings slightly reduces the natural period and drift ratios. This study emphasizes the impact of TBs configurations and twisting rates on both wind and seismic responses.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Afsari, L., Gökdemir, H., and Günaydın, A. (2024). Seismic analysis of RC buildings using X-braced and inverted V-braced friction dampers. Journal of Vibration Engineering & Technologies, 12(2), 1673-1686.

Alhalil, I., and Gullu, M. F. (2023). Investigating Infill Wall Configurations on 3-D Structural Systems with a Generalized Modeling Approach. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 48(10), 13523-13551.

Ali, M.M. and Moon, K.S., (2007). Structural developments in tall buildings: current trends and future prospects. Architectural science review, 50(3), pp.205-223.

ASCE 7-16, (2016). American Society of Civil Engineers. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. ASCE/SEI 7, Reston, VA.

Baker, W.F., Korista, D.S. and Novak, L.C., (2008), March. Engineering the world’s tallest–Burj Dubai. In Proceedings of CTBUH 8th world congress “Tall and green: typology for a sustainable urban future”, Dubai (pp. 3-5).

Başarir, B. and Sev, A., (2011). A Recent Trend in Tall Building Design: Twisted Forms. Engineering Sciences, 6(4), pp.1603-1619.

Deng, H., Yeh, C. H., and Willis, R. J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Re-search, 27(10), 963-973.

DeSimone, V., Ramirez, L. and Mohammad, A., (2015). Structural challenges of twisting towers. Global interchanges: resurgence of the skyscraper city.

Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., and Papayannakis, L. (1995). Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method. Computers & Operations Research, 22(7), 763-770.

Erkoç, Y., and Torunbalcı, N. (2024). Design of Twisted-Form Buildings: Correlation between Architecture and Structure. Journal of Architectural Engi-neering, 30(3), 03124004.

ETABS, (2021), "Integrated Software for Structural Analysis &Design Version 21.0.1", Computers and Structures Inc.

Gane, V., and Haymaker, J. (2007). Conceptual design of high-rises with parametric methods. In Predicting the Future, 25th eCAADe Conference Proceed-ings (pp. 293-301).

Lee, D.H., Kim, H.S. and Kang, J.W., (2021). Dynamic Response Analysis of Twisted High-Rise Structures by Plane Rotation Angle. Journal of Korean Association for Spatial Structures, 21(1), pp.105-112.

Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988) 'Theoretical Stress‐Strain model for confined concrete,' Journal of Structural Engineering-asce, 114(8), pp. 1804–1826.

Marmar, A., Zouia, S., Ismail, S. A., and Hallik, A. (2021). Twisted buildings: concepts and approaches. Architecture and Planning Journal, 27(2).

Mehta, C., Gondaliya, K., and Amin, J. (2024). Investigation of Wind Interference on Vertically Twisted Skyscrapers. In: Nehdi, M., Rahman, R.A., Davis, R.P., Antony, J., Kavitha, P.E., Jawahar Saud, S. (eds) Proceedings of SECON’24. SECON 2024.Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 607.

Moon, K., (2012). Structural design and construction of complex-shaped tall buildings. In Australasian Structural Engineering Conference 2012: The past, present and future of Structural Engineering (pp. 883-890). Barton, ACT: Engineers Australia.

Moon, K.S., (2011). Outrigger Structures for Twisted Tall Buildings. Advanced Materials Research, 255, pp.737-741.

Moon, K.S., (2012). Braced tube structures for complex-shaped tall buildings. Advanced Materials Research, 450, pp.1584-1587.

Moon, K.S., (2012). Diagrid structures for complex-shaped tall buildings. Advanced Materials Research, 450, pp.1489-1492.

Moon, K.S., (2012). Optimal configuration of structural systems for tall buildings. In 20th analysis and computation specialty conference (pp. 300-309).

Moon, K.S., (2014). Studies on various structural system design options for twisted tall buildings and their performances. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 23(5), pp.319-333.

Navya, K.S., Vishal, B.V., Kavitha, S. and Mamatha, P.G., (2021). Seismic Behaviour of Twisted Tall Building with Different Angle of Rotation. In Ad-vances in Mechanical Engineering: Select Proceedings of CAMSE 2020 (pp. 65-75). Springer Singapore.

Nikandrov, P., 2016. Upward spiral: the story of the evolution tower. CTBUH Journal, 3, pp.12-19.

Orbay, E., Bilgen, S., Sezer-Uzol, N., Ay, B.Ö. and Ostovan, Y., (2017). Numerical and experimental investigation of aerodynamic loads for tall buildings with prismatic and twisted forms. In the international conference on wind energy harvesting.

Paknahad, M., Hejazi, F., Al-Attar, A.A., Shahbazian, A. and Ostovar, N., (2019), Different configurations of cores and shear walls in tall buildings. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 357, No. 1, p. 012005). IOP Publishing.

PEER, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centre, (2023), Peer Strong Ground Motion Database.

Sahoo, S. K., and Goswami, S. S. (2023). A comprehensive review of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) Methods: advancements, applications, and future directions. Decision Making Advances, 1(1), 25-48.

Saini, D., Dokhaei, B., Shafei, B., and Alipour, A. (2024). Performance evaluation of high-rise buildings using database-assisted design approach. Structur-al Safety, 109, 102447.

Salmassi, M. A., Kheyroddin, A., and Hemmati, A. (2024). Evaluating the nonlinear behavior of tall buildings with end shear walls through chaos theory. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 9(3), 78.

Shahab, K., Irtaza, H. and Agarwal, A., (2021). Comparative study of aerodynamic coefficients of prismatic and twisted tall buildings with various cross sections using CFD. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 102(3), pp.635-650.

Shih, H. S., Shyur, H. J., and Lee, E. S. (2007). An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Mathematical and computer modelling, 45(7-8), 801-813.

Szolomicki, J. and Golasz-szolomicka, H., (2017). Application of the diagrid system in modern high-rise buildings. International Journal of Advances in Science Engineering and Technology, 5(3), pp.7-13.

Takeda, T., Sözen, M.A. and Nielsen, N.N. (1970) 'Reinforced concrete response to simulated earthquakes,' Journal of the Structural Division, 96(12), pp. 2557–2573.

TS-498, (1987). Design Loads for Buildings, Turkish Standard Institution, Ankara, Turkey.

TSC, (2018). Turkish Seismic Code. Specifications for Buildings to be Built in Seismic Areas. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, Ankara (2018).

Vollers, K., (2001). Twist and build: creating non-orthogonal architecture. 010 Publishers.

Xia, J., Poon, D. and Mass, D., (2010). Case Study: Shanghai Tower. CTBUH J, 2010, pp.12-18, Alhazmi, T., & McCaffer, R. (2000). Project procurement system selection model. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(3), 176-184.

Zhaoa, X., Ding, J. and Suna, H.H. (2011). Structural design of Shanghai Tower for wind loads, Procedia Engineering, 14, pp. 1759–1767.