Hi All,
Section 12.7.3 (b) gives that flexibility of panel zones should be considered in steel moment frames. My understanding is that the AISC Direct Analysis Method including 0.8 and τ
b stiffness reductions does not address this. The ASCE commentary indicates that using semi-rigid end zones may be applicable in some instances and also references a paper with kinematic modeling approaches. I believe the latter to be more accurate but not surprisingly is also a bit more complicated. I'm wondering how folks are approaching this and making their determination?
I'd expect that there might be some simple guidance somewhere, possibly something like e.g., semi-rigid is generally acceptable for say OMF with R<= 3 but kinematic models referenced in the commentary should be used for say SMF with R = 8(?) Or perhaps something similar based on story drift computed w/o panel zone flexibility? Is anyone aware of and/or applying a rule like this?
Please share how you are satisfying 12.7.3(b) and what limits you may have (e.g., R-value, building height, seismic zone, drift limit, ...)
Thanks,
Keith
#ASCE7#Seismic------------------------------
Keith MacBain Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE
Associate & Chief Analyst
Geiger Engineers, Campus 2
Suffern NY
------------------------------