Effects of near-fault pulse-like and non-pulse-like seismic excitations on the structural response of steel high-rise buildings with buckling restrained braces
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Effects of near-fault pulse-like and non-pulse-like seismic excitations on the structural response of steel high-rise buildings with buckling restrained braces
The seismic assessment of high-rise structures, especially in near-fault regions, necessitates advanced design solutions. This study evaluates the seismic performance of a 37-story steel Special Moment-Resisting Frame (SMRF) building equipped with Buckling-Restrained Braces (BRBs), subjected to near-fault pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions. The model, designed following ASCE7-22 standards, incorporates BRBs to enhance energy dissipation and mitigate inelastic deformations. Nonlinear time history analysis (NTHA) on the 3D model was conducted using OpenSees, considering key parameters such as inter-story drift ratio (ISDR), normalized base shear, and peak story accelerations. Also, the nonlinear response of the beam, column, and BRB have been presented. The results reveal distinct seismic response patterns based on the ground motion characteristics. Pulse-like records induce significantly higher demands, particularly at upper stories, manifesting in amplified accelerations and inter-story drifts compared to non-pulse-like records. In the most critical case, this resulted in approximately a 40% increase in drift and a 20% increase in acceleration. Conversely, non-pulse-like motions impose prolonged but less intense demands, leading to greater cumulative damage over time. The study underscores the critical need for incorporating both pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions in seismic assessments and highlights the importance of balanced stiffness and ductility in BRB-integrated designs. These insights contribute to the improvement of seismic design methodologies, ensuring the resilience and safety of tall buildings in earthquake-prone regions.
Abdel RaheemSEAhmedMMMAhmedMM, et al. (2018) Evaluation of plan configuration irregularity effects on seismic response demands of L-shaped MRF buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering16(9): 3845–3869.
2.
AbdelraheemFAKontoniDPN (2022) Mitigation of seismic pounding between RC twin high-rise buildings with piled raft foundation considering SSI. Earthquakes and Structures22(6): 625–635.
Antwi BuahPZhangYAbdulrazigM, et al. (2024) Effect of geometry on the natural frequency and seismic response characteristics of slopes subjected to pulse-like ground motions. Computers and Geotechnics176(May): 106777.
5.
Applied Technology CouncilFEMA P695 (2009) Quantification of Building Seismic Performance Factors. US Department of Homeland Security, FEMA.
6.
AriasA (1970) Measure of Earthquake Intensity, Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. Univ. of Chile, Santiago de Chile.
7.
ASCE/SEI 7-22 (2022) Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE7-22). American Society of Civil Engineers.
8.
BadalPSTesfamariamS (2024) Seismic collapse performance of high-rise mass timber building with buckling-restrained braced frames. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering177(November 2023): 108369.
9.
BakerJW (2007) Quantitative classification of near-fault ground motions using wavelet analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America97(5): 1486–1501.
10.
BakhshpooriTNezhadARN (2024) Effects of near-field earthquakes, connection types, and SSI on seismic performance of SMRF. Structures61(January): 105987.
11.
BeiraghiH (2018) Near-fault ground motion effects on the responses of tall reinforced concrete walls with buckling-restrained brace outriggers. Scientia Iranica25(4): 1987–1999.
12.
BlackCMakrisNAikenI (2002) Component testing, stability analysis and characterization of buckling-restrained unbonded braces. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
CaicedoDKarimzadehSBernardoV, et al. (2024) Selection and scaling approaches of earthquake time-series for structural engineering applications: a state-of-the-art review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering31(3): 1475–1505.
15.
CavdarEOzdemirGBayhanB (2019) Significance of ground motion scaling parameters on amplitude of scale factors and seismic response of Short- and long-period structures. Earthquake Spectra35(4): 1663–1688.
16.
ChoudhuryAMishraSKGhoshP (2025) Seismic demand amplification in earth dam by dynamic dam-reservoir interactions (DRI) under near fault pulse type ground motions. Engineering Geology344: 107853.
17.
Computers and Structures Inc (2023) SAP2000® version 25 (2023). Integrated Software for Structural Analysis and Design. Computers and Structures Inc. Available at: https://www.csiamerica.com/products/sap2000.
18.
DaeiAPourshaMZarrinM (2022) Seismic performance evaluation of code-compliant RC moment-resisting frame buildings subjected to near-fault pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions. Journal of Earthquake Engineering26(10): 5058–5085.
19.
DjerouniSOunisAEliasS, et al. (2022) Optimization and performance assessment of tuned mass damper inerter systems for control of buildings subjected to pulse-like ground motions. Structures38(January): 139–156.
20.
DuKChengFBaiJ, et al. (2020) Seismic performance quantification of buckling-restrained braced RC frame structures under near-fault ground motions. Engineering Structures211: 110447.
21.
EliasSDjerouniS (2024) Optimum tuned mass damper inerter under near-fault pulse-like ground motions of buildings including soil-structure interaction. Journal of Building Engineering85(January): 108674.
22.
ErgunMAtesS (2013). Selecting and scaling ground motion time histories according to eurocode 8 and ASCE 7-05. 5(2), 129–142.
23.
EslamniaHMalekzadehHJalaliSA, et al. (2023) Seismic energy demands and optimal intensity measures for continuous concrete box-girder bridges. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering165: 107657.
24.
EtedaliSAkbariMSeifiM (2019) MOCS-based optimum design of TMD and FTMD for tall buildings under near-field earthquakes including SSI effects. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering119(December 2018): 36–50.
25.
FaghirnejadSKontoniDPNGhasemiMR (2024) Performance-based optimization of 2D reinforced concrete wall-frames using pushover analysis and ABC optimization algorithm. Earthquake and Structures27(4): 285–302.
26.
FahnestockLA (2006) Analytical and Large-Scale Experimental Studies of Earthquake-Resistant Buckling-Restrained Braced Frame Systems. Lehigh University.
27.
FarghalyAAKontoniDPN (2023) Mitigation of seismic pounding between two L shape in plan high rise buildings considering SSI effect. Coupled Systems Mechanics12(3): 277–295.
GaoHZhangKWuX, et al. (2022) Application of BRB to seismic mitigation of steel truss arch bridge subjected to near-fault ground motions. Buildings12(12): 2147.
30.
Ghodrati AmiriGHamidiHMohebiB (2008) The effect of analysis methods on the response of steel-braced frame buildings for seismic retrofitting. Journal of Applied Sciences8(3): 432–442.
31.
GüllüAKarameşeG (2021) Effect of building importance factor on seismic performance of rc frame type shopping malls subjected to pulse-like records. Structures34(March): 158–168.
32.
GümüsM (2022) Effects of pulse like ground motion records with and without acceleration pulses on the earthquake responses of structures with varying dynamic properties. Structures45: 427–436.
33.
HaseliSPuorshaM (2018) Investigation of the seismic responses of base-isolated buildings under the influence of near-field rround motions. Amirkabir Journal of Civil Engineering50(3): 179–180.
34.
HoveidaeNRadpourS (2021) Performance evaluation of buckling-restrained braced frames under repeated earthquakes. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering19(1): 241–262.
35.
JaberiV (2023) Collapse-based design method for simple seismic design of complex structural systems such as linked column frame system. Structures55(March): 482–497.
JaberiVJaberiMAsghariA (2024) A new performance-based seismic design method using endurance time analysis for linked column frame system and a comparison of structural systems and seismic analysis methods. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings33(10): e2100.
38.
JaberiVVaziriSTorabiL (2025) A practical and innovative alternative framework for plastic design of structures. The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings34(12): e70062.
39.
JainASuranaM (2022) Floor displacement-based torsional amplification factors for seismic design of acceleration-sensitive non-structural components in torsionally irregular RC buildings. Engineering Structures254(January): 113871.
40.
JamnaniHHAmiriJVRajabnejadH (2018) Energy distribution in RC shear wall-frame structures subject to repeated earthquakes. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering107: 116–128.
41.
KardoutsouVTaflampasIPsycharisIN (2017) A new pulse indicator for the classification of ground motions. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America107(3): 1356–1364.
KhademiMTehranizadehMShirkhaniA, et al. (2024) Effects of near-field pulse-like ground motions on the seismic resilience of RC shear wall buildings. Structures70(February): 107585.
44.
KontoniDPNAbdelraheemFA (2019) The effect of base isolation and tuned mass dampers on the seismic response of RC high-rise buildings considering soil-structure interaction. Earthquakes and Structures17(4): 425–434.
45.
KontoniDPNAbdelraheemFA (2020) TMD effectiveness for steel high-rise building subjected to wind or earthquake including soil-structure interaction. Wind and Structures30(4): 423–432.
46.
KontoniDPNFarghalyAA (2023) Enhancing the earthquake resistance of RC and steel high-rise buildings by bracings, shear walls and TMDs considering SSI. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering24(7): 2595–2608.
47.
KontoniDPNFarghalyAA (2024a) Investigation of the effect of energy piles on the seismic response of RC high-rise building with piled raft foundation. Coupled Systems Mechanics13(5): 433–457.
48.
KontoniDPNFarghalyAA (2024b) Seismic control of T-shape in plan steel high-rise buildings with SSI effect using tuned mass dampers. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering25(2): 1725–1739.
49.
KontoniDPNFarghalyAA (2024c) Seismic control of vertically and horizontally irregular steel high-rise buildings by tuned mass dampers including SSI. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering25(2): 1995–2014.
50.
KontoniDPNGhamariAThongchomC (2023) Experimental and numerical study of a steel plate-based damper for improving the behavior of concentrically braced frames. Steel and Composite Structures47(2): 185–201.
51.
MashhadiSHomaeiF (2023) Soil-structure interaction and frequency components of near-fault records on the performance-based confidence levels of steel setback MRFs. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering166(October 2022): 107759.
52.
McKennaFMazzoniSScottMH, et al. (2007) Opensees Command Language Manual. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. University of California, Berkeley.
53.
MehdipanahAMirghaderiSRRazavi TabatabaeiSA (2016) Seismic performance of stiffness-based designed buckling-restrained braced frame and special moment-resisting frame dual systems. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering12(8): 918–935.
54.
MerrittSUangCMerrittS (2003). Subassablage testing of star seismic buckling-restrained braces. Report No. TR-2003/04.
55.
MinaeiYMashayekhiMSarcheshmehpourM (2025) Incremental dynamic analysis of mid-rise buildings with buckling restrained brace frame system under pulse-like near-fault ground motions. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering13(4): 47–67.
56.
MirtaheriMGheidiAZandiAP, et al. (2011) Experimental optimization studies on steel core lengths in buckling restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research67(8): 1244–1253.
57.
MirzaiNMEslamniaHBakhshinezhadS, et al. (2023) Seismic fragility assessment of a multi-span continuous I-girder bridge controlled by a self-centering damper. Structures50: 1838–1856.
58.
MohammadiAKarimzadehSYaghmaei-SabeghS, et al. (2023) Utilising artificial neural networks for assessing seismic demands of buckling restrained braces due to pulse-like motions. Buildings13(10): 2542–2551.
59.
MohrazBSadekF (2001). Earthquake Ground Motion and Response Spectra BT - The Seismic Design Handbook. NaeimF (ed.), pp. 47–124. Springer.
60.
NaseriARoshanAMGPahlavanH, et al. (2020) Effects of curvature radius on vulnerability of curved bridges subjected to near and far-field strong ground motions. Structural Monitoring and Maintenance7(4): 367–392.
61.
NaseriSAVaseghiAmiriJRajabnejadH, et al. (2022) A study into the effect of different ground motion durations on the seismic pounding force by considering soil–structure interaction. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering23(1): 53–65.
62.
PahlavanHZarifMBShamekhi AmiriM, et al. (2021) Probabilistic siesmic performance assessment of tall biuldings having special RC moment frames equipped with buckling restrained braces (BRB). Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering8(Special Issue 1): 230–250.
63.
PanellaDSTornelloMEFrauCD (2017) A simple and intuitive procedure to identify pulse-like ground motions. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering94(August 2016): 234–243.
64.
PantDRMaharjanM (2016). On selection and scaling of ground motions for analysis of seismically isolated structures Abstract15(4): 633–648.
65.
QiJDuKLuoH, et al. (2025) Physics-informed neural networks for structural dynamic response analysis: theoretical and numerical verification. International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics.
66.
RajabnejadHHamidiHNaseriSA, et al. (2021) Effect of intensity measure on the response of a 3D-structure under different ground motion duration. International Journal of Engineering, Transactions B: Applications34(10): 2219–2237.
67.
RaychowdhuryPRay-ChaudhuriS (2015) Seismic response of nonstructural components supported by a 4-story SMRF: effect of nonlinear soil-structure interaction. Structures3: 200–210.
68.
ReyesJCKalkanE (2012) How many records should be used in an ASCE/SEI-7 ground motion scaling procedure?Earthquake Spectra28: 1223–1242.
69.
SaffariHZahediMJEbrahimpourN, et al. (2023) The effect of earthquake characteristics on the seismic performance of steel moment resisting frames. International Journal of Steel Structures23(6): 1431–1446.
70.
Seismosoft. (2016). SeismoSignal–A computer program for signal processing of time-histories.
71.
SouriOMofidM (2023) Seismic evaluation of concentrically braced steel frames equipped with yielding elements and BRBs. Results in Engineering17: 100853.
72.
TerzicV (2011) Force-Based Element vs. Displacement-Based Element. OpenSees Webiner.
73.
TsalouchidisKTAdamC (2022) Amplitude scaling of ground motions as a potential source of bias: large-scale investigations on structural drifts. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics51(12): 2904–2924.
74.
UpadhyayAPantelidesCPIbarraL (2019) Residual drift mitigation for bridges retrofitted with buckling restrained braces or self centering energy dissipation devices. Engineering Structures199(September): 109663.
VaziriSJRajabnejadHSoleymaniA (2024) Ground motion parameters and damage correlation in plan irregular L-shape steel structure with BRB. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering186: 108916. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2024.108916
77.
VaziriSJVahdaniRSouriO (2024) Seismic evaluation of BRBF steel structures with L-shaped irregular plan considering soilstructure interaction. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering22(10): 5347–5377. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-024-01963-4
78.
VerkiAMPreciadoA (2022) Nonlinear incremental dynamic analysis and fragility curves of tall steel buildings with buckling restrained braces and tuned mass dampers. Earthquake and Structures22(2): 169–184.
79.
WanHPPengZXSuL, et al. (2024) Seismic response of a ground-bridge structure system in horizontal and inclined liquefiable site to near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Structures62(January): 106302.
80.
Watson-lampreyJAbrahamsonN (2006) Selection of ground motion time series and limits on scaling. Selection of ground motion time series and limits on scaling26: 477–482.
81.
WuKWeiGLinC, et al. (2025) Experimental study on the seismic performance of buckling-restrained braces with different lengths. Buildings15(2): 154.
82.
XingLZhouYHuangW (2020) Seismic optimization analysis of high-rise buildings with a buckling-restrained brace outrigger system. Engineering Structures220(June): 110959.
83.
Yaghmaei-SabeghSRanjbariM (2025) Effects of pulse period and frequency content of ground motion records on fragility curves of mega-configured buckling-restrained braced frames. Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami.
84.
ZahraiSMHeisamiA (2017) Seismic performance of tall buildings with impact damper under near and far-field earthquakes. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering19(4): 327–336.
85.
ZamaniAMPahlavanHShamekhi AmiriM, et al. (2022) Probabilistic seismic assessment of RC tall regular buildings having special moment frames subjected to long-period earthquakes. Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering8(Special Issue 4): 270–291.
86.
Zarif Moghadam BasefatAPahlavanHShafaieJ (2024) Probabilistic seismic performance assessment of tall RC special moment-resisting frame buildings equipped with buckling-restrained braces under near-field excitations. Periodica Polytechnica: Civil Engineering68(2): 524–542.
87.
ZhangRSunZQuC (2022) P-Delta effects on nonlinear dynamic response of steel moment-resisting frame structures subjected to near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Structures41(May): 1122–1140.
88.
ZhongJYangTWangW (2022) Quantifying the impact of normalized period on seismic demand model of ductile columns under pulse-like ground motions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering20(12): 6789–6812.
