Correlation of Dynamic Characteristics of A Super-Tall Building From Full-Scale Measurements and Numerical Analysis With Various Nite Element Models

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336 (DOI: 10.1002/eqe.405)
Correlation of dynamic characteristics of a super-tall building

from full-scale measurements and numerical analysis with
various nite element models
Q. S. Li; and J. R. Wu
Department of Building and Construction; City University of Hong Kong; Tat Chee Avenue;
Kowloon, Hong Kong
SUMMARY
The Di Wang Tower located in Shenzhen has 79 storeys and is about 325 m high. Field measurements
have been conducted to investigate the dynamic characteristics of the super-tall building. In parallel with
the eld measurements, seven nite element models have been established to model the multi-outriggerbraced tall building and to analyse the eects of various arrangements of outrigger belts and vertical
bracings on the dynamic characteristics and responses of the Di Wang Tower under the design wind
load and earthquake action. The distributions of shear forces in vertical structural components along the
building height are also presented and discussed. The results from detailed modelling of group shear
walls with several types of nite elements are addressed and compared to investigate various modelling
assumptions. Finally, the performance of the nite element models is evaluated by correlating the natural
frequencies and mode shapes from the numerical analysis with the nite element models and the eld
measurements. The results generated from this study are expected to be of interest to professionals and
researchers involved with the design of tall buildings. Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS: structural dynamics; tall building; structural analysis; nite element modelling; full-scale
measurement; wind eect; earthquake action
1. INTRODUCTION
The Di Wang Tower is located in the central district of Shenzhen City, China. The main
structure of this building has 79 storeys and is about 325 m high; it is the second tallest
building in China and amongst the tallest in the world. The plan of standard oors in this
tower includes a rectangular section (53:5 m 35:5 m) and two semi-circles (12:5 m in radius),
as shown in Figure 1, and the vertical view of the building is shown in Figure 2. The aspect
Correspondence
to: Q. S. Li, Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee
Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
E-mail: bcqsli@cityu.edu.hk
Contract=grant sponsor: Research Grant Council of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; contract=grant
number: CityU 093=02
Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 23 May 2003

Revised 23 January 2004
Accepted 1 June 2004
1312
Q. S. LI AND J. R. WU
Figure 1. Plan of standard oor in the Di Wang Tower.
ratio of height to transverse width is about 9, which means that it largely exceeds the relevant
criteria laid down in the current design codes and standards in China. This illustrates that the
Di Wang Tower is a exible and slender structure. As Shenzhen is located at the edge of the
most active typhoon generating area in the world, this super-tall building may be susceptible
to severe vibration induced by typhoons. All these facts make a detailed study on the dynamic
behaviour of this super-tall building of particular importance.
It has been widely recognized that the most reliable evaluations of dynamic characteristics (natural frequency, mode shape and damping ratio etc.) are obtained from measurements
on a prototype building. Full-scale measurements can produce limited but accurate results of
dynamic characteristics of buildings and structures. The nite element method (FEM) is a
powerful tool for structural design and analysis. However, a nite element (FE) model of a
structure is generally based on idealized engineering drawings and designs which may not
truly represent all aspects of the structure. A signicant discrepancy between the predicted
dynamic characteristics by FEM analysis and those measured from a prototype structure may
exist. For example, Li et al. [1, 2] have reported that there is a 20% dierence between the
numerical results and the full-scale measurements of the rst two translational natural frequencies of a 70-storey tall building. This proposes a challenging and important issue: how to
improve the FE model using test data so that the predicted modal parameters match the eld
measurements. In fact, FE model updating is being actively studied in various areas such as
mechanical and aerospace engineering [3]. However, as commented on by Brownjohn et al.
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336
DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING
1313
Figure 2. Vertical view of the Di Wang Tower.
[4], this updating technology can be dicult to apply as an engineering tool for civil engineering structures, because of the diculties in prototype testing and experimental data analysis. In
particular, investigations on correlating dynamic characteristics from eld measurements and
FEM analysis of tall buildings have seldom been reported except for several studies mentioned
below. Li et al. [5, 6] have proposed nite segment approaches for estimating the dynamic
characteristics of tall buildings and correlated with their full-scale measurements. Ellis and Ji
[7] have presented a study on correlating dynamic testing with the FE model of a steel-framed
building from construction to completion stage. Ventura and Schuster [8] established several
numerical models of a 30-storey RC building to correlate with their eld measurements. A
reduced-order continuum model has been proposed by Chajes et al. [9] to conduct dynamic
analysis of a 47-storey steel-framed building and correlate the numerical results with those
from measured responses during an earthquake. Brownjohn et al. [10] recently established six
3D FE models for a 66-storey RC building in Singapore, and the numerical results of dynamic
characteristic were compared with their eld measurement data to identify the FE modelling
errors. EI-Dardiry et al. [11] identied an appropriate FE model for determining the dynamic
characteristics of a long-span at concrete oor using natural frequency measurements. They
gradually rened the model based on the comparison between the numerical predictions and
1314
their measurements. However, the eects of various arrangements of horizontal outrigger belts
and vertical bracings on the dynamic characteristics of tall buildings have rarely been considered in the previous works. The eects of outrigger locations and variable element stiness
on the base bending moment, top level drift and natural frequencies of uniform tall buildings
have been evaluated by Smith and Salim [12] and further studied by Wu and Li [13] using
simplied analysis procedures. However, their approximated methods were based on many
assumptions (such as constant section properties of structural elements along building height,
uniform or triangular lateral load distribution along building height etc.). These methods are
suitable and useful for structural design at primary stages. However, if detailed information
on the dynamic characteristics and responses of a tall building subjected to arbitrarily distributed wind loads along the building height or under multi-dimensional earthquake actions
is needed, 3D FEM should be adopted in structural analysis. Shear walls are very common
vertical structural members in tall building systems. The structural behaviour of group shear
walls can be modelled by various types of nite elements such as the warping single-column
model, plane-stress model or shell element model [14]. The dierent nite element modelling
strategies for group shear walls have signicant inuences on the dynamic characteristics of
tall buildings, but such an eect has rarely been studied in the previous works. In this paper,
based on the structural drawings of the Di Wang Tower, seven 3D FE models have been
constructed to model dierent arrangements of outrigger belts along the building height. The
eects of numbers and locations of outrigger belts, various arrangements of vertical bracings
on the dynamic characteristics and responses of this high-rise structure are studied in detail. Furthermore, several nite element modelling strategies for shear walls are considered
to examine possible modelling errors. Finally, correlation of dynamic characteristics from the
eld measurements and the numerical analysis with the various FE models are conducted to
identify where the numerical models need to be improved.
This paper presents some selected results from our combined experimental and numerical
study on the Di Wang Tower including the eld measurements and nite element analysis.
The full-scale measurements by themselves provide some useful results. Meanwhile, the experimental results are used to rene the numerical models for the structural design of tall
buildings. Furthermore, the numerical modelling is able to provide additional results that are
not available from the measurements, so that the understanding of the dynamic behaviour of
tall buildings can be improved.
2. THE STRUCTURAL SYSTEM OF THE DI WANG TOWER

The Di Wang Tower consists of a 68-storey oce building, an 11-storey facility and refuge
oors as well as top tower structures. Totally, the main structure of the Di Wang Tower has
79 storeys and is about 325 m high from the ground. The structural system of the Di Wang
Tower uses both steel and reinforced concrete (SRC), with a central RC core connected to
the perimeter steel frames by a horizontal steel frame system at each oor [15]. The perimeter
steel frames are composed of a ring of concrete-lled tube (CFT) columns and steel beams.
The 100 mm thickness composite metal deck-slabs were built at each oor. The central RC
core extends to the 68th oor. The thickness of the central core is 600 mm above the 41st
oor and 750 mm below this level. Meanwhile, the rectangular steel tube columns below
the 58th oor were lled with C45 concrete to strengthen the stiness of the columns. The
1315
Figure 3. Plan of outrigger belts in the 22nd oor.
cross-sectional dimensions of the columns vary from 1100 mm 1300 mm to 600 mm 600 mm.
As shown in Figure 1, the longitudinal beams and curved beams in the semi-circles at the left
and right wings and the lintel beams in the central core have moment-resisting connections at
the beamcolumn joints, while the other beams were pinned to the columns or to the central
core.
Four levels of outrigger belts were built at the 2nd, 22nd, 41st and 66th oors. At each level,
the perimeter steel columns were connected with the central RC core with twelve outrigger
belt trusses from axes B to G in the transverse direction of the tower. The locations of these
outrigger belts in the 22nd oor are shown in Figure 3 [16]. Meanwhile, Figure 4 presents
the elevation view and dimensions of elements for the outrigger belt system at this oor [16].
The upper and lower chords of the outrigger belt trusses have moment-resisting connections
with the perimeter steel columns and the central RC core.
There are two vertical bracing columns extending to the 68th oor to connect the perimeter
steel columns and the central RC core at the axes B and G. The elevation view and dimensions
of the vertical bracing system in axes B and G are shown in Figure 5 [16].
The FE models constructed in this study were mainly based on the structural drawings
and other information that was provided by the design rm and architect. The dead loads for
building elements were determined by the FEM programs to be introduced in Section 4. The
Figure 4. Elevations and dimensions of elements for outrigger belt truss at the 22nd oor.
1316
1317
Figure 5. Elevations and dimensions of the vertical bracing system at axes B and G.
1318
information on the design imposed loads was provided by the design rm and architect, and
the live loads were determined from the China load code for building structures (GBJ9-87).
The sum of the dead and imposed load is 1 850 376 kN with 464 238 kN for the live load.
The design wind load for the Di Wang Tower, which was used in this study, was determined
from the China load code (GBJ9-87) by the following equation:
Wz = z z s W0
(1)
where Wz is the design wind pressure along the building height at height z; z ; z ; s ; W0 are
the dynamic response factor, the exposure factor, the external pressure coecient and the basic
wind pressure at height z, respectively, which can be determined from the code (GBJ9-87);
is the reduction factor for the design wind pressure based on the wind tunnel test for this
tower. According to the The Standard of Structural Earthquake Resistant Design (GBJ1189), Shenzhen is located in a seismic area of VII scale (abridged MM scale) in intensity and
the soil prole at which the tower is located belongs to Category II. The design earthquake
load for the Di Wang Tower, which was used in this study, was obtained from the response
spectrum approach and the mode superposition method, as specied in the code (GBJ11-89),
and the damping ratio for the super-tall building is assumed to be 3% in the present seismic
response analysis.
3. FULL-SCALE MEASUREMENTS OF DYNAMIC RESPONSES OF THE DI-WANG

TOWER UNDER TYPHOONS
Full-scale measurements of wind eects on the Di Wang Tower were conducted during the
passages of Typhoon Sally in September 1996 and Typhoon Dujuan in September 2003.
Accelerometers installed in several selected oors of the main structure provided measures of
two translational accelerations and rotational accelerations. These measurements were continuously acquired, amplied, and pass ltered at 10 Hz before being digitized at 20 Hz.
Figures 6 and 7 present the power spectral density of acceleration responses measured at
the 68th oor along the two major orthogonal axes of the tower (longitudinal and transverse
axes). The power spectra of acceleration responses in these two gures clearly illustrate the
rst six natural frequencies of this tower, which are listed in Table I. The detailed information
on the arrangements and some selected results of the full-scale measurements are given by
Li et al. [17, 18].
4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF TALL BUILDINGS BY THE FEM METHOD

With rapid development in computer technology and promotion of computational algorithms,
three-dimensional nite element analysis has become a basic tool and an important method in
the design of tall buildings. The following two assumptions are usually adopted to simplify
1319
Figure 6. Power spectral density of acceleration response in the X direction.
Figure 7. Power spectral density of acceleration response in the Y direction.
the modelling of tall buildings in FEM analysis:

(1) Rigid or elastic oor assumption. Each oor is considered as an in-plane rigid diaphragm with out-of-plane deformation only. The degrees of freedom (DOF) involved
in structural analysis then reduce greatly. If major openings exist in oors, the elastic
oor assumption should be adopted.
(2) If the rigid oor assumption for each oor is granted, the lumped-mass model is
frequently used for the dynamics modal analysis of tall buildings. The global lumpedmass matrix for a structure can be constructed by the determined mass and inertia
moment about the vertical axis at each oor level.
In general, there are three categories of FEM programs for modelling group shear walls
in the structural analysis of tall buildings [14]: warping single-column model, plane-stress
model with auxiliary beam and columns, and 3D shell element model. The common features
of these programs are: (i) 3D analysis for the whole building; and (ii) beams and columns
are modelled by 3D beam elements with six degrees of freedom for each node at its end.
1320
Table I. Natural frequencies (Hz) of the Di Wang Tower from the eld measurements.
Order of mode
Field measurement
Mode shape
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
0.173
along Y
axis
0.208
along X
axis
0.293
torsion
0.540
along Y
axis
0.688
along X
axis
0.886
torsion
The major dierences between these models are listed as follows:

(1) Warping single-column model (such as that adopted in the Tall Building Structural
Analysis (TBSA) commercial FEM package developed by the China Academy of
Building Research [19]). In this model, the open-sectioned group shear walls are modelled as a Vlasov warping single column. Such a column is assumed to be located at
the shear centre of the group shear walls. One extra DOF, which is associated with
section warping, is introduced at each node at the end of this column besides the six
common DOFs.
(2) Plane-stress model with auxiliary beam and columns (such as that adopted in the early
version of the ETABS code developed by Computers & Structures Inc. in the U.S.A.
and Tsinghua University Structural system (TUS) commercial FEM package developed
by Tsinghua University, China [20]). With this model, group shear walls are modelled
as plane-stress nite elements with auxiliary internal rigid beams and auxiliary storeyheight torsion columns [14].
(3) Shell element model (such as that adopted in the SAP 2000 code developed by Computers & Structures Inc. in the U.S.A. and Structural Analysis of Tall building, Wall
Element model (SATWE) package developed by the China Academy of Building Research [21]). In this model, each piece of shear wall is modelled as a 3D shell element. The shell element has both in-plane and out-of-plane stiness, having six DOFs
at each node of the element. Therefore, it can connect with the 3D beam elements
seamlessly.
5. EFFECT OF DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENTS OF OUTRIGGER BELTS

AND VERTICAL BRACINGS ON THE STRUCTURAL BEHAVIOUR
VIA FEM ANALYSIS
As mentioned in the previous sections, the numbers and locations of outrigger belts have
certain eects on the structural performance of multi-outrigger braced tall buildings. In order
to extend the simplied methods proposed by Wu and Li [13] for more general cases, seven
FE models were established by TBSA software to evaluate the eects of dierent arrangements
of outrigger belts and vertical bracings on the structural behaviour of the Di Wang Tower.
The detailed introductions on these seven FE models are as follows:
(1) Model 1 was constructed based on the structural drawings and other information
from the design rm and architect. The 3D FE meshing of this model is shown in
Figure 8.
1321
Figure 8. Three-dimensional FEM meshing of Model 1.
(2) In order to evaluate the eect of vertical bracings, two columns of vertical bracings
located at axes B and G in Model 1 were removed to construct a new FE model which
is called Model 2 in this paper.
(3) Two outrigger truss belts located at the 2nd and 66th levels were removed from Model
1 to establish a new FE model, namely, Model 3.
1322
Figure 9. Side views of Models 1 to 4.
(4) Compared with Model 1, in Model 4 all the outrigger truss belts were assumed to be
located at their optimum locations, i.e., the 7th, 22nd, 41st, and 66th oors in the
Di Wang Tower. It is noted that the optimum locations were determined from the
simplied procedures [13, 14, 22] on the condition that all outrigger belts have innite
stiness and the cross-section of vertical elements is uniform along the building height.
(5) The outrigger belt at the 66th oor in Model 1 was removed to build a new model
which is called Model 5.
(6) The outrigger belt at the second oor level in Model 1 was removed to construct a
new model which is referred to as Model 6.
(7) All the outrigger belts in Model 1 were removed. The new model is called Model 7.
The side views of Models 1 to 7 are shown in Figures 9 and 10. The assumptions of rigid
oor and lumping mass model were adopted for all these models. The horizontal displacements
1323
Figure 10. Side views of Models 5 to 7.
and rotation at the mass centre of each rigid oor were calculated when the tower was
subjected to the design wind load and earthquake action as determined in Section 2 based
on the China load code (GBJ9-87). The seismic response analysis was rst evaluated using
Model 1 by the Square Root of the Sum of the Squares (SRSS) modal combination method
including the rst six translational modes in each translational direction (along the main axis).
In the next stage, the rst 15 translationaltorsional coupling modes were used to calculate
the seismic responses of the Di Wang Tower using Model 1 by the Complete Quadratic
Combination (CQC) modal combination method. Two sets of the results by the SRSS and
CQC methods are listed in Table II for comparison purposes. It is shown from Table II
that there is little dierence between the results from these two methods, implying that the
Di Wang Tower is almost a bi-axis symmetric regular structural system. The eect of the
1324
torsional modes on the translational responses is very small when the building is subjected
to horizontal loads along its main axis. Therefore, in the following analysis, the results from
all the FE models under earthquake excitations were calculated by the rst six translational
modes and the SRSS method.
The rst six natural frequencies in each translational direction along the main axis, which
were determined from the dierent FE models, are listed in Table III, while Tables IV
and V present the calculated results of the maximum inter-storey drift index and the top
drift from these FE models. By comparison of these results, the eects of dierent arrangements of outrigger belts and vertical bracings on the structural behaviour are presented and
discussed as follows.
Eect of the horizontal outrigger truss belts
It is shown in Table III that the rst six translational natural frequencies in both longitudinal
(X ) and transverse (Y ) directions determined from Model 7 are much smaller than those
calculated from Model 1. Meanwhile, the results in Table IV illustrate that the maximum
inter-storey drift index and the top drift in the Y direction from Model 7 subjected to the
design wind loads are 57.7% and 60.8% larger than those from Model 1, respectively. The
corresponding dierences are 55.6% and 61.9% for the case of earthquake action, as shown in
Table V, which clearly demonstrates that the outrigger belts can strengthen the lateral stiness
of an outrigger braced tall building eectively. Therefore, the lateral displacements of the tall
building are thus reduced accordingly. However, such an eect on the natural frequencies,
especially for the higher order translational natural frequencies, is less than that on the lateral
displacement. Tables IV and V show that there are about 2030% dierences of the lateral
displacements in the X direction between the results calculated from Model 1 and Model 7,
even though the outrigger belts were built along the Y direction of the tower only. Therefore,
the lateral stiness in both directions is actually strengthened by the outrigger belts. This
could be partially attributed to the torsional rigidity of the whole structure being strengthened
by the outrigger belts.
Eect of the numbers and locations of horizontal outrigger belts
Dierent numbers or various locations of outrigger belts were considered in constructing
Model 1 and Models 3 to 6. This will allow us to investigate the eects of the numbers
and locations of outrigger belts on the structural performance of a multi-outrigger braced tall
building. The number of outrigger belts varying from 2 (in Model 3), to 3 (in Models 5 and
6) and 4 (in Models 1 and 4) are considered in this study. Two levels of identical outrigger
belts, which were located at the 22nd and 41st oors, are included in all these FE models.
Based on the simplied procedures proposed by Smith and Zhao [14, 22], these two outrigger
belts are located at almost the optimum locations for a two-level outrigger braced building
if the stiness of all the outrigger belts is innite.
From Table III it is found that the dierences of the natural frequencies from Model 1 and
those from the other models are in the range from 7:4% to 10.8%. Compared with Model 1,
the average dierence of the lateral displacements (the maximum drift index and the top drift)
for the two-level outrigger braced model (Model 3) under the design wind load is 14.3%. The
corresponding average dierences are about 8% and 1:7% for the three-level outrigger braced
models (Models 5 and 6) and the four-level outrigger braced model (Model 4), respectively. If
Natural
frequency
(Hz)
0.159
(Y )
0.159
(the 1st
in Y )
Lateraltorsion
coupling mode
(1st to 9th)
The rst 4
lateral modes
(in each
direction)
The maximum drift index induced by

wind load in X direction
The top drift induced by wind load in
X direction
wind load in Y direction
The top drift induced by wind load in
Y direction
earthquake excitation in X direction
The top drift induced by earthquake
excitation in X direction
earthquake excitation in Y direction
The top drift induced by earthquake
excitation in Y direction
Total shear force at base induced by
earthquake excitation in X direction
Total shear force at base induced by
earthquake excitation in Y direction
Computational results
222:62 mm
202:8 mm
0.174
(the 1st
in X )
0.1742
(X )
0.3666
(T)
23181:3 kN
197:2 mm
197:4 mm
0.543
(the 2nd
in Y )
0.541
(Y )
0.568
(the 2nd
in X )
0.566
(X )
0.783
(the 3rd
in Y )
0.895
(T)
0.957
(the 3rd
in X )
0.958
(X )
0.993
(the 4th
in Y )
0.992
(Y )
1.148
(the 4th
in X )
1.1481
(X )
22966:1 kN
22875:9 kN
41:8 kN
255:8 mm
1=864
0:45 mm
486:9 mm
1=480
0:06 mm
Lateraltorsion
coupling modes
41:8 kN
255:6 mm
1=865
486:3 mm
1=481
Lateral modes in
Y direction only
Response in Y direction
23260:6 kN
0:38 mm
1=1104
1=1104
0:12 mm
1=1083
Lateraltorsion
coupling modes
1=1159
Lateral modes in
X direction only
Response in X direction
Table II. The dynamic analysis results from Model 1 (comparison of the results based on the translational modes
and the translational-torsion coupling modes).
1325
Model 1 results
Model 2 results
Dierence from
Model 3 results
Dierence from
Model 4 results
Dierence from
Model 5 results
Dierence from
Model 6 results
Dierence from
Model 7 results
Dierence from
FE Model
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
0.174
0.181
+4%
0.173
0.6%
0.184
+5.7%
0.174
0
0.172
1.2%
0.155
11%
1st X
0.568
0.581
+2.3%
0.526
7.4%
0.606
+6.7%
0.538
5.3%
0.629
+10%
0.495
12.9%
2nd X
0.958
1.007
+5.1%
0.920
3.9%
0.922
3.8%
0.932
2.7%
0.948
1.1%
0.888
7.3%
3rd X
1.148
1.145
0.1%
1.096
4.5%
1.134
1.2%
1.140
0.7%
1.143
0.4%
1.104
3.8%
4th X
1.729
1.711
1.0%
1.589
8.1%
1.682
2.7%
1.702
1.6%
1.706
1.3%
1.678
2.9%
5th X
2.093
2.093
0%
1.978
5.5%
2.036
2.7%
2.092
0.1%
2.062
1.5%
2.022
3.3%
6th X
0.159
0.151
5.1%
0.149
6.3%
0.158
0.6%
0.155
2.5%
0.152
4.4%
0.124
22.1%
1st Y
0.543
0.538
0.9%
0.515
5.2%
0.571
+5.2%
0.538
0.9%
0.538
0.9%
0.485
10.7%
2nd Y
0.783
0.796
+1.6%
0.715
8.7%
0.728
7.0%
0.731
6.6%
0.779
0.5%
0.683
12.8%
3rd Y
0.993
0.990
0.5%
0.968
2.5%
0.975
1.8%
0.988
0.5%
0.982
1.1%
0.957
3.6%
4th Y
Table III. The rst six translational natural frequencies (Hz) in each direction for Models 17.
1.414
1.389
1.8%
1.298
8.2%
1.326
6.2%
1.365
3.5%
1.372
2.9%
1.287
8.9%
5th Y
2.161
2.160
0.1%
2.160
0.1%
2.160
0.1%
2.159
0.1%
2.162
0.1%
2.158
0.1%
6th Y
1326
1327
Table IV. The maximum inter-storey drift index and the top drift calculated from the dierent models
subject to the design wind load.
FE Models
Model 1 results
Model 2 results
Dierence from
Model 3 results
Dierence from
Model 4 results
Dierence from
Model 5 results
Dierence from
Model 6 results
Dierence from
Model 7 results
Dierence from
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
The maximum
inter-storey drift
index (X direction)
The top drift

(X direction)
(mm)
The maximum
inter-storey drift
index (Y direction)
The top drift

(Y direction)
(mm)
1=1159
1=1083
+7%
1=1063
+9.0%
1=1190
2.6%
1=1080
+7.3%
1=1072
+8.1%
1=948
+22.3%
208.8
222.8
+6.7%
238.3
+14.1%
206.9
0.9%
226.2
+8.3%
218.6
+4.7%
272.9
+30.7%
1=481
1=444
+8.3%
1=403
+19.4%
1=489
1.6%
1=414
+16.1%
1=455
+5.7%
1=305
+57.7%
486.3
533.6
+9.7%
560.9
+15.3%
478.5
1.6%
526.8
+8.3%
526.8
+8.3%
782.1
+60.8%
Table V. The maximum inter-storey drift index and the top drift from Models 17
under earthquake excitation.
FE Models
Model 1 results
Model 2 results
Dierence from
Model 3 results
Dierence from
Model 4 results
Dierence from
Model 5 results
Dierence from
Model 6 results
Dierence from
Model 7 results
Dierence from
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
Model 1
The maximum
inter-storey drift
index (X direction)
The top drift

(X direction)
(mm)
The maximum
inter-storey drift
index (Y direction)
The top drift

(Y direction)
(mm)
1=1104
1/1045
+5.6%
1=1104
0%
1=1104
0%
1=1102
+0.2%
1=1091
+1.2%
1=969
+13.9%
197.4
200.3
+1.5%
202.5
+2.6%
197.4
0%
192.1
2.7%
194.60
1.5%
244.9
+24.1%
1=865
1=798
+8.4%
1=786
+10.1%
1=898
3.7%
1/928
6.7%
1=814
+6.3%
1/556
+55.6%
255.6
268.7
+5.1%
296.6
+16.1%
268.7
+5.1%
262.7
+2.8%
266.6
+4.3%
413.9
+61.9%
the models have the same numbers but dierent arrangements of outrigger belts (for example
Models 5 and 6 or Models 1 and 4), the dierences of the lateral displacements determined
from the dierent models are very small. From the above comparisons, it can be concluded
that if two outrigger belts are located at their optimum locations, adding more outrigger belts
in the building does not have obvious eects on reducing the lateral displacements when the
structure is subjected to wind load. The same observation can be made from the results listed
in Table V for the case of earthquake excitation.
1328
Figure 11. Shear force distributions in vertical elements of Model 1 under

earthquake excitation in the Y direction.
Eect of vertical bracings

It is shown in Tables IV and V that the average dierences of the lateral displacements in the
Y direction determined from Model 2 and Model 1 under the design wind load and earthquake
action are, respectively, 9% and 6.8%. But for Model 7 and Model 1, the average dierences
are 59.3% and 58.8%. Therefore, the eect of the vertical bracings on reducing the top drift
and the maximum inter-storey drift index is much smaller than that of the outrigger belts.
However, the vertical bracings are eective to reduce the magnitude of leap in shear forces
in vertical elements near the outrigger belts. Further discussions on this issue will be given
in the next section.
Leap in shear force in vertical elements
It has been discussed that the outrigger belts are very eective in strengthening the lateral
stiness and reducing the top drift of the tall building. However, the stiness of an outrigger
belt is generally much larger than that of adjoining beams and columns. This can result in
very irregular distribution of stiness within some structural elements of the building. The
vertical distributions of shear force in vertical elements were obtained from the dierent FE
models for the case of earthquake excitation. The sum of shear force (along the Y direction)
in vertical elements was calculated from Models 1, 2 and 7 when these models are subjected to the design earthquake action in the Y direction. The calculated results are plotted in
Figures 1113. It is shown in Figures 11 and 12 that sudden leaps in shear force are obviously
present near the outrigger belts. However, the vertical distribution of the sum of shear force
from Model 7 is much smoother than those from the other models, as shown in Figure 13.
Figures 1416 show the sum of shear force (along the Y direction) in perimeter columns
at each oor, which are also calculated when Models 1, 2 and 7 are subjected to earthquake
excitation in the Y direction. It can be seen from these gures that the sudden leap in shear
1329


1330
Figure 14. Shear force distributions in perimeter columns of Model 1 under


force is also obvious near the outrigger belts; the magnitude of the leap is large especially
for Model 2. It is found from Figure 16 again that the vertical distribution of shear force
determined from Model 7 is relatively smooth. Since the vertical bracings in Model 1 carry
parts of the shear force in each oor, the magnitude of the leap in the sum of shear forces
for Model 1 is not signicant when compared with that for Model 2.
1331

An abrupt leap in shear force in vertical elements exists near the outrigger belts when the
outrigger braced structure is subjected to wind load or earthquake excitation. Therefore, it
tends to form a weak storey near the outrigger belts and it is hard to reach a mechanism with
ductile yielding or a strong column and weak beam system for a building under earthquake
excitation. This drawback should be carefully treated in the earthquake-resistant design of
outrigger braced tall buildings.
6. MODELLING OF GROUP SHEAR WALLS
The group shear walls in the Di Wang Tower were modelled by Vlasov warping singlecolumn element using TBSA software; this modelling strategy has been discussed in the
previous sections with the dierent FE models. When a warping single-column element is
adopted to model the group shear walls, the following assumptions should be satised as far as
possible [19].
(i) The width of each piece of shear wall should be less than 8 m. (ii) The layout of group
shear walls at two adjoining oors should be similar as far as possible. (iii) Major openings
in group shear walls at adjoining oors should be aligned vertically. As the rst assumption
cannot be fully satised in some cases for the Di Wang Tower, the calculated results from
Models 1 to 7 presented in the previous sections may deviate from their exact values to a
certain extent. However, the results and the comparative study presented in the last section
should still be valid for investigating the eects of dierent arrangements of outrigger belts
and vertical bracings on the structural behaviour.
Several researchers have also conducted structural analysis of the Di Wang Tower using
FEM software, such as Qian et al. [23] and Huang et al. [24] who used TUS and SATWE,
respectively. As the related information from their studies is very limited, only some selected
1332
Table VI. The rst two translational natural frequencies (Hz) in each direction obtained from
TBSA, TUS, SATWE and the eld measurements.
FEM software
The 1st mode in

longitudinal
direction
The 2nd mode in

longitudinal
direction
The 1st mode in

transverse
direction
The 2nd mode in

transverse
direction
0.174
0.201
0.201
0.208
0.568
0.704
0.676
0.688
0.159
0.159
0.159
0.173
0.543
0.599
0.592
0.540
TBSA
TUS
SATWE
Field measurement
Table VII. The maximum inter-storey drift index and the top drift obtained by
TBSA and SATWE.
Horizontal load cases
Wind acting along the
longitudinal (X ) direction
Wind acting along the
transverse (Y ) direction
Earthquake acting along the
longitudinal (X ) direction
Earthquake acting along the
transverse (Y ) direction
TBSA
SATWE
TBSA
SATWE
TBSA
SATWE
TBSA
SATWE
The top drift

(mm)
The maximum inter-storey

drift index
208.8
214.5
486.3
690.3
197.4
283.9
255.6
399.5
1=1159
1=1102
1=481
1=335
1=1104
1=845
1=865
1=611
results are included in this paper for comparison purposes. The main dierences in modelling
group shear walls using TBSA, TUS and SATWE have been discussed and summarized in
Section 4. The eects of using dierent modelling strategies for group shear walls on the
dynamic characteristics and responses of the Di Wang Tower are discussed below.
The rst two natural frequencies in each translational direction obtained from TBSA, TUS
and SATWE are listed in Table VI. The eld measurement results are also presented in
Table VI for comparison purposes. It is found from this table that all the natural frequencies
calculated from these three FEM codes are lower than those from the full-scale measurements
except for the 2nd mode in the transverse direction. While the results from TUS and SATWE
codes are in close agreement, the results from the TBSA package are the lowest among those
from the three codes.
The top drift and the maximum inter-storey drift index obtained form TBSA and SATWE
are listed in Table VII. The lateral displacements calculated from TBSA are smaller than those
from SATWE for all horizontal load action cases. Together with the results in
Table VI, it is found that the lateral stiness of the tower determined from TBSA is more
rigid than that obtained from SATWE.
When the warping single-column elements are adopted to model the group shear walls by
TBSA, the following assumptions should be satised as far as possible [19]: t=b60:25 and the
width (b) of each piece of shear wall should be less than 8 m (where t is the thickness of the
shear wall). As shown in Figure 1, the width b for some pieces of shear wall in the Y direction
is 12 m, which is much greater than the limitation (8 m). When TBSA software is used, the
exural stiness of the cross-section of group shear walls is obtained on the condition that
1333
the cross-section of group shear walls remains plane after deformation is presented. If the
width of a piece of shear wall is too large, the cross-section of group shear walls may be
deformed into a curved plane due to the combination of exural, torsional and warping eects.
However, it is assumed that the cross-section remains plane in TBSA software. Therefore, the
lateral stiness of the group shear walls with too large a width may be overestimated by
using TBSA software. Such drawbacks can be overcome by modelling each piece of shear
wall with 3D shell element in SATWE code. Therefore, the results calculated by SATWE are
much closer to the actual structural responses [21].
7. CORRELATION ANALYSIS OF DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS FROM THE
FULL-SCALE MEASUREMENTS WITH NUMERICAL RESULTS
In general, experimental measurements can provide reliable but limited information (i.e.,
modal parameters of several modes), while the numerical analysis gives many more, but
perhaps unreliable, results. Therefore, the experimental and numerical studies are complementary, and their combined usage can further the understanding of the dynamic behaviour of tall
buildings.
In order to examine the accuracy of the structural analysis programs considered in this
paper, some selected results of the dynamic characteristics of the Di Wang Tower, which
were measured by the authors and Qian et al. [23], are adopted herein to correlate with the
FEM analysis results from the various FE models.
(1) Comparison of the natural frequencies
The rst two natural frequencies in each translational direction obtained from the full-scale
measurements are listed in Table I. Comparing the measured data with those from the numerical analysis presented in Table VI, it is found that all the calculated natural frequencies are
lower than those from the full-scale measurements except for the 2nd mode in the transverse
direction. This may be attributed to the following two reasons: (i) the applied loads (dead
load, design imposed load and live load determined from the local load codes) were overestimated at the design stage, causing the eective mass of the prototype building to be less
than that adopted in the FEM numerical analysis; (ii) the eective stiness of the prototype
building is greater than those determined from the FE bare models as the contribution of
non-structural components (inll walls etc.) to the lateral stiness of a building are usually
not considered in establishing FE bare models.
(2) Correlation of mode shapes from the eld measurements with the FEM results
Only the rst two mode shapes in each translational direction of the tower are available
from the full-scale measurements [19], which are shown in Figure 17 together with the
corresponding mode shapes calculated from the TBSA and TUS programs. In order to identify the dierences between the numerical results and the eld measurements in quantity, the
Modal Assurance Criterion (MAC) method is adopted herein. The formula of MAC is dened
as follows [25]:
MAC(
ai ;
ej ) =
({
T
({ ai } {
ai }
{ ej })2
T
ai })({ ej } {
T
ej })
(2)
1334
Figure 17. Mode shapes from the eld measurements and numerical analysis by TBSA and TUS.
Table VIII. The diagonal entries of MAC matrix for TBSA and TUS.
The 1st mode in the
longitudinal
FEM software
direction
TBSA
TUS
The 2nd mode in the

longitudinal
direction
The 1st mode in the

transverse
direction
The 2nd mode in the

transverse
direction
0.9748
0.9742
0.9961
0.9844
0.7954
0.8671
0.9911
0.9904
where ai is the calculated i-th mode shape in the transverse or longitudinal direction of
the tower, ej is the eld measured j-th mode shape in the same direction. The value of
MAC( ai ; ej ) is usually expressed in a simple matrix form as MAC(a,e). If the correlation
between the numerical and full-scale measured mode shape is very weak, the corresponding
entry in the matrix MAC(a,e) tends to be zero except for the main diagonal entries. Normally,
the diagonal entries of the matrix MAC(a,e) are 0MAC( ai ; ei )61. The matrix MAC(a,e)
tends to be an identity matrix if the mode shapes from numerical analysis are very close to the
corresponding ones from experimental measurements. In this paper, the main diagonal entries
of the matrix MAC(a,e) were calculated from TBSA and TUS, as shown in Table VIII.
It can be seen from Table VIII that all the MAC values are greater than 0.97 except for
the second mode in the transverse direction. This illustrates that the mode shapes determined
1335
from the FEM analysis are generally consistent with the eld measurement results. As for the
second mode shape in the transverse direction, the MAC values are only 0.7954 and 0.8671
for TBSA and TUS, respectively. Both values are less than 0.90, this indicates that the second
mode shape along the Y -direction deviates from the eld measurements to a certain extent. As
the outrigger belts and most pieces of long shear walls were built along the Y -direction of the
tower, this implies that TBSA or TUS may not be able to model the structural behaviour of
outrigger belts and=or long shear walls very well. Therefore, in the next phase of our research
work, we will consider how to update the FE models using the experimental data so that the
predicted modal parameters match the eld measurements.
8. CONCLUSION
Seven 3D nite element models were established to study the eects of dierent arrangements
of outrigger belts and vertical bracings on the dynamic characteristics and responses of the Di
Wang Tower under the design wind load and earthquake action. The dynamic characteristics
of the super-tall building were determined by the nite element models. The comparisons were
made among the numerical results from the FE models and the eld measurements to identify
possible modelling errors and where the numerical models need to be improved. The main
conclusions of this combined numerical and experimental study are summarized as follows.
(1) The outrigger belts can strengthen the lateral stiness in both directions (X and Y ) of
the tall building, even though the outrigger belts were only built along the Y -direction
of the building.
(2) More levels of outrigger belts are generally useful to reduce the lateral displacements
of outrigger braced tall buildings. However, the present numerical results from the FE
models showed that if two outrigger belts have already been built at the optimum locations, adding more outrigger belts in the building does not have an obvious additional
eect on reducing the lateral displacements.
(3) There are abrupt leaps in shear force in vertical elements near outrigger belts when
an outrigger braced structure is subjected to wind loads or earthquake action. This
drawback should be carefully treated in the design of outrigger braced tall buildings.
(4) The eect of vertical bracings on the reduction of the top drift and the maximum
inter-storey drift index is much smaller than that of outrigger belts. However, vertical
bracing is eective to reduce the internal force leaps near the locations of outrigger
belts.
(5) It is found that there are some dierences of the numerical results when dierent types
of nite elements were used to model group shear walls. Therefore, the proper FEM
programs should be adopted in structural analysis according to the section property of
shear walls and structural layout of tall buildings.
(6) The calculated natural frequencies are generally lower than those from the full-scale
measurements. This may be attributed to several reasons such as that the eective
mass of the building is less than that assumed at the design stage and=or the eective
stiness of the building is higher than that determined at the design stage due to the
contribution of non-structural components. Through correlating the mode shapes from
the numerical analysis and the eld measurements, it was found that good agreements
between the two sets of results can be achieved.
1336
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to the reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions. The work described
in this paper was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grant Council of Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region, China (Project No.CityU 093/02). Thanks are due to Professor A. P. Jeary,
Dr C. K. Wong and Dr Les Robertson for their valuable contributions to the eld study conducted
in 1996.
REFERENCES
1. Li QS, Fang JQ, Jeary AP, Wong CK. Full scale measurement of wind eects on tall buildings. Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 1998; 74 76:741750.
2. Li QS, Fang JQ, Jeary AP, Wong CK, Liu DK. Evaluation of wind eects on a super-tall building based on
full-scale measurements. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000; 29:1845 1862.
3. Friswell MI, Mottershead JE. Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics. Kluwer: Netherlands,
1995
4. Brownjohn JMW, Pan TC, Deng XY. Correlating dynamic characteristics from eld measurements and numerical
analysis of a high-rise building. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000; 29:523 543.
5. Li QS, Cao H, Li GQ. Analysis of free vibrations of tall buildings. Journal of Engineering Mechanics (ASCE)
1994; 120:18611876.
6. Li QS, Cao H, Li GQ. Static and dynamic analysis of straight bars with variable cross-section. Computers and
Structures 1994; 59:1185 1191.
7. Ellis BR, Ji T. Dynamic testing and numerical modeling of Cardington steel framed building from construction
to completion. The Structural Engineer 1996; 74(11):186 192.
8. Ventura CE, Schuster ND. Structural dynamic properties of a reinforced concrete high-rise building during
construction. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 1996; 23:950 972.
9. Chajes MJ, Zhang L, Kirby JT. Dynamic analysis of tall building using reduced-order continuum model. Journal
of Structural Engineering (ASCE) 1996; 122:1284 1291.
10. Brownjohn JMW, Xia PQ, Hao H, Xia Y. Civil structure condition assessment by FE model updating:
methodology and case studies. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 2000; 37:761775.
11. EI-Dardiry E, Wahyuni E, Ji T, Ellis BR. Improving FE models of a long-span at oor using natural frequency
measurements. Computers and Structures 2002; 80:2145 2156.
12. Smith BS, Salim I. Parameter study of outrigger braced tall building structures. Journal of Structural
Engineering (ASCE) 1981; 107:20012014.
13. Wu JR, Li QS. Structural performance of multi-outrigger-braced tall buildings. The Structural Design of Tall
and Special Buildings 2003; 12(2):155 176.
14. Smith BS, Coull A. Tall Building Structures: Analysis and Design. Wiley: New York, 1991.
15. Hu JX. Shenzhen Di Wang Tower. China Architectural Industry Press: Beijing (in Chinese), 1997.
16. Chen FS, Qiu GH, Fan Z. Steel Structure Design for High-Rise Building. China Architectural Industry Press:
Beijing (in Chinese), 2000.
17. Li QS, Yang K, Zhang N, Wong CK, Jeary AP. Field measurements of amplitude-dependent damping in a
79-story tall building and its eects on the structural dynamic responses. The Structural Design of Tall Buildings
2002; 11(2):129 153.
18. Li QS, Xiao YQ, Wong CK, Jeary AP. Field measurement of typhoon eects on a super tall building.
Engineering Structures 2004; 26:233244.
19. China Academy of Building Research. TBSA5.0 (Tall Building Structural Analysis) Technical Manual; Beijing,
1996.
20. Tsinghua University. TUS (Tsinghua University Structural System) User Manual; Beijing, 1999.
21. China Academy of Building Research. SATWE (Structural Analysis of Tall Building, Wall Element Model)
User Manual; Beijing, 1999.
22. Zhao XA. Practical Method for Tall Building Structure Design. Tongji University Press: Shanghai (in Chinese),
1992.
23. Qian JR, Guo JJ, Cheng ZP. Field measurement on the dynamics characteristic, displacement and acceleration
atop Di Wang Tower during a Typhoon. Journal of Civil Engineering 1998; 31(6):30 38 (in Chinese).
24. Huang W, Wu SS, Lu J. Some views on the displacement of Di Wang Tower exceeding the limitation of China
Building Code. Proceedings of the 15th Conference of Tall Building Structure Design 1999; 44 51.
25. Allemang RJ, Brown DL. A correlation coecient for modal vector analysis. Proceedings of the First
International Modal Analysis Conference, SEM, Orlando, FL, 1982; 110 116.

Correlation of Dynamic Characteristics of A Super-Tall Building From Full-Scale Measurements and Numerical Analysis With Various Nite Element Models

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Correlation of Dynamic Characteristics of A Super-Tall Building From Full-Scale Measurements and Numerical Analysis With Various Nite Element Models

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336 (DOI: 10.1002/eqe.405)

Correlation of dynamic characteristics of a super-tall building

measurement; wind eect; earthquake action

Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 23 May 2003

Figure 1. Plan of standard oor in the Di Wang Tower.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 2. Vertical view of the Di Wang Tower.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

2. THE STRUCTURAL SYSTEM OF THE DI WANG TOWER

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 3. Plan of outrigger belts in the 22nd oor.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

3. FULL-SCALE MEASUREMENTS OF DYNAMIC RESPONSES OF THE DI-WANG

4. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF TALL BUILDINGS BY THE FEM METHOD

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 6. Power spectral density of acceleration response in the X direction.

Figure 7. Power spectral density of acceleration response in the Y direction.

the modelling of tall buildings in FEM analysis:

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

The major dierences between these models are listed as follows:

5. EFFECT OF DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENTS OF OUTRIGGER BELTS

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 8. Three-dimensional FEM meshing of Model 1.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Figure 9. Side views of Models 1 to 4.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 10. Side views of Models 5 to 7.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The maximum drift index induced by

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

The top drift

The top drift

The top drift

The top drift

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Figure 11. Shear force distributions in vertical elements of Model 1 under

Eect of vertical bracings

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A SUPER TALL BUILDING

Figure 12. Shear force distributions in vertical elements of Model 2 under

Figure 13. Shear force distributions in vertical elements of Model 7 under

Copyright ? 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336

Figure 14. Shear force distributions in perimeter columns of Model 1 under

Figure 15. Shear force distributions in perimeter columns of Model 2 under

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. 2004; 33:13111336