Abstract
AbstractThis paper addresses some fundamentally contradictory conclusions drawn by Tso and Ying1 and the authors2 regarding the additional seismic ductility demand in asymmetric building structures and the adequacy of certain code torsional provisions. It also clarifies a number of issues arising from the different approaches employed in the two studies. The Mexico 76 and 87 code torsional provisions are taken as examples. Results show that the structural element at the stiff edge is the more critical and that the Mexico 76 code torsional provisions (among others) are inadequate, substantially underestimating the strength demand of this element. On the other hand, the Mexico 87 code torsional provisions are found to be over‐conservative. Recommendations are also given for improving the form and effectiveness of these code torsional provisions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
