Análise comparativa de deslocamentos e esforços solicitantes de um edifício alto através de modelos estruturais distintos pelo MEF

• Ano de defesa: 2009
• Autor(a) principal: Daniel Gomes Cabral de Almeida
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; UFMG
• Palavras-chave em Português: modelos estruturais; Método dos; edifícios de andares múltiplos; análise estrutural; Elementos Finitos; Engenharia de estruturas
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUOS-8M5JVU

Every day new multistory buildings are designed in several civilizations of our planet. The choice of the structural model in the analysis of these buildings during the development of the structural project is the key issue. Everyone should seek always the best model to represent the real structure. However, many structural design offices consider simplified models for the structural analysis. This can introduce seriousmistakes in the project. In this work, it is analysed a building of 16 floors with four distinct structural models, using the Finite Elements Method. The model 1, normally used in structural design offices analyses the structure with a three-dimensional model, where frame elements model the beams and the pillars and rigid diaphragms model the slabs; the elastic length of the beams is considered between pillars axis. The model 2 is similar to the first one, however the rigid diaphragms are replaced by sheel elements to model the slabs; the frame elements axis is considered in the slab midplane. The model 3 is similar to the second one, however it considers rigid-ended beams in the connectionwith pillars changing, consequently, the elastic length of the beams. The model 4 is the best approach to the real structure. It is similar to the third one, however OFFSET connections are used to consider the axis of the beams in its real position that, in general, doesnt coincide with the slab midplane. The structure is analised for horizontal and vertical loads, and results are obtained for nodal displacements, efforts in beams,efforts in slabs and support reactions. Graphics and tables are constructed with the obtained results. The comparative analysis of models 1, 2, 3 and 4 shows that the results obtained with these models are not equal. In particular, comparing the results of model 4 with the results of model 1 it can be seen, in several situations, important differences.