Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (3) : 303-311     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-016-0347-9
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Validation of a steel dual-core self-centering brace (DC-SCB) for seismic resistance: from brace member to one-story one-bay braced frame tests
Chung-Che CHOU(),Ping-Ting CHUNG1,Tsung-Han WU1,Alexis Rafael Ovalle BEATO1
1. Department of Civil Engineering, Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, China
2. Director, Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (CEER), Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Download: PDF(474 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

A steel dual-core self-centering brace (DC-SCB) is an innovative structural member that provides both energy dissipation and self-centering properties to structures, reducing maximum and residual drifts of structures in earthquakes. The axial deformation capacity of the DC-SCB is doubled by a parallel arrangement of two inner cores, one outer box and two sets of tensioning elements. This paper presents cyclic test results of a DC-SCB component and a full-scale one-story, one-bay steel frame with a DC-SCB. The DC-SCB that was near 8 m-long was tested to evaluate its cyclic behavior and durability. The DC-SCB performed well under a total of three increasing cyclic loading tests and 60 low-cycle fatigue loading tests without failure. The maximum axial load of the DC-SCB was near 1700 kN at an interstory drift of 2.5%. Moreover, a three-story dual-core self-centering braced frame (DC-SCBF) with a single-diagonal DC-SCB was designed and its first-story, one-bay DC-SCBF subassembly specimen was tested in multiple earthquake-type loadings. The one-story, one-bay subassembly frame specimen performed well up to an interstory drift of 2% with yielding at the column base and local buckling in the steel beam; no damage of the DC-SCB was found after all tests. The maximum residual drift of the DC-SCBF caused by beam local buckling was 0.5% in 2.0% drift cycles.

Keywords dual-core self-centering brace (DC-SCB)      braced frame tests      residual deformation     
Corresponding Author(s): Chung-Che CHOU   
Online First Date: 10 August 2016    Issue Date: 25 October 2016
 Cite this article:   
Chung-Che CHOU,Ping-Ting CHUNG,Tsung-Han WU, et al. Validation of a steel dual-core self-centering brace (DC-SCB) for seismic resistance: from brace member to one-story one-bay braced frame tests[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2016, 10(3): 303-311.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-016-0347-9
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2016/V10/I3/303
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Chung-Che CHOU
Ping-Ting CHUNG
Tsung-Han WU
Alexis Rafael Ovalle BEATO
Fig.1  Tests and recent applications of SBRB in China Mainland and Taiwan. (a) SBRB section (mm); (b) test setup; (c) hysteretic response; (d) applications of SBRB (Taipei Envision Engineering Consultant; Shanghai Lanke Building Damping Technology Co.)
Fig.2  Kinematics and hysteretic response of the cross-anchored DC-SCB
Fig.3  Test setup of the cross-anchored DC-SCB (unit: mm). (a) Test setup; (b) cross section of the brace
Fig.4  Axial force versus axial displacement relationship of the cross-anchored DC-SCB. (a) phase 1; (b) phase 2
frame Cs W (kN) Vdes (kN) T, first-mode period (s) code period (1.4Ta)
(s)
DC-SCBF 0.125 4222 792 0.47 0.62
Tab.1  Design properties of a prototype three-story DC-SCBF
floor design parameter 2% drift
Freq (kN) Fdt (kN) Pdt (kN) Pf (kN) n Fut (kN) εpt (%)
3 349 400 277 123 8 941 0.75
2 630 700 416 284 12 1492 0.75
1 729 800 416 384 12 1597 0.76
Tab.2  Design strength of DC-SCBs in each floor
Fig.5  Elevation and pushover analysis of a DC-SCBF. (a) DC-SCBF; (b) pushover analysis
Fig.6  Actuator force versus displacement relationships of the subassembly (Phase 3, 7 and 8 tests). (a) Phase 3 test; (b) Phase 7 test (TCU039, MCE); (c) Phase 8 test (10 cycles)
Fig.7  DC-SCBF subassembly at 2% drift (Phase 3 test). (a) Overall view; (b) beam buckling
Fig.8  Test response in different test phases. (a) Lateral force ratio; (b) PT force and friction force in DC-SCB
1 Uang C M, Nakashima M. Steel buckling-restrained braced frames. In Earthquake Engineering from Engineering Seismology to Performance-based Engineering (Chapter 16). Bozorgnia Y, Bertero VV. (eds), CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL; 16–1–16–37, 2003
2 Fahnestock L A, Sause R, Ricles J. Analytical and experimental studies on buckling restraint braced composite frames. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Steel and Concrete Composite Construction. Rep. No. NCREE-03–026, Taiwan University, Taiwan, China, 2003
3 Roeder C W, Lehman D E, Christopulos A. 2006. Seismic performance of special concentrically braced frames with buckling restrained braces. In: Proceedings of the 8th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland California, Paper No. 1503
4 Tsai K C, Hsiao B C, Wang K J, Weng Y T, Lin M L, Lin K C, Chen C H, Lai J W, Lin S L. Pseudo-dynamic tests of a full scale CFT/BRB frame-Part I: Specimen design, experiment and analysis. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2008, 37(7): 1081–1098
5 Chen C, Gong H, Chou C C. Seismic behavior and application of buckling-restrained braces in China and Mainland Taiwan. In: the 14th World Conference on Seismic Isolation, Energy Dissipation and Active Vibration Control of Structures, San Diego, USA, 2015
6 Chou C C, Chen S Y. Subassemblage tests and finite element analyses of sandwiched buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures, 2010, 32(8): 2108–2121
7 Chou C C, Liu J H, Pham D H. Steel buckling-restrained braced frames with single and dual corner gusset connections: seismic tests and analyses. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2012, 41(7): 1137–1156
8 Chou C C, Chung P T, Cheng Y T. Experimental evaluation of large-scale dual-core self-centering braces and sandwiched buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures, 2016, 116: 12–25
9 AISC. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL, 2010
10 Christopoulos C, Tremblay R, Kim H J, Lacerte M. Self-centering energy dissipative bracing system for the seismic resistance of structures: development and validation. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 134(1): 96–107
11 Miller D J, Fahnestock L A, Eatherton M R. Development and experimental validation of a nickel-titanium shape memory self-centering buckling-restrained brace. Engineering Structures, 2012, 40: 288–298
12 Chou C C, Chen Y C. Development of steel dual-core self-centering braces: quasi-static cyclic tests and finite element analyses. Earthquake Spectra, 2015, 31(1): 247–272
13 Chou C C, Chen Y C, Pham D H, Truong V M. Steel braced frames with dual-core SCBs and sandwiched BRBs: mechanics, modeling and seismic demands. Engineering Structures, 2014, 72: 26–40
14 Chou C C, Chung P T. Development of cross-anchored dual-core self-centering braces for seismic resistance. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 101: 19–32
15 Chou C C, Wu T H, Beato A R O, Chung P T, Chen Y C. Seismic design and tests of a full-scale one-story one-bay steel frame with a dual-core self-centering brace. Engineering Structures, 2016, 111: 435–450
16 Standard A S C E. Minimum Design Loads for Building and Other Structures. ASCE, 2010
17 Tsai K-C, Lin B-Z. Development of an object-oriented nonlinear static and dynamic 3D structural analysis program. Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Taiwan University, China, 2003
18 Chou C C, Lo S W, Liou G S. Internal flange stiffened moment connections with low-damage capability under seismic loading. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2013, 87: 38–47
19 Chou C C, Liou G S, Yu J C. Compressive behavior of dual-gusset-plate connections for buckling-restrained braced frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2012, 76: 54–67
20 Chou C C, Chen J H. Analytical model validation and influence of column bases for seismic responses of steel post-tensioned self-centering MRF systems. Engineering Structures, 2011, 33(9): 2628–2643
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed