- Yield (Engineering)
- Soil — Structure Interaction — General Report
- The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity by R Hill
- Composite 121
- Steel Storage Pallet Racking Systems in Seismic Areas
- Green 2004
- Ndamentals of Metalworking
- Science 3
- Jahanian.pdf
- Hyd
- 08_Plasticity_04_ElasticPerfectlyPlastic.pdf
- plastizitaet
- Cutting Mechanics and Analytical Modelling (Orthogonal and Oblique Machining)by a. P. Markopoulos
- WCEE2012_3958
- Effect of internal pressure and dent depth on strain distribution
- 78593
- 13_505
- Mutlu Seçer, Volume12-3,4
- Journal_1916_Inst of Metals
- DNV Pt.2 Ch.1
- Stationary Crack Tip Fields
- Ajsute interferente
- FEA BOOK
- Machine Design i Final Exam Solutions
- Stick and Slip Model
- 2.Stress Straun Curve Lecture 6 Revised
- Metallurgy TUV
- Behaviour of RC frmaes for different ductilities.pdf
- A Generalized Description of the Elastic Properties of Nanowires
- 2
- 1316453167rare foundation failure-nbmcw august 2009.pdf
- L2_Beam Element Stiffness Matrix Formulation
- Dynamic Analysis-SDOF With Harmonic Excitation (1)
- Okala_Ecodesign_Strategy_Guide_2012_Final.pdf
- 926 Precast Deck Slab
- 930- Precast Concrete Pile Cap- Renfcment
- method of slices slope analysis.pptx
- AS1684_UserGuide_8
- 12_Yin_Ji
- 925- Precast Beam
- 66354763-Industrial-Pavement-Guide.pdf
- Proposed Level 1
- 931- Precast Concrete Pile Cap
- Displacement Method - Moment Distribution Method (1)
- Dynamic Analysis-SDOF with Harmonic Excitation (2).pptx
- 121- Access Road - Typical Cross Sections-121
- i2433e04.pdf
- 922- Precast Concrete Deck - General Arrangement-dwg-922
- 920- Precast Concrete Pile Cap- g a &Details-dwg-920
- 911 Pile Details Dwg 911
- 922- PRECAST CONCRETE DECK - GENERAL ARRANGEMENT-DWG-922.pdf
- 907 Wharf Sections 3 Dwg 907
- 923- Precast Beam
- Box Culvert design
- Survey Plan
- 900 Wharf General Arrangement Dwg 900
- 921- Precast Concrete Pile Cap - Abutment-dwg-921
- Wharf Elevation
- 924- Precast Beam
- 906 Wharf Sections 2&4 Dwg 906

, JULY 2016

TECHNICAL NOTE

PARAMETRIC P-M2-M3 HINGE MODEL

Overview

This technical note describes the Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge model, a non-

linear frame hinge model that can couple the behavior in the axial and bend-

ing directions. Here P is the axial force, M2 the minor bending moment, and

M3 the major bending moment.

The Parametric P-M2-M3 hinges use a P-M-M yield surface that is similar to

that described in El-Tawil and Deierlein (2001). This document is intended

to explain the fundamental concepts of the Parametric P-M2-M3 behavior.

For details regarding the definition of the Parametric P-M2-M3 parameters,

please see the Hinge Property Data form Help page in the program.

Two types of Parametric P-M2-M3 hinges are available: steel and concrete

P-M2-M3 hinges. The two types of hinges differ only in the yield surface

used. The Parametric Steel P-M2-M3 hinge is intended to model steel sec-

tions while the Parametric Concrete P-M2-M3 hinge is intended to model

reinforced concrete sections.

**Plasticity and Strain Hardening
**

The Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge uses plasticity theory to model P-M2-M3

interaction. This section discusses the general concepts for plasticity theory

while subsequent sections will discuss specific behaviors of the Parametric

P-M2-M3 hinge.

For biaxial stress, an elastic-plastic material has a yield surface, as shown in

Figure 1. If the stress point is inside the yield surface the material is elastic. If

the stress point is on the yield surface the material is yielded, and its behavior

is elastic-plastic. Stress points outside the yield surface are not allowed.

The yield surface thus defines the strength of the material under biaxial

stress. Plasticity theory defines the behavior of the material after it reaches

1

the stress point does not remain in one place. which means that the stress point can move around the surface. Point A in Figure 1 shows a yielded state defined by stresses 𝜎𝜎1𝐴𝐴 and 𝜎𝜎1𝐵𝐵 . Hence. even though the material is elastic- perfectly-plastic (e-p-p). This is why the behav- ior is referred to as elastic-plastic. That is. Plasticity theory also defines the direction of plastic flow. it de- fines the ratio between the 1-axis and 2-axis components of the plastic . and hence biaxial stress is fundamen- tally different from uniaxial stress. after it yields). 2. Suppose that strain increments Δ𝜀𝜀1 and Δ𝜀𝜀2 are imposed. the material stays in a yielded state. Figure 1 Some Features of the Yield Surface 3. However. The elastic part of the strain causes the change in stress.e. The stress does not change after yield for an e-p-p material under for uniaxial stress. As long as the stress point stays on the yield surface. Plasticity theory says that some of the strain increment is an elastic increment and the remain- der is plastic flow. The ingredients of the theory are essen- tially as follows: 1. all of the strain after yield is plastic strain. causing the stresses to change to 𝜎𝜎2𝐴𝐴 and 𝜎𝜎2𝐵𝐵 at point B. The plastic part causes no change in stress. For yield of an e-p-p material under uniaxial stress there is no stress change after yield. Plasticity and Strain Hardening 2 the yield surface (i. The stresses can change after yield.

consider uniaxial stress along the 1-axis. The theory can be extended from the e-p-p case to the case with strain hard- ening. Plasticity and Strain Hardening 3 strain. As shown in Figure 1. After yield. the stress path is OC. and the value of Poisson's ratio is 0. If the material is on the Y surface the material is elastic-plastic-strain-hardening.5 for plastic deformation. the Mroz theory specifies how the Y surface moves as the material strain hardens. and yield occurs at point C. If the stress point is inside the Y surface the material is elastic. For the case of trilinear behavior the Mroz theory is illustrated in Figure 2. the stress stays constant. For example. the theory states that the direction of plastic flow is normal to the yield surface. Essentially. as indicated in the figure. The normal to the yield surface at point C has 1-axis and 2-axis components in the ratio 2:1. and hence all subsequent strain is plastic. Among other things. the Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge uses the Mroz theory for strain hardening. namely a Y surface (initial yield) and a larger U surface (ultimate strength). as in the e-p-p case. These surfaces both have the same shape. Figure 2 Trilinear Behavior with Mroz Theory . There are many hardening theories. the material is elastic-plastic. There are two yield surfaces. As the material hardens the Y surface moves. When the stress point reaches the U surface. the plastic strains are in this ratio. Hence.

possibly overestimating the axial growth for a reinforced concrete column. Fiber P-M2-M3 hinges allow for more accurate calculation of the axial deformation because the uniaxial stress-strain relationships and hys- teretic behavior of each of the individual fibers are considered. inelastic hinges based on plasticity theory can be used to model steel columns with P-M interaction. plasticity theory can correctly account for P-M interaction. When used for steel sections. Extension to P-M2-M3 Interaction 4 Extension to P-M2-M3 Interaction Plasticity theory models the interaction between the material stresses 𝜎𝜎1 and 𝜎𝜎2 . for both bending directions. and the bending moments. especially for cyclic loading. the yield surface is now the P-M strength interaction surface for the column section. for both pushover and dynamic earth- quake analyses. It is suggested to consider Fiber P-M2-M3 hinges for cases where axial de- formation is significant to the structural behavior. where the axial force. is that for axial forces be- low the balance point. Hence. For the e-p-p case. In contrast to plasticity- based hinges. the P-M2-M3 hinge will generally extend or shorten axially as it yields in bending. Yield Surface for a Parametric Steel P-M2-M3 Hinge Figure 3 shows the yield surface for a steel section. especially when many fibers are used. However. In each P-M plane (P-M2 and P-M3): . plasticity theory predicts plastic strain in tension after the yield surface is reached. under cyclic bending the theory predicts that the column will progressively increase in length. The equations of the yield surface are essentially as follows. plasticity theory can be extend to P-M2-M3 interaction in a column. Hence. However. interact with each other. Fiber P-M2-M3 hinges may be computationally less efficient than plasticity- based hinges. The main error. some growth is to be expected since the concrete resists compression but not tension. Note that because plastic flow is normal to the yield surface. Analyses of more complex cross sections show that plasticity theory can make reasonably accurate predictions of steel cross section behav- ior. Plasticity theory does a mediocre job of modeling reinforced concrete behav- ior. P. M2 and M3. By analogy.

M = bending moment. Equation (1) defines the M values at which yield occurs. For any value of P. The equations of the yield surface are essentially as follows.0 for yielding. in both the P-M2 and P-M3 planes (put 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = 1 and solve for M). P = axial force. 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 = yield force at M = 0 . The yield function in the M2-M3 plane is then: 𝑀𝑀2 𝛾𝛾 𝑀𝑀3 𝛽𝛽 𝑓𝑓𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 = � � +� � (2) 𝑀𝑀2𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 𝑀𝑀3𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 Figure 3 Yield Surface for a Parametric Steel P-M2-M3 Hinge Yield Surface for a Parametric Concrete P-M2-M3 Hinge Figure 4 shows the yield surface for a concrete section. . Different values for the exponent 𝛼𝛼 can also be used in the P-M2 and P-M3 planes. Yield Surface for a Parametric Concrete P-M2-M3 Hinge 5 𝑃𝑃 𝛼𝛼 𝑀𝑀 𝛽𝛽 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = � � + � � (1) 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌0 where 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = yield function value = 1. Different values for the exponent 𝛼𝛼 and the yield force 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 can be specified for tension and compression. Call these values 𝑀𝑀2𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 and 𝑀𝑀3𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 . and 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌0 = yield moment at P = 0.

𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 = axial force at balance point (assumed to be the same in both P-M planes). 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 = yield force at M = 0 .0 for yield. Force-Deformation Behavior 6 In each P-M plane (P-M2 and P-M3): 𝑃𝑃 − 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 𝛼𝛼 𝑀𝑀 𝛽𝛽 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = � � +� � (3) 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 − 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 where 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = yield function value. The behavior can be trilinear or elastic-perfectly-plastic – for trilinear behavior. Equation (3) defines the M values at which yield occurs. For any value of P. P = axial force. M = bending moment. Different values for the exponent 𝛼𝛼 can also be used in the P-M2 and P-M3 planes. the U point can be . The yield function in the M2-M3 plane is then given by Equation (2). Figure 4 Yield Surface for a Parametric Concrete P-M2-M3 Hinge Force-Deformation Behavior Figure 5 shows the uniaxial force-deformation behavior of the Parametric P- M2-M3 hinge. = 1. and 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌0 = yield moment at P = 𝑃𝑃𝐵𝐵 . Different values for the exponent 𝛼𝛼 and the yield force 𝑃𝑃𝑌𝑌0 can be specified for tension and compression. in both the P-M2 and P-M3 planes (put 𝑓𝑓𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = 1 and solve for M). The Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge behaves essentially rigid up to the yield point (the B point on the backbone curve).

4. assuming M3 = 0 and P = 0 for the steel hinge or P = PB for the concrete hinge. assuming M2 = M3 = 0 2. assuming M2 = 0 and P = 0 for the steel hinge or P = PB for the concrete hinge. assuming M2 = M3 = 0 3. Bending moment around axis 3. M3. The force is constant between points D and E. and residual (Point D) strengths can be independently specified for the following directions: 1. Bending moment around axis 2. The deformation at Points D and E cannot be explicitly specified in the axial direction because the onset of strength loss is determined based on bending deformations only. ultimate (Point U). representing residual strength in the hinge. M2. Compression. The yield surfaces for P-M2-M3 interaction of this hinge only allows for doubly-symmetrical cross sections with equal positive and negative bending strengths each for M2 and M3. Tension. The force is constant between the U and C points. Strength loss is optional and is controlled by the slope between the C and D points. The yield (Point B). which extends indefinitely. Figure 5 Uniaxial Behavior . Force-Deformation Behavior 7 specified with a strength larger than that at the B point.

The C point is reached when the following equation is satisfied: 𝐷𝐷2 2 𝐷𝐷3 2 � � +� � =1 (4) 𝐷𝐷2𝐶𝐶 𝐷𝐷3𝐶𝐶 where D2. If you specify the same ratio for axial force as for bending. D3 are the current bending deformations about Axes 2 and 3. D3E are the E point deformations. D3 are the current bending deformations about Axes 2 and 3. and D2E. You can specify one ratio for bending moment and a different ratio for axial force. These bending and axial deformations are checked separately. Strength Loss 8 Strength Loss For the onset of strength loss (the C point on the backbone curve). and also an E-point axial deformation. whichever occurs first. D3C are the C point deformations. as the hinge loses strength the yield surface decreases in size without changing shape.. When you specify the E point must specify E-point bending deformations about both Axis 2 and Axis 3. axial deformations are not considered). The E point in bending is reached when the following equation is satisfied: 𝐷𝐷2 2 𝐷𝐷3 2 � � +� � =1 (5) 𝐷𝐷2𝐸𝐸 𝐷𝐷3𝐸𝐸 where D2. After strength loss occurs for trilinear behavior.e. the behavior is assumed to become elastic-perfectly-plastic. The E point is reached when either deformation exceeds the corresponding E-point defor- mation. When you specify the C point for strength loss you must specify C point bending deformations about both Axis 2 and Axis 3. You must also specify the ratio between the C point strength and the D point strength. If you specify different ratios. and D2C. . the P-M2- M3 hinges uses bending deformations only (i. the yield surface reduces in size and changes shape.

The degraded unloading stiffness is calculated to make the area of the degraded loop equal to 𝑒𝑒 times the area of the non- degraded loop. 𝑒𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 and 𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 are the energy degrada- tion factors at the maximum positive and negative deformations. 3. Figure 7(a) shows the case where the positive and negative deformation . The axial and bending stiffnesses are both reduced. Energy Degradation 9 Energy Degradation This section describes the behavior of energy degradation on the hysteretic shape of the Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge. 𝑒𝑒. for the loop as a whole is the larger of 𝑒𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 and 𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 . The behavior of energy degradation for the trilinear case is shown in Figure 7. As part of the hinge definition. in the same proportion. 2. Note that these are the maximum deformations up to the current point in the analysis. The energy degradation factor. Figure 6 Degraded Loop for E-P-P Behavior The following method is used to set the loop properties: 1. a relationship can be specified between the deformation of the hinge and the corresponding energy degradation factor. For the current state of the hinge. This factor is the area of the degraded hysteresis loop divided by the area of the non-degraded loop. Figure 6 shows a loop for the e-p-p case with energy degradation for the uniaxial case. not necessarily the deformations at the limits of the current de- formation cycle.

The deformation demand-capacity ratio is calculated as follows: 2 2 𝐷𝐷2 𝐷𝐷3 𝐷𝐷/𝐶𝐶 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = �� � +� � (6) 𝐷𝐷2𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐷𝐷3𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 . The hardening stiffness is kept constant and only the elastic stiffness is reduced for the unloading branch – this results in an increase in the elastic deformation range and the elastic force range. is calculated as for the e-p-p case. Figure 7(b) shows the case where the positive and negative deformations are both larger than the U point deformation. (b) After U Point Deformation Capacity Ratios For deformation demand-capacity ratios. When you specify the deformation capacities. The energy degradation in this case is a combination of that shown in Figure 6 and 7(a). Figure 7 Degraded Loop for Trilinear Behavior: (a) Before U Point. 𝑒𝑒. The energy dissipation factor. Deformation Capacity Ratios 10 are both smaller than the U point deformation. LS. the Parametric P-M2-M3 hinge uses bending deformations only. and CP). you can specify bending de- formation capacities for up to 3 performance levels (called IO.

and Deierlein. El-Tawil. References 11 where D2. “Nonlinear Analysis of Mixed Steel-Concrete Frames. No. G. References El-Tawil. No. G. “Nonlinear Analysis of Mixed Steel-Concrete Frames. 6. . For steel P-M2-M3 hinges you can specify that the deformation capacities depend on the axial force. S. Vol. and 𝐷𝐷2𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 . Vol.” Journal of Structural Engineering. 126.” Journal of Structural En- gineering. and Deierlein. I: Element Formulation. II: Implementation and Verification. June 2001. June 2001. D3 are the current bending deformations about Axes 2 and 3. 𝐷𝐷3𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 are the deformation capacities at a given performance level. For a concrete P-M2-M3 hinge you can specify that the deformation capacities depend on both the axial force and the shear force. S. 6. 126.

- Yield (Engineering)Uploaded bySurya Saputra
- Soil — Structure Interaction — General ReportUploaded byCeline Denaly
- The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity by R HillUploaded byAgapito
- Composite 121Uploaded byAhmed Dyal
- Steel Storage Pallet Racking Systems in Seismic AreasUploaded byLim Chern Kuang
- Green 2004Uploaded bySayyadh Rahamath Baba
- Ndamentals of MetalworkingUploaded byheru
- Science 3Uploaded byXaviour Xavi
- Jahanian.pdfUploaded byDavid Shannon
- HydUploaded byashwaniv_6
- 08_Plasticity_04_ElasticPerfectlyPlastic.pdfUploaded bysujayan2005
- plastizitaetUploaded bychetan_thakur4278
- Cutting Mechanics and Analytical Modelling (Orthogonal and Oblique Machining)by a. P. MarkopoulosUploaded bypptmnlt
- WCEE2012_3958Uploaded byAna-Maria Pop
- Effect of internal pressure and dent depth on strain distributionUploaded bymaziar60
- 78593Uploaded byMandar Kulkarni
- 13_505Uploaded bypradeepjoshi007
- Mutlu Seçer, Volume12-3,4Uploaded bycjcute91
- Journal_1916_Inst of MetalsUploaded byBala Ratnakar Koneru
- DNV Pt.2 Ch.1Uploaded bybram05202265898
- Stationary Crack Tip FieldsUploaded bysklux
- Ajsute interferenteUploaded byDavid Leonardo
- FEA BOOKUploaded byLakhan Kumar Sharma
- Machine Design i Final Exam SolutionsUploaded byOrhan Kalkan
- Stick and Slip ModelUploaded byUzair Maqbool Khan
- 2.Stress Straun Curve Lecture 6 RevisedUploaded byMantavya Agarwal
- Metallurgy TUVUploaded bySamir Chaudhary
- Behaviour of RC frmaes for different ductilities.pdfUploaded byyasirkazmi856
- A Generalized Description of the Elastic Properties of NanowiresUploaded byStefan Rey
- 2Uploaded byAnonymous Clyy9N

- 1316453167rare foundation failure-nbmcw august 2009.pdfUploaded byDaudHussain
- L2_Beam Element Stiffness Matrix FormulationUploaded byDaudHussain
- Dynamic Analysis-SDOF With Harmonic Excitation (1)Uploaded byDaudHussain
- Okala_Ecodesign_Strategy_Guide_2012_Final.pdfUploaded byDaudHussain
- 926 Precast Deck SlabUploaded byDaudHussain
- 930- Precast Concrete Pile Cap- RenfcmentUploaded byDaudHussain
- method of slices slope analysis.pptxUploaded byDaudHussain
- AS1684_UserGuide_8Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 12_Yin_JiUploaded byDaudHussain
- 925- Precast BeamUploaded byDaudHussain
- 66354763-Industrial-Pavement-Guide.pdfUploaded byDaudHussain
- Proposed Level 1Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 931- Precast Concrete Pile CapUploaded byDaudHussain
- Displacement Method - Moment Distribution Method (1)Uploaded byDaudHussain
- Dynamic Analysis-SDOF with Harmonic Excitation (2).pptxUploaded byDaudHussain
- 121- Access Road - Typical Cross Sections-121Uploaded byDaudHussain
- i2433e04.pdfUploaded byDaudHussain
- 922- Precast Concrete Deck - General Arrangement-dwg-922Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 920- Precast Concrete Pile Cap- g a &Details-dwg-920Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 911 Pile Details Dwg 911Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 922- PRECAST CONCRETE DECK - GENERAL ARRANGEMENT-DWG-922.pdfUploaded byDaudHussain
- 907 Wharf Sections 3 Dwg 907Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 923- Precast BeamUploaded byDaudHussain
- Box Culvert designUploaded byDaudHussain
- Survey PlanUploaded byDaudHussain
- 900 Wharf General Arrangement Dwg 900Uploaded byDaudHussain
- 921- Precast Concrete Pile Cap - Abutment-dwg-921Uploaded byDaudHussain
- Wharf ElevationUploaded byDaudHussain
- 924- Precast BeamUploaded byDaudHussain
- 906 Wharf Sections 2&4 Dwg 906Uploaded byDaudHussain