Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HysteresisModels OTANI
HysteresisModels OTANI
The resistance-deformation relations are different for constitutive materials of a section, for a
section, for a member, for a story and for an entire structure. The resistance-deformation relation of
a structural analysis unit observed in a laboratory test must be idealized into a
resistance-deformation hysteresis model. Different levels of resistance-deformation models must be
used for structural elements considered in an analysis; e.g., a constitutive model of materials in a
finite element method analysis, a hysteresis model for a rotational spring in a one-component
member model, a story shear-drift hysteresis model for a mass-spring model.
The state-of-the-art does not provide a reliable method to estimate the initial stiffness, yield
deformation and ultimate deformation. The stiffness degrades from the initial elastic stiffness with
increased inelastic deformation and the number of cycles under reversed loading. The elastic
modulus of concrete varies significantly with concrete strength and mix; initial cracks cause decay in
the stiffness. The estimate of yield deformation is more complicated by the interaction of bending
and shear deformation and additional deformation due to pullout of longitudinal reinforcement from
the anchorage zone and due to bar slip of longitudinal reinforcement along the longitudinal
reinforcement within the member. Empirical expressions are necessary for the estimate of yield and
ultimate deformation.
The coordinates of a response point on a deformation-resistance plane are given by (D, F), in
which, D: deformation, F: resistance. The skeleton curve is represented by either "bilinear" or
"tri-linear" lines for a reinforced concrete member, with stiffness changes at "cracking (C)" and
"yielding (Y)" points.
F Loading
The following terms are defined to clarify the hysteresis
description;
Loading: a case where the absolute value of resistance (or
deformation) increases on the skeleton curve; Unloading
Unloading: a case where the absolute value of resistance
(or deformation) decreases after loading or reloading; and
Reloading; a case where the absolute value of resistance D
(or deformation) increases after unloading before the
response point reaching the skeleton curve. Reloading
A hysteresis model of a reinforced concrete "flexural" member must be able to represent the
above characteristics. The skeleton curve is similar to an "envelope curve" of a force-deformation
relation under load reversals. The state of the art is not sufficient to determine the ultimate point, at
the deformation of which the resistance of a member starts to decay. The force-deformation relation
after the onset of strength decay is normally not modeled because the behavior is strongly
dependent on a particular local deterioration of materials.
Because such hysteresis relationship is highly dependent on loading history and structural
properties of the member, a general hysteresis model is difficult to formulate; or the parameters of
hysteresis models cannot be analytically determined by the properties of the member. In the design
of earthquake resistant structures, the pinching type behavior is generally thought to be undesirable
because small hysteresis energy can be dissipated by the behavior. Therefore, a proper design care
must be exercised to reduce such pinching behavior due to shear and bond deterioration.
Many hysteresis models have been developed in the past. Some hysteresis models are elaborate,
and include many hysteresis rules; others are simple. The complicatedness of a hysteresis model
indicates a large memory to store the hysteresis rule program in a computer. It does not lead to a
longer computation time because the complicatedness of a hysteresis model requires simply many
branches in a computer program, and only a few branches are referred to for a step of response
computation.
A class of hysteresis models, in which the unloading and reloading relation is defined by
enlarging the skeleton curve by a factor of two, are called "Masing type." Some examples of Masing
type models are shown below:
3
po 1
Dm =
k ω 2 ω
{1 − ( ) } + 4h 2 ( ) 2
ωn ωn
x(t ) = Dm sin(ω t + φ )
0
dt dt 0
= π c ω Dm
2
= 2π h mk ω Dm
2
where m, c, k ,: mass, damping coefficient and stiffness of an SDF system, h : damping factor
c m
(= ), Tn : natural period of the system ( = 2π ), ω n : circular frequency of the system
2 mk k
k
(= ).
m
At the resonant condition ( ω = ω n ), the energy dissipated per cycle can be expressed
ΔW = 2π h k Dm
2
The equivalent damping factor should not be confused with a damping factor of a viscously
damped system because the equivalent damping factor is not relevant in random oscillation.
References:
Bertero, V. V., and E. P. Popov, "Seismic Behavior of Ductile Moment Resisting Reinforced
Concrete Frames," ACI SP-53, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1977, pp. 247-291.
Comite Euro-International du Beton: RC Frames under Earthquake Loading, State of the Art Report,
Thomas Telford, 1996.
Otani, S, "Hysteresis Models of Reinforced Concrete for Earthquake Response Analysis," Journal,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Vol. XXXVI, No. 2, 1981, pp. 125-156.
Otani, S., and V. W.-T. Cheung, "Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Under Bi-axial Lateral
Load Reversals - (II) Test Without Axial Load," Publication 81-02, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Toronto, 1981.
Saatcioglu, M., "Modeling Hysteretic Force-Deformation Relationships for Reinforced Concrete
Elements," ACI-SP127, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1991, pp. 153-198.
4
11.2 Bilinear Model
At the initial development stage of nonlinear dynamic analysis, the elastic-perfectly plastic
hysteretic model ("elasto-plastic model") was used by many investigators. The response point
moves on the elastic stiffness line before the yield stress is reached. After yielding, the response
point moves on the perfectly plastic line until unloading takes place. Upon unloading, the response
point moves on the line parallel to the initial elastic line.
This model does not consider degradation of stiffness under cyclic loading. Energy dissipation
during a small excursion is not included.
When the degradation in stiffness was recognized in the behavior of the reinforced concrete, the
loading and unloading stiffness Kr was proposed to degrade with the previous maximum
displacement (Nielsen and Imbeault, 1970) in a form:
Dm −α
Kr = K y ( )
Dy
in which, α : unloading stiffness degradation parameters (0 < α <1); Ky: initial elastic stiffness, and
Dm: previously attained maximum displacement in any direction. The unloading stiffness remains
5
constant until the response displacement amplitude exceeds the previous maximum displacement in
either direction. The model is called a "degrading" bilinear hysteresis model." If the value of a is
chosen to be zero, the unloading stiffness does not degrade with yielding. A smaller value of a tends
to yield a larger residual displacement. The degrading bilinear model does not dissipate hysteretic
energy until the yield is developed. For a reinforced concrete member, the value of α is normally
selected to be around 0.4.
Reference:
6
11.3 Ramberg-Osgood Model
γ by
A stress-strain relation of the metal was expressed using three parameters D y , Fy and
Ramberg and Osgood (1943), where D y : yield displacement, Fy : yield resistance and γ : a
parameter of the model. Jennings (1963) introduced the fourth parameter η to the model. The
initial loading curve of the model under monotonically increasing deformation, as modified by
Jennings, is expressed by
γ −1
D F F
= (1 + η )
D y Fy Fy
in which, γ : exponent of the Ramberg-Osgood model; and η : parameter introduced by Jennings
(1963).
The initial tangent modulus is equal to (Fy/Dy), and the initial loading curve passes a point (Fy,
(1+ η )Dy) for any value of γ . The shape of the primary curve can be controlled by the exponent γ
from linearly elastic ( γ = 1.0) to elasto-plastic ( γ = infinity). For a larger value of γ , the behavior
becomes similar to that of the bilinear model.
Upon unloading from a peak response point (Do, Fo), the unloading, load reversal and reloading
branches of the relationship is given by
γ −1
D − Do F − Fo F − Fo
= (1 + η )
2Dy 2 Fy 2 Fy
until the response point reaches the peak point of one outer hysteresis loop.
The resistance F is not explicitly expressed by a given displacement D in this model. The
resistance F at a given displacement D must be computed numerically, for example, using the
Newton-Rapson's iterative procedure.
The Ramberg-Osgood model is often used for stress-strain relation of the steel in the finite
element analysis or in the lamina model, and for resistance-deformation relation of steel members in
a frame analysis.
References:
8
11.4 Degrading Tri-linear Model
A model that simulates dominantly flexural stiffness characteristics of the reinforced concrete was
used extensively in Japan (Fukada, 1969). The primary curve is of tri-linear shape with stiffness
changes at flexural cracking and yielding. Up to yielding, the model behaves in a manner the same
as the bilinear model. When the response exceeds a yield point, response point follows the
strain-hardening part of the
primary curve. Once
unloading takes place from
a point on the primary curve,
the unloading point is
considered to be a new
"yield point" in the direction.
The model behaves in a
bilinear manner between
the positive and negative
"yield points" with stiffness
degraded proportional to
the ratio of the slopes
connecting "current yield
points" and "the initial yield Degrading tri-linear model
points."
The ratio of the first and second stiffness is kept constant even after yielding.
9
References:
10
11.5 Clough Degrading Model
The model was made more versatile by incorporating the reduction in unloading stiffness Kr with
a maximum displacement in a form:
Dm −α
Kr = K y ( )
Dy
200
in which, α : unloading stiffness
Clough Model
degradation parameter; K y : initial elastic
100 RC Column
stiffness; and Dm : previous maximum
Column Resistance, kN
11
Saiidi and Sozen (1979) and Riddell and Newmark (1979) used models similar to the modified
Clough model.
Wang and Shah (1987) introduced the strength and stiffness degradation effect of cumulative
damage. The strength and stiffness degrade in proportion to (1-Dws), where Dws is the Wang and
Shah damage index. The ordinates of the bilinear skeleton curve in monotonic loading is multiplied
by the current value of (1-Dws). Unloading and reloading stiffness is reduced by the same amount, as
they are defined on the basis of the location of the point of reversal and of the maximum previous
deformation in the direction of loading, on the degraded skeleton curve. The Wang and Shah
damage index is defined separately for each direction of loading as
enδ − 1
Dws = n
e −1
where the damage prameter δ is expressed in terms of chord rotation,
∑θ i
δ =c i
θu
References:
12
11.6 Takeda Degrading Model
2. Condition: A load P1 is reached in one direction on the primary curve such that P1 is larger than
Pcr but smaller the yield load Py. The load is then reversed to -P2 such that P2<P1.
Rule: Unload parallel to loading curve for that half cycle.
3. Condition: A load P1 is reached in one direction such that P1 is larger than Pcr but not larger
than the yield load Py. The load is then reversed to -P3 such that P3>P1.
Rule: Unloading follows a straight line joining the point of return and the point representing
cracking in the other direction.
4. Condition: One or more loading cycles have occurred. The load is zero.
Rule: To construct the loading curve, connect the point at zero load to the point reached in the
previous cycle, if that point lies on the primary curve or on a line aimed at a point on the primary
curve. If the previous loading cycle contains no such point, go to the preceding cycle and continue
the process until such a point is found. Then connect that point to the point at zero load.
Exception: If the yield point has not been exceeded and if the point at zero load is not located
within the horizontal projection of the primary curve for that direction of loading, connect the point at
zero load to the yield point to obtain the loading slope.
6. Condition: The yield load is exceeded in one direction but the cracking load is not exceeded in
the opposite direction.
Rule: Unloading follows Rule 5. Loading in the other direction continues as an extension of the
unloading line up to the cracking load. Then, the loading curve is aimed at the yield point.
Takeda model included (a) stiffness changes at flexural cracking and yielding, (b) hysteresis rules
for inner hysteresis loops inside the outer loop, and (c) unloading stiffness degradation with
deformation. The response point moves toward a peak of the one outer hysteresis loop. The
unloading stiffness Kr after yielding is given by
13
−α
Fc + Fy Dm
Kr =
Dc + D y D y
in which, α : unloading stiffness degradation parameter; and Dm : previous maximum displacement
beyond yielding in the direction concerned. The hysteresis rules are extensive and comprehensive.
14
Bilinear Takeda Model: The primary curve of the Takeda model can be made bilinear simply
choosing the cracking point to be the origin of the hysteretic plane. Such a model is called the
"bilinear Takeda" model, similar to the Clough model except that the bilinear Takeda model has
more hysteresis rules for inner hysteresis loops (Otani and Sozen, 1972); i.e., the response point
moves toward an unloading point on the immediately outer hysteresis loop.
Additional modifications of the Takeda model with bilinear backbone curve may be found in
literature (Powell, 1975, Riddle and Newmark, 1979, Saiidi and Sozen, 1979, Saiidi, 1982). Riddle
and Newmark (1979) used a bilinear skeleton curve and unloading stiffness equal to the initial elastic
stiffness; loading occurs either on the strain hardening branch or towards the furthest point attained
in the previous cycle. Saiidi and Sozen (1979) claimed to simplify the Takeda model using a bilinear
skeleton curve; the model, however, is identical to the modified Clough model with reduced
unloading stiffness with maximum deformation, and reloading to the immediate prior unloading point
if reloading occurs during unloading and then to the unloading point on the skeleton curve.
References:
15
11.7 Pivot Model
(3) The modified strength envelope (acting as the upper bound for future cyclic loading) is defined by
lines joining the pinching pivot point PP4 (PP2) to maximum response point S1 (S2) until the response
point reaches the strength envelope.
(4) The pinching pivot points PP4 and PP2 are initially fixed, but they move toward the
force-deflection origin with the strength degradation. The resistance at a pinching pivot point is given
by β i Fyi where
*
16
β i* = β i (d iMAX ≤ d ti ) F
T1
Ft1
F
β i* = β i iMAX (d iMAX > d ti ) Y1
S1
Fti Q4 F1MAX
Q1
where β i defines the degree of pinching
PP4
for a ductile flexural response prior to D1
strength degradation. d iMAX , d ti : maximum D2MAX dt2 F1
df2
displacement and strength degradation D
dt1 D1MAX df1
displacement (displacement at the highest F2 PP2
D2
resistance) in the i-th direction of loading
(i=1 or 2). S2 F2MAX
Y2
T2 Ft2 Q2
Q3
Hysteresis Rules:
(1) Loading and unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed away from or toward point Pn,
respectively.
Modification (Otani): Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward maximum response point
Si, followed by the strength envelope. Unloading in Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward point Pn.
(2) Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed toward point PPn, then to maximum response point
Si, followed by the strength envelope.
(3) Unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed away from point Pn.
F P4 P3
Y1
S1
PP4
Q4 Q1 D
Q3 PP2 Q2
Y2
S2
P2 P1
17
Modification for Softened Initial Stiffness:
The unlading stiffness of the maximum F P4
displacement excursion in Quadrant Q1 is guided P4*
Q4 Q1
toward point P1. A new pivot point P1* is defined
on this unloading line at force ( 1 + η ) times larger S1
PP4
than the force at point P1. A line extending from PP4*
point P1* through origin defines the new softened
elastic loading line K*. Point PP4* is defined by the K*
D
intersection of the modified strength envelope
(line between points PP4 and S1) and the new
softened elastic loading line K*.
Q3 Q2
α1 Fy1
P1
P1* (1 + η )α1 Fy1
Reference:
18
Pivot Hysteresis Model (Version 2)
Reference:
Dowell, R. K., F. Seible and E. L. Wilson, "Pivot Hysteresis Model for Reinforced Concrete
Members," ACI Structural Journal, Title No. 95-S55, Vol. 95, No. 5, September-October 1998, pp.
607 - 617.
Modification:
(1) Initial stiffness is the same for positive (IS=2) and negative (IS=1) directions.
(2) Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward maximum response point Si, followed by the
strength envelope.
(3) Unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward point Pn.
(4) Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed toward point PPn, then to maximum response point
Si, followed by the strength envelope.
(5) Unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed away from point Pn.
F PV3(IS)
Rule 1
Y2
Y1 X(IS)
Positive Direction IS=2
Rule 7
(D3,F3) PV2(IS) Rule 2 Y3
Rule 3
Rule 8 (D5,F5)
D2 Y4
D4 Rule 4 D4
Rule 6 Rule 4
Y4 D2
Rule 2 Rule 3
Rule 7
Y3 PV2(IS)
Rule 5
(D5,F5) Y1
Negative Direction IS=1
Rule 1
Y2 X(IS)
PV3(IS)
Hysteresis Rules:
Rule 1: Loading on strength envelope in positive or negative direction.
Rule 2: Unloading from maximum response point X(IS) on strength envelope toward pivot point
PV3(3-IS) on the other side or loading toward maximum point X(IS) on the same side.
Rule 3: Loading toward pivot point PV2(IS) on the same side after Rule 2 crossing displacement axis
at displacement D2.
Rule 4: Unloading from Rule 3 at point (D3,F3) away from pivot point PV3(IS) on the same side until
the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D4 or loading toward
unloading point (D3,F3) followed by Rule 3.
Rule 5: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) on the same side after Rule 3 passing pivot
point PV2(IS).
Rule 6: Unloading from Rule 5 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other side until the
response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D2, or loading toward unloading
point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 5.
Rule 7: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) after Rule 4 crossing displacement axis at
displacement D4.
Rule 8: Unloading from Rule 7 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other side until
response point crosses displacement axis at displacement at D2, or loading toward
unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 7.
19
Rule 9: Loading initial elastic stiffness after loading on Rule 3 passing pivot point PV2(IS), or
unloading on initial stiffness before crossing displacement axis at origin.
Rule 10: Loading on the initial elastic stiffness before pivot point PV2(IS) is reached followed by Rule
5 or unloading on the initial elastic stiffness before until the response point crosses the
displacement axis at the origin followed by Rule 9.
F PV3
Rule 1
Rule 1 T
For each Yi and LVi
LV2 Y2
(DYi,FYi) and SYi
X(DX,FX)
Y1
LV3
Positive Direction Rule 2
LV1
Y3 LV4
Y4 D2 D2 Y4
LV4
LV1
Y3
Rule 2 Y1
Negative Direction
LV3
Y2 LV2
T X(DX,FX)
PV3
Rule 2: Unloading from maximum response point X(IS) on strength envelope toward
pivot point PV3(3-IS) on the other side or loading toward maximum point X(IS)
on the same side.
F
Rule 2 PV3(IS’)
Positive Direction Y1
X(DX,FX)
Rule 1
PV2(IS)
Rule 2
Rule 3 Y4
D2
D2
Rule 2 Rule 3
PV2(IS)
Y1
Q2 Negative Direction
Rule 1 X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS’)
20
Rule 3: Loading toward pivot point PV2(IS) on the same side after Rule 2 crossing
displacement axis at displacement D2.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 3
Y1 X(DX,FX)
Positive Direction
Rule 5
PV2(IS)
(D3,F3) Rule 3
Rule 4
Y4
D2 D4
Rule 4 D2
D4
PV2(IS) Rule 3 (D3,F3)
Rule 5
Y2
Negative Direction
X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
Rule 4: Unloading from Rule 3 at point (D3,F3) away from pivot point PV3(IS) on the
same side until the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement
D4 or loading toward unloading point (D3,F3) followed by Rule 3.
F PV3
Rule 4
Y1 X(DX,FX)
Positive Direction
PV2 Rule 7
(D3,F3) Rule 3
Rule 4
Y4
D4
D4 Rule 4
PV2 (D3,F3)
Rule 3
Rule 7
Y2
Negative Direction
X(DX,FX)
PV3
21
Rule 5: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) on the same side after Rule 3
passing pivot point PV2(IS).
F
PV3(IS’)
Rule 5
Y1
Rule 5 X(DX,FX)
(D5,F5) Rule 1
Positive Direction
PV2
Rule 6
D
D2 D2
Rule 6 PV2
Rule 5 (D5,F5)
Negative Direction
Y2
Rule 1 X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS’)
Rule 6: Unloading from Rule 5 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other
side until the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D2, or
loading toward unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 5.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 6
Y1
Rule 5 X(DX,FX)
(D5,F5) Rule 1
Positive Direction
PV2
Rule 6
Rule 3 D
D2 D2
Rule 5 (D5,F5)
Negative Direction
Y2
Rule 1 X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
22
Rule 7: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) after Rule 4 crossing
displacement axis at displacement D4.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 7
Y1 X(IS)=(DX,FX)
Positive Direction
Rule 1
Rule 7
PV2
(D5,F5)
D
D2 Rule 6
D4
D4 D2
Rule 6
PV2
(D5,F5)
Rule 7 Negative Direction
Y1
Rule 1
X(IS)=(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
Rule 8: Unloading from Rule 7 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other
side until response point crosses displacement axis at displacement at D2, or
loading toward unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 7.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 8
Y1 X(IS)
Positive Direction
Rule 7
PV2(IS)
Rule 3
(D5,F5)
D
D2 Rule 8
D4
D4 Rule 3
Rule 8 D2
PV2(IS)
(D5,F5)
Rule 7 Negative Direction
Y1
X(IS)
PV3(IS)
23
Rule 9: Loading initial elastic stiffness after loading on Rule 3 passing pivot point
PV2(IS), or unloading on initial stiffness before crossing displacement axis at
origin.
F PV3
Rule 9
T
For each Yi and LVi LV2 Y2
(DYi,FYi) and SYi Rule 1
Y1(DY,FY)
LV3
Positive Direction LV1 Rule 9
PV2
Rule 3 Y3 LV4
Y4 Rule 9 Y4
D2 D2 D2
Rule 10
LV4 PV2
Y3
LV1
Negative Direction
LV3 Y1
Y2 LV2
T X(DX,FX)
PV3
Rule 10: Loading on the initial elastic stiffness before pivot point PV2(IS) is reached
followed by Rule 5 or unloading on the initial elastic stiffness before until the
response point crosses the displacement axis at the origin followed by Rule 9.
F PV3
Rule 10
Y1(DY,FY)
LV3
Positive Direction LV1
PV2
Y3 LV4
Rule 9 Y4
Y4 D2 D2
Rule 10
LV4
PV2
Y3 Rule 5
LV1
Negative Direction
LV3 Y1
Y2 LV2
T X(DX,FX)
PV3
24
11.8 Stable Hysteresis Models with Pinching
Takeda-slip Model: Eto and Takeda (1973) modified the Takeda model to incorporate a slip-type
behavior at low stress level due to pull-out of longitudinal reinforcement from the anchorage zone.
The skeleton curve is tri-linear with stiffness changes at cracking and yielding where the cracking
and yielding levels can be different in positive and negative directions. The performance of the
model is identical to the Takeda model before yielding.
When the response point crosses a line connecting the origin and the maximum response point in
the direction of reloading, the response point moved toward the previous maximum response point
and then on the skeleton curve. The unloading stiffness is defined in the same manner as the
25
Takeda model.
The same pinching and unloading stiffness is used during reloading and unloading in an inner
loop.
−α
F 'c + Fy Dm
Kd =
D 'c + Dy Dy
where, F 'c and D 'c : resistance and deformation at cracking on the opposite side, Fy and Dy :
resistance and deformation at yielding on the unloading side, Dm : maximum deformation on the
unloading side, α : unloading degradation index.
Kabeyasawa-Shiohara Model: Kabeyasawa et al. (1983) modified the Takeda-Eto slip model to
represent the behavior of a girder with the amount of longitudinal reinforcement significantly different
at the top and bottom;
26
(1) the pinching occurs only in one direction where the yield resistance is higher than the other
direction,
(2) the pinching occurs only after the initial yielding in the direction of reloading, and
(3) the stiffness Ks during slipping is a function of the maximum response point (Dm, Fm) and the
point of load reversal (Do, Fo=0.0) in the resistance-deformation plane.
The reloading (slip) stiffness Ks, after unloading in the direction of the smaller yield resistance,
was determined as
γ
Fm Dm
Ks =
Dm − Do Dm − Do
where ( Dm , Fm ): deformation and resistance at the previous maximum response point, Do :
displacement at the end of unloading on the zero-load axis, γ : slip stiffness degradation index. No
slip behavior will be generated for γ = 0; the degree of slip behavior increases with γ > 1.0. γ =
1.2 was suggested.
The slip stiffness is used until the response point crosses a line with slope Kp through the
previous maximum response point (Dm, Fm); the stiffness is reduced from the slope connecting the
origin and the maximum response point by reloading stiffness index η ,
Fm
K p = η( )
Dm
The values of unloading stiffness degradation index α of Takeda model, slipping stiffness
degradation index γ , and reloading stiffness index η were chosen to be 0.4, 1.0 and 1.0,
respectively by Kabeyasawa et al. (1983).
27
and at a moment (1 − λ ) Fm , where Fm is the resistance at the extreme point if the previous
excursion. After reaching this terminal point of the reloading branch, further loading takes place
parallel to the post-yielding stiffness of the virgin loading curve.
Fy
Fc
D’y Dy
D’c Dc
F’c
F’y
References:
Costa, A. C., and A. G. Costa, “Hysteretic Model of Force-Displacement Relationships for Seismic
Analysis of Structures,” National Laboratory for Civil Engineering, Lisbon, 1987.
Eto, H, and T. Takeda, "Elasto Plastic Earthquake Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete
Frame Structure (in Japanese)," Report, Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1973,
pp. 1261-1262.
Kabeyasawa, T., H. Shiohara, S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Analysis of the Full-scale Seven-story
Reinforced Concrete Test Structure," Journal of the Faculty of Engineering, the University of
Tokyo, (B), Vol. XXXVII, No. 2, 1983, pp. 431-478.
28
11.9 Shear-type Hysteresis Models
Reinforced concrete members exhibit progressive loss of strength under reversed cycles of
inelastic deformation due to lack of shear capacity of member or bond resistance along longitudinal
reinforcement; the monotonic strength of such members cannot be attained.
The response of a reinforced concrete member, exhibiting early strength decay, is difficult to
model because such behavior is sensitive to loading history. General features can be summarized
as the decay in resistance with cyclic loading and pinching response during reloading followed by
hardening.
The undesirable features can be avoided or reduced by following design requirements and
detailing of reinforcement. Therefore, hysteresis models for shear-failing performance may not be
necessary for the response analysis of new construction, but may be necessary for the seismic
evaluation of existing construction.
Takayanagi-Schnobrich Model: Takayanagi and Schnobrich (1976) modified the Takeda model to
incorporate pinching and strength decay features caused by high shear acting in short coupling
beams connecting parallel structural walls. The skeleton curve is trilinear.
The reloading (loading in the opposite direction after unloading) is made smaller than the stiffness
toward the previous maximum response point in the direction of reloading; the response point moves
toward the previous maximum response point after the response deformation changes its sign.
The resistance at a target point for reloading in the hardening range is reduced from the
resistance at the previous maximum response point; e.g., the resistance at the target point is
selected on a strength decay guideline which descends from the yield point. After the response
reaches the target point, the response point moves along a line parallel to the post yielding line.
The pinching stiffness is based on the reinforcement resistance for bending. The rate of strength
decay is assumed to proportionally increase with the rotation.
M Y
My
Decay Guideline
Mc
Dm’
Dm
Pinching θ
Mc
My
Y’
Takayanagi-Schnobrich Model of
Pinching and Strength Decay
Roufaiel-Meyer Model: Roufaiel and Meyer (1987) used a hysteresis model that includes strength
decay, stiffness degradation and pinching effect.
29
The moment resistance of a bilinear F A
Y
moment-curvature relation was assumed to decay
when a given strain is reached at the extreme
compression fiber. The curvature at the
commencement of strength decay is called the
critical curvature. The degradation in resistance was
assumed to be proportional to the amount by which
the critical curvature was exceeded. B
C
An auxiliary unloading branch AB is drawn O Ks Do
D
parallel to the elastic branch of the bilinear skeleton
curve until it intersects a line OB through the origin O
parallel to the strain-hardening branch YA of the
skeleton curve. The line connecting this latter point B
of intersection to the point of previous extreme
deformation in the opposite direction defines the end
C of the unloading branch on the horizontal axis. If (Dm,Fm)
yielding has not taken place in the direction of Roufaiel and Meyer Model
loading, the yield point is used as the previous
maximum response point.
From that point on reloading is not always directed straight to the point of the previous extreme
post-yield excursion in the direction of reloading, but it may include pinching, depending on the shear
ration, M/Vh. Pinching is accomplished by directing the reloading branch first towards a point on the
elastic branch of the skeleton curve at an ordinate equal to that of the intersection of this branch with
the line of straight reloading to the previous extreme deformation point, times m<1. The second part
of the reloading branch heads towards this latter extreme deformation point. Parameter m assumes
the following values;
for M/Vh<1.5 m=0
for 1.5<M/Vh<4 m=0.4(M/Vh)-0.6
for 4<M/Vh m=1
The slope of slipping stiffness is
F 'm
Ks = m
D 'm − Do
30
3
⎛ φ −φy ⎞2
Δm(half cycle at φ ) = {m p (φ f ) − m f } ⎜ ⎟⎟
⎜ φ −φ
⎝ f y ⎠
Accordingly, a branch of reloading in the direction where the previous maximum curvature is equal to
φ , moves toward a point at ( m p (φ ) − Δm, φ ), rather than at ( m p (φ ), φ ) as in the original Roufaiel
and Meyer model.
If the strength-degrading feature is introduced, the response point after the pinching does not
move toward the previous maximum point, but a point on the skeleton curve at deformation greater
than the previous maximum deformation.
Dm
D *m =
α
and α = 0.8 is suggested in the study.
The skeleton curve may be different in positive and negative directions.
31
The response is linearly elastic before the response point reaches point A. The response point
follows the skeleton curve if the slope of the skeleton curve is positive; if the slope of the skeleton
curve is negative, the response point increases its deformation without the change in resistance
(plastic behavior).
If a response point crosses the descending branches during loading or reloading, the deformation
increases without change in resistance (perfectly plastic stiffness). Upon unloading from a maximum
response point on the perfectly plastic branch, the response point moves on a line parallel to the
initial elastic stiffness K e until the response point crosses the descending skeleton curve; the point
is termed as the maximum response point (Dmax, Fmax). Then the response point follows a line with
reduced stiffness K u ;
Dmax −α
Ku = K e ( )
Dy
where α : unloading stiffness degradation index, D y : yield deformation.
Upon reloading after crossing zero resistance line, the response point moves on a line with
reloading (slip) stiffness K s ;
Fmin D
Ks = ( max )− β
Dmin − Do Dy
where ( Dmin , Fmin ): previous maximum response point on the skeleton curve in the direction of
reloading, Do : deformation at the completion of unloading, D y : yield deformation in the opposite
direction.
Ke
D xo
Dmin D yp K s Ku
Dmax
As
Fmin
A
This slip stiffness is used for deformation ls (= γ l), where l: length from the unloading point to
the intersection of slip line and the line connecting the origin and the negative maximum response
point ( Dmin , Fmin ). The response point during strain softening moves toward the previous maximum
point ( Dmin , Fmin ) or the yield point if no yielding was experienced in the reloading direction.
If unloading takes place during reloading toward previous maximum response point, the
unloading stiffness from the previous maximum response point is used. If the response point crosses
32
the zero resistance axis, the response point follows the same slip stiffness previously defined in the
reloading direction. The length of slip deformation is defined for l: length from the new unloading
point to the intersection of slip line and the line connecting the origin and the maximum response
point ( Dmax , Fmax ).
33
simple hysteresis model, in which the response moves on the line connecting the previous absolute
maximum response point and the origin. If the response point reaches the maximum response point,
it moves on the skeleton curve. When unloading takes place from a point on the skeleton curve, the
response point moves on the line connecting the newly attained maximum response point and the
origin.
The model was obtained from the observation on steady-state response of reinforced concrete
structural model which oscillated about the origin of the force-deformation relation. No hysteresis
energy is dissipated during the oscillation within the
previous maximum response amplitude. Therefore,
viscous damping proportional to the initial stiffness is F Y
suggested as a mechanism to dissipate energy with
degradation of stiffness in a system.
C
Any shape may be used for the skeleton curve of
this model. This model is sometimes used to represent
a feature of shear-dominated member, which
dissipates small hysteresis energy and degrades its D
stiffness with plastic deformation. The model, however,
does not give residual displacement when the load
was removed. Therefore, the model may not be suited C
for the simulation analysis of response waveform.
Y
Similar to the origin oriented model, the response Peak-Oriented Model
point may directed toward the previous maximum
response point on the opposite direction. Such model may be called a peak oriented model.
Sucuoglu’s Energy Based Hysteresis Model: A cycle fatigue model was presented by Sucuoglu
and Erberik (2004). The model keeps the complete record of energy dissipation and the recorded
dissipated energy is used as a memory fluid for determining the amount of stiffness and strength
deterioration in the subsequent cycle.
stiffness
aK o where a accounts for hardening or softening effects. Pinching is not considered
explicitly in the general force-deformation reloading paths, however, loss of energy dissipation
capacity due to pinching is the main feature of the model.
34
Rule 2: the post-yield envelope curve has a slope a K o , where a is the post-yield stiffness ratio.
Rule 3: Unloading from the post-yield envelope or from a reloading branch follows a slope K o until
the entire force in the system is released. If unloading originates from the maximum
displacement point in any direction, then unloading stiffness K u = K o such as the
unloading branches A1C1, A2C2, A3C3, and A4C4. On the other hand, if unloading originates
from an intermediate displacement which is less than the maximum displacement in the
direction, unloading stiffness K u becomes equal to the slope of the line between the
reloading target B at the current maximum post-elastic displacement and is its unloading
intercept C; e.g., unloading stiffness K u for A5C5 is equal to the slope of B4C3 and
unloading stiffness K u for A6C6 is equal to the slope of B5C4.
Rule 4: Reloading from an unloading intercept C to a reloading target B follows a slope K r . The
slopes of CiBi are variable and depend on the reduced strength of the target point B at the
current maximum displacement in the respective direction. Strength deterioration depends
on dissipated energy.
35
where, σ B : concrete strength (MPa), ρ w : lateral reinforcement ratio (%), N / BDσ B : axial force
ratio, and Ls / D : shear span to depth ratio.
References:
Banon, H., J. M. Biggs and H. Max Irvine, "Seismic Damage in Reinforced Concrete Frames,"
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 107, No. ST9, September 1981, pp. 1713-1729.
Chung, Y. S., et al., “Seismic Damage Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Members,” National
Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York, Buffalo, Technical
Report NCEER-87-0022, 1987.
Kato, D., S. Otani, H. Katsumata and H. Aoyama, "Effect of Wall Base Rotation Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Frame-Wall Building," Proceedings, Third South Pacific Regional
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, May
1983.
Matsushima, Y., "Discussion of Restoring Force Characteristics of Buildings, the Damage from
Tokachi-oki Earthquake (in Japanese)," Report, Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan,
August 1969, pp. 587-588.
Park, Y. J., et al., “IDARC: Inelastic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame-Shear Wall
Structures,” National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New
York at Buffalo, Technical Report NCEER-87-0008, 1987.
Roufaiel, M. S. L., and C. Meyer, "Analytical Modeling of Hysteretic Behavior of R/C Frames,"
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 3, March 1987, pp. 429-444.
Shiga, T., Vibration of Structures (in Japanese), Structural Series, Vol. 2, Kyoritsu Shuppan, 1976.
Sucuoglu, H., and Atlug Erberik, „Energy-based Hysteresis and Damage Models for Deteriorating
Systems,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, No. 33, 2004, pp. 69 - 88.
Takayanagi, T., and W. C. Schnobrich, "Computed Behavior of Reinforced concrete Coupled Shear
Walls," Structural Research Series No. 434, Civil Engineering Studies, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1976.
Umemura, H., T. Ichinose, K. Ohashi and J. Maekawa, “Development of Restoring Force
Characteristics for RC Members Considering Capacity Degradation (in Japanese),” Proceedings,
Annual Meeting, Japan Concrete Institute, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2002, pp. 1147-1152.
36
11.10 Ibara-Medina-Krawinkler Model
The cyclic hysteretic response of a structural member tested in the laboratory indicates that (1)
strength deteriorates with the number and amplitude of cycles, even if the displacement associated
with the strength has not been reached, (2) Strength deterioration occurs after reaching the
maximum resistance, (3) Unloading stiffness may also deteriorates, and (4) The reloading stiffness
may deteriorates at an accelerated rate (Ibara, Medina and Krawinkler, 2005).
Backbone Curve: The backbone curve defines the force-deformation relation under monotonically
increasing load, defined by initial elastic stiffness Ke, yield strength Fy, and the strain-hardening
stiffness Ks. If deterioration of the backbone curve is included, a softening branch begins at the “cap”
deformation δ c , which corresponds to the peak strength (Fc) of the load-deformation curve. If the
cap deformation δ c is normalized by the yield deformation, the resulting ratio may be denoted as
ductility capacity ( δ c / δ y ). The softening branch is defined by the post-capping stiffness,
K c = α c K e , which usually has a negative value. In addition, a residual strength can be assigned to
the model, Fr = λ Fy , which represents the fraction of the yield strength of the component that is
preserved once a given deterioration threshold is achieved. The backbone curves can be different in
positive and negative directions in the proposed modeling.
The parameters of the backbone curve are normally obtained from experimental results rather
than theoretical analysis..
Bilinear Model: This model is based on the standard bilinear hysteretic rules with strain hardening
backbone curve. The strength limit is introduced if the backbone curve includes a branch with
negative slope; i.e., when the response in a direction passes the cap point and in the softening
range (point 3), response resistance cannot exceeds the smallest strength of the point 3 during
reloading in the direction, for example, after unloading from point 5. The resistance is limited by the
resistance at point 3.
37
Bilinear Model with Strength Limit
Peak-oriented Model: This model is similar to the Clough Model (Clough and Johnston, 1966)
modified by Mahin and Bertero (1976), but the backbone curve is modified to include the strain
hardening and softening.
Pinching Model: The pinching model is similar to the peak-oriented model, except that reloading
consists of two parts. Initially the reloading path is directed towards a “break point”, which is a
function of the maximum permanent deformation and the maximum load experienced in the direction
of loading. The break point is defined by the parameters k f , which defines the maximum
2pinched” strength (points 4 and 8), and kd , which defines the displacement of the break point
(points 4’ and 8’). The first part of the reloading branch is defined by K rel ,a and once break point is
reached (points 4’ and 8’), the reloading path is directed towards the maximum deformation of earlier
cycles in the direction of loading ( K rel ,b ).
If the absolute deformation at reloading (point 13) is larger than the absolute value of
(1 − kd ) δ per , the reloading path consists of a single branch that is directed towards the previous
deformation in the direction of loading.
38
Pinching Hysteretic Model
(a) Basic Model Rule, (b) Modification if Reloading Deformation is to the Right of Break Point
Ibara, Medina and Krawinkler (2005) suggest to determine cyclic strength and stiffness
deterioration on the basis of hysteretic energy dissipation.
(a) Basic Strength Deterioration, (b) Post-capping Strength Deterioration, (c) Unloading Stiffness
Deterioration, and (d) Acceleration Reloading Stiffness Deterioration
References:
Clough, R.W., and S.B. Johnston, “Effect of Stiffness Degradation on Earthquake Ductility
Requirements,” Proceedings, Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo, Japan, 1966,
pp. 227-232.
Ibara, L.F., R. A. Medina, and H. Krawinkler, “Hysteretic Models that Incorporate Strength and
Stiffness Deterioration,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 34, 2005, pp.
1489 - 1511.
S.A., and V.V. Bertero, “Nonlinear Seismic Response of a Coupled Wall System,” Journal of
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, 1976, pp. 1759-1980.
39
11.11 Special Purpose Models
The stiffness is updated for the subsequent load increment considering the existing axial force
level. For an increase in axial force, the moment-rotation hysteresis relation is directed to the
corresponding loop with increased yield moment.
The axial force-moment interaction effect can be easily handled by "fiber" model. Curvature may
be assumed to distribute uniformly over a specified hinge region, for which a moment-rotation
relation can be evaluated on the basis of the moment-curvature relation at the critical section.
References:
40
Mahin, S. A., and V. V. Bertero, "Nonlinear Seismic Response of a Coupled Wall System," Journal
of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, 1976, pp. 1759-1780.
Takayanagi, T., and W. C. Schnobrich, "Computed Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Coupled Shear
Walls," Structural Research Series No. 434, Civil Engineering Studies, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1976.
In a compression zone:
K1 = S1 ( K se + K ce ) for Dm ≤ Dsy
−λ Composite spring hysteresis model
D
= S1 ( K SE + K ce ) m for Dm > Dsy for MS model
Dy
In a tensile zone:
K 2 = S 2 K se for D ' m ≥ − Dsy
−λ
D'
= S 2 K se m for D' m < − Dsy
Dsy
where Kse and Kce: initial elastic stiffness of the steel spring and the concrete spring, Dsy: yield
deformation of the concrete and steel springs, Dm: previous maximum response deformation in
compression, Dm': previous maximum deformation in tension, S1 = S2 =2.0 and k = 0.4.
Post yielding stiffness was chosen to be 0.02 times the initial elastic stiffness of the direction of
loading. Upon reloading in compression, the response point moves on the slip stiffness line toward a
point (Dm, Fm"), where F " m = θFm and θ = 0.4. When the sign of deformation changes, the
response point moves toward the previous maximum point in compression. Similar to the Takeda
model, the response point moves toward a peak of immediately outer loop.
Axial Force-deformation Model: Kabeyasawa and Shiohara et al. (1983) used a hysteresis model
for an axial force-deformation relation of a boundary column in the analysis of a structural wall. The
model was developed on the basis of the observed axial deformation behavior of the boundary
column in the test of the full-scale seven-story structure tested as a part of U.S.-Japan Cooperative
Program (Yoshimura and Kurose, 1985).
The tension stiffening was ignored; concrete was assumed to resist no tensile stress. The axial
stiffness in tension was made equal to the stiffness of the reinforcing steel in the boundary column,
and the stiffness in compression was assumed to be linearly elastic including the stiffness of the
concrete. The stiffness in tension changed at the tensile yielding of the longitudinal reinforcement.
41
The gravity loads was considered as the initial stress.
When the response point reached the previous maximum point ( Dmax , Fmax ) in tension, the
response point moved on the second slope of the skeleton curve, renewing the maximum response
point.
When the response point approached the compressive characteristic point Y' (Dyc, -Fy) in
compression, the response point was directed to move toward a point Y" (2Dyc, -2Fy) from a point P
(Dp, Fp) on the bilinear relation:
D p = D yc + β ( D x − D yc )
where, β : parameter for stiffness hardening point (=0.2), and D x : deformation at unloading
stiffness changing point. This rule was introduced to reduce an unbalanced force at the compressive
characteristic point Y' due to a large stiffness change. The compressive characteristic point Y' did
not change under any loading history.
This axial-stiffness hysteresis model was used for the axial deformation of an independent
column as well as boundary columns of a wall.
A finite stiffness may be assigned to the slip stiffness and a stress hardening may start to occur
before the initiation of slip at preceding unloading.
Slip
Bond Stress
Bond Stress
Slip Slip
References:
Fillipou, F. C., E. P. Popov and V. V. Bertero, “Effect of Bond Deterioration on Hysteretic Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Joints,” Report No. EERC 83-19, University of California, Berkeley, August
1983, 184 pp.
Fillipou, F. C., E. P. Popov and V. V. Bertero, “Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Joints under Cyclic
Excitations,” Journal, Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 11, November 1983, pp.
2666 - 2684.
Fillipou, F. C., “A Simplified Model for Reinforcing Bar Anchorages under Cyclic Excitations,” Report
No. EERC 85-05, University of California, Berkeley, March 1985, 61 pp.
Kabeyasawa, T., H. Shiohara, S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Analysis of the Full-scale Seven-story
Reinforced Concrete Test Structure," Journal, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tokyo (B),
Vol. XXXVII, No. 2, 1983, pp. 432-478.
43
Li, K.-N., S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Study on the Elastic-plastic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Columns subjected to Bi-directional Horizontal Earthquake Forces and Varying Axial Load (in
Japanese)," Report, Aoyama Laboratory, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Tokyo, March 1990.
Morita, S., and T. Kaku, "Slippage of Reinforcement in Beam-column Joint of Reinforced Concrete
Frames," Proceedings, Eighth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, U.
S. A., Vol. 6, 1984, pp. 477-484.
Tanabashi, R., and K. Kaneta, "On the Relation between the Restoring Force Characteristics of
Structures and the Pattern of Earthquake Ground Motion," Proceedings, Japan National
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, November 1962, pp. 57-62.
Yoshimura, M., and Y. Kurose, "Inelastic Behavior of the Building," ACI SP-84, Earthquake Effects
on Reinforced Concrete Structures, U.S.-Japan Research, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
1985, pp. 163-202.
44
11.12 Hysteresis Model for Prestressed Concrete Members
This note summarizes a hysteresis model for prestressed concrete members. The model was
proposed by M. Hayashi et al. (1995).
mA
Member end moment M and rotation
θ of a prestressed concrete member under
anti-symmetric bending moment distribution
with the inflection point at mid span is mB = mA
considered. The skeleton curve of the
moment-curvature ( θ , M ) relation is
represented by a trilinear relation with
δ
stiffness changes at flexural cracking of
concrete and tensile yielding of longitudinal
reinforcement.
θA
θB = θ A
Trilinear Skeleton Relation: The two points to define a trilinear skeleton curve may be estimated as
follows.
(1) Initial elastic stiffness K1 is calculated for a prismatic line member considering flexural and
shear deformation:
L
K1 =
L 2
κ
+
3Ec I c Gc Ac
where L : member length from the face of the orthogonal member to the inflection point (0ne-half of
clear span or height), Ec and Gc : elastic and shear moduli of concrete, I e : moment of inertia of
the transformed concrete section, Ac : cross sectional area of the transformed concrete section, κ:
shape factor for shear deformation (=1.2 for a rectangular section).
(2) Cracking moment M c and rotation θ c are calculated for a condition that the tensile stress at
the extreme tensile fiber reaches the tensile strength σ t of concrete:
Pe
M c = (σ t + ) Ze
Ac
Mc
θc =
K1
where, Pe : axial force acting on the section including effective prestressing force, Ac : cross
sectional area of concrete, Z e : section modulus of the transformed section. Tensile strength σ t of
concrete may be assumed to be equal to 1.8 σ B in kgf/cm2 where compressive strength σ B of
concrete is expressed in kgf/cm2.
(3) Yielding moment M y should be calculated for a given axial force and effective prestressing
force assuming (a) plain section to remain plain after bending, (b) nonlinear axial stress-strain
relation of concrete and reinforcement, and (c) equilibrium of internal and external forces. A parabola
and straight descending line may be used to represent stress-strain relation of concrete in
compression; an elasto-plastic stress-strain relation may be used for steel reinforcement ignoring
strain hardening.
Rotation θ y at yielding may be evaluated by integrating the curvature along the member, but
this often underestimates the deformation. Sugano (1970) proposed an empirical expression for the
45
ratio of secant stiffness at yielding to the initial elastic stiffness as follows;
My
θy a N d
αy = = {0.43 + 1.64n pt + 0.043
+ 0.33 }( )2
K1 D b D σB D
where n : modular ratio of steel to concrete, pt :
tensile reinforcement ratio including prestressing Y
reinforcement area as increased by the yield stress My
ratio of prestressing reinforcement to ordinary
reinforcement, a : shear span, b and D : width and
Moment
depth of member section, N : axial force of section
including effective prestressing force, d : effective
depth of section, σ B : compressive strength of
α y K1
concrete. C
Mc
MA A
Characteristic Points on Hysteresis Relations:
The following points and stiffness are used in this
model. K1 Rotation
(1) Characteristic point A ( θ A , M A ) is defined on the
initial elastic stiffness line with stiffness K1 . This θ A θc θy
point is used for the hysteresis relation of a prestressed concrete member. Moment resistance M A
of the characteristic point is defined as decompression moment; i.e., for the effective prestressing
force Pe,
Pe
MA = Ze
Ac
The moment is zero for a reinforced concrete member without prestressing force. Rotation θ A is
calculated for moment M A and initial stiffness K1 ;
MA
θA =
K1
(2) Characteristic point B ( θ B , M B ) is defined for Takeda hysteresis model (Takeda, Sozen and
Nielsen, 1970) as the terminal point (zero moment resistance) of unloading from the maximum
response point M ( θ m , M m ). The unloading stiffness K B is defined as follows;
(a) unloading before yielding:
M m − M 'c
KB =
θ m − θ 'c
(b) unloading after yielding:
M y − M 'c θ m −γ
KB = ( )
θ y − θ 'c θ y
where M y and θ y : yield moment and rotation on the side of the unloading point, M 'c and θ 'c :
cracking moment and rotation on the opposite side, and γ : unloading stiffness degradation index of
the Takeda model (=0.5 for normal reinforced concrete members). The rotation θ B is calculated as
Mm
θB = θm −
KB
46
M
Moment
Y Y
My
Moment
Mm
C C
KB
A A KB
Rotation
θ 'c B Rotation θ 'c B
θB θm θB θy θm
M 'c M 'c
C’ C’
(3) Unloading stiffness K A of fully prestressed concrete members from the maximum response
point M ( θ m , M m ) on the skeleton curve is defined as follows;
Mm M
Y Y
Moment
My
M
Mm
Moment
KA
C C
KA
MA MA A
A
Rotation Rotation
θA θm θA θy θm
(5) Characteristic point D ( θ D , M D ) is defined as an intersection of line AB and the unloading line
MD of this model with unloading stiffness K D from the maximum response point M( θ m , M m ) on the
47
skeleton curve.
Moment M
Moment
Y
Mm Y
M
Mm
KD
C C
KD
MA MA A
A
D D
B Rotation Rotation
θA θB θm θA B θy θm
The index value from 0.4 to 0.5 is normally used for reinforced concrete members. The hysteresis
energy dissipation decreases with increasing value of the index.
The effect of prestressing on unloading stiffness is negligible when the ultimate moment ratio was
less than 0.3.
49
Hysteresis Rules:
Moment
If the response point reaches flexural cracking point C Rule 2
C
Rule 2: The response point ( θ , M ) moves on the Mc
second skeleton line CY toward yield point Y ( θ y , M y ) Rule 1
with stiffness K 2 .
K1 Rotation
If the response point reaches the yielding point Y
θc θy
( θ y , M y ), the response point follows Rule 3.
Moment-rotation relation during loading
If the unloading takes place from the maximum
response point M ( θ m , M m ), the response point follows Sub-rule 2-1.
K D = λ ' K A + (1 − λ ') K B D
If the response point reaches the previous maximum point M ( θ m , M m ) during reloading, the
response point follows Rule 2.
If the response point reaches point D during unloading, the response point follows Sub-rule
2-2.
Sub-rule 2-2: The response point follows Sub-rule 2-2-1 if no cracking has taken place in the
opposite direction, or Sub-rule 2-2-2 if cracking has taken place in the opposite direction.
Sub-rule 2-2-1: The response point moves elastically from the characteristic point D
( θ D , M D ) of Sub-rule 2-1 to point E’ whose moment level is equal to moment M ' A of
50
characteristic point A’ in the direction of reloading.
M
The slope K E of line DE’ is equal to the initial Mm
stiffness K1 . Between characteristic point D and
cracking point E’, the response point moves on line
DE’ during reloading and unloading.
C KD
The previous response point M’ on the side of
point E’ is defined as the cracking point C’. The K1
Sub-rule 2-1
unloading stiffness K 'D from the previous A
Sub-rule 2-2-1
θm
If the response point reaches point E’, the
response point follows Rule 4. K E = K1
A’ No cracking in
Sub-rule 2-2-2: The response point moves E’
reloading
elastically from the characteristic point D ( θ D , M D ) Rule 4 direction
of Sub-rule 2-1 to point E’ whose moment level is C’
equal to moment level M 'D of characteristic point
D’ in the direction of reloading. The unloading
stiffness K E is equal to the initial elastic stiffness K1 . Point D’ and its moment M 'D have
been defined by Sub-rule 2-1 or
M
Sub-rule 3-1 upon previous unloading
Mm
from point M’ ( θ 'm , M 'm ) on the second
skeleton line.
51
Sub-rule 3-1: The response point follows the unloading stiffness K D ,
M y − M A θ m −γ
KA = ( )
θ y −θ A θ y Mu
Y
Rule 3 M
M y − M 'c θ m −γ My
KB = ( )
θ y − θ 'c θ y
K D = λ ' K A + (1 − λ ') K B Sub-rule 3-1
If the response point reaches the unloading point M, the response point follows Rule 3 for
loading on the third skeleton line.
M 'A
M y − M 'c θ m −γ A’ E’
KB = ( )
θ y − θ 'c θ y C’
No cracking on
K E = λ ' K '1 + (1 − λ ') K B opposite side
Point E’ is defined on the unloading line at
Rule 4
moment level equal to moment M ' A of
characteristic point A’ on the initial
stiffness. Y’
52
The previous response point M’ on the side of point E’ is defined as the yielding point Y’.
The unloading stiffness K 'D from the yield point is defined as
M ' y − M 'A
KA =
θ 'y − θ 'A
M 'y − M c
KB =
θ 'y −θc
K D = λ ' K A + (1 − λ ') K B
Characteristic point D is defined as the intersection of the unloading line MD and line AB
connecting two characteristic points A and B. The moment M D at point D is given by
My
θ y −θ B −
KD
MD = MA
M
θ A −θ B − A
KD
If the response point reaches point D, the response point follows Sub-rule 3-1.
If the response point reaches point E’, the response point follows Rule 4.
M y − M 'c θ m −γ
KB = ( )
θ y − θ 'c θ y D
B’
K E = λ ' K '1 + (1 − λ ') K B
KE B
Point E’ is defined on the
unloading line at moment level D’ Sub-rule 3-2-2
If the response point reaches point E’, then the response point follows Rule 4.
Rule 4: The response point moves on line E’M’ toward the previous maximum response point M’
( θ 'm , M 'm ) in the direction of reloading. The characteristic point E’ is defined either in Sub-rule 2-2
or 3-2.
53
When the response point reaches the previous maximum response point M’ in the direction of
reloading, the response point follows either Rule 2 if no yielding has taken place or Rule 3 if yielding
has taken place in the direction of reloading.
If unloading takes place at point N’ before reaching the previous maximum response point, the
response point follows Sub-rule 4-1.
C
M
Y
A KD N
G C
MD D
A
θ 'm B’ B
E
D
F’ K E = K1 B’
G F
D’ E’ B
F’
D’ G’
K 'D
A’
A’
N’ N’ C’
C’
M 'm
M’ Y’
M’
Sub-rule 4-1: The response point moves on line N’F’ with unloading stiffness K 'D where
point N’ is an unloading point before the response point reaches the previous maximum
response point M’ in Sub-rule 2-2 or M
3-2. Point F’ is defined on the
unloading line N’F’ at moment level Y
equal to moment M 'D of
characteristic point D’. The
unloading stiffness K 'D ,
characteristic point D’ and its C KD
moment M 'D were defined during
KD
previous unloading from point M’ A
( θ 'm , M 'm ) on the skeleton curve in G
Sub-rule 2-1 or 3-1. MD D
B’
The response point follows line KE B
N’F’ during reloading and
D’ F’ M 'D
unloading.
M 'A
If the response point reaches K 'D A’ E’
point N’ during reloading, it follows
C’
Rule 4.
54
Sub-rule 4-2: The response point follows line F’G with unloading (reloading) stiffness K 'E
where characteristic point F’ is defined in Sub-rule 4-1. The moment level of point G is equal
to moment M D of characteristic point D. The characteristic point D’ and its moment M 'D
were defined during previous unloading from point M’ ( θ 'm , M 'm ) on the skeleton curve in
Sub-rule 2-1 or 3-1. The unloading stiffness K 'E depends on the previous maximum
response on the unloading side;
(a) If no yielding has taken place on the unloading side, the unloading stiffness K 'E is
equal to the initial elastic stiffness K1 .
(b) If yielding has taken place on the unloading side, the unloading stiffness is given
below;
θ m −γ
K '1 = K1 ( )
θy
M ' y − M c θ 'm − γ
KB = ( )
θ 'y −θ c θ 'y
K 'E = λ ' K '1 + (1 − λ ') K B
The response point follows line F’G during unloading and reloading.
If the response point reaches point G, the response point follows Rule 4.
If the response point reaches F’ during reloading, the response point moves toward point
N’ following Sub-rule 4-1.
References:
Hayashi, M., S. Okamoto, S. Otani, H. Kato, and J. Fu, “Hysteresis Model for Prestressed Concrete
Members and its Effect on Earthquake Response (in Japanese),” Journal, Prestressed Concrete,
Japan Prestressed Concrete Engineering Association, Vol. 37, No. 4, July 1995, pp. 57-67.
Sugano, S, "Experimental Study on Restoring Force Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete
Members (in Japanese)," Thesis submitted to fulfill the requirements of Doctor of Philosophy,
University of Tokyo, March 1970.
Takeda, T., M. A. Sozen and N. N. Nielsen, "Reinforced Concrete Response to Simulated
Earthquakes," Journal, Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. ST12, 1970, pp. 2557-2573.
55
Assignment (Chapter 11)
Otani, S.
Problem 1
Problem 2
Use FORTRAN program SDF to calculate the response of two SDF systems under El Centro (NS)
1940 motion (use the first 15.0 sec). Assume the mass M to be 1,000 kg.
(a) Calculate the response of two linearly elastic systems having natural period of 0.2 sec and 1.0
sec. Determine maximum response resistance of the two systems.
(b) Determine the period corresponding to secant stiffness Ky at yielding to be (1) 0.2 sec and (2) 1.0
sec. Determine the other stiffness properties as follows (ignore cracking point for bilinear and Clough
models);
Fy K u = 0.05K y
Ky Fc = Fy / 3
Fc Dc = Dy / 6
Dc Dy
Determine the yield resistance of the system, using the Newmark’s equal energy and displacement
principles; which are given below;
Fe
Fy = for T ≤ 0.5 sec
2μ − 1
Fe
Fy = for T > 0.5 sec
μ
56
where, Fe : maximum resistance of a linearly elastic system having the same initial (yield) period,
and μ : allowable ductility factor (=4.0), defined as the allowable maximum deformation divided by
the yield displacement.
(c) Calculate the response of bilinear model (ignore the cracking point), Clough model (ignore the
cracking point), and Takeda model. Plot the resistance-deformation relation during the earthquake
for each model. Compare the response displacement waveforms of the three models. Damping
should be proportional to instantaneous stiffness, and the damping factor should be 0.05 for the yield
secant stiffness.
c
h=
2 M Ky
(d) Compare the response displacement waveforms of Clough model using damping proportional to
stiffness and damping proportional to mass. The damping factor of the two cases should be 0.05 at
the initial stage.
Problem 3
Use FORTRAN program Pivot. Use the same stiffness properties of the Clough model in Problem 3.
Study the effect of post-yielding stiffness on the response, by varying the post yielding stiffness K u ,
(1) K u = 0.10 K y , (2) K u = 0.0 , and (3) K u = −0.10 K y . The third and fourth point of
resistance-deformation relation can be selected on the post-yielding branch.
Plot the resistance-deformation relation for each case, and compare response displacement
waveforms of the three cases. The parameters of the Pivot model should be α = 2.0 and β = 1/ 3 .
57