Professional Documents
Culture Documents
REPORT NO.
UCB/EERC-92/10
JULY 1992 EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERINGRESEARCHCENTER
SLOTTEDBOLTEDCONNECTION
ENERGYDISSIPATERS
(WITHANAPRIL,1993ADDENDUMOF
SOMERECENTRESULTS)
by
CARL E. GRIGORIAN
TZONG-SHUOH YANG
EGOR P. POPOV
Both specimens are of A36 steel. The steel surfaces were cleaned to clean mill scale
condition. The brass plates were of the widely available half hard cartridge brass variety
(UNS-260). The test specimens were prepared by a local structural steel fabricator so as
to simulate industry standards. Holes and slots in the steel plates were punched, and the
edges were deburred. The two specimens described in this section are two bolt specimens.
The bolts used were ½ inch diameter, 3• inches long A325 bolts. The Belleville washers used
were 8-EH-112 Solon compression washers. One such washer with a hardened washer on top
was placed under each nut. Belleville washers are initially cone shaped annular disk springs
which flatten when compressed. Earlier studies of SBCs [1] have shown that without the
use of Belleville washers, and under large cyclic displacements, there is an almost immediate
loss of bolt tension resulting in quick degeneration of the slip force. With the inclusion of
Belleville washers, both turn of the nut and torque wrench methods of developing minimum
bolt tension (70% of minimum tensile strength [ll D become inapplicable. To achieve the
desired initial bolt tension, Direct Tension Indicator (DTI) washers were placed under each
bolt head. DTIs are specially produced washers with protrusions pressed out of the flat
surface. As the bolt is tightened, the compressive force exerted on the DTI flattens the
protrusions and reduces the gaps between the flat portions of the DTI and the head of the
bolt. The gaps can easily be measured with a supplied feeler gage. When the feeler gage
fails to enter a specified number of gaps, the desired load in the bolt has been reached. DTIs
used here were designed to indicate a bolt tension in the range of 12 to 14 kips.
The specimens, described above, were placed within an MTS loading frame as shown
in Figure 3. The ram was capable of applying forces of 300 kips statically and 250 kips
dynamically, with a maximum displacement stroke of 6 inches. Both displacement and
force control were possible through a controller unit, and a function generator enabled the
servorarn to produce preprogrammed load or displacement histories. All testing was done
under displacement control. Axial load and displacements in the specimen were measured
through a load cell built into the MTS loading frame and a Linearly Variable Displacement
Transducer (LVDT) built into the servoram. Axial force and displacement were monitored
and recorded using a Data Acquisition System in conjunction with an IBM PC-AT computer.
In addition, an X-Y plotter recorded load-displacement curves on paper for immediate visual
observation of results.
Figures 4 and 5 show the applied displacement histories, force responses and the resulting
hysteresis loops for the two selected tests. Figure 4, representing the case of friction between
like clean mill scale steel surfaces, shows the main shortcoming of SBCs with friction between
steel surfaces. As seen in the force response diagram, there is an almost immediate increase
in the slip force followed by a quick drop to a magnitude several times less than the peak
slip force. Although this behavior has not been observed in all tests of SBCs with friction
between like steel surfaces, it has been present, to various extents, in the majority of cases.
In tests with specimens where the mill scale steel surfaces were polished by wire brushing
and those in which the surfaces were roughened and the mill scale removed by sand blasting,
this behavior not only did not disappear but was actually intensified. The occurrence of this
behavior in SBCs where friction occurs between steel surfaces renders such SBCs inefficient,
at best, and impractical, at worst, as energy dissipators. Figure 5 represents the case of a
SBC test with friction between clean mill scale steel and brass surfaces. As seen in Figure
5, the use of brass insert plates significantly reduces the variations in slip force magnitude
observed in SBCs where friction occurs between steel plates, almost completely eliminating
this undesirable behavior.
to abrasive wear. In Tribological terminology, the phenomenon that occurs here can be,
simplistically, described as adhesive wear giving rise to wear particles which then cause
additional abrasive wear. That abrasive wear occurs despite the smoothness of the original
surfaces is evidenced by the appearance of sliding surfaces observed after the completion of
experiments and upon the dismantling of the specimens. In the case of friction between like
clean mill scale steel surfaces, both surfaces can be described as severely scratched. While
in the case of friction between clean mill scale steel on brass, only the brass surface appears
as scratched while the steel surface appears undamaged but with smears of brass. Scratched
surfaces are a typical consequence of abrasive wear. The fall out and reabsorption of wear
particles has the effect of reducing the bolt tension force as the outer plates now displace
inward. This results in a reduction of normal force and is observed as a drop in the slip
force. That the outer plates displace outward and then inward simultaneous with rise and
drop in the slip force has been confirmed by measurements of the displacements of the outer
plates along the axes of the bolts.
The above mentioned behavior, i.e. initial increase in slip force followed by a drop,
observed in both Figures 4 and 5, although clearly far more poignantly evident in Figure 4,
is directly attributed to the wear mechanisms mentioned above. The difference in behavior
between the two types of specimens is solely due to the choice of the use of brass as a
frictional surface, as the other two parameters known to influence adhesive wear, namely
initial normal force and total travel distance, were identical for the two presented specimens.
This choice was made precisely with the reduction of wear in mind. Brass is a common
choice as a material frictionally compatible with low and medium carbon steels, and is often
used in moderate cost applications where it is desired to reduce adhesive wear [9].
average close to 85% of the total input energy is dissipated by the SBC.
To verify the validity of the assumption of elastic-perfectly-plastic behavior for SBCs with
brass insert plates and to observe the response of such an SBC to displacement histories more
realistically representing response to actual earthquakes, an SBC specimen was designed to
slip at 60 kips. Based on previous results from tests of specimens with two • inch diameter
A325 bolts, a test specimen with eight • inch A325 bolts was fabricated. The specimen was
subjected to SBC slip displacement responses derived from the above mentioned analyses.
The four SBC slip displacement response histories were applied consecutively, in the order
of acceleration histories mentioned above, to this specimen. Figures 11, 12, 13 and 14
show SBC sup displacement response histories and analytical and experimental hysteresis
diagrams for each acceleration history. It is seen that the target slip force of 60 kips is
attained almost perfectly in response to the first displacement history. As expected, the slip
force drops, although not significantly, for the next three applied displacement histories. The
rectangular shape of the hysteresis loops, coupled with the reasonably constant slip force,
indicates that the assumption of elastic-perfectly-plastic behavior for SBCs with brass insert
plates is a valid one.
Concluding Remarks
Both SBC types have been shown capable of dissipating significant quantities of energy as
judged by the areas enclosed by the experimentally arrived at hysteresis loops. Slip force in
SBCs where friction occurs between like steel plates has been shown to vary significantly.
The peak slip force for such SBCs occurs almost immediately and may be several times
the magnitude of the mean slip force. As such, for this type of SBC to dissipate energy
throughout the course of ground excitation, either the members supporting the SBC must
be designed with excessively large safety factors or the SBC itself must be under-designed.
On the other hand, in SBCs where because of the brass insert plates friction occurs between
brass and steel, slip force has been shown to remain relatively constant over the range of
interest. It has also been shown that such SBCs behave in nearly perfect elastic-perfectly-
plastic manner. In view of these results, it is evident that SBCs with steel on brass frictional
surfaces possess significant advantages in terms of efficiency as energy dissipators and ease
of modelling. As such, and with low material and fabrication cost, these SBCs exhibit great
potential as an alternative choice for energy dissipation in seismic design and retrofit of
structures.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support of the National Science Foundation under Grant
BCS-9016781 enabling the pursuit of the described research. The continued encouragements
of Henry Lagorio and S. C. Liu of NSF are particularly appreciated.
Thanks are also due to Bill MacCracken our electronics engineer who has been involved in
every phase of testing over three years and whose assistance with testing and data acquisition
equipment operation has been invaluable.
Machine shop specialists Mark Troxler, Jeff Higginbotham and Doug Zulaica are also thanked
for their assistance.
The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the sponsor.
References
[1] Venuti, W.J., "Energy Absorption of High Strength Bolted Connections," Test Report,
Structural Steel Educational Council, California, May, 1976.
[2] Pall, A.S. and Marsh, C., "Energy Dissipation in Panelized Buildings Using Limited
Slip Bolted Joints," Proceedings, AICAP-CED conference, Vol. 3, Rome, Italy, May,
1979.
[3] Fitzgerald, T.F., Anagnos, T., Goodson, M., Zsutti, T., "Slotted Bolted Connections
in Aseismic Design of Concentrically Braced Connections," Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5,
No. 2, 1989.
[4] Pall, A.S., Verganalakis, V. and Marsh, C., "Response of Friction Damped Braced
Frames," J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 108(6), 1313-1323, 1987.
Roik, K., Dorka, U. and Dechent, P., "Vibration Control of Structures Under Earth-
quake Loading by Three Stage Friction Grip Elements," Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics, Vol. 16, 501-521, 1988.
[6] Constantinou, M.C., Reinhorn, A.M., Mokha, A. and Watson, R., "Displacement Con-
trol Devices for Base Isolated Bridges," Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1991.
[7] Aiken, I.D. and Kelly, J.M., "Earthquake Simulator Testing and Analytical Studies of
Two Energy Absorbing Systems for Multistory Structures," Report No. UCB/EERC-
90/03, University of California, Berkeley, October, 1990.
[8] Timoshenko, S., Strength of Materials, Vol. 2, Van Nostrand Co., New York, NY,
1934.
[9] Rabinowicz, E., Friction and Wear of Materials, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York, NY, 1965.
[10] Yang, T.S., "DANS, A Computer Program for the Dynamic Analysis of Nonlinear Shear
Buildings," CE£99 Project, University of California, Berkeley, 1991.
[11] Kulak, L.K., Fisher J.W. and Struik, J.H.A., Guide to Design Criteria for Bolted
and Riveted Joints, 2nd. Ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1987.
9
MAIN PLATE...............
_JTER PLATES
DIRECT TENSION INDICATOR (DTI)......:
UNDER HEAD '- 9/16"x3-1/2" LONG SLOT
Figure 1
, i ! ? ,
! ,
................................ I , . . I I , I
................................
I ooOoOo
o o o ° o
-
i=...., ,
I
I
I
ooooo
o o oo o
° ° • o°° I i ' • l 'i o o o
0 0 0 0 0
i.,.
"" WELD
LOAD CELL
ADJUSTABLE GRIPS
! I I I I I
I !
! I I ' , ', I I . . . . MTS TESTING FRAME
LVDT
. . . . . . . . . .I '. . . . . . .! ' '• . . . . .
1
I
Figure 3
11
·
... 0.5 i .......... - : i
0
-1
-1.5 i i :i :i i ...........
-2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
(SF_•"ONDS) (SECONDS)
,_.20 2O
r•
g
0
-20 -20
-40 4O
40 40
,.,2O 20
...................... [ ........... i ........................................................
•o
-20 -20
-40
I I I I I I I
Figure 4 Figure 5
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
12
150 kips
i ,
Rigid deck
W12 !
,6 ft
, • • W12X72 W12X190
o
42 ft ,•
Figure 6
13
$
Z 0.5 0.5 ·
O
0 0 . . . . . . . . .
1 . • ] a [ ] , • , [ • ! 1 . 5 m , , _ , ] • • • [ , [
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 = 0 2" 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tnvm(srcol•rDS) • (SSCONDS)
1.5 D NSE, 1.5 STRUCTUREDISPLACEMENTRESPONSE
.................................................. o .............................
-0.5
4
..__.._...5
-1.5 ' . . . . . . . ] -1.5
. . . . . . . . . . . .
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME(S•'X)•S) (sF•co•s)
ENERGYDIAGRAM ENERGYDIAGRAM
9O0
80O
,. , V'•o• D T
[
E 100
0
, 2 r FrictionD ned I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(S•S) (sr=co•s)
Figure 7 Figure 8
Note: 1 Inch -- 25.4 mm, 1 Kip •- 4.45 kN.
14
ACC•r I•.RATION HISTORY 2*EL CENTRO ACCI•.•[OtTION HISTORY: 40*WH1TflER
1.5 1.5
1 1
$
0.5
0 0
-0.5 -.0.5
-1 -1
-1.5 I I I I I I I I , -1.5 I I I J I I I I I
0 2 4 6 10 12 14
8 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SF.•Z'OlVDS) Tn• (SF•-O
' NDS)
STRUCnmE m S P L • • •mS•NS£ STRUCTURE DISPLACEMENT RESPONSE
1.5
O.5
!. i 0 :-
-O.5
•
;•
' :;-: ' % ' ; ; • ............ •
-1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(SF.CO•S) TIME (SECONDS)
100
i
5O
0 I I I I I I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 d 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tn• (SECONDS) Tn• (SECONnS)
Figure 9 Figure 10
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
1 5
I III I t J 1
'•q----%---+- F / - ' - -4 - - i '
' '
'{ { {
,t U•1 J
,I i iI * t
,i
i
,t
! ! ! I
t I I
' I { i
I I
I w! I
I { I I I I I l i I I • { { I I I
. . . . -{ . . . -i. . . . . -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . . 4. . . . . .J - - - - - - - - - L - • - - - { _ •
-1 { ! i I { I I i {
4.,
I
-
!
i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..i
I i
. .
I
. . . . .
t I I t i I
i {I IJ , J IJ ', , I i I I I • I
-1.5 , L, t i I i [ [ J -1.5
!
, ,
t j
I , , I
i • I ,
, I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SECONDS) TIME (SECONDS)
• •o
40
........
1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i J 40
20
I
J
ua 0 0
. . . . . . .· . . . . . .
• -20 -20
-40
1 -40
I
I
t
-60 j ' { [ -60
I
I i { I
{
-80 I I , i I
-80 • , , , t I
-1.5 -1 --0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT (INCHES) DISPLACEMENT (INCHES)
20 . . . . . . . . .{
. . . . . . . q - 20
%.J
---t
0 0
O -20
. . . . . ._, ul , .............. -20
-4O -4O
-60 -6O [ -
-80 i i -80
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT (INCHES) DISPLACEMENT (INCHES)
F i g u r e 1 1 F i g u r 1e 2
_ i [ • • i [ i i - { iI • [ i {
0-'
{ { , { { { • }
i J i i i J J
i • i i i i i f ill{ilJ{J m {d{{ } • i {
t
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6O
4O 4 0 ................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .•. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-2o
-4O
-20
-4O ..4O
-6O -60 •
-8O ,. I , I I I I
..8O
-1.s -• .o.s o o.s 1 1.s -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT (INCHF_.S) r r (mOW_S)
F i g u r e 1 3 F i g u r e1 4
Addendum
April, 1993
number and size of bolts is expected to be smaller due to averaging of errors. It is also noted
the these curves verify again the validity of the elastic-perfectly-plastic characterization of
the behavior of SBCs. A sense for the effectiveness of SBC may be gained from Figure
5A. In this figure, the top curve represents the absolute input energy of the structure based
on integration of the measured base shear force of the structure with respect to the table
displacements. The curve immediately below this curve represents the sum of the total energy
dissipated by the SBCs, based on calculation of areas enclosed by the hysteresis curves, and
strain and kinetic energies. It is seen that at the end of the record, where kinetic and strain
energies vanish, nearly 75 % of the input energy is dissipated by the SBCs. The figure also
indicates the relative magnitude of energy dissipated at each story and the magnitude of
energy dissipated by each individual SBC, each layer below the "Total Dissipated" curve
representing the contribution of one SBC.
In summary, the results obtained from the shake table testing of the structure with
SBCs, a glimpse of which has been presented above, appear to verify at once the practicality
of implementation of SBCs into realistic structures and their effectiveness. A tremendous
wealth of data has been generated from these experiments and the process of data reduction
is currently in progress. Furthermore, analytical studies complementing and motivated by
the experimental efforts are being conducted by the authors with the aim of establishing
design guidelines for use of SBCs in real structures.
19
Figure IA
TABLEACCELERATIONHISTORY
1985CHILE EQ, LLOLLEOSIGNAL, AMPLIFIED TO PTA=.88G
=;
I I I ! I
5 10 15 2O 25
TIME (SECONDS)
Figure 2A
20
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE SF_3A HYSTERESIS OF BRACE NE3A
. . . . .
20 i
15
10
• o 0
-5
•.•
-10
-15 -15
-20
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
DISPLACEMENT 0NCHF3) D•SPt. A •( m • )
HYS'rERF_3IS OF BRACE NE2A
2O
15
• i i ............................ i
.................................................... . ............................................... 15
-5
-10
-lo ! i i
-15
-20 i i , i i ; -20
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
DISPLACEMENT 0NCT-IES) r r(mares)
15 .........................i ...................................................................................... 'i ................................................ 15 ...................-' ....................... i ............................ = ..........: ....... ---• . . . . . . . .
-15
-20
i . i!. . .i . i. ' '
.. . . . . . . . !i. . . i .! . . -20
-15 ....................
•i ............... i!............... . i
, ' ? - ...............
- i ..............
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
r)xst, LACEM•rr (n,•ctms) DXSPLnCEMt•-T (mctms)
F i g u r e 3 A
15 i • 15 • - - . 4 . . . .•' ...................
. -: .................................................... i . . . . . . .
-5
-15
0.3 0.2 oa 0 -0.1 -o.2 -o_a 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -O. 1 -0.2 -0.3
DrSPLACEMEm' (nqclms) DISPLACEMENT ( I N a m S )
15
10
• o
•-• - --
.•o]].•}Z ] Z iiiii i
-20 ' ' ' {
t
{
'i
•
- 2 0
i,i '
i :i: i i i:i": i:i
0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -O. 1 -0.2 -0.3
0 N • ) ACEmmT
OF BRACE SW1A HYSTERESIS oF BRACE)•WA
2O
' [ 5 ................................................................................................................................................... 15
1 0 ............................. l0
•; .....:i.................
• 5 ...... ........................................ 5
0 .. . . . . i............. 0
-10
-, , • ' '•'• -.i • i i i • i j ...................................
................................. -10
-5
. 2 O I I l -20 I [ I t {
0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -o. 1 -0.2 -0.3
DISPLACE• (n,i•) DISPt.A C E m • r r • )
Figure 4 A
Note: 1 Inch -- 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
ENERGYINPUTAND DISSIPATION i•STOltW. S
1985CHil.V.EQ,L L O • SIGNAl.A M P • TO l•A•
22
BYS
D Ca
l
A T 3
AT•2BYM
l • •. ....................................
......• - • - - ,
&4/d
AT 1
I f J t
10 IS 20 2S 3O
Figure 5A
E A R T H Q U A K E ENGINEERING RESEARCH C E N T E R REPORT SERIES
EERC reports are available from the National Information Service for Earthquake En$ineerin•NISEE) and from the National Technical Information
Service(NTIS}. Numbers in parentheses are Accession Numbers assigned by the National Technical Information Service:. these are followed by a i•iee code.
Contact NTIS. 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield Virginia. 22161 for more information. Reports without Accession Numbers • not available from NTIS
at the time of printing. For a current complete list of EERC reports (from EERC 67-1) and availablity information, please contacl University o f Califonmt,
EERC, NISEE. 1301 South 46th Street. Richmond, California 94804.
UCB/EERC-90/16 'Sensitivity of Long-Period Response Spectra to System Initial Conditions,' by Bla.•uez. R., Ventunt, C. and Kelly, J'.M., 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/17 ' Behavior of Peak Values and Spectral Ordinates of Near-Source Strong Ground-Motion over a Dense Array,' by Niazi, M., June 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/18 'Material of Elastomers used in Earthquake Base Isolation,' by Papoulia, K.D. and Kelly, J.M., 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/19 'Cyclic Behavior o f Steel Top-and-Bottom Plate Moment Connections,' by HarrioR, J.D. and Astaneh-Asl. A.. August 1990, (PB9 ! 229
260/AS)A05.
UCB/EERC-90/20 'Seismic Response Evaluation of an Instrumented Six Story Steel Building,' by Shem J.-H. and Astaneh-Asl, A., December 1990, (PB91
229 294/AS)A04.
UCB/EERC-90/21 'Observations and Implications of Tests on the Cypress Street Viaduct Test Structure,' by BolIo, M., Mahin, S.A.. Moehle, J.P.,
Stephen. R.M. and Qi, X.. December 1990.
UCB/EERC-91/01 'Experimental Evaluation of Nitinol for Eneri• Dissipation in Structures,' by Nims, D.K., Sasaki, fl=K. and Kelly, J.M., 1991.
UCB/EERC.91/02 'Displacement Design Approach for Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Earthquakes,' by Qi, X. and Moehle, J.P., January
1991.
UCB/EERC-91/03 'A Lons-Period Isolation System Using Low-Modulus Hijh-Damping Isolators for Nuclear Facilities at Soft-Soil Sites,' by Kelly, J.M.,
March 1991.
UCB/EERC-g[/04 'Dynamic and Failure Characteristics of Bridgestone Isolation Bearing,' by Kelly, J.M., April 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/05 'Base Sliding Response of Concrete Gravity Dams to Earthquakes.' by Chopra, A.K. and Zhan$, L., May 1991.
UCn/EERCo91/06 'Computation of Spatially Varying Ground Motion and Foundation-Rock Impedance Matrices for Seismic Analysis o f Arch Dams," by
Zhang, L. and Chopra, A.K., May 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/07 'Estimation of Seismic Source Processes Using Strong Motion Array Data,' by Chiou, S.-J., July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/08 'A Response Spectrum Method for Multiple-Support Seismic EJtcitations,' by Der A. and Neuenhofer, A., AulPiSt 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/09 'A Preliminary Study on Energy Dissipating Cladding-to-Frame Connection,' by Cohen, J.M. and PoweU, O.H.. September 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/10 'Evaluation of Seismic Performance of a Ten-Story RC Building During the Whittier Narrows Earthquake,' by Miranda, E. and Berg
tero, V.V., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/I 1 'Seismic Performance of an Instrumented Six Story Steel Building.' by Anderson, J.C. amd Bertero, V.V, November 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/12 'Performance of Improved Ground During the Loma Prieta Earthquake,' by Mitchell, J.K. and Wentz, Jr., F.J., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/13 'Shaking Table - Structure Interaction,' by Rinawi, A.M. and Clouf, R.W, October 1991.
UCB/E£RC-91/14 'Cyclic Response of RC Beam-Column Knee Joints: Test and Retrofit,' by Mazzoni, S.. Moehle, J.P. and Thewalt, C.R., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/I$ 'Design Guidelines for Ductility and Drift Limits: Review of State-of-the-Practice and State-of-the-Art isa Ductility and Drift-Based
Earthquake-Resistant Design of Buildings,' by Bertero. V,V., Anderson, J.C., K.rawin.kler, H., Miranda, E. and The CUREa and The
Kajima Research Teams,, July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/16 'Evaluation of the Seismic Performance ora Thirty-Story RC Buildinl,' by Anderson. J.C., Miranda, E., Bertero. V.V. and The Kajima
Project Research Team., July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/17 'A Fiber Beam-Column Element for Seismic Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures,' by Taucer, F., Spacone, E. and
Filippou, F.C.. December 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/18 'Investi•tion of the Seismic Response of a Lightly-Damped Torsionally-Coupled Building.' by Boroschek. R. and Mahin, S.A.,
December 1991.
'Studies of a 49-Story Instrumented Steel Structure Shaken dui'inS the l.oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Bonowitz, D., Chert. C.-C. and
Astaneh-AsL A., February 1992.
UCB/EERC-92/02 'Response of the Dumbarton Bridge in the Loma Prieta Earthquake,' by Fenves, G.L.. Filippou. F.C. and Sze. D.T., January 1992.
UC•EERC-92/03 'Models for Nonlinear Earthquake Analysis of Brick Masonry Buildinls,' by Menili, Y.,'McNiven, H.D. and Tanrikulu, A.K., March
1992.
UCB/EERC-92/04 'Shear StreniBh and Deformability of RC Bridge Columns Subjected to Inelastic Cyclic Displacements,' by Aschheim. M. and Moehle.
J.P., March 1992.
UCB/EERC-92/05 'Parameter Study of Joint Openin$ Effects on Earthquake Response of Arch Dams,' by Fenves, G.L, Mojitahedi, S. and Reimer, R.,
April 1992.
UCB/EERC,92/06 "Seismic Behavior and l•sign of Semi-Rigid Steel FTamcs,' by Nadet, M.N., and Astancb-Asl, A., May 1992.
UCB/EERC-g2/07 "A Beam Element for Seismic Damage Analysis,' by Spacone, E., Ciampi, V. and FUippou, F.C., August 1 • .
UCI•EERC-•2/O8 'Nonlinear Static and Dynamic Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Subasscmblages," by Filippou, F.C., D'Ambrisi, and lsan, ,it.,
August 1992
UCB/EERC-92/10 "Slotled Bolted Connection Energy Dissipators," by Grigorian, C.E., Yang, T.-S. and Popov, E.P., July 1•)2.
UCB/EERC-88/14 'An Experimental Study of' the Behavior of Dual Steel Systems.' by Whittaker. A.S., UanlL C.-M. and Berteto. V.V,, September 1918.
(PB91 212 712)AI6.
UCB/EERC-88/15 'Dynamic Moduli and Damping Ratios for Cohesive Soils,' by Sun, J.g.. Golesorkhi. R. and Seed, H.B., August 1918, (PB91 210
922)A04.
UCB/EERC-88/16 'Reinforced Concrete Flat Plates Under Lateral Load: An Experimental Study Including Biaxial Effects,' by Pan, ,aL and Moehle, J.P.,
October 1988, (PB91 210 856)AI3,
UCB/EERC-88/17 'Earthquake Engineering Research at Berkeley - 1988.' by EERC, November 1988, (PB91 210 864)A!0.
UCB/EERC-88/18 'Use of Energy as a Design Criterion in Earthquake-Resistant Design,' by Uanlg C.-M. and Benero, V.V., November 19811, (PB91 210
906/AS)A04.
UCB/EERC-88/19 'Steel Beam-Column Joints in Seismic Moment Resisting Frames,' by Tsai, K.-C. and Popov, E.P., November 19118, (PBgl 217
98a/AS)A20.
UCB/EERC-88/20 'Base Isolation in Japan, 1988,' by Kelly, J.M., December 1988, (PB91 212 449)A08.
UCB/EERC-89/0 I 'Behavior of Long Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames,' by Enlelhardt, M.D. and Popov, E.P., January 1989, (PB92 143 OS6)Aig.
UCB/EERC-89/02 'Earthquake Simulator Testing of Steel Plate Added Damping and Stiffness Elements,' by Whittaker, A., Bertero, V.V., Alonso, J. amd
Thompson, C., January 1989, (PB91 229 252/AS)Al0.
UCB/EERC-89/03 'Implications of Site Effects in the Mexico City Earthquake of Sept. 19, 1985 for Earthquake-Resistant Design Criteria in the San Fran-
cisco Bay Area of California,' by Seed, II.B. and Sun, J.l.. March 1989, (PBgl 229 369/AS)A07.
UCB/EERC-89/04 'Earthquake Analysis and Response of Intake-Outlet Towers,' by GoyaL A. and Chopra, A.IC. July 1989, (PB91 229 286/AS)AIg.
UCB/EERC-89/05 'The 1985 Chile Earthquake: An Evaluation of Structural Requirements for Bearing Wall Buildinp,' by Wallace, J.W. and Moehle,
J.P., July 1989, (PB91 218 O08/AS)AI3.
UCB/EERC-89/06 'Effects of Spatial Variation of Ground Motions on Large Multiply-Supported Structures,' by HaG, H., July 1989, (PB91 229
16 l/AS)A08.
UCB/EERC-$9/07 'EADAP - Enhanced Arch Dam Analysis Program: Users's Manual.' by Ghanaat, Y. and Clough. R.W., AulluSt 1989, CPB91 212
$22)A06.
UCB/EERC-89/08 'Seismic Performance of Steel Moment Frames Plastically Designed by Least Squares Stress Fields,' by Obi. lC, and Mahin, SA.,
August 1989, (PBgl 212 597)A05.
UCB/EERC-89/09 'Feasibility and Performance Studies on [mprovin8 the Earthquake Resistance of New and Existing Buildin8s Using the Friction Pendu-
lum System,' by Zayas. V., Low. S.. Mahin, S.A. and Bozzo, L , July 1989, {PB92 143 064)A!4.
UCB/EERC-89/10 'Measurement and Elimination of Membrane Compliance Effects in Undrained Triaxial TestinlL' by Nicholson. P.O., Seed, R.B. and
Anwar. II.. September 1989. (PB92 139 641/AS)Al3.
UCB/EERC-89/I I 'Static Tilt Behavior of Unanchored Cylindrical Tanks,' by Lau, D.T. and Clough, R.W., September 1989, (PB92 143 049)AI0.
UCB/EERC-89/12 'ADAP-88: A Computer Proip=am for Nonlinear Earthquake Analysis of Concrete A•h Dams,' by Fenves, G.L, Mojtahedi, S. and Rei-
ruer, R.B., September 1989, (PB92 139 674/AS)A07.
UCIFEERC.89/l 3 'Mechanics of Low Shape Factor Elastomeric Seismic Isolation Bearings,' by Aiken, I.D., Kelly, $.M. and Tajirian, F.F., November
1989, (PB92 139 732/AS)A09.
UCB/EERC-89/14 'Preliminary Report on the Seismological and Engineering Aspects of the October 17, 1989 Santa Cruz oma Prieta) Earthquake,' by
EERC, October 1989, (PB92 139 682/AS)AC)4.
UCB/EERC-89/15 'Experimental Studies of a Single Story Steel Structure Tested with Fixed, Semi-Ri8id and Flexible Connections,' by Nader, M.N. and
Astaneh.Asl, A, August 1989, (PB91 229 21 I/AS)Al0.
UCB/EERC-89/16 'Collapse of the Cypress Street Viaduct as a Result of the l,oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Nims, D.IC, Miranda, £., Aiken, I.D., Whit-
taker, A.S. and Bertero. V.V., November 1989, (PB91 217 93S/AS)A05.
UCB/EERC-90/01 'Mechanics of High-Shape Factor Elastomeric Seismic Isolation Bearings,' by Kelly, J.M., Aiken, I.D. and Tajirian, F.F, March 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/02 'Javid's Paradox: The Influence of Preform on the Modes of Vibrating Beams,' by Kelly, J.M., Sackman, J.L. and Javid, A., May 1990,
(PB91 217 943/AS)A03.
UCB/EERC-90/03 'Earthquake Simulator Testing and Analytical Studies of Two Energy-Absorbing Systems for Muitistory S t r u , a u • ' by Aiken, I.D. and
Kelly, J.M., October 1990.
UCB/EERC.90/04 'Damage to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridle Durinl the October 17, 1989 Earthquake,' by Astaneh-Asl, A., June 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/0$ 'Preliminary Report on the Principal Geotechnieal Aspecu of the October IT, 1989 l.oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Seed, ]LB., Dicken-
son. S.E., Riemer, M.F., Bray, J.D., Sitar, N., Mitchell, J.IC, Idriss, I.M., K•yen, R.E., Kropp, A., Harder, Jr. and Power, M.S.,
April 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/06 'Models of Critical Regions in Reinforced Concrete Frames Under Seismic Excitations,' by Zul6qar, N. and Filippou, F.C., May 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/0? 'A Unified Earthquake-Resistant Design Method for Steel Frames Using ARMA Models,' by I, Conte, J.P., Mahhng S.A. and
Pister, K.S,, June 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/08 'Soil Conditions and Earthquake Hazard Mitil•tion in the Marina District of San Francisco,' by Mitchell J.IC, Masood, T• Kayen,
R.E. and Seed, R.B., May 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/09 'Influence of the Earthquake Ground Motion Process and Structural Properties on Response Characteristics of Simple S • by
'
Conic, J.P., Pister, K.S. and Mahin, S.A., July 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/I 0 'Experimental Testing of the Resilient-Friction Base Isolation System,' by ClarlL P.W. and Kelly, J.M., July 1990, (PB92 143 OT2)A011.
UCB/EERC-90/i 1 'Seismic Hazard Analysis: Improved Models, Uncertainties and Sensitivities,' by Araya, R. and Der Kiureghiam A., Mat• 1988.
UCB/EERC-90/i 2 'Effects of Torsion on the Linear and Nonlinear Seismic Response of Structures," by Sedarat, H. and Berteto, V.V., September 19119.
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
470 Fernwood Drive
Moraga, CA 94556
(510) 631-9570
SPONSORS
Funding for this publication provided by the California Field Iron Workers Admlhrstl'ative Trust.