Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Experimental study of structure with “dual function” metallic dampers

Hong-Nan Li ∗ , Gang Li
State Key Laboratory of Costal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116023, China

Received 10 July 2006; received in revised form 10 October 2006; accepted 10 October 2006
Available online 29 November 2006

Abstract

A type of dissipative device referred to as a “dual function” metallic damper was presented in this paper. These types of metallic dampers are
referred to as “dual function” metallic dampers (DFMDs), because they provide additional structural stiffness, and also have fairly good seismic
energy-dissipation capabilities. Quasi-static tests with these types of metallic dampers were carried out. Furthermore, a steel structure with dampers
was tested on a shaking table under four earthquake ground motion records of various amplitudes to study the dynamic characteristic and seismic
response. More specifically, these tests are performed in order to estimate the effects of dampers on the seismic behaviors of the structure. A
building with actual “dual function” metallic dampers was also introduced, and the finite element model of this building was made with the ADPL
language in the ANSYS program. Seismic responses of the building with and without the metallic dampers are discussed and compared. The
results of test and calculated methods show that the metallic dampers with “dual functions” presented here not only provide the added structural
stiffness, but also have good seismic energy dissipation capabilities.
c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Metallic damper; Dissipative structure; Shaking table; Dissipating energy

1. Introduction dissipation in the gravity-load-resisting frame. Moreover, since

The use of passive energy dissipation has been rapidly
growing throughout the world. This technique reduces the
structural response subject to wind and earthquakes through
mounting dissipative devices into the buildings. Contrary to
semi-active and active systems, there is no need for an external
power supply. In recent years, various kinds of dampers have
been studied by several investigators and serious efforts have
been undertaken to develop the concept of energy dissipation
or supplemental damping into a workable technology [2–4,
6–11]. A number of these devices, such as passive metallic
dampers, viscoelastic, and viscous energy dissipation devices,
have been installed in structures throughout the world [12–16].
The primary objective of adding energy dissipation systems
to building frames has been to focus the energy dissipation
during an earthquake into disposable elements specifically
designed for this purpose, and to substantially reduce energy
∗ Corresponding address: Department of Civil Engineering, Dalian
University of Technology, 2 Linggong road, Dalian 116024, China. Tel.: +86
411 84708500; fax: +86 411 84708501.
E-mail addresses: hongnanl@yahoo.com, hnli@dlut.edu.cn (H.-N. Li),
lg dlut@163.com (G. Li).
energy dissipation devices do not form part of the gravity-load-
resisting frame they can easily be replaced after an earthquake
without compromising the structural integrity of the frame.
As to research on the seismic resistance of structures
with passive dissipation devices, a number of static tests on
these devices and structural models have been carried out
by many investigators [17,18]. Static tests can reveal the
capacity of dissipating energy and the relationship between the
force applied and the displacement of the structure. However,
earthquake motion is a kind of dynamic action applied to
the structure, and obviously static tests alone cannot simulate
seismic forces properly. It is therefore necessary to carry out
shaking table tests to study the dynamic behaviors of structures,
especially structures with passive dissipation devices under
simulated strong earthquake loading. Shaking table tests can
simulate various kinds of earthquake records, and simulate the
entire progress of an earthquake including the main shock and
after shock. The performance of the structure and deformation
of the dissipative devices can be observed from the shaking
table test for the structure with passive dissipative devices. In
this paper, the actual application for a structure with dissipative
devices is authenticated through shaking test. In recent years,

c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-0296/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.10.007
1918 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928

dynamic analysis methods have been widely used for the

design of earthquake-resistant structures. The dynamic testing
of structures using a shaking table and the observation of the
earthquake response of structures have also been conducted to
verify the validity of the analytical methods employed [19,20].
However, direct studies of the dynamic behavior of large-scale
model structures using a shaking table have been relatively
limited because the capacity and size of the shaking table is
limited. Furthermore, the results of the dynamic analysis can
be incorporated into the time history analysis of the nonlinear
earthquake responses of structures with passive dissipation
devices.
In this paper, a new type of metallic damper is presented,
with specific geometric shapes that improve the bearing force
of the damper in the axis parallel to the beam and the
energy-dissipating capabilities of the damper. The quasi-static
model test and shaking table test of steel structures with the Fig. 1. Experimental setup of model.
metallic dampers are conducted respectively. The objectives
of this study are to investigate the efficiency of this kind of
dissipation device under quasi-static forces and different strong
earthquakes, and to obtain useful experimental data for further
design and application. The progress of the structure with
the dampers subjected to earthquake records was exhibited,
showing where the structure started deforming and where it was
destroyed. The results of the shaking table tests and numerical
calculation showed that the “dual function” metallic dampers
are good dissipative devices. In addition the energy analytical
method for the model steel frame with the dampers revealed
that they have good seismic energy dissipation capabilities and
stability. Furthermore, the ability of the dampers to control
the seismic response of steel framed structures was assessed Fig. 2(a). Single round-hole metallic damper.
through shaking table tests.

2. Quasi-static test for models of DFMD

Quasi-static tests with two types of mild metallic dampers

made of 4 mm thick steel plates were conducted in the
State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis for Industrial
Equipment of Dalian University of Technology. The objective
is to obtain the relation of displacement versus force and
validate the damper’s energy-dissipation capability. The test
setup is shown in Fig. 1. Each of these dampers is subjected to
repeated cyclic loadings along its plane. The force-controlled
and displacement-controlled loading methods are respectively Fig. 2(b). Hysteretic curves of single round-hole damper.
adopted during experiments. The failure criterion of the
dampers is defined as follows: once a crack appears on the cirque, as shown in Fig. 2(c). The experimental results indicate
surface of the damper or the decrease of bearing capability that the single round-hole damper not only has good energy-
exceeds 25% overall, the damper is regarded as having failed. dissipation capabilities, but also high initial stiffness. Thus, it is
The results for model testing with two kinds of metallic suitable as an effective energy-dissipation device.
dampers are discussed below.
2.2. Double X-shaped metallic damper
2.1. Single round-hole metallic damper
The photograph of a double X-shaped metallic damper is
The photograph of single round-hole metallic damper is detailed in Fig. 3(a). Typical hysteretic curves from the test
shown in Fig. 2(a). Typical hysteretic curves from the test are shown in Fig. 3(b). When the damper was tested for an
are shown in Fig. 2(b). When the damper was tested for an amplitude equal to 17 mm, the crack appeared at a different
amplitude, equal to 12 mm, the crack appeared on the root of the position, as shown in Fig. 3(c). It can be noted from the
 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928
Fig. 2(c). Deformed single round-hole metallic damper.
Fig. 3(a). Double X-shaped metallic damper.
Fig. 3(b). Hysteretic curves of double X-shaped metallic damper.
Fig. 3(c). Deformed double X-shaped metallic damper.
experimental results that the damper presents both large initial
stiffness and energy-dissipation capability. Together with the
single round-hole damper, the double X-shaped damper can
1919
Fig. 4(a). The two-story bare test structure.
Fig. 4(b). The two-story test structure with metallic dampers.
be considered to be an effective damper to be implemented in
practical projects.
2.3. Comparison of DFMD and similar damper
In order to compare the DFMD and similar metallic
dampers, the additional stiffness of a single round-hole metallic
damper and a X-shaped metallic damper, which are of the same
geometrical shape and material, are computed. The geometrical
shape of two types of dampers are shown in Fig. 4. The
additional stiffness of a single round-hole metallic damper can
be drawn from Fig. 2(a), K s = 3800 N/mm; The additional
stiffness of a X-shaped metallic damper can be drawn from the
following equation [13].
2Ebt 3 2 × 2.1 × 105 × 200 × 43
K = = = 1792 N/mm.
3h 3 3 × 1003
From the results, the additional stiffness of the single
round hole metallic damper is much greater than the
X-shaped metallic damper. Above all, DFMD is of high
additional stiffness.
3. Shaking table test
3.1. Structure model design
The experimental tests were carried out with the earthquake
simulator facility of the Institute of Earthquake Engineering,
Dalian University of Technology. The facility includes a 4 m ×
3 m steel platform, driven by servo-hydraulic actuators and
a MTS analogue electronic control system, which made fine
feedback over accelerations, velocities and displacements. With
1920 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928
Fig. 5(a). The two-story bare test structure.
Fig. 5(b). The two-story test structure with metallic dampers.
a maximum level and vertical displacement of ±75 mm and
50 mm respectively, the shaking table has about 10 ton of
payload capacity and a frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 50 Hz.
The structural geometrical characteristics are shown in Fig. 5.
To avoid any out-of-plane movements of the model, two
steel braced frames were bolted to the shaking table at both
sides of the model, thus guiding the longitudinal movement
of the frame along the plane of the DFMDs. The building has
a steel moment-resisting frame structure along the earthquake
excitation (longitudinal) direction and it has a hybrid moment-
resisting and X-braced structure in the transverse direction.
Steel plates were used as floor masses of the structure. The
lumped mass on the first floor was estimated to be 360 kg.
The dimensions of components for the column and beam are
selected to be 6 30 × 30 × 3 mm and 6 30 × 60 × 3 mm,
respectively. Moreover, as can be seen in Fig. 5, the metallic
damper connects the beam into the braces.
Fig. 6(a). Single round-hole metallic damper.
Fig. 6(b). Double X-shaped metallic damper.
3.2. Model design of “dual function” metallic dampers
Two different types of DFMDs are made of 2 mm thick steel
sheets. The planar geometries and sizes for the DFMDs are
shown in Fig. 6. Despite obvious differences in the geometric
configuration of these two types of metallic damper, the
underlying dissipative mechanism in both cases results from
the inelastic deformation of a metal. The results show that
the metallic dampers presented not only provide a certain
stiffness in normal application, but also have good seismic
energy dissipation capabilities.
The dampers were installed between a bracing support and
the beam at the first floor of the two-story frame structure as
seen in Fig. 7. Next, the dampers were connected with four
high-strength bolts to the bracing support, which was then
fixed to the shaking table. For the steel braces, the design is
usually aimed at avoiding or limiting inelastic deformations in
structure members, by exploiting the metallic damper’s high
energy dissipation capacity and additional stiffness to reduce
displacements.
3.3. Experimental program
Seismic tests aim at evaluating the structural response
under seismic motion of increasing intensity (PGA). The peak
table acceleration was progressively increased during the test
 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928 1921

Table 1
Earthquake records

Serial number Station Earthquake Component Predominant period (s)

1 Array #9, El Centro Imperial Valley (1940/5/19) NS 0.45
2 0453, Taft Lincoln School Kern County (1952/7/21) Taf021 0.36
3 02001, Tianjin Hospital Tangshan Aftershock (1976/9/15) SN 0.90

Table 2
Peak earthquake intensity and displacement of structure

Earthquake Floor Model A Model B

Displacement (mm) Peak earthquake (g) Displacement (mm) Peak earthquake (g)
1 0.8 0.9
El Centro 0.72 0.70
2 2.5 5.8
1 0.6 1.5
Taft 0.56 1.04
2 4.1 7.2
1 0.4 1.2
Tianjin 0.37 0.98
2 1.9 4.3
Note: Model A presents the structure with single round-hole metallic damper; Model B presents the structure with double X-shaped metallic damper.

stages for each earthquake are introduced in the following

sections.

3.4.1. Yielding progress

Fig. 7. The sketch of structures with metallic dampers.
sequence, up to structural collapse or the operative limits of the
table.
The earthquake signals are input into the structure along the
DFMDs’ plane as shown in Fig. 7. Earthquake intensity may
influence the effectiveness of the structural vibration reduction.
In this section, the three earthquakes acceleration records
shown in Table 1 were selected as input signals in order to test
the structures with and without metallic dampers, respectively.
Aiming to measure the structure basic frequency, the input
signal of the table for the first test series was a low intensity
(0.07g) white noise. Three accelerometers were attached on
two floors and the shaking-table to measure the structural
accelerations and the earthquake input. The accelerometers are
mounted on the structural beam as shown in Fig. 4.
3.4. Structural dynamic analysis
Following increasing earthquake intensity, the metallic
dampers attained the limit value of elastic stress. Before
arriving at this stage, there is no energy dissipation, because
at loads corresponding to nominal stress less than the yielding
stress, the response of the structure is fully elastic. The yielding
phenomenon occurred at different earthquake intensities for the
two types of DFMD. Table 2 summarizes the peak accelerations
of the three earthquakes used in the test and peak displacement
of the structure, at the point where the two types of DFMD
attained their respective yielding point.
3.4.2. Obvious deformed progress
The DFMDs appear to be obviously deformed after the
loads corresponding to the stress exceeds the yielding stress. At
that time, the displacement response of the structure is several
times that of elastic progress. Most of the energy input by
the earthquake is dissipated by dampers due to metal plastic
motion. Table 3 also summarizes the peak accelerations of the
three earthquakes used in the test and peak displacements of the
structure, when obvious deformation can be seen.
3.4.3. Destroyed progress
Most metals appear to be damaged or destroyed after their
strain limit value is attained. Concerning the two types of
metallic dampers used here, the cracks occurred at different
regions as shown in Fig. 8 following the increasing earthquake
intensity.

Due to increasing earthquake signal intensities, the “dual 3.4.4. Comparison of structural responses with and without
function” metallic dampers go through different stages during metallic dampers
the earthquake. These stages are designated as yielding stage, The effectiveness of these two types of DFMDs is evaluated
large global deformation stage and failure stage. The different through the displacement response of the structure. Figs. 9(a)
1922 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928

Table 3
Peak earthquake intensity and displacement of structure

Earthquake Floor Model A Model B

Displacement (mm) Peak earthquake (g) Displacement (mm) Peak earthquake (g)
1 3.5 2.3
El Centro 1.94 2.06
2 6.5 7.6
1 2.0 3.7
Taft 1.06 1.89
2 6.2 15.0
1 1.5 1.8
Tianjin 1.02 1.53
2 3.2 5.9

Fig. 10(a). Displacement time history at first floor of Model B under 2.0g El
Centro earthquake.

Fig. 8(a). Deformed single round-hole metallic damper.

Fig. 10(b). Displacement time history at roof of Model B under 2.0g El Centro
earthquake.

metallic dampers under the 2.0g El Centro earthquake ground

Fig. 8(b). Deformed double X-shaped metallic damper.
Fig. 9(a). Displacement time history at first floor of Model A under 2.0g El
Centro earthquake.
motion. The displacements of the roof are shown in Figs. 10(a)
and 10(b). From these figures, it can be seen that the
damped structure achieves a significant reduction in seismic
displacement response as compared to the no damper case.
The effectiveness of these dampers under the scaled 1.0g
El Centro, Taft and Tianjin earthquake ground motions are
summarized in Table 4. This table provides a comparison of
the peak displacement response of the structures with and
without the metallic dampers to the three earthquakes with
a maximum ground acceleration of 1.0g. Selected results are
displayed in the Table 4, clearly indicating the beneficial
effects of the dampers for these cases. It can be seen that
dampers provide significant extra damping to the structure so
that the structure behaved elastically and reduced the seismic
displacement response at all floor levels.

3.5. Numerical simulation

3.5.1. Establishment of computational model

Fig. 9(b). Displacement time history at roof of Model A under 2.0g El Centro
earthquake.
and 9(b) show displacement time histories at the first floor
of the model structure with and without single round-hole
Numerical simulation for the structures above presented
was carried out using the finite element analysis program
ANSYS. The BEAM4 of ANSYS was used to model the beams
and columns of the frame structure, which is based on the
Timoshenko’s beam theory and has six degrees of freedom
 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928 1923

Table 4
Displacement peaks and reduction rate under 1.0g EI Centro earthquake

Earthquake Floor Displacement response

Bare structrue (mm) Mode A (mm) Mode B (mm) Reduction rate of Model A (%) Reduction rate of Model B (%)
1 15.80 1.30 1.40 97.7 91.1
El Centro
2 17.50 9.80 4.40 44.0 74.9
1 19.10 1.93 1.50 89.9 92.1
Taft
2 20.60 6.50 7.30 68.4 64.6
1 23.80 1.50 1.20 93.7 94.9
Tianjin
2 28.00 3.30 4.30 88.2 84.6
Note: The reduction rate = (displacement of structure without dampers − displacement of structure with dampers)/displacement of structure without dampers ×
100%.

Fig. 12. Displacement of first floor of bare structure.

(a) Single round-hole metallic

damper.

Fig. 13. Displacement of first floor of Model A.

good agreement between the experimental and numerical dis-

(b) Double X-shaped metallic damper.
Fig. 11. Finite element model of local connection for DFMDs.
at each node. The PLANE82 of ANSYS, which is a higher
order version of the 2-D, four-node element, was adopted for
modeling the metallic dampers. The mass21 of ANSYS was
used to model the weight of the structure. This was only
considered along with the earthquake input direction, because
of the symmetry of the structure. For metallic structures, the
bilinear hardening model is used to simulate its mechanical
features in computation. Fig. 11 provides detailed configuration
about the connection of the dampers with the beam and the
braces.
3.5.2. The numerical results
Fig. 12 provides the comparative curves of displacement
histories of the computed and the experimental responses for
the structure without DFMDs and at 1.0g El Centro earth-
quake. Moreover, it can be seen that the shapes of the computed
curves agree well with the experimental ones. Fig. 13 shows
placement time histories at the basic floor of the structure with
single round-hole metallic dampers under the 1.0g El Centro
earthquake. Thus, the seismic response of damped structures
can be reliably estimated using FEM methods.
3.6. Energy analysis
The objective of the shaking-table test is to explore the
structural response through installing the metallic damper into
the structure. The theory behind the passive dissipation system
is that the dampers absorb a lot of energy input by earthquakes,
thus preventing this energy from going into the structure
and destroying it. In previous studies, most of the work was
focused on the structural dynamics of displacement, velocities,
accelerations, and forces. However, a focus on energy as
an analytical method is conceptually very appealing. Energy
analysis can show clearly how much energy is absorbed by
dissipative devices. Actually, this energy concept is not new.
Housner [5] suggested an energy-based approach for seismic
design even for more traditional structures several decades
ago. In this section, the performance of the structures with
DFMDs presented above is evaluated using the energy analysis
method.
1924 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928

Fig. 14. The energy analysis of Model A under three earthquakes.

Fig. 15. The energy analysis of Model B under three earthquakes.

Z t
3.6.1. MDOF energy formulation Ec = { Ẋ }T [C]{ Ẋ }dt;
The equation of motion for a MDOF structure with passive 0
Z t
energy dissipative devices can be written as Es = { Ẋ }T [K ]{X }dt;
0
[M]{ Ẍ } + [C]{ Ẋ } + [K ]{X } + {F} = −[M]{δ}ẍ g (1) Z t
Ed = { Ẋ }T [F]dt.
where [M], [C] and {F} represent the mass, damping and 0

stiffness matrices respectively, while {F} symbolizes a vector The terms in the left-hand-side of Eq. (1) represent the
force offered by passive dissipative devices. Furthermore, the relative kinetic energy of the mass (E v ), the dissipative energy
vectors { Ẍ }, { Ẋ } and {X } denote the acceleration, velocity caused by the inherent damping within the structure (E c ), the
and displacement, respectively. Finally ẍ g is the acceleration elastic strain energy (E s ), and the energy dissipated by passive
contributed by the earthquake, and {δ} is a vector of units. devices (E d ). The summation of these energies must balance
Multiplying each item of Eq. (1) by { Ẋ }T , and integrating the the input energy imposed on the structure by a seismic event
terms individually, the equation becomes (E i ). Then an energy balance equation can be written simply as
Z t Z t Z t follows
T T
{ Ẋ } [M]{ Ẍ }dt + { Ẋ } [C]{ Ẋ }dt + { Ẋ }T [K ]{X }dt Ev + Ec + Es + Ed = Ei . (3)
0 0 0
Z t Z t
+ { Ẋ }T [F]dt = − { Ẋ }T [M]{δ}ẍ g dt (2) 3.6.2. Energy analysis
0 0 An energy analysis for the structures with metallic dampers
where is carried out utilizing the energy theory presented in
Section 4.1. Energy time histories for the structure with
Z t
E i = − { Ẋ }T [M]{δ}ẍ g dt; these two types of metallic dampers subjected to the three
0 earthquakes are provided with Figs. 14 and 15. For the 1.06g
Z t
Taft earthquake record shown in Fig. 14, the total input energy
Ev = { Ẋ }T [M]{ Ẍ }dt; increases. However, the added dampers dissipate a majority of
0
 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928 1925

applied. The seismic protection intensity on this building site is

VI degree, and the site soil belongs to the type II based on the
China code (GBJ2001-11) [1].

4.2. Design procedure for building with DFMDs

In order to make the design of the DFMD-structure system

standardized and rationalized, it is necessary to formulate
design guidelines and procedures. Making reference to the
Fig. 16. RC frame building with DFMDs. design considerations presented by Soong and Dargush [13],
the procedure adaptation to the DFMD-structural system
this energy, leaving only a small amount of hysteretic energy to presented here was established, which can be outlined as
be dissipated by the structural members. follows:
From the figures above, a considerable portion of the input
(1) Design the frame structure without the DFMDs in
energy is dissipated via hysteretic mechanisms of the dampers,
considering the corresponding loading actions.
which tend to damage the primary structure through cracking
and the formation of plastic hinges. These DFMDs dissipate an (2) Compute the lateral stiffness K f and yielding displacement
amount of energy between 42% and 87% of the total seismic ∆ y f of each story.
input energy. Each figure shows that the dissipated energy (3) Select a suitable S R value based on the China code
by the damper tends to approach a constant value towards (GBJ2001-11) [1], where
the end of the testing time. Moreover, note that at the same K a = (S R)K f (4)
time, the area of the hysteretic loop reaches a maximum value.
Furthermore, although the input energy has increased slightly, in which K a represents the brace-assemblage stiffness [14].
the dampers consume a significant portion of the total energy, (4) Compute the DFMDs and brace stiffness
thus protecting the primary structure. Therefore, both of these Ka Kb
metallic dampers are good dissipative devices. Kd = (5)
Kb − Ka
4. Application in actual building and
K b = 3K d (6)
4.1. Description of building
and the DFMD yielding displacement
A RC frame building shown in Fig. 16 is located on the ∆ y = α∆ y f . (7)
campus of Dalian University of Technology in China. The
project includes two parts: a five-story RC building (part A) Here, K b and K d represents the brace and DFMDs stiffness,
and a six-story RC building (part B). The sketch of part A is respectively, and the value of parameter α is less than 2/3
depicted in Fig. 17. The first story of this building contains from the China code.
the laboratory of hydraulic dynamics to simulate ocean waves, (5) Perform dynamic analysis of the structure with the DFMDs
which generates inter-story drift when functioning. In order to to several earthquake ground motions. Repeat steps 2 and
reduce the seismic response of inter-story drift, single round- 3 till the values of structural response lie within the bounds
hole and double X-shaped metallic dampers, i.e. DFMDs, are defined by code.

Fig. 17. The sketch of the building part A.

1926 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928

Table 5
Earthquake records

Serial number Station Earthquake Components Predominant period (s)

TAF-UP (Z ) 0.34
1 0453, Taft Lincoln School Kern County (1952/7/21) Taf021 (Y ) 0.44
TAF111 (X ) 0.36

B-HCH-UP (Z ) 0.26
2 1028, Hollister City Hall Central Calif (1960/1/20) B-HCH181 (Y ) 0.30
B-HCH181 (X ) 0.26

A-SON-UP (Z ) 0.14
3 280, San Onofre - So Cal Edison Borrego Mtn (1968/4/9) A-SON033 (Y ) 0.38
A-SON303 (X ) 0.30

H-C03-UP (Z ) 0.68
4 36410, Parkfield -Cholame 3W Coalinga (1983/5/2) H-C03000 (Y ) 0.40
H-C03090 (X ) 0.42

Fig. 18(a). Photograph of single round-hole damper.

Fig. 19. The sketch of building subjected to earthquake.

4.4. Dynamic analysis of structure with DFMDs

Fig. 18(b). Photograph of double X-shaped damper.
4.3. Installation of dampers
Since the yielding of the DFMDs is easily concentrated on
the small angled parts of the plates, the dampers should be
manufactured very carefully so as to avoid excessive local strain
concentration. The DFMD dampers are as a group formed with
three DFMD plates parallel to be placed together. The single
round-hole metallic dampers are installed between the C and
D axes along axes ¬ and ®, and the double X-shaped metallic
dampers are arranged between axes ­ and ® along the A and J
axes, respectively, which are all at the first floor in part A of the
building shown in Fig. 17. The DFMDs are fixed on the nodes
between beams and braces. In the installing process, the upper
side of the DFMDs is welded on the embedded level steel plate
in the beam, and the lower end of the DFMDs are welded on
another level steel plate, which is attached to the braces. The
installed DFMDs are shown in Fig. 18.
Earthquake intensity may influence the effectiveness of
the reduction of structural vibration. In this section, four
earthquakes acceleration records shown in Table 5 are used
to calculate the seismic displacement reduction effectiveness
of the structures with and without DFMDs based upon the
sites where the structure is located. To match the seismic
acceleration peak values for different earthquake intensities in
the China code (GBJ2001-11) [8], the four earthquake record
peaks are adjusted to 220 cm/s2 corresponding to VII degrees
in the grade of seismic intensity.
The dynamic responses of the building subjected to the
earthquake excitations shown in Fig. 19 are analyzed using the
ANSYS program. The acceleration is input into the structure
in three-dimensions, i.e. the X , Y and Z directions. The
results given in Fig. 20 show the displacement responses
of the structure with and without the DFMDs only with
the Taft record. It can also be seen from these figures that
the peak displacements at the base of the building without
the DFMDs are approximately 52 mm in the X direction
which is approximately 8 times the peak displacement of the
 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928 1927

Table 6
Response of building for four earthquake records in X direction

Serial number of Structure without DFMD (mm) Structure with DFMD (mm) The reduction rate (%)
earthquake records
Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of top floor
base floor top floor base floor top floor base floor
1 52.1 71.5 1.8 29.6 97.1 58.6
2 26.2 35.0 2.3 25.4 91.2 27.4
3 73.1 96.2 2.5 19.3 96.6 79.9
4 47.5 63.8 3.1 50.6 93.5 20.7

Table 7
Response of building for four earthquake records in Y direction

Serial number of Structure without DFMD (mm) Structure with DFMD (mm) The reduction rate (%)
earthquake records
Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of Displacement of top floor
base floor top floor base floor top floor base floor
1 44.2 60.8 6.6 29.3 85.1 51.8
2 32.3 44.2 10.0 37.3 69.1 15.6
3 42.4 59.0 5.8 53.6 86.3 9.1
4 68.2 92.2 12.3 82.0 83.5 9.4

Fig. 20(a). Displacement of the base floor in X direction. Fig. 20(c). Displacement of top floor in X direction.

Fig. 20(b). Displacement of base floor in Y direction. Fig. 20(d). Displacement of top floor in Y direction.

building with the DFMDs. Fig. 20(c) shows that the maximum
displacement occurs also at the top floor and is reduced from
72 to 31. Similar results are obtained for the responses of
the structure with and without the DFMDs at the other three
earthquake excitations presented above and summarized in
Tables 6 and 7.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, some experiments on “dual function” metallic
dampers are presented, and an actual application is introduced.
The following conclusion can be drawn:
1928 H.-N. Li, G. Li / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 1917–1928
(1) Quasi-static and shaking-table tests clearly reveal the
properties of DFMDs from their large hysteresis and time
history displacement curves. The results of experiments and
numerical simulation have exhibited that structural frames
using “dual function” metallic dampers can reduce the
overall response of the structure, but more importantly, can
reduce the risk of damaging or destroying the structure. In
particular, the hysteretic energy dissipation is transferred
from the load bearing elements, such as the columns or
beams, to non-load bearing devices that are essentially not
damaged.
(2) The DFMDs not only provide additional structural stiffness,
but also have good energy dissipating capabilities. The
results show that the DFMD is an effective dissipative
device, and it is feasible to calculate the response of the
structure with dampers utilizing the ANSYS software.
(3) Finally, a successful implementation of a new building with
the DFMD is given and the dynamic analysis of the building
with and without DFMDs is carried out individually.
References
[1] Seismic Design Code for Buildings (GB 50011 – 2001). Beijing: China
Architectural Industry Press; 2001.
[2] Kelly JM, Skinner RI, Heine AJ. Mechanisms of energy absorption in
special devices for use in earthquake-resistant structures. Bulletin of the
New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1972;5(3):
63–88.
[3] Whittaker AS, Bertero VV, Thompson CI, Alsonson LJ. Seismic testing
of steel plate energy dissipation devices. Earthquake Spectra 1991;7(4):
563–604.
[4] Tsai KC, Chen HW, Hong CP, Su YF. Design of steel triangular plate
energy absorbers for seismic resistant construction. Earthquake Spectra
1993;19(3):505–28.
[5] Housner GW. Limit design of structure to resist earthquake. In: Proc. 1st
world conference earthquake engineering. 1956. p. 5-1–5-12.
[6] Li Hong-nan, Ying J. Theoretical and experimental studies on reduction
for multi-modal seismic responses of high-rise structures by TLDs.
Journal of Vibration and Control 2004;10(7):1041–56.
[7] Li Hong-nan, Yin Yong-wei, Wang S-Y. Studies on seismic reduction
of story-increased buildings with friction layer and energy-dissipated
devices. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2003;32(14):
2143–60.
[8] Kelly JM, Skinner RI, Heine AJ. Mechanisms of energy absorption in
special devices for use in earthquake-resistant structures. Bulletin of the
New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1972;5(3):
63–88.
[9] Whittaker AS, Bertero VV, Thompson CI, Alsonson LJ. Seismic testing
of steel plate energy dissipation devices. Earthquake Spectra 1991;7(4):
563–604.
[10] Tsai KC, Chen HW, Hong CP, Su YF. Design of steel triangular plate
energy absorbers for seismic resistant construction. Earthquake Spectra
1993;19(3):505–28.
[11] Skinner RI, Kelly IM, Heine AJ, Robinson WH. Hysteresis dampers for
the protection for the protection of structures from earthquake. Bulletin
of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1980;
13(1):22–6.
[12] Martinesz-Romero E. Experiences on the use of supplemental energy
dissipators on building structures. Earthquake Spectra 1993;9(3):
581–624.
[13] Soong TT, Dargush GF. Passive energy dissipation systems in structural
engineering. John Weley & Sons; 1997.
[14] Tehranizadeh M. Passive energy dissipation device for typical steel frame
building in Iran. Engineering Structures 2001;23(6):643–55.
[15] Tnanka T, Makii K, Ueda H, Kushibe A, et al. Study on practical
application of a new seismic damper using a Zn–Al alloy with a
nanocrystalline microstructure. Mechanical Sciences 2003;45:1599–612.
[16] Bartera F, Giacchetti R. Steel dissipating braces for upgrading existing
building frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2004;60:
751–69.
[17] Mualla IH, Belev B. Performance of steel frames with a new friction
damper device under earthquake excitation. Engineering Structrues 2002;
24:365–71.
[18] Min KW, Kim J, Lee SH. Vibration tests of 5-story steel frame with
viscoelastic dampers. Engineering Structures 2004;26:831–9.
[19] Karadelis JN, Omair M. Elasto-plastic analysis with large deformation
effects of a T-end plate connection to square hollow section. Finite
Elements in Analysis and Design 2001;38:65–77.
[20] Phocas MC, Pocanschi A. Steel frames with bracing mechanism and
hysteretic dampers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics
2003;32:811–25.