International Journal of Steel Structures 17(2): 515-524 (2017)

DOI 10.1007/s13296-017-6011-y
ISSN 1598-2351 (Print)
ISSN 2093-6311 (Online)

www.springer.com/journal/13296

TADAS Dampers in Very Large Deformations

Reza Karami Mohammadi1,*, Arman Nasri2, and Azin Ghaffary3
1
Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department, K.N.Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
2
M.Sc. in Earthquake Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, K.N.Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
3
M.Sc. in Earthquake Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, K.N.Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Triangular-plate Added Damping and Stiffness (TADAS) dampers are special kinds of passive control devices that can be
used in seismic design and retrofitting of structural systems. However, when exposed to large deformations, primary members
of a structure can be in danger of serious damage due to improper geometric characteristics of these dampers. In this study,
response of a one bay frame equipped with a TADAS device, previously tested in the laboratory, was simulated using a detailed
FE model in ABAQUS. A monotonic analysis was then conducted on the TADAS damper alone, which indicated that in large
deformations, TADAS damper pins hit the top of the holes, resulting in an abrupt stiffness increase in the damper. Seismic
analysis of a six story moment resisting frame with TADAS dampers, using a series of twelve scaled earthquake ground
motions, was also conducted in OpenSees which indicated that with sudden stiffness increase in dampers, the value of moments
in beams as well as axial forces in braces will increase, causing possible damages in these areas. At the end, a method for
calculating the optimal height for the holes in the damper was proposed, which is shown to be in good agreement with detailed
ABAQUS models.

Keywords: TADAS damper, large deformations, test, simulation, improper geometric characteristic, structural damage

1. Introduction in 1970 who introduced a device that could absorb the

Seismic resistant structural systems can be classified
into traditional and modern categories; in traditional systems,
primary structural members dissipate the earthquake input
energy in regions such as beam-column connections, leading
to damage in these areas which may require major repair
after earthquakes (Aiken et al., 1993). Modern systems,
however, take advantage of different control systems for
seismic response reduction purposes. These control systems
are categorized as active, passive, semi-active, and hybrid
control devices (Soong and Spencer, 2002; Spencer Jr
and Nagarajaiah, 2003).
Passive control devices take advantage of different energy
dissipating mechanisms, such as metal yielding, friction,
and viscoelastic deformation of solids. Utilizing yielding
of metals is found to be a simple, economical, and
effective means of structural control. It was first proposed
by Kelly et al. (Kelly et al., 1972; Skinner et al., 1974)
Received May 13, 2016; accepted October 18, 2016;
published online June 30, 2017
© KSSC and Springer 2017
*Corresponding author
E-mail: rkarami@mail.kntu.ac.ir
input energy to the structure by deforming under applied
moments. In the past two decades, various kinds of metallic
yield dampers have been proposed; U-shaped steel dampers
which dissipate the energy trough out of plane flexural
plastic deformations (Tagawa and Gao, 2012), steel
honeycomb and slit dampers that take advantage of In-
plane shear-flexural yielding of steel plates for energy
absorption (Chan and Albermani, 2008; Kobori et al.,
1992), shear-panel dampers that work under In-plane
yielding of stiffened steel plates in shear (Nakashima et
al., 1994), and pipe dampers (PD) First studied by Maleki
and Bagheri (Maleki and Bagheri, 2010a, 2010b; Maleki
and Mahjoubi, 2013, 2014). Added damping and stiffness
(ADAS) and Triangular-plate Added Damping and Stiffness
(TADAS) dampers are also two common types of metallic
yield dampers, in which the former uses X-shaped steel
plates placed in parallel to each other, whereas the latter
incorporates triangular steel plates (Bergaman and Goel,
1987; Tsai et al., 1993). These dampers are placed between
the braces and the top beam. In the event of an earthquake,
the top of the damper moves horizontally with respect to
the bottom of the damper, dissipating the energy as a
result of yielding of the steel plates (Symans et al., 2008).
ADAS and TADAS dampers are inexpensive and relatively
easy to implement; they are not sensitive to temperature
516 Reza Karami Mohammadi et al. / International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524, 2017
Figure 1. Schematic of the unimproved TADAS device and its hysteresis (Tsai and Li, 1994).
Figure 2. Schematic of the improved TADAS device (Tsai
and Li, 1994).
or moisture; they have stable hysteretic behavior, and do
not affect the gravity load-carrying capacity of the structure;
they can sustain a large number of yielding reversals without
any stiffness or strength degradation (Symans et al., 2008;
Whittaker et al., 1989). TADAS damper special moment
resisting frames (T-SMRFs) are also proved to possess a
better behavior factor in comparison to uncontrolled
SMRFs (Mahmoudi and Abdi, 2012). However, they also
have extreme nonlinear behavior that may lead to
computationally expensive nonlinear analysis; and they
also may be damaged after earthquakes and accordingly
need replacement (Symans et al., 2008).
In addition to the advantages mentioned before, TADAS
dampers have a merit over ADAS dampers due to the
triangular shape of the steel plates which causes the
bending curvature to be uniformly distributed along the
height of the plate. Therefore yielding occurs simultaneously
over the height of the device, leading to economical and
optimal design and use of material in TADAS devices.
Despite all these benefits, Tsai and Tsai (1995) implemented
experiments and simulations of TADAS dampers in
National Taiwan University that were indicative of an abrupt
increase in the damper stiffness in large displacements of
the last loading cycles (Fig. 1). This sudden increase in
stiffness that may cause damage to the main structural
parts, was said to be a result of the adjacent steel plates
getting into contact as the deformations increase. To solve
this issue, Tsai and Li (1994) proposed using a pin at the
end of each triangular steel plate as can be seen in Fig. 2.
The question is, in case adjacent steel plates do not hit
each other in large deformations, is it guaranteed that the
damper shows a reliable behavior in large deformations?
To address this question, a detailed model of a one bay
frame with a TADAS damper was first built in ABAQUS
(SIMULIA, 2013), and validated according to experimental
results of the same structural system previously tested in
the laboratory. Then, the TADAS damper alone was subjected
to a monotonically increasing displacement history to
investigate the geometric characteristics of such dampers
that may lead to a sudden increase in stiffness. The harmful
effects of these stiffness increases on the seismic performance
of structures was investigated through simulating the response
of a six story MRF equipped with TADAS dampers to a
series of earthquake ground motions in OpenSees (McKenna,
2000). At the end, a method for calculating the appropriate
value for the special geometric characteristic that is
responsible for the stiffness increases and the consequent
harmful effects is proposed.
2. FE Model Validation
In this section, the aim is to establish a reliable FE
model that can realistically simulate the behavior of
TADAS dampers. For this purpose, a detailed FE model
of a one bay frame with a TADAS damper that was
previously tested in the laboratory is built in ABAQUS,
and validated with experimental results.
2.1. Experimental setup
A large scale model of a one story, one-bay frame of
Fig. 3. was constructed in the Road, Housing and Urban
Development Research Center (BHRC, 2015). The frame
is 3 meters high and has a span of 4 meters. A standard
double IPE180 is used for the columns. Beam’s I-section
is made from three 4000*200*12 mm plates, welded
together continuously. Double 100*100*10 mm angles
were used for the bracing system. Column bases, as well
as beam-column connections, are configured to be pinned.
A TADAS damper (Fig. 4) with geometric characteristics
described as below was incorporated into the structure
using a chevron bracing system.
(1) Triangular plates: These are the main parts of the
damper. However, due to construction issues the real
 TADAS Dampers in Very Large Deformations 517

Figure 3. An illustration of the experimental setup.

Figure 4. An illustration of the utilized TADAS damper in the laboratory.

shape usually cannot be an exact triangle (Fig. 4(b)). In
this study, six steel plates with a height of 34.5 cm and a
3 cm thickness are used.
(2) Top base plate: a 60×25 cm plate with a 3 cm
thickness is placed at the top of the damper, with all the
triangular plates welded to it.
(3) Bottom base plate: a 48×11 cm plate with a 2 cm
thickness is placed at the bottom of the damper.
(4) Pins: used to connect the triangular plates to the
bottom base plate, they have a diameter of 2 cm and a
length of 20 cm.
(5) Connection plates: these vertical plates are welded
to two opposite sides of the bottom base plate. They have
slotted holes that are 6 cm in height and have a width of
2.2 cm where the 2 cm diameter pins go through. The 0.2
cm gap is configured for the ease of pin’s movement into
the holes. Primarily, the distance between the top and
bottom base plates is configured such that the center of
the pins is placed 2 cm from the bottom of the hole.
The steel material for the pins in the TADAS device
has a yield strength of 360 MPa and an ultimate strength
of 520 MPa. The rest of the structure is built using a steel
material with a yield strength of 240 MPa and an ultimate
strength of 370 MPa. The young’s modulus for both materials
is equal to 2.1e11 MPa. Quasi static cyclic displacement
history of Fig. 5, defined according to ASCE41 standard
518 Reza Karami Mohammadi et al. / International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524, 2017

Figure 5. Loading displacement history in the laboratory.

(ASCE, 2014), was applied to the frame using two 60 ton

hydraulic actuators with a stroke of 25 cm at two opposite Figure 6. Comparison of the hysteresis of the TADAS
ends of the frame, each one imposing displacements in damper in ABAQUS with experimental outcomes.
one direction.

2.2. FE modeling in ABAQUS

The same frame tested in the laboratory, is modeled
with details in ABAQUS, using solid elements for modeling
the structural members and tie constraints for modeling
welded connections. For modeling the interaction between
the pins and inner surface of the slotted holes, a surface
to surface contact with a tangential behavior and friction
coefficient equal to 0.16, as well as a normal behavior
with hard contact constraint enforcement method is used.
Friction coefficient between steel and steel surfaces are
usually considered between 0.5-0.8 for clean and dry
surfaces. However, since the steel components of the
TADAS damper in the laboratory were painted, greasy,
and unclean, this coefficient has been decreased to 0.16
which applies to lubricated and greasy surfaces. A cyclic Figure 7. Force-Deformation relationship for the TADAS
damper.
analysis was conducted using the displacement history of
Fig. 5. the same as in the laboratory.
3.1. Damper stiffness increase in large deformations
2.3. Analysis Results vs. experimental outcomes Force-Deformation relationship for the TADAS damper
In Fig. 6. the hysteresis of the TADAS damper, modeled pushed to 16cm displacement at the top plate is illustrated
in ABAQUS, is plotted against the experimental data in Fig. 7. This curve can be divided into 4 regions. Region
under the prescribed cyclic loading. The good agreement number one shows a negligible, almost zero stiffness since
between the two hysteresis curves proves the validation the damper has not yet started working due to the 0.2 cm
of the prepared model, and indicates that the ABAQUS initial gap between the pins and the holes. Region number
model of the damper is reliable for further investigation two is the elastic region, while region number three is
of damper’s behavior in different loading histories. where the nonlinear behavior begins, providing a ductility
more than 20 for the damper. In region number four, with
3. Damper Behavior in Large Deformations excessive increase in deformations, both the strength and
stiffness of the damper increases, rapidly.
The TADAS damper of the above mentioned model in During the loading, the triangular steel plates come to
ABAQUS is used here alone to study the damper’s behavior yield, and as the loading continues they start to curve in
in large deformations. All six degrees of freedom of the shape. As a result of this, the pins move upward in the
top and bottom base plates except for the translational slotted holes until they hit the top of the holes, which
degree of freedom of the top plate in the loading direction results in a large axial force for the triangular plates. This
are constrained. The top plate is pushed to 16 cm unprecedented axial force causes a sudden increase in
displacement in that direction. stiffness of the damper. Fig. 8. illustrates the moment in
 TADAS Dampers in Very Large Deformations
Figure 8. pins hitting the top of the holes in the TADAS
damper modeled in ABAQUS.
the ABAQUS model analysis that pins hit the top of the
holes.
This is an important effect that can cause serious
damage to main structural elements by introducing large
internal forces in them. However, it is usually neglected
in most TADAS damper structure analyses. In the following
section, the effect of these sudden stiffness increases on
the performance of TADAS damper structures is extensively
investigated.
4. Damper Stiffness Increase Effect on
Primary Structural Members
A 3-bay, 6-story moment resisting frame equipped with
TADAS dampers was chosen to study the effect of damper
stiffness increase on primary structural members’ response.
First, the MRF without dampers was designed according
to “Iranian Code of Practice for Seismic Resistant Design
of Buildings, Standard No. 2800 (BHRC, 2005)” and
“Iranian National Building Code (MHUD, 2006)”. Then,
appropriate elastic stiffness was defined for dampers in
each story, according to the procedure explained later in
this section. A special material was defined for the dampers
to take into account the sudden stiffness increase. It is
assumed that the frame is built in a region with high
seismicity on a soil profile type II (very dense soil and
soft rock). The importance factor and behavior factor are
also assumed to be equal to 1 and 7, respectively. The
amount of dead and live load on the beams is considered
to be 20000 and 8000 N/m. In view of the fact that stiffness
of the braces should be more than the damper’s stiffness
in order to allow the dampers to work in the best way,
double 100*100*10 mm angles were chosen for bracing
sections. The designed frame with all the resulting element
sections that are chosen from European rolled steel
sections is shown in Fig. 9.
4.1. Simulation procedure
The structural system of Fig. 9. is modeled in OpenSees
using nonlinear beam-column elements and fiber sections
519
Figure 9. Elevation of the 3-bay 6-story TADAS frame.
which enable distributed plasticity integration. Structural
mass is assumed to be lumped at nodes, and beams are
configured to be axially rigid. The TADAS damper is
modeled using a zero length element with transverse
stiffness. Since in reality the damper has a height, in
addition to the identical forces that are applied to the
structure in the top and bottom base plates, it also
produces a moment equal to the product of these forces
and the height of the damper, as shown in Fig. 10.
Therefore, in combination with the zero length element, a
rigid element for producing this moment, and transferring
it to the top beam is also modeled (Fig. 10).
Steel02 material with isotropic strain hardening and a
3% ratio for the post yield stiffness to elastic stiffness is
utilized for the damper system in this stage of the study.
In order to find the appropriate stiffness for dampers,
six far field earthquake excitations (Table 1), as well as
six near field earthquake excitations (Table 2) were chosen
to perform a set of twelve dynamic time history analyses.
Since the frame is designed according to “Iranian Standard
code No. 2800 (BHRC, 2005)”, but the ground motions
used for analysis are not all in Iran, the ground motions
should be scaled according to the Iranian code. With this
procedure, a scale factor of 0.43 was obtained. In Fig. 11.
the resulting average acceleration spectrum for the scaled
earthquakes is plotted against the Iranian code spectrum.
4.2. Elastic stiffness for dampers in each story
The role of TADAS dampers in structural systems is to
520 Reza Karami Mohammadi et al. / International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524, 2017

Figure 10. TADAS damper modeling in OpenSees.

Table 1. Far field earthquake excitations

Record Earthquake Distance PGA
Magnitude
No. name (Km) (g)
1 Northridge 6.7 144.1 0.064
2 Northridge 6.7 44.7 0.1
3 Tabas 7.4 94.4 0.087
4 Landers 7.3 36 0.13
5 Whittier 6 48 0.072
6 Landers 7.3 64 0.128

Table 2. Near field earthquake excitations

Record Earthquake Distance PGA
Magnitude
No. name (Km) (g)
7 Northridge 6.7 7 0.67
Figure 11. Comparison of average acceleration spectrum
8 Northridge 6.7 6.4 0.83 for the scaled earthquakes and the Iranian code spectrum.
9 Coyote Lake 5.7 8.8 0.59
10 Parkfield 6.1 3.7 0.77
11 Parkfield 6.1 8 0.69 near field excitations, respectively. As can be seen, for
12 Whittier 6 17 0.48 both far field and near field excitations, the hysteretic
energy is considerably reduced in the 1 to 2 stiffness
ratios, and further increase in the amount of stiffness has
eliminate or at least reduce the input energy to the main a negligible effect on the reduction of hysteretic energy.
structural members. According to Xia and Hanson studies, Therefore, it can be inferred that an amount between 1K
this goal can be best achieved by increasing the elastic and 2K is the appropriate stiffness for TADAS dampers.
stiffness of the damper (Xia and Hanson, 1992). However, Fig. 12. also indicates that in general, the amount of
increasing the damper stiffness usually requires an increase dissipated energy by main structural members in the
in expenditure that is not desirable. In this section, the presence of near field ground motions is more than far
aim is to find an appropriate elastic stiffness for each field ground motions, suggesting that TADAS dampers
damper so that energy dissipation of the main structural have a better performance in far field excitations. In order
members is significantly reduced. For this purpose, the to verify this, for all the twelve analyses, the ratio of the
damper stiffness in each story is chosen to have the value energy dissipated by the main structural members of the
of nK; which K is the lateral stiffness of the story in frame, when controlled by TADAS dampers to the energy
which the damper is installed, and n is the stiffness ratio dissipated by the frame without any dampers is calculated
equal to 0.1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. (Table 3). It is clearly observed from Table 3. that this
For every one of these stiffness ratios, twelve nonlinear ratio is higher for near field excitations, or in other words,
time history analyses using the aforementioned earthquake the ratio of energy that TADAS dampers dissipate is higher
ground motions are conducted. In Fig. 12. the amount of for far field excitations, which is indicative of better
hysteretic energy dissipated by main structural members performance of TADAS dampers under far field ground
is plotted against different stiffness ratios, for far field and motions, and results from the difference between the
 TADAS Dampers in Very Large Deformations 521

Figure 12. Frame hysteretic energy for 12 scaled excitations.

Table 3. The ratio of the energy dissipated by the main structural members of the frame, when controlled by TADAS
dampers to the energy dissipated by the frame without any dampers (%)
TADAS stiffness 1K 2K 3K 4K 5K 6K
far field (average) 15.73972 9.083259 7.152748 6.374729 6.014099 5.903992
near field (average) 26.86613 16.77166 12.96433 11.6699 11.24633 11.17029

frequency content of far field and near field earthquakes.
4.3. Special material for TADAS dampers
The simple Steel02 material defined for the TADAS
damper in the previous section, unlike the FE model in
ABAQUS, cannot simulate the hitting of the pins to the
top of the holes, and accordingly, the resulting sudden
increase in stiffness. To take this into account, a parallel
material combining multi linear material and elastic-
perfectly plastic gap material is defined. The post yield
stiffness to elastic stiffness ratio is again assumed to be
3%, and the stiffness value when the hitting occurs is
considered to be 50% of the elastic stiffness that was
determined before. Furthermore, it is assumed that TADAS
damper pins hit the top of the holes when the displacement
of the damper reaches 8 cm.
Finally, for investigating the effects of sudden stiffness
increases on main structural member’s behavior, a nonlinear
time history analysis using scaled excitation record number
4 was conducted on the designed frame of Fig. 9 using
this special material for TADAS dampers. The record was
scaled so that to make sure the damper reaches the 8cm
displacement.
4.4. Analysis results and discussions
In Fig. 13. the hysteretic curves of the TADAS dampers
in different stories are illustrated. As can be seen, the
damper displacements in all stories, except for story one,
has reached the 8 cm displacement required for pins to hit
the top of the holes. The resulting increase in stiffness of
the damper is also seen in the dampers of story 2 to story
6. Therefore, this model can be used for further study
around the effect of sudden increase in damper stiffness
on primary structural members.
The effect of damper stiffness increase on primary structural
members is investigated by evaluating three parameters
for every story; bending moment of the beam in place
where the damper is attached to it, brace axial force, and
column shear force. Two cases are defined for the frame;
in the first, the damper is modeled using the steel02
material that does not take into account sudden stiffness
increase, and in the second, the special material is used
for modeling TADAS dampers, thus, taking into account
the sudden stiffness increase that happens as a result of
pins hitting the top of the holes. Analysis results are
shown in Table 4.
As can be seen in Table 4, analysis results of the first
story are close together for two cases, whereas for all
other stories, the results are quite different for case1 and
case2. It is clearly apparent that the sudden stiffness
increase has caused both the beam bending moment and
brace axial force of the story to increase, while it merely
had a negligible effect on column shear forces. This
suggests that the sudden stiffness increase of the dampers
increases the internal forces in some structural members,
and can cause them to be damaged. Thus, it should be
averted.
5. Proposed Solutions
In order to prevent TADAS damper pins from hitting
the top of the holes that causes a sudden change in the
522 Reza Karami Mohammadi et al. / International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524, 2017

Figure 13. Hysteresis curves for TADAS dampers in different stories under excitation number4.

Table 4. Effect of sudden stiffness increase on primary structural members under excitation number4
Maximum beam bending moment in the Maximum column shear force Maximum brace axial force
story
interface with the damper (ton·m) (ton) (ton)
Case1 Case2 Case1 Case2 Case1 Case2
1 14.32 14.55 61.84 56.59 22.70 23.59
2 12.13 21.17 53.75 49.21 21.67 36.35
3 9.34 19.38 42.74 45.46 16.77 33.32
4 8.99 23.53 36.99 35.34 15.07 39.02
5 6.99 17.86 28.32 27.06 11.89 29.88
6 2.98 12.56 19.68 16.77 5.42 21.31
 TADAS Dampers in Very Large Deformations
Figure 14. Schematic of the initial un-deformed, and deformed shape of a triangular plate in critical state.
Table 5. Comparison of the critical damper displacements obtained from ABAQUS and the proposed method
Height of damper holes (cm) 4 5
Critical damper displacement in ABAQUS (cm) 7.7
Critical damper displacement from Eq. 4 (cm) 9.96
error (Percentage) 29.3
stiffness of the device, leading to damage for structural
members, two solutions are proposed:
(1) Increasing the height of the holes: it is clear that the
higher the hole is, the later the pins hit the top surface of
it.
(2) Placing the center of the pins in the lowest distance
possible from the bottom surface of the hole: this way, the
pins should move a larger distance to reach the top of the
holes.
It is important, here, to estimate the critical damper
displacement in which the pins reach the top of the holes.
For this purpose, a method for calculating the critical
displacement is proposed (Eq. (4)). Below, comes a
description on how to use the proposed relationship. As it
is clear from Fig. 14, assuming constant curvature in each
plate, they could be considered as part of a circle with the
radios of r.
ρsinθ = h (1)
ρθ = l (2)
where l is the height of the steel triangular plates, h is the
vertical height of the deformed plates in critical state
(when the pins hit the upper edge of the holes), and ρ is
the radius of curvature of the deformed plates which is
assumed to be the same in the height of the plate.
Dividing Eq. (1) by Eq. (2) gives the value of θ as follows:
sinθ h
---------- = --- (3)
θ l
After the value of θ is determined from the above
equation, one can calculate the critical displacement (Δ)
523
6 7 8 9
10.7 12.8 14.6 16.4 17.9
12.07 13.79 15.25 16.5 17.62
12.8 7.7 4.4 0.6 1.5
according to the following equation:
θ
Δ = htan ⎛ ---⎞ (4)
⎝ 2⎠
To examine the precision of Eq. (4), different heights
were assigned to the TADAS damper holes in the
ABAQUS models. The displacement in which the pins
hit the top of the holes was then observed and compared
to that of the calculated critical displacement from Eq.
(4). Table 5 shows the values of critical displacements
obtained from these two methods for different heights, as
well as the percentage error for each case. Considering
the acceptable value of percentage error in all cases, the
proposed relationship is proved effective for TADAS
damper design and for finding the proper height of the
holes in the damper. For instance, if a damper is expected
to be subjected to displacements up to 16.5 cm, the
minimum height of the holes that would prevent the pins
from hitting the top of the holes would be equal to 8 cm.
6. Conclusions
In this study, behavior of TADAS dampers in large
deformations was evaluated. A detailed FE model of a
TADAS damper was built in ABAQUS, and validated
according to experimental outcomes. Subjecting TADAS
damper to large deformations revealed that pins in the
damper will hit the top of the holes, causing an abrupt
increase in damper stiffness that would make it behave
like a rigid element. A 3-bay 6-story TADAS frame was
then built into OpenSees to investigate the effects of this
524 Reza Karami Mohammadi et al. / International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524, 2017
stiffness increase on structural members. The results indicated
that the damper stiffness increase can have harmful effects
for beams and bracing systems in the structure. Therefore,
a relationship for calculating the minimum height for
damper holes was proposed to make sure that pins will
not hit the top of the holes. This relationship was proved
effective by comparing to FE models in ABAQUS.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Housing and Urban
Development Research Center in Tehran, especially for
providing experimental equipment. The support of Mr.
Hojat Kargar the executive manager of PART SAZE
engineering Company and Mr. Hadi Ghamari, a PhD.
Student of Professor Karami Mohammadi at K.N.Toosi
University of Technology is also greatly acknowledged.
References
Aiken, I.D., Nims, D.K., Whittaker, A.S., and Kelly, J.M.
(1993). “Testing of passive energy dissipation systems.”
Earthquake spectra, 9(3), pp. 335-370.
ASCE (2014). “Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing
Buildings” ASCE/SEI Standard 41-13, American Society
of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, USA.
Bergaman, D. and Goel, S. (1987). Evaluation of cyclic
testing of steel-plate devices for added damping and
stiffness, Report No. UMCE 87-10. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
BHRC (2005). “Iranian code of practice for seismic
resistance design of buildings.” Standard no. 2800, 3rd
edition, Building and Housing Research Center.
BHRC (2015). Road, Housing and Urban Development
Research Center, PART SAZE SAINAR engineering
Company report on TADAS damper experiments. Report
No. 1122-Ó/9 (in Persian).
Chan, R.W. and Albermani, F. (2008). “Experimental study
of steel slit damper for passive energy dissipation.”
Engineering Structures, 30(4), pp. 1058-1066.
Kelly, J.M., Skinner, R., and Heine, A. (1972). “Mechanisms
of energy absorption in special devices for use in
earthquake resistant structures.” Bulletin of NZ Society for
Earthquake Engineering, 5(3), pp. 63-88.
Kobori, T., Miura, Y., Fukusawa, E., Yamada, T., Arita, T.,
Takenake, Y., Miyagawa, N., Tanaka, N., and Fukumoto,
T. (1992). “Development and application of hysteresis
steel dampers.” Proceedings of the 10th World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain, pp. 2341-
2346.
Mahmoudi, M. and Abdi, M.G. (2012). “Evaluating response
modification factors of TADAS frames.” Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 71, pp. 162-170.
Maleki, S. and Bagheri, S. (2010a). “Pipe damper, Part I:
Experimental and analytical study.” Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, 66(8), pp. 1088-1095.
Maleki, S. and Bagheri, S. (2010b). “Pipe damper, Part II:
Application to bridges.” Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, 66(8), pp. 1096-1106.
Maleki, S. and Mahjoubi, S. (2013). “Dual-pipe damper.”
Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 85, pp. 81-91.
Maleki, S. and Mahjoubi, S. (2014). “Infilled-pipe damper.”
Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 98, pp. 45-58.
McKenna, F., Fenves, G. L., Scott, M. H., and Jeremic, B.
(2000). Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation
(OpenSees). Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research
Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
MHUD (2006). “Iranian National Building Code, part 10:
steel structure design.”
Nakashima, M., Iwai, S., Iwata, M., Takeuchi, T., Konomi,
S., Akazawa, T., and Saburi, K. (1994). “Energy
dissipation behaviour of shear panels made of low yield
steel.” Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics,
23(12), pp. 1299-1313.
SIMULIA (2013). ‘ABAQUS Documentation’, 6.13-1 ed.
Dassault Systèmes.
Skinner, R., Kelly, J., and Heine, A. (1974). “Hysteretic
dampers for earthquake-resistant structures.” Earthquake
Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 3(3), pp. 287-296.
Soong, T. and Spencer, B. (2002). “Supplemental energy
dissipation: state-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice.”
Engineering Structures, 24(3), pp. 243-259.
Spencer Jr, B. and Nagarajaiah, S. (2003). “State of the art
of structural control.” Journal of structural engineering,
129(7), pp. 845-856.
Symans, M., Charney, F., Whittaker, A., Constantinou, M.,
Kircher, C., Johnson, M., and McNamara, R. (2008).
“Energy dissipation systems for seismic applications:
current practice and recent developments.” Journal of
Structural Engineering, 134(1), pp. 3-21.
Tagawa, H. and Gao, J. (2012). “Evaluation of vibration
control system with U-dampers based on quasi-linear
motion mechanism.” Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, 70, pp. 213-225.
Tsai, C. and Tsai, K. (1995). “TPEA device as seismic
damper for high-rise buildings.” Journal of engineering
mechanics, 121(10), pp. 1075-1081.
Tsai, K.-C., Chen, H.-W., Hong, C.-P., and Su, Y.-F. (1993).
“Design of steel triangular plate energy absorbers for
seismic-resistant construction.” Earthquake spectra, 9(3),
pp. 505-528.
Tsai, K. and Li, C. (1994). “Seismic Analysis of Passive
Energy Dissipation Subsystems by Hybrid Experiments.”
Proceedings of the 12th International Modal Analysis,
2251, pp. 1520.
Whittaker, A.S., Bertero, V.V., G., J.L.A., and Thompson, C.
(1989). Earthquake simulator testing of steel plate added
damping and stiffness elements, Report No. UCB/EERC-
89-02. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University
of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA.
Xia, C. and Hanson, R.D. (1992). “Influence of ADAS element
parameters on building seismic response.” Journal of
Structural Engineering, 118(7), pp. 1903-1918.