Hysteretic seismic energy dissipation of steel structures related to bracing,

passive energy dampers, and steel plate shear wall systems

By
Dharma Raj Upadhyaya
2201020013
M. TECH- SE
 Hysteretic energy dissipation
 These bracings, dampers, and shear walls all possess hysteresis behavior of dissipation of energy
induced by earthquake.
 The dissipated energy is given by the following equation of conservation of energy.
 E(t)= Ek(t)+ Es(t)+ Eh(t)+ Ed(t);
 E(t) is the total input energy in the form of earthquake energy,
 Ek(t) is the kinetic energy,
 Es(t) is the strain energy,
 Eh(t) is the hysteretic energy,
 Ed(t) is the energy dissipated by the dampers, and
 t represents the time [2].
 Due to the capacity of materials to exhibit a nonlinear relationship between the applied Load and
corresponding displacement, a hysteresis loop exists.
 The area of the hysteresis loop represents the total amount of energy that is dissipated during the
cyclic loadings.
 Steel Bracing:
 There are mainly two types of braced frames Concentrically Braced Frames (CBF) and Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF).

 In CBFs, the axes of all members, i.e., columns, beams, and braces, connect at a single location, resulting in axial
member forces and not having moments.

 In EBF systems, yielding is only focused on link segments, and the proportions of all other members of the frame are
maintained so that they remain elastic. Links can therefore be thought of as structural fuses during strong earthquakes.
 Dampers:
Dampers used for controlling the seismic induced energy are mainly classified as

1) passive control systems (do not require any external energy),

2) active control systems (required external energy),
3) semi-active control systems (require comparatively less external energy compared to active control systems), and
4) hybrid systems.

In this paper, we only discuss passive control systems [6]. Passive control systems do not need external power to produce
system control forces, hence making them simple and affordable to implement in a structure [7].
 Fluid Viscous Damper:
 A FVD typically consists of a piston inside of a damper housing that is filled with a silicone compound or a similar
substance.
 The piston also contains a number of tiny orifices that allow fluid to travel from one side of the piston to the other. Fluid
is pushed to flow through orifices as the piston head of the damper is stroked [7].
 Produced resilience force is directly proportional to the displacement velocity in FVD [6].
 When the piston head moves inside the cylinder, the kinetic energy induced will be converted into friction energy and
hence energy will be dissipated in the form of heat energy.
 Tuned Mass Damper:
 The friction dampers use the mechanism of friction between two rigid objects one slipping over another, which is a
distinguished characteristic of energy dissipation [11].
 The friction force induced depends upon the coefficient of friction between the surfaces and the compression force of
tightened bolt but is independent of the contact area and sliding velocity of the body which is sliding [12].
 As per Pall, the frictional action takes place in four stages:

1) elastic range,
2) slip,
3) hardening due to bolt locking, and
4) hitting the groove end [13].

 FD slips just before the main structure starts yielding during severe earthquakes [14].
 FD may be either compression-tension or tension only depending upon their bracing
systems [11], [15].
 Steel Plate Shear Wall(SPSW):
 SPSW is recognized by its post-buckling strength, substantial ductility, stable hysteretic characteristics, high initial
stiffness, and large capacity for absorbing plastic energy compared to that only MRF[20].
 The principle of design should be “strong frame, weak wall” [21].
 Post-buckling characteristics of SPSW depend upon the strength of its boundary beams and columns.
 Hysteretic energy dissipation:
.

 In Figure 8, the considered EBF link element has a length of 400mm and has 2 stiffeners spaced at
135mm.
 The hysteresis loop shows a flat, pinched, and stable loop [25].
 In Figure 9, the considered CBF with X-braced configuration with a rectangular hollow tube section
having a dimension of 32mm external and a thickness of 3.18mm is used as bracing.
 The shape of the hysteresis loop shows narrow, pinched, and stable loop [5].
 When fabrication tolerance is very small, Frictional dampers possess a nearly rectangular
hysteresis loop shape as shown in Figure 10.
 The hysteresis loop of the fluid viscous damper is nearly elliptical in shape as shown in Figure 11.
 The hysteresis loop of passive tuned mass damper(P-TMD) which consists of mass, spring and
damping device is narrow and elliptical in shape as shown in Figure 12.
 The hysteresis loop of the steel plate shear wall as shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14 which is
pinched, wide, and stable.
Hysteretic energy dissipation:
.
Hysteretic energy dissipation:
.
 Literature survey:
S. Year of publication Author Title Remarks
N.
1 2019 Andrew D. Sen ⁎, Nonlinear modeling of The paper concludes that while special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs) have been
Charles W. Roeder, concentrically braced frames the focus of many previous nonlinear modeling recommendations, However, lower-
Dawn E. Lehman, ductility CBFs, including non-seismically detailed CBFs are more popular, and hence SCBFs
Jeffery W. Berman have not been well established.

2 2021 Shuling Hu a,b , Wei Comparative seismic fragility The strength and initial stiffness of the designed MRSFs decrease as the allowed story
Wang a,b,* assessment of mid-rise steel drift limit of the frame increases.
buildings with non-buckling The maximum story drift response of the designed frames under earthquake loading
(BRB and SMA) braced increases with the increase in the allowable story drift limits.
frames and self-centering
energy-absorbing dual
rocking core system

3 2020 Mahdi Shariati1 , Majid Evaluation of seismic The authors then design and model a set of TOBF archetype structures using a trial value
Lagzian2 , Shervin performance factors for of the R factor. The level of safety against collapse provided by the assumed R factor is
Maleki2 , Ali tension-only braced frames investigated using the non-linear analysis procedure of FEMA P695 comprising
Shariati*3,4 and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) under a set of prescribed ground motions. The
Nguyen Thoi Trung3,4 authors found that an R factor of 3.0 is appropriate for safe design of TOBFs, and the
system overstrength factor (Ω0) was estimated as 2.0 by performing non-linear static
analyses.
4 2017 Sina Kazemzadeh Azad, A review of research on steel The paper provides a comprehensive review of the behavior and design of steel
Cem Topkaya eccentrically braced frames eccentrically braced frames (EBFs). The research findings suggest that EBFs can combine
the advantages of moment-resisting frames (MRFs) and concentrically braced frames
(CBFs) during an earthquake while experiencing less damage and eliminating the negative
aspects of each system. The paper also identifies future research needs for improvement
of EBF design and application.
 Literature survey:
5 2015 Dhanaraj M. Patil ⁎, Seismic Behaviour of Different The paper concludes that the use of chevron braced frames, V-braced frames, and zipper braced
Keshav K. Sangle Bracing Systems in High Rise 2-D frames enhances the seismic performance of high rise steel buildings compared to moment resisting
Steel Buildings frames. . In MRF, more beams undergo plastic hinge formation than the braced buildings.
6 2021 Mojgan Yaghoubshahi, An overview of HSS brace The paper concludes that the low cycle fatigue fracture of Hollow Structural Section (HSS) braces in
Ali Imanpour * fracture in steel concentrically steel Concentrically Braced Frames (CBFs) under seismic loads is a critical issue in seismic design.
braced frames
7 2003 R. Sabelli a , S. Mahin Seismic demands on steel braced The paper concludes that buckling-restrained braces provide an effective means for overcoming many
b,∗, C. Chang c frame buildings with of the potential problems associated with special concentric braced frames. The results of the study
bucklingrestrained brace can be used to identify improved design procedures and code provisions for concentrically braced
steel frames.
8 2022 Rajan Suwal1* , Peshal Comparative Analysis of Steel The percentage change in maximum storey drift from its unbraced counterpart decreases with an
Dahal2 , Prabesh Buildings with and Without increase in the number of storeys for all bracing positions. The percentage change in storey drifts was
Shrestha3 Bracings in Nepal found to be maximum for braced frames with bracing in innermost bays.
9 1995 T. M. Roberts Seismic resistance of steel plate hystersis curve generated with experimental works match with the theoratical numerical models
shear walls
10 2010 Siddhartha Ghosh and RESEARCH ON STEEL PLATE Park et al (2007) experimented on three storey frame and analyze on energy dissipation and
Swapnil B. Kharmale SHEAR WALL: displacement ductility and find that displacement ductility and energy dissipation of shear plate shear
wall is more than that of CBF and MRF
11 2023 Magdalini D. Titirla A State-of-the-Art Review of it presents a brief overview of the steel braces frames and their problems. The efficacy of all of these
Passive Energy Dissipation types of dampers has been proved, as they have been used all around the world, and their
Systems in Steel Braces comparison in experimental or numerical studies, applications, and optimization shows that there is
no unilateral solution, as the appropriate selection of effective retrofit strategies takes into account
parameters such as cost, duration, technical aspects, architectural needs, etc.
12 2017 Said Elias∗ , Research developments in
Literature survey:
effectively works when frequency of TMD matches to that of the frequency of the structure. Generally placed at
Vasant Matsagar vibration control of the top of the structue.
structures using passive
tuned mass dampers

13 2019 Melda Yucela , Estimation of optimum more suitable for tall structures, most effective position to place TMD is at the top of structures since maximum
Gebrail Bekdaşa,* tuned mass damper mode shape is at top of the structure withoust base isolation and for base isolation below the base isolation
, Sinan Melih parameters via machine since displacement demand induced by earthquake is concentrated there.
Nigdelia , Selcuk learning
Sevgenb

14 2018 Saman Bagheri⁎ , Seismic response control This device consists of a mass, a spring and a viscous damper which all should be selected properly according to
Vahid Rahmani- with inelastic tuned mass the properties of the main system and the applied loads. Because of its simple and reliable implementation, TMD
Dabbagh dampers has been widely used and studied. Effectiveness of TMDs depends on their properties, such as mass ratio,
frequency and damping ratios, hence various studies have been carried out to obtain the optimal parameters of
these devices

15 2010 Giuseppe Carlo A comparison between TMD optimization is governed by the frequency and damping ratio of TMD whereas mass ratio of TMD to
Marano a,n , Rita different optimization structure is predetermined.
Greco b , criteria for tuned mass
Bernardino Chiaia dampers design
c

16 2013 Hernán Garrido, Improvement of tuned mass The working principle of all types of TMDs consists of transferring the vibration energy of the primary structure
Oscar Curadelli, damper by using rotational to an auxiliary mass-spring system (i.e., a TMD) in order to effectively dissipate the energy into a suitable damper.
Daniel Ambrosini inertia through tuned In the case of a traditional TMD, that damper is a linear viscous damper. However, other types of dampers can be
⇑ viscous mass damper used.
 Literature survey:
17 2023 Raja Dilawar Riaz 1 , Enhancing Seismic Resilience The study compares the seismic performance of an existing building with and without dampers using non-
Umair Jalil Malik 1 , Mati of Existing Reinforced linear dynamic analysis. The results show that adding non-linear fluid viscous dampers significantly improves
Ullah Shah 1,* , Concrete Building Using Non- the vibration performance of the system against undesired vibrations.
Muhammad Usman 1,* Linear Viscous Dampers: A
and Fawad Ahmed Najam Comparative Study
1,2

18 2021 Charbel Mrad 1 ,
Magdalini D. Titirla 2,*
and Walid Larbi 2
Comparison of Strengthening
Solutions with Optimized
Passive Energy Dissipation
Systems in Symmetric
Buildings
The study found that the tuned mass damper (TMD) system is effective for tall and flexible structures, while
the viscous dampers (VDs) provide significant reduction for mid-rise buildings. Friction dampers (FDs) are
more suitable for low-rise buildings and improve the performance of all structures under seismic action,
especially in terms of displacement. The study also found that the response of the pendulum TMD
configuration is better than the conventional one because it acts in all directions.

19 2004 Avtar PALL1 and R. Tina PERFORMANCE-BASED The use of Pall Friction Dampers has shown to provide a practical, economical and effective approach for the
PALL DESIGN USING PALL FRICTION performance-based design of new and retrofit of existing structures to resist major earthquakes. The low cost
DAMPERS - AN ECONOMICAL and maintenance free characteristics of Pall Friction Dampers suggest wide application.
DESIGN SOLUTION

20 2019 Farshad Taiyaria,1 ,
Federico M. Mazzolanib ,
Saman Bagheria,⁎
Damage-based optimal design
of friction dampers in
multistory chevron braced
steel frames
The results of the analyses show that the largest damage probability in each structural model corresponds to
the case with the higher slip force and the lower stiffness ratio, where the undesirable buckling failure will
govern before full activation of friction damper. For the three considered building frames, the optimal range
of slip force lies between 40% and 55% of the total weight of structures and the recommended value for
stiffness ratio is 2.
 Literature review:
Reference Category Load (kN) Displacement (mm) Shape Size of specimen

[25] EBF 360 30 pinched, flat, quadrilateral e=400mm with two stiffeners, flange width(b f)=220mm, web
height(h)=240mm, thickness of web (t w)=6mm

[2] FVD 160 1.2 narrow, elliptical Cd=25MNs/m, damping=100%, bracing=diagonal (L120*13
Angle)

[26] FD 14.5 6.7 rectangle slip load= 45kN, cross bracing

[27] P-TMD 14.75 270 narrow, elliptical mass of damper=658.7-ton, mass ratio= 1.25%, stiffness of
damper= 526.75kN/m, coefficient of damping (Cd)= 59.73
kNs/m

[5] X-braced CBF 250 36.28 narrow, quadrilateral, HS 32*32*3, square tube with 3mm thickness
pinched
[29] EBF 750 40 pinched, quadrilateral, flat H225*125*6*10

[10] FD 30 7.62 rectangle slip load= 11.5kips-4.8kips

[30] EBF 600 35 pinched, quadrilateral, flat HEA 280, L=300mm

[20] SPSW 55 2.8 pinched, narrow, thickness= 0.83mm

quadrilateral
[20] SPSW 80 2.8 pinched, flat, quadrilateral thickness= 1.23mm
[28] SPSW 2400 95 flat, quadrilateral, pinched thickness= 4mm
 Research gap:

 Comparative study of hysteretic energy dissipation among steel bracing, FVD, FD,
TMD, and SPSW.
 Expected outcomes:

 The expected outcome from this paper is to determine the most efficient system for
hysteresis energy dissipation among bracings, FVD, FD, TMD, and SPSW.
 References:
[1] D. M. Patil and K. K. Sangle, “Seismic Behaviour of Different Bracing Systems in High Rise 2-D Steel Buildings,”
Structures, vol. 3, pp. 282–305, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2015.06.004.
[2] A. Ras and N. Boumechra, “Seismic energy dissipation study of linear fluid viscous dampers in steel structure design,”
Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 2821–2832, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2016.07.012.
[3] S. Kazemzadeh Azad and C. Topkaya, “A review of research on steel eccentrically braced frames,” J. Constr. Steel Res., vol.
128, pp. 53–73, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.07.032.
[4] R. Sabelli, C. W. Roeder, and J. F. Hajjar, “Seismic Design of Steel Special Concentrically Braced Frame Systems A Guide
for Practicing Engineers,” no. 8, pp. 1–36, 2013.
[5] C. D. Annan, M. A. Youssef, and M. H. El Naggar, “Experimental evaluation of the seismic performance of modular steel-
braced frames,” Eng. Struct., vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1435–1446, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.02.024.
[6] A. Pourzangbar, M. Vaezi, S. M. Mousavi, and A. Saber, “Effects of brace-viscous damper system on the dynamic response of
steel frames,” Int. J. Eng. Trans. B Appl., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 720–731, 2020, doi: 10.5829/IJE.2020.33.05B.02.
[7] C. Mrad, M. D. Titirla, and W. Larbi, “Comparison of strengthening solutions with optimized passive energy dissipation
systems in symmetric buildings,” Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 21, 2021, doi: 10.3390/app112110103.
[8] T. K. Datta, "Seismic Analysis Of Structures,"
 References:
[9] M. D. Titirla, “A State-of-the-Art Review of Passive Energy Dissipation Systems in Steel Braces,” 2023.
[10] I. D. Aiken, D. K. Nims, A. S. Whittaker, and J. M. Kelly, “Testing of passive energy dissipation systems,” Earthquake
Spectra, vol. 9, no. 3. pp. 335–370, 1993. doi: 10.1193/1.1585720.
[11] M. Armali, H. Damerji, J. Hallal, and M. Fakih, “Effectiveness of friction dampers on the seismic behavior of high rise
building VS shear wall system,” Eng. Reports, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 1–14, 2019, doi: 10.1002/eng2.12075.
[12] F. Taiyari, F. M. Mazzolani, and S. Bagheri, “Damage-based optimal design of friction dampers in multistory chevron braced
steel frames,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 119, no. January, pp. 11–20, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.01.004.
[13] H. Moghaddam, F. Afzalinia, and I. Hajirasouliha, “Optimal distribution of friction dampers to improve the seismic
performance of steel moment resisting frames,” Structures, vol. 37, no. November 2021, pp. 624–644, 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.istruc.2022.01.007.
[14] S. Jaisee, F. Yue, and Y. H. Ooi, “A state-of-the-art review on passive friction dampers and their applications,” Eng. Struct.,
vol. 235, no. September 2020, p. 112022, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112022.
[15] A. Pall and R. T. Pall, “13 th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering PERFORMANCE-BASED DESIGN USING
PALL FRICTION DAMPERS - AN ECONOMICAL DESIGN SOLUTION .,” America (NY)., vol. 71, no. 1955, p. Paper No.
1955, 2004.
 References:
[16] S. Bagheri and V. Rahmani-Dabbagh, “Seismic response control with inelastic tuned mass dampers,” Eng. Struct., vol. 172,
no. November 2017, pp. 712–722, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.063.
[17] M. Yucel, G. Bekdaş, S. M. Nigdeli, and S. Sevgen, “Estimation of optimum tuned mass damper parameters via machine
learning,” J. Build. Eng., vol. 26, no. July, p. 100847, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100847.
[18] M. M. Murudi and S. M. Mane, “Seismic Effectiveness of Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) for Different Ground Motion
Parameters,” 13 th World Conf. Earthq. Eng., no. 2, pp. 1–8, 2004.
[19] G. Carlo Marano, R. Greco, and B. Chiaia, “A comparison between different optimization criteria for tuned mass dampers
design,” J. Sound Vib., vol. 329, no. 23, pp. 4880–4890, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2010.05.015.
[20] T. M. Roberts, “Seismic resistance of steel plate shear walls,” Eng. Struct., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 344–351, 1995, doi:
10.1016/0141-0296(95)00017-2.
[21] M. Wang, W. Yang, Y. Shi, and J. Xu, “Seismic behaviors of steel plate shear wall structures with construction details and
materials,” J. Constr. Steel Res., vol. 107, pp. 194–210, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.01.007.
[22] S. Jin, H. Du, and J. Bai, “Seismic performance assessment of steel frame structures equipped with buckling-restrained slotted
steel plate shear walls,” J. Constr. Steel Res., vol. 182, p. 106699, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106699.
[23] A. Astaneh-Asl, “Steel Plate Shear Walls,” U.S.-Japan Work. Seism. Fract. issues Steel Struct., vol. 1, no. February, pp. 1–12,
2000.
 References:
[24] S. Ghosh and S. B. Kharmale, Research on steel plate shear wall: Past, present and future, no. January 2010. 2010.
[25] M. A. Shayanfar, M. A. Barkhordari, and A. R. Rezaeian, “Experimental study of cyclic behavior of composite vertical shear
link in eccentrically braced frames,” Steel Compos. Struct., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 13–29, 2012, doi: 10.12989/scs.2012.12.1.013.
[26] S. Cherry and A. Filiatrault, “Seismic response control of buildings using friction dampers,” Earthquake Spectra, vol. 9, no. 3.
pp. 447–466, 1993. doi: 10.1193/1.1585724.
[27] Y. A. Lai, C. S. W. Yang, K. H. Lien, L. L. Chung, and L. Y. Wu, “Suspension-type tuned mass dampers with varying
pendulum length to dissipate energy,” Struct. Control Heal. Monit., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1218–1236, 2016, doi:
10.1002/stc.1834.
[28] H.-G. Park, J.-H. Kwack, S.-W. Jeon, W.-K. Kim, and I.-R. Choi, “Framed Steel Plate Wall Behavior under Cyclic Lateral
Loading,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 133, no. 3, pp. 378–388, 2007, doi: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2007)133:3(378).
[29] M. Lian, M. Su, and Y. Guo, “Seismic performance of eccentrically braced frames with high strength steel combination,”
Steel Compos. Struct., vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1517–1539, 2015, doi: 10.12989/scs.2015.18.6.1517.
[30] S. R. Massah and H. Dorvar, “Design and analysis of eccentrically braced steel frames with vertical links using shape memory
alloys,” Smart Mater. Struct., vol. 23, no. 11, 2014, doi: 10.1088/0964-1726/23/11/115015.
Thank You