Seismic performance of X-Braced Frame with Rubber-Fuse Damper (XBF-RFD)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Structural Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran

Abstract

As one of the most common lateral load-resisting systems, X-braced Frames have low energy dissipation. In this study, performance of a new energy dissipation system in X-brace frames (XBFs), which can be thought of as a passive control system, is investigated. The Rubber-Fuse Damper (RFD) is a new damper with a rubber core, steel plates, adhesive, and four bolts. The use of a rubber core for energy dissipation is a key feature of the damper's. The monotonic and cyclic behavior of a single-span and single-story XBF with varying frame height-to-span ratios equipped with the proposed RFD is investigated using finite element modeling and validated with experimental data. The RFD is either single or in pairs in each XBF specimen. In addition, the ductile damage method (DDM) revealed damage to the main structural components, such as bracing members. The results revealed that X-braced frames with single and double rubber-fuse dampers (XBF-RFDs) performed better under cyclic and monotonic loading than X-braced frames without rubber-fuse dampers (XBFs). Furthermore, because the bracing members did not buckle in the XBF-RFD specimens, there was no rapid loss in the stiffness and strength of the X-braced frames.
The monotonic loading reduced the stiffness of the XBF-RFD specimens by 93% to 98% to XBF specimens at various height-to-span ratios. In comparison to the XBF specimens, the yield and ultimate base shear of the XBF-RFD specimens dropped as well, with the highest reductions of 91% and 82%, respectively. When compared to XBF specimens under monotonic loading, the reduction in base shear and stiffness avoided buckling, resulting in more stable behavior and smaller nonlinear deformations of the XBF-RFD specimens.
Furthermore, the XBF-RFD specimens showed no sudden stiffness or strength drop. The results of the cyclic loading of the XBF-RFD specimens demonstrated that no rapid drop in stiffness or strength was detected due to no buckling of the bracing members under the cyclic loading, as was the case with the monotonic loading. Additionally, in comparison to the XBF specimens, the drifts corresponding to the first plastic hinges of the XBF-RFD specimens show that the bracing members experienced nonlinear deformation at greater drifts, with the plastic hinges created in them at bigger displacements.
The RFD also reduced Von Mises stress and damage in the bracing members of the XBF-RFD specimens, according to the cyclic loading results. At height to span ratios of 0.5, 1, and 1.5, the ultimate Von Mises stress reduction in the bracing members was 26%, 42%, and 36%, respectively, and this decrease was a reason to prevent the buckling phenomenon. Unlike the XBF specimens, which lost seismic functionality at low drifts, the XBF-RFD specimens maintained their seismic functionality up to a 4% drift of the cyclic loading, and they dissipated a greater quantity of energy.

Keywords

References

  1. Soong, T. and Spencer Jr, B. (2002) Supplemental energy dissipation: state-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice, Engineering Structures, 24(3), 243-259.
  2. Fisco, N. and Adeli, H. (2011) Smart structures: part I—active and semi-active control. Scientia Iranica, 18(3), 275-284.
  3. Symans et al. (2008) Energy dissipation systems for seismic applications: current practice and recent developments, Journal of Structural Engineering, 134(1), 3-21.
  4. Parulekar Y. and Reddy, G. (2009) Passive response control systems for seismic response reduction: A state-of-the-art review, International Journal of Structural Stability and Dynamics, 9(01), 151-177.
  5. Umachagi, V., Venkataramana, K., Reddy, G., and Verma, R. (2013) Applications of dampers for vibration control of structures: an overview. J. Res. Eng. Technol., 6-11.
  6. Mahmoodi, P. (1969) Structural dampers. Journal of the Structural Division, 95(8), 1661-1672.
  7. Soong, T.T. and Dargush, G.F. (1997) Passive Energy Dissipation Systems in Structural En-gineering. Wiley.
  8. Zhang, R.H., Soong, T., and Mahmoodi, P. (1989) Seismic response of steel frame structures with added viscoelastic dampers. Earthquake En-gineering & Structural Dynamics, 18(3), 389-396.
  9. Chang, K., Chen, S., and Lai, M. (1996) Inelastic behavior of steel frames with added viscoelastic dampers. Journal of Structural Engineering, 122(10), 1178-1186.
  10. Zhang, L., Su, M., Zhang, , Shen, H., Islam, M.M., and Zhang, R.A. (2019) Design method of viscoelastic damper parameters based on the elastic-plastic response reduction curve. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 117, 149-163.
  11. Ramakrishna, U. and Mohan, S. (2020) Performance of low-cost viscoelastic damper for coupling adjacent structures subjected dynamic loads, Materials Today: Proceedings, 28, 1024-1029.
  12. Huang, X.-H., He, Z.-F., and Xu, Y.-S. (2019) A Two-Step Transformation Approach for ESS Model of Viscoelastic Material to Time Domain, (in English). Frontiers in Materials, Original Research vol. 6, 2019-May-14.
  13. Modhej, A. and Zahrai, S.M. (2021) Numerical study of visco-hyperelastic damper with high axial damping rubber subjected to harmonic loading. Structures, 29, 1550-1561.
  14. Kelly, J.M., Skinner, R., and Heine, A. (1972) Mechanisms of energy absorption in special devices for use in earthquake resistant structures. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 5(3), 63-88.
  15. Aiken, I.D., Kelly, J., and Pall, A. (1988) Seismic Response of a nine-story steel frame with friction damped cross-bracing, Report No. UCB/EERC-88/171988.
  16. Chandra, R., Masand, M., Nandi, S., Tripathi, C., Pall, R., and Pall, A. (2000) Friction-dampers for seismic control of La Gardenia towers south city, Gurgaon, India. 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.
  17. Mualla, I.H. (2000) Parameters influencing the behavior of a new friction damper device. in Smart Structures and Materials 2000: Smart Systems for Bridges, Structures, and Highways, 3988, 64-74, International Society for Optics and Photonics.
  18. Pardo-Varela, J. and De la Llera, J. (2015) A semi‐active piezoelectric friction damper, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 44(3), 333-354.
  19. Bagheri, S., Barghian, M., Saieri, F., and Farzinfar, A. (2015) U-shaped metallic-yielding damper in building structures: Seismic behavior and comparison with a friction damper, in Structures, 3, 163-171: Elsevier.
  20. Lu, L.-Y., Lin, T.-K., Jheng, R.-J., and Wu, H.-H. (2018) Theoretical and experimental investigation of position-controlled semi-active friction damper for seismic structures. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 412, 184-206.
  21. Ghorbani, H.R. and Rofooei, F.R. (2020) A novel double slip loads friction damper to control the seismic response of structures. Engineering Structures, 225, p. 111273.
  22. Butterworth, J. and Clifton, G. (2000) Performance of hierarchical friction dissipating joints in moment resisting steel frames. Proceedings of 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
  23. Hu, S., Zeng, S., Xiong, J., Wang, X., Zhou, Q., and Xiong, X. (2020) Seismic Analysis and Evaluation of Y-shaped EBF with an Innovative SSL-SSBC. International Journal of Steel Structures, 20(3), 1026-1039.
  24. Xia, C. and Hanson, R.D. (1992) Influence of ADAS element parameters on building seismic response. Journal of Structural Engineering, 118(7), 1903-1918.
  25. Mohammadi, R.K., Nasri, A., and Ghaffary, A. (2017) TADAS dampers in very large deformations. International Journal of Steel Structures, 17(2), 515-524.
  26. Saghafi, M.H., Golafshar, A., Yahyaee, A., and Zareian, M.S. (2019) Analytical assessment of reinforced concrete frames equipped with TADAS dampers. Journal of Rehabilitation in Civil Engineering, 7(2), 138-151.
  27. Aghlara, R. and Tahir, M.M. (2018) A passive metallic damper with replaceable steel bar components for earthquake protection of structures. Engineering Structures, 159, 185-197.
  28. Aghlara, R., Tahir, M.M., and Adnan, A.B. (2018) Experimental study of Pipe-Fuse Damper for passive energy dissipation in structures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 148, 351-360.
  29. Bastami, M. and Jazany, R.A. (2018) Development of eccentrically interconnected braced frame (EIC-BF) for seismic regions, Thin-Walled Structures, 1, 451-463.
  30. Bastami, M., Jazany, R.A., and Mohamadi, A. (2019) Study of the seismic performance of Centrically Fused Braced Frame (CFBF), Thin-Walled Structures, 145, 106401.
  31. Araújo, H., Machado, J., Marques, E., and Da Silva, L. (2017) Dynamic behaviour of composite adhesive joints for the automotive industry. Composite Structures, 171, 549-561.
  32. S.G. ABAQUS and T. Manual, Ver. 6.8, ABAQUS, Inc., Providence, RI, 2008.
  33. AISC, Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings, ed: Chicago, 2010.
  34. Ma, X., Borchers, E., Pena, A., Krawinkler, H., Billington, S., and Deierlein, G. (2010) Design and behavior of steel shear plates with openings as energy-dissipating fuses. John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Technical Report, (173).
  35. Askariani, S.S., Garivani, S., and Aghakouchak, A.A. (2020) Application of slit link beam in eccentrically braced frames. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 170, 106094.
  36. Ogden, R.W. (1997) Non-linear elastic deformations. Courier Corporation.
  37. Muhr, A. (2005) Modeling the stress-strain behavior of rubber. Rubber Chemistry and Technology, 78(3), 391-425.
  38. Doudoumis, I., Gravalas, F., and Doudoumis, N. (2005) Analytical modeling of elastomeric lead-rubber bearings with the use of finite element micromodels. Proceedings of GRACM 05, 10(3), 143.
  39. Arruda, E.M. and Boyce, M.C. (1993) A three-dimensional constitutive model for the large stretch behavior of rubber elastic materials. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 41(2), 389-412.
  40. Saedniya, M. and Talaeitaba, S.B. (2019) Numerical modeling of elastomeric seismic isolators for determining force–displacement curve from cyclic loading. International Journal of Advanced Structural Engineering, 11(3), 361-376.
  41. Abe, M., Yoshida, J., and Fujino, Y. (2004) Multiaxial behaviors of laminated rubber bearings and their modeling. I: Experimental study. Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(8), 1119-1132.
  42. Celik, O.C., Berman, J.W. and Bruneau, M. (2005) Cyclic testing of braces laterally restrained by steel studs. Journal of Structural Engineering, 131(7), 1114-1124.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 24 April 2022
  • Revise Date: 06 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 17 July 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics