Hysteretic behavior of cambered surface steel tube damper: Theoretical and experimental research

doi:10.1007/s11709-023-0925-6

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.

2023, Vol. 17

Issue (4) : 606-624 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-023-0925-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Hysteretic behavior of cambered surface steel tube damper: Theoretical and experimental research

Jiale LI¹, Yun ZHOU¹(

), Zhiming HE¹, Genquan ZHONG², Chao ZHANG¹

¹. Department of Civil Engineering, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China
². Department of Civil & Transportation Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China

Download: PDF(16361 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

A novel cambered surface steel tube damper (CSTD) with a cambered surface steel tube and two concave connecting plates is proposed herein. The steel tube is the main energy dissipation component and comprises a weakened segment in the middle, a transition segment, and an embedded segment. It is believed that during an earthquake, the middle weakened segment of the CSTD will be damaged, whereas the reliability of the end connection is ensured. Theoretical and experimental studies are conducted to verify the effectiveness of the proposed CSTD. Formulas for the initial stiffness and yield force of the CSTD are proposed. Subsequently, two CSTD specimens with different steel tube thicknesses are fabricated and tested under cyclic quasi-static loads. The result shows that the CSTD yields a stable hysteretic response and affords excellent energy dissipation. A parametric study is conducted to investigate the effects of the steel tube height, diameter, and thickness on the seismic performance of the CSTD. Compared with equal-stiffness design steel tube dampers, the CSTD exhibits better energy dissipation performance, more stable hysteretic response, and better uniformity in plastic deformation distributions.

Keywords cambered surface steel tube damper energy dissipation capacity finite element model hysteretic performance parametric study

Corresponding Author(s): Yun ZHOU

About author:

^* These authors contributed equally to this work.

Just Accepted Date: 10 February 2023 Online First Date: 09 May 2023 Issue Date: 25 June 2023

Cite this article:

Jiale LI,Yun ZHOU,Zhiming HE, et al. Hysteretic behavior of cambered surface steel tube damper: Theoretical and experimental research[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2023, 17(4): 606-624.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-023-0925-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2023/V17/I4/606

Fig.1 CSTD processing.

Fig.2 Cambered surface steel tube damper.

Fig.3 Application scenarios of the proposed CSTD: (a) wall piers type; (b) chevron bracing type; (c) eccentrically braced structural systems; (d) coupling beams of reinforced concrete shear walls.

Fig.4 Deformation mechanism.

Fig.5 Computational diagram and positioning coordinates: (a) dimensions; (b) cross-section size; (c) stress state of the micro-unit; (d) section width of the steel tube.

Fig.6 Distribution diagram of shear force and bending moment.

Tab.1 Dimensions of the test specimens (unit: mm)

Tab.2 Properties of steel tube material

Fig.7 Test setup.

Fig.8 Loading protocol.

Fig.9 Measuring plan: (a) side strain gauge; (b) displacement measurement and strain gauge layout; (c) front strain gauge.

Fig.10 Hysteresis curve: (a) CSTD-1; (b) CSTD-2.

Fig.11 Skeleton and stiffness curves: (a) skeleton curves; (b) stiffness curves.

specimen	$K 1 T$	$K 1 C$	$K 1 T / K 1 C$	$F y T$	$F y C$	$F y T / F y C$
CSTD-1	186.26	193.91	0.9605	179.88	164.31	1.0948
CSTD-2	164.36	180.28	0.9117	147.14	143.64	1.0244

Tab.3 Comparison between calculated and test results

Fig.12 Definition of the equivalent viscous damping ratio.

Fig.13 Energy dissipation ability of the specimens: (a) equivalent viscous damping ratio; (b) cumulative dissipated energy.

Fig.14 Strain gauge results vs. horizontal displacement of the specimens: (a) CSTD-1; (b) CSTD-2.

Fig.15 Typical experimental phenomena: (a) typical experimental phenomena of CSTD-1 during loading; (b) typical experimental phenomena of CSTD-2 during loading.

Fig.16 Final failure modes of dampers: (a) CSTD-1; (b) CSTD-2.

Fig.17 Finite element modeling of CSTD under cyclic load.

$σ \| 0 (M P a)$	$C 1 (M P a)$	$γ 1$	$C 2 (M P a)$	$γ 2$	$C 3 (M P a)$	$γ 3$	$Q ∞ (M P a)$	$b (M P a)$
281.25	20000	200	3000	5	5000	30	100	10

Tab.4 Parameters of combined hardening model

Fig.18 Test and simulation comparison: (a) CSTD-1 test and simulation comparison; (b) CSTD-2 test and simulation comparison.

Fig.19 von Mises stress and buckling displacement at loading displacement of 16 mm: (a) CSTD-1; (b) CSTD-2.

Tab.5 Dimensions of CSTD for parametric analysis

Fig.20 1 ? t₀/t₁ analysis result: (a) envelope curve; (b) PEEQ curve.

Fig.21 H_w/D analysis result: (a) envelope curve; (b) PEEQ curve.

Fig.22 D/t₀ analysis result: (a) envelope curve; (b) PEEQ curve.

specimen	ratio	$K 1 F (k N / m m)$	$K 1 C (k N / m m)$	$K 1 F / K 1 C$	$F y F (k N)$	$F y C (k N)$	$F y F / F y C$
1 ? t₀/t₁	0.2	273.77	286.43	0.9558	285.02	261.19	1.0912
	0.3	273.70	268.61	1.0190	280.08	261.19	1.0723
	0.4	255.82	249.43	1.0256	253.25	238.62	1.0613
	0.5	235.88	228.55	1.0320	210.41	196.62	1.0701
	0.6	213.27	205.46	1.0380	164.86	155.52	1.0601
	0.7	187.02	179.23	1.0435	128.14	115.30	1.1113
	0.8	155.21	148.09	1.0480	87.71	75.98	1.1544
H_w/D	1.8	423.38	407.25	1.0396	322.99	281.50	1.1474
	2.1	337.83	328.59	1.0281	301.83	281.50	1.0722
	2.4	273.70	268.61	1.0190	280.08	261.19	1.0723
	2.7	225.18	221.92	1.0147	252.22	242.44	1.0403
	3.0	185.04	185.04	1.0000	220.30	225.62	0.9764
	3.3	155.32	155.52	0.9987	200.63	210.56	0.9528
	3.6	130.66	131.68	0.9922	168.91	197.10	0.8570
D/t₀	9.5	185.36	180.64	1.0261	180.75	188.79	0.9574
	11.9	273.70	268.61	1.0190	280.08	261.19	1.0723
	14.3	368.50	363.45	1.0139	349.71	333.44	1.0488
	16.7	465.60	461.79	1.0083	415.76	385.38	1.0788
	19.0	563.02	561.63	1.0025	460.13	437.32	1.0522
	21.4	659.89	661.82	0.9971	517.97	489.25	1.0587
	23.8	760.10	761.78	0.9978	541.24	541.19	1.0001

Tab.6 Comparison between finite element results and calculated values

Fig.23 Comparison between initial stiffness and yield force: (a) initial stiffness; (b) yield force.

specimen	H	H_w	D	t₁	t₀	H_b	t_q	$K 1 C$	$F y C$
CSTD	330	240	100	12.0	8.4	15	15	268.61	261.19
STD	330	240	100	9.5	9.5	15	15	257.40	211.44

Tab.7 Dimensions and mechanical parameters of dampers

Fig.24 PEEQ curve at the end of loading: (a) front axis PEEQ curve; (b) lateral axis PEEQ curve.

Fig.25 von Mises stress cloud at the end of loading: (a) CSTD; (b) STD.

Fig.26 Buckling displacement amplitude at the end of loading: (a) CSTD; (b) STD.

1	C C MichalakisT T SoongG F Dargush. Passive Energy Dissipation Systems for Structural Design and Retrofit. Buffalo: Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, 1998
2	T T Soong, B F Jr Spencer. Supplemental energy dissipation: State-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice. Engineering Structures, 2002, 24(3): 243–259 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00092-X
3	C C Chou, P T Chung, T H Wu, A R O Beato. Validation of a steel dual-core self-centering brace (DC-SCB) for seismic resistance: From brace member to one-story one-bay braced frame tests. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2016, 10(3): 303–311 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-016-0347-9
4	M D Symans, F A Charney, A S Whittaker, M C Constantinou, C A Kircher, M W Johnson, R J McNamara. Energy dissipation systems for seismic applications: Current practice and recent developments. Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 134(1): 3–21 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2008)134:1(3
5	A Wada, Z Qu, S Motoyui, H Sakata. Seismic retrofit of existing SRC frames using rocking walls and steel dampers. Frontiers of Architecture and Civil Engineering in China, 2011, 5(3): 259–266 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-011-0114-x
6	A Javanmardi, Z Ibrahim, K Ghaedi, H Benisi Ghadim, M U Hanif. State-of-the-art review of metallic dampers: Testing, development and implementation. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 2020, 27(2): 455–478 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09329-9
7	M M Javidan, S Chun, J Kim. Experimental study on steel hysteretic column dampers for seismic retrofit of structures. Steel and Composite Structures, 2021, 40(4): 495–509
8	M M Javidan, A Ali, J Kim. A steel hysteretic damper for seismic design and retrofit of precast portal frames. Journal of Building Engineering, 2022, 57: 104958 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104958
9	J M Kelly, R I Skinner, A J Heine. Mechanisms of energy absorption in special devices for use in earthquake resistant structures. Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 1972, 5(3): 63–88 https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.5.3.63-88
10	A S Whittaker, V V Bertero, C L Thompson, L J Alonso. Seismic testing of steel plate energy dissipation devices. Earthquake Spectra, 1991, 7(4): 563–604 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585644
11	M Shih, W Sung, C Go. Investigation of newly developed added damping and stiffness device with low yield strength steel. Journal of Zhejiang University—Science A, 2004, 5(3): 326–334 https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.2004.0326
12	A Farzampour, M R Eatherton. Parametric computational study on butterfly-shaped hysteretic dampers. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2019, 13(5): 1214–1226 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0550-6
13	M H ShihW P Sung. A model for hysteretic behavior of rhombic low yield strength steel added damping and stiffness. Computers & Structures, 2005, 83(12–13): 895–908
14	K C Tsai, H W Chen, C P Hong, Y F Su. Design of steel triangular plate energy absorbers for seismic-resistant construction. Earthquake Spectra, 1993, 9(3): 505–528 https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1585727
15	C Xuon energy dissipation Studymitigation performance of HADAS damper seismic. Dissertation for the Master’s degree. Shanghai: Tongji University, 2008 (in Chinese)
16	D Y AbebeS J JeongB M GetahuneD Z SeguJ H Choi. Hysteretic characteristics of shear panel damper made of low yield point steel. Materials Research Innovations, 2015, 19(S5): 902–910
17	X Lin, K Wu, K A Skalomenos, L Lu, S Zhao. Development of a buckling-restrained shear panel damper with demountable steel-concrete composite restrainers. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2019, 118: 221–230 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.12.015
18	H L Hsu, H Halim. Improving seismic performance of framed structures with steel curved dampers. Engineering Structures, 2017, 130: 99–111 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.09.063
19	P M Clayton, D M Dowden, C H Li, J W Berman, M Bruneau, L N Lowes, K C Tsai. Self-centering steel plate shear walls for improving seismic resilience. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2016, 10(3): 283–290 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-016-0344-z
20	C Zhang, Z Zhang, Q Zhang. Static and dynamic cyclic performance of a low-yield-strength steel shear panel damper. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2012, 79: 195–203 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2012.07.030
21	L Y Xu, X Nie, J S Fan. Cyclic behaviour of low-yield-point steel shear panel dampers. Engineering Structures, 2016, 126: 391–404 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.08.002
22	S Jain, D C Rai, D R Sahoo. Postyield cyclic buckling criteria for aluminum shear panels. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 2008, 75(2): 021015 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2793135
23	G de Matteis, F M Mazzolani, S Panico. Experimental tests on pure aluminium shear panels with welded stiffeners. Engineering Structures, 2008, 30(6): 1734–1744 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.11.015
24	G de Matteis, G Brando, F M Mazzolani. Hysteretic behaviour of bracing-type pure aluminium shear panels by experimental tests. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 2011, 40(10): 1143–1162 https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.1079
25	D R Sahoo, T Singhal, S S Taraithia, A Saini. Cyclic behavior of shear-and-flexural yielding metallic dampers. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2015, 114: 247–257 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.08.006
26	M M Javidan, M S E Nasab, J Kim. Full-scale tests of two-story RC frames retrofitted with steel plate multi-slit dampers. Steel and Composite Structures, 2021, 39(5): 645–664
27	R W Chan, F Albermani. Experimental study of steel slit damper for passive energy dissipation. Engineering Structures, 2008, 30(4): 1058–1066 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.005
28	H Tagawa, T Yamanishi, A Takaki, R W Chan. Cyclic behavior of seesaw energy dissipation system with steel slit dampers. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2016, 117: 24–34 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2015.09.014
29	E Gandelli, S Chernyshov, J Distl, P Dubini, F Weber, A Taras. Novel adaptive hysteretic damper for enhanced seismic protection of braced buildings. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2021, 141: 106522 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106522
30	S MalekiS Bagheri. Pipe damper, Part I: Experimental and analytical study. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2010, 66(8−9): 1088−1095
31	S MalekiS Bagheri. Pipe damper, Part II: Application to bridges. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2010, 66(8−9): 1096−1106
32	S Maleki, S Mahjoubi. Dual-pipe damper. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2013, 85: 81–91 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.03.004
33	S Maleki, S Mahjoubi. Infilled-pipe damper. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 98: 45–58 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.02.015
34	W Guo, X Wang, Y Yu, X Chen, S Li, W Fang, C Zeng, Y Wang, D Bu. Experimental study of a steel damper with X-shaped welded pipe halves. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2020, 170: 106087 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2020.106087
35	W Guo, X Chen, Y Yu, D Bu, S Li, W Fang, X Wang, C Zeng, Y Wang. Development and seismic performance of bolted steel dampers with X-shaped pipe halves. Engineering Structures, 2021, 239: 112327 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112327
36	D Y AbebeJ W KimJ H Choi. Hysteresis characteristics of circular pipe steel damper using LYP225. In: Proceedings of the Steel Innovation Conference 2013. Auckland: Steel Construction New Zealand, 2013
37	D Y Abebe, J W Kim, G Gwak, J H Choi. Low-cycled hysteresis characteristics of circular hollow steel damper subjected to inelastic behavior. International Journal of Steel Structures, 2019, 19(1): 157–167 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13296-018-0097-8
38	H Y Park, J Kim, S Kuwahara. Cyclic behavior of shear-type hysteretic dampers with different cross-sectional shapes. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2021, 187: 106964 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106964
39	M H Lai, J C M Ho. Effect of continuous spirals on uni-axial strength and ductility of CFST columns. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2015, 104: 235–249 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.10.007
40	M H Lai, J C M Ho. Axial strengthening of thin-walled concrete-filled-steel-tube columns by circular steel jackets. Thin-walled Structures, 2015, 97: 11–21 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.09.002
41	M H Lai, J C M Ho. Confinement effect of ring-confined concrete-filled-steel-tube columns under uni-axial load. Engineering Structures, 2014, 67: 123–141 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.02.013
42	M H Lai, J C M Ho. A theoretical axial stress−strain model for circular concrete-filled-steel-tube columns. Engineering Structures, 2016, 125: 124–143 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.06.048
43	M H Lai, J C M Ho. An analysis-based model for axially loaded circular CFST columns. Thin-walled Structures, 2017, 119: 770–781 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2017.07.024
44	M H Lai, M T Chen, F M Ren, J C M Ho. Uni-axial behavior of externally confined UHSCFST columns. Thin-walled Structures, 2019, 142: 19–36 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.04.047
45	M H Lai, W Song, X L Ou, M T Chen, Q Wang, J C M Ho. A path dependent stress−strain model for concrete-filled-steel-tube column. Engineering Structures, 2020, 211: 110312 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110312
46	8162-2018 GB/T. Seamless Steel Tubes for Structural Purposes. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2018 (in Chinese)
47	M H Lai, K J Wu, X L Ou, M R Zeng, C W Li, J C M Ho. Effect of concrete wet packing density on the uni-axial strength of manufactured sand CFST columns. Structural Concrete, 2022, 23(4): 2615–2629 https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.202100280
48	J C M Ho, X L Ou, C W Li, W Song, Q Wang, M H Lai. Uni-axial behaviour of expansive CFST and DSCFST stub columns. Engineering Structures, 2021, 237: 112193 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112193
49	M H Lai, C W Li, J C M Ho, M T Chen. Experimental investigation on hollow-steel-tube columns with external confinements. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2020, 166: 105865 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105865
50	F M Ren, Y W Liang, J C M Ho, M H Lai. Behaviour of FRP tube-concrete-encased steel composite columns. Composite Structures, 2020, 241: 112139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112139
51	297-2013 JGJ. Technical Specification for Seismic Energy Dissipation of Buildings. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2013 (in Chinese)
52	101-2015 JGJ/T. Specification for Seismic Test of Buildings. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2015 (in Chinese)
53	M Guan, W Liu, M H Lai, H Du, J Cui, Y Gan. Seismic behavior of innovative composite walls with high-strength manufactured sand concrete. Engineering Structures, 2019, 195: 182–199 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.096
54	A Kalnins, J Rudolph, A Willuweit. Using the nonlinear kinematic hardening material model of Chaboche for elastic–plastic ratcheting analysis. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 2015, 137(3): 031006 https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028659
55	S Koo, J Han, K P Marimuthu, H Lee. Determination of Chaboche combined hardening parameters with dual backstress for ratcheting evaluation of AISI 52100 bearing steel. International Journal of Fatigue, 2019, 122: 152–163 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.01.009

[1]	Demewoz W. MENNA, Aikaterini S. GENIKOMSOU, Mark F. GREEN. Compressive and cyclic flexural response of double-hooked-end steel fiber reinforced concrete[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(9): 1104-1126.
[2]	Pravin Kumar Venkat Rao PADALU, Yogendra SINGH. Seismic safety evaluation methodology for masonry building and retrofitting using splint and bandage technique with wire mesh[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2022, 16(4): 478-505.
[3]	Zaid MOMANI, Eyosias BENEBERU, Nur YAZDANI. Effect of earth reinforcement, soil properties and wall properties on bridge MSE walls[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(5): 1209-1221.
[4]	Mohammad Ali NAGHSH, Aydin SHISHEGARAN, Behnam KARAMI, Timon RABCZUK, Arshia SHISHEGARAN, Hamed TAGHAVIZADEH, Mehdi MORADI. An innovative model for predicting the displacement and rotation of column-tree moment connection under fire[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2021, 15(1): 194-212.
[5]	Aydin SHISHEGARAN, Mohammad SHOKROLLAHI, Ali MIRNOROLLAHI, Arshia SHISHEGARAN, Mohammadreza MOHAMMAD KHANI. A novel ensemble model for predicting the performance of a novel vertical slot fishway[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1418-1444.
[6]	Hassan ABEDI SARVESTANI. Parametric study of hexagonal castellated beams in post-tensioned self-centering steel connections[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 1020-1035.
[7]	Mohammad HANIFEHZADEH, Bora GENCTURK. An investigation of ballistic response of reinforced and sandwich concrete panels using computational techniques[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 1120-1137.
[8]	M. Z. Naser, R. A. Hawileh. Predicting the response of continuous RC deep beams under varying levels of differential settlement[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(3): 686-700.
[9]	Saleh YAGHOOBI, Ahmad SHOOSHTARI. Joint slip investigation based on finite element modelling verified by experimental results on wind turbine lattice towers[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(3): 341-351.
[10]	Ulf Arne GIRHAMMAR, Per Johan GUSTAFSSON, Bo KÄLLSNER. Modeling of shear walls using finite shear connector elements based on continuum plasticity[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2017, 11(2): 143-157.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed