Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hybrid Simulation Tests of a Soft Storey Frame Building Upgraded with a Buckling-Restrained Brace (BRB)

  • Research paper
  • Published:
Experimental Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Hybrid simulation (HS) is an experimental technique possessing advantages over other testing methods and, in several cases, it is the only available method to test structural systems with reliability. In this paper, HS is used to assess the effects of upgrading a soft-storey frame building using a Buckling-Restrained Brace (BRB). This topic is of paramount significance in seismic regions like Mexico, where more than 40 structures collapsed and thousands resulted with different levels of damage during the September 19, 2017 Mw 7.1 Earthquake. Unfortunately, one of the still-remaining challenges in many seismic countries is the use of seismic protective technologies (SPT) that help to mitigate damages in structures. With the aim of encouraging the use of SPT, this paper presents the results of an experimental program that shows the effectivity of buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) to improve safety and reduce damages in structures with one of the most typical causes of failure, i.e. the soft storey problem. A reinforced concrete five-storey frame building was selected first. Then, a numerical 2D model of the structure was subjected to nonlinear dynamic analyses using several earthquake ground motions. In many analyses, collapse was observed in the structure model. After that, the model was upgraded by introducing a BRB in the soft storey. HS was used to assess the performance of the upgraded structure under severe earthquake action. While the frame building was modelled numerically, the BRB was tested physically. The tests were repeated using a conventional brace instead of the BRB. The results show that introducing the BRB in the soft storey was an effective measure to improve the structure performance under seismic loading; while the disadvantages of the conventional brace were exposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26
Fig. 27
Fig. 28

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nakata N, Dyke SJ, Zhang J, Mosqueda G, Shao X, Mahmoud H et al. (2014) Hybrid simulation primer and dictionary. George E Brown, Jr Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation

  2. Schellenberg AH, Mahin SA, Fenves GL (2009) Advanced implementation of hybrid simulation. Center PEER, editor. University of California, Berkeley, In

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wang T, Mosqueda G, Jacobsen A, Cortes-Delgado M (2012) Performance evaluation of a distributed hybrid test framework to reproduce the collapse behavior of a structure. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 41:295–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mahmoud Hussam N, Elnashai Amr S, Spencer Billie F, Kwon O-S, Bennier DJ (2013) Hybrid simulation for earthquake response of Semirigid partial-strength steel frames. J Struct Eng 139:1134–1148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shing P-SB, Mahin SA (1984) Pseudodynamic test method for seismic performance evaluation: theory and implementation. University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mosqueda G, Stojadinovic B, Mahin S (2005) Implementation and accuracy of continuous hybrid simulation with geographically distributed substructures. University of California, Berkeley, Earthquake Engineering Research Center

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galvis F, Miranda E, Heresi P, Dávalos H, Silos JR (2017) Preliminary statistics of collapsed buildings in Mexico City in the September 19, 2017 Puebla-Morelos earthquake. Engineering. DoCaE, editor. John A Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Stanford University, In

    Google Scholar 

  8. CICM. The 19/Sep/2017 Puebla-Morelos Earthquake (in Spanish). https://www.sismosmexico.org/. 2017

  9. Della Corte G, D’Aniello M, Landolfo R (2015) Field testing of all-steel buckling-restrained braces applied to a damaged reinforced concrete building. J Struct Eng 141:D4014004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Terán-Gilmore A, Ruiz-García J (2011) Comparative seismic performance of steel frames retrofitted with buckling-restrained braces through the application of force-based and displacement-based approaches. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31:478–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Guerrero H, Ji T, Escobar JA (2016) On the upgrading of hospitals in Mexico City by using buckling-restrained braces. Geotechnical and Structural Engineering Congress 2016 . p. 299–313

  12. Uang C-M, Nakashima M (2004) Steel buckling-restrained braced frames. In: Bozorgnia Y, Bertero VV, editors. Earthquake engineering from engineering seismology to Performance-Based Engineering: CRC Press

  13. Atlayan O, Charney FA (2014) Hybrid buckling-restrained braced frames. J Constr Steel Res 96:95–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Andrews BM, Fahnestock LA, Song J (2009) Ductility capacity models for buckling-restrained braces. J Constr Steel Res 65:1712–1720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ariyaratana C, Fahnestock LA (2011) Evaluation of buckling-restrained braced frame seismic performance considering reserve strength. Eng Struct 33:77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sabelli R, Mahin S, Chang C (2003) Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces. Eng Struct 25:655–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Terán-Gilmore A, Ruiz-García J, Bojórquez-Mora E (2015) Flexible frames as self-centering mechanism for buildings having buckling-restrained braces. J Earthqu Eng. 19:978–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Montiel M, Teran-Gilmore A (2011) Comparative reliability of two 24-storey braced buildings: traditional versus innovative. Struct Design Tall Spec Build

  19. Merrit S, Uang C-M, Benzoni G (2003) Subassemblage testing of Corebrace buckling-restrained braces. University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tremblay R, Bolduc P, Neville R, DeVall R (2006) Seismic testing and performance of buckling-restrained bracing systems. Can J Civ Eng 33:183–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Black C, Makris N, Aiken I (2002) Component Testing, Stability Analysis and Characterization of Buckling-Restrained Unbonded Braces. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center

  22. Fahnestock L, Ricles J, Sause R (2007) Experimental evaluation of a large-scale buckling-restrained braced frame. J Struct Eng 133:1205–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Vargas R, Bruneau M (2009) Experimental response of buildings designed with metallic structural fuses. II J Struct Eng-ASCE 135:394–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lin YY, Tsai MH, Hwang JS, Chang KC (2003) Direct displacement-based design for building with passive energy dissipation systems. Eng Struct 25:25–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim J, Seo Y (2004) Seismic design of low-rise steel frames with buckling-restrained braces. Eng Struct 26:543–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Maley TJ, Sullivan TJ, Della CG (2010) Development of a displacement-based design method for steel dual systems with buckling-restrained braces and moment-resisting frames. J Earthqu Eng 14:106–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sutcu F, Takeuchi T, Matsui R (2014) Seismic retrofit design method for RC buildings using buckling-restrained braces and steel frames. J Constr Steel Res 101:304–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Guerrero H (2016) Seismic design and performance of hospital structures equipped with buckling-restrained braces in the Lakebed Zone of Mexico City. PhD Thesis, The University of Manchester, UK

  29. RCDF (1976) Mexico City building code and its complementary norms for seimic design. Mexico City, Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  30. Esteva L (1987) Earthquake engineering research and practice in Mexico after the 1985 earthquakes. Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Wairakei

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. NBS. Engineering Aspects of the September 19, 1985 Mexico Earthquake. Department of Commerce. National Bureau of Standards. Series 165. Maryland. 1987

  32. Meli R. Evaluation of performance of concrete buildings damaged by the September 19, 1985 Mexico Earthquake. In International Conference on the Mexico Earthquakes - 1985: Factors Involved and Lessons Learned American Society of Civil Engineers Mexico City 1986

  33. Kersting RA, Fahnestock LA, López WA. Seismic design of steel buckling-restrained braced frames. NIST GCR 15-917-342015

  34. Opensees. Open Source finite element platform for earthquake engineering simulations. Univ. of California, Berkeley: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Center; 2014

  35. Spacone E, Ciampi V, Filippou FC. A Beam Element for Seismic Damage Analysis. Report No. UCB/EERC-92/07. Earthquake Engineering Research Center, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley. 1992

  36. Spacone E, Filippou FC, Taucer F (1996) Fibre beam-column model for non-linear analysis of R/C frames: part 11. Applications Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 25:727–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Uriz P, Filippou FC, Mahin S (2008) Model for cyclic inelastic buckling of steel braces. J Struct Eng 134(4):619–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Guerrero H, Terán-Gilmore A, Ji T, Escobar JA (2017) Evaluation of the economic benefits of using buckling-restrained braces in hospital structures located in very soft soils. Eng Struct 136:406–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. FEMA-P58. Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency; 2012

  40. RCDF (2017) Mexico City building code and its complementary specifications. Mexico City, Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chen C, Ricles JM, Karavasilis TL, Chae Y, Sausem R (2012) Evaluation of a real-time hybrid simulation system for performance evaluation of structures with rate dependent devices subjected to seismic loading. Eng Struct 35:71–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Nakata N, Dyke SJ, Zhang J, Mosqueda G, Shao X, Mahmoud H, Head MH, Bletzinger ME, Marshall GA, Ou G, and Song C. Hybrid simulation primer and dictionary. George E. Brown, Jr Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation

  43. Hashemi MJ, Mosqueda G (2014) Innovative substructuring technique for hybrid simulation of multistorey buildings through collapse. Earthquake Engng Struct Dyn 43:2059–2074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Schellenberg A, Kim HK, Takahashi Y, Fenves GL, Mahin SA (2009) OpenFresco framework for hybrid simulation: installation and getting started manual. University of California, Berkeley, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

    Google Scholar 

  45. Schellenberg A, Kim HK, Takahashi Y, Fenves GL, Mahin SA (2009) OpenFresco command language manual. University of California, Berkeley, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

    Google Scholar 

  46. Combescure D, Pegon P (1997) Alpha-operator splitting time integration technique for Pseudodynamic testing error propagation analysis. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 16(7–8):427–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Priestley MJN, Calvi GM, Kowalsky MJ (2007) Displacement-based design of structures. Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  48. Jia L-J, Ge H, Maruyama R, Shinohara K (2017) Development of a novel high-performance all-steel fish-bone shaped buckling-restrained brace. Eng Struct 138:105–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Garcia JE (2020) Experimental characterization of a low-cost Buckling-Retrained Brace (in Spanish). MSc Thesis. Institute of Engineering, UNAM. Mexico

  50. Miranda E, Ruiz-Garcia J (2002) Influence of stiffness degradation on strength demands of structures built on soft soil sites. Eng Struct 24:1271–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Black GR, Wenger BA, Popov EP (1980) Inelastic buckling of steel struts under cyclic load reversals. UCB/EERC-80/40, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, California

  52. ASCE/SEI 41–17. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. Structural Engineering Institute. American Society of Civil Engineers. Reston, Virginia. 2017

  53. MTS. MTS Landmark® Test system operation. Using MTS FlexTest® Controller Software and MTS TestSuite® MPX Testing Software. MTS Systems Corporation. 2015

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges the founding and facilities provided by DGAPA-UNAM and the Institute of Engineering, UNAM.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

    H. Guerrero

  2. Department of Structures and Materials, Universidad Autónoma, Metropolitana, Mexico

    A. Teran-Gilmore

  3. Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

    E. Zamora

  4. Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

    J.A. Escobar

  5. Institute of Engineering, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico

    R. Gómez

Authors
  1. H. Guerrero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Teran-Gilmore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Zamora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J.A. Escobar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Guerrero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guerrero, H., Teran-Gilmore, A., Zamora, E. et al. Hybrid Simulation Tests of a Soft Storey Frame Building Upgraded with a Buckling-Restrained Brace (BRB). Exp Tech 44, 553–572 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-020-00378-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-020-00378-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation