Experimental study of a new pure bending yielding dissipater

  • Hassan Zibasokhan
  • Farhad BehnamfarEmail author
  • Mojtaba Azhari
Original Research


In this paper, a new yielding dissipater device is introduced for seismic protection of concentrically braced structures. The device is fabricated by a set of transverse plates inserted in the middle of a diagonal brace. The special configuration of the new device transforms the axial force of a concentric brace to pure bending in the dissipater plates. The dissipater plates are designed to bend inelastically over their whole surface to dissipate energy. Welding is avoided in the dissipater plates and consequently the ductile behavior of steel results in a good hysteric behavior of the new device. Experimental results of sixteen specimens of the proposed dissipater device show a stable hysteretic behavior of the brace and similar behavior in tension and compression. An analytical model is developed and verified to predict the behavior of the proposed dissipater.


Pure bending yielding dissipater Steel plate Energy dissipation Cyclic behavior Diagonal braced frame Analytical model 

List of symbols


Side part length of the plates


Middle part length of the plates


Width of the plates


Overstrength factor


Modulus of elasticity


Second branch modulus


Nominal yield stress


Expected yield stress


Ultimate stress


Moment of inertia


Initial axial stiffness


Experimental initial axial stiffness


Total length of the plates


Bending moment in the middle part


Number of dissipater plates


Axial force


Axial design capacity


Axial yield strength


Axial ultimate capacity


Experimental yield strength


Experimental tensile strength


Experimental compressive strength


Experimental capacity corresponding to 80 mm displacement


Radius of curvature in middle part


Material overstrength factor


Thickness of dissipater plates


Transverse curvature constraint coefficient


Movement restriction coefficient


Coefficient for calibration of εr


Yield displacement


Experimental yield displacement


Maximum experimental displacement


Ultimate displacement


Displacement of the device


Side part displacement caused by support rotation


Side part displacement caused by deflection


Axial displacement


Slippage of the dissipater plates on the middle support


Maximum strain in the middle part


Yield strain


Strain corresponding to beginning of movement restriction


Strain corresponding to ultimate stress


Plate rotation at the middle support


Plate rotation at the middle support at 80 mm displacement


Coefficient for calibration of β


Poisson’s ratio


Angle of strain plane of the section



  1. Amiri HA, Najafabadi EP, Estekanchi HE (2018) Experimental and analytical study of block slit damper. J Constr Steel Res 141:167–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andalib Z, Kafi MA, Kheyroddin A, Bazzaz M (2014) Experimental investigation of the ductility and performance of steel rings constructed from plates. J Constr Steel Res 103:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ASTM E8-04 (2004) Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagheri S, Barghian M, Saieri F, Farzinfar A (2015) U-shaped metallic-yielding damper in building structures: seismic behavior and comparison with a friction damper. Structures 3:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banisheikholeslami A, Behnamfar F, Ghandil M (2016) A beam-to-column connection with visco-elastic and hysteretic dampers for seismic damage control. J Constr Steel Res 117:185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Black C, Makris N, Aiken I (2004) Component testing, seismic evaluation and characterization of buckling-restrained braces. J Struct Eng 130:880–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calado L, Proença JM, Espinha M, Castiglioni CA (2013) Hysteretic behaviour of dissipative bolted fuses for earthquake resistant steel frames. J Constr Steel Res 85:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chan R, Albermani F, Kitipornchai S (2013) Experimental study of perforated yielding shear panel device for passive energy dissipation. J Constr Steel Res 91:14–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheng FY, Jiang H, Lou K (2008) Smart structures: innovative systems for seismic response control. CRC Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ciampi V, Marioni A (1991) New types of energy dissipating devices for seismic protection of bridges. In: Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Joint Sealing and Bearing Sys for Concrete Struct 1225-1245, State Univ of New York at Buffalo, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Deng K, Pan P, Li W, Xue Y (2015) Development of a buckling restrained shear panel damper. J Constr Steel Res 106:311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Formisano A, Lombardi L, Mazzolani FM (2016) Perforated metal shear panels as bracing devices of seismic-resistant structures. J Constr Steel Res 126:37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franco JM, Cahís X, Gracia L, López F (2010) Experimental testing of a new anti-seismic dissipator energy device based on the plasticity of metals. Eng Struct 32:2672–2682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gray M, Christopoulos C, Packer J, De Oliveira C (2012) A new brace option for ductile braced frames. Mod Steel Constr 52(2):40–43Google Scholar
  15. Hitaka T, Matsui C (2003) Experimental study on steel shear wall with slits. ASCE J Struct Eng 129:586–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kato S, Kim YB (2006) A finite element parametric study on the mechanical properties of J-shaped steel hysteresis devices. J Constr Steel Res 62(8):802–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kelly JM, Skinner RI, Heine AJ (1972) Mechanisms of energy absorption in special devices for use in earthquake resistant structures. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 5(3):63–88Google Scholar
  18. Lee J, Kim J (2017) Development of box-shaped steel slit dampers for seismic retrofit of building structures. Eng Struct 150:934–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee HM, Oh HS, Huh C, Oh SY, Yoon HM, Moon ST (2002) Ultimate energy absorption capacity of steel plate slit dampers subjected to shear force. Steel Struct 2:71–79Google Scholar
  20. Lee CH, Ju YK, Min JK, Lho SH, Kim SD (2015) Non-uniform steel strip dampers subjected to cyclic loadings. Eng Struct 99:192–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mahjoubi S, Maleki S (2016) Seismic performance evaluation and design of steel structures equipped with dual-pipe dampers. J Constr Steel Res 122:25–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maleki S, Bagheri S (2010) Pipe damper, part I: experimental and analytical study. J Constr Steel Res 66:1088–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maleki S, Mahjoubi S (2013) Dual-pipe damper. J Constr Steel Res 85:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakashima M, Iwai S, Iwata M, Takeuchi T, Konomi S, Akazawa T et al (1994) Energy dissipation behaviour of shear panels made of low yield steel. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 23:1299–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Oh SH, Song SH, Lee SH (2013) Experimental study of seismic performance of base-isolated frames with U-shaped hysteretic energy-dissipating devices. Eng Struct 56:2014–2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ozcelik R, Dikiciasik Y, Erdil EF (2017) The development of the buckling restrained braces with new end restrains. J Constr Steel Res 138:208–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Piedrafita D, Cahis X, Simon E, Comas J (2013) A new modular buckling restrained brace for seismic resistant buildings. Eng Struct 56:1967–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Piedrafita D, Cahis X, Simon E, Comas J (2015) A new perforated core buckling restrained brace. Eng Struct 85:118–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SAC (1997) Protocol for fabrication, inspection, testing and documentation of beam-colum connection tests and other experimental specimens. Report No. SAC/BD-97/02, SAC Joint Venture, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  30. Shih MH, Sung WP (2005) A model for hysteretic behavior of rhombic low yield strength steel added damping and stiffness. Comput Struct 83:895–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Skinner RI, Kelly JM, Heine AJ (1975) Hysteretic dampers for earthquake-resistant structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 3:287–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Soong TT, Dargush GF (1997) Passive energy dissipation systems in structural engineering. Wiley, USAGoogle Scholar
  33. Speicher MS, DesRoches R, Leon RT (2011) Experimental results of a NiTi shape memory alloy (SMA)-based recentering beam-column connection. Eng Struct 33:2448–2457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tabatabaei SAR, Mirghaderi SR, Hosseini A (2014) Experimental and numerical developing of reduced length buckling-restrained braces. Eng Struct 77:143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tagawa H, Gao J (2012) Evaluation of vibration control system with U-dampers based on quasi-linear motion mechanism. J Constr Steel Res 70:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tsai KC, Chen HW, Hong CP, Su YF (1993) Design of steel triangular plate energy absorbers for seismic-resistant construction. Earthq Spectra 9(3):505–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tsopelas P, Constantinou MC (1997) Study of elastoplastic bridge seismic isolation system. J Struct Eng 123(4):489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vetr MG, Ghamari A (2012) Improving of seismic performance of steel structures using an innovative passive energy dissipation with torsional mechanism. Int J Civil Environ Eng 12(5):63–69Google Scholar
  39. Whittaker A, Bertero V, Alonso J, 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, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyEsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations