Experimental and numerical study on the seismic performance of a self-centering bracing system using closed-loop dynamic (CLD) testing

Issa, Anas; Alam, M. Shahria

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.103

Cited by 55 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It can be seen from the comparison that in the band of 0. 15 MHz~1 GHz, changing the driving motor speed has basically no effect on the radiation disturbance, and the peak test curve and average test curve basically coincide at different speeds [23].…”

Section: Analysis Of Experimental Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

New Energy Vehicle Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Closed-Loop Simulation Analysis

2022

Journal of Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the rapid development of new energy vehicles, electromagnetic compatibility of new energy vehicles has been widely concerned. Therefore, based on the conducted electromagnetic interference theory of electric vehicle electric drive system, a kind of electromagnetic interference transmission path is proposed, and its closed-loop simulation is carried out. The results show that the key point that has great influence on the radiation emission of the electric drive system is whether there is a torque, essentially whether the motor controller has power output, and it has little relation with the motor speed and bus voltage. In addition to the influence of whether or not the torque has on radiation emission, the torque size is further compared, set 50 Nm, 100 Nm, and 200 Nm, respectively, for comparison, and it is found that the increase of torque has no obvious influence on radiation emission. Therefore, during the test, the appropriate torque can be selected according to the actual situation, rather than the maximum torque that the component can work.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Experimental Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

New Energy Vehicle Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Closed-Loop Simulation Analysis

2022

Journal of Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a systematic risk-mitigation framework needs to be put forth. Moreover, previous riskmitigation studies have been mainly devoted to evaluating the effectiveness of specific retrofit techniques for upgrading substandard structures [e.g., 3,4]. Fragility functions, which are the outcomes of vulnerability studies, have been adopted to estimate seismic loss and select suitable seismic retrofit techniques [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Methodology for Prioritizing Seismic Retrofit Alternatives

Joseph¹,

Mwafy²,

Alam³

2023

World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a systematic methodology for prioritizing seismic retrofit alternatives by considering their seismic performance and cost. The framework was applied to retrofit substandard buildings with structural systems common to a medium seismicity region. The proposed seismic assessment and retrofit methodology starts by evaluating the demand-to-capacity (D/C) ratios of the as-built structure and its retrofitted alternatives using 3D finite element models and code-prescribed analysis procedures in line with the region's seismic design criteria. After selecting suitable retrofit alternatives to achieve satisfactory D/C ratios, a verified fiberbased analysis platform is used to assess the inelastic behavior of the existing and retrofitted buildings using inelastic pushover analysis (IPA). This step is followed by incremental dynamic analyses (IDA) using suites of earthquake records representing the seismicity of the construction site. Finally, a seismic performance index (SPI) and a performance-to-cost index (PCI) are used for prioritizing and selecting the most effective retrofit technique.

show abstract

“…19,20 Later, to increase the deformability of such braces, dual-core SCBs were proposed to overcome the limitation of the narrow range of elastic strain of the PT tendons. [21][22][23] Meanwhile, the new materials, such as superelastic shape memory alloys (SMAs) 18,24,25 and fiber-reinforced polymer composites, 26,27 were successfully applied in SCBs to replace PT tendons. In addition, new elements, such as disc springs (washer springs) [28][29][30] and friction springs (ring springs), [31][32][33][34][35][36] are other promising alternatives for SCBs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic evaluation of friction spring‐based self‐centering braced frames based on life‐cycle cost

Zhang

Wang

Alam

2022

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, a variety of self‐centering braces (SCBs) have been developed to address the limitations of conventional frames by decreasing residual drift due to earthquakes. However, the initial construction cost of self‐centering (SC) structures is expected to be higher and the study about its cost‐effectiveness over the life‐cycle span is limited. This paper presents a seismic life‐cycle cost evaluation of emerging friction spring‐based self‐centering braced frames (SCB‐Fs) compared with traditional buckling restrained braced frames (BRB‐Fs) when an existing structure is upgraded. Particular focus is on the effect of residual deformation, initial construction cost, and high fatigue performance of the SCB. Following the performance‐based design of the SCB‐F and BRB‐F, system‐level analyses are conducted. Numerical results of case‐study buildings indicate that the total expected annual loss (EAL) of the BRB‐F increases by approximately three times when the effect of residual deformation is considered, while its effect on the total EAL of the SCB‐F is negligible. Besides, the superior performance of the SCB‐F compared to BRB‐F is highlighted by a substantial reduction in EAL induced by earthquakes. In addition, the acceleration‐related seismic losses of SCB‐F constitute approximately 44% of the total EAL. Its contribution is significantly larger in the case of the SCB‐F compared to the BRB‐F. From the perspective of economic benefit, increasing the structural life‐cycle span is beneficial to the SCB‐F compared to the BRB‐F. The high fatigue performance of the SCB is favorable to increase the economic benefit of the SCB‐F, especially when the reduction of repair time is considered. The economic benefit of the SCB‐F compared to the BRB‐F is highly related to the initial construction cost. Taking the 100 years as an expected life‐cycle span, the high initial construction cost of the SCB‐F would not be paid off when the unit cost of the SCB is about 2.1 times that of the BRB.

show abstract

Experimental and numerical study on the seismic performance of a self-centering bracing system using closed-loop dynamic (CLD) testing

Cited by 55 publications

References 23 publications

New Energy Vehicle Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Closed-Loop Simulation Analysis

New Energy Vehicle Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Closed-Loop Simulation Analysis

A Systematic Methodology for Prioritizing Seismic Retrofit Alternatives

Seismic evaluation of friction spring‐based self‐centering braced frames based on life‐cycle cost

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About