Global Restraint in Ultra-Lightweight Buckling-Restrained Braces

Dusicka, Peter; Tinker, John A.

doi:10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0000320

Cited by 58 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(8) and (9), it is clear that the triggering moments are governed by BRB end rotation, which relates to (i) deformation mode (H, HR1, HR2, and HRR), (ii) geometric parameters (α, β, a y , a jt , and a jb ), and (iii) initial geometric imperfections (φ t and φ b ). (6) and (7). To simplify discussion, it is assumed that the a jt and a jb values are identical (a jt = a jb = 1/2 À a y /2) and the connection zones are in geometrically perfect configuration (φ t = φ b = 0).…”

Section: Key Factors Affecting Brb End Rotation and Triggering Momentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The theoretical triggering moments, M tr,t and M tr,b , are obtained by Eqs. (6) and (9), in which the measured α and imperfection responses are adopted. The theoretical total flexural moments, M t and M b , are determined by Eqs.…”

Section: Initial Rotational Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Buckling-restrained braces (BRBs), one type of high performance hysteretic dampers with ductile, stable, and full hysteresis behavior [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8], have been widely implemented into building structures to minimize seismic damage. To ensure the practical use of BRBs as energy dissipation fuse, design of BRB end connections is of crucial importance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of non‐moment braced frame seismic deformations on buckling‐restrained brace end connection behavior: Theoretical analysis and subassemblage tests

Zhao

Lin

Zhan

2015

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary In‐plane buckling‐restrained brace (BRB) end rotation induced by frame action is a commonly observed phenomenon in buckling‐restrained braced frames (BRBFs). However, its effect on BRB end connection behavior has not yet been clear. In this study, four BRB end deformation modes for quick determination of end rotational demand are proposed for non‐moment BRBF considering different BRB arrangements, installing story of BRBs, and boundary condition of corner gussets connected with column base. Key factors affecting BRB end rotation and flexural moments are examined theoretically by parametric analysis. Subassemblage tests of seven BRB specimens under horizontal cyclic loading were conducted by adopting two loading frames to impose the expected BRB end deformations. It shows that BRB end rotation subjected BRB ends to significant flexural moments, leading to premature yielding of BRB ends or even tendency of end zone buckling. The deformation modes, the flexural rigidity of BRB ends, and the initial geometric imperfections of BRBs were found to have significant influence on BRB end connection behavior. The triggering moment induced by BRB end rotation was the main contributor to end flexural moment. However, the moment amplification effect induced by flexure of BRB end zones became prominent especially for small flexural rigidity of BRB ends. Implications and future research needs for design of BRB end connections are provided finally based on the theoretical and experimental results. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Key Factors Affecting Brb End Rotation and Triggering Momentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Initial Rotational Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of non‐moment braced frame seismic deformations on buckling‐restrained brace end connection behavior: Theoretical analysis and subassemblage tests

Zhao

Lin

Zhan

2015

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Genna and Gelfi (2012) analyzed the correlation between axial force and buckled wavelength, the research indicated that the lateral thrust exerted by the inner core depends in a discontinuous ways on several factors. Dusicka and Tinker (2013) proposed an ultra-lightweight BRB was designed with an aluminum core and bundled glass fiber reinforced polymer pultruded tubes for the bucklingrestraint, which satisfies global buckling restraint and weigh 27% and 41% lighter of traditional mortar-filled tube and all-steel BRB configurations, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance testing and comparison of buckling-restrained braces with H and crisscross cross section unrestrained segments

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) deliver ductile, stable, and repeatable hysteretic behavior. The plastic deformation capacity of the BRBs indicates the good indexes both in terms of ultimate deformation and in terms of energy dissipation capacity. In this paper, the load-carrying elements of BRBs were fabricated with steel (Chinese Q235), and four layers of plastic film (0.2 mm in thickness) were used as unbounded materials to prevent the buckling of inner cores in higher modes and provide spaces to facilitate its lateral expansion in case of compression. The differences of ultimate compression and tension loads were controlled in a small range. The transformation of the unrestrained segment's section from crisscross shape to H shape can significantly improve the moment-resistance capacity of the unrestrained segment, avoiding buckling instability effectively due to evident moment stiffness enhancement. The experimental results of pseudo-static tests (PSTs) under cyclic load indicate: BRB with H cross section unrestrained segments can undergo fully-reversed axial yield cycles without loss of stiffness or strength, which have large ductility and superior seismic energy dissipation ability. There is obvious strain intensification in tension and compression phases. But there is evident decreasing of stiffness and strength on BRB with crisscross section unrestrained segments due to the buckling of unrestrained segment under compression, the ductility and energy dissipation ability decline distinctly.

show abstract

“…However, the stoppers' spot welding has an adverse effect on the failure mode because the crack (Usami and Wang 2012b). An ultralightweight BRB was designed with an aluminum core and bundled glass fiber reinforced polymer pultruded tubes for the buckling-restraint, which satisfies global buckling restraint and weigh 27% and 41% lighter of traditional mortar-filled tube and all-steel BRB configurations, respectively (Dusicka 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Testing and Cyclic Behavior of Buckling-Restrained Braces with H Cross Section Unrestrained Segments

Jia

Lü

Sun³

2014

Advances in Structural Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hysteretic behavior of four buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) with H cross section unrestrained segment was tested under cyclic load. The transformation of the unrestrained segment's section from crisscross shape to H shape can improve the moment-resistance capacity of unrestrained segment significantly and avoid buckling instability of unrestrained segment effectively due to evident stiffness enhancement. BRBs were designed according to Chinese codes, the load-carrying elements of BRBs were fabricated with Chinese Q235 steel. In the process of experiment, BRBs did not buckle, BRBs could undergo fully-reversed axial yielding cycles without loss of stiffness and strength, the ductility and energy absorption capacity of BRBs are large enough to withstand major earthquake. The resilience model can be simplified to a symmetrical bilinear resilience model. The ratio of width to thickness of inner core has a little influence on the mechanical behavior and energy-dissipation capacity of BRBs. A suggestion for design improvement of BRBs was proposed according to the failure modes of BRBs.

show abstract

Global Restraint in Ultra-Lightweight Buckling-Restrained Braces

Cited by 58 publications

References 23 publications

Effect of non‐moment braced frame seismic deformations on buckling‐restrained brace end connection behavior: Theoretical analysis and subassemblage tests

Effect of non‐moment braced frame seismic deformations on buckling‐restrained brace end connection behavior: Theoretical analysis and subassemblage tests

Performance testing and comparison of buckling-restrained braces with H and crisscross cross section unrestrained segments

Performance Testing and Cyclic Behavior of Buckling-Restrained Braces with H Cross Section Unrestrained Segments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About