2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112227
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hysteretic behavior comparison of austenitic and lean duplex stainless steel square hollow section members under cyclic axial loading

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Korea, structural behaviors on austenitic and lean duplex stainless steel square hollow section braced members under cyclic axial loading has been compared (Kim et al, 2021e). Experimental and numerical studies on single-shear and double-shear bolted connections with two and four bolts made of cold-formed lean duplex stainless steel (STS329FLD) simple tensile tests have been performed (Kim et al 2020b, 2021f).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Korea, structural behaviors on austenitic and lean duplex stainless steel square hollow section braced members under cyclic axial loading has been compared (Kim et al, 2021e). Experimental and numerical studies on single-shear and double-shear bolted connections with two and four bolts made of cold-formed lean duplex stainless steel (STS329FLD) simple tensile tests have been performed (Kim et al 2020b, 2021f).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, based on the ratios between the numerical ultimate axial displacement and the estimated axial displacement at yielding, Zhou et al [28] proposed an expression to determine the normalized ultimate axial displacement, referred to as the compressive ductility coefficient, in terms of the local slenderness and the global slenderness of the member. Kim et al [29] also performed cyclic loading tests on square hollow section columns made of different austenitic and duplex stainless steel grades, and compared the buckling strengths, load-displacement hysteretic responses and the energy dissipation capacities of the different alloys. Among the findings reported in [29], it should be highlighted that austenitic specimens with the highest material strength showed a brittle behaviour after yielding due to the transformation of the microstructure from austenite to martensite and, consequently, their ductility and energy absorption capacities were lower than expected.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kim et al [29] also performed cyclic loading tests on square hollow section columns made of different austenitic and duplex stainless steel grades, and compared the buckling strengths, load-displacement hysteretic responses and the energy dissipation capacities of the different alloys. Among the findings reported in [29], it should be highlighted that austenitic specimens with the highest material strength showed a brittle behaviour after yielding due to the transformation of the microstructure from austenite to martensite and, consequently, their ductility and energy absorption capacities were lower than expected. Regarding the global behaviour of stainless steel structures under seismic forces, the studies carried out by Di Sarno et al [30][31][32] can be highlighted, which revealed a considerable increase in the ultimate strength of carbon steel systems (moment resisting, braced and eccentrically braced frames) when introducing stainless steel dissipative elements.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At member level, experimental studies on the hysteretic behaviour of austenitic and duplex (Nip et al 2010b;Zhou et al 2018;Fang et al 2018;Kim et al 2021;) members under cyclic loading (subjected to either axial, bending loads, or to a combination of both) are worth mentioning, as well as numerical studies proposing expressions to estimate the ultimate rotation and axial displacement of such elements as a function of the width-to-thickness ratio (Fang et al 2018;Zhou et al 2018). Note that these expressions were only valid for the loading combinations considered in the corresponding studies.…”
Section: Geometric Nonlinearity and Eurocode Design Approaches For In...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The loading was applied at the top end of the specimens by imposing a horizontal displacement controlled by a MTS 243.60-02 hydraulic actuator. It should be mentioned that, unlike the loading scheme given in (Fang et al 2018), no axial load was applied at the top of the specimens because the aim of this work is the investigation of the cyclic response under pure bending, which had not been investigated before to the best of the authors' knowledge -note that the tests conducted by Nip et al (2010b), Zhou et al (2018) and Kim et al (2021) were under cyclic axial loading and those conducted by Fang et al (2018) were under axial loads and cyclic bending. The loading section was carefully designed to prevent local failure.…”
Section: Description Of the Specimensmentioning
confidence: 99%