BEHAVIOUR OF SEISMIC RESISTANT BRACED FRAMES WITH INNOVATIVE DISSIPATIVE (INERD) CONNECTIONS

Ioannis Vayas , Pavlos Thanopoulos Laboratory of Steel Structures NTU Athens vastahl@central.ntua.gr Andre Plumier Mecanique des Materieux et Structures U Liege a.plumier@ulg.ac.be Carlo Castiglioni Department of Architecture Politecnico di Milano castigli@stru.polimi.it Luis Calado Department of Civil Engineering IST Lisbon calado@civil.ist.utl.pt

ABSTRACT Innovative dissipative (INERD) connections were developed for seismic resistant steel frames. The dissipative zones in such frames are the connections, while the other parts of the structure are protected against inelastic deformations and instability phenomena. Two types of INERD connections were developed: pin connections and U-shape connections. In the former the braces and the columns are connected with eye-bars and a pin running through them, in the latter consist the connection is made by U-shaped thick bent plates. Experimental and theoretical investigations were performed to study the cyclic behavior of the connections and the overall frames. The studies on pin connections show a very good seismic response. The connections are behaving as dissipative, full-strength connections. The financial contribution of ECSC is acknowledged. 1 INTRODUCTION

Earthquake resistant steel frames are usually designed so that they exhibit a dissipative structural behaviour. In such a case, parts of the structure (dissipative zones) exhibit inelastic deformations during strong seismic motions. The main structural typologies, the correspondent performance characteristics and the expected positions of the dissipative zones are listed in Table 1. It may be seen that conventional frames (columns 2 to 4) have certain disadvantages in respect to stiffness or ductility. Additionally in such frames, following problems arise after strong earthquakes due to the position of the dissipative zones, where damage is expected to concentrate: a) the need for strengthening or replacement of damaged and buckled braces which have a certain length and are difficult to handle, b) the need for strengthening and repair of the links or the beams that are part of the main system that supports gravity loading. Such works require therefore considerable skill and are associated with high material and labor costs. Damages in steel framed structures after recent strong earthquakes indicate the need for improvement of existing structural typologies and for introduction of innovative systems. These systems shall have following properties: a) High stiffness in order to limit drifts during moderate seismic motions, b) high ductility in order to dissipate energy during strong motions and c) possibility for easy inexpensive repair, if required. In the present paper, a new system with such properties, applicable to concentric or eccentric braced frames is presented (Table 1, column 5). The system was developed and studied during a joint European ECSC research

project, involving 4 Universities (Athens, Lisbon, Milan and Liege) and a steel production Company (Arcelor/Arbed). Table 1: Structural typologies and main characteristics for Steel Frames 1 2 Moment resisting Frames (MRF) Low High Beam-ends 3 Concentric Braced Frames (CBF) High Low Braces 4 Eccentric Braced Frames (EBF) Moderate Moderate Link beams 5 CBF or EBF with dissipative connections High High Connections

Stiffness Ductility Dissipative zones at 2

DESCRIPTION OF THE INERD CONNECTIONS

Contrary to connections in conventional Braced Frames which shall be stronger than the connected members and remain elastic, INERD connections shall be weaker than the connected members, exhibiting inelastic deformations and dissipating energy during seismic loading. Two types of INERD connections were developed: a) pin connections and b) U connections. Both types connect the braces to the adjacent members. The pin connections consist of two external eye-bars welded or bolted to the adjacent member (column or beam), two internal eye-bars welded to the brace and a pin of rectangular or circular cross-section running through the eye-bars, as indicative shown in Fig. 1. In case of circular sections, two opposite faces were a little flattened to restrain possible uncontrolled rotations of the pin along its axis. In this type of connection the pin exhibits inelastic bending deformations and dissipated energy due to the fact that the eye-bars are placed at some distance between each other. The U connections consist of bent U-shaped thick plates that connect the brace to the adjacent member, as indicative shown in Fig. 2. Here again, energy dissipation takes place in the bent plate(s). The advantage of these connections is that, by appropriate sizing, inelastic deformations are limited within exactly predetermined zones, the pins or the U-plates, whereas the adjacent parts remain elastic. Consequently, damage is restricted to the pins or the U-plates that are small parts that may be easily replaced, if they are largely deformed after a strong earthquake. The study of the performance of the new system included experimental and theoretical investigations on, as following: Full-scale tests on INERD connection details [1]. Full-scale tests on frames with INERD connections [2]. Theoretical investigations on connection details and frames with dissipative connections [4]. The experimental investigations that include monotonic, cyclic and fatigue tests and modelling of the U connections are described elsewhere. This contribution presents the accompanying analyses for the pin connections and the seismic response of frames with INERD pin connections and gives appropriate design guidance for the practical application.

Fig. 1: Detail of the pin connection during loading

Fig. 2: Pin connections within a frame

MODELLING OF INERD PIN CONNECTIONS

The behaviour of the pin connection was studied by means of three models with various degrees of complexity as following: a) FEM model, b) Beam model and c) Simple engineering model. The first two have the purpose of better understanding the connection response and to allow for the development of the third engineering model which is expected to be used for design purposes in practical applications. 3.1 FEM model FEM analyses by means of the general purpose programme ABAQUS, version 6.4 were performed in order to study the monotonic and cyclic behaviour of the pin connections. The exploitation of the symmetry properties, allows for modelling of one fourth of the complete connection, as illustrative shown in Fig. 3. The model dimensions corresponded with those of the specimen for which experimental investigations were performed. The contact between the pin and the eye-bars was achieved through contact or gap elements. Loading was applied by means of deformation control. For cyclic loading, the deformations increased by 5 mm per cycle.

Fig. 3: FEM model for the pin connection (1/4 of connection)

Indicative experimental and numerical results are illustrated in Fig. 4. Forces and displacement are positive when the eye-bars are in compression. Following observations can be made: a) The analytical rather than the experimental monotonic curves represent the skeleton curves for cyclic loading. b) Pinching in the hysteretic loops occurs due to holes ovalisation from bearing stresses. c) No hardening response takes place for cyclic loading due to inelastic transverse bending in the eye-bars (Fig. 3). d) The resistance is larger for eye-bras in compression than in tension. e) Satisfactory agreement between experimental and numerical results in respect to both local and global behaviour is observed. f) Contact elements describe better than gap elements the connection response. g) Pinching takes place in the analysis at the same yield load level, whereas in the tests at progressively lower levels.
TYPE D Test Cyclic Test Monotonic FEM Gap FEM Contact Engineering Model Beam Model FEM Cyclic Contact 800000

600000

400000

200000 Force (N)

0 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 -200000 0 10 20 30 40 50

-400000

-600000

-800000 Displacement (mm)

Fig. 4: Numerical vs, experimental results for one pin connection

3.2 Beam model In this model, Fig. 5, the pin is modelled as a simply supported beam with linear very flexible rotation springs at its ends. The span is equal to the axial distance between external eye-bars. The forces in the internal eye bars are acting uniformly across the thickness. For eye-bars in compression, two tensile forces are acting simultaneously at the beam ends, representing the friction between the pin and the eye-bars, the friction coefficient being equal to = 0,5. The beam is divided into 30 elements system and solved by second order, plastic zone analysis using the SOFISTIC Code for beam elements. Following observations can be made: a) At the initial stage of loading, up to initiation of yielding, the pin behaves as a simple supported beam. This is due to the fact that the stiffness of the beam is much higher than the stiffness of the end springs, so that the springs attract almost no moments.

b) At subsequent progressive loading, moments at the end supports develop, since the spring stiffness is becoming significant relatively to the beam becoming plastic. c) This occurs until yielding of the beam near the end supports. d) For further loading, the stiffness of the beam under the loading points and at the ends reduces significantly and deflections increase rapidly. e) At the last stages of loading, second order effects due to large displacements become significant in the presence of axial forces H. This supporting action of H is present only when the eye-bars are in compression. f) The final moments under the loads and at supports are higher than the full plastic moments due to hardening. g) Good agreement between experimental results and the beam model is observed (Fig. 4), especially what characteristic states (yielding, ultimate) concerns.
c c b

P/2
t

P/2

(a) rotational spring H

L (a) O (b)

P/2 H

P/2

P/2 (b) L

P/2

Fig. 5: Beam model. Geometry and loading

Fig. 6: Simple engineering model

3.3 Simple engineering model The previously made observations are used for the development of a simple engineering model that is describes two characteristic states, yielding and ultimate, for the derivations of a tri-linear response curve (Fig 6). Up to complete yielding under the acting loads (region O-I in Fig. 6), simple supports are introduced, do that the connection behaves as a four-point loaded beam.
Table 2: Forces and deflections of pin connection Eye-bars in Point I yielding y Tension and Compression P Py =

2M p

a EI 6 4 Mu Pu = Tension a Point II M 4 Mu u = 30 u h a ultimate u Pu = EI 15 M u Compression a (1 h) EI a M p = W pl f y M u = W pl f u = h = pin height fy, fu = pin strenghts L Wpl = plastic modulus of pin section Other symbols as in Fig.6

y = 1,5

Mp

l2

(3 4 )

At higher loading levels (region I-II in Fig. 6), two plastic hinges under the loads and rigid supports are introduced. For eye-bars in compression, additional horizontal forces due to friction are taken into account. By simple static and rigid plastic analysis for the two states, forces and deformations may be derived (Table 2). Good agreement between experimental results and model predictions (Fig. 4) could be observed. It may be seen that the strength in excess of the yield load is very high. The connections can be therefore regarded as fullstrength connections.
4 MODELLING OF BRACED FRAMES WITH INERD CONNECTIONS

4.1 Pushover analyses

Pushover analyses were performed for X-braced frames with and without INERD connections. The connections were introduced by means of tri-linear springs at the ends of the braces. Figure 7 shows characteristic results on a 6-storey frame, where different connections with decreasing stiffness and strength were introduced As expected, the yield load of the frame decreases when INERD connections are provided. However, following observations for the frames with such connections could be made that indicate an advantageous behaviour under seismic loading: a) The elastic frame stiffness is unaffected by the flexibility of the connections. This indicates the absence of serviceability problems for moderate earthquakes. b) The reduction in overall strength for frames with INERD connections starts at much larger displacements compared to conventional frames. This indicates that the influence of P-- effects will appear at much higher earthquake intensities. c) The distribution of drifts between floors is much more uniform for frames with INERD connections, indicating that inelastic action will be distributed within the entire structure. d) The overall post-ultimate stiffness is much higher compared with conventional frames. This indicates that buckling of the braces is largely avoided.
All P- curves

2500

2000

Total Horizontal Load [kN]

1500

Pin Spring1 Spring2

1000

Spring3

500

0 0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

Top displacement [% of total height]

Figure 7: Results of pushover analyses for 6-storey frames with and without INERD connections

4.2 Non-linear dynamic analyses

Non-linear dynamic analyses were performed for X-braced frames with INERD connections. The connection response was modeled by adequate cyclic lows representing closely the observed behavior from the tests. Parametric studies were performed in order to study the

influence of the connection behavior (elastic and post-elastic stiffness etc.) to the overall frame response. The frames were subjected to various seismic records with different spectral responses. The frames were pre-designed for a PGA = 0,24g and a value of the behaviour factor q = 3,5, valid for conventional braced frames according to the provisions of the European seismic Code (EN 1998, 2004). Drifts, as indicatively shown in Figure 8 for two frames subjected to the Kobe earthquake, were recorded for increasing PGAs. The results show that maximal drifts dont exceed 2,0% when the frame is subjected to the design PGA. For a target drift of 2,5% corresponding to life safety performance criterion and appropriate selection of the connection characteristics, PGAs almost twice as large could be achieved. This indicates the positive influence of the INERD connections to the performance of braced frames. In all the cases the connections responded within region I-II (Fig. 6), never reaching their ultimate strength or deformations as large as at point II. This shows that the connections behave as dissipative, full-strength connections.
6-story
Kobe
4 3,5 3 PGA multiplier 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 Drifts (%) Device 1 Device 2 Device 3
4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 Drifts (%) 4 4,5 5 5,5 6 6,5 Device 1 Device 2 Device 3

10-story
PGA multiplier

Kobe

Figure 8: Performance of frames with INERD connections

5 DESIGN RECCOMENDATIONS

For practical applications, the pin dimensions may be selected according to a simple and an advanced procedure. In the simple procedure, applicable for current European seismic Codes, the connections are dimensioned so that their yield stress is lower than the buckling strength of the connected braces. Eye-bars, adjacent beams and columns are designed for capacity design forces according to the connection strength. In the advanced procedure, applicable to performance level Codes, following steps are recommended: 1. Pre-sizing of the members for a prescribed performance level. 2. Selection of the performance point (Pper, per) of the connections, with following characteristics: a. Pper = Buckling strength of the brace Dh b. per = 2 1 + tan 2 (D = lateral drift, h= storey height, = angle of brace inclination) 3. Determination of the yield force of the connection from Py = Pper/M

4. Selection of the ratio r between post-elastic and elastic stiffness of the connections. 5. Determination of the connections dimensions, according to specific Tables [4]. 6. Design of the eye-bars, adjacent beams and columns for capacity design forces at the performance point Pper. The envisaged connection response is illustrated in Figure 9. It is obvious that the simplified procedure leads to smaller pins, but stronger eye-bars and adjacent members.
160

140

120

100 Force

80

Collapse Life safe Operational Immediate occupancy

60

40

20

0 0 2 4 6 Deformation 8 10 12

Fig. 9: Connection response for various performance levels

REFERENCES

[1] Calado L.,Ferreira J., INERD Connections, Technical Report, IST Lisbon, 2004 [2] Castiglioni C, Crespi A., Brescianini J. and Lazzarotto L., INERD Connections, Technical Report, Politecnico Milano, 2004 [3] European Convention for Constructional Steelwork (ECCS). Recommended testing procedure for assessing the behaviour of structural steel elements under cyclic loads ECCS Publ. No 45, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1986 [4] Vayas I., Thanopoulos P. and Dasiou M., INERD Connections, Technical Report, NTU Athens, 2004

KEYWORDS

Connections, Dissipative, Full Strength, Braced Frames, Earthquake