Overstrength and rotation capacity for EBF links made

of European IPE sections

Amin Mohebkhah
a,n
, Behrouz Chegeni
b
a
Structural Engineering Division, Faculty of Civil and Architectural Engineering, University of Malayer, Malayer, Iran
b
Young Researchers Club, Khorramabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khorramabad, Iran
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 2 June 2012
Received in revised form
4 October 2013
Accepted 16 October 2013
Keywords:
Overstrength
Inelastic rotation capacity
Eccentrically braced frame
Link beam
IPE section
a b s t r a c t
Overstrength factor and inelastic rotation capacity are the key parameters in eccentrically braced frames
(EBFs) design which may affect signicantly the design economy or safety. The overstrength factor given
in the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions is based on the previous tests on wide-ange link beams commonly
used in the united states. Despite the extensive research conducted on EBFs link beams, it is not known
whether the overstrength factor given by the Provisions can be used for the design of EBFs having IPE link
beams. In this paper a three dimensional nite-element model using ABAQUS is developed for the
inelastic nonlinear analysis of IPE link beams. The model is used to investigate the applicability of the
overstrength factor and inelastic rotation capacity given by the Provisions to design of EBFs with IPE link
beams. It was found that the strain hardening overstrength factor of short link beams made of European
IPE sections with closely spaced stiffeners is greater than the Provisions' factor. Therefore, using the
Provisions' overstrength factor may lead to unconservatie design of EBFs having such links. However, the
overstrength factor given by the Provisions can be used conservatively to design EBFs with intermediate
and long IPE links. Also, it was shown that links made of IPE sections can sustain much larger rotations
than the rotations required by the Provisions.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The concept of eccentrically braced frame (EBF) was proposed in
the late 1970s and developed later by Popov and his co-workers ([16]
among the others) at the University of California, Berkeley (UCB). To
have a ductile EBF, plastic hinges must be formed in the specically
designed ductile link beams while the other adjoining members (i.e.
braces, columns and beam outside of the link) remain in elastic range.
In other words, the links in an EBF must act as structural fuses and
dissipate earthquake-induced energy in a stable manner. To achieve
this, based on the capacity design concept the adjacent members
which are presumed to be brittle and elastic must be designed to
have strength in excess of the maximum shear capacity of the link
beams. The main reason of considering this excessive shear capacity is
to account for the normal uncertainties of material strength and
strain-hardening effects at high strains [7]. Under-prediction of the
maximum link shear capacity can lead to the premature failure of the
adjoining members intended to remain elastic under severe earth-
quake loads. Therefore, according to the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions
[8] and also the fact that link beams develop larger shear strength than
nominal shear strength (V
n
) (due to strain hardening and material
uncertainties), the maximum shear capacity of link beams (V
u
) can be
estimated as follows:
V
u
OR
y
V
n
1
in which, is the overstrength due to strain hardening. Values of 1.25
and 1.1 have been given for in the Seismic Privisions [8] for the
design of brace and beam outside link (also for columns), respectively.
R
y
factor (material overstrength) adjusts the nominal plastic shear
capacity (V
n
) to the actual capacity which is the ratio of expected yield
strength to the minimum specied yield strength. V
n
is computed as the
lesser of V
p
or 2M
p
/e as per the AISC Seismic Provisions [8]. The
proposed value of in the Seismic Privisions for brace design is
traditionally based on the experiments conducted at the UCB in the
1980s on rolled wide-ange Links. However, it is less than the factor of
1.5 proposed by Popov and Engelhardt [9] for a number of reasons
including [8]: (1) the use of R
y
in the link but not in the brace, and
(2) the use of resistance factors when computing the strength of
the brace.
Arce [10] conducted a test program to investigate the cyclic
behavior of wide-ange links constructed of A992 steel in seismic
resistant EBFs using the old-AISC loading protocol specied in the
2002 AISC Seismic Provisions [11]. The results of these tests showed
that, the average strain hardening overstrength () of the sections
was 1.28 with a variation from 1.17 to 1.44 [10]. The experiments
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws
Thin-Walled Structures
0263-8231/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2013.10.013
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: 98 851 2232346; fax: 98 851 2221977.
E-mail addresses: amoheb@malayeru.ac.ir, amoheb2001@yahoo.com
(A. Mohebkhah), b.chegeni@engineer.com (B. Chegeni).
Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260
performed by Itani et al. [12] indicated that higher strain hard-
ening overstrength factor of about 2.1 may be observed for built-
up shear links with heavy anges. However, Richards [13] argued
that overstrength factor much beyond the ratio F
u
/F
y
does not
seem to be merely due to strain hardening and it may also be
attributed to the anges shear resistance and existing axial forces in
the link beams because of boundary conditions applied to the test
specimens.
Richards and Uang [14] developed and veried a nite element
model to investigate the inuence of the ange width-to-thickness
ratio on the rotation capacity of wide-ange links in EBFs. They
found that under the 2002 AISC Seismic Provisions [11] cyclic
loading protocol, many of the intermediate link beams do not
achieve the design inelastic rotation capacity predicted by the
provisions.
Knowing the signicant effects of loading protocol on link
beams behavior, Okazaki et al. [15] conducted an experimental
investigation to reevaluate overstrength factors for EBF rolled
wide-ange links constructed of A992 steel using a revised
protocol developed and proposed by Richards and Uang [16].
The results of these tests showed that, the assumed overstrength
of 1.5 in the 2002 AISC Seismic Provisions is reasonable, and
perhaps somewhat conservative for longer links. Barecchia et al.
[17] investigated the overstrength of European hot-rolled steel
proles (including IPE, HE series) with no web stiffeners using a
numerical nite element modeling. They found that for short and
intermediate IPE links with axial restraints, the overstrength factor
under monotonic loading is equal to 1.6 and 2.0 for shear
deformation angles of 0.1 and 0.2 rad, respectively. Della Corte
et al. [18] investigated the plastic shear strength of stiffened and
unstiffened short links with axial restraints using nonlinear FE
analysis. The results showed that, unstiffened shear links made of
European hot-rolled shapes may be subjected to strength and
stiffness degradation under cyclic loading even in the case of
axially restrained boundary conditions [18]. They also concluded
that the axial force effect on the link response is considerable
when the link is subjected to large rotation demand. Della Corte
et al. [19,20] also studied the effects of tensile axial forces induced
by the presence of axial restraints (boundary conditions) and
geometric nonlinearity on the plastic overstrength of short links
made of European shapes using nonlinear FE analysis. They found
that for stiffened links made of European IPE shapes with or
without axial restraint, the hysteresis loops are stable in the range
of inelastic rotation of 70.08 rad and hence, their ultimate shear
capacity can be estimated by monotonic analysis [20]. They also
assuming an elastic-perfectly plastic model for steel, proposed a
simple analytical equation based on the FE analyses to estimate
the plastic overstrength of short links at inelastic rotation of
0.08 rad.
Daneshmand and Hosseini Hashemi [21] studied the general
behavior of intermediate and long links made of European IPE and
built-up sections using nonlinear FE analysis. The main purpose of
the paper was to investigate the impact of parameters such as
stiffener spacing and geometric properties of the link beams on
the their inelastic rotation capacity. They found that the links in
the controversial region (i.e. links with 1:8oo2:2) may not
satisfy the provisons on inelastic rotation capacity unless some
additional requirements mentioned in the paper are utilized [21].
Based on the abovementioned literature review, it can be
concluded that the link overstrength factor depends on the
following factors:
(1) Flange-web area ratio [12,1820] or shear resistance of
anges [13].
(2) link beam length ratio [15,18].
(3) loading protocol [15,22,16], and
(4) presence of axial forces due to boundary axial restraints
[13,1820].
Despite the aforementioned studies, the overstrength factors
(, R
y
) of EBF links made of European hot-rolled IPE sections with
different lengths has not been investigated. On the other hand,
most of the design rules given in the AISC Seismic Provisions for EBF
links are based on the results of tests performed on American
wide-ange link beams by Popov and his students at the UCB.
Therefore, the applicability of current seismic provisions should be
examined and validated to be used for IPE link beams.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the overstrength
factors and inelastic rotation capacity of EBF links made of hot-
rolled IPE sections which are commonly used in Iran for low-rise
EBFs. For this purpose a nite-element model based on the
commercial software package ABAQUS [23] is developed for the
nonlinear analysis of IPE link beams with a wide variety of span-
length (i.e. short, intermediate and long links). Then, it is used to
investigate the applicability of the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions [8]
to design of EBFs having IPE link beams.
2. Nonlinear nite-element model
To investigate the inelastic behavior of IPE link beams, a
nonlinear inelastic nite-element model is developed based on
the specications and assumptions given in the following sections.
2.1. Mesh and material properties
The nonlinear computations were performed using the com-
mercial nite element software package ABAQUS [23]. ABAQUS
[23] has the ability to consider both geometric and material
nonlinearities in a given model. Large displacement effects were
accounted for by utilizing the nonlinear geometry option in
ABAQUS. A 4-node doubly curved shell element with reduced
integration S4R [23] from the ABAQUS element library were used
to model the web, anges and the intermediate stiffeners.
The S4R element is suitable for complex plastic buckling
behavior and has six degrees of freedom per node and provides
accurate solutions to most relevant applications. Flanges were
Nomenclature
A
w
link section web area
e link beam length
F
y
yield stress of steel
F
u
ultimate stress of steel
M
p
section plastic moment capacityF
y
Z
R
y
material overstrength factor
V
n
section nominal shear capacityV
p
0.6 F
y
A
w
V
u
section maximum shear capacity
link rotation angle (ratio of the relative displacement
of the ends of the link to the length of the link)

p
link inelastic rotation capacity

e
link elastic rotation capacity
strain hardening overstrength factor
length ratio
A. Mohebkhah, B. Chegeni / Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260 256
modeled with 6 elements across the width and 10 elements were
used throughout the web height.
The steel is modeled as a J2 material with nonlinear kine-
matic hardening and a trilinear stress-strain curve as given in Gioncu
and Mazzolani [24] is assumed. In the stressstrain curve, a typical
value for the modulus of elasticity (E204,000 MPa) is considered.
Nominal yield stress (F
y
) and ultimate stress (F
u
) values of steel S235
are specied as of 235 and 360 MPa, respectively. It should be noted
that the effects of residual stresses and low-cycle fatigue (brittle
failure mode) were not considered in this work.
2.2. Boundary conditions, cyclic loading and solution procedure
Since in this study the behavior of isolated link beams is
investigated, boundary conditions are the same as proposed by
Richard and Uang [14]. As can be seen in Fig. 1, nodes on the left
end were restrained against all degrees of freedom except hor-
izontal translation. However, nodes on the right end were
restrained against all degrees of freedom except vertical transla-
tion. Loads were applied as displacement-controlled on the right
end nodes.
Full cyclic analysis is necessary in this study to consider the
effects of local buckling and associated strength degradation.
The link loading protocol in Appendix S of the 2005 AISC Seismic
Provisions [8] was used for the study. Link rotation was dened
as the imposed transverse displacement divided by the link
length.
3. Validation of the modeling technique
In this part, the accuracy of the nite element model of the link
beams was investigated. The model was developed to predict the
performance of two links tested at the Univ. of California, Berkeley
(UCB) by Hjelmstad and Popov [4] and two A992 rolled shape links
recently tested at the Univ. of Texas, Austin (UTA) by Arce [10].
Boundary conditions, loading, material properties and other
details on modeling were the same as experimental conditions.
Table 1 shows a comparison between maximum shear capacity
obtained from the tests and the nite element analysis for all the
specimens. It can be seen that, the agreement between experi-
mental and numerical results is satisfactory with a maximum error
of 5% for specimen UCB14. Fig. 2 compares the deformed geometry
and hysteresis of the experimental specimen and the model
for UTA 9.
4. Parametric study
After validating the nite element model, a nonlinear analysis
was performed looking at the strain hardening overstrength and
rotation capacity of IPE link beams. Owing to the fact that the
overstrength factor for IPE series sections is constant for a target
shear deformation angle [17] (i.e. it does not depend on the
cross-section depth of the section), only IPE270 section which is
commonly used in low-rise EBFs links in Iran is taken into account
in the present study. The link beam lengths were chosen to
represent a wide spectrum of behavioral zones. This section looks
at overstrength due to strain hardening and inelastic rotation
capacity for IPE links.
According to the AISC 341-05 Seismic Provisions [8] (Sec. 15.3.
a), links of lengths 1.6M
p
/V
p
or less (short links) shall be provided
with intermediate web stiffeners spaced at intervals not exceeding
(30t
w
d/5) for a link rotation angle of 0.08 rad or (52t
w
d/5)
for link rotation angles of 0.02 rad or less. Intermediate links
should also meet these stiffeners requirements corresponding
to the upper-bound and lower bound rotation angles. However,
these are not required for long links. Therefore, in order to investi-
gate the effect of web stiffeners' spacing on the strain harden-
ing overstrength factor and rotation capacity of IPE links,
36 links were modeled and analyzed under the 2005 AISC Seismic
Provisions [8] cyclic loading protocol in two categories:
(1) A number of 21 short, intermediate and long IPE links with
closely spaced stiffeners required to reach the target rotation
angle of 0.08 rad. (as per Table 2) and
(2) a number of 15 Short and intermediate IPE links with sparsely
spaced stiffeners required to reach the target rotation angle of
0.02 rad (as per Table 3).
Tables 2 and 3 list key characteristics, calculated strain hard-
ening overstrength () and inelastic rotation capacity for each of
the links analyzed in this study. Inelastic rotation capacity of the
links is calculated as follows:

e
in which
u
and
e
are the ultimate and elastic rotation capacities,
respectively. The ultimate inelastic rotation capacity was dened
as the point where the hysteresis curve reduced below 80% of the
ultimate shear capacity as proposed in Richards and Uang [14].
5. Discussion of the results
5.1. Overstrength factor for IPE links with closely spaced stiffeners
As can be seen in Table 2, the strain hardening overstrength
factor () calculated from nite element analyses is in a range of
about 1.531.77 (average 1.60) for short links, about 1.291.46
(average 1.37) for intermediate and 1.391.41 (average 1.40) for
long links. As it was pointed out earlier in Section 1, the over-
strength factors given in the 2005 AISC Seismic Provisions [8] are
Fig. 1. FEM model boundary conditions applied to the links: (a) initial congura-
tion and (b) deformed conguration (as per Ref. [14]).
Table 1
Comparison of experimental and nite element analysis maximum shear
capacities.
Specimen Section e (in) e=Mp=Vp VuEXP
(kip)
VuFEM
(kip)
Difference
%
UCB 4 W18 40 28 1.16 207 208 0
UCB 14 W18 35 36 1.91 184 193 5
UTA 7 W10 33 73 3.4 73 72 1
UTA 9 W16 36 48 2 173 172 0
A. Mohebkhah, B. Chegeni / Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260 257
based on an assumed overstrength factor of 1.5 obtained in the
previous experiments. Therefore, the obtained overstrength factors
using FEA in this study indicate that the assumed overstrength in
the Provisions is unconservative for short IPE links with closely
spaced stiffeners and may lead to unsafe design of EBFs. However,
the AISC assumed overstrength factor is conservative for intermedi-
ate and long IPE links' design. The observed high strain hardening
overstrength for short IPE links in relation to wide-ange links may
be attributed to the high compactness of their constituent plates
(anges and web plates with low local slenderness). In fact,
European hot-rolled IPE beams are seismically compact sections
and there would be no severe plastic local web or ange buckling
prior to the achievement of fully plastic shear capacity at relatively
high rotation angles. Also, it can be seen that, the overstrength factor
decreases as the length ratio increases for short and intermediate
links and then increases a little for long links again. Similar over-
strength variation reported previously by other researchers [10] for
wide-ange links. The lower value obtained for intermediate links
has been attributed to shearmoment interaction [25]. Therefore,
it seems that the overstrength factor for link beams should be
modied as a function of length ratio.
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
-0.1 -0.075 -0.05 -0.025 0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1
L
i
n
k

S
h
e
a
r

(
K
i
p
s
)
g
p
(rad)
Fig. 2. Deformed geometry and hysteresis curve foe specimen UTA9: (a) test [10] and (b) FEM analysis.
Table 2
Overstrength and rotation capacity of the analyzed link beam models with
intermediate web stiffeners spaced at intervals (30t
W
d/5).
Model
No.
Link
length e
(mm)
Length ratio
e=Mp=Vp
Intermediate
stiffeners
V
u
/
V
n

p
(rad)
Short 1 270 0.58 1@ 135 mm 1.6 0.19
2 326 0.7 2@ 109 mm 1.77 0.17
3 373 0.8 2@ 124 mm 1.59 0.17
4 419 0.9 2@ 140 mm 1.55 0.17
5 500 1.07 3@ 125 mm 1.65 0.17
6 559 1.2 3@ 140 mm 1.53 0.17
7 652 1.4 4@ 130 mm 1.59 0.15
8 745 1.6 5@ 124 mm 1.55 0.15
Intermediate 9 792 1.7 5@ 132 mm 1.46 0.13
10 838 1.8 5@ 140 mm 1.41 0.13
11 885 1.9 6@ 126 mm 1.41 0.13
12 932 2 6@ 133 mm 1.29 0.13
13 1000 2.15 6@ 143 mm 1.32 0.13
14 1071 2.3 7@ 134 mm 1.35 0.13
15 1118 2.4 7@ 140 mm 1.36 0.11
Long 16 1258 2.7 203 mm
from each
end
1.39 0.09
17 1365 2.93 203 mm
from each
end
1.4 0.09
18 1500 3.22 203 mm
from each
end
1.41 0.09
19 1657 3.56 203 mm
from each
end
1.41 0.09
20 2050 4.4 203 mm
from each
end
1.4 0.05
21 2437 5.23 203 mm
from each
end
1.41 0.04
Table 3
Overstrength and rotation capacity of the analyzed link beam models with
intermediate web stiffeners spaced at intervals (52t
W
d/5).
Model
no.
Link
length e
(mm)
Length ratio
e=Mp=Vp
Intermediate
stiffeners
Vu=Vn
p
(rad)
Short 1 270 0.58 1.31 0.19
2 326 0.7 1@ 163 mm 1.48 0.17
3 373 0.8 1@ 186 mm 1.4 0.17
4 419 0.9 1@ 210 mm 1.37 0.17
5 500 1.07 1@ 250 mm 1.33 0.17
6 559 1.2 1@ 280 mm 1.32 0.17
7 652 1.4 2@ 217 mm 1.34 0.15
8 745 1.6 2@ 248 mm 1.31 0.15
Intermediate 9 792 1.7 2@ 264 mm 1.3 0.13
10 838 1.8 2@ 280 mm 1.3 0.13
11 885 1.9 3@ 221 mm 1.3 0.13
12 932 2 3@ 233 mm 1.27 0.13
13 1000 2.15 3@ 250 mm 1.32 0.13
14 1071 2.3 3@ 268 mm 1.34 0.13
15 1118 2.4 3@ 280 mm 1.34 0.11
A. Mohebkhah, B. Chegeni / Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260 258
5.2. Overstrength factor for IPE links with sparsely spaced stiffeners
According to Table 3, it is observed that increasing intermediate
stiffeners' spacing to achieve the target rotation angle of 0.02 rad,
signicantly affects the overstrength factor. The overstrength
factor for these models is in a range of about 1.311.48 (average
1.39) for short links and 1.271.34 (average 1.30) for intermediate
links. Therefore, it can be concluded that the assumed over-
strength in the Provisions is conservative for IPE links with sparsely
spaced stiffeners and leads to a safe design. These ndings show
that, the overstrength factor is a function of not only length ratio
but also web stiffeners' spacing. Variation of the inelastic rotation
angle versus shear hysteresis loops for the model No. 5 in Table 3 is
shown in Fig. 3. As can be seen, this link which has even one
intermediate stiffener experiences plastic local web buckling at
inelastic rotation of 0.02 rad degrading to some extent the link
shear strength. Therefore, even if the IPE link sections are
seismically compact; they are prone to minor shear strength
degradation due to plastic local buckling.
5.3. Inelastic rotation capacity
According to Tables 2 and 3, it can be seen that all of the
analyzed link models can achieve well inelastic rotation capacities
much larger than the rotations required by the Provisions. This well
behavior can also be attributed to the high compactness of the
section that prevents severe plastic local web buckling. However, it
should be mentioned that these rotations may not be considered
as the actual rotation capacity of IPE link beams. This is because,
the nite element models do not predict material failures and
fracture such as high-cycle fatigue which generally occur in
laboratory tests and result in loss of strength and consequently
low rotation capacity. Therefore, these obtained rotation capacities
should be validated through some experimental tests on IPE links.
It can also be seen that, even the links with the least inter-
mediate stiffeners (Table 3) and relatively low overstrength factors
can sustain much larger rotations than the rotations required by the
Provisions. Hence, it appears that stiffeners requirements can be
relaxed for IPE links. In other words, it seems that providing IPE
links with the least stiffeners required by the Provisions exhibiting
low overstrength factor may lead to economic design of EBFs.
Therefore, more numerical and experimental studies are needed to
have a reliable conclusion on the relaxation of stiffeners require-
ments for IPE links. This is the subject of an ongoing research at
Malayer University by the authors.
6. Overstrength factors proposal
As it was observed in the previous section, starin hardening
overstrength factor () of IPE link beams depends on their length
and stiffeners spacing. The overstrength factor tends to be max-
imum for short links. To propose a reliable strain hardening
overstrength factor for IPE links in different behavioral zones (i.e.
for short, intermediate and long links), more comprehensive
research has to be conducted. Furthermore, a proposal of an
overstrength factor should take into account the inuence of the
adjoining members (beam, brace, slab effect etc.) as per the Seismic
Provisions [8] and hence, link beam should not be treated as an
isolated element. Although it is possible to provide different
strain-hardening factors for short, intermediate and long IPE links,
however, due to the limited number of link beams studied herein,
just a strain hardening overstrength factor is proposed for such
links with different length.
According to the obtained results in this paper, the strain
hardening overstrength factors given in the Provisions (i.e. 1.25
for brace and 1.1 for other adjoining members) are suggested to be
used conservatively for IPE links except the short links with closely
spaced stiffeners (i.e. required stiffeners to achieve the target
rotation angle of 0.08 rad as per the Provisions). For the short
links with closely spaced stiffeners, it is suggested to increase the
overstrength factors given in the Seismic Provisions [8] by 10% to
have a safe design.
As described earlier, the material overstrength factor (R
y
) is the
other factor needed to estimate the maximum expected shear
capacity of link beams. This factor is determined by testing con-
ducted in accordance with the requirements for the specied grade
of steel [8]. However, the factor should be monitored periodically
because it depends on the quality of steel production practice in
each country. Although, the steel S235 is widely used in Iran,
however, there are no comprehensive material tests on its mechan-
ical characteristics. To have a rough data on the statistical character-
istics of the steel S235, the comprehensive material tests data
presented by Melcher et al. [26] on the steels S235 and S355
produced in the Czech Republic can be used herein. Based on the
562 observations, the mean value and standard deviation of the
steel S235 yield strength have been reported [26] as 297.3 and
16.8 MPa, respectively. Therefore, it seems that a material over-
strength factor of 1.3 is reasonable for the steel S235. However,
separate material tests must be conducted in each country to reach a
reliable material overstrength factor.
7. Conclusions
The nonlinear analysis of EBFs links made of hot-rolled IPE
sections with a wide spectrum of length ratio were studied by
means of the nite element method. The main aim was to
investigate the effect of link beam section type on the overstrength
and inelastic rotation capacity of EBFs links. It was found that, the
strain hardening overstrength factor given by the 2005 AISC Seismic
Provisions is unconservative for the design of EBFs having short IPE
links with closely spaced stiffeners and it should be increased
by about 10% to have s safe design. However, the Provisions
overstrength factor can be used conservatively for other IPE links.
-350
-250
-150
-50
50
150
250
350
-0.16 -0.12 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Fig. 3. (a) Deformed geometry and (b) variation of shear capacity versus inelastic
rotation angle for the model No. 5 in Table 3.
A. Mohebkhah, B. Chegeni / Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260 259
Furthermore, it was observed that IPE link beams can achieve
inelastic rotation capacities much larger than the rotations required
by the Provisions. However, owing to ignoring the effect of material
failures (e.g. low-cycle fatigue) in nite element modeling, the
observed high rotation capacities are not yet conclusive and further
experimental studies must be carried out to validate the results.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to enormous help of Professor M.D.
Engelhardt in providing documents regarding this research.
Reviewers provided helpful suggestions that signicantly
improved the paper. Their contribution is appreciated by the
authors.
References
[1] Roeder CW, Popov EP. Eccentrically braced steel frames for earthquakes. J
Struct Div ASCE 1978;104(ST3):391412.
[2] Popov EP. Recent research on eccentrically braced frames. Eng Struct 1983;5
(1):39.
[3] Hjelmstad KD, Popov EP. Cyclic behavior and design of link beams. J Struct Eng
ASCE 1983;109(10):2387403.
[4] Kasai K, Popov EP. Cyclic web buckling control for shear link beams. J Struct
Eng ASCE 1983;112(3):50523.
[5] Malley JO, Popov EP. Shear links in eccentrically braced frames. J Struct Eng
ASCE 1984;109(9):227595.
[6] Engelhardt MD, Popov EP. Experimental performance of long links in eccen-
trically braced frames. J Struct Eng ASCE 1992;118(11):306788.
[7] Taranath BS. Wind and earthquake resistant buildings: structural analysis and
design. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2005.
[8] AISC seismic provisions for structural steel buildings (AISC 341-05). Chicago
(IL): American Institute of Steel Construction, March 9; 2005.
[9] Popov EP, Engelhardt MD. Seismic eccentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel
Res 1988;10:32154.
[10] Arce G. Impact of higher strength steels on local buckling and overstrength of
links in eccentrically braced frames. [Masters thesis]. Austin, Texas: Univ.
Texas; 2002.
[11] AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC 341-02). Chicago
(IL): American Institute of Steel Construction, May 21; 2002.
[12] A Itani, BM Douglas S El-Fass. Cyclic behavior of shear links in retrotted
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge towers. In: Proceedings of the 1st world congress
on structural engineering, San Francisco. Paper No. T155-3, New York: Else-
vier; 1998.
[13] Richards PW. Cyclic stability and capacity design of steel eccentrically braced
frames. [Ph.D. dissertation]. California: University of California at San Diego;
2004.
[14] Richards PW, Uang CM. Effect of ange width-thickness ratio on eccentrically
braced frames link cyclic rotation capacity. J Struct Eng ASCE 2005;131
(10):154652.
[15] Okazaki T, Arce G, Ryu HC, Engelhardt MD. Experimental study of local
buckling, overstrength and fracture of links in eccentrically braced frame. J
Struct Eng ASCE 2005;131(10)152635.
[16] PW Richards CM Uang. Cyclic development of testing protocol for links in
eccentrically braced frames. In: Proceedings of the 13th world conference on
earthquake engineering. Paper No. 2795; 2004.
[17] E Barecchia, G Della Corte FM Mazzolani. Plastic overstrength of short and
intermediate links. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on the
behavior of steel structures in seismic areas (STESSA 2006); 2004. p. 17783.
[18] G Della Corte, M DAniello FM Mazzolani. Plastic shear overstrength of short
links with axial restraints. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference
on the behavior of steel structures in seismic areas (STESSA 2009); 2009. p.
1620.
[19] G Della Corte, M DAniello R Landolfo Overstrength of shear links in eccentric
braces. In: Proceedings of the 15th world conference on earthquake engineer-
ing. Paper No. 4190; 2012.
[20] Della Corte G, DAniello M, Landolfo R. Analytical and numerical study of
plastic overstrength of shear links. J Constr Steel Res 2013;82:1932.
[21] Daneshmand A, Hosseini Hashemi B. Performance of intermediate and long
links in eccentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel Res 2012;70:16776.
[22] Okazaki T, Engelhardt M. Cyclic loading behavior of EBF links constructed of
ASTM A992 steel. J Constr Steel Res 2007;63:75165.
[23] ABAQUS standard user's manual. Version 6.8-1, vol. 13. USA: Hibbitt, Karlsson
and Sorensen, Inc; 2008.
[24] Gioncu V, Mazzolani FM. Ductility of seismic resistant steel Structures. London
and New York: Spon Press; 2002.
[25] MD Engelhardt EP Popov. Behavior of long links in eccentrically braced frames.
Report No. UCB/EERC-89/01. Richmond, California: Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, University of California at Berkeley; 1989.
[26] Melcher J, Kala Z, Holicky M, Fajkus M, Rozlivka L. Design characteristics of
structural steels based on statistical analysis of metallurgical products. J
Constr Steel Res 2004;60:795808.
A. Mohebkhah, B. Chegeni / Thin-Walled Structures 74 (2014) 255260 260