EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING AND STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn.

(2011) Published online in Wiley Online Library ([Link]). DOI: 10.1002/eqe.1103

Evaluation of plastic energy dissipation capacity of steel beams suffering ductile fracture under various loading histories
Yu Jiao1, , , Satoshi Yamada2 , Shoichi Kishiki3 and Yuko Shimada4
1 Department

of Environmental Science and Technology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, J2-21, Nagatsuta 4259, Yokohama 226-8503, Japan 2 Structural Engineering Research Center, Tokyo Institute of Technology, J2-21, Nagatsuta 4259, Yokohama 226-8503, Japan 3 Structural Engineering Research Center, Tokyo Institute of Technology, R3-12, Nagatsuta 4259, Yokohama 226-8503, Japan 4 Faculty of Engineering, Chiba University, 1-33 Yayoi-cho, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8522, Japan

SUMMARY The energy dissipation capacity of a structure is a very important index that indicates the structural performance in energy-based seismic design. This index depends greatly on the structural components that form the whole system. Owing to the wide use of the strong-column weak-beam strength hierarchy where steel beams dissipate the majority of earthquake input energy to the structures, it is necessary to evaluate the energy dissipation capacity of the beams. Under cyclic loadings such as seismic effects, the damage of the beams accumulates. Therefore, loading history is known to be the most pivotal factor inuencing the deformation capacity and energy dissipation capacity of the beams. Seismic loadings with signicantly different characteristics are applied to structural beams during different types of earthquakes and there is no unique appropriate loading protocol that can represent all types of seismic loadings. This paper focuses on the effects of various loading histories on the deformation capacity and energy dissipation capacity of the beams. Cyclic loading tests of steel beams were performed. In addition, some experimental results from published tests were also collected to form a database. This database was used to evaluate the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams suffering from ductile fracture under various loading histories. Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 25 July 2010; Revised 13 December 2010; Accepted 16 December 2010 KEY WORDS:

steel beam; cyclic loading test; energy dissipation capacity; loading history; ductile fracture

1. INTRODUCTION The balance between seismic input energy and the energy dissipation capacity of the structures is the principal concept of energy-based seismic design [1]. A structures energy dissipation capacity, which depends greatly on its structural components, is an important index of earthquake resistance. Steel moment frames with strong-column weak-beam mechanism are frequently used in earthquakeprone areas. In such a system, plastic hinges form in the beams and dissipate the majority of the earthquake input energy, making the beams the dominant anti-earthquake components in the whole structure. Under cyclic loadings such as earthquake effects, the damage of the beams accumulates. Thus, loading history is known as the most denitive factor that affects the deformation capacity and
Correspondence

to: Yu Jiao, Department of Environmental Science and Technology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, J2-21, Nagatsuta 4259, Yokohama 226-8503, Japan. E-mail: [Link]@[Link], [Link]@[Link] Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Y. JIAO ET AL.

4 y 3 y 2 y Deformation y 0 y 2 y 3 y 4 y ATC-24

0.05 0.04 0.03 Drift angle (rad.) 0.02 0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
8 p FEMA 461 6 p 4 p Japan Rec.

SAC

1.0 Relative amplitude (ai/m)

0.048 0

Rotation

2 p 0 2 p 4 p

1.0

6 p 8 p

Figure 1. Recommended standard loading protocols.

energy dissipation capability of the beams. Seismic effects of signicantly different characteristics are applied to structures during distinct earthquakes such as near-fault earthquakes or offshore interplate earthquakes. Furthermore, the number and amplitudes of the loading cycles the beam experiences during earthquakes depend on the conguration, strength, stiffness, etc. of the structure. Figure 1 shows some of the most common recommended standard loading protocols employed in steel beam cyclic loading tests including the ATC-24 protocol [2], the SAC protocol [3], and the FEMA 461 [4] protocol, which are widely used in the U.S.A., and the loading protocol recommended by the Building Research Institute and the Japan Iron and Steel Federation [5], which is commonly accepted in Japan. Among the U.S.A. protocols, the ATC-24 is similar to the Japanese one. The SAC protocol includes more small elastic cycles because of the observed Northridge weld fractures that occurred before yielding occurred [6]. However, some researchers and engineers are more concerned about the cumulative plastic deformation capacity of the beam after yielding. The advantage of introducing the recommended loading protocols is that it is easy to compare the performances of different specimens under the same loading protocol. A majority of the loading protocols are incremental deformation amplitudes loadings, which seem to be inadequate to represent different earthquake loadings. It is also indicated that a comprehensive testing program for structural components should include a monotonic test in addition to cyclic tests [7]. There is no unique best loading history that can represent all kinds of seismic loadings applied to the beams. In order to assess the consequences of cumulative damage, more loading histories should be employed in addition to the standard loading protocols in the steel beam tests. Under such circumstances, it is necessary to seek a concise method of investigating the seismic performances of beams with different structural details that are subjected to various loading histories. Ductile fracture is one of the typical ultimate states of steel beams in earthquakes. During the 1995 Kobe earthquake, a great deal of beam damage due to brittle fracture was observed. After that, according to the new Japanese design code, the most dangerous brittle fracture should be avoided. In addition, the current material and welding methods also help to prevent brittle fracture. Therefore, this paper focuses on beams that suffer ductile fractures at the anges. The seismic performance of the beams is discussed in terms of energy. Five large-scale beamcolumn
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

PL-450 x450 x16

Diaphragm Detail

1900

Backing plate (FB-9 x 25)

35

25

35 7

R10

R35

H-400 x 200 x8 x13(SN400B) 12-PL9-374 x96 RHS-400 x400 x19(BCR295)

Spot welding

Backing plate (FB-9 x 25)

Figure 2. Specimen details.

subassemblies were tested under different loading histories with incremental, decremental, and constant amplitudes in order to understand the inuence of the diversity of the loading histories on the beams. In addition, 24 specimens from six published steel beamcolumn subassembly tests [813] were also investigated. Based on the complete experimental database, the energy dissipation capacity of the steel beams with the failure mode of ductile fracture under various cyclic loading histories was evaluated.

2. CYCLIC LOADING TESTS OF STEEL BEAMS 2.1. Objective Cyclic loading tests of ve T-type beamcolumn subassemblies (Nos. 15 in the database) with exactly the same structural details were conducted to investigate the effect of the loading history on the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams. The only variable in this experiment is the loading history. 2.2. Specimens The column of each specimen was a rectangular hollow section (RHS) 400 mm400 mm19 mm (BCR295 steel) while the beam was a wide-ange section 400 mm (depth)200 mm (width) 8 mm (web thickness) 13 mm (ange thickness) (SN400B steel) (Figure 2). The beam was shop welded onto the column via through-diaphragms with the improved type of weld access holes and solid end tab in accordance with the Japanese Standard Specication JASS 6 [14]. The steel plates of the column and panel zone were thick enough so that neither yielded even when the beam reached its maximum strength. Furthermore, in order to prevent local buckling, stiffeners were welded to the beams near the connections as well as the loading points. Tensile coupon tests of both the ange and web were performed using JIS-1A testing samples [15]. The results are shown in Figure 3. 2.3. Test setup Each specimen, which was rotated 90 with its beam standing vertically and column lying horizontally, was setup through column jigs and screw jacks, with the former fastened onto the reaction frame for vertical support and the latter contacting the reaction frame for horizontal support (Figure 4). A loading jig connecting the free end of the beam and an oil jack, which was installed horizontally on the reaction frame, made up the loading system. In addition, lateral supports (stiffening systems) were set at three locations to prevent lateral buckling of the beam. The beam rotation is dened in Equation (1) and illustrated in Figure 5. =
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(1)
Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

600 Nominal stress [N/mm2] 500 400 300

Yielding Point Strength
N/mm

Flange Web

Elongation
EL

200
Flange 282 352

452 514

32 30

100 0 0 5

Web

10

15 20 25 Nominal strain [%]

30

35

Figure 3. Coupon test results and specimen mechanical characteristics.

Oil Jack

Loading Jig

Lateral Support

Reaction Frame Specimen

Screw Jack

Column Jig

Figure 4. Setup of cyclic loading tests.

Specimen

Column's Face line

Specimen

Column's Face line

Figure 5. Denition of beam rotation.

Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

8 p 6 p 4 p 2 p 0 2 p 4 p 6 p 8 p

8 p 6 p 4 p 2 p 0 2 p 4 p

8 p 6 p 4 p 2 p 0 2 p 4 p 6 p

Loading 1
8 p 6 p 4 p 2 p 0 2 p 4 p 6 p 8 p

6 p 8 p

Loading 2
8 p 6 p 4 p 2 p 0 2 p 4 p 6 p

8 p

Loading 3

Loading 4

8 p

Loading 5

Figure 6. Loading histories.

2.4. Loading histories Five different deformation-controlled cyclic loadings, shown in Figure 6, were applied to the specimens during the test with the unit beam rotation set to P (0.0058 rad by calculation), the elastic beam rotation when the moment of the beams cantilever end equals its full plastic moment M P (383 kNm by calculation). The ve loading histories are as follows Loading1: Incremental cyclic loading starting from 2 P , with intervals of 2 P . For each loading step, two cycles were applied. Loading 2: Decremental cyclic loading completely converse of loading (1), i.e. loading starting from the amplitude where the specimen subjected to loading (1) fractured, with intervals of 2 P . For each loading step, two cycles were applied. Loadings 35:: Cyclic loading with a constant amplitude of 3 P , 4 P , and 5 P , respectively. Loading (1) is recommended by the Building Research Institute and the Japan Iron and Steel Federation [5]. Considering the seismic effects of small amplitude shaking after large ones, the decremental loading (2) was also included in the loading histories. Loadings (3)(5) were employed to simulate earthquake loadings under long-duration ground motion. 2.5. Experimental results and discussion The loaddeformation relationships obtained from the cyclic loading tests (hysteresis loops) are shown in Figure 7. Ductile cracks on the beam ange were rst observed near the toe of the weld access hole of each specimen, which propagated longer and wider during the test until the specimen reached fracture. Here, fracture is dened as the point when the measured load starts to decrease while the specimens deformation is still increasing. The processes of the cyclic loading tests were as follows. Loading 1: Loading started from two cycles of 2 P , until two cycles of 6 P , as scheduled. After that, the specimen fractured during the rst loading cycle of +8 P . The fracture point was conrmed when the cumulative rotation was approximately 0.605 rad. Loading 2: Loading started with a half cycle of +8 P , which was the amplitude where the specimen under loading (1) fractured, followed by the decremental cyclic loading mentioned above (from 6 P to +2 P ). The specimen did not fracture until it was loaded again toward +8 P . The fracture point was conrmed at the cumulative rotation of 0.677 rad. Loading 3: 26 cycles of loading with a constant amplitude of 3 P were completed. The specimen fractured as it was approaching +3 P of the 27th cycle, when the cumulative rotation equaled 1.863 rad. Loading 4: 9.5 cycles of loading with a constant amplitude of 4 P were completed. The specimen fractured on its way to 4 P in the 10th cycle, when the cumulative rotation equaled 0.935 rad. Loading 5: 3 cycles of
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

800

-6 -4 -2 Loading 1

800

-6 -4 -2 Loading 2

6 8

800 Loading 3

-3

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)
0 0.05

-800 -0.05

0.05

-800 -0.05

-800 -0.05

0.05

Beam rotation (rad)

800 -4 Loading 4 4

Beam rotation (rad)

800 -5 Loading 5 5

Beam rotation (rad)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

-800 -0.05

0.05

-800 -0.05

0.05

Beam rotation (rad)

Beam rotation (rad)

Figure 7. Loading-deformation relationships.

M M

Skeleton Curve Elastic Unloading Part Bauschinger Part

Figure 8. Decomposition of beams hysteresis loops.

loading with a constant amplitude of 5 P were completed. The specimen fractured on its way to +5 P in the 4th cycle, when the cumulative rotation equaled 0.400 rad. Loaddeformation hysteresis loops of steel beams under cyclic loading can be decomposed into three parts: the skeleton curve, Bauschinger part, and elastic unloading part [1], as illustrated in Figure 8. Here, the skeleton curve is obtained by connecting parts of the loaddeformation relationship sequentially when the beam rst experienced its maximum load (both positive and negative). It is observed that the loaddeformation relationships of the steel beams under monotonic loading have an approximate correspondence to the skeleton curves of the steel beams with same structural details that fracture within relatively fewer loading cycles under cyclic loadings. Moreover, assuming the Bauschinger part to be elastic and neglecting the Bauschinger part do not result in unsafe-side estimation of energy absorption capacity, although the estimate might be too conservative [1]. Therefore, there is an empirical rule that the deformation capacity and energy dissipation capacity of the skeleton curves are adopted to characterize the behavior of the beams [1]. Nevertheless, this empirical rule was obtained under the condition that the steel beams fracture within relatively few loading cycles under cyclic loadings. Under certain loading histories such as long-duration ground motions, a beam fractures after many loading cycles. In these cases, the skeleton curves obtained are obviously shorter than the loaddeformation relationships of the beams under monotonic loading. The energy dissipation capacity in the Bauschinger parts becomes too large to be neglected, rendering this empirical rule no longer applicable. In this paper, the experimental results were also studied by rst dividing the hysteresis loops into skeleton curves and Bauschinger parts similar to the abovementioned methodology [1], while taking into consideration the contributions of the Bauschinger parts as well in the second step, which was neglected in [1].
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

800

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Plus Minus

800 Plus Minus 0

800 Plus Minus 0

-800 0 0.02 0.04

Loading 1 0.06 0.08

-800 0 0.02 0.04

Loading 2 0.06 0.08

-800 0 0.02 0.04

Loading 3 0.06 0.08

| | (rad)
800

| | (rad)
800

| | (rad)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Plus Minus 0

Plus Minus 0

-800 0 0.02 0.04

Loading 4 0.06 0.08

-800 0 0.02 0.04

Loading 5 0.06 0.08

| | (rad)

| | (rad)

Figure 9. Skeleton curves.

800

800

800

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Plus Minus

Plus Minus

Plus Minus 0

Loading 1 -800 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5

Loading 2 -800 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5

Loading 3 -800 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5

| | (rad)
800

| | (rad)
800

| | (rad)

Moment (kN-m)

Moment (kN-m)

Plus Minus 0

Plus Minus 0

Loading 4 -800 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5

Loading 5 -800 0 0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5

| | (rad)

| | (rad)

Figure 10. Bauschinger parts.

The skeleton curves and Bauschinger parts of both the plus and minus loading sides derived from the loaddeformation relationships are shown in Figures 9 and 10. Very similar skeleton curves can be observed from loadings (1), (2), and (5), which share the same characteristics of the comparatively large maximum deformation amplitudes; the specimens under these loading histories reached ductile fracture points within a fewer number of loading cycles. On the other hand, the skeleton curves of loadings (3) and (4) with relatively small deformation amplitudes and large numbers of loading cycles are considerably shorter than are those of the others. Although the skeleton curves of all specimens have similar shapes, they become shorter when the maximum loading amplitudes decrease, whereas the Bauschinger parts grow remarkably larger. The decrease in the energy dissipation capacity in the skeleton curves is much less than is the increase in the energy dissipation capacity in the Bauschinger parts. Thus, the sacrice of the skeleton curves results in larger overall energy dissipation capacity. In order to evaluate the energy dissipation capacity of the beams under various loading histories, it is necessary to clarify the relationship between the energy dissipation capacity of the skeleton curves and the Bauschinger parts.
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

3. RELEVANT EXPERIMENTS OF THE STEEL BEAMS Even though some basic information of the effects of loading histories on the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams was obtained from the experiment mentioned in Section 2, the number and diversity of the specimens are rather limited. To form a stronger argument, additional published experimental data were included in the database for evaluating the energy dissipation capacity of the beams. The loaddeformation results from six published beam-to-column subassembly (shopwelded ange and web connection) experiments were investigated. Stiffeners were welded near the connections on all specimens (beam parts) to prevent local buckling. The ultimate states of all of these specimens were conrmed to be ductile fractures at the beam anges near the connections. Here, the denition of fracture is the same as that illustrated in the previous cyclic loading tests. Together with the cyclic loading tests mentioned in Section 2, details of the database are listed in Table I. For the wide-ange section, H is the beam depth, B is the beam width, and tw and t f are the web and ange thicknesses, respectively. For the rectangular hollow section, D is the column width and t is the thickness. Nos. 69 are specimens from the monotonic loading tests [8]. The shape of the column crosssection (RHS column/wide-ange column), the thickness of the column, and the presence of the weld access holes are the variables of this experiment. The cross-sections and spans of the wide-ange beams were kept constant. Seven wide-ange beam-to-RHS-column connection specimens, numbered 1016, from a full-scale shaking table test [9] were also collected (Table I). The NS component of the JMA Kobe record (according to the Japan Meteorological Agency of Kobe, 1995), which was scaled to the peak velocity of 1.0 m/s, was input during testing. Note that due to the characteristics of the input record (near-fault earthquake record), each specimen fractured within few plastic loading cycles, meaning the skeleton curves obtained from this experiment would be very similar to the loaddeformation relationships of the beams if they were subjected to monotonic loading [1]. Thirteen specimens (Nos. 1729) from four cyclic loading tests [1013] are also included in the database (Table I). Eight of them are steel beam specimens with 50 mm thick end plates (PL in Table I); the others are beamcolumn subassemblies with wide-ange beams and RHS columns.

4. ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY OF STEEL BEAMS UNDER RANDOM LOADING HISTORIES 4.1. Equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio The energy dissipation capacity of steel beams was expressed by means of the Equivalent Cumulative Plastic Deformation Ratio ( ), which is one of the indices used to quantify cumulative damage in energy-based seismic design. Equation (2) shows the denition of : = Wp Mp (2)
p

where W p is the plastic energy dissipation capacity of a steel beam, M p is the full plastic moment of the steel beam, and p is the beam rotation when the moment at the beam end reaches M p . The equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of steel beams subjected to monotonic loading 0 is illustrated in Figure 11, which is dened as
0=

W p0 Mp p

(3)

where W p0 is the plastic energy dissipation capacity of a steel beam under monotonic loading.
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Copyright

Table I. Database details.

Beam Span (mm) 2100 2100 2100 2100 2100 1500 1500 1500 1500 2729 2729 2729 2729 2729 2729 2729 2050 3725 3725 3725 3725 2225 2225 2225 2225 1900 1900 2150 2150 359 359 397 267 282 282 282 282 282 334 334 334 334 330 330 330 330 330 330 316 291 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 314 314 386 318 62 62 62 62 62 70 70 70 70 64 64 64 64 64 64 62 68 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 71 71 73 72 352 352 352 352 352 375 375 375 375 413 413 413 413 413 413 378 385 334 334 334 334 334 334 334 334 368 368 396 318 68 68 68 68 68 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 70 74 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 78 78 71 72 35 35 35 35 35 0 0 25 25 35 35 35 35 0 35 35 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 35 35 35 40019 40019 40019 40019 40019 W 2502501014 2509 2509 2506 50016 50022 50022 50022 50022 50032 50032 40019 PL50 PL50 PL50 PL50 PL50 PL50 PL50 PL50 40019 40019 40019 40019 324.5 324.5 324.5 324.5 324.5 348 364 364 312 501 498 498 498 342 405 405 388 Cyclic Cyclic Cyclic Cyclic Cyclic Mono Mono Mono Mono Shaking Shaking Shaking Shaking Shaking Shaking Shaking Incr. Incr. Incr. Con. Con. Incr. Incr. Con. Con. Incr. Incr. Incr. Incr. Flange 2 y (N/mm) YR (%) Web Weld access 2 YR (%) Hole (mm) y (N/mm) Cross section D t Connection Column y Loading Number of 2 ) history (N/mm cycles 6.5 7 26.5 10 3.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 2 3 3 3 14 14.5 2.5 3 8 17.5 11.5 4.5 8.5 18.5 8.5 7 6.5 11 10 10.5 max / p
EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number

Cross section W H B tw t f

1 2 3 4 5 6 [8] 7 [8] 8 [8] 9 [8] 10 [9] 11 [9] 12 [9] 13 [9] 14 [9] 15 [9] 16 [9] 17 [10] 18 [11] 19 [11] 20 [11] 21 [11] 22 [11] 23 [11] 24 [11] 25 [11] 26 [12] 27 [12] 28 [13] 29 [13]

W 400200813 W 400200813 W 400200813 W 400200813 W 400200813 W 3001506.59 W 3001506.59 W 3001506.59 W 300150659 W 6003001225 W 6003001225 W 6003001225 W 6003001225 W 60030012 25 W 6003001225 W 6003001632 W 600200912 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 6002001117 W 400200813 W 400200813 W 4883001118 W 4883001118

6.55 8 3 4 5 17.76 15.28 9.85 9.25 12.35 13.65 13.91 14.1 12.94 13.92 15.28 4.72 6 6 4 6 6 6 4 6 6.1 7.6 6 6

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

M
Mp
M

WP0

Figure 11. Plastic energy dissipation of steel beam under monotonic loading.
M M M

Skeleton Curve

Bauschinger Part

WS 0 0 0 WB

Figure 12. Decomposition of the hysteresis loop and plastic energy dissipation of steel beams under cyclic loading.

In case of beams under cyclic loadings, with the decomposition of the hysteresis loops, the plastic energy dissipation capacity of a steel beam W p is expressed as the sum of the plastic energy dissipation capacity from both their skeleton curves and Bauschinger parts, as shown in Equation (4) and Figure 12: W p = WS + W B (4)

where W S and W B are the plastic energy dissipation capacity of the skeleton curve and Bauschinger part, respectively. Consequently, it is possible to express the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of steel beams under cyclic loading in Equations (5)(7). = S +B
S B

(5)
p) p)

= W S /(M p = W B /(M p

(6) (7)

where S and B are the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of the skeleton curve and Bauschinger part, respectively. In this study, the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of each part of the hysteresis loop was studied to investigate the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams subjected to cyclic loading. 4.2. Energy dissipation capacity of the steel beams under monotonic loading 4.2.1. Outline. The loading history is one of the principal factors that affect the plastic deformation capacity of steel beams. However, in order to evaluate a beams energy dissipation capacity, the mechanical characteristics of the material and its geometric characteristics must also be taken into consideration. Among them, the yield point and yield ratio of the steel together with the beams section and span affect the full plastic moment, initial stiffness, and the post-yield stiffness of the beam. The size of the weld access holes as well as the column cross-section greatly
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

local bending of the column tube wall (RHS column)

Loss of section
(Weld access hole)

Figure 13. Local bending of column tube wall and loss of web section.

affect the joint efciency of the beam web. Specically, the weld access holes (loss of section) cause a decrease in a beams moment of plastication. The tube walls of a column (especially RHS column) at the connections tend to have an out-of-plane deformation when the beams are subjected to bending. These are the main reasons for the inefciency of the connections moment transmission [8], i.e. the joint efciency of the beam web is less than 100% (Figure 13). The inuence of the material and geometric characteristics can be assessed by investigating beams under monotonic loading. Then, the energy dissipation capacity of beams under cyclic loading histories is studied based on the energy dissipation capacity of the beams under monotonic loading. According to the current research, the concept of a bilinear model of a beams loaddeformation relationship under monotonic loading was introduced to illustrate the effect of joint efciency. The relationship between the strain concentration ratio of the beam ange and the ultimate beam moment was obtained [8]. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of quantitative studies of deformation capacity/energy dissipation capacity. In this study, a quantitative bilinear model was developed to obtain the monotonic plastic deformation capacity of a beam. 4.2.2. Parametric study of a beams loaddeformation relationship. In order to obtain a reasonable second stiffness ratio of the bilinear loaddeformation model, a parametric study of the material characteristics and the beam moment gradient was conducted through an in-plane analysis [1618] of the ideal cantilever wide-ange beams subjected to monotonic shear bending (without outof-plane deformation). The cross-section of the analytical beam model was set to a wide-ange section of 600 mm (depth)300 mm (width)13 mm (web thickness)25 mm (ange thickness). In order to change the beam moment gradient, three different beam spans were dened: 3, 4, and 6 m. In addition, four stressstrain relationship models (material characteristics) with different yield stresses/strains and yield ratios were introduced in this analysis. Two types of steel with different yield points and elongations that are commonly used in Japan as steel beams, SN400 and SN490, were chosen as typical materials. The tensile coupon test results of these two types of steel were used as the basic stressstrain models. The experimental yield ratio of SN400 was around 60% while that of SN490 was around 70%. It is possible to obtain two more relevant stressstrain models with different yet reasonable yield ratios (70% for SN400 and 80% for SN490) by varying the post-yield stress value. The input stressstrain relation models and the output analytic results are shown in Figures 14 and 15. There is hardly any signicant difference between the second stiffness ratios of the loaddeformation relationships, despite the different parameters. Therefore, it is feasible to assume that the second stiffness ratio of the ideal steel wide-ange beam loaddeformation relationships under monotonic loading is a constant, which is considered to be around 2.5%. 4.2.3. Web joint efciency at the ultimate state. It is necessary to discuss the joint efciency of the beam web at the beam-to-column connection at its ultimate state in order to ascertain the ultimate
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

600 Nominal stress (N/mm2) 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Nominal strain 0.2 0.25 SN400-60% SN400-70% SN490-70% SN490-80%

Figure 14. Input stressstrain relationship models.

2 1.5

M / Mp

1 0.5 0 Bilinear model Analytic results

10

20

30

/ p

Figure 15. Results of the parametric study.

load and rotation of the beam under monotonic loading. Ultimate joint efciency
w= j Mwu

is dened as (8)

Mwu

where j Mwu is the maximum moment of the beam web at the connection considering the loss of the beam section and local bending of the column tube wall, Mwu = wu Z wp is the ideal maximum moment of the beam web at the connection, wu is the ultimate stress of the beam web, and Z wp is the plastic section modulus of the full section beam web. Here, j Mwu is calculated by modied Equations (9) and (10) based on the Japanese Recommendation for design of connections in steel structures [19].
j Mwu j Mwu

= m Z wpe = m Z wpe

wy wu

(beams with weld access holes) (beams without weld access holes)

(9) (10)

where wy is the yield stress of the beam web, Z wpe = 1 (Db 2tbf 2Sr )2 tbw is the plastic section 4 modulus of the beam web considering the loss of cross-section, and m [19, 20] is the normalized bending strength of the beam web at the beam-to-column connection m = j Mwu /Mwp , where Mwp is the full plastic moment of the beam web considering the loss of section due to the weld access holes. Here, m is controlled by the size of the column, beam and the weld access holes as well as the yield strengths of the column and beam. In design, it is possible to approximate m as follows: for the wide-ange columns (strong-axis direction), m = 1; for the RHS columns, m = min{1, 4(tcf /d j ) (b j cy )/(tbw wy )}, where cy is the yield stress of the column, Db is the beam height, tbf is the thickness of the beam ange, Sr is the loss of cross-section in the beam height dimension (usually the length of the weld access hole along the beam height), tbw is the
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

120 100 Calculated value (%) 80 60 40 20 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Experimental value (%) Modi. Meth. AIJ Rec. Meth.

Figure 16. Verication of the joint efciency calculation method.

thickness of the beam web, tcf is the steel plate thickness of the RHS column, d j is the inner distance of two diaphragms, b j = Bc 2tcf is the width of the yield area on the RHS column obtained from the yield line theory, and Bc is the width of the RHS column. In [19], only Equation (9), which originates from plastic analysis where the material is considered to be elastic-perfectly plastic, is recommended. Nevertheless, strain hardening occurs in real structural steel. In the wide-ange beams without weld access holes, the web works more efciently and reaches the maximum stress wu at the ultimate state. Equation (10) is introduced in this study for beams without weld access holes. The experimental results of the 11 specimens (specimen Nos. 69 from the monotonic loading tests [8] and specimen Nos. 1016 from the shaking table tests [9]) from the database were investigated to verify the proposed evaluation method of joint efciency. Note that although the specimens from the shaking table tests were subjected to cyclic loadings, under the JMA Kobe record, the specimens reached the maximum load within very few loading cycles. The strain data of the measuring steps in the loaddeformation skeleton curve were connected, which could approximately be regarded as the strain history under monotonic loading. The calculated joint efciencies of these 11 specimens through the recommended [19] as well as the modied evaluation method were compared with the experimental values calculated by Okada et al. [8]. Verication of the evaluation methods is shown in Figure 16 with the experimental results plotted on the x-axis and the calculated results plotted on the y-axis. The modied method shows higher accuracy. Particularly for specimens without weld access holes, the results of the modied method are considerably closer to the experimental results (arrows in Figure 16). 4.2.4. Bilinear loaddeformation model. A bilinear loaddeformation relationship model is proposed here based on the model mentioned in [8] to evaluate the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams under monotonic loading. Figure 17 shows details of the model. Following the previous discussion, it is necessary to divide the beams into two categories: with and without weld access holes. For both categories, K is the initial stiffness and K st = 2.5% K is the second stiffness. Mu and u are the actual ultimate loaddeformation conditions considering the decrease in joint efciency. For beams without weld access holes, the plastication moment can be represented by M p and p . Mui and ui are the ideal ultimate moment and beam rotation, respectively, when the joint efciency w is 100%, which can be obtained from the model with some basic structural information. For beams with weld access holes, the loss of the beam section causes a decrease in the plastication moment. Therefore, it is necessary to calculate the full plastic moment from the net beam section. Thus, the plastication moment M p and the corresponding beam rotation p are smaller than the commonly dened values of M p and p . Mui is the same as the ideal
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

M Mui Mu Mp , Mp

Actual ultimate condition (Joint efficiency<100%)

K st = 2.5% K

Actual ultimate condition (Joint efficiency<100%)

Mui Mu Kst W

Ideal ultimate condition Mp (Joint efficiency=100%)

W K p

Kst

Ideal ultimate condition (Joint efficiency=100%)

K , p p

ui

ui

Steel beams with weld access holes

Steel beams without weld access hole

Figure 17. Bilinear load-deformation model of steel beams under monotonic loading.
25 20
1

0 (Cal.)

15
2

10 5 0 0 5

10

15

20

25

0 (Exp.)

Figure 18. Verication of

of steel beams under monotonic loading.

ultimate fracture moment of the beams without weld access holes while ui is the corresponding beam rotation. The actual maximum moment of the beam Mu is expressed in Equation (11) as Mu = Mfu +
w Mwu

1)

(11)

where Mfu = fu Z fp is the maximum moment of the beam ange at the connection and Z fp is the plastic section modulus of the full section beam ange. From the joint efciency w , it is possible to obtain the maximum beam rotation u from the bilinear model. In other words, the actual ultimate loaddeformation condition of a steel beam subjected to monotonic loading can be derived. Therefore, through this model, it is possible to calculate the energy dissipation capacity W p0 as well as the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio 0 of steel beams subjected to monotonic loading. The experimental results from the monotonic loading tests [8] were investigated to verify the evaluation method. Figure 18 shows the verication. The experimental results of 0 from the monotonic loading tests are plotted on the x-axis and the calculated results of 0 are plotted on the y-axis. The graph shows good correspondence between the experimental and calculated values of the monotonic energy dissipation capacity of the beams. The effects of the mechanical characteristics of the material and the geometric characteristics of the beam on the energy dissipation capacity of the beam were obtained. 4.3. Energy dissipation capacity of steel beams under various cyclic loadings 4.3.1. Normalization of the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio. In order to remove the inuence of the material and geometric characteristics on the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams, the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratios of the skeleton curves ( S ) and Bauschinger parts ( B ) of the beams as well as the overall equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratios , were normalized by the equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratios of steel beams under monotonic loading 0 . The normalized values S / 0 , B / 0 , and / 0 can be regarded as the
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

3 2.5 2
S/0

/ = 0.15

/
M

1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 max/p

15

20

Figure 19. Relationship between the normalized equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of the skeleton curve and the normalized maximum deformation.

energy dissipation capacity of the steel beam with the same material and geometric characteristics, which is only affected by the different loading histories. 4.3.2. Maximum deformation and the energy dissipation capacity. This section discusses the relationship of the energy dissipation capacity of a beam and the maximum beam deformation during the loading procedure. The maximum deformation max is dened as the absolute value of the maximum beam rotation experienced by the specimens under cyclic loadings, which is normalized by p (Table I) for comparison between different specimens. The relationship between the normalized skeleton equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio S / 0 and the normalized maximum deformation max / p of the database is plotted in Figure 19. The plots show an approximately linear relationship, which is expressed in Equation as (12),
S

0 = 0.15 max / p

(3

max / p

17.76)

(12)

4.3.3. Number of loading cycles and energy dissipation capacity. This section looks at the energy dissipation capacity of the steel beams under various loading histories by investigating its relationship with the number of loading cycles the beams survive until ductile fracture. For the previously mentioned shaking table tests, it is necessary to count the number of effective loading cycles until fracture, i.e. the loading cycles with their amplitudes in the plastic region that contribute to plastic energy dissipation. The rainow-counting algorithm originally published in [21] was used to calculate the number of loading cycles in the shaking table tests. This algorithm denes cycles as closed load/deformation hysteresis loops. According to the loaddeformation relationship recorded during the tests, a large number of loading cycles experienced by the specimen was within the elastic region, which contributed little to the total plastic energy dissipation. Therefore, cycles with loading amplitudes less than 2/3 M p , which hardly inuenced the energy dissipation capacity of the specimens, were skipped in the cycle counting. In the database (Table I), the number of loading cycles until the beam fractures, N , varies from 0.5 to 26.5. The relationships of the normalized equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratios of the specimens and the number of loading cycles until the specimens fracture are plotted in Figure 20. S / 0 decreases with an increase in N , while B / 0 and / 0 show opposite trends. The tted line of each relationship is also plotted in these graphs It is possible to approximate the normalized equivalent plastic deformation ratios of the specimens as functions of ln(N n ) with tolerable errors, as illustrated in Equations (13)(15).
S S

/ /

0 0

= ln N 5/4 +1.9 (0.5 N 1) = ln N 5/12 +1.9 (1<N 26.5)

(13)

Copyright

2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

8 7 6 5

Skeleton Curve

7 6 5

/0

4 3 2 1 0 0 5

/0

/ = ln N

+ 1.9

4 3 2 1 0

/ = ln N
Bauschinger Part
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

10

15

20

25

30

Number of Loading Cycles

8 7 6 5

Number of Loading Cycles

/0

4 3 2 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

/ = ln N

+ 1.9
Overall

Number of Loading Cycles

Figure 20. Relationship between the normalized equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of the skeleton curve and the number of loading cycles until fracture.
B B

/ /

0 0

= 0 (0.5 N 1) = ln N 5/3 (1<N 26.5)

(14) (15)

= ln N 5/4 +1.9 (0.5 N 26.5)

Note that, different from the commonly used Miners rule, proposed Equations (12)(15) are based on the decomposition of the beams hysteresis loops, which can only be applied after the plastication of the steel beams subjected to relatively large amplitude cyclic loadings. Since Equations (12)(15) were obtained from the experimental results, the applicable ranges of these equations are considered to be within the scope of the database, ie. (0.5 N 26.5). Considering the characteristics of the seismic loadings applied on steel beams, the amplitudes are rather large and the total numbers of shaking cycles, especially those that cause damage to structures, is quite limited, usually a few tens. Therefore, Equations (12)(15) can be considered valid in seismic design However, when it comes to the loading cycles whose amplitudes are within the elastic region where the number of loading cycles is extremely large, these equations are no longer applicable.

5. CONCLUSION The energy dissipation capacity of the structural components plays a signicant role in energybased seismic design because it is the index of structural performance. Considering the diversity of earthquake loadings applied to steel beams, this study aims at evaluating the energy dissipation capacity of beams ending in ductile fracture under various loading histories. Five beamcolumn subassemblies were tested under different cyclic loadings to study the effects of various loading histories on the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams. Together with some published experimental results, a database of steel beams tested under diverse loading protocols was created. The energy dissipation capacity of the steel beams under various loading histories was evaluated by studying the energy dissipation capacity of the skeleton curves and Bauschinger parts of the specimens in the database. The conclusions of this study are summarized as follows:
Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

EVALUATION OF PLASTIC ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

(1) Under various loadings, a linear relationship was found between the normalized equivalent cumulative plastic deformation ratio of the skeleton curve (S / 0 ) and the normalized maximum deformation ( max / p ). (2) The normalized equivalent plastic deformation ratio of each part of the beams loaddeformation relationship (S / 0 and B / 0 ) and the overall normalized equivalent plastic deformation ratio ( / 0 ) can be approximately expressed by the natural logarithmic functions of the number of loading cycles that the beam experiences in its plastic region until fracture (N ). (3) It is possible to evaluate the energy dissipation capacity of steel beams that suffer ductile fracture under random loading histories through Equations (12)(15) by the maximum deformation ( max / p ) experienced by the beams. In energy-based seismic design of a steel moment frame, in order to evaluate the seismic behavior of the entire structure, it is necessary to obtain the energy dissipation capacity of each structural element (steel beam in a weak-beam frame). During the design procedure, it is possible to calculate the maximum deformations of the beams via response analysis. Thereupon, the energy dissipation of the beams can be evaluated through the equations suggested in this paper. Consequently, the energy dissipation capacity, i.e. the seismic performance of the entire steel moment frame can be evaluated. The results of this study are useful in the design work used to estimate the seismic performance of steel moment frames.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Grateful acknowledgment is given to Prof. Keiichiro Suita of the Kyoto University for providing his experimental data of steel beams under cyclic loading.

REFERENCES 1. Akiyama H. Earthquake-Resistant Limit-State Design for Buildings. University of Tokyo Press: Tokyo, 1985. 2. Krawinkler H. Guidelines for cyclic seismic testing of components of steel structures. Report No. ATC-24, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, 1992. 3. Clark P, Frank K, Krawinkler H, Shaw R. Protocol for fabrication, inspection, testing, and documentation of beam-column connection tests and other experimental specimens. SAC Steel Project Background Document, Report No. SAC/BD-97/02, 1997. 4. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Interim testing protocols for determining seismic performance characteristics of structural and nonstructural components. FEMA 461 Draft Document, Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, CA, 2007. 5. Building Research Institute and the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. Study on Testing Method for Structural Performance Evaluation of Steel Structures. Tokyo, 2002. 6. Youssef N, Bonowitz D, Gross JL. A survey of steel moment-resisting frame buildings affected by the 1994 Northridge earthquake. National Institute of Standards and Technology. NISTIR 5625, 1995. 7. Krawinkler H. Loading histories for cyclic tests in support of performance assessment of structural components. The 3rd International Conference on Advances in Experimental Structural Engineering, San Francisco, 2009. 8. Okada K, Matsumoto Y, Yamada S. Evaluation of effect of joint efciency at beam-to-column connection on ductility capacity of steel beams (in Japanese). Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, Transactions of AIJ 2003; 568:131138. 9. Matsumoto Y, Yamada S, Akiyama H. Fracture of beam-to-column connections simulated by means of the shaking table test using the inertial loading equipment. Behaviour of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas. Balkema: Rotterdam, 2000; 215222. 10. Kishiki S, Uehara D, Yamada S, Suzuki K, Saeki E, Wada A. New ductile steel frames limiting damage to connection elements at the bottom ange of beam-ends: part 3 experimental evaluation of composite effects and damage to concrete slab (in Japanese). Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, Transactions of AIJ 2005; 595:123130. 11. Suita K. Flexural strength demand for beam-to-column connections in earthquake resistant design of steel moment frames (in Japanese). Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, Transactions of AIJ 2003; 567:165171. 12. Kobayashi A. Evaluation of ultimate energy dissipation capacity of steel under cyclic loading (in Japanese). Master Thesis, submitted to Tokyo Institute of Technology; 2005. Copyright 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe

Y. JIAO ET AL.

13. Nakagomi T, Fujita T, Minami K, Lee K, Murai M. Study on beam-end detail for the method of non-scallop on beam-to-column welded joints (in Japanese). Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, Transactions of AIJ 1997; 498:145151. 14. Architectural Institute of Japan. Japanese architectural standard specication JASS 6, steel work (in Japanese). Tokyo: AIJ; 1996. 15. Japanese Standards Association. Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS) Z 2201, Test pieces for tensile test for metallic materials, Tokyo, 1998. 16. Kato B, Akiyama H, Uchida N. Ultimate strength of structural steel members (I) (in Japanese). Transactions of the AIJ 1966; 119:2230. 17. Yamada M, Sakae K, Tadokoro T, Shirakawa K. Elasto-plastic bending deformation of wide ange beamcolumns under axial compression, Part I: Bending moment-curvature and bending momentdeection relations under static loading (in Japanese). Transactions of the AIJ 1966; 127:814. 18. Yamada S, Akiyama H. Deteriorating behavior of steel members in post-buckling range. Structural Stability and Design. Balkema: Rotterdam, 1995; 169174. 19. Architectural Institute of Japan. Recommendation for design of connections in steel structures (in Japanese). AIJ: Tokyo, 2006. 20. Suita K, Tanaka T. Flexural strength of beam web to square tube column joints (in Japanese). Steel Construction Engineering 2000; 7(26):5158. 21. Endo T, Matsuishi M, Mitsunaga K, Kobayashi K, Takahashi K. Rainow method, the proposal and the applications (in Japanese). Bulletin of the Kyushu Institute of Technology Science and Technology 1974; 28:3362.

Copyright

2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn. (2011) DOI: 10.1002/eqe