Analytical Prediction of Seismic Response of Steel Frames with Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy
Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) is accepted
when it used as connection in steel structures. The seismic behaviour
of steel frames with SMA is being assessed in this study. Three eightstorey
steel frames with different SMA systems are suggested, the
first one of which is braced with diagonal bracing system, the second
one is braced with nee bracing system while the last one is which the
SMA is used as connection at the plastic hinge regions of beams.
Nonlinear time history analyses of steel frames with SMA subjected
to two different ground motion records have been performed using
Seismostruct software. To evaluate the efficiency of suggested
systems, the dynamic responses of the frames were compared. From
the comparison results, it can be concluded that using SMA element
is an effective way to improve the dynamic response of structures
subjected to earthquake excitations. Implementing the SMA braces
can lead to a reduction in residual roof displacement. The shape
memory alloy is effective in reducing the maximum displacement at
the frame top and it provides a large elastic deformation range. SMA
connections are very effective in dissipating energy and reducing the
total input energy of the whole frame under severe seismic ground
motion. Using of the SMA connection system is more effective in
controlling the reaction forces at the base frame than other bracing
systems. Using SMA as bracing is more effective in reducing the
displacements. The efficiency of SMA is dependant on the input
wave motions and the construction system as well.
[1] Sabelli R, Mahin S, Chang C. Seismic demands on steel braced frame
buildings with buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures
2003;25(5):655-66.
[2] Nakashima M, Inoue K, Tada M. Classification of damage to steel
buildings observed in the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake.
Engineering Structures 1998;20(4-6):271-81.
[3] FEMA. Recommended seismic design provisions for new moment
frame buildings. Federal emergency management agency report no. 350.
2000.
[4] Osteraas J, Krawinkler H. The mexico earthquake of september 19,
1985 behavior of steel buildings. Earthquake Spectra 1989; 5(1):51-88.
[5] Kim H, Goel S. Seismic evaluation and upgrading of braced frame
structures for potential local failures, UMCEE 92-24, Dept. of civil
engineering and environmental engineering, Univ. of Michigan, Ann
Arbor; Oct. 1992. p. 290.
[6] Tremblay R, Timler P, BruneauM, Filiatrault A. Performance of steel
structures during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering 1995;22:338-60.
[7] Tremblay R, Bruneau M, Nakashima M, Prion HGL, Filiatrault A,
DeVall R. Seismic design of steel buildings: lessons from the 1995
Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
1996;23:727-56.
[8] Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Marnetto, R., Mucciarelli, M., Nigro, D.,
Ponzo, F.C. and Santarsiero, G. (2004), "Experimental static and
dynamic response of a real RC frame upgraded with SMA re-centering
and dissipating braces", Proc. of the 13th World Conf. on Earthquake
Engineering, Canada, Paper no. 2878.
[9] Salichs, J., Hou, Z. and Noori, M. (2001), "Vibration suppression of
structures using passive shape memory alloy energy dissipation
devices", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 12, 671-680.
[10] Wilde, K., Gardoni, P. and Fujino, Y. (2000), "Base isolation system
with shape memory alloy device for elevated highway bridges", Eng.
Struct., 22, 222-229.
[11] Ocel, J., DesRoches, R., Leon, R.T., Hess, W.G., Krumme, R., Hayes,
J.R. and Sweeney, S. (2004), "Steel beam-column connections using
shape memory alloys", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 130(5), 732-740.
[12] Shahin, A.R., Meckl, P.H. and Jones, J.D. (1997), "Modeling of SMA
tendons for active control of structures", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 8, 51-
70.
[13] Tamai, H., Miura, K., Kitagawa, Y. and Fukuta, T. (2003), "Application
of SMA Rod to Exposed-type Column Base in Smart Structural
System", the Proc. of SPIE, 5057, 169-177.
[14] Mohamed OMAR, Toshiro HAYASHIKAWA and Shehata E. ABDEL
RAHEEM, Seismic Nonlinear Analysis of Cable Stayed Bridge Steel
Towers with Shape Memory Alloy Connection, Journal of Steel
Construction, JSSC, Vol.14, 2007.
[15] DesRoches, R. and Delemont, M. (2002), "Seismic retrofit of simply
supported bridges using shape memory alloys", Eng. Struct., 24, 325-
332.
[16] Clark, P.W., Aiken, I.D., Kelly, J.M., Higashino, M. and Krumme, R.
(1995), "Experimental and analytical studies of shape-memory alloy
dampers for structural control", Proc. of SPIE, 2445, 241-251.
[17] Salichs, J., Hou, Z. and Noori, M. (2001), "Vibration suppression of
structures using passive shape memory alloy energy dissipation
devices", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 12, 671-680.
[18] McCormick, J. and DesRoches, R. (2003), "Seismic response using
smart bracing elements", The Proc. of the Extreme Loading Conf.,
Toronto, Canada, August.
[19] Auricchio, F., Fugazza, D. and DesRoches, R. (2006), "Earthquake
performance of steel frames with Nitinol braces", J. Earthq. Eng.,
10(SPEC), 45-66.
[20] Zhu, S. and Zhang, Y. (2007), "Seismic behaviour of self-centring
braced frame buildings with reusable hysteretic damping brace", Earthq.
Eng. Struct. D., 36, 1329-1346.
[21] Alam MS, Youssef MS, Nehdi M. Analytical prediction of the seismic
behavior of superelastic shapememory alloy reinforced concrete
elements. Engineering Structures 2008;
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.05.025.
[22] Ozbulut OE, Hurlebaus S. Evaluation of the performance of a slidingtype
base isolation system with a NiTi shape memory alloy device
considering temperature effects. Engineering Structures 2010; 32:238-
49.
[23] Yang W, DesRoches R, Leon RT. Design and analysis of braced frames
with shape memory alloy and energy-absorbing hybrid devices.
Engineering Structures 2010; 32:498-507.
[24] Speicher M, Hodgson DE, DesRoches R, Leon RT. Shape memory alloy
tension/compression device for seismic retrofit of buildings. Journal of
Materials Engineering and Performance 2009; 18:746-53.
[25] Auricchio F, Fugazza D, DesRoches R. Earthquake performance of steel
frames with nitinol braces. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2006;
10(1):1-22.[Special issue].
[26] McCormick J, DesRoches R, Fugazza D, Auricchio F. Seismic vibration
control using superelastic shape memory alloys. Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology 2006;128:294-301.
[27] SeismoStruct Help file 2011, Version 5.2.1. Accessed on July 2011.
Available at http://www.seismosoft.com/SeismoStruct/index.htm.
[1] Sabelli R, Mahin S, Chang C. Seismic demands on steel braced frame
buildings with buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures
2003;25(5):655-66.
[2] Nakashima M, Inoue K, Tada M. Classification of damage to steel
buildings observed in the 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake.
Engineering Structures 1998;20(4-6):271-81.
[3] FEMA. Recommended seismic design provisions for new moment
frame buildings. Federal emergency management agency report no. 350.
2000.
[4] Osteraas J, Krawinkler H. The mexico earthquake of september 19,
1985 behavior of steel buildings. Earthquake Spectra 1989; 5(1):51-88.
[5] Kim H, Goel S. Seismic evaluation and upgrading of braced frame
structures for potential local failures, UMCEE 92-24, Dept. of civil
engineering and environmental engineering, Univ. of Michigan, Ann
Arbor; Oct. 1992. p. 290.
[6] Tremblay R, Timler P, BruneauM, Filiatrault A. Performance of steel
structures during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering 1995;22:338-60.
[7] Tremblay R, Bruneau M, Nakashima M, Prion HGL, Filiatrault A,
DeVall R. Seismic design of steel buildings: lessons from the 1995
Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering
1996;23:727-56.
[8] Dolce, M., Cardone, D., Marnetto, R., Mucciarelli, M., Nigro, D.,
Ponzo, F.C. and Santarsiero, G. (2004), "Experimental static and
dynamic response of a real RC frame upgraded with SMA re-centering
and dissipating braces", Proc. of the 13th World Conf. on Earthquake
Engineering, Canada, Paper no. 2878.
[9] Salichs, J., Hou, Z. and Noori, M. (2001), "Vibration suppression of
structures using passive shape memory alloy energy dissipation
devices", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 12, 671-680.
[10] Wilde, K., Gardoni, P. and Fujino, Y. (2000), "Base isolation system
with shape memory alloy device for elevated highway bridges", Eng.
Struct., 22, 222-229.
[11] Ocel, J., DesRoches, R., Leon, R.T., Hess, W.G., Krumme, R., Hayes,
J.R. and Sweeney, S. (2004), "Steel beam-column connections using
shape memory alloys", J. Struct. Eng. ASCE, 130(5), 732-740.
[12] Shahin, A.R., Meckl, P.H. and Jones, J.D. (1997), "Modeling of SMA
tendons for active control of structures", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 8, 51-
70.
[13] Tamai, H., Miura, K., Kitagawa, Y. and Fukuta, T. (2003), "Application
of SMA Rod to Exposed-type Column Base in Smart Structural
System", the Proc. of SPIE, 5057, 169-177.
[14] Mohamed OMAR, Toshiro HAYASHIKAWA and Shehata E. ABDEL
RAHEEM, Seismic Nonlinear Analysis of Cable Stayed Bridge Steel
Towers with Shape Memory Alloy Connection, Journal of Steel
Construction, JSSC, Vol.14, 2007.
[15] DesRoches, R. and Delemont, M. (2002), "Seismic retrofit of simply
supported bridges using shape memory alloys", Eng. Struct., 24, 325-
332.
[16] Clark, P.W., Aiken, I.D., Kelly, J.M., Higashino, M. and Krumme, R.
(1995), "Experimental and analytical studies of shape-memory alloy
dampers for structural control", Proc. of SPIE, 2445, 241-251.
[17] Salichs, J., Hou, Z. and Noori, M. (2001), "Vibration suppression of
structures using passive shape memory alloy energy dissipation
devices", J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str., 12, 671-680.
[18] McCormick, J. and DesRoches, R. (2003), "Seismic response using
smart bracing elements", The Proc. of the Extreme Loading Conf.,
Toronto, Canada, August.
[19] Auricchio, F., Fugazza, D. and DesRoches, R. (2006), "Earthquake
performance of steel frames with Nitinol braces", J. Earthq. Eng.,
10(SPEC), 45-66.
[20] Zhu, S. and Zhang, Y. (2007), "Seismic behaviour of self-centring
braced frame buildings with reusable hysteretic damping brace", Earthq.
Eng. Struct. D., 36, 1329-1346.
[21] Alam MS, Youssef MS, Nehdi M. Analytical prediction of the seismic
behavior of superelastic shapememory alloy reinforced concrete
elements. Engineering Structures 2008;
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.05.025.
[22] Ozbulut OE, Hurlebaus S. Evaluation of the performance of a slidingtype
base isolation system with a NiTi shape memory alloy device
considering temperature effects. Engineering Structures 2010; 32:238-
49.
[23] Yang W, DesRoches R, Leon RT. Design and analysis of braced frames
with shape memory alloy and energy-absorbing hybrid devices.
Engineering Structures 2010; 32:498-507.
[24] Speicher M, Hodgson DE, DesRoches R, Leon RT. Shape memory alloy
tension/compression device for seismic retrofit of buildings. Journal of
Materials Engineering and Performance 2009; 18:746-53.
[25] Auricchio F, Fugazza D, DesRoches R. Earthquake performance of steel
frames with nitinol braces. Journal of Earthquake Engineering 2006;
10(1):1-22.[Special issue].
[26] McCormick J, DesRoches R, Fugazza D, Auricchio F. Seismic vibration
control using superelastic shape memory alloys. Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology 2006;128:294-301.
[27] SeismoStruct Help file 2011, Version 5.2.1. Accessed on July 2011.
Available at http://www.seismosoft.com/SeismoStruct/index.htm.
@article{"International Journal of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences:64868", author = "Mohamed Omar", title = "Analytical Prediction of Seismic Response of Steel Frames with Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy", abstract = "Superelastic Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) is accepted
when it used as connection in steel structures. The seismic behaviour
of steel frames with SMA is being assessed in this study. Three eightstorey
steel frames with different SMA systems are suggested, the
first one of which is braced with diagonal bracing system, the second
one is braced with nee bracing system while the last one is which the
SMA is used as connection at the plastic hinge regions of beams.
Nonlinear time history analyses of steel frames with SMA subjected
to two different ground motion records have been performed using
Seismostruct software. To evaluate the efficiency of suggested
systems, the dynamic responses of the frames were compared. From
the comparison results, it can be concluded that using SMA element
is an effective way to improve the dynamic response of structures
subjected to earthquake excitations. Implementing the SMA braces
can lead to a reduction in residual roof displacement. The shape
memory alloy is effective in reducing the maximum displacement at
the frame top and it provides a large elastic deformation range. SMA
connections are very effective in dissipating energy and reducing the
total input energy of the whole frame under severe seismic ground
motion. Using of the SMA connection system is more effective in
controlling the reaction forces at the base frame than other bracing
systems. Using SMA as bracing is more effective in reducing the
displacements. The efficiency of SMA is dependant on the input
wave motions and the construction system as well.", keywords = "Finite element analysis, seismic response, shapesmemory alloy, steel frame, superelasticity", volume = "5", number = "11", pages = "759-9", }
