Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct
0141-0296/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.03.015
G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161 2153
• Easy production. Neither protected nor complex technologies Figs. 3 and 4 show that the two end steel connectors consist
are acceptable; in particular, neither big production facilities of two mirror halves; they are milled from a solid cylinder. The
nor highly skilled and experienced workers should be required connection is based mainly on friction through pre-tensioned
and the manufacturing should be fast. Moreover, the product bolts; since welding can impair the fatigue strength, it is only used
has to be robust with respect to manufacturing errors. Any in the outer parts, where most of the stress has been transferred
developing country should be able to produce the devices by from the core to the connectors. When the core is tensioned and
itself. reaches its maximum extension their ends protrude beyond the
• Basic materials. Only materials that are easy-to-find, replace- protection of the casing; when the motion reverts, the core is
able and widely spread in the construction world should be compressed and both naked ends are in serious risk of buckling. To
used. In particular, no particular requirements about the steel prevent this, four trapezoidal steel plates (see Figs. 3 and 4.c) are
of the core are suitable. welded to each of the connectors; they slide in cruciform-shaped
The considered dissipator consists basically of a slender solid grooves carved in the mortar, as shown by the right Front View in
bar (cylinder) as dissipative steel core and a round thin-wall steel Fig. 3 and by Fig. 4.b.
tube filled with high strength mortar (without shrinkage) as casing Both the core and the tube have a constant cross section
buckling restrainer. Two two-halved steel connectors are placed at because of simplicity and availability. A relevant decision was
both ends to ensure a proper anchoring to the frame. Fig. 3 shows to select the section of the core; in the technical literature
a plan view of the device, an elevation of one of their ends and two mainly flat rectangular and cruciform sections have been proposed
front views; the left front view includes a steel connector while [9,16] but round sections have been also considered [36]. In the
the right one shows a bare core end. Fig. 4 shows some images of a aforementioned previous tests of short dissipators the core had a
particular device. Fig. 4.a and b displays side and front views of one rectangular section and some cracks were detected in the mortar
of the ends, respectively; the steel connectors are not incorporated. near the corners [34,35]; hence, for these devices it was decided
Fig. 4.c contains two pictures of a connector and Fig. 4.d shows their to use a circular section for the core. Additional advantages that
two halves. support this choice are the facility of placing the sliding layer, the
G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161 2155
Table 1
Main geometrical parameters of prototypes D1, D2, D3 and D4.
Devices Lco (mm) Lcn (mm) Ltu (mm) Ldi (mm) dco (mm) dtu (mm) ttu (mm) dcn (mm)
equal buckling strength in any direction (compared to flat sections) 3. Buckling analysis
and the lack of risk of torsional buckling (compared to cruciform
sections). The tube is also round for simplicity and coherence; This section presents a simplified model of the second
moreover, in rectangular tubes the confinement of the mortar is order behavior of buckling restrained braces. This model allows
not fully effective in the middle of the sides (this can be relevant to designing the buckling restrainer system (casing). However, the
avoid local buckling of the core). The core can be made of ordinary casing of the tested devices was designed according to previously
construction steel. It is well known that the surface evenness existing models because this one was not completely developed.
reduces the risk of crack propagation and provides higher fatigue This study shows that the proposed model provides more slender
strength; however, for the sake of simplicity and of moderate cost, devices.
no surface treatment is required. In any buckling restrained brace, three types of flexural modes
are feasible [38]:
A key issue of the design is to ensure a proper sliding between
the core and the surrounding mortar to avoid relevant shear stress • Buckling of the core which does not involve the buckling of
transfer. In the proposed device, the sliding is ensured by a three- the casing; rather the core behaves as a column embedded in
layer interface: the steel core is coated with Teflon
r
, lubricated an elastic medium. This phenomenon is commonly termed as
with grease and wrapped with rubber. The purposes of the rubber rippling. For small lateral displacements, the medium is the
are: to provide shear flexibility, to guarantee an even sliding rubber, which is extremely flexible, being unable to provide
surface and to allow the transversal expansion of the core when any relevant restraint. Conversely, larger deflections involve the
compressed. The thickness of the rubber layer plays a significant mortar; [9] have shown that the critical load is several orders of
role in the design: if the layer is too thin it will inhibit lateral magnitude higher than the maximum possible axial load in the
steel core.
(Poisson) expansion of the core, conversely, if it is too thick it will
allow excessive local buckling and reduce fatigue life of the brace.
• Local buckling of the naked core ends. When the core is elon-
gated, it protrudes from the casing; when compressed, insta-
In the tested devices, 1.7 mm thick rubber has been selected, both
bility can arise. This phenomenon can be easily described by
for availability reasons and for being a common value in similar
conventional Euler analysis; therefore, no additional consider-
devices. The Teflon is selected, because of its high strength and
ations are included here.
low friction coefficient, as an additional measure to provide further • Global buckling of the whole device. The buckling of the core
sliding capacity. induces relevant overall bending of the casing.
Four prototype devices (termed D1, D2, D3 ad D4) have been
produced in Barcelona during June 2006 according to the described An analysis of the third type of modes is presented next. It is
technology (see Fig. 3). The total length of the devices is limited to based on second order formulations, typical in steel structures [39].
The proposed model accounts, in a simplified way, for all
3 m because of restrictions in the testing laboratory. The values of
the relevant issues: the initial geometrical imperfections, the
the geometrical parameters (Fig. 3) are summarized in Table 1.
nonlinear behavior of the core and the interaction between the
Table 1 shows that dissipators D1 and D2, as well as D3 and
core and the mortar.
D4 are designed alike, to compare their results. For all the devices The following geometrical imperfections are considered:
the difference between the length of the dissipative segment of
the core Ldi and the length of the tube Ltu is 44 mm (22 mm each • Initial gap (a) between the core and the surrounding mortar. It
side); it is intended to allow enough slide of the core with respect to is conservatively assumed that this gap is constant along the
the casing. This value is about six times the yielding displacement; length of the core and is equal to two times the rubber thickness
hence, this design largely allows ductility ratios (quotient between (a = 3.4 mm). This assumption is equivalent to neglect the
transversal stiffness of the rubber.
the yielding and the maximum displacements) slightly above 5.
• Initial eccentricity of the core duct (eco ) due to out-of-
The diameters of the core have been conservatively selected to
straightness. The observation of the split tested specimens (see
provide more slender bars than in usual full size devices. The
Fig. 14) shows that this parameter is relevant and, hence, cannot
restraining casing has been designed from the approach suggested
be neglected.
by [9]. For both the tube and the core, ordinary construction steel
S275 JR has been used [37]; its yielding point is fy = 275 MPa Fig. 5 describes the i-th buckling mode; it is assumed that its
while the ultimate strength is fu = 410 MPa. Commercially shape is composed of near-straight equally-distributed segments
available mortar without shrinkage has been used; the expected (with wave length li = Ltu /i) joined by plastic hinges leaning
compressive strength ranges between 45 and 50 MPa. alternatively on both sides of the hole housing the core. P is
The production cost in Barcelona during 2006 of the four the axial compressive force, Fi is the interaction force between
the core and the mortar and M is the bending moment in the
prototypes D1, D2, D3 and D4 has been 3272.28 e including
corners of the core. Since the interaction forces Fi are close and,
16% VAT. The material cost is 737.11 e and the labor and local
hence, nearly counteract each other, it might seem reasonable to
transportation costs are 2535.17 e; some tasks were carried out
neglect the transversal bending flexibility of the casing. Under such
directly by the authors of this work and are not considered. Also,
assumption, the equilibrium equations show that the maximum
the cost of the experiments is not included. It is noted that, under
shear force Vi and bending moment Mi in the casing are Vi =
normal manufacturing conditions in developing countries, the Fi /2 = 2P ei /li and Mi = Fi li /4 = P ei . Hence, for high buckling
labor cost can be dramatically reduced. modes the casing undergoes extremely large shear forces and,
A deeper description of the design and production issues is therefore, the assumption that its lateral flexibility is negligible
available in [35]. must be discarded. By considering such an effect [9] have shown
2156 G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161
The constant value k is given by k2 = P /(Eca Ica + Eco Ico ); since the
core yields, its bending stiffness can be neglected compared to the
one of the casing and ky P /Eca Ica . By integrating twice, a second-
order differential equation is obtained; its general solution is
∞
X πx
y = A sin k x + B cos k x + qi sin . (4)
i =1
li
A and B are unknown constant values and qi are also unknown final
eccentricities. By imposing the initial conditions y (0) = 0 and
y(l1 ) = 0, it follows that A = B = 0; since sin(π x/li ) are linearly
independent functions it follows that the eccentricities qi are given
by
ei
Fig. 6. Lateral interaction between the core and the casing. qi = P
. (5)
i2 − PE
that, under ideal conditions, the critical axial load of the brace is PE is the first critical Euler load of the casing; if the end connections
Pcr = π 2 (Eco Ico + Eca Ica )/L2k ; Lk is the effective length of the device are hinged it is given by PE = π 2 Eca Ica /l21 . Eq. (5) for i = 1 shows
and Eco Ico and Eca Ica are the stiffness (elastic moduli and moments that loads below the critical one can largely amplify the bending of
of inertia) of the steel core and of the casing, respectively. This can the core, possibly leading to collapse. The contribution of the first
be also concluded by noting that, if the bending stiffness of the core mode to the maximum bending moment in the casing is the value
is neglected, its buckling situation is roughly equivalent to the one of Eca Ica e1 (y00 − y000 ) in the mid section:
of a liquid column compressed axially by a frictionless piston [39].
P
π
2
Watanabe et al. and Black, Makris and Aiken [4,9] propose that PE P e1
the axial design load of the casing is equal to this critical value M1 = Eca Ica e1 P
= P
. (6)
l1 1− 1−
multiplied by a safety factor. This factor accounts for the initial PE PE
imperfections, the yielding of the core and the interaction between By neglecting the higher modes contribution, Eq. (6) allows
the core and the mortar; however, the given criteria to select designing the casing. Axial load P is the maximum feasible force
their values are not related to such issues. A modification of the in the core considering strain hardening effects and the difference
approach by Watanabe et al. and by Black, Makris and Aiken [4,9] between expected and nominal yield strengths of the core. It is
is presented next; it considers these three issues, and in particular noted that, because of the friction, the casing will also likely carry
incorporates explicitly the initial imperfections. some compression; the experiments (see Fig. 12) show that its
Fig. 6 describes the buckling interaction between the core and demand is negligible.
the casing. The upper sketch represents the initial position of the By assuming conservatively that e1 = 10 mm, in the tested
core (dashed line, y0 ) and the final one (solid line, y). The lower dissipators the casing is able to largely resist this demand. In
sketches represent, separately, the final bent configurations of devices D1 and D2, the safety margin for the bending moment
the casing and of the core; the distributed interaction forces are is bigger than 16, even neglecting the contribution of mortar; in
described by an unknown law p(x). devices D3 and D4, such margin is bigger than 5. These calculations
The initial position of the core is described by the Fourier series show that the design of the casing for devices D1 and D2 is clearly
decomposition: over-conservative; if a tube with thickness ttu = 3 mm and
diameter dtu = 63 mm is considered, the safety margin is still
∞
X πx ∞
X π ix bigger than 6.
y0 = ei sin = ei sin . (1)
i=1
li i=1
l1
4. Experiments
The first term is given by e1 = eco + a; for the other terms it can be
conservatively assumed that ei = a (see Fig. 5). The second order
4.1. General description
equilibrium differential equations of the casing and of the core can
be written as
The four prototypes were tested during July 2006 in the
Eca Ica (yiv − yi0v ) = −p Eco Ico (yiv − yi0v ) + Py00 = p. (2) University of Girona, Spain. The experiments are individual
(i.e. there are no subassemblages accounting for the frame) and
By adding both equations, the unknown interaction forces are consist of imposing cycling axial deformation until failure. A
eliminated and, taking into account Eq. (1), a single equation is comprehensive description is available in [35]. The objectives of
derived the tests are (i) to assess the performance of the proposed devices,
(ii) to learn about their structural behavior, (iii) to characterize
π πx
∞ 4
yiv + k2 y00 = their hysteretic behavior and (iv) to obtain experimental results
X
ei sin . (3)
i=1
li li useful to calibrate the numerical models to be developed. An
G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161 2157
additional objective is to increase the available information about followed. The average values of the compressive strength and
the fatigue strength of buckling restrained braces; that information deformation modulus are fm = 39.92 MPa and Em = 17.52 GPa,
might be useful to other researchers to develop models of such respectively.
capacity. The experiments are designed to reach these goals whilst
accounting for the time, budget and availability constraints. 4.3. Testing rig
4.2. Characterization of materials Dissipators D1, D2, D3 and D4 were placed horizontally, fixed
by one of their ends, and connected by the other end to a servo-
The mechanical properties of the steel of the core have been controlled hydraulic jack. Fig. 7 displays two sketches (plan view
obtained from tension tests following [37] on four specimens with and elevation) while Fig. 8 shows a picture of the testing rig of
diameter 10 and 22 mm (coupon testing). An extensometer was dissipator D1.
incorporated to three specimens to determine the elastic modulus. Fig. 7 shows that both end connections are pinned with respect
The average values of the yielding point, ultimate strength and to a vertical axis, i.e. the device is free to rotate in a horizontal plane.
Young’s modulus are fy = 303.75 MPa, fu = 425.31 MPa and This assemblage is aimed to simulate hinged connections among
Eco = 210.91 GPa, respectively; the main disagreement with the the dissipator and the main frame (Fig. 1); such a solution has been
nominal characteristic values lie in the yielding point (303.75 MPa adopted for simplicity and for avoiding the influence of bending
instead of 275 MPa). moments in the end of the device [16].
The experiments about the mortar consist of compressive Figs. 7 and 8 show that the registered magnitudes are: axial
testing of two specimens cut from the previously tested dissipators force in the jack (sensor 7), displacement of the actuator (sensor
D1 and D3 (coupon testing). European regulations [40] were 6), longitudinal displacements of the steel connectors (sensors 2
2158 G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161
Fig. 13. Horizontal bending moment in the mid section of the casing of dissipator
Fig. 11. Comparison between stress–strain plots for the 22 mm core bar and for D2 ([channel 16 − channel 17]/2).
dissipator D3.
Table 2
Main results of the experiments.
Device Buckled No. of cycles Normalized Cumulative
ends? dissipated energy plastic ductility
In Table 2, ‘‘Buckled Ends?’’ refers to the local buckling of the dissipators for seismic protection of buildings in developing
naked core ends. The dissipated energy is the area encompassed countries. With this aim, a simple dissipative buckling restrained
by the hysteresis loops normalized with respect to the elastic brace has been designed, produced and tested. The design and
energy corresponding to the yielding displacement (1/2 k ∆2y , production issues have been considered in an integrated way.
where k is the axial stiffness). This energy cannot be considered the All the adopted technical solutions, namely the sliding interface
ultimate energy dissipation capacity since it is highly dependent between the core and the mortar, are revealed. A buckling
on the loading history [41]. The ‘‘Cumulative plastic ductility’’ [9] analysis approach is described. Laboratory tests of four prototype
is a dimensionless normalized expression of the cumulative devices are carried out. Such experiments consist of cyclic axial
plastic deformation: Σ |∆+ − ∆− |/∆y where ∆+ and ∆− are deformation until failure; a wide set of magnitudes are measured
the maximum and minimum values of the plastic displacement, to investigate the performance of the devices and to collect a
respectively. The sum is extended to all the plastic excursions. set of results able to calibrate a numerical model currently being
Results from Table 2 show that, apart from the premature developed. Main conclusions are listed next.
failure of the dissipator D4, the devices performed properly. The • It is feasible to design buckling restrained braces that are ef-
performance was significantly better in dissipator D3 than in ficient, robust, virtually maintenance-free, durable, reasonably
devices D1 and D2. Such difference might be due to two reasons: cheap, easy to produce and made of basic and easily replaceable
(a) the observed permanent curvatures of the core (see Fig. 14) materials. It is noted that no particular smoothening operation
are smaller in D3 and (b) in such device the local buckling of both of the yielding core is required.
naked core ends was restrained by the aforementioned additional • The buckling design of the casing of the tested devices was
sliding supports. It is noted that such supports are feasible in real based on an existing model; it is over-conservative since the
applications, like those shown in Fig. 1. proposed buckling analysis approach allows designing slender
tubes, particularly for dissipators D1 and D2. A preliminary
4.6. Observations after tests experimental verification of the proposed buckling analysis
approach is presented.
Excluding dissipator D4, the failure came for breakage of the • The tests showed that, in general, the devices performed
core near the mid section. After pulling out the broken core, properly, without relevant shear stress transfer to the casing
the dissipator was split longitudinally in two halves to observe and with stable hysteretic behavior. It is noted that the inner
the actual condition of the mortar. Fig. 14 displays views of observation of the tested devices showed that the mortar was
representative parts of device D1; Fig. 14.a and b refer to the mortar not damaged by the lateral pushing of the core during its local
while Fig. 14.c and d correspond to the core. The other tested buckling.
devices provide similar results [35].
Fig. 14.a and b show that the mortar is in good condition, Acknowledgments
even in the near vicinity of the core; it means that the transversal
compressive forces due to high buckling modes (Fig. 5) were The Argentinean ‘‘National Technological University’’ and
not able to locally damage the mortar. According to Fig. 14.a ‘‘Banco Río’’ (Argentina), supported the stay of Mr. Palazzo in
some eccentricity of the core hole due to out-of-straightness was Barcelona and part of the testing cost (‘‘Programa de Becas
observed; it ranged between 5 and 10 mm. Both values fit those de Postgrado’’ and ‘‘Proyectos de Investigación Científica para
considered for the buckling analysis. The cover of the core (Teflon, el Perfeccionamiento Docente’’). The assistance of the Technical
grease and rubber) is in good condition. Fig. 14.c and d show that University of Catalonia and of the University of Girona is
the core is bent; it is shaped roughly like a warped sinusoidal wave gratefully acknowledged. Mr. O. Montenegro (Technical University
whose wavelength ranges between 100 and 200 mm and whose of Catalonia, Barcelona) tested the mortar of the prototypes; his
amplitude reaches 2 mm. Given that the lateral forces exerted by help is appreciated.
the core were unable to bend the casing and that the surrounding
mortar is not damaged, is obvious that only the compression of the References
rubber layer allows this permanent curvature. As expected, such
[1] Housner GW, Bergman LA, Caughey TK, Chassiakos AG, Claus RO, Masri SF,
observed permanent deformation was bigger for the 10 mm core et al. Structural control: Past, present, and future. J Eng Mech ASCE 1997;123:
bars (D1 and D2) than for the 22 mm ones (D3 and D4). This seems 897–971.
to indicate that the rubber layer is too thick for devices D1 and D2 [2] Soong T, Dargush G. Passive energy dissipation systems in structural
engineering. John Wiley; 1997.
and perhaps also for D3 and D4. [3] Martelli A. Modern seismic protection systems for civil and indus-
trial structures. An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios,
5. Conclusions with applications to different European towns; 2006. Downloadable at:
http://www.samco.org/network/download_area/paper_martelli.pdf.
[4] Watanabe A, Hitomi Y, Saeki E, Wada A, Fujimoto M. Properties of brace
This work belongs to a larger research project whose main encased in buckling-restraining concrete and steel tube. In: Proceedings of
objective is to promote the mass use of patent free energy ninth world conference on earthquake engineering, vol. IV. 1988, pp. 719–24.
G. Palazzo et al. / Engineering Structures 31 (2009) 2152–2161 2161
[5] Clark P, Aiken I, Kasai K, Ko E, Kimura I. Design procedures for buildings [22] Kasai K, Kibayashi M. JSSI manual for building passive control technology.
incorporating hysteretic damping devices. In: Proceedings 68th annual PART-1 Manual contents and design/analysis methods. In: 13th world
convention. 1999. p. 355–71. conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. 2989. 2004.
[6] Iwata M. Applications-design of buckling restrained braces in Japan. In: 13th [23] Kibayashi M, Kasai K, Tsuji Y, Kikuchi M, Kimura Y, Kobayashi T. et al.
world conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. 3208. 2004. JSSI manual for building passive control technology. PART-2 Criteria for
[7] Tsai KC, Lai JW, Hwang YC, Lin SL, Weng CH. Research and application of implementation of energy dissipation devices. In: 13th world conference on
double-core buckling restrained braces in Taiwan. In: 13th world conference earthquake engineering. Paper no. 2990. 2004.
on earthquake engineering. Paper no. 2179. 2004. [24] Sabelli R, Aiken I. US building-code provisions for buckling-restrained braced
[8] Palazzo G, Crisafulli F. Estudio Comparativo de Distintos Disipadores por frames: Basis and development. In: 13th world conference on earthquake
Fluencia en Base a los Requerimientos Establecidos en Distintas Normas. XXXI engineering. Paper no. 1828. 2004.
Jornadas Sud-Americanas de Ingeniería Estructural. Mendoza (Argentina); [25] Fahnestock LA, Sause R. Ricles JM Seismic analysis and design of buckling-
2004. restrained braced frames. In: Walraven , Blaauwendraad , Scarpas , Snijder ,
[9] Black C, Makris N, Aiken L. Component testing, stability analysis characteriza- editors. 5th international Ph.D. symposium in civil engineering. Taylor &
tion of buckling-restrained unbonded braces. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Francis; 2004.
Research Center report PEER 2002/08. 2002. [26] Kim J, Choi H. Energy-based seismic design of buckling-restrained braces.
[10] Usami T, Kasai A, Kato M. Behavior of buckling-restrained brace members. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. 2113. 2004.
In: Conference on behavior of steel structures in seismic areas. 2003. [27] Taranath BS. Wind and earthquake resistant buildings. CRC Press; 2004.
p. 211–16. [28] Astrella M, Whittaker A. The performance-based design paradigm. MCERR
[11] Carden LP, Itani A, Buckle I, Aiken I. Buckling restrained braces for ductile report MCEER-05-0011. 2005.
end cross frames in steel plate girder bridges. In: 13th world conference on [29] Brockenbrough RL, Merritt FS. Structural steel designer’s handbook. McGraw-
earthquake engineering. Paper no. 503. 2004. Hill; 2005.
[12] Lehman D, Roeder C, Yoo JH, Johnson S. Seismic response of braced frame [30] Sabelli R, Pottebaum W, Brazier JC, López W. Design of a buckling-restrained
connections. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. braced frame utilizing 2005 seismic standards. In: Metropolis & beyond 2005.
1459. 2004. Proceedings of the 2005 structures congress and the 2005 forensic engineering
[13] López WA, Gwie DS, Lauck TW, Saunders M. Structural design and symposium. 2005.
experimental verification of a buckling-restrained braced frame system. Eng [31] Choi H, Kim J. Energy-based seismic design of buckling-restrained braced
J 2004;41. frames using hysteretic energy spectrum. Eng Struct 2006;28:304–11.
[14] Mahin S, Uriz P, Aiken I, Field C, Ko E. Seismic performance of buckling [32] Sabelli R, Mahin SA, Chang C. Seismic demands on steel braced-frame buildings
restrained braced frame systems. In: 13th world conference on earthquake with buckling restrained braces. Eng Struct 2003;25:655–66.
engineering. Paper no. 1681. 2004. [33] Tremblay R, Lacerte M, Christopoulos C. Seismic response of multi-storey
[15] Nishimoto K, Nakata Y, Kimura I, Aiken I, Yamada S, Wada A. Sub- buildings with self-centering energy dissipative steel braces. J Struct Eng ASCE
assembly testing of large buckling-restrained unbonded braces. In: 13th world 2008;134:108–20.
conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. 1133. 2004. [34] Palazzo G, Crisafulli F, López Almansa F, Cahís X. Análisis numérico
[16] Tremblay R, Bolduc P, Neville R, De Vall R. Seismic testing and performance of experimental de barras de pandeo restringido. XIX Jornadas Argentinas de
buckling-restrained bracing systems. Canad J Civil Eng 2006;33:183–98. Ingeniería Estructural. Mar del Plata Argentina; 2006.
[17] Wada A, Nakashima M. From infancy to maturity of buckling restrained braces [35] Palazzo G, López Almansa F, Cahís X, Crisafulli F. Theoretical and experimental
research. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Paper no. analysis of dissipative buckling restrained braces. Monography report 1-2009.
1732. 2004. CIMNE Barcelona; 2009.
[18] Lee K, Bruneau M. Energy dissipation of compression members in concentri- [36] Sabelli R, Mahin S, Chang C. Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings
cally braced frames: Review of experimental data. J Struct Eng ASCE 2005;131: with buckling-restrained braces. Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
552–9. University of California; 2002. http://nisee.berkeley.edu/library.
[19] D’Aniello M, Della Corte G, Mazzolani FM, Landolfo R. Steel buckling restrained [37] EN 10025. Hot rolled products of structural steels. European Committee for
braces. In: Seismic upgrading of RC buildings by advanced techniques — The Standardization; 2002.
ILVA-IDEM research project. Italy: Polimetrica Publisher; 2006. p. 179–223. [38] Black C, Makris N, Aiken L. Component testing, seismic evaluation and
[20] Newell J, Uang CM, Benzoni G. Subassemblage testing of core brace buckling- characterization of buckling-restrained braces. J Struct Eng ASCE 2004;130:
restrained braces (G Series). University of California San Diego. Report no. TR- 329–37.
2006/01; 2006. [39] Bazant ZP, Cedolin L. Stability of structures. Oxford University Press; 1991.
[21] Tremblay R, Degrange G, Blouin J. Seismic rehabilitation of a four-storey [40] EN 206-1. Concrete — Part 1: Specification, performance, production and
building with a stiffened bracing system. In: 8th Canadian conference on conformity. European Committee for Standardization; 2000.
earthquake engineering. Vancouver: Canadian Association for Earthquake [41] Benavent-Climent A. An energy-based damage model for seismic response of
Engineering; 1999. p. 549–54. steel structures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 2007;36:1049–64.