Experimental Study on Seismic Performance of Chevron Braced Steel Frames with Replaceable Energy Dissipation Joints

doi:10.12141/j.issn.1000-565X.240454

Abstract

Abstract:

To achieve rapid post-earthquake repair of structures, chevron braced steel frames with replaceable energy-dissipating joints was proposed based on the design concepts of controllable damage and replaceable energy dissipating components. The replaceable energy-dissipating joint consists of two double-U-shaped metal dissipaters, a gusset plate, a bracing end plate, and high-strength bolts. To investigate the seismic performance and post-earthquake reparability of the structure, quasi-static tests and post-repair quasi-static tests were conducted on a half-scale, single-story, single span substructure specimen. The hysteresis curves, skeleton curves, stress-strain curves and ductility indicators of the specimens were studied and compared between the initial and post-repair loading tests. The results show that the specimens exhibited full hysteresis loops and ideal energy dissipation capacity in both tests. Plastic damage was mainly concentrated at the replaceable energy-dissipating joints, while the main structure remained largely elastic. The initial loading test was terminated when the interstory drift angle reached 0.83%, with a residual drift angle of 0.28%. After replacing the energy-dissipating joints, the repaired structure exhibited mechanical performance similar to that before repair, with good agreement in the hysteresis curves, skeleton curves, and stiffness degradation curves. The simplified analytical models for chevron braced steel frames with replaceable energy-dissipating joints were established. Based on deformation compatibility relationships, a formula for calculating the elastic lateral stiffness of the structure was derived, and a formula for calculating the structural bearing capacity at the yielding of the double-U-shaped metal dissipaters was proposed. The calculated elastic lateral stiffness differed from the experimental results by a maximum of 3.72%, and the calculated horizontal bearing capacity at the yielding of the double-U-shaped metal dampers differed from the experimental results by a maximum of 9.41%.

Key words: replaceable energy-dissipating joint, chevron braced steel frame, quasi static test, seismic performance

CLC Number:

TU 352

MA Hongwei, LI Ming, XIONG Wei, HUANG Zhonghai, XU Jiaxin, HE Wenhui. Experimental Study on Seismic Performance of Chevron Braced Steel Frames with Replaceable Energy Dissipation Joints[J]. Journal of South China University of Technology(Natural Science Edition), 2025, 53(7): 126-138.

Figures/Tables 19

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 1

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Fig.11

Table 2

Fig.12

Fig.13

Fig.14

Fig.15

Table 3

Fig.16

References 21

[1]	建筑抗震韧性评价标准：［S］.
[2]	吕西林，陈聪．设置可更换连梁的双筒体混凝土结构振动台试验研究［J］．建筑结构学报，2017，38（8）：45-54.
	LU Xilin， CHEN Cong ．Shaking table tests of double tube concrete structure with replaceable coupling beams ［J］．Journal of Building Structures，2017，38（8）：45-54.
[3]	郝际平，孙晓岭，薛强，等．绿色装配式钢结构建筑体系研究与应用［J］．工程力学，2017，34（1）：1-13.
	HAO Ji-ping， SUN Xiao-ling， XUE Qiang，et al ．Research and applications of prefabricated steel structure building systems［J］．Engineering Mechanics，2017，34（1）：1-13.
[4]	GHAMARI A， KIM Y-J，BAE J ．Utilizing an I-shaped shear link as a damper to improve the behaviour of a concentrically braced frame［J］．Journal of Constructional Steel Research，2021，186：106915/1-13.
[5]	陈政清，华旭刚，杨鸥，等．一种具备耗能承载双功能的抗震构件及缓冲器：CN114263289 A［P］．2022-04-01.
[6]	BAKHSHAYESH Y， SHAYANFAR M， GHAMARI A ．Improving the performance of concentrically braced frame utilizing an innovative shear damper［J］．Journal of Constructional Steel Research，2021，182：106672/1-21.
[7]	GRAY M G， CHRISTOPOULOS C， PACKER A J ．Design and full-scale testing of a cast steel yielding brace system in a braced frame［J］．Journal of Structural Engineering，2016，143（4）：04016210/1-9.
[8]	ZHENG L， DOU S， TANG S，et al ．Seismic performance of improved multistorey X-braced steel frames［J］．Journal of Constructional Steel Research，2024，212：108306/1-15.
[9]	庄朝禄．钢结构呼吸耗能斜撑试验研究［D］．广州：华南理工大学，2021.
[10]	DURSUN S E， TOPKAYA C ．Development of H-shaped hysteretic dampers for steel concentrically braced frames［J］．Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering，2023，166：107758/1-15.
[11]	黄晨凯，赵宝成．开孔形式影响装配式耗能支撑滞回性能研究［J］．工程力学，2021，38（12）：81-96.
	HUANG Chen-kai， ZHAO Bao-cheng ．Influences of the shape of holes on the hysteretic performance of assembled energy dissipation braces［J］．Engineering Mechanics，2021，38（12）：81-96.
[12]	ANDREOTTI R， GIULIANI G， TONDINI N ．Experimental analysis of a full-scale steel frame with replaceable dissipative connections［J］．Journal of Constructional Steel Research，2023，208：108036/1-15.
[13]	HASSAN M， VASDRAVELLIS G， VAMVATSUKOS D ．Eurocode-8-conforming seismic design and behaviour factor of high-post-yield stiffness concentrically-braced steel frames［J］．Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics，2023，52（5）：1536-1556.
[14]	XIANG Y， ZHOU X H， KE K，et al ．Experimental research on seismic performance of cold-formed thin-walled steel frames with braced shear panel［J］．Thin-Walled Structures，2023，182（PA）：110210/1-19.
[15]	金属材料拉伸试验：第1部分：室温试验方法：［S］.
[16]	Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings，ANSI/AISC 341-10 ［S］．
[17]	建筑抗震试验规程：［S］．
[18]	冯鹏，强翰霖，叶列平．材料、构件、结构的“屈服点”定义与讨论［J］．工程力学，2017，34（3）：36-46.
	FENG Peng， QIANG Han-lin， YE Lie-ping ．Discussion and definition on yield points of materials，members and structures［J］．Engineering Mechanics，2017，34（3）：36-46.
[19]	建筑抗震设计规范：［S］．
[20]	杜红凯，韩淼，闫维明，等．锰钢U形限位器承载力试验及弹塑性回归分析［J］．建筑结构学报，2016，37（8）：108-114.
	DU Hongkai， HAN Miao， YAN Weiming ．Capacity experiment and elsto-plastic regression analysis for U-shaped manganese steel limiter［J］．Journal of Building Structures，2016，37（8）：108-114.
[21]	李宗京．新型高性能钢框架-支撑结构体系理论及试验研究［D］．南京：东南大学，2019.

取样位置	厚度/mm	屈服强度/MPa	极限强度/MPa	弹性模量/GPa
支撑	6	335.73	485.18	216.23
梁	8	355.19	493.12	210.47
柱	10	360.43	512.13	209.12
双U型金属耗能器	12	285.87	419.44	204.35

阶段	类型	位移/mm	荷载/kN	层间位移角
屈服点	正向（+）	11.32	495.00	1/159
	负向（-）	10.07	500.70	1/179
	平均	10.70	497.85	1/168
更换点	正向（+）	15.00	551.80	1/120
	负向（-）	15.14	580.30	1/120
	平均	15.07	566.05	1/120
峰值点	正向（+）	36.10	676.67	1/50
	负向（-）	35.13	673.00	1/50
	平均	35.62	670.14	1/50
极限点	正向（+）	45.79	656.62	1/40
	负向（-）	45.13	649.33	1/40
	平均	45.46	652.98	1/40

加载级数	层间位移角/%	位移幅值/mm	残余层间位移角/%		刚度（试验值）/（kN·mm^-1）		刚度（试验值）误差/%	刚度（理论值）/（kN·mm^-1）		备注
加载级数	层间位移角/%	位移幅值/mm	首次	更换后	首次	更换后	刚度（试验值）误差/%	首次（误差）	更换后（误差）	备注
1	0.06	±1.125	0.02	0.02	78.11	73.77	5.56	76.62（-1.91%）	76.62（3.72%）	初始
2	0.13	±2.250	0.04	0.04	72.00	66.06	8.25
3	0.25	±4.500	0.07	0.08	63.68	61.05	4.13
4	0.38	±6.750	0.04	0.05	57.21	54.60	4.56
5	0.50	±9.000	0.09	0.10	50.56	49.42	2.25
6	0.63	±11.250	0.14	0.13	45.40	44.55	1.87
7	0.75	±13.500	0.22	0.21	41.21	40.34	2.11
8	0.83	±15.000	0.28	0.27	38.27	37.56	1.86
9	1.00	±18.000		0.30		33.47
10	1.25	±22.500		0.51		29.04
11	1.50	±27.000		0.78		24.35
12	2.00	±36.000		1.26		18.55
13	2.50	±45.000		1.54		14.36				-