Professional Documents
Culture Documents
amplitude,
(2) Small deflection amplitude
excursion must be placed after a large
amplitude excursion to study the
slip-type behavior
A lateral load-deflection relation of a
reinforced concrete member was
obtained from the test of a slender
column (Otani and Cheung, 1981). The
behavior was dominantly by flexure
although flexural cracks started to
incline due to the presence of high
shear stresses before flexural yielding.
The yielding of the longitudinal
reinforcement was observed in cycle 3.
The general hysteretic characteristics
can be summarized as follows:
(a) Stiffness changed due to the flexural cracking of concrete and the tensile yielding of the
longitudinal reinforcement (cycle 1);
(b) When a deflection reversal was repeated at the same newly attained maximum deformation
amplitude, the loading stiffness in the second cycle was noticeably lower than that in the first cycle,
although the resistance at the peak displacement was almost identical (cycles 3 and 4). This
reduction in stiffness is attributable to the formation of new cracks during loading cycle 3, and also to
a reduced stiffness of the longitudinal reinforcement in cycle 4 due to the Bauschinger effect.
(c) Average peak-to-peak stiffness of a complete cycle decreases with previous maximum
displacement. Note that the peak-to-peak stiffness of cycle 5 is significantly smaller than that of cycle
2, although the displacement amplitudes of the two cycles are comparable. The peak-to-peak
stiffness of cycle 5 is closer to that of cycles 3 and 4;
(d) The hysteresis characteristics of reinforced concrete are dependent on the loading history,
and
(e) The resistance at the peak deflection is almost the same for the two successive cycles in the
member dominated by flexural behavior.
A hysteresis model of a reinforced concrete "flexural" member must be able to represent the
above characteristics. The skeleton curve is similar to an "envelope curve" of a force-deformation
relation under load reversals. The state of the art is not sufficient to determine the ultimate point, at
the deformation of which the resistance of a member starts to decay. The force-deformation relation
after the onset of strength decay is normally not modeled because the behavior is strongly
dependent on a particular local deterioration of materials.
If the reinforced concrete is subjected to
high shear stress reversals, or if the
slippage of the reinforcement from concrete
within the anchorage area occurs, the
force-deflection curve exhibits a pronounced
"pinching". The pinching behavior is also
observed;
(a) in a "flexural" member when the
amount of longitudinal reinforcement differs
significantly for the tension and compression
sides at the critical sections, typically in a
girder with monolithically cast slabs,
(b) at a member end where additional
deformation may be caused by anchorage
slip of longitudinal reinforcement within the
adjacent member or connection, and
Hysteresis of slip type (Bertero and Popov, 1977)
2
(c) in a member where bond splitting cracks develop along the longitudinal reinforcement.
Because such hysteresis relationship is highly dependent on loading history and structural
properties of the member, a general hysteresis model is difficult to formulate; or the parameters of
hysteresis models cannot be analytically determined by the properties of the member. In the design
of earthquake resistant structures, the pinching type behavior is generally thought to be undesirable
because small hysteresis energy can be dissipated by the behavior. Therefore, a proper design care
must be exercised to reduce such pinching behavior due to shear and bond deterioration.
Many hysteresis models have been developed in the past. Some hysteresis models are elaborate,
and include many hysteresis rules; others are simple. The complicatedness of a hysteresis model
indicates a large memory to store the hysteresis rule program in a computer. It does not lead to a
longer computation time because the complicatedness of a hysteresis model requires simply many
branches in a computer program, and only a few branches are referred to for a step of response
computation.
A class of hysteresis models, in which the unloading and reloading relation is defined by
enlarging the skeleton curve by a factor of two, are called "Masing type." Some examples of Masing
type models are shown below:
Eh =
W
2 Fm Dm
po
k
Dm =
1
{1 (
) } + 4h 2 ( ) 2
n
n
x(t ) = Dm sin( t + )
The energy dissipated W by viscous damper per cycle is
Tn
W = (c
0
n
dx dx
2
)( )dt = c Dm 2 cos 2 ( t + )dt
dt dt
0
= c Dm
= 2 h mk Dm
where m, c, k ,: mass, damping coefficient and stiffness of an SDF system, h : damping factor
2
(=
(=
c
2 mk
m
), n : circular frequency of the system
k
k
).
m
At the resonant condition ( = n ), the energy dissipated per cycle can be expressed
W = 2 h k Dm
h=
k =
2 k Dm
W
2 Fm Dm
Fm
Dm
The equivalent damping factor should not be confused with a damping factor of a viscously
damped system because the equivalent damping factor is not relevant in random oscillation.
References:
Bertero, V. V., and E. P. Popov, "Seismic Behavior of Ductile Moment Resisting Reinforced
Concrete Frames," ACI SP-53, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1977, pp. 247-291.
Comite Euro-International du Beton: RC Frames under Earthquake Loading, State of the Art Report,
Thomas Telford, 1996.
Otani, S, "Hysteresis Models of Reinforced Concrete for Earthquake Response Analysis," Journal,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Vol. XXXVI, No. 2, 1981, pp. 125-156.
Otani, S., and V. W.-T. Cheung, "Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns Under Bi-axial Lateral
Load Reversals - (II) Test Without Axial Load," Publication 81-02, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Toronto, 1981.
Saatcioglu, M., "Modeling Hysteretic Force-Deformation Relationships for Reinforced Concrete
Elements," ACI-SP127, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1991, pp. 153-198.
Bilinear Model
Specimen SP-5
When the degradation in stiffness was recognized in the behavior of the reinforced concrete, the
loading and unloading stiffness Kr was proposed to degrade with the previous maximum
displacement (Nielsen and Imbeault, 1970) in a form:
Kr = K y (
Dm
)
Dy
in which, : unloading stiffness degradation parameters (0 < <1); Ky: initial elastic stiffness, and
Dm: previously attained maximum displacement in any direction. The unloading stiffness remains
5
constant until the response displacement amplitude exceeds the previous maximum displacement in
either direction. The model is called a "degrading" bilinear hysteresis model." If the value of a is
chosen to be zero, the unloading stiffness does not degrade with yielding. A smaller value of a tends
to yield a larger residual displacement. The degrading bilinear model does not dissipate hysteretic
energy until the yield is developed. For a reinforced concrete member, the value of is normally
selected to be around 0.4.
The hysteretic energy dissipation index Eh of
the degrading bilinear model is given by
Eh =
2(1 ){ (1 + )}
(1 + )(1 )
by
Ramberg and Osgood (1943), where D y : yield displacement, Fy : yield resistance and : a
parameter of the model. Jennings (1963) introduced the fourth parameter to the model. The
A stress-strain relation of the metal was expressed using three parameters D y , Fy and
initial loading curve of the model under monotonically increasing deformation, as modified by
Jennings, is expressed by
1
D
F
F
=
(1 +
D y Fy
Fy
in which,
(1963).
The initial tangent modulus is equal to (Fy/Dy), and the initial loading curve passes a point (Fy,
(1+ )Dy) for any value of . The shape of the primary curve can be controlled by the exponent
from linearly elastic ( = 1.0) to elasto-plastic ( = infinity). For a larger value of , the behavior
becomes similar to that of the bilinear model.
Upon unloading from a peak response point (Do, Fo), the unloading, load reversal and reloading
branches of the relationship is given by
D Do F Fo
F Fo
=
(1 +
2Dy
2 Fy
2 Fy
until the response point reaches the peak point of one outer hysteresis loop.
The resistance F is not explicitly expressed by a given displacement D in this model. The
resistance F at a given displacement D must be computed numerically, for example, using the
Newton-Rapson's iterative procedure.
The Ramberg-Osgood model is often used for stress-strain relation of the steel in the finite
element analysis or in the lamina model, and for resistance-deformation relation of steel members in
a frame analysis.
The hysteresis energy dissipation index of the Ramberg-Osgood model is expressed as
Eh =
(1
D F
2
)(1 y m )
Fy Dm
1+
The model can dissipate some hysteresis energy even if the ductility factor is less than unity. The
7
References:
Jennings, P. C., "Response of Simple
Yielding Structures to Earthquake
Excitation,"
Ph.D.
Thesis,
California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, 1963.
Ramberg, W., and W. R. Osgood,
"Description
of
Stress-Strain
Curves by Three Parameters,"
National Advisory Committee on
Aeronautics, Technical Note 902,
1943.
Eh =
(1
K y Fc
)
K c Fy
References:
Fukada, Y., "Study on the Restoring Force
Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete Buildings
(in Japanese)," Proceedings, Kanto Branch
Symposium, Architectural Institute of Japan, No.
40, 1969, pp. 121-124.
Nomura, S., "Restoring Characteristics and their
Modeling," Data for Earthquake Resistant
Design for Buildings, No. 65, Magazine of
Architectural Institute of Japan, June 1976.
Nomura model (1976)
10
Y
A
Kr=Ky
Ky
Clough Model
C
Y
A
Fy
A minor deficiency of the Clough model
was pointed out by Mahin and Bertero
(1976). After unloading from point A,
consider a situation in which reloading takes
Ky
B
place from point B. The original Clough
model assumed that the response point
Dy
should move toward the previous maximum
response point C. This is not realistic.
Therefore, a minor modification was added
so that the response point should move
Y
toward an immediately preceding unloading
point A during reloading. When the
Modified Clough Model
response point reaches the point A, the
response point moves toward the previous maximum point C.
Kr
D
Dm
The model was made more versatile by incorporating the reduction in unloading stiffness Kr with
a maximum displacement in a form:
Kr = K y (
Dm
)
Dy
200
: unloading stiffness
in which,
degradation parameter; K y : initial elastic
Dm : previous maximum
Column Resistance, kN
stiffness; and
Clough Model
100
RC Column
-100
-200
-100
-50
50
11
100
Saiidi and Sozen (1979) and Riddell and Newmark (1979) used models similar to the modified
Clough model.
Wang and Shah (1987) introduced the strength and stiffness degradation effect of cumulative
damage. The strength and stiffness degrade in proportion to (1-Dws), where Dws is the Wang and
Shah damage index. The ordinates of the bilinear skeleton curve in monotonic loading is multiplied
by the current value of (1-Dws). Unloading and reloading stiffness is reduced by the same amount, as
they are defined on the basis of the location of the point of reversal and of the maximum previous
deformation in the direction of loading, on the degraded skeleton curve. The Wang and Shah
damage index is defined separately for each direction of loading as
en 1
Dws = n
e 1
where the damage prameter
=c
Eh =
{1
(1 + )
References:
Clough, R. W., and S. B. Johnston, "Effect
of
Stiffness
Degradation
on
Earthquake Ductility Requirements,"
Proceedings, Second Japan National
Conference
on
Earthquake
Engineering, 1966, pp. 227-232.
Mahin, S. A., and V. V. Bertero, "Rate of
Loading Effect on Uncracked and Repaired Reinforced Concrete Members," EERC No. 73-6,
Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1972.
Riddell, R., and N. M. Newmark, "Statistical Analysis of the Response of Nonlinear Systems
subjected to Earthquakes," Structural Research Series No. 468, Civil Engineering Studies,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, 1979.
Saiidi, M., and M. A. Sozen, "Simple and Complex Models for Nonlinear Seismic Response of
Reinforced Concrete Structures," Structural Research Series No. 465, Civil Engineering Studies,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, 1979.
Wang, M.-L., and S. P. Shah, Reinforced Concrete Hysteresis Model based on the Damage
Concept, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester,
Sussex, Vol. 15, 1987, pp. 993 -1003.
12
kr = k y (
Dy
D
) 0.4
in which k r : slope of unloading curve, k y : slope of a line joining the yield point in one direction to
the cracking point in the other direction, D : maximum deflection attained in the direction of the
loading, and D y : deflection at yield.
6. Condition: The yield load is exceeded in one direction but the cracking load is not exceeded in
the opposite direction.
Rule: Unloading follows Rule 5. Loading in the other direction continues as an extension of the
unloading line up to the cracking load. Then, the loading curve is aimed at the yield point.
7. Condition: One or more loading cycles have occurred.
Rule: If the immediately preceding quarter-cycle remained on one side of the zero-load axis,
unload at the rate based on rule 2, 3 and 5 whichever governed in the previous loading history. If the
immediately preceding quarter-cycle crossed the zero-load axis, unload at 70% of the rate based on
rule 2, 3, or 5, whichever governed in the previous loading history, but not at a slope flatter than the
immediately preceding loading slope.
Takeda model included (a) stiffness changes at flexural cracking and yielding, (b) hysteresis rules
for inner hysteresis loops inside the outer loop, and (c) unloading stiffness degradation with
deformation. The response point moves toward a peak of the one outer hysteresis loop. The
unloading stiffness Kr after yielding is given by
13
Fc + Fy Dm
Kr =
Dc + D y D y
Dc
D y (1 + )
1
}
E h = {1
Fc
1+
Fy
1+
Bilinear Takeda Model: The primary curve of the Takeda model can be made bilinear simply
choosing the cracking point to be the origin of the hysteretic plane. Such a model is called the
"bilinear Takeda" model, similar to the Clough model except that the bilinear Takeda model has
more hysteresis rules for inner hysteresis loops (Otani and Sozen, 1972); i.e., the response point
moves toward an unloading point on the immediately outer hysteresis loop.
The behavior before yielding is
sometimes made simple by letting the
response point moves toward the
origin during unloading, and toward
the maximum response point in the
opposite side upon reloading. The
Takeda hysteresis rules are applied
after the yielding.
F
(D2,F2)
Dm
X0
(D0,F0)
X1
X3
D
Dm
(D3,F3)
(D1,F1)
Additional modifications of the Takeda model with bilinear backbone curve may be found in
literature (Powell, 1975, Riddle and Newmark, 1979, Saiidi and Sozen, 1979, Saiidi, 1982). Riddle
and Newmark (1979) used a bilinear skeleton curve and unloading stiffness equal to the initial elastic
stiffness; loading occurs either on the strain hardening branch or towards the furthest point attained
in the previous cycle. Saiidi and Sozen (1979) claimed to simplify the Takeda model using a bilinear
skeleton curve; the model, however, is identical to the modified Clough model with reduced
unloading stiffness with maximum deformation, and reloading to the immediate prior unloading point
if reloading occurs during unloading and then to the unloading point on the skeleton curve.
References:
Takeda, T., M. A. Sozen and N. N. Nielsen, "Reinforced Concrete Response to Simulated
Earthquakes," Journal, Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. ST12, 1970, pp. 2557-2573.
Otani, S., and M. A. Sozen, "Behavior of Multistory Reinforced Concrete Frames During
Earthquakes," Structural Research Series No. 392, Civil Engineering Studies, University of
Illinois, Urbana, 1972.
Powell, G. H., Supplement to Computer Program DRAIN-2D, Supplement to Report, DRAIN-2D
Users Guide, University of California, Berkeley, August 1975.
Riddle, R., and N. M. Newmark, Statistical Analysis of the Response of Nonlinear Systems
subjected to Earthquakes, Structural Research Series No. 468, Civil Engineering Studies,
University of Illinois, Urbana, 1979.
Saiidi, M., Hysteresis Models for Reinforced Concrete, Journal, Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108,
No. ST5, May 1982, pp. 1077 - 1087.
Saiidi, M., and M. A. Sozen, Simple and Complex Models for Nonlinear Seismic Response of
Reinforced Concrete Structures, Structural Research Series No. 465, Civil Engineering Studies,
University of Illinois, Urbana, 1979.
15
1 Fy1 .
2* Fy 2 .
P4
2 Fy 2
T1
Ft1
Fy1
Q4
Fy1
*
1
P3
Y1
Q1
PP4
D1
dd2 dt2
dy2
F1
D
dy
PP2
D2
df1
2* Fy 2
Fy2
Y2
Q3
dt1 dd1
T2
Ft2
Q2
16
i* = i
(d iMAX d ti )
F
i* = i iMAX
Fti
where
F
Ft1
(d iMAX > d ti )
Y1
S1
F1MAX
Q4
T1
PP4
df2
Q1
D1
F1
D2MAX dt2
D
dt1 D1MAX
PP2
D2
F2MAX
S2
Y2
Ft2
T2
Q3
df1
Q2
Hysteresis Rules:
(1) Loading and unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed away from or toward point Pn,
respectively.
Modification (Otani): Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward maximum response point
Si, followed by the strength envelope. Unloading in Qn (n=1 or 3) is directed toward point Pn.
(2) Loading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed toward point PPn, then to maximum response point
Si, followed by the strength envelope.
(3) Unloading in Quadrant Qn (n=2 or 4) is directed away from point Pn.
F
P4
P3
Y1
S1
PP4
Q4
Q3
Q1
Q2
PP2
Y2
S2
P2
P1
17
P4
P4*
Q4
S1
PP4
PP4*
K*
1 Fy1
P1*
18
Q2
Q3
P1
Reference:
Q1
(1 + )1 Fy1
Rule 1
X(IS)
Y1
Rule 7
(D3,F3)
PV2(IS)
Rule 3
D2
Rule 2
Y3
Rule 7
Rule 5
Rule 2
Rule 8
D4 Rule 4
Y3
(D5,F5)
D4
Rule 4
Rule 6
Y4
Y2
Rule 3
Y4
D2
PV2(IS)
(D5,F5) Y1
Y2
X(IS)
PV3(IS)
Hysteresis Rules:
Rule 1: Loading on strength envelope in positive or negative direction.
Rule 2: Unloading from maximum response point X(IS) on strength envelope toward pivot point
PV3(3-IS) on the other side or loading toward maximum point X(IS) on the same side.
Rule 3: Loading toward pivot point PV2(IS) on the same side after Rule 2 crossing displacement axis
at displacement D2.
Rule 4: Unloading from Rule 3 at point (D3,F3) away from pivot point PV3(IS) on the same side until
the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D4 or loading toward
unloading point (D3,F3) followed by Rule 3.
Rule 5: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) on the same side after Rule 3 passing pivot
point PV2(IS).
Rule 6: Unloading from Rule 5 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other side until the
response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D2, or loading toward unloading
point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 5.
Rule 7: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) after Rule 4 crossing displacement axis at
displacement D4.
Rule 8: Unloading from Rule 7 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other side until
response point crosses displacement axis at displacement at D2, or loading toward
unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 7.
19
Rule 9: Loading initial elastic stiffness after loading on Rule 3 passing pivot point PV2(IS), or
unloading on initial stiffness before crossing displacement axis at origin.
Rule 10: Loading on the initial elastic stiffness before pivot point PV2(IS) is reached followed by Rule
5 or unloading on the initial elastic stiffness before until the response point crosses the
displacement axis at the origin followed by Rule 9.
Rule 1
Rule 1
For each Yi and LVi
(DYi,FYi) and SYi
LV2
Y2
X(DX,FX)
Y1
LV3
Positive Direction
Rule 2
LV1
Y3
Y4
D2
LV4
Y4
D2
LV4
LV1
Y3
Rule 2
LV3
Y1
Negative Direction
LV2
Y2
X(DX,FX)
PV3
Rule 2: Unloading from maximum response point X(IS) on strength envelope toward
pivot point PV3(3-IS) on the other side or loading toward maximum point X(IS)
on the same side.
Rule 2
PV3(IS)
Y1
Positive Direction
X(DX,FX)
Rule 1
PV2(IS)
Rule 2
Rule 3
Y4
D2
Rule 2
Y1
Rule 1
D2
Rule 3
PV2(IS)
Q2
X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
20
Negative Direction
Rule 3: Loading toward pivot point PV2(IS) on the same side after Rule 2 crossing
displacement axis at displacement D2.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 3
X(DX,FX)
Y1
Positive Direction
Rule 5
PV2(IS)
(D3,F3)
Rule 3
Rule 4
D2
Y4
D4
Rule 4
D4
PV2(IS) Rule 3
D2
(D3,F3)
Rule 5
Negative Direction
Y2
X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
Rule 4: Unloading from Rule 3 at point (D3,F3) away from pivot point PV3(IS) on the
same side until the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement
D4 or loading toward unloading point (D3,F3) followed by Rule 3.
PV3
Rule 4
X(DX,FX)
Y1
Positive Direction
(D3,F3) Rule 3
PV2
Rule 4
D4
Rule 7
Y4
D4
Rule 4
PV2
Rule 3
Rule 7
(D3,F3)
Negative Direction
Y2
X(DX,FX)
PV3
21
Rule 5: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) on the same side after Rule 3
passing pivot point PV2(IS).
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 5
Y1
Rule 5
(D5,F5)
Positive Direction
PV2
D2
Rule 1
Rule 1
Rule 6
D2
PV2
Rule 6
Rule 5
X(DX,FX)
Negative Direction
(D5,F5)
Y2
X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
Rule 6: Unloading from Rule 5 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other
side until the response point crosses displacement axis at displacement D2, or
loading toward unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 5.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 6
Y1
Rule 5
(D5,F5)
Positive Direction
PV2
Rule 3
Rule 5
Rule 1
Rule 1
Rule 6
D2
Rule 6
X(DX,FX)
D2
PV2
Rule 3
Negative Direction
(D5,F5)
Y2
X(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
22
Rule 7: Loading toward maximum response point X(IS) after Rule 4 crossing
displacement axis at displacement D4.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 7
X(IS)=(DX,FX)
Y1
Positive Direction
Rule 1
Rule 7
PV2
(D5,F5)
D2
D4
Rule 6
Rule 7
Rule 6
D4
D2
PV2
(D5,F5)
Negative Direction
Y1
Rule 1
X(IS)=(DX,FX)
PV3(IS)
Rule 8: Unloading from Rule 7 at point (D5,F5) toward pivot point PV3(IS) on the other
side until response point crosses displacement axis at displacement at D2, or
loading toward unloading point (D5,F5) followed by Rule 7.
F
PV3(IS)
Rule 8
X(IS)
Y1
Positive Direction
Rule 7
PV2(IS)
(D5,F5)
Rule 3
D2
Rule 7
D4
D4
Rule 8
Rule 8
Rule 3
D2
PV2(IS)
(D5,F5)
Negative Direction
Y1
X(IS)
PV3(IS)
23
Rule 9: Loading initial elastic stiffness after loading on Rule 3 passing pivot point
PV2(IS), or unloading on initial stiffness before crossing displacement axis at
origin.
PV3
Rule 9
T
LV2
Y2
Rule 1
Y1(DY,FY)
LV1
Positive Direction
PV2
Rule 3
Y4
D2
Rule 9
D2
Y3
Y3
Y2
LV2
Y4
D2
LV1
LV3
LV4
Rule 10
PV2
LV4
LV3
Rule 9
Negative Direction
Y1
X(DX,FX)
PV3
Rule 10: Loading on the initial elastic stiffness before pivot point PV2(IS) is reached
followed by Rule 5 or unloading on the initial elastic stiffness before until the
response point crosses the displacement axis at the origin followed by Rule 9.
PV3
Rule 10
T
LV2
Y2
Y1(DY,FY)
Positive Direction
LV3
LV1
PV2
Y4
Rule 9
D2
Y3
Y4
D2
Rule 10
LV4
Rule 5
Y3
LV3
LV2
Y2
T
PV2
LV1
Y1
X(DX,FX)
PV3
24
LV4
Negative Direction
Takeda-slip Model: Eto and Takeda (1973) modified the Takeda model to incorporate a slip-type
behavior at low stress level due to pull-out of longitudinal reinforcement from the anchorage zone.
The skeleton curve is tri-linear with stiffness changes at cracking and yielding where the cracking
and yielding levels can be different in positive and negative directions. The performance of the
model is identical to the Takeda model before yielding.
Pinching takes place only when the
yielding has occurred in the direction of
reloading. The reloading (pinching)
stiffness Ks is defined as
Fm
Dm
Ks =
Dm Do Dy
(Dm,Fm)
Do
Ks
D 'o
Ks
Kd
D
(Dm,Fm)
Y
Takeda-slip model
When the response point crosses a line connecting the origin and the maximum response point in
the direction of reloading, the response point moved toward the previous maximum response point
and then on the skeleton curve. The unloading stiffness is defined in the same manner as the
25
Takeda model.
The same pinching and unloading stiffness is used during reloading and unloading in an inner
loop.
F 'c + Fy Dm
Kd =
D 'c + Dy Dy
where, F 'c and D 'c : resistance and deformation at cracking on the opposite side, Fy and Dy :
resistance and deformation at yielding on the unloading side, Dm : maximum deformation on the
unloading side, : unloading degradation index.
Kabeyasawa-Shiohara Model: Kabeyasawa et al. (1983) modified the Takeda-Eto slip model to
represent the behavior of a girder with the amount of longitudinal reinforcement significantly different
at the top and bottom;
26
(1) the pinching occurs only in one direction where the yield resistance is higher than the other
direction,
(2) the pinching occurs only after the initial yielding in the direction of reloading, and
(3) the stiffness Ks during slipping is a function of the maximum response point (Dm, Fm) and the
point of load reversal (Do, Fo=0.0) in the resistance-deformation plane.
The reloading (slip) stiffness Ks, after unloading in the direction of the smaller yield resistance,
was determined as
Fm
Dm
Ks =
Dm Do Dm Do
displacement at the end of unloading on the zero-load axis, : slip stiffness degradation index. No
slip behavior will be generated for = 0; the degree of slip behavior increases with > 1.0. =
1.2 was suggested.
The slip stiffness is used until the response point crosses a line with slope Kp through the
previous maximum response point (Dm, Fm); the stiffness is reduced from the slope connecting the
origin and the maximum response point by reloading stiffness index ,
K p = (
Fm
)
Dm
The values of unloading stiffness degradation index of Takeda model, slipping stiffness
degradation index , and reloading stiffness index were chosen to be 0.4, 1.0 and 1.0,
respectively by Kabeyasawa et al. (1983).
Fy
Fc
Dy
Dc
Dc
Fc
where,
Dy
Fm
(
)
Dm Do Dm
Fm and
Dy
Fy
Y
C
Ks
and at a moment (1 ) Fm , where Fm is the resistance at the extreme point if the previous
excursion. After reaching this terminal point of the reloading branch, further loading takes place
parallel to the post-yielding stiffness of the virgin loading curve.
Fy
Fc
Dy
Dy
Dc
Dc
Fc
Fy
References:
Costa, A. C., and A. G. Costa, Hysteretic Model of Force-Displacement Relationships for Seismic
Analysis of Structures, National Laboratory for Civil Engineering, Lisbon, 1987.
Eto, H, and T. Takeda, "Elasto Plastic Earthquake Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete
Frame Structure (in Japanese)," Report, Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1973,
pp. 1261-1262.
Kabeyasawa, T., H. Shiohara, S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Analysis of the Full-scale Seven-story
Reinforced Concrete Test Structure," Journal of the Faculty of Engineering, the University of
Tokyo, (B), Vol. XXXVII, No. 2, 1983, pp. 431-478.
28
Takayanagi-Schnobrich Model: Takayanagi and Schnobrich (1976) modified the Takeda model to
incorporate pinching and strength decay features caused by high shear acting in short coupling
beams connecting parallel structural walls. The skeleton curve is trilinear.
The reloading (loading in the opposite direction after unloading) is made smaller than the stiffness
toward the previous maximum response point in the direction of reloading; the response point moves
toward the previous maximum response point after the response deformation changes its sign.
The resistance at a target point for reloading in the hardening range is reduced from the
resistance at the previous maximum response point; e.g., the resistance at the target point is
selected on a strength decay guideline which descends from the yield point. After the response
reaches the target point, the response point moves along a line parallel to the post yielding line.
The pinching stiffness is based on the reinforcement resistance for bending. The rate of strength
decay is assumed to proportionally increase with the rotation.
My
Y
Decay Guideline
Mc
Dm
Dm
Pinching
Mc
My
Takayanagi-Schnobrich Model of
Pinching and Strength Decay
Roufaiel-Meyer Model: Roufaiel and Meyer (1987) used a hysteresis model that includes strength
decay, stiffness degradation and pinching effect.
29
The
moment
resistance
of
a
bilinear
moment-curvature relation was assumed to decay
when a given strain is reached at the extreme
compression fiber. The curvature at the
commencement of strength decay is called the
critical curvature. The degradation in resistance was
assumed to be proportional to the amount by which
the critical curvature was exceeded.
An auxiliary unloading branch AB is drawn
parallel to the elastic branch of the bilinear skeleton
curve until it intersects a line OB through the origin O
parallel to the strain-hardening branch YA of the
skeleton curve. The line connecting this latter point B
of intersection to the point of previous extreme
deformation in the opposite direction defines the end
C of the unloading branch on the horizontal axis. If
yielding has not taken place in the direction of
loading, the yield point is used as the previous
maximum response point.
B
O Ks
Do
(Dm,Fm)
From that point on reloading is not always directed straight to the point of the previous extreme
post-yield excursion in the direction of reloading, but it may include pinching, depending on the shear
ration, M/Vh. Pinching is accomplished by directing the reloading branch first towards a point on the
elastic branch of the skeleton curve at an ordinate equal to that of the intersection of this branch with
the line of straight reloading to the previous extreme deformation point, times m<1. The second part
of the reloading branch heads towards this latter extreme deformation point. Parameter m assumes
the following values;
for
M/Vh<1.5
m=0
m=0.4(M/Vh)-0.6
for 1.5<M/Vh<4
m=1
for 4<M/Vh
The slope of slipping stiffness is
F 'm
Ks = m
D 'm Do
Chung et al. (1987) extended the
Roufaiel and Meyer model to include
strength and stiffness degradation at
constant
amplitude
cycling.
The
degradation
model
requires
two
additional parameters: the value of
curvature f and the moment m f at
failure in monotonic loading. The failure
is defined as rupture or buckling of
longitudinal reinforcement, concrete
crushing, or the reduction of resistance
to 75 %. If the bilinear approximation to
the moment-curvature curve under
monotonic loading is denoted by m p ( ) ,
is given by
30
y
m(half cycle at ) = {m p ( f ) m f }
y
f
Accordingly, a branch of reloading in the direction where the previous maximum curvature is equal to
, moves toward a point at ( m p ( ) m, ), rather than at ( m p ( ), ) as in the original Roufaiel
and Meyer model.
K2
K1
D
Dm
Hysteresis rules are summarized below;
K s Dm
(a) Moment-rotation relationship is elastic up to the
yield point,
(b) Once the yield point is exceeded, loading
proceeds on the second slope of the bilinear envelope,
(c) Unloading is parallel to the elastic stiffness,
Y
(d) The stiffness during reloading immediately after
Banon-Biggs-Irvine Model (1981)
unloading is reduced to 50 % of the second slope of the
bilinear envelope,
K
Ks = 2
2
(e) When the direction of loading changes during unloading and resistance (or deformation)
starts to increase again, the reloading stiffness is parallel to the elastic stiffness before the response
point reaches a point where the last unloading started,
(f) When the sign of deformation changes during reloading, the response point moves toward
previous maximum response point in the direction of reloading.
If the strength-degrading feature is introduced, the response point after the pinching does not
move toward the previous maximum point, but a point on the skeleton curve at deformation greater
than the previous maximum deformation.
D *m =
and
Dm
D
Skeleton Curves of Kato Model (1983)
The response is linearly elastic before the response point reaches point A. The response point
follows the skeleton curve if the slope of the skeleton curve is positive; if the slope of the skeleton
curve is negative, the response point increases its deformation without the change in resistance
(plastic behavior).
If a response point crosses the descending branches during loading or reloading, the deformation
increases without change in resistance (perfectly plastic stiffness). Upon unloading from a maximum
response point on the perfectly plastic branch, the response point moves on a line parallel to the
initial elastic stiffness K e until the response point crosses the descending skeleton curve; the point
is termed as the maximum response point (Dmax, Fmax). Then the response point follows a line with
reduced stiffness K u ;
Ku = K e (
Dmax
)
Dy
D
Fmin
( max )
Dmin Do Dy
where ( Dmin , Fmin ): previous maximum response point on the skeleton curve in the direction of
reloading, Do : deformation at the completion of unloading, D y : yield deformation in the opposite
direction.
Ke
Dmin
D yp K s
As
D xo
Ku
Dmax
Fmin
This slip stiffness is used for deformation ls (= l), where l: length from the unloading point to
the intersection of slip line and the line connecting the origin and the negative maximum response
point ( Dmin , Fmin ). The response point during strain softening moves toward the previous maximum
point ( Dmin , Fmin ) or the yield point if no yielding was experienced in the reloading direction.
If unloading takes place during reloading toward previous maximum response point, the
unloading stiffness from the previous maximum response point is used. If the response point crosses
32
the zero resistance axis, the response point follows the same slip stiffness previously defined in the
reloading direction. The length of slip deformation is defined for l: length from the new unloading
point to the intersection of slip line and the line connecting the origin and the maximum response
point ( Dmax , Fmax ).
Values
for
the
parameters of this model
recommended for shear
failing reinforced concrete
members are =0.4,
=0.6 and =0.95.
Values
for
flexure
dominated members are
=0.2, = = 0.0.
Origin-Oriented Model
simple hysteresis model, in which the response moves on the line connecting the previous absolute
maximum response point and the origin. If the response point reaches the maximum response point,
it moves on the skeleton curve. When unloading takes place from a point on the skeleton curve, the
response point moves on the line connecting the newly attained maximum response point and the
origin.
The model was obtained from the observation on steady-state response of reinforced concrete
structural model which oscillated about the origin of the force-deformation relation. No hysteresis
energy is dissipated during the oscillation within the
previous maximum response amplitude. Therefore,
F
viscous damping proportional to the initial stiffness is
Y
suggested as a mechanism to dissipate energy with
degradation of stiffness in a system.
C
Any shape may be used for the skeleton curve of
this model. This model is sometimes used to represent
a feature of shear-dominated member, which
D
dissipates small hysteresis energy and degrades its
stiffness with plastic deformation. The model, however,
does not give residual displacement when the load
C
was removed. Therefore, the model may not be suited
for the simulation analysis of response waveform.
Y
Similar to the origin oriented model, the response
Peak-Oriented Model
point may directed toward the previous maximum
response point on the opposite direction. Such model may be called a peak oriented model.
Fy 0
k0
Fy = a N Fy 0
Kn = nk y
k = b N k0
Fn = Fy
n
Matsushima Model
Sucuoglus Energy Based Hysteresis Model: A cycle fatigue model was presented by Sucuoglu
and Erberik (2004). The model keeps the complete record of energy dissipation and the recorded
dissipated energy is used as a memory fluid for determining the amount of stiffness and strength
deterioration in the subsequent cycle.
The model operates on a bilinear skeleton curve with an initial stiffness
aK
K o and post-yield
Rule 2: the post-yield envelope curve has a slope a K o , where a is the post-yield stiffness ratio.
Rule 3: Unloading from the post-yield envelope or from a reloading branch follows a slope K o until
the entire force in the system is released. If unloading originates from the maximum
displacement point in any direction, then unloading stiffness K u = K o such as the
unloading branches A1C1, A2C2, A3C3, and A4C4. On the other hand, if unloading originates
from an intermediate displacement which is less than the maximum displacement in the
direction, unloading stiffness K u becomes equal to the slope of the line between the
reloading target B at the current maximum post-elastic displacement and is its unloading
intercept C; e.g., unloading stiffness K u for A5C5 is equal to the slope of B4C3 and
unloading stiffness K u for A6C6 is equal to the slope of B5C4.
Rule 4: Reloading from an unloading intercept C to a reloading target B follows a slope K r . The
slopes of CiBi are variable and depend on the reduced strength of the target point B at the
current maximum displacement in the respective direction. Strength deterioration depends
on dissipated energy.
d n = d p + (d max d min )
where, d p : displacement of the previous target point in the same loading direction, d max , d min : peak
displacements using the previous target point d p ,
as
L
N
0.019 s
BD B
D
where,
References:
Banon, H., J. M. Biggs and H. Max Irvine, "Seismic Damage in Reinforced Concrete Frames,"
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 107, No. ST9, September 1981, pp. 1713-1729.
Chung, Y. S., et al., Seismic Damage Assessment of Reinforced Concrete Members, National
Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New York, Buffalo, Technical
Report NCEER-87-0022, 1987.
Kato, D., S. Otani, H. Katsumata and H. Aoyama, "Effect of Wall Base Rotation Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Frame-Wall Building," Proceedings, Third South Pacific Regional
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, May
1983.
Matsushima, Y., "Discussion of Restoring Force Characteristics of Buildings, the Damage from
Tokachi-oki Earthquake (in Japanese)," Report, Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan,
August 1969, pp. 587-588.
Park, Y. J., et al., IDARC: Inelastic Damage Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Frame-Shear Wall
Structures, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, State University of New
York at Buffalo, Technical Report NCEER-87-0008, 1987.
Roufaiel, M. S. L., and C. Meyer, "Analytical Modeling of Hysteretic Behavior of R/C Frames,"
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 3, March 1987, pp. 429-444.
Shiga, T., Vibration of Structures (in Japanese), Structural Series, Vol. 2, Kyoritsu Shuppan, 1976.
Sucuoglu, H., and Atlug Erberik, Energy-based Hysteresis and Damage Models for Deteriorating
Systems, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, No. 33, 2004, pp. 69 - 88.
Takayanagi, T., and W. C. Schnobrich, "Computed Behavior of Reinforced concrete Coupled Shear
Walls," Structural Research Series No. 434, Civil Engineering Studies, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1976.
Umemura, H., T. Ichinose, K. Ohashi and J. Maekawa, Development of Restoring Force
Characteristics for RC Members Considering Capacity Degradation (in Japanese), Proceedings,
Annual Meeting, Japan Concrete Institute, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2002, pp. 1147-1152.
36
cap deformation
preserved once a given deterioration threshold is achieved. The backbone curves can be different in
positive and negative directions in the proposed modeling.
37
(a) Basic Strength Deterioration, (b) Post-capping Strength Deterioration, (c) Unloading Stiffness
Deterioration, and (d) Acceleration Reloading Stiffness Deterioration
References:
Clough, R.W., and S.B. Johnston, Effect of Stiffness Degradation on Earthquake Ductility
Requirements, Proceedings, Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium, Tokyo, Japan, 1966,
pp. 227-232.
Ibara, L.F., R. A. Medina, and H. Krawinkler, Hysteretic Models that Incorporate Strength and
Stiffness Deterioration, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol. 34, 2005, pp.
1489 - 1511.
S.A., and V.V. Bertero, Nonlinear Seismic Response of a Coupled Wall System, Journal of
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, 1976, pp. 1759-1980.
39
m = m( , n)
n = n( , )
The assumption leads to an un-symmetric relation in an incremental form;
m
m
m m n
m n
) +
+
n = (
+
n
n
n
n
n
n =
+
The above relation for incremental curvature and strain , and then modification factor was
m =
m
1
(
) = EI *
1 m n
n m
n
1
n = {
} = EA *
m m
n
m
1 ( /
)(
)
n n
m =
where EI * : instantaneous flexural rigidity, and EA * : instantaneous axial rigidity. The ratio
n
m
References:
40
Mahin, S. A., and V. V. Bertero, "Nonlinear Seismic Response of a Coupled Wall System," Journal
of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, 1976, pp. 1759-1780.
Takayanagi, T., and W. C. Schnobrich, "Computed Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Coupled Shear
Walls," Structural Research Series No. 434, Civil Engineering Studies, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1976.
Tension
Compression
K1 = S1 ( K se + K ce )
for
Dm Dsy
= S1 ( K SE
D
+ K ce ) m
Dy
for
In a tensile zone:
K 2 = S 2 K se
for
Dm > Dsy
D ' m Dsy
D'
= S 2 K se m
Dsy
for
where Kse and Kce: initial elastic stiffness of the steel spring and the concrete spring, Dsy: yield
deformation of the concrete and steel springs, Dm: previous maximum response deformation in
compression, Dm': previous maximum deformation in tension, S1 = S2 =2.0 and k = 0.4.
Post yielding stiffness was chosen to be 0.02 times the initial elastic stiffness of the direction of
loading. Upon reloading in compression, the response point moves on the slip stiffness line toward a
point (Dm, Fm"), where F " m = Fm and = 0.4. When the sign of deformation changes, the
response point moves toward the previous maximum point in compression. Similar to the Takeda
model, the response point moves toward a peak of immediately outer loop.
Axial Force-deformation Model: Kabeyasawa and Shiohara et al. (1983) used a hysteresis model
for an axial force-deformation relation of a boundary column in the analysis of a structural wall. The
model was developed on the basis of the observed axial deformation behavior of the boundary
column in the test of the full-scale seven-story structure tested as a part of U.S.-Japan Cooperative
Program (Yoshimura and Kurose, 1985).
The tension stiffening was ignored; concrete was assumed to resist no tensile stress. The axial
stiffness in tension was made equal to the stiffness of the reinforcing steel in the boundary column,
and the stiffness in compression was assumed to be linearly elastic including the stiffness of the
concrete. The stiffness in tension changed at the tensile yielding of the longitudinal reinforcement.
41
Tension
Elongation
Initial Load
Kr = Kc (
Dmax
)
D yt
Compression
Axial force-deformation model for
wall boundary element (Kabeyasawa et al., 1983)
When the response point reached the previous maximum point ( Dmax , Fmax ) in tension, the
response point moved on the second slope of the skeleton curve, renewing the maximum response
point.
When the response point approached the compressive characteristic point Y' (Dyc, -Fy) in
compression, the response point was directed to move toward a point Y" (2Dyc, -2Fy) from a point P
(Dp, Fp) on the bilinear relation:
D p = D yc + ( D x D yc )
where,
stiffness changing point. This rule was introduced to reduce an unbalanced force at the compressive
characteristic point Y' due to a large stiffness change. The compressive characteristic point Y' did
not change under any loading history.
This axial-stiffness hysteresis model was used for the axial deformation of an independent
column as well as boundary columns of a wall.
skeleton curve and zero slip stiffness in their nonlinear response analysis. No hysteresis energy was
dissipated until the response point exceeded the previous maximum response point.
A finite stiffness may be assigned to the slip stiffness and a stress hardening may start to occur
before the initiation of slip at preceding unloading.
Bond Stress
Slip
Bond Stress
Bond Stress
Slip
Slip
References:
Fillipou, F. C., E. P. Popov and V. V. Bertero, Effect of Bond Deterioration on Hysteretic Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Joints, Report No. EERC 83-19, University of California, Berkeley, August
1983, 184 pp.
Fillipou, F. C., E. P. Popov and V. V. Bertero, Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Joints under Cyclic
Excitations, Journal, Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 11, November 1983, pp.
2666 - 2684.
Fillipou, F. C., A Simplified Model for Reinforcing Bar Anchorages under Cyclic Excitations, Report
No. EERC 85-05, University of California, Berkeley, March 1985, 61 pp.
Kabeyasawa, T., H. Shiohara, S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Analysis of the Full-scale Seven-story
Reinforced Concrete Test Structure," Journal, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tokyo (B),
Vol. XXXVII, No. 2, 1983, pp. 432-478.
43
Li, K.-N., S. Otani and H. Aoyama, "Study on the Elastic-plastic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Columns subjected to Bi-directional Horizontal Earthquake Forces and Varying Axial Load (in
Japanese)," Report, Aoyama Laboratory, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Tokyo, March 1990.
Morita, S., and T. Kaku, "Slippage of Reinforcement in Beam-column Joint of Reinforced Concrete
Frames," Proceedings, Eighth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, U.
S. A., Vol. 6, 1984, pp. 477-484.
Tanabashi, R., and K. Kaneta, "On the Relation between the Restoring Force Characteristics of
Structures and the Pattern of Earthquake Ground Motion," Proceedings, Japan National
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, November 1962, pp. 57-62.
Yoshimura, M., and Y. Kurose, "Inelastic Behavior of the Building," ACI SP-84, Earthquake Effects
on Reinforced Concrete Structures, U.S.-Japan Research, American Concrete Institute, Detroit,
1985, pp. 163-202.
44
mA
mB = mA
B = A
Trilinear Skeleton Relation: The two points to define a trilinear skeleton curve may be estimated as
follows.
(1) Initial elastic stiffness K1 is calculated for a prismatic line member considering flexural and
shear deformation:
K1 =
L
L
+
3Ec I c Gc Ac
2
where L : member length from the face of the orthogonal member to the inflection point (0ne-half of
clear span or height), Ec and Gc : elastic and shear moduli of concrete, I e : moment of inertia of
the transformed concrete section, Ac : cross sectional area of the transformed concrete section,
M c = ( t +
c =
Pe
) Ze
Ac
Mc
K1
where, Pe : axial force acting on the section including effective prestressing force, Ac : cross
sectional area of concrete, Z e : section modulus of the transformed section. Tensile strength
concrete may be assumed to be equal to 1.8
t of
y at yielding may be evaluated by integrating the curvature along the member, but
this often underestimates the deformation. Sugano (1970) proposed an empirical expression for the
45
My
a
N
d
+ 0.33
}( )2
K1
D
b D B D
where n : modular ratio of steel to concrete, pt :
= {0.43 + 1.64n pt + 0.043
My
Moment
y =
y K1
Mc
Characteristic Points on Hysteresis Relations:
The following points and stiffness are used in this
model.
(1) Characteristic point A ( A , M A ) is defined on the
initial elastic stiffness line with stiffness K1 . This
MA
K1
A c
Rotation
point is used for the hysteresis relation of a prestressed concrete member. Moment resistance M A
of the characteristic point is defined as decompression moment; i.e., for the effective prestressing
force Pe,
Pe
Ze
Ac
MA =
The moment is zero for a reinforced concrete member without prestressing force. Rotation
A is
A =
MA
K1
(2) Characteristic point B ( B , M B ) is defined for Takeda hysteresis model (Takeda, Sozen and
Nielsen, 1970) as the terminal point (zero moment resistance) of unloading from the maximum
response point M ( m , M m ). The unloading stiffness K B is defined as follows;
(a) unloading before yielding:
KB =
M m M 'c
m 'c
KB =
M y M 'c m
( )
y 'c y
y : yield moment and rotation on the side of the unloading point, M 'c and 'c :
cracking moment and rotation on the opposite side, and : unloading stiffness degradation index of
the Takeda model (=0.5 for normal reinforced concrete members). The rotation B is calculated as
where M y and
B = m
Mm
KB
46
Moment
Moment
My
Mm
KB
'c
'c
Rotation
Rotation
KB
M 'c
M 'c
(3) Unloading stiffness K A of fully prestressed concrete members from the maximum response
point M ( m , M m ) on the skeleton curve is defined as follows;
Mm
Moment
Y
M
Moment
Mm
MA
My
KA
C
KA
MA
A
Rotation
Rotation
KA =
Mm M A
m A
KA =
M y M A m
( )
y A y
(4) Unloading stiffness K D of this model from the maximum response point M ( m , M m ) on the
skeleton curve is defined by index ' taking into consideration the characteristics of both reinforced
concrete and fully prestressed concrete members.
K D = ' K A + (1 ') K B
(5) Characteristic point D ( D , M D ) is defined as an intersection of line AB and the unloading line
MD of this model with unloading stiffness K D from the maximum response point M( m , M m ) on the
47
skeleton curve.
Moment
Moment
Mm
M
Mm
MA
KD
KD
MA
A
D
A
D
Rotation
Rotation
A B
MA
MD
=
A B D B
: line AB
Mm MD
= KD
: line MD
m D
The moment resistance M D is thus solved from the two simultaneous equations as
M
m B m
KD
MD = MA
M
A B A
KD
(6) Unloading stiffness K E after reaching characteristic point D
(6-1) No yielding has taken place on the unloading side:
K E = K1 (initial elastic stiffness)
(a-1) The terminal point of this unloading stiffness is point E at moment level equal to moment
M ' A of characteristic point A on the opposite side if no cracking has taken place on the
opposite side.
(a-2) The terminal point of this unloading stiffness is point E at moment level equal to moment
M 'D of characteristic point D, which was defined during unloading after cracking on the
other side.
(6-2) Yielding has already occurred on the unloading side,
m
)
y
K '1 = K1 (
KB =
M y M 'c m
( )
y 'c y
m is the maximum response rotation where the unloading initiated. The terminal
point of this unloading stiffness is point E at moment level equal to moment M 'D of
characteristic point D in the opposite direction.
48
KB =
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
M y M 'c m
( )
y 'c y
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
The index value from 0.4 to 0.5 is normally used for reinforced concrete members. The hysteresis
energy dissipation decreases with increasing value of the index.
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
of prestressing reinforcement
The effect of prestressing on unloading stiffness is negligible when the ultimate moment ratio was
less than 0.3.
49
Hysteresis Rules:
Rule 1: Before flexural cracking at C ( c , M c ), the
My
Rule 3
Moment
Rule 2
K2
C
Mc
Rule 1
with stiffness K 2 .
K1
Rotation
KA =
Mm M A
m A
KB =
M m M 'c
m 'c
Moment
Y
M
Mm
C
MA
K D = ' K A + (1 ') K B
KD
A
D
A B
Rotation
Mm
KD
MD = MA
M
A B A
KD
m B
Mm
K1
A
Sub-rule 2-1
D
B
Sub-rule 2-2-1
K E = K1
No cracking in
A
E
Sub-rule 2-2-2: The response point moves
reloading
elastically from the characteristic point D ( D , M D )
direction
Rule 4
of Sub-rule 2-1 to point E whose moment level is
C
equal to moment level M 'D of characteristic point
D in the direction of reloading. The unloading
stiffness K E is equal to the initial elastic stiffness K1 . Point D and its moment M 'D have
been defined by Sub-rule 2-1 or
M
Sub-rule 3-1 upon previous unloading
Mm
from point M ( 'm , M 'm ) on the second
skeleton line.
Sub-rule 2-1
K1
A
KD
MD
D
B
Sub-rule 2-2-2
E
Rule 4
Cracked in
reloading
direction
KA =
KB =
M y M A m
( )
y A y
Mu
M y M 'c m
( )
y 'c y
My
K D = ' K A + (1 ') K B
where yielding point Y ( y , M y ) is on the side of
maximum response point M (
Rule 3
Sub-rule 3-1
KD
m , M m ) and
D
B
M
m B m
KD
MD = MA
M
A B A
KD
The response is elastic between unloading point M and characteristic point D.
If the response point reaches the unloading point M, the response point follows Rule 3 for
loading on the third skeleton line.
If the response point reaches the
characteristic point D ( D , M D ) of unloading,
the response point follows Sub-rule 3-2.
M
Y
KD
A
Sub-rule 3-1
MD
m
)
y
KE
K '1 = K1 (
Sub-rule 3-2-1
M y M 'c m
KB =
( )
y 'c y
M 'A
E
No cracking on
opposite side
Rule 4
The previous response point M on the side of point E is defined as the yielding point Y.
The unloading stiffness K 'D from the yield point is defined as
KA =
KB =
M ' y M 'A
'y 'A
M 'y M c
'y c
K D = ' K A + (1 ') K B
Characteristic point D is defined as the intersection of the unloading line MD and line AB
connecting two characteristic points A and B. The moment M D at point D is given by
My
KD
MD = MA
M
A B A
KD
y B
If the response point reaches point D, the response point follows Sub-rule 3-1.
If the response point reaches point E, the response point follows Rule 4.
M
Y
m
)
y
K '1 = K1 (
KB =
Sub-rule 3-1
M y M 'c m
( )
y 'c y
D
B
KE
Sub-rule 3-2-2
Rule 4
Cracking
direction
in
reloading
If the response point reaches point D, the response point follows Sub-rule 3-1.
If the response point reaches point E, then the response point follows Rule 4.
Rule 4: The response point moves on line EM toward the previous maximum response point M
( 'm , M 'm ) in the direction of reloading. The characteristic point E is defined either in Sub-rule 2-2
or 3-2.
53
When the response point reaches the previous maximum response point M in the direction of
reloading, the response point follows either Rule 2 if no yielding has taken place or Rule 3 if yielding
has taken place in the direction of reloading.
If unloading takes place at point N before reaching the previous maximum response point, the
response point follows Sub-rule 4-1.
C
M
Y
KD
MD
D
A
'm
K E = K1
F
D
D
G
B
F
K 'D
N
C
M 'm
Y
Sub-rule 4-1: The response point moves on line NF with unloading stiffness K 'D where
point N is an unloading point before the response point reaches the previous maximum
response point M in Sub-rule 2-2 or
M
3-2. Point F is defined on the
Y
unloading line NF at moment level
M 'D
of
equal
to
moment
characteristic
point
D.
The
K 'D
,
unloading
stiffness
characteristic point D and its
C
KD
moment M 'D were defined during
KD
previous unloading from point M
A
( 'm , M 'm ) on the skeleton curve in
G
MD
D
Sub-rule 2-1 or 3-1.
B
KE
K 'D
N
Y
54
A
C
M 'D
M 'A
Sub-rule 4-2: The response point follows line FG with unloading (reloading) stiffness K 'E
where characteristic point F is defined in Sub-rule 4-1. The moment level of point G is equal
to moment M D of characteristic point D. The characteristic point D and its moment M 'D
were defined during previous unloading from point M ( 'm , M 'm ) on the skeleton curve in
Sub-rule 2-1 or 3-1. The unloading stiffness K 'E depends on the previous maximum
response on the unloading side;
(a) If no yielding has taken place on the unloading side, the unloading stiffness K 'E is
equal to the initial elastic stiffness K1 .
(b) If yielding has taken place on the unloading side, the unloading stiffness is given
below;
K '1 = K1 (
KB =
m
)
y
M ' y M c 'm
(
)
'y c 'y
References:
Hayashi, M., S. Okamoto, S. Otani, H. Kato, and J. Fu, Hysteresis Model for Prestressed Concrete
Members and its Effect on Earthquake Response (in Japanese), Journal, Prestressed Concrete,
Japan Prestressed Concrete Engineering Association, Vol. 37, No. 4, July 1995, pp. 57-67.
Sugano, S, "Experimental Study on Restoring Force Characteristics of Reinforced Concrete
Members (in Japanese)," Thesis submitted to fulfill the requirements of Doctor of Philosophy,
University of Tokyo, March 1970.
Takeda, T., M. A. Sozen and N. N. Nielsen, "Reinforced Concrete Response to Simulated
Earthquakes," Journal, Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. ST12, 1970, pp. 2557-2573.
55
Problem 2
Use FORTRAN program SDF to calculate the response of two SDF systems under El Centro (NS)
1940 motion (use the first 15.0 sec). Assume the mass M to be 1,000 kg.
(a) Calculate the response of two linearly elastic systems having natural period of 0.2 sec and 1.0
sec. Determine maximum response resistance of the two systems.
(b) Determine the period corresponding to secant stiffness Ky at yielding to be (1) 0.2 sec and (2) 1.0
sec. Determine the other stiffness properties as follows (ignore cracking point for bilinear and Clough
models);
K u = 0.05K y
Fy
Fc = Fy / 3
Ky
Dc = Dy / 6
Fc
Dc
Dy
Determine the yield resistance of the system, using the Newmarks equal energy and displacement
principles; which are given below;
Fy =
Fy =
Fe
2 1
Fe
where, Fe : maximum resistance of a linearly elastic system having the same initial (yield) period,
and : allowable ductility factor (=4.0), defined as the allowable maximum deformation divided by
the yield displacement.
(c) Calculate the response of bilinear model (ignore the cracking point), Clough model (ignore the
cracking point), and Takeda model. Plot the resistance-deformation relation during the earthquake
for each model. Compare the response displacement waveforms of the three models. Damping
should be proportional to instantaneous stiffness, and the damping factor should be 0.05 for the yield
secant stiffness.
h=
c
2 M Ky
(d) Compare the response displacement waveforms of Clough model using damping proportional to
stiffness and damping proportional to mass. The damping factor of the two cases should be 0.05 at
the initial stage.
Problem 3
Use FORTRAN program Pivot. Use the same stiffness properties of the Clough model in Problem 3.
Study the effect of post-yielding stiffness on the response, by varying the post yielding stiffness K u ,
(1) K u = 0.10 K y , (2) K u = 0.0 , and (3) K u = 0.10 K y . The third and fourth point of
resistance-deformation relation can be selected on the post-yielding branch.
Plot the resistance-deformation relation for each case, and compare response displacement
waveforms of the three cases. The parameters of the Pivot model should be = 2.0 and = 1/ 3 .
57