This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY 4.0
The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the structural response of composite steel-concrete eccentrically
buckling-restrained braced frames (BRBFs). The fi nite element (FE) software ABAQUS is employed to nonlinearly
analyse the BRBFs. Comparing the modelling and experimental test results validates the FE modelling method of
the BRBF. Three different strong earthquake records of Tabas, Northridge, and Chi-Chi are selected for the nonlinear
dynamic analyses. A BRBF is then designed having a shear link. Afterwards, the designed BRBF is analysed under
the selected earthquake records using the validated modelling method. The lateral displacements, base shears, and
energy dissipations of the frame and shear link rotations are achieved from the analyses of the BRBF. The results are
compared and discussed. The obtained BRBF results are also compared with their corresponding steel eccentrically
braced frame (EBF) results. It is concluded that the BRBF can generally accomplish the improved structural response
compared with the EBF under the earthquake records. Meanwhile, the BRBF has larger base shear capacity than the
EBF. Furthermore, the BRBF dissipates more energy than the EBF.
1. Hollander, M.B. (1966). Prestressed tubes and rods. US Patent No. 3232638.
2. Wakabayashi, M., Nakamura, T., Kashibara, A., Morizono, T., Yokoyama, H. (1973). Experimental study of elasto-plastic properties of precast concrete wall panels with built-in insulating braces. Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Architectural Institute of Japan, Structural Engineering Section, vol. 10, 1041-1044, in Japanese.
3. Watanabe, A., Hitomi, Y., Saeki, E., Wada, A., Fujimoto, M. (1988). Properties of brace encased in buckling-restraining concrete and steel tube. Proceeding of 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, vol. IV, 719-724, Tokyo, Japan.
4. Watanabe, A. (2018). Design and applications of buckling-restrained braces. International Journal of High-Rise Buildings, vol. 7, no. 3, 215-221.
5. Wada, A., Connor, J., Kawai, H., Iwata, M., Watanabe, A. (1992). Damage tolerant structures. Proceeding of 5th U.S.-Japan Workshop on the Improvement of Structural Design and Construction Practices, Applied Technology Council, ATC-15-4, 27-39, San Diego, CA.
6. Sabelli, R., Mahin, S., Chang, C. (2003). Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling- restrained braces. Engineering Structures, vol. 25, no. 5, 655-666.
7. Ju, Y-K., Kim, M.H., Kim, J., Kim, S.D. (2009). Component tests of buckling-restrained braces with unconstrained length. Engineering Structures, vol. 31, no. 2, 507-516.
8. Jiang, Z., Guo, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, X. (2015). Influence of design parameters of buckling-restrained brace on its performance. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 105,139-150.
9. Yang, Y., Liu, R., Xue, Y., Li, H. (2017). Experimental study on seismic performance of reinforced concrete frames retrofitted with eccentric buckling-restrained braces (BRBs). Earthquakes and Structures-An International Journal, vol. 12, no. 1, 79-89.
10. Tsai, C.S., Liu, Y., Liu, B.Q. (2017). An experimental study of buckling restrained brace with inspection windows. Proceeding of 16th World Conference on Earthquake, Santiago Chile,1231.
11. Jia, L-J., Li, R-W., Xiang, P., Zhou, D-Y., Dong, Y. (2018). Resilient steel frames installed with self-centering dual-steel buckling-restrained brace. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 149, 95-104.
12. Avci-Karatas, C., Celik, O.C., Ozmen Eruslu, S. (2019). Modeling of buckling restrained braces (BRBs) using full-scale experimental data. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, vol. 23, 4431-4444.
13. Sadeghi, S., Rofooei, F.R. (2020). Improving the seismic performance of diagrid structures using buckling restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 166, 105905.
14. Pan, W.H., Tong, J.Z., Guo, Y.L., Wang, C.M. (2020). Optimal design of steel buckling-restrained braces considering stiffness and strength requirements. Engineering Structures, vol. 211, 110437.
15. Wang, C-L., Qing, Y., Wu, J., Wang, J., Gu, Z. (2020). Analytical and experimental studies on buckling-restrained brace with gap-supported tendon protection. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 164, 105807.
16. Zhu, B-L., Guo, Y-L., Zhou, P., Pi, Y-L. (2020). Load-carrying performance and design of BRBs confined with longitudinal shuttle-shaped-trusses. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 167, 105954.
17. Mirtaheri, M., Gheidi, A., Zandi, A.P., Alanjari, P., Rahmani Samani, H. (2011). Experimental optimization studies on steel core lengths in buckling restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, vol. 67, 1244-1253.
18. FEMA 450, (2003). NEHRP Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures, Part 1: provisions. Prepared by the building seismic safety council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
19. Bahrami, A., Yavari, M. (2019). Hysteretic assessment of steel-concrete composite shear walls. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, vol. 8, no. 2, 5640-5645.
20. Bahrami, A., Heidari, M. (2020). Dynamic analysis of steel eccentrically braced frames with shear link. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, vol. 13, no. 2, 233-239.