Hybrid System Using Precast Prestressed Frame with

Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 7, No. 3, 297-306, October 2009 / Copyright © 2009 Japan Concrete Institute 297

Scientific paper

Hybrid System Using Precast Prestressed Frame with Corrugated Steel Panel Damper Yukako Ichioka1, Susumu Kono2, Minehiro Nishiyama3 and Fumio Watanabe4

Received 31 May 2009, accepted 27 July 2009

Abstract This paper proposes an economical structural system that reduces seismic damage and needs little or no repair by com-bining precast prestressed concrete elements and corrugated steel panel dampers. Precast prestressed concrete structures show high self-centering characteristics with negligible damage. However, the lateral displacement response during earthquakes tends to be larger than ordinary reinforced concrete (RC) structures because of their lower hysteretic energy dissipation capability. Corrugated steel panels attached to a moment-resisting frame improve its seismic performance with high energy dissipating capability as a hysteretic damper. Five portal frames with corrugated steel panel dampers were tested to investigate the hysteretic characteristics of the proposed hybrid system. Experimental variables were the type of frame structure and the yield strength of the corrugated steel panels. All precast prestressed concrete frames showed a sufficient amount of energy dissipation, and much smaller residual deformations and damage than the monolithic RC frame. Superposition of the simulated hysteretic loops of the frames with that of the damper agreed well with the experimental results obtained by reversed-cyclic loading tests. Using a simple calculation method to estimate the equivalent viscous damping ratios and residual displacements, a design procedure seeking the optimization of the hybrid system is examined.

1. Introduction

When major earthquakes have stricken large urban center over the last two decades, many reinforced concrete (RC) buildings have suffered severe damage and have not operated properly after the earthquakes, even if they did not collapse. The long delay for repair has resulted in serious social and economic losses. Although most cur-rent seismic design codes require little or no damage during moderate earthquakes and prevent the collapse of structures during major earthquakes, societal demands are shifting toward higher levels of performance. The general public has started to request structures that ex-perience at most minor damage, hence necessitating no repair, and can be used immediately after an earthquake regardless of its intensity. Some methods such as base isolation have been developed as a solution, but their initial and posterior maintenance costs are too high for inclusion in ordinary buildings.

Precast prestressed concrete structures need no or little repair after earthquakes because they exhibit nonlinear elastic behavior (Fig. 1(a)) with an effective restoring

force provided by prestressing tendons. Residual de-formations remain very small if rocking at the member interfaces is allowed. However, the small energy dissi-pating capability and the large degradation of stiffness after gap openings may result in excessive seismic drift demands.

In order to reduce seismic drift demands, the authors propose adding energy dissipating elements, which pro-vide fat hysteresis loops as shown in Fig. 1(b). Priestley et al. (1991, 1996 and 1999) proposed some structural systems using precast prestressed concrete members with energy dissipating devices in the PRESSS (PREcast Seismic Structural Systems) research program. The ini-tial concept of the self-centering structural system was attributed to the design of the rail bridge conceived by Cormack (1988). It was demonstrated in the PRESSS research program that those structural systems exhibited so-called flag shape hysteresis loops, as illustrated in Fig. 1(c), and excellent performance with limited or negligi-ble seismic damage. Some of these structural systems were used for 39-story buildings in California as reported by Englekirk (2002), and also have been applied to bridge piers (Pampanin et al. 2006).

The authors developed new energy dissipating devices for precast prestressed concrete frames using corrugated steel panels. When used as shear walls, corrugated steel panels have been shown to have high energy dissipation capabilities even after their peak load (Mo and Perng 2000 and Chosa et al. 2006).

This paper introduces a hybrid structural system using precast prestressed frames with corrugated steel panel dampers. Cyclic loading tests on five portal frames with dampers were conducted. The corrugated steel panels

1Research Fellow, General Building Research Corporation of Japan, Japan. E-mail:[email protected] 2Associate Professor, Dept. of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Kyoto University, Japan. 3Professor, Dept. of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Kyoto University, Japan. 4Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Architecture and Architectural Engineering, Kyoto University, Japan.

298 Y. Ichioka, S. Kono, M. Nishiyama and F. Watanabe / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 7, No. 3, 297-306, 2009

yielded at the expected drift angle and dissipated a suf-ficient amount of hysteretic energy. Good self-centering behavior was observed when the lateral load contribution of the damper was adequate. A calculation method to determine the adequate contribution of the damper was derived from a simple M-θ model. 2. Corrugated steel shear panel damper

Corrugated steel shear panels are mainly used as webs of box girder bridges as shown in Fig. 2(a) because they weigh less and decrease prestressing loss due to their negligible axial stiffness. Mo and Perng (2000) sug-gested the use of corrugated steel shear panels instead of reinforced concrete shear walls as the main lateral load resisting components in building structures. Although their experimental results showed poor seismic per-formance because of insufficient connection rigidity between the shear panel and the peripheral frame, Chosa et al. (2006) confirmed that the shear capacity and stiff-ness of corrugated shear panels can be fully utilized with anchorage satisfying the Japanese design guideline, De-sign Guidelines for Composite Structures (1985). Cor-rugated steel shear panels have already been used as shear walls in Japan (Fig. 2(b)).

3. Experiments

Experimental studies were conducted at Kyoto Univer-sity to investigate the seismic behavior of precast prestressed frames built incorporating corrugated steel

panel dampers. It was observed that corrugated steel panel dampers yielded at the expected drift angle and improved energy dissipating capabilities with small re-sidual deformations. Ductility of frames and dampers and damage conditions were also checked. 3.1 Specimens Specimens consisted of portal frames and corrugated steel panel dampers. Experimental variables were the yield strength of corrugated steel panel dampers (300 MPa, 225 MPa and 100 MPa) and types of frame struc-tures (precast post-tensioned frames with or without grouting and a monolithic conventional reinforced con-crete frame). The specimens are summarized in Table 1. Prestressing forces, Fi, corresponding to 85% of the yield strength of tendons were initially introduced in the four precast post-tensioned frames. Constant axial load of 900 kN was applied to each column. Also listed in Table 1 are initial axial force ratios, Pi/Agf’c (Pi: initial axial load including initial prestressing force and constant axial load, Ag: gross cross-sectional area, f ’c: measured con-crete compressive strength), for beams and columns.

3.2 Corrugated steel panel dampers The configurations of the dampers of the five specimens were identical, as shown in Fig. 3. The flat steel plates at the top and bottom of the corrugated plate were thick enough to concentrate shear deformation in the corru-gated plate. Triangular panels extruding from both sides of the flat plates were used to prevent flexural deforma-tion of the flat plate. The height of the corrugated steel

P

δ

P

δ

P

δFlag ShapeHysteresis Loop

(a) Nonlinear elastic behavior (b) Plastic behavior (c) Flag shape behavior

Fig. 1 Hysteresis loops of precast prestressed concrete structures and energy dissipating elements.

Concrete slab

Deviator

Concrete slab

Inner cables

Corrugated steel plate web

External cables

Corrugated steel plate web

(a) As webs of a bridge (b) As a shear wall in a school building

Fig. 2 Practical applications of corrugated steel shear panels.

Y. Ichioka, S. Kono, M. Nishiyama and F. Watanabe / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 7, No. 3, 297-306, 2009 299

panel, hD (= 190 mm), was the minimum height to ac-commodate one corrugation to ensure the corrugated steel panel yielded at a small drift. The peripheral flange plates at the sides of the corrugated plate were so strong and stiff that they remained elastic when the corrugated panel carried 1.5 times the shear force at shear yielding. The flange plates were welded to the corrugated steel panel, flat plates or triangular plates with full penetration welds. The corrugated steel panel and the flat plates were connected by high-strength bolts. The damper and the portal frame were connected through mortar by high-strength bolts. The mechanical properties of the plates are listed in Table 2.

The expected drift angle and lateral load at shear yielding of the shear panel are summarized in Table 3.

The expected lateral load at damper yielding was com-puted by multiplying sectional area of the corrugated steel panel by shear yield strength (= fy / 3 , fy: yield strength of the corrugated steel panel). The expected drift angle was calculated on the assumption that the lower half part of the damper was an elastic cantilever beam with H-section.

3.3 Frames Frames were designed at 40% scale and modeled as an internal span of the first story of a mid or low-rise building. The dimensions, reinforcing arrangement and cross-section configurations are illustrated in Figs 4 and 5. In the precast specimens (PCbS, PCbM, PCuS and PCuL), columns, beams and stubs were cast separately

Table 1 Main characteristics of test specimens.

Specimen Frame Tendon Fi (kN) Pi/Agf’c Damper Column 0.26

PCbS Beam 0.08

Extremely low yield strength

steel (LY100*) Column 0.26

PCbM

with grouting

Beam 0.08

Low strength steel

(LY225*) Column 0.26

PCuS

Indented9.0 mm* 277

Beam 0.08

Extremely low yield strength

steel (LY100*) Column 0.30 PCuL

Post- tensionedprecast

members without grouting Indented

11.2 mm* 434 Beam 0.12 Column 0.20 RC Reinforced concrete

(cast monolithically) - - Beam 0

Mild strength steel

(SS400*)

Fi: Initial prestressing force per a tendon, Axial force ratio: Axial stress to concrete compressive strength, *LY100: fy=105 MPa, LY225: fy=235 MPa, SS400: fy=307 MPa, Indented tendon 9.0 mm* and 11.2 mm*: Diameter of tendon is 9.0 mm and 11.2 mm

Fig. 3 Configuration and dimensions of corrugated steel panel damper.


and connected through mortar joints by post-tensioning. Specimen RC was cast monolithically. The material properties of the reinforcement, concrete and mortar are listed in Tables 4 to 6. 3.4 Loading arrangement The loading system is shown in Fig. 6. Axial load of 900

kN was applied to each column (the axial load ratio was 0.20) and kept constant during testing. Equal magnitude of lateral load was applied to both ends of the beam by two 1000 kN hydraulic jacks. The first cycle of loading was applied until cracking was observed in either beam or columns. This was followed by a series of loading cycles, which consisted of two full cycles to a story drift

Table 2 Mechanical properties of steel plates.

Specimen Plate type Thickness (mm)

Yield strength (MPa)

Tensile strength (MPa)

PCbS, PCuS LY100 2.09 105* 247* PCbM LY225 2.09 235* 324*

PCuL, RC

Corrugated steel panel SS400 2.09 307* 400*

Side flange plate 16.0 283 443

All specimensFlat plate,

Top and bottom flange plate,

Triangular plate

SS400 22.0 268 442

* In direction parallel to corrugations

Table 3 Expected drift angle and lateral load carried by damper at shear yielding.

Damper Specimen Expected drift angle at damper yielding (%)

Expected lateral load at damper yielding (kN)

LY100 PCbS, PCuS 0.026 38.0 LY225 PCbM 0.053 85.1 SS400 PCuL, RC 0.071 111.1

550

300

850

150

550 550300 3002200

joint20mm

Mortar

2 D16-

2 D16-

D10 80@ plate30mm

Anchor

5 D22-D13 100@

4 D22-

5 D22-

D10 70@2 D16-

Corrugatedsteel paneldamper

3900

550

300

850

300

550 550300 3002200

2 D22-

2 D19-

D10 80@

D13 100@

2 D22- 4 D22-

6 D22-

D10 70@

Corrugatedsteel paneldamper

(a) PCbS, PCbM, PCuS and PCuL (b) RC

Fig. 4 Arrangement of reinforcements and dimensions (unit: mm).

D16

300

300

216

216

143

143

240156

300

216

148

250

250

190

250

38

D10 D10

Column Beam 　　　　　　

D19

300

300

214

214

D22

240152

300

212

190

250

250

250

Cover 20

D10 D10

Column Beam (a) PCbS, PCbM, PCuS and PCuL (b) RC

Fig. 5 Cross-section dimensions of columns and beams (unit: mm).


angle, R, of 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6%, 0.8%, 1.0%, 2.0%, 3.0%, and 4.0%. Story drift angle was defined as the average of lateral displacements of both column tops at the central height of the beam divided by story height (= 1000 mm). Additional cycles to a story drift angle larger than 4% were applied to some of the specimens.

4. Experimental results

4.1 Hysteresis restoring force characteristics Figure 7 shows the lateral load carried by the frame and damper-story drift relations up to R = 4%. The lateral load and drift angle at yielding of the corrugated panel, and the peak load are summarized in Table 7. The yield

Table 4 Measured mechanical properties of reinforcement.

Bar type Area (mm2)

Yield strength (MPa)


Young’s Modulus(GPa)

D10 71.33 360 499 184 D13 126.7 327 470 172 D16 198.6 349 527 184 D19 286.5 389 585 196 D22 387.1 381 587 189

Indented tendon 9.0 mm 64.0 1410* 1500* 200* Indented tendon 11.2 mm 100 1410* 1500* 200*

* Data in the Inspection Certificate

Table 5 Measured mechanical properties of concrete.

Specimen Member Compressive strength (MPa)



Column, Beam 45.6 3.2 24.4 PCbS Stub 38.8 - 27.4 Column, Beam 46.2 3.1 24.7 PCbM Stub 40.2 - 26.0 Column, Beam 47.1 3.1 24.6 PCuS Stub 45.1 - 25.0 Column, Beam 45.4 3.4 25.7 PCuL Stub 46.4 - 25.6

RC All members 52.7 2.9 26.8

Table 6 Mechanical properties of joint mortar*.

Specimen Compressive strength (MPa)



Damper-Frame 51.4 2.7 14.7 Beam-Column 33.1 3.8 18.9

Column-Footing 71.3 3.6 26.1 Grouting in Beam 58.2 3.1 15.7

PCbS

Grouting in Column 47.2 2.3 15.0 Damper-Frame 55.9 2.6 15.5 Beam-Column 45.7 4.3 21.7

Column-Footing 62.8 4.0 32.3 Grouting in Beam 54.2 2.9 16.4

PCbM

Grouting in Column 55.8 2.9 16.4 Damper-Frame 57.5 3.3 15.6 Beam-Column 61.4 3.7 30.4 PCuS

Column-Footing 75.0 4.1 38.1 Damper-Frame 49.2 2.2 16.7 Beam-Column 52.6 3.6 23.4 PCuL

Column-Footing 42.4 3.3 29.6 RC Damper-Frame 81.2 5.8 27.7

* φ 50 mm x 100 mm cylinders were used


points were determined by strain gauge readings with the Von Mises yield criterion. Shown in parentheses are the second yield points, which may not be justified because of residual strains after the first yielding. Each specimen

dissipated a large amount of hysteretic energy. Residual displacements were relatively large in RC and PCuL with the mild strength steel corrugated panel, while the other three specimens with low strength steel showed good

3000 3500 3500

2280

Rea

ctio

nbl

ock

Rea

ctio

nw

all

Reaction floor

1000kNhydraulic jack

500kN load cell

1000kNhydraulic jack

1200kNhydraulicjack

500kN load cell

Fig. 6 Loading setup (unit: mm).

-1000

-750

-500

-250

0

250

500

750

1000

-4 -2 0 2 4

TotalDamperDamper yielding

Late

ral L

oad

(kN

)

Story Drift Angle (%)-4 -2 0 2 4




Story Drift Angle (%) (a) PCbS (b) PCbM (c) PCuS

-1000

-750

-500

-250

0

250

500

750

1000

-4 -2 0 2 4


Late

ral L

oad

(kN

)



Story Drift Angle (%) (d) PCuL (e) RC

Fig. 7 Lateral load-story drift angle relations.

Table 7 Lateral load and drift angle at damper yielding and peak load.

At damper yielding At peak load Drift angle (%) Lateral load (kN) Drift angle (%) Lateral load (kN) Specimen

Positive Negative Positive Negative Positive Negative Positive NegativePCbS 0.037 (-0.009) 190.0 (-186.1) 1.70 -1.56 720.2 -702.3 PCbM 0.042 (-0.041) 215.5 (-255.5) 1.95 -1.57 775.1 -768.2 PCuS (-0.002) 0.038 (111.6) -177.0 1.82 -2.95 711.1 -715.3 PCuL 0.097 (-0.082) 328.3 (-322.4) 1.55 -1.97 810.9 -811.4

RC 0.086 (-0.073) 355.3 (-272.7) 3.02 -2.93 854.0 -846.4


self-centering performance. Degradation of lateral load carrying capacity after peak load was small, with 80% of peak load still supported beyond R = 4.0% for all specimens. Specimen PCuL experienced abrupt lateral load decrease at R = 2 to 3% because of the slip at the gap between the beam and a column, but this had little or no effect on the lateral load carrying capacity. 4.2 Lateral load carried by dampers The lateral load carried by dampers-story drift angle relations are shown in Fig. 7. Damper yield points are also plotted. Shear stress induced in the corrugated steel panel was computed from strain readings, with plane stress assumption, and the Von Mises yield criterion. Strain gauges were attached to the flat plates, which showed elastic strain until R = 4%. The shear resistance of the damper was calculated by multiplying the shear stress by the cross-sectional area of the flat plate. The ratio of load carried by the damper to the total lateral load was 30% to 35% at R = 4% in the five specimens.

The computed contribution was 25% by considering the story shear force at the formation of a collapse mechanism for the bare frame and the shear force of the damper at yielding. The dampers carried a larger lateral load than expected. The lateral load carried by the damper increased until R = 1.0% after damper yielding. The increment was largest in PCbS and PCuS, which used extremely low strength steel (LY100).

4.3 Equivalent viscous damping ratio and re-sidual deformation ratio Figure 8 shows the equivalent viscous damping ra-tio-story drift angle relations. The equivalent viscous damping ratio, heq, was calculated from each second hysteresis cycle of the lateral load-drift relations. heq of the bare frames without dampers were computed from hysteresis loops of the lateral load carried by the frame-story drift relations. Lateral load carried by the frame was obtained by subtracting lateral load carried by the damper from the total lateral load. heq of the precast post-tensioned specimens was about 4% larger than that of the bare frames, while the increment of heq in speci-men RC was about 2%. The difference in yield strengths of the corrugated steel panels (LY225 and LY100) made only a small difference in heq as observed in PCbM and PCbS.

Residual deformation ratio, rd, which is defined as the ratio of the average residual deformation in the positive and negative directions to the maximum deformations in each cycle, was recorded to evaluate self-centering per-formance. Figure 9 shows the residual deformation ra-tio-story drift angle relations. The ratio was obtained from the second loop of each loading cycle. rd of specimen RC increased with story drift and reached 45% at R = 2.0%, while rd of the precast prestressed specimens were about 18 to 25% at the same story drift angle. The columns and beams of the precast post-tensioned specimens suffered little damage. Less concrete crushing

was observed in these specimens than in specimen RC and cracks were concentrated in the joint mortar. Almost the same amount of rd in PCbS and PCuL indicated that rd was independent of bond due to grouting. rd of PCuS was the smallest of all specimens since the small shear force carried by the low strength corrugated panel (LY100) can be easily offset by the restoring force of the precast post-tensioned concrete frame.

4.4 Damage of frames and dampers Damage of specimens PCuS and RC after experiencing R = 4.0% drift are shown in Fig. 10. Local and overall buckling occurred at the corrugated steel panel, but no fracture was observed at the plate and welded part. PCuS showed minor damage with small crushing areas at the

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

PCbSPCbMPCuSPCuLRC

Equ

ival

ent V

isco

us D

ampi

ng R

atio

, h eq

(%)

Story Drift Angle (%) (a) Total

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

PCbSPCbMPCuSPCuLRC

Equ

ival

ent V

isco

us D

ampi

ng R

atio

, heq

(%)

Story Drift Angle (%) (b) Bare frame

Fig. 8 Equivalent viscous damping ratio.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

PCbSPCbMPCuS

PCuLRC

Res

idua

l Def

orm

atio

n R

atio

, r d

(%)

Story Drift Angle (%) Fig. 9 Residual deformation ratio.


column bases and the ends of the beam. However, damage of the RC specimen was severe at the hinge zones near both ends of the beam, with concrete spalling and bucking of reinforcement. 5. Design procedure of the hybrid system

5.1 Numerical simulation using M-θ Model A simple mechanical model was developed to simulate the hysteretic behavior of precast prestressed concrete frames with corrugated steel panel dampers. The model is expressed by superposition of two independent and additive shear resistances attributed to the frame and the damper. Chosa et al. (2006) proved that the hysteretic characteristics of reinforced concrete portal frames with corrugated steel shear walls were well simulated by su-perposition of hysteresis loops of the frames and the shear walls.

The hysteresis loops of the damper are expressed by the Menegotto-Pinto model (Restrepo 1993) shown in Eq. 1. Based on the hysteresis loops of R = 0.05% and R = 1.0% cycles, the strain-hardening ratio, Q, and the con-trol parameter for transition from elastic to plastic branches, R, were defined as Q = 0.05 and R = 13.5, respectively. This model considers hardening due to cyclic loading. The hysteresis loops of the frame were computed based on the M-θ model proposed by Ichioka et al. (2008). This M-θ model was developed for a pre-cast prestressed concrete member taking into considera-tion the bond-slip behavior of tendons caused by a large gap opening at the interface between precast members.

The bond-slip relationship for strand tendons was based on research by Adachi et al. (2000). The analytical re-sults of PCbM in Fig. 11 gave a good estimation of measured lateral load resistance and residual deforma-tions.

fs = f0 + (εs – ε0) Em [Q + (1 – Q) / {1 + |Em (εs – ε0) / (fch – f0)|R}1 / R] (1)

where εs and fs: current strain and stress, ε0 and f0: strain and stress at reversal point, Em: initial elastic tangent, Q: strain-hardening ratio (ratio between post-yield tangent and initial elastic tangent), fch: yield strength, R: control parameter for transition from elastic to plastic branches. 5.2 Procedure to determine adequate damper contribution Optimization of energy dissipating performance and self-centering performance of the hybrid system pro-posed in this paper is simple since the frames and dampers work independently for a given story drift. The hysteretic characteristics of the system are estimated by superposition of the hysteresis loops of the dampers and frames, as mentioned in the preceding section. Figures 12(a) and (b) show the equivalent viscous damping ratio, heq, and residual deformation ratio, rd, calculated by the superposition method where the initial stiffness of the damper ranges from 0.25 to 5 times that of specimen PCbM. In Figures 12(a) and (b), β is the lateral load contribution of the dampers to the whole structural sys-tem (frames and dampers). In PCbM, the initial shear stiffness of the damper, GD, was 50 GPa and β was 0.33.

(a) PCbS (b) RC

Fig. 10 Specimen photos after R = 4.0% cycle.

-1000

-750

-500

-250

0

250

500

750

1000

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

ExperimentAnalysis

Late

ral L

oad

(kN

)

Story Drift Angle (%)-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

ExperimentAnalysis

Rotation Angle (%)-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

ExperimentAnalysis

Story Drift Angle (%) (a) Frame + Damper (b) Frame (c) Damper

Fig. 11 Comparison between experiments and analyses for PCbM.


To maximize the energy dissipating capability evalu-ated by heq, the lateral load contribution of a damper is defined from Fig. 12(a), however, rd in Fig. 12(b) sets a limitation on the value of β that can be selected. For example, if rd < 10% and heq > 15% is desirable, β > 0.35 is needed from Fig. 12(a) for a GD = 50 GPa damper. However, in Fig. 12(b), rd = 15% for β = 0.35. In the case of using GD = 250 GPa damper, β = 0.30 meets all re-quirements.

6. Conclusions

Static reversed-cyclic loading tests on five portal frames with corrugated steel panel dampers were conducted. The following conclusions were obtained. (1) The combination of corrugated steel shear panels

with precast prestressed concrete frames resulted in a high restoring force and large hysteresis loops. The performance of specimens with bonded tendons was as good as that with unbonded tendons. All speci-mens showed ductile behavior and reduction of the load carrying capacity was less than 20% of the peak load even at R = 4.0%.

(2) Performance of the extremely low yield strength (LY100) steel panel damper was as good as that of the low strength (LY225) steel panel damper. The energy dissipation capabilities of the two steel pan-els were almost the same. However, a smaller re-sidual displacement was observed in the specimen with the LY100 steel damper since the smaller shear force carried by the damper can be easily offset by the restoring force of the precast prestressed frame.

(3) The precast prestressed columns and beams suffered little damage. Less concrete crushing, compared with specimen RC, and less crack concentration in the joint mortar were observed in these specimens. Almost the same amount of rd in PCbS and PCuL indicated that rd was independent of bond due to grouting.

(4) The hysteretic behavior of the hybrid frame could be

accurately predicted by superposing the hysteretic behaviors of the precast prestressed frame and the dampers. The method accurately predicted the en-ergy dissipation and the residual displacement.

Acknowledgments Part of this research was financially supported by two Grant-in-aids of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (PIs: H. Tanaka and S. Kono), Development of Innovative Seeds, Japan Science and Technology Agency (PI: S. Kono), and Collaborative Research Projects of the Materials and Structures Labo-ratory, Tokyo Institute of Technology (Prof. S. Hayashi). References Adachi, M., Takatsu, H. and Nishiyama, M. (2000).

“Idealization of bond characteristic of prestressing strand.” Summaries of technical papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, C-2 Structures IV, 1009-1010. (in Japanese)

Architectural Institute of Japan (1985). “Design Guidelines for Composite Structures.” (in Japanese)

Chosa, K., Kashiwai, Y., Kono, S. and Watanabe, F. (2006). “Fundamental study on corrugated steel webs used as shear walls.” Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Vol. C2, 721-722. (in Japanese)

Cormack, L. G. (1988). “Design and construction of the major bridges on the mangaweka rail deviation.” Transactions of the Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand, Civil Engineering Section, 15(1), 16-23.

Ichioka, Y., Kono, S. and Watanabe, F. (2008). “Structural system enabling prompt recovery after earthquakes.” Proceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, ID 05-06-0080.

Englekirk, R. E. (2002). “Design–construction of the paramount – A 39-story precast prestressed concrete apartment building.” PCI Journal, 47(4), 56-71.

Mo, Y. L. and Perng, S. F. (2000). “Hybrid RC

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

GD=250 GPaGD=50 GPaGD=25 GPaGD=17 GPaGD=5 GPa

Equ

ival

ent V

isco

us D

ampi

ng R

atio

, heq

(%)

Lateral Load Contribution of Damper, β 0

10

20

30

40

50

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

GD=250 GPaGD=50 GPaGD=25 GPaGD=17 GPaGD=5 GPa

Res

idua

l Def

orm

atio

n R

atio

, r d

(%)

Lateral Load Contribution of Damper, β (a) heq-β relations (b) rd- β relations

Fig. 12 Optimization of amount of corrugated shear panel dampers.


frame-steel wall systems.” Composite and Hybrid Systems, ACI SP-196, 189-213.

Pampanin, S., Amaris, A. and Palermo, A. (2006). “Implementation and testing of advanced solutions for jointed ductile seismic resisting frames.” Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress, ID 8-20.

Priestley, M. J. N. (1991). “Overview of the PRESSS research programme.” PCI Journal, 36(4), 50-57.

Priestley, M. J. N. (1996). “The PRESSS program

current status and proposed plans for phase III.” PCI Journal, 41(2), 22-40.

Priestley, M. J. N., Sritharan, S., Conley, J. R. and Pampanin, S. (1999). “Preliminary results and conclusions from the PRESSS five-storey precast concrete test building.” PCI Journal, 44(6), 42-67.

Restrepo, J. I. (1993). “Seismic behaviour of connections between precast concrete elements.” Research report, 93-3, University of Canterbury.

Documents

Hybrid System Using Precast Prestressed Frame with