IranCivilCenter.

com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

ENERGY DISSIPATION SYSTEMS FOR SEISMIC RESISTANCE

Ali Sehat Tabatabaei, MSc. Civil Engineering University of East London

ABSTRACT - This research reviews four well-known energy dissipation devices (EDD) used in
practical structural applications and the effect of viscous damper on the behaviour of steel
frames. The response of the one, two and five storey steel frames has been investigated
through a numerical analysis. The seismic response of the frame, the storey displacements,
inter-storey drifts, bending moment in the structural members and natural periods of
vibration with EDD and without EDD were calculated and compared. The results showed
that the EDD can absorb a portion of the energy induced by the earthquake into the structure
and control the displacement of the structural members.
Keywords: Energy dissipation devices, Viscous dampers, Earthquake

1.

INTRODUCTION

Earthquake is on the most damaging disasters. Repairing an area that has experienced an
earthquake is expensive and difficult process. Engineers have introduced different techniques
to prevent a large amount of the damage typically caused by earthquakes. The energy
dissipation devises (EDD) are recognised as a suitable technique to control the seismic
response of the structures and reduce the damages caused by earthquake. EDD can absorb a
portion of earthquake-induced energy in the structure and minimise the energy dissipation
demand on the primary structural members such as beams, columns and walls. These devices
can substantially reduce the inter-story drifts and, consequently, non-structural damage. In
addition, lower accelerations and smaller shear forces lead to lower ductility demands in the
structure components. Many researches have been done on EDD since they have been used to
protect structures from dynamic effects (Soong and Dargush [1], Zhang and Soong [2]).
Zhang and Soong proposed and extended the sequential seismic design method to find the
optimal configuration of viscous dampers for buildings with specified story stiffness. They
used an intuitive criterion to place additional dampers sequentially on the story at which the
inter-story drift response is a maximum. There are many different types of EDD. Each of
these devices has a unique way of dissipating energy and controlling vibrations.
2.

ENERGY DISSIPATION DEVICES

Metallic Damper is one of the most effective mechanisms available for the dissipation of
the energy, induced a structure during an earthquake, through the inelastic deformation of
metals. There are several types of Metallic dampers including Steel Crossing-bracing dampers

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 1 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

Added Damping and Stiffness (ADAS) dampers, Bell-shaped Steel Dampers, Honeycomb
Dampers System (HDS), Lead Joint dampers and Lead extrusion Damper (LED. These
devices can be installed in bracing system of the structural frame. Figure 1 illustrates the Xshaped ADAS damper.

Figure 1 ADAS damper [ 3]

Friction devices dissipate energy as heat, caused by the sliding of steel plates against each
other. They generally exhibit rigid plastic behaviour and their force response can be modelled
by simple Coulomb friction, so the force-displacement curves of the devices are rectangular
loops. There are many different friction dampers include, Pall Dampers (Figure 2), Sumitomo
Friction Dampers, Energy Dissipating Restraint (EDR) and Wall Friction Damper. The
advantages of using friction damper over the other types of energy dissipation devices
include:
These devices have high resistance to fatigue
Their behaviour is not significantly affected by load amplitude, frequency, the number
of applied load cycles or variations in temperature
No fluid leaking problems

Figure 2 Pall friction damper [4]

Viscoelastic (VE) Dampers are used as energy dissipation devices in structures where the
damper undergoes shear deformations. A typical VE shear damper consists of steel plates
covered by viscoelastic layers as shown in Figure 3. When installed to a structure, shear
deformation and consequently energy dissipations take place when relative motions occur
between the centre plate and the outer steel flanges.
A Viscous fluid damper generally consists of a piston in the damper housing filled with a
compound of silicone or similar type of oil, and the piston may contain a number of small

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 2 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

orifices through which the fluid may pass one side of the piston to the other as shown in
Figure 4 [6]. The damper thus dissipate energy though the movement of a piston in a highly
viscous fluid using the concept of flow of a liquid through an orifice.

Figure 3 Viscoelastic damper [5]

Figure 4 Fluid viscous damper [7]

Fluid dampers have the following advantages:

The use of fluid dampers, however, reduced the story and base shears by 40% to
70% because of their pure viscous behaviour while other passive systems were
not as effective in reducing base shear.
The damping force is out of phase with the displacement if dampers were
installed in a structure in such a way that they have an inclined force.
The analysis on the 1, 2 and 5 storey steel frames with and without dampers were performed
and the results are given here.
3.

ANALYSIS OF STEEL FRAME WITH VISCOUS DAMPER

The seismic analysis was performed on 1, 2 and 5 storey steel frames without (bare frame)
and with viscous dampers. Different locations of the EDD in the frame have been considered.
The frames were subjected to earthquake loading using the EC8 simplified method
(Simplified modal response spectrum analysis) [8]. Finite element software (SAP2000

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 3 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

Structural Analysis Programme) was used to carry out the analysis. All the connections
between beams and columns are assumed rigid connections.
3.1 Analysis of One Storey Frame
The simplest dynamic model, one-storey steel frame as shown in Figure 5, has been
considered in the analysis.

Figure 5 One-storey frame

This frame modelled with and without the viscous damper with the properties shown in
Table 1.
Table 1 Properties of the added damper
Element

Weight
(KN)

Effective Stiffness
(KN/m)

Effective Damping
(KN-S/m)

50

2500

10

Table 2 presents the natural period of the frame with and without damper resulted from the
modal analysis. Adding the damper reduced the fundamental natural period by 32%.
However, it does not have a significant effect on period for in the other modes.
Table 2 Natural periods for bare frame and frame with damper
Mode
No.
1
2
3
4
5

Bare Frame
Period (Sec)
1.8625
0.208
0.2072
0.0055
0.0044

Frame with Damper

Period (Sec)
1.2665
0.208
0.2072
0.0054
0.0044

Reduction
Ratio
32.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.82%
0.00%

The displacement of the joint in the frame with the damper are reduced by over 50%
comparing to the once in the bare frame as shown in Table 3. It can be noticed that the
displacements of the joints 2 and 4 in the bare frame are higher than the allowable limit
required by clause 4.3.2.(a) of Part 1.2 in EC8 (0.024 cm).
Numerical studies on the bending moment of the column in the frame show a reduction of
25% in bending moment

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 4 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

Joint

Table 3 Joint displacement for both bare frame and frame with the damper

1
2
3
4

Output
Case

Displacement
along X, bare
frame (m)

COMB1
COMB1
COMB1
COMB1

0
0.0279
0
0.0276

Comments

Displacement
along X, frame
with damper (m)
0
0.0133
0
0.0128

>0.024 Not OK
>0.024 Not OK

Comments

Reduction
ratio

<0.024 OK

52.44%

<0.024 OK

53.44%

3.2 Analysis of Two-Storey Frame

Analysis on the two-storey steel frame has been done in four different conditions as shown
in Figure 7. The same damper that used in analysis for 1 storey frame was used for this frame.
The natural periods reduced since the damper(s) is installed in the frame and it can be
noticed from Table 4. The maximum reduction is in the fundamental natural period by 27%
and it occurred in Case 3 where two dampers were installed at both floors.

D
(b) Case 1

(a) Bare frame

(c) Case 2

D
(d) Case 3

Figure 6 2 storey steel frame

Table 4 Natural period for different cases
Mode
No.
1
2
3
4
5

Bare frame
Period
(sec)
2.917
0.940
0.554
0.545
0.096

Case 1
Period
Reduction
(sec)
ratio
2.482
14.9%
0.863
8.1%
0.554
0%
0.545
0%
0.096
0%

Case 2
Period
Reduction
(sec)
ratio
2.564
12.1%
0.786
16.3%
0.554
0%
0.545
0%
0.096
0%

Case3
Period
Reduction
(sec)
ratio
2.128
27.1%
0.744
20.8%
0.554
0%
0.545
0%
0.096
0%

Table 5 presents the inter-storey drifts for the bare frame and 3 other cases. In addition, the
reduction ratios in the inter-storey drift for each case are provided.
Table 5 Analysis results for the 2 storey frame

Interstorey drift
(m)

Reduction
ratio

Inter-storey
drift (m)

Reduction
ratio

Interstorey drift
(m)

Reduction
ratio

2
3

0.034
0.033

0.021
0.030

38.7%
10.7%

0.031
0.018

9.1%
45.2%

0.019
0.017

43.4%
50.3%

5
6

0.034
0.033

0.021
0.030

39.0%
10.5%

0.031
0.018

9.3%
45.8%

0.019
0.016

43.9%
50.6%

Joint

Bare
frame
Interstorey drift
(m)

Case 1

Case 2

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Case 3

Page 5 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

Analysis results for two-storey frame show that the inter-storey drift is within the EC8
allowable limit at the same floor at which the damper is installed. Moreover, the inter-storey
drifts at both floors are less than the allowable limit required by EC8 only in Case 3 and they
have been reduced by over 43%.
Analysis for the bending moment in all for conditions show the bending moment in the
column can be reduced by adding the damper between 25% - 38%.
3.3 Analysis of Five-Storey Frame
Analysis for a five-storey steel frame was performed in five different conditions, shown in
Figure 8, depending on the properties of the dampers and their location in the frame.
Three different dampers with different properties were used in the analysis. Table 6
presents the properties of these dampers.

D2

D2

D2

D1

(a) Bare frame

D3

D3

D3

D3

(b) Case 1

(c) Case 2

(e) Case 3

(f) Case 4

Figure 7 Different cases for five-storey frame

Table 6 Properties of the dampers
Damper
Name

Weight
(KN)

Effective Stiffness
(KN/cm)

Effective Damping
(KN-s/cm)

D1
D2
D3

19.24
19.24
19.24

3000
5000
7000

100
100
100

Modal analysis for this frame has been carried out and it shows a significant reduction for
the natural period in some cases as shown in Table 7. The maximum reduction ratio for the
natural period is 20%, which occurred, in the 1st mode of vibration of the Case 4. It can be
noticed that by adding the damper(s) to the frame, it become stiffer therefore the natural
periods reduced.
The inter-storey drifts in all storeys are acceptable by EC8 requirements only in Case 3 as
it shown in Table 9. Although, the inter-storey drift reduced considerably in case 4 at which
dampers are installed in X bracing, this value is higher than the allowable limit by EC8
(0.024m) at the 3rd floor. Comparing Case 2 and Case 3 shows the need of a damper where
the inter-storey drifts is higher than 0.024m.
Analysis results for the bending moment for the columns of this frame show a reduction up
to 46% in bending moment in columns

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 6 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

Table 7 Natural period of the frame

Mode
No.
1
2
3
4
5

Bare
frame
Period
(sec)
3.732
1.282
0.704
0.453
0.311

Case 1
Period
(sec)
3.448
1.234
0.703
0.449
0.296

Case 2

Reduction
ratio
7.60%
3.70%
0.20%
1.10%
4.60%

Period
(sec)
3.243
1.178
0.686
0.421
0.295

Case 3

Reduction
ratio
13.10%
8.10%
2.50%
7.10%
5.00%

Period
(sec)
3.115
1.178
0.664
0.416
0.292

Case 4

Reduction
ratio
16.50%
8.10%
5.60%
8.20%
6.00%

Period
(sec)
2.962
1.123
0.672
0.394
0.282

Reduction
ratio
20.60%
12.40%
4.40%
13.10%
9.20%

Storey

Table 8 Analysis results for five-storey frame

1
2
3
4
5

4.

Bare
frame
Interstorey
drift (m)
0.019
0.032
0.036
0.033
0.026

Case 1
Interstorey
drift
(m)
0.016
0.023
0.032
0.032
0.026

Reduction
ratio
15.2%
29.8%
11.4%
2.7%
0.6%

Case 2
Interstorey
drift
(m)
0.016
0.022
0.029
0.022
0.023

Reduction
ratio
15.5%
31.0%
19.3%
34.0%
14.1%

Case 3
Interstorey
drift
(m)
0.016
0.021
0.024
0.020
0.023

Reduction
ratio
16.3%
34.9%
33.1%
37.8%
14.4%

Case 4
Interstorey
drift
(m)
0.014
0.017
0.025
0.016
0.021

Reduction
ratio
23.9%
47.7%
29.4%
50.9%
21.1%

CONCLUSIONS

One of the objectives of this research was to introduce different types of energy dissipation
devices used for structural applications. EDD significantly increase the resistance of the
structure components to the dynamic loads and they are effective in reducing the seismic
response of structures.
In addition, the effect of the viscous damper at different locations the steel frames has been
investigated. With the proper distribution of the dampers in the frame, engineers can control
the storey displacements in the frame and therefore the inter-storey drift can be reduced
within the EC8 allowable limit. Moreover, viscous dampers slightly reduce the bending
moment resistance demand for the structural member of the frame.
5.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to appreciate Dr. A.M. Ciupala for her support and her guidance for this
project.
6.

REFERENCES
[1]. T.T.Soong, G.F.Dargush, (1997), Passive energy Dissipation Systems in Structural Engineering, John
Willey & Sons Ltd. ISBN 0-471-96821-8
[2]. R.H.Zhang, T.T. Soong (1992), Journal of Structural Engineering, 118 (5), 1375-1392. Seismic design
of viscoelastic dampers for structural applications
[3]. University of Buffalo,
(http://civil.eng.buffalo.edu/technion/Lecture5_12_Devices_and_Models.ppt#311,6,Slide 6)

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 7 of 8

IranCivilCenter.com - The Construction Industry Portal of Iran

[4]. Concordia University, Department of Building Civil and Environmental Engineering

(http://www.bcee.concordia.ca/department/About_Department.htm)
[5]. http://www.designcommunity.com/discussion/7551.html
[6]. M. C. Constantinou, M. D. Symans, (1992), NEER 92-0032, National Centre for Earthquake
Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY. Experimental and analytical investigation of seismic response of
structures with supplemental fluid viscous dampers.
[7]. F.Sadek, B.Mohraz, A.W.Taylor, R.M. Chung, (1996), Report NISTIR 5923, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Passive Energy Dissipation Devices for Seismic Applications
[8]. Eurocode8, Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures, (1996)

Copyright 2003-2006 Iran Civil Center, All rights reserved worldwide.

Page 8 of 8