See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327991867

Experimental and analytical characterization of steel shear links for seismic

energy dissipation

Article  in  Engineering Structures · October 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.005

CITATIONS READS

0 28

5 authors, including:

Iolanda Nuzzo Daniele Losanno

Parthenope University of Naples University of Naples Federico II
4 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nicola Caterino Giorgio Serino

Parthenope University of Naples University of Naples Federico II
49 PUBLICATIONS   312 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   264 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Special Issue "Vibration Control of Wind Turbines", journal "Vibration" by MDPI View project

Seismic behavior and numerical modelling of glazed curtain walls View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nicola Caterino on 11 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Experimental and analytical characterization of steel shear links for seismic T

energy dissipation
⁎
Iolanda Nuzzoa, , Daniele Losannob, Nicola Caterinoa,c, Giorgio Serinob, Luis M. Bozzo Rotondod
a
Department of Engineering, University of Napoli “Parthenope”, Naples, Italy
b
Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University of Napoli “Federico II”, Naples, Italy
c
Construction Technologies Institute, National Research Council (CNR), San Giuliano Milanese, Milan, Italy
d
Luis Bozzo estructuras y proyectos, S.L., Barcelona, Spain

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper describes the experimental investigation on a newly designed steel shear link (SL) for seismic pro-
Supplemental damping tection of civil structures. It is a low-cost hysteretic device, realized from a single steel plate where variable
Shear link device thickness is given through milling. It has been already adopted for several applications in South America, both
Experimental test for new constructions and seismic retrofit of existing buildings. Even small variation of device’s geometry can
Hysteretic behavior
significantly modify its mechanical behavior, both in terms of strength and stiffness, making such devices very
appealing for the flexibility in terms of design solutions.
SL device is conceived to be connected to the main frame through bolted connections and mounted on a
supporting brace. In particular, slotted holes on one edge of the damper prevent the device from transmitting
shear to the upper beam during the seismic excitation. A couple of specimens for each of 5 different geometries
has been tested, for a total of 10 tests. Two different boundary configurations have been considered, analyzing
results of fully-tightened or not fully-tightened bolts in correspondence of slotted holes. The set-up system has
been properly designed to apply forces up to 1000 kN, to be able to accommodate and test the largest specimens
of the set. The paper presents the experimental results and data processing concerning analysis of deformation
process, hardening behavior and collapse. The main features of the control devices are highlighted, above all, the
high dissipative capability that is mainly due to the particular shape of the steel damper, which leads to a high
buckling resistance.

1. Introduction manufacturing process and connection configurations to the structure

Shear link dampers belong to the family of hysteretic passive control
devices. They can provide additional source of energy dissipation
through metals yielding mechanism, when properly introduced within a
frame structure. The first versions of this type of device was used for
eccentrically braced frames (EBFs) [1]. The latter were conceived as
intermediate steel structure systems between dissipative but excessive
deformable moment resisting frames (MRFs) and stiff and brittle con-
centrically braced frames (CBFs). EBF systems are significantly stiffer
than MRFs due to the introduction of braces and supply an additional
source of energy dissipation through shear and/or bending in a portion
of beam called “link”. The longer or shorter link’s length respectively
identifies a moment or shear link primary behavior.
Many different steel dampers have been proposed and investigated
in literature, exploring different materials, geometric shapes,
[2,3]. The simplest shear link is a single steel plate, generally welded to
the structure, indicated in literature as shear panel damper (SPD) [4,5].
Low-yield steel [6] or aluminum materials [7,8] have been used for
alternative SPD. Actual dissipation capacity mainly depends on in-
elastic excursions that device can sustain even for small vibrations.
The family of flexural steel dampers is wider, including the most
popular ADAS, TADAS, slit dampers, honeycomb dampers. Added
Damping And Stiffness (ADAS) device was first investigated by
Bergman et al. [9] and Whittaker et al. [10]. It is composed by steel X-
shape plates connected in parallel at the top and at the bottom to rigid
elements so that the rotation is not allowed. The particular shape of
steel plates ensures a uniform flexural yielding in the element. Alter-
natively, Triangular Added Damping And Stiffness (TADAS) device is a
triangular steel plate [11] that subjected to a perpendicular lateral force
undergoes uniform yielding along the height thanks to linearly

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: iolanda.nuzzo@uniparthenope.it (I. Nuzzo), daniele.losanno@unina.it (D. Losanno), nicola.caterino@uniparthenope.it (N. Caterino),
giorgio.serino@unina.it (G. Serino), info@luisbozzo.com (L.M. Bozzo Rotondo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.06.005
Received 21 July 2017; Received in revised form 23 May 2018; Accepted 5 June 2018
0141-0296/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

increasing moment. The steel slit damper (SSD) is a standard I-section

with a number of slits cut from the web. The final shape is an alter-
nation of struts and slits, achieving a vierendeel truss arrangement
[12,13]. Honeycomb steel damper was developed by Kobori et al. [14]
with the aim of increasing energy absorption of high-rise buildings. This
device consists in a steel plate with honeycomb-shaped openings, which
generate X-shaped struts.
All the aforementioned devices are generally placed between
chevron braces and an upper beam. In some cases, hysteretic dampers
can be placed in series with diagonal braces, so providing energy dis-
sipating element in concentrically braced frames. This is the case of a
particular cast steel yielding fuse, also known as scorpion yielding
connector (SYC) [15], which dissipates energy through the cyclic in-
elastic flexural deformation of the SYC’s cast steel yielding fingers. The Fig. 2. Installation of a SL for the new construction of Torre Ixtapa (Mexico).
overall fuse’s aspect resembles ADAS or TADAS device, with the dif-
ference that SYCs are manufactured through steel casting process.
A different group of yielding dampers dissipate cyclic loads-induced
energy through axial deformation. This is the case of Buckling
Restrained Braces (BRB), developed by Clark et al. [16], which consists
in an unbonded core steel brace encased in a concrete-filled steel tube
to avoid buckling mechanism when compressed.
A wide number of experimental tests performed on both types of
dissipative link has shown that shear links can achieve larger plastic
rotations and greater energy dissipation than moment links [1]. In
general, shear links’ common features observed are stable hysteretic
curves, significant strain hardening and energy dissipation capacity.
These remarkable characteristics encourage further investigation of this
kind of passive device, on one hand trying to optimize some important
features such as the manufacturing process and the cost of the device,
on the other hand promoting its use with experimental campaigns that Fig. 3. Installation of a SL for the seismic retrofit of hotel Ceibo Dorado after
highlight the actual effectiveness for structural control. October 2016 earthquake in Ecuador.
This paper presents the experimental analysis of a particular shear
link damper, referred to as Shear Link Bozzo. It consists of a metallic
2. Previous investigations on SL passive dampers
yielding device first advanced at the University of Girona, Spain, in
1997 [17–19]. It will be widely described in the next section where it
The SL device system consists of a metallic hysteretic damper rea-
will be briefly referred to as SL damper. is particularly advantageous
lized from a hot laminated steel plate which is generally modeled so
thanks to its flexibility in covering a wide range of force capacities, that
that to obtain an I-shape. The flanges of the device represent the stiffer
makes it adaptable to different levels of demand. The basic idea behind
parts and are employed to realize the connection to structural elements.
the SL dissipator is providing local ductility, while avoiding local
Differently, energy dissipation is concentrated at the web where “dis-
buckling in a simple, manufactured controlled and cheap way. The
sipative windows” with reduced thickness are generated through a
simplicity of SL dampers’ geometry makes them particularly suitable to
milling manufacturing process [20]. Wide ranges of SL’s dissipation
be adapted to different arrangement within the structure. The typical
capacities can be obtained simply varying the height, width and
and most used installation mode for SLs is between chevron braces and
thickness of the dissipative windows and web stiffeners. For this reason,
upper beam, as schematically shown in Fig. 1. Although, the first use of
different generations have been proposed and investigated both nu-
such devices was to protect infill masonry walls [20]. The authors also
merically and experimentally during last 20 years (Fig. 4), aiming at
investigated the alternative use of SL dampers to protect precast RC
optimizing their mechanical performance.
structures, inserting devices within diagonal braces [21].
The first experimental studies (Fig. 4a) were performed at ISMES
Nowadays, several applications have been developed and carried
S.p.A., in Bergamo (Italy) in 1997, where the first generation of SL
out using these devices: more than one thousand of SL dampers have
devices was tested [22]. The flanges of the devices were welded to
been installed worldwide, mainly in RC buildings in Mexico, Peru and
horizontal thick plates, constituting elements of connection to the ma-
Ecuador, for new constructions (Fig. 2) as well as for seismic retrofitting
chine, through high strength bolts. In the web, there was a unique
of existing ones (Fig. 3).
column of dissipative windows with thicknesses between 1.5 and
2.0 mm, while flanges and other stiffeners were 15 mm thick. Four
devices with different types of transition zone between the web and
stiffeners were cyclically tested, all performing stable hysteretic beha-
SL vior with significant strain hardening. It is worth to note that after
severe damage of the dissipative windows, the SL devices continued to
exhibit a stable behavior even with lower hysteretic curves corre-
sponding to a flexural dissipative behavior (Fig. 5).
A further device belonging to the first SL generation was examined
at the Laboratory of the University of Girona. Its shape was squatter
than the previous and the main investigation was concerning web
buckling. It was observed that the distortion angle γ, analytically
evaluated as the ratio between the head displacement and the total
Fig. 1. Typical SL configuration within the structure. dissipative windows’ height, was quite close to the experimental strain

406
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

(a) Ht=284mm; tt=15mm (b) Ht=310mm; tt=20mm (c) Ht=310mm; tt=19mm

Hw=136mm; tw=1.5-2mm Hw=110mm; tw=2mm Hw=110mm; tw=3-5mm
L=60mm L=300mm L=300-500mm

Connection: welded/bolted Connection: bolted with circular holes Connection: bolted with circular/slotted holes
Fig. 4. SL generations in last 20 years (Ht = total height; tt = stiffeners thickness; Hw = web height; tw = dissipative window's thickness; L = web width): specimens
for tests at (a) ISMES (Bergamo) 1997, (b) ISMES (Bergamo) 2001, (c) University of Naples 2017.

50 F (kN) mechanism, probably due to torsion in correspondence of the head

x

40
30
20
10
dx (mm)
0
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
Fig. 5. Experimental force-displacement hysteretic curve (ISMES, 1997), from
[22].
angle γ’ assumed as twice the linear strain orientated at 45° in the
hypothesis of a pure shear strain state.
The second SL generation (Fig. 4b) was tested cyclically again at
ISMES S.p.A. in 2001 [23–25], with the main aim of generalizing its
mechanical properties for many different yielding force levels. The
device, indicated as SL30_2, has been compared to the previous one and
has been characterized by two columns of dissipative windows in the
web. The connection to the equipment was just bolted and the role of
the tolerance between holes and bolts has been analyzed through a
parametric analysis. In the case of tolerances of 2 or 4 mm, tests were
not concluded successfully because the slippage was too high. Con-
versely, specimens with 1 mm of hole tolerance showed again stable
hysteretic curves with strain hardening, performing shear and flexural
mode behaviors, similarly to what shown in Fig. 5. Anyway, even in this
case, significant slippage was registered, observing collapse in corre-
spondence of the vertical bolted connection. In order to continue the
test, the damaged connection was welded to the horizontal plate, but
after a high number of cycles even the weld connection failed. A nu-
merical interpretation of these experimental tests was used to deduce
mechanical properties of 32 devices of different dimensions (web height
fixed at 110 mm) that could even be combined in parallel, so providing
a wide range of performance parameters to designers.
A further device belonging to second SL generation was later tested
at the laboratory of the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (PUCP)
in Lima, in 2015. The geometry was similar to the SL30_2, but smaller,
with a total web’s width L of 25 cm (SL25_2). An horizontal actuator
was used to apply a quasi-static load history to the device through the
interposition of a square hollow element under controlled displace-
ment. During this test, the specimen suffered an out-of-plane failure
tubular component, causing a premature interruption of the experi-
ment.
The latest SL generation is the third one (Fig. 4c), characterized by
heights, as well as stiffeners’ thickness, mainly unvaried with respect to
the previous geometry. The connection is totally bolted, in order to
avoid welding and make easier installation and replacement process
during lifetime of the building. As a difference with respect to previous
generation, the number of dissipative windows, always distributed in
two columns, is increased from 2 to 4, reducing their height but sig-
nificantly increasing their width, in order to enhance ductility as well as
to improve web buckling resistance. A further innovation is the adop-
tion of slotted holes for connection on one side, with the aim to avoid
axial load transferred from the upper beam to the device and vice versa.
The performance of the newest SL version has been tested at the La-
boratory of Structures at the University of Naples Federico II in colla-
boration with University of Naples Parthenope, Italy. Five different
geometries have been investigated, testing two specimens for each of
them, for a total of ten tests. Seven specimens were tested cyclically,
while three of them were subjected to monotonic load, measuring re-
action forces up to 1000 kN. Experimental results and data processing
are discussed in the following sections, leading to highlight the main
advantages of using such devices for seismic protection of civil struc-
tures.
3. Experimental campaign
The experimental program was carried out at the laboratory of
Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University
of Naples Federico II (Italy). The testing machine has an axial hydraulic
actuator with a capacity of 2500 kN in tension and 3000 kN in com-
pression, with a stroke of 150 mm. The machine has a rigid basement,
where four vertical steel columns are founded. The actuator is attached
to the columns through a rigid frame that can move from 60 to 400 cm
from the base level. A total of 10 specimens (Fig. 6) of 5 different
geometries were tested, disposing of 2 samples for each typology. Each
specimen is indicated in the following as SL X_Y, where X is the web
width in cm, while Y is the dissipative windows thickness in mm. Total
height (310 mm), height of the web (110 mm) and thickness of the plate
(19 mm) are the same for all the devices (they are reported once in
Fig. 6 with reference to the device SL 30_3). The thickness of the dis-
sipative windows is 3 or 5 mm. The web width is 300, 400 or 500 mm.
The proposed SL device can be considered a low-cost hysteretic
damper for passive control of seismic vibrations. As a matter of fact, its
cost is about 20 € per kilogram. For instance, the cost of the prototypes
investigated herein varies in the range 400–750 €. Among alternative
commercial hysteretic devices for seismic application, one of the most
widely adopted are the buckling restrained (BR) metallic dampers,

407
I. Nuzzo et al.
Fig. 6. Geometry of the specimens (dimensions in mm).
whose cost – for similar strengths – is much higher (in the range
2200–3800 €, according to the Italian market [26]). It is worth to ob-
serve that additional costs for supporting braces and connections are
similar in the two cases, therefore they have been excluded from the
comparison.
The connection is made by means of M30 high strength bolts. On
one side of the device, there are circular 30.5 mm holes, while on the
other side 30.5 × 38 mm slotted holes have been realized. The small
tolerance of 0.5 mm is to reduce slippage movements during the tests,
that may affect the overall response. The number of bolts is 10 for all
the specimens, except for the smallest (SL 30_3), where 6 bolts have
been adopted. Bolts in circular holes have been always fully tightened
with a torque of 2800 Nm to achieve a fixed configuration without
slippage. Differently, bolts in slotted holes have been fully tightened in
some configurations, indicated as FF (Fixed-Fixed), while in other cases
they have not been tightened at all, obtaining the FNF (Fixed-Not Fixed)
408
Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418
configuration. This allows understanding the role of the boundary
conditions in determining the mechanical response of the device. In
particular, the slotted holes, as said above, had been thought to avoid
axial stress in the device due to deflection of the beam under gravity
loads. At the same time, however, the cyclic behavior of the device is
affected by slotted holes due clearances. Actually, due to free or re-
strained rotations at slotted holes, the device can be roughly thought as
a cantilever in the FNF configuration and as fixed at both ends in the FF
configuration, respectively (Fig. 7). Table 1 displays for each test the
geometry of the device, the number of the sample (1 or 2), the type of
test (cyclic or monotonic) and the tightening configuration of bolts on
the slotted holes (FF or FNF).
The monotonic tests were performed with a constant velocity of
0.05 mm/s of the actuator. The cyclic tests have been done according to
the displacement time-history described in Table 2 and Fig. 8.
Specimens were made of American ASTM A36 mild steel plates.
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

F>0 Two tensile tests were conducted to determine yielding stress (σy),
yielding strain (εy), ultimate stress (σu), ultimate strain (εu) and Young
modulus (Es), as given in Table 3. Other material's mechanical prop-
x>0
erties have been derived: shear yielding stress has been calculated as
σy/√3, shear modulus as E/(2(1 + ν)), where the adopted Poisson
modulus ν is 0.3; finally shear strain at yielding γy has been determined
as τy/G.

3.1. Experimental set-up and measurement

The experimental set-up is composed by a complex system of steel

plates, partially welded and bolted, designed to resist a maximum force
"FNF" condition (a)
of 1000 kN. It is characterized by a total height of about 2 m and
0.75m × 0.67 m plane dimensions. Plane section of the set-up is given
"FF" condition (b)
in Fig. 9, while in Fig. 10 front and lateral pictures are shown.
Fig. 7. Boundary conditions for SLB devices and sign convention for force (F) A cylindrical hinge connects the set-up to the machine, so avoiding
and displacements (x). the transmission of bending moment to the actuator and preventing
potential damage of the latter. Moreover, in order to control and limit
horizontal forces transferred to the actuator, an extension of the whole
Table 1
set-up height was necessary. In particular, it consists of a 0.545 m
SL test program.
height and 0.31m × 0.34 m transversal dimensions H profile designed
Test # Device Sample Type Tightening configuration to behave as a rigid link. The whole system has high stiffness (thickness
1 SL 30_3 1 Cyclic FF
of steel plates is between 20 mm and 30 mm) to ensure the effective
2 2 Cyclic FNF transmission of the force from the set-up to the specimen. The con-
3 SL 40_3 1 Cyclic FF nection between the specimens and the set-up are realized through M30
4 2 Monotonic FF high strength bolts. One side of the device is moved by the actuator
5 SL 40_5 1 Cyclic FNF
through the set-up system, while the other side is connected to stiff steel
6 2 Monotonic FNF
7 SL 50_3 1 Cyclic FF plates directly fixed to the basement of the machine, simulating a fixed
8 2 Cyclic FNF restraint. The geometry of the set-up has also been designed in order to
9 SL 50_5 1 Monotonic FNF avoid flexural-torsional buckling of the device, also limiting eccentri-
10 2 Cyclic FNF cities between the specimen and the actuator. Moreover, a specific out-
of-plane restraint (Fig. 11) was placed on the transversal side of the
specimen, so preventing any undesirable movement. In order to limit
Table 2
friction during vertical movement, Teflon layers were applied on ver-
Cyclic load history.
tical surfaces of restraints. These additional constraints, which would
No. of cycles [–] Amplitude [mm] Velocity [mm/s] not actually be installed for real applications, were positioned for pre-
cautionary purposes, i.e. to prevent damage to the machine and to
3 1 0.05
3 2 0.05 people working around it. However, for none of the tests carried out
3 5 0.1 they were really called to react.
3 10 0.2 A ± 1000 kN load cell is located at the top of the set-up, under the
3 15 0.3 head of the actuator, to provide the effective value of the applied load F.
3 20 1
3 30 1
A number of 6 LVDTs (4 horizontal, 2 vertical; range ± 10 mm) are
3 40 1 installed to measure all significant displacements of the specimen.
3 50 1 These measurements allowed filtering of components arising from rigid
body motion due to set up flexibility and clearances at the connections.

60
50
40
30
Displacement [mm]

20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 t [s] 4500

Fig. 8. Cyclic load history.

409
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

Table 3
Tensile test output results.
Sample Test # σy εy σu Es εu τy G γy
[MPa] [%] [MPa] [MPa] [%] [MPa] [MPa] [%]

19 mm A36 1 342 0.17% 448 200,786 16.5 197 77,225 0.26%

19 mm A36 2 342 0.17% 447 200,126 16.5 197 76,971 0.26%
19 mm A36 Average 342 0.17% 447 200,456 16.5 197 77,098 0.26%

Fig. 9. Experimental set-up plan view (dimensions are in mm).

In particular, also the fixed end side of the device has been in-
strumented after analyzing Test #1 output results, during which not
negligible sliding movements were observed.
The demand of displacement x to the device has been derived from
the above measurements. In addition to LVDTs, n°6 strain gauges (sg)
were used to measure local deformation. Number four sg were posi-
tioned on the windows with an inclination of 45°, while the other two
were placed at the bottom and top stiffeners in horizontal configuration
(Fig. 12).
3.2. Output results
Results in terms of force-displacements (F–x) response are shown in
Fig. 13 for all 10 tests. It is worth noting that F and x have the meaning
described in the previous section, except for test #1, where not all the
LVDTs were installed and x simply represents absolute vertical dis-
placement.
Smoother curves are those related to tests performed in the FF
configuration (#1, 3, 4, 7), as expected. The others referred to FNF tests
are more irregular due to the sliding of bolts within the slotted holes.
Too large, unexpected zero-force displacements have been registered
for test #2, highlighting something did not perfectly work during that
test, probably due to an incorrect tightening of the bolts at the end of
the device that had to be fully fixed.
A very stiff initial elastic behavior is observed for all the tests and
stable hysteretic loops are obtained up to ± 20 mm in all cases.
Differently from previous SL generations (Fig. 4 and 5), hysteretic loops
keep the same level of strength up to failure, not exhibiting significant
softening. It is worth noting that capacity force of specimens with the
same geometry but thicknesses of dissipative windows varying from 3
to 5 mm increases of about 50% (e.g. compare test #3 and #5, #4 and
#6, #7 and #10). Loops are not symmetric, particularly in case of FNF
configuration: during unloading and reloading phases residual de-
formations are stored due to slippage at the connections. This is also
confirmed by comparing displacement of the actuator (xact) and that of
the device (x), for test #7 and #8 (Fig. 14). The displacement demand x
to the device gradually deviates from displacement of the actuator xact,
especially in the case of FNF configuration, as expected. Displacement
xact is larger than x until the device is far from failure (i.e. up to values
for xact less than 15 mm, t = 2520 s). After that, the trend is inverted,
with higher displacement of the device due to significant, irreversible
damage.
The same SL device provided almost the same maximum peak force
for both cyclic and monotonic tests (Fig. 15). However, they occurred
for different amount of displacement. Actually, the envelope of the
loops registered for cyclic tests provided higher values of force with
respect to the monotonic test on the same device (such hardening
phenomenon will be addressed in the following sections).

410
I. Nuzzo et al.
Fig. 10. Experimental set-up: lateral (left) and frontal (right) views.
Fig. 11. Out-of-plane restraints.
As far as the failure mechanism is concerned, two different phe-
nomena were mainly observed under monotonic and cyclic load, re-
spectively. During all the cyclic tests, at displacement level around ±
20 mm a tearing break was generated at the top stiffener and quickly
propagated throughout the specimen until break (Fig. 16). In this case,
only when tearing practically affected most of the device's width, local
buckling at the windows could be observed in some cases.
Differently from cyclic test where cyclic degradation and residual
deformation are expected to reduce ductility, higher levels of de-
formation were reached during the monotonic test. For a displacement
level around 40 mm, a global buckling phenomenon occurred, invol-
ving almost all the windows and including internal stiffeners (Fig. 17).
411
Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418
4 3 2 1
Fig. 12. Strain gauges configuration.
In this case, just at the onset of buckling (tests #6, 9) or by end of the
test (test #4) some tearing in the top stiffener was observed.
4. Processing and discussion of experimental results
The output results of the 10 tests have been deeply analysed to
identify the main mechanical properties of each tested device and study
performance under different tightening and loading conditions.
Furthermore, in this paragraph analytical formulation to predict SLs
experimental behavior are suggested and assessed comparing simulated
to observed results.
The parameters in this analysis come from a bi-linear idealization of
the non-linear behaviour of SLs (Fig. 18). More in detail, they are:
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

1200
1200

Test #1 Test #2

F [kN]
900 900

600 600

F [kN]
300 300

0 0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
x [mm] x [mm]
-300 -300

-600 -600

-900
(a) -900
(b)
-1200
-1200

1200 1200
Test #3
F [kN]

Test #5

F [kN]
900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
x [mm] x [mm]
-300 -300

-600 -600

-900 -900
(c) (d)
-1200 -1200

1200 1200
Test #7 Test #8

F [kN]
F [kN]

900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
x [mm] x [mm]
-300 -300

-600 -600

-900 -900
(e) (f)
-1200 -1200

1200 1200
Test #10 (h)
F [kN]

Test #4, #6, #9

F [kN]

900

900
#9
600

300 #6
600
0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
-300
x [mm] #4
300
-600

-900 x [mm]
(g) 0
-1200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Fig. 13. F–x curves for all specimens.

Fy yielding force; keq equivalent stiffness at ± 20 mm;

kel elastic stiffness secant at yielding point;
where ED and ES are the energy dissipated in one cycle, given by the
kpl/ kel plastic to elastic stiffness ratio;
area enclosed in the loop, and the strain energy stored in the system,
Fmax peak force; respectively, both evaluated at a displacement of ± 20 mm. The plastic
Fmax / Fy maximum hardening ratio; stiffness is determined in correspondence of a displacement of 20 mm.
dmax displacement corresponding to peak force; Table 4 below shows results for all the analysed specimens.
ξ eq = ED/(4πES ) equivalent damping ratio at ± 20 mm; Due to different boundary conditions, it can be observed that SLs in

412
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

Fig. 14. Applied displacement versus recorded relative displacement.

FF configuration usually provide higher values of initial stiffness and
yielding force than FNF case, although with no significant discrepancy.
From the comparison of SLs under different loading conditions, it
emerges that initial elastic stiffness at yielding point is generally si-
milar, with slightly higher values in monotonic tests. Contrarily, re-
gistered yielding force values are higher for cyclically loaded samples,
as already highlighted in Fig. 15.
Even if in seismic loading condition SL device obviously undergoes
cyclic behavior, the sense of analyzing its monotonic performance
stands in the necessity of numerically modeling dampers within a
structure, particularly in the case of performing a static pushover
analysis. For this reason, authors believe it can be interesting to com-
pare F-x monotonic curves with the skeleton curve extrapolated from
corresponding cyclic tests.
Hysteretic behavior has been analyzed in order to get skeleton path
and compare it to the result of correspondent monotonic curves. Kato
et al. [26] observed that the stress–strain relation of steel bars under
cyclic loading can be decomposed into skeleton part, softened part and
elastically unloaded part. The same procedure has been applied to
force–displacement experimental curves of specimens SL40_3_1 (test
#3), SLB40_5_1 (test #5) and SL50_5_2 (test #10), but for sake of
shortness only test #3 plot is shown in Fig. 19, stretching its hysteretic
loops in one sequence for each sign domain until degrading behavior is
observed and differentiating the three parts mentioned above. The
segments indicated as “Skeleton part” represent the load path exceeding
the stress level attained in the previous cycle: connecting them in each
domain, the positive and negative skeleton curves are obtained. On the
other hand, the loading path covering a level of stress already attained
in the previous cycle turns out to be softened: this is the result of
Bauschinger effect, which consists in the reduction of material’s yield
stress when the direction of deformation is reversed after plastic regime
has been reached [27]. Since the loading path in all the tests starts in
the positive domain, the negative skeleton curves are significantly
softened with respect to the positive ones. It is worth to note that the

1200 1200
(a) (b)
F [kN]

F [kN]

900 900
Test #3 - SL 40_3 (FF) Test #5 - SL 40_5 (FNF)
600 600
Test #4 - SL40_3 (FF) Test #6 - SL 40_5 (FNF)

300 300

0 0
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 x [mm] 30
-300 -300
x [mm]
-600 -600

-900 -900

-1200 -1200
1200
(c)
F [kN]

900
Test #10 - SL 50_5 (FNF)
600
Test #9 - SL 50_5 (FNF)
300

0
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
-300
x [mm]

-600

-900

-1200

Fig. 15. Cyclic and monotonic F–x curves for specimens SL 40_ 3 (a), SL 40_5 (b), SL 50_5 (c).

413
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

Fig. 16. Cyclic test # 10 damage scenario: (a) initial condition, (b) yielded phase, (c) onset of tearing, (d) distribution of tearing.

600
unloaded part follows the initial elastic path in all the loops. F [kN] (d y , Fy )
The decomposition of the cyclic curve into the skeleton and
Bauschinger parts allows to formulate several considerations. First of all
the skeleton path can be compared to the monotonic test performed on Kpl
Keq
the same device. In particular, only the positive skeleton is compared to
the monotonic curve since the negative skeleton initial stiffness is af- Kel
fected by softening due to Bauschinger effect. As demonstrative ex- 0
-20 -10 0 10 x [mm] 20
ample, Fig. 20 shows positive skeleton and monotonic curves relative to
SL40_5 device: it emerges that initial stiffness predicted by the positive
skeleton curve is quite satisfactory, while after yielding the monotonic
curve is always lower. This behavior, consistent with results observed in
previous experimental investigations on steel material [6,28] is attrib-
uted to hardening effect. Quantification of hardening effect is very -600
important because it significantly affects energy dissipation capacity of
Fig. 18. Bi-linear idealization of the non-linear SLs behavior.
hysteretic devices. The gap between monotonic and positive skeleton
curves after yielding can be indicated as hardening factor (H_f), around
4% for specimen SL40_3 and 7% for specimens SL40_5 and SL50_5. The decomposition of the cyclic curve can also be adopted in order
Scaling positive skeleton curves by H_f, a quite good agreement with to do energetic considerations and compute the ultimate energy ab-
monotonic curves is obtained. It is interesting to note that the hard- sorption capacity as the sum of the areas respectively enclosed by
ening factor is consistent with the ratio between yielding forces ob- skeleton and Bauschinger parts [13,29]. Climent [30] proposed an en-
served respectively in cyclic and monotonic tests. This confirms that ergy-based damage model defining energy capacity through the above
hardening effect is more significant in cyclic loading conditions than in mentioned method. Furthermore, each of the two parts can be con-
monotonic ones: the ratio between the force corresponding to 20 mm sidered representative of different fracture mechanisms [18]. Kato et al.
displacement and the yielding force varies in the range 1.9–2.5 for [26] observed that ductile fracture, described by the skeleton part, is
cyclic tests (see Table 4), while it is 1.8–1.9 for monotonic tests. independent by fatigue fracture, represented by the Bauschinger part,

Fig. 17. Monotonic test # 4 damage scenario: (a) initial condition, (b) yielded phase, (c) onset of buckling, (d) global buckling.

414
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

Table 4
Experimental SLs mechanical parameters.
Test # SL Sample Test Tightening configuration Fy [kN] kel [kN/mm] kpl/kel Fmax[kN] Fmax/Fy dmax[mm] ξeq[%] keq [kN/mm]

1 30_3 1 Cyclic FF 188 250 5% 434 2.3 20.3 48 20

2 2 Cyclic FNF 160 240 4% 396 2.5 22.8 48 26

3 40_3 1 Cyclic FF 260 420 3% 517 2.0 20 52 28

4 2 Monotonic FF 250 450 3% 563 2.3 43.6 – –

5 40_5 1 Cyclic FNF 400 500 4% 800 2.0 19 49 50

6 2 Monotonic FNF 370 500 3% 803 2.2 37.3 – –

7 50_3 1 Cyclic FF 340 550 3% 671 2.0 20.7 53 37

8 2 Cyclic FNF 315 500 4% 676 2.1 19 47 45

9 50_5 1 Monotonic FNF 480 700 3% 1030 2.1 42.8 – –

10 2 Cyclic FNF 500 680 4% 1029 1.9 25.8 41 80

since hysteresis loops at constant stress amplitude do not contribute to 900

F [kN]
form the skeleton curve. This observation is confirmed also in Fig. 19 800
where it is evident that only the first of the three cycles at constant 700
amplitude provide a contribution to characterize the skeleton part. In
600
the three specimens analyzed above the ultimate displacement in the
cyclic test is always lower than the monotonic one. This can justify a 500
Monotonic curve
failure mechanism produced by fatigue in cyclic tests, where, as a 400
Positive skeleton
matter of fact, tearing on top stiffeners was observed, whereas in 300 H_f scaled skeleton
monotonic tests crisis of the device was always caused by buckling of
200
dissipative windows at a larger displacement.
100
In order to obtain effective parameters for simplified linear model of
SL devices, equivalent damping and stiffness have been estimated for 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
any cycle amplitude in the range 2 ÷ 20 mm (Fig. 21). As a con- x [mm]
sequence of stable hysteretic behavior, a general increasing trend of
Fig. 20. Comparison between monotonic and skeleton curves for SL40_5 de-
equivalent damping is observed, in spite of decreasing stiffness. At a
vice.
displacement amplitude of 5 mm equivalent damping is already higher
than 30%. for all devices. For the sake of brevity, only values at ± 20
mm are displayed in Table 4: at this deformation level ξeq is always for FNF configuration resulted to be slightly lower (maximum reduction
higher than 40%, in some cases around 50%. This is definitely con- 10%) than that achieved in FF condition, as expected due to clearances
sistent with results coming from similar experimental test performed in and slippage at slotted holes. Post-elastic stiffness is no larger than 3%
the past [12,31]. As far as tightening mode is concerned, damping ratio and 5% of the initial stiffness in monotonic and cyclic tests respectively,

600
Force [kN]

400

200

0
-160 -120 -80 -40 0 40 80 120 160

Cumulative displacement [mm]

-200

-400

Skeleton part Softened part Elastically unloaded part

-600

Fig. 19. Decomposition of test #3 cyclic curve into skeleton, Bauschinger (softned) and elastically unloaded parts.

415
I. Nuzzo et al. Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418

60 700

keq [kN/mm]
ξeq [%] (a) # 10 (b)
600
50

500
40
#5
400
#8
#7
30 #3
#2
#8 300 #7
#1
20
#3
200
#2
10 #1
#10 100
#5

0 0
0 5 10 15 d [mm] 20 0 5 10 15 d [mm] 20

Fig. 21. Equivalent damping (a) and stiffness (b) in the range 2 ÷ 20 mm cycle amplitude.

with a mean value of kpl/kel over the 10 tests of 4%. Table 6

Some attempts to define analytical formulations aimed at predicting Analytical prediction of elastic stiffness.
the devices' mechanical behavior were carried out as follows, particu- SLB G[MPa] h [mm] Aw [mm2] kel,m [kN/mm] ka,V [kN/mm] ka,V/kel
larly referring to yielding force and initial stiffness. Further insights will
be made as future developments of this work. 30_3 77,098 110 900 245 631 2.6
Yielding force was estimated starting from the knowledge of the 40_3 1200 435 841 1.9
40_5 2000 500 1402 2.8
yielding shear stress τy of steel (Table 3) and of the web area Aw:
50_3 1500 525 1051 2.0
Fy, a = τy Aw 50_5 2500 690 1752 2.5
(1)

Table 5 shows the comparison between experimental (mean value

between the two prototypes of the same SL) and analytical values of Table 7
yielding force (Fy,m and Fy,a), highlighting a very good agreement of the Experimental shear strain at yielding.
two results. This suggests an easy way to predict the reaction force at Test # SL Sample γ1 γ2 γ3 γ4 γ'av
yield of any SL device, starting from geometric information and
knowing the yielding stress of the material (Table 6). Considering a 1 30_3 1 0.0015 0.0021 0.0037 0.0021 0.0023
2 2 0.0023 0.0016 0.0018 0.0018 0.0019
pure shear behavior, SLs initial stiffness has been evaluated as
ka,V = GAw/h, where h is the web height, and compared to mean ex- 3 40_3 1 0.0013 0.0019 0.0057 0.0028 0.0029
4 2 0.0014 0.0057 0.0114 0.0027 0.0053
perimental values kel,m of those in Table 4 for the two prototypes of the
same SL (Table 6). The analytical stiffness ka,V usually provides higher 5 40_5 1 0.0024 0.0025 0.0024 0.0026 0.0025
values with respect to kel,m, being in the ratio of 1.9 ÷ 2.8. Over- 6 2 0.0018 0.0020 0.0020 0.0015 0.0018

estimation is expected, due to additional flexibility given by flexural 7 50_3 1 0.0029 0.0025 0.0022 0.0019 0.0024
behaviour and clearance at connections. In addition, kel in Table 4 has 8 2 0.0025 0.0026 0.0024 0.0021 0.0024

been estimated as the secant stiffness at yielding point. As a first ap- 9 50_5 1 *
NA 0.0022 0.0025 0.0026 0.0024
proximation, the expected elastic stiffness can be calculated as ka,V to be 10 2 0.0014 0.0021 0.0023 0.0026 0.0021
properly reduced by a coefficient 2.4. AVERAGE 0.0020 0.0025 0.0036 0.0023 0.0026

* NA = Not Available data.

4.1. Analysis of deformation
#1 to #4, Fig. 12) as γ’ = 2 ε. Shear strain measured at yielding in
The deformation process has been investigated exploiting informa-
correspondence of the four sg #1 to #4 of each specimen are given in
tion provided by strain guauges. Supposing that dissipative windows
Table 7: last row shows the average trend for each dissipative window,
deform in a pure shear mode, shear strain γ’ can be evaluated from the
evidencing generally increasing values from fixed end to loaded side of
axial strain ε detected along a 45° oriented direction (see strain gauges
the device. The mean shear strain registered on the four windows for
each specimen are given in γ'av column, while the overall average is
Table 5
evidenced in bold and it is equal to 0.26%, corresponding to the ex-
Analytical prediction of yielding force.
perimental value determined from the tensile test on the material. From
SLB σy[MPa] τy[MPa] Aw[mm2] Fy,m[kN] Fy,a[kN] Fy,a/Fy this analysis of deformation it emerges that in correspondence of Fy all
30_3 342 197 900 174 178 1.0
windows are already beyond the yielding point, resulting in a quite
40_3 1200 255 237 0.9 uniform distribution of deformation.
40_5 2000 385 395 1.0 The above analysis is based on the hypothesis of pure shear beha-
50_3 1500 328 296 0.9 vior up to yielding. In attempt to validating this condition, an analysis
50_5 2500 490 494 1.0
of relative rotation between the two sides of specimens was conducted:

416
I. Nuzzo et al.
Table 8
Displacement at yielding point for monotonic tests.
Test # Tightening configuration xy [mm] xy,flex [mm] xy,flex/xy
4 FF 0.56 0.01 1%
6 FNF 0.74 0.12 16%
9 FNF 0.69 0.08 12%
mean values at yielding and in correspondence of the maximum force
over the ten tests are respectively 6∙10−4 rad and 1.58∙10−2 rad, so
highlighting that in the elastic range flexural behavior was not sig-
nificant. A further validation of this consideration comes from estima-
tion of the flexural relative displacement at yielding for the three
monotonic tests (tests #4, #6 and #9) and its comparison with the total
yielding displacement xy. In particular, from the elastic theory, flexural
relative displacement xy,flex for a cantilever (FNF configuration) and a
fixed-fixed (FF configuration) beam can be estimated as Fl3/3EI and
Fl3/12EI, respectively. From Table 8 component xy,flex is around 1% for
FF configuration and 12–16% for FNF configuration, thus confirming
that shear is controlling deformation during elastic behavior.
5. Conclusions
The authors presented the main results of a wide experimental in-
vestigation on a particular type of SL damper, nowadays already em-
ployed in several applications in South America for seismic protection
of new and existing buildings. It is manufactured from a single steel
plate which is milled in the central part, addressed to dissipate energy
under external actions, thus avoiding any welding. Among the main
advantages of this device there is adaptability to different configura-
tions, i.e. different resisting force and initial stiffness, by simple mod-
ification of geometrical properties, thus resulting very cheap in com-
parison to other dissipation systems. Bolted connections are preferred
to welding in order to obtain the possibility to easily install and replace
the device in case of damage. At the same time, the need to avoid axial
stress in the device under outer frame gravity loads led to a slotted hole
solution on one side to create a suitable clearance with the bolts.
Ten specimens of five different geometries were tested, performing
both monotonic and cyclic tests under different configurations of bolts.
Test results showed very stable behavior with a maximum displacement
of around ± 20 mm and 40 mm in the cyclic and monotonic test, re-
spectively, with maximum force in the range 400 ÷ 1000 kN. In both
monotonic and cyclic test for the same SL device maximum attained
forces were almost equal. Collapse phenomenon in the cyclic tests was
due to tearing in the external stiffeners, while in monotonic tests
samples suffered from web buckling. In terms of tightening configura-
tion for the same device, the main difference between FF and FNF
specimens arises from sliding at connections due to slotted holes, which
is traduced in acceptable 5% lower equivalent damping in FNF con-
figuration. Due to slippage at connections, non symmetric hysteretic
loops were obtained, especially under FNF configuration. Significant
strain hardening was observed, traducing into peak force to yielding
force ratios more than 200%. A dominant shear behavior was high-
lighted from analysis of deformation process and estimation of me-
chanical properties. A simple formulation for estimation of yielding
force and initial stiffness was provided assuming a shear model of the
device: about the former, a very good agreement was found whereas
estimated stiffness was larger than experimental one due to both flex-
ural flexibility and clearances at connections. The decomposition of
cyclic curves into skeleton, Bauschinger and unloading parts also led to
interesting outcomes. Positive and negative skeleton curves provide
different initial stiffness, being the negative one affected by
Bauschinger effect. At the same time, comparison of monotonic curve
and positive skeleton curve of the same device showed a very good
agreement in terms of initial stiffness, whereas higher yielding force
417
Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418
correspond to skeleton curve.
At the next step, a numerical model of the SL device has to be im-
plemented in order to predict experimental behavior and analyze dif-
ferent configurations to further improve ductility. Additional experi-
mental tests can be done with the aim to validate expected response.
Simple analytical models have to be further investigated in order to
predict mechanical response at the design step and encourage em-
ployment of SL devices in real structures. At the same time, a further SL
generation device may be studied to avoid slippage related to slotted
holes under horizontal action while at the same time permitting free
vertical movements of the beam under gravity loads.
Acknowledgements
The research activity has been supported by The University of
Naples ‘‘Parthenope” with a grant within the call ‘‘Support for
Individual Research for the 2015–17 Period” issued by Rectoral Decree
no. 953-954/2016 and in the framework of the ReLUIS research project
funded by the Italian Department for Civil Protection. The above sup-
ports are gratefully acknowledged.
Authors would also like to thank the staff of the laboratory of the
Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture, University
Federico II of Naples, Italy. Special thanks should be given to Dr. Eng.
Giuseppe Campanella, responsible for the lab, and to Mr. Luigi
Frascogna, expert technician, for their valuable assistance and colla-
boration.
References
[1] Popov EP, Engelhardt MD. Seismic eccentrically braced frames. J Constr Steel Res
1988. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0143-974X(88)90034-X.
[2] Christopoulos C, Filiatrault A. Principles of passive supplemental damping and
seismic isolation. IUSS Press 2006;133:1192.
[3] Symans MD, Charney FA, Whittaker AS, Constantinou MC, Kircher CA, Johnson
MW, et al. Energy dissipation systems for seismic applications: current practice and
recent developments. J Struct Eng 2008;134:3–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/
ASCE0733-94452008134:13.
[4] Choi J, Abebe DY. Hysteresis characteristics of shear panel damper using SLY120.
In: APCBEE procedia, Stockholm; 2013. p. 370–5. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
apcbee.2014.01.065.
[5] Liu Y, Aoki T, Shimoda M. Distribution measurement of a shear panel damper de-
veloped for bridge structure. J Struct 2013;11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/
615275.
[6] Nakashima M. Strain-hardening behavior of shear panels made of low-yield steel. I:
test. J Struct Eng 1995;121(12):1742–9.
[7] Rai DC, Wallaces BJ. Aluminium shear-links for enhanced seismic resistance. Earthq
Eng Struct Dyn 1998;27:315–42.
[8] Sahoo DR, Rai DC. Seismic strengthening of non-ductile reinforced concrete frames
using aluminum shear links as energy-dissipation devices. Eng Struct 2010. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2010.07.023.
[9] Bergman DM, Goel SC. Evaluation of cyclic testing of steel-plate devices for added
damping and stiffness. Rep UMCE 87-10. Univ Michigan; 1987.
[10] Whittaker AS, Bertero VV, Thompson CL, Alonso LJ. Seismic testing of steel plate
energy dissipation devices. Earthq Spectra 1991;7:563–604. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1193/1.1585644.
[11] Tsai KC, Chen HW, Hong CP, Su YF. Design of steel triangular plate energy ab-
sorbers for seismic-resistant construction. Earthq Spectra 1993;9(3):505–28.
[12] Chan RWK, Albermani F. Experimental study of steel slit damper for passive energy
dissipation. Eng Struct 2008;30:1058–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.
2007.07.005.
[13] Benavent Climent A, Oh S-H, Akiyama H. Ultimate energy absorption capacity of
slit-type steel plates subjected to shear deformations. J Struct Constr Eng
1998;503:139–47.
[14] Kobori T, Miura Y, Fukuzawa E. Development and application of hysteresis steel
dampers. earthq. enginnering. In: Tenth world conf.; 1992. p. 2341–6.
[15] Gray MG, Christopoulos C, Packer JA. Cast steel yielding brace system for con-
centrically braced frames: concept development and experimental validations. J
Struct Eng 2014;140:4013095. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.
0000910.
[16] Clark P, Aiken I, Kasai K, Ko E, Kimura I. Design procedures for buildings in-
corporating hysteretic damping devices. In: 68th annu. conv. SEAOC; 1999. p.
355–71.
[17] Cahís X, Bozzo LM, Torres L, Foti D. An energy dissipating device for seismic pro-
tection of masonry infill walls. In: ANIDIS procedia – Taormina; 1997.
[18] Cahis X. Desarrollo de un nuevo disipador de energía para diseño sismorresistente.
Análisis numérico y validación experimental de su comportamiento. Doctoral thesis
(in Spanish) – Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya; 2000.
I. Nuzzo et al.
[19] Bozzo LM, Barbat AH. Diseño sismorresistente de edificios. Técnicas convencionales
y avanzadas. Barcelona: Editorial Reverte; 1999.
[20] Bozzo LM, Cahís X, Torres L. A shear type energy dissipator for the protection of
masonry infill walls. In: Proc. sixth U.S. natl. conf. earthq. eng. Seattle; 1998.
[21] Nuzzo I, Losanno D, Serino G, Bozzo LM. A Seismic-resistant Precast r. c. system
equipped with shear link dissipators for residential buildings. In: Second intl conf
adv civil, struct environ eng, vol. 2; 2014; p. 249–54. doi: 10.15224.
[22] Franchioni G, Severn RT, Bairrao R, editors. Experimental investigations on semi-
active and passive systems for seismic risk mitigation, Report n°7, ECOEST2 &
ICONS; 2001.
[23] Hurtado F, Bozzo LM. Un disipador Shear Link (SL) generalizado para diseño sis-
morresistente. Hormigón Y Acero; 2005. p. 235.
[24] Hurtado F. Propuesta de disipador genérico “SL” para edificios y su diseño sis-
morresistente. Doctoral thesis (in Spanish) – Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya;
2006.
[25] Hurtado F, Bozzo LM. Numerical and experimental analysis of a shear-link energy
dissipator for seismic protection of buildings. In: 14th world conf. earthq. eng.,
418
View publication stats
Engineering Structures 172 (2018) 405–418
Beijing, China; 2008.
[26] Kato B, Akiyama H, Yamanouchi Y. Predictable properties of material under in-
cremental cyclic loading. IABSE Rep Work Comm 1973;13:119–24.
[27] Mahato JK, De PS, Sarkar A, Kundu A, Chakraborti PC. Effect of prestrain and stress
rate on bauschinger effect of monotonically and cyclically deformed ofhc copper.
Procedia Eng 2014;74:368–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.06.281.
[28] Shi Y, Wang M, Wang Y. Experimental and constitutive model study of structural
steel under cyclic loading. J Constr Steel Res 2011;67:1185–97. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2011.02.011.
[29] Akiyama H, Takahashi M, Shi Z. Ultimate energy absorption capacity of round -
shape steel rods subjected to bending. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 1995;475:145–54.
[30] Benavent Climent A. An energy-based damage model for seismic response of steel
structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eqe.671.
[31] Teruna DR, Majid TA, Budiono B. Experimental study of hysteretic steel damper for
energy dissipation capacity. Adv Civil Eng 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/
631726.