A diagonal steel-shape memory alloy bracing device is proposed for seismic retrofitting of vulnerable building frame structure. Superelastic shape memory alloy bar is put in series with steel bars in the bracing. The device makes use of the loading plateau of superelastic shape memory alloy to limit the tensile force of diagonal bracing. A precast soft-storey building frame in Australia was selected for a case study. A numerical model of the frame was developed and validated with the results from full-scale pull-down field tests. Nonlinear time history analysis was then conducted to evaluate the seismic performance of the frame with different retrofitting strategies. The result shows that the diagonal steel-shape memory alloy bracing can reduce the displacement demand on the soft-storey frame. Meanwhile, the level of tensile force of steel-shape memory alloy bracing can be controlled by the force plateau of the shape memory alloy bar, which is recommended to be 20% of the yielding force of the steel bar. The lower tensile force demand could alleviate the force demand at the associated support connections.
AbdiHHejaziFJaafarMSet al. (2016) Evaluation of response modification factor for steel structures with soft story retrofitted by viscous damper device. Advances in Structural Engineering19: 1275–1288.
2.
AlamMSYoussefMANehdiML (2010) Exploratory investigation on mechanical anchors for connecting SMA bars to steel or FRP bars. Materials and Structures43(1): 91–107.
3.
AndrawesBDesRochesR (2005) Unseating prevention for multiple frame bridges using superelastic devices. Smart Materials and Structures14(3): S60.
4.
ArakiYMaekawaNShresthaKCet al. (2014) Feasibility of tension braces using Cu–Al–Mn superelastic alloy bars. Structural Control and Health Monitoring21(10): 1304–1315.
5.
BoroschekRLFariasGMoroniOet al. (2007) Effect of SMA braces in a steel frame building. Journal of Earthquake Engineering11(3): 326–342.
6.
CastellanoMGIndirliMMartelliAet al. (1999) Seismic protection of cultural heritage using shape memory alloy devices – an EC funded project (ISTECH). In: Proceedings of the international post-SMiRT conference seminar on seismic isolation, passive energy dissipation and active control of vibrations of structures, Cheju, Korea, 23–25 August, pp. 417–443.
7.
DesRochesRMcCormickJDelemontM (2004) Cyclic properties of superelastic shape memory alloy wires and bars. Journal of Structural Engineering130(1): 38–46.
8.
DolceMCardoneDMarnettoRet al. (2004) Experimental static and dynamic response of a real RC frame upgraded with SMA re-centering and dissipating braces. In: Proceedings of 13th World conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6 August.
9.
ForniMIndirliMMartelliAet al. (1997) Rehabilitation of cultural heritage damaged by the 15th October 1996 earthquake at San Martino in Rio, Reggio Emilia, Italy. In: Proceedings of the international post-SMiRT conference seminar on seismic isolation, passive energy dissipation and active control of vibrations of structures, Taormina, 25–27 August, pp. 767–781.
10.
GhassemiehMKargarmoakharR (2013) Response modification factor of steel frames utilizing shape memory alloys. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures24(10): 1213–1225.
11.
HanYLLiQSLiAQet al. (2003) Structural vibration control by shape memory alloy damper. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics32(3): 483–494.
12.
IndirliMCastellanoMGClementePet al. (2001) Demo application of shape memory alloy devices: the rehabilitation of S. Giorgio Church bell tower. In: Proceedings of SPIE: smart structures and materials: smart systems for bridges, structures, and highways, Newport Beach, CA, 30 July, vol. 4330, pp. 262–272.
13.
IqbalA (2006) Soft first story with seismic isolation system. In: NZSEE conference (CDROM paperID), Napier, New Zealand, 10–12 March, vol. 36.
14.
KafleBLamNTLumantarnaEet al. (2015) Overturning of precast RC columns in conditions of moderate ground shaking. Earthquakes and Structures8(1): 1–18.
15.
KurataMLeonRTDesRochesR (2011) Rapid seismic rehabilitation strategy: concept and testing of cable bracing with couples resisting damper. Journal of Structural Engineering138(3): 354–362.
16.
LiHLiuMOuJ (2004) Vibration mitigation of a stay cable with one shape memory alloy damper. Structural Control and Health Monitoring11(1): 21–36.
17.
LiuHLiJTsangHHet al. (2018a) Evaluating self-centering behavior of unbonded prestressed bridge columns using a new performance index based on quasi-static analysis. Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami, 12(01), 1850001.
18.
LiuXLiJTsangHHet al. (2018b) Enhancing seismic performance of unbonded prestressed concrete bridge column using superelastic shape memory alloy. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 1045389X18783074.
19.
McCormickJDesRochesRFugazzaDet al. (2006) Seismic vibration control using superelastic shape memory alloys. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology128(3): 294–301.
20.
McCormickJDesRochesRFugazzaDet al. (2007) Seismic assessment of concentrically braced steel frames with shape memory alloy braces. Journal of Structural Engineering133(6): 862–870.
21.
ManderJBPriestleyMJNParkR (1988) Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering114(8): 1804–1826.
22.
MuallaIHBelevB (2002) Performance of steel frames with a new friction damper device under earthquake excitation. Engineering Structures24(3): 365–371.
23.
OtsukaKWaymanCM (1998) Mechanism of Shape Memory Effect and Superplasticity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24.
OyenPEParkerJC (2009) Seismic rehabilitation of extreme soft-story school building with friction dampers using the ASCE 41 standard. In: ATC & SEI conference on improving the seismic performance of existing building and other structures, San Francisco, CA, 9–11 December, pp. 949–954. Reston, VA: ASME.
25.
OzbulutOEDaghashSSherifMM (2015) Shape memory alloy cables for structural applications. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering28(4): 04015176.
26.
PhocasMCPocanschiA (2003) Steel frames with bracing mechanism and hysteretic dampers. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics32(5): 811–825.
27.
SabelliRMahinSChangC (2003) Seismic demands on steel braced frame buildings with buckling-restrained braces. Engineering Structures25(5): 655–666.
28.
SahooDRRaiDC (2013) Design and evaluation of seismic strengthening techniques for reinforced concrete frames with soft ground story. Engineering Structures56: 1933–1944.
29.
ScottBDParkRPriestleyMJN (1982) Stress-strain behavior of concrete confined by overlapping hoops at low and high strain rates. ACI Structural Journal79(1): 13–27.
30.
SharabashAMAndrawesBO (2009) Application of shape memory alloy dampers in the seismic control of cable-stayed bridges. Engineering Structures31(2): 607–616.
31.
ShinJScottDWStewartLKet al. (2016) Dynamic response of a full-scale reinforced concrete building frame retrofitted with FRP column jackets. Engineering Structures125: 244–253.
32.
StrnadelBOhashiSOhtsukaHet al. (1995) Cyclic stress-strain characteristics of Ti-Ni and Ti-Ni-Cu shape memory alloys. Materials Science and Engineering: A202: 148–156.
33.
TaucerFFSpaconeEFilippouFC (1991) A fiber beam-column element for seismic response analysis of reinforced concrete structures. Report no. UCB/EERC-91/17. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California.
34.
TazarvMSaiid SaiidiM (2015) Low-damage precast columns for accelerated bridge construction in high seismic zones. Journal of Bridge Engineering21(3): 04015056.
35.
WibowoAWilsonJLGadEFet al. (2010a) Drift capacity of a precast soft-storey building in Melbourne. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering11(3): 177–193.
36.
WibowoAWilsonJLLamNTet al. (2010b) Collapse modelling analysis of a precast soft storey building in Australia. Engineering Structures32(7): 1925–1936.
37.
ZafarAAndrawesB (2012) Incremental dynamic analysis of concrete moment resisting frames reinforced with shape memory composite bars. Smart Materials and Structures21(2): 025013.
38.
ZhangYZhuS (2007) A shape memory alloy-based reusable hysteretic damper for seismic hazard mitigation. Smart Materials and Structures16: 1603–1613.
