Stainless steel has gained increasing attention in construction due to its sustainability, excellent ductility, and superior resistance to corrosion and fire, making it especially suitable for use in seismic-prone areas. This study introduces all-stainless-steel assembled buckling-restrained brace (ASS-BRB), comprising rapidly installable and removable restraining units. All components of the proposed ASS-BRB are made from stainless-steel plates and bolts, combining the corrosion resistance and strain-hardening characteristics of stainless steel to ensure long service life and high post-yield stiffness. Experimental tests are conducted on a total of three austenitic stainless steel STS304 BRB specimens to evaluate their cyclic behaviour. The resulting hysteretic response, failure modes, energy dissipation capacities, strength-adjustment factors, cumulative plastic deformation (CPD) and post-yield stiffness are analyzed. The STS304-BRBs demonstrated enhanced hysteretic performance, particularly significant higher stiffness at 2% and 3% strain amplitudes. Additionally, finite element models were created in ABAQUS, and their outcomes closely matched the experimental results, confirming the accuracy of the modeling approach. The developed stainless-steel BRBs are expected to contribute significantly to the advancement of resilient, durable, and corrosion-resistant seismic protection systems for built structures.
AndishehKLiuRPalermoA, et al. (2018) Cyclic behavior of corroded fuse-type dissipaters for posttensioned rocking bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering23(4): 04018008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0001197
3.
ANSI/AISC 341-16 (2016) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Chicago: American Institute of Steel Construction.
4.
BaigueraMVasdravellisGKaravasilisTL (2016) Dual seismic-resistant steel frame with high post-yield stiffness energy-dissipative braces for residual drift reduction. Journal of Constructional Steel Research122: 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.03.019
5.
ChenHBaiJ (2022) Loading protocols for seismic performance evaluation of buckling-restrained braces in RC frames. Journal of Building Engineering45: 103522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103522
6.
ChenYZhouFZhengS, et al. (2024) Cyclic behavior of cold-formed stainless steel sandwich tubular brace: an experimental investigation. Journal of Building Engineering96: 110625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.110625
7.
Di-SarnoLMajidianA (2023) Seismic risk of typical ageing petrochemical steel structure in harsh atmospheric conditions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering21: 4615–4641, Epub ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01702-1 (19 May 2023).
8.
ECCS (1986) Recommended Testing Procedure for Assessing the Behaviour of Structural Steel Elements Under Cyclic Loads. ECCS.
9.
ElflahMTheofanousMDirarS, et al. (2019) Behaviour of stainless steel beam-to-column joints — part 1: experimental investigation. Journal of Constructional Steel Research152: 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.02.040
10.
FujimotoAWMSaekiEWatanabeA, et al. (1988) A study on the unbonded brace encased in buckling-restraining concrete and steel tubes. Trans. AIJ34B: 249–258, (In Japanese).
11.
GaoJDDuXXYuanHX, et al. (2021) Hysteretic performance of stainless steel double extended end-plate beam-to-column joints subject to cyclic loading. Thin-Walled Structures164: 107787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.107787
12.
GardnerL (2019) Stability and design of stainless steel structures – review and outlook. Thin-Walled Structures141: 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.04.019
13.
GhowsiAFSahooDR (2023) Cyclic behavior of all-steel BRBs with bolted angle restrainers: testing and numerical analysis. Journal of Earthquake Engineering27(2): 362–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2021.2002217
14.
Heidary-TorkamaniHMaalekS (2017) Conceptual numerical investigation of all-steel tube-in-tube buckling restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research139: 220–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.09.022
15.
HoveidaeNRafezyB (2012) Overall buckling behavior of all-steel buckling restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research79: 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2012.07.022
16.
HuangFDuanHChengB, et al. (2021) Hysteretic performance of all-steel assembled double-cores buckling-restrained braces using Q195 low-yield core. Journal of Constructional Steel Research187: 106925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106925
17.
HussainHKimD-K (2023) Advancements and future prospects of buckling restrained braces for corrosive-environments: a comprehensive literature review. Buildings13(9): 2156. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13092156
18.
HwangBKimTAhnY (2024) Experimental and numerical investigation of austenitic stainless steel (304 type) slit damper structural behavior. Thin-Walled Structures196: 111551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2023.111551
19.
IwataM (2004) Applications-design of buckling restrained braces in Japan In: 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, August 1–6, 2004, 13 WCEE Secretariat.
20.
JGJ99-2015 (2015) Technical Specification for Steel Structure of Tall Buildings. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press.
21.
JiaL-JGeHMaruyamaR, et al. (2017) Development of a novel high-performance all-steel fish-bone shaped buckling-restrained brace. Engineering Structures138: 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.02.006
22.
JuddJPMarinovicIEathertonMR, et al. (2016) Cyclic tests of all-steel web-restrained buckling-restrained brace subassemblages. Journal of Constructional Steel Research125: 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2016.06.007
23.
KimRKimTImS, et al. (2021) Hysteretic behavior comparison of austenitic and lean duplex stainless steel square hollow section members under cyclic axial loading. Engineering Structures237: 112227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112227
24.
LaiB-LLiY-RBecqueJ, et al. (2025) Axial compressive behavior of circular stainless steel tube confined UHPC stub columns under monotonic and cyclic loading. Thin-Walled Structures208: 112830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2024.112830
25.
LiPLiHZhangT, et al. (2025) Experimental investigation and numerical study of all-steel buckling-restrained braces. Structures77: 109228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2025.109228
26.
LiuWZhangYZengB, et al. (2025) Experimental and numerical studies on the axial compressive performance of localized corroded circular steel tubes. Engineering Structures324: 119352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.119352
27.
MaRSuRCuiC, et al. (2025) Corrosion characteristics and mechanical properties degradation of stressed high-strength steel wires in acidic environment. Case Studies in Construction Materials22: e04773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e04773
28.
MalehmirAHongT-KLeeJ, et al. (2022) Fault intersections control short period intraplate start-stop seismicity in the Korean peninsula. Tectonophysics834: 229387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2022.229387
29.
NingKYangLMaY, et al. (2024) Experimental study on seismic performance of stainless steel full-scale frames: global response. Journal of Constructional Steel Research217: 108658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2024.108658
30.
NingKYangLJiangK, et al. (2025) Experimental investigation on seismic performance of austenitic stainless steel full-scale frames: component response. Engineering Structures326: 119521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2024.119521
31.
NipKHGardnerLElghazouliAY (2010) Cyclic testing and numerical modelling of carbon steel and stainless steel tubular bracing members. Engineering Structures32(2): 424–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.10.005
32.
QinLZhaoHLiuM, et al. (2025) Insights into the field corrosion behaviour of a weathering steel in southwest China. Case Studies in Construction Materials22: e04684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e04684
33.
RossiB (2014) Discussion on the use of stainless steel in constructions in view of sustainability. Thin-Walled Structures83: 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2014.01.021
34.
SchulteSMMooneyWD (2005) An updated global earthquake catalogue for stable Continental regions: reassessing the correlation with ancient rifts. Geophysical Journal International161(3): 707–721. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246x.2005.02554.x
SerinBBozkurtMB (2025) Development of replaceable core all-steel buckling-restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research226: 109247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2024.109247
37.
SunHJiaMZhangS, et al. (2019) Study of buckling-restrained braces with concrete infilled GFRP tubes. Thin-Walled Structures136: 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.10.040
38.
TakahashiSMochizukiN (1979) Experimental study on buckling of unbonded braces under axial compressive force In: Part 1. Summaries of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting. AIJ, Vol. 1979, pp. 1623–1626.
TakeuchiTHajjarJFMatsuiR, et al. (2012) Effect of local buckling core plate restraint in buckling restrained braces. Engineering Structures44: 304–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.05.026
41.
The Building Center of Japan (BCJ) (2017) Specifications for BRB Certification (BCJ-16), the Building Center of Japan, Tokyo, Japan: BCJ.
42.
TremblayRDehghaniMFahnestockL, et al. (2016) Comparison of seismic design provisions for buckling restrained braced frames in Canada, United States, Chile, and New Zealand. Structures8: 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2016.06.004
43.
UllahRVafaeiMC AlihS, et al. (2022) A review of buckling-restrained braced frames for seismic protection of structures. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C128: 103203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2022.103203
44.
WatanabeAHitomiYSaekiE, et al. (1988) Properties of brace encased in buckling-restrained concrete and steel tube In: Proceedings of Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo-Kyoto, Japan, August 2-9, 1988, 9WCEE Organizing Committee.
45.
WuMFanSZhouH, et al. (2022) Experimental and numerical research on fire resistance of stainless steel-concrete composite beam. Journal of Constructional Steel Research194: 107342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107342
YunZCaoYTakagiJ, et al. (2022) Experimental and numerical investigation of a novel all-steel assembled core-perforated buckling-restrained brace. Journal of Constructional Steel Research193: 107288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107288
48.
ZhengSZhouFChengJ, et al. (2022) Experimental study on cyclic hardening characteristics of structural stainless steels. Journal of Constructional Steel Research191: 107196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107196
49.
ZhengS-YYuanBWeiM-S, et al. (2023) Experimental & numerical investigation of all-steel assembled cruciform buckling-restrained braces. Journal of Constructional Steel Research207: 107981.
50.
ZhouFFangCChenY (2018) Experimental and numerical studies on stainless steel tubular members under axial cyclic loading. Engineering Structures171: 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.05.093
51.
ZhouYShaoHCaoY, et al. (2021) Application of buckling-restrained braces to earthquake-resistant design of buildings: a review. Engineering Structures246: 112991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112991
52.
ZhugeYMaXZengJ (2022) Recent progress in buckling restrained braces: a review on material development and selection. Advances in Structural Engineering25(7): 1549–1564. https://doi.org/10.1177/13694332221082730, Sage Publications.
