Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066 www.elsevier.

com/locate/engstruct

Experimental study of steel slit damper for passive energy dissipation

Ricky W.K. Chan a,b , Faris Albermani a,
a Department of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, Australia b Department of Building and Construction, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Received 13 April 2007; received in revised form 12 July 2007; accepted 12 July 2007 Available online 15 August 2007

Abstract This paper summarizes the development of a new steel energy dissipative device designed for earthquake protection of structures. The Steel Slit Damper (SSD) is fabricated from a standard structural wide-ange section with a number of slits cut from the web, in a vierendeel truss arrangement. The device is a weld-free design, thereby eliminating the uncertainties and difculties encountered in in situ welding. Energy is dissipated through exural yielding of the vierendeels web members when the device is subjected to inelastic cyclic deformation. The performance of the device was veried by nine tests and the effects of geometrical parameters were investigated. Experiments showed that the device exhibited stable hysteresis with excellent energy dissipation and ductility. The device yielded at small angular distortion and is thus expected to dissipate energy early in an earthquake. The structural characteristics of the device are readily determined from fundamental engineering principles, thus the design can be easily modied or extended to suit particular structural requirements. c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Energy dissipation; Metallic damper; Cyclic tests; Earthquake resistant structure

1. Introduction The research and development of structural control against wind and earthquake excitation have achieved signicant progress over the last three decades [1,2]. Structural control can broadly be classied into three categories: (1) Passive control systems are those structures equipped with designated devices or dampers which do not require an external source of power, (2) Active control systems are those structures equipped with real-time processing sensors and force delivery devices which require an external source of power to generate structural control forces, and (3) Semi-active control systems which use little power to change certain structural parameters. Passive control systems, also known as passive energy dissipation systems, have been considered an effective and inexpensive way to mitigate earthquake risks to structures. With designated energy dissipative devices installed in a structure, a large portion of the input energy supplied by wind and/or earthquake can be dissipated; hence the damage to the parent structure is

Corresponding author.

E-mail address: f.albermani@uq.edu.au (F. Albermani). 0141-0296/$ - see front matter c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.005

minimized. Passive devices do not require an external source of power, hence the reliability associated with power supply and computer control during an earthquake event is eliminated. By arranging the devices in a way that facilitates replacement, damaged devices can be replaced with minimum time and cost, hence interruption to human occupancy is minimizeda crucial benet to the building owners and occupants. Energy dissipation can be achieved by a number of mechanisms: friction sliding, yielding of metals, phase transformation of metals, uid oricing and deformation of viscoelastic solid or uid. In particular, one of the most popular mechanisms for dissipation of energy input to a structure is through the yielding of metallic materials. The research in metallic passive energy dissipative devices has been conducted over the last three decades. Numerous metallic dampers have been proposed and installed [35]. Popular devices include the hourglass shape ADAS device [6], its variant the triangular shape TADAS [7], Honeycomb damper [8] and Buckling Restrained Brace [9]. These devices are mainly designed to be incorporated into the bracing system of structural frames. Other devices were developed for installation between beams and columns in a frame structure [10]. On the other hand, some researchers have made use of alternative materials in device

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

1059

Fig. 1. Geometric design of steel slit damper (a) and (b) SL-1 to SL-7, (c) SL-8 and (d) SL-9.

fabrication, such as lead, low-yield steel, copper and shape memory alloys to improve the performance [1115]. de la Llera et al. [14] described that a good metallic damper must possess two important characteristics in order for these devices to be used in engineering applications: (1) to have stable and large energy dissipative capability; (2) to have a representative model of its cyclic behaviour. In line with the second aspect, numerous experiment-based and mechanicsbased models have been developed [1619]. While some researchers used the simpler bilinear model for hysteretic response [19], others adopted models such as the BoucWen model [14] and RambergOsgood model [18]. These models are capable of capturing the smooth transition from elastic to inelastic regime observed in experiments. The design aspect of structures equipped with passive devices has been considered by many researchers [1921]. Nakashima et al. [21] described that the rst yielding, i.e. yielding of the damping mechanism has to be set low, for the purpose of triggering the energy dissipation as early as possible, and to set the yielding level of the parent structure high for the purpose of retarding serious structural damage. This paper summarizes a development of a new metallic passive device; the steel slit damper SSD. The proposed device provides stable and reasonably large energy dissipative capability, and provides a low-cost alternative to structural designers. The structural behaviour of the proposed SSD is evaluated theoretically, followed by experimental verications. Eight cyclic tests and one monotonic test were conducted. Results and discussions are presented with emphasis on key

features which affect energy dissipation capability. The concept of SSD, though of a different conguration, was implemented in a 26-storey building in Japan in 1996 [22]. 2. Device design The basic design of the proposed device is shown in Fig. 1. It is fabricated from a short length of a standard structural wideange section with a number of slits cut from the web, leaving a number of strips between the two anges in a vierendeel truss arrangement. The slits are rounded at their ends, thereby reducing stress concentration in reentrant-corners. Four bolt holes are drilled on each ange for the connection to the parent structure. The device is a weld-free design, thus eliminating the uncertainties and imperfections associated with welding. The device can be installed on top of an inverted-V brace of a framed structure as shown in Fig. 2. Under small relative displacement between the two supported anges, the strips behave as a series of partially xed-ended beams and deform in double curvature. The elastic bending moment in the strips is shown in Fig. 3(a). Under sufcient displacement, plastic hinges form at both ends of each strip. Consequently, the mechanical characteristics of the slit damper can be described in terms of the strip length l0 , strip depth b and web thickness t (Fig. 1). Assuming elasticperfectly-plastic behaviour, the device yield load Py can be determined based on a plastic mechanism analysis (see Appendix). Py = n y tb2 2l0 (1)

1060

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066 Table 1 Test specimens (units: mm) Specimen ID SL-1 SL-2 SL-3 SL-4 SL-5 SL-6 Fig. 2. A single-storey structure with a damper. SL-7 SL-8 SL-9 Measured dimensions t 8.0 b 14.9 15.0 15.1 16.9 16.8 16.5 16.6 16.6 16.5 l0 97.0 87.1 77.0 99.2 88.3 79.0 99.1 Varies 0.155 0.172 0.195 0.172 0.191 0.215 0.172 Varies Monotonic Cyclic Cyclic b/ l0 Test regime

Fig. 3. (a) Bending moment in SSD and (b) Deformed shape of SSD.

where n is the number of strips in the device, l0 is as shown in Fig. 1(a) and y is the material yield stress. The elastic stiffness of the device kd can be determined by assuming that the strips are partially xed at their ends. It is given by, kd = cn Etb3
3 l0

drilled on each ange. Two standard test coupons were taken from the web of the section. Coupon tests gave an average tensile yield stress of 316.5 N/mm2 and an average Modulus of Elasticity of 206.1 kN/mm2 . Among the nine specimens, SL-1 to SL-6 aimed at investigating the best geometry of the slit arrangement (i.e. b/ l0 ratio). SL-7 was fabricated with the identical dimensions of SL-4 and was instrumented to determine the strain behaviour of the device under monotonic loading. SL-8 and -9 were fabricated with varied slit lengths, as shown in Figs. 1(c) and (d). Each specimen weighed approximately 2.2 kg. A summary of the specimens are given in Table 1. 3.2. Test setup, loading history and instrumentation Based on the existing laboratory conditions, the test setup shown in Fig. 4 was developed. The test specimens were installed between a ground beam and an L-beam, securely fastened by four M16 bolts (snug tight) on each side. Forced displacement was applied by an MTS 100 kN capacity computer-controlled actuator quasi-statically to the specimen via the L-beam. To ensure the verticality of the applied load, a pantograph system was welded to the right hand side of the L-beam. To prevent the L-beam from deecting out-ofplane, lateral supports (with rollers) were provided (not shown for clarity). However, these supports were later removed as it was noticed that the pantograph system already prevented the L-beam from deecting out-of-plane. The complete test setup rested on a reaction frame which was signicantly stiffer. The centreline of the actuator implied an eccentricity to the specimen, measured 162 mm to the centreline of the specimen. A free-run of the setup (i.e. without the specimen installed) was performed, and the result showed that friction and the effect of gravity were considerably negligible. The test setup was robust and repeatable, and no visible damage occurred after all tests were carried out. Displacement history for the cyclic tests is shown in Fig. 5. Three cycles were performed at each amplitude: 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, 10.0, 12.5, 15.0 and 20.0 mm. The tests were carried out until the complete failure of specimens. Displacements of the specimens were measured independently by a set of LVDTs, marked as 1 through 3 in Fig. 4.

(2)

where E is Youngs modulus and c is a stiffness coefcient to be calibrated from experiments. 3. Experimental verication The objective of the experiments is to verify the structural characteristics as well as the cyclic performance of the proposed device. Attempts were made to identify the key geometric parameters for largest energy dissipation. Particular attention was paid to the change in stiffness and equivalent damping ratio. It was assumed that the device is used as a retrot option where axial force in the device is less signicant; hence no axial force was applied to the specimens in the experiment. 3.1. Specimens A total of nine specimens similar to Fig. 1(a) were fabricated at the City University of Hong Kong. To simplify the fabrication process, all specimens (each 100 mm long) in this study were cut from a single segment of a structural wide-ange section 152 152 37 Universal Column to BS4449 (depth ange width web thickness ange thickness is 161.8 152.2 8 11.5 mm respectively). Consequently, the web thickness t is identical and material strengths of all specimens may be assumed equal. Four 16 mm diameter holes were

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

1061

Fig. 4. Test setup.

Strength degradation started to appear when cracks slowly formed at the ends of the strips due to stress concentration. On an average this took place after 27 cycles of loading. The exact location at which these cracks originated differed among the specimens. The tests were stopped after one or more strips completely fractured and the load sustained was signicantly reduced. The number of cycles Nc sustained by the specimens is tabulated in Table 2. On the other hand, the connection of the specimens by four structural bolts on each ange performed satisfactorily; no signicant distortion was observed after the tests. For specimens SL-8 and -9 with variable slit lengths, cracks rst appeared in strips on the side adjacent to the shorter slit. As will be discussed in later sections, in terms of strength and energy dissipation capabilities, these two specimens did not demonstrate any superior performance. Fig. 7 shows the damaged device after testing. 3.3.1. Yield and initial stiffness Key experimental results are tabulated in Table 2. Experimental yield strength Py ,ex is dened as the point at which there is visible deviation from the initial linear relationship. The predicted yield load of the device, Py , using Eq. (1) and the measured and calculated properties of each device are also tabulated for comparison. The predicted yield strengths using plastic mechanism analysis are generally in good agreement with the test results. The average stiffness coefcient c determined from the tests was 0.30, suggesting that the actual stiffness of the strips is 30% of that of a xed-ended beam. The c values for specimens with smaller slenderness (SL-3 and -6) were relatively lower than 0.3. A nonlinear nite element (FE) analysis, in which the device was represented by solid elements, was carried out and result was compared with the monotonic test of specimen SL-7 in Fig. 8. The elastic and plastic properties of the material were directly obtained from the standard coupon test. As can be seen from Fig. 8, the FE model gave very accurate prediction of the elastic stiffness but slightly over estimated the elastoplastic response. The same FE model gave an out-of-plane stiffness of 1.27 kN/mm based on the geometry of SL-7, a value comparable to a typical cleat-plate type of brace connection used in practice. 3.3.2. Peak strengths and ductility ratios Both the positive ( Pmax downward) and negative ( Pmin upward) peak strengths are tabulated in Table 2. Negative peaks were, on an average 13% lower than the positive peak values due to the Bauschinger effect. Due to strain-hardening, the maximum positive peak strengths Pmax obtained are on an average 2.0 times higher than the experimental yield Py ,ex . Cumulatively, SL-1 (the specimen with the lowest b/ l0 ratio) travelled the longest displacement prior to failure. Ductility ratio is dened by = max / y , where max is the maximum displacement during a stable cycle and y is the nominal yield displacement (see Appendix). The curves for normalized strength Pmax / Py versus ductility are shown in Fig. 9. It is

Fig. 5. Displacement history for cyclic tests.

While LVDT 1 measures the elastic deformation of the support, the difference across LVDT 1 and 2 measured the absolute distortion of the test specimen. With LVDT 3 and the distance between LVDT 2 and 3 measured, in-plane rotation of the L-beam could be monitored and was found to be negligible. 3.3. Test results and discussion All eight specimens deformed in a stable manner under the cyclic tests. The strips deformed in double curvature as expected. Figs. 6(a)(h) present the forcedisplacement hysteresis obtained in the cyclic tests. A positive sign refers to downward force and displacement. Shear strain (i.e. distortion divided by total width of the device) of the specimens are also shown. It is clear that all specimens have yielded at small displacement and exhibited very stable hysteretic behaviour with a gradual transition between the elastic and inelastic regime. As seen from Fig. 6, the device response is usually less than the input displacement (Fig. 5) due to small elastic support displacement. The structural characteristics of the device were determined based on the absolute deformation of the device as calculated from the difference between LVDT 1 and 2 (Fig. 4). Specimen SL-1 (specimen with the smallest b/ l0 ratio), sustained the lowest force while specimen SL-6 (specimen with highest b/ l0 ratio) sustained the largest.

1062

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

Fig. 6. Forcedisplacement hysteresis for cyclic test specimens.

interesting to note that all specimens behaved in a similar fashion. All specimens sustained ductility ratios in the range of 2940. It should be noted that ductility is dependent on the displacement history applied, and it will vary if the history is changed. For the monotonic test SL-7, a ductility ratio over 55 was achieved when the test was terminated. It is expected that a higher ductility than this is possible to achieve.

3.3.3. Energy dissipation The curves for cumulative energy dissipation versus cumulative displacement are shown in Fig. 10. Specimens dissipated negligible energy at the start while the specimens were loaded in their elastic range. The curves take off as the specimens were displaced beyond their yield limit. The small wobbles in these curves were caused by the elastic

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

1063

Fig. 6. (continued)

(a) SL-4.

(b) SL-8. Fig. 7. Specimens at failure.

Table 2 Summary of test results (units: kN, mm) Specimen SL-1 SL-2 SL-3 SL-4 SL-5 SL-6 SL-7 SL-8 SL-9 kd 6.67 9.31 12.36 9.30 12.54 13.52 14.56 11.02 10.21 c 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.23 0.48 0.31 0.25 Py 11.83 13.78 11.56 14.34 16.75 17.45 12.94 14.15 15.19 Py ,ex 11.51 13.09 15.02 14.62 16.11 17.47 14.08 14.80 15.49 Py / Py ,ex 1.03 1.05 0.77 0.98 1.04 1.00 0.92 0.96 0.98 Pmax 22.61 25.54 25.81 29.61 31.26 35.68 25.71 29.56 31.68 Pmin 19.37 20.59 25.98 23.28 26.40 29.79 25.41 29.41 y 0.49 0.39 0.30 0.45 0.36 0.29 0.46 0.41 0.37 max 17.32 12.05 11.66 16.47 11.92 11.44 25.71 11.88 11.42 35.42 30.86 38.49 36.69 32.83 39.19 55.89 28.86 30.81 Nc 29 27 26 29 26 26 27 26

energy released at each cycle. These light-weight specimens (around 2.2 kg each) are capable of dissipating signicant amounts of energy (810 kJ). Among the specimens, SL-4 dissipated the highest energy (10.3 kJ) while SL-3 dissipated the least (6.92 kJ). SL-6, which possesses strips with the least slenderness, dissipated energy with the highest rate but failed at a relatively low cumulated displacement. It is possible to design the proposed device according to the desired level of energy

dissipation that can be quantied through numerical analysis of the entire structure. 3.3.4. Strain distributions In order to monitor the strain behaviour of the device, a monotonic test was carried out. The forcedisplacement curve for specimen SL-7 is shown in Fig. 8. The geometry of SL-7 is identical to the previously tested SL-4 which dissipated the

1064

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

Fig. 11. Effective stiffness and energy dissipated in a cycle. Fig. 8. Forcedisplacement curve of SL-7.

mechanism analysis and also show that loading is uniformly distributed between the four strips in the device. 3.3.5. Equivalent stiffness and damping ratios It is generally accepted that energy dissipated in cyclic straining of metals is rate-independent. For practical use it is sometimes more preferable to express the device properties in an equivalent viscous system. This is basically a single degree of freedom oscillator with an equivalent stiffness keff dened as (see Fig. 11), keff = | Pmax | | Pmin | . |max | |min | (3)

Fig. 9. Envelope curves for test specimens in cyclic tests.

The damping ratio for the equivalent system, eq can be obtained by equating the measured energy dissipated per cycle ( E D ) in the experiment to that of a viscously damped oscillator [23]. It can be expressed by, eq = 1 ED 4 E S 0 (4)

where E S 0 is the energy stored in an elastic spring with a stiffness keff and displacement max . The plots of equivalent damping ratio versus normalized effective stiffness keff / kd are shown in Fig. 12 (for different loading cycles). Each point represents a feasible stiffness and equivalent damping ratio of the proposed device. Effective stiffness decreases as the device undergoes larger displacement. It can be observed that equivalent damping ratios vary approximately inversely with effective stiffness. In large displacement ranges, the specimens provide a damping ratio in excess of 50% and in general the device can furnish a damping ratio range between 30% to 50%.
Fig. 10. Cumulative dissipated energy of specimens.

4. Conclusions This paper describes the development of a new low-cost steel energy dissipative device. The steel slit damper SSD is fabricated from commonly available wide-ange structural section. No special fabrication technique is involved; hence the device can be easily implemented in practice.

largest amount of energy. A total of 24 high-yield strain-gauges (SG) were attached to the strips (i.e. 6 gauges on each strip). Under monotonic loading, the strain measured at the top and bottom bres of each strip are shown in Figs. 13(a) and 13(b) respectively. These gures conrm the validity of the plastic

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066

1065

Fig. 12. Equivalent damping ratios of specimens.

2. The yield strength of the device can be easily predicted by plastic mechanism analysis. The elastic stiffness of the device can be calibrated empirically. A nonlinear nite element analysis gave accurate predictions of the elastic and post-yield behaviour of the device. Therefore, the design of the device can be easily extended to suit particular needs. 3. Due to strain-hardening, the ultimate strength of the specimens was larger than their respective yield strength by a factor of 2.0. Such strain-hardening effect is benecial in terms of increased energy dissipation. 4. Devices with longer and/or wider slits behave more exibly. Devices with shorter and/or narrower slits possess higher stiffness, dissipate energy at a higher rate but suffer from earlier failure. 5. Large plastic strains concentrations at strip ends cause the specimens to fail by fracture. On an average this happens after more than 27 loading cycles with cumulative displacement of over 500 mm. Acknowledgement This research is partially funded by the City University of Hong Kong (Project No. 9040797-560). Appendix. Mechanism analysis of slit damper The second moment of area I can be calculated by the geometry of the prismatic strips. I = tb3 /12. (5)

Fig. 13(a). Axial strain measured on top of strips of SL-7.

For a unit displacement between the two sides of the device, elastic stiffness against displacement is given by, kd = cn 12 E I
3 l0

= cn

Etb3
3 l0

(6)

where n = number of prismatic strips in the SSD c = stiffness coefcient of device, expressed as a fraction of xed-ended stiffness t = width of strips b = depth of strips. When movement is sufciently large, bending moment at the ends of strips causes the extreme bres to reach yield stress. Subsequently, plastic hinges form at both ends with a rotation p . For prismatic beams the full plastic moment M p is given by, tb2 . (7) 4 The ultimate force of the device can be determined based on the collapse mechanism when all beam end moment become plastic hinges. According to the conservation of energy, and assuming an elasticperfectly-plastic material behaviour; M p = y Py p = 2n M p p . (8)

Fig. 13(b). Axial strain measured on bottom of strips of SL-7.

The proposed device dissipates input energy by exural yielding of a series of strips, which are created by cutting a series of slits through the web of a short length wideange section. Eight cyclic tests and one monotonic test were conducted and the main ndings are summarized below: 1. Cyclic tests demonstrated stable hysteretic behaviour and dissipated signicant amounts of energy (6.910.3 kJ) under quasi-static conditions.

By using the geometric relationship as shown in Fig. 3, the plastic displacement p sustained by the damper can be expressed in terms of plastic rotation p by p = l tan p . (9)

1066

R.W.K. Chan, F. Albermani / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 10581066 [10] Koetaka Y, Chusilp P, Zhang Z, Ando M, Suita K, Inoue K, et al. Mechanical property of beam-to-column moment connection with hysteretic dampers for column weak axis. Engineering Structures 2005; 27:10917. [11] Rodgers GW, Chase JG, Mander JB, Leach NC, Denmead CS. High forceto-volume extrusion dampers and shock absorbers for civil infrastructure. In: Proceedings of 19th Australasian conference on the mechanics of structures and materials. 2006. [12] Nakashima M, Iwai S, Iwata M, Takeuchi T, Konomi S, Akazawa T, et al. Energy dissipation behaviours of shear panels made of low yield steel. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1994;23:1299313. [13] Nakashima M. Strain-hardening behaviour of shear panels made of lowyield steel, I: Test. Journal of Structural Engineering 1995;121(12): 17429. [14] de la Llera J, Esguerra C, Almazan JL. Earthquake behavior of structures with copper energy dissipaters. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2004;33:32958. [15] Dolce M, Cardone D, Marnetto R. Implementation and testing of passive control devices based on shape memory alloys. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2000;29:94568. [16] Williams MS, Albermani F. Monotonic and cyclic tests on shear diaphragm dissipaters for steel frames. Advanced Steel Construction 2006;2(1):121. [17] Tena-Colunga A. Mathematical modeling of the ADAS energy dissipation device. Engineering Structures 1997;19(10):81121. [18] Nakashima M, Akazawa T, Tsuji B. Strain-hardening behavior of shear panels made of low-yield steel, II: Model. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1995;121(12):17507. [19] Xia C, Hanson RD. Inuence of ADAS element parameters on building seismic response. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1992;118(7): 190318. [20] Wu B, Ou JP, Soong TT. Optimal placement of energy dissipation devices for three-dimensional structures. Engineering Structures 1997; 19(2):11325. [21] Nakashima M, Saburi K, Tsuji B. Energy input and dissipation behavior of structures with hysteretic dampers. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 1996;25:48396. [22] Wada A, Huang YH, Iwata M. Passive damping technology for buildings in Japan. Proceeding of progress in structural engineering materials, vol. 2. 2000. p. 33550. [23] Chopra AK. Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall; 1995.

For small rotation, tan p p , Eq. (9) is reduced to p = lp. Substituting Eqs. (7) and (10) into (8) gives Py = 2n M p n y tb2 = l0 2l0 (11) (10)

and nominal yield displacement can be obtained from

2 y = 0.5 y l0 /b .

(12)

References
[1] Soong TT, Dargush GF. Passive energy dissipation systems in structural engineering. John Wiley & Sons; 1997. [2] Soong TT, Spencer Jr BF. Supplemental energy dissipation: State-of-theart and state-of-the-practice. Engineering Structures 2002;24:24359. [3] Boardman PR, Wood BJ, Carr AJ. Union House A cross braced structure with energy dissipaters. Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 1983;16(2). [4] Martines-Romero E. Experiences on the use of supplemental energy dissipaters on building structures. Earthquake Spectra 1993;9(3):581625. [5] Perry CL, Fierro EA, Sedarat H, Scholl RE. Seismic upgrade in San Francisco using energy dissipation devices. Earthquake Spectra 1993; 9(3):55979. [6] Bergman DM, Goel SC. Evaluation of cyclic testing of steel plate devices for added damping and stiffness. Report no. UMCE87-10. Ann Arbor (MI, USA): The University of Michigan; 1987. [7] Tsai K, Chen H, Hong C, Su Y. Design of steel triangular plate energy absorbers for seismic-resistant construction. Earthquake Spectra 1993; 9(3):50528. [8] Kobori T, Miura Y, Fukusawa E, Yamada T, Arita T, Takenake Y, et al. Development and application of hysteresis steel dampers. In: Proceedings of 11th world conference on earthquake engineering. 1992. p. 23416. [9] Clark PW, Aiken ID, Tajirian F, Kasai K, Ko E, Kimura I. Design procedures for buildings incorporating hysteretic damping devices. In: Proc. int. post-SmiRT conf. seminar on seismic isolation. Passive energy dissipation and active control of vibrations of structures. 1999.