Soni et al.

, Journal of Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN0976-7916

Research Paper
MATHAMATICAL MODELLING OF ADAS DAMPER
ELEMENT AND NON- LINEAR TIME HISTORY ANALYSIS OF
SDOF STEEL STRUCTURE USING ETABS
A. H. Soni1 and Prof C. S. Sanghvi2
Address for Correspondence
1
P G Student, 2Associate Prof Applied Mechanics Dept. L D College of Engineering, Ahmedabad Gujarat India
ABSTRACT
The use of passive energy dissipation has been rapidly growing throughout the world. This technique reduces the structural
response subject to wind and earthquakes through mounting dissipative devices into the buildings. The paper describes a
technique to find out combined stiffness of model equipped with ADAS damper and its mathematical modelling is carried
out. Non-linear time history analysis is also performed on single degree single story frame under el-Centro ground history
record. KEYWORDS: Mathematical modeling, time-history, Displacement, drift, special moment resisting frame (SMRF),
ADAS (aided stiffness and damping).
1. INTRODUCTION
Interest in the development of passive energy
dissipation in earthquake risk mitigation of civil (1)
structures has greatly increased in the last two Eq. (1) indicates that the brace stiffness is
decades. During an earthquake, a large amount of compromised by the insertion of a flexible damper. If
energy is imparted to a structure. The traditional the brace stiffness is required to withstand in-service
design approach relies on the energy dissipation as a lateral loads, a relatively high device-to-brace
consequence of inelastic deformation of particular stiffness is then necessary. Dampers which rely on
structural zones. The permanent damage of the post- plastic flexural deformation are generally flexible;
disaster structure is often so serious that it would be hence multiple dampers are usedto build up the
expensive to repair, if at all possible. The concept of required stiffness.
passive energy dissipation, however, attempts to Generally, a good metallic device for seismic
reduce such permanent damage to the structure. With applications must exhibit: (1) adequate elastic
designated energy stiffness to withstand in service lateral load (e.g.
dissipative devices installed within a structure, a wind); (2) a yield strength of the damper exceeding
portion of the input seismic energy could be diverted the expected in-service lateral loads; (3) large energy
into these devices; as a result damage of the parent dissipative capability; and (4) a stable hysteretic
structure can be effectively reduced. The inclusion of forcedisplacement response which can be modeled
dissipative devices in a structure is expected to alter numerically.
its stiffness and damping and hence influence its This paper concentrates on the performance of the
structural response. In addition, by strategically hour shaped ADAS device equipped with single story
locating these devices, repair and/or replacement of single bay steel model.
the devices following an earthquake can be carried 2. MATHEMATICAL MODELLING OF THE
out with minimal interruption to occupancy, a crucial ADAS ENERGY DISSIPATION DEVICE:
benefit to building owners and occupants. A number Experiment-based modelling approach involves the
of dissipative devices utilizing plastic deformation of direct use of experimental data obtained from
metals have been proposed. Devices which make use component testing of the damper. The basic form of
of flexural deformation of metals include the patented the force-displacement model is first selected, and
ADAS, its variants TADAS and Cu-ADAS and the then the model parameters are determined via a curve
Steel Slit Damper (SSD). The Buckling-restrained fitting procedure. In the second approach, discussed
brace (BRB), on the other hand, makes use of the in the following subsection, the force-displacement
axial deformation of steel. model is instead constructed from an appropriate
Devices such as the, SSD and the proposed ADAS constitutive relationship for the metal by applying the
are usually envisaged to be connected between the principles of mechanics. This latter approach can
top of an inverted V-brace (chevron brace) system often provide additional insight into the behavior of
and a floor beam in a structural panel (Fig. 1). the device, while reducing the requirements for
component testing.
Whittaker et al. (1989)1 have presented an analytical
procedure to define the load-deformation curve of the
ADAS device, assuming the equivalent X-triangular-
shaped geometry.
Although the method is simple, its results are limited
if more rigorous analyses are to be done. The use of a
detailed finite element analyses are to be done. The
use of a detailed finite element mesh to model an
ADAS device is reasonable to study the behavior of
the device alone; however, it is not practical for
studying the nonlinear dynamic behavior of
This results in the device being connected in series to multistory structures with several ADAS devices.
the bracing system. The resultant in-plane lateral Recently, a microscopic mechanist approach has been
stiffness of the brace-device assembly kbd, can be proposed for metallic dampers by Dargush & Soong
obtained from the individual stiffness of the brace,
kb, and the device, kd,
JERS/Vol.III/ Issue IV/Oct.-Dec., 2012/13-16
 Soni et al., Journal of Engineering Research and Studies
(1995) 2, the applicability of which could be tested for
the ADAS device.
Arturo Tena-Colunga (1997) 3 presented another
method to determine the global element elastic
stiffness, the element capacities & the load-
deformation curve of the ADAS device, based upon
the flexibility method & fundamental principles of
mechanics. Most of the resulting integrals are solved
explicitly; closed-form solutions are then made
available.
3. OVERVIEW OF METHOD PROPOSED BY
WHITTAKER et al. (1989)1 FOR NUMERICAL
MODELLING OF ADAS DEVICE:
An idealization of the geometry of an ADAS device
is given in Figure 2a. Here, the layout of the ADAS
is hour-glass-shaped. These devices are made with
tapered structural steel plates designed to work
primarily in double curvature, which makes their
layout more efficient as these elements yield almost
entirely along their length.
Because of its particular tapered shape, the
computation of the stiffness & the plastic capacities
of the ADAS device are nontrivial. Whittaker et al.
(1989)1 proposed a simple procedure to define the
load-deflection curve for the ADAS devices, using
equivalent X-shaped idealization of the plates
(Figure2b), which are inscribed inside the actual
profile of the ADAS. Their method is based on the
following assumptions: firstly, the X-plates are
rigidly restrained at their ends; secondly, the X-plates
deform in double curvature, antisymmetric about
their midheight; and finally, the equivalent width of
the X-plates at their ends is equal to half its height
(b1eq = l/2). The load-deformation curve in shear of
the ADAS can be idealized as an elastic-perfectly
plastic curve (Figure 3a), or as a bilinear one
(Figure3b), as recommended in the literature4. In the
procedure by Whittaker et al. (1989)1, the yielding
point is defined from the proposed equivalent
geometry.
Whittaker et al. (1989)1 do not specify the expression
they used to define the yielding displacements
reported on their analytical studies. However, it
seems that these displacements were computed from
the double integration of the average plastic curvature
M px ( z )
y =
d y = PL dx (1)
EI x ( z )
Where,
b( z)t 3
I x ( z) = (2)
12
b( z )t 2 (3)
M px ( z ) = y Z x = y
4
Therefore, according to the method proposed by
Whittaker et al. (1989)1, the plastic yielding
displacement of each equivalent X-shaped plate is
3 y l 2 (4)
px =
PL
4 Et
The plastic shear capacity of each equivalent X-plate
of the ADAS is computed from the equilibrium
equation based upon the yielding moment capacity if
the plate (equation (3)), this is
2 M px y b1eq t 2
VPL = = (5)
l 2l
JERS/Vol.III/ Issue IV/Oct.-Dec., 2012/13-16
E-ISSN0976-7916
Hence, the elastic shear stiffness of each equivalent
X-plate is calculated as
VPL
K PL = (6)
PL
For an ADAS device composed of n plates and
idealized as proposed by Whittakeretal. (1989)1 the
plastic yielding displacement is the one computed
from equation (4), whereas the plastic shear capacity
and the elastic shear stiffness are n times the one
computed by equations (5) and (6).
The procedure proposed by Whittaker etal. (1989)1 is
a simple approximation valid only for 2D modelling.
Their equivalent X-plate idealization is inscribed
inside the nominal shape of the ADAS, therefore, the
computed shear capacity and stiffness is
underestimated with respect to their theoretically
exact analytical values. In addition, the modelling
of the ADAS is based entirely on a shear criterion,
neglecting other effects that might be relevant, such
as the impact of axial forces and out-of-plane
bending. It was observed, from some test results, that
axial forces can be an important factor in the dynamic
behavior of the ADAS device when subjected to
large deformations2.
A more rigorous procedure to model the ADAS
devices based upon the flexibility method is
presented in literature3. The method is robust and
cannot only define the load-deformation curve in
shear of the ADAS, but can also define an ADAS
element model that can be implemented in standard
structural analysis or finite element computer
programs.
The author suggest this for future scope, but as whole
structural system is modelled mathematically as 2D
frame, the above described procedure by Whittaker
etal. (1989)1 is implemented here for Stiffness
formulation of the ADAS device, as depicted in
computations further.
4. STIFFNESS FORMULATION OF THE
ADASELEMENT BY ANALYTICAL MODELING
For the purpose of discussion, hereafter, an ADAS
element is defined as an ADAS device and two
chevron braces that support the device.
Here, for an equivalent X-shaped idealization of
ADAS plates b1eq = 72 / 2 = 36mm.
 Soni et al., Journal of Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN0976-7916

Plastic yielding displacement of each X-shaped plate Frequency of natural mode of vibration is 1.3687
3 y l 2 Hz & T = 0.7306 cycles/sec.
is PL
px =
= 4.025312 mm.
4 Et 6. THEORETICAL STIFFNESS & NATURAL
Plastic shear capacity of each equivalent X-plate FREQUENCY CALCULATIONS OF
STRUCTURAL FRAME:
y b1eq t 2
VPL = = 481.5 N. 6.1 Computations for Bare Frame:
2l 4 numbers of columns, with circular cross section of
Elastic shear stiffness of each equivalent X-plate Diameter = 5.075mm &
V Height = 501.5mm (base plate to top plate).
K PL = PL = 119.618057 N/mm.
PL Density of material = 0.00000785 kg/mm3.
Mass of single column rod = (/4) x (5.075)2 x
This ADAS device, consists of n=2 numbers of
identical structural aluminum plates positioned in 501.5 x 0.00000785 = 0.08 kg.
parallel, is typically installed within a frame bay
Total mass of column = 4 nos. x 0.08 kg = 0.32 kg.
between a chevron brace and the overlying top plate, Top plate= 500mm x 500mm x 3.2mm
as indicated in Figure1.
Mass = 500 x 500 x 3.2 x 0.00000785 = 6.28 kg.
Total plastic yielding displacement of single Additional mass supplied = 3.72 kg.
Here, taking effective / participating mass = 6.28 +
ADAS device= 4.025mm.
Total plastic shear capacity of single ADAS 3.72 = 10 kg.
Now, unsupported length of column rods in direction
device= 963 N. of sway or say in direction of applied excitation force
Total elastic shear stiffness of single ADAS is 472.75 mm, l=0.47275 m.
device= 239.23 N/mm. Modulus of Elasticity = E= 2 x 1011 N/m2& cross-
The horizontal stiffness of the ADAS element, Kt, is a sectional diameter = 0.005075 m.
function of the lateral stiffness of the braces, Kb and Total stiffness due to column-rods = 4 nos. x 12EI =
the device stiffness Ka. Lateral stiffness of ADAS l3
Element (consisting ADAS damper and bracings) is 2958.6303 N/m.
calculated from equation (7)
K .K
= k = 2958.6303 ;
Kt = b a (7) m 10
Kb + K a
T= 2 =0.3653 seconds/cycles;
SR coefficient is the ratio of the horizontal stiffness
of ADAS element (Kt) to the structural storey fn= 2.7376.cycles/sec
stiffness of building, without applying the ADAS 7. DYNAMIC NON-LINEAR TIME HISTORY
device and braces in place (Kf), is defined as STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
K (8) The Fig.1 shows the actual steel frame with ADAS
SR = a
Kf element deployed, for comprehensive experimental
Now, the horizontal component of stiffness of a program. This assembly was subjected to various
single brace can be written as periodic motions induced by the shake table. It was
found that, by providing a means for energy
E. A.(cos )2
kbrace = (9) dissipation realized by incorporating yielding of
l ADAS device, the damper could substantially reduce
here, the steady-state response near resonance and the
E = 2 x 1011 N/m2, transient response due to a particular seismic signal.
A = 258.4 mm x 3mm thick = 0.0254m x 0.003m, In this section, emphasis is given for the prediction of
l = (unsupported) 428.5656 mm = 0.428565 m, response of the same assembly under an actual
cos = 182 , gives earthquake excitation. For this purpose, numerical

428.565 simulations were carried out by CSi ETABS v9.6
kbrace = 6413242.2093 N/m. software.
One pair of chevron brace contributes 7.1 Description of Computer Model
12826484.4186 N/m in horizontal stiffness. The actual 3-dimensional model with ADAS element
Kb = 12826484.4186 N/m & is reduced to an equivalent 2-dimensional frame
Ka= 239236.114 N/m gives having a single dynamic degree of freedom. The
Kt = 234855.65 N/m criterion here employed was that, the fundamental
5. STIFFNESS OF THE COMPLETE frequency of both the structural systems to be kept
STRUCTURAL FRAME EQUIPPED WITH ADAS constant along with the contributing mass. Again, no
ELEMENTS & ITS NATURAL FREQUENCY OF changes were made in the configuration of ADAS
VIBRATION: element, only changes were made in finding out the
Horizontal elastic stiffness of ADAS element= equivalent cross-sectional geometry for the column
Kt = 234855.65 N/m. rods. It should be noted here: the error found in the
Horizontal elastic stiffness of structural frame = frequency computed for equivalent 2-dimensional
Kf = 2958.6303 N/m. frame to original 3-dimensional structural system
SR = K a = 234855.65 =79.3799 .
(both with ADAS elements) was only 0.0401%
(more).
K f 2958.6303
Following a trial & error procedure, iteration carried
Total elastic stiffness of single bay structural frame out, the geometric properties of beam-column were
with ADAS element = 237814.2803 N/m. found and following SDOF resulted, whose essential
Total elastic stiffness of whole structural frame
with ADAS element = 475628.5606 N/m.
JERS/Vol.III/ Issue IV/Oct.-Dec., 2012/13-16
 Soni et al., Journal of Engineering Research and Studies
structural properties are listed below & numerical
model is also explained:
The frame is modeled as two-column line, single bay
system. N-meter-second units are used. Other
parameters associated with the structure are as
follows.
All columns are of solid circular sections with
diameter = 4.37609mm.
The chevron braces are rectangular sections with
dimensions
Width = 3mm;
Depth = 25.4mm.
The beam, column & braces made up of structural
steel, are assigned with isotropic material properties
that consists of Modulus of Elasticity (E) = 2 x1011
N/m2
Shear modulus =0.99 x1011 N/m2
The ADAS elements are modeled in ETABS by
assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the
chevrons intersect the beams at roof level. The link
properties use the uniaxial hysteretic spring property
and provided beam-brace connectivity with nonlinear
behavior in the lateral direction (shear in plane
perpendicular to direction of earthquake motion).
Under this arrangement, displacements are
transferred between the chevrons and the frame via
the link elements undergoing shear deformation.
The type of nonlinear behavior that is modeled with
the ADAS device is Uniaxial Plastic (Wen model).
7.2 Wen Plasticity Property:
For each deformational degree of freedom one can
specify independent uniaxial plasticity properties.
The plasticity model employed in this study is based
on the hysteretic behavior proposed by Wen (1976).
All internal deformations are independent. The
yielding at one degree of freedom does not affect the
behavior of the other deformations.
The nonlinear force-deformation relationship is given
by:
f = ratiokd + (1 ratio) yieldz
Where k is the elastic spring constant, yield is the
yield force, ratio is the specified ratio of post-yield
stiffness to elastic stiffness (k), and z is an internal
1
hysteretic variable. This variable has a range of z
z =1
with yield surface represented by . The initial
value of z is zero, and it evolves according to the
differential equation:
k ,for d& (1 z exp ) if d& z > 0 ; otherwise d& .
z& =
yield
Where exp is an exponent greater than or equal to
unity. Larger values of this exponent increase the
sharpness of yielding. The practical limit for exp is
about 20. The equation for z& is equivalent to Wens
model with A=1 and ==0.5.
In the model, here Wen plastic Link used to model
the ADAS device has 3 Active Degrees of Freedom
U1 & U3, U2 is along the direction of earthquake
motion i.e., lateral direction, and 1 dynamic degree of
freedom. Bilinear force-deformation characteristics
are defined for the link element along with an
exponent that defines the sharpness of the transition
from the initial stiffness to the yielded stiffness.
Nonlinear properties are assigned to U2 degree of
freedom as explained herein.
JERS/Vol.III/ Issue IV/Oct.-Dec., 2012/13-16
E-ISSN0976-7916
The stiffness of the link element / ADAS device is
(already calculated as)
k = 239.236114 N/mm.
The yield strength, y is 214 N/mm2
The ratio of initial stiffness to yielded stiffness is
(Yield ratio, r) = 0.05;
Yield exponent, e that controls sharpness of transition
from initial stiffness to yielded stiffness is taken as =
2.
The active mass is 40 kg at roof diaphragm level
which is capable of moving in only lateral direction
(which is the same as supplied to actual model during
experiments).
The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the
nonlinear time history analysis. The time increment
for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second. The
ADAS elements are intended to produce about
3.844% damping in the fundamental mode, is the
value obtained in experimental investigation.
The input data file and the time history file are
available on the CD & in appendix.
8. RESULTS
Maximum roof diaphragm displacement:
The displacement of the roof diaphragm in UX /
global lateral direction, which for the structural
model equipped without ADAS elements, comes out
as
It can be concluded that: ADAS elements reduce the
roof diaphragm displacements by 91.71% produced
in bare frame model for El Centro 1940 (N-S) time
history record.
REFERENCES
1. Whittaker, A. S., Bertero, V. V., Alonso L. J. &
Thompson, C. L., " Earthquake simulator testing of
steel plate added damping and stiffness elements",
Report UCB/EERC-89/02,Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, University of California at Berkeley,
, 1989.
2. Dargush, G. F. & Soong, T. T., "Behavior of metallic
plate dampers in seismic passive energy dissipation
systems", EarthquakeSpectra 1995, 11 (4), pp. 545-568
3. Arturo Tena-Colunga, "Mathematical modelling of the
ADAS energy dissipation device", Engineering
Structures, Vol. 19, No. 10, pp. 811-821, 1997.
4. Martinez-Romero, E., "Experiences on the use of
supplementary energy dissipators on building
structures", Earthquake Spectra 1993, 9 (3), pp. 581-
626.
5. Y. K. Wen. 1976, "Method for Random Vibration of
Hysteretic Systems," Journal of the Engineering
Mechanics Division. ASCE, Vol. 1-02. No. EM2.
6. Scholl, Roger E. 1993. Design Criteria for Yielding and
Friction Energy Dissipaters. Proceedings of ATC-17-1
Seminar on Seismic Isolation, Passive Energy
Dissipation, and Active Control. San Francisco,
California. Vol. 2, 485-495. Applied Technology
Council. Redwood City, California.
7. Chopra, A.K. (2001), Dynamics of Structures: Theory
and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, Second
edition