4.6 Article

An Energy Dissipating Seismic Connector for Precast Concrete Shear Walls

期刊

BUILDINGS
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/buildings12070949

关键词

energy dissipation; seismic; shear walls; precast concrete; connector

资金

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University ofWisconsin Milwaukee

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the potential of several steel connector shapes as seismic energy dissipating devices between vertical precast concrete shear wall panels was evaluated. The multiple yield zone (MYZ) connector was proposed based on its improved performance in energy dissipation compared to the conventional U-shaped flexure plate (UFP) device. The MYZ connector provides stiffness and energy dissipation in both horizontal and vertical directions, and its use resulted in better energy dissipation and structure response compared to the UFP alternate. The presence of multiple yield zones through circular cut-outs is crucial for the performance enhancement observed with the MYZ connector.
In this study, several steel connector shapes were analytically evaluated as potential new seismic energy dissipating devices between vertical precast concrete shear wall panels. Based on the results of analytical and experimental studies, a multiple yield zone (MYZ) connector is proposed due to its improved performance (in energy dissipation) when compared to the conventional U-shaped flexure plate (UFP) device. Unlike the UFP, the MYZ connector provides stiffness and energy dissipation in both horizontal and vertical directions. The response of a shear wall building system utilizing the MYZ or UFP connectors was evaluated using a simplified frame model. The MYZ connector performed better than the UFP alternate both in terms of energy dissipation in the device and with respect to improved structure response. The use of multiple (distributed) yield zones through circular cut-outs is key in the performance enhancement observed with the MYZ connector.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据