Improvement of the model proposed by Menegotto and Pinto for steel

Abstract The model proposed by Menegotto and Pinto (1973) is widely used to simulate the dynamic response of steel structures and steel bars of reinforced concrete structures. In the early 1980s, Filippou et al. (1983) improved the original model by introducing isotropic hardening and highlighted a flaw in the original formulation. Specifically, these researchers observed that if partial unloading takes place at strains lower than the maximum recorded value, the reloading path provides forces that are higher than those expected. Filippou et al. deemed that such errors were not particularly significant for reinforced concrete members and did not propose any modification to the analytical formulation of the model. In the opinion of the writers, this observation is convincing when dealing with reinforced concrete members but is questionable when referring to steel members. The abovementioned flaw is eliminated in this paper from the Menegotto and Pinto model and the improvement over the original model is shown by means of nonlinear dynamic analyses on simple reinforced concrete and steel frames.

[1]  James O. Jirsa,et al.  Behavior of concrete under compressive loadings , 1969 .

[2]  Finley A. Charney,et al.  Hybrid buckling-restrained braced frames , 2014 .

[3]  Johnny Sun,et al.  Development of Ground Motion Time Histories for Phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC Steel Project , 1997 .

[4]  J. Conte,et al.  Flexural Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Walls- Model Attributes , 2004 .

[5]  Melina Bosco,et al.  Design method and behavior factor for steel frames with buckling restrained braces , 2013 .

[6]  Edoardo M. Marino.  A unified approach for the design of high ductility steel frames with concentric braces in the framework of Eurocode 8 , 2014 .

[7]  Aníbal Costa,et al.  Numerical modelling of the cyclic behaviour of RC elements built with plain reinforcing bars , 2011 .

[8]  M. Menegotto.  Method of Analysis for Cyclically Loaded R. C. Plane Frames Including Changes in Geometry and Non-Elastic Behavior of Elements under Combined Normal Force and Bending , 1973 .

[9]  Aurelio Ghersi,et al.  A Simple Procedure to Design Steel Frames to Fail in Global Mode , 1999 .

[10]  Valter José da Guia Lúcio,et al.  Assessing the behaviour of RC beams subject to significant gravity loads under cyclic loads , 2014 .

[11]  F. Filippou,et al.  Geometrically Nonlinear Flexibility-Based Frame Finite Element , 1998 .

[12]  John E. Goldberg,et al.  Analysis of Nonlinear Structures , 1963 .

[13]  Michael H. Scott,et al.  Plastic Hinge Integration Methods for Force-Based Beam¿Column Elements , 2006 .

[14]  J B Mander,et al.  OBSERVED STRESS-STRAIN MODEL FOR CONFINED CONCRETE , 1988 .

[15]  John F. Stanton,et al.  THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MATHEMATICAL MODEL TO PREDICT THE FLEXURAL RESPONSE OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS TO CYCLIC LOADS, USING SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION , 1979 .

[16]  Larry Alan Fahnestock,et al.  Evaluation of buckling-restrained braced frame seismic performance considering reserve strength , 2011 .

[17]  Filip C. Filippou,et al.  Evaluation of Nonlinear Frame Finite-Element Models , 1997 .

[18]  Amr S. Elnashai,et al.  Modelling of material non‐linearities in steel structures subjected to transient dynamic loading , 1993 .

[19]  S. Popovics.  A numerical approach to the complete stress-strain curve of concrete , 1973 .

[20]  Pier Paolo Rossi,et al.  An accurate strength amplification factor for the design of SDOF systems with P–Δ effects , 2014 .

[21]  Stephen A. Mahin,et al.  Model for Cyclic Inelastic Buckling of Steel Braces , 2008 .

[22]  Suhaib Salawdeh,et al.  Numerical simulation for steel brace members incorporating a fatigue model , 2013 .

[23]  J. Mander,et al.  Theoretical stress strain model for confined concrete , 1988 .

[24]  W. Ramberg,et al.  Description of Stress-Strain Curves by Three Parameters , 1943 .