Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811

www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

A finite element parametric study on the mechanical properties of J-shaped

steel hysteresis devices
Shiro Kato, Yun-Beom Kim ∗
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Toyohashi University of Technology, Tempaku, Toyohashi 441-8580, Japan

Received 16 May 2005; accepted 30 November 2005

Abstract

The present paper discusses the mechanical properties of J-shaped steel hysteresis devices, abbreviated to “J-dampers”, interposed between the
upper structure of a spatial structure and its substructure. The mechanical properties of a J-damper, which are characterized by its key geometrical
and material parameters, are evaluated through parametric analyses using an in-house Finite Element program. The hysteresis behavior of a
J-damper is also modeled by a bi-linear elasto-plastic hysteresis model with the strain-hardening effect. Its elastic stiffness, yield strength and
dimensionless hardening ratio, which are expressed as functions of the parameters, are formulated on the basis of mathematical models and the
results of parametric studies. Finally, some remarks relevant to the application of the proposed hysteresis model are made for the design of the
J-damper.
c 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: J-damper; Spatial structure; Parametric study; Finite element modeling; Mechanical property; Hysteresis model

1. Introduction earthquakes. Accordingly, the main structural elements, except

Conventional seismic design practice in principle keeps
the structural members remaining within the elastic range
during moderate earthquakes, on an implicit premise that
inelastic behavior of the main structural members will provide
structures with significant energy dissipation and enable
them to withstand very severe earthquakes without collapse.
Under the implicit premise, inelastic actions, i.e. seismic
energy dissipations, are intended to occur in the critical
regions of a structure such as both ends of beams and
beam to column connections. According to recent research,
the philosophy of this seismic design has inherent weak
points, in that structural members experiencing plastic
deformations deteriorate significantly due to local instabilities
when subjected to cyclic loading. New design concepts have
been developed and suggested in order to overcome these
shortcomings. Of the various concepts, an efficient approach
is that special devices called dampers are incorporated into a
structure to absorb the seismic energy and to avoid inelastic
deformations of its main structural elements during big
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 532 44 6846; fax: +81 532 44 6831.
E-mail address: kim-yb@st.tutrp.tut.ac.jp (Y.-B. Kim).
the dampers, only carry out the function of resisting its gravity
load. This concept has been applied for both new high-rise
buildings and the seismic retrofit of existing buildings [1,2].
Nowadays, spatial structures such as gymnasia and stadia
are being constructed all over the world, including seismic
areas such as Japan. Spatial structures built in strong seismic
areas should always play an important role as places of
refuge during and after earthquakes. Accordingly, their seismic
resistance capacity should be enhanced to satisfy this special
function. According to the field observation report of the
1995 Hyogoken-Nambu earthquake, the structure frameworks
of spatial structures designed in accordance with conventional
seismic design practice were not impaired so much, but damage
occurred to not only earthquake-resistant braces but also roof
ceilings, as well as the jointing parts of a reinforced concrete
substructure. Such damage might cause spatial structures
difficulty in functioning as a refuge. Considering the structural
characteristics of a spatial structure, it is also very difficult
to rehabilitate its damaged parts. Hence, the new seismic
design concept is regarded as an excellent alternative. This
can also make it possible to reduce its constructional cost
through a cutback in structural steel members for a roof
structure. There have been several attempts to apply this

0143-974X/$ - see front matter 

c 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.11.014
 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811
(a) Side view with hysteresis and friction dampers.
Fig. 1. Arrangement and composition of J-damper.
design principle to spatial structures. Kato et al. suggested
the design concept to reduce the response of a dome by
absorbing seismic energy by means of yielding of the braces
incorporated into its substructure [3]. S. Motoyui et al. proposed
the method to incorporate viscoelastic dampers into the roof
structure of a space frame as one of the possible passive control
schemes [4]. The efficiency of intermediate seismic isolation
systems in dissipating earthquake-induced energy and reducing
the earthquake response of a spatial structure, by interposing
the steel hysteresis devices between the upper structure and its
substructure, was proven by Kato et al. [5,6].
The design concepts for spatial structures are greatly
dependent on the performances of dampers, which are
mostly determined by the following characteristics: the
load–displacement relations, the energy absorption capacity,
and the fatigue resistance. For this reason, it is very important to
grasp the mechanical behavior of the adopted dampers. Related
to the last design method of the three, authors developed a
new steel hysteresis device called a J-damper and showed its
excellent earthquake performance in the previous paper [7].
The mechanical properties of dampers, the same as
or similar to a J-damper, which dissipate seismic energy
through a rolling-bending motion of steel plates, have been
studied by investigators [8,9]. The results obtained by the
investigators through their experiments showed merely the
mechanical properties, such as hysteresis behavior and fatigue
characteristics within small displacement amplitudes over the
range 2.5–3.0 cm, which correspond to the maximum inter-
story drift of a building. Such results are not appropriate for
application to the J-damper, whose maximum displacement
amplitude may be more than 10.0 cm, introduced for an
intermediate isolation system of a spatial structure.
This paper focuses on the mechanical properties of a
J-damper under large displacement amplitudes, but not on
its fatigue resistance capacity. Studies are also required to
assess the performance of the intermediate isolation system for
a spatial structure. The mechanical behavior of a J-damper,
which is characterized by its key geometrical and material
parameters, is evaluated based on the results obtained through
parametric analyses using Finite Element (FE) modeling. The
cyclic hysteresis behavior of a J-damper is also modeled by a bi-
linear elasto-plastic hysteresis model with the strain-hardening
803
(b) Configuration of a set of J-dampers.
effect, considering the energy dissipation capacity. Its elastic
stiffness, yield strength and strain-hardening slope, which are
expressed as functions of the parameters, are formulated on
the basis of mathematical models and the results of parametric
studies. Finally, some remarks relevant to the application of
the proposed hysteresis model are made for the design of the
J-damper.
2. Parametric analysis
2.1. Characteristics and numerical modeling of a J-damper
The concept and configuration of the J-damper and its
application to a spatial structure were explained in detail in
a previous paper [7]. Its FE modeling and some assumptions
necessary for simulating the behavior of a J-damper were also
described. However, they are prescribed here again concisely
for an understanding of the present work.
The arrangement and composition of the J-damper is
illustrated in Fig. 1. The J-damper is joined to the upper
structure of a spatial structure through the part marked with
a thick dotted line, denoted by UC in Fig. 1(a). A couple of
rollers, which move in the RD direction, attached to a slide plate
of the J-damper, are connected with its substructure through
stoppers. The damper is made of a set of four steel plates.
Each of them has the configuration of a letter ‘J’, as shown in
Fig. 1(b), and is produced through the cold bending process.
When the slide plate and guide frames move in opposite
directions along a horizontal plane, the plastic deformation of
the four J-plates corresponding to their relative displacement δ
makes a J-damper dissipate seismic energy.
A numerical model of a J-damper is shown in Fig. 2. Only
one J-plate, marked with a dotted line and denoted by OF in
Fig. 1(b), is used in the FE modeling because four J-plates
are located in symmetry and have the same displacement δ.
Several considerations are made in its FE modeling. To solve
the contact problem of a J-plate with guide frames and a slide
plate, contact spring elements are introduced. For simplicity
of calculation, we assume that friction forces generated by the
sliding of a J-plate on guide frames and a slide plate can be
negligibly small. Though residual stresses generated by the cold
bending process in the production of J-plates may have an effect
804 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811
Fig. 2. Numerical model.
Fig. 3. Effective stress–effective plastic strain curve.
on the mechanical behavior of the J-damper, we assume that
they can be neglected in the present work.
Three-dimensional (3D) solid hexahedral elements with 20
nodes and three translation DOFs per node were used to model
the geometry of a J-plate. The material for the J-plate is mild
steel of 400 N/mm2 , which corresponds to its ultimate stress.
The elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio are 205 800.0 N/mm2
and 0.3, respectively. A bi-linear effective stress–effective
plastic strain curve was assumed as shown in Fig. 3. H1 and H2
are assumed to be E/100 and zero, respectively and ε̄1p is about
20 times εY . A mixed hardening rule with β = 0.5 was adopted.
β represents the ratio of the isotropic hardening parameter to
the total hardening parameter.
2.2. Parametric analysis
In the present research, parametric analyses are performed
using the in-house FE program developed by the authors. The
validity of the FE program was verified by comparison of the
simulated results with the corresponding experimental results
of a J-damper in the previous paper [7].
The primary variables dominating the mechanical behavior
of a J-damper, i.e. yield stress σY as a material parameter and
internal radius r and thickness t as geometrical parameters, are
considered in this parametric study. The parameters r and t are
illustrated in Fig. 4. Though the width of a J-plate, W , may
influence the mechanical properties of a J-damper, the variable
is not considered here. However, comments on the limitation
of its width are made in Section 4. Another two variables L 1
and L 2 , which are relevant to the areas subjected to a rolling-
bending motion during operation, are also not considered,
Fig. 4. Configuration of J-plate.
because it is judged that they seldom affect the mechanical
behavior of a J-damper when considering the deformation
characteristic of a J-plate.
A total of 186 nonlinear FE analyses were performed in
which 168 cases were subjected to monotonic loading and
18 cases to cyclic loading. The analyzed specimens that
were subjected to monotonic loading had yield stresses of
235.2 N/mm2 (2.4 tf/cm2 ), 294.0 N/mm2 (3.0 tf/cm2 ) and
352.8 N/mm2 (3.6 tf/cm2 ), an internal radius of 45, 60, 75,
90, 105, 120 and 135 mm, and a thickness of 3, 6, 9, 12,
15, 18, 21 and 24 mm. The representative analyzed specimens
that were subjected to cyclic loading had yield stresses of
294.0 N/mm2 (3.0 tf/cm2 ) and 352.8 N/mm2 (3.6 tf/cm2 ),
an internal radius of 60, 75 and 90 mm, and a thickness of 6,
12 and 18 mm. The combinations of the variables considered in
the study are listed in Table 1. For these 186 cases, the width of
the J-plate, W , was held constant at 125 mm under an additional
assumption of L 1 /L 2 = 5/3. For the 168 cases and 18 cases,
the variable L 2 was set to 105 mm and 110 mm, respectively.
Comments on the dimensions L 1 and L 2 for the design of the
J-damper are made in Section 4. For all cases, the length of
Tap and the diameter of the bolt φ, as shown in Fig. 4, were
held constant at 20 and 18 mm, respectively. The length of B.F.
was assumed to be 2.5 × φ and the rolling-bending motion
was confined by bolts along the area of B.F. The permissible
maximum displacement of a J-damper is recommended not to
be beyond the limit value of 0.9×(R + L 2) for its stable rolling-
bending motion, though the geometry of a J-damper (or a
J-plate) itself may permit it to deform beyond the limit value.
Here, R denotes the value attained by adding internal radius r to
half of the thickness t of a J-plate, as illustrated in Fig. 4. This
maximum displacement was applied in this parametric study.
3. Mechanical properties and hysteresis model
3.1. Mechanical properties
In this subsection, the elastic stiffness, yield strength and
dimensionless hardening ratio of a J-damper, which has only
one J-plate, are formulated on the basis of mathematical
 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811 805

Table 1
Combination of variables used in parametric study

Yield stress (N/mm2 ) Internal radius (mm) Thickness (mm)

(a) Monotonic loading

235.2 (=2.4 tf/cm2 ) 45 / 60 / 75 / 90 / 105 / 120 / 135 3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 / 18 / 21 / 24

294.0 (=3.0 tf/cm2 ) 45 / 60 / 75 / 90 / 105 / 120 / 135 3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 / 18 / 21 / 24
352.8 (=3.6 tf/cm2 ) 45 / 60 / 75 / 90 / 105 / 120 / 135 3 / 6 / 9 / 12 / 15 / 18 / 21 / 24
Total number of cases 168 cases

(b) Cyclic loading

294.0 (=3.0 tf/cm2 ) 60 / 75 / 90 6 / 12 / 18

352.8 (=3.6 tf/cm2 ) 60 / 75 / 90 6 / 12 / 18
Total number of cases 18 cases

models and the force–displacement curves attained from the

parametric numerical investigation of the J-dampers subjected
to monotonic loading.

3.1.1. Elastic stiffness

A J-damper can be idealized simply as shown in Fig. 5
for the derivation of its theoretical elastic stiffness. In this
model, a half-circle-shaped segment is represented by a curved
beam element. It is assumed that one end can move freely in
the horizontal direction without any vertical movement and
that the other end is fixed, though the latter is actually not.
This assumption for the elastic stiffness is acceptable under
infinitesimal deformation of the damper. It is also assumed
that only the bending moment effect is considered and the
effect of axial and shear deformations are neglected for the
convenience of calculation. Applying the unit load method
based on the principle of complementary virtual work, the
theoretical elastic stiffness of the damper, which relates the
force P to the displacement δ within its elastic range, can be
computed as

n
t 1
K1 = C × E × W × (1.1)
R 26
1 1
C= ≈ (1.2)
18π − π 96 26
where n is 3 and E is the modulus of elasticity.
Eq. (1) is expressed in a dimensionless form, and is then
linearized with the log function as



K1 t agreement with the numerical findings. Fig. 6(c) also shows that
Log = n × Log + Log (C) . (2)
E×W R
The linearized equation is compared with the nondimension-
alized FE results expressed with the log function in Fig. 6(a).
When log(t/R) ≤ −0.75 (denoted here by the A-area), the
theoretical elastic stiffness is in good agreement with the FE
results. When log(t/R) > −0.75 (denoted by the B-area), the
discrepancy between the equation and the numerical results, as
can be seen in Fig. 6(a), indicates that Eq. (1) cannot be adopted
in both the A-area and B-area without some modification. Vari-
ables C and n of Eq. (1) need be modified for the purpose of re-
ducing the discrepancy in the B-area. C = 1/41.6 and n = 2.75
Fig. 5. Analytical model of J-damper for elastic stiffness.
are obtained by applying the linear regression method on the ba-
sis of the data points located in the range of log(t/R) > −0.75.
Eq. (1) is used in the A-area as it is. The prediction equations
for elastic stiffness of a J-damper can therefore be defined for
log(t/R) ≤ −0.75 as

3
t
K1 = ×E×W × (3)
R
and for log(t/R) > −0.75 as

2.75
1 t
K1 = ×E×W × . (4)
41.6 R
According to Fig. 6(b), Eqs. (3) and (4) are in good
these equations can predict the elastic stiffness of a J-damper
accurately within an error range of 8% in both areas.
3.1.2. Yield strength
When a J-damper is subjected to monotonic or cyclic
loading, significant yielding is expected in the J-plate. Two
plastic zones develop in the upper and lower parts of the J-plate,
leading to a collapse mechanism. Visualization of the effective
plastic strain of the J-plate, as shown in Fig. 7, demonstrates
this mechanism when its displacement reaches a maximum
value of 15 cm monotonically. The analyzed J-plate in Fig. 7
has a yield stress of 294.0 N/mm2 , an internal radius of
806 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811

(a) Comparison of prediction Eq. (1) with numerical findings.

Fig. 7. Collapse mechanism of J-damper.

Fig. 7. According to the conservation of energy, the following

relationship can be established:
PP × δ P = 2 × M P × θ P . (5)

Here, M P and θ P denote the plastic moment and plastic

rotation, respectively. Provided that a J-plate is regarded as a
curved beam element, the plastic moment can be calculated
from
σY × W × t 2
MP = . (6)
4
The plastic displacement δ P can be expressed approximately
(b) Comparison of prediction Eqs. (3) and (4) with numerical in terms of the plastic rotation θ P as
findings.
δP ≈ 2 × R × θP . (7)
Substituting Eqs. (6) and (7) into Eq. (5), the ultimate force
PP can be obtained as

n
MP  t
PP = = C × σY × W × R × (8)
R R
where C  = 14 and n  = 2.
For the 168 cases subjected to monotonic loading, the
force–displacement curves of J-dampers can be modeled as
bi-linear models with the strain-hardening effect, as shown
in Fig. 8. For bi-linear modeling, the yield strength Q Y is
determined so as to render the C-area equal to the D-area after
(c) Accuracy of prediction Eqs. (3) and (4). the determination of K 1 and K 2 . The equality of the two areas
means that Q Y is determined such that the area under the bi-
Fig. 6. Prediction of elastic stiffness.
linear model is equal to the energy dissipated by a J-damper.
60 mm, and a thickness of 15 mm. The visualization was In such a circumstance, it is unreasonable that Eq. (8) should
implemented by a GID (pre-post processor) [10]. The extent of be used as a prediction equation for the yield strength of the
plastic zones may grow larger and larger under cyclic loading, bi-linear model, because the real behavior of a J-damper is
accompanied by an increasing displacement amplitude. It is different from the perfectly elasto-plastic one assumed above.
assumed that the two plastic zones are governed by only the For this reason, variables C  and n  of Eq. (8) need to be
strains associated with the flexure of a J-plate, and not by the modified for accurate prediction of the yield strength. In order
strain due to shear forces and axial forces. On the assumption to find proper values of the variables, Eq. (8) is expressed in a
that the damper exhibits perfectly elasto-plastic behavior, and dimensionless form and then linearized with the log function as



that its behavior concentrates on two plastic hinges, the ultimate QY  t  
Log = n × Log + Log C  . (9)
force PP can be derived from the collapse mechanism shown in σY × W × R R
 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811 807

Fig. 8. Force–displacement relationship for J-damper (r = 75 mm, t =

(a) Comparison of prediction Eq. (10) with numerical findings.
12 mm, σY = 294.0 N/mm2 ).

From the data points of Fig. 9(a) obtained in the parametric

analyses, it can be seen that log(Q Y /(σY × W × R)) has a linear
relationship with log(t/R). C  = 1/2.854 and n  = 2.091
are obtained by employing the linear regression method. The
prediction equation for the yield strength of a J-damper can
therefore be defined as

2.091
1 t
QY = × σY × W × R × . (10)
2.854 R

Fig. 9(a) shows that Eq. (10) is in close agreement with the
numerical results. From Fig. 9(b), we can also confirm that the
suggested equation can predict the yield strength for a bi-linear
model within an error range of about 10%.

3.1.3. Dimensionless hardening ratio (b) Accuracy of prediction Eq. (10).

The strain-hardening slope K 2 is often described with an
elastic stiffness K 1 and dimensionless hardening ratio K 12 . This Fig. 9. Prediction of yield strength.
paper focuses on the prediction of the dimensionless hardening
ratio rather than on the strain-hardening slope. Herein the
dimensionless hardening ratio is assumed to be

−n
K2  σY t
K 12 = =C × × (11)
K1 E R
where C  and n  are the undetermined variables. This
assumption is acceptable in that log(K 2 /(σY × W )) has an
approximate linear relationship with log(t/R), as shown in
Fig. 10. This means that K 2 can be expressed by an equation
similar to K 1 , except that the elastic modulus E is substituted
for the yield stress σY .
In each parametric analysis, K 2 is obtained by employing
the linear regression method for data points located in the
range between dmax /3 and dmax , as illustrated in Fig. 8. K 12
is obtained by dividing K 2 by K 1 , obtained previously. In Fig. 10. Strain-hardening slope K 2 .
Fig. 11(a), where log(t/R) and log(K 12 × E/σY ) are the
variables of the horizontal and vertical axes, it can be seen J-dampers with r = 45 mm are expected not to be used
that K 12 can be divided into three groups corresponding to frequently in constructions. The irregular distribution of data
internal radii r : r ≥ 75 mm; r = 60 mm; and r = 45 mm. points belonging to the third group may make it difficult to
The third group with r = 45 mm is excepted, because predict accurate values of K 12 . Thus, two prediction equations
808 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811

(a) Variation of dimensionless hardening ratio. (b) Comparison of prediction Eqs. (13) and (14) with numerical findings
(r
75 mm).

(c) Comparison of prediction Eq. (15) with numerical findings (d) Accuracy of prediction Eqs. (13)–(15).
(r = 60 mm).

Fig. 11. Prediction of dimensionless hardening ratio.

for K 12 are established: one for dampers with r ≥ 75 mm and n  = 0.956 in the F-area corresponding to the right side of
the other for dampers with r = 60 mm. the boundary. For the case r = 60 mm, C  = 1/2.518 and
In order to find the proper values for C  and n  in each n  = 0.876 were also obtained from a statistical analysis.
prediction equation, Eq. (11) is transformed into the following The equations for the dimensionless hardening ratio are
form: summarized as follows: for r ≥ 70 mm,



−0.956
K 12 × E t   K2 1 σY t
Log = −n  × Log + Log C  . (12) K 12 = = × × :
σY R K 1
2.298 E R
t
In both cases, the undetermined variables of Eq. (12) were log ≥ −1.485 (13)
obtained from statistical analysis, such as linear regression. R

−3.087
For the case r ≥ 75 mm, it is evident from Fig. 11(b) K2 1 σY t
K 12 = = × × :
that the distribution pattern of K 12 changes at a boundary of K 1
3403.35
 E R
log(t/R) ≈ −1.485. The data points appearing on both sides of t
log < −1.485 (14)
the boundary are distributed linearly but have different slopes. R
Two sets of variables can be obtained from a linear regression
and for 55 ≤ r < 70 mm,
analysis: C  = 1/3403.35 and n  = 3.087 in the E-area

−0.876
corresponding to the left side of the boundary represented by K2 1 σY t
a dotted vertical line of Fig. 11(b); and C  = 1/2.298 and K 12 = = × × . (15)
K1 2.518 E R
 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811 809

Fig. 11(d) shows the accuracy of the prediction equations.

It can be confirmed that, for the case log(t/R) ≥ −1.485 and
r ≥ 60 mm, Eqs. (13) and (15) can predict the dimensionless
hardening ratio within an error range of 20%. On the other
hand, for the case log(t/R) < −1.485, Eq. (14) provides a
poor prediction of the dimensionless hardening ratio for some
data points. However, because those points beyond an error
range of 20% correspond to the J-dampers with a thickness
of 3 mm, and such dampers are expected not to be used
frequently in construction, it is judged that Eq. (14) predicts
the dimensionless hardening ratio with sufficient accuracy.

3.2. Hysteresis model

Nonlinear FE analyses of 18 analyzed specimens subjected

to cyclic loading were performed in order to investigate the
Fig. 12. Hysteresis model.
cyclic behavior of J-dampers and to propose their hysteresis
model. Each of the analyzed specimens had only one J-
plate. For cyclic loading, the displacement amplitude increases
gradually to the maximum displacement amplitude dmax ,
defined as 0.9 × (L 2 × R), as mentioned in Section 2. The
loading history comprises dmax /6, dmax /3, dmax /2, 2dmax /3,
5dmax /6 and dmax cm displacement amplitudes, each of one
cycle.
As shown in Figs. 15 and 16, a cyclic hardening
phenomenon was observed in the hysteresis loops of all the
analyzed specimens, at the initial stage of cyclic loading. With
an increase in the displacement amplitude, the cyclic hardening
was converted into cyclic stability, such that the force amplitude
converges gradually to a stabilized value. This phenomenon
should be reflected in the definition of a hysteresis model.
The hysteresis model presented in Fig. 12 is introduced for
this intention. This model can express the distribution of yield
points in terms of the displacement amplitude by using straight
lines with a slope K L [11]. In addition, the hysteresis model Fig. 13. Scale reduction of yield strength.
is required to reflect the real energy dissipation capacity of the
damper. This requirement is met by controlling two variables
a real hysteresis loop and that within a bi-linear hysteresis
Q Y and K L so that the area contained within the modeled loop,
loop for all specimens. As seen in Fig. 14, for ψ = 5%
corresponding to the real hysteresis loop, should be equivalent
the energy dissipation capacity of bi-linear hysteresis model
to the energy dissipated by the damper under cyclic loadings.
is overestimated. It is judged that, if ψ and Q mod i are set to
The modified Q Y is denoted by Q mod i
= (1.0 − ψ) × Q Y , Y
Y 8–10% and (0.92–0.9)×Q Y respectively, the energy dissipation
where ψ is a scale down factor which represents the extent of
capacity expressed by the bi-linear hysteresis models can be
the reduction of Q Y . The values of K 1 , Q Y and K 2 for a bi-
estimated safely over the range 3 mm ≤ t ≤ 24 mm and
linear model are those obtained from the equations proposed in 45 mm ≤ r ≤ 135 mm. For eight selected cases, Figs. 15
Section 3.1. and 16 show the comparisons between the hysteresis loops
Based on the fact that the cyclic hardening effect is not based on FE simulation and bi-linear hysteresis loops plotted
so pronounced in the hysteresis behavior of most of the J- with K L = 0.01 kN/cm and Q mod i = 0.92 × Q . It can
Y Y
dampers, as shown in Figs. 15 and 16, it is assumed that K L be seen that the hysteresis behavior of the present J-dampers
is approximately 0.01 kN/cm for all the cases. Each Q mod Y
i
are well predicted by the suggested hysteresis model and the
or ψ that can meet the stated requirements with respect to present prediction equations for elastic stiffness, modified yield
each analyzed specimen is found by controlling the variable strength, dimensionless hardening ratio and the slope K L .
ψ (0.0 ≤ ψ < 1.0) under a condition that K L = 0.01 kN/cm,
and each ψ is plotted as a percentage in Fig. 13. From Fig. 13, 4. Considerations for design of J-dampers
5%, 8% and 10% are selected as the representative values
of ψ that can be applied commonly to all the cases. The Several considerations are made in the design of J-dampers.
appropriate value or range of ψ is determined by evaluating In order to avoid twisting of the semi-circular bend of a
the extent of the discrepancy between the area contained within J-plate under large displacement amplitudes, and to obtain the
810 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811

(a) t = 6 mm, r = 60 mm.

Fig. 14. Prediction of appropriate QY through comparison of both real and bi-
linear hysteresis loop areas.

stable hysteresis loops for which the hysteresis model based

on the present prediction equations can be applied, the width
of a J-plate should be greater than 5t. For practical reasons,
it is advisable that a condition of L 2 > r should be kept,
although there is no special theoretical reason to impose the
limitation on L 2 . Herein, it was assumed that L 1 /L 2 = 5/3,
but practically it matters little so long as L 1 ≥ L 2 . It is
desirable that the thickness and internal radius of J-plates are
3 mm ≤ t ≤ 24 mm and 45 mm ≤ r ≤ 135 mm for (b) t = 6 mm, r = 90 mm.
application of the prediction equations. If the thickness of a
J-plate is large and its internal radius is small, the hysteresis
behavior may not be predicted properly. This is because the
present prediction formulas did not reflect the residual stress
effects that may be induced under no annealing. Such adverse
factors should be practically considered in the design of the
J-damper with large thickness and small internal radius.

5. Conclusions

A comprehensive parametric analysis of J-dampers under

monotonic and cyclic loading, with large displacement
amplitudes, has been conducted using the FE program (c) t = 18 mm, r = 60 mm.
developed by authors. From this parametric study, the important
parameters governing the mechanical properties of a J-damper
have been identified and its mechanical behavior evaluated. A
hysteresis model for J-dampers has also been proposed.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The mechanical behavior of a J-damper is mostly influenced
by the thickness, internal radius and width of the J-plate,
together with its yield stress.
2. In the design of J-dampers made of mild steels, the formulas
that have been developed can be used to determine the elastic
stiffness, yield strength and dimensionless hardening ratio,
accounting for the strain-hardening effect.
3. The hysteresis behavior of J-dampers can be acceptably
(d) t = 18 mm, r = 90 mm.
predicted by the present formulation, which accounts
for cyclic hardening and energy dissipation under cyclic Fig. 15. Comparison of hysteresis loops (σY = 294.0 N/mm2 ): —- real loop;
loading. - - - - bi-linear loop.
 S. Kato, Y.-B. Kim / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 802–811
(a) t = 6 mm, r = 60 mm. (b) t = 6 mm, r = 90 mm.
(d) t = 18 mm, r = 90 mm.
Fig. 16. Comparison of hysteresis loops (σY = 352.8 N/mm2 ): —- real loop; - - - - bi-linear loop.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support provided by a Grant-
in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
under grant No. (C) 2-14550565 in 2004.
References
[1] Soong TT, Dargush GF. Passive energy dissipation systems in structural
engineering. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1997.
[2] Aiken ID, Nims KDK, Whittaker AS, Kelly JM. Testing of passive energy
dissipation systems. Earthq Spectra 1994;9:335–70.
[3] Kato S, Nakazawa S. Dynamic collapse characteristics of single layer
reticular domes with substructure absorbing seismic energy due to
strong earthquake motions. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 2001;548:81–8 [in
Japanese].
[4] Kasai K, Motoyui S, Ooki Y. A study on application of viscoelastic
dampers to a space frame and response characteristics under horizontal
ground motions. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ 2002;561:125–35 [in Japanese].
811
(c) t = 18 mm, r = 60 mm.
[5] Kato S, Nakazawa S, Uchikoshi M, Osugi F, Mukaiyama Y. Dynamic
response characteristics of domes with large span implemented by
hysteresis dampers for earthquake isolation. J Struct Constr Eng, AIJ
1999;518:57–64 [in Japanese].
[6] Kato S, Ohya T, Okamoto T, Takayama H. Efficiency of steel
hysteresis damers to suppress earthquake response of spatial structure. In:
Proceedings of IASS symposium. 2002, p. 583–90.
[7] Kato S, Kim Y-B, Nakazawa S, Ohya T. Simulation of the cyclic behavior
of J-shaped steel hysteresis devices and study on the efficiency for
reducing earthquake responses of spatial structures. J Constr Steel Res
2005;61:1457–73.
[8] Skinner RI, Kelly JM, Heine AJ. Hysteretic dampers for earthquake-
resistant structures. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 1975;3:287–96.
[9] Aguirre M, Sanchez AR. Structural seismic damper. J Struct Eng, ASCE
1990;118:1158–71.
[10] GID. The personal pre-post processor, version 7, user’s manual. Barcelona
(Spain): CIMNE; 2003.
[11] Ono Y, Kaneko H. Constitutive rule of the steel damper and source code
for the analysis programs. In: Proceedings of passive control symposium
2001, p. 163–70 [in Japanese].