Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcsr

Development and experimental verification of self-centering disc slit

damper for buildings
Asad Naeem a, b, *, Yusuke Maida a, Kusunoki Koichi a, Mohammad Mahdi Javidan c
a
Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
b
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences, Quetta, Pakistan
c
Department of Global Smart City, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The damage avoidance design (DAD) philosophy is oriented towards the low-damage design of building struc­
Hysteretic yielding damper tures compared to the previous conventional ductile design. Low-damage structures with supplemental damping
Slit damper and self-centering ability are one of the main aspects of the DAD philosophy to decrease irreparable damage and
Disc springs
enhance the seismic performance of structures. This research proposes an efficient, double-acting self-centering
Self-centering damper
Energy dissipation devices
hysteretic damper by combining the widely used steel slit dampers and prestressed disc springs for building
Seismic retrofit structures. The proposed seismic protection device is called Self-Centering Disc Slit Damper (SC-DSD), which
consists of two square standard hollow steel sections, nested together with an assembly of prestressed disc springs
within the steel sections. The performance of SC-DSD is assessed experimentally through a static cyclic loading
test to evaluate the global system's dissipation capacity, self-centering ability, and hysteresis loop. A simplified
numerical model is developed to predict the self-centering force-displacement relationship of the proposed de­
vice. Finally, the seismic force bearing capacity of the proposed damper is compared with the conventional slit
damper.

1. Introduction
The hysteretic or metallic-yielding seismic devices are considered to
dissipate earthquake-induced energy through stable hysteretic behavior
and mitigate damages to the main structural components of a building.
Therefore, the application of yielding steel slit dampers is considered an
efficient seismic protection system for buildings. They are widely used
for retrofitting of new and existing structures because of their ease of
manufacture, installation, and availability of design guidelines. The
added stiffness and dissipation capacity of steel triangular plates under
bending is studied in [1,2]. A steel slit damper made by cutting with
several slits in the web of a standard steel structural wide-flange section
which dissipates seismic energy through in-plane bending is found
elsewhere [3,4]. The experimental investigation using cyclic loading test
of steel slit damper plate and design of slit damper plate is discussed in
[5], and the seismic performance of a structure retrofitted with the slit
damper is evaluated using the shake table test is presented in [6]. The
steel slit dampers are installed in the beam-column connection to of steel
frame to improve the seismic dissipation capacity of the joints can be
found elsewhere [7].
Though slit damper provides stable hysteresis but the energy dissi­
pation capacity decreases with each cycle after yielding of steel strips.
Secondly, once the slit damper yields it can not return to its center po­
sition itself. Recently, research studies have been conducted to enhance
dissipation capacity and post-yield stiffness of steel plate slit dampers by
combining the slit damper with a rotational friction damper in parallel
can be found in [8]. The multi-slit damper has been developed by
combining weak and strong slit dampers in wall height plates which can
provide dissipation in two phases for medium and high-intensity
earthquakes and has been tested in different cyclic experiments and
studied in [9,10]. Box-shaped slit damper braces have been developed to
increase the dissipation of slit dampers while keeping the size of the
damper small can be found elsewhere [11].
Various seismic self-centering seismic energy dissipation systems
have been developed, tested, and applied to reduce the seismic residual
drift in the structures. Mostly in these systems, energy is dissipated using
conventional dissipation devices such as friction dampers, metallic
yielding dampers, braces, or viscous dampers; and the capability of
recentering is provided either using prestressing cables or tendons,
shape memory alloys, or double-acting spring systems [12–19].

* Corresponding author at: Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
E-mail address: asad.naeem@buitms.edu.pk (A. Naeem).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107759
Received 5 October 2022; Received in revised form 12 December 2022; Accepted 26 December 2022
Available online 29 December 2022
0143-974X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Naeem et al.
Recently, researchers are trying to develop self-centering passive
dampers using the metallic disc springs as a potential alternative to
provide the recentering force. For instance, the stack of disc springs is
prestressed and combined with friction dampers or they are used as a
structural connector to provide self-centering for the global structural
system can be found elsewhere [20,21]. The application of disc springs
for developing the self-centering friction brace and the self-centering
buckling-restrained brace are examples of such devices studied in
[22,23]. Disc springs are suitable for seismic dampers as they provide
adequate structural capacity and can tolerate large deformation with
recentering ability. They are easily available in a large variety of sizes
and can be easily installed, and there are no issues of unexpected slip­
page of anchorage and loss of tension as in the case of prestressed cables.
This research aims to develop a self-centering hysteretic damper by
utilizing the stable energy dissipation ability of a slit damper and
combining it with the recentering ability of disc springs. The proposed
Self-Centering Disc Slit Damper (SC-DSD) has four slit dampers in a
square steel section installed with the prestressed two stacks of disc
springs. The configuration of the device is relatively small sizes and it
can produce a large damping force, higher bear capacity, and recen­
tering ability. In this paper, the components and working mechanism of
SC-DSD are explained and equations for the design of the proposed de­
vice are determined. The designed prototype SC-DSD is manufactured
and tested using an actuator to obtain its characteristics of hysteresis
curve and energy dissipation capacity. The analytical model of the SC-
DSD is proposed in structural analysis software and the bearing capac­
ity of the proposed device is compared with the conventional slit damper
(SD).
Fig. 1. Exploded view with assembly sequence of the self-centering disc slit damper (SC-DSD).
2
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759
2. Configuration of self-centering disc slit damper (SC-DSD)
The exploded perspective view of the SC-DSD with the assembly
sequence is shown in Fig. 1. The SC-DSD is composed of four slit
dampers cut out of a boxed-shaped Hollow Structural Section (HSS). The
slit dampers are cut into the outer steel section and the section is
assembled in a telescopic configuration with the inner steel section. One
end of the slit damper on each side of the outer section is welded to the
facing side of the inner steel box. The relative movement of the outer box
and the inner box causes flexural yielding of the steel strips of the slit
dampers and initiates the energy dissipation mechanism in the device.
The open end of the slit damper can be plug welded or bolted to the inner
box. The two stacks of the Belleville disc springs which are preloaded
with the threaded rod and nuts are installed inside the hollow steel
sections to provide the recentering force in an axial direction. The pre­
loading is applied by tightening the high-strength nut and washer at the
end of each stack of disc springs, each stack is held by the limiting plates.
The capping plate is welded or bolted on the top of the inner box while
the base is welded at the bottom of the outer section.
The preloading force in each stack of springs should be equal to or
higher than the yield force of the combined slit damper to have the
recentering capacity. The post-yield stiffness of the slit damper is rela­
tively less, disc springs can provide the additional post-yield stiffness
and enhance the bearing capacity and restore the device to its original
position. The disc springs are available in a broad range of sizes and can
be easily stacked in different layouts of series and parallel arrangements
to achieve the suitable design deformation and restoring force, which
will be further discussed in the next section.
A. Naeem et al.
Depending on the application of the proposed device, various con­
figurations can be designed for the SC-DSD, including tension-only,
compression-only, and double-acting self-centering devices. In the
following section, the performance of a double-acting SC-DSD device is
discussed in more detail.
3. Theoretical of formulation SC-DSD
3.1. Fundamental systems of SC-DSD
The energy dissipation component of the proposed device consists of
many steel strips on four sides of the outer steel section which are
combined to form four slit dampers. The slit dampers with the design
parameters are shown in Fig. 2. The in-plane stiffness of the slit dampers
subjected to horizontal shear force can be obtained assuming that strips
are fully restrained from rotation at the ends. The stiffness Ks and yield
strength Fy,slit of the slit damper can be calculated as shown in Eq. (1),
and Eq. (2).
( ) ( )
Ks = 4 n 3
12EI
=4 n 3
Etb3
(1)
lo lo
( )
2nMy 2nσ y tb2
Fy,slit = 4 = (2)
lo lo
where n is the total number of steel strips on each side, t is the thickness
of steel strips, b is the width and lo is the length of the strip. At the
yielding moments My hinges start to form at both ends of the steel strips.
Further displacement causes the strips to enter the plastic region from
which the slit damper cannot come to original position if the loading is
removed. The maximum displacement of the slit damper can be taken as
20 times the yield displacement as the fracture point for strips. More
details about the design of the slit damper are presented elsewhere [5].
The self-centering ability of the proposed device is composed of two
stacks of prestressed disc springs retained by limiting plates. The lower
stack of disc springs is installed in the outer box and the upper stack is
inside the inner box. Both stacks of disc springs are prestressed at the
initial state using the nuts and threaded rod to provide recentering force
Fig. 2. Configuration of a slit damper trimmed in the outer section.
3
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759
for the device during the unloading. The restoring force increases in the
disc spring with an increasing relative displacement of the steel strips of
the slit damper. Two stacks of prestressed disc springs can provide the
self-centering capability to the proposed damping device both in the
tension and compression stage.
The design parameters of the disc springs are particularly critical for
the properties of the self-centering capacity of the proposed device.
Every single disc has a specific maximum deformation and a corre­
sponding load capacity, the maximum load which it can bear is called a
flatness load because at this load the disc becomes flat. The dimensional
parameters of the disc spring, parallel and series layout configuration of
discs, and photographs of the disc spring and stack, are shown in Fig. 3.
The travel stroke of the spring stacked can be increased by mounting the
disc in a series configuration while the load-carrying capacity can be
increased a by placing more discs in a parallel layout in a stack are
explained in Fig. 4. The serial stacking of springs will regulate the
deflection of the stack without change in restoring force and parallel
stacking will account for the restoring force of the set disc springs. The
restoring force provided by the one stack of springs is calculated using
Eq. (3).
′ [ ( )( ) ]
m 4E ts 3 2 f 2 h0 f h0 f
Fr = ⋅ ⋅ ⋅M ⋅ M ⋅ − − + 1
1 − fM (m − 1) − fR 1 − μ2 M1 D2 4 t 4
t t t 2t
(3)
At a certain displacement, the Fr is the restoring force provided either
by bottom or top stack of disc springs which are further compressed
when the device is in compression or tension. In Eq. (3), m is the number
of disc springs installed in parallel configuration in one stack. Further­
more, the parameter fM is the friction coefficient on the inclined top side
of disc spring in parallel, while fR is the friction coefficient at the bearing
edge of the disc springs in series, E′ is Young's modulus of the disc
springs, μ is the Poisson's ratio, and t and h0 are the thickness and solid
height of one section of the disc spring without a bearing surface,
respectively. When the springs are stacked in the proposed damping
device t and h0 are replaced with t' and h'0 are the thickness and solid
height of one section of the disc springs with a bearing surface respec­
tively, Whereas M1 and M2 are the coefficients of disc springs, details can
be found elsewhere [24].
Therefore, the maximum deformation capacity or stroke for the SC-
DSD also depends on the maximum travel of the stack of disc springs.
Each disc has a defined ultimate deformation state δf at which the disc
spring is completely flat under full compression. The flattening force Fs
corresponding to the δf, is used to obtain the deformation due to pre­
stressing of the spring stack.
By considering i springs with a series layout, their maximum
displacement δmax is calculated using Eq. (4). Therefore, the stiffness of
the series disc springs Kds can be obtained using Eq. (5).
δmax = iδf (4)
Fs Fs
Kds = = (5)
δmax i × δf
The deformation δp due to the preloading force Fp on the stack of the
springs can be obtained using Eq. (6) and Eq. (7).
Fp = Kds δp (6)
δf
δp = iFp (7)
Fs
The maximum displacement of the stack of disc springs δult which can
be presented by the equation below:
( )
Fp Fp
δult = δmax − δp = iδf − iδf = iδf 1 − (8)
Fs Fs
The above equations can be utilized to calculate the prestressing
A. Naeem et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

Fig. 3. Schematic of disc spring and stack of disc springs with limiting plates.

Fig. 4. Parallel and series combinations of disc springs and their load-displacement characteristics.

displacement and hence the maximum stroke of the SC-DSD until the
maximum travel of the disc spring stack.
3.2. Mechanical behavior of the SC-DSD device
The simplified mechanism of the proposed SC-DSD device under
undeformed, tension, and compression states is depicted in Fig. 5. The
shaded area in green is the yielding segment of the slit damper which is
cut into the four sides of the outer steel box. The undeformed state and
two working stages of the SC-DSD are shown in Fig. 5(a), (b) and (c). As
shown in the figure, the two stacks of springs are prestressed by the bolt
and limiting plates. The activated SC-DSD will always result in further
compression of one of the spring stacks, whether the movement of the
damper is in tension or compression.
The combination of the disc spring and slit damper produces multiple
stiffnesses to occur within one hysteresis loop, which is one of the unique

4
A. Naeem et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

no longer considered after the SC-DSD is activated.

At the beginning of the loading stage, the forces inside the slit
dampers and disc springs are increased with the increase of the external
force. The activation of the SC-DSD refers to the force Fp when the initial
compression force exerted by the preloaded disc springs is completely
overcome. The equivalent force corresponding to the damper displace­
ment is called F0 as mentioned in Eq. (9) and Fig. 6, whereas the Fy, slit,
and Fp is the yielding force of the slit damper and preloading force of the
spring stack. The complete self-centering behavior will occur as long as
the initial pre-compression force in the spring stack is greater than the
yielding force of the all slit dampers of the SC-DSD device this phe­
nomenon is depicted in Fig. 7.
F0 = Fy,slit + Fp (9)

The initial stiffness K1 and the activation deformation denoted as

δ0 of the SC-DSD are shown below in Eq. (10) and Eq. (11):
1 1 1 1
= + + (10)
K1 Kd1 + Kds Kp Kbr

F0
δ0 = (11)
K1

where Kd1 is the initial stiffness of the slit damper before yielding, Kds is
the stiffness of the disc springs, Kp denotes the stiffness of limiting plates
and Kbr is the stiffness of the connecting bracing members. However, the
stiffness of the brace and limiting plates are relatively larger than the
dissipation device and the springs.
When the force F exceeds the activation force F0, the energy dissi­
pation and the self-centering system of the device are activated, and the

F
Fp y,slit

Fp y,slit
Fig. 5. Mechanics and working principles of SC-DSD.

features of a recentering damper. The flag-shaped hysteretic response in

different stages of loading and unloading can be theoretically predicted
using the pre-defined stiffnesses, as shown in the full hysteresis loop in
Fig. 6. All the stiffnesses listed in Fig. 6, can be determined according to Fp y,slit
the geometries and materials specified in the design requirements. For
the simplicity of the derivation of governing equation, some assump­
tions are considered: 1) the axial deformation of the inner steel box and
capping plates at the top and bottom of sections are not considered due
to the large stiffness compared to the dissipation element; 2) frictional
forces due to the relative motion of the inner and outer box are assumed
Fig. 7. Effect of prestressing force on flag-shaped hysteretic behavior SC-DSD.
negligible; and 3) additional deformation of the load transfer elements is

Fig. 6. Force-displacement relationship: (a) recentering element; (b) hysteretic device; (c) flag-shaped hysteresis.

5
A. Naeem et al.
post-yield stiffness of the slit damper and the spring stiffness of the disc
springs is equal to the K2. The axial deformation δ due to the axial force F
at this stage is given by Eq. (12):
F = F0 + (δ − δ0 ).K2 (12)
During the unloading, when the force is reversed or removed at point
C, the yielding part of steel strips is unloaded first to its zero force. After
this, the steel strips of the damper are reversely loaded to its negative-
yielding force because of the recentering force provided by the stack
of disc springs. The unloading force is twice the yielding force of the
damper. The corresponding unloading stiffness will be equal to K1, and
the self-centering disc springs will eventually be restored to their initial
prestressed state without residual deformation.
Finally, the degree of ductility can be expressed as the ratio of acti­
vation displacement to ultimate displacement before the rupture of the
steel strips which is taken 20 times the yielding of the slit damper or the
stroke of damper, by Eq. (13).
δult
μ= (13)
δo
4. Cyclic loading test of SC-DSD
The purpose to perform the cyclic loading test is to evaluate the
global hysteretic response, energy dissipation capacity, and reduction in
the residual displacement of the proposed SC-DSD. The displacement-
controlled loading test was carried out because SC-DSD is mainly a
displacement-dependent device that dissipates energy by yielding the
steel strips. Moreover, an experimental benchmark is established to
facilitate the calibration of the parameters of the analytical model for the
proposed damper to predict the self-centering hysteresis with more
precision for future analyses. This section begins with the details of the
SC-DSD prototype and its material and next, the test setup, configura­
tion, and test procedure are described. In the last part of this section, the
test results, and the analytical simulations are compared and discussed.
4.1. Details of the proposed SC-DSD prototype
The SC-DSD prototype is manufactured using two (HSS) steel sec­
tions, selected from the Japanese JIS G 3466 standard. The HSS sections
consist of SBHS 400 steel with a yield strength of 400 MPa and tensile
strength of 490–640 MPa. The box-shaped sections are HSS 200 × 200 ×
12 mm for the outer box and the inner section is HSS 175 × 175 × 9 mm.
The total yield strength of the designed four slit dampers is 64 kN
Fig. 8. Details of SC-DSD prototype: (a) dimensions and details of the prototype; (b) photo of prototype.
6
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759
which consists of 32 strips, with 8 strips trimmed into each side of the
outer box. The thickness t of each strip is 10 mm, the width b of 10 mm,
and the length of 100 mm with a radius of 5 mm at the end of the strips.
The open end of the slit damper plates is connected to the inner section
through five plug welds with a diameter of 10 mm.
Each stack of disc springs in the prototype consists of 16 discs with an
outer diameter of 125 mm, an inner diameter of 64 mm, and a thickness
of 8 mm. The disc springs are made of Japanese JIS SUP 10 steel which is
high carbon alloy spring steel with good performance under cyclic
loading conditions. Each stack consists of 2 discs in parallel configura­
tion and 8-steps in series to provide the maximum travel of 26 mm with
the maximum load of 270 kN. Due to the limitation, the torque wrench is
used to prestress each stack of springs with 64 kN of force, and the stacks
travels 5.6 mm after the prestressing. The dimensions and details of the
prototype are shown in Fig. 8(a) and the photo of the prototype before
the test is shown in Fig. 8(b).
4.2. Test setup and equipment
The efficacy of the proposed damper is investigated by performing
the displacement-based cyclic loading test on the prototype. The axial
displacements are applied using the 5000 kN hydraulic actuator as
shown in Fig. 9(a). The top of the prototype is connected with the load
cell using the pin connection, whereas the bottom base plate is fixed
using M20 bolts to the strong floor. The displacement vs force data was
measured using the depicted load cell and two linear variable differen­
tial transformers (LVDTs) placed at the two corners of the prototype.
Strain gauges are installed on the steel strips of the slit dampers to
measure and validate the yield strain in the steel strips, and they are also
indicated in the photo of the test setup shown in Fig. 9(b).
The loading protocol used for the quasi-static cyclic loading test is
according to the FEMA-461 [25] as shown in Fig. 10. The minimum
displacement is set to be 1 mm and then the amplitude is increased by
1.4 times the previous one. There are a total of 10 increment steps in
amplitude and each step consists of two cycles. The maximum
displacement is selected to be 20 mm which is the maximum stroke of
the prototype in tension and compression. The loading rate is selected to
be 1 mm/min for the first 8 cycles and after that, the rate was increased
to 2 mm/min till the end of the test.
4.3. Test results and discussion
The force-displacement hysteresis loop of the SC-DSD prototype
under the cyclic loading is depicted in Fig. 11, where it can be observed
A. Naeem et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

Fig. 9. Detail of test setup: (a) configuration of test setup; (b) locations of strain gauges and LVDTs for test.

Fig. 10. Applied cyclic loading protocol for test.

the resulting flag-shaped hysteresis loop shows self-centering behavior.

The average maximum capacity of the prototype for positive and
negative directions is 264 kN at a displacement of 10.9 mm. The self-
centering effect of the prestressed disc springs can be observed with a
Fig. 11. Hysteresis curves of self-centering disc slit damper obtained from
significant reduction in residual deformation of the SC-DSD. During the loading test.
first 10 cycles of the test residual deformation ranges from 0.03 mm to
0.56 mm and the maximum residual deformation observed was 2.1 mm
stiffness transition zone. This frictional force resulted due to the sliding
during the unloading of the last cycle.The cyclic test was ended during
of surfaces between the inner box and the outer box. The sliding
the 16th cycle at the displacement of 13.8 mm due to the limitation of
occurred due to the symmetric welding of the slit damper plates on the
the connecting jig which begin to elongate. The increase in the residual
opposite sides causing the external moment at the corner of the inner
deformation in the tension is because of the limitation of the current
box cause tilting as depicted in Fig. 12 (a). The pin connection at the top
design in which the upper connection is made with M 20 Bolt. During the
of the prototype also aided in tilting the inner box which leads to friction
unloading of device from tension there are other uncertain residula
between the two boxes. The final state of the prototype and deformed
displacement from the connecting bolts and limiting plates.
steel strips at the displacement of 13.8 mm during the last cycle, are
The overall working mechanism of the prototype and the force-
shown in Fig. 12 (b).
displacement relationship comply with the discussion in Section 3.2.
The test result shows that the slit damper part of the prototype acts
The loading in tension shows the predicted flag-shaped behavior and the
stably during the cyclic loading, dissipating a significant amount of
slit dampers begin to activate and start to dissipate the energy after
energy. The local buckling or out-of-plane buckling is not observed in
overcoming the prestress force which was 64 kN. It is observed that the
the slit plates and the plug weld remained intact. All the disc springs,
yielding force of the prototype is 127.8 kN as designed and the yield
internal M30 rod, prestressing nuts, and limiting plates remained elastic
displacement is 1.45 mm. However, during the loading in compression,
till the end of the test as per the designed. Further more, the acceptable
it is observed that the frictional force has affected the hysteresis in the

7
A. Naeem et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

Fig. 12. Photographs of test: (a) Friction sliding corner of the inner box over the outer box; (b) deformed steel strips of the prototype after the test.

Fig. 13. Analytical model of SC-DSD: (a) schematic nonlinear analytical model; (b) behavior of each element and complete hysteretic loop of model.

8
A. Naeem et al.
residual deformation of the SC-DSD with properly designed connections
should range from 0.56 mm. Furthermore, self-centering behavior of the
proposed device can be improved by following modifications; 1) The
welding of the slit damper to the inner section should not be symmetrical
on the opposite sides; 2) Both the top and bottom connections should be
designed as fixed with bolts rather than pin connection and 3) High
strength bolts can also be used as an alternative to blug-weld the slid
damper and inner box.
The SC-DSD is relatively smaller in size with a large dissipation ca­
pacity compared to conventional slit dampers, making it more suitable
for the retrofitting of existing buildings. The conventional slit damper
required extra steel frame or large steel plates to be installed in the
existing structure. The total weight of the proposed damper is 80 kg,
which can be installed with one brace element. If post-earthquake repair
of the device is required only the outer box needs to be replaced.
Moreover, 75% reusability of parts of the SC-DSD, implies that it is a
cost-effective and environmentally sustainable solution for the seismic
protection and retrofitting of building structures.
5. Analytical model and simulation of test
The analytical model of the SC-DSD is developed in the structural
analysis software “Perform 3D”. The analytical model consists of three
types of nonlinear elements in a scheme shown in Fig. 13 (a), which are
the Plastic Wen element combined with the Multi Linear Elastic (MLE)
and Multi Linear Plastic (MLP) element in parallel configuration [26].
The energy dissipation characteristics of the SC-DSD are modeled with
the Bouc-Wen model (Plastic Wen Element) because it is a widely used
approach to predict the hysteretic loop of yielding dampers [27,28]. The
initial stiffness and post-yield stiffness of the slit damper of the SC-DSD
are modeled using the Bouc-wen model. The self-centering behavior of
preloaded springs can be reflected using MLE + MLP elements. The ef­
fect of prestressed stack of disc springs has a bilinear response, initial
force is required to overcome the prestress force after this restoring force
increases linearly with the increased displacement of disc springs. The
unloading stiffness of the disc spring stack is approximately 90% of the
loading stiffness with the complete recentering ability and without
strength reduction [24]. In addition, the disc spring stack exhibits a
small energy dissipation capacity because of the contact friction be­
tween the discs. The force-displacement relationship of each element is
presented in Fig. 13(b), which leads to a multilinear curve of the
analytical model in a way that area under the idealized curve and the
actual curve remain the same.
The combined model exhibits the trilinear behavior. The initial
stiffness before the prestressing force is governed by MLE element, it
takes the prestressing force. Once the prestressing force is over come,
stiffnesses of these combined elements are modeled in such a manner
that it is equal to the initial stiffness K1 of the whole system. After the
yielding of the Bouc-Wen element, the stiffness of the system is
controlled by the stiffness of the MLE spring which is equivalent to the
spring stiffness and post-yield stiffness of the slit damper. The energy
dissipation of the system and unloading transition is governed by the
Bouc-Wen and MLP elements. MLP accounts for the energy dissipation
contribution due to the springs. The deformation of each element should
be equal to the yield displacement of the device. Moreover, the initial
theoretical stiffnesses, i.e. K1, in the stiffness transition zone are over­
estimated. The main reason for the overestimation is that the effects of
the elastic and local plastic deflection induced by the other load transfer
parts, for instance, the limiting plates, threaded rod and top and bottom
connecting plates, cannot be precisely estimated by an analytical model.
The nonlinear Hook-Spring and Gap-Spring links incorporated in the
model are used to confine the SC-DSD to work in the designed stroke
range of the device under both tension and compression.
The force-displacement relationship from the analytical model is
compared with the results obtained from the cyclic loading test of the
SC-DSD. The resulting prediction of the hysteresis loop is shown in
9
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759
Fig. 14. Comparison of hysteresis loop obtained from cyclic loading test and
the analytical model.
Fig. 14, a reasonable agreement is observed between the analytical
model and experimental results. As shown in the figure, the over­
estimated theoretical initial stiffness agrees well with the experimental
results. During the loading in tension, the hysteresis curve of the
analytical model can predict the increasing peak load and the residual
deformation during the unloading path accurately. However, during the
compression, the frictional force due to the sliding of the inner and outer
steel section is ignored in the analytical model, due to which the loading
and unloading curve are similar in both directions and has moved up
towards the center compared to the test results. The maximum predic­
tion error that occurred in the load-bearing capacity of the analytical
model compared to the test specimen is 1.5% in tension loading. The
average positive and negative direction peak load and residual de­
formations of the specimen and the analytical model are listed in
Table 1.
The initial stiffness is the sum of the stiffness of the connecting bolt
and steel plates when the external force is less than the pre-stressing
force of the disc springs. Once the SC-DSD has been activated, the
stiffness of the damper is predominantly determined by the stack of disc
spring stiffness and the post-yield stiffness of the slit damper.
The cumulative dissipated energy obtained from the hysteresis of the
prototype and the analytical model of the SC-DSD is compared in Fig. 15.
This demonstrates that the area enclosed by the hysteresis loop of the
analytical model can accurately predict the dissipative capacity of the
proposed damper under cyclic loading. Fig. 15 also shows the cumula­
tive energy dissipated of the conventional SD It is interesting to mention,
that even though the observed cumulative dissipated energy of the SC-
DSD system is 18% higher than that of the conventional SD. The po­
tential of introducing disc springs can be observed in enhancing the
load-bearing capacity (peak load) of the SC-DSD systems. Compared to
the conventional SD, the peak load of SC-DSD increased at an average of
65% for each peak displacement as depicted in Fig. 16. The proposed SC-
DSD has enough bearing capacity and post-yielding stiffness to dissipate
energy during a strong earthquake. With the properly designed recen­
tering ability of the SC-DSD, a building structure might have negligible
permanent lateral drifts with minimum repair and replacement after a
seismic event.
6. Conclusion
In this research, the self-centering disc slit damper is developed and
investigated using the cyclic loading test of a prototype and analytical.
The SC-DSD device consists of two standard boxed-shaped steel sections
A. Naeem et al. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759

Table 1
Residual deformations and peak load at each increment steps obtained from cyclic loading test and the analytical model of SC-DSD.
No. of step Amplitude of cycle (mm) Number of cycles Speed (mm/min) Avg. Peak load (kN) Avg. Residual deformation (mm)

Experiment Analytical Experiment Analytical

1 1 2 1 97 98 0.03 0.03
2 1.5 2 1 130 115 0.13 0.05
3 2.5 2 1 152 142 0.26 0.10
4 2.9 2 2 166 154 0.42 0.25
5 4 2 2 185 170 0.56 0.40
6 5.6 2 2 200 192 0.85 0.85
7 7.8 2 2 228 217 1.15 1.56
8 10.9 2 2 264 258 1.85 1.80

hysteresis loop and small residual deformation. The results of the

experiment were simulated using the analytical model developed in the
Perform 3D software and the analytical model was verified by comparing
the results from the analysis and experiment. The seismic force bearing
capacity of the proposed device is significanlt higher, when compared
with the conventional steel slit damper. Hence, the SC-DSD is an effi­
cient and sustainable self-centering seismic protection device for
buildings.
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2022.107759.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgment

Fig. 15. Accumulated energy dissipation obtained from the cyclic loading test Long-Term Visiting Program, Earthquake Research Institute, The
and analytical model of SC-DSD and conventional SD. University of Tokyo, Japan.

References

Fig. 16. Load bearing capacity of proposed SC-DSD and conventional SD.
combined in a telescopic configuration with prestressed disc spring
stacks installed within steel boxes. The steel strips of the damper yield
under in-plane bending moments and dissipate seismic energy when it is
subjected to axial displacements. The working mechanism of the pro­
posed device is described with the assembly and design details. The
displacement-based static cyclic test was performed on the prototype
and the details of the experiment were described and the results and
design limitations were discussed. The test of the prototype showed that
the SC-DSD had a stable energy dissipation capacity with the flag-shaped
[1] A. Whittaker, /Earthquake simulator testing of steel plate added damping, Earthq.
Eng. (1989 Jan) Report No. UCB/EERC-89/02.
[2] C.S. Tsai, K.C. Chen, C.S. Chen, Seismic resistibility of high-rise buildings with
combined velocity-dependent and velocity-independent devices, ASME-
Publications-PVP. 366 (1998) 103–110.
[3] T. Kobori, Y. Miura, E. Fukusawa, T. Yamada, T. Arita, Y. Takenake, N. Miyagawa,
N. Tanaka, T. Fukumoto, Development and application of hysteresis steel dampers,
in: Proceedings of the 10th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 1992,
pp. 2341–2346.
[4] A. Benavent-Climent, Seismic Design of Structures by Using Brace-Type Hysteretic
Dampers, University of Tokyo (Japan), 1998.
[5] R.W. Chan, F. Albermani, Experimental study of steel slit damper for passive
energy dissipation, Eng. Struct. 30 (4) (2008) 1058–1066.
[6] A. Benavent-Climent, L. Morillas, D. Escolano-Margarit, Seismic performance and
damage evaluation of a reinforced concrete frame with hysteretic dampers through
shake-table tests, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 43 (15) (2014 Dec) 2399–2417.
[7] A. Köken, M.A. Köroğlu, Experimental study on beam-to-column connections of
steel frame structures with steel slit dampers, J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 29 (2)
(2013) 04014066.
[8] J. Lee, J. Kim, Seismic performance evaluation of moment frames with slit-friction
hybrid dampers, Earthq. Struct. 9 (6) (2015) 1291–1311.
[9] A. Naeem, J. Kim, Seismic performance evaluation of a multi-slit damper, Eng.
Struct. 189 (2019 Jun 15) 332–346.
[10] M.M. Javidan, M.S. Nasab, J. Kim, Full-scale tests of two-story RC frames
retrofitted with steel plate multi-slit dampers, Steel Compos. Struct. 39 (5) (2021
Jun 10) 645–664.
[11] J. Lee, J. Kim, Development of box-shaped steel slit dampers for seismic retrofit of
building structures, Eng. Struct. 150 (2017) 934–946.
[12] F.G. Golzar, G.W. Rodgers, J.G. Chase, Design and experimental validation of a re-
centring viscous dissipater, in: Structures, Elsevier, 2018.
[13] P. Chi, et al., Development of a self-centering tension-only brace for seismic
protection of frame structures, Steel Compos. Struct. 26 (5) (2018) 573–582.
[14] C. Christopoulos, et al., Posttensioned energy dissipating connections for moment-
resisting steel frames, J. Struct. Eng. 128 (9) (2002) 1111–1120.

10
A. Naeem et al.
[15] E. Nobahar, et al., A post-tensioned self-centering yielding brace system:
development and performance-based seismic analysis, Struct. Infrastruct. Eng.
1–21 (2020).
[16] A. Naeem, J. Kim, Seismic retrofit of a framed structure using damped cable
systems, Steel Compos. Struct. 29 (3) (2018 Jan 1) 287–299.
[17] A. Naeem, J. Kim, Seismic performance evaluation of a spring viscous damper
cable system, Eng. Struct. 176 (2018 Dec 1) 455–467.
[18] A. Naeem, J. Kim, Seismic retrofit of 3000 kVA power transformer using friction
dampers and prestressed tendons, Structures. 32 (2021 Aug 1) 641–650.
[19] A. Naeem, M.N. Eldin, J. Kim, Seismic performance evaluation of a structure
retrofitted using steel slit dampers with shape memory alloy bars, Int. J. Steel
Struct. 17 (4) (2017) 1627–1638.
[20] W. Wang, et al., Performance assessment of disc spring-based self-centering braces
for seismic hazard mitigation, Eng. Struct. 242 (2021), 112527.
[21] C. Fang, W. Wang, D. Shen, Development and experimental study of disc
spring–based self-centering devices for seismic resilience, J. Struct. Eng. 147 (7)
(2021) 04021094.
11
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 201 (2023) 107759
[22] L. Xu, X. Fan, Z. Li, Hysteretic analysis model for pre-pressed spring self-centering
energy dissipation braces, J. Struct. Eng. 144 (7) (2018 Jul 1) 04018073.
[23] L.H. Xu, X.W. Fan, D.C. Lu, Z.X. Li, Hysteretic behavior studies of self-centering
energy dissipation bracing system, Steel Compos. Struct. 20 (6) (2016) 1205–1219.
[24] J.O. Almen, A. Laszlo, The uniform-section disk spring, Trans. ASME 58 (4) (1936)
305–314.
[25] FEMA, Prestandard, Interim Testing Protocols for Determining the Seismic
Performance Characteristics of Structural and Nonstructural Components (FEMA
461)., Federal Energency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 2007.
[26] PERFORM, 3D User Manual (v5. 0.1), Computer and Structures, Berkeley, CA,
2011.
[27] M. Ismail, F. Ikhouane, J. Rodellar, The hysteresis Bouc-wen model, a survey,
Archives Comp. Methods Eng. 16 (2) (2009 Jun 1) 161–188.
[28] J. Song, A. Der Kiureghian, Generalized Bouc–Wen model for highly asymmetric
hysteresis, J. Eng. Mech. 132 (6) (2006 Jun) 610–618.