International Journal of Steel Structures 16(3): 671-683 (2016)

DOI 10.1007/s13296-015-0134-9
ISSN 1598-2351 (Print)
ISSN 2093-6311 (Online)

www.springer.com/journal/13296

A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel

Considering the Bauschinger Effect
Satoshi Yamada1 and Yu Jiao2,*
1
Structural Engineering Research Center, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama 226-8503, Japan
2
Faculty of Engineering, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo 125-0051, Japan

Abstract

This study proposes a concise hysteretic model of structural steel that is effective at simulating the mechanical behaviour of
steel components. A series of plate element specimens made of SS400 structural steel were tested under diverse cyclic axial
strain loadings. The hysteresis loops of the specimens are decomposed into skeleton curves and Bauschinger parts. The
hysteretic model, which is composed of the skeleton curve, the Bauschinger part, and the elastic unloading part, is proposed
based on the test results. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed hysteretic model, three simply supported beam specimens
were tested under cyclic loadings. In addition, numerical analyses of the beams were performed using the proposed hysteretic
model. The analytical results were compared with the experimental results, and the overall load-deformation relationships and
the local strain histories show a good correspondence.

Keywords: hysteretic model, cyclic loading, energy dissipation, skeleton curve, Bauschinger part

1. Introduction accepted as skeleton curve in the analysis of structural

Ductile fracturing is one of the failure modes of
structural components under extreme seismic effects and,
which is likely to lead to severe damage or even failure
of steel structures. The plastic deformation capacity and
energy dissipation capacity of structural components such
as beams have been studied for several decades. Most of
the related research is based on the results of structural
experiments, which cost a large amount of financial and
human resources. On the other hand, it is impossible to
cover all the relevant parameters in the experiments.
Structural analysis is commonly adopted in many cases,
to overcome the limitations of experiments.
The uniaxial hysteretic constitutive model of structural
steel under cyclic loading is the basic of steel structural
analyses. Bauschinger was the first to carry out cyclic
loading tests of steel, who established two extreme values
for the yield point and discovered Bauschinger effect
(Bauschinger, 1886). Ramberg and Osgood proposed a
three-parameter stress-strain relationship which has been
Received August 25, 2015; accepted January 29, 2016;
published online September 30, 2016
© KSSC and Springer 2016
*Corresponding author
Tel: +81-3-5876-1717, Fax: +81-3-3609-3876
E-mail: yjiao.sjtu.titech@gmail.com, yujiao@rs.tus.ac.jp
steel (Ramber and Osgood, 1943). This model shows good
accuracy. However the uncertainties of the parameters are
difficult to determine and the complicated mathematical
relationship is not very practical (Gabauer, 2000; Skelton et
al., 1997). Great effort has been made to simplify the
hysteretic relationships for practical application, different
models such as some bi-linear and tri-linear hysteretic
models are proposed (Clough, 1966; Ibarra et al., 2005;
Sablik et al., 2004; Nip, Gardner et al, 2010; Shi et al.,
2011; Kato et al., 1970; Ono, Kaminogo et al, 1997). With
the improvement of analysis technology, these hysteretic
models have been playing an important role in estimating
the seismic behavior of steel material and steel structural
components.
Among the research on the cumulative damage evaluation
of steel components, Kato and Akiyama (Kato et al.,
1970; Akiyama, 1985) proposed an evaluation method
based on the decomposition of the hysteresis loops. The
initial idea of this model came from (Kato and Akiyama,
1968). In this method, the load-deformation hysteresis
loops of steel components are divided in to three parts of
the skeleton curve, Bauschinger part as well as the elastic
unloading part, as shown in Fig. 1. Here, the skeleton
curve is obtained by connecting parts of the load-
deformation relation of both positive and negative sides
sequentially, when the component experiences its highest
loading for the first time. Based on massive experimental
672 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016
Figure 1. Decomposition of the hysteresis loops of steel components.
data, it is observed that when subjected to relatively large
amplitude cyclic loadings such as earthquake effects, the
load-deformation relationship of structural component
under monotonic loading have an approximate corres-
pondence to the skeleton curves of the component that
fracture within relatively fewer loading cycles. Meanwhile,
the empirical relationship between the energy dissipation
capacity in the skeleton curves and the Bauschinger parts
were established (Kato et al., 1970; Akiyama et al., 1995).
In (Jiao Yamada et al, 2011), steel beam specimens were
tested under various cyclic loading histories. The plastic
deformation capacity of the beams within the scope of the
experimental database were evaluated by studying the
cumulative plastic deformation ratio in the skeleton curve
and the Bauschinger part. In (Akiyama and Takahashi,
1990), a simple hysteretic model of steel beams based on
the decomposition of the hysteresis loops were proposed
(Akiyama-Takahashi model), where the Bauschinger part
was modelled using bi-linear relationship. The results
from the response analysis of a plane-frame proved that
this hysteretic model is effective enough to simulate the
beam’s behavior under cyclic loadings.
In the present study, attempts are made to establish a
hysteretic model of structural steel based on the above
mentioned philosophy. The hysteretic model should be
concise, practical and accurate in the earthquake damage
evaluation of steel structural components through analysis.
A series of steel plate element specimens made of
structural steel SS400 (Japanese Industrial Standards G
3101, 2010) and SN400 (Japanese Industrial Standards G
3136, 2012), which are frequently used in Japan in low-
to-middle rise steel buildings, were tested under diverse
cyclic axial strain loadings. The hysteretic constitutive
model of structural steel was proposed based upon the
experimental results. In order to assess the accuracy of
the proposed hysteretic model, cyclic loading tests of
steel beams were conducted. The hysteretic model was
introduced into a numerical in-plane beam analysis, of
which all the geometric and physical parameters of the
analytical beam models match with those from the
specimens. The practicability of the proposed model was
confirmed through the comparison of the analytical
results and the experimental results.
2. Cyclic Loading Tests of Structural Steel
2.1. Objective
The cyclic loading test of structural steel plate elements
under various axial strain histories investigates the
hysteretic behavior of structural steel, the results of which
work as the experimental database in establishing the
hysteretic model of structural steel under various loadings.
2.2. Details of the specimens
The shape of the steel plate specimen is shown in Fig.
2. The size of the testing part is 40 mm×200 mm. Both
sides of the testing part are designed to have a corner
radius R=0.25 mm, to even the average stress in the
testing part during loading. Four screw rods (M12) were
spot welded onto the joint parts of the specimens to attach
the displacement transducers which measured the
deformation of the testing part.
Four specimens made from SS400 steel and three
specimens made from SN400 steel were employed in this
experiments. The constituents and mechanical characteristics
of both types of steel are listed in Table 1. The material
of each type of steel material was from the same steel lot,
respectively. Tensile coupon test was conducted using the
JIS-1A standard coupon (Japanese architectural standard
specification 6, 1996). The results of the tensile test (the
engineering stress-strain relationships and the strength)
are shown in Fig. 3.
2.3. Test setup
Figure 4(A) shows the setup details of the experiment.
A testing machine with its loading capacity of 500 kN
was employed to offer axial load. In order to prevent
Figure 2. Details of the steel plate specimens.
 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect 673

Yielding point Strength

σy [N/mm2] σu [N/mm2]
SS400 252 401
SN400 288 449

Figure 3. Coupon test results of steel plate specimens.

Figure 4. Test setup and deformation measuring system.

Table 1. Characteristics of SS400 and SN400B steel

Constituents (%) Mechanical characteristics
Thinkness
Type of Steel Yield strength Tensile strength
[mm] Si Mn P S
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
SS400 12~16 ≤ 0.050 ≤ 0.050 245 400 ≤ ~ ≤ 510
SN400B 12~16 ≤ 0.35 0.60 ≤ ~ ≤ 1.4 ≤ 0.030 ≤ 0.015 235 ≤ ~ ≤ 355 400 ≤ ~ ≤ 510

buckling, several buckling restraining jigs were set around

the specimen. Teflon sheets were attached to the jigs to
avoid the friction between the jigs and the specimen. The
load was recorded by the build-in load cell of the testing
machine. Four displacement transducers were set to the
end of the testing area. The deformation of the specimens
was calculated through the results of these four transducers
(Fig. 4(B)).

2.4. Loading histories

Table 2 lists up the loading histories employed in the
experiment. Five specimens were loaded under incremental
strain cyclic loading histories, while the other two were
tested under random strain loading histories (Fig. 5) which
are similar to the strain histories that structural components
are likely to experience during earthquakes. The loading
speed of all specimens were 0.01%/sec, based on the
Design Standard for Steel Structures of Japan (Design
standard for steel structures, 2005).
Figure 5. Random loading histories.
2.5. Experimental results
2.5.1. Stress-strain relationships
The engineering stress-strain relations nσ – nε from the
experiments are shown in Fig. 6 (black lines). Here,
engineering stress at the cross section of the testing part
674 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016

Table 2. Specimen lists and loading histories

Specimen Steel Loading histories
SS_1 SS400 0.5% Incremental strain 2 cycles at each loading amplitude
SS_2 SS400 1.0% Incremental strain 2 cycles at each loading amplitude
SS_3 SS400 0.5% Incremental strain at tension side 1 cycles at each loading amplitude
SS_R1 SS400 Random 1 Figure 5
SN_1 SN400 0.5% Incremental strain 3 cycles at each loading amplitude
SN_2 SN400 1.0% Incremental strain 2 cycles at each loading amplitude
SN_R2 SN400 Random 2 Figure 5

was derived by dividing the axial force recorded by the
load cell with the area of the original cross section. The
engineering strain was obtained by dividing the axial
deformation of the testing part by the original length of
the testing part (200 mm). Most of the hysteretic model
was expressed in term of true stress-true strain relationship
tσ – tε . The true stress-true strain relationships were
calculated from the engineering stress-strain results.
Under the assumption of constant volume of the testing
area, the following equations can be used for conversion.
tσ = ( 1 + nε ) ⋅ nσ
tε = ln ( 1 + nε )
2.5.2. Decomposition of the stress-strain hysteresis
loops
Similar as the hysteresis loops of steel beams mentioned
in (Kato and Akiyama, 1968), the true stress-strain
hysteresis loops obtained from the experiment were
divided into the skeleton curve, Bauschinger part, and the
elastic unloading part, as shown in Fig. 7, to study the
relationships between the cumulative strains in each part.
The hysteresis loops in tension or compression side
were processed respectively. Here, E=205940 N/mm2 is
the Young’s modulus of steel; Δt εs is the true strain
increment of each cyclic in the skeleton curve; and Δt εB
is the true strain increment of each cyclic in the
Bauschinger part.
2.5.3. Modelling of the skeleton curve
The true stress-strain relationship from material coupon
tests is adopted as the skeleton curve in the hysteretic
model, based on the observation that the stress-strain
relationship under monotonic loading resembles the skeleton
curve of hysteresis loops under cyclic loading (Akiyama,
1985). The skeleton curve in the compression side is
perfectly symmetric to that in the tension side.
2.5.4. Modelling of the Bauschinger part
The principal objective of the hysteretic model is to
simulate the damage of structural steel under cyclic loading
in a concise approach. Therefore, the Bauschinger part of
the hysteresis loops is modelled using bi-linear relationship
with the basic concept of having equivalent plastic energy
dissipation (Fig. 8). The first gradient (stiffness) of the bi-
linear model is set to be the Young’s modulus E. The
point where the Bauschinger part finishes (entering-
skeleton point) is decided by the maximum stress from
the previous cycle tσBS . The rest of the necessary
parameters of the bi-linear model are the strain increment
of the Bauschinger parts in each cycle Δt εB , and the stress
where the gradient changes (stiffness changing point)
(Fig. 8).
Previous research indicates that the shape of the
(1) Bauschinger part is greatly affected by the strain histories,
and the development of the Bauschinger part is directly
(2) related to the growth of the skeleton curve (Akiyama et
al., 1995). Figure 9 shows the relationship between the
strain increment of the Bauschinger parts in each cycle
Δt εB and the cumulative strain in the skeleton curve
ΣΔt εS . Despite the difference of the loading histories
applied on each specimen, an approximately linear
relationship can be obtained from Fig. 9. Eq. (3) shows
the fitted linear regression relationship.
Δt εB = 0.33ΣΔt εS (3)
The plastic energy dissipation in the bi-linear model is
required to have the same value of that in the Bauschinger
part, i.e., the area in blue should be the same as the area
in black from Fig. 8. Assume the stress at the stiffness-
changing point is αB times the maximum stress from the
previous cycle tσBS . The relationship between αB and
Δt εB in each cycle is investigated in Fig. 10. αB slightly
increases together with Δt εB . For the sake of simplicity, in
the bi-linear model, αB is set as a constant equals to its
mean value 0.67 (Eq. (4)).
αB=0.67 (4)
3. Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel
To sum up, the hysteretic model of structural steel is
made up of the skeleton curves and the Bauschinger
parts. The skeleton curves are picked up from the coupon
tests results (converted into the true stress-strain relation).
Each fragment of the Bauschinger part is simplified as a
 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect 675

Figure 6. Comparison of the experimental true stress-strain relationship and the hysteretic model.

bi-linear curve, with the requirement that the bi-linear
curve dissipates approximately same amount of plastic
energy as the Bauschinger part does.
In this model, the entering-skeleton point and the
unloading point in the skeleton curve (unloading point
(skeleton)) (Fig. 11) are reset every time if and only if the
hysteresis loop enters its skeleton curve and remain
unchanged until the hysteresis loop enters next skeleton
curve fragment. Eqs. (3) and (4) illustrate the two basic
rules in this hysteresis model. Figure 11(A) shows an
example of the hysteresis loops based on this model.
The true strain increment from the “stiffness changing
676 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016
Figure 7. Decompose of the true stress-strain relationship.
Figure 8. Bi-linear modelling of Bauschinger part.
Figure 9. Strain increments in the Bauschinger parts in
each cycle v.s. Cumulative strain in the skeleton curve.
point” to the next “entering-skeleton point” (loops 3-4, 6-
7, 9-10, and 12-13 in Fig. 11(A)), and ∑ Δt εS is the
cumulative skeleton strain till each “entering-skeleton
point”. In Eq. (2), tσCS is the true stress at the point when
the hysteresis loop changes its stiffness from the elastic
stiffness to the second stiffness due to the Bauschinger
effect (point 3, 6, 9, and 12 in Fig. 11(A)), and tσS is the
true stress of the current unloading point (skeleton).
When unloading starts within the elastic region (point
15 in Fig. 11(B)), the loop will go back to the current
unloading point (point 14 in Fig. 11(B)) in the plastic
region and continue growing with the same slope (loop
15-14-13 in Fig. 11(B)).
Figure 10. Relationship between αB and ΔtεB.
Figure 11(C) shows the case of unloading within the
plastic region of Bauschinger part. Before unloading, the
plastic region heads to the next entering skeleton point
(loop 12-16 in Fig. 11(C), which heads to point 13). At
the stiffness changing point 17, the true stress tσ17 =
0.67 ⋅ tσ11. The plastic region of Bauschinger part after the
stiffness changing point (loop 17-18 in Fig. 11(C)) goes
toward the unloading point in the skeleton curve (point 13
in Fig. 11(C)).
When unloading starts within the elastic region (point
15 in Fig. 11(B)), the loop will go back to the current
unloading point (point 14 in Fig. 11(B)) in the plastic
region and continue growing with the same slope (loop
15-14-13 in Fig. 11(B)).
Figure 11(C) shows the case of unloading within the
plastic region of Bauschinger part. Before unloading, the
plastic region heads to the next entering skeleton point
(loop 12-16 in Fig. 11(C), which heads to point 13). At
the stiffness changing point 17, the true stress tσ17 =
0.67 ⋅ tσ11 . The plastic region of Bauschinger part after
the stiffness changing point (loop 17-18 in Fig. 11(C))
goes toward the unloading point in the skeleton curve
(point 13 in Fig. 11(C)).
Note here, in the first cycle of the hysteresis loop, the
true stress-strain curve on the compression side is also
 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect
Figure 11. Multi-linear hysteresis model of structural steel considering Bauschinger effects (True stress-true strain relation).
counted as skeleton curve because this is the first time for
the material to experience highest/lowest stress, although
Bauschinger effect is considered in this part (loop 3-4 in
Fig. 11(A)).
The results of the proposed hysteretic model is
compared with the experimental data in Fig. 6. Figure 12
compares the cumulative strain of both experiments and
the proposed model in the skeleton curve, while Fig. 13
shows the comparison of the cumulative strain energy
obtained from the experiment and the proposed model.
These graphs show good correspondence between the
experimental and modelling results.
4. Cyclic Loading Tests of Wide Flange Beams
In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed
hysteretic model, three simple-supported beam specimens
were tested under cyclic loadings. Meanwhile, numerical
677
in-plane analysis of the specimens were conducted, with
the proposed hysteretic model adopted. The analytical
results were verified with the experimental results.
Figure 14 shows the test setup. Both sides of the wide-
flange beam 244×175×7×11 were set onto the pin roller
supports upon the reaction jigs. The middle of the beam
span (loading point) was loaded with a knife edge which
was connected to the loading system through a loading
jig. Cyclic vertical load was applied to the specimens
during the tests. The specimens were made of SS400
steel. Figure 15 shows the material characteristics of
beam flange and web, which were obtained from the
coupon test.
The variables in this experiment are the loading histories.
Three specimens named RH1, RH2, and RH3 were tested
under different cyclic loading histories, which are shown
in Fig. 16. RH1 and RH2 were subjected to incremental
deformation-amplitude loadings. The loading history of
678 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016

Figure 12. Cumulative deformation in the skeleton curve. Figure 13. Cumulative energy dissipation.

RH2 leans to the positive side, while RH1 was loaded earthquake effects.
symmetrically to its neutral position. RH3 was loaded The vertical load was recorded by the built-in load cell
under random amplitude cyclic loading that simulates the in the loading device. Deformation of the beam was

Figure 14. Setup and measuring system of the beam test.

Yielding point Strength

σy [N/mm2] σu [N/mm2]
Flange 278 446
Web 326 461

Figure 15. Coupon test results of steel beam specimens.

 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect
Figure 16. Loading histories of the beam tests.
measured using the displacement transducers set around
the loading area of the specimens (Fig. 14). In order to
obtain the local strain history, plastic strain gauges were
attached to the beam flange at two sections to record the
flange strain during loading. The locations of these sections
are shown in Fig. 14.
5. Verification of the Proposed Hysteretic
Model
In this section, an in-plane numerical analysis was
conducted based on the beam tests described in Section 4,
the hysteretic model proposed previously was introduced
in the analysis. The analytical results were compared to
the experimental results to verify the efficiency of the
hysteretic model.
5.1. In-plane numerical analysis of steel beam subjected
to cyclic loading
5.1.1. Assumptions
The in-plane analysis of the wide-flange beams
subjected to cyclic loading histories was conducted under
the following assumptions:
(1) The assumption of the plane section.
(2) The deformation due to shear force is considered to
always be elastic.
(3) There is no out-of-plane deformation of the beam.
Figure 17. Internal force balance of the beam section.
679
(4) The beam reaches its maximum load without local
buckling.
5.1.2. Basic algorithm of the in-plane analysis
The algorithm of this analysis is based on the monotonic
in-plane analyses in (Kato, Akiyama er al, 1966) (Yamada,
Sakae et al, 1966) (Yamada and Akiyama, 1995). The
details of the analytical algorithm are illustrated in the
appendix. The basic idea is to obtain the moment-
curvature relationship (M-ϕ) of a certain beam section
through the internal force balance under the assumption
of the plane section. Additionally, the load-deformation
relationship (M-θ) of the beam can be derived by
integrating the moment-curvature relationship along the
beam span:
Calculation of moment-curvature relationship
The moment-curvature relationship of a specific section
was obtained by the internal force balance in the beam
section. Fig. 17 shows the internal force balance of the
beam section. The width of the beam section is the
function of the distance from the section tension edge
g(Z). The stress value at each point in this section is the
function of the strain value at that point f(ε). Therefore,
the axial force P and bending moment M can be written as:
H H
P=
∫ 0
f ( ε ) ⋅ g ( Z ) dz =
∫ 0
f ( ε 0 + φ ⋅ Z ) ⋅ g ( Z ) dz (5)
H
M=
∫ f(ε) ⋅ g(Z) ⋅ Zdz – P ⋅ Hg
0
H
∫
= f ( ε + φ ⋅ Z ) ⋅ g ( Z ) ⋅ Z dz – P ⋅ Hg
0
0 (6)
by giving the section a small curvature increment dφ, Eqs.
5 and 6 change to:
H
P + dP =
∫ 0
f ( ε0 + dε0 + ( φ + dφ ) ⋅ Z ) ⋅ g ( Z )dz (7)
M + dM
H
∫
= f ( ε0 + dε0 + ( φ + dφ ) ⋅ Z ) ⋅ g ( Z ) ⋅ Z dz – P ⋅ Hg (8)
0
680 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016

Figure 18. Mesh generation along the beam span.

Figure 19. Comparisons of load-deformation relationships.

where dε0 is the increment of tension edge strain. In this are considered negligible.
study, the steel beams were subjected to pure bending, Through Eqs. 9 and 10, the moment curvature
therefore, P=0, dP=0. Equations 9 and 10 were derived relationship can be obtained.
using Taylor series expansion. Terms after the 2nd term
 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect 681

Figure 20. Comparisons of energy dissipation.

∫ f ′(ε + φ ⋅ Z) ⋅ g(Z) ⋅ ZdZ

0
0
dε = -------------------------------------------------------------- ⋅ dφ
0 (9)
where G is shear stiffness, and Aw is the area of the beam
web. Furthermore, from the force balance in mesh No i,
H

∫ f ′(ε + φ ⋅ Z) ⋅ g(Z)dZ
0
0
the moment of i+1 point can be obtained by Eq. 16.

H
Mi + 1 = Mi – Q ⋅ Δx
∫
(16)
dM = f ′( ε + φ ⋅ Z ) ⋅ ( dε + dφ ⋅ Z ) ⋅ g ( Z ) ⋅ Z dz
0 0 (10)
0
This analytic method is known to be sufficiently
Calculation of the moment-rotation relationship accurate before the beam reaches its maximum strength.
The moment-rotation relationship of the beam was
derived by integrating the moment-curvature relationship 5.2. Comparison of analytical results and
along the beam span. The beam was divided into meshes experimental results
10 mm in size. In a certain mesh No i [i, i+1], the boundary 5.2.1. Moment-rotation relationships
condition is shown in Fig. 18. The curvature of a certain Figure 19 compares the moment-rotation relationships
mesh is considered constant. Therefore, of the beams obtained from the experiment and the
analysis. The analytical moment-rotation relationships of
y″ = φ i (11) all specimens satisfy the experimental results well.
Moreover, in Fig. 20, the analytical value of the energy
θ = y′ = φ i ⋅ x + C1 (12) dissipation during the loading procedure is compared
with the experimental results. The analytical energy
2
y = 0.5 ⋅ φ i ⋅ x + C1 ⋅ x + C2 (13) dissipation is very close to that obtained in the tests. It
shows that the proposed hysteretic model of steel material
for mesh No i, suppose the boundary condition θi and yi is very effective in simulating the energy dissipation,
are known, then, which is the main purpose of developing this model.

θ i + 1 = θi + φ i ⋅ Δx (14) 5.2.2. Flange strain histories

The beam flange strain histories obtained from the
2 Q ⋅ Δx
yi + 1 = yi + θ ⋅ Δx + 0.5 ⋅ φ i ⋅ Δx + -------------- (15) analyses and the experiments are plotted in Fig. 21. The
G ⋅ Aw
results of both the upper flange and the lower flange from
682 Satoshi Yamada and Yu Jiao / International Journal of Steel Structures, 16(3), 671-683, 2016

Figure 21. Comparisons of flange strain histories.

section A or C, are shown as examples here. There is
some difference between the experimental and analytical
strain value. However the variation are considered to be
within the acceptable error range. The analytical strain
histories correspond with the experimental results
approximately.
By all accounts, the results of the in-plane analysis of
steel beams where the proposed hysteretic model of
structural steel is introduced simulate the beams behavior
(both the overall behavior and the local strain) very well.
The proposed hysteretic model of structural steel is
effective in simulating the mechanical behavior of steel
components
6. Conclusions
Structural analysis is an important approach in
evaluating the behavior of steel components such as the
energy dissipation capacity. Hysteretic models of structural
steel that can work effectively in the analysis is indis-
 A Concise Hysteretic Model of Structural Steel Considering the Bauschinger Effect
pensable. This paper proposes a concise and effective
hysteretic model of structural steel aiming at simulating
the energy dissipation of steel components precisely.
Steel plate element specimens made of SS400 structural
steel were tested under different cyclic axial strain
loadings. The hysteretic model of structural steel was
proposed based on the test results. The proposed
hysteresis model is composed of the skeleton curve, the
Bauschinger part and the elasticity unloading part. Here,
the skeleton curve is based on the coupon test results and
the Bauschinger part is simplified as a bilinear model
which is a function of the cumulative strain in the
skeleton curve the material has experienced so far.
Three simple-supported beam specimens were tested
under cyclic loadings to verify the effectiveness of the
proposed hysteretic model. An in-plane analysis of the
beams was carried out with the proposed hysteretic model
introduced. Good correspondence between the analytical
results and the experimental results are confirmed, with
not only the overall moment-rotation relationships, but
also the local strain histories. The proposed hysteresis
model is simple and proved to be effective enough to
analyze the behavior of steel components under earthquake
effects.
References
Akiyama H., Takahashi M., and Shi Z. (1995) Ultimate
energy absorption capacity of round-shape steel rods
subjected to bending (In Japanese). Journal of structural
and construction engineering, Architectural Institute of
Japan, No. 475, pp. 145-54.
Architectural Institute of Japan. (1996) Japanese architectural
standard specification JASS 6, steel work (In Japanese).
Tokyo: AIJ.
Ben Kato, Hiroshi Akiyama (1968). The strength of steel
structural members (in Japanese). Journal of structural
and construction engineering, Architectural Institute of
Japan, 151, pp. 15-20.
Ben Kato, Hirofumi Aoki, and Hiroyuki Yamanouchi. (1970)
Experimental study on the behavior of steel material under
tension and compression loadings (in Japanese). Proceedings
of annual meeting of the Architectural Institute of Japan.
Design standard for steel structures -based on allowable
stress concept- (4rd version), (2005) Architectural Institute
of Japan, Tokyo.
Hiroshi Akiyama. (1985) Earthquake-resistant limit-state
design for buildings, Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
Hiroshi Akiyama, and Makoto Takahashi. (1990) Influence
of Bauschinger effect on seismic resistance of steel
structures (in Japanese). Journal of structural and
construction engineering, Architectural Institute of Japan,
No. 418, pp. 49-57.
Johann Bauschinger. (1886) Mitt. Mech. Tech. Lab. Munchen,
13, pp. 1-115.
Kato B, Akiyama H, and Uchida N. (1966) Ultimate strength
of structural steel members (I) (In Japanese). Transactions
683
of the AIJ, No. 119, pp. 22-30.
K.H. Nip, L. Gardner, C.M. Davies, and A.Y. Elghazouli.
(2010) Extremely low cyclic fatigue tests on structural
carbon steel and stainless steel. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, 66, pp. 96-110.
Luis F. Ibarra, Ricardo A. Medina, and Helmut Krawinkler.
(2005) Hysteretic models that incorporate strength and
stiffness deterioration. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics. DOI: 10.1002/eqe.495, 34, pp. 1489-1511.
Martin J. Sablik, Taeko Yonemine, and Fernando J.G.
Landgraf. (2004) Modeling plastic deformation effects in
steel on hysteresis loops with the same maximum flux
density. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 40, No. 5.
Ray W. Clough. (1966) Effect of stiffness degradation on
earthquake ductility requirements. Structural Engineering
and Structural Mechanics, Department of Civil Engineering.
R.P. Skelton, H.J. Maier, and H.-J. Christ. (1997) The
Bauschinger effect, Masing model and the Ramberg-
Osgood relation for cyclic deformation in metals.
Materials Science and Engineering, A238, pp. 377-390.
Rolled steels for general structure. (2010) Japanese Industrial
Standards, JIS G 3101.
Rolled steels for building structure. (2012) Japanese Industrial
Standards, JIS G 3136.
Tetsuro Ono, Takashige Kaminogo, Fumihisa Yoshida, and
Manoru Iwata. (1997) A study on material properties and
hysteretic behavior of metallic material (in Japanese).
Journal of structural and construction engineering,
Architectural Institute of Japan, No. 498, pp. 137-143.
W. Gabauer.(2000) The determination of uncertainties of
Ramber-Osgood parameters (from a tensile test). Manual
of Codes of Practice for the Determination of Uncertainties
in Mechanical Tests on Metallic Materials, Standards
Measurement & Testing Project No. SMT4-CT97-2165,
UNCERT COP 17.
Walter Ramberg and William R. Osgood. (1943) Description
of stress-strain vurves by three parameters. Techical
Notes 902, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics.
TN 902.
Yamada M, Sakae K, Tadokoro T, and Shirakawa K. (1966)
Elasto-plastic bending deformation of wide flange beam-
columns under axial compression, Part I: Bending
moment-curvature and bending moment-deflection
relations under static loading (In Japanese). Journal of
structural and construction engineering, Transactions of
the AIJ, No. 127, pp. 8-14.
Yamada S and Akiyama H. (1995) Deteriorating behavior of
steel members in post-buckling range. Structural Stability
and Design, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 169-74.
Yongjiu Shi, Meng Wang, and Yuanqing Wang. (2011)
Experimental and constitutive model study of structural
steel under cyclic loading. Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, 67, pp. 1185-1197.
Yu Jiao, Satoshi Yamada, Kishiki Shoichi, and Yuko
Shimada. (2011) Evaluation of plastic energy dissipation
capacity of steel beams suffering ductile fracture under
various loading histories. Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics. DOI: 10.1002/eqe.1103, 40, pp.
1553-1570.