PSI - Issue 44

7

Gaetano Della Corte et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 472–479 Cantisani, Della Corte / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 00 –000

478

2

1.5

[-]

1

G1-SAP2000,KH G1-SAP2000,SH G1-CodeAster,KH G1-ANSYS(I) G1-ANSYS(IEQ) G1-ANSYS (I+RS)

l,Re

V/V

0.5

0

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

b)

c)

[-]

a)

Fig. 6. Non-linear static analysis results: (a) link response curve; (b) Von Mises stresses at θ = 0.005 rad; (c) Von Mises stresses at θ = 0.08 rad.

c)

a)

b)

Fig. 7. Equivalent plastic strain contour plots: (a) θ = 0.01 rad; (b) θ = 0.04 rad; (c) θ = 0.08 rad.

5. Conclusions The numerical results presented in this paper indicate that out-of-plane buckling was not an issue for the examined bracing system, even if no lateral bracing was applied at the bottom end of the link. Consequently, the representation of geometrical imperfections and residual stresses was practically irrelevant in the examined case study. On the contrary, a realistic representation of cyclic loading effects was very important to capture the steel cyclic hardening. In fact, the use of a simple hardening model calibrated using the monotonic steel stress-strain response resulted into a “plastic overstrength” (ratio between the peak link shear force resistance and the corresponding yield value) equal to 1.33, calculated at a link chord rotation of 0.08 rad. Instead, using a steel stress strain response calibrated with cyclic loading tests, resulted in the same ratio being equal to 1.77. The current Italian