Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 2012, 2, 87-95

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojce.2012.23014 Published Online September 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ojce)

Improvement of Concrete Shear Wall Structures by
Smart Materials
Mehdi Ghassemieh
1*
, Mohammad Reza Bahaari
1
, Seyed Mohyeddin Ghodratian
1
, Seyed Ali Nojoumi
2

1
School of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2
Civil & Environmental Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Email:
*
mghassem@ut.ac.ir

Received May 7, 2012; revised June 10, 2012; accepted June 20, 2012
ABSTRACT
Smart materials have found numerous applications in many areas in civil engineering recently. One class of these mate-
rials is shape memory alloy (SMA) which exhibits several unique characteristics such as superelasticity and shape
memory effect. Due to these characteristics, research efforts have been extended to use SMA in controlling civil struc-
tures. This paper investigates the effectiveness of SMA reinforcements in enhancing the behavior of shear walls, espe-
cially when subjected to seismic excitations. Two ordinary and coupled shear walls were introduced as reference struc-
tures and were modeled by ABAQUS software. For improving the seismic response of the shear walls, vertical SMA
reinforcing bars were proposed to be implemented like conventional steel reinforcements, throughout the height of the
structures and in every connecting beam in the coupled shear wall system. The one dimensional superelastic model of
SMA material was implemented in the computer software using FORTRAN code. The dynamic response of the shear
walls subjected to seismic loading was investigated through time history analyses under El-centro and Koyna records.
The results showed that using superelastic SMA material instead of steel bars caused remarkable reduction in residual
displacement for both ordinary and coupled shear walls. In addition, SMA reinforcements could significantly decrease
the maximum deflection of the coupled shear wall system.

Keywords: Smart Material; Shape Memory Alloy; Shear Wall; Superelasticity; Seismic Behavior
1. Introduction
Many multi-storey buildings contain shear walls around
the elevator shafts and stairwells as lateral resisting sys-
tems. For the concrete shear wall systems, it is difficult
to satisfy the very ductile behavior conditions. Therefore,
such structures have often suffered damages caused by
earthquake events. Shearing damage, bending damage,
sliding and overturning damage are usually four kind of
damage occur in concrete shear wall during earthquake.
If concrete shear wall can attain their initial shape after
an earthquake, then problems associated with permanent
damage can be addressed. Sometimes, there are several
openings in these shear walls and if two such openings
are on opposite sides, deep coupling beams are supposed
to interconnect the walls. These coupling beams are gen-
erally used as a means of dissipating energy during
earthquakes through experiencing inelastic yielding. Due
to their small span to depth ratio, they require highly
congested reinforcement in order to achieve ductile be-
havior. Although dissipating energy through plastic
hinging is a common practice in the design of multi-sto-
rey buildings, this practice usually results in significant
residual displacements and the need to repair the struc-
tural elements after the earthquake. To address the
shortcomings of current practices, a new design approach
using smart materials such as shape memory alloy (SMA)
is proposed.
SMA is one example of smart materials that exhibit
several unique characteristics such as shape memory ef-
fect, superelasticity, and energy dissipation features. Due
to these characteristics, Shape Memory Alloys have
widely attracted attentions in passive control of structures
in recent years. Dolce, et al. in a series of publications
studied the effectiveness of SMA materials for use in
seismic applications [1]. They also studied the imple-
mentation of various states of SMA materials for the use
of special dampers in structures. They proposed different
recentering or dissipating devices based on experimental
results. Wilde et al. performed an analytical study of
SMA-based seismic isolation system consist of laminated
rubber bearing and superelastic SMA bars [2]. They
conducted time history analysis with different excitation
to compare the SMA-based bearing with conventional
bearing with lead core. Dolce and Cardone experimen-
*
Corresponding author.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 88
tally investigated the proper choice of alloy, the effect of
temperature, SMA size and loading rate and number of
cycles [3]. Bruno and Valente showed the effectiveness
of the use of SMA materials by analytical measures using
simple pseudoelastic constitutive model for SMAs using
damage index approach [4]. Baratta and Corbi analyzed
the dynamics of a structural elastic-plastic frame, en-
dowed with pseudoelastic SMA tendons [5]. DesRoches
and Delemont evaluated the efficiency of using SMA
restrainers to reduce the response of decks in a multi
span simply supported bridge [6]. Masuda and Noori
investigated the optimization of hysteretic characteristics
of damping devices based on pseudoelastic SMAs [7].
DesRoches et al. experimentally evaluated the properties
of superelastic Ni-Ti shape memory alloys under cyclic
loading to assess their potential for applications in seis-
mic resistant design and retrofit [8]. Abolmaali et al.
compared the energy dissipative characteristics of bolted
t-stub connections using steel and shape memory alloy
(SMA) fasteners [9]. Choi et al. proposed a new SMA-
rubber bearing which is composed of a conventional
elastomeric bearing and SMA wires wrapping the bear-
ing in longitudinal direction [10]. A multilinear constitu-
tive model developed by Motahari and Ghassemieh was
adopted to capture the most common behaviors of SMA
[11]. Czaderski et al. tested a reinforced concrete (RC)
beam equipped with SMA material and compared it with
conventional RC beam [12]. The results proved that by
using shape memory alloys it is possible to produce a RC
beam which has variable stiffness and strength. Saiidi
and Wang presented the application of SMA bars instead
of steel bars in plastic hinge zone of reinforced concrete
bridge piers [13]. Motahari et al. also introduced a spe-
cial SMA damper to have both re-centering and energy
dissipating characteristics simultaneously [14]. Li et al.
experimentally studied the behavior of smart concrete
beams with embedded shape memory alloy bundles [15].
They used SMA bundles as actuators to achieve recovery
force. Andrawes and DesRoches compared the efficiency
of SMA restrainers with three other retrofit devices in-
cluding conventional steel restrainers, metallic dampers
and viscoelastic dampers [16]. Johnson et al. conducted a
large scale testing program to evaluate the effect of SMA
restrainer cable on the seismic performance of in-span
hinges of multiple-frame concrete box girder bridge sub-
jected to strong ground motion [17]. Rahman et al. in-
vestigated the effect of cross section geometry on the
bending of a beam and also buckling of a column made
of SMA through a numerical study [18]. Sharabash and
Andrawes studied the application of SMAs as seismic
passive damper devices for vibration mitigation of cable
stayed bridges [19]. The feasibility of superelasticity in
increasing ductility capacity and decreasing residual dis-
placement of concrete bridge column was investigated by
Saiidi et al. [20]. Ozbulut and Hurlebaus explored the
effectiveness of SMA-rubber based isolation systems for
seismic protection of bridges against near-field earth-
quakes. They also compare the performance of SMA-
rubber based isolation systems with SMA-based sliding
isolation system [21]. Kari et al. evaluated the effective-
ness of a new dual bracing system for improving the
seismic behavior of steel structures [22].
In this study the behavior of concrete shear walls rein-
forced with SMA bars is investigated. Finite element
program, ABAQUS, was used in order to assess the re-
sponse of the structures subjected to seismic loading.
Two ordinary and coupled shear walls were introduced
as reference structures and their seismic behavior with
and without SMA reinforcement was evaluated through
time history analyses.
2. Shape Memory Alloy
Shape Memory Alloys are new class of metallic alloys
that display multiple incomparable characteristics, based
on martensitic phase transformation. SMAs are able to
undergo large strains (8% - 10%) without leaving per-
manent deformations in the material. They can recover
their initial shape at the end of the deformation process,
instinctively (called superelasticity) or by heating (called
shape memory effect) as shown in Figure 1. The most


(a) (b)
Figure 1. Stress-strain curves for SMAs: (a) superelasticity effect; (b) shape memory effect.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 89

favorable characteristic of SMAs which is used in passive
control of structures is superelastic behavior in which the
material can recover large deformations of order of 8
percent while producing flag-shaped hysteresis. The
second feature of the SMA is the shape memory effect.
When the material is in Martensite form, application of
stress leads to twinning of Martensite. By removal of
stress the detwinning process begins and at the zero
stress, some residual strain will be remained that can be
recovered by heating the material above a specific tem-
perature. Other desirable characteristics of SMAs are
high energy dissipation capacity, stability of hysteresis
loop and high fatigue resistance. Added to all those
characteristics, the relatively high stiffness and strength
makes SMA a promising material for control of struc-
tures in severe earthquakes. Although several alloys have
the shape memory feature, the most widely used SMA in
civil engineering applications is Nitinol, which is a com-
bination of Nickel and Titanium. However, since Nitinol
is a very expensive material compared to steel, it may not
be economical to use it unless high energy dissipation is
demanded.
3. Analytical Models of Shear Walls
This study investigates the seismic performance of two
concrete shear wall structures equipped with superelastic
SMA. The first structure had the width of 5.0 m, height
of 15.0 m and thickness of 0.3 m. The second structure
was a coupled shear wall with two interconnected con-
crete walls. Each wall had the width of 3.0 m, height of
15.0 m and thickness of 0.3 m and each coupling beam
was 0.6 m deep, 2.4 m length with 0.3 m width. Height
between each level was fixed at 3.0 m. In order to attain
the numerical behavior of the structures, finite element
computer program (ABAQUS) was used in this study
[23]. Finite Element models of the first and the second
shear walls are presented in Figures 2 and 3, respectively.
Concrete material had compressive strength of 32 MPa,
Youngs modulus of 30 GPa, poisson ratio of 0.2, and
density of 25 kN/m
3
. Concrete damage plasticity, devel-
oped by Lee and Fenves [24] was utilized for a proper
material modeling of the concrete behavior in the nu-
merical analyses. Lumped masses were placed at each
node at story levels to represent the lateral inertial loads
induced from the floor to the walls in time of earthquake
excitations.
In order to grant better understanding of the dynamic
behavior of the shear walls, a modal analysis was con-
ducted for the reference structures by the ABAQUS
computer program. Mode shapes and natural period of
each mode are presented in Figures 4 and 5. As illus-
trated, the first three fundamental periods of the first
shear wall were 0.726, 0.157 and 0.134 sec, respectively
and the coupled shear wall had the first three periods of
0.828, 0.202 and 0.131 sec, respectively.
4. Proposed Enhancement Technique
The proposed method uses SMAs as reinforcement in the
concrete shear wall for the purposes of eliminating the
residual displacement. For the upgraded structure, verti-
cal SMA reinforcing rebars were proposed to be imple-
mented like conventional steel reinforcements, through-
out the height of the wall structures and in the all five
connecting beams in coupled shear wall. No diagonal
rebars were used as reinforcements in this research. For
reaching the different percentages of reinforcements, the
SMA and steel rebars were studied to posses various di-
ameters and spacing. Since in the ABAQUS finite ele-
ment program, the SMA mechanical behavior does not
appear by default, thus the SMA material was imple-
mented in the computer program by writing a subroutine
using FORTRAN and attaching it to the main program as
a subroutine material module.


Figure 2. Finite element model of the ordinary shear wall
without openings.


Figure 3. Finite element model of the coupled shear wall.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 90


(a) 1
st
mode shape (Tn
1
= 0.726) (b) 2
nd
mode shape (Tn
2
= 0.157) (c) 3
rd
mode shape (Tn
3
= 0.073)

(d) 4
th
mode shape (Tn
4
= 0.134) (e) 5
th
mode shape (Tn
5
= 0.050)
Figure 4. Mode shapes of the first shear wall.


(a) 1
st
mode shape (Tn
1
= 0.828) (b) 2
nd
mode shape (Tn
2
= 0.202) (c) 3
rd
mode shape (Tn
3
= 0.131)

(d) 4
th
mode shape (Tn
4
= 0.144) (e) 5
th
mode shape (Tn
5
= 0.091)
Figure 5. Mode shapes of the second coupled shear wall.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 91

Since most civil engineering applications of SMA are
related to the use of bars and wires, one dimensional
phenomenological models are often considered suitable.
Several researchers have proposed uniaxial models for
SMA. Figure 6 shows the 1D-superelastic model of
SMA material [11] implemented in the computer model.
This model is capable of describing the constitutive be-
havior of superelastic SMAs at a constant temperature.
The model requires 6 material parameters. The parame-
ters used to define the material model are austenite to
martensite starting stress (
am-s
), austenite to martensite
finishing stress (
am-f
), martensite to austenite starting
stress (
ma-s
), martensite to austenite finishing stress
(
ma-f
), superelastic plateau strain length (
L
), and modulus
of elasticity (E
A
). The SMA model represents an ideal-
ized behavior for SMA material where no strength deg-
radation occurs during cycling and the residual deforma-
tion is taken zero at the end of each cycle. Further as-
sumption is that austenite and martensite branches have
the same modulus of elasticity ( = 1). Previous studies
have shown that such simplifications generally have neg-
ligible effect on the response [25]. Table 1 shows SMA
mechanical properties defined in ABAQUS computer
program as User Implemented Material.
5. Analyses and Results
In this section, analyses were undertaken on two shear
wall structures to evaluate the effectiveness of the SMA
rebars in seismic performance of the concrete walls. The
behavior of the structures subjected to earthquake excita-
tions was investigated through dynamic time history
analyses on the numerical models, and the response of
the structure was attained by subjecting them to the
El-centro and Koyna earthquake records. To show the
significance of the SMA reinforcements in improving the
seismic response, the story displacements at each floor
level were obtained from time history analyses. The re-
sult of the new proposed system subjected to seismic
excitations was then compared with those of the original
concrete structure (without SMAs) and also assessed
against models with different percentages of SMA rein-
forcements.

Figure 6. Stress-strain relationship of the superelastic SMA
material.

Table 1. SMA mechanical properties.
Value SMA Material Properties
40 Modulus of elasticity (GPa)
400 Austenite to Martensite starting stress (Mpa)
500 Austenite to Martensite finishing stress (Mpa)
300 Martensite to Austenite starting stress (Mpa)
200 Martensite to Austenite finishing stress (Mpa)
6 Superelastic plateau strain length (%)
5.1. The First Shear Wall
Figures 7 and 8 compare the seismic response of the
structure with steel or SMA reinforcement subjected to
El-centro and Koyna records. The results showed that
using superelastic SMA material instead of steel in con-
crete shear wall can significantly reduce the residual dis-
placement. In particular, in the case of steel reinforce-
ment, the concrete shear wall had residual displacements
of 0.05 m and 0.08 m for El-centro and Koyna earth-
quakes, respectively. In the case of SMA reinforcement,
the structure just experienced the residual displacements
of 0.02 m and 0.02 m for El-centro and Koyna earth-
quakes, respectively. These results illustrated 60% and


Figure 7. Tip deflection of the shear wall subjected to El-centro earthquake for different types of reinforcement.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 92

75% reduction in the residual displacement of the shear
wall for El-centro and Koyna records, respectively. How-
ever, the results also showed that SMA reinforcements
could not reduce the maximum deflection of ordinary
shear walls meaningfully.
The residual deformation of the shear wall subjected to
El-centro earthquake for five stories is presented in Fig-
ure 9. As illustrated, the SMA reinforcement could suc-
cessfully reduce the residual displacements compared to
steel reinforcement for all five levels. This was mostly
due to the superoelasticity feature of the SMA. In other
words, in each cycle, shape memory alloys could restore
most of the displacement and hence avoided the accu-
mulation of residual displacement in the repeated cycles.
Therefore, SMA limited the residual deformation at the
end of the record. However, in the case of traditional
steel reinforcement, yielding of material might accumu-
late plastic deformations in loading cycles and hence
considerable residual deformation remained in the end of
the earthquake.
Figure 10 displays the time histories of tip deflection
for 4% and 6% SMA reinforcements in combination with
2% steel reinforcement. It can be observed that adding
more SMA reinforcement to steel rebars could reduce
both maximum and residual displacements. Specifically,
by changing SMA reinforcement from 4% to 6%, the
maximum tip displacement of the structure was de-
creased from 135 mm to 88 mm (46% reduction) and
residual displacement was reduced from 30 mm to 15
mm (50% reduction).
5.2. The Second Coupled Shear Wall
Figure 11 compares the seismic response of the coupled
shear wall with steel or SMA reinforcement under Koyna
earthquake. The result showed that the coupled shear
wall with SMA reinforcement experienced much lower
level of deflection than the shear wall with steel rein-
forcement. In particular, in the case of steel reinforce-
ment, the concrete wall had maximum deflection of 0.13
m, while in the case of SMA reinforcement, the structure
just experienced the displacement of 0.07 m (i.e. 46%
reduction in the maximum displacement). In addition,
superelastic SMA reinforcement could significantly re-
duce the residual displacement of the concrete wall. Spe-
cifically, the residual displacement of the structure was
reduced from 0.06 m in the original wall to 0.01 m in the
controlled structure (i.e. 83% reduction in the residual
displacement).


Figure 8. Tip deflection of the shear wall subjected to Koyna earthquake for different types of reinforcement.


Figure 9. Residual deformation of the shear wall subjected to El-centro earthquake in five stories for steel or SMA rein-
forcements.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 93

The maximum displacement of the coupled shear wall
subjected to Koyna earthquake for five levels is illus-
trated in Figure 12. As it can be observed, using SMA
reinforcement could meaningfully reduce the maximum
displacement compared to steel reinforcement for all five
stories especially for upper levels. This might be due to
the fact that SMA bars were superelastic and had the
ability to maintain their effective stiffness for repeated
cycles while steel bars lost their effectiveness remarkably
due to early yielding and caused large displacement in
the response history.
Figure 13 displays the time histories of tip deflection
for 0% steel and 4% SMA reinforcement and 1.5% steel
and 2.5% SMA reinforcement. It can be observed that
replacing 1.5% of shape memory alloy rebars by steel re-
bars did not affect the seismic response significantly and
two concrete walls behave similarly under El-centro earth-
quake. However, since SMA is a very expensive material
compared to steel, it may be economical to use it when the
steel and SMA reinforcements are well proportioned.


Figure 10. Tip deflection of the shear wall subjected to El-centro earthquake for different combination of SMA with steel
reinforcement.


Figure 11. Tip deflection of the coupled shear wall subjected to Koyna earthquake for different types of reinforcement.


Figure 12. Maximum displacement of the coupled shear wall subjected to Koyna earthquake in five stories for steel or SMA
reinforcements.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 94

Figure 13. Tip deflection of the shear wall subjected to El-centro earthquake for different reinforcement combinations.

6. Conclusions
In this paper, an analytical study was conducted to
evaluate the effectiveness of, one the latest smart mate-
rial namely, shape memory alloy (SMA) in seismic im-
provement of concrete shear walls. Two types of shear
walls such as ordinary type and coupled shear walls were
introduced as reference structures and were modeled by
ABAQUS computer program. Modal analyses were per-
formed to capture the modal periods and mode shapes of
the shear walls. For improving the seismic behavior of
the shear walls, vertical SMA reinforcing bars were pro-
posed to be implemented similar to conventional steel
reinforcements, throughout the height of the structures
and in all five connecting beams in coupled shear wall.
The 1D-superelastic model of SMA material was imple-
mented in the computer program by using FORTRAN as
a subroutine material module. The dynamic response of
the structures subjected to earthquake excitations was
investigated through time history analyses subjected to
El-centro and Koyna records.
In the case of the ordinary shear wall, as illustrated,
using superelastic SMA material instead of steel rebars
caused remarkable reduction in residual displacement.
The results showed that SMA bars decreased the residual
displacement by 60% and 75% for El-centro and Koyna
records, respectively. However, the SMA reinforcements
could not reduce the maximum deflection of the shear
wall significantly. For the second coupled shear wall, it
was observed that the structure with SMA reinforcement
experienced lower level of maximum and residual dis-
placements than the coupled shear wall with steel rein-
forcement. The results indicated that the SMA bars re-
duced the maximum and residual displacements up to
46% and 83%, respectively compared to the responses of
the reference wall under Koyna earthquake.
In addition, different combinations of SMA rein-
forcement with steel reinforcement were modeled in both
reference structures. The results showed that using such
combinations of different reinforcement types improved
the shear walls performance with an extent that depended
on the percentage of SMA reinforcement. However, due
to economical consideration, the steel and SMA rein-
forcements must be proportioned properly.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Dolce, D. Cardone and R. Marnetto, Implementation
and Testing of Passive Control Devices Based on Shape
Memory Alloys, Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 29, No. 7, 2000, pp. 945-968.
doi:10.1002/1096-9845(200007)29:7<945::AID-EQE958
>3.0.CO;2-#
[2] K. Wilde, P. Gardoni and Y. Fujino, Base Isolation Sys-
tem with Shape Memory Alloy Device for Elevated
Highway Bridges, Engineering Structures, Vol. 22, 2000,
pp. 222-229. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(98)00097-2
[3] M. Dolce and D. Cardone, Mechanical Behavior of
Shape Memory Alloys for Seismic Applications-2. Aus-
tenite NiTi Wires Subjected to Tension, International
Journal of Mechanical Sciences, Vol. 43, No. 11, 2001,
pp. 2657- 2677. doi:10.1016/S0020-7403(01)00050-9
[4] S. Bruno and C. Valente, Comparative Response Analy-
sis of Conventional and Innovative Seismic Protection
Strategies, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dy-
namics, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2002, pp. 11067-11092.
doi:10.1002/eqe.138
[5] A. Baratta and O. Corbi, On the Dynamic Behavior of
Elastic-Plastic Structures Equipped with Pseudoelastic
SMA Reinforcements, Computational Materials Science,
Vol. 25, No. 2, 2002, pp. 1-13.
doi:10.1016/S0927-0256(02)00245-8
[6] R. DesRoches and M. Delemont, Seismic Retrofit of
Simply Supported Bridges Using Shape Memory Alloy,
Engineering Structures, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2002, pp. 325-
332. doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00098-0
[7] A. Masuda and M. Noori, Optimization of Hysteretic
Characteristics of Damping Devices Based on Pseudoe-
lastic Shape Memory Alloys, International Journal of
Non-Linear Mechanics, Vol. 37, No. 8, 2002, pp. 1375-
1386. doi:10.1016/S0020-7462(02)00024-0
[8] R. DesRoches, M. Delemont and J. McCormick, Cycli-
cal Properties of Superelastic Shape Memory Alloys,
ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 1,
2004, pp. 38-46.
Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE
M. GHASSEMIEH ET AL. 95
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:1(38)
[9] A. Abolmaali, J. Treadway, P. Aswath, F. K. Lu and E.
McCarthy, Hysteresis Behavior of T-Stub with Supere-
lastic Shape Memory Fasteners, Journal of Construc-
tional Steel Research, Vol. 62, No. 8, 2006, pp. 831-838.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.11.017
[10] E. Choi, T.H. Nam, J.T. Oh and B.S. Cho, An Isolation
Bearing for Highway Bridges Using Shape Memory Al-
loys, Material Science and Engineering A, Vol. 438-440,
2006, pp. 1081-1084. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2006.05.098
[11] S. A. Motahari and M. Ghassemieh, Multilinear One-
dimensional Shape Memory Material Model for Use in
Structural Engineering Applications, Engineering Struc-
tures, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2006, pp. 904-913.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.06.007
[12] C. Czaderski, B. Hahnebach and M. Motavalli, RC
Beam with Variable Stiffness and Strength, Construction
and Building Materials, Vol. 20, No. 9, 2006, pp. 824-
833. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.01.038
[13] S. Saiidi and H. Wang, Exploratory Study of Seismic
Response of Concrete Columns with Shape Memory Al-
loys Reinforcement, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 103,
No. 3, 2006, pp. 436-443.
[14] S. A. Motahari, M. Ghassemieh and S. A. Abolmaali,
Implementation of Shape memory Alloy Dampers for
Passive Control of Structures Subjected to Seismic Exci-
tations, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol.
63, No. 12, 2007, 1570-1579.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2007.02.001
[15] L. Li, Q. Li and F. Zhang Behavior of Smart Concrete
Beams with Embedded Shape Memory Alloy Bundles,
Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures,
Vol. 18, No. 10, 2007, pp. 1003-1014.
doi:10.1177/1045389X06071974
[16] B. Andrawes and R. DesRoches, Comparison between
Shape Memory Alloy Seismic Restrainers and Other
Bridge Retrofit Devices, Journal of Bridge Engineering,
Vol. 12, No. 6, 2007, pp. 700-709.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2007)12:6(700)
[17] R. Johnson, J. E. Padgett, M. E. Maragakis, R. DesRo-
ches and M. S. Saiidi, Large Scale Testing of Nitinol
Shape Memory Alloy Devices for Retrofitting of
Bridges, Smart Material and Structures, Vol. 17, No. 3,
2008, pp. 1-28.
doi:10.1088/0964-1726/17/3/035018
[18] M. A. Rahman, S. R. Akanda and M. A. Hossain, Effect
of Cross Section Geometry on the Response of an SMA
Column, Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and
Structures, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2008, pp. 243-252.
[19] A. M. Sharabash and B. Andrawes, Application of
Shape Memory Alloy Dampers in the Seismic Control of
Cable-Stayed Bridges, Engineering Structures, Vol. 31,
No. 2, 2009, pp. 607-616.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.11.007
[20] S. Saiidi, M. OBrien and M. Sadrossadat-Zade, Cyclic
Response of Concrete Bridge Columns Using Superelas-
tic Nitinol and Bendable Concrete, ACI Structural
Journal, Vol. 106, No. 1, 2009, pp. 69-77.
[21] O. E. Ozbulut and S. Hurlebaus, Seismic Assessment of
Bridge Structures Isolated by a Shape Memory Alloy/
Rubber-Based Isolation System, Smart Materials and
Structures, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2011, pp. 1-15.
doi:10.1088/0964-1726/20/1/015003
[22] A. kari, M. Ghassemieh and A. Abolmaali, A New Dual
Bracing System for Improving the Seismic Behavior of
Steel Structures, Smart Materials and Structures, Vol.
20, No. 12, 2011, pp. 1-35.
doi:10.1088/0964-1726/20/12/125020
[23] Abaqus, Inc., ABAQUS User Manual, V6.4, 2006.
[24] J. Lee and G. L. Fenves, A Plastic-Damage Model for
Cyclic Loading of Concrete Structures, ASCE Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 124, No. 8, 1998, pp. 892-
900. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1998)124:8(892)
[25] B. Andrawes and R. DesRoches, Sensitivity of Seismic
Applications to Different Shape Memory Alloy Models,
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 134, No. 2, 2008,
pp. 173-183.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2008)134:2(173)


Copyright 2012 SciRes. OJCE