The applicable restrictions of these curves are

0:3 6 Rf 6 0:7; 0:25 6 __

6 0:5; P=Py 6 0:2; =_ > 3:0 (5)
The above equations are plotted in Figure 12. The solid line in each plot denotes the _tted
equations
with average values of test results, while the dashed line represents the curve which is
lower than
the solid line with a constant distance of S. Here, S is the standard deviation.
It is observed that for the most part, the computed results are close to the _tted curves.
However,
when the value of Rf__
becomes very small, the curves will predict higher results, especially for the
ultimate strength [see Figure 12(a)]. Moreover, the inuence of the modi_ed sti_ener's
equivalent
slenderness ratio parameter __
0

was not reected in Equations (2){(4). Therefore, it is necessary to

propose new formulae for both the ultimate strength and the ductility based on the
current computed
results. Incorporating the e_ect of __
s

on the ultimate strength and ductility of the columns, the

equations that provide satisfactory predictions to the computed results are _tted as
follows:
Hmax
Hy
=
0:10
(Rf__
__
s

s)0:5

+ 1:06 (S =0:07) (6)

_m
_y
=
0:22
Rf
p
__
__
0
s

+ 1:20 (S =0:59) (7)

_95
_y
=
0:25
(1 + P=Py)Rf
p
__
__
0
s

+ 2:31 (S =0:64) (8)

The applicable ranges of the parameters are
0:25 6 Rf 6 0:56; 0:20 6 _ 6 0:50; P=Py 6 0:3; =_ > 1:0 (9)
The above _tted equations are plotted in Figure 13. It can be seen that the curves well
represents
the tendency with the variation of all the main parameters. Although six columns with
=_<1:0

are included in the current analysis, adopting =_ > 1:0 is recommended in practical
design to
e_ectively improve the ultimate strength and ductility capacity.
Based on Equations (7) and (8), the critical values of Rf , __
and __
0

can be obtained when two

of them are determined to meet a certain capacity demand. Figure 14 illustrates the
relations of
these parameters using _95=_y as ductility factor. For the sake of safety, M{S curve is
employed.
The axial load applied is 0:15Py. For a given ductility demand of _95=_y =10, if Rf =0:25,
__
s

will
be less than 0.25 in the case of __=0:20 [see Figure 14(a)], while in the case of __
=0:50, __
s

0
s

should be under 0.16 for the same Rf and ductility demand [see Figure 14(c)]. In
conclusion, the
proposed equations are quite useful for the seismic design of steel box columns with
longitudinal
sti_eners.
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The present paper was concerned with the ultimate strength and ductility evaluation of
sti_ened
steel box columns failed by coupled instability. An elastoplastic large displacement _nite
element
Copyright ? 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Earthquake Engng Struct. Dyn