## 4 Phenomenological and Statistical Analysis of Results
### Analysis of Energy Dissipation  
The energy dissipation capacity of the specimen under horizontal load is gauged using the area encompassed by the hysteretic loop in the hysteretic curve. The most commonly used assessment index is the equivalent viscous damping coefficient \(h_{e}\), which is represented as follows:  
\[h_{e}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\cdot\frac{S_{(EFGH)}}{S_{(\Delta OFM)}+S_{(\Delta OHN)}} \tag{2}\]  
where \(S_{(EFGH)}\) symbolizes the area enclosed by a hysteretic loop; \(S_{(\Delta OFM)}+S_{(\Delta OHN)}\) symbolize the area enclosed by an imaginary elastic line at the same displacement. The visual explanation of \(S_{(EFGH)}\) and \(S_{(\Delta OFM)}+S_{(\Delta OHN)}\) is portrayed in Figure 8. The equivalent viscous damping coefficient \(h_{e}\) of the five joints under the peak state is provided in Table 5.  
The analyzed data in Table 5 show that the equivalent viscous damping coefficient of the cast in situ joint XJ-1 is considerably higher than the rest of the four joints. The \(h_{e}\) of ZP-2 and ZP-3 is notably smaller, suggesting a lower capacity to dissipate energy and more severe shear damage from the perspective of the failure process. It is also observable  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Specimen Number**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Loading Direction**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Yield Point**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Ultimate Point**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Breakdown Point**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Ductility Coefficient**} \\ \cline{3-4} \cline{6-10}  & & \(P_{y}\) **(kN)** & \(\Delta_{y}\) **(mm)** & \(P_{m}\) **(kN)** & \(\Delta_{m}\) **(mm)** & \(P_{u}\) **(kN)** & \(\Delta_{u}\) **(mm)** & \(\mu\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{XJ-1} & positive & 33.25 & 18.68 & 35.29 & 28.42 & 33.92 & 77.58 & 4.15 & \multirow{2}{*}{4.38} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-10}  & reverse & \(-\)28.8 & \(-\)17.37 & \(-\)32.8 & \(-\)25 & \(-\)28.75 & \(-\)80 & 4.61 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{ZP-1} & positive & 31.39 & 20.96 & 35.25 & 24.88 & 29.96 & 65.58 & 3.12 & \multirow{2}{*}{3.22} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-10}  & reverse & \(-\)29.19 & \(-\)21.04 & \(-\)32.03 & \(-\)24.97 & \(-\)26.92 & \(-\)69.8 & 3.32 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{ZP-2} & positive & 26.60 & 20.67 & 31.45 & 29.86 & 26.73 & 60.96 & 2.95 & \multirow{2}{*}{3.05} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-10}  & reverse & \(-\)28.13 & \(-\)21.38 & \(-\)34.06 & \(-\)34.99 & \(-\)28.1 & \(-\)67.37 & 3.15 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{ZP-3} & positive & 33.05 & 18.40 & 38.57 & 27.85 & 32.78 & 51.55 & 2.8 & \multirow{2}{*}{2.87} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-10}  & reverse & \(-\)29.88 & \(-\)26.78 & \(-\)30.94 & \(-\)29.97 & \(-\)26.55 & \(-\)78.63 & 2.93 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{ZP-4} & positive & 31.53 & 21.18 & 35.66 & 26.89 & 30.31 & 78.75 & 3.72 & \multirow{2}{*}{3.96} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-10}  & reverse & \(-\)26.88 & \(-\)19.07 & \(-\)32.01 & \(-\)24.29 & \(-\)30.5 & \(-\)79.93 & 4.2 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Load characteristic values and ductility coefficient of specimens.  
Figure 8: Calculation diagram of the equivalent viscous damping coefficient.  
that enhancing the length of L-bars, the concrete strength of the composite beam, and the post-cast area of concrete in the joint area can boost the energy dissipation capacity.