Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

CYCLIC BEHAVIOR OF EXTERIOR PRECAST CONCRETE BEAM COLUMN FRAMES USING COMBINED WELDED-BOLTED CONNECTION

R. Ketiyot 1 and C. Hansapinyo 2 1 Department of Civil Engineering, Chiang Mai University, Thailand. Email: rattapon.ste7@gmail.com 2 Department of Civil Engineering, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.

ABSTRACT

This paper presents experimental investigation on seismic resistant of exterior precast concrete beam-column frame using combined welded-bolted connection. The specimens were tested under cyclic loading which is recommended by ACI T1.1-01. The precast concrete beam-column specimen having precast beam connected to precast column at the column face. The connection at bottom face of the beam is welding and the top is bolted type. The test results were compared with those of the cast-in-place specimen having identically reinforcement in connection conforming to design standard for earthquake resistant buildings, ACI318-08. The test results indicated that diagonal cracking is the failure pattern of the two specimens. However, the precast specimen has shown better seismic performances including ultimate capacity, ductility and energy dissipating capacity.

KEYWORDS

Cyclic load, beam-column element, precast, combined welded-bolted connection.

INTRODUCTION

With the merits of quality control, low construction cost and construction speed, construction method has been continuously shifted from cast-in place to prefabrication system. It is extremely true for a large project containing repeated parts. Due to its versatility, moment resistant frame is the most popular building system. To response to loadings, connection between the beam-to-column plays an important role. Three distinct properties of connection are capacity, stiffness and ductility. The properties are essentially significant in the earthquake prone area such as northern Thailand.

Several studies have been conducted to study the behaviour of precast beam-to-column connections. Earliest works of the studies had been focused on stiffness and capacity aimed to resist gravity load. PCI Manual on design of connections for precast prestressed concrete (PCI, 1973) is one of the product from the past researches. With evident of past earthquake damages, extended researches focusing on precast element for proper seismic resistant have been widely performed since the late of the twentieth century until present. Testing of precast connections under reverse loading have been considered as a proof performance method in order to obtain better understanding of newly proposed connections such as Seckin and Fu (1990), Cheok and Lew

(1991), G

n (1997), Korkmaz and Tankut (2005) and etc. With cast-in-place detail emulation, the results

were that the precast connection could be used for the earthquake resistant buildings in moderate to severe regions. Onur et al.(2006) and Pampanin S. et al. (2006) studied the hybrid connections. The results showed that the connections were better than monolithic connection in terms of strength, drift capacity, energy dissipation, residual drift, and damage to concrete. The results indicated the application of the hybrid connection providing a means of connecting the precast members for large forces in severe seismic zone.

o

rg u

The literature review have shown applicability of precast element. Welding or wet process for connecting members have shown good seismic resistant. However, the connection processes require more on-site attention which may compensate the benefit of using precast element. This paper presents the test results of exterior precast beam-to-column joint under reversing load. To minimize welding work in construction site, bolted connection between rebar using couplers were adopted. The cyclic test method is recommended by the ACI T1.1-01 (2001). The seismic properties of the precast specimen i.e. strength, ductility, stiffness degradation,

strength degradation, energy dissipation and mode of failure are then compared with identical monolithic reinforced concrete specimen.

METHOD OF STUDY

Experiment study

The experiment comprised of two exterior reinforced concrete frames, one monolithic (Mvj) and one precast (Pvj). The test specimens are planar beam-column sub-assemblage representing a portion of frame building at an exterior joint between column and beam (Figure 1a). The test specimens were subjected to cyclic load by means of concentrated vertical reversed force P at the end of the beam element (Figure. 1(b)). The testing method generates the bending moments and shear forces similar to that of a beam-column sub-assemblage under laterally loaded moment-resisting frame (Figures 1(c) and 1(d)).

(a) (b) (c) (d) Figure 1 (a)frame under lateral loads; (b) beam-column sub assemblage; (c)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 1 (a)frame under lateral loads; (b) beam-column sub assemblage; (c) bending moment diagram; and (d)
shear force diagram

Test specimens

The two specimens have identical dimensions, as shown in Figures 2 and 3 for monolithic connection (Mvj) and precast connection (Pvj), respectively. For the precast specimen, the connection was consisted of welded plate and bolted rebars at the bottom and top layers of the beam, respectively, as shown in Figure 4. This is to facilitate member installation. The two specimens were designed based on design standard for earthquake resistant buildings ACI 318-08 (2008). Eight 16 mm diameter deformed bar (DB16) reinforcing bars were used for all column and the steel ratio of columns are about 0.027. Arrangement of beam reinforcement for all two specimens were also identical, i.e., five 16 mm diameter deformed top bars and four 16 mm diameter deformed bottom bars. Flexural reinforcement ratio for beam members are 0.011 and 0.012 for reinforcing bars at bottom and top beam respectively. The compressive strength of concrete for overall specimens were 23 MPa. Table 1 summarizes the steel reinforcement properties for all specimens.

Table 1 Reinforcing bars

Rebar

Yield strength (Fy) (MPa)

Ultimate strength (Fu) (MPa)

DB6

318

437

DB12

545

707

DB16

589

689

Test setup

Figure 5 presents the set-up and the location of deformation measurements. Figure 6 shows strain gauges installation. The specimens were supported on a pinned connection at the base and the column top was a pinned support with rigid link to reaction frame. Reversing vertical load (P) was applied at the beam end by a hydraulic ram and gradually increased to achieve a controlled story drifts, as shown in Figure 7. Transducers i.e. LVDTs and gauges were installed on the test specimens in order to measure the deflections, rotations and shear deformations. The drift ratio( ) is calculated by Eq. 1 from the obtained displacements of LVDTs numbered D1 D2 and D3, as shown in Figure 5(b).

cos tan cos =
cos tan
cos
=

(1)

Figure 2 Detail of the specimen Mvj Figure 3 Detail of the specimen Pvj Figure

Figure 2 Detail of the specimen Mvj

Figure 2 Detail of the specimen Mvj Figure 3 Detail of the specimen Pvj Figure 4

Figure 3 Detail of the specimen Pvj

Figure 2 Detail of the specimen Mvj Figure 3 Detail of the specimen Pvj Figure 4

Figure 4 Detail of the connection of specimen Pvj

(a) Loading (b) Deformations Figure 5 Configuration of test setup Column Beam Monolithic specimen(Mvj) Precast

(a) Loading

(a) Loading (b) Deformations Figure 5 Configuration of test setup Column Beam Monolithic specimen(Mvj) Precast Specimen

(b) Deformations

Figure 5 Configuration of test setup

Column Beam
Column
Beam

Monolithic specimen(Mvj)

of test setup Column Beam Monolithic specimen(Mvj) Precast Specimen (Pvj) Figure 6 Installation of strain

Precast Specimen (Pvj)

Figure 6 Installation of strain gauges

4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 2.00% 1.40% 1.00% 0.75% 1.00% 0.25% 0.35% 0.50% 0.20% 0.15%
4.00%
3.50%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
2.00%
1.40%
1.00%
0.75%
1.00%
0.25% 0.35%
0.50%
0.20%
0.15%
Cycle (N)
0.00%
-0.15%
-0.20% -0.25% -0.35%
-0.50%
-1.00%
-0.75% -1.00%
-1.40%
-2.00%
-2.00%
-2.50%
-3.00%
-3.50%
-4.00%
Drift Ratio (%)

Figure 7 Loading history

As shown in Figure 7, three repeated cyclic load is controlled by target drift ratio. First three cycles started at 0.15 percent drift ratio. The tests were continued with gradually increasing drift ratios to 3.50 percent of the drift ratio or until loss of capacity to withstand loading.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Behaviours

For monolithic specimen (Mvj), at the +0.15 percent story drift ratio, The first visible vertical flexural cracks were observed on the beam at the beam column interface. With the increase of drift ratio, the existed cracks propagated and new flexural cracks were found. Diagonal cracks were observed on the column at the beam- column joint core at the third cycle of ±0.20 percent story drift ratio. At the ±0.50 percent story drift ratio, flexural cracks were observed at the column. At magnitude of ±1.40 percent story drift ratio, the diagonal cracks at the beam-column joint were widened. Until ±3.50 percent story drift ratio, the specimen was failed by concrete crushing in the joint as shown in Figure 8. The relationship between column shear forces and story drift

ratio is presented in Figure 9. As shown in Figure 9, the monolithic specimen is good in term of ductility and energy dissipation. After 1.00 percent story drift ratio, pinching effect can be observed. The maximum lateral load capacities of the specimen was 36.2 kN at the 1.93 percent story drift ratio. At the last load cycle, the lateral load were decreased to 14.49 kN or 40 percent of ultimate lateral load capacities.

Crack development of the precast specimen(Pvj) is very similar to the monolithic one described above. It was started with flexural cracks on beam and columns near to the joint core and followed by diagonal crack in the joint core. However, pushing out of concrete at the column face is more clearly observed, as shown in Figure 10. This is due to the end reaction of the end plate connected to flexural reinforcement. The column shear forces and drift ratio relationship is presented in Figure 11. The maximum lateral load capacities of the specimen is 50.0 kN at the 3.46 percent story drift level and the final cycle, The lateral load is slightly decreased to 70 percent of ultimate lateral load capacities. The pinching effect was observed on the second and third cycles at higher 2.00 percent story drift level.

Measured strains of longitudinal bars of Mvj specimen are shown in Figure 12. With the increase of the loading magnitude, strains were increased. However, the strains are lower than yielding values in which the observed flexural cracks were not much widened. It can be observed that compressive strains are much less than less than the tensile strains regardless of position of the longitudinal reinforcements. It is due to the cyclically shift of neutral axis of the beam. The observed longitudinal strain of the Pvj specimen is similar to those of Mvj specimen.

of the Pvj specimen is similar to those of Mvj specimen. Figure 8 Damage of specimen

Figure 8 Damage of specimen Mvj at 3.50 percent story drift ratio

60 50 Joint Diagonal Cracking 40 Joint Failure 30 Flexural Cracking Beam 20 10 Drift
60
50
Joint Diagonal Cracking
40
Joint Failure
30
Flexural Cracking Beam
20
10
Drift ratio(%)
0
-4.0%
-3.0%
-2.0%
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
-10
-20
Flexural Cracking Beam
Surface Diagonal Cracking Joint
-30
Joint Failure
-40
-50
Concrete Spalling
-60
Column shear force (kN)

Figure 9 Column shear force and story drift ratio of specimen Mvj

Figure 10 Damage of specimen Pvj at 3.50 percent story drift Concrete Spalling 60 Joint

Figure 10 Damage of specimen Pvj at 3.50 percent story drift

Concrete Spalling

60 Joint Failure Flexural Cracking Column 50 40 Surface Diagonal Cracking Joint 30 Flexural Cracking
60
Joint Failure
Flexural Cracking Column
50
40
Surface Diagonal Cracking Joint
30
Flexural Cracking Beam
20
10
Drift ratio(%)
0
-4.0%
-3.0%
-2.0%
-1.0%
-10
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
-20
Flexural Cracking Beam
Surface Diagonal Cracking Joint
-30
Flexural Cracking Column
-40
-50
Joint Failure
Column shear force (kN)

Concrete Spalling

Figure 11 Load vs. story drift response of specimen Pvj

Strain (x 10-6 ) 3,000 Yield Strian 2,500 25 29 31 23 27 2,000 19
Strain (x 10-6 )
3,000
Yield Strian
2,500
25 29
31
23 27
2,000
19
21 33
17
1,500
Cycles Number
13
15
1,000
11
7
5
1
3
9
500
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
-500
-1,000
-1,500
Step Number
sg1
sg3
sg7

(a) Top bar

Strain (x 10-6 ) 3,000 Yield Strian 2,500 25 23 27 2,000 19 21 29
Strain (x 10-6 )
3,000
Yield Strian
2,500
25
23 27
2,000
19
21 29
Cycles Number
17
1,500
31
15
13
1,000
11
9
33
5 7
500
1
3
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
-500
-1,000
-1,500
Step Number
sg2
sg4
sg8
(b)
bottom bar

Figure 12 Strains on the longitudinal reinforcement bars of the monolithic specimen(Mvj)

Ductility (µ)

The definition of equivalent yield and ultimate displacement as proposed by Park(1989) for general case of lateral load-displacement response are adopted in this study for ductility estimation, as seen in Eq. 2. The ultimate displacement (d u ) is taken as the post peak displacement with 80 percent drop of lateral load capacity, as show in Figure 13. The yield displacement (d y ) is taken as the displacement at the hypothetical yield point of an equivalent perfectly elasto-plastic system with an elastic stiffness equal to the secant stiffness of the specimen at 75 percent of the peak lateral load. Considering the backbone curves of the hysteresis behaviors, the thick line shown in Figures 9 and 11, the ductility ratios of the specimens are estimated in Table 2.

µ = d
µ = d

(2)

Figure 13.Equivalent yield displacement and ultimate displacement (Park, 1989)

Table 2 Ductility ratios

Pushing direction

Pulling direction

Specimens

d

u

d

y

d

u

dy

µ

avg

(%)

(%)

µ

(%)

(%)

µ

Mvj

2.34

1.19

1.96

3.05

0.85

3.71

2.84

Pvj

3.50

1.45

2.41

3.50

0.95

3.68

3.04

Stiffness Degradation

Stiffness degradation of the test specimens is discussed here based on the secant stiffness. The secant stiffness (K sec ) of any drift ratio, as shown in Figure 14, is calculated from the peak load for the third cycle divided by the corresponding displacement. The secant stiffness for each drift ratio is normalized (K norm ) by the secant stiffness at 0.15 percent story drift ratio. Figure 15 shows the stiffness degradation of the specimens. At the story drift ratio less than 1.0 percent, the degradation of both specimens are very similar. The loss of initial stiffness for these is approximately 45 percent at 1.0 percent story drift ratio. This is due to similar cracking behavior at the beginning of loading. However, for larger story drift ratio, the stiffness degradation of specimen Mvj is greater compared to the Pvj. It is because the more severe of diagonal cracking in the joint area of specimen Mvj.

Energy Dissipation

The equivalent viscous damping ratio ( eq ) is used to explain the energy dissipation characteristics under cyclic loading. Chopra (1995) defined the ratio as shown in Eq.3 and Figure 14. The strain energy (A e ) is calculated from the assumed linear elastic behavior and the dissipated energy, given by the area A p , is the area enclosed by hysteresis loop.

the area A p , is the area enclosed by hysteresis loop. 1 = 2 ×
1
1

= 2

× 100

(3)

The equivalent viscous damping ratio increased with the increase of story drift, as shown in Figure 16, as damages induced in the specimens. The ratio of the both specimens are around 3-8 percents and the precast specimen gives a small higher value.

norm

K

n o r m K Figure 14 Secant stiffness and equivalent damping ratio (Onur,2006) 1.2 1.0
Figure 14 Secant stiffness and equivalent damping ratio (Onur,2006) 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Pvj
Figure 14 Secant stiffness and equivalent damping ratio (Onur,2006)
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
Pvj
0.2
Mvj
0.0
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%

Drift ratio(%)

Figure 15 Stiffness degradation of overall specimens

10.0% 9.0% 8.0% Pvj 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% Mvj 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5%
10.0%
9.0%
8.0%
Pvj
7.0%
6.0%
5.0%
Mvj
4.0%
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
eq (%)

Story Drift (%)

Figure 16 Equivalent damping ratio vs. story drift

CONCLUSIONS

This paper presents experimental investigation on seismic resistant of exterior precast concrete beam-column frame using combined welded-bolted connection. Comparison in terms of the seismic resistant are made with the identical monolithic specimen. Based on the test results, the following conclusions can be drawn:

(1)

Cracking behavior of the specimens are similar. Flexural cracking were found on beam and columns close

(2)

to the joint at lower loading. Then, diagonal cracks in the joint zone were developed and finally led to failure of the specimens. With the provided end steel plate of the precast specimen, pushing out of the concrete beam end in the joint zone was more prominent compared to the monolithic one. The hysteresis behaviors of the specimens are also similar. Due to more stable diagonal cracking in the

(3)

joint zone, the precast specimens shows better seismic performance e.g. equivalent damping ratio, stiffness degradation, ductility. The use of precast concrete beam-column using combined welded-bolted connection can be used having seismic performance comparable to the monolithic one.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the Thailand's Office of the Higher Education Commission under the National Research University Project for financial support.

REFERENCES

ACI T1.1-01 (2001) Acceptance Criteria for Moment Frames Based on Structural Testing , American Concrete Institute. ACI318-08 (2008). Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, American Concrete Institute. Cheok, G.S. and Lew, H.S. (1991). Performance of a precast concrete beam-to-column connection subject to cyclic loading , PCI Journal, May-June, 56-67. Chopra, A. K.(1995). Dynamic of Structures-Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering, International Edition, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

n , H. (1997). Semi-Rigid Behavior of Connections in Precast Concrete Structures, Ph.D. Thisis,

University of Nottingham. Korkmaz, H. H. and Tankut, T. (2005). Performance of a precast concrete beam-to-beam connection subject to reversed cyclic loading , Engineering Structures, 27, pp.1392 1407. Onur, E., Sevket, O. and Turan, O. (2006). Ductile Connections in Precast Concrete Moment Resisting Frame ,PCI journal, May-June,2-12. Pampanin, S., Buchanan, A., Fragiacomo, M. and Deam B. (2006). Code Provisions for Seismic Design of Multi-Storey Post-Tensioned Timber Buildings, Florence, Italy. Park, R. (1989). Evaluation of Ductility of Structures and Structural Assemblages from Laboratory Testing , Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 155-166. PCI Committee on Connection Details. (1973) PCI Manual on Design of Connections for Precast Prestressed Concrete, Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago. Seckim, M. and Fu, H.C. (1990) Beam-column connection in precast reinforced concrete construction , ACI structural Journal, 87(3), 252-261.

rg u

G o