Professional Documents
Culture Documents
connection detail for four-story 30 MPa (4350 psi) in the other one.
94 PCI JOURNAL
tory. These two served as reference
t------7.2 m _ _ _ __, specimens, and the performance of
(~3.6' l precast concrete specimens was evalu-
ated by comparing the results with
those of the reference specimens.
0.75m
(2.46'1
the floor
L 750 mm
(30")
_.J.._ 750 mm __j
(30")
it was concluded that the premature
joint failure observed in Specimen
TPl was due to poor reinforcement
Bar diameters, ~ 14 = 0.56 in. , lb 16 = 0.64 in. , ¢20 =0. 80 in. detailing at the joint. Therefore, the
improved reinforcement detail, shown
as Type (b) in Fig. 3, was used in the
Fig. 2. Test specimen.
other specimens.
Two types of connection were used
these plates would be able to transfer behavior of joints with and without in the precast concrete test specimens.
both shear and moment without reduc- side plates, and to investigate the ef- These are shown as Types I and II in
ing the capacity of the beam. The au- fect of joint width on behavior and Fig. 4. In Type I, the connection pro-
thors suggested providing additional strength under reversed cyclic loading posed in the original design was used,
plates on each side (mid-depth) to en- simulating the seismic action. Five i.e., no side plates were provided. In
able better shear transfer. specimens with welded steel plate Type II, side plates were introduced in
A test program was organized at connections were tested under re- addition to the top and bottom plates.
Structural Mechanics Laboratory of versed cyclic loading. 3•4 In both types, connecting steel plates
Middle East Technical University to In addition, two specimens in which were welded to plates anchored into
investigate the improvement provided the column bracket and the beam stub the members.
by side plates. The main objective of were cast together (monolithically) As stated previously, the dimensions
this test program was to compare the were tested under a similar load his- and reinforcement of the test speci-
July-August 1993 95
mens were identical with those of the
prototype. Dimensions of the test spec-
r anchored plate
imens are shown in Fig. 2. Specimens
~~/~ were reinforced with five top, two in-
Bar sizes·. termediate and three bottom longitudi-
weldtd
1 ~ 16 =0.64 in. nal bars. Diameters of the top, inter-
(J 20 =0.80 in. mediate and bottom bars were 20, 14
(
~3--16 - l_./ 4-,20
I• • ~
Test Procedure
All specimens were tested under re-
versed cyclic loading. The load was
applied at a point 1250 mm (49.2 in.)
Ltlnchored plote
away from the root of the cantilever
Note : Stirrups ore not shown (representing the column face) to cre-
ate moment to shear ratios at the joint
(b) Improved Detail
comparable to those calculated for the
prototype. The central block was
Fig. 3. Reinforcement detail for column bracket and beam stub at joint. firmly fixed to the test floor. Load was
~welding
1 !c:f::JI
Top view Top view
96 PCIJOURNAL
Table 1. Properties of test specimens.
TR1 27 - - - - -
TR2 40 - - - - -
TP1 27 Original I 20 350x200x10 -
TP2 27 Original II 20 350 X 150 X 10 150x90x10
TP3 40 Improved I 20 400x150x10 -
TP4 40 Improved II 30 400x 150x 10 150 X 90 X 10
TP5 45 Improved II 20 400 X 150 X 10 150x90x10
TEST RESULTS
Fig. 5. Loading system and instrumentation.
As mentioned previously, Speci-
mens TR1 and TR2 were monolithic
reference specimens (no connection). detail at the joint, it behaved effec- caused by rigid body rotation from the
In evaluating the performance of the tively and reached the required ulti- tip deflection measured. The relative
precast concrete specimens with dry mate capacity. This specimen had side vertical displacement of the two sides
joints, the test results were compared plates in addition to the top and bot- of the joint was measured by Dial
to those of the reference specimens. tom plates. Results of these tests Gauges 1 and 2 as shown in Fig. 5.
Specimen TP1, which had a joint clearly illustrate the importance of The variation of the relative displace-
reinforcement detail designated as side plates, which limited the relative ment at the joint with the applied load
Type (a), failed at 20 percent of the displacement at the joint, thus pre- history is shown in Fig. 7. Dial gauges
calculated ultimate capacity. After the venting premature failure. used to measure the relative displace-
test, it was observed that this prema- Some representative load-deflection ment at the joint were located 130 mm
ture failure took place due to fracture curves obtained from the tests are pre- (5.1 in.) apart. Therefore, it should be
of the reinforcing bars at the bent sented in Fig. 6. The deflection, 4zer is pointed out that the relative displace-
points (see Fig. 3a). Although Speci- defined as the net tip deflection ob- ments shown in Fig. 7 include flexural
men TP2 had the same reinforcement tained by subtracting the deflection deformations.
July-August 1993 97
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 J in.l (kips l 0 Q5 1.0 1.5 2,0 25 3.0 (in.l
(kips)
60 no side plates 60
.......
u..
monolithic
50
40
z 240
-"'
u.. 200
~;Gnol 50
40
160 :F
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
20 10 20 30 40 60 70 30 40
snel (mm) gnot (mm)
120
(a) Specimen TR2 (b) Specimen TP3
z 60 z 240 60
-"'
-"'
50 u.. 50
u..
40 side plates 40
w.=20mm
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
20 70 40 50 60 70
cSnet ( mm) sn•l (mm)
The load-deflection curves shown in and beam stub) on the behavior of higher compared to those of the speci-
Fig. 6 indicate that the specimens with specimens can be studied by compar- mens with side plates (Specimens TP4
side plates (Specimens TP4 and TP5) ing the load-displacement and relative and TP5). During the test, bending of
behaved well. The load carrying ca- joint displacement curves of Speci- the top and bottom plates was visible.
pacity, stiffness degradation and en- mens TP4 and TP5 (see Figs. 6 and As a result of these large deformations
ergy dissipation of these specimens 7). From this comparison, it becomes at the joint, failure took place by frac-
were comparable to those of the clear that when the joint width was in- turing of the welds which connected
monolithic reference specimens. creased from 20 to 30 mm (0. 79 to 1.2 the bottom and top plates to the an-
The poor performance of Specimen in.), relative displacements at the joint chored plates.
TP3, which did not have any side increased considerably, thus increas- In all specimens, with the exception
plates, can be seen when Fig. 6b is ing the tip deflection. of Specimens TP1 and TP3 (without
compared with Figs. 6c and 6d. The During the test, it was observed that side plates), hinging occurred at the
maximum load carried by this speci- in Specimen TP4, which had a joint root of the bracket. The test results are
men remained below 50 percent of the width of 30 mm (1.2 in.), the side summarized in Table 2. In this table,
load carried by the monolithic speci- plates were highly stressed, causing Meal is the ultimate moment calculated
mens and the specimens with side visible displacements of the anchored at the root of the specimen. The ulti-
plates. The second peak marked as 3 plates and crushing of concrete in the mate moment was calculated using the
in Fig. 6b should not be taken into vicinity of these plates. The load car- basic assumptions stated in the ACI
consideration. After excessive defor- rying capacity of this specimen was Code, Section 10.2.
mations, the joint was closed and, reduced by about 15 percent beyond Since the reinforcement was located
therefore, the load could be transferred the second cycle. In Specimen TP5, a at three levels, a trial-and-error solu-
by bearing of the two concrete faces comparable reduction took place after tion was used to calculate the ultimate
against each other. the fifth cycle. moment. Referring to Fig. 8, first the
The effect of the joint width (clear Relative joint displacements in distance from the bottom fiber to the
distance between the column bracket Specimen TP3 were significantly neutral axis, c, was assumed, and
98 PCI JOURNAL
9 0.4
I ..
(in)
(kips)
q
4
1.0
I
2.0
I
3.0 (inl
I llr
60 280 (kips)
280
z z 240 Q)
~ 50 ~ 50
lL
lL 200 40
40
160
~0 30
20 20
10 10
0
0
4 2 10 12 14 10
40 (s2- S ). mm 40 (S - S ), mm
3 2 3
80 80
120 120
(a) Specimen TR2 (b) Specimen TPJ
0 .4 (in.)
0 0.6 Q~ (iln.)... (kips) (kips)
280 60 60
z z
~
50 ~ 50
lL lL
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
4 14 16 18 20 22 24 4 8 10 12 14
(S -S ),mm (8 - S/mm
2 3 2
July-August 1993 99
Table 2. Summary of test results. authors would like to thank FEGA-
Specimen designation GAMA for their contributions and co-
operation.
Ratio TRl TR2 TPl TP2 TP3 TP4 TPS
Note: Values given are for downward loading (strong side). 1. Ersoy, U., "Development of Seismic
Resistant Prefabricated Structural Sys-
tem," Proceedings of Joint Conference,
Berlin Technical University Publica-
CONCLUSIONS 3. The width of the joint is an im-
tion, Herausgeber, Berlin, 1984, pp.
portant parameter, especially when the 324-340.
Based on the test results, the follow-
member is subjected to reversed cyclic
ing conclusions appear valid: 2. "Design and Construction of Prefabri-
bending. Therefore, tolerances should cated RIC Building Systems," Building
1. Dry joints composed of top, side
be checked carefully on the project Construction Under Seismic Condi-
and bottom plates with adequate stiff-
site during erection. tions in Balkan Region, UNDP/-
ness behaved satisfactorily under re-
In the light of these conclusions, UNIDO Project No. RER/79/015,
versed cyclic loading. The strength,
the improved connection tested was V. 2, Vienna, 1985.
stiffness and energy dissipation of
used in all the dormitory buildings 3. Ayik, S. B., "Behavior of Dry Joints
such members were comparable to
built by FEGA-GAMA Construction Under Seismic Action," M.S. Thesis,
those of a monolithic member.
Company. Civil Engineering Department, Middle
2. Side plates are mandatory for dry East Technical University, 1986.
joints which are expected to be sub-
4. Ersoy, U., and Tankut, T., "Behaviour
jected to reversed cyclic loads. In
ACKNOWLEDGMENT of Precast Beams With Dry Joints
members without side plates, very Under Cyclic Reversed Loading," Pro-
large deformations took place and the This project was financed by the Pre- ceedings of Eighth European Confer-
load carrying capacity was reduced fabricated Concrete Construction Com- ence on Earthquake Engineering, V. 4,
significantly. pany FEGA-GAMA of Ankara. The Lisbon, 1985, pp. 49-56.
APPENDIX- NOTATION
c = distance from bottom fiber to neutral axis of section q, = tip displacement at yielding
F = force applied at tip of cantilever £\ = maximum tip displacement at M ~ 0.85 Mtest
M = flexural moment .18 = relative joint displacement (relative displacement
Meal = calculated ultimate flexural capacity of specimen of bracket with respect to beam stub at joint).
at root of cantilever .18= 8:3- ~
~ = displacement of beam stub measured adjacent to
Mtest = maximum flexural moment reached during test
joint as shown in Fig. 5
8 = displacement
8:3 = displacement of bracket measured adjacent to joint
4zet = net displacement at tip of cantilever as shown in Fig. 5