Analytical and Experimental Study on R/C Exterior Beam-Column Joints without Transverse Reinforcement

Sangjoon Park, Ph.D Candidate Khalid Mosalam, Prof. & Vice Chair UC Berkeley
5th ICEE, Tokyo, Japan, March 3-5, 2010

Motivation
Seismic performance of old existing RC building joints
- No seismic design code prior to 1970s - No transverse reinforcement in the joint region Brittle failure and collapse

Lateral force

Beam flexural failure

Joint shear failure Lateral displacement

Motivation
Existing joint strength models and suggestions
- Inappropriate application from reinforced joints to unreinforced joints - Overly simplified failure mechanism - Underestimation of shear strength (ASCE41)
v j = V j b j hc =
joint geometry

f c' (psi)

4 6 8

v j ,test f c'

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

v j , proposed f c'

Database of Previous Tests

Unreinforced exterior joint tests w/o or w/ one lateral beam
or

(a)

(b)

(c)

Anchorage details of selected specimens

Type A

Type B

Type C

Type D

Column width (bc) beam width (bb) 62 test data are collected Failure mode:
J (joint shear failure without beam yielding) BJ (joint shear failure with beam yielding)

Developed Semi-Empirical Model

1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2

V jh b j hc f
' c

= a2

cos h 1.31 + 0.085 b hc

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

low aspect ratio, high aspect ratio,

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

Joint aspect ratio, hb/hc

Beam reinforcement index As

V jh b j hc
Ymax=X2

b j hc

f y 1 0.85 hb ' H f c

f c'

Proposed Model
Ymin=1.25X1

V jh b j hc

h = As f y 1 0.85 b H f c'
: overstreng th factor 1.0 1.25

As f y

X1

X2

b j hc

h 1 0.85 b H f c'

Developed Analytical Model

V jh = V jh,ST 1 + V jh,ST 2
V jh,ST1 = V jh = As f s n b ( f s ) dx
lh 0

V jh,ST2 = (1 )V jh = n b ( f s ) dx Vc
lh 0

4 H = 1 H 0.85hb b

( f ) dx
lh 0 s

fs

Vc

( fs )
V jh,ST 1

As fs

: Bond strength
ST1 ST2
E
12 f c' [psi]
Lehman & Moehle (2000)

Y R

6 f c' [psi] 1.8 f c' [psi] CEB-FIP (1990)

fy fp fs : tensile stress of beam reinforcement

Developed Analytical Model

' Input: f c , f y , b b , h b , b c ,

hc , H , b , A s , l h

Calculate: fo , fp , fr , 1 , 2 , Vjh,ST1,max Assume: fs,i Determine: i Define: Vjh,i =As fo(1-0.85hb/H) Yes Check: fs,i < fo No Define: Vjh = Vjh,i End Yes Check: Vjh,ST1,i Vjh,ST1,max No Calculate: Vjh,i , Vjh,ST1,i

Predictions by Proposed Models

300

300

Vjh,test [kip]

250

Vjh,test [kip]
MEAN = 0.97 COV = 0.16

250

200

200

150

150

MEAN = 0.98 COV = 0.15

100

100

50

50

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

(a) Semi-Empirical

(b) Analytical

For More Details

PEER Report 2009/106

http://peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2009/web_PEER9106_PARK_Mosalam.pdf

Experimental Program
1. Test matrix
Beam Section (A-A)
Reinforcement Ratio
SP1
4-D19 4-#6

SP2
stirrup #3@3'' D10@76mm 4-D19 4-#6
457 18" 406 16" 4-D25 4-#8 stirrup D10@76mm #3@3'' 4-D22 4-#7

B Aspect Ratio
top and bottom slab reinforcement : D10@305mm

18" 457 16" 406

A
H=3.68m

SP3
4-D19 4-#8 762 30"

SP4 (in progress)

4-D25 4-#6

A
L=2.44m
#3
16" 406

stirrup 762 30" #3@3'' D10@76mm

4-D19 4-#7

#3
406 16"

stirrup #3@3'' D10@76mm

4-D22 4-#6

Column Section (B-B)

SP1&2
8-D25 8-#8

SP3&4
18" 457 18" 457

8-D32 8-#8

For All Specimens: Target concrete strength: f'c = 24 MPa (3.5 ksi)

18" 457 18" 457

hoop D10@76mm #3@3''

hoop D10@76mm #3@3''

Reinforcing bars nominal yield strength: fy = 414 MPa (Grade 60)

Experimental Program
2. Construction

EW direction
76.2mm

38.1mm

50.8mm

63.5mm

NS direction

Experimental Program
3. Loading
+
Papplied
Group 4 Group 3 Group 2 Group 1

Control beam tip displacement

+
Group 5 Group 6

Group 7

+
NS

+
EW

0 =

y 4

y 1.5 y 2.25 y

1 previouse 3

- Simulate variation of column axial loading

0.1 0.05

P/(f 'c Ag)

SP1&2 : Papplied=-95 + 4Vb,x + 4Vb,y SP3&4 : Papplied=-95 + 2Vb,x + 2Vb,y

SP1 SP2

0 -0.05 -0.1 -0.15 -0.2 -0.25 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 x 10

4

Testing time (sec)

Experimental Program
4. Setup
Papplied Allow vertical translation for column axial load variation

Vb,L

Vb,T

Preact

Target B/C

Sliding vertically

Test Results
SP1- Load vs. Drift

SP1

150

Beam shear (kN)

100 50 0 -50

EW direction

5 4

150
7 8

100 50 0

NS direction

5 4

6 7

8 7 6 5

-100 -150

Yielding Peak
0 2 4 6 8

-50
7

-100 -150

6 5

Yielding Peak
0 2 4 6 8

-8

-6

-4

-2

-8

-6

-4

-2

Drift (%)

Drift (%)

Test Results
SP2- Load vs. Drift

SP2

150
4

6 7 8

150 100 50 0 -50

6 7 8

Beam shear (kN)

100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 -200

EW direction

NS direction

8 7 6 5 4

Yielding Peak
0 2 4 6 8

-100 -150 -200

8 7 6 5 4

Yielding Peak
-2 0 2 4 6 8

-8

-6

-4

-2

-8

-6

-4

Drift (%)

Drift (%)

Test Results
SP3- Load vs. Drift

200 150

200
6 7

Beam shear (kN)

Beam shear (kN)

EW direction

150
8

NS direction

6 7 8

100 50 0 -50
8

100 50 0 -50
8 7 6 5 4

-100
7

-150
6

Yielding Peak
-4
5 4

-100 -150 -200

Yielding Peak
0 2 4 6 8

-200

-8

-6

-2

-8

-6

-4

-2

Drift (%)

Drift (%)

Test Results
Normalized joint shear vs. Joint distortion
SP1
0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1

SP2
0.8 0.6 0.4 ASCE 41 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1
0.8

SP3
0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8

EW direction

EW direction

EW direction

-0.01 -0.005

0.005

0.01

(MPa)

(MPa)

-0.01 -0.005

0.005

0.01

-0.015 -0.01 -0.005

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Joint shear strain Joint distortion (rad)

0.8 NS direction 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 ASCE 41 -0.6 -0.8 -1 -0.01 -0.005 0 0.005 0.01

Joint distortion Joint shear strain(rad)

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1

Joint distortion (rad)

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8

NS direction

NS direction

Joint distortion Joint shear strain(rad)

-0.01 -0.005

0.005 0.01

-0.02 -0.015 -0.01 -0.005

0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02

Joint distortion Joint shear strain(rad)

Joint distortion (rad)

- Normalized joint shear stress ASCE41 - Joint distortion: upward loading, i.e. slab in compression > downward loading, i.e. slab in tension

Test Results
Joint Shear Strength
1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4
EW

SP2

Loading Up Down NS Up Down EW SP2 NS Up Down Up Down Up Down Up Down

Test [MPa0.5] 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.66 0.80 1.09 0.81 1.10 0.52 0.59 0.47 0.51

Semiempirical [MPa0.5] 0.64 (0.90)* 0.71 (1.00) 0.64 (0.96) 0.71 (1.08) 0.79 (0.99) 0.97 (0.89) 0.79 (0.98) 0.97 (0.88) 0.57(1.10) 0.61(1.03) 0.57(1.21) 0.61(1.20)

EW SP1

SP3

0.2 0 0.8 1

SP1

SP3 NS

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.2

( )*: vj_model/ vj_test

Joint aspect ratio, hb/hc

Test Results
Intermediate Column Bar

top middle bottom

top middle bottom

2.5

top middle bottom

Strain (10 -3)

2 1.5 1 0.5 0

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5

top

Tension Tie ? Not likely

bottom middle

-0.5 -1 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

-1

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1

Drift (%) (a) EW direction

SP2

Drift (%) (b) NS direction

Test Results
Effect of Slab
Loading group 6 5 4 3
152

1 1 2 3 4 Strain ( / y )
5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2

Top gages @1 to 4
457

top

bot

Bottom gages only @1,2

1 0.8

Strain ( / y)

slip

5 4 3 2 1

slip

EW-Top

EW-Bottom

0.6 0.4 0.2 0

EW-Top

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

EW-Bottom

4
1 0.8

0 1 2 3 4

Bar number

Bar number

1
1 0.8

Strain ( / y )

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

Strain ( / y)

5 4 3 2 1

Bar number

Bar number slip

NS-Top

0.6 0.4 0.2 0

slip

NS-Bottom

NS-Top

0.6 0.4 0.2 0

NS-Bottom

Beam reinforcement low high

0 1 2 3 4

Bar number

Bar number

Bar number

Bar number

SP1

SP2

Test Results
Effect of Slab
457(SP1)

Bottom gages only @1,2

Loading group 6 5 4 3

762(SP3)

Strain ( / y )

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

0.8

slip

Strain ( / y )

5 4 3 2 1 0

1.2 1

slip

EW-Top

EW-Bottom

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1

1 0.8

EW-Top

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1

EW-Bottom

4
1 0.8

Strain ( / y )

5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

Strain ( / y )

Bar number

Bar number

5 4 3 2 1

NS-Top

0.6 0.4 0.2 0

slip

NS-Top

NS-Bottom

0.6

NS-Bottom
slip

0.4 0.2 0

Beam depth
1 2

0 1 2 3 4

Bar number

Bar number

SP1

small

large

SP3

152
2

1 1 2 3 4

Top gages @1 to 4

Test Results

crack

A B
Twisting angle (rad)
0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02 0.03

C
loading cycle 6 5 4 Distance 4 5 6
uniform for upward
001 09

crack

Twisting angle (rad)

0.01
09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 0

-0.01

4 5 6
concentrated between A-B

-0.03

SP2

001

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

Horizontal crack during NS upward loading

6 5 4 Distance

crack

Torsional crack during NS downward loading

Summary
1. Main parameters
Joint aspect ratio (hb / hc) Beam reinforcement index

2. Shear strength of unreinforced exterior joints

= 0.5~1.1 from tests vs. = 0.5 from ASCE 41
Accurate prediction by proposed models

3. Intermediate column bars

No function as a tension tie

4. Effect of slab
Contribution of slab reinforcement Torsional effect Different joint shear distortion when slab in tension or in compression

Future Research
Further verification of proposed models Extension to unreinforced interior joints Progressive collapse analysis using developed joint element Collapse fragility curve of old existing R/C prototype buildings
Probability of collapse

Partial collapse by joint shear failure

Partial collapse by column axial failure Complete collapse

Hazard level (PGA)

Test results are uploaded at http://research.eerc.berkeley.edu/projects/cornerbeamcolumnjoints/

Thomas(Oct.,2009)

Gordon(Dec.,2009)

James(Jan.,2010)

Percy(Next week)

Thank You!