Founded 1905 DESIGN APPRAISAL OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE JOINTS by TEO TECK HEONG, B.ENG. (Hons.) DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY NATIONAL UNIVERSITY of SINGAPORE 2003 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author would like to make use of this opportunity to acknowledge various individuals for their guidance and encouragement in the course of this research. Firstly, the author would like to express his appreciation for the constant guidance, valuable advice, constructive suggestions and encouragement provided by his project supervisors, Associate Professor J. Y. Richard Liew and Professor N. E. Shanmugam. Secondly, the help given by technical staff in Concrete and Structural Laboratory, National University of Singapore in the experimental testing is gratefully appreciated. Finally, the author is glad to have the moral support and encouragement given by his family members, especially his wife, Li Sze. The understanding of his daughter, Jing Jie, for not being able to keep her company during the course of study, is highly appreciated. Without them, the author would not have his achievement as it is. This research project was funded by the National University of Singapore under the research grant RP-264-000-138-112. The author was offered Research Assistantship under the grant, which made this study possible. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF NOTATION vi LIST OF FIGURES x LIST OF TABLES xv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvi SUMMARY xvii CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 General 1.2 Research Objectives and Scope of Research 1.3 Structure of the Thesis CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Joint Studies for Composite Non-Sway Frames 10 2.3 Joint Studies for Composite Sway Frames 23 2.4 Summary 25 CHAPTER EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION 3.1 General 30 3.2 Specimens and Test Set up 3.2.1 Phase I – Tests Under Symmetrical Loads 3.2.2 Phase II – Tests Under Reversal Loads 30 30 33 3.3 Instrumentation 35 3.4 Measurement of Joint Rotation 3.4.1 Beam Rotation 36 37 iii 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.4.5 Column Rotation Panel Zone Rotation Connection Rotation Joint Rotation 37 37 38 39 3.5 Material Properties 39 3.6 Test Results 3.6.1 Phase I - Specimens Tested Under Symmetrical Loading 3.6.1.1 Specimens SCCB1, SCCB2 and SCCB3 3.6.1.2 Specimen SCCB4 3.6.1.3 Specimens SCCB5 and SCCB6 39 40 40 44 46 3.6.2 Phase II - Specimens Tested Under Reversal Loading 3.6.2.1 Specimen SJ1 3.6.2.2 Specimens CJ1 and CJ2 3.6.2.3 Specimen CJ3 3.6.2.4 Specimen CJ4 3.6.2.5 Specimens CJ5 and CJ6 3.6.2.6 Specimen CJ7 49 50 51 53 54 55 56 3.6.3 Discussions and Evaluation of Test Results 3.6.3.1 Cyclic Load Behaviour 3.6.3.2 Strain Profile in the Steel Beam Section 3.6.3.3 Strain Profile in the Concrete Slab 3.6.3.4 Panel Zone Response 3.6.3.5 Rotation Capacity 57 57 59 60 61 62 CHAPTER ANALYTICAL MODELS 4.1 Introduction 107 4.2 Moment Resistance 108 4.3 Tensile Resistance in concrete slab 4.3.1 Shear resistance of headed stud connector 4.3.2 Tensile resistance of the reinforcement 110 110 112 4.4 Compressive Resistance 4.4.1 Compressive resistance of the steel beam 4.4.2 Compressive resistance of the beam flange 4.4.3 Compressive resistance of column web 113 113 114 114 4.5 Negative Moment Capacity 4.5.1 PNA in the slab 4.5.2 PNA in the steel beam 115 116 117 4.6 Positive Moment Capacity 127 4.7 Panel Zone Shear Resistance 131 4.8 Initial Rotational Stiffness 4.8.1 Initial rotational stiffness under negative moment 4.8.2 Initial rotational stiffness under positive moment 133 133 142 iv 4.9 Rotation Capacity 4.9.1 Deformation Capacity of Slab Reinforcement 4.9.2 Deformation of the shear connector 4.9.3 Deformation of plastic compression in the beam 4.9.4 Deformation of panel zone due to horizontal shear 4.9.5 Rotation capacity of composite joint under positive moment 142 144 146 148 148 150 4.10 Comparison with test results 152 CHAPTER JOINT MODELING AND IDEALIZATION FOR FRAME ANALYSIS 5.1 Introduction 181 5.2 Types of joint models 5.2.1 Joint modelling reflecting the actual behaviour (advanced joint model) 5.2.2 Simplified joint modelling (concentrated joint model) 182 185 186 5.3 Joint Transformation 186 5.4 Idealization of M-φ curves for frame analysis 191 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR FUTURE WORK 6.1 Introduction 200 6.2 Experimental Study 6.2.1 Phase I 6.2.2 Phase II 201 201 202 6.3 Analytical Assessment 203 6.4 Joint Modelling 205 6.5 Future Work 206 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 208 REFERENCES 210 APPENDIX A PUSH OUT TESTS ON SHEAR CONNECTOR 219 v LIST OF NOTATION a A distance from the face of the column to the first shear connector along the beam, distance from the centre of the load at the tip of the beam to the column face area Ac cross sectional area of column Ar area of slab reinforcement Abolt tensile area of bolt Avc shear area of column Ast area of profile steel sheeting ap throat thickness of weld on end plate bj width of a finite size joint bfb breadth of beam bfc breadth of column Bec effective width of concrete slab beff effective width beff,wc effective of column web bo mean width of trough of profiled steel sheeting c depth of compression stress block measured from top of slab, effective depth CS,Rd translational stiffness of shear CLC,Rd translational stiffness of compression component at L Ceq,Lt,Rd Db equivalent translational stiffness of tension components at L with an equivalent lever arm depth of beam Dr distance from the top of steel section to the centroid of the reinforcement Ds depth of slab in compression Dfc clear depth of column web Dfb clear depth of beam web Dwb depth of beam web in compression Dwbe effective depth of beam web in compression d the thickness of the concrete flange dc effective of concrete slab dbolt diameter of bolt dstud diameter of shear stud vi ey yield displacement E elastic modulus Ea elastic modulus of structural steel Ebolt elastic modulus of bolt Ec elastic modulus of concrete Ecm mean value of secant modulus of concrete Er elastic modulus of reinforcement F force Fb compression resistance of steel beam Fc,slab compressive force in concrete slab Fdc reduced beam web compression resistance due to web buckling Fr tensile resistance of reinforcement Fs tensile resistance of composite joint Ft,slab tensile resistance in concrete slab Fbf resistance of beam flange Fwc compression resistance of unstiffened column web fck compressive strength of concrete cylinder fcu compressive strength of concrete cube fctm mean tensile strength of concrete fy yield strength fyr yield strength of reinforcement fyb yield strength of beam fy,wc yield strength of column web fy.st yield strength of profiled steel sheeting fu,stud ultimate tensile strength of shear stud fu,bolt ultimate tensile strength of bolt G shear modulus h1 hc distance between centres of reinforcement and bolt-row nearest to upper beam flange the height of the steel column section hp height of profiled steel sheeting hr lever arm of reinforcement hj height of a finite size joint hstud height of shear stud vii I second moment area Ib second moment of area of beam ki stiffness coefficient of component i kp , kt reduction factor for shear stud ksc, stiffness of shear connector Lr length of reinforcement having elongation Lt transmission length M moment Mr moment capacity of composite joint Ns number of shear stud Nstud number shear studs in one ribs at a beam section Pstud design shear resistance of welded headed stud with a normal weld collar Pri tensile capacity of bolt-row i PRd shear resistance of shear stud Pv shear resistance of column web PRK the characteristic resistance of a stud pstud pitch of shear stud rc root radius of column s slip deformation of shear stud Sj rotational stiffness Sj,ini initial stiffness of composite joint SS,Rd rotational stiffness for shear at S SL,Rd rotational stiffness for shear for connection and load introduction at L SSC,Rd transformed shear stiffness SLC,Rd transformed connection stiffness tfb thickness of beam flange tfc thickness of column flange thickness of plate twb thickness of beam web twc thickness of column web Vwc shear resistance of an unstiffened column web Zc centre of compression viii zo αstud is the vertical distance between the centroids of the uncracked, unreinforced concrete flange and the uncracked, unreinforced composite section calculated using the modular ratio for short term effect, Ea/Ec coefficient for shear stud σsr1 the stress in the rebar when first crack formed γy shear strain at first yield ε value of εy yield strain of steel ϖ reduction factor for shear in column web panel ρ reduction factor for plate buckling, rebar ratio η reduction factor to concrete slab area due to profiled steel sheeting β transformation parameter βt factor, 0.4 for short term loading δ factor, 0.8 for high ductility deformed bar ν Poisson’s ratio τsm is the average bond stress along the transmission length δten total deformation in the tension zone δcomp total deformation in the compression δs total deformation in the shear zone φr the diameter of the rebar φb beam rotation φcol column rotation φc rotation capacity of composite end plate joint φz panel zone rotation φcon connection rotation φ, φ j joint rotation ∆a compressive deformation of lower beam flange ∆εsr the increase of strain in rebar at the crack, when crack first occur ∆us deformation capacity of the reinforcement 235 / f y ix LIST OF FIGURES Chapter Figure 1.1 Distinction between joint and connection (Nethercot & Zandonini, 1990) Figure 1.2a Parts of a beam-to-column joint configuration by EC4: Single-sided configuration (Proposed Annex J, EC4, 1996) Figure 1.2b Parts of a beam-to-column joint configuration by EC4: Double-sided configuration (Proposed Annex J, EC4, 1996) Chapter Figure 2.1 Typical M-φ curves of commonly used steelwork connection Figure 2.2 Symmetrical and Unsymmetrical/Unbalanced Loadings Figure 2.3 Reversal of Loading Figure 2.4a Specimen types tested in University of Minnesota, USA (Leon, 1990) Single connection monotonic tests. Figure 2.4b Specimen types tested in University of Minnesota, USA (Leon, 1990) Single connection cyclic tests Figure 2.4c Specimen types tested in University of Minnesota, USA (Leon, 1990) Floor subassemblage tests. Figure 2.5 Type of joint details tested by Plumier and Schleich (1993) Chapter Figure 3.1 Phase I – Tests under Symmetrical Loads Figure 3.2 Phase II – Tests under Reversal Loads Figure 3.3 Details of Flush end plate used in Phase I tests Figure 3.4 Cross section of Composite Beam. Figure 3.5 Details of longitudinal and transverse bars Figure 3.6a Details of SCCB1, SCCB2 and SCCB3 Figure 3.6b Details of SCCB5 Figure 3.7 Details of SCCB6 Figure 3.8a Details of Doubler plate Figure 3.8b End plate and haunch connection details in Phase II Specimens. Figure 3.9 ECCS (1986) loading procedure x those subject to reversal of loading. Therefore, different approach to model panel zone may be required. 2. To study the experimental behaviour of composite joints subjected to quasistatic cyclic loading with extended load cycles as to simulate the composite joint for buildings in low and medium seismic area. It is necessary to check whether composite action will diminish when concrete slab cracks under extended load cycles. 3. To experimentally investigate the moment-rotation behaviour of composite joints in cruciform shapes when both sides of the joint are loaded in the upward direction, i.e. positive moment. This type of loading may not exist in the actual structure, but it is needed to construct a complete rotation curve that can be used for the composite sway frame numerical model development. The experimental results can then be compared with the analytical models of the present study for positive moment when the panel zone effect is excluded. 4. To develop an analytical model to predict the rotation capacity when its accuracy does not rely on the rupture of the slab reinforcement or by attainment of limiting slip capacity. Various failure modes have been observed in the present study other than above. The analytical model developed should be able to determine the rotation capacity of the joint in accordance with its failure mode. 207 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS Based on the research work presented in this thesis, the following technical papers and report were published: 1. Teo, T. H., Yu, C. H., Liew, J. Y. R and Shanmugam, N. E. (1997) “Experimental Study of Steel - Concrete Composite Connections”, Research Report No. CE 020/97. Singapore: National University of Singapore, 91 pp. 2. Shanmugam, N. E., Yu, C. H., Liew, J. Y. R. and Teo, T. H. (1998), “Modelling of composite joints”, Proceedings of the Second World Conference on Steel Construction, 11-13 May 1998, San Sebastian, Spain. Spain. 3. Teo, T. H., Yu, C. H., Liew, J. Y. R. and Shanmugam, N. E. (1998), “Design appraised of steel-concrete composite joints”, Proceedings of the Fifth Pacific Structural Steel Conference, 13-16 October 1998, Seoul, South Korea, pp. 735740. South Korea. 4. Teo, T. H., Liew, R. J. Y., and Shanmugam, N. E. and Yu, C. H.(1998), “Moment rotation characteristics of steel-concrete composite joints”, Proceedings of the eight KKNN seminar on Civil Engineering, Edited by S Swaddiwudhipong, Wang C M and Leung, C F, 30 November to December 1998, 47-52 pp, Singapore: National University of Singapore 5. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H., Shanmugam, N. E. and Yu, C. H (2000) “Testing of Steel-Concrete Composite Connections and Appraisal of Results”, Journal of Construction Steel Research, Vol. 56, 117-150. 6. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H. and Shanmugam, N. E. (2004a) “Composite Joints Subject to reversal of Loading–Part 1: Experimental Study”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 60, 221-246. 208 7. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H. and Shanmugam, N. E. (2004b) “Composite Joints Subject to reversal of Loading–Part 2: Analytical Assessment”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 60, 247-268. 209 REFERENCES 1. Ahmed, B., Li, T. Q. and Nethercot, D. A. (1997) “Design of Composite Fin plate and Angle Cleated Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 41, 1-29. 2. Ahmed, B and Nethercot, D. A. (1996) “Effect of High Shear on the Moment Capacity of Composite Cruciform End Plate Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 40, 129-163. 3. Ahmed, B and Nethercot, D. A. (1997a) “Design of Flush End Plate Connections in Composite Beams”, The Structural Engineer, London, Vol. 75, No. 14, 233244. 4. Ahmed, B and Nethercot, D. A. (1997b) “Prediction of Initial Stiffness and Available Rotation Capacity of Major Axis Composite Flush End Plate Connection”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 41,31-60 5. Ahmed, B and Nethercot, D. A. (1998) “Effect of Column Axial Load on Composite Connection Behaviour”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos.1-2, 113-128. 6. AISC 97 (1997) “Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings”, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. Chicago, Illinois, USA. 7. Altmann, R., Maquoi, R. and Jaspart, J. P. (1991) “Experimental Study of the Non-Linear Behaviour of Beam-to-Column Composite Joints”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 18, 45-54. 8. Ammerman, D. J. and Leon, R. T. (1987) “Behaviour of Semi-rigid Composite Connections”, Engineering Journal/American Institute of Steel Construction, 2nd Quarter, 53-60. 210 9. Anderson, D. and Najafi, A.A. (1994) “Performance of Composite Connections: Major Axis End Plate Joints”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 31, 31-57. 10. Anderson, D., Aribert, J. M., Bode, H. and Kronenberger, H. J. (2000) “Design Rotation Capacity of Composite Joints”, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 78 No. 6, 25-9. 11. Aribert, J. M (1999) “Theoretical Solutions Relating to Partial Shear Connection of Steel-Concrete Composite Beams and Joints”, Proceedings in Steel and Composite Structures International Conference, Netherlands, 7.1-7.16. 12. Barnard, P. R. (1970) “Innovations in Composite Floor Systems”, Proceedings in the Canadian Structural Engineering Conference, Canadian Steel Industries Construction Council, 13. 13. Benussi, F., Puhali, R. and Zandonini, R. (1986) “Experimental Analysis of Semi-Rigid Connections in Composite Frames”, Proceedings of International Conference on Steel Structures: Recent Research Advances and Their Applications to Design, Edited by Pavlovic, M. N. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, 135-152. 14. Benussi, F., Puhali, R. and Zandonini, R. (1989) “Semi-Rigid Joints in SteelConcrete Composite Frames”, Construzioni Metalliche, n5, 1-28. 15. Bijlaard, F. S. K.; Nethercot, D. A., Stark, J. W. B., Tschemmernegg, F. and Zoetemeijer, P. (1989) “Structural Properties of Semi-rigid Joints in Steel Frames”, IABSE Survey, Periodical No. 2/89. 16. Boswell, L. F. (1992) “The Structural Behaviour of Haunched Composite Beams in Long Span Building Application”, Ph. D Thesis, City University. 211 17. Broderick, B. M. and Thomson, A. W. (2002) “The Response of Flush end plate under Earthquake Loading”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 58, 1161-1175. 18. Brown, N. D. and Anderson, D. (2001) “Structural Properties of Composite Major Axis End Plate Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 57, 327-349. 19. BS 5950 Part I (1990), Code of Practice for design of Simple and Continuous Construction: Hot Rolled Sections, British Standard Institution, London. 20. BS 5950 Part 3: Section 3.1 (1990), Code of practice for Design of Simple and Continuous Composite Beams, British Standard Institution, London. 21. COST C1 (1999) “Composite Steel-concrete Joints in Frames for Buildings: Design Provisions”, Edited by Anderson, D. European Commission. 22. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990, Lausane, CEB 1990. 23. Davison, J. B., Lam, D. and Nethercot, D. A. (1990) “Semi-rigid Action of Composite Joints”, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 68, No. 21/18, 489-499. 24. DD ENV 1993-1-1: 1992 Eurocode (1992). Design of Steel Structures, Part 1: General Rules and Rules for Building, British Standard Institution, London. 25. DD ENV 1994-1-1: 1992 Eurocode (1994) Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures, Part 1.1 General Rules and Rules for Building, British Standard Institution, London. 26. Deierlein, G. G., Sheikh, T. M., Yura, J. A. and Jirsa, J. O. (1989) “BeamColumn Moment Connections for Composite Frames: Part 2”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 115, 2877-2896. 212 27. Echeta, C. B. and Owens, G. W. (1981) “A Semi Rigid Connection For Composite Frames – Initial Test Results”, Proceedings of International Conference on Joints in Structural Steelwork, ed. Howlet, J. H. 6.93-6.121. 28. ECCS (1986), Technical Committee 1-Structutal Safety and Loadings-Technical Working Group 1.3-Seismic Design, Recommended Testing Procedure for Assessing the Behaviour of Structural Steel Elements under Cyclic Loads. 29. Huber, G. (1999) “Non-linear Calculations of Composite Sections and SemiContinuous Joints”, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Innsbruck. 30. Huber, G. and Tschmmenerg, F. (1998) “Modelling of Beam-to-Column Joints”, Journal of Construction Steel Research, Vol. 45, No. 2, 199-216. 31. Hanswille, C. (1997) “Cracking of concrete: mechanical models of the design rules in Eurocode 4”, Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete, New York, ASCE, 421-433. 32. Jaspart, J. P. (2000) “General report: Session on Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 55, 69-89. 33. Jaspart, J. P., Steenhuis, M. and Weynand, K. (1995) “The Stiffness Model of Revised Annex J of Eurocode 3”, Proceedings of Third International Workshop: Connections in Steel Structures III, Behaviour, Strength and Design, edited by. Bjorhovde, R., Colson, A and Zandonini, R. 34. Johnson, R. P. and Hope-Gill, M. C. (1972) “Semi-rigid Joints in Composite Frames”, IABSE Ninth Congress, 133-144. 35. Johnson, R. P. and Law, C.L.C., (1981) “Semi-rigid Joints for Composite Frames”, Proceedings of International Conference on Joints in Structural Steelworks, Edited by Howlet, J. H. et al, 3.3-3.19. 213 36. Kirby, P. A., Zandonini, R., and Davison, J. B. (1990) “On the Determination of Moment Rotation Characteristics of Beam-to-column Joints”, RILEM Workshop: Needs I Testing Metals, Naples, May 1990. 37. Lawson, R. M. and Rackham, J. W (1989) “Design of Haunched Composite Beam in Buildings”, SCI Publication 060, Steel Construction Institute. 38. Lee, S. J. and Lu, L. W. (1989) “Cyclic Tests of Full-Scale Composite Joint Subassemblages”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 115, No. 8, 19771998. 39. Leon, R. T. (1990) “Semi-Rigid Composite Construction”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 15, 99-120. 40. Leon, R. T., Ammerman, D. J., Lin, J. and McCauley, R. D. (1987) “Semi-rigid Composite Steel Frames”, Engineering Journal/American Institute of Steel Construction, 4th Quarter, 147-155. 41. Leon, R. T. and Zandonini, R., (1992) “Composite Connections”, Constructional Steel Design: An International Guide, Edited by Dowling, P. J., Harding, J. E. and Bjorhovde, R., Applied Science, London, 501-522. 42. Li, T. Q., Nethercot, D. A. and Choo, B. S. (1996a) “Behaviour of Flush End Plate Composite Connections with Unbalanced Moment and Variable Shear/Moment Ratios-I. Experimental Behaviour”, Journal of Constructional Steel research, Vol. 38, No.2, 125-164. 43. Li, T. Q., Nethercot, D. A. and Choo, B. S. (1996b) “Behaviour of Flush End Plate with Unbalanced Moment and Variable Shear/Moment Ratios-II-Prediction of moment Capacity”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 38, No. 2, 165-198. 214 44. Liew, J. Y. R and Chen, W. F (1995) “Analysis and Design of Steel Frames Considering Panel Zone Deformation”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 121, No. 10, 1531-1540. 45. Liew, J. Y. R., Yu, C. H., Ng, Y. H and Shanmugam, N. E. (1997), “Testing of Semi-rigid Unbraced Frames for Calibration of Second order Inelastic Analysis”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 41, No. 2/3, 159-195. 46. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H., Shanmugam, N. E. and Yu, C. H (2000) “Testing of Steel-Concrete Composite Connections and Appraisal of Results”, Journal of Construction Steel Research, Vol. 56, 117-150. 47. Liew, J. Y. R., Ng, Y. H. and Shanmugam, N. E. (2000) “Design of Haunched Composite Connections for Long Span Beam Construction”, Proceedings of Connections in Steel Structures IV Workshop, Edited by Leon, R. T. Virginia, USA. 48. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H. and Shanmugam, N. E. (2004a) “Composite Joints Subject to reversal of Loading–Part 1: Experimental Study”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 60, 221-246. 49. Liew, J. Y. R., Teo, T. H. and Shanmugam, N. E. (2004b) “Composite Joints Subject to reversal of Loading–Part 2: Analytical Assessment”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 60, 247-268. 50. Liu, and Astaneh-Asl, A. (2000a) “Cyclic Testing of Simple Connections Including Effects of Slab”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 126, No. 32-39. 51. Liu, and Astaneh-Asl, A. (2000b) “Cyclic Behaviour and Seismic Design of Steel Shear Connections”, Proceedings of Connections in Steel Structures IV Workshop, Edited by Leon, R. T. Virginia, USA. 215 52. Najafi, A. A and Anderson, D. (1997) “Ductile Steel-concrete Composite Joints”, Conventional and Innovative, IABSE, Zurich, 427-432. 53. Nethercot, D. A. (1986) “The Behaviour of Steel Frame Structures”, Proceedings of Conference on Recent Research Advances and Their Application to Design. Edited by Pavlovic, M. N, Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, 135-152. 54. Nethercot, D. A. (1995) “Semi rigid Joint Action and The Design of Non-sway Composite Frames”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 17, No. 8, 554-567. 55. Nethercot, D. A. and Zandonini, R. (1990) “Methods of Prediction of Joint Behaviour: Beam-to-column Connection”, Chapter 2, in Structural Connections: Stability ad Strength, edited by R. Narayanan, Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, 22-62. 56. Ng, Y. H. (1996) “Experimental Study of Semi-rigid Sway Frames”, M.Eng Thesis, National University of Singapore. 57. Plumier, A. and Schleich, J. B. (1993) “Seismic Resistance of Steel and Composite Frame Structures”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 27, 159-176. 58. Puhali, R., Smotlak, I. and Zandonini, R. (1990) “Semi-Rigid Composite Action: Experimental Analysis and a Suitable Model”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 15, 121-151. 59. Proposed Annex J for EN 1994-1-1 (1996) Composite Joints in Building Frames, Draft for Meeting of CEN/TC250/SC4. 60. Ren, P. and Crisinel, M. (1995) “Prediction Method for Moment Rotation Behaviour of Composite Beam to Steel Column Connection”, Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop, Connections in Steel Structures III: Behaviour, 216 Strength and Design. Edited by Bjorhovde, R., Colson, A and Zandonini, R. 3346. 61. Revised Annex J (1996) Joints in Building Frames for Eurocode 3: Part 1-1, ECCS Committee TC10-Structural Connections, The Steel Construction Institute. 62. SCI/BCSA Connection Group Publication 207/95 (1995) “Joints in Steel Construction: Moment Connections”, Steel Construction Institute. 63. SCI/BCSA Connection Group Publication 213 (1998) “Joints in Steel Construction: Composite Connections”, Steel Construction Institute. 64. Shanmugam, N. E., Ng, Y. H. and Liew, J. Y. R. (2002) “Behaviour of composite haunched connection”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 24, 1451-1463. 65. Sheikh, T. M., Deierlein, G. G., Yura, J. A. and Jirsa, J. O. (1989) “BeamColumn Moment Connections for Composite Frames: Part 1”, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 115, 2858-2876. 66. Teo, T. H., Yu, C. H., Liew, J. Y. R. and Shanmugam, N. E., (1997) “Experimental Study of Steel-Concrete Composite Connections”, National University of Singapore, Research Report No. CE 020/97. 67. Tschemmenerg, F. (1992) “The Non-linear Behaviour of Composite Joints”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 21, 59-70. 68. Tschemmenerg, F. and Humer. (1988) “The Design of Structural Steel Frames Under Consideration of the Non-linear Behaviour of Joints”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 11, 73-103. 69. Van Dalen, K. and Godoy. H., (1982) “Strength and Rotational Behaviour of Composite Beam-to-Column Connections”, Canada Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol 9, 313-322. 217 70. Wang, Y., (1996) “Design of Composite End Plate Connections”, M. Eng. Thesis, National University of Singapore. 71. Wang, J. Y., Wong, Y. L. and Chan, S. L. (1996) “Experimental Study of SemiRigid Composite End-Plate Connection Under Cyclic Loading”, Advances In Steel Structures, Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Steel Structures, Edited by Chan, S. L. and Teng, J. G., 489-494. 72. Xiao, Y., (1994) “Behaviour of Composite Connections in Steel and Concrete”, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nottingham. 73. Xiao, Y., Choo, B. S. and Nethercot, D. A. (1994) “Composite Connections in Steel and Concrete. I. Experimental Behaviour of Composite Beam-Column Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 31, 3-30. 74. Xiao, Y., Choo, B. S. and Nethercot, D. A. (1996) “Composite Connections in Steel and Concrete. Part 2-Moment Capacity of End Plate Beam to Column Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 37, 64-90. 75. Zandonini, R., (1989) “Semi-Rigid Composite Joints”, Structural ConnectionsStability and Strength, Chapter 3, ed. Narayanan, R. Elsevier Applied Science, London, 63-120. 218 APPENDIX A PUSH OUT TEST ON SHEAR CONNECTOR Four push out tests on headed shear studs were carried out to obtain the initial stiffness of the individual headed stud, ksc. Load-displacement curves of the push out test specimens can be plotted and the slope of the linear portion of the curve taken as the initial stiffness of headed shear stud. The parameters varied in the push out test include the number and spacing of the headed studs; the arrangements were kept the same as in the joint specimens tested. Details of a typical specimen and the test set up are shown in Figs. A1 and A2, respectively. The size of the slab remained identical to that of the composite joint specimens, viz. 120 mm thick and 1500 mm width. However, the length of the concrete slab, b, is related to the longitudinal spacing of the headed stud, a. Therefore, the lengths of the concrete slabs were differed from SPT1 to SPT4. There were headed studs in SPT1, two studs in each slab, arranged in single row. The rest of the specimens had studs, four in each slab and were arranged in two rows. Details of push out test specimens, properties of the headed studs and concrete properties are summarized in Table A1, A2 and A3, respectively. Ultimate load and initial stiffness of single stud obtained from the tests and the failure modes of the push out test specimens are listed in Table A4. The loaddisplacement curves are shown in Fig. A3 for specimens SPT1 to SPT4. The load-displacement behaviour for all the specimens is similar and consistent. The displacement, which in the form of slip between the steel beam and concrete slabs occurred when the load was applied. The load-displacement curves are 219 linear initially and started to show non-linear characteristic after certain level of load. The curves for SPT1 and SPT4 become nonlinear approximately at 80 kN, whereas for SPT2 and SPT3 it occurs at a load level of 50 kN. The reduced stiffness signalled the onset of stud yielding or concrete deformation. Flattening of curves at early stage of loading in respect to the specimens SPT2 and SPT3 may be due to lower concrete strengths, about 11% lower than that of SPT1 and SPT4. The initial stiffness that describes the response of the studs with respect to load before any component yielding is taken the slope of the linear portion of the load-displacement curve. The initial stiffnesses of SPT1 to SPT4 are 107.3, 91.8, 83.3, 120.1 kN/mm respectively. Again, the test results indicate that the higher the concrete strength was, the higher the initial stiffness. The average value of 100 kN/mm is used as ksc in the analysis of the joint specimens. Table A1 Details of Push Out Test Specimens Test SPT SPT SPT SPT No. of Studs in each slab 4 Spacing of Length of Studs, a (mm) slab, b (mm) 240 c/c 700 240 c/c 700 160 c/c 500 130 c/c 425 Rebar Ratio 0.5 % 1.12 % 1.56 % 1.12 % Test attributed to SCCB1 SCCB2, SCCB4-6 SCCB3 CJ1-CJ7 Table A2 Properties of Headed Studs Test Yield Strength, fy (N/mm2) 405 400 400 420 410 Ave. (N/mm2) 407 Ultimate Strength, fu (N/mm2) 490 494 493 507 495 Ave. (N/mm2) 496 Modulus of Ave. Elasticity, Es (kN/mm2) (kN/mm2) 189.7 216.1 228.2 250.2 256.8 - 220 Table A3 Properties of Concrete Test Average Cube Strength (N/mm2) Average Cylinder Strength (N/mm2) Average Young Modulus (kN/mm2) SPT SPT SPT SPT 39.6 35.3 36.4 38.2 33.3 33.4 31.5 34.7 24.5 21.7 23.8 21.2 Table A4 Experimental Results of Push Out Test SPT Load-carrying Capacity/stud (kN) 122.5 Initial Stiffness/stud (kN/mm) 107.3 SPT 99.3 91.8 SPT 110.6 83.3 SPT 110.1 120.1 Test Failure Mode(s) Studs Shearing Studs Shearing & concrete crushing Concrete crushing Studs Shearing & concrete crushing PL350x190x25 305x165x54UB A a b A 19mm diameter headed stud 1500 100 1500 50 120 Side Elevation 120 120 Section A-A (specimen with one row of stud) Section A-A (specimen with two rows of stud) Fig. A1 Typical details of push out test specimens 221 Fig. A2 Test set up for push out test for headed stud 140 SPT1 SPT4 120 Load per Single Stud (kN) SPT3 100 80 SPT2 60 40 20 0 10 12 Average Displacement (mm) Fig. A3 Load slip curve for push out tests carried out 222 [...]... 3.49a Strain Profile in the steel Beam of CJ7 under increasing negative moment Figure 3.49b Strain Profile in the steel beam of CJ1 under increasing negative moment Figure 3.50a Strain profile in the concrete slab of CJ4 with increasing positive moment Figure 3.50b Strain profile in the concrete slab of CJ7 with increasing positive moment Figure 3.50c Strain profile in the concrete slab of CJ6 with increasing... eighteen full-scale tests on composite joints The parameters in the experimental study were type of column (partially encased H section or concrete filled circular tube), type of beam (steel or composite) , slab (solid or composite) and shear connector (headed stud or angle) Based on the tests, a macro-mechanical model of composite joints was developed, similar to that of steel joints (Tschemmernegg and... which some or all of the beams and columns are composite members EC4 (1994) defines composite joints as those where steel or composite beams frame into steel or composite columns, or reinforced columns in which steel reinforcement is intended to contribute to the resistance To abate the scope, hereafter, a composite joint refers to a joint where composite beams frame into steel or composite columns... which a general description of the merits of composite construction and the need for further research in composite beam-to-column joints are given and the objectives and scope of the research highlighted in the same chapter Chapter 2 reviews briefly the selected literature available on composite beamto-column joints Both experimental and analytical studies on composite joints for composite braced and sway... FOR COMPOSITE NON-SWAY FRAMES The concept of semi-rigid joints as an alternative to rigid joints has been suggested by Barnard (1970) to provide a significant degree of continuity while reducing the susceptibility of steel elements (web and flange) from local buckling It was obvious that, to achieve full capacity of composite beams, the compactness requirement for steel sections is more stringent in composite. .. capacity of the connection was determined simply by adding the moment capacity of the steel connection to the moment resistance of the rebar, which is given by the yield strength of the rebar Determination of the elastic stiffness of the joint relied on elastic partial interaction analysis of the cantilever beams on both sides of the connections, with the assumptions that the end cross section of the composite. .. symmetrical tests The comparative evaluation of the test results of all tests formed the basis for the proposal of a spring model, which permitted comprehensive simulation of the beam-column joint behaviour A pilot series of tests, which incorporated metal deck flooring was designed to investigate the influence of the presence of a composite floor slab on the performance of steel beam-to-column connection, was... form so called composite construction, the merits of these two materials are optimally used The efficiency of composite construction is increased significantly where concrete is utilised for compression and steel in tension Furthermore, concrete provides corrosion resistance and fire protection to steel sections and reduces the susceptibility of slender steel sections to buckling modes A composite frame... end plates and haunched joints in composite non-sway and sway frames are proposed The key joint properties, i.e moment capacity, initial stiffness and rotational capacity, especially for sway composite joints are evaluated for global frame analysis Thirteen composite beam-to-column and one steel beam-to-column joints were tested to failure in the laboratory Six of the composite joints were tested under... xiv LIST OF TABLES Chapter 3 Table 3.1 Details of the Specimens in Phase I Table 3.2 Details of the Specimens in Phase II Table 3.3 Tensile Test of Structural Steel Members Table 3.4 Tensile Test of Reinforcement Bars Table 3.5 Concrete Cube/Cylinder Strength and Young Modulus Table 3.6 Test Results of Phase I Specimens Table 3.7 Test Results of Phase II Specimens Table 3.8 Rotation capacities of Phase . DESIGN APPRAISAL OF STEEL-CONCRETE COMPOSITE JOINTS by TEO TECK HEONG, B.ENG. (Hons.) DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. A st area of profile steel sheeting a p throat thickness of weld on end plate b j width of a finite size joint b fb breadth of beam b fc breadth of column B ec effective width of concrete. effective of column web b o mean width of trough of profiled steel sheeting c depth of compression stress block measured from top of slab, effective depth C S,Rd translational stiffness of shear