ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 92-86

Reinforced Concrete Eccentric Beam-Column Connections
Subjected to Earthquake-Type Loading
by Gregory S. Raffaelle and James K. Wight
Test results for four reinforced concrete eccentric beam-column connec-
tions subjected to reversed cyclic loading are reported. The specimens
were part of an experimental program designed to investigate the effect of
torsion, induced by earthquake motions, in eccentric frame connections.
The major design parameters varied in the specimens were the beam width,
the beam depth, and the amounts of top and bottom longitudinal reinforce-
ment in the beam. From the test results, it was concluded that the presence
of eccentricity in the joint reduced the strength of the connection to the
extent that none of the specimens were able to attain their predicted story
shear strength. To account adequately for the effect of torsion, a new equa-
tion for the effective joint width to estimate the nominal joint shear strength
is proposed.
Keywords: beams (supports); columns (supports); connections; cyclic
loads; earthquake-resistant structures; eccentricity; energy; joints
Gunctions); reinforced concrete; structural design.
Since the mid-1960s, many researchers have been investi-
gating the behavior of reinforced concrete beam-column
connections subjected to earthquake forces. Most of the in-
vestigations have consisted of experimentally testing subas-
semblages that represent joints isolated at the inflection
points in reinforced concrete (RC) frames subjected to lateral
forces. The subassemblages are usually designed following
the generally accepted "strong column-weak beam" philoso-
phy for RC structures in seismic zones. The "strong column-
weak beam" design is desirable because the inelastic actions
take place in beam-plastic hinges, resulting in high energy
dissipation. Plastic hinges in the columns, which could result
in a soft story mechanism, should be avoided. To insure the
formation of plastic hinges in the beams, the joints must be
designed to transfer the internal forces associated with the
development of beam-plastic hinges without loss of strength
or stiffness. The previous experimental investigations have
concentrated on developing design recommendations for
beam-column joints to achieve this type of behavior. There-
sults of those studies were used to form the design guidelines
given in Chapter 21 of the ACI Building Code,
1
and the joint
ACI-ASCE Committee 352 report.
2
Several design questions concerning beam-column con-
nections have not yet been addressed because of insufficient
information. Some of the areas needing research are listed in
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
Appendix A of the ACI-ASCE Committee 352 design rec-
ommendations. Connections with eccentric beams were list-
ed as one of the areas needing research because all previous
investigations have included connections where the beam
and column axes are in the same plane. The majority of the
connections in a reinforced concrete building are concentric,
but it is not uncommon to have eccentric connections in the
exterior frames. For architectural reasons, this type of con-
nection may be desired because the outside faces of the
beams and columns are flush.
In eccentric beam-column connections, the axis of the
spandrel beams is offset from the axis of the column. Bend-
ing in the spandrel beams produces internal compression and
tension forces that act on the joint at an eccentricity with the
column centroid, thus producing torsion in the joint (Fig. 1).
The torsion in the joint will produce additional shear stress-
es, and it is unclear to what extent this will affect the shear
capacity of the joint. Thus, the design recommendations de-
veloped from concentric beam-column connection tests may
be inadequate for an eccentric beam-column connection.
There is also evidence that the effect of eccentric beams
may be very significant to the frame's ability to survive a se-
vere earthquake. A four-story RC school building at Hako-
date College in Japan was heavily damaged by the
Tokachioki Earthquake in 1968. All the other buildings in
the same area as the school building showed very little or no
damage. Ohno and Shibata
3
investigated the school building
and concluded the heavy damage was due to the eccentricity
between the axes of the columns and girders around the pe-
rimeter of the building.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Reinforced concrete buildings can be constructed safely in
seismic zones. However, the safety of eccentric connections,
ACJ Structural Journal, V. 92, No.1, January-February 1995.
Received Sept. I, 1993, and reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copy-
right 1995, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including the making
of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent dis-
cussion will be published in the November-December 1995 ACJ Structural Journal if
received by July 1, 1995.
45
Gregory S. Raffaelle is a recent PhD graduate in civil engineering from the Univer
sity of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He received his BS and MS degrees in civil engineering
from Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. His research includes the design
and analysis of earthquake-resistant connections for reinforced concrete structures.
James K. Wight, FACI, is a professor of civil engineering at the University of Michi-
gan. He is chairman of ACI's Technical Activities Committee; joint ACI-ASCE Com-
mittees 352, Joints and Connections in Monolithic Concrete Structures; and 445,
Shear and Torsion; and ACI Committee 368, Earthquake Resisting Concrete Struc-
tural Elements and Systems. His primary research interest is in earthquake-resistant
design of reinforced concrete structures.
which are not uncommon in the exterior frames of these
structures, may be questionable because of the lack of
experimental information on this type of connection on
which to base design criteria. The research presented in this
paper provides valuable information that can help further
improve the design requirements for eccentric beam-column
connections.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Only one type of eccentric connection was considered in
this investigation. The type of connection considered is one
in which the beam is narrower than the column and the two
members are joined together, such that the exterior faces lie
in one plane. Since the beam was narrower than the column,
an eccentricity existed between the column centroid and the
beam centerline. The test subassemblage represents a joint
isolated from a frame at the inflection points that are consis-
tent with lateral loading of the frame. The inflection points
were assumed at the midheights of the columns and at the
midspans of the beams because the earthquake-induced mo-
ments are observed to be much larger than the gravity load
moments. The effects of the earthquake were simulated by
laterally loading the test subassemblage following a reversed
cyclic loading pattern, which was designed to impose the
same level of damage as a major earthquake. The experimen-
tal investigation was carried out by designing and construct-
ing four eccentric connection specimens and testing them in
the University of Michigan Structural Engineering Labora-
tory.
Description of specimens
The beams and the columns of the specimens were de-
signed according to the seismic provisions of the ACI 318-
89 Building Code, and the joints were designed to meet the
seismic requirements of ACI-ASCE 352 recommendations.
In some of the specimens, certain ACI-ASCE 352 joint de-
sign recommendations were not satisfied to evaluate the giv-
en limits. The major design parameters varied in the
specimens were the beam width, the beam depth, and the
amounts of top and bottom longitudinal reinforcement in the
beam. By varying the beam width, the eccentricity between
the column axis and the beam axis changed. The change in
eccentricity affected the torsional demand placed upon the
joint. The smaller beam widths also decreased the area of the
joint that was effective in resisting the horizontal joint shear.
The amount of reinforcing steel in the beam influenced the
horizontal shear and torsion demand on the joint and
changed the beam-to-column moment-strength ratio. The
same column section and amount of joint hoop reinforce-
ment was used in all four specimens. Fig. 2 illustrates typical
reinforcing details of the specimens, and the individual spec-
imen design parameters are summarized in Table 1.
Test setup and loading sequence
A schematic drawing of the test setup is shown in Fig. 3.
The specimen was mounted vertically with the bottom of the
column being held by a universal pin, and the top of the col-
umn being held by an actuator that was mounted to the struc-
tural wall. The actuator had a capacity of 50 kips and was
capable of moving the top of the column 5 in. in both positive
and negative directions. A displacement of 5 in. would cor-
respond to a story drift of approximately 5 percent. Both
beam ends were held by axial links to the structural floor.
The axial links allowed the beam ends to move horizontally
in the plane of loading, but not vertically. Before the links
were attached, an axial load of 20 kips was applied to the col-
umn by a pair of prestressing cables on each side of the spec-
imen and was keep constant throughout the test.
Each specimen was instrumented with load cells, displace-
ment transducers, and strain gages to monitor the applied
displacements and corresponding loads and the resulting
strains and relative deformations.
The specimens were tested under displacement control,
following a predetermined displacement history defined in
terms of story drift percentage. The displacement routine,
shown in Fig. 4, consists of 14 cycles with story drifts rang-
Exterior (Flush) side
axis
,T_m--1
_ colunrnn
centroid
Interior side
Fig. 1-Forces acting on eccentric beam-column connection
46 ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
,...-
r-
Ay
A
14"
1 .. ..I
~ B
3-16, 1#2 stirrup
+
~
7
~ B
3-#S J
~
2"
8@3-1/4"
{
#3 ties
1 in. cover
Section A-A
2-#3 ties-
::r 3-1/2" typ.
10"
.....
"'
ELEVATION VIEW
14"
1.. I
~ IIIIIIIIIRJ!IIIIIIIIIIt
[[J
I'w-16 ..
1
#2 stirrup
IS"
3-#S
PLAN VIEW
Fig. 2-Reinforcing details for Specimen 1
Structural floor
Fig. 3-Test setup
Section B-B
Axial load supplied by
..-+-- post-tensioning jacks
Universal pin
Table 1-Specimern details and joint design parameters
Column Beam bars Joint
Beam size, size, Eccentricity, reinforce-
Ash' in.2
Specimen in. x. in. in. x. in. in. Column bars ment layers*
Top Bottom
1 10 X 15 14 X 14 2 3 -#6 3. #5 8 -#6 3 0.376
2 7 X 15 14 X 14 3.5 2-#6 2 -#5 8- #6 3 0.376
3 7.5 X 15 14 X 14 3.25 3. #5 2 -#5 8. #6 3 0.376
4 7.5 X 22 14 X 14 3.25 3- #5 2- #5 8 -#6 5 0.376
..
*Each layer cons1cts of 2 #3 JOIDt hoops.
tFull column depth divided by diameter of largest beam bar passing tbrough joint.
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
h
~ t
db
18.7
18.7
22.4
22.4
Shear Moment
strength strength
factory ratioMR
14.6 1.15
11.5 2.25
9.77 2.20
12.7 1.37
47
g
-1
"'
-3
-4
-5
.<j
Fig. 4-Loading sequence
ing from 0-25 to 5.0 percent. Some of the displacement cy-
cles were repeated to measure the strength degradation, and
cycles to story drifts of LO and 2.0 percent were inserted be-
tween the later cycles of the test to determine the loss of stiff-
ness.
DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS
Due to the length required to present all the results from
the four eccentric beam-column connection tests, only an
overview of the general specimen behavior supported by rel-
evant experimental results will be discussed in the following
sections.
Crack development
The development of cracks in each specimen during test-
ing was carefully observed and recorded by marking the
cracks at the peaks of each load cycle. Schematic illustra-
tions of the typical cracking patterns for the interior and ex-
terior sides of the specimen are shown in Fig. 5 and 6,
respectively. Most of the crack damage was concentrated in
the beams near the column and in the joint. The largest flex-
ural cracks opened at the interfaces of the beam ends and the
column faces. By the end of the test, these cracks were ex-
cessive, and the beam flexural bars were observed to be slip-
ping through the joint due to a loss of bond.
Shear in the joint caused diagonal cracks that formed a
grid of inclined cracks during the load reversals. As might be
expected, the diagonal cracking was visibly more extensive
on the exterior (flush) side of the joint than on the interior
side away from the beam.
The eccentricity between the internal compression and
tension forces in the beam and the shear force in the column
caused a torsional moment in the joint. The inclined cracks
that were observed on the column faces adjoining the beams
were a result of this torsion. The torsional cracks appeared
early in the testing, but did not grow significantly as the dis-
placement cycles progressed.
Load-displacement response
The load-versus-displacement hysteresis loops for all four
specimens exhibited similar characteristic behavior, and, as
an example, the loops for Specimen 1 are shown in Fig. 7.
The hysteresis loops show the degradation of stiffness and
load-carrying capacity during repeat cycles that is character-
istic of reinforced concrete due to the cracking of the con-
crete and yielding of the reinforcing steel. All the specimens
48
experienced some degree of pinching, depending upon the
values of the joint parameters. Pinching is characterized by
the narrow width of the hysteresis loops near midcycle.
Pinching is mainly caused by: 1) shear deformation of the
joint; 2) slippage of the longitudinal beam bars through the
joint core; 3) closing of wide flexural cracks in the beam-
plastic hinging zones; and 4) any looseness in the test appa-
ratus. Due to the adjustability built into the test setup, the er-
ror due to Item 4 was eliminated as much as possible.
Most of the phlching in the hysteresis loops was accredited
to Item 2. The measured strains in the beam reinforcement
gave some indication of the degree of slippage that occurred.
Fig. 8 shows the story shear versus the strain in the longitu-
dinal beam bar at the beam-column interface on the flush
side of the joint for Specimen 1. For loading in the positive
direction, it is expected that the top reinforcing bars would
be in tension while the bottom bars would be in compression.
As the load is reversed, the strain in the top bars should
change to compression, and the bottom bars should go into
tension. As shown in Fig. 8, the compressive strain in the bar
for negative story shears decreased after the first loading cy-
cle, and the bar went into tension by the end of the fourth
load cycle. The results of a nonlinear analysis of the beam
section showed that for positive bending (compression in the
top), the neutral axis should stay below the top bars up to the
ultimate capacity of the beam. In the actual beam, since the
compression in the top bars was decreasing and the bars
eventually went into tension, the neutral axis should even be
lower than that predicted by the nonlinear analysis. The
change in strain from compression to tension in this bar was
therefore attributed to the propagation of tensile stress
through the core from the other side of the joint. Once this
phenomenon is observed, the beam longitudinal bars have
begun slipping through the joint core.
Energy dissipation
The energy dissipated by each specimen during a loading
cycle was computed as the area enclosed within the hystere-
sis loop for the particular cycle. The amount of energy dissi-
pated by each specimen is dependent upon the strength of the
specimen. Because the strengths of the specimens were not
the same, a realistic comparison of their energy-dissipating
capabilities should be made by considering a normalized en-
ergy dissipated per cycle. The energy dissipated per cycle,
normalized by the energy dissipated during the first cycle to
1 percent story drift, is plotted versus the story drift percent-
age in Fig. 9 for all the specimens.
The curves in Fig. 9 confirm the observations that the
pinching was more severe in Specimens 2 and 4. Pinching
decreases the area enclosed within the hysteresis loops, thus
reducing the amount of energy dissipated. The performance
of the four specimens was similar up to 3 percent story drift.
After 3 percent, Specimens 1 and 3 performed better than 2
and 4. Specimens 1 and 2 had the same size bars, but the im-
proved performance of Specimen 1 is attributed to the small-
er eccentricity because of the larger beam width. Specimens
2 and 3 had approximately the same beam width, but smaller
size bars were used in Specimen 3. The energy-dissipating
capability of Specimen 3 was greater than Specimen 2 be-
cause the smaller. size bars improved the anchorage condi-
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
Diagonal Shear Cracks____,
,'
'
,
Beam Flexural Cracks
Inclined Torsional Cracks
--Cracks from ( +) Loading
- - - - Cracks from (-) Loading
Fig. 5-Illustration of typical crack patterns on interior side of connection
Column Flexural Cracks
Diagonal Shear Cracks
,
,
' I
I '
I \
I \
\ I
I I
, --Cracks from ( +) Loading
- - - - Cracks from (-) Loading
Fig. 6-Illustration of typical crack patterns on exterior (flush) side of connection
25
20
15
10
"'
~ 5
j
0
Cll
~
-5
s
Cll
-10
Y Yield
-15 "" Ultimate
-20
-25
-6 -s -4 -3 -2 -I 0 2 3 4 5 6
Story Drift, %
Fig. 7-Load-versus-displacement response of Specimen 1
ACI Structural Journal/ January-February 1995 49
"'
Q,
~
~
.c
Gfl

Gfl
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
8
- - - - - ~
B5
-0.001 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004
Strain, in/in
Fig. 8-Story shear versus strain in longitudinal beam reinforcement at Gage B5 in Spec-
imen 1
14
.!l
12
(.)
>.
u
....
Cl)
Q,
10
"0
~
.e-
8
"'
"'
l5
>.
e.o 6
Q)
c
Ul
"0
4
. ~
"a
J
2
0
0 2 3
Specimen 1
__ - - Specimen 3
.............. Specimen 2
. _ : - - .. - - - - .. - Specimen 4
4 5 6
Story Drift, %
Fig. 9-Normalized energy dissipation per cycle
tions and decreased the pinching in the hysteresis loops.
Specimens 3 and 4 had the same beam width and used the
same size bars. The deeper beam in Specimen 4 caused the
joint to deteriorate at a faster rate, thus increasing pinching
and decreasing the amounts of energy dissipated.
Joint hoop strains
The strains in the joint transverse reinforcement were
measured by strain gages placed on the reinforcement
throughout the joint. Each outer joint hoop was gaged on op-
posite legs that were parallel with the axis of the beam. The
profiles of strain in the joint hoop legs on both sides of the
connection are shown in Fig. 10 for Specimen 3. For corre-
50
sponding story drifts, the strains in the hoop legs on the ex-
terior (flush) side of the joint were larger than those on the
interior side of the joint. This is consistent with the observa-
tion of larger and more diagonal shear cracks on the exterior
side of the joint. The larger strains in the hoop legs on the ex-
terior side of the joint are due to the addition of stresses from
shear and torsion. On the opposite side of the joint, the
strains are less because the shear and torsional stresses coun-
teract each other.
EVALUATION OF EFFECTIVE JOINT WIDTH
The interaction between the maximum story shear ob-
tained during the tests to the horizontal s.hear demand on the
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
4.0
Slory Drift
--- 0.25% ___,._ 2.0%
--&-- 0.5% _.,.__ 3.0%
-e- J.()% ......._ 4.0%
__,__ J.S% -- 5.0%
3.0 2.0 1.0
Strain, infm x 10"
3
''<
:a:
""
[
3.0
Strain, in/in x 10"
3
4.0
Fig. 1 0-Strain profiles for joint hoop legs in Specimen 3
Table 2-Ratios of measured to predicted strength
1 2 3
Specimen
Fc(max)' kips Fc(exp)' kips
I 25.2 21.4
2 16.8 14.0
3 18.1 16.2
4 27.3 23.5
New Zealand 20.6 20.8
JX0-85 14.7 13.9
joint was analyzed to help determine the adequacy of the ex-
pression for the nominal joint shear strength vn given in the
ACI-ASCE Committee 352 recommendations. More specif-
ically, the sufficiency of the expressions for the effective
joint width bj, which is used in calculating Vn, was studied.
The performance of the joint was evaluated by the compari-
son of the predicted to the measured values of the story shear
force Fe and the horizontal joint shear force \.}
In addition to the four specimens tested as part of this re-
search project, one eccentric beam-column specimen tested
in New Zealand
4
and one tested in Japan,
5
called JXO-B5,
were also analyzed. These specimens were included because
they were of similar scale as the specimens tested in this re-
search, and they were the only other eccentric beam-column
connections known to the authors at the time.
The maximum story shear Fc(maxJ' which the specimen
could theoretically resist, was predicted by
_ M max, I + M max, 2
F c (max) - -"""'-'-'-1-c ----'-
(1)
and is given in the second column of Table 2 for each speci-
men. The moment capacities calculated for use in predicting
the maximum story force were determined using a nonlinear
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
4 5 6
7 ~
Fc(exp)
vj(exp)
F---
c(max) vj(cal)' kips ";(exp)' kips
vj(cal)
0.85 130 136 1.13
0.84 110 94.6 0.86
0.90 134 106 0.79
0.86 96 92.7 0.97
1.01 226 110 0.48
0.94 73 66.0 0.90
analysis with the actual material properties. The maximum
story shears measured during the tests are recorded as Fc(expJ
in the third column of Table 2. Finally, the ratio of the mea-
sured to the calculated story shear strength is given in the
fourth column.
The horizontal shear resistance of the joint was calculated
according to
(2)
where
(3)
which is Eq. (4.5) of the ACI-ASCE Committee 352 report
with their expressions for the effective joint width. The re-
sulting values are shown as "JrcalJ in the fifth column of Table
2. The horizontal shear applied to the joint during the tests
was estimated from the experimentally measured forces us-
ing
51
2
Quadrant A: Sufficient joint
shear strength to develop
ultimate capacity of the beams.
i
e
"<:)'
~
--
1
A
*ov
,_..._
0..
;<
~
(J
~
Quadrant B: Insufficiencies
exist in other joint parameters.
.. rt=BEj},
~
bj =
bb +be
2
0
Quadrant C: Beams do not
reach ultimate capacity due
to insufficient joint shear
strength.
2
0 1
02
* 3
04
A New
Zealand
v JX0-85
Yj(exp) I Yj(cal)
Fig. 11-/nteraction between story shear strength and horizontal joint shear strength
based upon ACI-ASCE 352 equation for bj
(4)
The maximum joint shears obtained for each specimen are
recorded in the sixth column of Table 2 as VJ!expr The ratio
of the maximum applied joint shear to the calculated joint
shear resistance is given in the last column of Table 2.
The interaction between the maximum story shear and the
joint shear strength was examined, as shown in Fig. 11, by
plotting the two strength ratios given in Table 2. Referring to
Fig. 11, there are three possible quadrants in which the data
points can fall. Data points in Quadrant A would represent
specimens that had sufficient joint shear strength such that
the ultimate capacity of the beams could be reached. Points
in Quadrant C would represent specimens that were not able
to utilize the full capacity of the beams due to insufficient
joint shear strength. Points in Quadrant B would represent
specimens with premature failures, possibly due to plastic
hinging in the columns or beam bar anchorage failure. If the
calculated story shear and joint shear strengths are correct, it
should be impossible for specimens to obtain both ratios
greater than one and thus lie in the fourth (unlabeled) quad-
rant.
For the six specimens, neither plastic hinging in the col-
umns nor significant beam bar anchorage failure was ob-
served during testing. The data points for the specimens
should therefore fall in either Quadrant A or Quadrant C of
Fig. 11. For the specimens that did not reach their predicted
strength, the cause is believed to be insufficient joint shear
strength because of the amount of damage observed in the
joint region. Thus, the scatter of data points for the speci-
mens should be shifted more toward Quadrant C. It appears
that the joint shear strength is overestimated for these eccen-
tric specimens because too large of an effective joint width
is defined by the ACI-ASCE 352 expressions.
52
PROPOSED EFFECTIVE JOINT WIDTH
An equation for the effective joint width was derived by
adding the stresses due to the horizontal shear and torsion in
the joint and setting that equal to an equivalent stress that
only considers the horizontal shear force acting on an effec-
tive joint area. Using a value of'/, for the torsional constant
of cracked reinforced concrete as suggested by Hsu
6
and de-
fining xc to be equal to the smaller of be or he the following
equation was obtained
1+3elxc
(5)
where e is the eccentricity equal to (bc-bb)/2, be is the column
width, he is the column depth, and bb is the beam width. Re-
evaluating the calculated joint shear strength VJ!cal!' using
this equation for bp the resulting scatter of data points is as
shown in Fig. 12. Comparing this figure to the previous one
obtained using the ACI-ASCE 352 expressions for bp it can
be seen that the data points have shifted to the right. This, of
course, means Eq. (5) results in a smaller effective joint
width and a more conservative estimate of the joint shear
strength. The scatter of the data points in Fig. 12 is believed
to be more representative of the behavior observed in the
specimens.
The proposed equation for the effective joint width de-
pends upon the ratio of the column's width to depth. The
equations for the effective joint width given by the ACI-
ASCE 352 recommendations, the Architectural Institute of
Japan's (AIJ) guidelines,
7
and the New Zealand National
Code
8
are compared to the proposed equation in Fig. 13 for
b/hc = 1. It should be noted that all the specimens tested, in-
cluding the New Zealand and Japan specimens, had square
columns (bjhc = 1). Furthermore, the width of the beams
was approximately one-half the width of .the columns for all
the specimens except Specimen 1. Fig. 13 shows that the
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
2
Quadrant A: Sufficient joint
shear strength to develop
ultimate capacity of the beams.
1\
--
1
Quadrant B: Insufficiencies
exist in other joint parameters.
bbif

I be I
b
bj "'(

v
<> 0
Quadrant C: Beams do not
reach ultimate capacity due
to insufficient joint shear
strength.
2
01
D 2
(l3
<>4
1::. New
Zealand
" JX0-85
Vj(exp) I Vj(cal)
Fig. 12-/nteraction between story shear strength and horizontal joint shear strength
based upon proposed equation for bj
proposed equation results in a smaller effective joint than the
ACI-ASCE 352 expressions, and for a ratio of b/bc equal to
0.5 the proposed effective joint width is only 76 percent of
the ACI-ASCE 352 value. For Specimen 1, the ratio of btfbc
is 0.71, and the difference between the two values is slightly
less.
Further study is required to verify the influence of the col-
umn's aspect ratio (b/hc) on the effective joint width, as sug-
gested by this.proposed equation. The column's aspect ratio
may be significant because it strongly influences the torsion-
al resistance of the joint. In Fig. 14, the effective joint width
equations are compared for a column aspect ratio of 1.5. This
figure illustrates that, for aspect ratios exceeding one, the
difference between the proposed equation and the ACI-
ASCE 352 equation becomes more dramatic.
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the results of the experimental investigation of
eccentric beam-column connections, the following conclu-
sions were reached:
1. A reduced performance was observed for the eccentric
beam-column connections, as evidenced by excessive pinch-
ing in the load-versus-displacement hysteresis loops. The
pinching was mainly caused by the loss of anchorage of the
beam bars through the joint. The beam-bar anchorage deteri-
orated as a result of diagonal cracking in the joint caused by
high shear stresses.
2. The energy-dissipating characteristics of the four eccen-
tric test specimens were similar up to 3 percent story drift.
After that, the beam width and the diameter of the beam bars
strongly influenced the energy-dissipating capability of the
specimen. Larger beam widths and smaller diameter bars im-
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
proved the anchorage condition of the beam bars passing
through the joint and, thus, enhanced the energy dissipation.
3. As a result of the eccentricity in the joint, the crack dam-
age was more extensive on the exterior (flush) side of the
joint than on the interior side. The crack damage seemed to
be concentrated in the portion of the joint common to the col-
umn and the beam.
4. The eccentricity reduced the strength of the joint to the
extent that none of the specimens were able to attain their
predicted story shear strength. The nominal joint shear
strength according to the present ACI-ASCE Committee 352
recommendations does not adequately account for the tor-
sion in eccentric connections. It is proposed that Eq. (5) be
used for the effective joint width to obtain a more conserva-
tive estimation of the nominal joint shear strength.
5. Strain in the joint hoops was higher on the exterior side
of the joint due to the addition of stresses from horizontal
shear and torsion. The maximum strain approached the yield
value of the joint hoops. Previous research has shown in-
creasing the joint size is more efficient in resisting the joint
shear than increasing the amount of joint reinforcement. To
avoid congestion, it is recommended that the percentage of
joint reinforcement required by ACI-ASCE Committee 352
not be increased if the proposed effective joint width is used.
Future research
Future study is required to validate the effect of the col-
umn's aspect ratio on the behavior of eccentric beam-column
connections, as suggested by the proposed equation for the
effective joint width. The experimental investigation should
include some specimens with rectangular columns whose as-
pect ratios are less than one and some with columns whose
aspect ratios are greater than one. The latter case is believed
53
....
1.00
/
New Zealand / " -
National Code'\_./" -:---- -:-----
./
ACI-ASCE 352 ..- ..-/' -:-..-.
,.,c'
...,.....- /' ...
_.,.,.....,.. A, .
..-,.. /'., .
...
A .
0.75
....... 0.50
0.25
.. -
/,
"'

.. "--..... AIJ Guidelines
+ 3e)
xe

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
btJ I be
Fig. 13-Comparison of effective joint width equations for b /he = 1

New Zealand _. / --..,-- -
National Code" / _._..,:-._,..._


-
ACI-ASCE 352 ..- _. _. ..-:.;.
/ --
0.75
/ /"
// /' ..
/ <"''
/ .
/ ....
/ AJ'.
/ ...
// ,.!"'
....... 0.50
be
hc = 1.5
...
0.25

.,:<''... AIJ Guidelines
Fig. 14-Comparison of effective joint width equations forb /he = 1.5
to be more critical for the validation of the proposed equa-
tion. The column's aspect ratio may be significant because it
strongly influences the torsional resistance of the joint.
including crossties, crossing section of column core
bb width of beam section
be width of column section
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The experimental work was performed in the Structural Laboratory of
the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University
of Michigan. Ann Arbor. Support by the National Science Foundation
under Research Grant No. NSF-BCS-8901260 is gratefully acknowledged.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in
this paper are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views
of the National Science Foundation.
NOTATION
total cross-sectional area of all legs of hoop reinforcement,
54
bj effective joint width
db nominal diameter of bar
e joint eccentricity = (be - b e)/2
Fe story shear force
fc' concrete compressive strength
Fe(exp) = measured maximum story shear force
Fe( max)= predicted maximum story shear force
he total depth of column section
jd
1
assumed moment arm for positive bending
assumed moment arm for negative bending
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
t[,
".:
Mmax,l =
Mmax,2=
Mn
MR
vc
'j
\)(cal)=
\)(exp)=
vn
vu
vl
v2
y
total beam span length
total column height of test specimen
maximum positive moment capacity of beam section
maximum negative moment capacity of beam section
nominal flexural strength of beam or column section
moment strength ratio= L Mn(columns)/L Mn(beams)
applied story shear force
horizontal joint shear force
calculated joint shear strength
measured maximum joint shear force
nominal shear strength of joint
design shear force in joint
measured shear force in right beam
measured shear force in left beam
smaller of b c or h c
shear strength factor= V I b .h fi0 (psi)
u J c,fc
REFERENCES
1. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Reinforced
Concrete (ACI 318-89)," American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1989, 353
pp.
ACI Structural Journal I January-February 1995
2. ACI-ASCE Committee 352, "Recommendations for Design of Beam-
Column Joints in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures," ACI JOUR-
NAL, Proceedings V. 82, No.3, May-June 1985, pp. 266-283.
3. Ohno, K., and Shibata, T., "On the Damage to the Hakodate College
by the Tokachioki Earthquake, 1968," Proceedings of the U.S.-Japan Sem-
inar on Earthquake Engineering with Emphasis on the Safety of School
Buildings, 1970, pp. 129-144.
4. Lawrance, G. M.; Beattie, G. J.; and Jacks, D. H., "Cyclic Load Per-
formance of an Eccentric Beam-Column Joint," Central Laboratories
Report 91-25126, Central Laboratories, Lower Hutt, New Zealand, Aug.
1991.
5. Joh, 0.; Goto, Y.; and Shibata, T., "Influence of Eccentricities between
Column and Beam on the Seismic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beam-
Column Joints," Department of Architectural Engineering, Hokkaido Uni-
versity, Sapporo, Japan.
6. Hsu, Thomas, T. C., "Torsion of Structural Concrete-Plain Concrete
Rectangular Sections," Torsion of Structural Concrete, SP-18, American
Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1968, pp. 203-238.
7. Otani, S., "Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) Proposal of Ultimate
Strength Design Requirements for RC Buildings with Emphasis on Beam-
Column Joints," Design of Beam-Column Joints for Seismic Resistance,
SP-123, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1991, pp. 125-144.
8. NZS 3101, "Code of Practice and Commentary for the Design of Con-
crete Structures," Parts 1 and 2, Standards Association of New Zealand,
Wellington, 1982.
55